DunedinDragon

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......

Chances are if you're trying to accomplish an "amp in the room" feel it's probably going to be less about mic positioning and more about other environmental factors such as early reflections and room coloration effects as that is what you ears are wanting to hear. Of course none of those things are typically that relevant for live performances that get mic'd..which is what 99% of your audience is used to.

Unfortunately, it doesn't really matter how many years you've played if you don't read and follow the release notes for the firmware you're updating...which starts with HX Edit update and then direct update of firmware via HX Edit. Updater hasn't been in the picture for a very long time now....

Use google and see if you can get some idea of the configuration amp/pedals/etc used and then simulate it on the Helix.

All of these anomalies are the reason I transitioned away from trying to use my Helix about three years ago as a MIDI controller to using a dedicated MIDI controller that included controlling my Helix. I think the Helix as a MIDI controller implementation suffers from it's integration into the snapshot and footswitch paradigm of the Helix which severely limits it's functionality for things like multiple MIDI transactions and various types of MIDI message content types from a single footswitch interaction like what you get with in a dedicated MIDI controller. For simple things this isn't a problem, but it becomes and major headache when trying to coordinate the action on multiple devices. In my case I automate all devices including the Helix from a Morningstar MC8 which handles everything perfectly without any problems.

I've been saying this for a while now that modeling technology, at least at the premium level, is more or less and even playing field. You can achieve the sounds you're after on any of them once you know them and are confident in how to dial them in and get what you want. There are some differences in certain areas. For example Fractal tends to provide a wider range of tunable parameters than the Helix (which may not be such a plus for some people) whereas Helix tends to have the most easily understandable and comfortable paradigm for dialing in sounds. In practice you will probably never encounter anyone in the audience that will know or care about the difference, so your best bet is to get the one that best suits your needs and the way you like to work.

The main reason I use IRs is for convenience. I have a set of around 80 or so loaded with different variations of speakers and some differences in mic and mic placements. For any given preset and amp it's very easy to quickly cycle through the various IRs to get a feel for what's going to sound best. I'll probably try the new cabinets with dual mic setups and see how easy they are to dial in a sound but the problem will still come in making comparisons between different configurations on a given preset.

I think the industry itself is still sorting out how to manage and perform updates. Things are getting clearer and better, but it's been long road. Even Windows, which has a very seamless and self-contained updating process, has taken many years and a lot of development time to get to the point it's at. I think the writing is on the wall as far as where this is going. The first type is the automatic updates that depend on internal scheduling and releases all independent of the user such as the Windows update procedures. Those work well for smaller updates and upgrades but clearly a major release is going to be performed by a specialized program. The trend I think is most exciting are manufacturers providing a separate update and management facility that keeps track of all of the updates, installations, reconfigurations and manages overall licensing. These type of facilities are mostly seen in plug in vendors such as the Toontrack Product Manager or Native Instruments Native Access manager or even HP's Printer Manager software. Aside from just installing they provide management, reconfiguration, diagnostic and direct interfaces with vendor support facilities for more advanced troubleshooting. I think things could be much easier with this kind of architecture than to have a combined facility that provides day to day facilities for configuring snapshots or presets as well as management of firmware and updates. Hopefully Line 6 will consider this in future versions of their products.

I'm sure they'll check in with you before they make any decisions about what kind of amp they're going to model specifically for you for free......

As I read these responses I begin to think that maybe my "luck" with upgrades may have more to do with how I configure/maintain my computers than what many others do. In my case I have two Helix Floor units so I'm always upgrading them separately because they're connected to different computers, one desktop and one laptop. In both cases my computers are over configured in both processing power and memory and from very reputable manufacturers. I can't say I've been overly digilant in what USB port I'm connected to, but I would be pretty intolerant of any USB port that displayed any kind of anomalies such as one that is a hub rather than a true port. The other factor is probably related to when I do my upgrades which is always early in the morning which is low usage time on the internet. I do know that my attitude toward the health of my computers is most likely NOT the norm and probably accounts for a lot of my "luck" I suspect.

Once again a perfect, no problem update to my Helix without a flicker of a problem. At one time I could understand people having updating issues back in the early days before we even had much of an HX Edit to work with. But I just don't understand with the way things are setup and work nowadays how anyone can have problems. I mean I still read through the update procedures and all before I start, but I'm pretty sure even if I didn't I can't imagine I'd get tripped up anywhere. This has got to be one of the smoothest and most trouble free update procedures I've ever seen from a hardware vendor. Does anyone have any clues how people can be screwing this up? Is there any kind of common denominator?

Since I'm doing pretty much the same as what you're doing I can only tell you the reasons I use a dedicated audio interface for my setup. The key thing is that the backing track needs to be gain staged and mixed at the mixing board in a live performance along with all of the other live instruments and voices as if it were just another set of instruments to get the mix correct. Additionally I've found it's pretty important in a lot of cases to favor one side or the other in the front speakers for some of the backing instruments to provide better definition and mix. To me there's no real downside to using an audio interface because it's all setup on it's own standalone rack system. It requires no separate power and is prewired such that it's a simple matter of plugging the USB into the laptop and running the two 1/4'" cables to their own dedicated inputs on the mixing board. In terms of MIDI control I've separated all of that out into a separate Morningstar MC8 controller. That's allowed me to not only control the Helix from the backing track, but also control other stage elements such as lights or videos from a single MIDI control track in the backing track. In fact I never have to touch the Helix as a control surface since the MC8 coordinates all of the Helix preset changes along with the appropriate backing track and is used to start each song. The only thing I use on the Helix during performance is the volume pedal.

If I were to guess, having your output block that high would most likely cause some level of clipping in the Digital to Analog conversion coming out of the Helix. I don't know for sure because I've never turned up my output block like that. Generally I'm reducing my output block to present a more rationally gain staged level to my mixer input.

Well the obvious approach is what most of us do which is have our mics going directly to the mixer so it's not affected by the tuner. But I assume you're using Helix facilities on your voice so that's not possible. If so then your easiest way is to just use a clipon tuner for when you're live on stage because there's no workaround for the Helix tuner as it bypasses the signal chain when it's on.

Mic type and distance probably have the single most impact on overall tone. Distance is one factor but the other is the type of mic and it's normal response characteristics over distance. Ribbon, condenser and dynamic mics all respond a little differently over distances...some lose highs quickly some retain them over distance and so forth. Over time most people tend to find the best combinations for what they want and stick with them. Myself, I'm an MD421 dynamic mixed with a R121 ribbon mic generally but everyone's different. The room characteristics can have some impact, but generally you really don't need that much volume to hear the true characteristics of the sound. I'd suggest loading a signal meter on your phone and shoot for about 85db from where you stand when playing. That will be above the point where Fletcher Munson effects color the sound and below the level where you get too much flavoring from the walls and should be a pretty accurate representation of your live sound through a PA in room filled with people.

Somewhere along the line you're going to have to address the output method. You're using some very inexpensive powered speakers that aren't known for high quality sound and expecting high performance out of them. In the field of speaker systems, you get what you pay for whether it's amp or a powered speaker. You'll find the vast majority of Helix or any other modeling users that want to work with FRFR style speakers tend to use speakers from JBL, QSC, Yamaha, RCF, ElectroVoice and so forth because those companies are very well known for the quality of their speakers and their speakers are tunable to your situation. They are all more expensive than your Behringers, but that's because they don't cut corners in order to appeal to budget oriented buyers. You spent quite a bit of money on a high end modeler. Does it really make sense to cut corners on the output method? I exclusively use FRFR style speakers and have a bunch of them. My most used ones are Yamaha DXR12 which I have six of, but I also have QSC K10 and EV ZLX12p, but I know I can get great performances out of any of them. I'd suggest you make some time to take your Helix unit into a music store and audition different ones. Make sure you download and read their operation manuals so you can be prepared to audition the different tuning possibilities on each of them.

The bottom line is, the "amp in the room" sound only comes from an "amp in the room" whether it's a modeler or a traditional setup and no one can ever hear that sound other than a person standing in the room where the amp is. You can't get the "amp in the room" sound from a recording nor from a live stage production once you mic the amp. As mentioned previously you can get the "amp in the room" sound by routing your Helix through an amp in the room, in which case you'd likely not want to use the Helix cabinets. What you can get from the Helix through an FRFR very easily is the production sound everyone is used to hearing on recordings or in live productions. The quality of that sound varies based on the quality of the FRFR speaker which Behringer is not in that higher quality category. That would be reserved to companies like QSC, Yamaha, JBL, RCF, ElectroVoice, etc.

I'm pretty conservative with reverbs and delays, but most of my presets have at least a small touch of reverb to "liven" the sound. But it really depends more on the song than anything else as does every kind of block I use in a preset.

I don't think you'll see this with HX Edit as it's fundamental design depends entirely on the logic contained in the Helix unit. This means if you were able to do it you could design a preset that wouldn't even load or work on your Helix unit. As I understand it, there is something of a workaround if you have Helix Native because you can create presets in that environment then transfer the preset to your Helix hardware.

I think you're beginning to run into the same kind of limitations that made me move from using the Helix as a MIDI controller to a separate dedicated MIDI controller which is a Morningstar MC8. Although the Helix works fine in relatively simple situations, once you begin trying to control multiple MIDI enabled units simultaneously in more complex ways, the convoluted mechanics of the Helix MIDI implementation in Snapshots and the inability to simply fire off multiple MIDI actions from a single foot press lead me to the MC8 which has solved everything in a much more straightforward manner. The added benefit is I no longer worry about the footswitches on the Helix wearing down and becoming non responsive since I rarely use them.

It sounds like something is a bit out of phase. What kind of output device are you going to? Are you using stereo blocks?

For some odd reason guitar players seem to be obsessed with their volume levels with not much regard for how they actually sit in the mix with the other instruments. I rarely find the need for adjusting my volume knob on my guitar unless I really want to accomplish a tone change such as cleaning up an overdriven sound. Even then I often can often accomplish what I want by changing my right hand technique. What I do get obsessed with is how I sit in the mix with the other instruments and voices. That's where I spend most of my time when practicing and preparing for a gig. That's why I always practice going through a mixer so I can not only listen to my levels but watch them on a signal meter and I ALWAYS play against a backing track. Playing music (especially with stringed instruments) is all about dynamics. In some phrases the guitar needs to be more prominent than in others. How you accomplish that varies with technique.

Remind your techie son that you were advised by a person that made his living for 40 years in computer tech and software development that EVERYTHING starts with reading the manual. Nothing else matters as much as that....

I don't think it just applies to cover bands. It's not unusual to have different amps and setting even for original songs. The settings in my experienced are more based on the style and overall sound of the song including the kind of guitar used for a given song. That's why so many big named bands used so many different amps and setups in the studio. Just ask someone like Joe Walsh. The same general sound but adjusted to the feel of the song.