HonestOpinion

That does look like the right cable from Thomann (NL4 --> 1/4). But I would add this caveat, apparently although NL2 jacks have a standard wiring scheme, NL4 do not. Here is a warning from one site regarding the use of NL4 jacks. "If either your amplifier or speaker cabinet are equipped with NL4 type Speakon jacks, it's naive to assume the wiring scheme. To construct a proper cable, the panel jacks must be positively identified as being NL4 type and the pin-out configuration of both the amplifier NL4 jacks and speaker NL4 jacks must be known.". See this link: http://www.audiopile.net/Technical_Library/speakon_explained.htm The manual for your amp does have the pin assignment diagram for their NL4 connectors. You might want to provide that to Thomann and verify that their cable wiring matches that and your Marshall. https://images.thomann.de/pics/prod/c_156554ff_en_online.pdf I don't think there is an external switch on this amp to change the ohms at the output. Cruison2 is right about it being difficult to predict the wattage output into a 16ohm input because not only is the 16ohm rating not included but you would expect it to be roughly half of the wattage into an 8ohm input. The spec listed in the manual has 700watts into 4ohms and 450watts into 8 ohms which seems a little strange. I would have expected to see the 700watts rating roughly halved to 350watts at 8ohms. I defer to the experts out there to explain why this amp's output wattage may be rated this way. Here is the blurb from the manual regarding parallel, stereo, or bridged operation: STEREO | PARALLEL | BRIDGED switch Switch to select the operating modes ‘STEREO’ (both channels operate independently of each other), ‘PARALLEL’ (the inputs of both channel are interconnected) and ‘BRIDGED’ (both channels are interconnected to form one channel with double output power) In your case where you are just hooking up the Helix you could select either the "Stereo" or "Parallel" mode ( Helix --> Chan. A input, Chan. A output --> Marshall cab). It probably makes more sense to select "Stereo" even though you are not running out to two cabs but either setting will probably work given your intended use. Just DON'T use "Bridged" mode. The "Parallel" mode in essence acts almost like a simple onboard mixer/combiner for the power amp. If you wanted to plug in both the Helix and an Ax8 for example you could use the Chan. A input for Helix, Chan. B input for the Ax8, select parallel mode, and the output from both the Line6 and the Fractal would be combined and appear at both the Chan A and Chan. B outputs giving you the option to select either channel's output for connection to your Marshall cab. The main difference on the parallel versus stereo setting is that in "Stereo" each channel will act independently. So anything plugged into Channel A will be output only to the A output and anything into the Channel B input will be output only to Channel B. If you use the amp in "Parallel" mode anything plugged into the Channel A or Channel B inputs will be combined and output to both the Chan. A and the Chan. B outputs. Last but not least just wanted to reiterate I would have the volume for both channels way down low before trying this out. Good luck!

A "nifty analogy festival" is like a Renaissance Fair without the medieval costumes, or giant turkey legs, but with the jousting. Learned that one at the "Simile Tent" workshop at the festival ;)

It is probably worth opening up a ticket, especially if you can reliably reproduce the bug. Even if there has already been a ticket created it is helpful to support if they can get a good description of how to reproduce the bug and are aware that it impacts more than one user. Some most likely not relevant text from the 2.21 firmware notes but I thought it might be worth referencing: - Global Settings > MIDI/Tempo > Receive MIDI Clock—Helix can now synchronize its time-based effects (such as delay and modulation) to incoming MIDI clock from external DAW software, drum machines, keyboard workstations, or other modelers. Select “Off†(Helix ignores MIDI clock), “MIDI†(Helix responds to clock received at its MIDI IN jack), “USB†(Helix responds to clock received via USB), or “Auto†(Helix uses its internal tempo generator until receiving clock from either MIDI or USB) - Global Settings > MIDI/Tempo > Send MIDI Clock—Helix can now transmit MIDI clock to synchronize the tempo of external pedals, rack gear, and software. Select “Off†(Helix does not transmit clock), “MIDI†(Helix transmits clock from only the MIDI OUT jack), “USB†(Helix transmits clock only via USB), or “MIDI+USB†(Helix transmits clock from both MIDI and USB)

You make a good point and this is why the mismatch rules appear to violate common sense until you apply the water&pipe analogy. Perhaps it is a matter of degree and "how much harder" the amp is working. Too low an impedance on a cab can be kind of like setting up your cab for a concert on a cliff side. You go to move your cab two feet expecting it to weigh 50lbs and it only weighs 3lbs. Both you=amp and the cab go over the cliff from too strong a push.

Great analogy, this helped me wrap my head around why ohm mismatch rules seem to work so counter intuitively.

You are right about there being a potential difference in the sound when running into a cab with a higher impedance than the rated impedance output on the amp, but this generally does not damage the amp unless the impedance is grossly mismatched. It would seem on the face of it that if the cab has too low an impedance rating than the amp would need to push less hard and do less work but that is not the way it works. Even though it is not intuitive, generally running into too low an impedance is what is more dangerous as it actually makes an amp work too hard and is more likely to cause an amp failure. When the cab does not have a high enough resistance(ohms) the amp just keeps pushing and that is when you can have something burn up. The scenario you ran for years (an 8ohm amp into a 16ohm cab) is perfectly fine with most amps, the mismatch is in the right "direction", and is generally safer than for instance running a 16 ohm output on an amp into a 4ohm cab(s). As stated though, some equipment is more tolerant than others to mismatches and will result in zero damage to speaker or amp . Maybe an electrical engineer on the forum could explain this better but when an amp does not see enough resistance in the speaker cab it keeps working harder rather than less and is more prone to damage. Goes against common sense but there it is.

I would start with the volume way down on the power amp as it was designed for PA not a guitar cab. Make sure the power amp is not in "bridged" mode as this would probably be more power than you want going into the cab. If you can find it online or better yet know how to test with a multimeter try to figure out the ohm rating for the output(s) of your amp and and the input(s) of your 1960A cab. You might want to keep in mind that if you do have to go with an impedance mismatch it is always safer for the cab and especially the power amp to have the higher ohm setting be on the cab, NOT the power amp. For example 8ohm output from the power amp into 16ohms on the cab is preferable to doing the reverse. The higher resistance on the cab keeps the power amp from having to work too hard and potentially burn something. It will also be easier on the cab. With that said, running too extreme an ohm mismatch in either direction can damage the amp or speaker. Also, some equipment is more forgiving than others about impedance mismatches, especially if the ohm ratings are close to each other, regardless of whether it is the amp or the cab that has the higher ohm rating. You may also find that you can get away with using some of the Helix cab sims even though you are already going through a Marshall cab. Not a hard and fast rule there.

I agree with this and other comments here. A digital modeler into a full range speaker already delivers a level of faithfulness and accuracy to the material being played that many analog signal chains don't possess. The frequency range tends to be wider and the frequency response more even across a wider range. Add a tone rich in mids and high end, especially a clean sound, no compression, and no EQ dips, and you can end up with a very unforgiving sound that reveals every mistake and nuance in technicolor. I noticed this in our friends' bands and our own band when we moved from old analog mixing boards and unpowered speakers to digital mixers with modern powered speakers. The vocals and guitars generally sounded much clearer and more articulate and accurate with a superior high end. The vocals now required a better job of EQ to prevent them from sounding too harsh while exposing every frequency and bit of timbre, pleasant or otherwise, in the singer's voice. We also had to adjust mentally to the sound of hearing our voices more clearly in the monitors. You don't get the same cover of "mud" in the monitors and FOH that you did with so many older PA systems. Mud that could sound very musical, very forgiving, and provide some cover. Modern digital sound systems and speakers are like starting with a perfect view and a pair of perfectly clear sunglasses and adding tint (EQ, compression, etc.) until the sun stops burning your retinas. Not saying a great soundman can't dial in an old analog system for that kind of clarity but generally they didn't or couldn't. My bandmates and I have definitely observed that some of our friends bands' older analog PA systems sound like ours with a blanket thrown over it. Not near as present or clear although sometimes those older systems still sound great, just in a more muted way.

I have had air conditioners kicking in cause equipment problems before so that is certainly a possibility. There have been some problem presets in various firmware versions that were able to cause substantial mayhem on the Helix. Everything from strange block behavior to lockups. The first thing I would do is see if I could recreate the problem with the same preset that caused it initially. In the past sometimes simply changing a parameter and then saving has been enough to fix some of the preset problems, if not, creating it again from scratch is always an option.

This is a total guess on my part but since this problem seems to be happening on pedals that were previously working fine, I wonder if it could have anything to do with the hex bolt for the internal expression pedal loosening up. This might cause the pedal to jitter a little when the footswitches are pressed and maybe that is causing the auto calibration function on the Helix to constantly recalibrate the pedal. Don't have anything to base this on, and it might well be erroneous, just throwing out some wild conjecture.

One more thing occurred to me. I am not sure what the implications of trying to load your presets to a Helix that has a newer firmware version with, for example, an older Editor version. I would probably make a point of downloading the version of the Editor that matched the rental Helix's firmware version when I loaded up my presets. Make sure you have internet access, or better yet, just download but don't install all of the "Helix" app versions so you will always have access to the one you require. No telling what version Helix a rental company is going to throw at you unless that is specified in the rider and taken care of as well. I would probably consider keeping a few different firmware versions of my backed up presets handy just in case.

You indicated it had been working with your other band with no issues. Did anything change in your rig other than the location with your other band. I would look for anything different with either the power or in my rig's setup.

Some great suggestions from MusicLaw. I might be a little cautious about updating a Helix being provided by a rental company depending on how much time I had before the show though. Would hate to run into an upgrade problem that hung the Helix an hour before a performance. I think some firmware versions cooperate across preset versions better than others. It is probably largely contingent on what has been added to or changed in the firmware since the last upgrade. Big changes between firmware versions might be more likely to cause a problem in the event of a preset/firmware mismatch. It also may depend on how many revisions difference there is between the rental's firmware and your presets. Chances are old presets will work better with new firmware than the reverse. New firmware will attempt to "rebuild" your older presets to the new firmware version. Trying to use new presets with old firmware where an effect or setting may exist in the new preset but not in the older firmware seems like it is more likely to cause problems. I would also suggest always rebooting the loaned Helix after you load your presets as you will notice, at least as of the current 2.21 firmware, that your newly loaded presets will display a "Rebuild..." message as the Helix boots.

I'm curious, how do you ensure that the Helix will be at the correct firmware level for your presets? Do they always provide a Helix with the latest firmware version loaded?

Your firmware version will be displayed on the Helix as it boots up and also in the upper left hand side of the Editor screen. To see your Editor version open up the Help --> 'About Helix' screen in the Editor's menu. As others have indicated just having the latest firmware does not ensure that you have the latest Editor and driver. You need to download and install the "Helix" application version that matches your firmware in order to have the correct Editor and driver for your firmware. Running the global reset footswitch combination is what loads the latest factory templates and presets (also wipes out all user presets and IRs and resets global settings to default). You can find some nice links to free IRs at the link below as well as the many that can be found with the Google machine. http://line6.com/support/topic/17076-links-for-free-impulse-responses-ir-here/?hl=free+impulse

It looks like you will need an adaptor like the one listed below. Of course the PRS manual says to only use their footswitch and cable so caveat emptor, don't know if this will damage your amp. Once you have the adaptor cable maybe you could use the CV output on the Helix to switch channels. Seems like it would likely work but maybe someone else with a Helix who has been using the PRS Archon amp could chime in if they have done this successfully and spare you the stress of being the test subject. https://btpa.com/AS-ARCHON-XX.html

If you haven't already it might be worth experimenting with changing the input block from "Multi" to "Variax" or vice-versa. Also the usual advice of unplugging and reseating the VDI cable on both sides. Is the Variax Bass 705 upgraded to whatever the last firmware was for that instrument? Even if it is perhaps reflashing it would help? I wonder if everyone with the Variax Bass 705 is having the same issue?

Any observations by Ben Adrian or others in those discussions that you found particularly useful? I tend to adjust Sag, Bias, and BiasX parameters to what sounds best to me for a given preset but Hum and Ripple I tend to just set very low. Now you have me thinking maybe I should be paying closer attention to the Hum and maybe also the Ripple parameters.

Great detailed write-up regarding some of the design decisions for the Editor and now I guess Native as well . Thanks DI! It still seems that drop-down menus would be preferable for many parameters that are alpha rather than numeric. If you need to select between multiple "unpredictable" text options, rather than for example, a predictable numeric parameter that goes from 1-100, a dropdown menu allows you to see all of those options at once and is easier and faster to use. This is particularly true when there are a large number of text options. A slider forces you to scroll horizontally through each parameter option one at a time. Drop-down menus seem to also share many of the GUI advantages that DI detailed when explaining the choice of sliders, including their relative ease of implementation and positioning in an evolving and mutable GUI and the fact that they are also fairly touchscreen friendly.

I hesitate to enter into this discussion and I have no dog in this fight. I have a Helix and am quite alright with the $99 price tag. Just wanted to throw this out there. I can understand where Helix LT owners would prefer to see a $200-$250 price tag on Native. We Helix owners essentially got a $100 discount on Native's price for every $500 we spent on the Helix (Helix=$1500; Native discount =$300). If one applied that exact math to the $1000 price on the Helix LT you would expect to see a $200 discount for Native(Helix LT=$1000; Native discount=$200). Similar to many companies however there is an added incentive to buy their top of the line product so $300 to purchase Native for a Helix LT could be considered a fair price given industry practices. I do have to wonder if the price was lowered to the $200-$250 range for Helix LT owners if the increase in the number of sales might not more than make up for the lost revenue on the lower price. My primary interest is in seeing Native be successful and widely employed. I believe that is in all its users' best interests for the longevity and the amount of resources that can be devoted to its enhancement and future development. Lastly, the success of Native will extend to and be shared by the entire Helix line of products. That means a Native success also rolls down to more development for all the devices in the Helix line. So . .. I am not saying that $300 is not the right price for Helix LT owners but if a lower price for Helix LT users translates to more Native (and Helix LT) units sold, happier Helix LT users, and a much larger user base for Native then it may be worth lowering the price for LT users. That kind of outcome would benefit everyone including Line6. The Native software just came out and prices are not written in stone so hopefully if the $300 price proves not to be ideal for either Line6 or their customers, it can be adjusted. I am sure with this said that Line6 has considered carefully how Native should best be priced, and has reasons for their pricing strategy that may not be obvious to the end user, for instance, the balance of how many of each kind of product they are looking to sell - Helix, Helix LT, Native. Hopefully the quality of Native will leave most users happy regardless of its initial purchase price.

The more similar your stage monitor is to your PA speakers, all other variables aside, the better a predictor it will be of the FOH sound, . Common sense dictates that the the closer you get your stage monitor to the same make and model/size of speaker in your FOH whether that is powered or passive, 10" or 15", modern or old, "FRFR" or "powered PA", the more similar they will sound. So the predictability of the FOH will be on a continuum where using your old Mesa Boogie combo on stage as a monitor will probably do the poorest job of accurately predicting the direct sound of your Helix to FOH, and using a stage monitor exactly the same brand and size as FOH will be the most accurate predictor of the FOH sound. My experience has been similar to DunedinDragon's however that once you get FOH and stage monitor roughly in the ballpark, e.g. you are using similar modern powered PA speakers for both stage monitors and FOH, even if they are not exactly the same make and model or your stage monitor is marketed as an "FRFR" like the Friedmans you mentioned, the difference is usually not significant enough to prevent the stage monitors from being a fairly accurate predictor of the FOH.

You definitely do want to always have your "Variax Settings" parameter set to 'Per Preset'. This parameter appears to be a local setting but it is actually global. If you don't set it to 'Per Preset' any saved preset with a Variax input block may not honor that preset's Variax settings properly as it thinks it is being set globally and it may have been changed in another preset. The first thing I would check, given that this is working directly on the Helix but not in the Editor, would be that your software and firmware versions match. You can see the firmware version on the Helix when it is booting and you can see the Editor version by checking the menu under "Help" --> "About Helix". You can also see the firmware version in the upper left hand side of the Editor but this is NOT the Editor version. If the firmware and Editor versions are not matching I would download the correct "Helix" app version for your firmware which will unpack the proper version of the Editor when it is installed. When you do have the proper version of the Editor installed (maybe you did already) and have the input block set to 'Per Preset' for the "Variax Settings" parameter, and the preset saved, I would shutdown the Helix, recheck and replug my VDI cable on both ends, restart and test again. Good luck! Btw, where do you have the Model knob on the Variax set? I have found model selection and operation can get wonky if you have it turned all the way to the extreme, kind of in a "null" position.

This is the link for the Helix 2.21 app for OS X for the Helix floor version. This includes the Editor and Updater : http://line6.com/sof...a.html?rid=7445

I have the same concerns that robbie61 has been expressing about the impact I am having on high frequencies I want to retain being cut along with the nasty ones. When you have a good tube amp the preamp and your cab are making dramatic cuts inherent in their design. The proper EQ is essentially baked into the physical limitations of the amp. You don't have to dial down your high end or engage an EQ pedal with everything cut above 4-5k. This starts with the fact that most guitar speakers frequency response starts dropping off at 70hz on the low end and 5k on the high end. Judging by the sound, I would not be surprised if the frequency response on many guitar amps starts attenuating even earlier than that on both the high and low end. Partly due to the fact that there is no adjustable "slope" parameter in the Helix's high and low cuts it would seem that you really need to use a parametric EQ to be more surgical in the way you do your cuts. Maybe it is purely psychological but when I set a high or low cut, particularly a high cut to something like 5k I can't help but thinking "did I just lop off a good bit of my high/low end just to get rid of a narrow frequency range that give me a boomy or shrill sound?". Perhaps the cuts which look quite severe when made on the Helix are doing the same thing that a tube amp's construction is doing but without an oscilloscope to compare my tube amps's output to my Helix it feels to some extent that when I use a high/low cut I am 'gating' the high/low end rather than subtly rolling it off. This may be exactly what my tube amp is doing without the need for additional EQ but some confirmation as to that fact would be reassuring. This all brings me back to wondering if not only do we need a slope control for high and low cuts but also if we need high and low cuts that take a more complex approach than perhaps they do now in most modelers. A new version of the high and low cuts that not only takes frequency range into account but also frequency response such that the low and high end can be cut without just lopping it off or too severely attenuating the frequency range on both ends. I would think that cabs and IRs would already be designed to do this but on many occasions this does not seem to be what is ultimately rendered in an FRFR. This would be a more complex algorithm that would for example mimic the way a Celestion speaker still reproduces a 9k signal but does it in a manner where, due to the frequency response of the speaker it is attenuated, but not cut. Maybe that sort of logic is already built into the high and low cuts, I don't know, but right now I do have the same concern other users have expressed about cutting too much from my signal just to get rid of offending frequencies when I use high/low cuts. A visual representation of what the low and high cuts in both the cab and the EQ blocks are doing, like the graphing on the global EQ or even an RTA, might be helpful. Maybe ultimately modeling technology will require a modeler and a "smart" FRFR that are designed to talk to each other such that frequency response information can be passed from the modeler to an FRFR speaker in a more granular way so that the speaker knows which frequencies to attenuate or even accentuate and how much, based on the anticipated interaction of the cab/mic that has been modeled and the innate speaker characteristics of that specific FRFR . Currently, sometimes it sometimes seems like the signal being passed to the FRFR is getting too similar a response across the entire frequency range, not tapered or attenuated in the right spots. A kind of perversion of the "Full Range, Flat Response" mantra that gives every frequency roughly the same weighting and volume even though this is not ideal for a good guitar tone. I am still able to get great realistic amp sounds out of my Helix, however a little less EQ tweaking required when going through an FRFR would be welcome as well as a bit more insight or guidance on the best practice for getting closer to a tube amp's intentionally 'limited' sound using the Helix's EQ.

It may not be everyone's favorite setup (I prefer going through an FRFR) but you can go straight to the front of your amp using effects only(commonly recommended when not using 4CM method). Contrary to conventional wisdom though you can also use amp and/or cab blocks. If you are using amp and/or cab blocks they often sound best through a very clean channel with headroom as gangsterusa described above but there may be times when your amp's crunch or lead channels sound just fine combined with a Helix amp/cab block. Just realize that your amp will color any amp/cab blocks you select on the Helix and not necessarily reflect their true character as accurately. Additionally if you use a cab block you are adding a mic'ed cab to your guitar amp's already existing cab. But hey, some people like every emulated amp/cab block from Fender Twin to Bogner and everything in between to be filtered through the sound of their favorite actual tube amp. Nothing wrong with that IMHO, even if it is not the way I have chosen to use the Helix. If you like the way it sounds, do it. Rules are made to be broken, particularly in the digital realm, even when it is interfacing with the analog world.