jackhammer111

Anybody ever use of it? How was it?

Is there an amp in the worx that will be symbiotic with helix even with tablet control and all the bells and whistles?

So some manipulation of the amp cab and mic IRs is possible? If so which and how?

Do FRFR heap hones exist, in ear monitors maybe? Looking to work some tones without waking the house up and or just rehearsing.

the cab/mic combinations (IRs) have not a dedicated volume control, their volume is fixed..

therefore you have to use the amp model volume control case by case to find the right setting

I'm thinking I might have to make 2 separate setlists with the same presets one normalized for stidio/direct and one normalized for combo front. Tedious but it should get the job done. Thoughts?

the cab/mic combinations (IRs) have not a dedicated volume control, their volume is fixed..

therefore you have to use the amp model volume control case by case to find the right setting

OK wishful thinking I guess.

Impulse Response. It's a time-domain way to model a transfer function.

Now I get it! Thanks!

the only output mode that uses the L6 cab/mic IRs is the studio/direct, all the other modes use instead live-voiced cabs which are different, not affected by mic

selection, and are not IRs..

 

in studio/direct mode each cab/mic IR has a different volume, and the live-voiced cabs in the other modes have also different volumes

Ok now that I understand IRs, let me ask if there's any way to manipulate the IR volume itself in the edit software?

By the way, things are beginning to make sense.

give a look here, nicely explained:

http://www.thegearpage.net/board/index.php?threads/would-someone-mind-explaining-impulse-responses-to-a-noob.856080/#post-10114638

the only output mode that uses the L6 cab/mic IRs is the studio/direct, all the other modes use instead live-voiced cabs which are different, not affected by mic selection, and are not IRs..

 

in studio/direct mode each cab/mic IR has a different volume, and the live-voiced cabs in the other modes have also different volumes

Ok here's a newbie question. What does IRs stand for?

I don't suppose there's anyway to assign my XLR outputs as studio/direct and simultaneously assign my 1/4 inch outputs as combo front? This would allow me to send my signal to FOH (XLR studio/direct) and use my little combo (1/4 inch combo front) as a monitor on stage.

That wouldn't surprise me at all. The profile and response characteristics of a guitar amp is completely different from that of a FRFR speaker arrangement. I would imagine the difference you're hearing is from the restriction of frequency response in various areas of the frequency range, and the added coloration a guitar amp adds in other frequency areas. This is one of those either/or situations...you gotta choose one or the other. This is why I only use FRFR setups for setup, practice, and gigging.

Well that breaks my heart!

That wouldn't surprise me at all. The profile and response characteristics of a guitar amp is completely different from that of a FRFR speaker arrangement. I would imagine the difference you're hearing is from the restriction of frequency response in various areas of the frequency range, and the added coloration a guitar amp adds in other frequency areas. This is one of those either/or situations...you gotta choose one or the other. This is why I only use FRFR setups for setup, practice, and gigging.

Well that breaks my heart!

Studio EQ wprks at the end of the signal chain to normalize patches. Howevwr for some reason if I change my set up from plugging straight into FOH to plugging into my little tube combo , the patches aren't even anymore. I of course also swith the outputs from studio/direct to combo front.

Thanks again for the info guys. I'm learning a lot about the unit. Looks like moving the mixer to the end of each chain is my best bet so far. Just seems tedious for a problem I imagine is common enough. The only other problem I could foresee is not having enough open blocks in the signal chain to pull it off. I might send in a suggestion for some kind of patch volume. After all if they can add a global EQ the latest firmware update I'm sure they could pull off a patch volume. Or even a normalizer to get them in the ball park of each other.

I tend to rely mainly and more quickly on my ears to find the right balance between the levels of the different tones/patches in order to save them..

 

but as an help it's possible to use also external levels measurements tools: watching the levels in your DAW is quite useless, what instead really works quite good is by using a "loudness meter" which is based on the human hearing loudness perception characterstics..

 

many loudness meters are not free, they are often used for radio broadcasts to make sure every audio source is properly leveled..

 

however I discovered a couple of free loudness meters, one of them is called "Orban Loudness Meter" http://www.orban.com/meter/

 

 

 

it works also standalone..

 

all you have to do is: to select your POD as the audio interface, turn on the meter and play each patch for some seconds and watch the value shown in the black rectangle labeled as "LKFS" at the end of the "short term" bar..

 

I change the patch output volume until I see a value around -16-17 for each patch, and I save

Thanks for the reply. Very useful tool. I was balancing by ear and the meter of my FOH console but the loudness meter looks like an awesome tool to use.

What exactly do you use to change "the patch output volume".

I've tried "ch. Vol" in the amp tab of the edit window but that seems to be for the amps volume alone and seems to affect any fx down the signal chain. Like I mentioned in the previous reply I've also tried adjusting the "MASTER" knob on the floor unit itself but that thing is global.

Personally, I simply modify the "volume" parameter for each amp as this does not color the sound (outside of normal Fletcher-Munson perception changes other others have mentioned). The only effects I run after the amp are delay/reverb, so the amp volume doesn't really modify the characteristics of those effects anyway (unless you're running a tube delay, in which case the drive may be modified by the amount of signal hitting it...)

Thanks for the reply. The tube delay example seems to be my dilemma. Many of the paches I've downloaded are running FX after the amp and ARE indeed affected (outside Fletcher-Munson perception) when I adjust the amp volume. So I'm looking for a way to adjust and save the volume after all fx without resorting to adding a volume pedal at the end of each signal chain as the last block. There must be an easier way to do it.

I tried adjusting patches via the know labelled MASTER on the floor unit itself and subsequently saving the patch but quickly found out that is the GOBAL master output volume for the unit.

Thanks piano guys. I'm looking to play live and I want to avoid any drastic changes in volume in the mix as I change presets from song to song. As it stands some of my presets will rip my head off while others are way too low. BillBee's suggestion could work but could also affect the nature of the tone if the internal (virtual) pod mixer isn't at the end of the signal chain. Which is the case in most of my presets. So I'm looking for the best way edit and save each patch volume at the end of each signal chain. Not sure if this clarifies my question.

Thanks for your input BillBee. Looking at many presets in my edit window I can see that most of them have certain FX after the Mixer in the signal chain. I'm worried that changing the mixer will affect any FX that are down the line. Like a reverb or a delay for exmaples. I know that if these were physical componenents in a real FX rack it would certainly affect the input gains on anything downstream.

What is the best way to normalize all my patches going directly to a P.A.? I'm sure this has been addressed before but I can't seem to find a thread.

My pod hd500x is direct to my mixer into 2 channels panned 100% L/R respectively. My PFL gains are all over the map with each preset. My thought is to edit volume of each preset to normalize manually but which parameter is best to use to globally match output from the pod for each preset without affecting the characteristic of the preset itself?

If you disable the cab the preselected mic becomes disabled because a mic without a cabinet is moot. I tried disabling the cabinet within a preset and although there still appears to be a mic in the edit window, changing mics does absolutely nothing because it is bypassed. Try changing mics when the cabinet is active vs No cabinet. You should see the difference.

Thanks DarrellM5 for your response. I do have more questions if you don't mind. Does the vetta have cabinet, amp and mic modelling, if so how does that work? It seems confusing to me. If the vetta is a physical amp plugged into a physical cabinet with their own physical sound characteristics, it seems counterintuitive that any cab or amp modelling within the vetta would be accurate? Won't the physical and amp color the modelling sound? Or is the modelling within the vetta designed with that in account? What I'm getting at is I want to know if it's worth picking up a vetta or am I better off getting something that has a flat response to allow the pod hd500x to work it's magic?

How does the modelling of the Vetta II compare to that of te hd500x? I'm considering using the hd500x through a Vetta II (with expansion card).