Mudloop

Right, there's probably some of those too. My experience with Linux is mostly limited to using it on servers, doing some basic command prompt stuff, so I'm not super in touch with the needs of the Linux crowd :) Either way, I'd say there's plenty of people that could find this useful.

If I understand your question correctly, I think it's a DAW setup problem. You should try disabling monitoring on the recording track in your DAW. Usually it's an "i" or "in" button. That way, you only hear the Helix's signal while recording. In your DAW, you have a choice of what you're recording. You can record the dry signal or the processed signal - or, ideally, both at the same time. That gives you the option to reamp later, either with the Helix (by routing that dry track to the signal chain input), but if you're happy, you can keep the processed signal. Another alternative, and what I've been doing recently, is using Helix Native. I use the Helix for monitoring, but record the dry signal. Then I add a Helix Native plugin, and start with the same preset that I had in my Helix, which sounds the same as recording the processed signal directly. If I'm not 100% happy with how it sounds in the mix, I tweak the preset, or try other ones.

That's cool. I'd say make that guide, if you're up for it. Many current users might not care too much - after all, people who have Native most likely already have a setup that runs it. So you might not get an overwhelming response from the current userbase, but a guide could make Helix Native attractive to Linux users who wouldn't consider using it otherwise.

As far as I know, there's no tone matching capabilities in any of the Helix products. So yes, has to be done by ear - for now at least, but you could always create a suggestion for this on Ideascale.

I believe they open the way they were saved. If you save with snapshot 3, it will open like that.

When I first got native, what I did was this : I recorded a track on two channels simultaneously, one dry and one processed by the Helix Rack. I then added Helix Native on the dry track, with exactly the same preset loaded. I couldn't hear a difference at all. If you're doing AB tests, make sure the source material is the same (I saw someone mention a difference in playing... not sure which method the OP used). Also make sure that you're using the same interface for output to your speakers (whether it's the Helix or a different interface), because the DA conversion has to be the same. I suppose that it's possible that your DAW makes it sound a little different though. I don't know what type of magic DAWs do under the hood, but if for instance the volume of the track that it's sending to native is slightly different, that could impact the sound.

Yeah I did some comparisons as well, I'd say they're identical in sound (at least when using the same input). I'm really happy with the Helix line, but that doesn't mean there aren't some things that could use some improvement :) I personally like using presets (mostly fremen), and making them work for me. I've dialed in some decent tones myself, but it's just more convenient to have solid starting points. Which is why I think the global IR thing needs a solution. I imagine I will buy other sound packs in the future, and they all come with a myriad of IRs, and my library is already full. I'm not using all of them, but keeping track of which ones I use is a hassle.

Yeah it's pretty great, except for two gripes I have with it : No snapshots... yet. This renders a bunch of my presets useless, but I imagine they'll add that soon IR management is a bit of a drag (if you overwrite an IR from one song, you can inadvertently change the way another song sounds) But other than that, it's awesome. I've been using it on keys and strings too, not just guitars. It's an integral part of my sound toolbox now. I tend to use CLA Guitars (without its amp simulation) after Helix Native... I find it fattens up the sound nicely for the mix... nothing that Helix Native can't do by itself, but I like going through a bunch of presets for this purpose, rather than tweaking patches.

I have a Helix too (rack version), and while it' could be annoying there, it's acceptable. In plugin land, it's expected that you can't break one song from within another song... or at least, that's what I've grown to expect. I'm very disorganized, but so far, I've never had to worry about plugins that have this risk. The thing is, I would want them to fix this, but in order to make an ideascale suggestion, I'd need a suggestion for an actual solution, something that doesn't complicate the plugin too much but does the trick... All I can think of is an "IR library lock" button, which basically saves the entire plugin library with the preset, but I'm not sure if that's ideal. At least it would allow us to protect tracks, even though it would still be possible to forget to lock the library.

Works fine. You can drag it as big as you want.

Thanks for checking... I find this a little bit alarming. Imagine your IR library being full, and you want to try out some new ones. So you have no choice but replacing some... And unless you keep notes, you risk changing how existing songs sound. That's a bad thing. They should add some sort of "store IR in patch" option in the plugin. Of course this could make transferring patches to the hardware a little bit trickier, so they would have to put some thought into it :)

Hi, I haven't done much with Helix Native yet, and there's something I'm wondering about. If I change the IRs in my library, is this a global thing? IE if I overwrite an IR, will this change the sound of existing songs when I open them? Seems to me like it would, but on the other hand, the whole idea is that presets are saved in the tracks, so it would be sort of annoying to change the way tracks sound without even touching them directly. Thanks!

I got the vintage and bass sets, configured the IRs, and I was less than impressed... I much prefer the guitar tones in the Fremen packs, and the bass tone I dialed in myself... Could be that I need to play around with it more, or change the tone on my guitar a little for better results. I only tried it in some prerecorded parts with Native, and it didn’t work with what I had, but I’ll dig in a little more.

So I just received my DSP110 speaker. First impressions : It sounds great to me. It will definitely serve it’s purpose for practicing at home and for monitoring while recording. Is it loud enough? Don’t really know yet. I can’t crank it in my home, I went as loud until things in my house started rattling, but can’t push it to its limits here. My instincts say that it will be fine, but I’ll know when we use it at rehearsal. I like that it has EQ built in. Tried it with a Roland VDrums set too, sounds great. So, so far so good! Nothing for the singer yet, that’s one of the next things I’ll have to tackle.

So I bit the bullet and went with that DSP 110. It's relatively cheap, and will probably do the trick. I can always send it back if it doesn't work out. I'll report once I've had a chance to use it, might be useful information for other people with similar needs.