Line 6 Helix Stadium Pre-Launch Discussion

As you say, if you use a global block, same as if you use any block, it must be a deliberate decision, and therefore any misuse would be the user's fault.

As said, when you copy a patch on the GT-1000, the global blocks will stay assigned. That's where the problems start.
And now let's imagine you don't adjust things on the unit but via an external MIDI controller (which would be one of the reasons why I wanted to use global blocks). You simply wouldn't see the indicator frame or whatever.
Your proposal doesn't adress that issue.
 
As said, when you copy a patch on the GT-1000, the global blocks will stay assigned. That's where the problems start.
Oh sorry, I don't fully understand this. Do you mean this?
  • Go to a preset.
  • Press "Save as", and save it as a new preset. The global block stays global in the new preset.
If that's what you mean, where's the problem? You might not want the global block to stay global in the new preset? If so, there would be two solutions:
  • Remove the global block and add a normal block instead (you could use a Favorite or User Defaults here).
  • There could be a way to "un-global" a global block.

And now let's imagine you don't adjust things on the unit but via an external MIDI controller (which would be one of the reasons why I wanted to use global blocks). You simply wouldn't see the indicator frame or whatever.
Your proposal doesn't adress that issue.
I see. Well, that sounds like a really niche use case, to be honest. Sorry if you've mentioned this before, but, what would be the solution you suggest in this case?

Anyway, again being honest, I wouldn't complicate the implementation of a simple feature that most users would use "normally" (editing through either the device or through the desktop or mobile app, where you would always see if a block is global) with great benefit, only because a small group of users (well, maybe it's a big one, but it doesn't sound like that) edit through MIDI only and aren't willing to have an eye on visual indications on the device. I mean, with the workflow you mention, how do you know if you're editing a delay time or a phaser rate, if you're not looking at the device or the editing app?


I worked for a company that had the bad habit of adapting the interface to any of the users demands, and that was a huge mess, causing other users to be highly confused about "what does this button here does?", which was a button made for just one customer (true story, repeated many times).

You have to be very careful with that, and try to keep things as simple as possible. There will always be users wanting certain things that would only work for them, and if you try to satisfy them all, you'll end up with an unusable software that most people don't want to learn, because there's too much noise. Sometimes users just need to adapt to the software, and the software must only adapt to the user if the impact is big enough.

Maybe if I understood better your use case I could change my mind, but as you've explained, I'd instantly mark the feature request as a "Won't do" :(
 
Last edited:
If that's what you mean, where's the problem? You might not want the global block to stay global in the new preset? If so, there would be two solutions:
  • Remove the global block and add a normal block instead (you could use a Favorite or User Defaults here).
  • There could be a way to "un-global" a global block.

This is possible with the GT. But it's cumbersome as you'd have to check each and every block for being global or not. And once you forget one, chances are you'd mess up other patches. Take a wild guess of how I know...

Well, that sounds like a really niche use case, to be honest. Sorry if you've mentioned this before, but, what would be the solution you suggest in this case?

Using global groups, as described.
Once you copy a patch you would have to explicitely tell it to become a part of that global group again. Which would possibly be a 1-2 click affair.

And well, as far as "niche use case" goes: Have you ever tried adjusting the relevant parameters in a patch through some external MIDI knob/fader box? I have, and it's absolutely excellent. I'm even considering to buy one of these here, should the Stomp make it back onto my main board (which may happen).
And IMO one of the reasons we don't see more people doing so is the lack of global blocks, simply because once you switch patches, your external knobs/faders won't represent the actual values anymore.

---

However: There's another reason speaking against your proposal. With that proposed favourite-alike list of global blocks, you might add one of those global blocks to a patch. Fine.
But how would you know in which other patches that global block is used? Right, you won't know at all. This is one of the big issues of the Boss way. My mind might be able to keep track as much as in "block presets 1 are for live preset bank 1, block 2 presets are for live preset bank 2" - and that was it already, especially as you might use multiple global blocks of the same type (in my case delays and EQs). It's incredibly tough to keep track of that once you have a larger amount of banks all using different global block presets. I'd say it's almost impossible to run this 100% error-free, especially with an ever growing list of patches and live sets.

You have to be very careful with that, and try to keep things as simple as possible.

My proposal would be very easy to use. And pretty much foolproof.
Just add the patches you want to use for any given gig to a "global group" (could as well just be a setlist - this is where we could debate about how this could interact, or rather shouldn't, etc.) and decide which of the blocks within a patch of that group should become a global one.
You could possibly start with, say, a clean amp and set a checkmark in whatever "global" (or rather: global-group-wide) box. In any other patches assigned to that very group, this amp would now be available to pick from whatever menu. In that very menu you wouldn't be able to pick anything else but that very amp (or anything else that you've assigned to become global).
And that's pretty much it.

And as far as organisation goes: Once you copy a patch, you'd have to explicitely select a global group again to keep it inside that group, a plain saving process would create a "normal" patch. No hassle at all as selecting a global group would be a one-click affair on the saving process.
In addition, all patches belonging to a global group should be indexed in the patch list, just a color and a number from, say, 1-10(0) would be fine, depending on how many global groups you allow for. For my personal use case, 10 would be absolutely sufficient, especially in case the overall process of assigning things is easy. Too much and it'd possibly become too confusing.

As said, this should defenitely *not* be another, extended way to present block presets (which is what it's handled like in the Boss universe) but a "strictly live" utility. Something that should be as easy to add to any existing setlist/bank as it gets.

Maybe if I understand your use case I could change my mind,

Don't know how to explain it any better. As said, this is pretty much strictly a live (or let's call it "realtime") playing functionality. The home dweller may not ever need it (unless you're mimicking a live performance). I wouldn't even call it a "feature" but rather a "utility". This hasn't got anything to do with block presets or whatever (that functionality is covered already). It's single purpose would be to adress the "Yuck, my cleans aren't loud enough but I don't have enough time to adjust and resave all of my 13 clean patches during soundcheck!" issues.
It'd take you one step closer to re-create a complexed hybrid, loopswitcher-controlled rig. And as said, these are the rigs I enjoyed playing the most. Not because of their sound but because I was able to quickly tweak the entire setup in a matter of seconds to accomodate pretty much each and every situation.

Almost needless to say, but: it might as well become very handy for some other scenarios. Let's say you'd use a "free form" patch that you'd call up here and there. You have that nice MIDI fader/knob box (or a virtual representation through, say, TouchOSC) sitting there already and start some delay mayhem on that free form patch. Now you switch back to one of your bread and butter patches. Call up the free form patch again and your delay will be back to it's saved settings, not corresponding with the dialed in knob controller anymore.

After all, there's a reason for me going back to a hybrid setup and using the only unit on the market doing global blocks (namely the GT-1000 - ok, there's the Axe FX III as well, but I can't justify the huge expense only to end up with a rack unit, something I just don't want to deal with anymore). I'd rather not have to do so as I'm absolutely fine with anything the HX-verse delivers soundwise.
 
But it's cumbersome as you'd have to check each and every block for being global or not. And once you forget one, chances are you'd mess up other patches.
There could just be an option in the "save as..." screen to choose whether to keep or discard "globalness" of global blocks.

Once you copy a patch you would have to explicitely tell it to become a part of that global group again
What if you wanted to always keep globals and not do another click to have that? It should be analyzed which of the two cases is the most common and set it as default. Anyway, the "keep globals" flag in the "save as" screen would be a better solution for both cases.

Have you ever tried adjusting the relevant parameters in a patch through some external MIDI knob/fader box?
Nope, and I can't think of a reason to do that instead of just editing in the device or the editor app 😅

And IMO one of the reasons we don't see more people doing so is the lack of global blocks, simply because once you switch patches, your external knobs/faders won't represent the actual values anymore.
I'd say the reason is more related to why most people prefer Mac/Win over any Linux distro in terms of UX. Linux is fun only for people who enjoy customizing things, but it's hell for any other user, which is the majority of computer users.

It's like buying a Super Nintendo Classic Mini or making a retro console from a Raspberry Pi. The latter is not for everyone.

Disclaimer: I'm a programmer and I work with Linux at my job, but I prefer MacOS for using DAWs, Photoshop, or for my personal dev projects. I'm more of less comfortable with complexity but I much prefer simplicity in software.

But how would you know in which other patches that global block is used?
That raises a question: how would you know which presets belong to a global group? I must be missing something for sure, but I don't see yet how grouping/layering solves that problem. I'd say it's fair to just ask the user to be aware of what he does😅

Anyway, I don't think it would be difficult to add this in a global block screen: a button that opens the list of presets where that global block is used. And pressing an item of that list loads that preset.

Not trying to fight for who's right or wrong here, but I honestly think the impact for your solution and mine is way different. And impact is what ultimately greenlights a feature request or not.

Not meaning that "my proposal is so good and Line6 should develop it" by any means. Helix team might find better solutions or just fully discard this feature for not being as useful as I think.
 
What if you wanted to always keep globals and not do another click to have that?

As you said yourself, there could be an option in the save dialog. Something I defenitely support.

Nope, and I can't think of a reason to do that instead of just editing in the device or the editor app

So you always want to have a laptop or tablet showing the editor during a gig? I'd need two tablets to get there as one of them is most often used for sheets.
In addition, real knobs can be adjusted MUCH, MUCH easier in the heat of a live playing context.
Let alone I wouldn't have to select anything before editing as all the parameters I would want to edit would be mapped to my physical knobs already.

I'd say the reason is more related to why most people prefer Mac/Win over any Linux distro in terms of UX. Linux is fun only for people who enjoy customizing things, but it's hell for any other user, which is the majority of computer users.

Ok, we can maybe stop discussing it between us now. You clearly don't seem to understand what I'm aiming at. Which is absolutely fine with me, but it's rendering any further discussion useless.
You haven't used a knob controller live, you also haven't used global blocks live - and still you're trying to tell me how this would be a weird or "niche" thing.

That raises a question: how would you know which presets belong to a global group?

They would be indexed. See my previous post.

I'd say it's fair to just ask the user to be aware of what he does

Ask any supporter. Expecting users "to be aware of" is the last thing to happen.

Not trying to fight for who's right or wrong here, but I honestly think the impact for your solution and mine is way different.

The obvious difference being that I have actually tried things out in real existing scenarios, aka gigs.

As said, we shouldn't discuss this any further among us two. You don't seem to need such a functionality at all. Which is fine, really. But that's about it. And your not alone with your opinion, either - many people keep going at me when I try to explain the usefulness of global blocks.
 
Honestly such a dull topic and comes across as hyper niche. Sounds like in general some global eq will do most of the on the fly problems and the rest would just be a nice to have.

Hopefully one day a Sascha approved workflow is out there for you but I get the feeling people are just fine with whatever’s out there now and make it work for their live rigs just fine
 
And fwiw:

but I get the feeling people are just fine with whatever’s out there now and make it work for their live rigs just fine

Just that often they aren't. /cue endless discussions about Fletcher-Munson, how effects get lost in a busy live scenario, amp channel balances and what not. Global EQs aren't good enough to adress that.
 
Last edited:
So you always want to have a laptop or tablet showing the editor during a gig? I'd need two tablets to get there as one of them is most often used for sheets.
Oh no, I wouldn't ever want to use a laptop or tablet to edit my presets during a gig. I would either kneel to my Helix LT to change whatever if it's really urgent (i.e.: volume is WAY too high or too low) and doesn't take much time, or just leave it as it is and remember to fix whatever needed editing when I'm back home, for the next gig.

I usually just try to have everything well thought-out in rehearsals so I don't need to edit anything during a gig, which is something I just couldn't afford (singing, playing guitar and switching things in Helix with my right foot and in my Boss VE-500 with my left foot is already pretty hard XD).


You haven't used a knob controller live, you also haven't used global blocks live - and still you're trying to tell me how this would be a weird or "niche" thing.
FWIW, and this is obvious: my opinion is just an opinion, and if I ever sound like I'm trying to go further than that, I'm sorry.

I could perfectly be wrong, but I'm just saying what I think about your proposal (because we're in a discussion board, aren't we?) based on the fact that this is the first time I've heard about this. I hope the words I'm using aren't rude, as that's not my intention at all.

And again, and I can't stress this enough, just because I think something, doesn't mean I'm stating that it's the only universal truth and anyone who thinks otherwise should feel ashamed. I'm more aware about not knowing anything everyday.


The obvious difference being that I have actually tried things out in real existing scenarios, aka gigs.
That's totally true :)

The most complex thing I've done live is syncing a click track with MIDI commands being sent to keyboards and 4 multieffect units (bass, guitars and vocals) through a MacBook with Ableton, and we stopped doing it after we had to cancel a gig because the MacBook wouldn't boot (and it had been a long time since the last time we rehearsed without click track and automation, so we couldn't do a "normal" gig). The Showcase feature might make me give a second chance to this.


Ok, we can maybe stop discussing it between us now. You clearly don't seem to understand what I'm aiming at. Which is absolutely fine with me, but it's rendering any further discussion useless.
Sure, no probs! (y)


Super realistic amp modeling is every bit as hyper niche in a live context. Maybe even more so.
True that. Although in terms of marketing, that feature is way easier to work with in order to sell a product than "global layers to make MIDI editing easier", which is something most people wouldn't even understand at all ^_^U
 
I usually just try to have everything well thought-out in rehearsals so I don't need to edit anything during a gig, which is something I just couldn't afford (singing, playing guitar and switching things in Helix with my right foot and in my Boss VE-500 with my left foot is already pretty hard XD).

I'm playing lots of subbing and telephone band gigs, so that's an entirely different thing. No rehearsals at all.

and if I ever sound like I'm trying to go further than that, I'm sorry.

As said, it's all fine. Didn't want to start an argument, no hard feelings, either.

For me it's just "been there, done that" - so I'm pretty aware of what I'm wishing for and how I think things could be implemented.
In a nutshell: Just as a lot of folks want the sound of analog amps and what not to be nailed, I want the usability aspect to be nailed as well. And crawling on the floor to adjust things, maybe even having to select items beforehand, simply is quite the opposite of turning around to your amp, grab one knob, turn it and be done with it.

I hope the words I'm using aren't rude, as that's not my intention at all.

No, you weren't rude. And my reply wasn't meant to be rude at all, either.

True that. Although in terms of marketing, that feature is way easier to work with in order to sell a product than "global layers to make MIDI editing easier", which is something most people wouldn't even understand at all ^_^U

It's pretty much a general thing. All things "just usability" or utilitarian simply aren't great fodder for promotion.

For instance, I only bought a Helix Floor when there was an option to deactivate snapshot bypass. I know I'd love snapshots and would want to use them, but the way they were implemented at first was in the way. Adding that little piece of functionality made a huge difference for me and once I learned it was introduced, I started looking for a Floor - at the same time, I didn't even spend a second looking for new fancy amps and FX, I just knew I'd get along with what was there a long time before. And when you look up HX Floor YT videos, you will hardly ever see anything regarding usability being mentioned. Sure, snapshot introduction was praised, but the smaller things usually go under the radar.

Same with MIDI control now not being tied to snapshots anymore. When I went through my BCR experiments, it'd be just kickass to have that already, and it's been the main reason for me to not try to expand the idea further. Might've changed some things in my Floor relationship.

Add to this that whenever I'm bringing up any such things, I'm almost treated as an outlier. Just when I demonstrated my BCR setup to some folks, they were like "oh, that's excellent!" - unfortunately there's no video of it (only one of me controlling things through a tablet, which isn't as impressive). Maybe I should recreate something similar with the Stomp (even if I don't need it for my small Stomp board) and do a video.

I mean, seriously, by now there's small and affordable MIDI controllers that you could possibly mount to a small mic stand, always in reach, no need to bow down or crawl around, no need to look for and select any specific parameters, everything would just be mapped, allowing for instant WYSIWYG control. Hence pretty much every bit as you'd do with analog equipment. Which, at least IMO, still trumps any currently available options in terms of quick sound adjustments on a live stage.
 
Honestly such a dull topic and comes across as hyper niche. Sounds like in general some global eq will do most of the on the fly problems and the rest would just be a nice to have.

Hopefully one day a Sascha approved workflow is out there for you but I get the feeling people are just fine with whatever’s out there now and make it work for their live rigs just fine
Not even a little bit. For context, if I have a bank (or several) of presets that I use live and and I want to adjust the “dirty amp” gain -10 on all of them, having a block that I know changes wherever that block appears in that bank would be hyper useful. Or if you wanted to change a delay or modulation model for all grouped presets. Going from Helix to a GT-1000 global blocks are awesome and something every modeler should have. Having a lock to setlist/lock to bank and a warning like “Editing this Block Will Effect other Presets, Would You like to Ungroup this Preset?” would make it pretty simple, IMO. It’s way different than a global EQ.
 
No chance I or nearly anyone else are gonna read these novels you guys are writing as posts. Carry on though…

Working Kermit The Frog GIF
 
No chance I or nearly anyone else are gonna read these novels you guys are writing as posts. Carry on though…

Working Kermit The Frog GIF
That’s actually true
the Cole’s notes
Sasha hopes for a product with more knobs to play with
And some sort of protection from sunlight and telephone gigs
 
That’s actually true
the Cole’s notes
Sasha hopes for a product with more knobs to play with
And some sort of protection from sunlight and telephone gigs
As long as there are locking rings around each switch where you can mount the upside down styrofoam cups; visibility should not be a problem :rollsafe
 
Add to this that whenever I'm bringing up any such things, I'm almost treated as an outlier.
I feel ya.

I mean, seriously, by now there's small and affordable MIDI controllers that you could possibly mount to a small mic stand, always in reach, no need to bow down or crawl around, no need to look for and select any specific parameters, everything would just be mapped, allowing for instant WYSIWYG control. Hence pretty much every bit as you'd do with analog equipment. Which, at least IMO, still trumps any currently available options in terms of quick sound adjustments on a live stage.
At this point, with amp sim/multi-FX units with increasingly sophisticated touch screen GUIs hitting the market, it makes more sense to have the unit itself at arm's reach, and just work on external footcontrol solutions. I know there are always some wrinkles there in terms of presenting state information, but it's nowhere near as challenging as trying to duplicate the on-unit (screen, encoders, switches) functionality with a generic MIDI controller.
 
I feel ya.


At this point, with amp sim/multi-FX units with increasingly sophisticated touch screen GUIs hitting the market, it makes more sense to have the unit itself at arm's reach, and just work on external footcontrol solutions. I know there are always some wrinkles there in terms of presenting state information, but it's nowhere near as challenging as trying to duplicate the on-unit (screen, encoders, switches) functionality with a generic MIDI controller.

I have high hopes for the wireless editing (which I'm assuming will be dashed upon product launch), but I'm envisioning the ability to essentially mirror the Stadium's touch screen on my iPad.
 
I have high hopes for the wireless editing (which I'm assuming will be dashed upon product launch), but I'm envisioning the ability to essentially mirror the Stadium's touch screen on my iPad.
It was mentioned earlier in the thread that at launch the editor might be somewhat basic, but I'm hoping eventually it will have the same functions as the touch screen. A lot of things should work well with dragging a mouse around, such as focus view etc.... In the mean time, I'm thinking about how I can set it up and use the on board touch screen without having to bend over too much. That's one issue with it being a floor based device.
 
Back
Top