Leaderboard

I use this to supplement my Helix. Made it out of pine 1x8 and 1x2. Had green paint on hand, so figured... why not?

If the Harmonic Flanger model is stereo, yes, there are some greyed out effects after that. The only available, for instance, is the mono version of the Ganymede. One thing is that a stereo uses almost twice the DSP of the mono version, so putting a chain of stereo blocks together we'll eat the DSP up faster. I actually recreated this chain both in my Helix and in the Stomp and had them both connected to HX Edit at the same time. Since HX Edit has multi-device support now, each has its own window. When I compare the lists of effects that are greyed out on each device after adding the Harmonic Flanger, they appear to exactly the same. One thing I will say is that I wouldn't say there were hardly any effects available after adding the fourth block in your example - there were more available than unavailable. That's the same in the Stomp and the Helix.

Not yet, but they're working on it.

Yep... 100% sure. All Helix products are using the SHARC ADSP-21469 chip. It's just the Floor, LT and Rack have two of them, and the HX Effects and Stomp have one. BTW, the Fractal FX8 uses a single SHARC ADSP-21469 chip as well, just for comparison's sake. There are simply some amp and cab models that are a lot more DSP intensive than others. Sometimes if you put in an amp, a cab, and the '63 Spring Reverb model, you won't have left for much else at all on a path. With some amp models you can have a lot more. On the Helix itself, you can have up to 16 blocks on a processor path, but it's not like you can fill them all up with DSP-intensive blocks. It's really more for the sake of routing flexibility than being able to max out blocks. If you create an effects-only Helix patch, you can load a lot in there, but unless you want 16 EQs in a path, you wouldn't be able to use all the blocks.

Are you 100% positive that there weren't some processor compromises? Because my understanding is the full Helix can have at least double the number of blocks on one signal chain without even going into the second path. I realize this could mean it was tapping into the second DSP, but I thought I'd heard of dual signal paths with 20 or more blocks (I don't own a Helix so I could be completely off base here). The idea that the Stomp hit a brick wall at 6 with some pretty simple choices seems crazy if it's half the processor of the full unit.

Actually, the biggest part of the cost of the Helix would probably be in design and development. The processor cost is just a fraction. Regarding the GT1000 comparison: Technical specs don't take into account the biggest factor in sound quality, which is sound design & programming (including the development of a brand new OS). Read: (Californian) man-hours = $$$$$. Which brings us back to the thread topic: -Line6 has invested a lot in developing the core HX software. -First, they have to sell enough of HX products to break even on their ROI. -Second, since the true value of the Helix is in the IP, they would definitely want to maximize utilization of this asset. (Simply put, selling lots of HX stuff) -They are doing exactly this right now, by releasing offshoots/variants in the HX family to expand their market share. No need to reinvent the very expensive wheel, just customize the package to cater to different target audiences. In short, no, there will likely not be a Helix Mk2 any time soon.

That would be awesome. Then I could stop copy and pasting between patches when we write a new song...

Great idea. I recently got a Headrush Gigboard and they have a feature where you can save different presets for every amp/pedal/IR. Helix would benefit well from this too.

As far as delays go, you can probably set your tempo to global and have the pedals just follow your global tempo, then you don't have to think about it so much. If you just want a quick comparison of how one thing sounds generally compared to how another sounds generally, honestly I would just leave the settings as they are , should still get you a pretty good feel. If you want a really in depth comparison of the two, I'd just put them on two different blocks and switch between them.

The main difference between modelers in this range is the proficiency of the person using it to able to precisely dial in the tones he wants. Technically both will do whatever you want. You just have to know what you're dong and know how you want to set your rig up to get the sound you want. Neither of them is simply plug in and play. Both require you to be knowledgeable about how to build a signal chain. If you know what you're doing both will sound great. If you don't know what you're doing both will sound bad.

Cool! I used a Pitch Black tuner forever, right up until I got Helix. Great unit, I still keep it for use as a bench tuner. I was running a standalone "satellite board" for a while, but it ultimately got to being kind of a hassle. So I consolidated onto a Pedaltrain Terra. (Helix is not hanging off the board, trick of perspective...) Guitar is straight into Trio+ with the rest of the board in its loop. FreqOut is in front of Helix. The two treadle pedals are home-brew expression pedals built in a RotoVibe and Wah enclosure. Bit Commander, Shoe Gazer (and the NS-2 Noise Supressor), and the Erupter are each in their own Helix FX Loop. The remaining loop is the last block in the chain and is used to send back to Trio+ FX Return and then bring the Trio's output back. Everything out via XLR to an Atomic CLR cab.

So I was setting up my Kemper set up for tonight's gig. I work in performance mode and was setting up wahs and pitch control functions for certain songs. I figured that since I was using performance mode, I when I stores each rig, it would also store weather the expression pedal was in wah function or pitch function. But it appears that is a global system function and I have to choose between wah, pitch, etc Does that mean I have to get another another expression pedal or is there a work around to use it for both