mikisb

i drive two selfmade FRFR active monitors in a stereo setup via AES/EBU on the Helix floor. Still a week ago, everything worked fine. The monitors are powerd each by a Hypex Module PSC 2.400 wich has multiple inputs (analog + digital) wich are autoswitching. Yesterdy i wanted to play (OK - i call in playing) and there was nothing. No sound, no noise - just silence. Did'nt change anything as far as i know. Tried then first to reboot, other cables, changing sides - nothing again. Via Headphone, everything ist ok. Via XLR out, everything is ok. Every output block is set to multi and as said - i changed nothing. The only thing i did the last time was the update to 2.82 but i'm not even sure, if the digital out worked once after the update or not. After a while, i found the digital output configuration in the globals set to S/PDIF instead of AES/EBU. Changing to AES/EBU - and everything was fine. So just in case someone has similar problems - check the global setings ;) - they might have been changed with the update. P.S. Sorry for my bad engish :(

Every speaker model in the Helix includes a microphone model. So running thru a FRFR-Speaker, you always get a simulated miced sound. One way to avoid it: Disabling the Speaker model (with the mic model) and using a guitar speaker. But this way, you loose a lot of flexibility in sound. Second way to avoid it: Using a Line6 powercab (have'nt it, can't judge the quality) Third way to avoid it: disabling the speaker/mic model in the Helix, replacing it by a parametric EQ wich emulates a guitar speakers frequency response and running thru FRFR speakers. The difference of the third option compared to a real guitar cab is, thhat a guitar cab "beams" more - spotting high frequencies far more on axis, while most FRFR speakers (with build in tweeter) spread the sound more even. That's the nature of physics using a big cone for every frequency or a big cone for bass/mid and a smaller tweeter for high frequencies.

Within the last years, i did'nt own a real tube amp except a Line6DT25 (not really a real tube amp because of some modelling stuff included) sold two years ao and replaced by a couple of selfmade FRFR-Powercabs. Problem: As i mostly play just for myself with selfmade guitars, i was a bit afraid to lose the "reference" - forgetting how a real tubeamp sounds and reacts. So - as a reference - back to the roots: In the early 80's, i owned and played an Acoustic G100T 112W with a Elecrtovoice 12L speaker. I played a lot during this time from small gigs to medium open air up to 4000 people, so i still have the sound and feel in my head and on some rare records. A couple of weeks ago - i found one of these old diamonds and bought it for small money. :) I can get a nice sound with it on home level, as the amp uses cascaded gain stages, but at last under these conditions, i can get still better sounds with the Helix and FRFR. Not regarding the huge differences in variability. This was a surprise to me. Next week, i'll get my old guitar back: A Ibanez Artist 300 AV from 1982 in nearly mint condition - better than my old one that i bought new in 1982 after two years of playing. This was a pretty good guitar in it's style and i'm curious how my selfmade paddels compare to this original. When this setup is complete, i will have my old 80's setup to comare it with the actual selfmade stuff. Think this well be an interesting experience after so much years of analog absence.

Did'nt try one of your presets jet as i still have to much undiscovered ones on my Helix. But i like how detailed you describe your patches (what type of pickups, cable length, assignment of expression pedal..........) Leaves the impression "less mass, more class" to me

More than this: my selfmade monitors use Hypex PSC 2.400D Modules each and it works with digital daisy chain too. I think that tHelix always sends both channels thru the digital cable and each speaker picks his part if correctly configured.

Why not: I never was able to turn my old Acoustic G100T tube combo with 1x12" in 50 watt mode full power in this scenario, and we had a loud drummer with a huge drumkit. So one 250 Watt powercab should be able to blow your drummer away twice - why more? Just guitar does'nt need much power to get really loud. I have two selfmade "powercabs" 400 watt each with a 12" coaxial driver. Why? 1. I want to use it for bass too 2. I want to use ist as "party PA" when i need one 3. Just sleep better knowing to have a lot of overhead Actually, i link them digitally to the Helix without any problems, but some people prefer XLR connections for less risk for problems on stage. Maybe they're right.

I think, if the onboard adjustments in input/Mic-Pre/output are'nt enough even not with an additional neutral boost via EQ, there's probably something wrong. Does the mic need phantom power and is it activated?

Sorry if i expressed a bit confusing - it's hard for me to hit the point in english. What i wanted to say: Each cabsim in the Helix and each IR i know are influenced by the mic and the room with/in wich they are created. So the result is'nt comparable to a amp in a room like your JCM. - it's more processed by these parameters. You can minimize these influences by the choice of the mic,, the distance and the early reflections, but you can also skip these influences by replacing the cab model or IR by a parametric EQ wich just stamps the response curve (frequency wise) of a certain guitar speaker on a linear FRFR cab. It's not my idea, i think it's from a guy "Chad Boston". I just tried it and modified it for my needs and it works fine for me if i want to get a "unprocessed" sound like an "amp in the room sound" and come close to a "real amp" standing just besides my FRFR monitor. The frequency response of a guitar speaker differs in everey angle you listen to it. Unfortunally, Helix does'nt offer a choice here and we're nailed to the angle the engeneers at Line6 have choosen. Perhaps that's the reason, why so much people talk 'bout using high cuts? I guess that the sound of the G100T with EV12L directly in front of me pointing at my ears ever was way too harsh to my ears, so i always turned it a bit away from me or placed in on the floor. I even glued some foam in front of the speaker to get rid of that harshness as in these times, i din't know anything 'bout acoustics. But that's the point: in this way, some people in the audioence had a good sound 8my taste), others not. That's the nature of big cones reproducing higher frequencies. Big advantage for tweeter loaded FRFR speakers. Here i can dial in a EQ curve wich corresponds the "sweet spot" of the guitar speaker - thats a matter of taste too. But now i have this sweet spot not only on one point in the room but in a bigger space.

Can't say anything about a JCM800 because i never had one. But after some years of modelling devices, i got my first good tube amp back last week, an 1982 Acoustic G100T - kind of a Boogie MK I/II "clone". I just wanted to have a "true reference" to calibrate my ears. Well - it's fun to play this monster, but i can easily get the same sound and feeling out of the Helix with a good 1x12" FRFR monitor wich was a big surprise to me. I doubt that it is'nt possible to get an authentic "amp in the room sound" with the Helix. It all depends on the Mic Type and position and if this does'nt work for you, you can use a parametric EQ instead of cab sims or IRs - completly without modelled influences of mics and rooms. It works, cause it transfers the tonal characteristics of a guitar speaker on a FRFR-Speaker without all this recording environment. What's a cabsim (on Helix with mic) or a impulse response? Just a frquency response of the speaker + a frequency response of the mic + room influences recorded. Subtract the last two positions and you have just en EQ curve. All you loose is the sharp beam of a guitar speaker, as the upper frequencies are spread wider by a tweeter usually used in a FRFR system. I tkae it as a bonus cause different sound in different angles to the speaker were allways annoying to me. The main difference: I can get the "true tube sound" at bedroom level with the Helix while the Acoustic with it's 12" EV12L blasts away the neighbourhood. And while the Acoustic delivers a few good sounds and no effects but reverb and a 5band EQ, the Helix delivers everything. What brings me to the biggest "but": The huge amount of possibilities makes it more difficult (for me) to dial in a desired tone cause i loose myself in myriads of switches and pots and possible combinations. Not so easy to get an instant great tone. More choice - more pain ;)

funny - i switch between stompbox and snapshots by pushing bank up/down at the same time. In the Setup you can configure if the so selected mode stays until selecting a stompbox or snapshot or if it stays until you repeat the procedure.

Nearly ;) At toutlehautparleur.com (France), the price ist 244.-/pc if you buy two. They're not only suitable for guitar and bass but even für music in general.

Why not? If you like this kind of distortion and cannot get it with the Helix itself, it should work. The price you will pay is in tubes wich are running full power. Therefore, you safe the heating induring :D Did you try tweaking the modelled poweramps to get a similar result without double-amping? (BIAS, X-BIAS.......)

just received my DT770-80 listening some first takes music and Helix demos from the web (Fremen, Glenn Delaune.....) so far so pretty good, even if the headphone amp of mys office computers soundcard probably isn't great. :) Will see how it does on the real machine this evening.

i dig this thread again cause i just ordered a new pair of headphones: The Beyerdynamic DT770pro 80 Ohms. I ordered this because of all the recommendations here (and elsewhere) and because i loved my old HD990 (now broken) for its natural sound (listening music, not guitar) and his comfort for my head/ears. Reading across all the headphone threads, the Beyerdynamic DT770 Pro and the Sennheiser HD600/HD650 seem to be the most called when the target is to get a sound close to good studio monitors. I would like to have cans where i can practice at night with about the same sound and without creating different patches for speakers and headphones. My 7" studio monitors are pretty linear (+/- 1.2 dB on axis 50-20.000 Hz measured )and my 12" power monitors can be adjusted to taste cause they have free programmable DSPs onboard. Now i found some sources for the frequency response of the DT77 Pro. Even if different sources show some small differences, they all show a dip at about 3.500 Hz of about 6 dB and a broad peak at about 8500 Hz + 6 dB. The Sennheiser HD600 seems to be more linear. +/- 6 dB from 200 to 9000 Hz seem not unimportant to me. The last can i used was a old AKG K66 wich sounds awfull producing a lot of fizz (distorted guitar) wich is'nt completly to eliminate by EQs. So yes - i'm afraid of fizz. Unfortually, this cheap K66 is to old to find measurements to compare and to identify the critical frequency range. Regarding the response of the DT770, it does'nt seem really linear to me and i suppose that the peak @ 9000 Hz could add unwanted fizz. Please tell me, that i'm wrong :)

2 Ideas: - overdriving the computers input - poor quality of the audio interfaces output - inferior to the Helix headphone out.

They seem to use a 12" Eminence driver wich is able to bear a coaxial tweeter. The only driver i know ist the Beta12CX wich has a ferrite magnet. But - it's still lighter than many 12" drivers with neodymium magnet suitable as coax base. If the Beta12CX is the perfect base for a speaker priced 1.500 $ (1.600 € in Germany)? So the weight does come more from the baffle. Even a wood baffle can be light, using thin but braced walls of poplar plywood but it seems that an old fashioned heavy design was choosen here. Eminence Beta 12CX + heavy wood enclosure = 1.600 €? No thanks. I'm even not shure if i would like the concept: The 6.5 stereo speakers in the sides start beaming at about 3 KHz so in the front of tha speaker, stereo will be limited to about 5000 Hz with just a few distance between both chanels - probably digitally enhanced, wich is not the same as "real" stereo. What i miss in the spec sheet is at least a frequency response and the loudness of 116 dB (at what frequency) seems a bit weak to me for a 700 watt (what watt???) speaker. The Emi does'nt support so much power. I guess: I'm always a bit sceptical if there are no real technical specs and measurements...but a lot of written words. I think this would not be an alternative to 2 separate 12" poweed Coax speakers. My own speakers have together 22 kg/48.5 pound, 800 watts RMS. I can place them in a right distance for real stereo or as a stack - just as i want. They're able to amplify bass as well as recorded music (just one of them moves more air than on Emi 12CX) - and real stereo if i want. So i prefer a solution with 2 speakers. And for guitar mono, i can travel with one of them with 11 kg/24 pounds, 400 watt.

i don't know the monitors, but using just one with a mono patch should'nt change sound to dullness. Some reviews of the speakers say nothing about dullness or a lack of high frequencies. First i would check the Input. The 1/4" jack of the speaker is designed as balanced input, wich of the Helix outputs do you use? The Helix 1/4" outputs are unbalanced, so it would be better to use a adapter cable 1/4" (Helix) to RCA (speaker) or just a XLR cable. If this point is done i would play around with LF and HF level on the speaker trying to come close to the headphones sound.

What about the sound of the monitors simply playing recorded music? If they even sound dull in this case, i would think about a bad construction or a broken tweeter. Are there any switchable EQ-presets on the monitors? If headphones and monitors have different characteristics and you dial in a patch using one of them, it will not be sound the same as the other one.

i believe that power supplies for AD-converters, better OP amps, caps ... can make a audible difference on HiFi stuff - experienced this after modding a Behringer DCX i used in the old days as digital crossover for my loudspeakers. The DCX seemed to be good in the digital range but rather poor (in HiFi sense) on the analog side. If it make sense for a device as the Helix? - difficult to say. If it's worth 500 bucks? Not without a clear evidence. There's so much low-Fi in guitars, amps and effects - that's part of the system ;)

well - if i try to play about the same phrase with Line6 Badonk (Factory1 12D) and recording it via USB with audacity, the character is pretty similar to your recorded wma file. Both listened with 6" Coax Studio monitors. It's just a bit fizzy but this can be corrected with a high cut at about 6 KHz at the 4x12 Cali. Then i compared both records with my 12" Coax-Monitors (selfmade - so difficult to compare with stock stuff), but the result is the same: No big difference. With my setup, there's a bit more low-mid, but this can be the difference of the guitar/pic/player. I use a selfmade neckthru walnut-maple-wenge with a selfmade sidewinder (output similar SD SH4) humbucker at the bridge -so, again - difficult to compare. To me, both sound not bad so i cannot exactly recognize your problem. What do you mean with low end breakup? I swear i have a lot patches with a lot more fizz without using the Highcut ;) So i'm with Rocco_Crocco: The problem is not in your Helix but in the chain after the Helix. The only thing that seems a bit strange to me in the patch is the agressive noisegate. This makes only sense to me if the Temaah! distortion is activated (standard is off), but otherwise it cuts the tone way to early, so i would couple it with the distortion.

perhaps to keep in mind that a monitor is a bit more than throwing one ot two drivers in a cabinet. Aktive stuff has mostly active crossover/EQ, analog or digital. In the scond case, it's "just" a piece of software but the user cannot change or update it. (one reason for me to build my cabs myself) Small changes in this software can cause big differences in sound with the same drivers in the same baffles. it even can influence "beaming" or dissipation by changing the crossover frequency within the limits of the used drivers. Just to know that - even if it looks the same with the same drivers and the same housing, is can sound very different. So it would for example be possible to offer a preset "guitar speaker" (no frfr) Tweeter off gives the same dissipation/beaming as a conventional 12" guitar speaker. Than a bit EQing to pull the frequency response direction Celestion XX and wow - a powered guitar speaker is only a switch away. Why somebody should offer such a feature in a monitor never aimed to guitarrists? Stupid for Alto, clever for headrush. I could understand when a manufacturer/brand will not communicate such dirty little tricks. Competitors are reading too and in guitarists world, spreading mojo and voodoo seems often more important than technical facts ;)

well - an external looper adds switches accessible at the same time, but most loopers offer less switches then the helix in looper mode. OK, you have to switch between looper mode and other modes wich is'nt ideal. But what we have with the Helix would be better with a bit more time ;) I guess - it's not my priority, but to some other people it could be.

Perhaps a reason for the problem: Most people look at speakers only regarding frequency response, perhaps distortion and dissipation. A simple Honk frequency in this case is easy to eliminate by an parametric EQ, still easier when you have measuring equippment. But there is more behind the curves. Sometimes a honk is just a level/frequency Honk, sometimes, there is not only more level at this frequency but also more time. Even if you eliminate the Honk by EQ, the cone/speaker will continue to swing longer at this frequency than at other frequencies, so it is sending more energy to the room and to your ears. This cannot be eliminated by EQs or other electronics, just by changing the speaker. Sometimes it helps to overcompensate this frequency by EQ, but tis is'nt the same as a linear response with equal decay.

As i just experienced a similar effect: Did you listen before/after at about the same volume? My chain starts sounding fizzy if i turn volume too low. I know that's stupid simple but 'til last week, i did'nt realize this context. Nut sure if it's the Helix itseld at very low volume settings, the AES/EBU out, my poweramps or the speakers. It seems a bit logic to me that a digital output/input, driven at ultra low level, can cause some mess.

Hi Jim, perhaps you should post this question in Thibaults thread. Not sure, if he reads here.