HonestOpinion

I downloaded a couple of the free db meter apps available for my phone and tried using them for leveling but soon found I just don't have the discipline to use them consistently. I generally use my ears and go block by block, if any block substantially alters the volume, up or down, I modify it to try and keep a consistent volume. I use the Channel Volume on the amp and the Output block volume to finalize my levels and the large physical volume knob on the Helix when I need it. One thing has always bothered me. The Channel Volume parameter on the amp blocks has always seemed redundant and a bit confusing to me. Shouldn't the Volume on the Output block be adequate? Intuitively it makes more sense to me to have the "Master" volume raise the volume just for the amp block. I assume the "Channel Volume" is just intended to raise the volume of the Amp block without interacting with the amp's tonestack or drive but it seems to act more as a volume boost for the entire preset. Within a preset why have two locations, the Amp and the Output block, where overall preset volume can be modified? Shouldn't it be sufficient to just have the Volume control on the Output block acting as the overall preset volume control (perhaps with a bit more boost than it currently allows)? Not only am I not sure why a channel volume was included on the amps but because the "Drive" control is on the first page of Amp block parameters I have always found it extremely unusual and bad ergonomics to have the "Channel Volume" also be on the first page of the amp parameters where the "Master" volume should be located. I am not fond of the design that forces me to switch back and forth between the first and second pages of the amp parameters to get the blend of "Drive" and "Master" volume correct. Ideally "Drive", "Master", and "Channel Volume" would all be on the same parameter page but there are not enough buttons for that. I have an Idea on Ideascale to swap these two parameters' locations ("Master", "Channel Volume") for others who would prefer those parameters swapped. http://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Put-Master-volume-on-the-same-page-as-the-Drive-in-amp-model/788502-23508 I remember seeing a fairly cogent explanation from DI at one point (can't remember what it was) as to why meters had not been included on the Helix and after using the Helix for a while it does seem fairly resistant to digital clipping but it still seems it would benefit from level meters, even if it was for no other reason then providing a visual confirmation of what my ears are telling me.

I recommend dialing in a preset with the Helix Autofilter or Mutant. I have the Guyatone WR-2 and while it does sound good for a cheap pedal in my opinion it does not even come close to the quality and variety of auto-wah sounds I can get with the Helix. Unless you are planning to gig without the Helix I would save my money for something the Helix does not do way better than the Guyatone. If you compared the two (Guyatone, Helix) you will instantly hear how much better the Helix auto-wahs can sound and if you still needed to you could probably get very close to the Guyatone by tweaking your settings (but you won't want to).

I also check out guitar gear, especially when I hear a great guitar sound. Would have preferred it have been the guitarist with for instance "Dream Theater" but very cool nonetheless. ;)

Thanks for this piece of information. Hmm, what source is this coming from within L6? That would mean the low and high cuts are not only sloped as Phil_m mentioned with a -12db cut, but they are not even a fixed slope and actually vary with or "follow" each speaker type. If that is true that would be awesome but I am a bit dubious. Wouldn't mind hearing DI chime in directly on this one.

Interesting! I was wondering how presets designed using IEMs would sound through the FOH. For me the message keeps coming back to whether you prefer to use an actual guitar amp/cab, IEMs, FRFR, or PA type monitor/speaker on stage for your guitar, that perhaps you are best off designing or at least finalizing your presets at or near stage volume through something like an FRFR or a PA monitor/speaker that gets as close as possible to the sound of FOH speakers. That method seems to be the easiest way to ensure the audience is hearing what you want them to hear. Not that good results can't be had using other methods, they are just much more unpredictable and require you to anticipate the potential differences in the EQ required for the FOH.

I know this is unlikely but what kind of guitar/pickups are you using? Just want to make sure you don't have a "ghost" piezo or something like that generating an unexpected signal. Does this happen with headphones? Could have a "microphonic" tube on your Engl amp generating some extra nastiness but you said this is happening on your Alto as well.

I also rarely find a CustomTone that works for me, as has been already mentioned the likelihood of someone else designing a preset that works with your ears, equipment, and guitar tends to be fairly low. I do truly appreciate the fact that there are some diamonds in the rough now and then from talented folks that have spent a lot of time and energy on them and been generous enough to share them. The problem is there is a lot of chaff to sort the wheat from. The star rating system does help somewhat but I still rarely end up using a downloaded preset. I do occasionally learn some great new method for building a preset from them and that I think is where the greatest value in CustomTone lies. To me it would almost be a better approach if the presets rather than trying to provide someone with the perfect sound would instead focus on specific areas, tricks, effect and block parameters, and tips of patch construction. For instance, here is a patch for wet, dry, wet, or how to set a great compressor sound, or how to split IRs, custom routing, balancing block output, getting an organ sound, 4cable method, setting up a Variax, etc.. In a way focusing on templates rather than presets. Providing just innovative pieces of a preset that can be universal and employed by others with the express intention of only being used as building blocks in other's presets rather than providing a complete patch that will probably not work in someone else's rig.

Impressively observant of you and I agree that Cleartype is worth looking into. The additional memory, connectivity, and driver demands of the Helix Editor however could potentially point to other things worthy of investigation. Despite the fact that the menu bar appears correctly there could potentially be other apps that would appear to be "ghosting". All of the suggestions made in this topic should probably be explored to at least eliminate possible causes and hopefully to provide a fix.

I don't presume to know what technology Line6 has implemented in their cabs but from this blurb in their description of how their "hybrid" cabs are designed with "proprietary algorithms" it sounds like perhaps they figured out a way to combine an IR with mic modeling in such a way that rather than having a different "stacked" IR for each mic distance, instead they have a parameter that can be changed in concert with the IR that changes the sound and the perception of the mic distance. In other words, perhaps they just figured out how to make mic distance an adjustable parameter in tandem with a single IR. Almost like they have shoe-horned in their own programming into IRs which would ordinarily be treated as a sort of monolithic .wav file. Or.. perhaps it is just stacked separate "Mic" IRs, or changing the mic distance selects a completely different IR, I am strictly speculating.

I don't think he mentioned that it was only the Helix app. If it is only the Helix app doing it I would offer the standard advice of uninstalling all of the Helix software and then reinstalling. Perhaps the the Windows driver did not load properly (it is loaded up as a default option when you run the Helix Editor). You probably already tried this but I would also offer the advice of making sure as little as possible is running on the PC and it is freshly rebooted when you bring up the Editor. Maybe kill any process you can that is not critical to running the PC in case you have a driver conflict. Might also be worth looking for the latest update to your graphics card/chipset as DunedinDragon alluded to. Also, many graphics cards have a "hardware acceleration" setting that uses your PC's resources to aid the graphics card. It might be worth experimenting with toggling that on/off.

That is awesome support. What did they fix?

Don't know if you are using a laptop or a PC but I have seen this happen on a PC when the VGA/DVI connector from the monitor is not plugged in all the way either on the PC or the monitor. Of course it usually effects how all the apps appear not just Helix Edit. However, if it is a PC it is possible you may have dislodged the VGA/DVI connection when you plugged in your USB cable. Worth checking.

Great links! Thanks for posting this.

Clever use of routing, thanks for the explanation.

+1 Great sound and tutorial, darn nice of you to contribute it to the community. Thanks! Btw, I have never set up a patch with two inputs for Variax magnetics. How does that work exactly?

Granted but there is some overlap and some common features that are great to have on either one. As long as they're shinier on the Helix! ;)

Snort, wheeze, chuckle :D

More effects and amps/cabs, acoustic amps/cabs, tuner stability, astrolabe, coffee-maker, zither, auto-autoharp, particle accelerator, and dog-walker.

Thanks for the reassurance. I hear you and I in no way feel like it is time to begin working on the Helix's eulogy, I know the pattern of lessening support and focus and eventual end-of-life is inevitable with any product but without getting into the tired old debate of "entitlement" regarding "..but I paid $1500 for this thing" I do think it is the smart choice for the most expensive items at the top end of any company's cost structure to get top-notch support and attention for as long as possible. It definitely instills me with the confidence in that company to buy an expensive item from them again. They should get at least as much attention and probably more than the low-price devices that probably sell more units. Ideally there are enough development resources to go around. I would hate for precious resources to be squandered on perfecting, let's call it a ruby, like the Spider V, when you can focus them on a diamond like the Helix (man I hate that metaphor, insert Kia and Rolls Royce, feh, don't like that metaphor much better but I think you know what I am getting at).

In a white shirt and khakis :wacko:

I think this has been mentioned by someone else on the forum so I do not want to take credit for their idea but wouldn't it be cool if someone came up with a Fletcher-Munson EQ block or global setting that automatically compensated for volume by changing the EQ as the volume was cranked up. I can see how difficult this would be because there are so many variables to account for. You would probably need to have a reference mic attached to the Helix to monitor and inform the EQ changes (think that idea was suggested as well). The objective would be to keep the same perceived EQ for a given preset regardless of volume. Quite a challenge and unless you could do it with a fixed algorithm that did not require a reference mic I could see it requiring quite a bit of DSP. Note: I suppose a "poor man's" method of doing this now would be to setup potentially multiple sets of EQ blocks you only use live that compensate for the added perception of lows & highs as the volume rises. For instance, if you know that the 2k range sounds as if it is 6 decibels louder when there is a 3db bump in volume you could kick in an EQ block(s) specifically for that volume setting. EQ blocks are inexpensive on the Helix and use up very little DSP.

You are right, I can see why some of this stuff like built in wireless and drum loops was not included on a pro level device like the Helix but it is darn cool nonetheless. I am looking forward to similar innovation on the Helix with features and amps/effects more targeted at the pro market.

Thanks for the sanity check on the acoustic situation Phil_m. I get it, The Helix has way more potential in almost every area including the acoustic sound. Still.. one would prefer if some of the newest whizbang features show up on your Tesla rather than your neighbor's Camry, and granted many of them such as Snapshots and even the tuner have done just that.

Chuckle, I knew I was going to get slapped for my comments about the Spider V. And from what people are saying it may not be near as egregious a situation as it appeared to be when I read through the feature set. I appreciate Silverhead's comments regarding the Variax acoustic features in the Spider although I still think we could use some amps, cabs, and effects specifically for acoustic on the Helix. Perhaps I over-reacted. However, I do hope L6 continues its support for new features, amps, and effects for the Helix. The huge array of products Line6 supports and develops makes me nervous. DI is always in danger of getting spread too thin :huh: Just getting new firmware withdrawal. My apologies, going back to the decaf for this week.

What the f#%$^? Look what they loaded the new Spider V up with. Granted I have a vested interest in it but it seems like a bit (lot?) of the attention that could be going into the Helix is going elsewhere. We have been asking for features like acoustic presets, amps, and effects (already on the Spider V) for a year now. And look at the number of cabs, amps, effects, wireless, drum loops, and other features on this thing. I know it takes longer to develop HX models but I hope some of these features make their way over to the Helix and soon. I know some of these features won't be targeted for a pro level device like the Helix but I hope L6 does not neglect us with their new products coming out.