DunedinDragon

You could probably get by with any of them, but the key thing for your application is which one of these is most likely to simulate the sound and behavior of the PA you'll be going through at church? The idea here is that you want to be confident that the tone you get at home will be the tone you get when you play at church. In this regard I would probably opt for the JBL. The reason being is the price difference which is more related to the sophistication in how the DSP is used in the JBL to tailor the JBL to different applications such as used as a floor monitor, a mian speaker, with or without a sub. That means they've given at least some consideration to it being used in live music performance situations. I'd rather pay for that than just more wattage which tends to be a feature more oriented toward DJ's and electronic music/dance applications.

That shouldn't be a problem. They're basically the same piece of equipment...just organized differently.

Exactly. And it's not like you can only do Apple and not Android. If you do it, you have to do both. And the real consideration is, how many more Helix units would be sold if this were developed? I'm not convinced it would measure up well in that regard in order to justify the cost of development and support.

I think one of the issues that may be an impediment in this case is that the USB on Helix requires your device to run in host mode as if directly controlling a printer or scanner or some other external slave device (notice the USB Type B port on the Helix). Although things are improving, it's been dicey finding the right level of support or support at all on tablets and phones depending on the manufacturer and model of tablet/smart phone. I suspect this would be an impediment to investing in the development of a tablet based HX Edit until the market matures and gets more stable in that regard. There would be a LOT of complaints if you introduced it and it wouldn't run very well on most people's tablets and required buying a new one.

I'll be curious to see if this exhibits any perceivable latency with the serial nature of the signal chain on complex signal chains using all three DSP chips.

It could be the pre-amps in the Behringer that just aren't up to snuff, or it could simply be that you haven't gain staged the channel adequately where the Helix is coming in. But having a mixer is no different that what many of us do when playing live. In your case I'd send the Helix via direct XLR into two different channels and gain stage both of them very precisely and see if you can't get a better sound.

I use my Helix as my only audio interface to my PC and only turn it on if I want audio. My PC stays on 24/7. Many times, such as right now, my Helix is turned off because I'm not doing anything with audio. If I were to come across a video or something I wanted to watch, I just turn on the Helix with my power conditioner which also powers my studio monitors. The benefit is that I can also have my electronic keyboard plugged into it at the same time as well as a mic, and a bass guitar. I think it's a very simple setup and enabled with the flip of a switch.

This is really not a good idea. So bad in fact that Line 6 advises not to do it in the manual except when correcting for room acoustics. Granted it's the easiest way to do it, but with some pretty significant implications. There is nothing you can do in global EQ that you can't do better in a final parametric EQ within the preset. If you have more than one preset or snapshot, chances are the cuts you need to apply will vary based on any number of factors such as, the guitar being used, the amp model, the cabinet/IR, type of mic/combo of mics and mic placement. I have over 150 presets and the high cuts range from no cuts at the high end to 8.5 Khz. There's a good likelihood if you use global eq you may affect the overtones in the upper range depending on how you've set up a particular patch. Adjusting each patch with a final EQ gives you the ability to address that, global EQ doesn't. The best way to correct for high end differences is to do first do it the natural way with your selection of cabinet, selection of mic or combination of mics, and the placement and mixes of those mics. Then adjust whatever is left using a final EQ. In three years of use with my Helix I've never used global EQ. If the room acoustics are such that things need to be adjusted, they should be adjusted at the mixer because those same room acoustics affect ALL channels equally.

Well...plugging straight into the amp input is the first problem. The concept is that if you're going to go into an normal amp head, using an amp model you generally use an amp model and go into an effects return which bypasses the pre amp and uses only the power amp side of the head. If you're using a guitar amp and speakers you simply use the amp model but not a cabinet or IR because you already have a cabinet. That's the general concept, but there are people that have done otherwise and are happy with it. But it can be a challenge. I really can't answer why your volume is so low unless there some form of limiter circuit in your amp input that's capping out the level in order to protect the amp circuit. Going to some form of FRFR type powered speaker certainly simplifies things, but you need to carefully consider these because you tend to get what you pay for and wattage ratings tend to be not so important as are several other factors, and you get what you pay for generally with these things. You owe it to yourself to do some real-life examination of these things before you jump into them. Most of us that have been using these for a while have found it's well worth the money to get a premium style speaker like a QSC K series or Yamaha DXR series to get premium style results. But there's also some very good mid-priced units like the Electrovoice EV-ZLX12p and some of the JBL's that work well for you. The other alternative for you might also be something like the Line 6 Powercab as that tends to be in a good space between a traditional guitar amp and a FRFR style speaker.

Well...not exactly. There's still going to be a difference between the sound you get from the Powercab and what comes out of the PA, but it will be much closer than a traditional cabinet. In the OP's case he's not using any amp on stage. Just going direct through the PA, so that's the sound he's trying to match.

I use a FRFR powered speaker at home to dial in my Helix tones as that's about the only way to really simulate the way the your presets will sound direct through a PA. This, of course depends greatly on what type of PA you're going through. If it's a reasonably modern PA with a non-powered mixer that uses it's own powered speakers this works fine. On the other hand if it's an older style PA with a powered mixer and passive speakers it's going to be much tougher as the PA won't really have a predictably flat response like more modern non powered mixer PA's do, particularly in the mid-range frequencies. So you may have to turn up the Mid range EQ on the PA channel that your Helix is plugged into to get the tone closer to what you dialed in at home. The really important aspect of dialing in tones at home this way is to make sure you're checking the tones at some level that's reasonably close to performance level due to limitations in the way the human ear responds to different frequencies at different volume levels referred to as the "Fletcher Munson" effect.

It's not really clear what you're asking here. If you have an existing preset that you want to add the Friedman Dirty amp to, you simply press the joystick control and add it to the preset. From there you simply designate the state of that amp in each of the snapshots within that preset. If you want to copy and paste the amp from one preset to a different one you highlight the amp via the joystick control then press the Action button, then at the bottom of the screen you'll see the copy and paste commands just above the control at the bottom of the screen. Press copy then move to the preset and location you want and press paste then configure the state of the amp in the various snapshots of the new preset. Other than that I'm not sure what you're asking here. You don't really copy and past snapshots as a snapshot is only defined within a preset. You can copy a preset (with it's defined snapshots) by simply pressing the Save button then select the new preset location using the buttons below the screen and save it there.

I think what you're forgetting is you have PLENTY of presets. You really don't have to cram every possible thing into one preset you know....it's not against the law to change to different presets once in a while.

You don't need to be concerned about such things. This is 2018, not 1978. Things have progressed significantly... LOL

Well if it's not going to take up a block then where is it going to exist in the signal chain? Before the reverb or after the reverb or at the beginning or end of the signal chain? Off of the main signal chain or off of a split and mixed portion of the signal chain? And what level of signal will it receive or send? Line level or instrument level? If it's not a block then how would you expect to specify such things?

Well, as far as what's in it and when it will be there pretty much ZERO chance of anyone knowing anything that would be willing to share the info. We are dealing with Line 6...and that's just how they roll. As far as my wish list, it's pretty simple. I'd be happy with just some additional utility and management functions such as signal metering and more comprehensive IR management. I wouldn't be upset if they decided to include some other interesting vintage computers like a Fender blackface Vibrolux or a different Matchless variation.

I'm not sure it's fair to characterize a "gaming" computer as a "Star Trek' solution. I own one simply because it's the only thing with enough beef to keep up with video editing and rendering. There's not a game in sight. The same goes for my youngest son who spent almost $6000 on his "gaming" computer to facilitate video editing and special effects production as well as real time coordinated lighting and video for stage productions. My other son has one to facilitate CAD and CNC automation production. Sometimes these are really the only solutions available to handle certain types of heavyweight applications.

Probably not so well. The guitar doesn't typically produce much in the subwoofer range which is generally below 125 HZ. A 12" speaker is more than adequate in most cases for producing low end guitar frequencies.

I have one of my Helix floor units connected to an ASUS G73S gaming laptop which I use for video editing with no problems at all on Windows 10. So tell the ASUS support people the ball is in their court. Mine works just fine with the Helix. Personally I'd suggest you make sure you have no other additional peripherals or controllers attached just to make sure there's not a device level conflict. The only thing attached to mine is a USB mouse and the Helix.

The state of the volume pedal is stored whenever the preset is saved just as is any effect state of off and on. If you want the volume pedal to be in the heel position, place it in the heel position and save the preset. However remember when the preset is recalled the state will be zero even if the pedal is full on.

Short changeovers isn't a big deal at all. I've done this numerous times in a multi-band environment both on the stage performing and at the sound board. You configure your XLR output to be at Mic level in the globals, unplug the XLR out of the mic being used on the cabinets and plug it into your XLR out. You should be in same ballpark on that line as is the signal coming from the mic when changing between different amps and possibly different positions. There are no major reconfigurations. When you're done, unplug the XLR from the Helix and plug it back into the mic. No big deal. It's wonderful that you want to be as pro as possible, but I would suggest that the soundman return the favor and be a pro as well.

There really isn't a "no mic" configuration for the Helix, and for good reason in my opinion. The Helix is designed such that it can work in a FRFR type setup, or a cabinet style setup through a power amp and traditional cabinet. When you opt to go through a traditional cabinet you don't use the Helix cab+mic setup because you have an actual cab. And if that actual cab needs to be sent through the PA, you simply mic that cab....when then gives you roughly the same effect as an FRFR setup as far as the audience is concerned. What this means is if you were to mic the FRFR speaker, you would no longer have an FRFR output, because the mic will add it's own unique coloration to the sound just as it does with a cabinet and that negates the use of FRFR. I occasionally play small venues in which I don't send my output to the FOH. Instead I mount my speaker on a half height pole behind me in a backline situation and it serves both as my stage monitor as well as an augmented FOH speaker. The reality is that your FRFR speaker is no different than the speakers used by the FOH, so you're getting the same effect as you would were you to go through the FOH in a small venue setup. Honestly I've never had any soundman question my direct setup either on my Helix or the HD500X before that as long as I'm giving them a good signal on an XLR line. If I did I'd probably ask the soundman if there are any soundmen around with familiarity with equipment from THIS century if I did run into it.

I think it would be a huge leap to attribute it to bad coding since bad coding in the modeling world is more about introducing latency as it is with DSP usage. My guess is the complexity lies in the algorithm used to model the slope of the hi and low cuts since they aren't typically linear and are generally parametric in the real world which is what they're modeling. That would mean more advanced math than simple scalar functions. It doesn't surprise me at all that you're running short on DSP in path2 given that's where you have some of the most DSP intensive effects...particularly the reverb and delay. That's exactly why I reserve path 2 for such things so I have more room to play in path 1.

You're more than welcome. My short answer is what I told the Bass player I worked with this weekend when he asked me why I don't use a regular guitar amp. I answered, "Because it's 2018"......

Well it's pretty unlikely the Line 6 dev team will chime in with their headphone choice since modeling isn't really a headphone kind of thing. It's a signal measurement on a circuit and a mathematical simulation calculation kind of thing, which is not an audio based process until it's finally QA'd. You may be confusing modeling with sampling which are very different processes. They may or may not use headphones in the final QA of the modeling development and maybe someone from the product side might be able to chime in about what they've seen in dev, but don't count on it. I'm with what previous posters said...you have some very honest and accurate headphones, so what the Helix produces they will accurately reflect. But your problem may be in what you're expecting to hear based on what you're comparing it to. EQ is definitely affected in a number of ways by the cabinet/mic simulation as it is in real life with a real amp, cabinet and mic in the real world. Microphones can have a certain limiter aspect to them simply to prevent a signal overload, but that's pretty subtle. EQ, on the other hand is affected more prominently based on the type of mic, the placement of the mic relative to the speaker on the cabinet, cabinet resonance and room acoustic interaction, and finally the speakers being used in the cabinet which have their own unique frequency response characteristics. All of these thing are simulated with both Helix cabs and IRs. The type of mic can also have a significant affect on the signal as all mics have their own response characteristics. That's why the most accurate captures tend to be with multiple mic mixes on a cabinet that combine various mics with different responses. A popular example of that would be combining a Royer R-121 ribbon mic with a Sennheiser MD-421 dynamic mic. As to why you prefer a mix of the raw amp signal with a cab, only you can answer that question. But I suspect it's because you're comparing apples and oranges. With a fully formed signal chain consisting of an amp and cab/IR, the only viable real world comparison is to either a studio recorded guitar and amp, or a live PA performance of a mic'd cabinet. To get an accurate representation of a guitar amp setup in a room you would need to remove the cabinet and mic from the signal chain in the Helix and go directly from the output of the Helix into a simple power amp through an actual guitar cabinet. That removes the EQ and limits imposed by the microphone on the cabinet. Once you mic that cabinet for either recording or live performance through a PA, you're right back to all the sonic characteristics of a fully formed Helix signal chain. One other thing that comes into play when making these type of audible comparisons is the Fletcher-Munson effect which deals with how the human ear translates sound at different volume levels. What I can tell you in my personal experience of playing guitar for 5 decades and working both as a musician and live/studio recording engineer is I've totally abandoned traditional amps and no longer make any type of comparisons to a traditional amp in the room. When I dial in my patches I only compare them to what I hear on professionally recorded guitars as that's what I want my audience to hear when I play.