Line 6 Helix Stadium

[Chocol8]

Partially ready launches include Quad Cortex and TMP. I’m not singling out Line 6. I just don’t like gear that delivers some and promises more. Launch it with a full feature set.

If all the major players in the industry follow a similar strategy that you disagree with, it should make you stop and think that maybe, just maybe, they are the ones who know what they are doing and why. If after thinking about it you conclude they are all wrong, then by all means you should jump into the market and kick their collective asses.

Launching with a full feature set is completely impractical. DI said the Stadium design requirements were set in 2017 and some of the features they want to include are still not ready and won't be until 2026. Others may take several more years to finish. They could sit on the device for another 5 years or they could let us buy it and enjoy what is already complete while we wait for the remaining development. It sure seems to me that the guitar community overwhelmingly prefers the Line 6 approach and loves firmware updates that deliver new functionality and features. They only get upset, and rightfully so, when things are promised but not delivered. Line 6, Fractal, Kemper and throw in IK, have all done a pretty good job of delivering updates they promised plus unpromised updates. A couple players don't make promises and don't offer much in the way of updates, and NDSP stands as the one major player that makes a lot of promises and fails to deliver. Let's not condemn the industry and the standard strategy because of one bad company.

 

[KingsXJJ]

Just like the amps, there have been at least a couple generations of HX reverbs, so I wouldn't refer to them as a monolithic whole.

The latest generation of "Dynamic" reverbs along with the redone Spring reverb are a couple of tiers above the Double Tank/Searchlights generation for me. They compare really well against Fractal, and with their timing amidst Stadium development...... they're probably Angoura in all but name. Same for the latest delays.

I’m not surprised that Line 6 has been working on improving them. Perhaps they are Agoura level in some sense and were never constrained by the decision that they would work on old hardware and legacy platforms. With reverb in particular, I would be inclined to doubt that.

An example of the intensity of DSP usage for reverb that was illustrative to me was Fender’s work on the Tone Master Amp line. I seem to recall them having a quad-core processor. One core was dedicated to the amp tones and the remaining three were all dedicated to delivering as an authentic spring reverb as possible. Makes sense since “Reverb” is right in the name of some of them. I think if thought of objectively this example might lend credence to my thoughts.

Why is anyone against having the very best effects possible? Maybe there’s a reason I don’t get. Or perhaps effect quality is not as important as amp tones to some folks.

 

[KingsXJJ]

He said something along the lines of “IF new effects can run on the old devices, they will be added” which means it’s not relying on the old hardware, it’s “if the old hardware can hang, give it the new thing” and I think that’s an EXCELLENT business model

Well if the new effects aren’t being limited to the old hardware at all, I’m good!

 

[ian_dissonance]

Why would you need new effects that can ONLY run on the new DSP? Like how much resources should a reverb take up on a device 2-2.5x as powerful as the current gen that it can’t run on a lesser DSP? If they update and new FX that have same % of DSP as they do now, what’s even the point of the extra power? Simply the 2% tone difference a lot of people only pretend to hear anyways? What a waste, lol.

 

[KingsXJJ]

You'll get there,

We all do!

 

[KingsXJJ]

but clearly it would help everyone else understand what the hell you are talking about.

If I’m not clear by now, I’ll never be. I’ve slimmed it down as much as I care to.

 

[KingsXJJ]

Why would you need new effects that can ONLY run on the new DSP? Like how much resources should a reverb take up on a device 2-2.5x as powerful as the current gen that it can’t run on a lesser DSP? If they update and new FX that have same % of DSP as they do now, what’s even the point of the extra power? Simply the 2% tone difference a lot of people only pretend to hear anyways? What a waste, lol.

Why would you need any new amps that run only on the new DSP? I’m guessing quality.

Reverb takes up 3/4’s of the ToneMaster Amps available processing. The 2% reference is just hyperbole based on your opinion.

Why would Line 6 devote all that extra DSP to new amps that only 2% that a lot of people only pretend to hear anyways? That’s using your logic, not mine.

Again, folks seem to be arguing against improved effects quality. It’s kinda funny seeing the contortions needed to maintain that stance.

 

[Lysander]

(maybe) RIP Kemper & QC, it was nice knowing you.

 

[Dom Mcsweeney]

If I’m not clear by now, I’ll never be. I’ve slimmed it down as much as I care to.

I think the question of 'can effects get even better?' is a perfectly good one, of course things can be improved, but doubting Line 6 for the sake of doubting alone is crazy to me considering how much they've proven in the past.

I would suggest that some of your way of wording things is coming across a little too cynical, and it's unclear to me why you would go down that route.

 

[Mongillo19]

(maybe) RIP Kemper & QC, it was nice knowing you.

View attachment 46675

Yeah I can really see making convolution reverbs a thing. Still, very exciting

 

[Dom Mcsweeney]

I'd love convolution reverbs to be a feature on the Stadium, especially if you could load true stereo IRs.
That would be glorious.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

Convolution is good for springs and some rooms/chambers, but on the whole it sounds like ass (IMO) compared to decent algos. I’d be happy to have it in modellers, just because, but it’s miles off having a glorious proper suite of algo verbs. To rely on convolution is a shortcut approach.

I really wanted to love the newer Helix verbs but I just can’t get on with them.I don’t mind some of the Helix springs, which is actually very hard to get right algorithmically.

 

[ian_dissonance]

Why would you need any new amps that run only on the new DSP? I’m guessing quality.

Reverb takes up 3/4’s of the ToneMaster Amps available processing. The 2% reference is just hyperbole based on your opinion.

Why would Line 6 devote all that extra DSP to new amps that only 2% that a lot of people only pretend to hear anyways? That’s using your logic, not mine.

Again, folks seem to be arguing against improved effects quality. It’s kinda funny seeing the contortions needed to maintain that stance.

I’m not saying they’re not going to be quality, I’m asking why they’d only be able to run on the new DSP and how they would necessarily make them better. The amps are a totally new modeling engine, so if the process of back-porting them is a programming roadblock that makes sense. Maybe I missed the part about Agoura being for FX too? Seemed like it was specifically for amps at this time.

 

[Chocol8]

Convolution is good for springs and some rooms/chambers, but on the whole it sounds like ass (IMO) compared to decent algos. I’d be happy to have it in modellers, just because, but it’s miles off having a glorious proper suite of algo verbs. To rely on convolution is a shortcut approach.

No, to rely on just one would be a shortcut. To have both would be a more complete solution.

 

[Digital Igloo]

I just remember digital igloo saying the next unit was not gonna be called helix but he also said it wasn’t gonna be released this year

2 years ago—Digital Igloo: "There won't be a new Helix anytime soon."
18 months ago—Someone else: "Digital Igloo said there wouldn't be a new Helix anytime soon."
12 months ago—Someone else: "Digital Igloo said there wouldn't be a new Helix anytime soon."
6 months ago—Someone else: "Digital Igloo said there wouldn't be a new Helix anytime soon."
1 week ago—Someone else: "No new box on Wednesday because Digital Igloo said there wouldn't be a new Helix anytime soon."

Time passes, people and Team Helix doesn't slow down.

Also, every single time I said there wouldn't be a new Helix, it was worded as "There won't be a 'Helix 2' because that's a boring name."

No one lied; y'all just need to pay better attention.

Now I’m starting to wonder if any of the newer Hx amps are downsampled versions of the Agoura amps.

Not at ALL. In fact, we erred on the side of re-modeling in Agoura some of the latest HX Amps (Revv, Panama, Bogner, others) specifically because we wanted to validate that the new methodology does indeed sound and respond notably better than our very best and newest HX models. So when people inevitably ask why we didn't model more amps from our circa-2015 HX list—that is, the ones that don't sound as good as the newer ones—that's the reason.

Even if you ignore the extra DSP required to run them, Helix/HX doesn't have the infrastructure to run Agoura amps.

One question about scribble strips (as I have a Helix LT and have never seem them in action): do they show the same that is being shown on screen (stomps or snapshots grid) or are they independent?

As with Helix, footswitch modes are independent of what you see on the screen. So you can have the XY Controller on the screen with Transport mode, Focus view on the screen with Combo mode, or Song view with a fully customized Stomp B mode (which may have switches from many different modes). This is by design.

Non-XL Stadium works the same way, but unless you're on Play view, you may not know what the switches do, just like on Helix LT.

 

[Dom Mcsweeney]

Yeah the extra option of adding convolution reverb loading would be great, that's all I'm saying.
I also would enjoy improvements to the algorithmic reverbs.

 

[KingsXJJ]

I think the question of 'can effects get even better?' is a perfectly good one, of course things can be improved, but doubting Line 6 for the sake of doubting alone is crazy to me considering how much they've proven in the past.

I would suggest that some of your way of wording things is coming across a little too cynical, and it's unclear to me why you would go down that route.

Thanks. Perhaps you’re right that I am being too cynical. I’ve just seen promises made that either weren’t delivered upon or took forever to actually appear. That’s why I said I was tired of the approach. Perhaps Line 6 will deliver and we’ll see but I’m not encouraged if any of their strategy is to limit what what can be delivered to older hardware. I hope it’s not.

Call me crazy but I think the new $2k+ platform is more than capable of running a a more complex and pleasing reverb than the HX One I paid $249 for. And that those differences will be apparent to more than just a few folks. Crazy, I know.

Finally, as far as being cynical, the hostile reception here isn’t helping. My points are valid to me don’t break any logic that I’m aware of and if implemented would benefit everyone, including Line 6. I also have spent zero time (or intended to) denigrating HX Effects. I just stated that I think there’s room for improvement and I believe the new platform offers an excellent opportunity to move on that. It doesn’t seem like that’s what people hear unfortunately.

 

[mbenigni]

Again, folks seem to be arguing against improved effects quality. It’s kinda funny seeing the contortions needed to maintain that stance.

No one is saying this. We’re just trying to comprehend your indignation that future effects are in the future.

 

[Digital Igloo]

Convolution is good for springs and some rooms/chambers, but on the whole it sounds like ass (IMO) compared to decent algos. I’d be happy to have it in modellers, just because, but it’s miles off having a glorious proper suite of algo verbs. To rely on convolution is a shortcut approach.

I really wanted to love the newer Helix verbs but I just can’t get on with them.I don’t mind some of the Helix springs, which is actually very hard to get right algorithmically.

Yeah, convolution is great for conveying a specific acoustic space (or as you say, things with special acoustic properties, like springs), but they tend to be less musical than algorithmic reverbs.

But I do use convolution reverbs in my mixes, so I'm not opposed to them at all.

 

[Dom Mcsweeney]

Yeah, convolution is great for conveying a specific acoustic space (or as you say, things with special acoustic properties, like springs), but they tend to be less musical than algorithmic reverbs.

But I do use convolution reverbs in my mixes, so I'm not opposed to them at all.

also fun for experimental / more whacky things... not just 'real spaces' or 'real springs'
like making noises that otherwise aren't possible, especially synth > helix > convolution sound from random nonsense...

in the same way that wavetables are fun