scallybert

Reading of some problems people have had following firmware updates on physical Helixs; I was wondering whether it was possible to have multiple versions of the Helix Native plug-in installed, and available in the DAW. Not that I'd necessarily want to *use* multiple versions; but it might be far easier to compare the behaviour of different versions, if problems were encountered with certain presets, etc. It might also be an easy way of checking that presets sounded the same across an update. Any thoughts ?

Saw this in the Helix Native update 1.60 notes: /// Bug Fixes DSP intensive presets with one or more Placater Amp+Cab, Amp, or Preamp blocks can sometimes generate an error message — FIXED /// Is this at all relevant ?

Another vote for buying the Helix Native plug-in, to go with the physical Helix & Reaper. Being able to re-amp just using the laptop, or tweak tones on the move, etc, etc is great. Plus, it makes recording and monitoring more versatile. Being able to quickly play back and mess about with different Helix presets on multiple tracks, etc, etc, is great.

Obviously, only 'he' can answer this; but from what I'm reading, he's understandably irritated by the company's attitude to its customers. ie that the product 'designed especially for modelling guitarists', is actually a cut-down version of an existing product, with a nice logo, and no price reduction for the feature removed. If he wants to push back against this kind of marketing BS, I think that's a good thing.

Yeah, I guess on that course, I could record a 're-amping' track with a physical Helix, and match the Solo recording level to that.

Given that they're digital devices, I'm guessing it's a fair assumption that all Helixes sound and behave identically. [Fair ?] I'm not so sure this would apply to the analogue inputs and outputs - maybe due to slight variations in components, etc. Of these, the input is (to me) more interesting, as changes in the input levels effect the sound - just as the guitar volume control does. Anyone have experience of plugging into different Helixes ? Are they, to all intents and purposes, identical ? If so (and hopefully, so), what about Helix Native ? The 'Native' is an exceptional case, here; as the input circuitry isn't part of the Helix; being something like a USB analogue I/O module, plugged into the host computer. It's also likely, that this input device will have a control to adjust the input level. eg the Scarlett Solo does, along with a level indicator, which provides a means to set this level. So, is it realistic to set the input level, so the Helix Native configuration behaves identically to a physical Helix ? If so, how do you set the Solo (or such) input level control, to facilitate this ?

In theory, what sounds great in your headphones; sounds just as great going into a desk [PA/studio/IEM/etc]; or coming out of your personal PA or monitoring system.

Given what people have said about price & availability, and what I said about good results many years back with a Mackie SRM450, it may be worth a look at https://www.sweetwater.com/store/search.php?s=mackie+powered+speakers . Also bear in mind that various of these products have been around a while (or earlier versions have), so the there may be some available 2nd hand. eg Various SRM450s on UK Ebay.

Cheers - one Solo ordered..!

I'm a Helix LT & Reaper user for playing/recording/re-amping/etc. I've taken advantage of the discount, to purchase Helix Native, so I can tinker with tones, etc, etc away from the Helix LT. [I'm confident this will go fine, but I have a little way to go yet...] Meanwhile, it's occurred to me, that if I could plug a guitar into a Reaper + Helix Native laptop, I'd have something extremely portable - if I needed it. On this basis, what would I need to plug the guitar into the laptop ? [I'm almost wondering whether an in-built mic port might be good enough, given apparent advances in PC audio.] Given 'extreme portability' is an ideal, small is good.

Well, in 2005 I was using a Mackie SRM450, driven from Bass PodXT. *Very* loud and compact.

Thanks, there's a lot there. Interesting you mentioned Matrix - one of their directors [Robin Szemeti] is a mate of mine from a motorcycle mailing list. The same mailing list where, in 2005, I was talking about running my PodXT into a 'personal PA' for stage use; and someone there [Paul Matthews] suggested I use a Mackie SRM450 - which I did, very successfully. [Interesting discussion in the shop {Turnkey} about why I only want *one* SRM450, and what I was using it for.] There's a joke between Robin & myself that FRFR Matrix products came about as a result of that discussion..! [TBH, who knows whether it was actually the inspiration, or not. FRFR seems like a pretty logical thing to do.]

Yes, interesting how that integration works. Other than into headphones, I've used a Mackie SRM450 as a 'personal PA' with a PodXT, in the past. Compact, and rather loud... FWIW, I'm pretty sure I'm going to got for a Helix LT.

Yep, I think I'll have a big look at the online manuals. It does sound like a better option.

Interesting points... It's not really the money, as such. It's more the thought of buying a PodHD, then shortly afterwards a Helix (or whatever). That would make me feel uncomfortable. The Pod HD does seem to have the advantages of being similar to the XT (which I fundamentally loved - but ran up against shortcomings), whilst seeming to address many of those shortcomings. I reckon I could either import my XT patches; or use what I'd already done as a good starting point. The Helix seems a different animal. I almost got the impression that it had less options than the Pod HD, but people speak highly of the sounds, and it's current. The PodXT always struck me as a 'studio in a box' into your headphones. I like that model. It makes sense if you're playing into headphones, or recording, or playing against tracks, etc. I'm assuming the Pod HD is conceptually the same - in spite of being labelled a multi-effect unit. Is the Helix ?

Yes, I've not been paying attention, and hadn't heard the term. I get the interaction between the amp power stage and cab - but also the massive effect that the (virtual) room has on things. One of the big things I discovered when I first got the PodXt was that a post-amp stereo reverb made things sound massively better into headphones (from a wasp between the ears, to feeling real). I've had a quick look at that article, I'll read it in more detail. Cheers.

Ok, I've done a quick search - and I have no idea what Impulse Response is..! Any links ?

Yes, this is similar to where I am. I was pretty familiar with the PodXT - but a little frustrated as well. Similarity is good; but it would also be a shame to miss out on new stuff - if it was useful to me.

The Pod HD500X is 8 years old ? While I'm not necessarily focused on having the latest, it's worth thinking whether it's sense to buy into something that's a bit old. What is the most modern incarnation of the Pod concept ? I had a quick look at a Helix, based on similar comments - but it seemed quite different.

Cool, that sounds most useful. Are there much in the way of constraints as to what FX you can put in the FX blocks ? [Aside from the DSP limits.] The manual suggests that any FX model can be loaded into each of the FX blocks. On that basis, you could (if you wanted) put 3 EQ blocks in the chain ?

Simply put, what will a Pod HD500X get me that I don't have on my (now somewhat elderly) Pod XT ? [i'm particularly interested in what flexibility there is in the effects blocks. eg can I put in multiple EQ blocks ? eg one before, and one after the amp model ?]