Line 6 DL4 Mk II

The Lounge Other Gear
#29

Line6 mention/sell/explain just about every other aspect of its features and they’re not shy (nor lacking detail) about it - that would be a big deal and i’d have expected them to mention this if possible - sadly their documents don’t preclude it, which would have been even more exhaustive

i’m assuming helix or hx users would know if it’s in line6’s wheelhouse to deliver on midi sync’d looping - i’d guess not, but that’s not to say their latest product would lean on new tech if it’s cloning their earliest

otherwise it looks like a tempting offering

my take is that midi stability is the issue and therefore how a manufacturer handles the loop ‘crossover’ points would allow them to wax and wane the length to accommodate clock drift - or crossfade or elasticate etc

having midi sync is good (my original lexicon jamman has it) and it would offer a nice reason to justify a current looper if you have one of the majority without sync

it’s the reason i ended up not getting the ditto x4 (although it has midi ‘sync’) it’s only syncing the first generation of the then set-in-stone loop - if the clock varies thereafter, the loop will drift from sync - it otherwise had a useful feature set for my interests

the new dl4 does look promising and seems quite flexible and it’s of course primarily a delay unit and delay times are synced

2 Likes
#30

Whoa just got the shipping notification from Sweetwater this morning. That was quick!

1 Like
#31

I haven’t looked too deeply into whether the loopers in the Helix family (which includes HX Stomp) can be MIDI synced, but cursory Google search seems to indicate the answer is no. Typical workaround is to trigger looper functions by MIDI CC messages.

This does not necessarily mean, in and of itself, that DL4 MkII looper does not respond to MIDI sync. We have one person state it isn’t there, without any citation, and the rest of us simply took him for his word, which to me is amusing since we live in the era of fake news.

I do recall the designer/engineer of the Loupe pedal stating he didn’t implement MIDI sync in the Loupe because it would require too much time and effort, relative to the pedal’s other functions.

On the rare occasion I would want to loop audio with MIDI sync, I still have my Octatrack. But it’s much more straightforward to me to sample whatever I would have looped, and trigger the sample from an integrated sequencer.

#32

I enjoyed the video.

The comment about destroying tone/tone suck is the sort of thing I saw a lot of when I used to hang out in guitar-oriented forums. I don’t miss those forums. :innocent:

3 Likes
#33

of course, fair enough, however i did scour every page of the manual and watched all available videos - i think it would probably have been mentioned, especially as it would need some explanation if used unwittingly - however, that’s not to say it 100% can’t be in it, nor added, but i’d say it’s very unlikely based on the current info - especially if helix etc don’t offer this either

just my take until an informed/definitive statement is made somewhere

1 Like
#34

I scoured the manual as well, thus my curiosity was raised. Did this person see something in in the manual that I missed? Or he heard it from his bro who heard it from his bro?

I found this on the Line 6 forum - by extension they will probably set up something in IdeaScale for the DL4 MkII:

When another company makes a standalone looper, they have an entire team of engineers and developers devoting 18-24 months to that single product. Helix’s looper was always going to be utilitarian at best because no one can agree on what makes a world-class looper anyway. Look at the Headrush Looperboard—they spent gobs of time, money, and effort developing it, only to have 90% of looper geeks dismiss it outright because it didn’t have the exact workflow and feature set they’re accustomed to. Why would we want to follow them down that rabbit hole?

If you want Helix’s loops to sync to MIDI, visit IdeaScale and hope your request gets voted higher than the hundreds of other features and models that have been requested.

1 Like
#35

the difference is plain as day if you plug a synth into it (I don’t play guitar). this is why mods for it exist.

#36

I had my MkI modded, as previously mentioned.

Obviously by using 4 DL4s, his perception of tone was not in line with the guitarist on the forums that I abandoned. He bought that many, he can do whatever he wants.

Anyway the MkII has multiple bypass modes: DSP bypass, true analog bypass, buffered analog bypass, or dry kill - so this should allay the concerns of most in the tone department.

1 Like
#37

I was only referring to the four mk1 units in the photo, not the mk2. and of course he can do what he wants. never said otherwise.

#38

Yeah, I’m fine with you having an opinion.

I was just observing that he seems to have something in common with me, and that is having little in common with guitar forum members.

#39

awesome, thanks :+1:

#40

Line 6 forum has started a DL4 Mk II FAQ

1 Like
#41

Awesome! Sadly about 10 years too late I feel.
Had two of these on my pedalboard about 15 years ago when I was on a massive Dave Knudson trip.

1 Like
#42

See this post on TGP. This user appears to be connected to Line 6 and specifically rules out midi sync on the looper. Other evidence is the fact that the manual mentions absolutely nothing about looper midi sync (or any sort of tempo sync), and indeed the footswitch assignments in looper mode change the tempo switch to a half/double switch, which rules out tapping updated tempos to keep the looper in sync.

#43

I see. I appreciate you being a good sport about my “heard from my bro” joke.

I’m guessing you’re getting caught up on this thread but be sure to check out this post. I mean, skip my dumb joke and read the part about Ideascale and stuff.

#44

Thanks for the link - I didn’t realise that Line 6 does’t have loop sync on any of their products - even their flagship megabuck whizzbang MFX (Helix) or their dedicated looper (JM4). Clearly Line 6 don’t have the resources and/or motivation to develop the code for it, so I wouldn’t be expecting it on any Line 6 product for a while. Unless they sink those development costs into a ‘JM4 mk2’, after which they could paste the code via a firmware update into their other products (Helix, DL4 mk2 etc).

1 Like
#45

Their comments about the Headrush Looperboard were quite telling to me.

Headrush Looperboard folks tried to make a looper to please all possible customers, and seemed to not please anyone in the end.

Hence the decision to keep the looper in the Helix units utilitarian. But they did leave the door open with that invitation to submit your idea to Ideascale and pray it gets loads of votes. Seems to me that the DL4 MkII has better odds than any Helix device of winning the right amount of votes because it is more dedicated to delay and looping than the general-purpose Helixes.

#46

how is it possible that they made it uglier?

4 Likes
#47

When v1 was on sale, the delay world was quite different. I wonder how this will fare against all the amazing delays around today?

1 Like
#48

i think most of them are used for looping, don’t think theyre redundant at all

when i was still playing in bands i had 2 DL4s, one for triggering one shot loops and another for looping the one shot phrases again