Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by EdwinV

  1. That's possible.... Please keep the ideas coming... Would prefer to keep it in the loop because all the great

    possibilities that can be done with it....

    You haven't mentioned which AnalogMan Fuzz you have. If it's a Sunface, the only way is to put it in front of the Helix. In the conventional setup you would also put this first in the signal chain after your guitar. It does work with few 'true bypass' effects in front of it, but will act strangely when confronted with a buffered input signal.


    The AnalogMan Astrotone Fuzz is supposed to be less sensitive to a buffered input signal and may work better in the loop. Haven't tested this myself though. If I have some spare time I may try this. I have several Sun Faces, Sun Lions, Astrotones and a Sunbender lying around. Really love those fuzz boxes, but the Helix is so incredibly convenient and sounds great too

  2. To the OP's question: I don't find the reverbs really disappointing


    It all depends on one's expectations and intended use. But I'm not much of a reverb corksniffer anyway; to me, reverb is OK when it's barely audible and you mostly notice it when you turn it of. Since we're paraphrasing here, I guess I'm more in the gearmanndude camp ("reverb sucks") 😜


    In my pedalboard days (which I don't consider to be all past, though I've only been using it scarcely since I got Helix), I didn't even have a reverb at all. Now, I mostly use the plate reverb and sometimes the '63 spring reverb. For me they are absolutely usable. I'll trade any HX reverb for a fuzz face model with switchable trannies (Ge) or a Tonebender MkII any time!


    But as with anything: you can't please them all

  3. I saw a Line 6 page on https://line6.ideascale.com.  Is that the right place to make a feature request for the Helix?  Or somewhere else?



    Yeah, that's the right place. Before submitting, you may want to check if a similar idea has already been submitted. There is also a pinned thread "Helix Ideascale Community Submissions" where you can discuss your idea(s). But I believe that the Line 6 people mainly look at the ideascale site.

  4. PLEASE, if you're going to model a Roland Echo, model the 301 as it has unique preamp circuitry that guys like Brian Setzer use (in part) to achieve that classic growl...


    Nice! Perhaps you can send it to Line 6 for while ... 😉


    I've had the RE-20 on my pedalboard for quite some time. Loved the sound of the delay, but it had a sort of noise gate that I finally grew tired of. In the end, I replaced it by an AnalogMan ARDX20 (which is a great, no fantastic bucket brigade delay).

  5. Are you sure your EXP2 was not also assigned to control another block's parameter? Note that by default EXP2 is auto assigned when you insert a Volume block, so if you have a Volume block in your preset, then you might be adjusting the Volume at the same time with EXP2. I tried your steps and added only an Amp block + a stock cab + an IR (with Allure IR loaded in it), and then assigned EXP2 to the stock cabs Mic Model selection parameter. If I bypass the stock cab, I hear a brief "dropout" in my guitar signal whenever I adjust the EXP2 pedal as it loads a different Mic model for the bypassed stock cab (as expected I suppose) but I don't hear it affect the tone at all.


    Sorry for the confusion; English is not my native language.


    I'm quite sure I didn't assign EXP2 to something else, but the "dropout" you're describing is exactly what I mean. The tone of the IR does not alter, but I did not expect this "dropout" when loading a different Mic model on a bypassed cab block. I would only expect to hear this when you're playing through this cab (when it's not bypassed).

    • Upvote 1
  6. That sounds really interesting. I'll have to try that. Did you have them in series?

    Yes, in series. The cab and IR were next to each other and had a footswitch assigned to both to alternate between them.


    FW 2.12 by the way

  7. Hi,


    I was comparing the new Allure IRS to the helix stock cabs, when I encountered the following:


    I assigned the EXP2 controller to control the microphone stock cab. I noticed when I had the stock cab bypassed and was playing through the IR, that it had an audible effect when I was changing the mic of the bypassed cab.


    This is no real life problem as I wouldn't do this while performing, but it didn't make sense to me. I reckon that this should not be audible when it's bypassed.



  8. However, I find the Champ model doesn't really sound very Champy like that. So I leave those parameters as they are set when the amp loads: Bass 3.3, Mid 6.0, Treble 6.8, Presence 3.5. These default parameters sound much more like a Champ to my ears. Master volume I leave at 10, like God intended. I find the drive at 4 delivers warm cleans that break up with just a little pick attack, but it gets a bit "flat" below that. Drive at 9 really cooks, while I find going past that just turns to mush. (I use this amp with my Strat and Teles and these settings are based on those single coil pickups. You could obviously expect humbuckers to push things a little harder) I have the drive and channel volume assigned to an expression pedal so that heel-down is drive 4, channel volume 10 and toe-down is drive 9, channel volume 8.9. That's a fun thing.


    I use the stock Helix 1x8 Small Tweed cab (haven't committed to one of those IRs just yet...) with a SM57 set back at 2". While it's not bad at lower drive settings, the Champ is quite fizzy at higher drive settings. I reign this in by also assigning the cab high and low cuts to that same expression pedal. Heel-down (clean) has the low cut at 65Hz, high cut at 12kHz. Toe-down (cookin') has the low cut at 100Hz, high cut at 6kHz.

    Thanks! That helps a lot. Can't seem to get it sounding like that '57 Champ though ...


    Maybe that sound is in the fingers 🤔

  9. Curious if you are digging the Helix better now. Setting the IRs to 100% mix should help a lot (try what happens if you bypass them! - and do that on low volume).


    I must say that I don't understand that people immediately start with IRs. I think this only makes things more difficult in the beginning. The Helix has one of the best UIs I've ever seen (reminded me of the first iPad), but I certainly needed some time to get used to a modeler (though I had a POD 2.0 before). Having all these controls can be a bit overwhelming, specially for someone that came from a Marshall 2061X.

    I must say that getting an Alto TS210 helped a lot. That really improved the experience; though the Altos may not be the best that money can, I think they're more than decent powered speakers that really help the Helix experience.



  10. Hi,


    You could do this in multiple ways and also depends on how you are using your Helix. One way would be to create parallel paths (1A and 1B), split them at the beginning of your signal path and have path 1A routed to your normal output. You can configure the output of path 1B e.g. to send1/2 and send that to your tuner.


    Hope that helps!

  11. I already knew the Helix can do much, but that's truly amazing.


    However, I do agree with PeterHamm that this is a risky setup for gigging. Although my Helix has been very stable, your whole setup would depend on the Helix. I wouldn't go out without having a backup Helix in your case ...

  12. A quick note - since the time I wrote my original reply here, Line 6 has updated the Vintage Digital Delay model. They added a "headroom" parameter in the 2.10 release, so increasing the headroom will alleviate the clipping issues mentioned above without having to worry so much about the level going into the block. The one caveat is that the headroom parameter only shows up in the Vintage Delay block if you enter a new one in a tone. If it was a preset created prior to 2.10, you'll have to delete the original block and put it in again for it to show up.

    That's interesting; I can't seem to remember reading this in the release notes. Did I miss something? How did you find out?

  13.   I think I may have noticed a second bug/feature here with trails. The trails from a snapshot are not only being affected if there are different parameters on another snapshot but actually being reprocessed by other blocks. I put a second delay block after the first one I was using to run experiments with trails. If I switch snapshots and the second delay is activated (it was bypassed in the first snapstho) It appears to be processing the trails from the first snapshot and adding a delay to them.  My understanding of trails is that they should not be processed by the blocks from a subsequent snapshot. They are simply the trailing remainder of the last snapshot. I am hoping someone else can confirm this.




    IMHO this is genuine problem or at least a lack of flexibility with how trails have been implemented and I hope it gets addressed at some point.

    Sorry, but is the Helix not just doing what it's supposed to do? With a normal pedalboard, the behavior would be exactly the same. The trails are feeding into everything downstream and whatever you turn on there will affect (effect 😉) your signal.


    If you don't want that, you may try splitting the last part of your signal chain (into A and B path, one delay in A and the other in B ).


    Maybe I'm silly, but I wouldn't want this to be "fixed" ...



  14. Hi, Ive got my helix 99% where i want it for use on a p.a. system and thru 4cm on my dual rectifier.


    Now, ive seen a few people having issues with the update,i wont be using the PRS model or the new effects but someone did say it sounds like the existing models sound better (may be trick of the ear).


    Im using the dual rec model when going through p.a. as i use a real dual rectifier when playing with amp set up,is this model any better sounding?



    I'm not very much into urban legend stories, but I do have the idea that in general it sounds better with 2.10 than 2.01. Or to be more precise, it sounds more like it did with 2.00 (and before). With 2.01 I noticed with some amps a bit of unpleasant distortion that resembled a bit a torn speaker (digital distortion?). One of the amps that suffered much from this was the bassman. I perform all updates exactly according to the instructions and fully restored all presets and - where used - the IRs as well. I even repeated the firmware update but that didn't help.


    With 2.10 it sounds as it used to do. Perhaps I had some kind of glitch with 2.01. Doesn't really makes sense to me.


    The dual rec doesn't get much playtime in my setup, so can't comment on that. Personally, I like the PRS clean amp and I really like the Litigator. PRS lead is not my cup of tea.


    Whether you want to update or not is entirely up to you. I have also read about issues and one that I also had was the one with the expression pedal. Was able to solve that by following the procedure described in this thread: http://line6.com/support/topic/24048-fw-210-expression-pedal-question/

    Posts #4 and #18 worked for me.

  15. Anybody tried the free VOX sneak preview IR? Thoughts? Opinions?

    I tried it and I like it very much. It has very nice sparkling upper mids as well as some kind of clarity to it that's hard to describe. Still has a nice bass response. Haven't been able to get close with the Helix 2x12 silver bell cab (it's clearly similar, but not quite the same).


    Now I'm tempted to one of your 3 Marshall bundles, but which one ... 🤔


    And I am bit reluctant to checking out >1900 IRs, but maybe as you stated one can just start with the "Multi" IRs.

    • Upvote 1
  • Create New...