Line 6 HX Stomp - Compact Professional Guitar Processor

  • They may be the same price wherever you are, but I have just Googled them in the UK, and an HX stomp is £465 GBP, a M9 is £229 GBP.

    Ah, my mistake. I was thinking of the Effects pedal. However, for me, coming from a second Kemper, the Stomp would be much closer in function, and a lot cheaper as an alternative to my present rig. Even at that, so far I've not been satisfied with anything I've tried as a substitute for backup. I guess I'm spoiled.

    Go for it now. The future is promised to no one. - Wayne Dyer

  • @ Sharry - thanks for posting that interview link. DI (Eric K) does a great job for Line6/Yamaha, both behind the scenes and interfacing with the seething mass of us modelling aficionados.


    Not bagging the competition or the customers - there's an idea! I wonder if it will catch on? ;)

  • Great topic.


    @Monkey_Man Yes, it would be great if we could get a mini-Kemper with say 32 profiles pre-stored in a stompbox form factor. Getting all the effects would be nice but I bet that's what takes most of the real time processing. Modding the guitar signal according to the profile itself - as I imagine it - is probably not that much real-time CPU power.


    Well, even if it is, CPUs are cheap now :D


    Having a box on the pedal board that is an amp emulator with a few Kemper profiles would be spectacular. Then we could use the Rig Manager to copy our favorite few profiles onto it and it would observe the same MIDI commands to change them.

  • CPUs are cheap, but if it performs too closely to the toaster at a lower price point, then they have a real issue from a "how do we still sell the KPA as well" standpoint.


    Limiting the amount of profiles that can be stored is something that comes up a lot, but unless they make it very low, I'm not sure how much that matters. I know some people like to keep a lot of profiles on the kpa, but as long as you'll be able to audition through RM, I can't see that helping them out much. Like, there was a thread recently asking basically "how many profiles do you actually use regularly", and the average answer was a lot less than I thought it would be. So, most of us don't really "need" to store very many profiles on our Kemper when auditioning through RM is so easy.


    I think no effects is interesting, but maybe not the best move from a marketing standpoint. Never know, it could be the Kemper for those who prefer to keep their stompboxes, I dunno.


    Now, not having the profiling feature would be a pretty good differentiator, and could help explain a lot of that market confusion that could otherwise be an issue. But I doubt most people who have a KPA have ever used the profile feature (I could be way off base here, but with the rise of commercial profiles, it seems like most prefer to use them instead). So it's only a differentiator for a certain segment of the customer base.


    Then there's the issue of trying to compete with other similar products on the market, without adding features that surpass the KPA. For example, the Line 6 device in this thread is an 8x8 audio interface. That's something a lot of people wish the KPA was, so to me it's a "dammed if you do, dammed if you don't" situation. Because if they don't compete with features they will be at a disadvantage. And if they do make it an audio interface, how do they explain that? The floor unit will obviously be targeted to the gigging musician, and interface is pretty much a studio thing, which is what the KPA was designed for.


    I think it's actually a bit of a tricky issue for them.

    Disclaimer: When I post demo clips for profiles, there will be some minimal post-processing, unless stated otherwise. I normally double-track hard L/R, and add to the main buss a small amount of EQ and a limiter/comp set pretty light as well. Sometimes I get test profiles in advance of release, though 90% of my clips will be from packs I have purchased.

  • @Locrain It sure is not an easy question.


    I have to say though that - as you said - most people would not miss the profiling feature too much. Thing is I tried it, felt really good about myself and I don't think I would buy the high end microphones that I would need to actually profile or build the amp isolation "space" that is needed. I would much rather spend ~$10-20 (each time :D ) to get the profiles.


    On the other hand, not having the effects - I believe - would be a differentiator. You want to go with a full Kemper, nothing changes. However for people who have a love for some pedals - be it a Golden Horsie or a FreqOut - the cheaper alternative or getting a Kemper pre-amp would be there.


    Being one who plucks few fat strings this would be right there a win! I would take a Kemper Bass DI box over anything on the market today, no questions asked.


    And I think a lot bands having to play in a coffee shop with minimal space but a PA that the venue has would feel the same.


    I would recommend against it, but Kemper could make it that you'd have to have a "real" Kemper registered before you could Rig Mgr the profiles onto the KSB (Kemper Stomp Box) ;)

  • I believe that it is not a technical problem for Kemper to bring a profile player onto the market as a floorboard.
    I tend to think, as indicated by @Locrain above, that it would be moreless a market policy decision.


    I would very much like to have a more portable device with the Kempersounds for live performances.

  • @Locrain It sure is not an easy question.


    I have to say though that - as you said - most people would not miss the profiling feature too much. Thing is I tried it, felt really good about myself and I don't think I would buy the high end microphones that I would need to actually profile or build the amp isolation "space" that is needed. I would much rather spend ~$10-20 (each time :D ) to get the profiles.


    Exactly. I am the same way. I know I could get pretty good profiles of my amps, but I only have one anymore, and they wouldn't be as good as the pro ones. So I just don't know how much of a draw the profile feature is for the average end-user, and therefore, I don't know how much it would help to separate the two products


    On the other hand, not having the effects - I believe - would be a differentiator. You want to go with a full Kemper, nothing changes. However for people who have a love for some pedals - be it a Golden Horsie or a FreqOut - the cheaper alternative or getting a Kemper pre-amp would be there.

    You're right that it would be a differentiator. But now we run into the opposite issue mentioned earlier: Now it doesn't stack up against the competition, as they all will have effects included. I think that's a problem.


    Limiting RM functionality for the floor model would help. but again, we run into issues with making the product less attractive than the competition.


    I have no idea how to approach it from a marketing perspective. I guess if I had it to do over, and it was up to me, I'd release two kempers originally, a "Pro/Studio" one (with profiling), and a "Tour" version without profiling. The Pro could be more expensive, the Tour could cost less, and when a floorboard comes out, there wouldn't be this huge value gap to deal with, the differentiators could be fewer and less significant, and still have the intended effect. But that wasn't Kemper's vision for the product, and he couldn't have known that commercial profiling would take off the way it has, so it's easy to criticize in hindsight.


    Limiting RM functionality for the floor model would help. but again, we run into issues with making the product less attractive than the competition.


    It's kind of like Camaros and Corvettes. Generally they have practically the same engine, just the Camaro will have more restrictive manifold, less aggressive cam, etc. Can't have your entry-level sports car making as much power as your flagship models that costs twice the price. :D

    Disclaimer: When I post demo clips for profiles, there will be some minimal post-processing, unless stated otherwise. I normally double-track hard L/R, and add to the main buss a small amount of EQ and a limiter/comp set pretty light as well. Sometimes I get test profiles in advance of release, though 90% of my clips will be from packs I have purchased.

  • Great topic.


    @Monkey_Man Yes, it would be great if we could get a mini-Kemper with say 32 profiles pre-stored in a stompbox form factor. Getting all the effects would be nice but I bet that's what takes most of the real time processing.

    I don't think the effects would pose much of a problem, TD; I wouldn't underestimate the grunt required to render Profiles.


    To me it would make sense for a floor unit, especially a compact one with a limited interface, to be released only after an official editor drops. That way there'd be a simple, intuitive way to tailor one's effects as one sees fit.

  • Sure the HX Stomp has a lot of limitations, but in all honestly, it's REALLY damn impressive, even at $599. You can get Prymaxe to let it go for $475, maybe even $450.


    The intuitiveness, the parameter control, the routing options, various footswitch modes, snapshots, full MIDI implementation w/learning for EVERY parameter (and it's already documented 8| ), IR loader, dual paths, built-in looper, every block from the Helix.


    If the Line6 modeling floats your boat, or works for what you need, it seems like a fantastic buy.

  • The achilles heel of the helix stuff is not only the lack of spillover, but the large gap between presets that renders changing presets mid song impossible. I had the Helix for a week and returned it for this reason alone. . It sounds like this product will have the same limitation. Now if you can set up presets in such a way that you simply use it in stomp mode without switching presets mid song, then it should be fine.

    So while it may be able to be a great compliment to use with the Kemper in terms of the number of quality effects and routing convenience, I'd think through the way you plan on organizing the sounds you use on it. If you had planned to stay parked in a particular Kemper rig, and change some presets mid song using this pedal, you'll have those audio gaps to contend with. If, however, you plan on having a single preset in the Helix that you use per song, and opt to turn things on and off in stomp mode, it might fit the bill.

  • The achilles heel of the helix stuff is not only the lack of spillover, but the large gap between presets that renders changing presets mid song impossible. I had the Helix for a week and returned it for this reason alone. . It sounds like this product will have the same limitation. Now if you can set up presets in such a way that you simply use it in stomp mode without switching presets mid song, then it should be fine.

    So while it may be able to be a great compliment to use with the Kemper in terms of the number of quality effects and routing convenience, I'd think through the way you plan on organizing the sounds you use on it. If you had planned to stay parked in a particular Kemper rig, and change some presets mid song using this pedal, you'll have those audio gaps to contend with. If, however, you plan on having a single preset in the Helix that you use per song, and opt to turn things on and off in stomp mode, it might fit the bill.

    You do realize the Helix and HX units have Snapshots (since 2016) that are completely gapless?! This doesn't apply to the HX Stomp (which can only run one amp at a time), but since a single Helix preset can run multiple amp models, you can gaplessly switch between them quite easily. Plus there are a number of amps that scale nicely between clean and lead tones, especially when you add drives into the mix.


    And the cool thing about Snapshots (versus AxeFX/AX8 Scenes, which can only turn blocks on/off) is that you can modify any Preset parameter (up to 64) AND turn blocks on/off. Kinda like morphing (without the morph ramp time), but you get 8 morphing sets per Rig.

  • Snapshots were so buggy and difficult to implement when I had a Helix. Plus, they limit the number and type of blocks you can use, if you have multiple amps in one preset. Still, it’s better than gaps, though us folk with Kempers haven’t had to worry about that since Performance mode was introduced years ago.

  • You do realize the Helix and HX units have Snapshots (since 2016) that are completely gapless?! This doesn't apply to the HX Stomp (which can only run one amp at a time), but since a single Helix preset can run multiple amp models, you can gaplessly switch between them quite easily. Plus there are a number of amps that scale nicely between clean and lead tones, especially when you add drives into the mix.


    And the cool thing about Snapshots (versus AxeFX/AX8 Scenes, which can only turn blocks on/off) is that you can modify any Preset parameter (up to 64) AND turn blocks on/off. Kinda like morphing (without the morph ramp time), but you get 8 morphing sets per Rig.

    Yes. I had it and utilized the snapshot feature. The problem I was running into was that I often need to transition songs by playing through the gaps, although sometimes I have the keyboardist do this, and play particular songs in various order in a worship setting, in which it's a different handful of songs each weekend. The first weekend I attempted to use it, I had already created a preset for each song, then realized that I couldn't go from one to the next without stopping playing. So I then had to get creative to reorganize a single preset so that it did what both songs needed. And of course at that point, it was getting tricky to reorganize what I needed for the two songs in a single preset. The routing complexity which is an advantage on one hand is a royal pain when you need to combine elements from different presets, as this requires lots of copy, paste, save, and back and forth, and then of course redoing all the snapshots. Don't get me wrong, I don't constantly need no audio gaps and spillover, but when I do, the Helix is an organizational mess for the way I need and like to organize.


    The organization of the KPA performance is better solution for me. I create individual rigs for songs, often only one is needed since I utilize instant morph and manual on off of effect blocks on the Remote. I can place them in any order within a performance in seconds and I rarely need more than two performances for an entire set of songs and never need to worry about spillover, let alone audio gaps. Also, I can go through back and forth between rigs within a performance to edit without having to hit save until I'm all done editing the entire performance.


    Many try to compare a preset within the Helix and say that you have more options than a single Rig in the KPA. This is true, but it's useless comparison, because the real comparison is between what the number of amps and effects and spillover you have in a single Performance to what you have in a single Helix preset. In a Kpa performance, I have full spillover no gap with five separate rigs, each with the ability to have unique amps, cabs and 4 pre and 4 post effects, each with an extra "snapshot" utilizing the morph feature. Conversely, the Helix is limited to the number of amps cabs and effects and snapshots that you can fit into a single preset, which is a lot less options that what you can fit into a single KPA performance.


    So in short, if a person wants to use this pedal for most of their effects, they had better be prepared to fit all they need without audio gaps within single presets utilizing the stomp or snapshot type of mode, which means that all the effects they'd like to utilize without audio gaps is limited to 6, and only 5 if using the KPA in a four cable method.

  • In some ways, the "wow look how many options you have per preset" of the helix is just a marketing trick. If you can't toggle between presets without big audio gaps, you have no more options than an entire bank of presets that don't have an audio gap between them, even if each individual preset has fewer options. Years back I had owned a Pod HD, and while the audio quality was miles behind the Helix, it was much more organized. If I wanted a "snapshot" all I had to do was copy and paste a preset adjacent the original preset, alter it to taste, and hit save. It accomplished the same thing compared to having one massive preset, that heaven forbid you feel like swapping the amp and had snapshots of its settings, you now have to go back and edit all its shapshots again. Repeat for each and every Preset you plan on using that day.


    With the Helix, what they should have said was, "here's a bunch more options that you can do in a preset, but you no longer can go from one preset to the next without a big audio gap." How is that any better than just using more presets that you can go between without worrying about audio gaps?