Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by hideout

  1. 3 hours ago, loonsailor said:

    The issue he’s referring to is not that 3.1 is essential because of features like new models or whatever, but that Big Sur compat (and maybe M1) is a huge deal for some.  For me, it’s merely an annoying nuisance that Line6 is the only thing keeping my from upgrading my OS, but for those who really need to be on Big Sur (got a new Mac in the last four months, need to be on it for work, ...) this is a potential show stopper.

    Not having HX Edit be compatible with Big Sur does not render the Helix unusable, however.  It's a minor annoyance indeed not to be able to use the editor but you can still do your editing on the Helix itself.  Hardly what I would call a show stopper.

  2. 1 hour ago, miguelassaf said:

    Almost 4 months is a long time to release a working version for a core OS in the marketplace (Big SUR). This is not acceptable for a company that has such a good quality product.

    And if they release it too soon and it bricks your Helix, how would you feel about that?  What is it exactly that the current version is not doing for you and what makes you think 3.10 will?

  3. This encapsulates everything that I hated about the Pods but love about the Helix.  To me the Pods were the most static sounding modelers ever created. They were ok if you just bashed the crap out of the guitar strings all the time.

  4. Yes, the Helix reverbs "do the job" but that's about it.  To me, they're either too much or too little so I have to err on too little. The Lexicon reverbs that my Digitech GSP2101 and GSP1101 had are something that I do pine for every now and then.  They were so sweet and so lush  even at the lowest settings but they were never overbearing at higher settings which the Helix's reverbs can definitely be. No, I'm not gonna be attaching anything to the Helix's FX loops.


    • Upvote 1

  5. Ever since I've owned the Helix, I have never paid any attention to the factory presets that it comes with it.

    Now, for some reason, after this last update I decided to check them out and found some favorites.

    Have these presets always been there?

    Big Monosynth

    Bel Haven boi!

    Needed Space

    Mandarine Gaze


    Nine Inch Pills

    Sweet Dispozish

    Dream Syrup

    Low E Sludge

    SFX Ufology

    Hi Octane

    Knife Fight - Love this one!!

    Secret Travel

    Chem Trails


  6. I think it would be a lot simpler to just get a decent powered speaker.  I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish by putting a full range speaker in a guitar cab.  I mean, it will extend the high frequency range of the cab but it certainly will not have a flat response.  As a guitar cabinet, it is designed to accentuate certain portions of the frequency band. This approach is anathema to the requirements of Full Range, Flat Response.

  7. On 5/6/2017 at 5:36 AM, PeterHamm said:



    Word Clock is ONLY in the Rack. Never was in the floor.


    AES/EBU in is also only in the Rack, as is buffered Guitar Out, and also (unnecessary on floor) connections for all 3 EXPs as well as a switch connection for EXP 1 with a Mission pedal so equipped.

    Uhh... care to tell us what that red thing is on the right in the picture?

    Screen Shot 2020-05-09 at 9.46.19 AM.png

  8. I really wish that a true modulated delay were available.  Instead of one with just a chorus on it. A true modulated delay would be a lot better and more natural sounding.  Better yet, If the LFO controlling the modulation had a random setting it would take away the mechanical nature of the chorus sounds.

  9. Well, 2.82 has been rock solid for me.  I'm glad they're continuing to improve the update process but it sounds like the update itself still needs work.  Once again I am forced to say that there's nothing feature-wise that appeals to me in this update. The things I want may never come to be and really, that's ok. Everything in 2.82 does absolutely everything that I need the Helix to do. The wishlist is just that. A wishlist.

  10. 27 minutes ago, gunpointmetal said:

    And I'm saying you can't recreate sound pressure levels without sound pressure levels. Which is independent of the modeling. You're saying modeling can't recreate the "psychoacoustics" (not sure that term even applies to this), which has nothing to with modeling. 

    OMG... ok... lol  I'm done with this. Still laughing though.

    • Confused 1

  11. 1 hour ago, gunpointmetal said:

    Ok, but that has nothing to with the "complexity" of the signal, and everything to do with the amplification method and sound pressure levels is my point. Even if you could recreate the exact spatial sound of two cabs in a room, which one probably could by shooting their own "head placement" IRs with neutral mics, its not going to be the same without all the air moving. The sound of two amps moving air in a room is different in every room, because the sound depends on the source (guitar cab) interacting with the room. The sound of two cabs in a room in a 15x15 rehearsal space is going to be dramatically different than those two cabs interacting with the room in a full 300 person venue.

    I mentioned absolutely nothing about the complexity of the “signal”. Read my post again.  

    The signal is dead simple. The psychoacoustic effects are not. 

  12. 10 hours ago, gunpointmetal said:

    Where's @Digital_Igloo when we need to do a shot for someone conflating playback source for modeling? The only way to achieve the "psycho-acoustic" of two cabs at volume in a room is two cabs...at volume...in a room. Now, if you want to get the mic'd studio sound of two amps and two cabs in a room and play it back in high fidelity through a stereo PA system, its definitely NOT too complex for modeling.  

    The mic'd studio sound of two amps and two cabs in a room is nowhere near as dramatic as the sound of being in the room with those two amps is my point.

  13. On 3/28/2020 at 11:02 PM, robbieb61 said:

    Am I the only one that didn't think the two amps together sounded any better than just one of them? 
    I had one of the first Helix Floors that shipped out of Sweetwater back in October of 2015. (now I have a Stomp instead)

    And no matter what I did...I was never able to get two amps together to ever sound as good as just one amp dialed in correctly. And I don't hear it sounding any better in that guys video either.

    Nope.  Even when you run it in stereo, you're not getting the full effect of two real amps together in a room. The psycho-acoustic effects are very complex. Likely too complex for modelers.

    • Like 1

  14. 41 minutes ago, robbieb61 said:

    Back in the 1990's when I first started using modeling...I had the Boss GT 5
    And the way they did it was you could tweak an amp model or an effect and save that "Block" (though that's not what they were called) and it showed up in your choices of amps and effects (with the name you gave it...I would just add my first name to them lol "Robbie Marshall" or "Robbie Delay")

    Always wondered why the Line 6 stuff didn't do that too. Not my old Vetta or the HD 500 or the Helix. :(

    Yup. The GT-5, 6, 8, all had this feature as I remember.  Very very handy. It helped a lot especially since the thing as a whole was a pain in the keester to edit.

    I loved that you could create your own overdrives and preamps too.

    • Like 1

  15. I was switching guitars for my next gig... which of course got cancelled.  Thanks Covid-19!

    Anyway, I use different setlists for each of my guitars and tailor the patches accordingly and switched to a setlist for my FrankenStrat.

    Anyway, did that and and as I was putting the Helix back in its case, I heard myself say, "Man, I love this thing!"

    Nice to know I can count my blessings without having to be reminded.

    I hope you're all staying healthy, my friends!

    • Like 1
  • Create New...