mileskb

Awesome shirt...   

Eeesh my man, I would think that if through the PA its cool the amp should go fine as well with the same settings. Only thing I can think of is a ground loop hum. Try plugging everything into the same outlet or power strip. I don't have a JM4 but the others I have DM4, MM4 DL4 and they can use batteries so the JM4 should use them too (maybe) which might be a way to try to see if its a ground loop hum.

He's had the unit for quite awhile, maybe a year.  He's tried it in different places and different amps same result.  It doesn't have the "ground lift" kind of sound, although anything is possible, but it can best be described as hisss.   Plug it in and SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.  I was able to back off the output level and somewhat get it under control, but not really.   He has hung onto it, because just plugging straight into his board, for recording, he really liked it.  It spent a bunch of time learning to use the looper and such but when it came to time to play out....  well... it was unusable.  He has revisited it on several occasions, but same result.   I thought he was exaggerating until I heard it.  

I was helping out a friend today who has been struggling with his JM4.

It sounds great through the PA, but when he tries to use it with any of his amps, there is LOUD hiss, even before turning up the volume on the guitar.  We tried assorted setups of going into the effects loop, or using the guitar out instead of the stereo outs..  but all had their version of either killing the tone, or noise.

I do have some other questions... but simply to start..

He has a Carvin 1 x 12 tweed combo amp that he wants to use with the looper.   Are there any special settings? I have a Helix and there are certain output and input level settings to set based on how you want to connect to an amp so I'm thinking this is the step he's missing.

Additionally,  He wants to send a signal to his amp (for his stage monitor) and the PA.  He's currently micing, but it seems like he should be able to get line out somehow.

Finally, how does one ByPass the JM4?  The Carvin is a great sounding amp all by itself.  There are some tunes where he doesn't want the signal going through the jm4 at all, just bypass direct to the amp.  

Thanks in advance... and yes I looked in the manual and seached...  I guess I wasn't asking the right questions because I came up empty.

Miles

I've also had luck "amplifying" the Aux input by using the LA Studio preamp as an early Block. Its got several parameters that you can use to boost the gain. Or, you use an analog preamp to boost your signal before you plug in.

I run a GR-20 into the Aux input for synth sounds on some patches. Generally I run it into a gain block (for on/off switching) then a JC120 amp/cab and reverb, seems to work pretty well.

In both of these it requires

A - Adding a block to each preset (not that terrible)

B - Having room to add the bock...  (this gets a little sticky as it seems my favorite patches use both paths.).

I have found adding a return block at the very end of the 2nd path to be the quickest-ish.

In the end, I may just go ahead and run the Helix and my Laptop Audio into a small mixer.  Where I'm running into the issue is playing a backing tracking and looking for the best patch to go along with it.    I could hook up a 2nd sound system, but then listening via headphones is out...  so... a small mixer I will get.

There is a suggestion in ideascape to be able to route the inputs directly to outputs, but until that happens...  a mixer is what I will use.

Hey...  I found one thing I can't do with the helix alone... I'll live.

I thought I could bypass the signal paths with AUX?    Generally I just bring w

No, but provided you're not clipping Helix's A/D, you could place a Volume/Pan > Mono > Gain block at the very beginning of the signal path.

 I thought the AUX bypassed the traditional paths.     I'm doing some A/B of effects that are a bit complex and while I normally just bring my "AUX" in on Path #2, I'm getting to the point where some of my Patches are on both Paths.   I guess I could stick it in at the end, but was really hoping to not have to add a block every time.

Is there a way to adjust the AUX Input level?

I've searched around, and I can find an input level adjust for everything else.  

Forget costs (although that's a factor) bit if Line6 keeps up the pace of updates, it's old news before it gets put in the box.  

Anytime I need to look something up (for any gear), I just go to the most current manual online.

This needs to go to helixhelp for sure.  Thank you.

I'm really curious what people are playing that make the Helix reverbs less than stellar?   This is a guitar effects unit, and I know of no guitar amp that has any reverb that comes close to what the Helix can do.   There are reverbs out there that cost thousands of dollars, and sound like it... but they are generally used for vocals and frankly kinda sound like crap if used on a guitar.   At least that has been my experience.  I also don't think in 30+ years I've ever had a reverb for a particular instrument turned up more than 20% into the mix.... usually closer to 10%.   Some springs are nicer than others, but they all sound like springs if they are in the mix much more than 15%.    I guess it's all subjective.   I kinda like the reverbs.

I think I can supply a somewhat unbiased opinion.  I love my Helix, but I have a very diverse background and what struck me is your comment that "I would be using the Helix at home and playing through my Presonus monitors."   Now I don't want to talk anyone out of gear, and you haven't elaborated on your setup, but just based on that statement, if it was me, I'd have a hard time justifying the Helix.  Imagine the plugins or even just upgrades you could get for your DAW, including a powerhouse MIDI controller (like the FCB1010 or an older X15 for $150-ish bucks) if you need footswitches to stomp.  You could upgrade your monitors, your computer, your A/D and get some amazing IR's too.  

Yes the Helix sounds great, and the "realism" of the simulations (the way playing affects the drive/tone just like a real tube amp) is it's #1 attraction.  However, if you are not playing music that has those dynamics as a requirement it may not be important to you.  Additionally, Helix is so much more than a multi-effect and modeler.  The routing and I/O capabilities are mind boggling.  But, you have a DAW.  Are you ever going to need the 4-cable-method, are you ever going to need to send outputs to Front Of House, Backline, personal monitors and recording desk?  Are you even going to be playing backing tracks and singing while playing along, at the same time you send outputs all over town(the rooom)?

The choice is yours!!   I hope this helps.  

Anybody an idea how to get the patches?

I followed the link to PayPal and made the transaction, but then, nothing happened.

I bet scott explained how it works in one of the videos, but i did'nt see them all yet and sometimes it's hard for me to translate everything.

And is there anywhere an overwiew wich patches are sold in wich pack?

 

Thanks

 

Michael

Agree with all of the above comments. I learn more from his vids and playing with this patchsets than anything else.  

If you paid, he will email them shortly to the email account you paid from.  If you pre-ordered a patchset, like Yacht Rock, he will email them as soon as they are ready.   

Not sure why I of all people didn't notice this (I'm a founder of OvationFanClub.com).   Ovation and Adamas (and maybe even Takamine)  guitars have XLR output and can be phantom powered.   For Acoustic, Helix just eliminated batteries an extra cable and DI for me.    Too cool.  

It seems to me while some are based on artists, some are based on songs, and some are based on just the amps which are known for a sound.  

Would love to see the full list complete.

I play guitar and sometimes bass with the helix. Mostly at home, but on small stages without PA too.

 

Now i want to buy for different reasons one or two active frfr monitors. For guitar only, i would take a 12+1. For bass, i rather would take a 15+1. Both would be loud enough for me.

What's the minimum for bass on small stages up to 300 people "against" acoustic drums and classic rock?

Are 2x10"or  2x12? as powerful with bass as a 1x15"

One monitor would be the cheaper solution and lighter than two, on the other hand i would like to try stereo wich i never did.

In know that it depends on the quality of the systems, but provided the same quality,

 

what would you prefer?

Indeed a good question.

If you are just using the speakers for monitors, and you don't have to worry about other musicians on stage hearing your monitors, than a pair of 10's or 12's would be fine.  I only say "pair" because you mentioned wanting to do some stereo stuff.  As far as "Are 2x10"or  2x12? as powerful with bass as a 1x15"?"  It really depends on how you are using them.   At close range, they are all fine, and the 2x10 or 2x12 might even sound better than the 1x15.  However a single 15 will throw bass farther.

I hope this helps a little.

Actually...  doesn't power-on while holding pedal #2 bring up a screeen to adjust the brightness, or is it under the power-on while holding  #4 + #5 menu.  I swear I have seen it somewhere, but rather well hidden..... ironically.

Really sounds like hard drive noise from computer. I have a similar sound when i have my laptop connected via usb, and too close to helix.

While I haven't played out with mine yet, I have a similar setup with a 2 x 12 custom Genz Benz (slanted horizontal, 4 ports) loaded with EV  Series II 12L's.  Bottom line...  fairly flat response guitar speakers.

I have an assortment of stereo amps both tube and solid-state and all I can say is the tube amps color the sound a little.  This is either bad or good...  As example, I happen to like the JC 120 Amp/Cab model and I had a JC 120 and to the best of my memory, it sounds essentially same through my current rig.    With a solid-state amp, it sound roughly the same as I remember the real JC120 sounded, however, if I use a tube amp, it sounds a little warmer than I remember the original.

Good? Bad?  meh...   Great either way.   FWIW, some of the amps I have used are Carvin TS100, Carver PCM120, Rockman XP-100 (just plugging into the power amp section), QSC 1100, QSC 9000, Hafler 2500, and Dynaco ST70

I think I could tweak the global EQ on any one and make it sound just like any other there was that little difference.

Get something you like, with as few knobs as possible.   I like the QSC's as they only have a left and right volume and power switch.

Also worth mentioning, with the XT, I used to still use cab emulation.

With the helix, should I use just the pre-amp/head/ or Head&Cab?

Others covered most of the rest.   If you are going into the front of a guitar amp, the simple answer is do whatever sounds best.  I personally wouldn't use any amp/cab modeling going into the front of a real guitar amp, but... nothing wrong with having an enhanced signal.  I personally like some of the "distortion" of the amps in the Helix and in those cases just use the amp model as my "distortion" pedal.   

Bottom line, do what sounds good.  

I think i have a best of both worlds rig.  My cabinet has guitar speakers that are known for that flat response over the guitar frequency range.  I seem to be getting, at least to my ears, the intent of the models.  I have tried several amps, solid-state and tube to drive the speakers, and frankly there is little difference except that I can "color" the signal with a stereo tube amp if I'm not careful so I have been sticking with solid-state for now.

This vid I think is a great primer (along with some others) for using EQ on the Helix.  It touches on a lot of what we've been discussing.

Every box you plug an amp modeler into will color the tone in some fashion, and to a greater or lesser extent than the next one that you try. You could play the same Helix patch through two different FRFR speakers of the same make and model, with convective serial numbers, and still not end up with identical tones. Close? Probably...but there are no guarantees.

 

There are a multitude of reasons for this...which at this point, could fill a doctoral thesis.

This is a VERY crucial point to understand.  As infered by this quote from cruisinon2, it's NOT just frequency "range" it's frequency response.   Every speaker is different, but more recognizable every speaker model is different.  Two speakers of identical range of different brands sound different because of the way they "respond" to different "frequencies".   Because Helix is a modeler of sorts, and has to be able to reproduce ALL of the combinations, it is designed for maximum coverage.  The rule of thumb argued by recording engineers for decades...  you can always attenuate a frequency, but you can't put back what wasn't there in the first place.

Besides frequency range, and the dynamics (response) of the tones we want to hear, are also how the speaker handles all the tones that are getting sent its way that we don't want to hear, or we want to hear to some degree.  Again, it's seems pretty obvious that Line6 thought about this long and hard as they have high and low cuts on just about everything involved in shaping the output signal.

Remember that Helix has the ability to play backing tracks as well, or be used for a multitude of other instruments besides guitar.  

Where I think Line6 has missed the mark a little, or their sheer genius is revealed, I haven't decided which, is in not providing filtering on the presets and not delving into more of how to setup the Helix for optimum use.  The reason I say it might be a genius plan as well, is that the result is these forums!!!!    Folks sharing idea's on how to get the best out of the unit in all situations... and they don't have to pay us.  :)  

I have had my Helix since December.  I have essentially given up on creating specific patches for a little while and opted for just attempting to create patches on a whim, for whatever I feel like playing at the moment.  I realize not everyone can do this, but after getting all of Glenn D's patches and all of Scott's patches I realize I am at the beginning of the learning curve and the potential of this unit.   As I just create patches I am learning the subtleties so when the time comes later this summer when I'll be going into the studio and hopefully playing live, I'll be able to dial up what I need fairly easily.

If I have one wish, it's that the stock presets were not so much focused on songs but actually presets of the amp models.  Like being able to choose a JC-120 that sounds like a JC120 with the chrous and reverb preferences just like the amp has.  Or a Fender Twin or a Marshall or any of the other amps.  It would be a great starting point.

Just not to be misunderstood: The graphs above shown nothing produced by the Helix, they show just the frequency response of a frfr monitor and the speaker wich lives in the DT25.

Just to understand you right: If the Helix with amp and cab sim produces higher frequencies than it should (as the real amps and cabs and mics does'nt produce this frequencies), then  in my understanding the modelled blocks are'nt right. This would be a "bug" in the modelling, as for my understanding, with a cab sim, it should sound from a frfr system like the original. Where i'm wrong?

Perhaps i should try to make a IR from my DT cabinet with a measurement mic. With this IR, a frfr system should sound about like the DT Cabinet (just in tonal sense, not dynamics...). If it does not, there's something wrong.

 

Of course i could use the global EQ for this, but i would like to preserve ist for other corrections like room correction for a venue.

Not a bug, but just like in the real world you can pump a full range signal into a guitar cab and depending on a multitude of things from response, to power handling it will attempt to process those signals, and likely not produce a decent sound.

So, like in real life, when you choose a cab, you need to eq to that cab most of the time.  You will notice, all of the cabs have a high and low cut as well as the EQ's.  It's for a reason.  

If you are only playing guitar/bass you might just use the global EQ.

why not just provide the ability to "name" ins, outs, sends, and returns?

This would really address a LOT of issues.  

Hi,

 

i'm happy what comes out of my frfr monitors or my DT25. But what comes out out my (different) headphones lets my ears cry - harsh, bright and noisy. So i wonder if i've just the wrong headphones or if it's a general effect. In the second case, i would wish a EQ like the global EQ but dedicatet to the headphones out. As i switch often between Amp, FRFR and Headphones, this would be more usefull than always using the global WQ for that.

 

What do you think?

I added the idea add http://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/EQ-dedicated-to-headphone-out/813724-23508

a verry old Beyer DT990, a AKG from about 2002 (don't know exactly what model - sounds ok on HiFi but cruel with guitar) wich are both half closed. Plus some different open  "walkman"-Headphones/inears, where a older Sony still is the best. Have to look this evening for the exact types.

Sony MDR-7506.  They are one of the few that can handle the Helix because of their design as monitors.  

Headphones in general are designed for post-production music, e.g. your stereo.  Some headsets (folks have mentioned a few) also sound good as monitors even if that wasn't what they were intended for specifically.  

Lets take a quick peek at the Beyer, because that is a really nice headset for listening to music.

The Beyer have a freq response of 5 hz to 35 Khz, that's a LOT of extra headroom on both ends.  You'd initially think that's a good thing, but the reality an instrument like a guitar creates harmonics and overtones.  They are actually outside the hearing range, and if your headsets are reacting to them, well that's just taking energy away from the frequencies you can actually hear.  When records are mastered, those overtones and harmonics out of the human hearing range are eliminated in the process to provide a crisp clean rich sound.

The Sony's I mentioned run from 10 hz to 20 Khz.  While still wide, not as wide as the Beyers and when you're dealing with distorted guitar, that's a good thing.

Then there's input.  The Sony's can handle 1000 mW, the Beyer's can only handle 100 mW.   Again, fine for a home stereo system cranked, but the Helix can put out some volume along with all those overtones and harmonics mentioned above.  While I doubt it's anywhere near 1000 mW, and likely not much more than 100 mW, the headroom of the headphones enables extra low lows and high highs to not really affect the overall sound where on the Beyer's if a overtone is pushing the limits of the headsets powerhandling, that could sound like crackly or just harsh.  

I'm not picking on the Beyer's and I'm not selling MDR-7506's.  I have used both.  They are both touted as professional monitoring headsets with fairly flat response curves supposedly.    While I'd never mix with headsets, The Beyer's are great for listening to final mixes looking for details that need to be addressed or nuances you want to ensure you hear.  If you want to listen to a recording the way the producer intended, use the Beyer. The MDR-7506's are great for checking monitoring during recording or monitoring in live situations where there is high room noise.  You can crank them loud enough to hurt your ears and they won't distort.  They also reproduce bass surprisingly well.  The extra power handling keeps them from getting muddy when listening to complicated (like distortion guitar) sources. 

Some other folks have mentioned other headsets they use.  I'm sure if you check the specs it will be apparent why they work well with the Helix.  Flat response, good frequency range but let dogs and snakes listen to their own tunes, and high power handling so harmonics and overtones that you can't hear anyway don't mess with the frequencies you can hear.

I've said it before, and I'll repeat it from the mountain tops.   You can't really go wrong with any of the latest units for sound.

However....  Line 6 has gone for the creature comforts and flexibility.  Of course like anything else, if you don't need/want those options, and many people simply do not need most of the options on the Helix, than again.. whatever unit they feel comfy with will work just fine.  

What's going to be interesting is what happens in the next couple of years.   Fractal and Kemper duking it out, based on their core audiences, wasn't really competition, it was just taking what they had to offer and making it a bit better with each version/update.  Line 6 has up'd the game not only with a different approach to "modeling" but with the interface for editing, the pedal board with controllers, the routing and lets not forget Variax integration and a reasonable price point.  All three players individually now have pressure to make sure they outshine the two.   

Will Line 6 come up with a profiler to create IR's for the Helix?  Will AxeFX come up with a "super controller" with expression pedals and multichannel I/O?  WIll Kemper adopt deeper component style modeling so the models not only sound like the original amps, but also act like the original amps?  

Yes indeedy it's a good time to be a guitar player.   

Hi,

  I've been working on a bunch of patches that have extremely different I/O configurations.  I'm running into an issue where I need to start writing down (actually I should have done this) what gets plugged in where.  

  I was thinking, much like my DAW as for each project, a notepad.  Not very long, but enough to say stuff like.

Stereo on Ret 1/2

Sustainer on Ret 3

Rockman in Aux

Guitar in Guitar

Test signal in Ret 4

    This was just a made up list, but you get the idea.  I can imagine coming back to a patch used for a partiular amps and effects setup that wan't used for 6 months and having to try and remember where eveything goes.  

If others think this would be useful, I'll add to IdeaScape..  maybe they already thought of it and we can vote it up.