zooey

I wanted to play an iPod through Helix, and asked the same questions, except that USB isn't a solution in that case. I ended up adding a merge block as suggested above, and wishing for a global setting that let you mix a selected analog input into the final output of all presets at once. I was told by various folks here that the Helix is a Pro unit, and Pros don't need to play mp3's through their guitar rigs, which I don't actually buy, but it is what it is. Helix's overall routing flexibility does give us various solutions, depending on the exact scenario.

I think he's suggesting a change to how the mode switch works, a feature request. Personally, I understand the motivation, but it'd annoy me to have an additional step to get to footswitches mode after selecting a preset in 10-switches presets mode. It's annoying enough already, wish there was a global setting to go immediately into footswitches mode in that case. OTOH, it'd only have that extra step if you added a looper block, which I rarely do, and if you did, you might well want it, so no harm, especially with a global setting to enable and disable it.

Thanks for the real world answer :) Of course many of us have gigged with 1 or 2 channels, plus stomps, or not, that's what there was. 4 channels? No such thing existed, much less hundreds. It's just odd that an amp with so many presets (what is it, 128?) can only access 4 of them without going back to the amp and turning a knob manually. It's like they specifically didn't want it playing in the "pro" (meaning gigging) market.

Ah, right. Corresponding minus is the transmitter sticking out, possible damage to it an/or your guitar if it gets banged around.

Has anyone felt that the high end on the Alesis/Alto FRFRs is pretty beamy at close range, much brighter directly on-axis than not? I know it's physics, and completely not unique or an actual defect, I just don't like it. Given that, has anyone tried any of the typical beam blocker/diffuser solutions out there, commercial or not, and if so, how did it work out? From what I've read, none of them are super great for curing guitar cab beamyness, so there's really no reason to think it'd be any better for this use, maybe even worse, given that more hi-fi goals of FRFR solutions, and the design of such horns. Still, just wondering. In some ideal world, I'd maybe have a Center Point Spacestation, but I'm trying to make do with what I've got, more or less.

Way OT, but I looked at the Mustang III before I ended up w a Helix. One huge drawback seemed to be that it's got tons of presets, but no practical way to recall them on stage, since it doesn't have MIDI in for a footswitch. Am I right about that? How do people gig w it then? Stick to the four patches you can recall w its own footswitch? Or they just don't, it's built for bedroom use?

Not really in the market (yet?), but what's the big plus of the G10 over the G30? Prices are close. Solution for the flimsy battery door problem I hear is a big deal w the G30?

Totally applaud bringing the moral and legal implications into this, but these are murky waters IMO. How is this different from an IR of a proprietary (and likely way more expensive to develop and produce) cab, and/or amp, or fx unit? If it's not OK to create a facsimile of a piece of hardware or software using other means, Helix itself would be blatantly illegal. The whole music industry is struggling with the moral/legal edges of "fair use" in various digital contexts. Outright sampling and reuse of recorded music is clearly not OK, and you can't market something using another company's trademarked name, but I'm not aware of any legal precedent about IRs. But then again I'm not a lawyer. As to whether it's morally OK to do anything that may harm the developer of something we're glad got built, especially a small company, I'd say no. Practically speaking, maybe it depends on the scale of the harm?

Speaking of preamps, since they provided all these cool preamps, it's a shame they didn't provide the matching power amps too. Owner's manual says the preamps are for running into an external power amp, but mixing and matching at that level be a great option inside Helix too.

Sorry I wasn't clearer. I mean a preset for one amp, cab, or effect, recallable separately, without leaving the patch you're in. So while you're editing a preset, you can insert a block from a saved amp preset, or apply those settings to an existing block. It'd also be great if you could save default settings for each item, so inserting it gets you your custom version, not the factory one. Amplitube lets you save presets for individual amps, cabs, and effects, as well as whole pedal boards (each preset has two), rack effects (again two per preset), etc. Applying them is as simple as choosing from a right-click menu. You can't set the defaults though.

Anyone else noticed how quiet the Zed preamp is? I actually thought it didn't work when I first pulled it up, but it was just too quiet to hear.

Really wish you could save named presets for individual amp, cabs, and effects

Anybody have any idea how to get close the wah texture in EXP, from Axis Bold As Love? Really different than every other wah sound I can think of. Of course a lot of it is no doubt the player (kida good, ya know), but I'm wondering if anyone knows anything about the wah pedal itself.

Agreed, upvoted.

That's kind of the question I was asking myself: a ) Do bypass the global EQ, build my patches so they sound good the 112s? b ) Or do I EQ the 112s to sound good with good recordings, and build my patches so they make sense in the context of those mixes? In both cases, I'd use the global EQ for headphones, and stage adjustments in weird rooms, and let the FOH person handle FOH. Let me guess, most folks do (a), rock what's sitting in front of them :)

I'd think you'd want to back up all setlists that have anything in them besides the default New Preset, unless you have one that's just a temporary scratch pad. Personally, I have patches like that, but not whole setlists.

Wow. That's all.

Next chapter: Today I turned off the global EQ, and played some commercial recordings I know pretty well through the 112s, to see what I thought from that arguably less biased perspective. Completely different than what I thought on first listen to my Helix presets. I thought there was a pretty narrow peak about 100hz, common just above the rolloff point; cabs are often built that way to feel like there's more low end than there really is. Took that out w the global EQ. And they're too bright IMO, took 2.5 db out at 8k, pretty wide. They sounded pretty reasonable to me then. There's not that much deep bass relative to a full mix, but I knew that. They're 12" woofers, spec is 51Hz-20kHz (-10db), and 10bd's a lot. A DJ would need a sub, I don't for guitar, haven't played bass through them much, but I'll just have to live w whatever I get. So does it make sense to start there, EQ my presets to work with an overall curve that makes commercial records sound reasonable, to me? Maybe play along w those mixes, see how my tones fit in? I feel really weird asking these modelers-101 questions. Back in the day I was a professional musician, sound man, and custom electronics guy, for decades. But w my guitar rig back then, I just tried to get what was in front of me sounding like something I liked. These perspective questions didn't exist, or I didn't think about them so directly. As a sound man, I thought my job was like a photographer, in that what's "really there" isn't the question, it's about finding angle to "view" the performance that's some appropriate kind of really cool, and helps the performances get across. So maybe I should just forget all this analytical stuff, make my presets sound good to me throught this rig, let the sounds person worry about absolutes.

One at a time, pretty certain, just asked the same question about adding a Boost switch. One thing you can do is set one up, copy that block, then go through the presets you want to add it to and paste. You'd have to do one insert that way, then the other, since you can only copy one block at a time. Other thing you can do for the future is make a template with those in it, and create new presets from that. Doesn't help for existing patches. EDIT: Beat me to it :)

Just to say it, the amp sound on that iso track may or not be what you're looking for in 2016, it's pretty dirty. Hard to hear if that's what's really there in the full track, but if so, just goes to show what you can get away with if the overall track feels good.

Did you see this post: http://line6.com/support/topic/20704-ampeg-b15n-vs-helix-tuckn-go/ mileskb has "couple of B15N's", which he compared to the Helix Tuck 'N Go model, and in his opinion the Helix version is as good or better. He posted a SoundCloud link to a comparison, but it's messed up now, for me. In any case, I'd certainly start with the Helix model of the amp you'd like to emulate :) And props to Mr Jamerson BTW, just the best. Check this: Don't know how that track was made, but it feels like it's for real.

Ah, right, return inputs. I was thinking only about the main inputs, but clearly a return would work fine. Thanks. Can I mark two different posts as the answer? (Not that that matters a ton.)

When you're in phones plugged into Helix, routing other music through Helix is the ONLY way to listen to backing tracks, a rehearsal tape, a band member's new song, or a tune you're interested in. There simply isn't an alternative, except to fire up the whole studio rig and not use Helix's headphone out at all. Part of what I love about Helix is that I don't have to do that, or even turn on a computer, and when I'm playing on the couch in the living room the full studio isn't even an option. Or maybe pros don't play on the couch? :) Practical question: Am I right that if a patch already uses both paths, there's no way to route external audio that bypasses the guitar processing? (I thought for a second that if you weren't using both the 1b and 2b paths, you could leave the input set to Multi, split right after that, route the guitar and external audio to 1a and 1b respectively, with all guitar processing on 1a, and do the same and path 2. But then I realized that there's no way to get from path 1 to path 2 that preserves that separation, unless you made everything mono.)

"in the way"? In the sense of consuming development time maybe, but I can't believe no pro musician (was one for multiple decades) ever wants to play music through their FRFR rig. Still, agree that it's cool you can do it at all.

Understood, thanks.