cruisinon2

Too much of a good thing... I neither need nor want to sift through 200 amp models.... and I'm sorry, but there are precious few who would actually "need" a model of every tube amp ever conceived. If you're the most well rounded musician in the world, equally at home playing everything from Django to Dimebag, and you've got sessions booked 8 days a week into the next century... fine. Then you can complain because your favorite is missing... but otherwise, please. If you can't get what you want from this, or any other gear currently on the market, then the hardware is the least of your problems.

I've never even seen this much... nevermind having changes extended into other set lists. I will quite often copy and paste a patch into the adjacent slot, then tweak one of them, save the changes, then A/B back and forth. It would be impossible to do even that much if the default behavior was to save changes in more than one place. That would drive me (and I suspect a whole lot of others) nuts. There'd be a mutiny, lol...

I have separate set lists for headphones, studio monitors, and live use. They all contain basically the same bunch of patches, just slightly tweaked for their intended use. Most, if not all of them have been copied and pasted from one set list, out to the other two... patch names remaining the same from one set list to the next, and I've never seen this kind of behavior. Changes definitely don't propagate across different set lists for me...I can't imagine why this would be considered a "feature"... if you can't keep two patches with the same name isolated, it essentially renders the whole concept of set lists pointless.

Amen.... and why? Because it's juvenile. "If I don't get what I want, I'm taking my toys and going home!". Go ahead...nobody gives a $hit. Buy Fractal. Or don't. Go acoustic instead. Take harp lessons. No one cares... least of all the intended target of the diatribe. Anyone who thinks that L6 will change their strategy because they've gone online and emphaticly declared their intention to jump ship to another device, is gloriously naïve. Internet tantrums accomplish exactly nothing. Whatever is in the pipeline will eventually arrive, whether we like it or not...on their schedule, not ours, and without our pre-approval. Life's rough....

Well Helix may very well have the capability at some point if polyphonic pitch shifting ever gets added, but that has to come first.... as it exists today however, you're not gonna have much luck trying to cobble together any of the existing FX, and get them to do what that pedal does...

lmao...

Well not me...I want half-a$$ed crap by the bucket. But I guess that's just me. So much for my "Mediocre tones, but you'll be drowning in choices!" ad campaign slogan I was gonna submit on Idea Scale...I had a "Meh... but at least there's tons of it" t-shirt all designed too. Oh well, back to the drawing board... ;)

You don't... at least not in the traditional sense. There's no "delete preset" option anywhere. You can overwrite it with something else, or delete all the blocks in the signal chain and then hit "save", but that's it.

Anyone willing to barter? I have two fatted calves, and a goat...;)

+1... though I must admit I will never understand why this topic generates so much discussion. It's like having a debate over the best way to tie shoes. Just do it... assuming that you can emerge from the experience without having lashed your fingers to the tops of your Nikes, then victory is yours! ;) Besides... thanks to biology (and our friends Fletcher and Munson for figuring it all out), the relative volume of one tone to the next is really a matter of perception, not quantifiable absolutes...and perception is forever variable, no matter what the numbers are. Meters might help you get in the ballpark, but until you're actually playing in the mix with other instruments at stage volume, you simply don't know what adjustments might be necessary. Regardless, there is no magic device or protocol that one can apply outside of a mix, that will be foolproof in getting it done, because the circumstances, listening environment, and overall volume (especially the volume) all matter. Sometimes a lot, sometimes a little...and sometimes everything sounds like $hit merely because it's Tuesday, and you're cranky that the boss made you work through lunch. Listening and adjusting accordingly works 100% of the time, however... but there's no way to do a complete end run around the grunt work. Relative levels that were "ideal" at one gig or rehearsal, might not be at the next, for any of 1000 reasons...and that's never gonna change.

Just turn off direct monitoring from your DAW... unless you're applying time based FX from the DAW, there's no compelling reason to have direct monitoring turned on for the channel you're recording to anyway.

Well these threads never get old... strap in gents, here we go again!!! Woo hoo!!!!

IR's are 3rd a third party thing, they aren't supplied with the unit. There are a bunch of companies making them now...Ownhammer, 3 Sigma, Redwirze, etc. Most offer a few that you can try for free, the rest you pay for.

If your first few days with your 500 were anything like mine, then you know what working with modelers is like initially. Helix is no different... it's all trial and error. Much depends on what you're playing through, also... what are you using? PA speakers, studio monitors, headphones? Regardless, you should stay away from the global EQ... that's for fine tuning all your patches to various different acoustic environments. Don't use it to create patches... the are 1000 other ways to tinker with individual tones, and what works for one amp model won't for the next. Put an EQ block in the chain if necessary.

I have no problem with the stock cabs, and still use a number of patches that have them...but for the last few months, for any new patches, I've been gravitating more towards IR's. They're just less work. I don't have to spend nearly as much time futzing with high and low cuts, distance parameters, etc... it's all baked in. Less tweaking, more playing.

Yes, lol... you're already into the HX for $600. Another $600 for the Stomp doesn't make much sense, as you'll have spent more than the cost of the LT... and while we're at it, getting an LT at this point is silly too. You'd be out $1600, at which point you will have out-spent the cost of a full Helix, and you'll have purchased all the same FX twice. If you're gonna make a change now, the only thing that makes financial sense is getting whatever you can for the HX and get a full Helix... unless you can get back more than half of what you paid for the HX, you'll be getting close to $1500 out of pocket even if you get the LT... won't be saving much.

As is always the case, the only ones who actually know ain't talkin' until the press release... happy guessing!

Whatever twirls your beenie...6 of one, half dozen of the other.

Yup... that and I'm lazy...I want a master volume right in front of me at arm's length, not on the floor. ;)

You could use a separate interface to get what you want, but latency may become a problem depending on the unit, and your computer's horsepower. I run Helix into a Focusrite 2i4, which has a feature they call "direct monitoring", but it's actually a blend control of the direct line-in from Helix, and the playback from the DAW. You can use the blend control with the DAW's direct monitoring turned off, or set it to 100% playback, with the DAW's direct monitoring on... I've done it both ways and honestly, I can't tell the difference. The Focusrite stuff is pretty decent...I think they boast something like a 2-3 ms round trip latency. Whatever it is, it's minimal, and only becomes a problem if you try to blend the direct signal with the playback while the DAW's direct monitoring is turned on. That'll give you both signals and an annoying chorus-like effect.

This is it right here, folks. The stomp is not being marketed to the same users as the other devices. It would have made no financial sense to release a 3rd Helix product that's functionally identical to first two, just in a smaller package.... it's essentially saying "here's the exact same thing we've already released twice, please pay us less money for it." Nobody does that...

1.21 gigawatts...;) Sorry, couldn't resist...I have no idea.

Just don't expect to hear the exact same thing you've found in YouTube demos the very second you open the box. It's NOT an amp... modelers behave a bit differently, and you can expect there to be a bit of a learning curve. But the sounds are in there if you put the time in....

Well you're asking a bunch of digital converts if it's a good idea to do what we've all done already, lol...;) Seriously though, you're the only one who knows what your wants/needs are...some guys make the jump to modelers and never look back. Others try it for a while and decide that they can't live without their tube amp(s). Different strokes... there's no "right" answer. Just DON'T go selling off your amps to finance a new rig until you decide what's gonna work for you in the long run....

It would be nice, but no...it doesn't work that way. You will find that some of the same types of amps are modeled from one device to the next, but the modeling algorithms do not remain the same between devices. Nothing is transferable.