Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


perapera last won the day on October 10 2014

perapera had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

40 Neutral

About perapera

  • Rank
    Just Startin'

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Registered Products

Recent Profile Visitors

422 profile views
  1. hi, I have a question on helix native v 1.8: is the hardware compatibility mode a global or per session or per instance parameter? I hope it's per session and not global, because I have both helix floor and hx stomp (just bought, waiting for it) so I'd like to work in 2 ways in different tracks or if not possible in different sessions at least and I'd like to switch hardware compatibility mode off when mixing too! any help is appreciated
  2. perapera

    TS 1/4 outputs

    yes and in the article you linked above it says they have 1Mohm impedance this means that returns are in general more appropriate as auxiliary guitar/bass inputs than the aux in !
  3. perapera

    TS 1/4 outputs

    I measured the guitar in pad at -5,5dB the XLR outs at line level have the same level as the jack outs when switched to mic it's -11dB less (which is not so much for a line/mic switch by the way) the aux in, which has a fixed impedance of 10kOhm, compared to the guitar input when also set to 10kohm, has 7,5dB less another interesting fact is that the signal chain: guitar input (no-pad, 1Mohm) > unity gain blank patch > master volume at maximum > Left Jack output "Instrument" is at unity gain (the input level equals the otuput level) (this setup is thought for going to the input of a real amp using the Helix as a "pre-amp pedalboard" so it's at unity as many bypassed effect pedals are)
  4. perapera

    TS 1/4 outputs

    yes, I can confirm that and also sends work the same way (-8dB for instrument) while returns compensate by attenuating by -8dB when in line mode
  5. perapera

    TS 1/4 outputs

    thanks zolko60 for poiting me to the specifications article then I ask myself: why would a company spend money to have on their product 6x TRS jacks and the relative impedance balancing circuit (not a lot of money but money anyway) and write about it only on a forum and let people think they are TS by suggesting to use TS cables in the manual?!? just to not scary people?! or to avoid that people buy TRS cables?! what about just writing "use TS cables to go to unbalanced gear, use TRS cables to go to balanced gear" ? on old products there used to be an "advanced guide" and a "pilot's guide" or something like that ... it was way less insulting than being treated as dumb people sorry for the ranting...
  6. perapera

    TS 1/4 outputs

    actually there is this interesting article by a line 6 moderator that contradicts the manual and says that all outputs on the Helix, including sends, are TRS impedance balanced !
  7. I'd like to add that on the Helix manual at p. 44 under "Tips for Creative Controller Assignment" it says: "To smoothly blend between the tone on parallel paths A and B, select a Split > A/B block and assign the Route To parameter to an expression pedal. By default, a heel-down position means the signal passes fully through Path A. Moving the pedal toward the toe-down position will gradually crossfade into Path B. Alternatively, assign a footswitch to control the Route To parameter, for instantly switching back and forth" "gadually crossfade" is wrong and actually it would be cool if it was a crossfader (but they can not change it in a fw update, because that would ruin many user presets) what they could do is actually add a crossfader parameter in the merge mixer block but of course we could do that by assigning level A and level B, or two gain blocks each on his path, to the same expression pedal with opposite min and max values: this also avoids the problem of sending different levels from the split to gain-related fx and amps on the two paths, because we are controlling the levels after the fx ...the potential problem I see with the use of mixer levels is that -60dB, which is the minimum value for the levels in the mixer block, is not exactly silence (by the way, why didn't they go with -120dB like in the gain block?!?) I say "potential" because the interference of a signal -60dB lower than another totally depends on the kind of sounds at stake i.e.: it coul totally be ok for two clean or two distorted sounds but maybe not for a clean vs a distorted sound
  8. the a/b "route to" parameter does not have a pan law it changes the volume because it's not a crossfader but a balance so it gives you both paths at full volume at the center position and attenuates one of the paths when you move it so it's a good idea to use snapshots, the best controls to mix two cabs, would be merge mixer faders (problem: they only go down to -60dB) or the cabs or IR's levels or a gain block in each path anyway I think a new "split crossfader" block or better a "merge crossfader" parameter! would be a good addon for a new firmware
  9. Yes, I think you got it all wrong, sorry :) You should read it again... I wrote that the attenuation or the boost is happening at the merge block mixer not at the split I wrote that the a/b split "route to" parameter is not very well suited to mix between two different amps (or cabs) on the two paths, but just to switch between them and the acoustic power sum thing applies to... well acoustics, so we're talking real hardware speakers not the virtual speaker cabinets inside of helix
  10. you may find this helpful: cheers Lorenzo
  11. you could find this helpful : cheers Lorenzo
  • Create New...