DunedinDragon

Well, I guess first things first. Let's just concentrate on what and how you're hooked up because that appears to be the big disconnect. Let's dismiss the home stereo system because that's really consumer gear. After all you wouldn't expect to use your home stereo as a PA system. So let's concentrate on the PC side for now. You mentioned you were going through your FocusRite Scarlett 2i4 into your studio monitors. First, what kind of monitors are we talking about? I'm assuming they're pro audio powered studio monitors of some sort such as JBL LSR305, Yamaha HS5/HS7/HS8, PreSonus R65, or other comparable studio monitors? If so I'd suggest to eliminate some possibilities you hook those powered studio monitors directly up to the Helix either 1/4" out or XLR out and see if that makes a difference. To start with, set the powered monitor volume/gain setting to halfway between 0 and maximum. There are WAY too many of us here that have had great experiences right out of the box with Helix as long as we were using some form of pro gear output like powered studio monitors, powered stage monitors, or into the loop return on a stage amp to bypass the preamp stage of the amp, or even a good pair of pro quality headsests. So it's clear to me that this issue isn't so much with the Helix as it is getting you on board with the right kind of gear to ensure you're hearing things correctly. Also, given you have a pro audio set of studio monitors, make sure the settings on the monitors are set to the flattest settings possible. You don't want any additional coloration to the tone to be added to the Helix output. All that being said, it is also possible that your ears are wanting to hear something closer to an amp rather than a polished studio sound which is what the Helix with a normally configured preset is going to output. It shouldn't sound "thin" but you could very well be hearing additional highs and lows that you normally wouldn't hear using just a standard guitar amp cabinet. Although guitar amp cabinets cover the full range of frequencies, they don't cover them all equally and tend to be far more oriented to frequencies in the 800 to maybe 2,500 hz, and most dominant in the 1000 to 1500 hz. That's not a problem because within each cabinet block you can modify the hi-cut parameter which will focus the output more closely to that of a typical guitar cabinet. Most of us find that setting a hi-cut in the 3.8khz range gets pretty close, but you can play with that a bit depending on the guitar and pickups being used, the Helix cabinet model being used, the mic model being used, and the position of the mic model. I would say that if you are using a decent pro audio set of powered studio monitors plugged directly into the Helix, you should get a pretty decent sound with plenty of volume from any of the presets that may or may not need some adjustment. If not, there may be something wrong elsewhere, but I'd start there for sure.

I guess another big advantage of splitting the cab and amp is the ability to easily change the cab from a stock cab to an IR or vice versa. At the start of using the Helix I didn't recognize this which meant that when I started getting into IR's I had to manually rebuild my amp block in all my presets because there's no way to easily split the amp and cab while retaining all their settings. Just a word to the wise.....

We live in an amazing times for musicians. It's easy to forget that the same advances that resulted in the Helix have benefited us in so many areas. Not just PA's but also in keyboards, drums, recording, guitar construction, etc. Exceptional quality at amazing prices compared to what it once was. It's just a shame that so few can actually make a living wage from doing it like we did back in the days of expensive, crappy equipment.....

I've been using mostly the Celestion and Redwirez IR's for mine and they all work great!! It just depends on the sound I want for the song.

I purchased both the Tele Elite and the Strat Elite with the N4's. I originally got the Tele Elite and I was so impressed with the N4's I traded my Strat with Lace Sensors in on the Strat Elite. They tend to be a bit hotter than standard pickups, but that may also be due to the way they've wired up the S1 switch on the tone bypass on the tone knobs. But they have a lot more presence and dynamics than what I've had in the past on my Strats. I had to dial back some of my cleaner presets due to the output of the N4's, but not by much. If I don't use the tone bypass they tend to be pretty close. To be honest I haven't really yet explored all the 10 different pickup options using the S1 switch pn the Strat since I just picked it up on Saturday. The Tele Elite is simply a monster!!! It's got some real grit to it so doing stuff like gritty Keith Richards or Pete Townsend sounds with some nice tasty punch to it is pretty easy to achieve. Very clean and crisp twangy sound as you would expect if you need it to go that way. I haven't yet found any use yet for the S1 switch, but I'm sure I will at some point. I'm just having a blast with the N4 pickups because they're really responsive. It took me a bit to get used to the compound radius fretboard and C to D neck contour, but now that I'm used to it I love it. All I can tell you is, the Tele N4's and other elite featues were impressive enough that I felt I needed them on my Strat as well. I did play a bit with the Strat Pro when I was looking at the Tele Elite, but I can't say it impressed me the way the N4's did.

I think this is where things begin to cross over into personal preferences and practices. When I'm performing in the band, I'm not running the PA, so it's very important to me and to the rest of the band that our stage sound and stage mix be the standard for what the FOH is supposed to sound like so we're confident about what the audience is hearing. In practice that's not typically a big problem because our basic stage sound is pretty consistent so it's typically a process of getting the monitor mix correct for non amplified things like voices and harmonica. Once that's set it's pretty easy to gauge and compare it to the FOH sound during the sound check. Since we primarily depend on gain levels and EQ's used in our recording mix to determine the channel settings, anything that varies from the stage mix is typically going to be fixed with the board's graphic equalizer for the room. This is why in practice for us the guitar and drum channels need no individual channel EQ treatment because they didn't need it during recording. Because the vocals and other instruments ideal EQ has been pre-determined everything else for them also falls to the board graphic EQ for room adjustments. It's just a simplified process to make sound checks faster and more accurate. It's a process we've developed over the last 9 years together that tends to work best for us for keeping a consistent sound venue to venue..

Well I'd say I'd have agreed more with some of what you're saying maybe 10 or 15 years ago, but not as much with the changes that have been occurring in sound reinforcement and modeling technology certainly within the last decade or so. The live sound systems that have come into popular use in the last decade or so are far better at faithful reproduction of signals than what was available prior to that. Even on a limited budget FOH systems are not anything like that of the passive speaker systems of old in that they have very similar frequency response profiles. Prior to that it was anybody's guess what a given speaker system's profile might be. There are minor differences but by and large the profile of an Alto isn't terribly different than that of a Renkus-Heinz. So a digitally produced signal whether it be from a modeler, a drum kit (acoustic or electronic) using triggers and samples, or even electronic keyboards can be assumed to be a true and faithful representation of what the artist wants. Rooms may vary with frequency hot spots, deadness, ambient noise, and other factors...but that's not a channel issue. Those kind of things affect all channels equally and should be dealt with using an equalizer across all channels before final output whether that be to the monitor system or the house system. Of course this really only applies to direct digitally produced signals, not mic'd signals. I've tested this concept frequently with our own system which consists of a QSC Line Array of KLA12's. Because the array sits atop a pole I can easily turn it toward the stage and with flat channel EQs and no room EQ corrections it clearly matches the tone I hear from the DXR12, or at least close enough that I can't tell the difference. The same is true for the drummer who uses triggers and samples and monitors using a Mackie Thump. That advantage is only available if you build your patches using a comparable system. The same holds true when we play at venues with different but comparable systems. It's one of the key advantagew of this type of technology.

I think this is really the key to the whole issue. This isn't about FRFR Fail, nor is it about a Helix Fail. This is ultimately about USER Fail. Ultimately the only thing an FRFR offers you is a wide palette to paint on. That offers you the opportunity with the Helix to craft the tone you want VERY precisely. That requires you to know how to craft the tones you want. The more you know about the resources available to you in the Helix and how to apply them, the better your ultimate sound will be. You can craft that sound on many different output devices, but none will be as flexible and responsive as an FRFR in accurately portraying the sound you've crafted. It's just like a guitar. No guitar will make you a better guitar player. Only practice and knowledge will do that. Same with the Helix.

Here's the key question. If you try to change the frequency response curve of your FRFR, how are you going to know what you will sound like through the PA? The PA is likely to have the same, or close enough, response curve as the default setting of your FRFR. That assumes, of course, you've got a decent FRFR. Would I use Global EQ? I wouldn't, but that's because I use a lot of different amp models, a lot of different styles of music, and a several different guitars when I play. If you tend to use a very limited set of amps, and pretty much the same style of music with a single guitar, then Global EQ might be more convenient. There is nothing you can do with the Global EQ that can't be done, and likely done better within the patch. But it really all boils down to how you intend to use your Helix.

None of this is surprising at all to me. This is simply the old "amp in the room" observation that's been talked about ad nauseum. If you want the "amp in the room" sound, there is certainly a way to get it with the Helix or any other modeler...even the HD500X. You turn of cab and mic simulation and plug it into an amp. But at the same time you have to recognize you will never be able to capture that sound on a recording or through a PA. What you've always heard on any recording or in any live performance is an amp being mic'd through a cabinet and reproduced using a FRFR speaker. There's nothing wrong with wanting to hear the "amp in the room" sound if that's what you personally want to hear when you play, but the fact is it will only be heard by you on stage or in the room with the amp. Once it's mic'd it will be a different sound. In fact, once you move to a position off axis from the cabinet it will sound different. That's simply the nature of the beast. The choice of going FRFR is for the sake of consistency. What I hear on stage or in a room with my FRFR setup is exactly what my audience will hear out front and what I'll hear when I record it. If that doesn't bother you, then by all means go through an amp.

I think to get that particular tone you pretty much need a full hollow body like he's using. The 335 has a bit of that feel, but it's still fundamentally a solid body given the center block. I had one for many years and I could never really achieve that full, round sound of a hollow body. What you might do is look into maybe a Gretsch 5420T. Brand new they price out at $700, but I bet you could find a good deal on used one in your price range. A lot of guys like me started with the 5420 and then went to the premium line. It's a great guitar. Not humbuckers but the blacktop Filter'Trons come pretty close to the same sound. You never know, you might get hooked on hollow body guitars once you start using them. They're extraordinarily useful for getting a unique sound for certain styles of songs, and there's really no substitute. I think my band would kick me out if I ever got rid of mine. They're really workhorse guitars.

It all comes down to the frequency response profile of the system you're going into whether it be reference monitors or a PA. When we use a term like FRFR it really refers to having a relatively flat response across a broad frequency range. That's precisely what studio reference monitors and modern PA's are supposed to have to some degree or another. So you shouldn't be surprised by a big difference if you've built your patches using studio reference monitors. What will be different between your studio monitors and a PA or powered speaker monitors is they will seem a bit harsher, but that's mainly because they're built for longer projection of the sound unlike studio monitors with are more for close listening. Typically if you stand back from them a ways the harshness goes away. I think most of us that are doing this sort of thing have our own powered speakers we use as a stage monitor and feed one line to the PA and the other to the stage monitor. Some folks choose to only send one line to the PA board and use either the PA's stage monitors or in ear monitors. I personally have two Yamaha DXR12's. One I leave at our rehearsal space and is used for performances, and the other I keep at home for dialing in presets and practicing. I also have two Yamaha HS7 studio monitors on my recording system, but it's just easier to bring my Helix home and plug it directly into the monitor rather than hooking it up to the computer all the time. This also ensures that I'll get exactly the same sound on stage as I get at home. This also gives me the flexibility of taking my home DXR12 when I gig occasionally with other bands. This is important because when I do that it's often in venues in which I don't go through the PA and just depend on my stage monitor. That means the audience will always hear the same sound whether it's with my normal band through a PA, or some other band in a smaller venue. As far as adjustments, I haven't really run into much that requires any adjustment as far as global EQ as long as I get my tone dialed in at home and get the volume on my patches consistent. I sometimes may need to make some minor volume adjustments in my patches at rehearsal, but that's about it.

I suspect one of the problems you're running into here on getting the right tone may be that you're not working with the same type of guitar. Even though he's using humbuckers on his G175 that deep resonance in his tone is characteristic of typical hollow body. There are certain tone characteristics I can only get using my Gretsch Silver Falcon, and that's why I have it in my guitar arsenal.

As long as you're not using them to develop your patches. That would probably throw off the sound of the patches when you go direct to the PA/IEM's.

If you think you're thrilled now, wait till you actually play it through some decent speakers or full range studio headphones. The headphones alone are enough to explain why you weren't happy with what you were getting out of the Helix. Those headsets are pretty good for regular music, but not exactly a flat, studio output which is what you really need to hear how well the Helix sounds...either really good headphones or preferably a decent FRFR powered speaker. Then you can REALLY be amazed at how much of that tweaking you're doing now won't need to be done.

Even without snapshots changing presets would be the wrong approach in this case. This could all be done within a single preset by assigning multiple actions to a footswitch. Snapshots are simply an extension of that capability. The thing to bear in mind is that changing presets loads all the blocks or effects in your case, which causes a pause while the Helix loads and hooks up everything in the preset. In a snapshot you're simply loading the preset once and then using snapshots to enable various combinations and settings on the blocks turning them on and off or setting new values so all of the blocks, whether used in the current snapshot or not, get loaded from the beginning in the preset so there's no delay in switching things. There are far too many aspects of snapshots to expect someone to regurgitate what's written in the manual here. If you have an aversion to reading manuals, go on to YouTube and search for 'Line 6 Snapshots' and you will get a pretty big list of videos that cover all aspects of Snapshots, how to set them up and use them.

It's kind of hard to troubleshoot a "sounds like crap" problem. It might help to be a bit more specific about "crap".

Typically the simple fact that the lead guitar is no long playing its normal rhythm part while playing a lead usually adds enough space so that a smaller increase in volume of maybe 2 or 3 db is sufficient to stand out. It becomes a bit more complex with more instruments because the lead guitar is still providing a rhythm part while another instrument is taking a lead (such as a harmonica or a keyboard). By laying back just slightly it gives more space to the solo without a large boost in SPL and tends to sound more musical. What doesn't work very well in my experience is that if you try to fill the space left open by the vocals with the same level of volume from the lead, the lead sounds too loud, especially if there's more than one voice such as in the case of multiple part harmony. Generally a lead instrument doesn't need quite that much volume lift to be heard correctly.

I'm assuming when you refer to Helix original IR's you're talking about the stock cabinets used in the cabinets block? Those aren't exactly IR's. They operate somewhat like IR's but are a proprietary construct that can only be used on the Helix. What makes them unique is that unlike typical IR cabinets you can use a single cabinet and make various adjustments such as changing the mic used, changing its distance from the speaker, early reflections, and so forth without changing the actual cabinet as you would with an IR. Some folks swear by them. I used them for a long time as well, but as I got into exploring various IR's I found the Line 6 cabinets just simply weren't flexible enough on their own. I could get them close to what I wanted sometimes, but I would typically have to add some external EQ to tame them and get the precise sound I was looking for. Although IR's are not as convenient because each variation of mic and mic placement is a different IR, they provide the capability (most of them) to position a mic at various locations on the speaker, at different angles (off axis). and even combine room ambience IR's to really hone the sound more precisely to what you want. In a practical sense this has allowed me to fairly quickly combine different IR's to get the sound I want and not have to use an IR block to further refine the sound.

I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing here. I'm referring to the low-cut parameter that's a part of the adjustments on any cabinet used in your patche whether that be a stock cabinet or an IR. it's either off or goes up in the frequency where you want the low end to be cut off. Typically you would raise it from off up to around 120 hz or more to reduce the very low frequencies that are of no real use for guitar. Setting low-cut on 0hz means you aren't cutting off at any frequencies. It's not like a volume knob, It's a knob to set a specific frequency.

I'll agree with two things here. First, how much you need to increase really depends on the type of lead you're doing and tons of other factors. If you're keeping the same general tone as you've been playing throughout you may need a 3 to 4db shift in volume for it to stand out. My preference is to change the tone (EQ) of the lead typically toward more high mid and treble. In some cases you may not even need a boost in volume, or just a slight one. Second, it's not just about the rhythm guitarist dropping volume IMO. My preference is that he keep close to the same volume but simplify and lighten his strumming pattern. The key to getting good separation for the lead is to simplify things backing it up..all instruments. I do this all the time for the harmonica player when he has a lead. I simplify and lighten my pattern and he stands out just fine. You don't want the whole foundation of the song to dissipate, just a little less busy. The bad news is, this type of thing takes some maturity from everyone in the band to want the band to sound good rather than simply getting attention for themselves.

In my experience the Rokit line tends to be a bit bassy compared to other studio monitors. But they do have a knob that allows you to lower the low frequencies by 1 or 2 db. That may be enough to get rid of the muddiness in your bass. Other than setting your guitar input level on the Globals/Input selection the two things that tend to work for me is to play with the low cut on the cabinet block. Somewhere in the 100hz to 140hz range tends to tighten things up a bit. Also increasing the bias on the amp block slightly will give you some more articulation which also might help.

I totally agree with everything you said here. It's nice to find out I'm not the only one having this experience. I think most of this issue probably comes from people not having experience with how mic placement has such a significant effect on the tone you get from a cabinet. It's that way with real cabinets and modeled cabinets work exactly the same. If there's any issue Line 6 needs to address it would be greater flexibility in how their stock cabinets get mic'd. Although I'm personally fine with using IR's, using stock cabinets with a greater range of mic placement would likely be more convenient. I would echo and expand on what you've said that EQ is really only a last step tweak and may or may not be necessary depending on what you've done with the mic's and the cabinets. I used to be one that assumed I would need to use a hi-cut/lo-cut until I began using IR's. I still use them on some patches if none of the IR positioning or mic's sufficiently tames the highs or lows to my taste. But it's never an assumption that I MUST do it. Very often I can add a second different cabinet in a parallel mix and achieve a great tone with no EQ on either cabinet. That may not be as DSL efficient, but iit;s certainly more authentic to the way things work vin the real world.

If I'm understanding what you're saying I'm not sure this would even be possible. Let's say you have several song specific patches that are based on a given template. You want to make a few changes to the template and cascade that through the song specific patches that are based on it. But how, exactly, is the cascading logic going to know which elements are song specific and which are template based? For example your template may be based on a Vox amp. But in the song templates you make certain modifications to the EQ in some of them, maybe bias parameters in others, presence in yet others. How is the cascading logic going to know what to change and what not to change in the song specific patches? Plus with a major change in something like an amp type, there are bound to be a number of other impacts in the parameters for song specific patches. I guess with enough horsepower and additional flags for locking or not locking each and every parameter in each and every element in a patch it could be done, but you may have to wait until the 3rd or 4th generation of Helix for something like that.

Exactly!!!! This is the reason I've learned to get up and walk away from working on a preset after a while. You came back in an hour or two and you have a "what in the world was I thinking" moment. I've gotten to the point now that I'll work on different presets over a period of several days just to give my ears a rest. Otherwise I end up with something that's not anything at all like what I wanted it to be.