DunedinDragon

Well yes...of course it's sarcasm. But these comparisons do get a bit tiresome given their importance in the big scheme of things. It's not like the audience is going to appreciate any similarities or differences, and there's no doubt with enough knowledge, time and skill you can produce whatever sound you feel best fits the situation live or recorded with any premium level modeler. So after a while it just starts to become a dead horse beating contest.... After all no piece of gear is going to turn you into a guitar god. Only practice and performance does that. I'm more of a Frank "just shuddup and play yer guitar" Zappa kinda guy I guess....

Oh goodie!!! Yet another comparison of these type of units. Lord knows the 3,254,126 previous comparisons weren't nearly enough!!!!

The thing to remember in this situation is the Helix will only be as good as the output device it's played through. Personally I don't think that fact is stressed enough to new buyers and therefore the output devices they tend to use are afterthoughts rather than an essential part of the system they're wanting to build. The Helix will work fine through your return loop and cabinet, but you'll be missing out and a fairly big part of what it's capable of doing and how flexible it can be without the cabinet models and IRs. I really encourage you to think about this and maybe make some plans in order to take full advantage of what it has to offer.

You can download presets from Line 6's Customtone facility. However you would have to make sure they're for the Stomp since full Helix presets won't work. The editor for the Stomp is the HXEdit application which you download from Line 6.

I don't have anything in particular against the Alto in general. In this day and age of powered speaker design, I'm just not a fan of any speaker that doesn't provide some useable range of DSP contouring options for the various ways these speakers might be used. To me that's the value proposition in these types of speakers so the can be easily adapted to a wider range of physical setups or for different purposes whether that be as a floor monitor, on a pole, live or recorded music, as FOH speakers or as dedicated stage monitors. But that's the main differentiator between Alto and it's competitors and allows them to offer their speakers at a lower price. I just think in the end it's too much of a limitation to not have that range of capabilities. And I have tried them out, although not specifically the 312. But that's just a subjective comparison and mine is no better than anyone else's when it comes to the sound as we all look for different things.

Personally, I'd probably return the 312 and go for something of higher quality with a greater ability to contour the DSP of the speaker for the application. My personal preference would probably be a QSC CP8, or a Yamaha DBR10 which have far better reputations, customizability and sound than the Alto even though not quite as much wattage. Both of those can be tuned for use as a floor monitor, or stand applications as well as having their own low cut filters. Alto tends to be marketed more toward the DJ crowd whereas QSC and Yamaha are more professional live sound oriented. The Powercab could also be a good option if you prefer to go the cabinet route, but there's some people that feel they're underpowered for some applications.

It's kind of hard to know what you think is missing in your sound in order to recommend anything. Were you using stock presets, downloaded presets or ones you built yourself?

Just a couple of extra checks here. Make sure the contour switch is set to flat. If not your low frequencies and high frequencies will end up being accentuated. As far as low cuts and high cuts you can do it in the cab setting if you want or in a final EQ at the end of your chain. I prefer using a final parametric EQ as that allows me to make final adjustments for any and all frequencies in my signal chain that need some adjustment. All sorts of things can affect your EQ adjustments including different amps and how you have them dialed in, what kind of cabinet/IR you're using, the type of mic model and it's placement, even using a guitar with different pickups, so I wouldn't advise settling on a given fixed high or low cut. Use your ears and adjust only as much as is necessary. In many cases I have presets that don't even have high or low cuts depending on how I've setup the signal chain. The main thing is don't be seduced into applying cuts globally to correct for your patches as global cuts or adjustments will be applied to ALL patches and may rob you of tone.

Well the specification is the same as any standard 1/4" line level or instrument level output, thus the recommendation. The 1/4" and XLR outputs are the typical standards that would be used on any live PA channel input or the same as any PA output to either a powered amp or any powered speakers be they fronts or aux monitors. You can, of course, change the 1/4" output to instrument level or XLR output to Mic level if you choose via global ins/outs all of which are IEEE and ISO industry defined standards for those types of connections.

Page 7, Item 26 on Rev D of manual. It makes sense they would be TS connections as they operate in the same way as a monitor or Aux line output from a mixing board. If you use a TRS cable it doesn't really matter as the ring part of the cable is simply ignored.

The Stomp is providing all of that, so all you're using your Spider amp for is the power amp and speaker cab. Technically speaking you could simply plug the Stomp directly into a PA system and get all the same benefits of a fully functioning amp and effects rig.

Or you can get a banjo guitar like those offered by Gold Tone

This is exactly the reason I tend to prefer IRs. I think it's entirely possible to get the same effect from the cab and mic blocks most of the time. But as you mention, I tend to prefer pretty much the same general setup as far as mics used and mic positions most of the time, so why keep making those changes every time I use a cab block. I just select the IR with the setup I prefer and I'm done. Plus I get the advantage of being able to use IRs that have a larger combination of mics and mic positions on a single IR like in the Ownhammer massively multi-mic variations (up to six mics being used for the capture) for more exotic variations.

Think of snapshots as different states of a given patch. One state may be the clean version. Another state may be the crunch version or the lead version. The snapshot simply allows you to capture which blocks are enabled or disabled and the settings that are being used within the blocks in that patch so it can be recalled at any time. Because all blocks remain loaded and the only their states change there's no overhead like there is in changing patches, but you have the upper limit of blocks and DSP usage within the patch using snapshots.

Well you hear wrong. Helix cabs are not a mixture of mic placements relative to the speaker cab. They are dynamic, programmatic model implementations that simulate the behavior of IRs and that's why they take up less DSP usage than does a typical IR.

The easiest way to think of IRs is they are "pre-cooked" cabinets. In other words when using a Helix cab block you specify what cabinet you want, what mic model you want to use with it, and where to position that mic relative to the speaker. An IR has all of this sort of information already baked into it, but it can't be modified. Therefore each variation of mic and mic position on a specific cabinet will be a different IR.

I do own the Redwirez big box collection though I can't say I directly made any comparisons to the Helix stock cabs. I suppose that's because the purpose of having them wasn't to compare them to anything but to explore them for possible uses in my patches. Because of that I was MUCH more interested in the mic positioning alternatives in the Redwirez that went beyond what could be accomplished with the stock cabinets. IMO the stock cabinet mic and mic positioning alternatives were pretty limited especially in comparison to what was offered in the Redwirez collection as well as probably the broadest range of speakers and cabinets I'd ever seen available. In short I was focused on all the wider sonic possibilities Redwirez offered more than if they matched the limited alternatives offered with Helix cabs. That, and of course their MixIR utility that would provide me with a workable way of combining IRs.

Well after many decades working in and around Fortune 500 businesses I can pretty much assure you that Line 6/Yamaha's thoughts on this would be, "some customers just aren't worth having...."

Shhhhhhh.....that's supposed to be a secret so that naive little guitar wannabee's can be fooled into buying something they have no idea about and will result in them finally becoming guitar Gods!!!!

In three years of working with the Helix and creating well over 100 different presets in a range of genres from rock, jazz, funk, r&b, country, blues, showtunes etc. I've yet to run into something I couldn't find an answer for in the lineup of amps, cabs, and effects in the Helix. If you can't do it without your "special" amp model, I suspect you aren't trying very hard.

It always amuses me when I see these discussions given that in all likelihood the people asking for the amps invariablly end up creating one or two patches filled with snapshots using only a small handful of amps, all in the same general category of amps. Apparently they're not aware that no matter how many amps you have available, it's not going to improve your guitar playing ability.

I think you're asking a lot trying to nail all the typical performance characteristics you're used to after just a few days with the unit, particularly given the fact that you've never really been deeply involved in digital modeling until now. There are a couple of things that may help in your approach. I know they helped me a lot when making the transition. I get the sense we may have fairly similar backgrounds in that I've been playing live and working in studios for several decades so we may share certain common experiences. First, the Helix or any modeler for that matter, is far more like working in a studio environment than in a live environment. As you probably know the live sound you achieve in a studio through a guitar amp, is not commonly what shows up in the recording. A lot of the general ambience characteristics go away once you mic and capture the guitar on a recording. So rather than targeting the live ambient sound approach it's easier if you approach it like you're producing the finished recorded sound live, because that's essentially what the modeling approach is. You're constructing a finished production signal chain that will produce consistent sound on a recording as well as live rather than the process of converting the live sound to a recorded sound. That being the case cabinets/IRs and mic'ing are much more important in producing the finished sound you're after. You'll hear a lot of talk about EQ high and low cuts, which can and are sometimes very important. But that also can produce a much more synthetic sound than having the right cabinet combination and mic'ing combination to begin with. There are many cases in which I don't need to apply any cuts if I get the right combination of cabs and mic setups. When I do need cuts they're very often very slight. Only rarely do I need to apply high cuts below 10Khz in my patches for example, and most of my EQ notches tend to be in common EQ areas around 500Hz, 4.2KHz, or 8.0KHz as they have been in studio recordings over many decades. Your time getting familiar with the different combinations of speakers and mic'ing arrangements will pay off ten fold over simple EQ manipulation in my opinion. My experience tells me you can achieve all of these things with either stock Helix cabs or with IR's. I personally prefer IR's because of their convenience and the availability of some fairly common pre-baked mic'ing setups available in most collections. Another important consideration is that the Helix can only sound as good as your output device allows it to be. I use Yamaha HS7 speakers and DT770 80 ohm headphones for my studio work and Yamaha DXR12 or QSC CP8 powered speakers for live work. In the area of speakers it's the same as it's always been as far back as I can remember. You get what you pay for. Lastly patience and knowledge are the BIGGEST part of getting what you want out of the Helix or any modeler. I'd HIGHLY recommend spending some time looking at any of Jason Sadites YouTube videos on dialing in amps as he very good at going over the key elements of getting very polished and professional sounds out of a wide range of the Helix amp models.

I've got a small Alesis mixing board I plug into at home and use the signal meters to normalize my patches and snapshots. Something like this one would probably work great. https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/MG10c--yamaha-mg10-mixer

My process is somewhat similar. I have a DXR12 set up at home at about chest height. I find this gives me a pretty good indicator of what my sound will be like through most decent PA system as long as I stand about 6 or more feet away from the speaker at volume when I'm listening to it at performance levels. When I build a preset I have a general tone I'm going for. That tone I'm looking for will generally be influenced by the guitar I choose to use on it whether it's a Les Paul, Strat, Tele, Gretsch Hollow Body, Gretsch steel resonator, or acoustic guitar. That preset will always be used with that guitar. If it's a cover song I do some level of research to figure out what type of equipment was used on the record and go from there. If that's not available I can typically get a feel for the type of gear used by just listening to it. My Helix is setup on a bar top rather than on a floor. It has my 1/4 inch output going to a DI which sends a 1/4" line level signal to the DXR12 with DSP contouring off, volume at unity (12 o'clock) and bass low cut on the speaker set to 100 Hz. From that same DI I have an XLR output going to a single channel on a small Alesys mixing board that I use to monitor signal level strength to more or less get my patches into the same output level as I'm dialing them in. My Helix master volume is set to 11 o'clock and I generally dial in my tones at performance levels. I use a stock beginner preset that contains my volume pedal, a Parametric EQ and a LA Studio Comp toward the end of my lower signal chain with a split bypass with two gain block in my top signal chain. I drop in the amp block and an IR block and get those dialed in and make any high/low or other eq adjustments I might need on the final parametric EQ. As I dial the patch in and as I add other blocks to the patch I try to get it corrected to about -8db on the Alesys mixer, and with each modification listen to the results by backing away from the speaker, standing off-axis, facing toward and facing away from the speaker to get a good feel for how it will sound in different situations. I'll also play it with the recording if one is available to see how I'll sit in a mix. As mentioned above I take several breaks over a couple of days coming back and tweaking it as I go. The whole purpose of my process is to get a good feel for how the patch will sound to the audience through the FOH.

It almost sounds like you don't have a cab/IR connected to your chosen amp.