amsdenj

There's really three basic options. The simplest is to use Helix as a front of the amp pedalboard. Do this like you would any pedalboard. Jeff McErlain has a nice course on guitar effect pedals for front of the amp. I highly recommend it for a lot of good ideas. In this case, there will usually be no amp or cabinet models, that's what your amp is doing. Also, depending on your amp and channel setup, you might use quite different configurations for gain staging and distortion. At the other extreme, if your amp has an Effects Return or Poweramp input, you can bypass your's amps preamps altogether and use Helix for your whole signal chain - except for the cabinet. This is different than the previous case because you are using a Helix amp model and have more choice about where you put effects before the amp/distoration and after the amp. Your guitar amp is still providing the speaker model. Then there's the 4CM hybrid approach where you are using Helix for front of the amp effects, using your guitar amp's preamps and distortion channels, and putting other Helix effects (after preamp distortion effects) between your amp's preamp and power amp. This is very flexible and makes the most use of Helix and your guitar amp.

We also think of the contribution of mic choice, placement, angle, and the IR capture process as a negative - something that takes away from the "amp in the room". But that need not be the case at all. Any post processing done in a recorded or live mix can produce a positive impact if done right. There's a lot of stuff you can do to the output of a guitar cabinet that isn't necessarily all bad. I think of this as the contribution of the whole signal path - from pick and string to FRFR/PA speaker motion. With Helix we have a lot of options for managing that signal chain from start to finish. Now we can all dream about the small Blues Club environment where a Fender Deluxe with a Les Paul, Hammond organ and Leslie speaker, Fender Rhodes piano, Precision bass and SVT with 8x10s (I don't know about drums), is providing us with direct stage sound with the PA only addressing vocals. That's pretty awesome, but not realistic much of the time. What I love about Helix is that we can get to the 90-95% case, with a very convenient solution. That's pretty nice. We can leave the other 5% to the pros.

Indeed, even the significant problems I've been having for years with Apogee GiO have gone away in the latest Mac OS X release, and the Apogee drivers are from 2011.

This sounds a bit like what happens when the input impedance isn't set to 1M or at least auto. I never use auto, always 1M. Check your global settings. Also small volume differences can be perceived as tonal differences. Use meters on your DAW to set the levels the same.

It is certainly possible to get great tones out of Helix. Here's a great example of how: https://youtu.be/xbyd9mXo6rM. Helix and S-Gear sound different, and that's good since they both sound excellent. If you want a more reasonable comparison, you need to use the same IR (speaker, mic and mic position) in both since the speaker model has a huge impact on the overall tone. But all this comparing things and trying to make them sound the same isn't really using them to create music. I can get very satisfactory sounds out of both and use them both, but for different purposes.

So you're using Helix for guitar input and headphone output in both cases - Helix amp/cab/IR and S-Gear? If not, then I'd suspect the impedance of your headphones isn't agreeing with Helix's output. If so, then there's a couple of possibilities. One is that you might need some high and low cut on your cab or IR models to compare with S-Gear. S-Gear amps have a fair amount of mid focus in the distortion voicing, lots of bass cut before clipping, lots of treble cut after clipping. You can do that which Helix, but it isn't necessarily the default of many of the amp and cabinet models. The second possibility is that S-Gear is really something special, a bit beyond anything else that's available. That could be because of the underlying technology used to build the amplifiers and/or it could be a result of the digital amp designs in S-Gear - they're not models of existing amplifiers, rather they are boutique guitar amplifiers imspired by existing styles, but built from the ground up in the digital domain. It could also be a result of Mike Scuffham's ears. I still use S-Gear amps and back of the amp effects (mods, delay and reverb) for all recording. The flexibility, ease of use and tone are very hard to beat. But I'm anxious to get Helix Native to have that option too, and to have the additional front of the amp effects from Helix Native that are missing in S-Gear. But Helix is a fantastic live performance rig in every way, especially coupled with a good Variax. Its great to have both options.

Us guitar players deal with tone in two distinct contexts. One is in the "amp in a room" where we're using a guitar amp and cabinet on stage behind us. This is unique in a lot of ways: that we're listening to something behind us, that the guitar speakers are very directional and the we are far enough off axis to miss a lot of the brittle, fizzy high end, its in a room, and its often really loud even interacting with the guitar strings. The second is recodings and concerts we attend. These are usually mic'd guitar cabinets where we are hearing the sound of the speaker close up, but processed through mixing and mastering in the song as a whole. This is an entirely different world. Now It curious that we are able to interact with these two different contexts, switching from one to the other, and not complain about this vs. that loss. Its probably because this is the reality of how we hear things and learn what we like and don't like. We can easily translate between these context without much dissonance because we're very use to doing it. Helix is somewhere between these, and that's what's odd about it. Its not an amp in the room because the cab and IR models all involve a microphone and what it hears based on its placement in front of the speaker - a place we never put our ears. And from the our perspective as performers, its not a mixed and mastered sound either. Its somewhere in between. This is both a compromise and an opportunity. Instead of focusing so much on reproducing the "amp in the room" as a reference goal, why not be a bit more flexible and listen to Helix through our FRFRs as an opportunity to experience sound a new, interesting and flexible way? If we focus on what Helix is producing and how it contributes musically instead of how it reproduces something else, we might find new opportunities for exploration. I've been experiencing this with my new JVT-69S for example. Its a pretty nice instrument, but it doesn't play or feel as nice as my Strat Deluxe or '67 Les Paul Deluxe (humm interesting how so many thing I really like in my life are deluxe). But the JVT is its own instrument, with a flexibility and different tones that open things up for new possibilities as well as convenience. For example, I found myself using the Spank models during last night's gig just to get a different Strat sound for different songs. Certainly the magnetic pickups sound "better". But the modeled sounds are different, and sometimes different is good. We should all explore and embrace diversity as a way of opening discovery, learning, and creating opportunities we might not otherwise experience. To me, diversity brings interest and joy to life, not fear.

Just guessing, but I suspect this isn't much of an issue other than the looks. And a worn guitar that looks used always looks better than one that's never been played.

@guix, I think you make a good point. Sending things on patch change should be limited to patch changes, not changes within a patch. These should be treated as different user actions. The purposes for patch change and for snapshot change within a patch are quite different and one might expect to the integration with other components to be quite different too.

I tend to use very few patches, preferring to get the most out of individual patches with effects like you would with a traditional amp and pedalboard. This is mostly to avoid distractions, having to align patches with changing set lists, and establishing my own "identity tone". So I configure for 10 footswitches to give maximum control within a patch. Then I use the mode switch to get to Patch/Snapshot mode. This gives me four patches on the top for Acoustic, Clean, Mid-Gain, High-Gain configurations. Each of these patches have similar effects in similar order so there's no confusion going from patch to patch. The bottom row has four snapshots for significant changes within a patch - mostly for open tuning and for those situations where I have to switch between acoustic and electric in the middle of a song. In this case the snapshot for acoustic simply turns of the amp and IR blocks, and changes the settings on the EQ block at the end of my signal chain. By the way, I'm really liking my new JVT-69S. This is simple, consistent and works great. But the alternative is to craft individual patches that are specific to each song. Richie Castellano does this for Band Geek and it also works great. Personally I don't want to be hunting for patches during a performance, so I keep things a little simpler and consistent.

I try to keep all blocks close to unity gain, and create boosts by cutting first, then removing the cut when the boost is on. The Helix input takes quite a wide dynamic range and when in doubt, use the input pad switch. These simple precautions will easily eliminate any possibility of internal digital clipping. Then just just use normal gain staging into the FRFR or other amplifying device.

Helix Native will make it a lot easier to explore IRs. I mostly use S-Gear to determine which ones to load into Helix and minimize loading ones I don't use. Indexing by name instead of number would eliminate the IR management issues. 127 might be a smallish number, but may be all we'll get in this hardware version of Helix.

Regarding the original question - is there a difference in the sound of a Variax Standard vs. a JVT Variax? I have both, a Variax Standard and a JVT-69S. They are both setup similarly, including doing the proper string balancing in Workbench HD, and putting a wider nut on the Variax Standard. They do certainly play different - the JVT-69S is physically a much nicer instrument. That quality translates to a feel that makes the guitar nicer to play and therefore you play just a bit better. They also sound different. The magnet pickups are different, so that's an expected source of different tone. Every guitar neck/body is different, even with the same woods. Playing them without an amp sounds a little different because of variation in wood and construction. The pickups see that difference too, including the piezo pickups that feed the model - perhaps especially these pickups. Even the models are a little different. I think that possibly because of variation in the piezo pickups and perhaps more importantly, how they seat into the bridge pieces. This is a case where the better JVT-69S design and construction could contribute to better inputs into the models. The piezo pickups are very sensitive to even small differences and this translates into different inputs into the models.

For switching between electric and acoustic tones in the same song, I'd setup the patch for the most predominant instrument, then use snapshots to reconfigure the blocks for each instrument. As long as you have an EQ somewhere in the patch, you can use a snapshot to change the EQ settings for acoustic guitar and turn off amp and cab/IR blocks. You should be able to use the same back of the amp effects: chorus or other mods, delay and reverb with either instrument. That might not be a perfect patch for acoustic guitar, but it should suffice for part of a song. When changing instruments for the whole song, I just use a different patch.

Also well polished stainless frets feel wonderful.

I have not been able to reproduce this on my Helix with 2.20. I suspect the issue is with a corrupt patch. This seems to happen, possibly when reloading patches from a previous release into an updated release and the patches don't get converted exactly correctly. For example, I had a situation where saving a preset caused Helix to crash every time. Turned out to be one of the patches in the preset was corrupt. Don't know how or why, but I suspect its related to patches with snapshots containing Variax model and open tuning settings. I have not yet had a freeze with 2.20, but has a bunch with 2.12.

I still have a working Lexicon MPX-G2 hooked up to my old Showman amp in the garage. It still a pretty useful digital pedalboard. But the programming is pretty complicated.

I'm using a Mac, so that might account for a different experience. I use to have a lot of problems with Helix USB connections, but changes in Helix and changes in Mac OS seem to have addressed that, especially recent Mac OS releases. I have no problems at all with 2.20. Helix can be sensitive to USB cables, use a good one. Use a USB 2.0 port if you have one. Drivers might need to be updated on Windows. You didn't say what Windows OS you're using, but this might be a case where updates are your friend.

After using good neck oil a couple of times, and polishing the frets, my new JVT-69S is a pretty playable instrument. I have to keep the action pretty high as the models don't like fret buzz. But I don't actually mind the action a bit on the high side. I like the guitar to have a little fight in it.

I had Fender Lace pickups on my early 90's Strat Deluxe - Blue, Silver and Gold. I hated them. They had no character at all. I replaced them with Tom Anderson stacked humbuckers and it was a huge improvement. I have a JVT-69S and find its pickups compare fairly well with the Tom Andersons, they are noisy, and don't have quite the fullness, but I think I'd prefer them over how I remember those Lace sensor pickups sounding.

I've become a real Matt Schofield fan. He has fantastic tone and an approach and style that really sings to me.

A Variax Standard is setup up just like any other electric guitar with a couple of minor additional considerations. The models are getting their input from piezo pickups in the bridge. These pickups are very sensitive to small pressure changes and this can have an inpact on setup. The first consideration is action. Generally one sets the action as low as possible with an acceptable level of fret buzz. This should be done after neck relief has been adjusted which can be impacted by string gauge. Heavier strings might need a bit more relief since the purpose of relief is to provide a pocket in which the string can vibrate without hitting the frets. Different people will have different levels of "acceptable" fret buzz. But on a Variax guitar, those piezo pickups tend to see that fret buzz more than magnetic pickups and it is therefore transferred into the models. So I generally run my action a bit higher on a Variax guitar and keep the fret buzz to the minimum. The second consideration is pickup height. The magnetic pickups have pretty strong magnets and there can be anywhere from 3 to 4 pickups on a Variax. These magnets interact with the vibrating string and if the pickups are too close, you can get some odd intermodulation in the low E string especially when it is fretted more than half way up the neck. Again the piezo pickups seem sensitive to this and tend to accentuate that warble. So keep the pickups perhaps a little lower on the bass side, especially the neck and middle pickups and make sure there's no warble on the low E string. Although not part of setup, pick choice can also have an impact on modeled sounds. Pick attack puts a big transient pressure wave on the piezo pickup which tends to get picked up a bit more in the models than in the magnetic pickups. So beveled picks with rounder points and smooth edges might help control potentially excessive pick attack in the modeled instruments.

No, I didn't do any firmware changes. The guitar was already 2.21.

A lot of it is what you're use to hearing. Going from guitar amp and cab to Helix in a FRFR (PA style cabinet) to IEMs are three very different experiences, even if the tone is similar in each case. The feel will be different, as will the interaction between the guitar and your playback system. A FRFR is going to distribute a lot more highs more evenly. If you have it on the floor pointed at you, its going to sound pretty bright/harsh. IEMs, especially if run mono and with a whole band mix will loose the spatial effect of an amp in the room. These are all compromises. No question a real amp in the room is going to sound and feel good. Helix with a good FRFR, maybe stereo, will sound very different, but good in another way. And its a lot more flexible. Helix into IEMs will help you hear your contribution to the overall mix, is very flexible and will protect your hearing. Frankly this is the bottom line, and its unarguably worth giving up a bit of tone and feel to know how you're fitting into the total mix, and not loose your hearing.

Regarding string volumes, you can easily change these in Workbench either globally and/or per model. The volume variance is likely caused by differences in the piezo pickups and could be impacted by string selection, gauge, and/or setup. There's also a possibility that the "piezo ping" and string volume variance are both caused (or contributed to) by how the piezo pickups seat in the bridge pieces. For example, I noticed on my Variax Standard a strange resonance and low string volumes on the G, B and E (plain) strings which I adjusted as best I could using Workbench. But after playing the guitar for about 8 months, there seems to be some significant improvement. The resonance is much less than it was, and the string volumes have improved enough that I had to go back and adjust them back to more similar levels. I can only suspect/guess that the piezo pickups have through use, and temperature changes (a lot of outside gigs in very hot weather) eventually settled into their bridge pieces, making better, more consistent contact. I didn't have any of these issues with my new JVT-69S. Since the JVT-69S and Variax Standard use the same piezo pickups and the same models, the big difference might be in the bridge assembly which would reinforce this theory. Not sure if there are any implications of this other than to think about how to better seat the piezo pickups in their bridge pieces.