duncann

You're the one who will know best if Helix is a worthwhile purchase for yourself. Others can give their opinions and experiences. Since you're a tweaker, you're likely already somewhat familiar with a lot of the technical aspects of both units. I'd be surprised if, after looking at both units on paper and hearing samples of both, you didn't come to the conclusion that Helix is a superior device to the HD. But again, only you can tell if it's worth it. An interesting thing happened. I received my Helix sometime in October. Before that I used the HD500X. Since I started using Helix, my HD500X wasn't used at all during this time and the character of it's tonal quality (sound and feel) have sufficiently leaked from my memory. I turned the HD500X on the other day to play a little through it and go through some the patches I made for it. I was really shocked at just how much better Helix is in both sound and feel. It's one of those things that jars your attention when the actual realization hits you. Not saying the HD is bad or anything, just that Helix is better; not light years though. Also, since you're a tweaker, don't even bother with the presets. Just make your own. It's more fun. All I've ever done with presets on either the HD or Helix is just quickly scroll through them because of a spout of boredom. I also used the HD500X and use Helix for recording and always use headphones with either device.

The Mission Engineering EP1-L6 works like a charm for wah. It sucks for volume. The onboard pedal works well for volume though. Don't worry about no switch on the Roland pedal. It wouldn't make a difference if it did have one anyway. It just plugs into either EXP2 or EXP3. If you plug it into EXP3, the onboard pedal still can toggle between EXP1 and EXP2. Using Helix Control with the non-rack Helix isn't possible as far as I know.

Here's something already made from phil_m: https://soundcloud.com/phil-miller-20/acoustic-strat?in=phil-miller-20/sets/helix-clips Here's the link where the above link comes from: http://line6.com/support/topic/15873-helix-clips-and-samples/ Note that although this was made using Helix, the bulk of the tone comes from the IR. Very few other blocks were used if I remember right, such as the LA2A compressor (tube comp in the HD), some EQ maybe, and some reverb. I don't think there was an amp. Perhaps if phil_m would like to confirm.

Some of these types of effects tend to need extra headroom because they can be additive to the signal. So if you start to hear a sort of clipped, or unwanted overdriven signal because of an effect in the chain like a chorus, increase this parameter. It allows more breathing room. A much better and more concise explanation is here: http://www.thegearpage.net/board/index.php?threads/line6-helix.1586637/page-681#post-20795301

No. But if you're looking to change the mic while playing you could toggle between two of them using a switch. Or using pedal edit mode, increasing or decreasing the mic parameter from among all the choices is possible.

If you have a way to load an IR (DAW, Torpedo Cab, or Logidy Epsi) instead of using any of the HD built in cabs, you could grab the Taylor IR's floating around the web that produce a pretty convincing acoustic guitar with electric. This would probably get you the closest next to that Boss pedal mentioned above, but I've never actually heard that Boss pedal in action, so maybe the IRs would be even better. Edit: here's a link for the mentioned Taylor IRs - https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1XgNa5vH3j1ZkVoTFJLQ241WTg/view

No it doesn't. It would certainly be a nice feature. There's a link on ideascale for this: http://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Switchless-or-Spring-loaded-Wah-mode-for-Helix/739780-23508 In the meantime you could set up the wah so the pedal controls both the position and mix. With a minimum mix of around 30-40 or so, when the wah is in the heel position, it's essentially off. Doing this changes the wah character slightly though, which you may or may not like. All but one of the wahs have an adjustable Fc Low and Fc High, so you can compensate for the not always 100% mix somewhat with these parameters.

You're probably right. But I don't think they're going to go out of their way to tell people not to fix it themselves, either. I suspect they'd rather not have people send them to a repair place. Anyone can come on these forums to search for the solution. It's easy enough to find. And they might have already put something in place in the manufacturing process.

That's interesting that you bring that up. When I first got Helix I thought the HD was comparable to Helix, as far as sound quality.. This morning, I played through the HD after it sat there since I got Helix, and was completely floored how much different it sounds and feels. I couldn't believe it. So you're absolutely correct, in my view, when you say the HD and Helix are not comparable. I wonder how long the AX8 takes to boot up. That unit would be comparable.

Uh oh. Must improve my reaction time with the stop watch, or else my guitar playing will suffer as a result. The HD500X is much quicker: 6.50 seconds.

21.67 seconds. No. I use it for bass and guitar. And it's really great for bass. But it depends on what you think is overkill and what you want out of your tools you connect your bass to. For someone that only will ever play one single tone ever, I guess that would be overkill.

For the most part, I find it not to be too much of an issue, and when the editor is released it's not going to be an issue at all for people who use the editor. But it's something that could be fine tuned over time. I've noticed some parameters respond differently than others. A good example might be the predelay on a reverb, which doesn't seem to respond as aggressively to quick spins as does say the level of an output. So it would be a matter of finding out which parameters adjust poorly and somehow make Line 6 aware of it. However, poorly for one person might be perfect for another.

I made one a while back, but for the HD500X. Not sure how different the two devices are, but I'll describe the the one I made with the hopes you might be able to duplicate it on the HD400. Red Comp: sustain: 30, level 75 Q Filter: filter: BP, freq: 75, Q: 3, gain: 25, mix: 30 Line 6 Drive: bass: 85, mid: 55, treble: 60, drive: 80, output: 50 Noise gate: decay: 50, threshold 45 Solo 100 Clean: drive: 50, bass: 75, mid: 45, treble: 30, pres: 25, ch vol: 65, e.r.: 0 DEP: master: 40, sag: 35, hum: 50, bias: 50, bias x: 50 1x12 Blue Bell 57 On Axis: low cut: 100, res level: 0, thump: 0, decay: 0 Stereo Delay (optional): left time: 186 ms, right time: 124 ms, left fdbk: 30, right fdbk: 40, mix: 45 Room Reverb: decay: 35, pre delay: 6 ms, tone: 60, mix: 30 The stereo delay is in there because I also had the stereo chorus/delay module. And to simulate the chorus, I used a pitch glide (pitch +0.1, mix 100%) in one of the paths right before the mixer, which is panned 100% left and 100% right. But the HD400 I'm almost certain doesn't have a path split? So that wouldn't work. Anyway, good luck.

Wave shapes are really limited with the HD. The only filter with this option is the attack synth: square, pwm, or ramp. Forget about any sort of ADSR envelopes in the HD. Doesn't have that. About the only thing you can do is sit down and experiment with the HD's plentiful selection of filters, and mods.

Tagmusenmagnus1 is on the right track. Also, try the new tremolo/autopan block, with a square wave shape (other waveshapes create interesting things too). Put a bunch of them in series (don't have to waste a path split then), or use a bunch in series and parallel and mess with the speed (Hz or tempo) and dutycycle of each block. This can create some goofy patterns.

Lol. Rancid. I use the same stuff on the knife edges of my edge tremolo. It's specifically the original, "unflavoured". When I did this, I put it on the surfaces that contact each other that are parallel to the big allen-bolt. Anything that spills, or squishes out from this, just wipe away, so it minimizes any globs just sitting there out in the open that only collects dust.

That's a shame they're telling people to do this. It's a complete waste of time and money.

Yea that effect is missing in Helix. After listening to the video in the link cruisinon02 posted, a couple of other effects could be useful: obi-wah or seeker or both (both missing from Helix but in the HD), the new auto-panner, and possibly the mystery filter. But without some sort of pattern maker, I don't see how this can be done on Helix.

My guess is they didn't intend anything for this. If they did, it would have been lubricated in the first place. After using chapstick on mine some time ago, and after considerable use, it's still working beautifully.

Hmm. I wonder if this is something similar to the pattern tremolo in the HD? Never used that effect for anything but I remember messing with it once. If that's what a slicer would do, not sure how one would go about making something like that on Helix.

Holding the left arrow while powering will do a global reset, which usually fixes this. After, hopefully, it starts working again, you'll need to do a pedal calibration: http://line6.com/support/page/kb/_/pod/pod-hd500-hd500x/pod-hd500xhd500-pedal-calibration-r161 And also make any changes you had before to the global options.

Using a dual pitch, select the stereo one, and make all the settings neutral except for V1Level, V2Level, V1Pan, V2Pan. A dual pitch, when used like this is also good for simulating a double tracked, wide, djenty tone. But your way is better, using a pan and gain block. It's simpler and takes less dsp.

Version 1.0 was released 7/10/13. It could be older stock, but it probably doesn't make any difference if it is. When I bought mine, sometime early 2014, it had either 1.0 or 1.1 on it. Probably 1.1 because I always download the files and keep them and the first one I have is 1.2.

Does anyone actually use any of the factory presets?

This is a good idea. Voted. But I'd be really surprised if this is even considered by Line 6 for the HD series. Never know though. I also like the idea of assigning more useful, generically descriptive names to things like this, rather than on the technology it's modeled from. Isn't this kind of the direction modelers could be going anyway? As modelers become more widespread the need for actual physical amps and cabs becomes smaller. And then might modelers start having more of their own purely virtually designed amps (like some Line 6 creations already), and maybe even cabs?