rd2rk

Yes. You'll probably want to use the "4 cable method" so that you can choose which effects go before the amp and which go in the effects loop of the amp. Guitar>REAL PEDALS>HXFX Input>HXFX OD,Dist, etc>Send Return1 Block>HXFX Send1>Amp Input>Amp FX Send>HXFX Return1>HXFX Delay, Reverb, etc>HX Output>Amp FX Return

If you want specific presets grouped together, use HX Edit to organize them.

de nada

If the updater is v1.15 and it shows the LT at 2.30, that's what you choose to update. As noted, make sure that HX Edit is closed before you open the Updater.

See Page 42 of the manual. Come back if you still have questions, and provide specifics of how you've set it up.

Guitar>CB535, etc>HXFX Input>HXFX OD,Dist, etc>Send/Return(FX Loop)1 Block>HXFX Send1>Amp Input>Amp FX Send>HXFX Return1>HXFX Delay, Reverb, etc>HX Output>Amp FX Return Pay attention to the Input/Output Level settings in Globals (see pages 21/39 in the manual). If your cable runs are long and you detect "Tone Suck", use Buffer Pedals.

Vote for it here: https://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Save-As/924085-23508#idea-tab-comments

copy/paste /rename is it. How the programmers failed to implement "Save As" is a mystery, especially when the actual unit allows for it.

There's always something "in the pipeline". If you follow the Helix thread in the Digital and Modeling forum over on Gearpage, occasionally they'll drop a hint as to (very) approximately when the next update might drop. That's about as good as it gets. The philosophy seems to be that, since there's always going to be people who'll whine and cry when they don't get what they want (many of us have been patiently waiting for our free pony FOREVER), they don't get to start until all of us who DO get what we wanted chime in with our "GREAT JOB L6!" comments.

Yes.

Too much latency even for me!

50% of a latency undetectable by human ears is not what I call bragging rights. If it takes 10,000 years to get to the nearest inhabitable planet, and that can be cut to 5,000 years, that's a 50% improvement, but you're still DOA! ;-)

That's what "YMMV" means. The thread diverged into a latency discussion with the post by christroiani1. I don't care about proving you wrong, nor can you prove that you're right. Bottom line, use whatever OS serves your purpose. Meanwhile, MANY THOUSANDS of people are using VSTs on Windows platforms without latency problems. YMMV!

It sounds like you're saying that our results disagree, therefore you must be right? "My tool's better than your tool, my tool's better than yours..." doesn't fly. Document your claims that the CEntrance tester is defective, or get off it. The comments following the referenced post on facebook seem to support the idea that his test results are the ones that shouldn't be taken seriously. As I demonstrated, results obtained by direct hardware tests differ from results obtained using a DAW, which also differ from one DAW to another. If I could get the Oblique tester to work, it would probably give a whole other set of results. Methinks there's more to this latency thing than anybody really understands. Anybody's apple compared to anybody's orange is always going to be bulllollipop. The only TRUE answer is 42. But seriously, MY ONLY POINT here is that there's no NOTICEABLE (YMMV) latency attributable to use of W10 vs whatever other OS happens to be the particular favorite of any individual poster on this forum. I only took the time to run those tests because YOU ASKED me to.

Upfront, I'll admit that the subtleties of all this escape me. That said, this is how I ran the tests, using the CEntrance Latency Test Utility v3.71 (I couldn't get the Oblique utility to work): HP i7 laptop, 16gb, W10 Focusrite 18i20 (2nd gen) Helix v2.70 Line Input 64/48k RTL Utility settings -6db (differences between -6/-12 negligible). The utility sends various sample sizes on successive tests. On the 18i20 it consistently sent 372-378 samples. On the Helix it was all over the place, below are the min/max samples sent. 18i20 372=7.75ms 378=7.78ms Helix 65=1.35ms 226=4.71ms DAW reporting was interesting.Using empty (no VSTs or tracks) projects for testing. RTL: Reaper 18i20=3.9ms Helix=8.6ms Sonar (Bandlab) 18i20=7.9ms Helix=12.6ms This could be a result of the number of samples sent by the different DAWs. I didn't test using LIVE, but I suspect that the results would be similar. The point of all this being, not really noticeable latency. I'll stick with W10 and all the flexibility it gives me over LINUX.

Gee, I use W10 and have no noticeable latency. AND I use anything I want to use, DAWs, VSTs, whatever. I guess I'm just not as sensitive to latency as some folks. Just lucky I guess!

Thanks to @chuckr for this link: http://www.hermannseib.com/english/savihost.htm It's a simple, low overhead, single VST Host. Primitive, but it works! My secondary (out of studio) email/web PC is an ancient, 4gb Core2 Duo. I usually just run Reaper or Cantabile if I want to play along with EZDrummer (serious noodling), but if I want to play along to YouTube or Spotify, while I check email it sometimes crashes. This works great for that! If you decide to try it, remember to run the renamed executable from a folder with the Helix dll. Also, the ASIO setup is a little strange. You have to set the OUTPUT Port in WAVE DEVICES to your Interface or it won't let you open the ASIO CHANNEL portion.

Wouldn"t solve the perceived problem, but you ALWAYS want to use a good surge supressor/emi filter with any electronics worth more than a coupla bucks!

Some years ago, my sister's computer died. Since they only used a computer for internet/email and I had an older box running Linux sitting around, I donated it. When I tried explaining the difference between Linux and Windows, my brother-in-law wanted to know why the OS was named after the character from Peanuts......

While my personal interests and preferences include neither professional wrestling nor Budweiser, I'll take plug'n'play over Rube Goldberg all day long. Mouth breather? It's not that LINUX is unable to be everything we'd want it to be, but that it's idealistic devotees spend most of their time on the esoteric underpinnings of the OS, and very little time on practical applications. I attribute this, as noted earlier, to the lack of financial incentive built in to the open source model. Idealism is lovely, but Junior wants a Les Paul......

Yes, agreed, these applications are LINUX's strong point. I always wonder why someone as brilliant as Linus Torvalds can't come up with a way to solve the desktop conundrum. While I'm (blissfully) ignorant of the details of Penguin Politics, hopefully now that he's chosen to reenter the fray some progress can be made?

People use MACs (OSX) because they think that they're easier than PCs. People use PCs (Windows) because they ARE easier than LINUX. The reason that LINUX is not now and never will be ready to challenge those markets is that, while the open-source model is idealistically wonderful, the vast majority of people with computer skills want to be PAID for their work! A wise man once said: "The problem with communism is communism. The problem with capitalism is capitalists." I've been revisiting LINUX every few years since the mid 90s. Twenty years later there doesn't seem to be that much progress toward making LINUX consumer friendly. Some people might call that a failed experiment. YMMV.

Whatever your mother tongue is, you get 10 attaboys for effort! You're doing better than I could going the other way! As to your somewhat confusing post....TS312 aside....and remembering that I thought they all sounded like poo......which one did YOU like best? Anyone else have a favorite?

Link to the side by side comparison or opinion piece? Seriously, I hadn't seen one. I'm aware that there's likely no real difference. Elsewhere on this site (and on Gearpage) you can see the painful dialogue between myself and the HR support folks attempting to establish if there was any technical difference. All they could/would state was the lack of mic pres. Point I'm making is that, yes, you're absolutely correct, this is NOT a scientific test. IMO, it's barely even useful. It made everything, including the Kemper, sound like poo. I'm not meaning to get in your face about it, thanks for the link! Just saying, IMHO, YMMV, etc. All I'm stating is that, having owned one for a long time, the video was TOTALLY misleading, not even CLOSE to the way it really sounds.

That video sounds like they had the contour switch on. Did they make ANY attempt to eq for the individual speakers, or did they just set all the heads the same? Who DOESN'T know that an FRFR speaker on the floor sounds different than on a pole? The other three FRFR speakers in the video were actually optimized for guitar - why use the TS312 instead of the HR FRFR112? Better would have been a comparison between the TS312 and equivalent Yamaha, QSC and JBL offerings Actually, based solely on that video, I wouldn't buy ANY of those speakers! Even the guitar cab didn't sound all that great. I really don't get all this to do about the hyped bass. Contour switch OFF, vertical position, off the floor - sounds great! If you want less bass - some amp/cab/mic combinations are going to be bassier than others - put a low cut on the cab, try a different cab/mic, use the eq on the amp. There's LOTS of tools available in the Helix to get the sound you want and, misused, to hose the best preset ever made. I've been using this speaker since it came out, with strats (want ice pick? NO PROBLEM!), LPs, acoustics, synths, e-drums, vocals (with a preamp) and bass, and I ain't got no bassy/muddy problems like some people can't seem to handle. If it makes your life easier, spend 2-5 times as much for something with built-in DSP but, for me, the FRFR112 handles everything I throw at it, AND it's frackin' LOUD!