gunpointmetal

If you're playing the exact same thing on each track that's gonna happen. Even if you edit your DI to be "perfectly" in time, when you run two separately recorded tracks through distortion for reamping you're going to get what you're seeing if you use the same amp/cab settings. It really is best to mix with your ears and only use the visuals when you can't identify what doesn't sound right.

Right, I get what you're doing. I'm just not sure how the routing in Logic works, or the function of the IRU, but for my IRs I could send the sweep from one instance of ReaVerb (reaper stock plugin with IR creation functions) and route the output of the track that is on, into the input of another track with my EQ plugin loaded, record the OUTPUT of the EQ plugin track, then import that audio file back into ReaVerb for convolution into an IR. It all happens in the DAW, no need of for external patching. EDIT: does IRU let you export a sweep file instead of doing it in real time?

Is it necessary to send the audio out via Soundflower? Can't you just send the output of the track with the sweep through the input of a second track with the EQ you want and record the output of that track? I've done it in Reaper that way a few times with no issues.

I have no problem getting tight tones with any of the "metal" amps on the Helix. They all have different gain structures, EQ functions, etc. The cab is going to be a big part of the sound, too. If the Mesa model is too dark, change the mic/cab, or try dual cabs. The Revv model can do tight modern metal without a boost, so can the Friedman model. The badonk is a cool amp, for sure, but I prefer the 5150, Revv, Modded 2204, or the Friedman model over it most of the time.

If you set-up 4CM properly with your amp, presets that don't use an FX loop will just go straight to the power amp input of the FX return on the amp and bypass the entire preamp section of the amp.

I can get a pretty solid metal tone out of just the Revv amp model and a noise gate. Dial the bass down a little, set the gain so pinch harmonics hit easy, set the Aggression parameter to 2, pick a cab you like (I really like the ML Soundlab IRs for everything metal), and go to town. That amp model doesn't even really need a boost for modern tones. But the trick for modern metal having that saturated, yet articulate tone is light comp->OD boost with a bass cut (tubescreamer with the tone up)-> high-gain amp with the gain dialed back pretty low, just enough to saturate with the boost engaged->V30 cab with either an SM57 or a combo of a SM57 and a bassier mic.

Things like this are why I make effort to avoid proprietary file formats, connectors, dongles, etc.

I'll be ready for Winter NAMM 2021's "SOON" announcement, lol.

Is 2.9 gonna be the stepping stone to "faster" updates that 2.8 was supposed to be? The staff had mentioned prior to 2.8 that the "core" architecture was going to lead to more/faster updates, which a lot of people read as "we'll get updates an a shorter cycle" and so far, it seems to be pretty standard. I'm not complaining, the thing already does more than I need it to most of the time, but I'm curious.

L6 staff spends less time here than they do on TGP, and they'll just link you to ideascale if you have an idea. Complaining here is literally pointless. @SaschaFranck I'm not welcome at TGP any more either, lol. I told a certain speaker designer with no social skills that he needed to quit being an a$$ to everyone and woke up the next morning permabanned.

No, making a request on IdeaScale is how you get Line 6 to work on stuff. Or go complain on TGP. Complaining here is just shouting at the peanut gallery.

IMO, it sounds like they left them a little more raw on purpose to give the end user more options, whereas most commercial IRs are aiming at Speaker+Mic "realism". Given the abundant high end in the stock cabs, I almost feel like the speaker and the microphone are independent elements and the speakers were "shot" with a very wide-range reference microphone and the microphone sound is added after the fact.

Personally, I think the mic distance/selection stuff IS a fancy IR browser. There are several plugins coming out now that allow you to "move" a mic on a cabinet via IR by having different IRs at different locations, and I wouldn't be surprised if thats similar to how the adjustments on the stock cabinets work. The early reflections parameter is more or less a short, well-defined reverb. All of it combines with a pre-defined EQ depending on the cab/mic model selected and I imagine there's some additional compression or other processing involved. This is all speculation on my part, of course. If there was a cone-edge parameter I'd be more than happy with the stock cabs. A simple distance parameter doesn't get me the sounds I'm after most of the time.

Congratulations, I'm sure there's a general discussion forum around here that would be much more appropriate a venue for all this nonsense. Edit: oh wait, no there isn't, because its a gear forum....

Let's go ahead and lock this thread and start a new one for 2.9...nobody cares about anyone else's philosophical view on anything.