HonestOpinion

In addition to your ears you can also use a decibel meter or any of a number of free decibel meter apps for smartphones for an objective measure of the output volume across snapshots although that does not really take Fletcher-Munson into consideration. Adding a volume block to your presets also allows you to make changes on the fly with the internal or an external expression pedal. I would still love to see an output meter of some kind added to the Helix though. I like jumpy colored lights, they go well with the tuner... :P

I agree and have been requesting this change since I first received my Helix. I submitted the Idea back on Oct, 2015 requesting this and it would make a much more informative home screen as well as make editing easier. You can vote it up here: https://line6.ideascale.com/a/idea-v2/787888

Granted that with a standard amp control configuration the Drive/Preamp adds preamp level and usually distortion on higher settings and the Master volume adds power amp level. I understand Ben Adrian's description of how Master volume only amps have been modeled but I want to make sure my understanding of how the models of amps that originally had both a pre-amp and power amp volume control work on the Helix. I have often found for amps with a master(power amp) and preamp volume control, turning the Master up all the way to 10 and then gradually turning the Drive/Preamp volume up can deliver the cleanest sound at the highest volume that the amp is capable of. Particularly on higher wattage amps/cabs with plenty of headroom there may be no appreciable increase in grit or distortion as the Master is turned up all the way. Starting the Drive/Preamp volume at 0 with the Master at max and coming up slowly on the Drive/Preamp control delivers louder clean tones than for example, backing off the Master from max and adding more Preamp/Drive volume. Of course when the preamp level gets above a certain point most amps tend to start demonstrating some distortion. I guess what I am saying is that on many amps I have played with both preamp and power amp controls turning up the power amp control does not necessarily add perceptible grit or distortion, just volume. How the Master volume control works I suppose depends on the specific amp and cab used but many I have tried work as I just described. It sounds like Ben Adrian's implementation of the Master volume, depending on the amp modeled, may be a bit more nuanced than the way I traditionally expect a Drive/Preamp control to interact with the Master volume. I am referring to modeled tube amps that already have both pre-amp and power amp level controls. I understand that adding a pre-amp volume to a model of an amp that originally had only a Master volume may work a bit differently. I guess I am trying to establish if turning up the master volume to max will add more grit, even with a low Drive setting, on a model of an amp that originally had both a pre-amp and master volume? I don't expect more grit generally from turning the master up to 10 unless the original amp modeled only had a master volume control, was low wattage, or had a lower power handling speaker that distorted more easily.

Really loving the new "Bypass/Controller Assign" screen in HX Edit 2.30! A single screen where you can see and edit all footswitch/controller assignments in one place. This makes it infinitely easier to see what is assigned where. By clicking on any of the assignments on the split screen on the left you can now set all your assignments from a single screen instead of having to go searching for assignments and clicking back and forth between all the blocks (although you can still do that as well). Click on any of the three headings (Block, Parameter, or Source) to sort by that category with color coding to create different and clear lists of all assignments. This is a huge improvement over the old bypass assign screen. Great implementation. Fantastic! Very happy to see this feature make its way into Helix Edit. Thanks Line6!

Yup, good tip! Just to expand a bit on what others here have already laid out. The "Restore From Backup" screen does not come up with the Setlists expanded out so they can be seen individually. You will notice however the arrow indicating this directory can be expanded and lo and behold, there are the Factory, Template, and User setlists. They have added and even edited Factory presets as well as ones in the Templates directory in the past so at least for now if you have not upgraded yet you will probably want to uncheck the Factory and Template directories if you want to get the latest ones from Line6. I don't know if they added anything to the Templates setlist this time but as noted by other users they did add some new presets. If you want the latest and greatest stock presets and maybe templates from Line6 but you have already upgraded to 2.30 and went through the restore process without unchecking the Factory and Template setlists on the restore you can do the following : Back everything up to be on the safe side. Make sure you do a "Create Backup" from the "File" menu per the new Helix Edit 2.30. I also exported my setlists, IRs, and presets separately to be thorough. Restart using the proper footswitch combination for a global reset as per your flavor of Helix. Helix = FS 9&10; Rack = Encoders 5&6 Use the "Restore Backup" command in the "File" menu on the new Helix Edit 2.30 to restore your backup made with "Create Backup" in step #1. Make sure you expand the "Presets" directory in the restore backup screen and uncheck the Factory and Templates directories if you want the latest stock ones from Line6. After restore completes restart the Helix one more time to allow final rebuild of your restored presets.

A corrupt preset is a likely culprit per Duncann's post. You might also want to try selecting a different directory than the default to backup to. Make sure it doesn't require special permissions.

New update went brilliantly exactly according to plan and firmware release instructions. This is a dramatic improvement to the upgrade process as promised. Loved the fact that the IRs were restored to all the correct slots automatically. No more prepending them with numbers, what a great improvement! The presets rebuilt automatically as part of the firmware process just as the firmware notes indicate. One note though, after you do the restore of your backup and it completes you will want to shut down the Helix and reboot as your newly restored presets will rebuild one more time. Probably better not to start editing them until you allow this final rebuild. Love the new thinner bars in the HX Edit application. Blocks with many parameters that used to require scrolling down the screen now all appear onscreen at the same time. Lots more to love here but I just updated so will reserve comment. Definitely looking forward to the upcoming 3.0 update but this is a very nice incremental one.

A lot of Helix users have found this video useful for setting up MIDI channel switching for their amps. This one is for Hughes & Kettner amps but it should be a similar process.

I suppose you could use the one of the pitch blocks on the Helix to transpose the pitch down 1 octave along with a bass amp block and a bass cab block or IR. Not sure how convincing this would be using an acoustic guitar as the source but it is probably doable and who knows, it might sound great. I don't know how to get a violin sound at all on the Helix although I would not be surprised if someone figures it out at some point, maybe someone already has.

I might just figure out a good way to strap a guitar to a Helix backpack, might have to reinforce the straps. A compact guitar without a headstock like a Steinberger or a travel guitar might reduce your footprint a bit more. I suppose you could have a tailor sew a heavy padded canvas compartment for the Helix to a strong and high quality guitar gig bag if you wanted a custom solution. You would probably require some reinforced carry straps there as well.

Posted a similar request for "Stomp/Preset" in Ideascale two years ago and still hoping Line6 will add this feature to the Helix some time. The core idea remains the same though - the ability to globally swap all your stomp assignments from the top to the bottom row and vice-versa. Vote it up here: https://line6.ideascale.com/a/idea-v2/790520 A script is the only alternative right now.

I actually find the Marshall models on the Helix to be very convincing. I apply EQ with high/low cuts on the top and bottom end as well as parametric cuts in a few other spots. I play through an FRFR and find that I require low pass and high pass cuts at 10khz and 75-110hz. I will usually cut around 5.2khz, 3.4khz or 2.2khz as well. I use a combination of the parametric filter and the low and high cuts on the cab/IR to get my EQ dialed in. For example, I will often apply a 10khz high cut with the cab/IR high cut so I can allow the cab to pass as much signal as possible to the parametric which I apply after the cab/IR. I will then apply a parametric cut or even a parametric low pass cut around 4.2-5.8khz (adjusted depending on the amp and cab used). I use the sweep method on the parametric to fine tune the EQ. I also assign my cab/IR and parametric parameters to snapshots so that for instance a snapshot for a clean sound will get different and generally less cuts than a snapshot for a crunch or lead sound. If you use a guitar cab rather than an FRFR you may find you need to do less or even no EQ depending on what you are playing through. Your requirements may vary depending on what you are using as a monitor. I am able to get all the grit, crunch, and singing lead you find with a Marshall without the harshness through proper EQ. I can play a gig with little to no cuts on these patches but when I listen back to recordings I find that the sound is a little brittle or harsh through my system without proper EQ. My goal is to get as close as possible to the EQ curve published for various Celestion speakers when using Marshall models and I use their frequency curve and my ears as my guide.

My backups directory structure My main director is the firmware version and Editor version: (these have been different upon occasion). Under that are four directories - IRS, Bundles, Setlists, and Presets. When I make new backups I append a new version number to the file rather than doing an overwrite. The files are dated by the OS. Here is a skeletal example. Firmware 2.21 - Editor 2.21 IRS ir1 ir2 etc.... Bundles bundle_1 bundle_2 Setlists user1_1 user1_2 user2_1 templates_1 etc... Presets zep_preset_1 zep_preset_2 floyd_preset morse_preset etc... How many backup sets do you have? I keep all my backups so the answer to this question would be a whole lot. What sort of output would you like from this program? Have not put a whole lot of thought into this but I would like to be able to at least see the following Each IR that is in use and its corresponding "slot" number in the Helix IR list. Not sure how you can do this by parsing the backups. The name of each preset using an IR grouped by IR name and slot number A list of IRs not in use would be very useful A way of comparing the actual name of an IR that a preset use to point to as well as the slot number. Not sure how to do this from parsing backups either. Some kind of a compare utility that enabled you to see if two IRs were exactly the same would be helpful given that you have to currently rename them due to the Helix's short namespace. Utilities that do compares are already out there but having it built into an IR tool would be helpful. Even better would be if Line6 would extend the namespace such that most renames become unnecessary.

Assuming you are on Windows. You can download the driver as gunpointmetal suggests. You can also download the version of the "Helix" app that matches your firmware. This will include the driver as well as the version of the Editor and Updater that match your firmware version. Downloading the latest version of the "Helix" app will provide you with the latest Updater to update your firmware and Editor to the latest version(2.21). Backups first.

Presets from an earlier firmware version will usually load ok as well. You just want to make sure that your Helix is on the same firmware version (best case scenario) or a later one than the presets you are loading. If you load presets from an earlier version of the firmware make sure you restart the Helix after loading as it will do an update process on the newly loaded presets.

All other resale considerations ultimately boil down to this indisputable truth. Maybe things will change somewhere in the distant future for the occasional item held in nostalgic esteem but for now there is really no market that provides a resale value for digital modeling equipment that could possibly qualify it as an investment. Not unless you define an investment as a purchase that makes you money right now gigging/recording or provides you satisfaction as a musician. There is just no great way to anticipate which equipment will end up increasing in value and given that digital equipment is still improving by leaps and bounds every couple of years, your odds of it increasing in resale value or often even retaining significant resale value on the used market are even worse. If you have to sell digital gear you generally need to sell it within a reasonable time after purchase to recoup a good percentage of your buying price. It is not a Stradivarius (or even an old Stratocaster)!

The value of a used Helix appears to absolutely be affected by the advent of Native and its licensing policy. You would expect a used Helix to have a higher resale value if it still meets all of the Native discount requirements, with the transferable original receipt from an authorized seller that still includes a usable $300 discount for Native (original owner has not purchased Native). I don't believe that Line6 is necessarily responsible for what happens in the used resale market although an argument regarding that can probably be made. Their pricing and licensing policy with Native will impact the resale price of used Helices. I suppose a valid rationale on the part of Line6 would be that although you will get less for your used Helix without the ability to transfer Native you will still retain Native and this will compensate you for the reduced price you receive for selling your Helix without a Native discount. This may result in a net win for the original Helix owner who will probably get a decent price for their used Helix, especially from a user who does not care about Native, and the original owner will still have Native to use. The downside will primarily be for original sellers who no longer have any interest in Helix or Native but have already used the Native license discount. That seller will probably receive less for their Helix than one with a valid Native discount. I can also see a potential downside for buyers of a used Helix without a valid Native discount who determine some time after purchase that they would like to have Native (which will then cost them $400), particularly if Native continues to add even more compelling features as I think it probably will. I suspect this debate around the Native licensing policy may hang around for a while and might even result eventually in modifications to the policy (or not). I don't feel strongly about it either way right now but my sentiments could change depending on my future equipment/software decisions. Perhaps Line6 will figure out a way to offer a transferable Native license without resorting to a security dongle or the like. Another option could be a discounted price offered to registered owners of used Helices, maybe less substantial than that offered to the original owner. A discounted Native price for owners of used Helice's could help the resale price for the original owner as well as selling and putting more copies of Native out in the wild. A win-win-win for sellers, buyers, and Line6.

I think CBTL does a great job of using his ears instead of his eyes or "conventional" wisdom to design presets. He made an excellent preset for the Clapton tune "Let It Rain" a while back. His placement for the harmonizer block was between the amp and the cab and it sounds great there. I have used that placement in some other presets even though I would never have thought to put it there myself as it in no way resembles the typical placement at the beginning of the effects chain you would tend to use with an old school analog pedal board.

I think this is a great idea and I also have considered being able to do this exact thing, but not just with pink noise. Although "pinking" might be particularly useful for singer/songwriters and guitarists to some extent, especially those who are using the Helix as their PA or mic processor, it could also be useful and a huge boon for general use for automated adjustment of the EQ of the guitar in a preset. I can think of a lot of cool ways you could leverage a capability like this due to the fact that the Helix has a mic input. You could add a feature that allowed the user to select a target EQ curve or even a target "speaker model" (e.g. Celestion Greenback) and have the Helix automatically adjust itself to that target using the sound from your specific monitor and the room you are in to fine tune your tone. This would be the ultimate in new "intelligent" customized tones that are "aware" of the monitoring equipment and even the room unique to each user. Moving the mic around in the room could even deliver very specific tones for example, the sound of a Greenback being optimally setup for an audience member 20 feet in front center of the stage. I think some of these ideas have been batted around on the forum before. There may be too few people who actively want this such that it might fall towards the bottom of Line6's list of priorities but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be great to have and provide a leap forward in ease of use and accuracy of modeling. How soon this happens probably depends to some extent on how much processing power is required for automated tweaking of a preset and if there is enough return on investment to dedicate the required hardware and/or development resources to doing this. I hope something like this comes around at some point in the future. I suspect it will.

My compliments on your ability to pull off "pinking" a room that is already populated. You must have a flair for diplomacy or a good stand-up routine as I never got comfortable with the audience irritation factor. Maybe I will have to re-approach this again some time. Using a cut you know to get things sounding optimal, like the one you mentioned by Garbage, is a great start. You are still left however with cranking up the PA and using the RTA, GEQ, and mic positioning to fix any feedback issues as they won't show up by playing recorded music.

Yep, because I mainly run a mono path that is my primary motivator and the same concern probably extends to all blocks, not just reverb. I would opt for a mono version for any effect where it was available if it used less DSP (potentially half as much). That would not only leave more room for bloated "everything but the kitchen sink" presets but also provides a way for the Helix to provide more complex blocks that really hog DSP without limiting too severely which other blocks can be used in combination with them. ;)

You are correct sir, it is a simple matter to run a stereo reverb in a mono path currently. I guess the following are my main reasons for wanting to see mono HX reverbs. Some of this I suppose may depend on how DSP usage in HX reverbs shakes out. HX reverbs may use more DSP than current reverbs. Having a mono option could potentially halve this if the current paradigm is maintained (mono blocks use half as much DSP) Is there a preferable audible difference between summed stereo reverb and mono? I don't know, maybe not? If there is a difference it would be great to be able to select a mono block. I do occasionally run up against the DSP limits. This bit of extra DSP would be just the ticket on some presets. In future firmware revisions there may be enhancements made or new parameters added to existing blocks that require more DSP. New effects may be added such as a new synth model, etc. that may require large amounts of DSP. If this is the case you may find yourself needing to select optimized lower usage DSP blocks to combine with the hungrier blocks. Overall I guess I look at DSP optimizations cumulatively. I'm in favor of any place where the code can be optimized to save DSP. Those little incremental gains really mount up over a while and when put together can end up making a fairly substantial addition to available DSP. That can translate into more available DSP for firmware enhancements that result in more complex or detailed models or provide extra available blocks. It can be the difference between seeing every block available when building a preset or pulling up a list with several grayed out and unavailable. DSP saving changes might include code optimizations, a mono version of an effect that uses less DSP, or sometimes just a simplified version of an effect - maybe one with fewer parameters that use less DSP(as long as we keep the more in depth, more DSP intensive version of the block as an option). I'm in favor of incremental gains wherever Line6 can find 'em. I can see however where depending on how a musician uses the Helix, DSP optimization could take a low priority. If you never push up against the limits this is probably one of the last things you want to see worked on. It is pretty stunning what the Helix can do with its current available DSP.

Probably preaching to the choir here but for those of us who tend to run a mono signal chain this is one of the more compelling reasons we hope some updated mono HX reverb options are included in a future firmware revision. Especially as one would think that HX versions of the reverbs would be even more DSP intensive than the current reverbs although perhaps with optimizations that might not be the case(?).

Ain't this the truth! They still make the dbx DriveRack and it is one of these comprehensive PA sound "conditioners" with pink noise generation for automated dialing in of the perfect EQ for a venue. Seemed like a great idea and I bought one several years ago. It ended up going back. Not only did I find I could handle most of the tasks the DriveRack performed without it but the main problem is just as jondufour described. They are fine if you have an empty room or pre-festival for a sound check but otherwise pink noise generation is supremely annoying to everyone within hearing range. Another issue is that a room full of bodies is not gong to have the same sound characteristics as an empty one. This presents you with somewhat of a dilemma if you don't want to bother an audience with pink noise. A fine tool for the proper scenario but it has its practical use limitations and don't expect to be using it to set up in a crowded venue unless you enjoy stale beer and rotten tomatoes flying in your general direction.

I hope whatever improvements are made can be applied, even if it is a limited subset, to my JTV Variax. I purchased it new in the last year, would hate to see it become obsolete already. Guess it depends on what hardware changes in the Variax line are going to accompany the firmware changes.