SaschaFranck

Fwiw, for me, being able to finally use fullrange amplification all throughout (in the past I only did so in case someone kinda pointed a gun to my head, such as theatre directors demanding "No sound on stage!") posssibly is the biggest godsend in my guitar playing life. I had pretty great analog rigs and most of it is sold already with the rest to follow. Zero regrets so far and I will never ever go back.

Fwiw, I can perfectly understand that someone would prefer more knobs over less knobs. If possible, I would love to have as much physical knobs available as possible. I actually already have them (in form of a Behringer BCR2000 MIDI controller), it's just that the Helix won't work too well with them (for reasons already described in other threads). And it's that very lack of physical knobs which would put me off the HX Stomp a bit (6 knobs with the Helix are ok but still not great). I also own an Amplifirebox and the WYSIWYG approach is quite nice in my book. In fact, before purchasing my Helix, for a while I even thought about just buying another Amplifirebox.

There have been suspicions that both the used speakers/tweeters are 1:1 identical (they're both made by Alto and the specs read the same, too), the only difference being that with the Alto, the volume knob around halfway in activates the mic preamp section (I don't think anything is kicking in, it's just a broader input level tolerance). Fwiw, there's a pretty huge difference between the previous Alto models and these (TS210 vs. TS310). I A/B-ed them and the newer models comes through a lot more balanced and doesn't get boomy as quick, either. I also compared it directly with both a Yamaha DBR10 and a DXR10. Both of these would likely do a better job for "normal" monitoring duties, as they have some decent monitoring-tailored DSP settings, but apart from that, personally I even slightly prefered the Alto - and I don't need any extra monitor settings as I can do the same with the Helix' global EQ (which is only routed to my monitor out), should I ever need to. So I just saved a few bucks.

Personally, I'm perfectly happy with an Alto TS310 (which seem to be pretty similar to the Headrush offerings). Gives me a very nice balance between portability and decently full sound. Holds up pretty well with rather loud drummers, too. And yes, I'm gigging regularly with it, covering a rather broad musical bandwidth. I usually place it like a typical monitor because on most gigs (pretty much all) I play there's a PA.

Hi, It says somewhere that the Helix supports IRs in the format 48kHz/16bit/mono. Fine. Anything else will be automatically converted on import (and truncated, in case it's too long). Fine again. Ok, now, when you export any IRs, the exported file is a 32bit-float one. So, my guess would be that this is the format the Helix is using when doing its internal calculations - from all I know, most DAWs do it the same way. So, my question would be what's actually happening within the IR business? When I load a 24bit file (which HX Edit accepts just fine), will it be converted to 16bit first but then treated like 32bit-float? That sounds like a sort of convoluted thing to me already. Then, possibly even more important: What happens with these exported 32-bit float IRs when I re-import them (pretty much the most obvious thing to do when dealing with backups and what not)? Will they also be converted to 16bit and then back to 32bit-float? I could possibly try whether there's some kind of signal degration happening after multiple exports/imports, but perhaps someone with a bit more technical insight could shed some light on this.

Btw, when you record the DI signal through USB outs 7/8, there's no point in recording stereo, so you could just record either channel 7 or 8 onto a mono track, saving some ressources.

Why would you want something else? For quick and dirty patch construction I'm using the onboard looper straight at the beginning of the signal path, for detailed "in context" editing I'm recording the dry signal and use Helix Native. When done, I drag the patch into the Helix Floor and do some final finetuning (such as setting up switches and the likes).

What you'd experience when running it in a Helix/HXFX/Stomp loop is roughly 3 times the latency. 2 times from the Line 6 unit in question and one time for the Iridium (I would think it'd come in at similar latency values). So instead of roughly around 2ms you'd deal with 6ms. And depending on the preset, it might as well become 8ms. Whether that's an issue would be something only you could decide. Otherwise I can't see any problems.

What exactly would you need to know? By default, USB Outs 1/2 deliver the full Helix shebang and USB 7/8 carry just the dry guitar DI signal. For reamping purposes you may want to record both, so you know what you played (from recording USB 1/2) and still have all the reamping options by using the dry signal that you recorded in parallel.

Nah, DI boxes don't block phantom power. No idea whether there's some providing this extra functionality, but usually they don't. Apart from that, in most cases DI boxes have a 1/4" in, so phantom power doesn't need to be blocked anyway. Whatever, I'm always using 1/4" for my monitor and XLR for FOH, the latter always running through an additional PP blocker, just in case.

The advantage (even id it'd might not apply often) would be that you'd not run into issues with phantom power. In case your monitor supplies PP, you can at least switch it off yourself whereas you are on the FOH folks mercy when providing them your XLR out (and in case you don't bring your own PP blocker).

Another vote for snapshots. What hasn't been mentioned yet: Have a look which way of using the global switching options floats your boat. Personally, I have my mode switch set to switch between 10 stomps and Snapshot/Switch mode (resulting in 4 snapshots and 4 switches) and occasionally go into 8 snapshot mode by pressing the up/down keys simultaneously. In addition, I think it's pretty relevant to select the proper Snapshot Edits mode. I have set it to "Discard" (default would be "Recall"), so my snapshots are always the same as initially programmed, whereas "Recall" would "auto-save" the last status they were in (such as when adding a block via switches). Yet another thing to look into would be the "Snapshot Bypass" function of each block. In case you turn that off, you can switch blocks globally (well, patchwide) and no snapshot switching will affect the status. A little off topic but still: I am however right now trying to create a bunch of patches without using any snapshots. Due to the rather easy way to assign multiple things to footswitches (at least as long as you stick with on/off things), this is working quite fine, too. The reason I'm doing this is because I'm trying to use my Android tablet as a MIDI controller, to have some instant control over the most relevant parameters I may have to adjust to suit the gig or that I simply may want to fool around with while playing (like raising delay feedback and such). Unfortunately, all this won't work anymore once you're using snapshots because once a parameter is controlled via MIDI, it'll as well be automatically recalled with snapshots. Quite a drawback for my personal idea of an ideal setup. I really hope this will be adressed in a future update because external MIDI control via some virtual tablet (or even just smartphone) faders is *way* cool, seriously!

Same for the Mac version.

Hi, I thought it'd be a nice idea to share some ideas about how we all create our patches and how we use them in different situations. Things such as special routings, switch assignments and what not. I'll start myself with what I think will be my main way to use the Helix in a typical recording situation when I'm recording on my own, using the Helix as an interface, too. Note before I start: I also own Helix Native, but that's irrelevant for this kind of patch. Here's a picture demonstrating the basic layout of this patch (I can as well attach the patch, but it's really nothing special): First thing is a looper, so I can always record something quickly and adjust the patch without having to play myself (incredibly handy). Then there's a gain block (not controlled by any switch) that I use to somewhat compensate for different guitar output levels. Next there's a wah block and a bunch of drives, followed by some modulation blocks. I use and replace them whenever I feel like. They're all controlled by switches for quick access. In path 2a, you'll see the amp block - this is also what will ultimately run into USB 1/2 and be recorded. I might add some post-amp blocks whenever I feel like. At the end of path 2a there's a split, path (a) going out to the mentioned USB 1/2, path (b) being reserved for monitoring only. The first thing in path 2b is an IR block, loaded with what I'd call a "generic cab", suitable for all kinds of sounds. I do occasionally exchange the IR, but it's not really required. Next thing is a volume block routed to EXP2, which is very comfortable as it adjusts my monitoring volume. Small caveat: Should I want to record a volume swell, I would have to drag it into path 2a and lose the quick monitoring volume control. Same goes for recording a wah (I'm not using an external pedal but just a switch for EXP3). Still fine most of the time - and in case I need a different monitor level, I can as well adjust the output of path 2b. The last two things are a "monitoring pleasure" delay (usually the legacy stereo delay) and reverb (usually the legacy plate). As you can see, what gets recorded via USB 1/2 is a sound a) without any cab information and b) without any room FX. Having no cab recorded is allowing for a lot of mixing freedom as I can chose from a plethora of IRs in my sequencer of choice. For a start, I always load the IR I'm using on my monitoring path. Similar things go for delays and reverbs, I usually have some of them running in my sequencer anyway, so I'm rather using those, especially as it's quite easier to mix. Punch ins are easier that way as well, as I don't have to deal with any overlapping or cut off delay/reverb trails. Pretty happy with this setup. And should I feel like, I could always record USB 7/8 simultaneously, delivering a DI guitar track that I could slap Helix Native on. This patch can easily be modified to suit recording with another interface, in that case I'd simply change the output of path 2a to XLR. And in case I wanted the cab portion to be recorded as well, I could just drag it from path 2b to 2a. As said, so far this is my prefered recording patch, seems to work as great as it gets. Hopefully there's more to come.

I know. I'll post it there as well.

Title pretty much says it all. I'll elaborate anyway: When you notice something's going wrong while recording a loop, a "Cancel" option would make enormous sense. As is, you can either press the stop/play button which will play back what you've recorded or the record button which will take you to overdub mode. The undo button does nothing (why?). So, regardless of what you do, as long as you stay within one patch, you *will* have to listen at least to the beginning of your messed up miserable recording. The super cheap Zoom units have a cancel function for their looper and it works a treat. And then there's these two unused switches anyway...

And it'd be even better if one could save a bunch of serial blocks as one single "multi block" preset. I know this would possibly be a tad difficult to handle from a coding aspect, due to the dynamic DSP allocation of the Helix, but there's always the good old option of "Not enough DSP power to load/paste!" or "Not enough free blocks to load/paste!" messages.

I'm doing it pretty much like you, in addition I'm using Helix Native for such tasks as you can open multiple instances and drag'n'drop between them. When done, the patches go to HX Edit and hence onto the hardware. All this is working miraculously well already and it's almost a godsend. Doesn't mean it couldn't be improved, though. As just another example: I find myself using the same blocks straight after each other in many patches (such as a certain combination of drives/comps/EQs, amps and cabs). Would be quite a time saviour if this could be done with one copy/paste action.

I totally agree on all points and none of the patches I'm actually using has an Amp+Cab block in them. Yet, when quickly looking for sounds, that block is pretty handy as it provides a (more or less) matched cab instantly, whereas you'd need to look one up separately using just the amp block (you usually don't want to run a Marshall style amp through a Jazz Rivet cab, do you?). Which, btw, is also why it'd be cool if we could save the default settings ourselves (or even block presets in general, which would as well come in handy for other more complexed blocks such as the delays and reverbs).

So you're saying the amp settings stayed intact when switiching between the two in previous FW versions? That's just nice and I almost filed a feature request already (fwiw, I bpught mine with 2.8.2). Seems as if Line 6 just had to reactivate this very useful feature. I often wish I could keep a patch intact but replace the cab with an IR. And fwiw, IMO there could as well be an IR option for the cabs in the Amp+Cab blocks.

Unfortunately, this only seems to work well in the US. Just read of someone from over here, waiting over 6 weeks for a repair. No loaner unit has been offered or anything.

I'm not having too much issues with the global EQ in its present incarnation to partially help me in defeating Fletcher-Munson.Typically, I have a rather broad midband ready to roll and just boost it a little, which is kinda like the opposite of a loudness button on home HiFi systems. That way, I only need to deal with adjusting one band and perhaps the center frequency. In addition, as long as the global adjustment options are as limited as they are right now, I'm a strict "one patch per gig" guy (might become a different story on a larger tour project which might start somewhen next year, but that's nothing relevant for now...), so I can adress the issue at two points in the signal chain. Last block in my signal chain is always an EQ, I use that to actually balance the patch (and what goes the FOH route as well) whereas the global EQ is dedicated for my own monitor path only. So far this is working really well for me.

Yeah well - if anything, I think there's generally too much gain to be found in the Helix' models, at least when using their default settings (which, well, reminds me that I'd really love being able to set the defaults myself....). There's hardly any completely clean amps and those that originally would be more akin towards a kinda mellow breakup are almost "riff-y" already. Out of fun, I just went through all of the Amp+Cab settings with the mentioned Epiphone LP and Guitar Input Pad switched off (which is the default...). No kidding, but if what I heard would've been my first expression of the Helix (it fortunately wasn't...) I wouldn't be here because I'd never bought it in the first place. Just as one example, the Fullerton Jump sounded more like a hot candidate for a most serious amp repair rather than anything I'd ever consider using (apart from some electro-thrash maybe). Had to activate the Input Pad and turn down most everything on the amp to get a useful (and still "grumpy") sound out of it. Now, I am perfectly aware that the Fullertons aren't exactly the role models for chorused 80s cleans, but I do defenitely think that Line 6 has meant it a bit too well with their default settings.

Not a fan of high output PUs at all, too. For a while they seemed to be necessary here and there in case you wanted plenty of drive while keeping the noise acceptable (in my experience any kind of external analog boost always raised the S/N ratio at least to a certain amount), but especially when using digital devices and no further external stuff, IMO they're not really required anymore. My No.1 axe, a modified Tom Anderson (custommade mini HB at the neck, Duncan-designed Framus PAF-alike at the bridge) has comparatively low output (not all that much more than most modern strats) and yet, I have the Helix' Guitar Input Pad switched to "on". Still getting more gain than I'd ever need without any noise issues. I mean, we're talking humbuckers here anyway. I also have an Epiphone LP with some rather hot stock PUs (no idea what they are), and while I sometimes use it for recordings, the neck PU is the master of "un-clarity". I even use it occassionally for some way over the top muddy-fuzzy-mayhem things, but for anything "normal" I vastly prefer lower output PUs, so apart from that Epiphone, all of my axes are pretty "un-hot". It also always seemed to me that it's easier to add some gain to lower output PUs than doing it the other way around, hotter PUs would always come through a little less clear (with some PUs it might of course have to do with string pull as well).

I would at least sort of agree with brue58ski, there's a certain resonant character in the sound. Didn't manage to get there with my pretty ancient (early 70s) Ibanez 335 clone, though - but that's likely because the bridge PU is really sharp sounding (should exchange that - just not much fun with a semi acoustic). Could as well be a Rickenbaker. Anyhow, what I'm a bit wondering about would be, why one would want to recreate this sound (or, in fact, any famous sound...). I just never do that and I could only imagine doing so on well paid jobs.