Jump to content

victorcastro1

Members
  • Posts

    55
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by victorcastro1

  1. Tried that, it's the method Matt Schofield uses to dial in his amps. I've addressed this already in this thread, but making fun of anyone proposing a different idea gets a lot more likes than having a conversation, so I understand you'll probably ignore it once more, but, if anyone else is interested... It's just a better way to start. If you're used with the Fuzz Factory is useful to know the value for the input impedance should be 10k if it's first pedal that's actually on in the signal chain. If you set to auto, a lot of people have a compressor in the first spot and it will sound dramatically different because Helix will set the input impedance based on that, which would be 1M, and it would sound a lot brighter. The input impedance is a misunderstood feature, most would never look at it to solve the problem, and would try to tame it using EQ's probably... But it would be quickly solved, or at least close to it, if the person knew the proper value for the input impedance. Does anyone really disagree with this? I don't get it. Why should it be different the deep parameters? Yet again - I'm not saying this is the "best" value, just saying it's arguably a much better starting point. BTW, I have very limited technical knowledge, but I could see the crossover distortion using a tone generator and a Oscilloscope VST when I turned the Bias down :) Way cool.
  2. There are no such issues inside a modeler. In theory there would be a perfect value for the bias with zero crossover distortion, which would be possible in a modeler. Maybe they programmed all the inconsistencies you describe on Helix, I don't know, but I doubt it. The lack of curiosity among most of you really puzzles me, really.
  3. Well, you were the one who said nobody knew the answer and didn't care for it.
  4. The input impedance of a fuzz pedal is close to 10k, , Helix will not always set to that value on its own. I am crazy to think it's a good idea to start at 10k and go from there? No, I'm not saying you have to like it better when it's set to 10k, and just saying that's useful information to have. Yeah, sure, you could tweak it blindly until you got something you liked, but having said information made it a lot easier.
  5. That's interesting, so it would not be crazy to imagine the default values for the deep parameters maybe are not the same as the amps modeled. There is actually a technically optimum value for the bias - if that will sound the best is a whole other thing, that's totally subjective. My point is that I think it's in the user's best interest if the amp (model) came stock with the correct bias.
  6. I'm ok assuming it, I just think it would be good to know for sure. Maybe they are the most active because they will post on a thread even if they, as you said, don't know and don't care for the question being asked. I don't think I have the right to know, but I very much would like to. If you try that, please share.
  7. Cool, I agree with both of you. In the end it doesn't matter where the controls are at. Great... I still want to know. I don't get why you come to a thread asking for information you don't have and don't seem to want and start lecturing me on why I shouldn't want it too. Not really complaining, you are free to post whatever, I know you want to help somehow, but think about it, If you really don't want to know, maybe you should stop reading the thread because maybe, just maybe, someone might have the answer. If in the end you do want to know, stick around, support and maybe learn something you didn't know before.
  8. It's a sober decision to at least start tweaking with the amp "stock". Imagine altering the deep parameters are like "modding" the amp, I don't think it's a good idea to start tweaking there. Sure, I could assume the values correspond to the real amps, I'm just trying here to know for sure. I don't get why that's so hard to understand. Also, can I say I'm just a bit curious? Why not? I can't see any reason they would make it a secret.
  9. My ears are not trustworthy. Somedays I like stuff, next day I hate it. I just want to make it easier for me. Also, can I say I'm just a bit curious? It's cool you guys trust your gut so much, I don't. I just want this information, it seems pretty straight forward.
  10. I want the closest tone possible to the amps that were modeled. Unfortunately I can't know that for myself, that's why I'm asking. I get some like all the parameters in the world, I'm the other way around, they really distract me. Knowing the closest value to the real amps would give me some peace of mind. Thanks. I imagine you're probably right, but without a confirmation there's always a voice in my head "it's not close enough" and it's hard to stop tweaking lol.
  11. What I want is to have less options when setting the amp. Setting the deep parameters to closest match the real amps seems reasonable.
  12. So, as we don't really have access to those controls in the real amps, I'm curious if the default values are the closest possible and, if not, how we should set them to get there. Thanks.
  13. You and tjbassoon are. The issue is very simple. Auto setting should set the input impedance based on the first "active" block. You can read this pretty much word for word on the article by the Eleven Rack's designer and also on the Axe-fx II manual. There's no mention of bypass this, 3PDT that, hardwire, buffered bypass, nothing. I don't understand the need to make something more complicated while adding nothing useful.
  14. The parameter is called "input impedance". Helix and other devices have an digitally controlled analog circuit to mimic the different input impedance values of different devices... But you start your point by talking about an specific kind of bypass switch. Auto setting should be set by the first active block. There, it's simple.
  15. Yes, the terminology problem is that most of your are confusing input impedance and bypass as the same thing. They are not the same. It may not seem hard because you think you understand something you actually don't. Sorry if I sound a little harsh, I get that through text it may sound like it, but I'm just trying to be as straight forward as I can. It's about the input impedance, not bypass. You guys throw around "buffered bypass" like this is what happening right now, and it's not. Understand that with a buffered bypass, when the effect is turned off, the signal goes through a buffer. Usually (and ideally, so it can do it's designed to do) a buffer is a high input impedance effect with a low impedance output signal. Which means that a Fuzz, if it has a "buffered bypass" will have a high input impedance when off, not a low one like it happens with Helix. For me it would be easy to just agree. "True bypass", how you describe it, would solve my problem. "Yay, great!"... But you keep throwing ideas on top of this false idea, and it ends up making things way more confusing than they need to be. Auto setting sets the input impedance based on the first block in the signal chain, it should be the first "active" block in the signal chain. It's this simple.
  16. It's not about bypass. If Helix was doing this, pedals that in reality are true bypass would not impact the input impedance, but they do. It's not about bypass. 1 - Set the impedance based on the first block is useless. It's the same as fixed. Want fixed? Fix it. 2 - Every device has it's own input impedance, not just stomps. I agree it should be an option, but the auto setting still needs to be corrected. 3 - That would add a layer of complexity that would be useless and only make things confusing. If you want to replicate this behavior you suggested, you'd only need to set the EQ's input impedance to match the fuzz's. It's not about bypass.
  17. The input impedance circuit "is" analog. It's been confirmed, it's the same in all the devices mentioned, there's absolutely no question about this. But, it's digitally controlled. The auto setting in Helix sets the input impedance to match the first block in the signal chain, doesn't matter if it's on or off - and that's the problem. Fuzz Face first in the signal chain, auto setting sets the input impedance to match it, but when it gets turned off, nothing changes, Helix keeps the input impedance the same, but it should change to match the next effect that's actually turned on. That's how the Eleven Rack does it, that's how the Axe-fx does it.
  18. There's no "high impedance device". A buffer has a high input impedance, but a low impedance output signal. The high impedance makes so the signal isn't messed with when it comes in, out goes a low impedance "SIGNAL", a low impedance signal isn't as easily affected by long running cables. It's not about bypass. Think the input impedance is the front end of every effect, but this is a crucial part that can't be digitally recreated as of now, it needs to be analog, that's why devices like Helix, Eleven Rack and Axe-fx II has an analog version of it, but controlled digitally so it can change value. What's the problem with Helix? Other devices set the input impedance to match the fist active effect. In the video example, what effectively is happening is that when I have the Fuzz Face first, it does't matter what goes after it, Helix will stick to the same front end. When I turn it off, what's happening is that I have the amp with the front end of a Fuzz Face, that's why it sounds wrong. It's like putting a pig nose on a fish. In the analog world I could build the fish with the pig nose while still making it true bypass. Do you get that? I's "NOT" about bypass.
  19. From the very first post: "A buffer serves the sole purpose of avoiding signal degradation caused by long running cables(...) inside a modeler it doesn't happen, we can think Helix as a kind of paradise where there's no place for Bob Bradshaw, LA Sound Design, Gig Rig, Pete Cornish and a bunch of other companies, whose sole purpose is to make sure your guitar still sounds like your guitar after going through a metric ton of cables and gear." And... It's not about bypass.
  20. It doesn't. As far as I understand, two things can happen when you bypass an effect: the signal is hardwired through, so it's like a cable: or it goes through a buffer to avoid signal loss. There's the input impedance of the actual effect (which is what we get in Helix) and the buffer, which effectively is just another circuit that's processing the signal from the input. The input impedance on Heliix related to the actual effect, the bypass is part is not related. If you read the Strymon manual you'll see they specify the input impedance of the "buffer" when the pedal is bypassed, it has no direct relation with the input impedance of the actual effect. (Technically I guess you could make a true bypass after the buffer, making it so the part of the circuit that is actually responsible for the effect is fed by the signal coming from the buffer, making it so that the input impedance is the same when the effect is turned on or off, but when the pedal is off the buffer is useless in a scenario where signal loss is a nonissue.)
×
×
  • Create New...