Line 6 Helix Stadium

[Orvillain]

And yet, selling preorders without not even knowing how much the product will go for is icky.

Less icky than bullet-pointing features to drum up pre-orders and sales as part of what essentially amounts to a kickstarter, and then never delivering said features.

 

[paisleywookiee]

I haven’t bought anything digital fx or amp-wise in 12-13 years which is probably enough to have me evicted from this forum

As long as you don’t go on a long winded diatribe about how electronic drums are better than real drums, we’ll be just fine.

 

[BenIfin]

I think that would be an incredibly stupid approach. Why would Line6 benefit from the duplication of development efforts plus the performance hit of running native NAM?

Even if native NAM does slightly better in some YouTubers null tests, that’s not going to be the reason anyone buys a Stadium or Stadium XL. It’s all cost and no upside.

A top tier pro level modeler that also runs NAM Standard Natively ... to me would be the exact opposite of "incredibly stupid" :)

There is also the possibility that given the name "Proxy", they may or have already developed a lossless NAM conversion algorithm .... so it will transparently run NAM and "L6-NAM" ?

Either way, I doubt sheer grunt power is going to be an issue ..... but as of now, who the f*ck knows

But hey, this is what forums are all about :)

 

[Chocol8]

A top tier pro level modeler that also runs NAM Standard Natively ... to me would be the exact opposite of "incredibly stupid" :)

That's because you are thinking like a customer who likes NAM. From the Line6 point of view, how many extra units do you think they could sell with native NAM support, as opposed to their own high quality capture system with or without the ability to do high quality NAM conversions?

I would guess less than 100 units globally and probably single digits. Certainly not enough extra revenue to cover additional R&D costs, plus the market positioning costs. The only way I could see it making sense is if Proxy is being developed as an extension of NAM and support for legacy NAM is a painless very low cost add-on like including legacy Helix models and effects.

 

[ian_dissonance]

Offerings like this should be forbidden. Being curious about european asking prices, I found a shop from the Netherlands:

View attachment 50861

Nowhere does it say that this is just the preorder-deposit, the final asking price isn't announced, either, and there's also a whole lot of other misinformation or information not matching the picture ("12 OLED scratch strips" for starters).

But then, even Anderton's isn't telling the final asking price. I mean, they could as well just ask 3k for it, you wouldn't accept and they'd keep your deposit.

It says preorder right at the top of the page?

 

[MirrorProfiles]

The only way I could see it making sense is if Proxy is being developed as an extension of NAM and support for legacy NAM is a painless very low cost add-on like including legacy Helix models and effects.

I would not be surprised if it ends up being a customised and closed fork of NAM, but just total guesswork.

 

[ian_dissonance]

A top tier pro level modeler that also runs NAM Standard Natively ... to me would be the exact opposite of "incredibly stupid" :)

There is also the possibility that given the name "Proxy", they may or have already developed a lossless NAM conversion algorithm .... so it will transparently run NAM and "L6-NAM" ?

Either way, I doubt sheer grunt power is going to be an issue ..... but as of now, who the f*ck knows

But hey, this is what forums are all about :)

people who usually love free stuff aren’t looking to spend $2k on a piece of hardware that works with their free stuff. Most of the conversation around NAM hardware has been focused on paying as little as possible.

 

[JiveTurkey]

That's because you are thinking like a customer who likes NAM. From the Line6 point of view, how many extra units do you think they could sell with native NAM support, as opposed to their own high quality capture system with or without the ability to do high quality NAM conversions?

I would guess less than 100 units globally and probably single digits. Certainly not enough extra revenue to cover additional R&D costs, plus the market positioning costs. The only way I could see it making sense is if Proxy is being developed as an extension of NAM and support for legacy NAM is a painless very low cost add-on like including legacy Helix models and effects.

Is this because you're thinking like a customer that likes Tone-X?

 

[Sascha Franck]

It says preorder right at the top of the page?

Sure, but it doesn't say the 99 are a deposit.

 

[mikah912]

Given that DI says they have plans for Proxy that may go beyond audio (and because they've also hinted that time-based effects are on the table too), I think compatibility or equivalence with NAM is a bit too small.

 

[Lysander]

I really wish people stop bringing up NAM to the Stadium discussion like, every other week

L6 has already clearly explained their stance on NAM for the platform. And 99% of users won't give a shit.

 

[JiveTurkey]

If I wanted something that played other turd formats; I would have just bought gear intended for those capture/profiling file types. Proxy should be it's own thing.

 

[Dom Mcsweeney]

Given that DI says they have plans for Proxy that may go beyond audio (and because they've also hinted that time-based effects are on the table too), I think compatibility or equivalence with NAM is a bit too small.

Time effects are possible using NAM, though it is not provided off the shelf to users of the basic trainer.
For example, Steve made a NAM of the Vibrato channel on his Fender DR.


If D.I. and Steve and others do want to put their heads together about adding NAM support, or even some custom NAM solution, then that'd be awesome. I know the door is open from Steve's perspective.

 

[Orvillain]

Time effects are possible using NAM, though it is not provided off the shelf to users of the basic trainer.
For example, Steve made a NAM of the Vibrato channel on his Fender DR.


If D.I. and Steve and others do want to put their heads together about adding NAM support, or even some custom NAM solution, then that'd be awesome. I know the door is open from Steve's perspective.

lmao. Literally sounds like a Boss TR-2.

 

[Digital Igloo]

@Digital Igloo

My apologies if this is known info. The Stadium Floor XL will be my first L6 device.

How will the Stadium support vocals? While this is not top priority for me, I've never been satisfied with how the QC handles it. During gigs my vocalist deals with his own gear. When practicing at my house we run his mic through the QC. It feels jury rigged. For example, if I want an output control to mix his vocals I need to add an EQ block and then use the output from the EQ block. How will the Stadium UI manage this? Will there be any vocals-specific blocks?

Thanks in advance!

Unfortunately, we can't talk about future potential features or plans for Stadium, but Helix Floor/Rack/LT has been able to process four signals with stereo processing and separate stereo outs since 1.0. We even have a template in Setlist 8 for it.

Stadium will make things easier on the monitoring front because you have a completely different Matrix mix layer for the 1/4" (Guitarist or bassist's playback system), XLR (FOH), and Phones (singer's IEMs) outputs. Each Matrix output gets its own Global EQ as well. At launch, the mixes are all controlled from the front panel, but we plan to add various remote control capabilities later. If one knows anything about Stagescape M20d, they might infer something there.

 

[Karl Houseknecht]

We've already been hinted that Proxy is machine-learning based - i.e. closer to NAM than what Kemper does.

The learning part doesn’t make the “model” part leaner.

 

[Karl Houseknecht]

Because a proxy or “clone” is like a “single representation” of that amp with a specific set of parameters dialed in. It’s like it’s “static”. But the model has to be able to represent a myriad of parameter changes on the fly. It’s “dynamic”.

Which one would require more processing power? Representing an amp at one particular setting? Or a model that has to compute and represent thousands of permutations of those possible settings?

Neither. They’d be the same, because there would be one or more base amplifier models that would be “dialed” in by the profiling process. It’s just that those base models wouldn’t have knobs.

 

[Lysander]

The learning part doesn’t make the “model” part leaner.

It means there's no model running underneath, which is the way Kemper operates. All in all, static profiles/captures are normally less DSP-demanding than models.

 

[paisleywookiee]

Neither. They’d be the same, because there would be one or more base amplifier models that would be “dialed” in by the profiling process. It’s just that those base models wouldn’t have knobs.

That’s not how NAM works, AFAIK. It’s not a base model, with an EQ match, like the Kemper is.

 

[Dom Mcsweeney]

You can't say one is more or less powerful than the other (white box vs black box).
It depends on how complex one or the other is.
For example, a Tonex model requires a lot less CPU power to run (approximately comparable to a Nano sized NAM model), compared to a Standard NAM model. Same goes with white box component based amp models and how complex they are.