mikisb

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.

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?

Well - while searching for headphones wich would sound better with guitar on Helix, i found the Marshall Monitor wich should hae a descending frequency response starting at 8 KHz. Marshall delivers this Headphone with a Felt damping system, wich are in fact felt disks wich can be integrated in the headphones. So i took my AKG Hearo777 wireless headphones and experimented a bit with sheets of 1,5 mm felt. You know what? With two sheets per side, the tonal response of the Hearo 777 is pretty similar to my frfr monitors, this is really sounding great! Thanks to Marshall for this inspiration! Never touught that it could be so much better just with a simple trick. Maybe, i could work for other headphones to, depending on their preference for higher frequencies.

Helpful link, thank you! I know that in the HiFi sector (worse - in the High End sector), there are different opinions about good sound. My aproach is simply a neutral (as far as possible) reproduction, in case of frfr monitors in the near field. I don't saeach a good sound as for a guitar amp, just a reproduction. Good sound should be made by guitar amps and acoustic engineers, not by speakers ;)

sorry i'm not abolutly sure what the helix display told my. But i'm sure that i have the information (5+6) from here: http://line6.com/support/topic/19444-helix-application-v110-now-includes-full-editor/ (6.)

well - i'll try out some other heaphones, even if the old ones where not often used as i had the same problem with pod XT, pod hd and other amps from other brands. Joust tought it would be normal that headphones and guitaramps does'nt match verry good without a specific EQing. Bad, that i still listen about 19 KHz - a bit less would heplfull for electric guitars :rolleyes: Additionally, i will measure the impedances of the old ones. But generally, i'm not so bad in listening as i construct and build (and measure and listen) loudspeakers (HiFi) for about 35 jears. I've already tried at different levels from whisper to ear killing, but the harsh character does'nt change. With a brutal highcut from 6 to 8 KHz it's ok for overdriven/distorted guitar but harms the clean/acoustic tones. By the way - i think there is a reason why we can vote for ideas (or not) and why i asked for your opinion: So that the mayority decides what's most important for the mayority. For some it's the 198th amp model or 5 amps with 6 IRs in the same path, for others a headphone EQ. As said, i never was happy with guitar over headphones, except with the AX2 wich i modded with passive elements as 1st order lowpass in the headphone jack ;)

does old means bad if we talk about speakers or headphones? Really? ;) Do i hear a bit rivalism between different whishes? ;-) What does'nt mean the the headphones i use and wich are quite ok for music in general are the perfect choice just for guitar.

thanks - just voted for :)

a verry old Beyer DT990, a AKG from about 2002 (don't know exactly what model - sounds ok on HiFi but cruel with guitar) wich are both half closed. Plus some different open "walkman"-Headphones/inears, where a older Sony still is the best. Have to look this evening for the exact types.

Hi, 1. "my" udater told me to press switches 5+6 (not 4+5) during reboot and did the reset without any problems. 2. Sorry, no idea 3. Depends on where you import the older bundles ;) In the Helix software, you can choose the setlist where you want to import to, so if you choose 1 or 2, the factory presets will be overwritten for shure.

Hi, i'm happy what comes out of my frfr monitors or my DT25. But what comes out out my (different) headphones lets my ears cry - harsh, bright and noisy. So i wonder if i've just the wrong headphones or if it's a general effect. In the second case, i would wish a EQ like the global EQ but dedicatet to the headphones out. As i switch often between Amp, FRFR and Headphones, this would be more usefull than always using the global WQ for that. What do you think? I added the idea add http://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/EQ-dedicated-to-headphone-out/813724-23508

Yes - it absolutley would!

Works great on my asus Zenbook with Win 7 and FHD resolution. Even if there still are perhaps a few points to work on, for my taste it's allready way easier to use than the HD500 edit witch already was'nt bad and i was lucky to have it. For a beta, it runs really stable and the functionality is still not perfect, but still great. On some parameters, it's sometimes hard to read the words cause the text color is similar to the bars behind the text. Otherwise, the grapical display of the global EQ is something i wished for a long time as i'm used it from HiFi DSPs. If i could have a wish: Even if it's outdated, i would like to run it under the old windows XP as my workstation runs stable here and there are some applications i need wich won't run under 7, 8 or 10. If i could add a second wish ;): When connected by usb with the Helix application, i cannot manipulate on the helix itself, so i have to disconnect. Not a big deal, but as far as i remember, it was different with the HD500 and hd500edit.

Do i feel that a Porsche turbo S has enough power now and for the future? As there are more muscled cars out there i feel "no". On the road - i feel "yes" - at last for my own abilities. In both cases: Use the power wise and you'll allways have more than you need or you can really handle ;) With a car, you can burn more rubber with more horsepower wich does'nt mean that you get faster. I think for a modelling unit on this level it's about the same.

Has anybory an idea about the input capacity of the G10? Just to know witch lenght of cable it simulates/corresponds concering the influnence on the guitars pickups and circuit.

Not so be misunderstood: I don't think that the Helix itself is confusing. I think the inverse, that the Helix offers a huge amount of possibilities with the best usability i can imagine. What tends to confuse me is just the endless amount of possibilities and how i get "my" sound with - perhaps for the reason of my age ;) Could anybody please invent a kind of brian scanner wich is just modelling the sound i have in mind? ;)

I just wonder why a "true guitar speaker" and a corresponding frfr speaker with modelled cab characteristics should be so different on stage if they both have the same efficiency? You can easily (ok, it's not soo easy but you can do it) build a frfr system with a guitar speaker (or a dedicated bass driver) plus a tweeter - just requires a bit more brain and work in the crossover. In this way, the most important difference between both systems will be the angle dissipation, as regulary the tweeter has a far wider spread at higher frequencies than a 12" cone. Seriously - i don't want to have a angle depending sound on stage, not as backline, monitor or for the guests, so i'm happy to minimize this effect with a good frfr. Just for myself, i prefer since about two weeks (since i have the Helix) rather a frfr system as i don't have to tweak patches or globel EQ or whatever when i change between live and recording. So it's a matter of conveience (yes, i'm lazy) and gives me a bit more flexibility, as the live sound is'nt always colored by the characteristics of a certain (guitar) speaker wich is hard to eliminate when you don't have a lot of time.

Hi Mike, do you know the output impedance of the G70? Nearly every active device has a low output impedance compared to passive guitar/bass pickups, so it should be no difference it you choose 1 MOhm or auto.

Thanks folks - as i'm just in my pickup winding phase, it was'nt too difficult to me ;) But i'm happy that you understood what i mean cause my english is'nt really good. If you ask me next week, i've probably forgotten the half of what i learned in the last weeks. A last word when guitars come to active: As zooey said, the input impedance and cable capacity becomes way less important in this case. But the sound changes for the same reasons, as the cable capacity is "lost" and therefore the pickups resonance frequency will rise. This can cause a harsh and shrill sound not everybody likes and wich the first active guitars where known for. To sound active as with the former cable, just add an impedance in the input of the buffer/booster in the guitar with about the same value as the cable had. Just put it from the hot wire to the ground. With 90 pF per Meter cable it's quite ok and the guitar will sound like with cable before but with less cable and impedance influence ;) I think in the wireless systems of line6, they include a input capacitor just to simulate the cable - this works without modelling just with a part for a few cents.

... ....if this pedal has'nt itself 1 MOhm, what's mostly the case, but not always. But yes - that's the point.

not a suggestion for a buy but perhaps helpful: As i wanted to have a frfr for guitar and bass in wedge design AND all controls in front, i created a combo with 15" Neo + 1" with a neutral markbass amp integrated, 22 kg all together. So i have real 300 watts withj a lot of headroom for clean sounds and real 500 watts if i add a second speaker. Should be enough for the most things and is very flexible in usage.

Hi, while most modern guitar amplifires have a 1 MOhm input impedance, this would be a good value as general default. Some effects originally have other (mostly lower) input impedances, what affects the sound if these effects are put in the first place directly after a guitar. So if you set the value to auto, this behaviour is reproduced. But as some may wonder why a effect (delay for exemple) can change the base sound of the instrument as much when its in the first place and not, when its in another place i suppose, line6 had set the default to 1 MOhm. I can't imagine that in "auto", the Helix is adapting the impedance to your guitar as he don't now what guitar it is. It is just reproducing the original device witch is the first after the guitar. What's the influence of the input impedance? Each magnetic pickup is - in the electrical point of view - characterized by a resonance frequency (usually between 1500 and 6000 Hz) and the Q value wich describes how much more output the pickup delivers at the resonance frequency in relation to the average. Resistive loads lower the q factor, so the overwight of the resonance frequency gets smaller. So if the amp hast a smaller value as input impedance, the described peak is more flat, as the load is bigger. The resistive load like input impedance and the combination of volume and tone pots does not or just a little bit affect the frequency itself but just the strength of the peak. The capacitive load, specially from the guitar cable, lowers the frequency itself. With a longer cable, the capacity gets bigger and the resonance frequency lower as with a shorter cable. This can change the character of your guitars sound dramatically - often more then a new/other pickup. My main guitar delivers a resonance requencs of about 2500 Hz with a 2 meter cable. with a 6 m cable it falls down to about 2000 hz wich make a pretty noticable difference in sound if the Q factor is not to small and there is a clear peak. Some pickups in certain environments have a small Q factor and no really peak, so the resistive Load/input impedance is a bit less important. If you have no peak at 3 or no peak at 2 KHz is about the same ;) But cause after the resonance frequency the curve falls down with about 18 dB/oktave, there still is a difference to hear. So between dull and a bit more dull :) Just to makevisible the relation between resistance and capacity and pickup: This is a pickup i wound yesterday and measured. Nearly all pickups measuring in the same way, only the output power, resonance frequency and Q factor are different. The load values, the pickup was mesaured with are writen in the picture