mikisb

there's nothing else going on.

But again: Where in the circuit of the guitar the buffer is positioned? Between Pickups and potentiometers or after the potentiometers?

Or are you comparing different guitars with different pickups? Each pivkup has its individual resonance frequency and "peak strength" and is influenced individually by pots and cables. This all depends on the inductivity and resistance of the pickup coils, how they are solded together and some other details as magnets, magnet position and magnetic materia (as steel) in the coil.

Sorry that i'm perhaps a little bit slow in understaning, but a foreign language makes things not easier to me ;)

It would be easy if you could pass by and we could measure your guitar and cable, but from Boston to Germany is not this easy.

Hi zooey,

Yes, all this is in my case inspired by Lemme, who sells C-switches, but i mady mine myself.

To not to talk to much, i try it with pictures.

This happens to a Pickup by changing the capacitive load before the first buffer (own measurement), this is a Seymour SH 4 with C-Switch 0-1000 pF and 500 KOhm load.

you will notice that a short cable with 100 pf and a long cable with 1000 pF make a huge difference!!!!!

This happens to a Pickup with different resistive loads (sum of tone + vol + Amp)

The same SH4 with 106, 207 and 328 Ohms load at 569 pf kapacitive load.

So if your buffer is behind two 250 Kohm pots, you have a resistive load of 125 Kohm and a capacitive load from about zero.

I cannot know exactly what you're hearing and what of this you don't like. But perhaps these measurements help you to discover the reason and to find the solution ;)

To say that the SH4 does not have a strong resonance, other pickups have far more (depending on the winding, magnet, construction of the Pickup. A strong resonance can sound very characteristic but it can also also kill your ears.

So it's all about your taste and your gear you're using as with passive pickups, this often changes more than a new pickup. Unfortunally, a lot of people won't believe this - a lucky fact for Seymour, Di Marzio..... :D

After all, it's not rocket science, so a lot of Voodo is needed to make money ;)

Hi zooey,

that's easy ;)

i do it every day, 'cause i use a c-switch in my guitars.

A good good  guitar cable has about 80 pf/meter, a really bad up to 200 pf/meter. Standard is about 110 pf/m.

So you just have to put a capacity corresponding to yout prefered cable leghts in meters multiplied with 110pf and solder it between hot and ground of the buffers input.

Do you have your buffer before or after the volume and tone controls? I suppose it's after the pots because cou can run your guitar passive.

If you have ist after the pots, everything is ok now.

If you have it before the pots you still have to simulate the resistive load of the pots seen by the pickups, in your strat probably 125 KOhms, if you have 2x 250 KOhms pots. But regulary, the buffer ist after the pots so this will not be necessary.

Just in case you don't know: The capacitive load lowers the resonance frequency itself from lets say 8 to 4.5 KHz, where the resistive load lowers the peak wich is reproduced by the resonance frequency, lets say from 10 to 4 dB.

A lower input impedance of the helix does'nt help in this case, because with buffer, yout guitar is'nt depending on this while it it without buffer.

Using the tone pot to lower the resonance frequency kills the peak completly in the middle and gives you a strong peak just at the end of the range at a much to low frequency, as the capacity of the tone is way to high for this purpose. You'll need probably about 550 pF, not 10 nF or more wich would be 20 times more.

The behaviour of tone controls is'nt absolutly not a linear thing.

I think it's a misunderstanding of the function ;)

I don't think that the Helix senses anything you're changing on the guitar. "Auto" means imho that Helix is adjusting his input impedance depending on the first active device after the guitar cable. So if you take a certain Wah pedal, input impedance is set as low as the original was with all consequences on the guitar signal.
So the rest of the idea should'nt work ;)
 

Hi roscoe,

dont worry to much about what i say because i don't know nothing about IRs and maybe what i think to "discover" is wrong.

I tried to create a IR file of my DT25 with a high grade measurement microphone and failed completly. Not to much treble, but to less bass and base. Seems that it is'nt so easy ;)

I use a software for loudspeaker mesaurements (Arta) wich is able to import .wav files and show them as frequency response and as impulse. In case you need it - Arta is freeware with full functionaility except saving and loading files. But a license is'nt expensive and it's a real powerful tool.

Here's a screenshot of one of your IRs:

where it seems that the impulse record does'nt start at zero. Perhaps this might influence the trebles?

As frequency response, this IR looks like this:

this seems about plausible to me, so i don't know where the harshness comes.

Well - my measurement of the DT25 (open back) looses about 40 dB from 5 to 20 KHz what seems quite normal to me for a guitar speaker.

Let's better forget about manufacturers specs about frequency range. Usually they use a +/- 3 dB range - what happens after - who knows ;) Some tell the specs at -10 dB - does'nt help us much further.

I used a measurement microphone wich is ultralinear up to 40 Kz, so my measurement is not colored by a musicians mic. I measured on axis - off axis the drop probably would even be stronger. Your Marshall cab shows a drop of "only" about 17 dB from 5-10 KHz. What microphone in wich angle and distance did you use?

I still have to change my main computer from XP to 7, in the actual situation it's hard for me to measure (Win XP) and work with the Helix wich needs Win 7 or above. When i've done this, i probably can get a bit deeper in IRs.

just checked out your IRs. Thanks again for this work!!!!!!!

What i noticed: Compared to the free IRs of ownhammer, there is more treble in almost every of your models. In my setup it sounds more authentic with activated highcut. at about 4.5-7 KHz. When i look at the impulse response itself it seems, that the start could be a bit to late, so the first sample of the wav file seems not tobe really the first of the impulse. But perhaps my software is misleading me here. Or could it be that you've cut a bit close?

Is'nt it recommemdet to backup the own patches before updating? Not neccessary for the factory presets, as they come back with a reset. But if they are changed to your taste.....?

did'nt try out one of your IRs but i will do it soon. So, in advance: Thanks for the work and sharing the results!!

it's the old trap ;)

The footswitch activates when you press the pedal all the way down, but jou need a bit of pressure/weight. Pushing it with the hands ist to hard (for me). If it does'nt work with the foot, you'll have to eat a bit more.

obviously everything but the master volume. Thats the reason why i asked for a global EQ dedicated to the headphone out.

Thanks!!

How shall i ever master all these great options? I suppose the Helix will be a toy and tool for a long time :)

Even more cool: in the edit mode, i can cnahge the IRs by pressing Value+/Value- and with the pedal.

Thanks - good advice!!

I did this before and it's a great possibility (like all the possibilities i'm actually swimming in), but sometimes a certain sound forces me to see how it reacts on some things - this does'nt work with the looper. But i guess, that's really a luxury problem ;)

just discovered, that i can sweep trough the IRs using the experession pedal, wich is a great tool to tewak a sound without stopping to play.

I just love all these gadgets we have nowadays.

But it's not easy to point a certain IR when 128 IRs are in the range of one footkick. In know that i could limit the way of the pedal, but i want it all :D

So is there a possibility to program a footswitch (or better two) to switch a certain parameter up and down (like the bank/preset switches to the left)? Would still make this more comfortable. I don't think so and it would not be an important feature, but perhaps i may ask? ;)

No updater needed, as the updater updates the helix itself (hardware) and not the app (software). The Hhelix firmware did'nt change and is still at 1.10. Perhaps it was not the greatest idea from line 6 to call both just "helix" ;)

I've downloaded the 1.11 app (Helix1.11.1Installer.exe), installed it (where it replaced the older app) and thats it. No problems at all.

showing ver 1.11 in the "About Helix" info box

 

but the actual Helix Editor screen still shows ver 1.10

 

I assume I'm good?

I think so, because i assume, that 1.11 is the App and 1.10 the firmware of the device

You mean all together? I do'nt think so, just the active one. To show all blocks in Detail in a complex patch probably would require a much bigger screen than must of us own ;)

But another smart feature: In blocks with a lot of parameters as amp+cab, ju can scroll down to reach the cabs parameters. Or you can just click on the cab under the amp ;) Some details are really nice!

If you mean this: Just a little screenshot for mouthwatering ;)

The pictures of the devices are not really big but good enough to recognize what's selected.

Dealers in Germany talk about 02.05.2016. No idea if they can hold the promise and how many days earlier the dealers in USA receive them.

If all three sound good and only are different in smaller details in this point, convenience becomes the most important point to me. Forgetting all routing options and coloured lights, and forgetting the big sharp screen,  just to know what will happen if i touch a footswitch in one of dozens of presets (scribble strips) for me is an huge advantage. I would whish that more devices with changable button functions would have this feature, such as cameras. This really makes live easier.

For the one it was created with...period. That's what a lot of folks don't seem to get. 1:1 continuity across multiple combinations of amp/cab, FRFR rigs, or headphones, using a different guitar than whomever sat down to create a particular preset, is simply impossible. Amp modelers are not Xerox machines.

 

No preset...on any device on earth...is going to sound exactly the same under all possible scenarios, regardless of what final output device happens to be.

 

Every box you plug an amp modeler into will color the tone in some fashion, and to a greater or lesser extent than the next one that you try. You could play the same Helix patch through two different FRFR speakers of the same make and model, with convective serial numbers, and still not end up with identical tones. Close? Probably...but there are no guarantees.

 

There are a multitude of reasons for this...which at this point, could fill a doctoral thesis.

i agree when we discuss about 1 or 2 db at a narrow frequency range. But it should be possible to come close to the original when reproduced with a quality frfr system. Of course there are differences, but just in detail. If not, it's not frfr but just marketing blah ;)

If it would not be like this, a certain sound would not keep it's characteristics played by different sources. I wonder how we would be able to listen Jor Bonamassa in TV (with TV-Speakers!!!) and later recognize his sound in the car and still later at home with a good HiFi chain?

So, if some people 're feeling the distorted sound to have to much treble and try to reduce by hicut and noone's complaining thad the sound seems too dull, it seems like line6 people use dull monitors to create the boxsims. Hard to believe, that they don't know a real frfr system ;)

So my question remains the same.

When I look at the frequency response charts on for instance the Celestion speaker website the frequency range is usually in the neighborhood of 75hz - 5000khz. The rolloff on gutiar speakers on the high end starts much sooner than 14khz, it actually starts at 5khz and rolls off steeply for almost every guitar speaker they make. I use Celestion as a sort of general rule of thumb as they make some of the most used and most musical guitar speakers out there (subject to personal preference of course). I find that by the time you get to 14khz direct through a full range speaker such as an FRFR or PA speaker you can have some real icepick high end going on.

 

http://celestion.com/product/16/G12M_Greenback/

abolutely - see my measurement above.

perhaps i understood something completely wrong:

If an amp and cab sim does not output about the frequency response of the original cab, why then a cab sim?

I can't imagine that people who are genial enough to invent and build a device like the helix are not able to take frequencies out of the simulated/modeled signal wich were'nt in the original signal coming out of the real cab and mic. Where these frequencies come from? And why?

I understand a Cab sim or IR as a kind of filtercurve, so a preshaped EQ.

To follow your argumentation would mean, that the output signal wich comes from the factory presets would be good to send it thru a guitar speaker (wich one?) or whatelse but not thru a frfr system. It's hard to imagine.

In the other direction: For wich output device the factory presets with their cabsims are optimized?

Just not to be misunderstood: The graphs above shown nothing produced by the Helix, they show just the frequency response of a frfr monitor and the speaker wich lives in the DT25.

Just to understand you right: If the Helix with amp and cab sim produces higher frequencies than it should (as the real amps and cabs and mics does'nt produce this frequencies), then  in my understanding the modelled blocks are'nt right. This would be a "bug" in the modelling, as for my understanding, with a cab sim, it should sound from a frfr system like the original. Where i'm wrong?

Perhaps i should try to make a IR from my DT cabinet with a measurement mic. With this IR, a frfr system should sound about like the DT Cabinet (just in tonal sense, not dynamics...). If it does not, there's something wrong.

Of course i could use the global EQ for this, but i would like to preserve ist for other corrections like room correction for a venue.

So I think the issue here is the OP is comparing headphones to a DT25

Absolutly not, sorry for the misunderstanding!

I know that a guitar speaker never is frfr and that for a tone that sounds good to my ears out of a guitar amp, i have to tweak a lot to get a similar sound out of frfr systems wich good monitors and good headphones should provide.

This is a quick and dirty measurement of the DT25s speaker:

where good frfr monitors should show a flat line.

What i was looking for is a haedphone with about the same characterisics of my pretty flat coax monitors:

I know that they are not perfect, but for a measurement of a coax unter 5° angle not too bad.

Why? Because i want to have about the same sound when i play, when i record, what i'm hearing when listening the records and what other people hear when they play this records.

All this without tweaking , because other people with their  speakers have'nt the possibilities to tewak something to change the guitar sound without changing the other instruments on the record too.

I think in this way it works for most records,as they're made for other people with different equipment.

So i know that i need two different sounds, one for the DT and one for the rest. But for all this rest, the sound of the Helix should be about the same without tweaking, if it's headphones, monitors, PA or HiFi ;)

@Ka5par: Thanks for this helpful links!!  And no, you did'nt say to often "flat", as "flat" cannot be said often enough when it comes to sound reproduction and not sound forming ;)

right, because i made the experience, that a good headphone for listening music is'nt always a good headphone for playing just guitar.

So it's difficult to choose one and tests mostly are made under HiFi aspects.

Wonder how they will react is i come with guitar and helix into the (far away) store to test :)

Had the same effect after the update and reimporting patches in some footswitch assingments in patches from Glenn Delaune. Not all, just a few. Glenn told me that on his Helix, everything was fine after update. After i switched my Helix off and on a few times, the assignments were ok again. Who knows, whats going on in the head of this Helix sometime?