You know what, I confused the term gapless switching with spillover. There wont be effects spillover at launch on the stadium. Gapless switching I retract my statement because as I understand it they are two different things and spillover relates to effects trails when switching the presets gapless would cut off your trails but still switch without a detectible audio gap. Of which I did not hear anything. Apologies for the misinformation. But either way they are working on solution for spillover that doesnt sacrifice the second row. The info is in an interview with Eric Klein on DougDopplerMusic YT channel. Its about an hour long but as far as really getting some interesting information its a worthy watch. I didnt post a link simply because Its not neural related and I dont think thats allowed.
Eric Klein, the chief developer, said in an interview that seamless switching will most likely not be available right from the start. However, that doesn’t mean that Line6 is leaving it out completely, just that it will come later.
I would be willing to sacrifice half of the slots right away. I’m so tired of constantly trying out the most amazing presets and then having to spend hours incorporating them into my existing presets, only to find that in the end they don’t sound anything like the original preset. The gap between two presets often forces you to use snapshots, so you have to stay within your presets.
If I could have spent the weeks/months I’ve spent in my life integrating sound into presets on practicing, I would be a much better guitarist 
Yeah that is the interview i was talking about. He said not at launch. But my confusion is if spillover and gapless switching are the same thing. The term he used in the interview i watched was spillover and then it focused on trails of effects sometimes being so long that on the helix people could give up half their DSP to get that spillover effect. So I guess never having used a helix and not understanding the terminology and if there is any difference. Would it not switch to another preset instantly and just not carry over the trails of your existing effects? Or would there be a complete gap? I havent a clue. Also I wonder if its more powerful and uses the same older amp models as well does this only apply to the agoura stuff? I have no idea. But these are the questions I ask myself. Still a lot of mystery meat on the bone to be known before release.
Here’s all the info you need for the normal Helix spillover- https://youtu.be/CaF9NMR_kEg?si=VpGDT79GJ_6EVhBn
what sucks about that is the normal Helix DSP is super limited. So just only having one of the DSP chips for a preset can be hard for certain players. The newer models for Helix would sometimes not allow two amps (clean and dirty for example) plus some effects to be loaded at once on one chip. Hopefully the DSP is better for the Stadium, even if the Agoura models need more DSP.
Thankfully snapshots and scenes are awesome for Helix and the QC. Honestly that solves most issues with needing gapless switching, and tweaking parameters for each part. I used to be weary of using scenes, but wow is it amazing to just hit one footswitch instead of pedalboard tap dancing for every song section, etc. literally am able to have such drastic tonal adjustments for every part of a song, and not worry about pedal settings changing between shows on a tour.
Yes, seamless switching has its disadvantages. But as already mentioned, snapshots also have disadvantages because they make it impossible to quickly integrate newly found presets into your own set. It always takes a lot of effort to incorporate them into your own presets, if it’s even possible at all. Or you just have to live with the long switching times.
With seamless switching, I wouldn’t have to build a preset incorporating all in the song used sounds for every single song. Every time I want to adjust a basic sound using this method, I have to go through 40-50 presets and adjust it everywhere. If I could work with one preset per sound, it would be much easier.
The bottom line is that there will always be people who get along better with one method than the other. However, I assume that the number of people who would benefit greatly from Seamless Switching is very large.
Incidentally, there is another way to implement Seamless Switching without taking up half of the slots. With a reasonable setlist/song/song part mode, similar to Showcase, but without all the audio track playback options, the QC would know which preset is next in the song and could preload it. But that’s also been on the wish list for years without anyone paying attention to it.
Does anyone know if the “Mini” comes with gapless switching and/or spillover? If the Nano can (could) do it, I am naively hoping it can be done by the Mini….
Neither of them can. As far as I know only Fractal can do gapless preset switching.
The QC and Mini operate the same. It’s just the form factor mainly that different. They don’t have gapless preset switching.
Does the Nano even still have gapless switching? I remember people complaining it didn’t after a certain firmware update
Thanks. That’s a pity and a deal-breaker for me. I swapped my QCs to FM9s for the same reason (yes I even had two). Still using the Nano as backup though and haven’t “upgraded” the firmware. Lucky me, I guess. Well, next model then…. Maybe….
Don’t get me wrong, I absolutely love my QC but, the slow preset switching is frustrating. I have a few presets set up with scenes but because of a need for on-the-fly flexibility, I still do a lot of preset changes.
Another frustrating aspect; I use an expression pedal as a master volume. During a preset change, there is a split second when the signal level is as if the expression pedal is all the way up. Because of this, I must make sure and set the master volume so the expression pedal is operating toward the top (toe down) of it’s range to keep that split-second volume boost to a minimum.
Coming from other modellers, the QC was a different way of working. At first I thought scenes were a workaround because of the long switch time of presets. However, one patch per song is something that really works for me now and is much better organised than eighty presets for a live show on my Kemper and Helix.
Sure, I am a bit obsessive on delay times when we play to a click, but I’m not sure I’d want to trade DSP for seamless switching any longer. In fact, what would work for me would be more scenes available in each preset selectable from midi control changes.
Every modeller I’ve had has it’s good and bad points, but QC comes out on top for me.
I understand what you’re saying. If I were working in a group where we do the same 12-15 songs at every show, setting up a preset per song would make perfect sense. We have 70+ songs on our list and our shows are customized to fit the venue and event and plans often change mid-set. Flexibility is a must. I’ve owned over a dozen modeling devices and they all have their own strengths and weaknesses. At this point, for me, the QC’s many strengths more than offset it’s weaknesses.
For that kind band I see your problem Pete. What about Setlists? You probably have a good idea of what will be played and only have to search for the odd extra song or two.
The only thing with seamless changes is that there surely has to be a compromise somewhere.
A preset per song is definitely the best route. I used to think otherwise when I started using modelers, but scenes and a preset per song makes the most sense. I play stuff that has lots of different effects per song and per part, but 8 scenes is a good amount to cap the various tones per song. I can see some specific bands needing more, but honestly for most people if you need more you probably aren’t great at deciding tones for songs
Seems like the best course for you would be a preset per song, and sort of midi to call up any of the 70+ songs wit a tablet or something similar. Not sure if that exists, but the 70+ song selection is a very specific use case that has to be pretty stressful to call on the fly haha. Respect for handling that
I’m fully onboard with the preset per song and usually can get by with 8 scenes. Where I get stuck is in longer songs with tempo changes where I’d like to be changing the delay ms, as tempo sync occasionally does strange things.
Also I occasionally need 3 different settings on Minivoicer. I guess being able to address more things with control changes would also help, as requested in other threads. Or else user definable scales, which Kemper managed to implement, although it was quite cumbersome.
I play in a cover band with a huge repertoire, also over 70 songs.
But I never needed more than 8 scenes per song. Actually, the most I need is three different sounds per song.
Between the songs, I switch per ipad / midi.
I never understood why there is a need to switch presets during a song.
“For that kind band I see your problem Pete.” Oh, I have way more problems than this, Karlic. 
Maybe I’m just an OG. Back in my day, our modelers didn’t have these fancy, new-fangled Scenes! 
I do have a bank of presets set up with scenes but they’re mostly song specific.
I’ve been following the seamless switching topic for a long time. Unfortunately, there are a lot of guitarists who have resigned themselves to this and have adapted their workflow accordingly to scenes and one preset per song. And because people always think what they do themselves is the best way, they argue fiercely about why seamless shifting is unnecessary or impossible to implement. But there are many reasons in favor of seamless switching. Scenes are no substitute for it.
Two examples:
- If you have one preset per song and want to change your general bread and butter sound (e.g., because of new captures in v2 or because a new, better FX has been released), you have to go through all the presets and adjust them. With one or two presets, this is no problem, but with 20, 30, or 70 presets, it’s hellish and prone to errors.
- Let’s imagine that we need a sound for a new song, such as the intro sound from Purple Rain. Without seamless switching, you now have to start modifying your preset to get reasonably close to that sound. If you’re unlucky, you’ll have to significantly modify or supplement the signal chain of your preset. This requires a lot of knowledge and experience, and you run the risk of breaking the original preset. You could easily spend an evening or two on this until everything is just right. With seamless switching, you go to the cloud, download two or three Purple Rain presets, and choose the best one. Done. Takes less than 5 minutes.
Yes, it may not be possible without disadvantages. With Helix, two lines were deactivated for this purpose. But if you can decide for yourself whether to activate it or not, no one who doesn’t want it would be at a disadvantage. I would gladly sacrifice the two lines. It’s also important to remember that presets could be made much simpler if you didn’t have to create bloated monster presets for every eventuality. Presets with four amps only exist so that you can switch between them variably via scenes.
A second option would be for NDSP to map a reasonable setlist/song/song part structure. Then they would know exactly which preset would be called up next and could load it in advance.