somebodyelse

Hey, Updated Helix Floor - followed the usual process - HX Edit update>Backup>Helix Update>Factory reset (9+10). Lost all the new cabs, including the 3.50 cabs. I suspect the factory reset wiped them? So, ran firmware update again, through the Line 6 updater. Still no new cabs. Anyone got any suggestions to get the cabs - I know, I'll still have the 3.50s in the backup. It's the new ones I'm scratching my head about. Thanks.

Shame I couldn't access the clip, nevertheless, the idea sounds really cool. I actually own a B Bender Tele, so the title caught my attention. Don't really know much about the Variax, but seems like a fascinating bit of kit.

Bought a PC212 a couple of weeks back, registered it with Line 6, then a couple of days ago, I received an email with reference to taking a survey of registered Powercab owners. This is my second PC+, and as far as I remember, I haven't been 'surveyed' before. Just wondering if this was 'just me', because I'd registered a new one, did all registered owners get the same email on the same day, and do you think Line 6 has accepted that while the PC+ is a brilliant concept, they haven't executed it as well as they could have done, and are now thinking about taking it seriously and either doing a proper software update, or maybe getting back to the drawing board and doing a proper job with a Powercab 2? Just thinking out loud.

Not so much a brand recommendation. I got one from a local (UK) cable supplier. You'll probably get lots of suggestions that a standard XLR cable will do. Maybe it will... I dunno, but I wasn't going to risk the best part of three grands worth of Helix/PC212, just for the sake of saving a few quid on a cable. An AES-EBU cable has a 110 ohm impedance/resistance. A mic cable doesn't. There's a good reason why they specify AES-EBU.

All I saw/heard was a Bad Monkey CASING on a PEDAL MAKER'S youtube video with some expensive pedals sounding the same. Just saying...

Hiya Neil, Best place to try is https://charliehall.proboards.com/ I'm a member there, as well, and have seen a couple of threads there with good advice. Also, try the Matchless models. Assuming you've got the latest updates, in the cab setting, use a U47/67/87 condenser mic, set 12" away towards the edge of the speaker. Fine tune to suit. Set the Low cut to around 100Hz and High Cut to around 5-8kHz. Amp models set as you'd set the real thing, as a starting point. Fine tune from there. Cheers. EDIT: I've attached a zip with a couple of presets to have a look at. I did these on a Helix, with a '54 reissue (A3 pickups), so they may need a little tweek for your guitar. Also, because I used a Helix, they may be a bit too... elaborate for your unit? Any problems or questions... anything... send me a PM and we can take it from there. I've assumed you're already a HBM expert, perhaps not so familiar with the Helix 'ways', yet? HBM Presets.zip

Haven't listened, because at my age, I probably couldn't hear it anyway. What you describe sounds like a digital thing where the dsp is 'rounding off' the maths. Used to be a common thing back when we were using gear with lower bitrates. I'd be amazed if you were actually hearing it happen at 48kHz, though. If you've got a noisegate going on, switch it off. Perhaps, try a low pass filter?

'People' are idiots. It's a tuner. It either works or it doesn't. The weak point of the Helix is it doesn't come with a sun roof.

Tuner, bottom of screen, third knob.

Powercab 112+ here. It does what it says on the tin, as they say. The reason people can't get the 'amp in the room sound' is that modellers, whether Helix or otherwise model their cabs with a mic after the event. What you get is a model of how that setup sounds after it's been recorded, regardless of the amp/monitor you use. With the Helix/Powercab combo, when you (or me at least) use the speaker models in the PC112+, the output from the PC speaker has the mic etc modelled in to it bypassed - just the speaker. To get the real effect, you need to remove the cab block from your Helix preset, then you get the 'amp in the room' sound. Be aware, the speaker models are supposed to sound how the real thing would sound if it was screwed in to the PC112 cabinet - eg. my old rig uses a couple of 1 x 12 V30 cabs. The PC112 sounds very near to how they sound. It doesn't sound how a 4 x 12 with four V30s would. You aren't getting 'amp in the room' if you use FRFR, third party IRs etc, etc. Helix through a real guitar amp? You're hearing how your presets sound with the inherent sound of your amp colouring them.

I use Reaper, too. To get the same result as your real world recording, I'd pan the mics - as you suggested - and record a stereo output to two mono tracks - recording left (input 1) to one and right (input 2) to the other. Your recording will be 'up the middle' mono, which you can then process as you did previously. I've done this many times via the XLR outputs, but I don't see any reason why it couldn't be done via USB.

Based on a guitar I bought a few years back, and what the lads in my local guitar shop laugh about, many out there need to learn how to put strings on 'em, first.

I've got the S/PDIF cables, now and I'll be trying it out later, however something that has occurred to me is that whether using L6 Link or S/PDIF, it's one stereo output. You can control what gets sent down either channel of it - panning - but the level, regardless of how many paths you send to that output is controlled at the output by an overall level - you're not controlling the volume level of the path, you're controlling the digital signal level of the output section, to avoid digital signal dropout in long S/PDIF cables. You can either control the individual path levels before they get to the output, or control the speaker model levels at Powercab 1/2 section. With the way you intend to use it, I would probably get my PC+ speaker models balanced for output (using a direct signal through an empty Helix preset) and then level match the presets as I wrote them.

I don't disagree with you - whatever the reason is, they're different. The reason doesn't matter. However, pots are a lot more inconsistent than they've ever been, today. Pickups are not as consistent as you believe, especially wire and magnets, and when all said and done, wood is the most inconsistent part of the equation - no two pieces from the same log are the same, let alone from an entire species. You can have two seemingly 'identical' (in every single respect) guitars that sound different. The same is true of analogue amplifiers and pedals - there is an inconsistency in all the components they're made from AKA manufacturing tolerance, which in most cases is quite a wide tolerance. At the end of the day, unless you have unlimited pots of money to swap and change things around, your gear sounds how it sounds.

Well, I was going to try running a similar setup out through S/PDIF to my interface and through my monitors. Anyhoo, couldn't find the cables, so ordered a pair... Whether it would have helped, I dunno, and I expect by the time my cables arrive, you'll have it sorted - I'll check back - but at least I'll be recording with a little less latency in future ;)

I'm using a Helix, so none of that cr@p matters to me. When I fire up the old gear, then I'll care... maybe. At the end of the day, I've got what I've got. It sounds how it sounds. Whether I think it makes a difference or not doesn't change how it sounds.

Yeah, we probably aren't. However, I'm not sure you can set this up properly until you have both PC+ plugged in. I seem to recall it being in the manuals somewhere, that when you have two PCs linked by L6 Link, it assigns one as '1' and the other as '2' and treats them as left and right. I think, in order for you to get the two outputs to the separate PC+ you need to pan the outputs, otherwise they will be sent to both PC+. EDIT: Having looked at your image, it looks like you've taken care of this. In terms of managing the individual levels, it'll be something to do with the 'Mode' - 1, 2, 1+2 Link - which I suspect you need both PC+ plugged in to be able to use. EDIT: These settings... in your image, the settings you have visible, there are 'tabs' at the top of that section, in the 'Powercab' tab, you'll need (for what you're suggesting) 'Remote' set to 'Global', 'Mode' set to 'Speaker', and 'Select (Preset)' use 1, and 2 as required. FWIW, the PC212+ can be made to operate as a stereo cab, so it'd be well worth doing a search of this forum and the Powercab section, for threads relating to the PC212+. As I understand it, the 212 is essentially two 112s in one cabinet. It's also well worth reading the manuals for the Helix, HX Edit and Powercab. I'm going to see if there's anyway I can simulate your setup, as I don't have a second PC112+, in a while. If I learn anything useful, I'll get back with ideas/theories. I'm dead certain you can achieve what you want, without having to have a 'Bolognese' of cables.

Okidoki, the simple, short answer is that 'the setting' is easily found in HX Edit, and I expect it's there somewhere on the Helix. In HX Edit, set up your parallel path, but where the path returns to the main path (path 1?), drag it away so you're left with a second output - an output for the parallel path. Now go to the 'output' for the individual parallel paths and pan them left and right. If I'm right, when you connect everything up, one Powercab should be playing one path, and the other plays the parallel path. Still in the outputs, there's a 'Powercab' tab, set it preset or global, depnding on whther you want each preset to select different speaker models or global if you're using one setting for everything. Set 'Mode' to speaker and select which speaker model you want. NB: you'll need to set these for both outputs. I haven't got two Powercabs, but if I got this right, you should be good to go. Hope that makes sense. EDIT: I have a feeling that you can't set them up individually until you have them both plugged in.

The longer answer is... When you use an fx loop in an amp, usually they send the whole signal through the loop, and back in through the return - the path is interrupted between the pre and power amp sections. With the Helix (I assume, as I haven't tried it), you can send a percentage of the signal out, bring it back in at the return and blend it in over the percentage that wasn't 'sent'. Regardless of what unit you use, it takes time for that signal to travel down the cables and back to the unit, as well as the processing time in the second unit, so the return will be delayed compared to the original signal. As little as 12 ms can be enough to cause audible phasing. You could use a predelay as a work around before the return block in unit one to sync the two together - it'd work for recording purposes, but would probably drive you insane in a gigging scenario. You'd need to determine the latency - record the send and return at the same time in a DAW, zoom in on a peak on both and measure the time 'distance' - fiddly, but doable - then add a delay block between the send and return on unit one set to the time difference and 100% wet, no feedback. As I said, I've never used the send/return on the Helix, so I'm assuming it'd be possible to drop a block in, in between the send and return?

That's latency for ya.

Just a suggestion or two... I'm not familiar with Guitar Rig, but I do use Amplitube. Open the preset and check for an EQ 'module' at the end of the 'signal chain'. For example, it may be OD pedal>Amp model>Cab model>Mic>Compressor>Reverb>EQ. Try bypassing the EQ (temporarily) and then match that sound, then switch the EQ back on, add an EQ to your patch and set it to match the one in the GR preset. Alternatively, bypass every module except one and progress through the signal chain one at a time matching it's specific sound. When you've done each one, theoretically, you should be there. Something to bare in mind, that probably never occurs to anyone. You're basically working with software, not hardware, to get a sound, and assuming that they're coded in the exact same fashion - which they probably aren't. One may be coded to just model how each 'unit' sounds on it's own, whereas the other is coded to also model how the individual 'units' interact with the adjacent units in the signal chain. Even if they are both coded for those interactions, there's no guarantee they are coded to do the same things in the same ways.

This again? Digital output is NOT analogue output.

Where Line 6, this forum, youtube and the rest of the 'net gets this wrong is announcing that there is an update in the first place. I got an email about it. If you're a regular on the forum, or subscribed to one of those tubes who does videos, that's usually, the first place you hear about the update. Those of us who've 'been there, done it' know to plug in and start HX Edit, WHICH CLEARLY TELLS YOU THAT YOU NEED TO UPDATE HX EDIT FIRST! It would be better if Line 6 didn't announce the update, so the first you know about it is when HX Edit tells you there's one, and they integrated the Updater app in to HX Edit to stop people using it to carry out routine updates, as it seems it's only needed when you screw it up.

This thread needs to be 'Stickied'...

Oh yeah. I know exactly why, but it's frowned upon to say what that reason is, these days.