The H9K is an impressively powerful box. It would surely be “overkill” for some people, and “not enough” for others. I’d say that it makes an absolutely astounding string instrument processor.
In comparison to the Eclipse, though, it’s surely a massive upgrade, The H9K is basically 16 eclipses… but the eclipse works with vastly limited (but still very cool) subset of the algorithms that the H9K does. And each of the algorithms on the H9K can be 8 channels (as on the H8K).
Depending on how you set your system up, you could use all 16 of the Algorithm slots in the H9K to process one instrument. What you can’t do right now is route signal from one effects Chain to another. So you could treat each effects Chain as it’s own effects rack, each able to run 4 x H8000 level algorithms. You’d have to route signal into and out of those Chains. You could do this by connecting the H9K to an effects routing pedal board and use the 8 analog I/O as 4 X stereo pairs (one for each chain) Or, you could connect the 4 chains together in series in using the Optial, Dante or AES connectons on the H9K (bascially route out of Chain 1 into Chian 2, out of 2 into 3 etc….). It would be digital, so the signal shouldn’t degrade.
But overall you end up with a LOT of processing power.
One thing you could do with that power is use it to enable complete instant patch change by simply running two parallel paths, and just swap between them using volume control. You could do smooth crossfaces between two sets of two effects chains, each chain running 4 algorithms (remember the H8K can run two algorithms at the sime time, total).
So, yeah, it’s could be overkill for many, but it might be just what some folks really always wanted.
It’s good to remember that the H series has never really been a device designed specifically for guitar. It’s really a studio tool that was adopted by guitarists due to that fact that it sounds astounding and unique. It still does. That said, there are also some very high end devices aimed at (and capable of ) nothing but guitar processing. And it would make a lot of sense that they would have a feature set designed to complement the needs of live instrumentalists. I would assume they would have more guitar-centric focuses like amp modeling, ‘classic’ distortion modeling, and features like quiet and instant patch change of individual “effects” within a larger chain. Some of that will be hard to do on the H series. But the H9K is so damn powerful that you can get around some of those issues.. and it gives you massive flexability you wouldn’t have on any guitar focused device.
Personally I’m using it to do individual string (hexaphonic) processing on a guitar with individual outputs for each string, I’m sure that it’s the only device on the market that I can create a separate, independant effects chain for each string of my instrument. THAT opens up some interesting possibilities.
I’m also going to be using it in a live sound environment, where the Chains as “Racks” concept makes a lot of sense: I can run 32 channels between my console and H9K via Dante, so I’ll set the H9K essentially multiple effects devices. I’ll likely set up 16 channels as channel or bus inserts, and then still have 8 x stereo sends.
Personally, I think the H9K is going to make a splendid instrument processor. But – I also suspect it’s overkill for some folks.
hi guys, is the H9000 going to be overkill for live guitar application? i am currently running an Eclipse to great effect 🙂 but would like more flexibility to bring in shimmers, and ambiance when needed with some midi control.
it looks like in a guitar application i can only use 4 effect blocks out of the 16 at a time? (not that i need 16 at anyone time)
thoughts?
Alan
