jester700

IMO not all presets suck. Many are certainly overeffected. But if I want a quick fix of an old Heart sound, for example, I can load up one of the "Barracuda" sounds, turn off the effects, and start tweaking quickly. Even if I end up with something quite different, I'm likely starting in the ballpark. Many of us already have a good idea of what amps & pedals were used for classic sounds like that, but not everyone is. And I don't always know what I'm after when I'm dorking around with gear; sometimes I'm just seeing what sparks a new idea path. And if HX Edit is being used, all this file shuffling is quick & easy. So my greater point is, we all have preferences in guitars, amps, pedals, and uses for Helix. I'm not gonna criticize anyone else's.

True, but you'd only have to do it once. Load up anything you're interested in, and after it rebuilds, re-save it.

For my purposes, the limitations Lawrence lists aren't a big deal. So, for anyone in the same situation as me, here's a ZIP file with all Helix Native factory presets since Native 1.01, which was around Helix Firmware 2.20 or something. I've saved the .hlx setlists, saved out the individual presets in separate folders, and made a Master folder with all the presets. Anything in that folder named the same from version to version has only the latest iteration. I THINK I did this right. I restored factory presets after each Native update. I thought there would be more changes with each version change, but there were usually only a few new presets. Let me know if you catch anything I missed. I can redo it if necessary. Helix_Native_Factory_Presets.zip

It might be easier to do this with Native, assuming factory presets come with each version.

It will, of course, depend on how well you can learn to "computer", but my attitude is that most things that CAN be done on a computer are BETTER done there - though I know others may disagree. I've had a few little hardware based home studio rigs (and still do), but computer DAWs are just a whole other critter - an awesome critter. Mixing, editing, mastering... and in many cases the software is free or cheap. Take your time, don't stress about it, and ENJOY the recording process as you do playing. Then you can decide what's best for you with a clear & open mind.

If you're skittish about the newest 2.80 firmware, I suggest you just update to 2.71. It is a much easier procedure, and it has most of the models and features of 2.80, especially if you use Helix as a standalone unit, not connecting with PC or any other Line6 devices. I assumed you were using some kind of standalone recorder, whether a separate mixing board and tape/hard disk recorder or an all-in-one hardware unit. I have a 24 track hardware device for location recording and Helix works just fine with it.

You don't NEED to update firmware. Helix was pretty stable by 2.3. There have been several new amp models, effects, and features since then, but your will work fine. Maybe look at https://line6.com/software/index.html and see if any of the newer updates has anything you really want. Yes, you can record right into a hardware multitrack using XLR or 1/4" outputs on the Helix.

That's true. This was a difficult update. Though so far it's the only one like this, and hopefully the only one for the rest of helix lifespan. I don't think any of the others have been too hard on us 50-something guitar guys.

THIS is proper thinking. I updated because I don't have a critical need for Helix to be 100%, so I'm willing to play with new features at some risk of issues and maybe help find glitches. Any major software change is like this, from firmware, to apps, to computer OS. Companies try to beta test thoroughly, but until it gets into "the wild" with the entire user base, things will likely be missed. This is simply the reality of software development. To expect different is just not reasonable, IMO. The greater difficulty of this update was PLAINLY spelled out, as were the step by step instructions. There are those having problems despite following instructions, but most that I've seen have gone back, said "oops", done it correctly, and are working. Anyone seeing "major code rewrite" and still opting to update a "critical production system" instead of waiting a bit for the x.1 update is playing with fire. With any brand or software type. Agreed on the 3.0 designation. My guess is the new feature set wasn't enough to name it that way, but as another IT guy, the code rewrite warranted it.

It's been said many times but worth repeating often: NO modeler with an FRFR speaker will feel exactly like a guitar cabinet in a room. Because no FRFR speaker acts like a guitar cabinet. They are built differently, for different purposes, and interact with the room differently. If you want to sound like a miked amp & cab on a recording or through a PA, modern modelers can do this perfectly, IMO. But for the room interaction and feel you're used to from an amp cabinet, you need an amp cabinet. I rarely did the "cranked amp in a room" thing in my formative years, so I've been pretty happy with modeling quality for over a decade. Of course, IMO Helix was still a big improvement for me.

The speed of electricity isn't the same thing as the speed of electron movement. Electricity travels through copper at a significant fraction of the speed of light - around 95%. You could think of electricity as a wave and atoms (and their electrons) as the medium.

+1 to the above. I also have JBLs (LSR308). Those Kalis are getting raves and would be at the top of my list if I were looking today, but I'm used to my JBLs. Do remember that your patches will still sound different through different rigs (even other ones that are meant to be "flat" and "accurate" and at different volumes. But this is a very good way to get a close approximation.

I always thought he often sounded like he was using two single coil pickups in series. It had a bit of strat cluck but with more fullness and power. That's how I approximate his sound, but I'm no purist.

Here's a freeware program that seems to do similar stuff, though it doesn't have the pretty interface or all the features of the Redwirez one. Still, if (like me) you're not sure if making Custom IRs is a good path for you, you might want to try it out. https://github.com/ValdemarOrn/IRWorkshop

The Digitech harmony man (one of the best "intelligent harmonizer" FX ever) has a split input so that you can use one feed for tracking (just clean with maybe a compressor as mentioned earlier) and a second feed for the effected actual signal, which could be post-fuzzbox. I'd think that Helix could allow this kind of routing if it were desired, and it would be the best of all worlds.

It does depend on the sound you're after. For drop tuning, or octaves, I agree. For "twin guitar" parallel thirds using distortion, although you're right that it tracks better if the harmonizer is first in the chain, I think it sounds better if it's post distortion. The IM distortion you get when adding the new voices wrecks the "sweetness" of that sound to my ear. And yeah, my DT Whammy (latest version) drops better than the Helix, It has the same algorithm as the DT Drop.

If you want to do this manually, the parametric will work, and there are a number of free real time analyzer apps that will help you ring out the system. It IS much easier to just put one of those Behringers (or - better IMO - an old Sabine Solo) inline with the mic. Is the feedback coming from the house or a monitor? If it's from a monitor, I'd put a de-feedbacker device on the monitor feed, leaving the signal to the house PA untouched.

I sometimes have my Helix through my stereo system - 8" JBL in-wall speakers and a sub in the corner - very little floor space taken up. Or my 8" 2-way studio monitors. Sounds plenty full, though I do tune to E. Might not be as good on a 7 string or something.

https://medias.audiofanzine.com/files/helixlt-cheatsheet-480092.pdf

I've heard and like the Shures, but never owned them, and have no experience with the others mentioned, but would like to offer another closed options you may want to listen to. I love my NAD HD50 headphones. After years of using Sony MDR7506 and Sennheiser HD250, I consider these a big improvement from those (Sonys are kind of boom/sizzle and Sennheisers are midrangey) In response to the greater discussion, we really can't make any claims about impedance being the main factor in the sound of Helix when cans sound so different in the first place. My 32 ohm NADs sound better IMO than the other two types I own, but are lower impedance. The only way to really know is to take a model that has multiple versions, like a Beyer DT770 (available in 32, 80, and 250 ohm versions) and A/B those. Well, I guess A/B/C them...

I measured these. The FiiO gives me 40ms delay. My generic $15 non-AptX receiver is 130ms! So, definitely an improvement. I'll stop bothering you guys now... ;-)

I got my toys. I think the delay with this combo is likely in the 30-40ms range. It bugs me, so I don't think I'll use this for guitar, but I do think it's in the "YMMV" range. It does work great for its intended use - keeping sync with video. It doesn't bug me there (though you can usually adjust sync in modern media player software anyway).

I'm trying another combination, as I wanted a "Class 1" transmitter capable of further distance, while still being AptX LL. There are many ~$50 ones that look like they're the same build, but this was on a "lightning deal" for $35: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07JZH47B3/ I thought about the Avantree receiver, but figured I'd try a FiiO because of the good reviews of its sound quality: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07JM5ZQPF I'll post how well they work...

I would buy one of those.

Just to update - this spring's Native v. 1.80 is supposed to eliminate the limitation. Add as many blocks as your CPU can handle...