Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Kilrahi

  1. In terms of volume leveling, the only way is to balance them to your taste preference.
  2. That was always what I figured with the IRs. What about the built in stock cabs. It would make sense for them to faithfully reproduce the cabs they were modeled after, but people speak like they don't. Do you know what the answer is here?
  3. You ask a question I've always wondered too that I'm hoping maybe someone can weigh in. Do the Helix amps and caps also emulate the frequency response of their originals? Based on the extensive discussions of hi and low cuts I always assumed they didn't . . . but then why not? Wouldn't it be better to? Or does it? Not that you never EQ real amps/cabs, but still. It's spoken of like it's a unique case to modelers.
  4. Ehhhh . . . If you want to have BOTH the PA on stage AND the real amp on Stage AND have your time based effects ... you might be finally banging up against some IO and DSP limitations. It kind of depends on how complex you want to get. Generally speaking if you want to do a PA/Amp setup then you do the main left/right outs to the PA, and the FX send on the Stomp to your amp. You keep your onstage amp as more of a monitor so it doesn't have all the complex effects the PA is getting. You could create two paths, one for the PA and one for the amp, but you're going to run into serious block issues though. Getting too complex is the kind of thing you typically want the Helix for.
  5. Thanks for weighing in. That's crazy the full Helix can do that kind of merge/blend. Damn it it makes me want one. So I'm kind of glad you solved it, and kind of pissed that now I know.
  6. I considered both the Gigboard and the Stomp extensively. At the time, the big pros for the Gigboard was that it had ALL of the processing power of the full unit, was small, affordable, and the easiest to program. It's weaknesses was it was $50 more than the Stomp and bigger. When I looked at the Stomp, it was SIGNIFICANTLY smaller than even the Gigboard, had better sounds (in my opinion - this is the debatable part), a full stereo FX loop vs. mono, and I knew the Line 6 ecosystem and trusted it. It's weaknesses were the obvious 6 block limit. I pulled the trigger on the Stomp and I adore the thing. After months of using it, the touch screen of the Gigboard has been rendered irrelevant (the Stomp is not as immediately easy to figure out, but after a few hours it becomes a breeze). The six block limitation is still a complaint I have (I hope they open it up more), and I love its small size. I generally prefer it in snapshot mode, with an expression pedal. The easiest way for me to switch a preset is to bend over. There are other options and your mileage may vary. In my opinion, if adding an additional foot switch really is a deal breaker to you then you'll probably want to test a Gigboard if you can in order to compare. It has ONE extra footswitch than the Stomp. I don't know how much easier that really is. I found the Stomp perfectly workable with its default, but adding an expression pedal just took it to a completely new level. I'd hate to weigh in on the Gigboard too much without ever actually trying the thing. I still prefer Line 6's ecosystem and sounds to Headrush. Its big selling point is the touchscreen, but honestly, that is only an initial strength. So that's my 2 cents.
  7. Yeah I don't know if I should sell you on it. To be clear - I LOVE my Firehawk. It does so much beyond what I even ever expected to do with it (for example, the other night I used it to blast the sound of my PS4 while I played an online game) and it does it great. At the time I bought it it had just gone on sale, and I was thinking it was a great way to get an amazing sounding amp with some solid modelling. Since it was flat response, I also considered myself future proofed if I ever finally had the money to get a Helix LT. At the time, getting a straight Helix wasn't something I was tempted to do because I felt I'd still need a flat response speaker, and there weren't any cheap options. A lot has changed in six months, including the release of the HX Stomp which was much cheaper than a Helix LT but with the same amazing sounds (admittedly though missing some functionality). Plus the Firehawk weighs as much as a small house and is largely useless as a gigging option without the $200 bag to go with it and the $270.00 FBV switch. The thing is though, if I could have seen the future, I'm not 100% sure I would have made the same decisions. There's a VERY good chance I would have instead bought the HX Stomp and a Powercab - or a Helix LT and a Powercab. Or a Stomp or Helix and a Headrush FRFR. It's kind of crazy how much has changed in that time. So here's my honest advice - I think the Firehawk 1500 sounds DANG good. The modelling within it was excellently done and they tuned the 1500 to work very well with it. However, if what you as a player want is the absolute best sound possible then I think you should go with something on the HX line and a flat response speaker system of your choosing. In the long run you'll probably save money, and be happier.
  8. Okay, first, as to the Firehawk. I think the Firehawk is a great multi effects model for $400 (or less on deals - you can find it for $350 right now). However, Line 6 never promised that it would be supported with new amp models and effects. The only support that will be provided is bug repair. So keep that in mind - when you buy it you have to be happy with what it already has. As to the Variax, I completely disagree about the acoustic amp. I have one - and it does work great - but when I use the Firehawk or the HX Stomp I don't use an amp sim at all. I simple dial in the EQ, add the effects I want, and a boost sometimes, and it sounds great. The Firehawk even has a few presets specifically for acoustic sounds and I found they worked great for the Variax. The Firehawk FX does have a Varaix amp and to be honest I was always underwhelmed with it. I don't know if it was intended originally for another product and it really sounded great there, but with the Firehawk it always sounded muddy and dull to me.
  9. As a Stomp owner I'd say no, no it's not normal.
  10. Supposedly this will happen this Spring with Helix update 2.8.
  11. Rather than continue to argue it with you, I'm going to just assume there is a misunderstanding somewhere and move on.
  12. Wow ... interesting. That's definitely not how I would set up something like that. Maybe it sounds great though, I dunno. For example, if one path is supposed to be a rhythm, and the other a lead, I wouldn't meld them. I'd put them on branching paths so you could swap between them. Still, if this is an official Line 6 preset maybe I'm missing something.
  13. That ... is a weird looking set of paths. I'm assuming they have different inputs and outputs which would make sense if you wanted to have a dual rig, but that's not as common a scenario so I'm kind of surprised a Pick Floyd preset was done that way. When you look at the far left guitar input and far right guitar output for both paths what does it say?
  14. Dude, why are you so bitter? I worry about you.
  15. No, and in fact, most people do it just as you do because it conserves DSP and the stereo signal gets nuked when it goes through a mono amp. As Phil said, only if you need your effects before the amp to remain stereo should you use a stereo distortion - then once you do you need to create a signal flow that will maintain that stereo separation (such as splitting into path A and path B with an amp in each path). If you stick a ping pong delay in stereo and follow it up with a mono flanger, and then again with a final stereo reverb your signal will end up being stereo BUT the stereo effect of the ping pong delay will be lost because the mono flanger summed it to mono.
  16. Have you ever tried running one amp into another? Probably not. Few have. It might be a usable sound in some context but it's generally not done. So it is with a modelled amp (Helix) into a real amp. Anyway, that's my take on it but it's a pretty universal one. You may be able to get some joy out of using preamps as a type of distortion pedal for your amp. That's possible, but the full amp models and the cabs will probably be unusable. The HX Effects was designed specifically for situations like you describe. Now, with that said, I think a Helix would be a wonderful choice. Maybe a year or two later you'll grab an FRFR speaker for it. Honestly, there are some pretty decent priced ones even now (like the Headrush model for as low as $200).
  17. See . . .that makes no sense though. What, do some of you guys only like one sound on planet Earth? I like tons of music, tons of tones . . . I mean it's endless. By your argument, the first time you heard a REALLY good player play a Les Paul guitar you still couldn't be sure if the Les Paul WAS a good guitar. That's madness. It's a tool same as the Helix is a tool. I heard Slash bring out amazing sounds with the Les Paul and I KNEW I wanted one. I bought one, I love it. To this day I do not sound as good as he does, NOT EVEN CLOSE, but I still KNOW that it's a great guitar. If you hear the Helix modelling amps and effects really well then quite frankly you KNOW it can do it and you KNOW it's a great modeler. There's no need for all this weird belly aching indecision about "is it or isn't it" and "there's no way to really know." Bulllollipop. If you see a hammer drive in a nail really well you know that a hammer is a good tool for driving in a nail. Yeah, Mr. Miyagi might still drive the nail in much better than you do . . . but you still know it's a damn good tool.
  18. I honestly don't think anyone was disputing that aspect. I just think people were focusing on two definitions of the word tone. You have the machinery which has a specific tone that it creates and it takes input and spits out output. Two androids programmed to play exactly the same way will always output the same thing. This is the tone of the machinery. Then you have human skill - how hard they attack, how they emote, even the way they hold the bloody thing - and that creates it's own feel and tone. Anyone who has played any musical instrument is well aware of this. From trumpet players to kazoos. Eggghhh . . . thread is kind of derailed now, but admittedly that's not necessarily a bad thing.
  19. Okay, lets just call a draw on this one. The fact is there are two definitions of tone, and because people use them back and forth all over the place it can get confusing. I tend to think of the FIRST definition - clearly some people are thinking of the second definition - which I hate that definition in terms of guitar playing skill but it does fit. So hey we can all be right here. Now our board can be friends again. 1. a musical or vocal sound with reference to its pitch, quality, and strength. "the piano tone appears monochrome or lacking in warmth" synonyms: timbre, sound, sound quality, voice, voice quality, color, tone color, tonality, resonance, ring "bassoons add considerably to the tone of the tuba 2. The general character or attitude of a place, a piece of writing, a performance, etc.
  20. No I don't. Look . . . machines always output the SAME thing. We need a name for that. I don't care what you want to call it. If we don't want to call it tone (though that was the original name created for it, hence "tone" knobs). Should we call it amp juice? Freaky sound lollipop? Either way, machines always output THE SAME THING for everyone. Now, players have different styles, different skills, different abilities. That's guitar SKILL. No two players are the same, and that's why a player on one amp with X settings will sound different than another player on the SAME amp with the SAME settings - but the machine is still outputting the same damn stuff.
  21. See, I think that's your first mistake. You're not speaking the same language as your fellow guitarists. Guitar tone is the output of your machines connected. That's it. Nothing more nothing less. Guitar skill is a different measure. That's the thing that makes Eddie Van Halen with a Vetta II sound better than you or I with an Axe FX.
  22. I don't think you understood what he was saying. You should read it again.
  23. I do hope to buy a bass in the future but sometimes you just hit emergencies. Still, I have to say running through some bass presets on the HX Stomp it sounded pretty cool and I got some compliments.
  24. Yes you can link them. You would want to choose one of them as a primary amp modeler and the other for effects (probably pod for amp since it can do dual amps). It'll take a bit of skill to balance them. Either way, yeah.
  25. Sweet! I'm hoping to get some play time this weekend and I'll be sure to try them out if I do and let you know what I think. Thanks for sharing.
  • Create New...