Simon268

Thank you ... very inspiring article!! But: Craig mentions 'audio expamples" .... and i dan't find them enywhere. Am I blind? Or did I misinterpret? ...

Hi and congrats to entering the Helix world! It's full of fun and wonders. :-D ... unfortunately the user interface is completely overloaded with all those kind of 'shortcuts' - where simple commands would be a lot easier (not only regarding paths). But don't lose hope: You get used to it and/or switch to using HX Edit (the client software for pc/mac) :-D I personally use A) the Helix's interface for 'sound parameters' of the blocks (choosing the block, setting up gain, delay time, compression, eq, ...) because it is very self explainatory, quick and 'reality like'. It's easy to play your guitar and turn a button at (nearly) the same time. B) For all the other stuff ('routing', controllers, in/output configuration, ....) i use HX edit. Great that you can use A) und B) at the same time! Rock on .... it's worth it! Simon268

Thank you! :-D :-D i just bought the Strat and the Teller pack and am impressed, how 'stratty' my ESP-LTD can sound! As with everything I realized it needs a little experimenting and experience, but even right out of the box I got cool sounds. Also there is a 'manual' delivering valuable tipps.

My everlasting nemesis is trying to (re)assign controls. I NEVER succeed with less than 4 tries - even with browsing through the manual. And i am really used to handling digital equipment (different sound and lighting consoles, dsp controllers, various multi effect devices, ....). But the logic, when to hit, turn, touch, ... which button or switch and what to select (in the flow diagram) and where to position in the menus, .... remains to be hidden to me. Our grandMA Ultralight is easy compared to that part of the Helix .... IF (!!!) there wouldn't be the HX Edit - which is the absolute game changer. That software speaks for itself. Also: The 'live editing' concept of the block parameters (with the small turn buttons under the screen) is really good end effective. Compared the the tcelectronics g system i owned beforehand, managing - the block parameters is a 'walk in the park' and - managing the controls is a 'bad day in Bosnia'. ;-) Because of that i usually tune in my sound with the physical interface (much faster then fiddeling with mouse and keyboard) and assign the controls via HX Edit. And at the bottom line: The Helix is still an excellent device (for my purposes) .... with some smaller road bumps.

.... what i am also miss from the samples: - These 'electric impulses' really cry for an A/B comparison (unaltered guitar vs IR) - and generally mentioning the used guitar at all.

Nice approach! I'll think about it. What about DSP load? Does that mean that one has a) to use path A and B always and b) all 'after-cab-effects' must be placed in path B if you also want to use a 'cab-IR' ?

That's a great solution!!! I never really liked switching wah on via the toe switch (even on 'physical wah stomps') and preferred to activate that effect the same way as all the others. A little unfortunate is that there is no 'internal Midi loopback' in the Helix, but i can live with that.

Hi, i also installed mine (Floor) a few days ago ... and it immediately paid off, because as i connected the cables again, my SM57 fell from the table directly unto the Helix. :-O :-O :-O It would've crashed right on the main display - if it wasn't protected - and probably caused some damage. So it only lead to a tiny scratch on the protector. But i have to admit: Maybe the Mic wouldn't have fallen at all if i haven't removed and reinstalled the Helix for the installation of the protector. ;-) Bye Simon

hmmm, to my ears the 'not_so_hairy-mix' sounds just completely muffled and dull. Just as sent through a low pass filter (as malhavoks frequency response suggests) and nothing i would aim at. I also had problems with an effect i would have named 'hair' - described and solved in ... ... but it sounded way different.

HI, i also ordered one - just irrational kick of the new Helix. ;-) To be honest I have no idea what the production costs are but i'm also irrated by the price, esp. because a) i have paid 160USD (because of international shipping) ... and maybe local customs will charge me additional 20% and b) at this price the 'protection' itself defies it's purpose to soime degree - when you start to fear that the cover itself will be damaged. It's like buying a 10.000-USD-Safe to protect 100 USD .... ;-) But in the end: It's a hobby and 'rentability' is a somewhat minor point in hobbies. :-D Bye Simon

Sounds like mainly a lot of 'FOMO' (fear of missing out) to me. ;-) it's not forbidden - and since both option differ only little understandable and no real problem. So i would strongly suggest to just try both for yourself. Finally nobody can decide it for you. There are people who are perfectly happy with a 10'' Box but obviously - since they are being sold - other who prefer 12''. I just wanted to point out that also the 12'' box has drawbacks in certain settings and its not always the 'if you can afford it do it'-solution. ;-) Also i dont have something like '..my cabinet...' between my monitor (= what i hear) and FOH (= what the audience hears). Maybe that made my decision easier. (Further i usually play in locations where lower volume and clearer sound on stage are mandatory). just my 2ct Simon

Hi i think it's crucial for what you want to use the FRFR box. For personal monitoring - too much low end (even if you like the feeling) will pollute the stage sound (esp. on medium and small stages) - it's not unlikely that your sound guy will ask you to tone it down, - 'feeling palm mutes' is not really crucial and - weight is a topic - dragging 2,5 kg around that you don't need is no fun. Together with the sound that i really like - that were the points that made me decide fot the TS 310 (instead of the 312). Bye Simon

Hi, I know this is a internet forum and unfortunately in those it is rather common to discuss a little sloppy on the logical end. Consequentially also in this discussion there is a lot of a) out of context * i never argued about '... good ...' equipment [even less 'blamed' it for anything] * but about how significant a good sounding YT-example is for MY experience at home b) and overstating * i never stated 'irrelevancy' or 'lying' * but 'a little skepticism' [as in 'not necessary translatable' and 'not proof beyond any doubt']) In essence: That's correct. And that's not madness but really logical. The opposite (what you seem to be stating) is: '...[the first time you heard a REALLY good player play a Les Paul guitar you] HAVE TO BE SURE THAT [Les Paul WAS a good guitar]...' Or in short term: One Example is (unconditional) PROOF. How is that true? Never said that and never will. Nightynight Simon

I think what you are trying to say is: The machine will produce the same output WHEN FED WITH THE EXACT SAME INPUT. On this i could agree. But as you put it yourself: Meaning: The input of different players (esp when using different guitars) WILL be different .... and so will the output of the machine. And THAT's why i say: Hearing e.g. Marco Fanton playing (HIS guitar) via the Helix is nice ... but only has little weight for me for how I will sound playing (MY guitar) via the Helix. Also I am skeptical about comparing the Helix with the Axe FX3 by comparing the (Helix) videos of Marco Fanton or Pete Thorn with the one (FX3) of Cooper Carter .... Coopers Video doesnt convince me that the FX3 is better than the Helix (as MarkJarvis seems) - and the Fanton+Thorn-Videos doesnt convince me on the other hand that the Helix is at least as good as the FX3. But that's only my opinion and '.... everybody has one.' ;-)

Never said that and never will. ;-) 'YT-professionals' != 'guitar pros' Different expressions meaning different things ... and here it's about somebody who professionally creates and sells sounds.