lawrence_Arps

Craig Anderton (if you don't know just google!) said this "These reverbs are light years ahead of the digital reverbs you used to find in multieffects, which sounded grainy, periodic, and often had to be mixed in the background so you wouldn't notice how bad they were. I'd have no problem using these on voice, drums, and other signal sources, which makes me wonder if maybe Helix is going to end up being a platform, and not just a guitar effects...sort of the hardware equivalent of how Native Instruments' Guitar Rig was transformed into more of a general-purpose studio processor rack..... These reverbs are light years ahead of the digital reverbs you used to find in multieffects, which sounded grainy, periodic, and often had to be mixed in the background so you wouldn't notice how bad they were. I'd have no problem using these on voice, drums, and other signal sources, which makes me wonder if maybe Helix is going to end up being a platform, and not just a guitar effects...sort of the hardware equivalent of how Native Instruments' Guitar Rig was transformed into more of a general-purpose studio processor rack." yup high praise indeed from someone who actually knows!

its been said so many times...but once more to balance the discussion. I play in a three piece and use multiple patches per song. Ive never had a problem with the patch change time or spillover . Its never raised a comment from other band members or audience. On recordings of the gigs I cant hear any drop out. The music encompasses clean, dirty and some very radical fx patches...timed delays or synth FX. No problem. The most complex song uses 4 patches and a couple of individual FX switches (I use the 4 patch, 4 stomp mode). Sure if I was doing some weird ambient stuff I could imagine spillover being an issue but even then I think I could work within a patch. No disrespect meant but I simply cant imagine this ever being an issue. Even a worst case scenario would see a Helix patch change faster than the time it would take to press two different pedals on a pedal board.

Switching between patches is still unusable in a live situation in some very rare and unlikely circumstances....for the vast majority of users its great!

Im using this in one song so far. Like all pitch to synth conversion your pick attack has to be consistent. I have about 75% which leaves a little guitar in there as well.

select another block with the joystick, or by touching and holdng another pedal...watch the outline move with the selection.

hey gunpoint metal thanks for the insight. It does suggest that this type of product may not be the right solution in your example. I think Im too old to be wanting to be pressing buttons that often!

Im so gonna regret getting into this discussion. Ive been using presets for years...since the first red bean came out. I have never yet had a situation where I had to change preset in the middle of a sustained chord. I have never had a situation where the preset change was not at the start of a beat (usually the start of a bar but not always) and I simply hit the switch on the "and" (the 8th) or on the "e" (the 16th) before the first note of the new patch. (an 16th note at 120bpm is 125ms...seems to be enough) I have never heard the delay in switching while performing. I have never heard the delay in switching in recordings of gigs. No-one, be it friends , bandmates, colleagues or family, has ever mentioned anything suggesting a gap. What sort of music or performance are you guys doing that requires such "instant " patch changes???

This. I have never had an issue with the joystick doing something I didn't want. Its a great little control. Helix is a woman , not a pickup truck!

OK its a bit of an assumption. Im curious as to the number of units currently in use and the number that actually generate genuine problems...ie. not user errors. My Helix has never glitched in any way. I haven't bothered with the last update but will probably do the next one. If there have been 5000 units shipped and 50 have hat problems that's 1%.....but I have no idea of the actual numbers involved.

thanks Di. ...Drink?

Hi all. Love my Helix. I note that the factory labels have several font sizes..and the presets are 2 lines. I cant work out how to change this when labeling things?

Why does it matter if the label is not the same...Gain, preamp, drive whatever?....if its the control that sets the "Input Level" or whatever then it is what it is. And Channel volume is always a straight volume, not part of the amp model. The Master volume is a page across.

so if we assume 0 latency in a tube amp (which is incorrect but thats not the topic here) then to achieve the identical latency we need to stand 1 foot closer to our speakers when using the HD500......... not that any human being is capable of noticing 1 ms of delay......

suddenly sound like a normal American with no accent no no no! The various American accents are still accents...yes other countries singers tend to copy them, and most actors do cos the US market is so big that movie makers cater primariliy to that market. But dont start saying that its not an accent.... Just last week I was touring a VIP through our institution and we visited a class where acting students were being drilled in moving between New Zealand accents (for us thats normal no accent) to northern US mid Western, to southern US drawl....sounded pretty funny changing mid sentence! as for Hew Jeckmin.....Geez Mayt feer suk of the sav! Hees a Strylian! nneds ta loos 'is axsint

DI: In any reasonably unbiased look at this - to have created this much discussion, debate, love...and hate.... on the basis of a pre-launch announcement and a couple of vids says only one thing: You are on to something really good. It doesnt matter if a few extremists are not happy...and it doesnt matter if the final product is not all things to all people. Clearly it is going to fit a niche that is currently unfilled, and do it with a fair bit of flair. For me its a simple equation: is this a better tool than what I currently have (500x).... yup I think so!

fixed :-)

Back in the day we put up with dodgy sounding stomp boxes for compression and delay etc because we had no option. and of course, most of us can get a bad sound out of even really good equipment. I would rather have a dbx160 or an LA2 than any mxr or Ross compressor....same with delays, mod fx etc. Personally I dont care too much if my sound is "better" than the icons I looked up to in the past!

may I ask why? I cant imagine what sort of time pressures would cause this! My 500x boots faster than the Line6 speakers...or the XR18 mixer I gig with...at home I turn the studio on when I get home from work and switch it back off at bedtime.

mmm to my ears the sample you posted is way more overdriven than what VH used. The Fred is probably hotter than whatever was in Eddie's gat at the time. I never care at all about copying and recreation...but I thought the Panama model has promise.

ha. Im not moaning about this as such - but its ironic that the only time I use line 6 link for my HD500X is when Im NOT using the M20D mixer - e.g. when we play through other peoples rigs and I take L3ms or L2ms as my stage rig. The M series speakers don't have EQ available....how ironic. Guess Ill stop using the Link and set up another set of analog cables. Oh well.

so update went fine...everything looks as it should. Global EQ is there and I can edit it (and turn it on and off) but its not actually doing anything. Ive checked this with very extreme settings etc. HD500X runs to L3ms via line 6 link. any ideas?

Hi - yes join the club. This is becoming a common problem. Now wait for someone to try and tell you its because you have bad cables.... believe me its not. Ive been without my mixer for over 2 months now waiting for the service guys to fix it...and I fear it will not be a permanent fix. Fantastic system, great sound, wonderful design....but unreliable. I too have a full system, (2 L3s, 3L3m, 3 L2m and the M20D. Currently its all sitting unused and I don't know if I can ever rely on the mixer for a gig again. I want to say that Im not some internet naysayer. I researched this for ages based on 30 years of experience. and truly believed this was the best system out there for the money. ...now I wish I had gone with something else.

be prepared for this to happen a lot....and search the forum as many of us have this issue. Sure...it is possible that some of the people reporting this have faulty leads or whatever...but not the majority. Some believe its an earthing (Ground) fault ..or at least poor design of the grounding in the mixer. Many people have solved this with modifications..of course that voids warranty. My own MD20 has been at the service workshop for a couple of months now trying to fix this exact fault......rendering my whole rig unusable. I love this sytem, but none of my friends and colleagues who have purchased competing digital mixers are experiencing this type of problem. ....I just want my mixer back and working reliably....:-(

"two channels of my mixer, and I have them both panned to the centre" - if this is what you have done then you will never hear any panning. Pan the left output to the left, and the right output to the right!

Ive edited my statements here away from addressing any particlar forumite... Strange and weird posts .... This thread asks the question "Will digital modelling ever replace analogue?". It does not, nor should it, ask if the models will ever exactly replicate the entire experience of a given amp. Some of the views expressed seem to assume that there is something perfect about some existing valve amps...when there is not. Not one of the amps ever built is perfect....some do some things well and some dont. Actully, I go so far as to say that every Tube and traditional solid state amp ever built has major problems in meeting all the possible expectations of an amp. Even the very best of the "swiss army knives" such as the Mesa V series doesnt come close to being able to cover every possible base. Every tube amp ever built is a compromise. The fact that some players like the characteristics that various amps exhibit is a positive but undeniably most big rock amps are too loud for small gigs, most cool lil retro amps cant do modern rock sounds, most great clean amps have a limited range of drive tones, most light amps lack girth on a big stage, most great recording amps are less suitable live.,...the list goes on. No piece of equipment in any field is considered perfect by every user. There is no universal standard of quality for a guitar amp. Guitar sounds are based on fads, fashions and trends and, all too much, on blindly hero worshipping and copying succesful artists. Modelling, as an approach to creating useful guitar sounds, enables the creation and editing of tones in a format that feels familiar to users. We have heard Plexi Marshalls so we have a sense of the general ballpark of what types of sounds they can create. Likewise with a fender model or whatever. This makes modelling a valid approach to a product even if it never replicates any given amp exactly. After all, every 30 year old Marshall sounds different...and many of them dont sound "good" at all. As we have seen with the deep editing parameters, most players are overwhelmed by too many subtle choices,..imagine if we had a product that gave all the choices without any reference to previous amps...it would be a nightmare. The answer remains true...Can a digital modelling amp replace analogue. Yes it can. Does it need to perfectly model any existing amps to do so -no it doesnt. The fact that I choose to use a practical solution, and one that meets all 99% of my needs well does not give anyone a warrant to question my standards. In fact, as an artist I will argue that by creating my own tones without specifically trying to copy somebody elses ideas on what is a great tone is a more artistically valid approach.