HonestOpinion

LOL, a noble effort, nobody can accuse you of not putting in the work. Good luck!

This script is to help make backing up and restoring IRs to the same slot a little easier. For anyone looking for a quick way to add an incremented prefix number to all their IRs. Still an imperfect solution for IR backups but I hope this helps. I wrote a DOS script inspired by some suggestions on the web for adding an incremented numbered prefix to all of your IRs at once. I considered doing it in PowerShell but I thought more people might be comfortable with a DOS script. It can be run from a Windows directory or any Command window (DOS prompt) As of right now numbered prefixes are the only way I know of to be able to dependably restore IRs after a firmware update and global restore in the same order so that your presets don't point to the wrong IR. I pasted the script here so you can create your own batch file rather than uploading code which always has the possibility of a virus. Cut and paste from this post and just name the file something like IncrementedPrefixIR.bat and run it from the command prompt on a Windows computer. My apologies to Mac users, I am not a Mac person but I am sure it could easily be adapted by someone who is, or run from a Mac DOS emulator. The script is totally non-destructive, only does a copy, and seems to work perfectly but I make no guarantees implied or otherwise. The safest way to test this script will be to copy your IRs and the script to a new directory and run it from there. If anyone has any issues please let me know and I will attempt to fix them. Thanks! Instructions for .bat file use Cut and paste the script into Notepad and save and name the script, e.g IncrementedPrefixIR.bat Make sure you have a .bat extension for the file name. Place it in the directory with your IR files. It will only copy IRs (*.wav) files You can run the script by double-clicking it or using "Open" on the .bat file from the Windows directory, or, alternatively you can open a dos/command prompt and navigate to your IR directory with the script. Then type .\ IncrementedPrefixIR.bat All IRs in the directory will be copied with a prefixed incremented number and underscore. For example, the files "MarshallGreenback.wav" and "MesaBlackWidow.wav" will now have copies named "1_MarshallGreenback.wav" and "2_MesaBlackWidow.wav". You may need to refresh your directory to see the new files. If you run the script twice you will end up with two sets of copies. You can now either move your prefixed copies to a new directory or delete the old files without prefixes (make sure you have a backup of them somewhere else first). You can now order the Windows directory on name and all your IRs can be imported into the Helix in the same order every time. Please feel free to enhance the script, I can think of a couple of ways it could be better. The .bat file script (cut and paste everything from "@echo off" down to the "GOTO :eof" line into a .bat file) @echo off SET COUNT=1 REM FOR /f "tokens=*" %%G IN ('dir /b .\*.wav') DO (call :renum "%%G") GOTO :eof :renum copy %1 %count%_%1 set /a count+=1 GOTO :eof

I concur with your decistion opting for the more direct and simpler solution. Would you mind editing your post that was used for the green "Mark Solved" block so the proper FET code shows up in the top post. Thanks!

This script is to help make backing up and restoring IRs to the same slot a little easier. For anyone looking for a quick way to add an incremented prefix number to all their IRs. Still an imperfect solution for IR backups but I hope this helps. I wrote a DOS script inspired by some suggestions on the web for adding an incremented numbered prefix to all of your IRs at once. I considered doing it in PowerShell but I thought more people might be comfortable with a DOS script. It can be run from a Windows directory or any Command window (DOS prompt) As of right now numbered prefixes are the only way I know of to be able to dependably restore IRs after a firmware update and global restore in the same order so that your presets don't point to the wrong IR. I pasted the script here so you can create your own batch file rather than uploading code which always has the possibility of a virus. Cut and paste from this post and just name the file something like IncrementedPrefixIR.bat and run it from the command prompt on a Windows computer. My apologies to Mac users, I am not a Mac person but I am sure it could easily be adapted by someone who is, or run from a Mac DOS emulator. The script is totally non-destructive, only does a copy, and seems to work perfectly but I make no guarantees implied or otherwise. The safest way to test this script will be to copy your IRs and the script to a new directory and run it from there. If anyone has any issues please let me know and I will attempt to fix them. Thanks! Instructions for .bat file use Cut and paste the script into Notepad and save and name the script, e.g IncrementedPrefixIR.bat Make sure you have a .bat extension for the file name. Place it in the directory with your IR files. It will only copy IRs (*.wav) files You can run the script by double-clicking it or using "Open" on the .bat file from the Windows directory, or, alternatively you can open a dos/command prompt and navigate to your IR directory with the script. Then type .\ IncrementedPrefixIR.bat All IRs in the directory will be copied with a prefixed incremented number and underscore. For example, the files "MarshallGreenback.wav" and "MesaBlackWidow.wav" will now have copies named "1_MarshallGreenback.wav" and "2_MesaBlackWidow.wav". You may need to refresh your directory to see the new files. If you run the script twice you will end up with two sets of copies. You can now either move your prefixed copies to a new directory or delete the old files without prefixes (make sure you have a backup of them somewhere else first). You can now order the Windows directory on name and all your IRs can be imported into the Helix in the same order every time. Please feel free to enhance the script, I can think of a couple of ways it could be better. The .bat file script (cut and paste everything from "@echo off" down to the "GOTO :eof" line into a .bat file) @echo off SET COUNT=1 REM FOR /f "tokens=*" %%G IN ('dir /b .\*.wav') DO (call :renum "%%G") GOTO :eof :renum copy %1 %count%_%1 set /a count+=1 GOTO :eof

Ah, yes, I see your point, this remains a workaround rather than a fix as it does not work in certain scenarios. I stand corrected.

Awesome! Irie, respect!

When we are not going through our own PA that is my setup these days as well and then direct to the PA. If we are using our own PA I don't even bother with the L2 as I have my Helix monitor sound set up quite nicely through our wedges. I always use the L2 for building my presets though as it gives a pretty accurate approximation of what to expect through the FOH.

Thanks for the answer! Still awesome and one more than we had before.

Have you installed the latest 1.11.1 version of the Helix App?

Great to know, thanks for researching this! You may want to hit the "Mark Solved" button on your answer to get that lovely green color for an answered topic :D

If you have not tried a global reset yet this might be your first step (make sure you have bundle, setlist, and individual preset backups of everything first). I would probably wait for an answer from L6 or contact them directly with this question. I would think rolling back the firmware and restoring presets made with the older version of the editor that accompanied the 1.06.5 firmware would be no issue but restoring presets made with the current editor version and firmware to an older version of the firmware may NOT work. Definitely a question for the experts! Not sure why this happened. In the meantime an approach that might work is to back up your new presets made with the 1.10 firmware and editor individually, you can highlight them all at one time and hit the "Export" link. They can be imported back en masse with the "Import" link in the same fashion. If you still have your backups of the older presets from the previous editor/firmware version you can roll back to the previous firmware, restore your old (1.06.5) backups, save them again, and then go through the upgrade process again. Once the upgrade process is completed you can restore both your old presets and the new ones from the 1.10 firmware backup that you exported individually, of course there is no guarantee the outcome will be any different. Backup (twice) a bundle, all your individual setlists, and all your individual presets before attempting any of this. That way, worst case scenario you can at least get back to where you are now.

I am all for minimizing load times and you left out the part of my quote that says if they need to take an incremental approach, on/off functionality would be a good place to start. However, I hope they include parameters as well as on/off if they give us scene functionality. If adding parameters to a scene adds load time that still leaves the user with a choice as to scene latency which is likely to be far less than preset latency; and again, that way you have the choice, you can not include parameter switching in your scenes. And let's not forget that scene switching includes spillover, so it is not just about latency. An analogy might be the way Line6 implemented their DSP in order to give users a choice on how to load blocks up rather than limiting them to for instance one Mod slot, one distortion slot, etc.. I see no reason not to continue their own development model that allows users to design presets in a manner that utilizes the Helix's resources in a fashion ideal for that user rather than hobbling the unit so for instance you don't get an "out of DSP" message; or in this case a potentially imperceptible increase in latency (parameters vs. no parameters). Why encourage only a partial scene mode when you have no idea if, or how much additional latency including parameters would entail? That is for the L6 engineers to determine.

Genius! And this solution requires no modifications to the Helix only to the cable being plugged in. Could you please post a graphic on how to wire this if you feel so inclined although your clear instructions will probably suffice for most. Does this provide full TRS (two possible amp input) functionality? If so the Helix can now potentially accommodate a total of four jack switching options on an amp thanks to your work. Thanks! You just provided some free R&D Line6 might want to include in the next Helix. This post is yet another that should be a permanent addition to the HelixHelp.com page for guitarists who want to switch for example between all the channels on their Mark V or be able to change channels as well as kick EQ and reverb in/out.

HelixHelp.com is third party. It is run by a forum member.

I think HelixHelp.com would be a perfect spot for this list to reside ultimately.

Thanks for bringing this to our attention. I was not aware of this technology, I will be researching it.

I own and still like the Vetta as well, and what stands out in my memory is it was the first time I remember owning a guitar oriented product that actually got better after I bought it. I remember my total surprise and gratitude when for the first time in my guitar equipment owning career, Line6 issued a free update that added bugfixes and more models and effects. To me, Line6 was the progenitor and dominating force in adding value (not resale value) to guitar equipment after the initial purchase. This has now become a standard for other manufacturers and in many ways I grant the credit to Line6 for pioneering it. That is why I encourage and hope they will continue the trend that arguably they started, or at the least were hugely influential in, with timely and valuable upgrades and additions to the Helix before their attention turns to the next latest and greatest toy.

If it could be powered via phantom on the XLR you could plug the XLR ouput on the G10 into the Mic input on the Helix (with Helix phantom power set on) and power it directly from the Helix. That would be awesome although I am not sure how differing impedance and having a mic preamp in the chain might impact the guitar sound. Future versions of the Helix might want to include impedance setting and the ability to switch the mic preamp out of the chain on the XLR input as there appear to be some great alternate options for using this input.

The exception to this method is when the path is already full. It would be great if there was an "Insert Block" option under the Action button that allowed you to insert a new block in this use case and would automatically adjust and move the blocks like the current functionality down to the second path where necessary(when you have a dual path Serial or Super Serial scenario). I generally try to always leave at least one block space available and instead open up a second Serial path to add additional blocks to avoid this situation when I am designing my presets. That way if I have to add another block I don't have to start reshuffling blocks to Path B to make room. If not on the Helix itself, the "Insert Block" functionality would be a nice addition to the Editor but low on my priority list.

+1 I am familiar with that MIDI controller and that unique "Pass Parameter" feature and this is an ingenious way to use it! Thanks for the tip! This is one that should go in the HelixHelp "Tips & Tricks" section.

I agree the Helix does seem to be fairly forgiving regarding using multiple guitars with the same preset but I currently customize each preset to a specific guitar, you can use different setlists for each guitar as well. In the ideal scenario I suppose you would have a "Guitar 1", "Guitar 2", "Guitar 3", etc. choice in the menu. Each one could potentially be a different set of global options and a different global EQ. This would provide max ease and flexibility when switching between guitars but a setlist per guitar works fairly well for now (unless of course you have 14 guitars ;) ) although it requires some duplication of effort -- copying and tweaking the same presets to multiple setlists, uses up more preset slots(although there are so many this is generally not an issue), and is not as simple and user friendly as just being able to switch to the global options and global EQ for an alternate guitar would be.

Agreed, the first option (on/off assigment) would be a great start, but full scene functionality would be ideal. This is the ability to not only assign the on/off function for a block to multiple footswitches but also to assign any parameter to multiple footswitches. Right now you can only assign a parameter to a single footswtich. Full scene functionality allows for example, assigning three switches to respectively "clean", "crunch", "solo" and having each switch be able to change the drive, bass/mid/treble, and master volume on the amp and dial in different parameter settings in your effect chain (distortion, delay, reverb, etc.) as you press different footswitches. Right now, a parameter can only be assigned to one footswitch with a min/max setting. I would think once the functionality to assign on/off to multiple switches is there, including the same functionality for parameters would be just as easy to implement. If they give us scenes I hope they go for the whole ball of wax. However, if they take an incremental approach, on/off would be the best place to start.

Expectation versus obligation is certainly a legitimate philosophical debate and a very thin line when it comes to items as expensive (at least to me) and complex as the Helix. I know you did not expressly use the word but in some sense we are probably talking about "entitlement". I certainly have my own sentiments and sense of disgust regarding an unreasonable sense of entitlement. However I think entitlement can also become a code word for bashing either someone else's priorities, or any attempt to improve the Helix. Given the pressure to bring products to market there is a point to be made that companies do actually have an obligation to flesh out products for early adopters who buy them with full confidence that the company will make sure they are ultimately relatively bug free and have a comparable although perhaps different feature set to other competing products. With fierce competition it has become common to release a product to market and use the sales cycle for additional development cycles. Besides all else this allows the company to determine how many development resources to allocate to the product based on sales figures. Nonetheless, I certainly understand those who feel that "obligation" is too strong a word and I hate to get caught up in semantics when ultimately I feel most forum users and Line6 work best when we work together. Both customer and company need to exercise reasonable expectations of each other. I would like to think that when the semantic argument is over that the company is left feeling they have produced a first rate product and earned decent profits, the customer is happy with their purchase, and both parties feel confident in each other's commitment to ongoing efforts to rock this world.

I am surprised to hear this, the most extensive and exhaustive review I have seen gave the Helix top marks on build quality. What specifically cost the Helix a star on build quality? Here is the most thorough review I have seen, this guy actually opens up and deconstructs the Helix and he feels the build quality is top notch: http://www.tonymckenzie.com/line6-helix-effects-unit-floor-pedal-inside-and-out-review.htm

So you think people should expect that what is essentially a bleeding edge hardware design with a complex application on top of an operating system to be in its finished state the day its is released to market? I know of very few new and innovative pieces of hardware with extensive applications or operating systems that don't require upgrades, bug-fixes, and enhancements as part of their lifecycle and people do have an expectation of them based on past experience with other similar products. Successful and responsible companies provide support and improvement. Whether or not all their customer's expectations come to fruition, some new products are purchased not only for what they are but for their future potential, and this product has a lot of potential. This is not the family toaster! Helix users generally don't expect it to be exactly the same in a year. There are plenty of other products that are exceptions to your assertion that we shouldn't buy the Helix if we expect any improvements; at least the long-lived better ones that retain a loyal user base . I would like to think people with reasonable expectations who buy the Helix for what it could be will end up being described as chronically hopeful rather than "chronically disappointed". A much better outcome for all parties. The user's on this forum have a reasonable expectation of improvements and additions to this product. Line6 certainly has not told its customers, this is the Helix in its finished state. How does your statement contribute in any way to the improvement of this product? Do you even own a Helix? If so it does not appear you have much of an interest or faith in its ongoing development. How is a healthy dose of sarcasm combined with a dour pronouncement about how ridiculous it is to think the Helix "MIGHT" be better one day a contribution to this forum? So what, if fastnloud appears to have had some bad experiences with Line6 in the past and has given up on the Helix (for now). I don't see any reason to ridicule or harass the guy, he does not appear to be a troll. I for one hope Line6 surpasses his expectations and he repurchases it at some point. If not, no harm, no foul, Different strokes for different folks. I know people including myself don't always express themselves in the most diplomatic fashion possible but it seems like some people only jump in a thread just to stoke the fire. There is enough of that going around already and after all, that is what Facebook is for ;)