Should I get a HX Stomp?

[Jakester]

Ah, decisions, decisions.

 

I have a pedalboard setup that I'm happy with, and that can just about cover most things I'm called to play. 

 

However, it's got quite a few pedals on it, some of which are only ever used once or twice a year. 

 

There's also the inevitable faff if a cable comes loose, or you get an unknown buzz etc etc. I'd idly been thinking about whether I could simplify everything by using a Stomp and setting up patches equivalent to the pedals I use now. So far, so straightforward?

 

Well. 

 

I also double on DB at the same gig, and sometimes during the same song. The songs that do use effects use chorus, or octave, or dirty synth sounds. 

 

Current setup as follows:

 

Tonebone OD -->  C4 --> Whammy Ricochet -> EHX Freeze -> SFX Micro Thumpinator --> Keely Bassist

 

I have a DMC Micro connected to the C4 to change the patches. 

 

I tend to use the OD on the Tonebone if needed, though I have some grindy patches on the C4; it also does a good chorus, octaver and synth (natch!) if needed. The Freeze is good for sustained pedaled notes where I'm not on the DB, and the Ricochet is useful if I'm using a different patch on the C4 and need to go octave up or down (and also can be fun of itself for fills etc).

 

What I'd probably need to do with a Stomp is set up two parallel paths using the L/R inputs; one with the effects etc for the electric bass, and one straight thru/or with EQ and HPF for the DB, and then combine them out to the amp (possibly with a compressor). 

 

Would a Stomp be able to do all of those things in a user-friendly package? I'm guessing the HPF would be able to be inserted anywhere (instead of where it fits on the pedalboard!), and I could use the DMC Micro to change patches as do now.

 

Or am I just looking for a shiny new toy and if it ain't broke, don't fix it?

 

 

[lidl e]

Yes

[ahpook]

No.

[lidl e]

Well, it seems we're at an impasse...

[lidl e]

In all seriousness, i am a big fan of the stomp. I think it's a great device. I'm not the type to dig deep into multi effects, but at a surface level I'm very impressed with it.  

 

The stomp would replace a lot of what you have or at least make it redundant.

 

If you want to augment what yoi currently have, what about a plethora X3? It will give you all the delays and modulation you're missing in a tidy package for a good value. 

 

Get an HPF/LPF combo pedal, stick it under the board and boom. You wouldn't be able to insert it wherever you wanted though 

 

Too much?

 

[Al Krow]

@Jakester

 

"I have a pedalboard setup that I'm happy with"

 

I think you've answered your question 😊

 

If, however, you fancy spending a lot of time getting up to speed on a multi-fx and tweaking it so that it gets close to your dedicated pedals with your specific rig, so that you're equally happy with your Stomp well that's an entirely different matter - crack on! 

[uk_lefty]

The HX Stomp is a phenomenal piece of kit. Absolutely amazing capability to it. But. You can easily get lost in programming it, trying every single type of chorus, there can be an overwhelming amount of choice. If you want to delve into it, it's all there. I found I spent more time programming it than actually playing bass, whereas with dedicated pedals you just turn three knobs to get what you need. 

 

If your pedalboard has noise it's probably worth persistence to solve it with better quality patch cables, power supplies and secure it all well. If you've got pedals that only get used once or twice a year then you could either replace them with a little, easy to use zoom unit or take them off the board until you need them.

 

Long and short of it, you're happy with your board already.

[Skybone]

On 25/03/2024 at 20:08, lidl e said:

Yes

 

On 25/03/2024 at 20:51, ahpook said:

No.

Maybe?

 

I would say that it really depends on what you want to do with it.

 

Will you be wanting to use the amp/pre-amp section or just the effects?

 

If it's just the effects you're after, then look at the HX FX. 

[BigRedX]

11 hours ago, uk_lefty said:

But. You can easily get lost in programming it, trying every single type of chorus, there can be an overwhelming amount of choice. If you want to delve into it, it's all there. I found I spent more time programming it than actually playing bass, whereas with dedicated pedals you just turn three knobs to get what you need. 

 

On the Helix/HX range here may be multiple modules that do the same basic thing, but IME I quickly found that there was one version that I preferred over the others, and that's the one that gets used in the vast majority of my Presets. Occasionally when I'm creating a new Preset I will have another look (listen) at the alternatives, but always end up going back to the variant I originally chose. 

 

The first thing I did when I got my Helix was to build up a default Preset that included all the effects I wanted to use with a sensible default settings applied to each. Then I saved it to a location where it wouldn't get accidentally overwritten and I make a copy every time I want to create a new Preset. Mine has actually been refined recently as firmware updates have introduced new models (although only the preamp which has replaced separate drive and EQ models has changed since my default Preset was originally created), and is currently just a compressor, pre-amp (for EQ and drive), chorus and delay. If a song requires a specific additional effect this just gets patched in when I create a new Preset for that song.

 

It also helps if you use the HX Edit app which makes creating new Presets far easier than the front panel controls which in my case are only used for fine-tuning Presets and Snapshots in the rehearsal room.

Edited March 27 by BigRedX

[DaleASmith]

I think you need to treat it like an amp and effects setup. Imagine you have an amp and some effects pedals. 
firstly ignore the demo patches. 
pick an amp. That’s your amp for all of your patches! One of the big issues people have is massive sonic changes between patches and this is because every patch has a different amp and cab setup. Why?

 Once you have your amp, insert an effect and set it up to get a good sound. Repeat until you’re done. 
 

[BigRedX]

You don't even need amp and cab models, after all an amp is just something with a baked in sound and limited range EQ, and the basic function of a real amp is get your line level signal to a volume where you and the audience can hear it. If you're going through an FRFR/PA/IEMs then the amp and cab models are something that IMO gets in the way of your ideal sound. The right EQ and drive models will get you there much better.

 

And if you are determined to use amp and cab models try them all even the "guitar" ones. The worst that can happen is that you won't like the sound, and then you can try another one. It's not as though you run the risk of damaging anything. Also plenty of "vintage" bass amps are guitar amps with a different name and maybe the EQ frequencies slightly adjusted.

 

Of the few Presets where I do use amp/cab models one model is a guitar combo that would never be suitable for bass at gig volume in real life, and other was chosen because the distortion sound fits exactly in the context of the track, an is essential being used a drive pedal rather than an "amp".

[Jack]

1 hour ago, DaleASmith said:

I think you need to treat it like an amp and effects setup. Imagine you have an amp and some effects pedals. 
firstly ignore the demo patches. 
pick an amp. That’s your amp for all of your patches! One of the big issues people have is massive sonic changes between patches and this is because every patch has a different amp and cab setup. Why?

 Once you have your amp, insert an effect and set it up to get a good sound. Repeat until you’re done. 
 

See I couldn't disagree more. Ime anyone who goes down this road just ends up thinking that the modeller (any modeller) is absolute garbage because the ac30 model doesn't sound exactly like the one they once heard in 1974.

 

Treat the Stomp like a box that has many sounds in it. 

[fretmeister]

I love my Helix. It's amazing. It is now part of my home recording set up so I'm thinking about a Stomp for when I'm out of the house.

[mikegatward]

I love mine and have no regrets about swapping from my previous multi pedal set up to the Stomp.

 

Just give some thought as to how you’re going to power it. The power supply it comes with isn’t the sturdiest thing but you’ve probably already got something powering your board that will do the job.

 

And also think how you’re going to operate it in a gig setting. Three stomp switches isn’t a lot so I’d defo add an auxiliary dual foot switch to give you FS4/5. I also added a Morningstar MC6. All that, plus my wireless receiver sits nicely on a pedaltrain nano plus. Shout if you want a pic.

[SumOne]

If you are sticking with some core sort of sounds, I'd probably stick with your setup:

 

Tonebone OD -->  C4 --> Whammy Ricochet -> EHX Freeze -> SFX Micro Thumpinator --> Keely Bassist

 

I think most of them do their individual job as well - or better than the stomp (especially the C4 for synths and envelope filters, and things like the Tonebone & Freeze & Compressor I prefer a bit of hand on (or foot on) control. 

 

The Stomp is good if you want to more complex presets though. 

[Skybone]

I was considering getting a HX Stomp a while ago, but always felt that it was a bit too much for what I would really use, but also that it only has 3 footswitches, which would make it a bit limited for live use.

 

I bought a POD Go instead, most of the functionality, most of the amp/cab/effect models, plenty of footswitches. Yes, it is "compromised" in comparison with Helix/HX, but it is an ideal bass player's tool IMO.

 

Definitely worth considering.

[Jakester]

Actually, having read the above, and looked into it a little more, I reckon a HX One would do the job perfectly as I wouldn’t be looking for the amp sims or IRs. 
 

Interesting…

 

<edit> actually, looks like you may not get the dual input control that you could get with the Stomp. 
 

Still, might be good to replace some of the separate effects after the Tonebone.

Edited March 27 by Jakester

[Jakester]

Actually, looking further into it it's 'one effect at a time', rather than the Stomp 'create a patch', so would just be like putting a different stompbox on the board each time.

 

What I was hoping the Stomp could do would be to have electric bass patches e.g. 'normal', 'drive', 'synth', 'octave' etc but each one also have the same preamp, eq (as appropriate), parallel clean (switchable?) DB channel into the shared HPF and compressor then into the amp, so basically cutting down on all the other pedals. Seems like the HX One is a much smaller version of the HX FX.

[Jack]

In theory that's possible, although I wonder if you might run out of processing power. If you let me know exactly what you want on each channel I'll test it out for you?

[Al Krow]

If processing power is an issue, then maybe have a think about the Boss GT1000 Core as an alternative? The Stomp chipset is almost 9 years old now and getting a little long in the tooth compared to some of its rivals. That's not a criticism that can be levelled at the software patches available for the Stomp though!

[BigRedX]

2 hours ago, Al Krow said:

If processing power is an issue, then maybe have a think about the Boss GT1000 Core as an alternative? The Stomp chipset is almost 9 years old now and getting a little long in the tooth compared to some of its rivals. That's not a criticism that can be levelled at the software patches available for the Stomp though!

 

And what exactly could a newer chipset improve?

 

 

[SamIAm]

2 minutes ago, BigRedX said:

 

And what exactly could a newer chipset improve?

 

 

Fair question.

In my experience ...

Newer tends to mean faster  (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law) - allowing for better tracking, more sophisticated IRs, longer signal chains, using more complex plugins in signal chains, reduced latency.

OFC most of these things would also require s/w changes.

Sam x

 

[BigRedX]

I suppose in my case the Helix already does the vast majority of things that I want and it does them very well.

 

All the "improvements" I am after should be possible with the existing hardware and all I need to do is to persuade Line6 to implement them in a future firmware update.

[Al Krow]

26 minutes ago, SamIAm said:

Fair question.

In my experience ...

Newer tends to mean faster  (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law) - allowing for better tracking, more sophisticated IRs, longer signal chains, using more complex plugins in signal chains, reduced latency.

OFC most of these things would also require s/w changes.

Sam x

 

Wot Sam said 😊

And overall more "realistic" sounds / better pitch shifting. But the nuances may not matter a great deal in a live band mix to anyone but ourselves. Will be much more noticeable in a home or studio environment when you're not competing with a drummer and guitarist.

And even with whatever processing power, few multis can yet still do as decent a filter or synth sound comparable to dedicated pedals.

 

25 minutes ago, BigRedX said:

I suppose in my case the Helix already does the vast majority of things that I want and it does them very well.

 

All the "improvements" I am after should be possible with the existing hardware and all I need to do is to persuade Line6 to implement them in a future firmware update.

 

Bear in mind your full fat Helix has double the chip set and processing power of the Stomp (or HX Effects). It shouldn't therefore run into the same processor power limitations that @Jack was referring to.

[Jack]

Yes I don't want better sounds on the Stomp, I just want more of them. The 8 block rule is fine if you want 8 gain pedals, but create a patch with a polyphonic pitch shifter and you might only be able to add 2/3 more blocks.