mikisb

did look for this option too and did'nt find. But you can import an empty setlist to the place of the one you want to delete ;)

why not linking two helix? ;) Doubles the dsp power, place in the paths, second pedal. And you can touch the two sreens (even if there's nothing happening) :lol:

The input impedance does'nt make such a huge difference. A low value simply lowers the resonance peak (the amount, not the frequency) of the pickups, wich normally is between 2 and 4 KHz with a gain of 0 to 6 dB. As the Pots in the guitar usually build a load between 250 and 125 KOhms, the influence of the amps input impedance is'nt huge as long you're not going down to 100 Kohms. Choosing a higher value in the helix should'nt make a big difference, as the resistive load is mainly definied by the pots ;) Again: If the speaker/mic models of the Helix would'nt reproduce to much high frequencies, why a lot of people (and even prodfessional patches) feel it necessary to engage the high cut? Unfortually i have no access to my measurements of guitar speakers at work, but why a high cut at 6 KHz makes a big difference in sound where the modelled speaker does'nt output the frequencies above in a audible amount? And again: Of course you can get great sounds out of the helix, but it needs some tweaks wich are'nt necessary in the analog world. (By the way, the high cut is'nt a really sharp tool as it allows to change the corner frequency but not the slope). And because the helix want's to simulate this analog world, why this tweaks? So creating a sound is'nt equal to the analog world and we have to understand this to not to be frustrated. It seems sometimes to me, that the amp/speaker/mic models are designed to be reproduced by a guitar speaker wich does'nt make sense to me. Driving a moddeled cab thru a microphone thru a real cab to make it sound good without tweaks seems ridiculous and make the sound far more sensitive to the speaker/headphone sound. There must be a philosophy of line6 behind this behaviour (as it was similar in the pod family) but i just would like to know wich one?

Hi, if there would be anything broken, i suppose you would'nt hear anything via xlr. So probably there's something changed in the input/output configuration/routing.

made a similar experience with the headphone out and posted it months before. I understand that different headphones may be different in sound as they are vary with every other audio signal. But: I recognize the sound of a Marshall Amp when listening with different headphones, high end loudspeakers or the cheap kitchen radio. For shure with differences, but with the same character. With the helix, the sound of different speakers or headphones is variing far more than from other sources and this makes it difficult to dial a sound in or to use patces other people builded. Perhaps this is the reason why sounds from others often are not satisfying in another environment. In my opinion (i know that this is subjective and worthless), every output of a modelling amp should give s signal of a miced cab (if dialed in), without hiss and noise wich makes it necessary to use additional high-cut, as the original guitar speaker does'nt reproduce these high frequencies. So why it is necessary to reduce high frequencies if they should'nt appear in the signal? This point changes from source to source but seems always to be necessary to me if i don't use guitar speakers. I simply cannot understand why? For my headphones, i helped myself by inserting thin felt sheets (2 sheets per side seems the best with my hps) to reduce hiss that never would come out of a real guitar speaker. So i see two possibilities for this hiss and lifeless flat sound: 1. The modelled speakers have a wider frequency response then the originals. Why??? 2. The models represent speakers miced just on axis in the middle of the high beam of the guitar speaker. A position, nobody wants to listen to when not using a acoustic guitar. Nobody would mike a guitar speaker like this, so what's the reason? Some people turn their amp on stage for some degrees, others use tools as deeflex to avoid thhis high beam (wich is physically not to avoid with a 10" oder 12" speaker), but the helix seem to make a feaure out of it. That's the point why i suggested different microphone angles i ideascale, but for the most users, still more amps seem to be way more important.

i have the same effect from time to time, but i think, people wich never experienced this won't belive it. Seems to me that the helix get's blind to all cabs. If the effect started, it can only be stopped by repowering the helix. Even the latest firmware releases did'nt fix it on my unit but - as said, it appears from time to time, not every day. Still hope this is a software thing and nothing wrong with the hardware.

Hi, i had a similar problem during my first days owning the Helix. Sometimes, the preset sounds where OK (for preset sounds), but sometimes, after changing a patch it seemed like all the cab sims where eliminated from every single patch. Every sound with at least a bit of overdrive or distortion was fizzy and noisy. Sometimes it was OK again after powering the Helix down and up, sometimes a reset did help. Since the last updates (i think it was 2.0) the problem was gone for me and never appeared again. Normaly a certain patch with a certain input signal should shoud give the same output signal on every Helix in the world, but i think that's not always true. Lets hope that it's a software bug and not a hardware issue. So it might be a issue with pad, global EQ, cab parameters, but it might be even this bug i had at the beginning.

+1 :wub:

Still asked this question in the G10 subforum, but without any answer: Is the G10 acting like a simple buffer wich eliminates cable capacity virtually or does id add a capacity so simulate a real cable? This would be important to know how Helic will react. And if G10 simulates a cable, even a fuzz should behave as expected, as far the input impedance of the model is equal to 1 MOhm when "auto" is selected.

well - i don't think that line6 will be able to implement/add "seemless" microphone angles / center distances, as a infinite numbers of IRs would be necessary to do this. I can't imagine that there is enough place in the Helix for it ;) Perhaps we get some day an angle of 25° and 45° off axis with the possibility to blend between 0, 25 and 45. This would'nt be the same as really miking all possible positions, but would give enormous variations of whar we get today. I did'nt often mice a cab but when i did, i never had the idea to do it on axis just in front of the speaker, as most cabs in my opinion does'nt sound the best way there. And this shurely don't sound like we're used in real life if we don't use cabs as headpones ;) So i wonder a little bit if, and in case, why line6 modeled just this mic position?

a few days ago, i posted this point to ideascale here: http://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Helix-Please-add-Microfone-angle-to-cab-parameters/817573-23508 ;)

can't reproduce that with my helix - at least today. The sound is independent (and now pretty good) from the output level. But as there where some strange effects on my Helix too, i think nothing is impossible ;) In fact, the sound of this machine really should'nt depend on the output level. On a master volume ok - in a certain range.

Hi, had a similar issue iwithin the first days, but in my case, all outputs where concerned (instrument, line, headphone). In each overdriven/distorted sound it seemed that the cab sim was disabled. After some restarts and a factory reset, this fizzy, noisy sound was gone, helix changed his character completly. Don't ask me for the reason, but as more than one people complain about hard and noisy distortions, i think there's still ab bug wich appears sometimes after an firmware update. In my case, some resets and restarts did help what makes me think that we talk about a software bug and not a hardware issue.

thanks a lot for your explications. So it seems that it isn't my personal problem but something systematic. This makes me not play better, but it makes me sleep better :)

thanks! I don't think that the Helix looper can be syncronized - in my understanding it's just a loop with what i play, with start and end definded by my foot. How he should know what i want? I wonder how musicians use lopers on stage? Do the human beings adapt to a beat presented by a machine or loop?

it seems that i've not enough talent to use the looper :( At the aux input of the Helix, i use a Digitech Trio wich gives me a drums and bass base. Works fine. Using the looper, i try to add a lick/rythm guitar. Works fine too. But i'm not able to really syncronise both, so after a few takes, it does'nt match anymore. It seems that i'm not able to start and stop the looper exactly at the same count, so the timing difference between both gets bigger each time the loop repeats. I simply cant handle the multitask challenge to play guitar and switch the looper at the same time. Even if there's only 1/19 second difference, it's still 1 second when the loop repeated 10 times. Du you have a hint how to use the looper better? Don't have any experience with.

hmmm - my active Ibanez works good on the guitar input. I even did'nt have to engage the input pad but i guess that the Ibanez electronics don't boost much, it's more a kind of active tone control. I have no idea why the aux input should be better?

humm - there are some effects when driving a speaker really to it's limits: Speaker: - as already said thermal compression and voice coil destruction - distortion is rising too at the top end - don't know if the amount is bif enough to be heard with a overdriven guitar. - on some speakers, distortion is also rising at really low levels - Limits of the suspension just in the moment before the speaker dies ;) - voicecoil damage Amp: - Overdrive of the poweramp (modelled in Helix by master volume) Ears: - psychacoustical effects 1, as the sensitivity vor frequency ranges changes with the level - psychacoustical effects 2, as the feeling of sound pressure adds to what we hear I thing both effects can't be reproduced at lower levels Hope i did'nt forget something?

as far as i know, "speaker breakup" is in general a function of the frequency, not of the level. In their normal working range, speakers behave the same relativly independent of the level. When a cone breakup appears at 115 dB, it usually appears at 90 dB to, cause its usually the frequency where the piston stops to work as a piston and gets into partial vibrations, wich is sen in the frequency response. If you compare this response at 80 dB and at 110 dB, you will hardly note a difference (if the speaker is'nt crap and its maximum level is above the 110 dB.) Thermal compression is another thing and mechanical limits at low frequencies just another thing, and these both are level dependent. But i'm not shure if we really want to hear this. Modelled voicecoil crash or deformation? No thanks :) The easiest way to get it would probably be making IRs not only at different mikrofone angles and distances but at different levels to. So we could easily get hundrets of IRs just for one cab - who will keep the overview and wich device will manage this amount? ;)

All right - as i did'nt find something similar in ideascale, i posted this as a new suggestion here: http://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Helix-Please-add-Microfone-angle-to-cab-parameters/817573-23508

Hi roscoe, thanks for all the research you've made and for sharing the results - your own IR's and your conclusions. I fully agree with all conclusions you made. For my taste, many of 3th party IR's sound better and more authentic than the modelled cabs. But why? The cabs are more convenient for me as i'm able to change some important parameters. If i could change even the mic's angle, it would be great as i think this would make them much more realistic. Using IR's is cool but not convenient for me, as i loose myself in thousands of IR's with less possibilities to modify Remember: A mic (or ear) direct in front of the speaker(0°) is just one of many vectors. It is not the mayority of the sound dissipating into a room, but a minority, as you habe 1 vector at 0° and many vectors at 15° for exemple. So for my taste, the frequency response exactly on axis was always overweightet for my taste. Speakers dissipacion changes a lot with the angle. In average, a angle of 15 to 30° corresponds much more to what we hear in a room than the one angle of 0°. I think this could be the reason why often the cabs sound harsh to me and i have to use the highcut. The highcut should be used to do some fine tuning, but it should not be necessary to make a cab sound about like a real cab with guitar speakers. So i think, adding different angles to the cabs (as parameter as the distande) would probably result in more convenient sound and would'nt destroy all patches still made as the 0° angle would still exist. Changing the cabs completly would do this and we all had to modify all existing patches based on those actual cab models. So i think adding the option of different mic angles could be the best solution for all.

Thanks for your relpies! Meanwhile, scott already answered - everything's fine! :)

Anybody an idea how to get the patches? I followed the link to PayPal and made the transaction, but then, nothing happened. I bet scott explained how it works in one of the videos, but i did'nt see them all yet and sometimes it's hard for me to translate everything. And is there anywhere an overwiew wich patches are sold in wich pack? Thanks Michael

strange - i'm not a hum noise fan, but the device does it for me. Maybe not every piece produces noise in the same way, as the comments at thomann are pretty different regarding noise. My copy makes more noise at home than in the office - perhaps a matter of internal shielding? But even at home in a absolutely quit room it's OK regarding sound and price. On stage, it is'nt worth talking about. Could be an issue when miking and recording but hey - who would drive a helix with a miked frfr monitor for recording? :rolleyes: So I did'nt talk about the best monitor available, but a good compromise between sound power size + weight features price If you know a better one, constructive hints are welcome ;)

i agree, but you did'nt list one more important point when it comes to deep bass: The linear displacement, because surface x displacement = moved air ;) Usually you will not be able to bring a speaker to it's electrical limit at let's say 40 Hz, because the displacement is the limiting factor. At higher frequencies, it becomes less to unimportant and the electrical power handling becomes limiting. The range of displacement ist huge between different speakers with the same size, so the moved air volume it it too. Some 15" move only +/- 1,5 mm, others are able to +/- 15 mm. It's ten times more moved air. Unfortunally i don't know the displacement of the driver. It's invisible from outside - perhaps i find the time to measure it. With the 300 W power and a large displacement, even this one 12" driver could be enough for me. From 100 Hz and above, it certainly will.