hideout

Sold my Fender Princeton RI about a month ago. I always go straight to PA and if I need an amp, I'll use my Quilter Aviator 8 or Yamaha THR100HD

Yes indeed! I hate the response of the expression pedal. Please upvote my suggestion - https://line6.ideascale.com/a/idea-v2/890716 Thanks!

Unless it's his band, I say it's your rig and you get to use what you like. End of discussion.

I have EON610s and they're plenty.

Interesting. Up until I got the Helix, I've never been able to get the sounds and that I've always wanted. Close, but no cigar was always the result of months of tweaking. I too had an ADA MP-1 for years and for me it was always missing one major component - power tube compression. During its heyday, the only option was to use a real tube power amp. No thanks. These days I just don't have to do any tweaking at all anymore. My sounds are all always available in the Helix. And no lack of sustain or feedback and at moderate levels at that. No muss, no fuss.

Well... I guess the amazing sounds, ease of use and flexibility all go out the window because of two buttons you don't like... Seriously? Your loss.

I would tend to put the EQ block after the delay.

I have had the opposite experience. Every pro level box I've ever own and even some not so pro level units (Fender Mustang Floor) has never had any issues with phantom power. The only issues I've had with built in DIs have been with ground loops which are for the most part are relatively easy to fix with a ground lift switch.

Sorry, but that is ridiculous. And yes, it does matter. Why give us XLR outs if they're just going to hamstring it by not making it compatible with phantom power? Why force users to have to pack around yet another box when there's supposed to be already one in the Helix. Most other truly "Professional level" devices would not have any issues with something as commonplace and ubiquitous as phantom power. Are they there just as a marketing ploy just so they could say, "Hey, our device has XLR outputs!"That, I say again is ridiculous. If you're going to use a standardized connector, you should at least adhere to the standards that apply to that connector - especially if you're going to put that connector in a supposedly "Professional" product that you're gonna sell. Obviously, vintage professional ribbon mics would be exempt to this but most certainly not the Helix. I love my Helix but I absolutely will not make any excuses for its shortcomings.

Then they ought to explain why they designed the Helix that way. What advantage does it give the Helix? I seriously doubt that that design offers any signal quality advantages. Maybe it's just a way for Line 6 to cover their butts if you connect it to a poorly designed mixer.

I've never had an issue with the Helix's XLR output signal and have never had the need for a DI box when using it. If anything, the Helix's output when set to "Line" might be a tad too hot and "Mic" setting a little too low... maybe. I have not actually used the "Mic" setting because I found the drop in output disconcerting. As for phantom power, it's supposed to be invisible to devices that don't need it - like the Helix... if, and here's where the variable is, if the phantom power circuit is designed properly. It should also be said that devices that don't need phantom power, like the Helix, are supposed be designed to ignore it. Yes, turn it off before you plug it unplug but that should be it. The only thing I wouldn't take a chance on with regard to phantom power are vintage ribbon mics. Some modern ribbon mics need phantom power if the have a built-in preamp to boost the output.

Agreed.

I think that's more technique than an amp setting or a pedal. Despite the fact that he uses a wah to accentuate the "clavinet" sound, it's mostly the way he plays his guitar that makes you think it sounds like a clav more than it really does.

Well yes, there is that.

That might be asking a little too much from the Helix. I mean, it's not a synthesizer. Not sure how you think you be able to change the sound of a guitar's attack to mimic that of the very distinctive attack and tonality of a clavinet.

My boss caught a show I did a couple of weeks ago. He's a vintage tube amp guy only. He approached me later and said, "Dude your tone was huge, it was mean and it cut through the mix. What amp were you using?" He couldn't believe it when I told him it was just the Helix straight to the board. That's what it's designed to do. Was I happy with it right out of the box? Absolutely NOT! There was not one single preset that I liked. Sure, I went through my levels of frustration with it, albeit not like I did with the Boss GT-5, 6 & 8, or worse, the Pod XT Live, but it was mostly specific functionalities that I didn't like in the Helix... and I still don't but that's small potatoes. Getting the tones and the feel that I like was the easy part - dead easy. All the tone shaping tools are highly effective and get me where I need to go. Bottom line; No Effort, No Joy. Full Stop.

Agreed. Right. I mean, who could afford to have all those amps in their house? Indeed. Those who are willing to put in the time to learn how to use it will be rewarded with tone that makes them happy. Those who are frankly, too lazy to learn, will never reap the rewards. I would be the first to say that the Helix is not without its foibles and that I vehemently disagree with some of the decisions Line 6 made regarding its interface conventions but dang folks, it's still way easier than any other modeler out there. You can make it sound pretty much any way you like... which is something I never thought I'd say about a Line 6 product! Put a little effort in. It's not that hard.

LOL In my collection of 8 patches that I use, only one is sort of high gain... well, it's high gain to me anyway.

It seems to me that the OP is judging the Helix strictly from the presets it comes with. That approach is never going to pay off.

Hmmm... thanks guys. I finally decided to just change my password and that did it. Weird.

I've verified myself 4 times now and I know the password I'm using is correct.

I think that modeling specific guitars might be possible using a combination an IR of an electric guitar's body, if it's possible to capture that, and then modeling the pickups. Please vote up my pickup modeling idea. Thanks. https://line6.ideascale.com/a/idea-v2/819088

You mean "Acoustic Guitar Body" not cabinet, don't you? Also, it does in fact modify the sound of your guitar. That's what it's supposed to do and tries to make it sound like an acoustic guitar.

Yes indeed!!!

It has been my experience that while pitch shift fails when you're trying to shift the pitches up or down a fifth or an octave, it works well enough for detuning a few cents polyphonically.