Line 6 Helix Stadium Talk

[I S]

Wheeeeeee!

 

[Karl Houseknecht]

Okay, @Digital Igloo , I really need an updated Stomp. I need a compact solution soon and I don’t want to have to buy the old one. My birthday was last month, unfortunately, but maybe it could be a Father’s Day present?

 

[dbfretz]

Okay, @Digital Igloo , I really need an updated Stomp. I need a compact solution soon and I don’t want to have to buy the old one. My birthday was last month, unfortunately, but maybe it could be a Father’s Day present?

QC mini the only option now.

 

[Chocol8]

With the talk of load boxes to simulate pickups…..

As the Stadium physically has a variable load within it on the guitar input, is there (software wise) anything L6 could do with the internal routing during the capture process to use that physical value if you’re capturing a vintage fuzz? I’m probably missing something or overthinking and, of course, Proxy is still brand new so it’s possible it will get low z fuzz even closer as it evolves. Although it’s not bang on, it’s already an impressive start imo.

The fuzz is reacting to the high impedance coming from the guitar which I think could be captured, but the low impedance input of the fuzz is also loading down the pickups. That moves and changes the resonance peak, smoothing out the highs etc.

I think the stadium would need a way to know what pickup you have and the volume pot value and setting to fully simulate the volume rollback interaction. It's a real outlier case though, so I think Line6 should focus on using Proxy to capture amps and other effects better, and those of us who are fuzz face fans should accept that we still need a physical pedal first in the chain.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Talking about a Stomp successor, I really wish they made it along "half a Stadium" lines, not like the quarter the OG Stomp more or less is. I could deal with less switches (4 would be kind of a must for me, though) but DSP-wise, please give me one full path with 16 blocks.

 

[EOengineer]

I think the stadium would need a way to know what pickup you have and the volume pot value and setting to fully simulate the volume rollback interaction. It's a real outlier case though, so I think Line6 should focus on using Proxy to capture amps and other effects better, and those of us who are fuzz face fans should accept that we still need a physical pedal first in the chain.

I agree. I’d love to be able to capture some of the more archaic (and cool) vintage fuzz circuits but it’s such a PITA I don’t see a sane path and would rather see L6 focus on more typical devices.

I do wonder if somewhere WAY down the line they open up a “Fuzz” option for proxy that lives with the other options for distortion, amp, amp + cab where perhaps the model that gets built infers some of that cleanup and loading behavior not unlike their current Hx arbiter model. It wouldn’t always be a 100% behavioral match but would probably perform better than the current caps.

 

[Sascha Franck]

I think the stadium would need a way to know what pickup you have and the volume pot value and setting to fully simulate the volume rollback interaction.

Not really. You can simulate pretty much any volume rollback behaviour with modifiers.

 

[BenIfin]

Re: Proxy Captures.

It seems to me (?) that most of the currently shown Proxy Capture Demonstrations on Y/T have been done using a Load Box (?)

From my limited understanding, a more "real" way is to have the real speaker connected and DI Tap off that, to do a Full or DI Capture (?)

In particular, Karlis from Amalgam has written in the past on his main thread at TOP that all his Captures for all devices, be they Cab and Speaker or just DI, are all DI Tapped off a connected Real Speaker - he has stated that in his tests as to whihc way to go, Captures done via a Load Box just weren't "as good"

He posted earlier on in his mega thread that this provided, to his ears, "better" and more "real sounding" copies in Tonex, QC, NAM etc...

Is there merit to this, or have the current gen Load Boxes negated this method (?)

 

[EOengineer]

Re: Proxy Captures.

It seems to me (?) that most of the currently shown Proxy Capture Demonstrations on Y/T have been done using a Load Box (?)

From my limited understanding, a more "real" way is to have the real speaker connected and DI Tap off that, to do a Full or DI Capture (?)

In particular, Karlis from Amalgam has written in the past on his main thread at TOP that all his Captures for all devices, be they Cab and Speaker or just DI, are all DI Tapped off a connected Real Speaker - he has stated that in his tests as to whihc way to go, Captures done via a Load Box just weren't "as good"

He posted earlier on in his mega thread that this provided, to his ears, "better" and more "real sounding" copies in Tonex, QC, NAM etc...

Is there merit to this, or have the current gen Load Boxes negated this method (?)

I’ve done pretty extensive testing - better is subjective but there are differences.

Not really. You can simulate pretty much any volume rollback behaviour with modifiers.

What?

 

[Karl Houseknecht]

QC mini the only option now.

I don't need captures. As good as Proxy is sounding, I doubt I'll ever really use it. I need Agoura amp modeling in a compact pedal, with effects.

 

[Karl Houseknecht]

Talking about a Stomp successor, I really wish they made it along "half a Stadium" lines, not like the quarter the OG Stomp more or less is. I could deal with less switches (4 would be kind of a must for me, though) but DSP-wise, please give me one full path with 16 blocks.

That's reasonable, but I'd even be fine with the 8 in the current Stomp. When I need compact it's for acoustic, lap or pedal steel, or just simple backup for a rock or church rig. I want this thing to be roughly the size of the original too, but I wouldn't turn down an extra footswitch if it made it a tad bigger.

 

[SillyOctpuss]

Not really. You can simulate pretty much any volume rollback behaviour with modifiers.

Has anyone managed this yet? I've never heard a good digital fuzz face, some ok muffs but that's about it.

 

[Chocol8]

Not really. You can simulate pretty much any volume rollback behaviour with modifiers.

Uh, how exactly is the Stadium supposed to know the volume pot position? Unless you are talking about a fixed position, its not simple.

 

[dbfretz]

I don't need captures. As good as Proxy is sounding, I doubt I'll ever really use it. I need Agoura amp modeling in a compact pedal, with effects.

The models in the QC are more than good enough?

 

[GTR37]

The models in the QC are more than good enough?

I have not used one lately but the first year they were kinda hit and miss
800, Silver Jube, /Be/Hbe those were really good
Pretty much any amp w an EL34

The SLO/ Recto /Dzl
Were not but they have since redone those I believe

People say the recent batch of Fender and the Dumble are really good but I can’t comment

 

[[Nathan]]

Re: Proxy Captures.

It seems to me (?) that most of the currently shown Proxy Capture Demonstrations on Y/T have been done using a Load Box (?)

From my limited understanding, a more "real" way is to have the real speaker connected and DI Tap off that, to do a Full or DI Capture (?)

In particular, Karlis from Amalgam has written in the past on his main thread at TOP that all his Captures for all devices, be they Cab and Speaker or just DI, are all DI Tapped off a connected Real Speaker - he has stated that in his tests as to whihc way to go, Captures done via a Load Box just weren't "as good"

He posted earlier on in his mega thread that this provided, to his ears, "better" and more "real sounding" copies in Tonex, QC, NAM etc...

Is there merit to this, or have the current gen Load Boxes negated this method (?)

if you’re using a loadbox and connect a speaker to it then it will bypass the impedance of the loadbox and take on the speaker. So you can still do all of this while still using a loadbox

The downside is it’s going to be blasting through the speaker so you’d want to be in a studio or somewhere you can crank the nuts out of an amp if you wanna go this route

I haven’t tested this extensively but if I had a studio and a bunch of cabs then yeah it would be cool to have the amp at the same settings and try out some different cabs as the load to hear the differences.

I don’t think it’s a dealbreaker and the notion that “if you don’t do it that way” then your captures won’t be as good as someone who is doing it that way. I think it’s just a cool thing to have imparted on the capture… but in reality a quality loadbox will be fine

 

[Karl Houseknecht]

The models in the QC are more than good enough?

Not interested in Neural's modeling of the amps I use. I like what I like.

 

[DG80]

Not to sound like a broken record, but this talk of using a load box to make a proxy capture; is nobody else noticing the fizz happening 'behind' the notes when you roll the guitar volume down on the proxy capture itself?

It's driving me nuts, and nobody else seems to be saying about it.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

Not to sound like a broken record, but this talk of using a load box to make a proxy capture; is nobody else noticing the fizz happening 'behind' the notes when you roll the guitar volume down on the proxy capture itself?

It's driving me nuts, and nobody else seems to be saying about it.

I definitely noticed it clearly in your example but I haven’t heard anyone else demonstrate it or mention it. Would be curious if others can test

 

[dws2384]

Re: Proxy Captures.

It seems to me (?) that most of the currently shown Proxy Capture Demonstrations on Y/T have been done using a Load Box (?)

From my limited understanding, a more "real" way is to have the real speaker connected and DI Tap off that, to do a Full or DI Capture (?)

In particular, Karlis from Amalgam has written in the past on his main thread at TOP that all his Captures for all devices, be they Cab and Speaker or just DI, are all DI Tapped off a connected Real Speaker - he has stated that in his tests as to whihc way to go, Captures done via a Load Box just weren't "as good"

He posted earlier on in his mega thread that this provided, to his ears, "better" and more "real sounding" copies in Tonex, QC, NAM etc...

Is there merit to this, or have the current gen Load Boxes negated this method (?)

Tapping off a DI while keeping the speaker connected to the amp is going to result in the most accurate captures for that amp.

1) The absolute best load boxes have very close impedance curves to real speakers but still not exact and only a few are close - Suhr, Fractal and the new Two Notes. Many others aren’t really that close. Captor, Ox, Boss, pretty much all the others. Fryette is not bad.

2) Even if you do use one of the good load boxes, they pretty much all match a 412 with usually either greenbacks or v30’s. So if you’re capturing an AC30, Deluxe reverb, Princeton, etc you’re going to get that capture with that 412 impedance curve baked in, which again is fine, but if you’re loading a DI capture of an AC30 you’re likely going to pair it with a 2x12 alnico blue cab and having that impedance curve would likely sound ‘more correct’ it’s not wrong either though. If have a fractal device you can change the impedance curves to see what the difference in sound would be.

It’s also going to be loud as hell on most amps doing captures with the speakers connected

Currently even with Agoura, if you use an IR it’s going to default to the impedance curve of the matched cab, so you could have a similar mismatch, although the matched cab for Agoura is likely the common one for that amp.