mdmayfield

Do you mean you adjust the master volume many times a show/rehearsal, after each patch switch? That works, but personally I've found it much easier and more convenient to always leave Master Volume at maximum, and set the mixer or speakers the Helix is going into to an overall preferred volume. Then I save each patch with its overall level adjusted appropriately (either at the amp's Channel Volume, the Output block's Gain adjustment, or at the last effect block in the path). Sometimes it takes a couple of rehearsals or gigs to dial it in perfectly, but once it's dialed in it's "set and forget." Also, it's pretty easy to adjust the patch volume hands-free - that's where the foot edit mode is really useful.

I took the outer knob off of the main joystick encoder, making it much harder to turn accidentally. All the same, in my opinion this crazy joystick/rotary/pushbutton hybrid is the #1 most serious design/usability flaw in an otherwise excellent, excellent product.

I'd imagine that unless you're also using wireless in-ears, the latency is probably just due to distance and the speed of sound (about 1' per millisecond) rather than the wireless rig. (Radio waves move at the speed of light, after all) Also... 120' being too small of a range? I guess if you're Hotblack Desiato, maybe...

When restoring presets with the Helix app after the update, you may have restored your entire bundle including ALL presets/setlists, rather than just your custom presets/setlists. This would have replaced the new 2.20 factory presets with the older pre-2.20 ones.

Unfortunately I have to agree with the general feeling in this thread... I would much rather have an auto-swell effect that's simpler, more musically useful, and forgiving/easy to dial in, like the one in the HD500. Is there a particular reason not to just port or recreate the one in the HD series?

I always go direct, but I can appreciate the desire for not having to keep two sets of presets in sync when tweaking. One possibility, if you're not already using all the paths/outputs of the Helix, would be to create every patch such that the XLR outputs come after the amp/cab simulation, but the 1/4" outputs are split off before the amp model. This approach has some limitations, of course - it would require some creative routing in both the physical and virtual realms to do any post-amp (effects loop) style effects.

Yes, they should! :) Any distortion that is happening in a properly-configured Helix should be happening inside the simulations - post digital conversion. The whole idea is to do the initial A/D conversion as cleanly and neutrally as possible, so that the only distortion that happens is in the digital emulations of pedals and amps. In the case you describe above, the fact that they sound identical merely confirms that your guitar is not clipping the A/D converter at the input of the Helix (which is 100% normal). The gain block boosts the signal before it hits the virtual amp, which means the amp reacts as if the signal coming to it is hotter (which it is, due to the gain block).

I would have agreed with you 100% in the 1990s through about 2005, but they made some huge changes in their manufacturing in the early to mid 2000s. Nowadays, totally unlike 10-15 years ago, in my experience Behringer has improved to the point of being probably the best of the very-low-budget brands. For example, I had a little $80 Behringer 4-channel mixer in the late 90s and it was the lousiest-sounding piece of $#!+ you could imagine. Noisy, severely band-limited, unreliable with crackly pots, loose input jacks, etc. They also made a rackmount guitar modeler, called the V-Amp Pro, around 2003 or so. I had the school I taught at buy a couple for the students to use, and while they were fine sound-wise for the time (roughly on par with Pod XT), the knobs and input jacks kept failing and I kept having to replace them. This is the "old Behringer" that you're probably thinking of - "they're so cheap you can buy two, and you should since at least one will fail." Then around 2011 or so I tried their updated 4-channel mixer and the new one is absolutely fine. I even tested it using an impulse response analysis and match EQ, and it checks out admirably clean and transparent. I've owned it for 7 years now, and it's been completely reliable so far. Around the same time, I bought a couple of the B208D active speakers, as well as the much much nicer QSC K8 and K10s. The B208D doesn't sound as nice as the K8, and it craps out and hits its limiter probably 20dB sooner, but on an extremely limited budget for home practice you could do a LOT worse for the same price. The F1220D is not a speaker I have experience with, but it's probably not total crap based on my experience with the B208D; it's probably adequate for the purpose and no worse than anything else in that price range. However, for the OP I would lean more toward "buy once, cry once." I suggest you save up for the nicest thing you can possibly afford - it saves a lot of money in the long run. Yamaha, E/V and JBL all make better stuff at a slightly higher price point; or you can look for a used QSC K-series or similar.

The Helix has both advantages and disadvantages compared to the Axe FX. A bandmate has the AxeFX and I have the Helix, and I would say they are completely comparable as far as their sound potential. I'd be surprised if anyone could tell a recording of either of these modelers apart from a recording of a mic'd cab in a controlled, level-matched, double-blind test (with each modeler using an IR measured from the same cab+mic setup). The Helix is much easier to program and use footswitches, especially since you can color and label the switches. The Axe FX has more detailed programming options with advanced concepts borrowed from the synthesizer world, like LFOs and envelope followers, which as of current firmware the Helix lacks. As a synth programming geek, I sometimes wish I had more in-depth access to those sorts of things in the Helix, but overall I'm happy with the tradeoffs of the MUCH more clear and quickly usable interface, and the custom colors/labels per patch on footswitches.

Unfortunately this is not possible. The reason is that the actual placement of the pickup, where it senses the string relative to the string's length, is what contributes to the "neck" or "bridge" sound. Because the effective length of each string changes depending on where you fret it, there is no single EQ shape or other effect that will compensate for this.

I've been using one of these for a year for playback of backing tracks and lighting automation using Reaper: http://www.microcenter.com/product/440932/winbook_tw802_tablet_-_black That one is nice because it has a full-size USB port in addition to its micro-USB charging port, so it can charge/run off AC, and connect a device by USB, at the same time. The notion that laptops and portable devices are underpowered for audio has been outdated for a long time, and nowadays it's getting just plain silly. In 2003 I used a state-of-the-art 800MHz PowerBook G3 to record and mix 16-track live concerts with no problem, and that cheap-@$$ bottom-of-the-line Winbook tablet is like 10x as powerful. Really, any computer on the market these days will be up to the task of basic recording and mixing, as long as you're not trying to do heavy-duty studio mixing with hundreds of tracks and 1000+ plugins.

This depends on the situation. If you're using passive speakers and a separate power amp, yes I'd expect most power amps to perform better set that way. If you're using active speakers, though, most of those already have DSP and other circuitry to maximize the efficiency and transient response of the power amp, and IIRC their input gain is actually that of a separate built-in preamp. If that's the case, the advice in the Crown manual wouldn't apply here and the best practice would instead be to maximize signal-to-noise ratio by cranking the output of the Helix/other device and setting the speaker input volume to taste.

I've done this by manually copying and pasting the JSON text in the .hlx patch files. It's not for the faint of heart, but it's the only way I've found to copy more than one command at a time between patches - and, at least in the firmware versions I've tried, the only way to maintain custom colors and labels. If you try this, be careful about the syntax or it won't load properly - watch for extra or omitted commas and {} braces. For example, this is a piece of code representing four footswitch commands that I copied between presets to send MIDI notes to a DAW to select songs and control live click tracks: "commandFS3" : { "@fs_customcolor" : 3, "@velocity" : 2, "@fs_ledcolor" : 462860, "@fs_enabled" : false, "@command" : 5, "@channel" : 1, "@fs_customlabel" : "Pause:Play", "@fs_momentary" : true, "@pending" : 1, "@noteoff" : 1, "@fs_label" : "Note", "@note" : 13 }, "commandFS2" : { "@fs_customcolor" : 6, "@velocity" : 1, "@fs_ledcolor" : 462860, "@fs_enabled" : false, "@command" : 5, "@channel" : 1, "@fs_customlabel" : "Start", "@fs_momentary" : true, "@pending" : 1, "@noteoff" : 1, "@fs_label" : "Note", "@note" : 12 }, "commandFS5" : { "@fs_customcolor" : 5, "@velocity" : 4, "@fs_ledcolor" : 462860, "@fs_enabled" : false, "@command" : 5, "@channel" : 0, "@fs_customlabel" : "Down", "@fs_momentary" : true, "@pending" : 1, "@noteoff" : 1, "@fs_label" : "Note", "@note" : 15 }, "commandFS4" : { "@fs_customcolor" : 5, "@velocity" : 3, "@fs_ledcolor" : 462860, "@fs_enabled" : false, "@command" : 5, "@channel" : 1, "@fs_customlabel" : "Up", "@fs_momentary" : true, "@pending" : 1, "@noteoff" : 1, "@fs_label" : "Note", "@note" : 14 }

We're making a number of speculations and assumptions in this thread (not judging here, just summarizing - some or all may be true): - That the reverbs were ported from the HD series - That it would have taken a lot of effort to make them mono - That mono reverbs would use significantly less DSP I'd like to throw in one other speculation: what if these reverb algorithms are written in such a way that there would be minimal DSP savings for going mono - that is, what if mono versions would still use like 90% as much DSP as the stereo versions? Who knows what crazy optimizing tricks could be happening in the math behind the scenes... Like pre-calculating the commonalities between L/R (maybe that's 90% of the work), then introducing the difference between channels (maybe that's only 10%), for example. Until/unless someone from Line 6 comments authoritatively, I guess speculation is all we have.

It's theoretically possible, but I don't think it's very likely that the firmware update is involved. You may want to double-check: - Helix physical master volume is up - the patch has a Multi or XLR output set up appropriately - Phantom Power is off at the mixer or interface that the Helix is connected to

Personally, I've found that people care more about the notes and melodies than about the specific tone (or even specific instrument). Of course, that's when they even notice the instruments at all.... The general public seems to think of music as: Singing! Oh is there a "beat" in the background? Huh.

Unfortunately that's not possible with IRs alone. Impulse responses only measure linear, time-invariant aspects of something. That includes EQ curves, phase shifts per frequency that don't change over time, and reverberation / ringing. Distortion and saturation are examples of changes that are non-linear... therefore not captured in an IR. Also, chorus, phaser, flanger, and other modulation effects are time-*variant* and not captured in an IR either.

Pretty cool! I'd love to use something like this - in reverse - to wirelessly send MIDI program changes from the Helix to a Variax, so I can go completely wireless with the Variax (over the 1/4" jack) while still changing guitar models with footswitches.

It's possible to control DMX lights with MIDI, but you need some hardware and/or software set up to do it. There are probably hardware lighting consoles that respond to MIDI, but I'm not familiar with them. I have used two different systems involving a computer though: 1) DMXIS, made by ENTTEC. It's simple and easy, and lets you set up scenes of lights per MIDI notes. It comes with a USB to DMX converter, and the software can even run inside a plugin in a DAW and act like a software synthesizer. I used this to create automated lights for backing tracks with a solo show. 2) QLC+ software, an open-source lighting console. This is much more complex and comprehensive, and you have to manually program most of the ways that the lights interpret the MIDI data. So it's more powerful, but more complex. If it were me, since I already own the pieces, I'd use DMXIS and a computer. As for sending MIDI messages from the Helix, I have not done this with Snapshots, but I believe you'd do it using "instants" in the Command Center. It may be that the Helix won't send Note Ons, but only CC values; I'm not certain though. EDIT: look in the Helix version 2.0 manual under Command Center, and also try a Ctrl-F / Command-F search within the PDF for the word "instant" to find more info about this.

The JTV and original Variax can also be powered using a TRS connector. My XPS-Mini box accepts 9V AC, 1200mA, but on opening it up I see it has a big ol' capacitor, along with a bunch of small resistors, a transistor, and a couple other components on a PCB - so I'm pretty sure that the Variax does not expect 9V AC; it probably needs DC. I'm not sure of the polarity and voltage it expects, though. EDIT: I just remembered I have a multimeter somewhere. If I get a chance (hopefull this week, but no promises) I will check what voltage the XPS-Mini puts out. Or maybe someone else here already knows.

What were you running it through before? A guitar amp? If so, then of course it will sound bad, like plugging headphones into a distortion pedal. In that case you need to use an Amp + Cab block in your chain. Otherwise, dunno. Attach a sound clip and maybe we can give some concrete advice instead of "flying blind" so to speak.

Also... If you have access to any of these devices, they will work as a Variax interface: Pod XT Live Pod X3 Live Pod HD500 or 500X (latest firmware) There may be other devices too that I've forgotten.

If I'm remembering correctly, this is because the Workbench USB interface does not supply power to the Variax. So you either need a charged battery in the Variax while using a regular 1/4" cable to get the guitar's electronics to turn on - or you'll need the special 1/4" TRS (aka stereo) cable supplying power to the JTV through either an XPS-mini or the special line 6 A/B box.

Using the Helix and a VDI cable, you can control and power the Variax, but not update it or use Variax Workbench (with current Helix firmware as of 2016-10-12).

From the sound of it, I'm guessing it's 6dB per octave. If so that means that, set at 4.2kHz, the signal would be 3dB down at 4.2kHz and 9dB down at 8.4k.