willjrock

Ok maybe not from the editor then....Unless mine is bugged. because increasing drive level for snapshot #1 increases drive level for all snapshots..or treble, middle, or any of them.

Snapshots much to my surprise dont offer as much flexibility as i hoped. You can really only turn unwanted/wanted fx off and on. You cant automate levels, or remove/add fx, so i wouldnt be surprised if you were asking it to do more than its capable of. I dont know for sure, just giving you a heads up.

Im not sure if id call it a "trick" or not. Any of the pre's will do this. Just keep the elements down that add distortion (if thats what a person wants) and boost those that add volume. Even using a pre model as a distortion pedal works often works well. Some of my best Helix sounds were built by stacking two pres. Though, it can make tweaking feel endless at times.

Hey cool. Never had anyone agree with me before :) Come around more often :)

Just use a snapshot.

Would also love to see an analyzer in the EQ section.

Not the one hes talking about is not. Big difference.

I wish i could thumb you up 73 times. Its like modeling the JCM 900 instead of the 800. Bewildering almost XTC Powerball JMP 2203 Rockerverb Dumble Though, id rather have 10 accurate emulations than 30 so so. The plexis in the helix for example...... UAD version sounds more authentic. Much more.

I think that word resonated with me because i felt similar to you. Ill have to go back to the manual i guess, but for whatever reason, i felt like the wording was "one place to increase and decrease patch volume is- channel volume". Sure its possible, but its not always a practical option. Your other points are noted as well. In support of your comment, if the helix were plugged directly into a set of speakers, an out meter may be useful. Which never occured to me.

When i read your post, i thought you were mistaken, because i had read in (i think) the manual, that a "good" place to control helix patches were, using the channel volume. ....but now after inserting a compressor after the amp block, i see you are 100% correct. Amplifier channel volume DOES influence succeeding fx!

so does that mean you WERE plugged into a 3.0 jack at the time of posting this? just curious.

Just some things to kick around...If i have one amp but more than one output block in a patch, using the channel volume will make things a bit nicer. If i am NOT using an amp block at all, then the output block is my only choice....without adding a gain block or whatever. If i have a compressor after the amp block, and dont want to hit it and harder, i HAVE to use the output block. Try it. I didnt think this was the case as i was reading your post but...try it. So i dont think the channel volume and output blocks are 100% redundant...even tho i didnt think the channel vol "pushed" the other blocks following the amp block at the time of writing this post. Now i do. Now, the gain and level knobs on the LA2A comp are 100% redundant as far as i can see :) That one always bugged me. Well you cant change input levels anyway, so if you are plugging youre guitar straight into helix, input meters would do you no good. Output levels would be read on a mixer (or any device the helix is plugged into) so no need there. The only place i can see a meter useful FOR ME, is a gain reduction meter, for very subtle compression levels.

I would hope the FOH engineer tested another channel. Thats just part of being proficient.

Before you even think about a reset you better have all of your IRs in alphabetical order or you are losing all of your presets with IRs. Lets try something...a simple riff. Take my settings, load them into your Helix, play the riff, double track it, helix volume at 12:30...Leave both track faders set to 0db, pans 84L 84R, try to mix your track as close to -12 as possible without any processing at all (your master fader all the way up-about +10db) and compare it to mine here. Here are my settings (just import and load the file) https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/26654830/UC/AC30%20Heavy.hlx Heres the riff ...Tempo is 105 https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/26654830/UC/hx1.wav Anyone else wants to give it a go feel free. Just to compare how these particular setting might sound from unit to unit...... sure there are other variables, but playing the same riff with the same mix settings, we should be able to get a pretty good idea. I realize this isnt a world class sound :) Im on dell destops at the moment and i just punched buttons up for a reasonably tame low end since the OP expressed specific interest in this area. Could be cool to compare a few though.

As Amsdenj said...i would just drop the 3.0 connection completely if thats where youre plugged in. I had no trouble with mine until i plugged in to the 3.0 jack.

PC here i7 16 GB ramm

Well, i was definitely plugged into a usb 3.0 jack......Only time will tell now. I havnt had any connection problems for the last 4 or 5 months, and i know helix WAS in a 2.0 jack.....so im betting thats it. Appreciate it Amsdenj............ Sorry i missed that. Youve already mentioned it plenty of times. I think i just did a fly-by on this thread. :)

Im not sure if you guys are still thinking this is a MAC specific issue, but im now seeing this on my PC. Have never had a problem until updating to 2.0 and it is persisting in 2.0.1 Started by me seeing a lot of this screen first. but that screen has since chilled out with the 2.01 update and just skips to the "cannot connect to device" screen. Closing and reopening the Editor is the fix but sometimes thats 10 times in an hour. Lately once an hour or less.

Well you cant really change the input levels if you are plugging your guitar directly into the helix, so even if there were input meters, theres not much you could do to make use of them. the best you could do is with your volume knob on the guitar. Your output levels are going to be read on the mixer meters, so seeing the levels on the Helix isnt going to help you any there. The sound guy should probably take a direct line out from the Helix, or mic the RCF unless the XLR has some sort of speaker emulation on it im unaware of. Im unfamiliar with your speaker cab, but plugging an amplifier speaker output into a mixer, would fry both the mixer channel and the amp. You know your stuff better than i do, but just some things to be cautious of.

With Helix cab sounds, being as bad as they are, you will ALWAYS be twiddling. Either get some IRs or keep on L6 until they understand that taking the guitar sound seriously also means taking the cab section seriously, but please dont let yourself be swayed by others here, into believing that the stock cabs are all you need for good sound.. They 100% are not....I guess it goes without saying that you are constantly twiddling because you are constantly unhappy about the sound you are getting.

Everything from my personal monitoring which is a $14,000 set up, to $110 dell desktops, larger PA system, to modest club PA system, to my left over and seldom used, cheap and mid priced nearfield monitors. Ive tried most everything and Helix cabs are seldom used. But then I dont need an expensive, or even the proper monitoring set up, to tell me that the cabs in TH3 sound better than Helix. They sound better on every set-up ive tried.....and furthermore, one shouldnt need the "perfect speaker set-up" to make Helix itself, or the native cabs sound good. This is cabinet tone my friend. Sonic signature defined by a combination of speaker model,, cab construction, mic, and placement....among other variables.. all essential to building a great guitar tone. If you find a very faithful replication of some of the most sought after speaker/cab/mic combinations in history of guitar........and you find that to be overrated compared to Helix cabs.... Respectfully speaking -You might want to re-evaluate what you believe is to be good guitar sound. Ummmmmmm....I would hope so because other than high and lo cuts, IRs cant be "tweaked" at all.. Since anyone liking IRs better is "doing it wrong" can you post some audio examples of your stock Helix cab sounds that are O sooo right? Until then, im considering this to be, argument for the sake of argument, from someone that doesnt really have a handle on what good guitar tone is, but more importantly, how to achieve.. You should have an idea of what you want beforehand. The only time you might be sifting through IRs, is when you are experimenting. Otherwise, most people gravitate towards a few cabs a few mics and a few positions. Thats not so many IRs i dont think... start with what you know and like best and move on from there. Thank You. I was beginning to wonder if they were all over 60 posters with fried hearing :P Kidding.... an option for left/right placement could help things, but all in all i think the cab/mic modeling is just poor. Id like to add in support of your comment here - With the exception of a few, Helix cabs all pretty much sound the same. With a bit of EQ and mic swapping, i could make the Recto sound just like the Mandarin, the Whowatt sound just like the Greenback 25, ect...... close enough nobody would care anyway...Same goes even moreso for the mics..They are without a doubt the weakest recreations ive ever heard. You will never convincingly reproduce the sounds of Cantrell, Nuno, ACDC, Stone temple pilots, Def Lep, Lynch, Petrucci, ect with stock Helix cabs. More wishful update hopes: 1) Engl Powerball 2) JMP 2203 3) Bogner Ecstasy 4) Ability to choose alternative default mics on native cabs. 5) For Cab B to remain constant when cab A is changed - (cab B shouldnt switch to the lead 80 cab just because cab A is changed) 6) option to move mics left/right 7) much better mic modeling 8) much better cab modeling 9) Very in depth cab control......This is where the guitar sound IS, ,and to take it lightly means taking the guitar sound lightly. Soundwise, Helix does a lot of things, but nothing really well. I get better tones with a POD 2.0 bean than Helix and its native cabs. Happy to submit audio examples if you are skeptical. Load up the Plexi preset. No one will ever accuse you of having great tone :P , or even playing thru a Plexi knock off for that matter. They wouldnt even know you are going for a plexi sound. Load up the Plexi on my UAD card and you know what it is instantly. Same with the Shiva. Would it really be such a sought after tone if it sounded like the helix preset?

Please just fix the existing cab and mic models. They are the worst sounding of any amp modeler i own, including software. If not for IRs, it wouldnt get used much.

Oh yeah? Can you please point me to one great recorded tone, on an album by a "top professional", using the Helix in the manner the OP is?

I dont get these snapshots at all...Is there any other place to hit "save" other than the main save button in the editor? All im doing by hitting that button is overwriting the preset. By clicking over the camera im offered copy and rename options, but but never anything else. right clicking does nothing. Renaming is simple. Im trying to do everything from the editor. Maybe thats not possible. Sorry, i havent made it to the manual on this one yet.

LOL i miss quite a lot....Sorry yeah.... i guess i assumed that most everyone was using the editor. Im not sure with what update those were implemented but on a couple of occasions i had cleared blocks and not known why. They were actually a bit hard to see before i knew what i was looking for.