Global features on modelers suck

[ian_dissonance]

But full spillover means losing one path, and that's a sacrifice I can't make in most of my presets.

So but if you use the same fx in multiple presets with the Boss stuff you get all the FX and spillover, so it essentially works that same as snapshots but much more flexible, IMO.

 

[Sascha Franck]

I mostly use them for amps and drives and always on stuff like pre/post EQ across banks of live patches. One I stopped trying to figure out how to recreate snapshots and realized copying a preset as many places as I wanted it’s virtually the same thing, full spillover, “snapshot” specific footswitches, and if I want to change the pedal board around the amps, I know the amps will still sound the same.

At least sort of how I'm doing it as well with the GT.
But I can see the limitations of either method - so I'd rather have both.

 

[ian_dissonance]

At least sort of how I'm doing it as well with the GT.
But I can see the limitations of either method - so I'd rather have both.

For sure, for my use they’re essentially the same, but both have their strengths.

 

[quadgear]

It's challenging once you have cross cutting concerns and indirection.

I think most devices conflate:

• Sharing a block and it's settings between presets at edit time.
• Sharing state of a block when playing (e.g., stomp mode)
• What happens when you edit a shared block (all presets are affected or only the current preset is affected). This is related to making a copy of a global as a starting point versus a single copy, versus some shadowing capability.

 

[molul]

I'm curious now: on top of being able to have a full stompbox preset, is Boss GT1000 amp emulation and effects quality and variety similar to Helix?

Back in 2020, I was about to jump from Boss GT8 to GT-whatever was available at that time. I read an user review in Thomann saying "for the price, Helix is much better", and that's the first I learnt about Helix.

And when I saw the UI I got totally hooked, because it was a huge leap from the GT8 and the GT-available in 2020. But I found way more than what I expected.

I wonder if GT1000 is a different animal or just the typical Boss device: robust and whatnot, but way too old UI-wise.

 

[ian_dissonance]

I'm curious now: on top of being able to have a full stompbox preset, is Boss GT1000 amp emulation and effects quality and variety similar to Helix?

Back in 2020, I was about to jump from Boss GT8 to GT-whatever was available at that time. I read an user review in Thomann saying "for the price, Helix is much better", and that's the first I learnt about Helix.

And when I saw the UI I got totally hooked, because it was a huge leap from the GT8 and the GT-available in 2020. But I found way more than what I expected.

I wonder if GT1000 is a different animal or just the typical Boss device: robust and whatnot, but way too old UI-wise.

Definitely a different UI, not as “idiot proof” as Helix. Less flexible in the variety of FX, more flexible in the in-preset routing. I’m not one to comment on modeling quality, lol. I don’t care about “this sounds exactly like X amp” and more “this sounds sick and responds the way I like”. In that regard I’m equally as enthused about the Boss stuff as the Helix stuff. If you need to be a virtual amp collector it’s not for you, I guess. On Helix I used mostly originals, same on the Boss. I honestly think the Boss has an edge for unique high gain sounds that work for modern detuned stuff. Definitely not as many choices in each category as far delays and stuff. My unique FX needs are more based around pitch and sound destruction and the boss excels at that. It’s probably not going to be everything if massive shoegaze reverbs and spiraling modded delays are what you’re after.

 

[Sascha Franck]

I'm curious now: on top of being able to have a full stompbox preset, is Boss GT1000 amp emulation and effects quality and variety similar to Helix?

As I don't want to derail this thread, I try to keep it short:
For my use cases (ian's seem to be different), the amp modeling sucks. That's why I'm using external modeling. The FX are fine for me. Defenitely not much variety but very solid, kinda "instant gratification".
Editing IMO plain and simply sucks as well, regardless whether it's on-device or through the editors.
But once you accept the shortcomings (or they don't apply to your use cases) and did your programming homework, it's in fact a pretty good device. Gapless switching, usually FX trail spillover (depending on the signal path differences between patches).
Very good hardware (Boss makes things that last, the GT-1000 is no exception), super low device latency included, which allows for nesting other digital units in its loops.
More info about my findings here.

 

[Orvillain]

I like offset.

Personally I think he's a fucking dildo.

 

[molul]

As I don't want to derail this thread, I try to keep it short:
For my use cases (ian's seem to be different), the amp modeling sucks. That's why I'm using external modeling. The FX are fine for me. Defenitely not much variety but very solid, kinda "instant gratification".
Editing IMO plain and simply sucks as well, regardless whether it's on-device or through the editors.
But once you accept the shortcomings (or they don't apply to your use cases) and did your programming homework, it's in fact a pretty good device. Gapless switching, usually FX trail spillover (depending on the signal path differences between patches).
Very good hardware (Boss makes things that last, the GT-1000 is no exception), super low device latency included, which allows for nesting other digital units in its loops.
More info about my findings here.

Interesting. I find it really curious how UX can be overlooked nowadays in a market where there are way better options. I mean, I only have the Boss VE500 because there are almost no competitors, but if there was something similar with 2020's UI, I would instantly switch. Here's hoping Stadium adds the needed vocals effects so I can kick it.

I hate Boss' UI and their lack of effort in that regard for so many years

 

[DrewJD82]

I think the only 'global' feature I've used on a modeler is the batch soft reset in AxeEdit.

 

[dws2384]

Global features on all modelers - regardless of brand - kinda suck, don't they?

• Global EQs:
  • There's often only one instead of e.g EQ presets you can define and toggle between. Studio monitor EQ, headphone EQ, live gig EQ...
  • It's always buried several menus deep so it's not quick to access.
  • It's often way more complicated than you need, e.g a full parametric or graphic EQ, when all you want is "something that can tweak the lows/mids/highs a bit" that could be a simple 3-knob EQ like you find on e.g some full range powered speakers.
• Functions that apply to all presets:
  • Global blocks don't even exist on most modelers so you could use e.g the same amp/cab settings across preset changes.
  • Global functions can be weirdly complicated like e.g Fractal's per-channel scene ignore when most just wanted "keep this block the same across presets".
  • Turning on/off cab sims is often buried, and often not flexible enough (e.g use cab sims on output 1 and not on output 2).
• Global parameter control:
  • MIDI mapping is limited, non-existent or preset specific.
  • MIDI mapping can get discarded if you change models within the same preset.
  • MIDI mapping can't be quickly turned on/off but requires removing the assignments one by one.
  • No global mapping features where you could e.g hook up a MIDI controller, assign its knobs to your amp params and have amp controls across all your presets, whether those have an amp block or not.
• Level control:
  • Many modelers don't have a single place to monitor and adjust all levels in/out of the unit. They rely on having physical knobs for some things, but otherwise it's all tied up into level controls inside presets.

It's kinda weird how this stuff is like an afterthought for all modeler manufacturers. Most real world rigs have a single amp/cab, and fx are switched around them. Yet this scenario is impossible to replicate on many modelers unless you can fit everything you need inside one preset and its switching capabilities.

Ya, I think the next generation of products will push into things like this or I hope they do. A brand like Fractal already has a lifetimes worth of amps to explore. They could add 1 a year and still be doing great.

I’d like them to put as much focus on how people use these in all kinds of different scenarios than just tweaking the modelling all the time. I’m not saying stop with that but we’ve reached the point of diminishing returns.

Their footswitching is already the best and the channels are a killer feature. It just needs to all tie together a bit more seamlessly

 

[laxu]

Thought I'd bump this one up so people don't clog down the Helix Stadium thread with global block talk.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Thought I'd bump this one up so people don't clog down the Helix Stadium thread with global block talk.

Possibly a good idea. Almost forgot about the existance of this thread.

 

[ian_dissonance]

Carried over from OT. I don’t want an auto save, I like being able to reselect a preset to “erase” changes if I want. I’d also rather see it implemented in an easy way and leave the “remember where your globals are” stuff to the user or just automatically copy them into an alternate playlist so you can leave them where they are but also see all of them in one place. And I like the idea of a limited number of “slots” per block or effect so you don’t end up with 600 global blocks.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Carried over from OT. I don’t want an auto save,

But that is precisely how the GT-1000 is treating global blocks. I thought you were fine with it?

 

[ian_dissonance]

But that is precisely how the GT-1000 is treating global blocks. I thought you were fine with it?

I have to save my preset on my GT-1k if I want the changes to persist.

 

[Sascha Franck]

And I like the idea of a limited number of “slots” per block or effect so you don’t end up with 600 global blocks.

As said, I would simply implement "performance groups". Place any patch in that group and you can share common blocks with any other patch in that group. Take it outside the group and things are as if nothing happened.

We could obviously discuss about what the process exactly would look like, but my idea would be to either copy a patch into a group or tag it.
The blocks you wanted to be tweakable group-wide would then be assignable in a similar fashion. Tag one as "group-wide" and it'd show up in whatever way in the block's selection menu on any other patch in that group.
Bonus points for being able to name the block.

 

[Sascha Franck]

I have to save my preset on my GT-1k if I want the changes to persist.

Not as long as it's switched on, only in case you reboot it.

 

[yek]

On my One Big Beautiful gigging rig with the Axe-Fx III, global blocks are essential.

Because I use the preset-per-song approach, and the same drives+amp+cab combination in each preset, plus other effects which are the same across presets.

However, automatic global blocks are not easy to implement.

I've suggested an alternative approach in the past and I stand by it:

• Every block would have an additional parameter: Link To Preset (..)
• This establishes a link between the block in the current preset and the same block instance in another preset that acts as source
• The link is not dynamic, so no automatic updates and no impact on preset loading times
• An Update Linked Blocks command in the UI would launch a batch update process that pastes the linked block values (all channels) from the source preset(s) into the linked blocks. Ideally, the Update parameter would be available per preset AND global
• The result would be similar to Global Blocks (shared block parameters values), but easier to implement. Speaking for myself, it would even replace the need to use Global Blocks on the III

 

[laxu]

On my One Big Beautiful gigging rig with the Axe-Fx III, global blocks are essential.

Because I use the preset-per-song approach, and the same drives+amp+cab combination in each preset, plus other effects which are the same across presets.

However, automatic global blocks are not easy to implement.

I've suggested an alternative approach in the past and I stand by it:

• Every block would have an additional parameter: Link To Preset (..)
• This establishes a link between the block in the current preset and the same block instance in another preset that acts as source
• The link is not dynamic, so no automatic updates and no impact on preset loading times
• An Update Linked Blocks command in the UI would launch a batch update process that pastes the linked block values (all channels) from the source preset(s) into the linked blocks. Ideally, the Update parameter would be available per preset AND global
• The result would be similar to Global Blocks (shared block parameters values), but easier to implement. Speaking for myself, it would even replace the need to use Global Blocks on the III

With this system, I guess you'd always have to go to that specific preset first to make any changes to say your Amp block. Then remember to propagate those changes to other presets.