victorcastro1
-
Posts
55 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by victorcastro1
-
-
On 3/30/2018 at 2:43 AM, soundog said:
The default values for the deep amp parameters are the closest to the real amps being modeled.
There.
Where did you get the information?-
2
-
-
5 hours ago, phil_m said:
Regarding bias, there really isn't a single value that's optimum, but rather a target range for whatever power tubes it's using. The tolerances of power tubes aren't anything like modern electrical components. They vary a lot even from tubes labeled the same from the same manufacturer. That's why you see tubes sold as "matched pairs". The manufacturer attempts to bin the ones that are performing similarly together. But even then, the bias in an amp can drift. There are some amps where you can't actually adjust the bias apart from modding them.
Basically, tube amps aren't static systems. They're always changing. Now, I guess we could say that whenever they model it, they're kind of creating a model of that amp at the moment when it was modeled, so there are discrete, measurable values for these parameters. As to whether those are truly optimum, who knows? That's why the give you a range to play with...
I mean, I understand the spirit of the question. I just think that it's one of those things that's not worth worrying about.
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.
4 hours ago, cruisinon2 said:Amen... and for a guy who's said more than once that he wants fewer parameters to tweak, he's doing an awfully good job of doing the exact opposite. Leaving things alone is the simplest thing in the world to accomplish.
The lack of curiosity among most of you really puzzles me, really.
-
3 minutes ago, rd2rk said:
Not to mention that you've insulted everybody that's TRIED to help you....
Well, you were the one who said nobody knew the answer and didn't care for it. -
3 hours ago, silverhead said:
Sorry, but Line 6 is not going to 'officially' answer your question here. I understand that you'd like to see a definitive answer from Line 6, and I'm not saying you shouldn't have it. I'm just saying you're not going to get it here. You'd be better off to open a support ticket and ask for that info directly.
Also, as phil_m explained there is no hard-wired 'correct' bias. Every physical amp has its own bias. It's quite reasonable to assume (although you don't seem to want to) that the default DEP parameters for every amp model are those that most accurately reflect the physical amp being modeled. I expect they keep tuning the model until, for instance, a Bias value of 5 along with the other related DEP parameters at a value of 5, or 10 or whatever, makes the amp model sound as close as possible to the physical amp. Am I 100% certain about that? No. But why would they do something different?
I know you think that you can somehow make things 'better' (despite what your ears tell you) if only you knew what the 'technically optimum values' are, but what we are all trying to tell you is that it's a futile chase. Even if you do manage to get some magic values from Line 6, your ears may tell you something different - because your ears and brain are different from anyone else's. Are you then going to stick with the so-called optimum values or go with what sounds better to you? If the latter, why not start with the default values and experiment until you find the values that work best for you, and forget about whether or not they match some hypothetical optimum values?
Again, I'm not trying to say that Line 6 shouldn't give you an answer. But I am saying that you won't hear it here, and it's likely not useful anyway except perhaps to satisfy your obvious curiosity.
Good luck in your ongoing quest.
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.
-
-
On 3/21/2018 at 12:07 PM, phil_m said:
My understanding is that they work with an outside consultant to set the default model values, and from what I can tell, that involves the DEP values. It doesn't look most of them stray that far from 5.0 though. I think it's a relatively safe assumption that 5.0 is the actual value of the amp they modeled. Things like tube bias, though, aren't like a hardwired thing. It's possible that some of the amps in their collection have been biased to values that are slightly different than the factory values. For some vintage amps, "factory values" might not even be a thing.
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.-
1
-
-
22 hours ago, brue58ski said:
I would say if you haven't heard from a Line 6 "official" by now, you won't be. I'm 97.284367493% sure they are the "normal" parameters for that amp.
I'm ok assuming it, I just think it would be good to know for sure.
20 hours ago, rd2rk said:You've now heard from many of the most active members of this forum, who mostly agree that:
1) We don't KNOW/don't much CARE, because
2) We think that the defaults are what L6 considers the norm, and
3) No one from L6 is likely to answer your question on this forum
Here's an idea - maybe you're asking in the wrong place? Why don't you open a support ticket and ASSERT YOUR RIGHT TO KNOW!
I, for one, would LOVE to see how THAT turns out.....
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.
-
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.
-
4 hours ago, cruisinon2 said:
If, by your own admission, you don't know what the "real" amps are supposed to sound like, then the peace of mind you're looking for will remain forever elusive, because you'll never actually know if you've achieved it anyway.
Stop worrying about where any one parameter should be... there is no magic formula with this stuff. When it sounds good to your ears, that's where it "should" be.
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?
On 3/17/2018 at 3:16 PM, rd2rk said:If you're looking for a definitive answer from Line6 about the defaults, forget it, ain't gonna happen.
Why not? I can't see any reason they would make it a secret.
-
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.
-
3 hours ago, FlyingsCool said:
So, unfortunately, if you are looking for a particular tone, and not getting it
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.
3 hours ago, brue58ski said:I don't know the answer... I would definitely approach it as if they are accurate where they're at.
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.
-
1 minute ago, FlyingsCool said:
I'm wondering if the OP meant the deep parameters
It's what's written in the title, isn't it?
-
What I want is to have less options when setting the amp. Setting the deep parameters to closest match the real amps seems reasonable.
-
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.
-
Was this issue fixed in 2.30?
Unfortunately, no.
-
Bump. Had high hopes for the new FW. Will keep pushing it.
-
Or maybe I am, just using different words.
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.
-
We're not discussing impedance and bypass as if they are the same thing. Not at all. You're the only one that seems to be putting this idea out there.
Many pedals use 3PDT...
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.
-
Do I understand correctly that you consider it to be a problem that Helix reads the impedance of the first block, whether it's active or not? Or in my terminology, "bypassed" or not?
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's not that hard.
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.
-
3 scenarios in the "real world", not 2.
1. True bypass: effect is completely switched out of circuit (in other words, acts like it isn't there at all)
2. Buffered bypass: effect is turned on or off after an input/output buffer- can present a constant impedance input or output side. Also good for driving long runs (think Boss/Ibanez pedals etc )
3. Traditional mechanical bypass: input goes into the effect, as well as tapped, only the output is switched between the effect output or the input. The downside of this is that the input is ALWAYS affected by the input impedance of the effect. Most of the classic effects like fuzz face, crybaby wah, all of,the old click switch MXR/DOD effects of the 70s and 80s work like this. Also what I suspect that the Helix is emulating when modeling specific effects.
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.
^^^ This.
So as mentioned many pages ago, the ultimate solution is three enhancements:
- Add a global setting for whether Helix's input impedance should be set by the first ACTIVE block, or the first block in the chain, whether it's active or not
- Add Input Impedance as a parameter for all block types, or at least stomps, defaulted to the real-world impedance of the real-world device if one exists, otherwise whatever sounds best to the designer
- Add Bypass Mode as a parameter for all block types, choices being the ones listed by Rebel420, True, Buffered, and Traditional
Just to point out, adding impedance and bypass settings for all block types, not just "stomps" (whatever that means exactly), would let you do things like this: Switch on a fuzz with an EQ before it with one footswitch, and set the impedance of the EQ to match the fuzz, so the guitar gets loaded like the fuzz would, but still gets EQ'd first.
As to whether that's too techie for us lowly guitarists, I'd vote no, it's not, for people who are already using a pretty sophisticated modeler anyway.
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.
For those inclined to read more in-depth on the topic, here is a great article by RG Keen (who was "the man" back in the 90s DIY community whose designs were used by a good number of boutique builders, and he himself went on to be big with Visual Sound effects company)--- http://www.geofex.com/Article_Folders/bypass/bypass.htm
It's not about bypass.
-
First... I agree with you, or at least your premise. I used the word bypass, cause that's what the little button reads.. here's a little closer to what's really happening.
When you pre-compile two subroutines, one with two functions, one with one function. If you have code that doesn't execute the first function, both subroutines should have the same output.
This is what you video proves and I agree... It's not right.
There's no impedance, bypass or any other ANALOG routine in the code stack. I find it hard to believe they modeled what a fuzz does in bypass. Maybe they did... but it seems silly considering, "turning off" something in the chain should mean that code isn't executing at all. Further it would mean they modelled all of the devices in the off position as well, or that "off" means different things to different devices... that's just seems silly to me. Possible, but a bit silly.
In any case... I still agree with you... something is not right.
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.
-
That's an interesting read, but quite off topic here: we don't have cables degrading our signals in Helix, and some fuzz pedals don't work correctly if preceded by a buffer or by an high impedance device. So a 'true bypass like' implementation is the only way to have the realistic input load on fuzz emulations without the dull sound of a low impedance setting when the fuzz is bypassed.
^^^ This.
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.
I have been holding off on saying anything.... as I don't think referencing "impedance" is the issue.
However... especially in a digital world, the video is very clearly unexpected behavior. This could be a real issue with complex snapshots and likely is.
Bottom line... I agree... If you have a preset setup... with an amp, and another preset setup with an effect and an amp... if the effect is bypassed, both presets should sound the same. That's simple logic.
An option for Bypass (True or Buffered) on the appropriate pedals might be a good solution, as well as many others suggested. I find the Line 6 folks are pretty smart, so at this point I assume they see the problem (if they see it as a problem) and will address it in some clever way none of us thought of.
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.
-
No dog in this fight.. but a good read.. The Case Against "True-Bypass"
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.
-
That's the fundamental question here: Does a pedal that's off still load the guitar, or does it pass the loading question on to the next block in the chain.
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.)
Are the default values for the deep amp parameters the closest to the real amps being modeled?
in Helix
Posted
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.