DunedinDragon

Since all presets are exported in JSON format, you should be able to use oine of the hundreds of free JSON to CSV utilities to get what you want.

IRs are just one more thing to gain experience and knowledge about. There are a ton of IRs but not a lot will likely be applicable to get the tone you're shooting for. The best thing you can do for yourself is educate yourself on the general response attributes of the different mic's being used by the IR vendor as well as the various placements of those mics and how they affect the overall tone being captured along with the characteristics of different speaker cabinets. The more you know, the easier it is to dismiss the IRs that aren't likely to be applicable to the styles of songs you're likely to be playing. A little bit of experimentation with different mic arrangements and combinations you'll likely figure out the handful of IRs that will be useful to you in any collection of IRs. If this sounds like a skill set most applicable to a recording engineer or a live sound man...it is. The power is now in your hands. Welcome to the new and more technical world of modeling.

I'm sure it will suffice for your purposes. Just make sure you plug them directly into the Helix and plug the Helix into your computer via USB and you should be able to jam along with any tracks from your computer or the internet.

No matter what you do, the preset gets saved to the Helix even if you're working in HXEdit. You can export the preset to your hard drive on your PC and then re-use the preset on the Helix if you want. But bottom line, when you're editing in HXEdit, you're editing on the Helix. Just want to make that clear.

This appears to be more of a Windows problem than a Helix problem as HX Edit seems to be failing to load rather than loading and failing with an error. Try right clicking and run HX Edit as Administrator to see if it's a security related problem. Other than that I can only suggest looking at the Windows Event Log to see what's going on.

I think something like this might be a bigger effort than many think. Other than file system operations and system update operation, HX Edit relies entirely on the editing functionality in the Helix and simply provides a graphical interface for them. I understand why that's the strategy as it keeps all core editing functionality in the Helix rather than spread the coding between the Helix and HX Edit. That being the case though, it might take a while to figure out how to build that sort of multiple selection functionality into the Helix.

I think what you're wanting may be more related to the mic combinations and placements than the cabinet choices. To my ear the cabinet type such as a Vox with Blue Bell speakers or a Marshall basket weave cabinet will favor a certain type of recognizable tone, but the mic combination with determine the clarity, articulation, and overall body of the tone. I personally favor a combination of ribbon (Royer R121) and dynamic (Sennheiser MD421) for full bodied, warm responses. Some of my most used IRs are the Ownhammer massively mic'd IRs like those on the Marshall basketweave collection, particularly the Brown Sound mic arrangements.

When you say you want a preset that will sound right through for both live gigging and recording that's going to be a challenge if you want to use a traditional cabinet for live gigging because, by definition you'll be missing some components that are automatically baked into a preset for recording. Namely the modeled cabinet (or IR) that includes the mic, mic combination and mic placements, which you wouldn't be using for the signal going to your 2x4 cabinet. Ideally if you branch off of your main signal chain through a send to your Quilter and 2x12 cabinet, that output shouldn't affect your USB output which would be the full signal chain that contains the modeled cab/IR that normally goes to the PA and would be used for recording purposes to the DAW. That's why life is so much simpler with a simple FRFR monitor.....

I use a lot of Ownhammer IRs and have for several years now across a lot of different styles of songs and different guitars and I can't say I've ever had any real problems with getting good, solid tones out of them with very little EQ adjustment. But as was pointed out by rd2rk, you have to be selective about what mic and mic positioning you use as that, more than anything else, determines the baseline of the tone you're going to get. The most I've ever had to EQ typically is a simple high cut of around 8khz and a low cut around 125hz, and sometimes a minor adjustment using the low/high shelf and that's it. If you're doing more than that I'd suspect you'd be better off selecting a different mic combination and positioning.

THIS^^^^^^^^^ is exactly what is confusing everyone. If you have your headphones plugged into the Helix, then why in the world is Logic even in the picture? It's not necessary in any way as you can clearly listen to what you're playing without it. And without knowing what kind of headphones you're using none of this is meaningful. You have a premium quality modeler, so you need to be listening to is with some kind of premium quality output system if you want to hear the results accurately.

As a user that's built a library of over 300 presets, I can't say that I feel much empathy for your plight. If you want to forego all the benefits of 2.92 that's your choice, but that also means you'll likely have to forego the benefits of the upcoming mega update of 3.0 and all future ones as well....or...you can just adjust your presets. Sometimes it's just darn inconvenient to put those big boy pants on....

There are a ton of hi-gain models in the current version of Helix. Make sure you've updated to the current firmware level which is 2.92. Here's a list of all the amp models and their pedigrees. https://helixhelp.com/models/

I think the problem in asking what you're asking is that YOU are the main variable in all these equations. Whether the Helix performs better than your current system depends entirely and solely on your skills and very little else. I have no doubt the Helix has far greater technical depth in how you can form your signal chain, but whether the results are better will depend on your knowledge and technical skills for arranging and configuring all the pieces of your signal chain to produce the sound you want.

That's true....kinda. As long as you don't increase the volume level too much as you add blocks it will be at more or less unity level, depending of course on the signal level you're sending and what you're sending it to (Mic level, Line level, Instrument level). Unity is a somewhat situational characteristic as it depends on the device receiving it.

This hasn't been the standard for PA setups for at least two decades now, and older style power amps aren't in the same generation of design as DSP enabled powered speakers like the Headrush. The common manufacturer's recommendation for modern powered speakers is to set the gain knob at 12 o'clock which represents unity. In other words, the amp in the speaker will not have any gain added to or subtracted from the signal going to the speaker's amp. You can, if necessary boost it slightly on most speakers. But a lot of today's modern speakers incorporate a built-in limiter circuit which can cause your sound to get compressed if it's too hot. I'm not sure if this is the case on the Headrush, but if not it will begin to clip at some point. Given that you're using the headrush as a stage monitor you should have more than enough volume at the 12 o'clock position to fill the stage unless you're working with a bunch of neanderthal musicians that have no understanding of volume management. The general practice for stage monitors is to set them for Line level input as that's how they're used when connected to a PA. Typically you wouldn't max out your volume knob on the Helix unless you're sending a Mic level signal to a mixing board. On my rig I have the volume knob disconnected from the XLR output and the XLR output set to Mic level. This allows me to use the volume knob on the Helix to control the signal level going to the on stage monitor (in my case a Yamaha DXR12 with it's volume set at 12 o'clock) without affecting the level going to the mixing board...which is a very sound crew friendly way of doing it. I gain stage my presets and snapshots at home through my XLR output going to a QSC TM-30 mixing board so they're all consistent volumes/signal levels. At the gig I set the volume level on my Helix volume knob so that it's adequate for the stage volume which tends to be somewhere around 11 o'clock on most stages...higher on bigger stages, lower on smaller stages. Because of the way I pre gain stage my XLR output, the sound man only has to gain stage one preset and can be assured it will be consistent all night.

Also do some research on the speakers you're interested in and examine how they recommend the speakers be placed. That could be critical in getting them to perform to the best of their ability and may not fit with the way you have your room set up. Case in point, I have a pair of Yamaha HS7 speakers which have a rear facing bass reflex ports which makes it important to get them located properly relative to the walls behind them. For me it's worked out great because when they're faced inward around 45 degrees the rear port is about 16 inches from a corner wall on each side with myself directly in the center between the speakers.

The Helix is really not the deciding factor as far as speakers any more than any single amp would be. That's all a matter of individual taste and preference since the Helix is simply (in this case) providing just an amp model. The choices get much more varied if you begin using the cabinet and mic models with FRFR output devices since each combination of amp, cab, and mic setup can be dramatically different.

Most any speaker will work fine with the JC120 as it's a nice clean amp. It depends on the sound you're after. I've used BlueBells, G12M, Creambacks, Redbacks and even Fane IRs. Mic combinations and arrangements will also play into the overall sound, so there's no real answer without knowing what kind of sound you want.

Generally speaking, there's nothing you can get out of an IR that you couldn't get out of a stock cabinet. It's just more work to do it. Here's a good real world example. The sound of any cabinet is really determined primarily by the mic or mic combination being used on it and how that mic is placed to capture the sound. Often the most realistic sound comes from combining different mic types such as a dynamic mic and a ribbon mic placed in different locations on a cabinet. Once you know what mic types you like and how you like them placed, if you were using Helix stock cabinets you choose a Dual Cab block so you could place the dynamic mic on one and the ribbon mic on the other and setup the placements (as well as other parameters) in each cab to get what you're after. if you were using an IR you would just select the IR that uses your preferred mic and placements and you're done. However you can't change those mics and placements without changing the IR. Either way you're going to need to understand the different behaviors of different mics and know what kind of placement tends to work best for you. If not you'll just be shooting in the dark and wasting a lot of time trying to discover what you tend to like. I think a lot of us that have been doing this for a while have come to some conclusions about what works best to our ears. For example, 99% of the time I'm going to use a MD421 dynamic mic in combination with an R121 ribbon mic. The placements may change slightly depending on the song, but it's almost always the same combination whether it's a stock cab or an IR. It's true that stock cabinets use less DSP than IRs, but I suspect that's only true if you're not using a Dual Cab setup. When it comes to using multiple mics and placement I suspect the IR wins, especially if you use the smaller length (1024 versus 2048). Another consideration in favor of IRs is that, because of the way they're created, there is no additional DSP cost if you want to use more than just two mic and mic placements. One of my more often used IRs is the Ownhammer Massively Multi Mic'd IRs for the Marshall Basketweave cabinet in which 1 IR can have up to 5 different mic's and combinations. I'm not sure if you could even achieve such a thing with stock cabs without running into DSP limits. Bear in mind I use the Helix Floor so I don't have the same DSP limits you might encounter on your Stomp.

There are some known device interrupt problems with certain other devices such as the Logitech port hub. You may have encountered this problem if you had any kind of Windows update that might have replaced some older drivers. Definitely not a Helix problem. If nothing else you can always try using the Windows Event Viewer to see if you can isolate the driver causing he crash.

It's highly unusual and rare that Line 6 ever discusses future features especially those related to amp and effects. My personal insticts tell me that a drum kit would be well outside of the scope of what Helix is about, so I'd be surprised to see it.

You must have misunderstood the purpose of the Helix. It's a performance tool (live or recording). Other people have built machines that excel at file management called "computers" where you can arrange your presets to your heart's delight then load them into your Helix when you're ready to perform. Not only that you can have them backed up constantly to other drives or even the cloud to make sure they're secure. This may be a case of "If all you know is a hammer then every problem starts to look like a nail".

I would still suggest you're making a broad set of assumptions about why there isn't a full featured looper system in the Helix based on YOUR needs, and not necessarily the market needs. It's been my experience with Helix over the last 5 years are that the things that are most readily responded to by the development team are the ones that have the widest application across the user base and specifically within the scope of the product. I've seen interest in expanded looper capabilities occasionally, but it doesn't really compare to request for features like better management of IRs or polyphonic pitch shifting which we know is on the table for development, but isn't there yet. R&D costs are relative because they're measured against the potential market growth. That's the product development view which is very different from the development view. We understand L6 hired expertise in polyphonic coding, so that certainly was a big R&D cost, but measured against the market share for POGs and such, and the fact that falls clearly in the modeling segment of the Helix market potential makes it a worthy investment. I'm not sure I could say the same as far as complex looper usage. You see it occasionally out in the field, but not to the extent you see POG-like features being used. And there may be other physical limitations in the Helix design that make it problematic. For example looping is really a very simple recording and playback functionality, but the Helix is designed more specifically for modeling suggesting it is far heavier in DSP computational resource programming than it is in managing large memory resources which would be something necessary for more complex looping situations. Quite honestly I don't care either way because I don't use a complex looper and have no need for one. If it shows up, that's fine as long as I'm not force to pay for it on an upgrade or something.

I'd agree with the previous posts for studio monitors given your description and need for stereo output. I use Yamaha HS7 speakers for the studio and I use a Yamaha DXR12 for all my live work where I don't need stereo. Whatever you choose be aware that you get what you pay for. There are cheaper studio speakers but they won't compare with the bigger and more expensive and more professional units.

Now why would you take it out on the Helix? It sounds to me like your Logitech GHub might need a couple of tire tracks across it...