mileskb

Yeah the experiment I did was to compare the Real to the Model. For the above "tone" I think just cutting back the high-end and add a tinge of gain or distortion from the TS808 that's in the factory patch, and you'd be almost on it. The guitar you are using and playing style is going to have an affect on the track as well of course.

This is so true and I proved it myself. Very "similar" situation. In another thread that no-one really cares about I wanted to see if I could get the Helix the match my actual Ampeg B15N which has a very distinct character about it. Long story short... The Helix wins. Recording the amp, there are so many variables of microphone, microphone placement, room, gain, tone controls, eq, etc etc etc.. not even talking age of tubes, temperature, line voltage and humidity which have a dramatic affect on classic amps like that... The tone from the Helix is unmistakably a B15N with all the flexibility to let me drop it into a mix any way I want. Back to the OP... the XLR out will be different than the direct USB. If you are using decent gear, better or worse aren't going to be terms you need. It will be different. I think that's all we're saying.

I think you are going to have to be the judge if the XLR out is acceptable. (see below) But you are not taking the XLR outputs and putting them back into digital again so you have Helix recording digital, and playing back digitil and converting to Analog. There isn't as much loss going to analog as there is Analog to Digital. But in ANY case.... I can pretty much guess without experimenting that recording audio in on my laptop is going to be crap because it has crap converters but on my PC it will be fine because I have very good converters. You are just going to have to try it yourself because anyone else, unless they have the exact same setup, isn't going to be of much help.

Not sure anyone cares, but I sure do. Here is a link to a SoundCloud file. https://soundcloud.com/miles-kevin-baron/b15n-vs-helix-test/s-QFyvK The Helix is hard panned one way, the actual B15N Hard Panned the other. I used a D12E at 1" on axis half-way on the cone. First Part of Clip = Guitar: Neal Moser custom Genesis with humbucker pickups. Send Part of Clip = Bass: Ovation Magnum II, both pickups on. I did have to adjust the tone on the B15N when I plugged the bass in, and surprisingly did NOT have to adjust anything on the Helix. Recording was done by splitting the input signal and feeding the Helix with one side and the B12N with the other. I also used the Helix as the recording interface by bringing the D12E microphone into the mic input and panning hard on one path and the Tuck'nGo patch was on the other path hard panned the other way. I was going to use a separate audio interface and take the line or XLR out of the Helix into one channel and the microphone into another, but adding all of the extra layers and variables seemed silly and pointless. I'll giveya's a hint. The Helix track sounds more like a recorded B15N with an actual microphone. I didn't do any post production (nor did I practice or tune apparently) but if I have the need to "record" and want a vintage amp sound... I'm going to dial it up on the Helix even if the Vintage amp is in the room. At most, I might even track the Helix AND the vintage amp if available because what the two channels sound like to me is how I normally record or mix.... as in... I have a DI on the output of the amp to one channel and also a Mic on the Speaker with this exact mic into another channel. Then mix to taste. Why would I do that? There are just tooo many variables to get the sound right. Yes, I "could" use the real amp, but why bother. Mic placement is so critical, tone settings on the amp are so critical, the room itself is so critical... And lets no forget the condition of the mic being used. After this I'm wondering if my mint condition D12E is still mint. Maybe if I had an ISO Booth optimized around the frequencies of the instruments I was recording I would bother... but seriously... why bother with all that. The Helix sounds AMAZING !!!! and some engineers, with likely better gear and more experience, did the work already. I am going to assume all of the amp models are as close as this one. Miles

Well I made the first recording and WOW... I'll try to post something later, but if anything the Helix set up as a B15N with a D12 mic at 1" sounds better than an actual B15N with an actual D12 mic at 1`" I can eq the tracks to sound the same. I'll post the results later to soundcloud.

" I'm wondering what the sonic differences are between USB recording and just taking the XLR out into the preamp/interface." Apples and Hammer. It's all about the D/A and A/D converters. No matter how good a converter is, you loose something with each conversion from Analog to Digital. - Using the USB you are just sending the digital signal that was used by Helix when it digitized your Analog guitar input. - The XLR out is the above digitized Analog guitar input signal being converted back to analog, then... when you plug it into your computers audio in... converted back to digital. As mentioned above there might not be significant audible difference with today tech, but why risk it? The fewer the conversions the better.

Ding Ding Ding we have a winner for the entire post. I just quoted the last bit because it is the bottom line.

While I have all of Glenn's patches and I like them, I honestly have learned the most from Scott's patches at TheHelixChannel on youtube. He posts here as well under that name. While he does use Ownhammer IR's, for learning who things work on the Helix to get YOUR sound, they really are the best in my opinion. He is VERY conservative on blocks and really gets EQ and the whole Sag, Ripple, BIAS and hum stuff. I suggest checking out his youtube channel and just watch and listen, then decide. He actually shows the patches and what the different parameters do and why. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpJrfCxQmio6zyjut4n0qRw He also is the one who posts the Freeset Friday presets.

Started in electronics 70's, then programmer 80's then computer support, project management and web development. I still have a web development and consulting company we're in the process of re branding at the moment. I created forums and I generally belong to forums for any subject I have a passion about so I can learn more and then use that knowledge to help others.

Now follow me on this. I would settle for being able to just bypass the pre-amp on the combo amp blocks. This would enable putting any pre-amp block first into any amp. ( PRE > COMBO (with pre-bypasses) ) > cab or whatever. So once that is doable, have a "custom amp block creator" likely outside of the helix, maybe in the editor, where you could create Combo Amp blocks with any pre-amp/amp combination. The Editor ability, might be better suited to modify the AMP and PRE-AMP structure a little more. Use 12AT7 instead of 12AX7, or have an insert point for the effects etc.. Maybe a voltage option on the output section if it's tubes. This would really open up the creativity of sound. Imagine using any combo front end pre-amp with any amp in the collection. The tube amps already have lots of control over BIAS, Sag etc..

Seriously? I thought for sure someone would point me to the 18 times this question had been answered that I was just to dumb to find.... Not providing info on the microphone placement is right up there with not having any way of setting unity gain... oh wait.. they left that out too. I just find this kinda silly considering the first things Line6 engineers (and anyone else) has to do is...... Place the microphones and adjust gain.

On the Helix we can choose the microphone and the distance, but "where" in relationship to the cone is the location? Just from tone my guess is that it's pointing on axis, 1/2 way between the cap edge and the cone edge, but that's just an assumption. Does anyone know for sure?

I will continue to say that if you are just getting a unit for the models, and you don't need the routing, the pedals, the controls, the interface and the connectivity options.. sure there are other choices. None of them do what the Helix does. And I'm actually going to go out on a limb and lollipop a whole bunch of people off with the truth. If you are THAT concerned about the tone, why are you using a modeler in the first place.... and if the answer to that is "the convenience of multiple rigs that would just not be practical" then get a workstation that you can load with professional grade IR's and Models and call it a day. And yes... take it on the road as your rig. I know someone who shows up to the gigs with basically his Guitar and and his Laptop and he sounds damn good.

I have a couple of B15N's. I have been meaning to run this experiment for a while but I needed to get more familiar with the Helix to be fair about it. So here's my setup.. Helix > QSC 100 amp > Genz Benz 2 x 12 Flat Response Guitar Cab and in the other corner.... A recently refurbished 60's B15N Fliptop. I have an A/B switch so I just went into the Helix with side A and the Ampeg off of side B. For guitar, I was using my trusty Ovation UltraGS H-S-S with Kahler Pro. While the B15N is primarily a Bass amp, it makes a very nice guitar amp as well and it has inputs for "Guitar, Bass" and "Instrument." Initial Result: After noodling around, switching between the two rigs, and tweaking EQ or tone as applicable on both units here and there, it sounds and feels like the same amp using two different cabinets. Maybe I could get them identical with a full FRFR setup, and maybe even with my current setup, but honestly, there wasn't a better.... there was just a difference between the two. Then I put on the headphones attached to the Helix on and as they say "I got it." While it was a bit awkward sliding the headphones on and off, there was little if any difference between what was coming out of the headphones and what the actual B15N sounded like in the room. My next test is to use a microphone (probably an SM57) on the Ampeg speaker and compare the "mic'd" speaker to the output of the Helix with the same selected mic. It's just a hunch, but I'd be willing to bet that if I don't make note of which signal I'm listening to, I won't be able to tell the difference. I will try to put some decent audio together to post.... but... My point of this arguably premature post is that when "comparing" there are a LOT of factors involved especially when trying to achieve that "in the room" feel. No matter how much EQ'ing or IR magic I can perform, two 12" speakers, and I dare say even an FRFR setup, is not going to provide the same "feel" as a single 15", and while that "may" matter in a room by myself, on stage, it becomes a mute point. Bottom line is that I'm VERY impressed with the Helix's ability to capture this amp's sound and feel. I'll plug in a bass later and see what that sounds like in comparison, but really... I hear people talk about <insert competition modeler here> is "better" and I really have to wonder what that's based on. I have full confidence in saying that a recorded Helix Tuck"nGO patch is likely indistinguishable from an actual B15N (recorded with the same microphone as the model) as you can get, and I honestly can't imagine getting closer because it's obvious the audible "differences" have to do with Microphone and placement, room and tone/EQ settings. Tonality is the same. Of course, I now need to make an actual recording to back that up... but I'm pretty confident.

There are obviously many choices for those just looking for a box that makes sounds... be they amps or effects or some combination thereof. With today's computing power, they all sound great. I bought the Helix because of all the things it seemed like you classified as secondary or iceing.. " It still has advantages over the AX8 like an expression pedal, dual amps and cabs, a headphone jack (really AX...no headphone out), a user interface that blows ax out of the water and my favorite...scribble strips." I look at the Helix as an Excellent controller and routing device that also has effects and modeling. Nothing out there comes close. As far as number of models... I need one. I haven't exactly found it yet, but I just need one. I've never played with more than one amp unless it was my stereo setup I had for years with two Roland Bolt 60's. Once I dial in my sound... I will have roughly 6 patches that are focused on different effects combinations. Might even be able to do it with one patch, but we'll see. So why do I need a Helix, as I said above.. "an Excellent controller and routing device that also has effects and modeling. " If I want to run to FOH and let them control my monitors, or if I want to have my own monitors and send something to FOH, or if I want to record, or if I just want to plug into a combo amp, or if I just want to plug into a poweramp/cab setup, or I want to play by itself (headphones) or with a backing track, or do a vocals and guitar thing. I can do it all with one unit, one interface.

I "undo" all the time. As long as I didn't hit save, I can just switch to another patch and back... and poof.. whatever I did, was undone.

In another thread I had suggested just being able to BYPASS the pre-amp on any given AMPBLOCK effectively giving you just the power-amp. In reality, as these are all digital already, it might just be a case of knowing how to set the pre-amp so it isn't actually doing anything. Separate power amp blocks would work as well too. Just adding to the box.

Aren't you defeating the Pan be rejoining the path at the end. As someone else suggested, I think if you actually have a LEFT and a RIGHT you will find the "Pan Law" works. Also... you might put the Y where they come back together and control it there. Do a 50/50 split to the two paths, but do the pan where they two signals RETURN to the one path.

I don't know how to say what I'm thinking without sounding like an arse so let me try it this way.... After you tune your guitar with your Strobe.... play notes up and down the scale watching the strobe to see how "in tune" they are. I think you'll find the notes you tuned, without fretting, are the only few notes the strobe doesn't drift a little. Now... in "principle" it seems Helix has enough horsepower to be more granular so from that aspect I agree just because this is a flagship unit. But geez... what music are you guys play'n ??

Just to follow up.. I had some time yesterday so I setup some patches... from scratch... 1. AMP&CAB > 63 Sprint 2. AMP > 63 SRPING > CAB (same as used by combo block) 3. PREAMP > 63 SPRING > ...... Ran into an issue here cause any amp I you would have a PREAMP again. While 1 & 2 sounded very similar, there was a different feel. I wasn't able to narrow down what was different but there was a difference and #2 certainly sounded better/more pleasing and natural out to my FRFR system. In the headsets... although I had to add a gain block at the end to bring up the level, #3 sounded the best to me. I'm gonna figure out how to word this for IdeaScale. I think it will be TWO ideascales. 1. The ability to BYPASS the PREAMP of any AMP or AMP&CAB Block. (effectively creating power amps.) 2. Request models of Classic Power Amps.

I'm not sure I'd use the word "benefit," more like just different. Someone smarter than I will have to explain it.. but as best I can do... I want my reverb. delays and even some things like Chorus or rotary effects to sound as they sound when only driven by the pre-amp, not what they sound like when being driven by an AMP or after the Cabinet.

I want to run this up the flagpole before I add it to IdeaScale to ensure I'm on the right track. A popular IdeaScale entry is for their to be an Effects Loop block that can be added to at least the amp models/simulations that have effects loops. However, in responding to another post I came up with these ideas that might be easier and in fact provide more options. As the goal is to be able to put primarily time-based effects between the pre-amp and amp as they are in real life, and as Line6 has already made the pre-amps available... maybe one or all of these options might be doable as well. Option to bypass preamp of AMP and AMP&CAB blocks. In this way one could use the PREAMP block, followed by the effects, even putting them on a separate path so the "mix" just like they do in real life, followed by the AMP or AMP&CAB block with the pre-amp bypassed. This is how most effects loops work. The BYPASS PREAMP option should be in both AMP blocks and AMP&CAB blocks for the same current reasons there are AMP and AMP&CAB blocks. Add models of Power Amps. There are many current and classic power amps that people use and what a great pairing with some of the PREAMP blocks !!!! Not everyone plays through a combo amp. In fact, in reality, most don't. Regardless of the stack of Marshalls or Orange or whatever you see on the stage, you'd be surprised (or not) how often the actual sound is a power amp into a mic'd cabinet or a power amp into an ISO speaker box. Some power amps with unique voice that come to mind are: Rocktron Velocity 300 Carvin TS1000 Mesa/Boogie Fifty/Fifty Engl Microtube 200 Carver PCM120 FRYETTE TWO/FIFTY/TWO Marshall 9200 Dual MonoBloc 100/100 Peavey Classic Series 50/50 Lexicon Signature 284 There are of course many more power amps, and while most of the ones I listed are Tube amps, there are of course solid state ones as well. I really think Option #1 of just being able to BYPASS the pre-amp of an AMP or AMP&CAB block opens up so many options. My main problem with placing time based effects between the amp and cab or after the cab is that many effects respond to the gain section in the PREAMP, So... what does the hive mind think of this?

If I may, regarding delay and reverb effects placement. If you are adding an "effect" to create a particular sound, placement between amp and cab is very appropriate. However, you may find as I have that if you are adding the reverb, delay or EQ for overall ambiance or tone, it may fit better AFTER the cab... or specifically after the MIC. Remember that as stated above, when you add a CAB you choose a Microphone and control it's placement as well. You are Micing the cabinet. And just like when you Mic a cabinet in the "real" world, that's generally where you add reverb, eq and even delay if it's part of the overall tone. Personally I have found that putting timebased effects between the amp and cab doesn't not provide realistic results for me as in the real world these would actually go in the effects loop between the pre-amp and amp. While it is a popular IdeaScale suggestion, as of yet there isn't a way place something between the preamp and amp.

I think a 2 x 12 Flat Response or even full FRFR is going to be a thing soon. My setup is a 2x12 with EV12L which are essentially Flat Response guitar speakers. It's a ported Genz Benz cabinet. It doesn't matter much what I drive it with, it sounds awesome and very true to the "real" version of whatever amp I'm simulating. As close as one can get really. I mean if you take two amps that have been used for a few years, put'em side by side, they aren't going to be "exactly" the same anymore. You'll likely be able to hear the difference and a simple adjustment of the tone knob corrects that. That's how close I feel my 2 x 12 setup is. Putting it side-by-side with the "real" amp, would just be a matter of touching up the tone or eq to match them. I'm currently driving it with a QSC 50 watt per channel amp. I have tried several amps both solid state and tube, and while the tube amps due sound a little warmer, they are coloring the signal. I like the tube amp sound better, but it gets away from the "modeled" sound which is best with a solid state. But if someone would start making a 2 x 12, and 2 x 10 with a good amp... maybe a cab that could tilt.... really something along the lines of the Line6 PA options but specifically for the guitar range with 12" speakers... I think it would be a hit. Use it on the backline, monitor, tower, whatever. Ability to go stereo or mono.

I don't know why people are glossing over this. THIS is the most important part of the diagnosis. If there is a grounding issue (could be a cold connection internally) all bets are off on EVERYTHING else and no need to look any further. Replace the unit.