Helix API: Custom Control Possibilities?

[panhardleft]

Hey everyone, I’ve been using the Helix for a couple of years and love it, but I really miss having a documented API. It would be amazing to build a custom hardware controller with physical knobs and switches or even a nice interface on an iPad. Is there any chance Line 6 could release or document an API for Helix? @Digital Igloo ? Would love to hear your thoughts!

 

[Orvillain]

Doubt this would ever happen.

 

[laxu]

I really wish modeler manufacturers released a full MIDI Sysex spec for their gear.

The Axe-Fx II era was cool when there were some 3rd party tools that could augment the unit, like that RAC-12 rack box that added more knobs to the unit. By comparison Axe-Fx III era gear requires reverse-engineering the Sysex commands yourself, and that just sucks.

 

[Sascha Franck]

I really wish modeler manufacturers released a full MIDI Sysex spec for their gear.

Sure. Not that I'd really use it myself (I try to avoid SysEx as best as I can ever since I've built a - finally working! - Roland Sound Canvas Editor environment in Logic myself), but it'd surely bring up some nice 3rd party tools.
I was about to at least look into it for the GT-1000 (which, in best Boss/Roland tradition, comes with full SysEx specs) but due to the lack of a proper hardware controller (after a pretty intense honeymoon I stepped back from TouchOSC as I realized a tablet isn't all *that* great for quick access in a live environment when you still have to hold your pick and what not...), I skipped those plans, at least for the time being.

Whatever, what I'd like to see is some of the bigger modeler offerings to come up with, say, Mackie HUI compatibility. There's several controller supporting it, it also features bidirectional communication, so that'd possibly be the easiest way for non-tech-nerds to get proper external controllers going.

 

[Digital Igloo]

Hey everyone, I’ve been using the Helix for a couple of years and love it, but I really miss having a documented API. It would be amazing to build a custom hardware controller with physical knobs and switches or even a nice interface on an iPad. Is there any chance Line 6 could release or document an API for Helix? @Digital Igloo ? Would love to hear your thoughts!

It's not so much keeping users from making custom controllers or editors; it's more about not giving competitors free insight into our methods. And of course, avoiding CS calls from people who run into issues: "Your API says this but I'm getting a different result. Can you distract your development team with a slew of emails to help me develop a product?"

If we had time to spare, maybe, but we're positively slammed right now.

I really wish modeler manufacturers released a full MIDI Sysex spec for their gear.

The Axe-Fx II era was cool when there were some 3rd party tools that could augment the unit, like that RAC-12 rack box that added more knobs to the unit. By comparison Axe-Fx III era gear requires reverse-engineering the Sysex commands yourself, and that just sucks.

I was under the (perhaps mistaken) impression that AxeFX III no longer uses SysEx to communicate with the editor/FC6/FC12. Aren't they now doing something similar to how Helix Rack communicates with Helix Control?

Regardless, there are far more robust and more powerful, scalable, and extensible protocols than SysEx.

 

[laxu]

I was under the (perhaps mistaken) impression that AxeFX III no longer uses SysEx to communicate with the editor/FC6/FC12. Aren't they now doing something similar to how Helix Rack communicates with Helix Control?

It uses Sysex between Axe-Edit and Axe-Fx 3. You send a Sysex command with e.g block ID, param ID, param value and a checksum, and over MIDI In you get the same thing back as "Axe-Fx 3 set the value to what you wanted", or an error if it failed. Not sure what it does between the FC stuff, but probably something fairly simple since most of the processing is at the Axe-Fx 3 end.

Regardless, there are far more robust and more powerful, scalable, and extensible protocols than SysEx.

Oh for sure. MIDI 2.0 would probably allow for a lot of cool things too for external software/hardware.

It's just that none of the modelers on the market offer any good way to work with them using 3rd party gear if you want to do something that is not directly possible from the unit.

One example is the way Fractal locks down parameter control from Axe-Edit and front panel if you map a MIDI controller external modifier to any param. Only the MIDI controller, whether it's connected or not, can change that parameter now. There's not even an escape hatch to disable all modifiers if you forgot your MIDI controller, there's a faulty cable etc. All you can do is remove the mapping one by one, from each preset.

If you instead use MIDI Sysex to say "set block ID 3 param ID 2 to value 6.2" it will do that without complaints. This instantly allows you to use a MIDI controller OR Axe-Edit OR front panel as you please. You can also adjust as many parameters as you want in realtime instead of the 16 CC mapping limitation on the unit.

But you need to write a middleman software to translate MIDI CC values -> Axe-Fx Sysex commands.

To bring it to Helix, the "Let's ditch all MIDI CC mappings because you changed the model in this block" functionality is so, so bad. If Helix offered a global MIDI mapping system that doesn't give a damn about whether the param actually exists in a preset, you could build your own instant control system for any block params.

 

[FuzzyAce]

If we had time to spare, maybe, but we're positively slammed right now.

With what? Do tell...

 

[panhardleft]

It's not so much keeping users from making custom controllers or editors; it's more about not giving competitors free insight into our methods. And of course, avoiding CS calls from people who run into issues: "Your API says this but I'm getting a different result. Can you distract your development team with a slew of emails to help me develop a product?"

If we had time to spare, maybe, but we're positively slammed right now.

Thanks a lot for your detailed reply, Eric – I really appreciate that you took the time to respond!

I understand your concern about giving away too much insight to competitors. But to be honest, I think it would mostly benefit dedicated users like us. There’s a great community around the Helix, and having some more open tools could lead to interesting third-party projects. Things like open-source controllers, accessibility tools, or even educational setups.
For example, I found this GitHub project: kempline/helix_usb. The author only figured out a few USB messages between HX Edit and a Helix device – but it shows how motivated some users are to go deeper, even without documentation.

Speaking of controllers: I’ve had this idea for a long time. Imagine a small controller with a horizontal screen, some endless encoders, and a few switches. When a preset is selected, the display shows the current amp model and its available parameters. The encoders then control things like gain, bass, mid, treble – depending on the amp. Like a “Helix Channel Strip”.
This would make live tweaks super intuitive – especially for players who find menu-diving cumbersome...

I understand that your team is very busy, but I still hope that someday a more open architecture will be possible. Even just a small “developer beta” would be a great start.