WickedFinger

No it is just science and how things work, opinions are not a matter of science, it does not require ones belief of opinion it is simply the foundation premise of the laws of physics. Again you justify everything as to what someone hears. We use scientific measuring tools to measure see and hear things beyond the flawed ability of biological personal appendages. One's personal want or dislike of sound is something worked out in your own personal preset sounds not a reference system or the how and why of a global system EQ. Are you aware you can DI tap the speaker line(s) and send that primary tone to the PA without the need of further mic coloring? If your sound PA engineer is adjusting the environment system EQ by ear he is not a sound engineer but a hobbyist. As a bit of history, high wattage guitar amps were developed to be heard by the audience on stage when one did not dream to have their primary sound solely in the hands of the PA guy. Do you think any one in the crowd is having trouble being off axis from Malmsteen's wall of Marshalls which he indeed has on. Extreme example of course. Do you want to hear your guitar through a monitor from the PA, fine. Want your main sound to go to the PA, one wonders what arenas you are playing. I am interested in producing the most viable great sounding guitar tones and whether one pipes that to an external source using DIs or lines or off to a recording medium the whole premise is the primary sound and how amazing it is. If someone wants the most amp like real tones out of your modeler there is a better way to get them. This is intended for the argument of everyone buying and using FRFR speakers for their modeler and the use of global and system EQ adjusts. By the way I just happen to have a good 4x12 I use, you can put high end guitar speakers in any config one likes, split twin 12s and point them out to the crowd as you wish. It is not about me or my 4x12 use it is what sounds the best and why we need FRFR on our modelers to reproduce ranges they do not see.

I must have said this sort of thing a million times. EQ is relevant to environment and volume, that is a fact of physics. The problem these days is that many have no idea what the science means or consists. Seems adjusting an EQ via the use of pink noise and spectrum analyzer has been forgotten over using your ears and the infinite range of degrade and flawed biologic issues each person has. One of the primary standards in all scientific testing and experiments is the establishment of reference and control. If you have a home studio or any studio and you have not analyzed the space at various volume levels to determine its spikes and resonant frequency issues then you have no idea what it means to study sound engineering or the proper use of a global or system main EQ. You are in no way an actual "engineer" that is capable of producing music to any sense of industry and science standard that would be viable on any listening scenario. You would be in effect making something compensated and adjusted to sound good on your personal system in your personal environment. Parametrics and internal block or pedal EQ things are there to adjust the infinitely variable needs of a particular preset, before, it goes out to the reference system EQ. Running sound is a science not a hap hazard ear adjust methodology. No guitar can be heard in any sense in the extreme range of 20Hz to 20KHz human hearing which is basically what full range speakers systems were designed to reproduce. FRFR is used in the studio to encompass the low kick of drums and the feel and the ringing high presence and sibilant of cymbals, not just guitar. Other musical instruments produce frequency response outside the ranges of guitar like an orchestra, strings, organ and what have you. When I was running a Gr-55 guitar synth producing other musical instruments an FRFR rig was essential because there were frequencies present that needed to be reproduced. In regard to guitar rigs all one is doing is taking a fullrange device and EQ curving it down to the guitars freq ranges. So question remains if one is putting in a signal IR and EQ'd across the range of the guitar in the first place then what is the additional ability of the FRFR speakers to reproduce in a range they are not given??? Take into consideration your massive guitar tone be that as it may when it goes through a FRFR speaker design is being split through frequency crossovers into different speakers, so the unified signal is being divided into different speakers from its unified start. While that sort of thing would go unnoticed and is a part of fidelity in a listening system, is it something you want to do to the live sound of your guitar? There is a difference in a playback of a music source and the creation of that sound before it becomes something in playback. What sort of guitar tone and sound do you want? This is why I advocate using higher end more advanced high wattage guitar speakers on amp modelers over FRFR rigs. I have both and believe me if one sounded much better than the other I would use it, that is why I prefer my custom wired and loaded 4x12 for the shear real amp tone, punch, and low end, without mud and range of highs across the entire ability of the guitar. Seems coming from an age of cheap low wattage severe coloring guitar speakers muddles the understanding that higher end guitar speakers are a different animal. If you want the sound and coloring of the low tech speakers that is exactly what an IR is for. Use them on presets into the higher guitar speakers to color the sound just as you would an FRFR rig it works. My sound engineer brother wanted to know out of curiosity what sort of frequency spectrum one of my prior guitar cabs was doing to the sound, he was a bit shocked to discover it was nearly a flat response across the entire range of the guitar spectrum, what lies outside the range of the guitar is just not there so why worry a rig and system that can reproduce what it is not given???

This chap is on the right page. I must have said this sort of thing a million times. EQ is relevant to environment and volume, that is a fact of physics. The problem these days is that many have no idea what the science means or consists. Seems adjusting an EQ via the use of pink noise and spectrum analyzer has been forgotten over using your ears and the infinite range of degrade and flawed biologic issues each person has. One of the primary standards in all scientific testing and experiments is the establishment of reference and control. If you have a home studio or any studio and you have not analyzed the space at various volume levels to determine its spikes and resonant frequency issues then you have no idea what it means to study sound engineering or the proper use of a global or system main EQ. You are in no way an actual "engineer" that is capable of producing music to any sense of industry and science standard that would be viable on any listening scenario. You would be in effect making something compensated and adjusted to sound good on your personal system in your personal environment. Parametrics and internal block or pedal EQ things are there to adjust the infinitely variable needs of a particular preset, before, it goes out to the reference system EQ. Running sound is a science not a hap hazard ear adjust methodology. No guitar can be heard in any sense in the extreme range of 20Hz to 20KHz human hearing which is basically what full range speakers systems were designed to reproduce. All one is doing is taking a fullrange device and EQ curving it down to the guitars freq ranges. So question remains if one is putting in a signal IR and EQ'd across the range of the guitar in the first place then what is the additional ability of the FRFR speakers to reproduce in a range they are not given??? This is why I advocate using higher end more advanced high wattage guitar speakers on amp modelers over FRFR rigs. I have both and believe me if one sounded much better than the other I would use it, that is why a prefer my custom wired and loaded 4x12 for the shear real amp tone, punch, and low end, without mud and range of highs across the entire ability of the guitar. Seems coming from an age of cheap low wattage severe coloring guitar speakers muddles the understanding that higher end guitar speakers are a different animal. If you want the sound and coloring of the low tech speakers that is exactly what an IR is for. Use them on presets into the higher guitar speakers to color the sound just as you would an FRFR rig it works. My sound engineer brother wanted to know out of curiosity what sort of frequency spectrum one of my prior guitar cabs was doing to the sound, he was a bit shocked to discover it was nearly a flat response across the entire range of the guitar spectrum, what lies outside the range of the guitar is just not there so why worry a rig and system that can reproduce what it is not given???

I just wish the FRFR sounded as good as the users wished. I have both and very high end products. The FRFR just does not sound as good. I get the theories but perhaps no one is able to read the issues of what is going on, I tried to explain above. You IR the full range to the basic response curve of a guitar cab as that is what the IR is. Many of you further low cut and high cut the signal and then presume a full range is buying something outside of what you just cut. It makes no sense. And if your amp is shrill and tinny or whatever maybe adjusting it properly might help. For high gain the Mesa V or Cali EQ is a must but that is not a part of the FRFR issue really. Despite guitar speakers have a roll off designed for guitar, mine starts dropping at 5K but the presence control on most amps is around 9K and you can hear that on guitar speakers most assuredly. You guys are confusing guitar speaker roll off with a complete cut of frequencies or the inability for the speaker to produce them. I would be the first to say that FRFR on my prior GR-55 guitar synth rig were paramount important as the synth created instruments and ranges beyond the scope of the guitar itself and you could hear the difference right off but on my guitar system my Eminence sound much better and can handle whatever is thrown at them. Remember that I am not speaking of cheap low efficiency green back 30 watt speakers. If my FRFR 15" EVs sounded better I would have retired the stereo 4x12 but they just don't. BYW, the EV are power rated at 400 watts each. My Eminence loaded 4x12 is rated 600 watts RMS. Also the perhaps unread matter of splitting your signal into FRFR cross overs verses one solid main signal, that makes a difference. If the audience cannot hear the on stage cab then what is in it? Piping into the PA does not have the same tone really. Just saying something is not right with the theory when it comes to IR'ing a full range speaker and also using high and low cuts. Why does one need frequency response outside the range of what is being produced and/or cut?? Defies logic.

Input and outputs set to guitar and 1/4 or whatever you're using. There is also a a PAD and a NR Gate on the guitar in line might want to check these for off. Guitar Impedance can also muffle the signal, best option I think is auto detect. I made a goof one time of plugging into the AUX instead of the GUITAR IN could not see the back panel clearly, thought something was wrong, just wrong jack.

I wish I had the pink noise analyzer capability, adjusting things by ear is at best a flawed premise. Yes when you pink noise something to a room the resulting sound is so much more pleasing to the ear and less tiring. Every studio is supposed to be Pink Noised EQ'd out for proper monitoring. EQ is relative to volume and room issues not merely the initial response of the unit in question. The Helix should be globally set to be as flat as possible and control the preset EQ via the configs. That is the same principle has having a proper studio monitoring setup which allows one to adjust the recorded music from a flat reference, if your studio is not flat reference then your end result is going to sound different than you assume. If the Helix global is right then adding a (ex) Cali EQ further allows one to make that amp have killer low end punch and presence while cutting the 750 lower mid which is what made Mesa famous. You would not want your preset EQ block and adjustments to have to compensate for what the Helix normally does or does not put out. Something to consider in regard to high cuts, most presence controls on amps are focused at 9K. despite the frequency range of the guitar is below that considerably it is hard to argue argue one cannot hear it when turned up. Focusing on the mid range quality of the guitar often has the illusion of sounding better because it is more prevalent but balance is a different thing. Cutting off the high end makes a more smooth subdued jazz tone thing which might sound "better" in some regards but not good for others. I always present the issue that using full range monitors is somewhat flawed in concept as the guitar does not render in the extreme ranges of hi and low, then one uses a speaker IR to EQ and curve down the full range to a "guitar speaker" so in the grand scope of logic it is hard to understand the argument of full range when we cut and EQ things out of the fullrange and use IRs from cabs. Personally I prefer high end more efficient guitar speakers than full range and the sound is different when you split if between crossovers in a fullrange rig and if you are cutting the lows and highs from the cross over manifesting the sound primary put of one speaker then how is a quality high wattage guitar speaker a bad thing?? My Eminence stereo wired 4x12 just has much better guitar sound than my full range, Despite even the best guitar speakers start rolling off at 5k tell me when you turn the presence on any amp centered at 9k you do not hear it? Just thinking through the confusing frequency thing and the full-range ideology.

Food for thought: Guitar speakers are a varied lot. There is a huge difference in low efficiency low wattage classic guitar speakers than higher wattage more efficient models. Now in theory it is correct to think that if one is using guitar speakers one does not need an IR after the amp, but, let me explain what I use and have done. I have two separate rigs, a full range pair of EV15" PA speakers amd a custom wired stereo cab 4x12 loaded with high wattage Eminence Man O War 12s. I can use both or either in my rig as it suits me. Now if I may: EQ is directly related to volume level. What sounds good adjusted at low level or headphones may not be suitable at all w band volume. Period. In running my rig)s): theory wise, since I use a power amp rig I probably do not "need" the amp model and in theory a preamp should do well, and if I have the 4x12 then I do not need speaker IR on my models. BUT, an easy A/B of the tones reveals that often the full amp model sounds great and using IRs imparts the tonal quality of a different speaker response to my cab so everything is not the same or subject to having the same speaker issue on every preset. Not all PRESETS need adhere to the same design config rules. Here's the deal, "full range", I built a full range stereo EV 15" rig for my GR-55 guitar synth BECAUSE the synth could manifest ranges beyond the spectrum of the guitar response which made perfect sense with the synth. The guitar speakers could not reproduce the higher and lower ranges of other musical instruments and the full FRFR speakers on that rig were immediately apparent. Hands down better. Sonic physics and logic rock solid. Now here is where the full range theory runs into some problems. On a modeler, which is designed to reproduce GUITAR AMP tones and response through IRs which have the range and impulse of guitar spectrum, why full range, when there would seem to be nothing there to reproduce?? (recalling sonic physics here in regard to wattage on a PA sound system, we use sub sonic filters to cut off the low end as that uses and robs the system of wattage and adds nothing to the music but rumble and mud. If you want ultra low end one uses subwoofers powered outside the normal PA speakers.) Honestly, I get and can hear the logic of FRFR on the guitar synth needs, but, on a guitar system which is not really reproducing highs and lows outside the range of the guitar or amp then the logic of FRFR seems flawed. What I can hear and use on my rig is that the FRFR system using various amp modelers just does not sound as good as my high end Eminence 4x12 cab, not the punch, power, push or presence at all. Just sounds better and whether you use a full amp model use a speaker IR for tones is just simply relative to the result in question. If the preset sounds better using them then guess what, use them. Every time I hear my modelers through the FRFR rig and this is true of a few I have used or have, the bass is flubby and over bearing as it is trying to produce things a guitar amp was really not meant to have, and the high end more shrill as the guitar range stopped low before the upper 20K response of the FRFR which really just adds more noise and hiss to what would have been a clear signal. Ever hear that special over blown bass overwhelm in someone's car as they put a hell of lot of bass rumble and mud in "music" that it never really had? Do we want or need the guitar to produce low end or high shrill that is really does not need or produce? Does FRFR sound good, well certainly it can be adjusted to do well, but honestly kosher theory aside I prefer the sounds coming out of my 4x12 Eminence loaded cab hands down. One has to ask the magical question why does an "amp modeler" with "guitar speaker cab IR's" need a FRFR range of frequencies outside of the range it is supposed to be reproducing?? Any thought given to this simple result of physics that the crossover on the PA FRFR speakers is splitting your signal right smack in the middle of the central guitar mid point to the tweeter and woofer section(s)? Is that conducive to tone or the punch and presence of in your face guitar tones? From what I hear and experience the better guitar speakers kick major butt because they sound like a guitar amp which is I thought what the modeler was supposed to be doing. Does the FRFR rig sound good, sure given the right EQ and adjust it should sound great, my quest is always what sounds better, not what in theory should sound better. Without a doubt on my GR-55 guitar synth rig FRFR was a MUST. But looking at the entire gestalt of the issue of FRFR verses the aspect of better more efficient, higher wattage handling. often slightly greater freq response Guitar speakers is being dumped into cheaper low efficiency, low wattage guitar speakers and that my friends is a serious flaw in the FRFR logic. If a modeler and IR is designed and meant to reproduce what a guitar amp and a guitar cab do and sound, then what are we reproducing so much higher and lower than the guitar, amp and cab IR are actually designed to do? Add in the crossover network splitting your main frequency of the guitar in two (or more) routes to different speakers and really can one imagine the better unified punch and power of a high end 12" guitar speaker just maybe sounding better?? Bottom line: Try everything, EQ everything at the level it will be used, try the preset with combination of full amp model. preamp model, IR and no IR. Run it through the PA FRFR thing and the guitar cabs as just pick the best sounding result. Now before the argument begins spare me the comparison of FRFR quality high wattage speakers to cheap green back low wattage guitar speakers or what not. I am speaking of high end 12" guitar speakers capable of 150watts with much better efficiency and response. I can stand right here and not only hear but feel the power and punch of that 4x12 and it is dead quiet. SO again, bottom line rule, use what sounds the best. lollipop on guitar speakers(?), hold back on that assumption as the theory surrounding guitar range and frequencies does not quite make logic sense. Classic old vintage guitar speakers low wattage that really color and degrade signal, NO, NO and again NO, but higher end speakers they make these days, do not dismiss them off hand as they have a power a punch that you will notice on stage and trying to cut through a band mix. Ever notice that when you run your guitar out to the PA and/or monitors, the sound is more loose, undefined, spaced and reverberish? Think about what I have said. One solid rule is use what sounds the best, 2nd rule is do not apply a blanket null to using full amp model over preamp or yes or no IR, try every combination as some preset designs are going to work better and sound better doing things one might not do in another. So the higher wattage higher end guitar cab speakers work great on modelers because, they can handle anything thrown at them with punch, power and unsplit tones while using an IR of often less efficient speakers modeled imparts the sound of those cheaper speakers and/or different cab response without the limitations of using them. Why does one use an IR on FRFR speakers, simple answer to cut and roll off the frequencies outside the guitar normal range. Something else to ponder in regard to mic'ing cabs, if you have a great IR going in your modeler then modern DI technology (Radial) offers speaker line taps which take the main sound going to the cabs and send it to PA or recorders without using mic's. Just FYI.

I use tilt boards I make myself and I could not put the Helix on it as the tilt was just not workable for the expression pedal. No pics yet I just wired up my rig the other day and still have some ideas to use the mighty Helix for more routing and switching.

Personally man, you could not give me a POD. I left L6 after my HD POD phase, had issues I just could not resolve with it. Hides them pretty well in a 4CM thing (they must have prayed most used) but I ran into all sorts of problems as a stand alone rig core. I learned how to create massive sounding dual amp presets (remember the L6 genius "meambobbo" who wrote an advanced user manual?) but they used all the DSP and had much of nothing left for any effects. The Helix brought me back to L6 as it truly is a different animal than a POD. This is "component" modeling not merely surface mimic of how an amp sounds or a weak pedal copy. The new front end effects are good but the ability to farm out to other stuff works damn well with this unit. I have to use a gate NR after the loop return but these gates are really well done in the Helix not chokers like the POD. There are some new effects in there which can be really great sounding once you learn the tweaks. Tri-Chorus, Dynamic Flanger, Vibe are amazing. Here is a nice review of the mighty Helix. I am hyper critical of most gear but I find the Helix a jewel with its massive ability for routing and loops. http://tonereport.com/blogs/tone-tips/line-6-and-yamahas-absolutely-incredible-collaboration-the-helix

I did not know Yamaha bought Lin6. Nice review of the Helix, I enjoyed it, maybe everyone has seen it but I just ran across it. http://tonereport.com/blogs/tone-tips/line-6-and-yamahas-absolutely-incredible-collaboration-the-helix

I have both a pair of fullrange EV 15" speakers and a custom 4x12 stereo wtred with Eminence Man O war 12s. I love that guitar cab and it kills with the Helix rig or anything I have used with it. Nothing quite has the power and punch of the Eminence cab, not even the full range EV 15"s. I use both for different things bu my main guitar rig uses the 4x12.

I learned my lesson about three times now of getting rid of all my pedals for the latest greatest multi unit. Sadly I never rebuild my mod, delay, and reverb pedals so I rely on the Helix for all that. I find many of these better to many pedals I have had anyway. I have a GSP1101 loaded w C63 software, I really like this unit, but would sell it if I get enough to let it go, damn thing is brand new. I just got it before I went for the Helix. I still have not found anything in the Helix I like as mush as the two optimized Clean Tube models this puppy has. I am keeping my 2LeafAudio Proton envelope filter, my Mesa Tone Burst, Mesa Flux Drive, and a new Seymour Duncan Palladium I had just got. All these are much liked and will not part with them. They are rigged in a loop just after my up front Heix wah block. I have a Mel9 on a split line of a Radial PB1 and a Radial ABY which I may find an artful way to integrate it into the Helix but keep it isolated from my main Helix and loop chain. I use a series of BBE units which I will not be without on my rigs. There is am XLR unit after the Helix into my main power amp. Another one on my Mel9 and Trio line which runs into a little Mackie mixer converting to XLR outs to my powered EV rig. I have another spare instrument level unit I could use on the Helix 1/4 outs if I send them out the EV rig. I prefer balanced XLR feeds over unnbalanced. The BBE units if used per design really improve the sound. Some may not like them but been my experience it is usually from not using them right.

I was cranking on this model today and man it is one of my favs. It is pretty clean and takes to OD and whanot really well. Bloody great amp, if the model is this good, I would love to have the real deal.

To me I would place the Helix just below the Fractal and Kemper on the food chain. They are the next step up and the money difference is pretty much the jump from POD to Helix but I rate the tech jump from POD to Helix an order of 7 while up to Fractal or Kemper from Helix maybe only a 2 or 3 at best. I have heard a lot of A/B tests where you honestly cannot tell much difference in the sound and tone. So really Helix gets my vote for best bang for the buck. If I had unlimited resources I would go Fractal and Kemper but the Helix does the deal for me. I am digging this unit I was using a GSP1101 which I liked a lot and I had and returned an Atomic Amp, both I consider better than POD in sound quality but the helix has it all over either of them.

Really, record it and put it up on YouTube, website or something accessible. Most of us cannot get there from here.

My switch problem turned out to be something weird in the preset and it seems to be OK right now. I have had other similar switches go bad, like in my tc X4 delay had to return it for warranty exchange. What I do know is the word "stomp" should be eliminated from use, never pop a switch roughly or let it bounce by letting it go after smacking it. These things are not heavy duty and are indeed the weak link in the chain, press lightly and even on them without undo drunken led foot. With the capacitance thing on the switches in the Helix I do not fancy ever changing one myself so maybe extended warranty might have been a good idea? OR maybe L6 how about a little added protection on the switch thing as these babies are eventually going to die, some sort of "just a switch" repair send/return deal???

Yes, on a 3rd party IR it is an integral part of the process and the way it is done, but I am speaking of the mic add on with the Helix which further effects the IR. Also bugs me about the mic position as other modeler units I have used allow you to move the mic across the speaker from cone to edge and you can hear that; also being 1ft distance as a min, who really does that when mic'ing an amp?? Most of the time the mic is at grill distance not 1ft. Other than placing a mic back off feet at a time for distance reverbish effect that seems to be a an exotic flavor than a need. I often have used speaker line DI taps to record with no mics at all and that can work very well if you have the engineering skills in the studio. It is dramatic to me how much a mic can alter the sound and being a pure amp sound player not a studio headphone mic'ing an amp user it can sometimes ruin a great tone that is already there. I work to tweak in an amazing amp tone and then I have choose which mic filtering as to mess the tone up the least. They seem to range from the 57 being the most true sound to gradually more darker, which is not always a bad thing but why not a "direct" bypass on the mic like a DI thing, its like a captive mic coloring on the tone which might be useful at times but also nice to have another option.

All things considered. I have tried out the preset in question and other than thoughts of tearing it down and redoing it, was not the deal for me. Too many volume pedal things and plausible extra expression pedal needs. And why call something a JTM45 if you are not using the amp??? That made no sense at all. Why not use the amps JB uses or a little more closer than a make he does not. As with most "customtone" downloads, I usually dump them after a minute as they are not a fit for me. Quite a few I thought must be a joke as they were just wrongfully programmed, like the inputs on "mic" or a filter not even set right to make the sound "mysterious ways". If you want great well thought presets try the couple bundles they offer here, I have heard and seen nothing but high end goodness from them. At best most of the user free stuff are OK for getting ideas that may not have occurred to you but in general many not unlike the factory stuff are just dreadful, but that is my opinionated self. Don't lose too much sleep if you cannot download it, but like has been said update the unit to 2.01 and do not forget to follow the info sheet instructions about resetting the Globals. 3rd party IR's must be obtained and loaded in separately as far as I know. Little trick on the editor, you do not see the list of IRs you have loaded until you pull down the bar on the screen to get the list, they all just do not appear like other effects blocks in the unit. They also take up a lot of DSP so in a busy preset like the JB I do not think he could get custom IRs in there as it is really busy.

Much love for the HELIX. Excuse me while I review the unit a little for those you might be curious about getting one: Besides the mighty Helix: I can only think of probably one other piece of guitar gear that exceeded my expectations and the ability to master it out relatively quickly and that was my former GR-55 guitar synth, that puppy took some serious learning curve. The Helix is just the best amp modeler I have had to date and I have had a few. The unit is deep enough to have a myriad of programming features to keep you busy with all manner of preset design and tones. At first I thought $1500 was a mint, but really for what it can do and its potential I am really pleased with it. Due to the manner in which I study and absorb as much technical info and programming savvy as I can before I rig it up, I have spend my last few weeks headphone learning the unit to build around 10 presets of personal major coolness before I totally bring it on line with my full sound system. I want to be able to wail on some tones without killing my back bending over every 2s to adjust something. Much less trying to build a preset from scratch while I am wired up holding the guitar. I have learned to love the late night headphone sessions working on things in blissful silence for my wife's sake. Did the same for my GR-55 which required months of study and learning curve to really use it to its potential. While the Helix is not that deep, it still requires one get in there and try a bunch of possible ideas to use the unit to its potential. It begs to be taken to a higher level of tone ideas over just a simple amp and mini chain line and I cannot believe that was all it was intended. Multiple amps, switching, routing, inventive arrays of effects, and if you want simple then isn't it just an easy thing to click off the extra but nice having it there if you want to orbit Titan? If you're like me or pondering the issue of getting one of these and selling off your pedal board: I can say having done that maybe three times with the latest greatest multi unit, pause and hold your roll for a second. I suggest if you have some cool overdrives or even high gain pedals you like maybe you should hang on to them as this unit has superior quality effects loops and ability to position them anywhere. Now maybe modulation, delay and reverb you could sell those off unless you have something really cool or expensive that was hard to get. Maybe be selective in what you unload as a lot of the ability to the Helix is the ability to route and control your gear. While I have no major complaints on the effects there are just many I do not use nor cared to have the pedal versions. So if you have a cherished OD maybe hang on to it. The effects in the Helix are stellar compared to other modeler units I have used. The mod, delays and reverbs have everything you might need and probably a lot of fun in store for some you do not. Some of those reverbs like "cave" can be a real hoot. The drive/gain section is pretty well stocked if you have no pedals or want to stay within the unit. I appreciate the efforts L6 did to render a decent Klon and Timmy and their TS rendering is pretty dead on to the original and they included a mod as well. Certainly there are ways to adjust things that might not have occurred to you "outside the box" via running a pedal into something to buffer it down a little. Like say a Klon after a fuzz and things like that. Personally I have my 4 hard sought after drive section pedals I have piped in to the loop as I am used to them and they have survived my constant gear change-out syndrome. At any rate, big recommend for the Helix from me, and I say that as a "you-could-not give-me-a-Pod" opinionated former user. The notion that the Line6 cats drew me back on board with the Helix magic is no small feat, believe me. Now as a friend to all guitarists if you are like me and cannot afford this much baksheesh in one bucket. Bop on over to zZounds.com (not affiliated in any way) and grab a Helix unit while they still offer it for 12 easy, no qual, no card approval, no interest or finance charge, payment plan. :rolleyes: Thank me later.

I look forward to that. I seem to prefer the Weeper myself but I guess all have their certain uses depending on the amp structure. I wish there was maybe a modeled optioned wah you could adjust params more so than just another model. Sometimes I get annoyed with the copy mimic of things and prefer a more optimized high end model over a name. I had been using a GSP 1101 recently with the last available software C63 which has IR capability. My fav GSP1101 models for cleans were the "2101 Tube Clean" and the "Digitech Clean Tube" which were just optimized killer glass cleans I used quite a bit. I care more how things sound that what they are supposed to sound like. Makes me glad I did not spend a fortune on numerous amps I would have not liked. Still trying to narrow down my favs and go to amps in the Helix. I finally got into the Shiva model which has that mid ground of not clean and not all out gain which where modelers have their hardest territory to meet. Digging the Helix, wondering just how far they can take the update thing with its internal hardware config. I would prefer more tweaking options on pedals than just mimic models. I mean tubescreamer yeah that was novel 30 years out and yes 95% of all drives these days are "based" on that circuit, BUT, would you believe they are trying to improve it and make it better not just copy it?

I actually loved the Shiva model for just a little warm fuzziness on the notes, so many other options for cleans which I like a lot. The Shiva seemed to clean up pretty nicely cutting down the gain, bias and X bias also matter. but it is not a clean model really. Do ripple and hum serve a higher purpose other than making the amp sound realistically noisy? l use more clean amps than high gains as it easy to hit a pedal for gain. Have not found my fav amps yet in the Helix, still shopping around and adjusting. I loved the clean tube models in my GSP1101 which were not really mimics of certain amps but optimized clean tube amps, they are amazing, still looking for some similar things in the Helix. It's harder for me to really dial in a high gain amp I like than a clean one. Dig that Engl Fireball a lot. I try to ignore the name of the mimic and just dial through the tones until something rings with me and then tweak on it. Wondering why there is not a "no mic" direct option in the Helix? Mics color and change everything why can't we just get the pure IR? Or am I missing some trick?

Yep, that was the deal. Pays to read the header stuff more closely. All is cool now with the updates, actually went pretty smoothly after prying my head out of the neither regions. Be sure to reset the globals on updates kids, just like the procedure calls. I got confused as it was a brand new PC I was just starting up so amidst the various problems with modem connections and what not I was not paying enough attention on the L6 stuff. So can someone tell me what that FLASH memory update is for??? Isn't that handled with the 2.01? Is that something we need to deal with? Still bloody hate Windows 10 why did they do this to Windows, you have no control over anything anymore, the machine runs itself, updates what it wants and sets up accounts using your email password om everything that you do not want. And no you cannot config it not to do things like Windows used to work. I suppose its wonderful for the younger age phone obsessed ones that use all the social media and whatnot, I just do not want, need or care about it. I do not carry a cell anymore either, just a waste of money for me, I use my wife's when we are out and that is good enough.

Improved upon the basic glitch burble of all monophonic tracking pitch shifters and octave things they are still sadly not polyphonic (chords) tracking as so much new technology is these days. Wondering if it is just beyond the scope of the in unit technology?? EHX does it in their effects and they are not extreme high tech pedals. Many get away with slight detunes on 1 step and get reasonable tracking but they are not by any means polyphonic tracking effects. =

I've been using stereo power amp to a stereo wired cab and/or a pair of EV powered speakers for some time: Don't forget for true stereo you can run Path A chain out to your L 1/4" or XLR. You split the A line wherever it suits you and do not return to Path A merge, but down to Path B line and that goes straight out to your other R XLR or 1/4. A great way to have separate L and R chains. You can design a myriad of chains like each line having its own amp/cab and what not, depends where you split the A line off and what you do to it. I use this sort of template all the time even to create full on wet/dry sides and true stereo feeds. you can still place stereo effects near the end of the chains to still get them on each side without compromising the stereo separation. If you want more spread add a slight delay no repeats like 20ms just on one side and it pulls the stereo spread more. If you use any stereo effects be sure to increase the spread param.

I could not tell a difference in the vjd A/B pretty impressive. I am not a fuzz user myself so doubtful I will ever use them much. I do love good drives and I farm out to my better pedals in the loop if nothing works quite right. Personally I prefer more updates on the back end effects and amp model tweaks over more fuzz stuff which is not my thing anyway. The Helix for me is all about the amp models the notion it has decent effects is just icing.