waymda

Highly likely, deliberate. It's product differentiation and allows marketing to a specific audience, with the intent of cross product sales should said market suddenly realise they would like/require something different. Pretty much business 101, and done by all the vendors. Your crazy is their strategy.

Something I hadn't thought of and just remembered. I run both low and hi-pass EQ on my guitar channels on the UI24, helping it sit in the mix and improve clarity, so that will be going to my IEM feed. Not sure the frequencies and not near it, but likely having a similar impact.

This likely doesn't help in the short term, but i reckon it took me close to 2 years to fully move to IEMs. In my first move to modellers I tried valve power amps to cabs, specialised FRFR wedges, a JC120, 2 x Powercab+ you name it and I was never happy. For IEMS I tried, wedges + IEMS, various generic IEMs, generic with custom molds, custom molds, custom molds + ambient mics, finally sensaphonics with custom molds and built in ambient mics. The sensaphonics are expensive and were worth it for enjoying playing. But the real key was running a silent stage, with an e-drumkit and largely DI'd bass and the UI24 to manage my own mix. As I mentioned earlier the 64 ears are still great, with this set-up/band - and 2 years working with them to refine what I need. Moral of my story- it takes lot of time and effort to find what works for you - my incentive was/is I sing and play guitar in a 3 piece so hearing whats really going on and not screaming to be heard made i worthwhile in the long run. Happy to share any of that journey if it helps you get what you need/want easier/quicker.

Yes and no. Yes: You will be much more critical bout how you hear yourself in any system/iems than the rest of the mix - its you, and you know how you want to sound The sound of your guitar coming straight to your ear through IEMs is substantially different to via a wedge ot other air moving system - you will also hear other ambient sound Using IEMs means you need a much better mix than you can get away with in stage with live sound - for example, when you move your head on stage the sound changes and you can move to find a balanced spot on stage - not so with IEMs, you get what you get No: The quality of the IEMs will massively influence how you hear your sound - see the first point Generic IEMs don't provide a good seal so you will hear a weird mic of live stage sound with IEM direct. The live will include FoH, and stage sound and will generally be slightly muffled. It can also result in strange phasing issue due to tiny differences in the timing of the internal and external sounds hitting your ears IEMs that sound OK for produced recorded music do not always reproduce the sort of sounds you want/need to hear live on stage TLDR - using IEMs is a massive change from live on stage sound and you need to learn what the compromises are, and the quality of your monitoring WILL impact on your experience. What works for hearing recorded music does not necessarily translate to working live.

The UI24 allows you to patch physical inputs to multiple logical (or internal channels). So assuming you have spare channels you can patch your guitar inputs to an addition set of channels, set their aux send as pre-fader, pull the chanel fader out of the mains and use the aux send for just your IEM send (and/or other band members). The UI24 is likely more flexible than you realise. Not sure if this guy covers this in his patching video, but he's a great resource However, if everyone wants their own eq'd version of your guitar or their inputs you're up for a lot of messing about and will run out of channels quickly. I know nothing about the KZ ZS10 Pros, but at less than $70 AUD I wouldn't be expecting them to be great. When I first started using IEMs I really struggled with the sound, and balance on stage. My first decent set of fully molded 64 ears cost me more than I wanted to spend but the difference was/is phenomenal. I still have and use them occasionally some 8 years later even though they're my back-ups. As someone who's always spent on gear, back line etc my post hoc rationalisation is what I spent on proper in-ears + my Helix is way less than I would have spent on a range of gear across the years, sounds better, and gives me a much more consistent on stage sound for performance (remember tweaking you amp at every evenue every time???). So my advice FWIW is if you're want to go IEMs think of them as your back line and spend accordingly.

I also run my Helix direct into a UI24 via XLR. The Helix is set to mic level output and the UI needs no gain added to get a healthy signal. Whilst this doesn't help with diagnosis, I have not experienced what you describe in 2+ years of use. I would support looking at whether phantom power has been accidently turned on for one channel. If that makes no difference try a) a seperate source on the channel, b) a seperate channel or set of channels on the UI24 to isolate the issue.

My 2c worth - have the band hire/invest in a FoH that includes subs. The overall sound will be improved substantially and you won't blow away your band members. I'm assuming that your current DYI approach is loud stage sound and minimal mix to PA. IMHO (and experience) thats a recipe for disaster - though a huge sound where vox never quite cut it.

Hi - it will help if you can describe how you want to use the piezo pickups so peeps here can give you some tips. Whilst I use Variaxes, I only use their piezos for the modelling tech. I'm guessing (very much guessing) you want same sort of accoustic sim with the PRS piezos?? I'm basing this on thinking they'd sound pretty bad as an electric type sound, but may be very wrong. I think ricstudioc has answered the how to get them into the LT, but if you give more info on your use others may have thoughts on how to use the LT to its best.

The more guitarist can sound homogeneous the better. As ai is only good at replicating existing forms and not capable of extending them the sooner it takes over tone the better and the quicker we will regress to the norm. I welcome my tone overlords with welcome arms.

Name your presets with a prefix that manages the sort and actively manage that naming - eg 001 Preset 1, 002 Preset 2, etc Sorry, but thats the only way I know of if ordering is important to you. I used to do that, but moved to approaches that used lookups to manage the relationship between songs and presets (ie name independent).

I would physically inspect the 'problem' JTVs VDI output jack for any obvious physical issues, and clean it with isopropyl alcohol to ensure it doesn't have some sort of gunktm build up. I would also try another cable to be sure its not that cable's connection with that guitar causing the issue as the other guitar may have damaged the cable in a way they work fine together, just not with new freinds. I would also make sure I have a high quality VDI cable not the thing they come with thats like a network cable as they're pretty average. I've had one line 6 branded VDI cable go bad over many years, and it was giving flakey connections before it fully died. Also, whilst you're not getting sound, does the Helix power the problem JTV via the VDI cable (ensuring there is no battery in the JTV)? If not on plugin, does it power it after changing the Helix Patch or pressing the JTV model button? All things to try to isolate the issue.

When I first started using in ears I was using a system called Posse. Not sure if you can get them still, but it allowed me to mix the Helix, a vocal monitor send from desk, and built in stereo romm condensors. It was cheap portable, easy to set up, and sounded great. Not as great as a proper monitor mix, but pretty damned good. If you're in Australia I can sell you a second hand unit as I had enough for my whole band at one point. https://www.zzounds.com/item--POEPOSSE This isn't exactly the same, but will work. This

This is a complete guess, but... the product description say it is 1) loading the guitar pickups properly with the same loading as your guitar would see if plugged into a tube amp and 2) converting the signal to low impedance, driving the line so it is the least susceptible to environmental factors that might alter the tone Have you played with the input impedance setting of the Stomp, and does it make a difference? The Stomp Manual says the below - does that mean there's some form of double impedence loading going on, and your mention of microphonic feedback suggests too much high end being passed. 2 1 In-Z HX Stomp has an impedance circuit on its Main L/R inputs that affects tone and feel by loading your guitar’s pickups as they would by an effect pedal or amplifier. A lower value will typically result in some high fre- quency attenuation, lower gain, and an overall “softer” feel. A higher value provides full frequency response, higher gain, and an overall “tighter” feel. The “Auto” option allows the impedance to reflect the impedance of the first block in the signal path—also see the Auto Impedance option in “Global Settings > Preferences” As in the first line this is just guessing as I am no electrical engineer.

Its someone's truth. Only you will know what works for you as this is entirely subjective, and it sounds like you're looking for affirmation on your need to satisfy GAS. May your pedal choices be sound ones!

I reckon I know less than both of you put together about the genre, but the freebie's of these have to be worth a shot. https://line6.com/customtone/search/?submitted=1&family=&sort=rating&sort_dir=desc&search_term=black+metal+helix If they don't use lots of blocks/DSP the Helix ones might work in the stomp - you can check them here https://dbagchee.github.io/helix-preset-viewer/ or in Helix Native, which you can use to edit them to fit the stomp.

Thanks everybody. TheYoulean Loudness meter plugin would only work with Helix native, right? No - the assumption is you are routing hardware outputs to a DAW or stand alone version of YouLean. If you have a Helix you can do this direct via USB or through a audio interface. Whilst you can use Native and share presets between Native and hardware there are lopts of gotcha's with input levels, impedance, etc Still a little confused about power amps. So, back in the day, the old Fenders and Marshalls had no gain knob or master volume. That would imply that the power section was always maxed, right? Yes Most Helix models have a drive knob, a channel volume knob and a master knob, although a couple don't have a master volume. So does the master volume of the amp model have any effect on the tone? Yes - it simulates the impact on power sections as opposed to pre-amps. Some amps are great flat out, some distinctly not (IMHO). Or are you saying that the channel volume affects the tone but not the master volume of the model? No - the Channel volume only changes the output levels. You will perceive tones differently as they are louder/softer but that's a percepton issue and won't translate across playback devices. I have an Egnater MTS amp that uses the synergy tube preamps. I am trying to compare the helix to that and maybe that is unfair. Each preamp has a drive and a Master and then the amp itself has a master volume. Would that be similar to the Helix models? It is weird that there is a channel volume and then a master and then the Helix itself has a master and then the power amp also has a volume. I am just struggling to get my head around all of these volumes so please be patient with my questions.... Each Helix amp has a models a single pre-amp (unless jumped versions) and poweramp combination. The drive affects the pre-amp, the master the output section and the channel parameter the overall volume. Think of channel as the leveling tool you wished you always had on and amp. In the context of useing external power amps with the Helix, the external power amp should be as transparent as possible and only add volume (unless you deliberately want a specific colouration of tone) rick

It really depends on the bass combo, how you set it up and how much volume you need. Why not just try it? I'm assuming the send is not powered - that'll blow the amp.

I use a UI24R and linked stereo channels with my Helix. No problems to date, but depending on the age of the UI24R see reports of chanels failing in the Farcebook communities. I find I run very little channel gain as the UI see's the Helix as hot, even with mic output levels. I've also seen reports of maxing out the UI input gain levels causing system reboots - so its a sensitive thing. I'd test using: different linked chanels a fresh/clear scene (have seen references to chanel programming getting messed up over time) the bottom row of inputs vs the top noting the top row has combi inputs the Helix XLRs into a phatom power filter (even if the UI says phantom is off) the Helix 1/4 inch outputs into a DI

This path is likely your problem. I do this as Guitar >> Helix >> Mixer (XLR) Laptop (with audio) >> Mixer (USB) Mixer >> Heaphones Set the mixer as the USB playback device in Windows, and trim inputs from the Laptop and use the faders to set the over relative volume - then use Patch changes to adjust the Helix output levels. I normally do this with both my mixer and Helix connected via USB but the Helix USB only being used for edit. This approach allows both the channel input levels to be monitored and the relativities of patches to pre-rec music - noting that pre-rec audio may vary in loudness as well.

I'm not near my gear atm, and haven't run speaker models for quite a while. However, when I did I ran through the multi output. Worth a try?

Does the label say dryclean only? But, no I don't know for sure and would be concerned about damaging my washing machine with its size and external zips, along with how the internal padding would come out the other side once it got wet.

If I read this correctly, you're expecting the Helix to change to the USB input mode, AND retain the settings for the Multi/Helix input mode for when you switch back. Whilst I understand why you want to do this I can't think of a way the Helix would achieve this, short of retaining parameter settings independent of selected input choice, which would require some sort of input mode related memory provisioning and management. I suspect its dropping all parameters not relevant to the selected mode (ie Variax model settings) as it no longer 'needs' or can use those parameters. I would also expect that the output block behaves the same way with any patch specific settings for PowerCab and DT amps when USB is selected as well as the Multi block output levels. This would explain why the other snapshot parameters remain in place - nothing has changed to wipe them. Think of these blocks as behaving like any other block and the input/output sources as being a new model dropped into the block. To do what you want, Multi input would accept any of the USB inputs (not just 1/2) as well as guitar/variax, and Multi output would allow selection of USB 7/8 within the DAW, but it doesn't look like its engineered that way. This might be worth putting onto IdeaScale, after checking it hasn't been done already.

Well yes and no, as you'll need to consider stage real estate, not getting in peoples way etc. Having undertaken a long journey of using IEMs and other monitoring since using a Pod HD500x, my experience is: all monitoring is a compromise adding ambient stage sound to direct IEM mix is much harder to control/manage than you expect - and can have perverse results (for example being flooded by bass through conduction) that are really hard to track down. Its just not as obvious as you might think when you're sound checking etc I used stereo condensers for a while, and franky they made it more problematic than not having them Good IEMs make all the difference, and the amount of bleed you want/need varies from stage to stage (event) I have good molded 64 ears and the Sensaphonics and each is different (not better just different) and I vary what I use depending on the event controlling my IEM mix has proven more important that adding ambience to get the sweet spot I want/need But finding what works for you is the real challenge.

That sounds like a recipe for a feedback loop. Bass >> HX >> mains to Desk >> Desk FB to HX in >> HX mains..... you can see where that's going. To achieve HX to desk without a loop would require an output pre the return of mix from desk that is routed to your IEMs. I have a Helix but I'm sure there's a way of sorting that routing for the HX at the expense of blocks. TBH - even with the full Helix I run the IEMs from the desk back to a dedicated headphone amp with my guit in the mix. I have a strong preference for separation of hardware functions reducing decencies and complexity, and allowing fallback solutions. But YMMV.

I'm not sure it is. The kicker will be the low range frequencies from the Nord and the bass. Getting them loud and clean takes a lot and most FRFRs and not designed for truly full range. I'd be guessing that's what craps out the QSC10.2. A single 10inch speaker (with horn) can't cover that frequency range AND volume for a sustained period. Guitar targeting FRFRs will likely be worse as they are designed for a narrower band of frequencies. A reasonable compact powered sub with appropriate crossover could give you that range with the addition of one box for keys and/or bass gigs. Alternatively a compact bass combo sitting under the QSC.