DunedinDragon

Oh I suspect it's an updated version as most everyone in the industry is responding to the new high wattage ceiling that QSC set when it introduced the version 2 K series speakers. It looks like the things they changed such as the heavier voice coil were just to accommodate the higher wattage and higher heat, but it doesn't appear to functionally add anything other than a higher power rating. All of it is kind of silly given that it only produces about 2 or 3db more in SPL....but that's marketing for you.

It's a pretty sure thing that it sounds exactly like a Alto TS212. Clearlly just rebranded.

As far as placement, it doesn't really matter whether it's on a stand or a desk as long as you follow the placement guidelines that typically are documented in the speaker guide.

I can't be sure, but I strongly suspect that getting rid of extra clutter on someone's desktop is not in the strategic product plans for Line 6. :lol: However, I also strongly suspect there may be a Chinese company that's building something that will address most of these things and you will find it on the shelves of your local Walmart soon.

I'm VERY happy with my Beyerdynamic dt770 Pro 80 ohm headsets at the very reasonable price of around $150 street price. They compare well sound wise to my Yamaha HS7 studio speakers and I can wear them for hours and not be bothered by them. This is my second pair so they've been my headphone of choice for many years now.

The rhythm guitar player in our band uses a Spider V 120 and for what they are, they're pretty decent units. I'm not sure what you mean by oversaturated but his sounds great even on overdriven presets. It does have a full-range speaker cabinet, but it provides no way to by-pass the pre-amp. The Marshall DSL40C has a send/return setup so you could use that to by-pass the pre-amp on the Marshall, but it's not a full-range speaker setup. Here's the reality of what you would be facing going to a Helix. The Spider V, just like most modeling amps in this category, provides a fairly simple, but generally thorough way of managing the signal chain in a preset. Although it follows a lot of the Line 6 conventions as does the Helix, it's pretty rudimentary compared to the kinds of things you can do on the Helix with building a preset, so there would still be a significant learning curve. The interface is very easy, but it's up to you to understand the fundamentals of how to put things together in a way to get the sound you want. Basically the Helix is only as good as the knowledge of the person using it. In some ways I think you would be taking a step backwards if you went to a conventional non full-range setup. The advantage you have on the Spider is that what you're hearing from the cabinet is what your audience will be hearing if you route it through a PA. So since you really don't have a way of exploiting the Spider amp and full-range cabinet, you'd probably need to look at some other avenue like a powered speaker such as an Alto or Yamaha, or QSC, or Line 6 L2 speaker...pr some form of a full range cabinet like the Friedman. That's yet more learning curve to deal with. As most here would testify you can get some amazing things out of the Helix, but you have to recognize and be willing to take on the learning curve that comes with it in order to get the most out of it. That part is quite a leap from the "plug-in-and-play" aspects of the Spider. To be honest that's why I would NEVER recommend something like the Helix to our rhythm guitar player because I KNOW he would never commit to that and would end up being frustrated.

One of the key factors for successful businesses is called "stick to your knitting", which means that successful companies know what they excel at and don't venture out into other areas that are not their expertise. What you're detailing here would be a great consumer electronics piece of gear. But Line 6 isn't a consumer electronics company, it a pro audio performance company. I would hate to see them deviate into the kinds of things you're noting here because it means they would be diluting their attention away from being a leader in the industry at what they do, and focus on area which are not at the core of what their customer base looks to them for.

Just unplug the studio monitors from the focusrite and plug them into either the 1/4" out or XLR out depending on how you have them wired. The speakers should be powered speakers so all should be fine.

Assuming it's real, which it appears to be at this point, it's a pretty logical addition to the current line of products. It's not necessarily something I would be interested in as I have all the effects I need with the Helix, but I would think it's going to be using all the same effects as the Helix and should be compatible, so that would put more emphasis at Line 6 on ramping up their game on the effects side. Meaning, of course, us Helix users will benefit. However I'd hate to be that guy that bought the Helix just to use the effects through their traditional amp setup. This might make me have an aneurism!!!

For home and jamming I would think you should be looking more toward studio monitors, unless you intend to be jamming pretty loud. As far as the difference between FRFR wedges or a powered speaker like a DXR series, that's a personal preference. Although I use DXR12's I'll be the first to admit that they can be a bit daunting to get used to for someone that hasn't dealt too much with PA equipment. You may be better off with something along the lines of a Friedman or CLR as that might feel more familiar to you. As far as recording, I think most of us simply use the Helix as our audio interface. In your case it's perfect timing if your focusrite is about to give out. I actually have two Helix floor units. One is set up in my practice space and connected to my DXR12. The other is connected via USB to my desktop computer which serves as my DAW. I have two Yamaha HS7 studio monitors directly connected to that Helix so I can do my recording as well as any other audio stuff on that computer. It works out super well because I can keep my guitar/bass, keyboard, and studio mic constantly connected and switching between them for recording is as easy as selecting the correct preset. The HS7's pretty beefy at 100 watts, but I don't know how they'd be for jamming as I tend to do that more with my practice setup, but they might be okay unless you really want to wail.

I hope you're playing a 4 hour gig, otherwise it might take you longer to setup and tear down than it does to play your set. :huh:

There really is no confusion, just preferences. The Helix is flexible enough that it can accommodate several different ways of being used. It really all comes down to personal preferences about how you prefer to use it, and for what purpose. In dealing with live performances there are a couple of main choices. FRFR setups, of which there are a couple of different variations. The idea here is to be able to hear your sound in the same way as your audience hears the sound, and it's also the simplest and most straightforward way of using the Helix. My preferred setup which is a popular way to do it, is to have my own personal stage monitor run directly from the Helix off of the 1/4" out, while sending a separate signal direct to the sound board via the XLR out. This allows me to have my own stage source of sound that, in my case, I place behind me in the backline so it's very similar to a traditional backline amp. Some people place them in front of themselves like normal monitors or even use a stereo pair of speakers. A variation on this is to simply go direct to the FOH and use in ear monitors or the traditional monitor system to hear yourself. The difference between using a traditional style powered monitor such as a DXR12, or QSC K12.2 and a cabinet based FRFR setup such as an Atomic CLR or a Friedman is these will give you more of a cabinet feel than a traditional powered monitor. As mentioned before, the advantage to these types of setups is you can take full advantage of all the facilities in the Helix and be confident that what you're hearing on stage is what the audience is hearing, which is NEVER the case with a traditional amp setup once you mic the cabinet. The disadvantage of this setup is it takes a bit more effort to EQ the sound into what you want because the speakers are much more efficient and precise than are traditional cabinets and can sound harsh or boomy without some EQ work to tame the frequencies. The biggest disadvantage to some people is that it will never sound like an "amp in the room" feel you get from a traditional setup. Instead it has more of a polished studio sound that you would hear in a produced recording. Some people can adapt to that, others can't. If you can't then some people turn to using a different type of setup using a traditional amp. There are more or less three different flavors of using a traditional amp setup. The most common is probably simply using the effects return on the amp to bypass the pre-amp and simply use the power amp stage of the amp. A variation on this is to use a dedicated power amp to drive a traditional speaker cabinet. Another style of setup would be to use the 4CM or 4 cable method which allows you to still take advantage of the full capabilities of the traditional amp as well as use the facilities of the Helix. This can be a rather complex setup but there are a number of YouTube videos on the subject that can explain it much better than I can. The advantage to these setups is that you'll get the same feel and sound on stage as you would from a traditional guitar amp setup. In other words, you get the "amp in the room" feel. The disadvantage is there are a number of tradeoffs when it comes to how you design and use your patches. Because you are using a traditional cabinet on stage there's no reason to use the cabinet and mic models in the Helix as that would simply be redundant and would flavor the sound inappropriately. But the problem comes in feeding the signal to the sound board because that signal WILL need to have cabinet and mic models in the patch. In that case you have to ensure all your patches are built with a customization of the signal chain in which the output that goes to the 1/4" has no cabinet or mic models, and the output that goes to the board on the XLR output has those elements, adding a fair amount of complexity to your signal chain of each patch as well as complexity to your physical setup. It's not that either of these type of setups are right or wrong. They are simply based on a person's preferences and each have distinct advantages and disadvantages.

I don't think that's what we're talking about here. It's more like a "Save" or "Restore" to/from an in-memory image of what you're currently working on and that capability already exists in the Helix. That's different than a full file based Export or Restore. More like a COMMIT and ROLLBACK in database parlance. It doesn't affect the stored image on disk but restores an intermediate image in memory of what you last saved. Most of the time you only export .hlx files once the patch has been finished. It doesn't really need to be cross platform since it only applies to a single unit where someone is actively working on a preset.

Actually what you're describing there, if I'm understanding what you're driving at, would actually be simple to implement with the existing architecture. In other words I gather you're saying basically the same functionality as already exists when you roll off of the preset you're working on then roll back to it. It reverts to the last in-memory saved version. That would be simple as it's just a shortcut basically to restore that last in-memory image of the patch.

Oh, there's no doubt it COULD be done. I'm just not sure how far they want to deviate from the traditional architecture of the program. Once you open that door it's sometimes hard to close it. ;)

I think we need more information here to help you. Are your speakers connected directly to the Helix via 1/4" out or XLR out, or are you trying to use speakers connected to the laptop? Normally you would have your Helix connected directly to your speakers and play the backing track on the USB. That way the Helix simply becomes the audio output device for your PC and you control the volume of the backing track with the laptop volume out.

I think you may be confused about HX Edit. Even though it's a standalone program it really has no functionality of it's own other that saving and restoring or general backups. All other functionality is simply a remote control of the functionality contained in the Helix hardware. In order to have an Undo type of functionality, that capability would have to be in the Helix hardware first. I've never missed an undo operation since I generally understand the concept that nothing is permanent until it's saved on the Helix hardware. If I've made a lot of changes and abandon those changes I simply don't save it and select a different preset then come back to the one I was working on and all the old functions will be there as they were before I started. If you really want to be sure you can go back simply save the preset to disk and you can always recall it.

I've been a longtime user of Yamaha studio monitors so I can speak to their accuracy and responsiveness. I've not heard anything about the Genelec though. I did notice they market these speakers as "near field" monitors rather than "far field" monitors typically meaning they should be listened to in close proximity. Not sure if that bears out in practice though. I do know that one of the key aspects that's always been promoted by Yamaha on their HS series speakers is the larger magnets which would generally equate to beefier response. You might want to get ahold of the documentation for each of these speakers (typically available from the manufacturer's website) to see what their recommendations are for placement. As someone mentioned earlier that's a key part of how well these types of speakers can perform. That might be a difference maker for you with limited space.

What kind of speaker/cabinet are you playing through? Some of it could very easily be due to the single coils as the VAST majority of classic rock used Les Pauls.

This is like saying, "I've got a blank canvas, some brushes, and some paints...give me a sure way to create a masterpiece"... ;)

Mackie CR4 speakers are a bit of an odd animal. Generally speaking for recording you want really true flat reference monitors so that what you dial in to them will be pretty close to what gets recorded. These aren't the same as consumer audio speakers, but rather pro audio speakers Mackie CR4 are marketed somewhere between consumer and pro audio speakers as is evidenced by the design of a single amp in one speaker and the other speaker being a passive speaker. This isn't typically the design of the pro audio reference monitor in which each speaker has it's own independent amp and frequency response trims. Something like the Yamaha HS series. You'll pay a bit more, but you'll probably get closer to what you want. The bottom line, in this category of speaker whether it be studio monitor or live FRFR speaker, you generally get what you pay for.

What may be confusing you is Celestion IRs are organized into different folders. There are a set of folders specific to a mic, and within that folder are IRs. that use that mic in different mix configurations, but they are fully formed IRs that you simply import and place into your signal chain. At the top level of the directory you'll see a set of mix IRs that use mixes of mic's such as a 121+57 so you can get a combination of the two mics without having to mix two mic specific IRs.

Yeah...this is just a quick and dirty example. In reality all that matters is the relative signal levels (difference of signal levels between different channels) and I leave the actual levels to the discretion of the sound man as he knows his equipment and what works best on it. I just tend to give him a rough idea of relative signal levels and what works best for our mix.

I think you need to follow these instructions for upgrading to the current firmware and editor. It appears you're following old directions for prior updates. http://line6.com/support/topic/18284-latest-helix-firmware-230%E2%80%94nov-21-2017/

I can't say there's any real consistency in where and how much I'm cutting on highs and lows as it's so dependent upon which guitar is being used, the style of the song, the amp, and particularly on the cab/IR, mic, and mic/cab mixes. I generally prefer to use a parametric EQ toward the end of my signal chain rather than cuts on the IR or cabinets as it tends to have a steeper slope on the cuts. It also provides me with the ability to accentuate or notch out specific frequencies. In some cases I require no high or low cuts. My high cuts (if necessary) range from around 8000 hz up to 12000 hz. Low cuts (if used) in the 130 to 140 hz. But all of that is based on what I'm hearing. I'm going through a Yamaha DXR12 which is in the floor monitor position behind me in a typical backline fashion. The DXR12 is set to the 'Monitor' position on its DSL selector which reduces the bass frequencies pretty significantly. Generally speaking I use mic and cabinet mixes...either dual cab with Helix stock cabs, or mic mixes on Celestion and Ownhammer IR's most commonly using R121 and MD421 mics.