Jump to content

cruisinon2

Members
  • Content Count

    7,843
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    222

Everything posted by cruisinon2

  1. The only cure for headphones that you don't like, is a new pair. I didn't particularly care for how the 240's sounded with Helix either, and I had used them for years prior... they sounded kinda "brittle", for lack of a better term. I gambled on a pair of AKG K701's, which I much prefer, though I doubt impedance has anything to do with it. The 701's are rated at 62 ohms vs 55 for the 240's, which is hardly a difference worth talking about. The 701's are fully open-back, though (the 240's are only semi-open) and have larger diameter cushions... so unless you're Dumbo, your ears should fit entirely inside, which I find much more comfortable (especially when wearing for long periods) than the 240's, which sit on your ears as opposed to around them. Ultimately, as with any other output method, any pair of cans you buy will add color to a greater or lesser degree, no matter how flat or transparent the brochure claims they are. It's always a gamble... buy from someplace that has a decent return policy so you don't get stuck with something else you don't like.
  2. Of course. That's now the default justification for any and all instances where the rights of the electorate are trod upon, the endless expansion of the surveillance state, etc etc etc. "Pay no attention, there's nothing to see here... this is all about your safety. Now shut up and obey."
  3. I can sum it up in for you: The companies are not concerned with consumers' best interests. The lawyers are not concerned with the consumers' best interests. And the politicians sure as $hit are not concerned with the consumers' best interests. Yet these are the three entities that will argue amongst themselves, grease each other's palms, and ultimately decide how the cookie crumbles for the rest of us serfs...you do the math.
  4. It shouldn't, but unfortunately I think the answer to that is sometimes "yes"... Google the "right to repair" legislation, and you can read for days (and probably become alarmed) about what you can and can't legally do to things that you've paid good money for, and own outright. As far as I'm concerned, if I want to buy 100 Helixes (Helices?) and fill them with maple syrup, I should be able to do exactly that... but that's not necessarily the world we live in.
  5. Not to put too fine a point on it, but if your experience wasn't typical, there would be no reason for anybody to bother experimenting with different pickups, and the gazillion aftermarket options out there wouldn't exist...
  6. Exactly my point. I could care less if one chip has 11 extra phemtobytes (or whatever esoteric units in which one wishes to measure) of DSP. Does it do what I need it to do? Does it sound good? If the answer to those questions is "yes", great. Sold. If not, moving on...
  7. Ok... but a laptop might be called upon to do any one of 10,000 very different tasks, the success or failure of which might really be dependent on genuinely knowing what's under the hood so that you don't find yourself in a "you can't get there from here" scenario...but a modeler either does the one thing it's designed to do, and do it well, or it doesn't. And the assessment of said performance is almost entirely subjective and directly related to an individual's personal experience with these kinds of tools. In the end, I fail to see how a reading a spec sheet beforehand will aid in the above determination one way or the other, for one simple reason: I'm no dummy, but I'm also not tech savvy on a super granular, component level, either... you could almost tell me that Helix's innards consist of a really smart hamster named Lou, who manually implements whatever changes I make in real time on a tiny laptop, and I'd be hard-pressed to disagree. Similarly, you could rattle off the name(s) of the latest and greatest processing chips, and it wouldn't mean any more or less to me than if you called them Fred and Ethel... and I know I'm not alone in this regard. So it's not hard to understand why they don't bother to publish the majority of those specs...Joe Average neither knows nor cares, and for the minority who do, some are bound to whine loudly and publicly (just like Captain Video, above) about anything they've judged to be substandard. So if you're Line 6, what's the upside? The only question I need answered is "will 'Device X' serve my needs, or not?"... and I can't get that from a spec sheet. There's exactly one way to find out. Just my 2 cents.
  8. I was thinking of upgrading my kidneys... how big should I go? ;)
  9. Yeah, I get that... however, it's a safe bet that the overwhelming majority of users own just one Helix product. And even for those who do have more than one, it seems rather cumbersome to try and edit both simultaneously. So I'll stick with my original assessment...I would not have assumed that such a feature would exist, and it wouldn't surprise me if it never occurred to the guys who wrote the software, either.
  10. Personally, I'd start by posting this question on some sort of engineering forum... just a bunch of half-bright guitar players around here. Don't hold your breath for any local epiphanies...;)
  11. I doubt that's possible... the software simply identifies the type of device(s) that you've connected. I can't imagine why the devs would have allowed that to be edited.
  12. Same reason as everything else in life...$$$. Variax is a niche product that the overwhelming majority of the guitar playing world is either completely unaware of, or not interested in. Now he's got a signature guitar that'll appeal to the other 99.97% of the market.
  13. For the former, the only cost is the time you'll have to spend turning the patch into something you can actually use... and the latter requires you to pay for the privilege of doing exactly the same thing...;) Save yourself both the time and the money, and do it from scratch... in the long run, you'll waste less time and have extra beer money.
  14. Take your shirt off and showcase your chiseled 60 year old abs...;)
  15. Truer words have never been spoken, lol...I don't even remember what Mac OS I'm running now...At this point I only update if forced to by an application that won't run on whatever I have. Grew tired of every update $hitting the bed for everything else I connect to the damn laptop...
  16. Unfortunately posting in here won't help you... nobody who can help you win at this. If you can't open a service ticket, your only option is to try and get someone on the phone
  17. Or just boost using the amp block's 'Chanel volume' parameter... for the 2 or 3 dB boost you'll need for leads, it won't affect your tone.
  18. Don't feel bad...nobody's asking me to play Madison Square Garden, either...;)
  19. Ok... so I'm not exactly sure where we disagree... Volume is critical as you said (global EQ, Fletcher Munson, etc). Speaker choice perhaps less so, but still significant. No patch that I've ever tinkered with at a nice comfy living room volume through a pair of 5" monitors or headphones has ever worked at stage volume without significant adjustments... and that's difficult, if not impossible to do at home and outside a mix. If there something wrong with my ears or approach, so be it... but that's been my experience for years on end. As such, I've kept different set lists for each scenario forever... all of them tweaked in context.
  20. This will always be the case, and the issue is two-fold: 1) You are switching to a different output device(s) 2) You are almost certainly playing at a much higher volume than at home. Patches must be dialed in as you intend to use them, meaning through the same (or at least similar) speakers, and at or close to the same volume. There is no substitute for this... especially the volume, which is an ENORMOUS variable. This cannot be stated emphatically enough.... perception of tone varies drastically with volume. Nothing that you dial in at home with headphones will translate to live use without significant adjustments.
  21. Thank you, thank you... remember folks, the 9:30 show is completely different from the 7:30 show. Please don't forget to tip your servers...;)
  22. Well that's new Well that's new... on the bright side, Line 6 has actually done you an enormous favor. They have saved you countless hours of downloading and auditioning patch after useless patch from the Sewer of Wasted Time that is Customtone...;) On a side note, I'll give 8 to 5 odds that you've purchased a stolen unit...
  23. Let me save you the suspense...you can't "new gear" your way out of this problem.... because the monitors are not the problem. And the headphones are not the problem. The problem is that the monitors are monitors, and the headphones are headphones...you could spend the rest of your life trying to make one behave like the other, and you will fail. Every time. You must adapt to what they are capable of doing, because they're not gonna change...their frequency responses and projection capabilities are what they are. As such, you could invest in a pair of every model of studio monitor on earth, and none of those will sound just like your headphones, either. It's a losing battle. The need to make EQ adjustments from one output to another is inevitable, and that will never change. Learning to use different pieces of gear as they are intended to be used, and accepting the strengths and limitations of each, is the only way to get happy results. Anything else is an unattainable fantasy. Either way, good luck...I have no intention of repeating myself any further. It'll either sink in eventually, or it won't.
  24. A completely different device IS creating the sound. Your chosen output device accounts for a tremendous % of your tone...headphones are not studio monitors, and studio monitors are not a PA. And like it or not, EQ is the way out. The only way. Will you ever achieve 100%, indistinguishable continuity between headphones and other output methods? Probably not... because they are very different, they're used in different ways, and that will never change. If you want to though, you can get damn close... but not until you accept what's happening in the first place. I have successfully navigated around this issue for years, not because I'm omniscient or some kind of savant, but because I learned how... stumbling along the way like everybody else. You can disagree all you want... but your predicament is not new, nor is your reaction to it... the steadfast rejection of what's actually going on is the default response of many. You'll find 1000 other threads around here documenting the exact same sequence of events. The same initial question, the same answers provided, and the same "Nope. Can't be." blanket rejection of said answers... it actually gets rather tiresome. We'd all love a miraculous solution that allows for identical tones to emerge, completely independent of what we're monitoring through, and the volume at which we're listening, but that isn't gonna happen, because it's impossible. Your only option is to make it happen with the appropriate adjustments. It's work. Annoying, time consuming, and at times difficult work... but on the bright side, you only have to do it once. You get used to monitoring with one particular output method, and when you switch to another it's a gut punch, because all of a sudden it sounds nothing like what you're used to hearing, and initially it can be a bit confusing as to why. But that doesn't change the fact that there's precisely one answer, which multiple people have already provided... and it is straightforward: Dial in your sounds through the same output, and at or close to the same volume as you intend to use them. Hit 'save'. Often. Or keep searching for a magic bullet that doesn't exist. No matter how convinced you are that you'll be the guy to find it, you won't. This is all about the physics of sound production of various different devices, how and at what proximity they interact with your ears, and the biology of perception. You can't win a fight with any of those things... you can only learn to work around them, and manipulate your gear so that it produces something useful.
  25. And it's never going to, not without (often significant) adjustments,... that's the whole point.The sooner you accept that, the easier this will get. Different output = different sound. End of story. There is no magic workaround, no push-button solution. Patches must be tailored for their intended use. That "perfect" sound that you dialed in at a nice comfy volume with headphones will not sound the same through studio monitors, or cranked to stage volume through some other FRFR/PA speaker. I keep three set lists... one tweaked for headphones, one for studio monitors, and one for live use. EQ is your friend... and the need to make adjustments based on how you intend to use a given patch will never go away.
×
×
  • Create New...