DunedinDragon

I'm mystified by this also. I've been on my Helix since I think it was FW 1.21 and I really don't remember any special save in current state functionality. More importantly I don't get what you're talking about here. It may be that I don't ever end up in the situation being described because every patch I own resides on my hard drive and is manually exported after every change. So once it's loaded into memory I always have a saved version I can go back to.

This is totally bizarre behavior that I've never encountered with the Helix. There are certainly some amps that require a higher volume setting than others, but I can always get them to even out volume wise by adjusting the volume and without any tricks from a compressor or a gain block, and it's never lower than the signal I get were I to bypass the amp and cabs. I'd be very curious what you find out about this and what causes it. I've built well over 100 patches using a very wide range of amp models and cabinets and I've yet to encounter such a thing.

There are a couple of things you have to adjust to when going to a powered loudspeaker like your JBL. First is to make sure you have the contouring options set correctly for how you have it set up. If you have is set in a floor monitor position select the Monitor option. If you have it vertically elevated you're probably best off with it set to Main. You probably also don't want to engage the EQ+ option as that may affect the contouring in a non-natural fashion. The other thing is to make sure you have ample space between you and the speaker. Unlike your studio monitors these type of loudspeakers are designed for projection across long distances. Therefore, up close you don't always get an appropriate blending of the sound between the high and low end drivers. I keep about 5 feet of distance and will often stand off-axis from the speaker to get a better feel for the actual live sound. Because these are bi-amped systems with an amp dedicated to the lower frequencies in the speaker and a separate amp dedicated to the higher frequencies through the horn you will get a much flatter response on the high end than you would through a normal studio monitor. In many cases this can be handled by simply changing the cabinet/mic setup or the IR to get a warmer tone with a warmer mic or greater distance from the speaker or out further from the cap of the speaker. Alternatively you can also adjust the high cut parameter for highs or low cut if it's too boomy. I sometimes use a combination of tactics. Usually a combination of mics such as a ribbon mic like an R121 combined with a dynamic mic like an MD421 will give you a nice pleasant blend. But I often attenuate the high frequencies, but I generally use a Parametric EQ toward the end of my chain to trim the highs as well as any final adjustments to any other areas that are needed. The reason I use a Parametric EQ rather than the high and low cuts in the cabinet block is the cuts in the Parametric EQ use a steeper slope so I don't have to make such a dramatic cut on the highs. With this approach my high cuts can range anywhere from 10k down to about 7.5K. Bottom line it does take a bit of adjustment to get what you want from these type of powered loudspeakers, but the good news is your direct signal will end up being a fully production level polished sound through a direct FOH connection, so you won't have to worry about making any adjustments at the mixing board to your channel. It will match nicely to what you're hearing on stage. The other big advantage for me is the great articulation and clarity I get on stage in my tones. A little more work, but well worth it in my opinion.

Wow, that hasn't been my experience at all!!! I get very consistent results across different venues and FOH setups and sound crews. I'm mystified why you seem to be having so much trouble. Even when we play as a support warm up for groups that are touring through (and you know they really don't spend much time getting your sound check done), I have to say I've been very happy with the result.

The fact is, manuals including the one for Helix are pretty much basic functionality any more because the details are generally covered in instructional videos and many other sources. Line 6 is no different in this regard. I'm no rocket scientist but the manual was enough to get me up and running and gigging effectively with the Helix within two weeks of getting it. It was more than sufficient for letting me learn the lay of the land and the rest came from experimentation, dissection of provided presets with the Helix, several videos and additional technical info published by Line 6. I still continue to learn and improve in my use of the Helix, but that's because I have the desire to learn and am willing to look. And I haven't felt I lacked access to any information if I pursued it. I've actually owned software that was three times more expensive than the Helix with less documentation and far greater complexity. And yes, it took some digging but I mastered the elements I needed to master to get what I wanted out of it. But, I've always said there are two types of people in the world: Those that make excuses and those that make a difference. If you don't have some initiative or the desire then it may take you a while to get the full benefit of your investment in the Helix or any other thing of great value and complexity. Just a fact of life.

Okay, I'll apologize ahead of time if I tick someone off, but understand I'm not directing this at you personally. But I am directing it at an attitude I've seen from a number of people on this and other forums as it relates to the way they're approaching the Helix. First, the person ultimately responsible for understanding the tools they are using, is the person using the tool. No one is going to spoon feed you knowledge any more than anyone spoon fed me. When I bought the Helix, or any other professional tool I've used throughout my music career, it was up to me to learn what it did, how it did it, and ultimately how to use it effectively. And that's been the case for the last 50 plus years in this business. And surprisingly enough I did most of that without the benefit of Google or YouTube videos or even forums like this. I read the manuals and what I didn't understand I researched it (in a place we called a "Library") in order to become knowledgeable enough to make good, reasonable decisions about how to use it. The fact is, if you want to be a carpenter you have to learn how to use a square, work with angles, understand how to use a level, and so forth. If you want to be a musician you have to do the same thing. If you understand how an amp works and what the stages of an amp are, no one has to explain to you the differences between going into an effects return and plugging into the front of an amp and the effect that can have on anything you have in your signal chain. The same applies to guitars and pickups, effects, what they do and how they interact with the other components within a signal chain, and even to the intricacies of recording and live sound because they are ALL a part of being a musician...and no one is going to spoon feed you that information. I'm literally baffled by people asking questions that are covered adequately not only in the Helix manual but on numerous YouTube instructional videos. I'm even more baffled by people that have spent the money on the Helix and can't even differentiate the USB port on the Helix from a typical USB port on a PC or a Mac or Tablet, or don't even comprehend the relationship between HX Edit and the Helix unit, or think of the Helix as just another type of laptop. But I'm most baffled by the people that would invest the money in something like the Helix without any idea of what kind of output method they intend to use with it, or have even bothered to understand the technical differences and trade-offs between the different options. This is called "due diligence" and is a critical part of homework one does before they invest their hard-earned money in something. I don't have any problems providing knowledge about questions people might have, but I expect a certain amount of diligence and curiosity on their part enough that they will do some research and not have to be hand-held through the entire process of effectively building their setup and dialing in some basic tones. But I think Line 6 has provided more than enough information about the Helix for the average musician to understand it and get it working effectively for them. Why should anyone try to document a flow chart covering all of the possible configurations and considerations when users don't even tend to bother reading the manual that comes with the Helix???

Most of the problems with live stereo have nothing to do with the Helix and far more to do with the placement of FOH speakers, the arrangement of the room, the ambience in the room, the "liveness" of the room, the location of people in the audience, etc. There are simply just too many variables for stereo to be effective in most common environments with standard FOH setups except for maybe a select few in the audience. Most often it just adds to the noise level and obscures the clarity of what's being played. If you want to, however, you can invest in 3 or 4 flown stacks of line arrays perfectly positioned for every venue to get the same results as Alex... ;)

Not cutting through the mix could be any number of things many of which have nothing to do with your setup and could be more related to how the soundman chooses to mix your signal, or how and where the recording was made. I'd agree with cruisinon2 that trying to do stereo could easily be adding to the problems, but it could also be you have your patches set too dark, or you have an overabundance of spatial effects or distortion levels that obscure your core tone.

This is one of those bizarre discussion areas that really makes no sense in light of going direct into a mixing board and what unity is technically about. Unity doesn't really have anything to do with 0db at the mixing board. It really only relates to the signal going into the preamp and whether the preamp is adding or subtracting from that signal. And the only reason for adding or subtracting from the signal is to achieve the DESIRED signal level that's consistent with all the other inputs into the mixing board. Which, in the vast majority of cases is NEVER going to be 0 db because that doesn't allow for enough headroom for boosting the signal if necessary via the faders. That's why the discussion of unity is more or less inconsequential. Even given the same high SPL level going into a microphone is not very likely to produce a 0db at unity level gain across all mics, even those from the same manufacturer and model. So why is it even a discussion as far as the Helix is concerned? I can see where it's important in terms of a line into the front of an amp as phil_m points out, but in terms of a mixing board it just simply makes no sense. What DOES make sense is to have a consistent signal level going into a mixing board so the person working the mixing board can set it at whatever appropriate signal level he wants it to be at relative to the other signals and be able to count on it being that level regardless of whether the gain knob is on unity or not. So in terms of going direct into a mixing board what matters is that the Helix provide a SUFFICIENT and CONSISTENT signal that can be tailored to meet the needs of the soundman. That's the reason I choose to only send MIC level signals to the board, because that's the signal level being received by most of the inputs into the board. And I do that with the Helix master volume disconnected from the XLR outputs so they send at full volume level regardless of my master volume setting. Given my typical patch setup this results in a preamp gain setting on the board slightly above unity in order to achieve the target signal level we want of around -6db with the fader set at unity. Roughly about the same as most of the microphones give or take a few clicks up or down on the preamp gain knob. So bottom line the concept of UNITY output from the Helix is meaningless as it relates to going direct to the mixing board. The concept of CONSISTENT signal output is far more relevant.

Well around here 40 years or playing is still a kid among us old farts that started our first bands back in the 60's...but the good news is, with the Helix you'll get consistent results from the cabinets and mics, no matter how many hours you play through a virtual 4x12 cabinet with Celestion Greenbacks using a mic mix consisting of R121 and MD421 microphones. Repeatable, predictable, duplicatable....ahhh...the scientific method at work!!!!

In principle I agree in one aspect of what you're saying. For the novice it's not completely obvious what the implications are for building out a system using the Helix. The Helix is very versatile and can be effectively used in a number of ways. Those of us that have been in the modeling world for a while understand many of those implications, and if you hang around forums such as this you can begin to get a feel for what those implications are. For example, it's a perfectly viable choice to run the Helix through the effects return of a combo amp, but there are implications in that you will be limited to the sound of that cabinet and those speakers. Many users are perfectly happy with that type of setup, but it means sacrificing a considerable amount of functionality built into the Helix for using different cabinets and mics because they won't sound correct or authentic as the end sound will be colored by the limitations of the physical speakers and cabinets you're playing through. It further means that if you do play live you will need a separate signal chain that contains cabs and mics that will go to the mixing board, or else simply use the cabinet you have and mic it...again limiting the full features available to you. Many of these type of things are obvious to those of us that have been using modelers like the Helix for a while, but aren't necessarily common knowledge for people just getting into this type of stuff. Some form of white paper or talking paper would probably be useful for folks like that so they can make appropriate decisions about how they want to use the Helix, the limitiations of those decisions, and to understand up front how much beyond the price of the Helix will be necessary to get it.

Actually most can tell the difference, but the difference may or may not be due to the woods being used. It could just as easily be the difference in the physical speaker in the cabinet. A Celestion Creamback speaker has a completely different response and sound than a Celestion Redback. And that's why the Helix provides cab models as well as mic models and variations in how those mics are placed on the cab. The same holds true for IRs. That's why that market exists, in order to simulate those differences. A Fender Twin has a considerably different sound from a stock Fender Twin when it's played through a Vox AC15 cabinet, not only because of the cabinet but also because of the speakers being used. Some, including myself, would say that cabinets and mics are as big a factor in the resulting sound you will get as is the amp and guitar being used.

Nope..... That's me as well..... I kind of have the same thing with a old keyboard buddy of mine. The nicest guy in the world and an extraordinarily talented keyboard player, studio guy, and live sound guy. The only problem is, he continues to think that nothing of technical value has been created after 1975. That includes modelers, solid state amps, electronic drums, powered speakers, class-D amplifiers and digital mixing boards..the list goes on and on. But course none of that has stopped him from swapping his Hammond B3 in live performances for an electronic keyboard....hmmmmmmm????

That doesn't surprise me at all. If I remember correctly 2.30 was a fairly significant restructuring of how the internals of the Helix worked, so the in memory structure of the presets and setlists prior to that would probably be pretty different. But then again, that's why they stress making a backup as the first step in upgrading.

Yeah, I've kind of taken to telling people that if you don't really understand the differences in the mics and how placement can affect the tone, they're better off just using the stock cabs. Without a certain amount of understanding about what you tend to prefer in terms of mics and mic placements you definitely going to be wandering in the IR wilderness for a while until you figure it out. Eventually once you figure out those things from the stock cabs it may be worth your time finding IRs that fit your needs as they're very quick and easy to use once you know that stuff.

I picked this collection up a couple of weeks ago and it's already one of my goto sets of IRs. The great thing about this collection is not so much the vintage cabinet as it is the comprehensive massively multi-microphone collection. Primarily the mixes in the Summary and OTB Sum Mixes are mixes built with 8 different microphones in various cabinet and room positions and are stunningly realistic. The brown sound mix is one I've found to be very versatile, but I've used these variations on rock, blues, jazz, funk, and finger picked ballads with great success. This is definitely one of my best IR purchases I've ever made.

If the new basketweave collection is any indication of what's to come from OwnHammer in the future you may have to expand some of the mixes you might want to use. The Summary and OTB Sum mixes consist of captures using 8 mics in various cabinet and room configurations. They are absolutely stunning!!!

It's odd how people can have such vastly different experiences. I've been gigging with my Helix rig every week for over two years now across a pretty wide range of PA systems. I expect to get great results out of our personal PA system which consists of QSC KLA12 line arrays and KW181 subs. But I can't say I've been disappointed when playing through any of the other relatively decent systems be they traditional club level powered speaker systems or concert quality line arrays. All have performed well and my stage sound has been highly consistent with what the audience was hearing using a DXR12 as my stage monitor. My only problem in all of that time was with an older passive system that used centralized amps and crossovers which just simply didn't have the range of performance as that of modern designs and struggled to deliver decent, crisp mid-range. . I do make it a point however of stressing to the sound crew to leave my channel set flat and I can't say anyone has given me any grief over it. I certainly understand if they need to make EQ compensation for the environment, but that has nothing to do with the EQ on my channel. Those factors affect all channels equally and should be handled on the final output EQ at the board. That's why I never even make adjustments on my global EQ for acoustics at a venue. I leave those adjustments to the sound crew. I suspect people's experience in this regard may be more related to the style of music they play as well as the venues they tend to play in.

What I'm most curious about in all of this is what their pricing model will be going forward. I took advantage of the deal offered by Sonar in the last couple of years in which I paid a single price for the upgrade on Sonar Platinum that would ensure I got all future upgrades for free. I'm not expecting that deal will hold, but I do hope they have some level of consideration for those of us that have been long-time customers of their premium products. But I guess we'll see....

Have you set the USB in 1/2 Destination to XLR in the Global Settings Ins/Outs? It defaults to 1/4"

I totally agree with cruisinon2. Hard to tell you what settings to use since the settings you use will depend on what you want it to do. That's what modeling is about. If you want to give us a couple of hints about the type of sounds/music you are intending to play we might be able to give you some ideas. But the best thing to do, especially if you're new to modeling is to spend some time studying. The manual is a good place to start, but there are also some pretty incredible YouTube videos out there. But I'm not sure how much you will gain out of the videos without some basis of understanding about the functions and vernacular used in the Helix...and that's what the manual should give you. Once you've got your bearings I'd highly recommend looking through some of the videos jason sadites has done on YouTube as they'll give you some good ideas about how to construct presets as well as snapshots. How well the Helix performs for you will be directly related to how much time and effort you put into studying the concepts and mastering the skills.

It makes it easier if you have an idea of what type of mic's, mic mixes, and mic placements you prefer. That allows you to isolate the one's most likely to be close to what you want. Beyond that I typically reserve the last 10 IR slots for testing out different variations. Load them in, try them out and compare them. Generally speaking, out of an entire pack of IRs I'll generally end up with 5 or 6 that tend to fit my needs. I'll then load those into permanent slots lower in the IR list.

When you look at the audio panel what is the device the music is playing on? The easiest way to check is to right click on the speaker icon at the bottom of the screen and select Playback Device and see if it says it's using the Helix or some other sound device. If it's some other sound device just specify the Helix as the default device. If Helix isn't showing as a sound device then you likely don't have the Helix device driver loaded on your PC.

I'd love to feed into this conversation but I will need to run to the store to pickup some polarized sunglasses to read the OP's choice of font color....

I guess I see the volume pedal in the old school way in that it's the same as rolling off the volume on the guitar. I have my volume pedal at the beginning of every patch. It's primarily because I often change guitars so I use it to kill the signal while I do that. Rarely I might use it to attenuate the volume, but generally I can control that simply through technique. But there are cases in which I want to roll off some of the sound and tone the same as I would by rolling back the guitar volume.