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.

I ordered one of these puppies for my gig basket, in case I run into this situation again : https://www.thomann.de/gb/millenium_die_dibox_passiv.htm It's cheap, and not sure if it is any good (reviews seem to say it is), but it's only for situations where the phantom power can't be turned off. So I plug my Helix's line out into this DI, run a mic cable to the mixing desk, but if said mixing desk has phantom power enabled, wouldn't that reach my helix, and now on the line connection... Or would the DI box "eat" that phantom power? It's a passive box, FYI.

Not really... If you were to look up the specs (nutritional contents) of apples and oranges, at least the numbers would be on the same scales :)

Thanks for the responses. I am really confused though... The Alto TX10 has 280W and 116dB. The Kustom KPX12A only has 100W, but 119dB. So it seems to me that the Kustom has higher volume, for less power. Does that mean it's more efficient? I also don't understand how for a guitar amp, 15W can be enough for this purpose (if barely), but for a powered speaker, 100W wouldn't cut it from what I read here. I'm guessing that this is because the powered speakers have a broader frequency range (I know bass amps need higher W than guitar amps), but all this makes it really difficult to shop for a speaker online :) To quote ICP, f'ing magnets, how do they work???

This alone makes Native quite unusable for me. I have a bunch of presets (both bought and self-made) that I like using that use snapshots. If I open them in Native, I can only use one flavour, and the one it opens with is rarely the one I was planning on using. So many of my presets are unusable (or I'd have to resave them all with different versions, but that's just a nightmare). So, in other words, I'm eagerly awaiting this feature!

Hi, I'm looking for an active speaker to use with my Helix. The intended uses are : - Playing at home, and also use for monitoring while recording (useful because my studio monitors are not attached to my Helix) - Rehearsals (loud enough to compete with drums) - Small bar gigs (again, if it's audible with live drums, it should be good) - Monitors for slightly larger gigs Optional use : it would be nice if another instrument could be plugged in directly, mostly for jamming... but this is not essential. I don't care too much about sound quality, I mean it has to sound nice, but I'm on a budget here... Thomann has some nicely priced speakers, I was looking at these : The Box Pro DSP 110 : https://www.thomann.de/gb/the_box_pro_dsp_110.htm I think one of those should do the trick, but if it's not enough, there are some slightly more powerful (and more expensive) versions in that series, using 12 and 15 inch speakers... I was wondering if I could go even lower in price... Like these : https://www.thomann.de/gb/the_box_pro_tp_105_ma.htm Or even these : https://www.thomann.de/gb/the_box_pro_achat_104_a.htm These last two are tiny, but they do get good pretty reviews, and their max SPL (dB) might still be enough for most of my needs? I'm an absolute noob when it comes to volume stuff. Maybe they just have less low-end, but maybe that's good enough for guitars? I could go for the cheapest option for now, as I currently mostly need it for home and rehearsal use, and if it's not powerful enough for using with the Helix at gigs, I could repurpose them for something else later (like, maybe they're good enough for the keyboard player's monitoring needs). I'm open for other suggestions too of course. Edit : I just found this one, which looks interesting despite not having any reviews (yet... I think it's a new product, but Kustom speakers overall seem to get decent reviews on most sites) : https://www.thomann.de/gb/kustom_kpx12a.htm Slightly cheaper than that DSP110, and it has a 12 inch speaker, which is probably beneficial for guitar. I also like the design more, because it fits in a corner and can be placed in a tilted position (like a wedge monitor)... So this looks like a good contender, at least to my noob-eye. Thanks!

Thanks for the responses. Well, I would only consider ignoring it if I didn't have another option. I didn't know the warning was about the sound quality, I thought it had the potential to damage the unit, but that maybe it was very unlikely to happen, and just something they added in the manual to cover their asses. This is why I asked.

Hi, I recently played a gig with the Helix, but the PA was kinda crappy, and only had a global phantom power switch. I remember the Helix manual saying to never use the Helix out with phantom power, and since we needed power for the mics, we ended up connecting the Helix to a combo (in the return) and mic'ing that. Good thing we had the spare combo (and mic), otherwise we would have been screwed. How bad would it be if we actually used phantom power? Isn't this a bit of a shortcoming of the helix, because I would assume that there are plenty of smaller venues with crappy PA that only have a global phantom power switch. Are there any little load boxes that could eat the phantom power, that could be used in situations like this? Or would a better solution be to turn off the board's phantom power, and get a dedicated mic preamp? Or should I just ignore that warning in the Helix manual? (probably not). Thanks!

You're right about one thing, I don't know how easy or hard it would be to crack. I was assuming that once a cracked version is out there, people could just torrent it, follow some instructions and be done with it in minutes, but I don't know if that's actually the case. The crack could be much more complex and beyond most people. I won't argue the wallet jab - maybe I'm dirt poor, maybe I'm not, either way that's no concern of yours, and it doesn't matter to the conversation. My only point was that while I can understand that you want helix to be a long-lasting platform, I think your proposed solutions would do more harm than good. That is all.

I would only be getting Native for the benefit of not having to re-amp when I want to try different tones, and because it would store my patches with my songs. That's what I would be paying for, and that's worth about $100 to me, not much more (since I already have a Helix, things would be different if I didn't). Suggesting that I should want to pay more just for the longevity of the program is like saying I should get another Helix or two, just so they can continue the support longer. I'd rather use my money for other purposes. It's a matter of priorities. The longevity is theirs to worry about, and to do that, they have to make products that people want, at prices that people are willing to pay for them, like any company. Just charging more doesn't always lead to more revenue, that only works for Apple :) I never said piracy doesn't exist (to the contrary), but the idea that it would hurt the Helix platform to the extent that they have to suddenly hit a panic button and rethink their pricing model and/or punish paying customers is something that you made up out of thin air, at least at this point. If you think that they haven't thought all this through and need you to suggest better solutions for them (without any market data to support them) you might be delusional. This isn't their first rodeo. Looks like I might have hit a nerve somehow while expressing my thoughts on your suggestions, if so, that wasn't my intention... It might just be your sense of humour though, hard to tell from text. But either way, no need to call people tight because they don't want to or can't afford to pay more. I'm lucky enough to be in a position where I can buy cool toys now and then, but most people I know can't afford to spend too much on music... And $200 is worth a lot in some parts of the world. As for a better anti-piracy system, I'm a programmer, but I'm not a security expert - I am basing my opinion solely on the fact that I have read that ilok has been cracked, so if that's the case, I think it's no better than having a custom license system. It would get cracked either way... I could be wrong about this though. Just seems like a bit of an old-school approach to me, that does more harm than good.

Who says they won't have a safety net? There's other forms of copy protection, and none of them (dongles included) are 100% effective. Chances are that there will be a pirated version eventually - but that's true for almost all software in existence, and there's still plenty of software companies alive and kicking. Punishing paying customers is a bad way to deal with piracy. Also, I don't think anyone is going to extremes, we're just stating that we disagree with you. And IMO, rightfully so, because your suggestion is that Line6 changes the prices that they previously promised (well, stated), all just to solve an issue that currently only exists in your head :) Personally I also reacted because I like having discussions. It can always lead to me and/or you gaining new insights or understanding different perspectives.