All Activity

Today i sat down for many hours comparing 292 with 370 using the exact same settings, same speakers, same guitar, same phrases with the same 10 different presets (from 292 and settings backup) on both firmwares, eq is OFF of corse. The recodings clearly showed a difference. 370 against 292 produces way more treble (hiss, hsss,sss) which may gives the impression of a somehow "clearer" sound, but makes certain presets sound rather like a behringer vamp then a helix . 292 sounds way warmer to me (slight lower trebble or upper mid boost), the antialiasing is there but not in the way. I do not know what Line 6 did, but 370 sounds definatly worse then 292. Too much sss hsss, shhh, certain presets sound rather flat compared to 292. 370 sounds like the signal goes through a slight final compression with a misaligned exiter. I have no idea when these "changes" have been introduced, so ill stick with 292 for now. Dont really have the nerve to try out 196 different firmwares in order just to sneak a few new effects. For the everage or new user the difference may be not noticable,but when comparing recordings side by side you clearly notice the difference. The difference is less noticable on presets with lots of delay and reverb, but rather on tight dry presets which are supposed to sound clear. 370 seems to overdo it somehow with "fidelity" which you (i) dont really need in the studio. You may try a Strat with a Dire Straits preset in position Pickup 4 then you may know what i am talking about. When i first tried 370 i immediately had the impression of beeing something not right, now i know for shure. The only positive thing about 370 i could discover soundwise was less antialiasing like descibed IIRC around 350, heights sound cleaner, but there are too many of them unfortunately.

Thanks, guys. I’ll have a play later

Just use a Send L block in front of the cab block. This way the signal for the power amp / physical cab is on the Send Out.

There are likely several ways. My first thought is to use a split path preset with the cab sim alone on Path B. Split your paths just before the Output blocks. Path A output will use USB 1/2 and the Main outputs as usual for routing to your amp. Path B Output will use USB 3/4 so set the Record Input in your DAW to receive the incoming signal on USB 3/4. If you need details on how to set up a split path with a Path B output block consult the manual.

Since the footswitches on Helix are touch-sensitive, I have found that sometimes when I'm adjusting something (and wearing short sleeves), my forearm will briefly make contact with the TAP footswitch and trigger tempo view. Hope this is useful.

Line 6 Central https://line6.com/software/index.html requires MacOS Big Sur

Hello, I couldn't find an answer for this anywhere online - nor workout if its possible myself. I have my Stomp set up via 4CM but wouldn't mind being able to record via USB simultaneously - is it possible to have a cab sim set up that'll go to the daw via USB but not on the main out to a physical cab? KR

Fractal...;) Sorry, couldn't help myself, lol. Sadly I'm not the one to ask, but someone will likely chime in. Be prepared for IT- themed questions like what OS you're running, etc etc.

I cannot install Line6 Updater on my MacBook. Is there another solution?

Besides the jumpered channels in the HX I'd recommend to try the Divided Duo - use Drive1 as a bright channel gain and Drive2 is a normal channel gain. A trick is to set Drive2 to 0, then choose the amount of gain you want with Drive1 and finally add Drive2 back to add body/fullness - pretty cool. Also the Elmsley has the feel of an already dialed in jumpered amp.

For the record, my following support ticket has now been logged as a bug:

You didn't get one?!? I love mine.

It's just something I was reading about in reference to the Deluxe Reverb. Yes, there are amps that are jumpered but they are mostly Marshalls, not the Fenders. I figured both inputs were mixed before the power amp but, as we all know, the Helix doesn't have separate power amps. Thank you all for your responses.

As an amateur nobody, I've found that the internet is overflowing with people pretending to be something they're, clearly, not.

If you get less "digital clipping" with less CH Vol then the amp model is not the problem.

From your description it sounds like you're going into a mixing board? I'm basing that on your description : "L/R out via Line signal to my interface. Interface is set to line, gain is at zero on the interface. I have to volume knob turned all the way up on the HX." Normal inputs into a mixing board expect Mic signal levels which are WAY lower than Line level. The fact you have the gain set at zero, which I'm assuming means the 12 o'clock position, really means nothing. What matters is the signal level as shown by the mixing board signal lights on that channel, not the position of the knob. If this is the case it doesn't surprise me at all with the Helix main output maxed out that you'd be getting clipping on that channel. The first thing I'd do if this is all true would be to change the Helix output level to Mic rather than Line and see if that helps.

I'm not sure if this will meet your needs or not. I frequently run two amp models simultaneously. I put a split block on path 1 and then an amp model on 1A and another model on 1B and then merge them after. I'm certain you could used two of the same amp model and then set them up differently to simulate a jumpered amp. I believe some amp models may have the jumpered option built in. Our local guru, Craig takes it a step further and adds EQ blocks to each model and alternates boost and cut bands. For example, he'll cut X at 120 Hz and boost Y at 120 Hz, then boost X at 250 Hz and cut Y at 250 Hz and so on up the scale. There is probably a thread somewhere on this forum covering that method. He says it makes a fuller sound but I have not tried it, so I cannot confirm or deny. My approach is to run two different amp models and set them up quite differently. One model, usually on path 1A, will be a higher power model and set it to a cleaner and stiffer state than the other. The other model, usually on path 1B, will be a lower power model and set for higher gain and spongier than the other. When they combine I get the clarity and spank and chime of a cleaner amp mixed with the grit and growl and sag of a dirtier amp. It works good for blues but it really excels at medium gain rock.

Thank you, I'll give that a try!

No...I said that I liked the sound of the sample video. That was not the sound I was getting from my amp. Not even close. I contacted tech support and was able to reload that preset. Now it works perfectly. I think that preset must have been corrupted during the update process...Or something. Thanks again for great tech support from Line 6!

Sort of. But not really. There are multiple ways to jumper amps which changes the input impedance in different ways. Using jumpered inputs on an amp means the guitar signal is split and runs in parallel through parts of the amp. Often that's two preamps and both signals are mixed before the power amp. There are some interactions - negligible or audible - that aren't there when you use two parallel amps.

I'm not getting a straight answer from the internet. I want to simulate jumpering two amp inputs. It sounds like it's essentially the same as having the one guitar plugged into the two inputs so I would just need to use the two amps in parallel to each other going into the same cab. Like the Vib an Nrm channels in a Twin Reverb. Can anyone confirm this?

Yes, turning down the gain drive does help... Haven't tried increasing the bias... I'll give that shot! Thank you!

I havent had this problem before. Typically, same setup.....sans mixer connection....i'd have to run spotify volume around 80% or it overpowered my helix portion of what I was hearing. As far as I'm aware, unless a Spotify update changed something with settings, I have not noticed this issue otherwise. I really think the mixer is not an issue, was more looking for a way to adjust the Spotify/tracks volume as my Spotify/Windows volumes are maxed, without having to adjust my preset volumes cause they are hitting my mixer where I want them.....or needing to have a separate at home vs. practice/gig setlist of presets. I will say, which I have not added to this conversation....and this is more likely the 'problem'....is that I have redone my presets for this project. My output settings have always been set to 0.0 db previously, and then using a gain block to adjust a boost for leads. On my new presets I do have the rhythms -3db, and leads at 0.0 db. so nothing should be different then in a way that makes my guitar louder than it was. However I am using the SLO amps in my presets and have noticed that the channel volumes range between 4.5 and 7 depending on the version of the SLO and its gain setting. I'm wondering if that amp model is just that much 'louder' of an amp sim than the Placatar which I was using before. I'm using the same IR so no changes there. Is the SLO amp just that much louder compared to the Placatar? My Placatar settings (saturation switch was on, which seems to drop the output volume a bit) was constantly in the 9 range.

So when at home and not using the mixer do you still have this problem? Is it possible that Spotify has its own audio device setting, independent of the overall PC audio setting? What happens if you disconnect the mixer from the computer (usb) but leave it connected to Helix (XLR)? Just trying to troubleshoot here, not really suggesting solutions.

Create two extra versions of your target preset. Just save them to a new location without overwriting the existing preset. Save them independently somewhere outside your normal saving area. One with snapshot X set as default and one with snapshot Y set as default. Then link to them.