SaschaFranck

I know it's doable. But they're not even fixing some horrible UI things on the Stomp (such as, for example, not being able to deactivate model scrolling once you turn the lower right encoder, which is just as annoying as it gets).

Would love that (hence upvoted both ideas) but it won't happen. Boss at least sort of has this since ages, the encoders below the screen on their GT units could be assigned to anything once you're outside of edit mode. Excellent - and it could even be expanded by allowing the encoders to control multiple parameters at once. But as said, I doubt it'll ever happen, especially on the Stomp, which has so many way less than shiny UI issues that aren't adressed, either.

See, I wasn't talking about you to actual use the 4cm method. Just use it as a test setup until you've matched your tones.

I'd also try what Schmalle said. In addition, you could try to tackle the problem by setting up the Stomp in 4 cable method, with your Super Sonic's preamp sitting in the loop (note: when you do this for the first time, you need to check out which loop levels are appropriate, they can be switched between instrument and line level, in addition, the loop blocks have their own leveling options for further finetununing). Within that scenario, you could now comfortably switch between the internal amps/preamps and the Super Sonic's preamp. You could even place a looper block as the first thing in your signal chain, record something and have your hands free for all editing purposes while the looper is playing.

Thing is, there's way more of a difference between home and live/band setups but just to defeat Fletcher Munson. As said before, mids are your friend. They help you to stand out without raising volume. And at the same time, as you will likely lower the overall output when boosting some mids, this will help with Fletcher Munson as you're essentially reducing low and top end.

And then you would still have to use corrective EQ should you play louder (very likely to happen in a band context).

For the future, he should create a handful of patches at band volume through the equipment used for band playing. You can then compare them at home and draw your conclusions when designing more patches at home. For a quick remedy, he might want to try the Global EQ and a relatively broad mid boost with a center frequency somewhere between, say, 700Hz and 1kHz. Just set it up and fool around with it while playing (as much as possible at least). In addition, it's always a pretty good idea to have the low and high cuts in reach, to tame excessive boom and shrillness.

1) I tried to carefully explain why that is not the most convenient way (at least when controlling output level rather than gain - which is what you said you wanted to do) as long as you have a free block left to insert a gain block (or a Simple EQ, which is what I'd do). You'd just assign the on/off status to a snapshot or a switch, done. No fooling around with finetuning your drive's output level, which a) will become tedious in case you plan to use the same setting in more than one snaphot, especially because b) you'll be losing "patchwide" control of the drive's output level, which means anything you might want to change later on will have to be done in multiple snapshots - I find that to be *the* opposite of convenient. But just check it out yourself. There's various ways to integrate path B. It can as well be a switchable serial path. Which you could use in multiple ways. Just to describe one: You could slap your drive and your gain block into path B and then preselect whether you wanted to have the gain block active or not. Path B could then be activated via snapshots. But really, that's just one way of doing things. --- In the end, all I'm saying is this: Regardless of which method you chose (controlling the drive's volume or adding a gain block), in case you want to use the drive without and with boost, you will defenitely have to sacrifice a snapshot or a switch for that maneuver, absolutely no way around it. So that's defenitely nothing you will magically avoid by controlling the output level of your drive. Any switching scenarios I could possibly imagine do *not* improve by using the option to vary the drive's output compared to using a gain block after the drive. More to the opposite, especially when you try to keep things simple and manageable, using an additional block is quite more convenient for a number of reasons. As said, just try to flip the drive we're talking about here - once you're doing that, all your carefully curated output level settings for normal and boosted operation go ***poof*** up in smoke. With a gain block you don't even have to think about it, everything stays intact. And it'd only get better in case you'd be using an EQ instead of the gain block because that way you could actually shape the way you boost following pedals, a massive benefit in many situations. Sorry for quoting that again, but: It's not about what you use to control the gain, it's about *which* gain (or rather output level...) you control. Which is making a whole world of a difference in terms of convenience.

Either the same way as you'd alter the output level of the drive, hence by using snapshots. Or by assigning it to a new switch. Or by assigning it to the same switch as the drive (which is extremely easy on the Helix, just select the gain block and hold the switch, you will then be asked whether you'd like to assign it). There's down- and upsides to either method. But the "drive level via snapshot" method would be at least as downside-ish. There's some more methods of realizing such things, such as slapping either the drive or the gain block onto path B (in case it's still free to be used). With that, you could sort of preselect what's supposed to happen when activating that path (which could again be done via a switch or snapshot). That's a method I was using in all my patches (for slightly different tasks, though).

You would not lose any of them by inserting a gain block. And it's as easy as it gets to control multiple blocks in stomp mode, too. Really, there's nothing easier in using snapshots for additional output volume control, more to the opposite. The only thing you gain is another free block - but as long as you have enough of them, inserting an addtional gain block is by far the more elegant and easier to deal with solution, it's even proveable. Quicker access, less save operations, more flexible (you could use the boost along with another drive block or just on it's own, etc.). But hey, each to their own.

To adress this with minimum effort, you could just insert a gain block and switch it on/off per snapshot. This only won't work in case all blocks are used up (unlikely, from my experience, even in my kitchen sink preset there's usually a block or two left). Well, it's just one way of doing things - and IMO rather convoluted. Why? Well, in case you want to adjust the drive's output level on your snapshots where you're not using it as a boost, you'd have to re-adjust and re-save in all snapshots. Same goes for the drive-as-boost snapshots should you want to alter the boost level. With an additional gain block, you set the boost level independently of the drive level, which is a huge benefit in terms of ergonomics. In addition, should you try to fool around with the patch by exchanging the drive in question, you'd have to go through all snapshot parameter assignments again. With a gain block, you don't have to do that. Especially as your plans are to use the Helix as a big pedalboard, once it comes to live playing, adjusting your drive's output levels on whatever how many snapshots during, say, soundcheck, becomes a mess. However, adjusting both the drive and gain block level once is done in a matter of seconds. In my book, controling any other parameters than on/off via snapshots should always only be done in case there's no other options left. Simply because re-tuning your patch is becoming *much* more complexed and time consuming.

And fwiw, the "solution" you provided will result in an almost unmanageable patch mess, multiple things controlling multiple gain stages with one switch without providing any overviev. Which, fwiw, is one downside of snapshots, so especially in case of gain staging you need to be very careful about what levels you assign to snapshots - and whenever possible, especially in case the additional gain you want is static (aka just one value), it's a much better idea to insert, say, a gain block. The full Helix usually provides enough blocks doing so.

Because in order to answer a question, it's absolotely relevant to know why there's a problem in the fist place. Was that sufficient for you, Mr. Superclever?

I absolutely don't understand this. I mean, each of the drive blocks has gain and output level parameters that you can adjust. Every bit the same as on a standard drive pedal. When you experience volume jumps, turn the level up or down, case closed. And as far as stacking drives goes, keep the output volumes civil in case you also want to use the drives just on their own.

As said above, pretty much the same here. It's a good idea to leave spatial FX out until mixing (and only add them for monitoring pleasure, which isn't an issue at all), unless they're an integral part of whatever sound. But even in that case I'd possibly try to get them done non-destructively in my DAW, it's just a whole lot easier to deal with dry guitars when cutting, punching, rearranging and what not. And fwiw, ever since I "stepped back" (because I was tracking DI guitars only for quite some time), I got both more productive and quicker. Interestingly enough; even more so after I sold the Helix and went back to a hybrid system (analog dirt, dynamics and what not, digital amps). As I can't save patches that way anymore, this way of recording foces me to finish at least entire takes as there's no option for "ah, will do it tomorrow". This makes me concentrate on a single track a lot more (rather than adding tons and tons of tracks vertically) as well. And I have to follow at least a certain time management, because as said, usually there's no "let's start this now and finish later" (unless I don't touch a thing, which is unlikely). At first, all these points seem to be limiting (which, technically, they obviously are), but still, these were the things re-speeding up my working progress.

The latter for me. Always (regardless whether it's with the Helix or other tools). Ok, I usually record some modulation FX as well, because most often I like them in front of the dirt stages (or at least in front of the amp). I sometimes monitor with some spatial FX (delay/reverb) within the Helix (or rather the HX Stomp by now, sold my Floor), but usually I just monitor the dry signal and add some 100% wet bits from the delay and reverb busses in Logic, which are running there anyway. As far as reamping, using a DI guitar signal then sending it to HX Native or whatever, goes, I pretty much stopped doing that. Option paralysis. In case a take can't be adjusted to suit a mix using some standard EQing and such, it usually wasn't right to begin with and as a result I very likely also didn't play in an ideal way (as we always adjust our playing to suit the used sound) - and no reamping will help with the latter. Recording a bone dry amp sound usually leaves enough room for tweaking. At least for me. Fwiw, I still use reamping quite a bit, but that's rather to slap new sounds together without having to play while tweaking and still hearing everything in context.

Hm, not exactly (in fact not at all) what was asked for, no?

You will not exactly be able to do that directly from the Stomp as it's lacking of an audio loopback function. But there's file grabbers for all sorts of services, either as a separate program (such as ClipGrab for YT) or as browser plugins. Much more comfortable, too, as they're grabbing the file faster than in realtime.

Impedance should be largely irrelevant in this scenario. As said, I'd just give it a try.

Depends on the send level of your pedal, but usually, the Stomp can deal with a very wide range of levels on the "plain" input, so I'd possibly just use that as it's kinda the default (and who knows, maybe you want to abuse the Stomp's loops for something else one day). Just take a listen whether there's any clipping. I run my Stomp as a time based FX pedal only as well, using the "normal" input, sending, hm, let's say a sort of low level line signal into it. Works great.

Fwiw, my method to remove fizz and boom from any sound I'm using live is to use IRs that have both ends of the spectrum removed almost brutally. In the end, there's hardly any musically useful information in any kind of typical guitar sound above, say, 5-6kHz. So I cut there. I don't trim everything out but I'm using an extremely steep high cut. In the end, there's still a bit of the range above there, so should I ever need it, I could get it back with some EQ. Usually doesn't happen. As said, we're talking live purposes here. And fwiw, I'm doing this destructively straight on the IR. Admittely, with the new cabs, I don't have to do it when using the Stomp, but in my live rig it's for delay and reverb only, still need IRs for my other amp sims (Amplifirebox and Amp Academy).

Why would you put a speaker IR in front of an amp? If you really wanted to tame fizz there, you could use a simple EQ. Also, what would an additional DI offer to you? The Helix has a built in one. Ok, using an external one would help avoid the phantom power issue, but others than that? That's quite an awkward statement. Usually, at low levels your hearing will also perceive less high end. This has been proven in numerous listening tests and is the reason for a "loudness" button to exist on cheap HiFis (which is enhancing the low and top end). It's also kind of the base idea behind the "Fletcher Munson Effect". And as a result, it's usually the best idea to check for highs and lows at rehearsal or gig volume.

To me it sounds a lot as if you were hitting HX Native pretty hard. Just try again with lower input settings.

Modelers made with outdoor use intents should actually be white. In direct sunlight, it makes a world of a difference.

Lots of people have already been reporting similar things about the HX family devices. These things aren't made for direkt sunlight. The very bad visibility gives it away, too. If you have to play lots of such gigs, get some sort of sunshield or a different modeler.