DunedinDragon

I think it's simply more obvious or prominent when practicing by yourself, but it's a lot less prominent in a band context for sure. Not missing, just less prominent. A lot of the harshness is in the detail of the tone which probably gets washed out a bit more by the full range of sounds in a band. In some ways I think many people may confuse articulation with harshness. Harshness to me is when certain frequencies stand out and are annoying. In a lot of cases where people may be used to traditional guitar cabinets, the articulation between the different strings and the pick attack are often more muted simply due to the nature of the frequency response profile of the speaker and cabinet. That type of thing can easily be adjusted through the bias parameter. Personally, I like the articulation.

In my experience they do to some degree or another. Remember there's a mic and mic placement involved. Certain IR's pretty much eliminate the harshness with the right mic and placed further out from the cone. It also appears to be true that what sounds somewhat harsh playing live through my DXR12, sounds perfect when recorded and played through my HS7's. This tells me that some of the artifacts I'm hearing are mostly likely directly related to audible differences in speakers built for long projection and those built for filling a room with sound. I suspect if I was able to move far enough away from my DXR12's in the room I'm in I wouldn't notice the harshness nearly as much because the horn and the main speaker would blend together better. I get the same effect when I play pre-recorded music through the PA if I stand too close to the speakers, so that tells me my guess may be pretty accurate. Personally I'm not bothered too much by it. Over time I've learned what to listen for and how much I need to cut to get the sound I want coming out of the PA. And that cut will vary based on the guitar I'm using, the amp model, and the IR's (cabinets, mics, and mic placements). In some cases I simply don't need any cuts after I've EQ'd my patch. It may be slightly more harsh, but in practice/performance it's pretty much spot-on.

The last thing in the world I would want to do is depend on a FOH guy to get my tone right. Not only does he not know the tone I'm shooting for, but the tools they typically have available for live sound are way too primitive to be terribly precise or accurate. I'll send you a finished tone. Keep my channel EQ flat, gain stage it appropriately, and leave it alone I say.... And this is coming from a guy who IS a FOH guy.....

Here are some of my observations I've made over a period of time regarding the harshness issue. One key point is with FRFR speakers. The traditional powered speakers require a certain amount of distance from them in order to get an accurate feel for the sound. Often the harshness when standing 4 feet away dissipates at 5 or 6 feet. That makes sense given the size of the horn and the design of the speaker and that these speakers aren't meant to be positioned in close proximity to the listener. These speakers are designed for long projections so it takes a certain amount of distance before the horn and the speaker blend correctly. I don't get the same effect from my Yamaha HS7 studio monitors as I have them positioned correctly all the time and they're not designed specifically for long distance projection. What is very true to my ears is that stock cabinets will always be more harsh than IR's. I can reduce some of that harshness by pushing the mic out further from the cab, but it's not the same as IR's which allow you to move the mic further away from the cone or off-axis. My experience in mic'ing actual cabinets tells me that mic positioning is far more critical to getting the sound you want than is distance. If there's any specific deficiency in the Helix design I'd say it's the handling of mic's on the stock cabinet. It's simply not flexible enough. For me harshness depends a lot on the type of guitar and pickup. A preset that sounds quite harsh for a Strat or Tele will sound just about perfect for a Gretch hollow body. Often I can completely mitigate the harshness simply by combining cabinets and mixing them together rather than using a high cut. What phil_m mentioned about the high cut parameter on cabinets appears to be absolutely spot-on. A high cut on a cabinet of 3.8khz is very different than an EQ high cut of 3.8khz and indicates the slope of the high cut on the cabinets is much less steep than that of the EQ.

The issue is not with the Helix, but rather with the playback mechanisms. Typical guitar cabinets have a big range but the vast majority of the sound comes from a very limited frequency range due to the nature of the speakers and not having a compression driver. Because of this you very often have to limit very low ranges and high ranges on full range speakers to limit their response in a fashion similar to a guitar cabinet. I'll add, however, that's not always the case depending on which guitar, amp model you're using and the setting for the cabinet/IR and mics. Very often I don't have to even touch the high cut with certain guitars, amps, and IR's...but it varies with how I set up things in my signal path.

Yeah, I kind of forgot about that. I don't use it because doing it the other way kind of forces a certain amount of volume discipline so that we don't end up getting into volume wars.

Well, it's pretty clear you're dealing with a drummer and not a guitar player. He clearly has no background in working with distributed systems such as the Helix. Take everyone's advice here. Once you set your tones through the FRFR speaker, the FOH tone is going to be VERY similar. There may be some adjustment for the room, but I personally never trust the sound man to do that and prefer to correct it with my Global EQ...that's what it's for. At best have him start (after gain staging the signal) with a flat EQ which should be a good match to your stage monitor. Hopefully he knows and understands how to correctly gain stage the signal to achieve the appropriate signal strength and blend with the rest of the channels. Personally I leave my global outputs on the default of Line for both the XLR and 1/4 inch. I might change the XLR out to Mic if it were a very long run to the board. Line level is never a problem as long as the sound man understands how to correctly gain stage the signal, which I've never run into a problem because I insist on it in every performance and every venue. As long as you're not clipping through the limiter on your FRFR speaker, you shouldn't be clipping through the board unless he doesn't gain stage you correctly. I personally go direct to the board with the XLR L(Mono) line out but use a phantom power protector on my cable just to be sure. I go from my 1/4 L(Mono) out to my FRFR speaker which I position behind me on the floor. In my case my speaker has a 'Monitor' setting which corrects for the bass buildup on floor monitors. If you don't have that you're probably best to mount it on a pole rather than try to correct the signal via EQ. Alternatively you could use an amp stand or even a plastic milk crate to isolate the speaker from the actual floor. Bear in mind if you do it this way your Helix Master Volume will affect both signal to the FRFR monitor speaker as well as the signal you're sending to the board. That's why I'm very careful to get all of my patches at the same relative voluem levels so I can set the Helix Master Volume correctly for the stage level I need with the Master Volume, then have the FOH gain stage that signal, then I leave it alone through the rest of the performance. I've used this process both on the Helix and the HD500X for a few years and have never run into a problem at any venue I've played at. But I can't over-emphasize the importance of correct gain staging and consistent volumes across patches. If done correctly at the board leaving ample headroom at unity setting on the fader for your channel as should be the normal process, you shouldn't have any problems with clipping in the FOH or on your stage monitor.

The good news is that your proficiency with the Helix only grows over time if you stay engaged on forums like this or the Helix Facebook group. It seems like every few weeks I make a discovery about how to best use certain features based on what I see or hear in these groups and start incorporating it into updates on my previously built patches. It's almost as cool as an update of firmware when you make one of these discoveries. You get a whole new tool.

probably transistor tape delay, 1/8 tempo, around 40% feedback, maybe a little increase in wow/flutter, mix/blend to taste....something along those lines. The rest is all guitar tone you feed into it.

I didn't really hear anything I couldn't duplicate with Helix delays.

The main design differences between the DXR and DBR is the DBR has a speaker design that provides a more prominent bass and it also has the capability to mix two input signals. I use the DXR12 myself. I really didn't consider the DBR simply because it tends to be marketed more toward front of house applications and particularly toward DJ applications. I've come across a bunch of DXR/Helix users, but I can't say I've come across any DBR/Helix users. The reason I went with the DXR12 was due to the fact that I often play a Gretsch hollow body and very often finger pick it in a Chet Atkins or James Taylor style and the 12" speaker configuration gives a little more body to the sound. It also helps when I'm using the Les Paul in a more overdriven style to make it sound a bit bigger on power chords. In my case I use it as a floor monitor on stage so I have the switches set to monitor and set the low cut to 125hz which seems to best match the sound I'm getting from the FOH system which is typically a QSC KLA12 line array. I keep the DXR volume knob set at the 12 o'clock position and typically have my Master Volume on the Helix set to about the 11:30 position. In that configuration I try to target all of my patches to average about 95 to 98 db which is about right for our band's stage mix which consists of two guitars, a bass, drums, harmonica and typically three part harmony vocals. On larger stages and venues I have never had to go up more than the 12 o'clock position on the Helix. There's more than enough headroom on the DXR to handle any stage I've played on at the 12 o"clock position without invoking the limiter on the DXR. I often play with another band in a venue in which we don't put the instruments through the PA (other than the electronic drum kit). Because of the acoustics in that room which are very "live", I bring my Helix Master Volume down to around the 10:30 position which is more than enough to fill the room. But a lot of my configuration is dependent on how your band manages the stage and live mix. We tend to be pretty disciplined in that regard as we've been together as a band for 9 years or so.

Does anyone else see the irony in the fact that all of us "older" musicians (I'm 64) choose to use the hi-tech modeling approach while all the "tech-savvy" youngsters are still playing around with tube amps and vinyl records???

I use a Yamaha DXR12, but those same features are available in a number of other powered speakers in that price range.

Many of the FRFR powered speakers are equipped with a 'monitor' setting which corrects for the bass coupling. In addition a lot of them come with low cut filters. I leave mine on the floor all the time, but it's set for 'monitor' as well as I have a low-cut engaged at 125hz. That keeps the bass nice and tight. I guess I always assumed the contour switch on the TS212 served the purpose of contouring the resonse to correct for bass coupling, but I guess I was wrong.

As far as your pedal, this thread may be the answer for you. http://line6.com/support/topic/19026-expression-pedal-calibration/ When it comes to speaker output, there's a pretty big range of answers there. The only thing that bothers me a bit with the JBL's is the separate gain and master volume controls. Most modern FRFR powered speakers like the Alto's, QSC's, or Yamaha's simply have a volume control and gain is automatically managed by the DSL with an overall signal limiter built into the logic. The JBL's deviate from this both in the gain/master volume as well as in the configurations. The powered speakers most often used tend to only have configurations for use as a monitor or as a FOH speaker. Also there's no low-cut switch which is also common on the types of speakers I referenced. If price is a consideration you might want to look as the Alto TS212's as they seem to be pretty popular around here and are priced in the same range as the EON's.

You definitely may have your hands full getting that passive PA system to sound similar to a modern FRFR speaker like the EON610. I suspect your in-ears shouldn't be that much different from your EONs, but you're going to have to figure out how to best EQ your signal at the board to better match the response profile of the EON if you want your FOH to be representative of what you are hearing through the EON. My band used to use the Yamaha Studio series years ago, but unless they've made some pretty significant improvements in the last few years you're going to lose a considerable amount of articulation and presence in your guitar tone in the FOH. It's not due to anything in the Helix or the EON, it's just the way passive systems work because the speakers themselves aren't powered and therefore don't have any DSL capabilities to help define and maintain a anything close to a flat frequency response.

I too am an immigrant from the POD HD500X and came to the Helix a little over a year ago. Aside from the nice surprises I uncovered similar to the OP, what's become the most interesting part of the Helix for me is how much I've matured in understanding and exploiting the capabilities of the Helix. Although most of my patches remain relatively simple, thanks to many of the discussion here and on the Helix Facebook page I've incorporated lots of new ideas into many of my patches that have supercharged my patch building. Some examples are: - The use of IR's and how to combine them in parallel to fine tune a tone. - The differences in compressors and how to effectively incorporate them to give some polish to my tones. - Discoveries about how to best use some of the amp models that I had previously overlooked and how to effectively use the deeper bias and sag controls to manage articulation and blending. Along these lines a deeper understanding of what made those amps distinctive in their day which has lead me to differences in the way I construct the signal paths for them. - The use of the tempo to better control the parameters of effects. - Better and more effective ways of equalizing the output volume of different patches as well as managing the EQ of the guitar tone using cabinet parameters. I'm sure there are many other examples I'm overlooking, but it's almost as if there's an endless box of new things to discover and learn, which makes life with the Helix very interesting. It reminds me a lot of how I uncovered new ideas and ways of playing the guitar when I was learning to play guitar. I'm now learning how to better "play" the Helix now.

Sure. TONS of ideas. But without a little more information about what you're connected to as an output device and how you have things set up they're all pretty irrelevant.

I've always wondered whether or not anomalous behaviors might come about when one uses a signal path formed in the Helix and then augments it with other plug in elements in a DAW. I guess I have my answer....

You will certainly adapt faster to the interface because the HD500 shares a lot in common with how resources are categorized and how signal paths are created. The major areas that will differ will be in the globals, more advanced routing options, features like snapshots, and also the options associated with certain things such as cabinets and IR's. Most of what you had on the HD will be there plus some very cool new amps.

Without seeing what's in your preset it's just guessing. I'm assuming you've taken this down to the very basics with no amp, cab, effects and feeding a raw signal to the DAW and it does the same thing? If not I'd suggest starting there then adding components one at the time. That may give you a better clue of why this is happening.

Just to clarify some of what you're saying. Specifically the DXR10 crosses over to the compression driver at 2.3khz and the DXR12 crosses over at 2.1khz which seems to be at odds with your statement regarding the smaller bass having a lower frequency crossover. I'm not sure it's really distinguishable as they use the same frequency response profile chart for all the DXR speakers. To be specific in terms of weight if it's a consideration, there's roughly ten pounds of difference between the DXR10 and 12. 32.2 versus 42.5 lbs.

I personally use the DXR12. A lot of folks however are happy with the DXR10. My decision for the 12 was simply the fact that I've always been happier with cabinets that use 12's rather than 10. I suspect it's the fact that I prefer a bit warmer tones.

This thread reminds me of the old Simpsons episode where Homer wonders what "that button does"....then presses it.... Things didn't go so well after that.......

I think if you're using any typical modern powered speaker you're going to be relatively close to the response of most modern PA systems. I have a Yamaha DXR12 at the house that I use for constructing my patches and for practice. I use a separate DXR12 that I keep at our rehearsal space for my stage monitor. Most commonly I'm playing direct through a QSC KLA12 line array system with KW181 subs. I'm sure there are some minor differences in the frequency response curve of the PA, but it doesn't really make any real difference from my DXR12. I've also played through a variety of other systems both line arrays and standard powered speaker systems and they're all pretty much the same. I always tell the sound man to leave my channel completely flat and it always works out well. The only time I ever had a problem was when the PA was an older central amplifier with crossovers to non-powered speakers and subs. That was considerably muddier than my DXR12, but because I position my DXR12 behind me I simply placed it on a vertical stand so it would project better into the audience. It was a small enough space that it all worked out.