DunedinDragon

Since day 1 when I received my Helix 10 years ago I've always had separate patches for each song and all my patches are exported to a single directory with the type of guitar used on it to the end of the file name. For the vast majority of my presets there's just one guitar exclusive to that preset. That's always made sense to me in that my guitars have generally specific uses as far as where they work best for certain types of songs. When I change guitar on stage it's because that song will only sound the way I want it to sound for that song. There's really no other reason to change guitars in my opinion unless the song dictates it. This also ensures the output volume of all patches match across all songs regardless of which guitar is being used. The only downside to this is in how you set up the order of your songs to minimize guitar changes, but that's just takes some additional planning.

I can't say any of this bothers me. I've had my Helix Floor since they first came out and have updated it religiously through the years..until the last update. It's always done everything and more than what I could ask of it and the last update didn't really change that much that would apply to me. It's still a very viable platform and serves all my needs. There are just a couple of things that interest me in the new platform, but not enough that I'm willing to dedicate the time to learning and using them. The more important ones like playing along to backing tracks I've been doing that for years with my existing system. It's probably not as slick and easy as it is on the new platform, but mine is FAR more functional for my needs than what they're introducing. I'm curious about the new amp modeling technology and that could sway me once I actually see and experience it. But other things like the abilty to capture an amp and model it are of no interest and I can't see where I'd want to use it. I appreciate the thought and initiative Line 6 has demonstrated in this new design, but it's just not enough to where I'm willing to make that investment.

Typically a click track is something everyone in the band uses together typically generated from the mixing board so everyone is in sync, so an individual click wouldn't really make much sense other than for personal practice. These days it's usually more of a prompt/click track to not only align timing but ensure people are prepared for the musical transitions.

It's interesting I've never run into this problem and I do a LOT of copying of presets. However I always export then import them, then make changes and export them to a new preset name. Maybe this relates to an "in memory" copy of the presets?

Did you install the Windows Helix ASIO driver per the instruction outlined in the link I sent you?

I use my Ableton in a live operation with my Helix, but I have it connected to a standalone audio interface which is directly connected to two input channels on the mixer. There is some guidance for doing this through the Helix, but I can't vouch for it because that's not how I use it. https://helixhelp.com/tips-and-guides/universal/usb-audio

For the last few years I've been using my Helix in the same manner with external tracks but I quickly began to understand the deficiencies that can arise using an external MIDI clock. So in my case, because I have a separate preset for each song, I save the tempo to be consistent with the track it will be used with and that works flawlessly. There may be other ways to configure it to share a common clock, but my approach is bullet-proof, so I've never pursued anything else. I know the MIDI clock definitions and functions will be changing soon with the new MIDI specifications now coming out, but that won't affect me.

You're exactly right. You've stepped up into the current generation of modeling in a BIG way with the Helix. I've had mine since they first came out in 2015 and haven't needed anything more than that for both the studio and live performances. Of course it's still relevant in 2025 mainly due to a great design but also due to the firmware updates that keep it current and expanding it's abilities. The way you intend to use it live is exactly how I use mine. In the studio it's just a simple USB connection to the computer and you're off to the races on pretty much any DAW you can imagine. The biggest challenge you'll encounter is how to configure the Helix and your presets in such a way that they're consistent from song to song. Not everyone does it that way, but I've found it the easiest way to do things and never run short on DSP memory because I've tried to overload a single preset to make it useful on several songs. But that choice is up to you. In my case I have a separate rehearsal space setup in my house with a decent mixing board (QSC TM30) and powered speakers the same as what I'll be using on stage (Yamaha DXR 12). That allows me to gain stage every preset so it will always be consistent for a live mixing board. It also allows me to setup my amps and effects, EQ and compression so there's really nothing that has to be done at a live setup on the mixing board other than to plug my Helix into the appropriate channel and double check my gain level on the mixer and I'm good for the whole performance. There are a vast amount of capabilities you can also take advantage of on the Helix with it's MIDI capabilities if you want to pursue it. You can use the Helix to automate other devices and/or have the Helix automated by an external MIDI controller (which is how I use it in conjunction with backing tracks I record in my studio). The possibilities are extraordinary, but it takes some time and effort to learn about them and how you want to use them. So good luck with your new unit. Now the fun begins!!!!

Most likely you have your Helix output configured for sending Mic signal level rather than Instrument signal level.

It sounds like you might have it set for 4 snaps/4 stomps rather than the 8 snapshots setting

The idea of using the Helix, or any guitar modeling system, to handle vocals has always been foreign to me and never made much sense. The value and purpose of live or recorded sound mixing falls well outside of the design intentions of the Helix which is to handle the processing of one instrument, the guitar, and it does that job exceptionally well. Likewise handling all instruments and vocals in a performance to satisfy the needs and requirements of everyone involved in a live or recording production falls into a separate domain of technology only addressed specifically by a mixer. And today's mixers are just as advanced at doing that as is the Helix at managing the needs of producing the correct guitar sound for any song. Why would I try and force the Helix to do something it's not particularly good at given how easily and effectively I can do that with a Helix and a mixing board? That makes no sense to me in the real world of music production.

Aside from Global EQ you can most likely get the appropriate level of "sizzle" by simply using the new Helix cabs with the appropriate mic and positioning parameters much more precisely than doing it artificially through EQ. My presets seem to sound pretty close to the same played through our stage monitors (Yamaha DXR 12) and our front end speakers (QSC KLA 12). Using the right cab setups with the new cabs and I only need to make very small minor EQ adjustments with a final parametric EQ at the top end and everything's fine regardless of the volume. Making room adjustments is a different animal and there are specific automated tools on modern mixing boards that allow for such things using white noise generators.

I guess this doesn't surprise me given the architecture of the Helix where real-time processing of an entire signal chain takes priority over everything else which is not the case on a standalone pedal which has a much smaller job to do. Add to that the heavier processing incurred by most delay effects and you have a perfect setup of that kind of situation.

The simple fix if you're going to FOH with the L/Mono output is to have your mixer simply send that signal to your floor monitor on a separate monitor output. That's what's usually done. Simple and works flawlessly every time.

When it comes to recording a bass track I don't think there's anything better than using virtual instruments. I finally sold off my Fender precision bass a couple of years ago because it simply pales in comparison to the flexibility and control I get using various plugins for standard electric bass, upright bass, picked/plucked bass, even orchestral bass sounds I can get through using my MIDI keyboard and various sampled bass and professional EQ'ing tools like iZotope's Neutron 5.

THIS is why it works so well if you go direct to the mixing board in a live setting.

https://helixhelp.com/tips-and-guides/universal/midi

To further clarify things, that tone on the video was produced in a recording studio and it's highly unlikely he played that through any kind of amp. The tone you hear is representative of the type of microphone used to capture the guitar for the recording. The tone of the guitar sounds great to me, but I'm listening to it through a pair of Yamaha HS7 studio monitors. If you were to listen to that video through any of those amps you've mentioned it would probably sound good, but not nearly as clear and precise as I was hearing it because amp speakers aren't that sophisticated due to the fact they have a limited frequency response range. And in all likelihood, with your guitar you would be hearing it through the piezo-electric pickups in your guitar, not captured on a high quality recording studio mic setup. With that in mind the HXStomp would provide you with all the same capabilities used for studio recording including the selection of cabinet, mic and mic placement which will give you a greater degree of consistency with how his guitar was captured and playing it back through studio monitors would come very close. When it comes to acoustic guitar I've never used an amp as it's just not the right tool for the job. I always, even to this day, go direct to the mixing board and in a live setting pretty much ALL PA's use FRFR style speakers for the reasons cited above.

IR's aren't really audio files even though they're distributed as WAVs. They capture the "impulse" of the sound as it interacts throughout the room it's recorded in with the specified mic. But, of course that affects the audio frequencies when you play audio through them. The mic and the position of the mic when capturing the impulse response have different effects on the sound coming out of a given cabinet. For example if it's captured near the center of the speaker cone it will be brighter than if it's captured at the outside rim of the speaker which will be darker. That's just the physics of sound from the speaker. Distance from the speaker and angle of the mic have similar effects. You can of course add EQ after the sound of the IR, but I generally just depend on the mic and the position and maybe a couple of small EQ tweaks at the end of the signal chain if needed to correct something. IRs are used for other purposes as well such as recording orchestras to recreate the natural reverb in a performance hall. In fact I have one such plugin from Spitfire Audio that captures the environment of AIR Studios at Lyndhurst Hall in London that I commonly use on various instruments such as percussion or string ensembles.

Each of those WAV files represents different configurations of microphones and microphone placements that were used to make that particular IR. Generally not all of them will be relevant to you and you would tend to settle on the ones that fit the kind of sound you want given whatever amp you decide to apply it to. When I was using IRs I ended up having way more IR entries in my list on my Helix than I ever needed. That all disappeared when I started using the new Helix cabs that are actually IRs but you can easily adjust the mic and mic positions without having a ton of different IRs loaded

What @rd2rk said... Things that factor into it are music styles, band makeup, types of guitars, types of performance venues, etc. all have a bearing on what will work best in any given situation. For example, I'm at the far end of that spectrum because I have no amp or cabinet on stage. I go direct into the mixing board and use floor monitors coming from the mixer. But my application is probably not anything like yours. Mine is more like a pit musician in a stage production. Works perfect for me, but probably not what you're looking for.

Your signal path isn't visible or compatible for anyone to be able to see it because it's an .HEIC file.

What you have to understand is that each amp modeled in the Helix is modeled directly from the circuitry of the actual physical amp. Amps rarely behave the same way and a 100 watt amp set to 5 will be a very different volume than a 50 watt amp set to 5. The most accurate way to level out these situations is to do as has been pointed above and do it the way it will be done in a studio or live performance through "gain staging" which is the process of adjusting the signal level of the output coming from the Helix so they're exactly the same on a channel receiving the signal. The easiest way is to have either a mixing board or a DAW that will display the signal strength on a meter and, as it has been mentioned above, adjust the channel volume and/or the level of the output block until the signal is always at the same level. That's the only way to make sure everything is at the same level without affecting the tone and makes it very easy for any sound engineer to gain stage your Helix.

What I've found for years now is, IF you have a proper cable that fits correctly, and IF it's plugged into a REAL USB port and not an internal hub port (which depends on the computer) I've never had a problem with either of my Helix Floor units. I do know those type of USB B hub can be particularly picky about when you plug into it, but mine have always worked fine as long as I'm careful when I plug into my Helix. It's important to understand that not all ports on a computer are direct USB ports. Sometimes they're often defined as part of an internal USB port collection which acts as a hub and not a pure connection. Typically the only way to really be sure is to examine the way it's defined in your Device Manager. As long as it's a standalone USB entry it's always worked for me even if I use an external hub. Currently on both my PC and my laptop I plug in my hubs to a powered USB Type A (3.0) and have no problems using any of those ports to plug into my Helix.

The VAST majority of folks doing PC studio work tend to use 48000Hz because it's quicker and faster to perform the mathematics on the conversion and therefore avoid latency. There's generally no audible advantage to higher rates at least as far as humans are concerned. Your dog may disagree.....