emagli

Very true, I have also rediscovered this model lately. Plays nice clean, crunch and works well with fuzz.

I think there is also a matter of intellectual property for the algorithms implemented in digital effects such as digital delays and reverbs. If Line6 "copied" them into their own model, they should obtain a license from the inventors. Not the case for most analog pedals and amps, whose circuits are not protected by patents. And I agree with the issue of DSP power. If an algorithm uses a lot of DSP power, I would probably want to have it as a separate stompbox. The way I see it, Helix should provide models of effects that use a reasonable amount of power; for high end stuff (like Strymon-like reverbs), I don't think it would be reasonable to have them within the Helix. This is why I am curious to see which polyphonic pitch shifting effects will appear in the 3.0 firmware. These tend to be power-hungry, so while I'd love to get rid of the Digitech Drop for drop tuning and use an equivalent Helix model, I am afraid this may severely limit the number of other blocks that can be inserted in the same patch. For reverbs, I have been considering purchasing an Eventide H9 (you know, during these stay-at-home times one has to keep themselves busy...). I also have a TC Electronics Hall of Fame, so I compared the usability of the Helix Reverbs versus the HoF. It is all subjective, but here's my thoughts. For regular stuff like rock/blues, where you don't want to hear the reverb too much, I think the legacy reverbs are perfect. Actually the spring reverb is better than the one in the HoF (which sounds too kinda metallic). When you want to hear the reverb a little more and use longer decay, I think that in general the HoF is slightly better (the reverb tails sound a bit more musical to me). The legacy reverbs are very tweakable though, and you can get almost there with a bit of work. The high cut parameter is essentially a tone control (maybe it should be called as such!) and will allow you to make the tails brighter or darker. One has to be careful though, because too bright or too dark may not sound good; the HoF tone control has a more limited range where almost every setting sounds good. All in all, I am using the HoF because I particularly like a couple of reverbs and one particular Toneprint, but I could easily live with the legacy reverbs. I would not buy the HoF if I didn't have it already, and I decided against buying an H9. For the new reverbs, these are a bit more out-there; I find Glitz and Ganymede usable and the others are a bit too much for me. They sound good and may be useful once in a while, but I can see that if you regularly need that type of reverb, you might want to purchase a dedicated effect. Oh and the delays are VERY good IMO. Hard for me to see that I would want to upgrade them. I thought phasers were a bit of a weak area, but we have had the Small Stone model with 2.90...

That's the way it seems to be, but I am not entirely sure I have gotten this right either. The instructions on this specific topic could have been a little bit more detailed, but I figure it can be sorted out with a little of bit of trial and error.

I have quickly checked the manual of the real Revv 120 amp. "Purple" (gain 3) is tighter and drier, typically used for rhythm, and Red (gain 4) is fatter and typically used for leads. YMMV. These are indeed great models. I tried Purple, it has less gain than Red and it does sound great. What a great update is 2.90!

I usually use 4snaps/4stomps, assigning a couple of footswitches to stomps I want to be able to turn on/off irrespective of the snapshot I am in (typically a level boost and a tilt eq). I do not want to have to define a different snapshot for all possible combination of tones (snapshots) and stomps, which could easily exceed the maximum number of snapshots. But I do have a use case where I'd like to have 5 snapshots plus a couple of stomps, and this upgrade should make this available. Not sure it is a game changer, but for me it is good to have. The gain reduction meters are indeed much more important for me.

I am certainly not saying anything new here, but it also depends a lot on the guitar(s) you are using. If I plug a strat into a preset that I have tweaked for a PRS custom 24, it will generally not sound particularly good to me. I am trying to learn tweaking amp models based on the characteristics of the guitar I am using, in order to find a good starting point. E.g., my custom 24 has very strong low mids and generally high output, so I'll start with the mids on the amp rather low, as well as the gain. With a strat I'd probably do the opposite.

I see your point :-) To put this in perspective: I have been able to perfectly replicate the behavior of a mid boost stompbox whose tone I love, but which occupies a lot of real estate on my board connected to Helix. Now I can get rid of the stompbox. In the process I have also tried to analyze and replicate my compressor stompbox. Long story short, I have learned that (at least from my findings), the LA2A works as a sustainer in addition to providing compression, which allows me to do away with my compressor stompbox (which I was using as a compressor/sustainer) and free one effects loop. And yes, I did not get to play any real music as I was doing this, so that's all for the experimentation, and now I'm back to playing guitar.

Good point, I was also afraid that this might be the case, but it is not. I have my Helix LT with my analog eq pedal in one of the effect loops, and a software on my PC that can test the impulse response by sending a test signal through Helix via USB, recording the output and deconvolving. That way, I can observe tiny differences in the impulse response as I change the parameters (this approach is only technically sound if the system being tested is linear, which is the case of an EQ). I can tell you without any doubt that for the parameters that I managed to change (center frequency and level) I measured the exact change that I was expecting. On the other hand, I do not necessarily feel very comfortable using a feature that is not documented, but so far so good.

Sorry that I phrased this poorly... For the IR block I mean that the low and high cuts can be set to any value. I have a third-party IR block with high cut set to 11648.35 Hz. Agreed that the difference with 11.5 kHz may not be audible, but just for the sake of understanding how this works, I have tried to edit parameter values directly in the .hlx preset file, and then reload the preset. For the eq block, doing that allows me to change the center frequency (but not the Q) and level to any value. In my application, for the same value of Q, quantizing the center frequency to 1100 with respect to 1120 Hz leads to a difference in the frequency response up to 0.5 dB at 5 kHz. I doubt that I am able to hear that (and certainly not in a mix or live context), but for the sake of matching a given frequency response as accurately as possible, it would be nice if HXedit allowed to input an arbitrary value. At least for the parameters for which there are no constraints in the algorithm implementation, it should be just an UI thing.

Hi there, I am trying to set up an eq block where one of the center frequencies is 1120 Hz (because that's the exact center frequency of my analog mid boost, which I am trying to emulate using a parametric eq block). However, with HX edit I can only choose minimum increments of 100Hz (and increments of 0.1 for the Q), so I can select either 1100 or 1200 Hz. I can type any integer number in the frequency field, but then it is rounded off to the nearest 100 Hz increment. Do you know how to set the parameter to any number? I guess it should be feasible, as I have the Mbritt package and his IR blocks have very precise and not rounded-off frequencies.

Sounds pretty good to me! Nice guitar tone — which amp/cab are you using? If anything, the drums are a bit dry, for the lack of a better word (and for my taste).

At home: JBL LSR305 studio monitors. Practice and gigging: Yamaha DXR10 FRFR speakers. Very happy with both.

I have a small pedalboard next to my Helix, with the following pedals on it: - Digitech Drop — probably the only one I could not emulate decently with the Helix. - Suhr koko boost. I don’t know what it does to the tone esp. in the mid boost mode, but it does it pretty darn well. - Mad professor forest green compressor. Same as above. - Fulltone Clyde wah deluxe. I like it better than the wahs in the Helix, which I still find very usable. - Wampler velvet fuzz. I never bonded with the fuzzes in the Helix. That said, these pedals are not a matter of GAS for me. I already had them from my analog rig days, and I am trying to find some use for them. Aside from the Drop, the others I could certainly do without. The one pedal I have purchased is the Siegmund Pup Emu Mini, a passive circuit to be put after my wireless receiver. It emulates the impedance of a pickup (as opposed to the buffer at the receiver output), so that wah and fuzz will sound more natural.

Agreed that the Drop would be best placed before the helix input and really right after the guitar. The cleaner the input to the drop, the better it is going to track notes. You will find that, if you drop more than a half-step, the drop will tend to darken the tone. I use a tilt eq as first thing in the chain to pre-compensate for that, and it works resonably well for me.

Hi there! I also have a Mark V:25, great little amp! I agree that the Helix sounds great into its effects loop + cab. A while ago I A/B-ed the Helix Mesa Mark V preamp model into the V:25 return, then take the speaker sim out into my monitor (LSR305), versus the V:25 preamp+power amp and speaker sim out into monitor. I could eq the preamp model to sound essentially indistinguishable (to my ear) sound and feel-wise with respect to the real preamp (despite the Mark V:25 using EL84's). I did this at home volume, though. This is just to say that in principle you could indeed sell amp+cab. Oh by the way... it was a bit harder to find a good match for the Crunch channel of the V:25 using one of the Helix amp models. Eventually I got very satisfactory results using the Park Drive model, which is another take of a Plexi-ish amp. Also, despite the above, eventually I have not been able to depart from my Mark V:25; I wanted to keep a valve amp just in case, and the Mesa is just too good. Regarding what you should buy to go with the Helix, it also depends on your future plans. If you just play at home and will not gig in the near future, then I suggest by all means to get a quality monitor. I am happy with my JBL LSR305, but there are plenty of good monitors out there. If you picture yourself playing with a band sooner or later, you may consider an FRFR speaker that you will be able to use as a wedge monitor later on. I am not particularly keen on the power amp+cab solution; live, if you go direct to PA, monitoring with power amp+cab would give you a different sound and feel with respect to what the audience hears, which you may or may not like -- I do not. Power amp + cab has the advantage that it will give you the amp-in-the-room feel, and a lot of people like it; in that case, you may also consider the L6 Powercab, which can work as amp in the room and also as FRFR. I have not tried it but it seems to receive a lot of praise.

I have had my LT for 2 years now. I used to use the built in pedal, but at some point I had a hardware failure on the optical component reading the pedal position. Since then, I feel uneasy using it for heavy duty stuff, and I have relegated it to control the volume boost on my leads. I have an external wah pedal and an external expression pedal (Ernie Ball VP jr) that looks more sturdy to me. YMMV.

Very true. Leveling patches is a very important process, but I have not found any other way to do it that is more reliable than trial and error at gig volume.

That can be done and it would be great. I tried to get my band mates to do this, but never succeeded... I guess one of the reasons is that I am the only one having a monitor with multiple inputs, so this would not solve the problem for all band members.

I think it is hard to generalize. I find single stock cabs may not be very lively sometimes, but dual cabs are very good. Plus, it's a different thing if you are playing at home/studio or live. A sound that is a bit dull/harsh at low volumes (like using a cab with SM57 mic) may cut through very well in the mix on record or live. For IRs, I find they usually sound very good at low volumes, but many of them are too scooped for live use (for my taste). YMMV.

Hi Mark, I use FRFR for stage sound. I go direct to PA from the XLR out; I do not need to use power amp+cab for stage sound, and I like that what I hear on stage is the same sound that goes to PA. I usually put the FRFR as a stage monitor (Yamaha DXR10, getting sound from the Helix 1/4" out) in front of me, in monitor mode with low cut at 100 Hz. On small stages I might have to put it behind me. I set the XLR out volume control to OFF, so that maximum signal is fed to the PA, but 1/4" out volume control is ON; in this way, the volume knob tweaks the volume of my stage sound. As to what other band members want to hear, I won't get into that :-) Everybody has their own idea on that but our implementation is a bit messy. In my band we have 2 guitars, and my main problem is that I do not hear the other guitar well. I can live with that, as I know what the other guitar is supposed to play at any time. We do not feed a mix to the stage monitors, but we have 3 individual monitors for voice, keyboard and guitar plus one cab for the other guitar, powered from the Kemper power amp.

I perfectly understand that. I also contemplated a single pedalboard as you mentioned, but then I thought it'd be very bulky and deep (and possibly hard to get into the pedalboard case). Plus, I thought I did not need one single pedalboard but could have 2 pieces, and that would give me more flexibility. For me the most important thing was to have neat wiring including power supply, in order to avoid using batteries and multiple small 9 V power adapters. This dictated that I choose a raised pedalboard. So my suggestion is to first think how you'd like to supply power to your pedals. Pedaltrain has boards in many different sizes, but there are many other brands too.

Hey there, I have a pedalboard alongside my Helix LT. I thought I ‘d use it for my “best” analog pedals + wireless receiver. What is on it: ABY switch (for 2 guitars), digitech drop, clyde wah deluxe, ernie ball vp jr. Then suhr koko boost and mad professor forest green comp connected to one of the helix fx loops, and finally the receiver for line6 g50. Power supply for all of this comes from a power brick mounted under the pedalboard (a pedaltrain jr, iirc). The bad: the whole setup is about 1 meter wide. But I wanted a pedalboard that I could mount the power supply underneath, which rules out flat ones. The good: I have all I need neatly mounted, and a single power supply for everything.

I have had my LT for more than 2 years now, using it mostly for rehearsal, occasionally for gigging. I have never had a problem with corrupted presets, except once upon a power supply issue. Copying/pasting has been working well for me. I did have problems with the EXP pedal, and specifically a failure of the optical component reading the pedal position. After that failure, I stopped using the onboard pedal for heavy duty things (like controlling a wah) because I feared it could happen again (and my warranty has expired now); I only use it very occasionally to control the level of my solo boost. I have added an external Ernie Ball VP JR, and despite the extra cost I am still happy with the system, although the extra real estate occupied by the pedal bothers me a bit. In your case, having repeated problems with preset corruption seems strange. Not sure that it is viable for you, but maybe you could try and see if you are still having the same problems using a different computer. Sometimes USB ports are defective and can cause problems; in my workplace we had a laptop that was frying every USB memory card that was connected to it. Just saying...

Tried this... The good news is that not only it works, but the assignment done and saved in one preset carries over to all presets; it seems to be a global setting. The bad news is that once I reboot the Helix, the setting is lost :-( Maybe Line6 could add an option to set the internal pedal to EXP1 no matter what, or an option to disable this switching mechanism? The other, admittedly less elegant solution, is to add a small thickness on the base plate of my exp pedal, so that it never reaches exactly 0%. It should get the job done pretty easily.

if you want to load the factory presets associated to a new firmware, you will need to do 7&8. Beware that that will also erase your own presets, so you need to back them up and restore them after the reset. Ask yourself if you really need those factory presets — I have little use for them anyways. More in general, none of these reset options will “really” get the Helix to factory defaults, because they will update everything except for the firmware. I had a weird experience with my Helix LT about one month ago at rehearsal, where all Helix inputs apparently stopped working, and the Helix would output no sound at all, upon switching to a different patch. The patch I had switched to was also empty. At the same time, I found the power supply of my external pedalboard, which supplies the input to Helix, was loosely connected. I figure some static charge temporarily prevented the inputs from working. I reset using 9 & 10, but that did not help. The next day the Helix was working properly again. My question is: if the Helix boots properly, can one assume that the firmware is not corrupted? I would be willing to do a full reset (firmware included) and then re-upgrade to 2.82, but I’ll be happy to avoid it if it is not needed.