DunedinDragon

The physical connections shouldn't have any effect since what determines this is line versus mic versus instrument levels, XLR or 1/4" is just wiring.

Great analysis and very informative! Thanks!!!!

Your global settings are saved as part of the Helix backup feature that was introduced with HXEdit 2.30.

Depending on a typical club soundman to babysit your EQ at the board is a pretty dangerous way of approaching this problem. In most cases you're probably lucky if the poor schmuck running the board can do a passable job of gain staging your signal, much less EQ it. If your stage sound is that much different than the sound you're sending the mixing board my response (as a person who's run live sound for three decades) would be to tell you to forget about sending me a direct line, I'll just mic your on stage cabinet. It's also why most people in the Helix world use a very different approach. Ideally, you're right that if someone is using a powered FRFR system as a monitor on stage that sound should be a fully formed, finished sound..the same one they're sending to the mixing board. However there are many people that prefer to use a standard guitar cabinet and power amp on stage. The normal approach being used by these folks is they have two separate signal paths. In the main on stage path they don't use a cabinet or IR and send the signal direct to their on stage power amp and cabinet. This makes sense because they already have a cabinet so why would you add a modeled cabinet for that signal? They normally split off to a separate signal path that incorporates a cab/IR and mic arrangement along with possible other EQ that gets sent direct to the PA. That's a far more efficient way to handle it than depend on a sound man who, in most clubs works as the sound man, door man, and the guy that fills the ice at the bar.

As has been suggested this is a different question than what was talked about at first which was how to get a good sound on the PA, now it's getting a good sound on the studio monitors. And they're somewhat related but there's a different animal involved here which are your studio monitors. As far as MIC or LINE levels, typically on an output device LINE level signals are what is traditional whereas on mixing boards MIC level signals are traditional. That's one of the differences between the question you first posed and what you're posing now. The term "fizziness" means different things to different people so you need to be a bit more precise in what you mean. If what you're referring too is simply too brittle a sound due to too much in the high frequencies, I'd start with how you have your settings on your A5X speakers. Ideally everything should be flat meaning high shelf, low shelf, and tweeter level at 0 or 12 o'clock. To make sure you're getting an accurate reflection of what the Helix is producing they should be plugged directly into the Helix so there are no intermediate PC drivers in the way. As far as you being able to get decent sounds out of the amps and cabs, most of what's been said on this thread applies as it regards using a FRFR output device compared to traditional amp speakers. With FRFR speakers there is far greater response on the high end and low end of the frequency spectrum than what you would hear from a normal guitar amp speaker. You're going to find on full range speakers that high gain tones will sound much more brittle because you're hearing the high end of the distortion which won't be as prevalent on a guitar amp speaker. There are many ways to fix this but the easiest way is to reduce the amount of gain and distortion because with full range speakers a little bit goes a long way. I would say in general even on tradtional amps, overuse of distortion, gain, or overdrive is a VERY common problem, but on full range speakers it's overuse becomes much more obvious. Beyond that this high end shrillness can be tamed a number of ways, but the first place to start is with the speakers, mic and mic placements. Two key things are important here which are the mic's and the placement. Certain mic's like ribbon mics such as a Royer 121 will give a more rounded sound with better low end, whereas an SM57 is more of a mid range mic which has more high end in it, so you need to get familiar with the attributes of the different mics and how they affect the sound so you can choose the right mic for the sound you want. The second part is placement. The closer to the cap of the speaker, the more high end frequencies are accentuated. Usually in the real world this gets dealt with by moving the mic further away from the cap of the speaker out into the cone area. Stock speakers on the Helix don't allow this, but you can get somewhat of the same effect by moving the mic further away from the speaker through the distance parameter. You can also attenuate much of this shrillness by combining cabinets using a dual cabinet block with different speakers using different mics and distances and using a split block to mix how much you want them blended together. Once you've got your cabs, mics, and mic placements settled you can use EQ to fine tune them. You mentioned in your original post you used global EQ with a high pass filter. I'm assuming you meant a high cut as a high pass would effectively be a low cut and accentuate highs. As mentioned previously global EQ is NOT the place to be doing these things especially given you want to use different amps and ideally different cabinets all of which would require different EQ treatments, so you want to do this in the patch itself. The cabinets allow for high cuts, but those high cuts have a fairly gradual slope which means you have to start that slope much lower in order to eliminate high frequencies. Most people have learned it's better to use the Parametric EQ as one of the final blocks in you signal chain to take care of tweaking the overall frequencies. The high cut and low cut parameters in the Parametric EQ have a much steeper slope which allows you to set them higher. On most of my patches, if I need a high cut (which isn't always the case) it can range anywhere from 7Khz to 12Khz with the parametric EQ versus 4 or 5Khz on cabinet high cut. You asked the question why you can't get any good sounds when everyone else seems to be able to. The answer is simple...it's knowledge. You're not driving a Ford Fiesta anymore, you're driving a Porsche so you need to develop some additional skills and knowledge in order to get what you want out of it. The best investment you can make at this point is your time and attention to understanding as much as you can about the different type of blocks and how to best use them. I'd suggest you spend some time watching Jason Saddites excellent Helix series to gain some insight in this regard. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=jason+sadites+helix

The only difference between these two units is the skill of the person putting together the signal chain, the units themselves are pretty much equal.

Not that specific one, although they do have the updated CL80. You might want to check out all the ones they have https://www.celestionplus.com/products/irs-by-speaker/

I'd encourage you to maybe look at a couple of pro IRs just to get the lay of the land. In IR land it seems to me that you tend to get what you pay for. Probably my favorite IRs are Celestions, particularly their premixed sets that combine R121 mics and MD421 mics. I'm particularly happy with the Redbacks, Celestion Blues (Alnico), Creambacks and Vintage 30s...but it's really a matter of taste. But it's worth seeing the difference between free and production level products.

I wouldn't worry about the pissiness. Some people kind of get religious about how they do things, but in the end it only matters if you get the sound you want. Like you I've been a performing musician since the 1970s both live and as studio hired gun, so I'm pretty clear on what I want out of my sound and whatever gets me there is fair game. As I said previously I use IRs almost exclusively, but not because I think the sound is any better than what I can get with stock cabs. But it is faster since I spent the time to select out key IR's that use the speakers I prefer with the mic's, mic placements and mic mixes I like so it's just a matter of dropping them into my signal chain. It saves a LOT of steps. Out of around 60 presets I probably use about 15 IRs consistently among most of them, with a few extras for special purposes. I also have dialed in a few presets using stock cabs to get a particular sound I was looking for so I'm pretty sure if I wanted to I could survive using stock cabs. But given I know pretty much what I want most of the time it's just easier to pick an IR and move on to other things in the signal chain.

We normally use our own mixing board which is a Mackie ProFX22. I normally PFL my channel to about -3db with the gain set at roughly 1 o'clock. I dial in my tones at home using an Alesys with the gain around 2 o'clock which comes in at about -4db. I know I've used Soundcraft gear at some events in the past, but older models than what you have, but haven't seen any real difference in levels. But I'm pretty conservative with my channel volumes as I perform live using the 1/4" out to a DXR12 with my Helix master volume at about 11 o'clock which puts me at about 100-110db SPL on a sound meter.

That may be why I've never had any problems with my signal being too hot on any mixer I've used because I've never used any pre-made presets, just one's I've built myself. Still that's quite odd that your signal would be that hot on your board even at the lowest gain settings. It makes me wonder if there's not something going on in your unit with your XLR out signal. I'm assuming all the microphones gain stage normally. Have you tried it on any other mixing board?

I'm not sure why you would be getting an overload if you've reduced the gain unless you have your Helix master volume very high and haven't disabled it from affecting the XLR out. I've never had this problem across tons of different mixers. Are you actually PFL'ing the signal when you take the channel reading?

To take this a bit further, in addition to the points made by cruisinon2, if you've been using traditional amps and cabs you probably aren't going to hear it as much simply due to the fact the speakers aren't flat response. Flat response generally means the speakers will respond at the same relative level at 12Khz as they do at 3Khz or 1Khz. If you look at the frequency profile of most major speaker in most cabinets their frequency profiles aren't anything like that. Therefore what you hear is actually a muffled response compared to the full range of frequencies being produced, which is what you're used to. When you apply the hi-cut you're reducing the impact of those frequencies in the mix, but at the same time retaining more of the level response of the rest of the frequencies which give you better clarity and articulation than will a traditional speaker in a cabinet. There are several ways to address these differences only one of which is a hi-cut. Other ways are speaker selection, mic selection, mic placement, and mic and/or speaker combinations all of which you can employ with either stock cabs or IRs. This is the way it's addressed in professional studios. I generally do this first to get the baseline then, if needed, apply an appropriate hi-cut at the end ot the signal chain with a parametric EQ. The thing is with the Helix, it's less like working with a traditional guitar and amp rig and more like working in a studio environment. The more you adopt this paradigm the more successful you will likely be at getting the tones you want with greater clarity, dynamics and articulation than you ever could with a traditional rig. This isn't limited to the Helix. It's an attribute of any high end modeler.

Well, here's my editorial comments after two years of using it....we'll see how it compares!!! 1) This thing is almost embarrassingly simple to program. I can't say enough good things about the interface. Coming from the world of old lexicon processors, this is a delight. Couldn't agree more. What's even more embarrassing (or should be for Line 6), is that I get more confused trying to modify/program my rhythm player's Spider V. How can one piece of equipment be so simple and another be so clunky and non-intuitive..hmmmmm??? What does aggravate me somewhat is all the whining about what the HX Edit should do. In two years the only use I've found for the HXEdit program is saving and restoring presets...and now doing backups for when I update firmware. It begs the question, what do these people that are so addicted to HXEdit do when they need to change something at the gig? Are they going to drag they laptop along just to do some edits??? 2) Snapshots are the best idea ever. I will probably be able to do most shows on a single snapshot. This reminds me of the old saying "when all you know is a hammer every problem starts to look like a nail". I think snapshots are a good idea that has been way overused in many cases. In over 60 presets I've created I've only come across three situations in which I benefited from using a snapshot. Most of my more complex transitions are well handled through assignments, which was the traditional way of doing it in the early releases of Helix. What's interesting to me is how often people have problems with corrupt presets and DSP limitations due generally to the overuse of snapshots. Maybe I'm just old fashioned and like to follow the Keep It Simple Stupid policy...but it always works and never causes problems. 3) Love the scribble strips. I certainly find them useful, but they were never the big advantage for me that some people make them out to be. In practice I've found the additional I/O and headphone volume control to be far more useful, at least as far as recording. 4) Just once I would like to see a modeler that dials like an amp. In that regard this is very much like the POD; you have to think like an engineer. Compression on both ends of the chain, high and low cut, rapt attention to mic and placement choices. If it wasn't for my background in live sound this would probably be a kind of frustrating experience. To me this is the entire selling point of the Helix or any modern modeler. I have all of the facilities one would find in a typical professional studio environment packed into a single unit that I can take live so I can provide a polished studio sound in a live environment. Something I could never do with just a simple amp and stomps. 5) Once you get past the above, the sound immediately and obviously superior to the POD... and I was getting good stuff from the POD. I didn't have to get past any of the above because they weren't negatives to me...other than that there's no question it was a huge step forward....IF (a big if) you spend the time and get an understanding of how to use it. 6) Why does everyone hate the stock cabs? I think they're fine and doubt like hell I will bother buying any IRs. I don't hate the stock cabs at all, but I still primarily use IRs. The reason being what would take me several minutes of tweaking in order to get the sound I want which is done in one step with an IR that's been well mixed with the mic's I want, the specific speaker I want, and the placement I want. It takes a while to figure out the ones that best suit you, but once you've got them it's a HUGE time saver. 7) The people selling patches are ripping you off. This is far too easy to program to warrant paying someone else to do it. I don't think they're ripping people off, just taking advantage of people that are too intellectually lazy to learn how to use their Helix. God help them if they need to make some tweaks to it because they get a new guitar or find themselves playing in a different band or venue that doesn't match up well to their paid for preset. It's like buying a Ferrari and needing to hire someone to drive it for you. 8) This is so easy to program I am probably taking it to my show tonight. It's a blues gig so I only need a couple of sounds. I'm doing a much more complex show both Friday and Saturday, so unless I get more setup time I will probably take the POD for those. But I look forward to be using the Helix 100% before next weekend. I totally see this!!! When I transitioned from my POD HD500X to the Helix I took a bit over a month getting used to it and dialing things in before I debuted it at a performance. It's a great piece of gear, but you really need to spend some time to know what you're doing with it. 9) Thus far my favorite amp model is the Cali Texas, but others show promise. For the blues show tonight it'll be that amp for everything. If you liked the Cali Texas, you're going to LOVE the Cartographer. These are the two most versatile amps in the lineup in my opinion, although there's some classics that still rate very high with me. They may be limited in what they do, but what they do, they do better than anything else. 10) The range of options in here is essentially limitless. I can't imagine running it out of DSP. If you continue down the road of an all-encompassing preset using snapshots I fear your day is coming soon.... 11) The tuner stinks. Please fix. Amazingly enough, for he last two years I've only depended on the Helix tuner for tuning my 3 to 4 guitars I use in my performances...and amazingly enough, they've always been in tune!!!! There must be some magic incantation they did over my specific Helix unit!!!!!

Actually reading the release notes and installation procedures is the solution to the problem.....

This may be an artifact of the headsets or speakers you're using rather than the Helix. Some headphones are geared more for consumers rather than pro use in studios so they'll take a lot of lattitude with the frequency profiles to make recorded songs sound sweeter and warmer. My high cuts tend to be more in the 8kz up to sometimes 12khz depending on the amp, cab/IR, mic or mic mix as well as the type of guitar I'm using, so I highly suspect your headphones or output devices may not really be that flat.

The EQ for your patch or snapshot should be specific to the patch or snapshot. Different amps will need different EQs so the last thing in the world you want is a global EQ messing with your patches. If you happen to run into a room that needs it, then use global EQ. But in two years of running my helix I haven't used it at all.

Personally I attribute the differences to modeling more exotic amps. The initial set of amps was pretty much stuff that's been dominant in the market over many years and tends to be the models you MUST have to cover most of the bases. What we're seeing now are some interesting variations and takes on original designs and custom or boutique creations in the amp market. Also some original designs that don't exist in the real world, but have some unique qualities. I'm not sure you'd get much more out of a model for a Twin or Deluxe Reverb or a Marshall or Orange as those have been done for years and there are no real surprises in the way they're constructed.

Not really. It's just about the particular tone I want out of the Strat in this case. I wouldn't use it if I wanted that spanky feel, but in cases like this where I'm looking for a more traditional crunch like Texas blues, it gives it a meatier sound. The same holds true even on the Tele though I usually want spankiness if I'm using the Tele.

The thing I like the best about the Tube Screamer (as well as some of the other pedals like the Klon or Minotaur), is I can use it without a whole lot of gain or volume and use the tone control to get a nicely formed solo sound without having to add much, if any, volume to the overall sound and still stand out in the mix. It makes for a much more professional sound than a solo suddenly jumping way up in volume.

My experience with the Lonestar was using a Strat Elite and is pretty much the same as ansdenj. The mids are pretty good as is but I had to dial back the bass quite a bit. I wanted a relatively clean string sound with just a bit of bite so I ended up dialing back Drive 1 to 3.6 and Drive 2 to 4.8 and then came up a little bit on the channel volume. I found the highs were just a bit too harsh so I dialed back the presence quite a bit and that fixed it. The mids stayed pretty much centered in the 5.0 area and the Treble is up around 7 or so. The only other accommodation I made for the Strat is the same as I always do with the Strat and I dial back the 4Khz area about -2.0db using the Parametric EQ to reduce the Strat twang. No low cut, but I used a high cut up around 7.5Khz on the Parametric EQ. Basically this ended up with a nice tight clean but slightly crunchy sound with a lot of tight, dry punch on power chords and some nice clean bite on arpeggio picking. Reminds me a lot of some of SRV's stuff as well as some of the older Doobie Bros sounds.

I just upgraded my performance Helix since I didn't want to do it prior to the weekend. And I have to say I totally agree on the Lonestar as a go to medium crunch monster. I haven't had time to play with it too much but I dropped it into one of my Litigator based presets and that thing came ALIVE. Nothing against the Litigator but the Lonestar has this very dry crunchy feel and I can really have some precise control over how my crunch I want. Very professional studio sound going through a Celestion Redback IR with a mix of an R121 and MD421. Good job L6!!

I hate to tell you guys this, but I've been retired since 2001 and although you might think you get all the time in the world to play with your toys at that point, it's almost the exact opposite. My daughter-in-law says I'm the busiest retired person she knows. Yeah, I get to spend maybe a couple of hours a day with my Helix, but life somehow fills up the time with grandkids and other life and family commitments. When I was young play time was really "PLAY" time. Now when I get on the Helix it's focused on getting things set up and preparing for the upcoming weekend so it's not exactly "PLAY" time. But I have to say I feel absolutely blessed to have lived long enough to realize all my dreams as a guitar player and have access to such extraordinary equipment!!!

But you would still encounter the pause as part of loading a new preset, so it's not really seamless as if it were a snapshot in the original patch. At a minimum it would be the same as switching to a new patch, so you would get the same effect as having the snapshot by itself in it's own separate preset. You'd be better off just doing that.

Yeah...the loser of the bet had to join a band where he could actually get paid and make money... :lol: