DunedinDragon

If that were the case audiences all over he world would be in a revolt against anyone using a Helix since most Helix units go directly through a PA system. That's kind of what they're designed to do. Going direct through a modern powered speaker is pretty much exactly the same as going direct through a PA. Of course not all powered speakers are equal as you tend to get what you pay for. As for myself I haven't gone through anything other than a modern powered speaker (mostly Yamaha DXR12 or QSC K10.2) in 8 years and have been perfectly happy.

Quite honestly you really shouldn't have any problem doing what you're trying to do even with the Helix as an interface. I do pretty much exactly what you're trying to do every single week using Ableton Live 11 in literally hundreds of recordings with backing tracks and live guitar and sometimes with live piano and vocals using the Helix audio interface on Windows 10. The difference being I monitor the source signal coming from the Helix, not the recorded image that's being captured in the DAW when I'm recording so there is no noticeable latency during recording. Once it's recorded and I play it back it's all perfectly sync'd in the DAW. You can feel free to chase after audio interfaces or latency if you'd like, but there are still going to be noticeable differences if you continue to monitor your recorded image when you're recording rather than your source signal coming from the Helix.

THIS is the key indicator that you most likely have a signal level gain staging issue within your patches (as determined by the channel volume on your amp model) which is adding noise to your output. What you're not telling us is where you have your signal gain staged at on the mixer and on any powered speaker outputs. I have my XLR output that goes to the mixer disengaged from the Helix volume knob and set to Mic level output (which sends a full volume signal to the mixing board). I control my output levels within my patches primarily through my amp model channel volume (typically set between 4 and 5) and additionally through the output block on my patch such that I get a reasonably clean signal level with the gain on my mixer channel set to about 1/4. Even then some of the amp models are just noisy and produce a fair amount of hiss based on the modeling of that amp, but most are totally silent. I no longer go direct from the Helix to my speaker, but when I did I had the 1/4" output set to line level and it was controlled by the Helix volume knob with my powered speaker set to unity level or at noon on the speaker's gain knob. What helps in this regard is that I have my Helix hooked up through my mixer when I'm dialing in my patches. That allows me to monitor the signal level on the mixer as I'm dialing in my patches and set the appropriate levels on my amp channel volume or output block to achieve a correctly gain staged signal level as measured on the mixing board.

The two most important factors in latency are your buffer size and sample rate. The lower your buffer size and the higher your sample rate, the less latency you'll get in Ableton, but they will increase your CPU usage. I keep my sample rate (set in Ableton preferences) at 44100 and my buffer size fairly high to avoid clicks/pops. Since I don't monitor the output signal when recording I never notice any kind of latency. To me the battle is more about CPU usage than latency since that's where you're more likely to run into problems particularly if you're using a lot of plugins in Ableton. Some of your issues may be coming from your CPU usage as I'm working with an I7-6700 CPU running at 3.40 GHz on Windows 10.

Our Bass player is perfectly happy with using a DXR12 as a stage monitor. I can't think of one good reason to lug around a DXR15. Of course we also have a KS 112 sub, but even a DXR15 won't fill that role.

A lot of what you're asking about deals more with what kind of things you're doing and what you think you'll want to be doing in the next few years. For example, having access to a large group of amp models is important for some people that tend to play a range of different styles and music whereas it's not so important to someone that tends to have a select style they generally always play which sounds more like what you're doing. Effects are of course a different animal since you very much would likely need a range of effects even if you're not likely to need different amp models so something like an HXFX unit might be right down your alley. When it comes to MIDI controls, yes Helix does provide an answer in addition to their modeling and effects, but I'll be the first one to say it's not as flexible and powerful nor as inexpensive as a dedicated MIDI unit. I initially started using my Helix Floor as a MIDI controller several years ago but got so frustrated with the limitations that I got a Morningstar MC8 which solved any and all the problems I ever had with MIDI automation and just use the Helix for what it does best which is amp and effects modeling. For example it would be quite easy to have a single footswitch on my MC8 that could automate any number of changes to the Catalyst configuration as well as an HXFX unit. I would think that's where you'd likely get more out of it.

Snapshots or stomps are set individually in each preset so it can be whatever you need in that preset.

I think the point is the G10S automatically mutes which isn't true of the G50. I had a G50 which now sits in my garage unused because the auto mute of the G10S is just so convenient for switching guitars on stage. Pull it out of one and plug it into the other and it's completely silent.

You wouldn't use an audio interface to record from an internet source because it's already a digital source which is what you need on your computer. Typically you just download the digital file (.mpg) directly such as in the case of SoundCloud which provides that facility on their website. The same thing applies to sources like YouTube, but you typically need to get separate utility to do that which there are a number of such things available all over the internet.

If you only installed the driver the question is whether that driver is compatible with your version of Stomp firmware. Ideally, the appropriate driver for any version of firmware is installed with the firmware. If they're not in sync there's no predicting what might happen.

I often play fingerpicked acoustic guitar using the poly capo and in many cases it's fairly rapid travis style fingerpicking and I've never had any problems, but it may be more related to the frequency of the bass guitar.

Yes it's normal. I would assume your processed signal is going through at least an amp model and cab whereas the clean reamped signal is the same as a going through a signal chain with nothing in it.

Don't quote me, but I suspect you're eventually going to see those models show up in some future Helix update if you're patient.

Lord knows those that have been around here for many years, pretty much since the beginning of Helix have suffered through a lot of dumb questions including our own in the beginning. But I'm kind of agreeing with @datacommando that there's a lot of comments and questions that make you go "hmmmmmmmm....". For example in this case my first thought was, didn't he notice there were a LOT less footpedals on the Helix than what he wanted to have active before he bought it? And why didn't that prompt him to do a little bit of research on the capabilities of the unit before buying it? But maybe that's just my nascent curmudgeon trying to come out......

Well that you can take up with Digital Igloo and the rest of the L6 development team. They've always been very explicit about why the limits exist based on the number of DSP chips (which are NOT CPUs by the way, they're technically real-time math/audio processors) and why the allocation of blocks are limited per signal chain (the same reason you have to sacrifice one signal chain in order to have no pause between presets because one of those DSP chips must be used as a buffer. If you're in doubt try loading up 32 delays and see what happens.

Anything is possible given enough time and money. But you could certainly pay $5,000 or so for a modeler with enough DSP modeling chips to do that if you'd like. But price ultimately dictates what you CAN do. Just like you can't buy an economy car and expect it to perform like a Ferrari. Those aren't my rules, those are the rules of physics.

This is where modelers tend to have a different working environment than a traditional pedalboard. The main reason for limitations is to ensure low latency when working with a modeler. The more things loaded in a signal chain, the more that has to be processed and the higher the likelihood that latency will become a noticeable issue. For that reason many of us choose to divide our setups into different presets, often by song for example, which is essentially what Bank Up and Bank Down accomplish. You have more than enough presets to allow you to do such things and I doubt seriously you're going to need more than 8 stomps in the course of a song. The advantage to such an arrangement is that over the last 7 years I've never run into any limitations in what I can include in any of my presets even if I use very demanding things like some of the polyphonic effects. This also makes sense in that one clear advantage of a modeler is being able to customize the amp/cab/mic/mic positions for different types of songs in the same way as one would do when working in a studio environment, which is virtually impossible in a non-modeling live pedalboard arrangement. The idea of using banks could be useful, but the same limitations would apply as it does for using different presets such as a slight dead space while the preset loads it's signal chain. If they're loaded into memory and active they will have an impact on latency.

There isn't any formula here because that's what your ears and personal preferences for tone are for. You may or may not need any high or low cut. Depending on the type of pickups you have you may need to be more aggressive on cutting the low end to reduce boominess. Likewise if you want to smooth out the bass, cutting some highs out might fix it.

Most of the time my PC is always powered up and I just put it to sleep when I'm not going to be using it. I power up my studio equipment (which includes the Helix) separately when needed and turn it off generally when not using it and I've never had any problems doing it this way for years.

Because you only need to turn on and off one or more effects with no modifications to their settings, or want it unlatched so it's only on when you're depressing it, or you only want to send a simple MIDI message, or....well there's plenty of other reasons.

I'm just not sure in practice how much time it would really save. Ultimately replacing old cabs with new ones is going to take some experimentation to find the right combination of configurations. Once you find that and save it off as a favorite it only takes a moment to replace and existing an old cab with a new tested and approved favorite in other presets, so it's not clear how any software is going to do that any more efficiently.

There's probably a lot more features that need to be considered than just the basic tones you're interested in. For example, what kind of setup will you be using? Direct to the mixing board or 4cm through an amp? How complex would the changes be within the type of material you're playing? Will you be using it for live or also for recording? How will you be rehearsing with it at home? The fact is this decision is a lot more about the eco system you intend to setup than just the individual box.

This is a no brainer if you're using an external MIDI controller which is what I use. From the Helix Wiki Help site, if you press the presets button to open up the setlist menu and dial up the setlist and preset you want it will display the appropriate CC32 value for the setlist, the PC message number for the preset and the CC69 value for the snapshot. Plug those values into your external MIDI controller to send to the Helix and it all happens like magic.

It's pretty clear (to me at least) that the architecture used within the Helix for maintaining and processing the signal chain is where this limitation comes into play and Line 6's obsession with limiting latency is the key speed limit for these limitations. What that means to me is that without an additional processor, there's little likelihood we'll see a viable improvement in the number of active snapshots. None of this affects me since I really don't typically need to make extensive use of snapshots in my presets, but I can see there may be some market opportunities in certain types of usage scenarios such as theater productions where it might be useful. But I doubt we'll see it with the current hardware.

That depends on what percentage of people know how to take care of their PC and not do stupid things with it....which is probably around 2% of users from what I can tell......