Search the Community

Hi all Just updated my Helix to 2.8 and Powercab to 2.0... been awaiting this update since I first bought helix... even sold my DT50 as I expected no helix dt50 connection would happen.... just to see it does now... nonetheless i am more than happy with my powercab plus. Now I have been a user of PODs since 2.0 and always have striven to get the max out of the amazing hardware Line 6 puts up.. and after all these years waiting to control my amp (DT50 112 before and now powercab plus 112) i get into a conundrum: Helix only allows powercab settings BY PRESET. With the advent of snapshots Line 6 did a HUGE, HUMONGOUS step that made a lot of us super happy... specially JTV Variax users like me... finally without any problems I could play acoustic and a banjo and an electric guitar IN THE SAME PRESET! But here is where it gets interesting... with powercab allowing only PER PRESET settings... I cannot change powercab presets PER Snapshot.... Yes i could do it all in the helix and use a FRFR for the preset but I didn't buy the PC Plus for that I bought it so I could use IRs and allow more power to be used in the helix.... I have looked but so far I can only see changing the powercab preset is not possible using snapshots... Any ideas?

hi guys first of all I'd like to let you know that I read all the threads I found about this same subject and didn't find the complete answers, so I decided to run some tests myself (like I did on the POD HD years ago) and to create a new thread with my results (I'm on FW 2.60 by the way) ok, I'll start from the end results, so that those who just need to have a quick answer can read it immediatly, then I'll give some deeper explanations the main point of this post is: the moment you create a split/merge routing configuration by dragging down a block you get a level change: after the merge block, with all bypassed fx: with split A/B and Y you get +3dB at the output sum with split crossover you get -3dB at the output sum BUT each path by itself gets attenuated by -3dB so if you use the split A/B to switch between sounds, each of those sounds is -3dB qiueter than the same fx/amp with the same settings in a non-splitted path the good news are that the level changes do not actually occur at the split, so the two paths are both an exact copy of the signal before the split, instead the change occurs at the merge block so the right solution is to act on the merge mixer faders --- why? and why those values? • well to answer, I need to clarify two things that I've read someone get wrong and mixed up in other threads 1) when you sum two identical signals in a circuit either analog or digital you get +6dB boost (voltage sum) 2) when you send a signal to a physical speaker and then send the same identical signal also to another identical speaker you get +3dB (acoustic power sum) this is math and physics, not an opinion now, this second point is one of the reasons why something called "pan law" exists: as we said, when you have a mono signal going to two speakers (so the pan knob on a mixer is at the center position) you get +3dB of sound pressure so mixer designers in some cases decided to pad the center position of the pan knob by -3dB, gradually returning to unity gain at the extremes (in some other cases they may use -2.5, -4.5 or -6dB: the actual effect of the pan law depends on the coherence/incoherence of the signals, on speaker placement, on listening conditions, and also on mixing taste I would say, so the designers have to make an assumption and take a plunge, I don't have time to enter into this now, sorry). • now back to the Helix: you have an empty "new preset" patch you have a signal going through path 1 (I used various sine waves and pink noise) you add a gain block at 0dB (if you want you can even bypass it) => nothing changes you drag the block down creating a double path => you get +3dB at the output sum so, what's going on? - the A/B or Y split duplicates the signal to two paths, so each of them carries the same identical signal which goes to a merge block mixer channel, then the two get summed together... so you should get +6dB, but... ... since the pans in the mixer have a -3dB pan law you only get +3dB - the crossover does not duplicate the signal but splits it in two frequency bands, if you sum those two filtered signals you get the exact same signal you had before, so no +6dB boost here, but there is still the pan law, so you get the -3dB - but, as I wrote before, each path by itself gets attenuated by -3dB because of the pan law, so if you use the split A/B to switch between sounds, each of those sounds is -3dB qiueter than the same fx/amp with the same settings in a non-splitted path • please note that these are not theories or speculations, I've tested and measured thoroughly every configuration and I'm sure the Helix routing works like that • all this behaviours occur identically to mono or stereo signals, remember that all the lines representing signal flow in the Helix display are always "double conductor cables" so either stereo or dual-mono (stereo = they carry two different signals; dual-mono = they carry two identical signals) this point could be deepened a lot but I don't have time for this now --- some other considerations: • if for example you open the pan pots of the merge mixer to the extreme L and R, the pan law attenuation does not apply and the level goes back to unity BUT this is not a solution, because if you run in stereo you only get the left from path 1A and the right from path 1B • I'd like to warn you of potential problems I found with the parameters inside the split blocks I) the split A/B "route to" parameter is a balance control, not a crossfader, so moving it to the left attenuates the signal going into B while not touching the signal going into A and viceversa; so it is appropriate to use that parameter to switch from A to B but not too much to find a mix of A with B for 3 reasons: 1- as I said you only have control over the attenuation of one of the two signals you are mixing 2- at center (even position) you have more level than any other position because the two signals are at full level, so the judgement on which is the best mix is compromised for psychoacoustic reasons 3- worst of all: if the blocks in the paths are amps or distortion boxes or compressors, as long as you are not in A100, "even" or B100 positions, you are sending an attenuated signal to one of them, changing its sound and not only its level II) the split Y "Balance A" and "Balance B" parameters (added in fw 2.10 so not covered in the manual) work like this: the stereo or dual mono signal goes into the split, it is duplicated to path A and B and on each of those you can control the balance between left and right, those balance control also have a pan law but different from the merge mixer block pans ! in this case it's unity at center and +3dB at sides ! (I think the reason for this is to avoid an attenuation to the splitted signals at default settings) so if for example you use 2 amps in the paths do not use these parameters or the two amps will receive a different level than if the balance is at center. --- • to finish I'll add two other Helix Routing measurements I found during my tests: - the pan block is actually a balance control with a pan law equal to that applied in the split Y block: at center it's at unity gain, going to the left attenuates the right up to minus infinite and adds +3dB to the left (and viceversa) - unlike the POD HD500 the fx sends / returns on the Helix are all at unity gain levels (+/-0.3dB), thanks Line 6 ! --- thanks for reading, I hope to have been helpful bye Lorenzo

Hey folks, I have a dual amp patch that I'm working on, but I can't seem to figure out how to bypass amp #1 by pushing the footswitch assigned to amp #2, and vice versa.

Hi there, I'm quite new in the line6 family and actually bought the hd500x because a friend of mine recommended that one. The setup I want to realize is like this: I play Strats over my Mesa Boogie Nomad 4x10 Combo My effects (actually only stomp distortion, phaser and chorus) should come from HD500x I want to play acoustic guitar with comp, chorus routed to the PA (DI like) with one channel because... I want to have the whole thing connected to my 16ch audio interface in order to record every type of setup I am using. I have done some try on realizing iot but am actually stuck due to my limited time and technical problems (meaning my intelligency) I have found out that my acoustic guitar can be routed like this with a very high output on the audio interface, but not that loud throu the PA As soon as I change a preset to a e-guitar the signal to the audio interface is very low. Generally the sound comming from my amp (hd=>amp) is not that good due to my personal limitations. Is there anybody out ther who can recommend me some patches (or share patches with the same routing that I need)? Patch - Clean (Sound of amp) - Stomp for distortion - stomp for chorus - stomp for phaser => Is it possible to have my true boogie sound in the room and a fender twin reverb amp sound into audio interface? Patch - Acoustic Guitar with same routing (Except that I would go into the PA of the rehearsal room or get a fullrange monitor instead of boogie amp), but same signal level on the audio interface? Patch- Distortion modeling amp into boogie, but with same level as mentioned above into audio interface? I'd realy appreciate your help and thanks in advance, Mark

I just bought a hybrid guitar which has two separate outs. One for Piezos and one for humbuckers. But I use one full path for vocal as well. Can anyone think of a way to create a quazi-dual preset chain on a single path? I do have a stand alone A-B-Y pedal too but I'm not sure that can help. Essentially I want to setup different blocks with different EQs etc. For each output on a dual output guitar , - but I can't use my second Helix path because to is dedicated to vocal. P.S. I think the answer lies in using a full stereo path, but I'm just not smart enough to figure it out. Lol.

WHY does the harmonizer sound sooo bad? Hi Guys, so really want to know how you are making the harmonizer sound good. If you insert it 'post amp' like effects like delay ..you get stereo and two harmony and cool stuff like panning ..but damm it sounds awful... The only way I have gotten Harmony working decently is to put it in front of one of two amps (dual setup) and set the mix to 100%. I cant use the dual harmony that way unless i just only use one part harmony. Harmonizing an amp sounds really bad in my opinion and while sure i can find use for it..its not solution. How are you making it sound great?

In Global Settings on the IO page I often find that while adjusting the USB input trim knob my finger accidentally moves the adjacent USB 1/2 IN Destination knob - thus sending the audio to 1/4" jacks and not the XLR outputs which are the ones currently connected to my monitors... so silence..... HELIX Firmware developers :- Please can some thought be given to how the USB trim can be adjusted without the risk of something like this happening ? Its happened many times now and is hard to track down. https://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/USB-1-2-IN-Destination-knob-needs-relocating-or-locking-option/920174-23508?submitted=1

Although the Helix has an S/PDIF input mounted on the unit, other than the back panel descriptions in the manual (item 29), there is nothing else addressing this input. The global settings panel on page 50 of the manual only mentions digital output level nothing about inputs. On the firmware side, the home screen for global settings also defaults to digital output level, nothing about input level or routing. Also, when trying to access S/PDIF input by creating a path within a patch, the input block will not give the option to select S/PDIF input (or digital in). So, is this an oversight or am I missing something?

Hi, I'm a new Helix user and was wondering if the "Multi" Out option could be changed from the 4 (XLR, 1/4, Digital, USB) to just 2. For instance, to send audio only to XLR and Digital, or XLR and 1/4 (and leave the other outputs free for other routing). Could there be a way to mirror one output to another? If not possible, could there be a chance for a firmware update that includes more flexible routing options? Also, is there a possibility to monitor the audio coming from the "Digital" source in the headphones output? This option is not available in the HP settings. Thanks. Leo

Hi guys. I’m seriously thinking about buying a helix lt. I’m leaning towards the helix rather than the ax8 mostly because I like the dual amp possibility (the price of the ax8 in europe also made me choke). But I still have a few concerns Mostly, I need a very specific signal routing and I’m not sure the helix can achieve it. Right now I’m using a gt 100 in 4CM with an amp, a pog into a bass amp and a digitech stereo looper. I want to go full digital on the guitar part of the signal. The signal would be as follow : 1. Dual amp signal without cab sim => L ¼ jack out (into my poweramp+Gcab) 2. unaltered clean signal => R /14 jack out (into my pog>bass amp). I have to be able to mute/unmute that signal by the press of a switch. 3. Dual amp signal (same as 1.) with cab sim on => L xlr out (to PA) 4. Dual amp signal (same as 1.) with cab sim on => headphone out (to IEM) / I don’t want the signal 2. (clean) in the headphone output. The looper will be in the effect loop, that has to be after the cab sim section (L effect out containing signal 1/3/4 and R effect out containing signal 2). This seemed easy to achieve on the helix lt, until I discovered that having two amps on one path could "overload" the DSP chip. Now, I’m not sure anymore if the helix can handle this signal routing. What do you think ? Also I aw a few times that the new software improved the high gain sounds a lot and that the digital artifacts that you could sometimes hear are mostly gone, is it true for all high gain amps ? Problem with most helix videos is that they are either on the old software or a full mix with post-eq, where you can’t tell the quality of the sound either way. I’ll try the helix in a shop before buying it, but I’m not sure I’ll be able to tell in 30min what sound I can really get out of it.

What is the proper way for me to create a patch OR patches that will allow me to loop acoustic guitar and violin live from the Helix? I want to be able to record acoustic guitar via the looper and then immediately add violin. Ideally this would be done within a single patch where I have access to fx pedals for both. Currently I have my violin sending into "Aux1" and my acoustic guitar sending into "Guitar In." Both sound excellent. How do I preserve 2 separate signal paths (the first signal path being acoustic guitar - sending through Guitar 1; and the second path being violin - sending through Aux 1) yet have them sum to the looper? Do I need to create 2 separate patches (violin) and (AG) and switch between the two? Or can I create 1 patch using separate routing (paths 1A and paths 2A) to and somehow sum them to the looper? I was trying the latter idea of 1 patch with two separate paths (1A for guitar and 2A for violin) but guitar ends up being pushed through path 2a, thus picking up all the violin fx. Attached is my current patch. Can anyone help?

I'm thinking of getting a Helix LT next week to use as a 4CM FX only board with my Orange Dual Dark 50. I've been led to believe the amp has a line level tube FX loop. Would the following configuration of I/O and level settings work to maintain correct gain structure through the rig?... Guitar > Helix In Loop 1 (Inst Lvl) Send > Amp In Amp Send > Loop 2 (Line Lvl) Return Helix (Line Lvl) Out > Amp Return Thanks.

I posted this in the old forum months ago, since many peole found it useful I thought I could re-post it here: ___ I really think these are important things not stated (or in some cases not clearly stated) in the manual, that you need to know to start seriously programming your POD HD I ran some serious tests on my Pod HD 500 and here is what I found out (I made my tests on a POD HD500 but this is valid for HD500X and HD Pro and is very similar for the "bean" version too), I'll try to be as synthetic (but complete and clear) as possible, but this is going to be a long reading so sit down and take your time or just go surfing somewhere else §§§ In short: the "famous" [input-1: guitar / input-2: variax] setting gives you different levels of signal depending on the position of the first *mono* effect block you use (amplifiers included), in particular you LOSE 6dB in the "pre" path in comparison to the path A/B or post path (note that this is not the same as saying that you gain 6dB with input-2 to "same", read on). [ if you don't know what I'm talking about just go and read this thread: http://line6.com/support/thread/74045?start=0&tstart=0 then come back here to hear a different opinion on the matter] first of all, try it out: - connect a guitar to the guitar input and the Left output to a full-range linear amp (or use your headphones) - recall a "new tone" default blank patch - set input-1 to Guitar and input-2 to Variax - set mixer channel A fader to unity (0.0dB) and pan to center - set mixer channel B fader to mute - setup a noise gate* with the threshold set to 0% in "pre" position (with this setting this IS a unity gain mono fx block) - play thru it - now if you bypass it, you'll hear that it looses 6dB of level when it's active (I initially thought this was noise gate's fault, but it's NOT) - now re-activate the noise gate and move it in A or "post" path - now if you try to bypass it you'll hear that it does NOT loose any dB - try moving the block back and forth between pre and A or post paths and you'll hear more level in path A or post than in pre this was already found out at least by hurghanico here: http://line6.com/support/message/403287#403287 but it's so important that needs a dedicated and more detailed thread. [* you can repeat the experiment with other mono effects instead of a noise gate but keep in mind that, if you want to clearly hear a level difference, you need a mono unity gain (www.music-dictionary.org/unity_gain) effect, for example: - a tube comp with thresh 100% & level 2% settings will work just as the noise gate above - an fx loop block with a mono cable connected between send and return will work just the same (but also read point 2 below) - do it with an amp with medium-low gain and, moving it between pre and A or post paths, you'll hear a significant difference in gain/ovedrive/distortion, not only level difference] §§§ OK now that you heard it, let's see it in detail; these are the REAL schemes of the pod and fx blocks routing, yes it's done by hand and I love it ;-) As you can see the pre path is a "dual-path" while A, B and post are all stereo paths; at the splitting point, where the path A and B are born, the signal coming from input-1 is splittted to the Left and Right channels of the path A and the signal coming from input-2 is splittted to the Left and Right channels of the path B; furthermore all fx blocks have TWO inputs and two outputs and the mono blocks do attenuate by 6dB and sum their inputs, then process the result and then split their mono output to both outputs of the block; for those who don't know, notice that: - "splitting" means duplicating one mono signal to two "routes" - and summing those two identical signals means doubling the level of the original signal (which equals to 6dB more) [and some side-notes: - the "stereo dry & mono wet" effects are for example the pitch effects and the "dry" type delays, I'm not considering this type of effects in this post, but they work as expected from the scheme you see above; - you can find a list of all the fx blocks divided by type here: http://line6.com/support/page/kb/_/pod/pod-hd/stereomono-fx-list-for-pod-hd-r567 where "stereo dry & mono wet" blocks are called "Stereo Thru/Mono Effect" which I personally find less clear - the mixer control named as "pan" is actually a "balance" control because if you move it to one side (e.g.: left) it acts on the stereo or dual mono signal by doing NOTHING on that side (left) and ATTENUATING the opposite side (right)] §§§ So, summarizing, if you only activate input-1, in the pre path, the first mono effect is attenuating the input 1 and 2 and summing them, but, since input-2 is actually silence, you loose 6dB; in A, B and post paths the effects are receiving a doubled signal on L/R, so the mono blocks, attenuating and summing the two signals, receive the right signal level to process so using "same" or "guitar" for input-2 does not mean to gain anything, but having a constant doubled signal wich is compensated by a 6dB attenuation in each mono summing it encounters in his flow please note that I am NOT saying that using only input-1 is wrong, you just need to know that this can give you different gain results depending on the position of the first mono effect with only input-1 active (Guitar/Variax) and the same parameter values, this: is giving you more distortion than that: now, if you use those two setups with "Input-1: Guitar / Input-2: Same", you get EXACTLY the same sound with both and this is something that can not be ignored ...don't know how to be more clear than that

Could someone out there please explain to me in a simple step by step manner how to set up a 1 into 2 Routing as seen on page 18 of the Line 6 Helix Manual? I'm not the most tech savvy person and maybe owning a Helix is a mistake altogether on my part but I'm finding the manual does a great job of showing you all the cool stuff Helix you can without actually explaining how to do it. Any advice others may have would be greatly appreciated and feel free to explain things as you would to a 4 year old because that's how I'm feeling at the moment. Cheers!

Hey all, Is there any way to set up the HD500x to have 2 effects loops? For example, could I use the Headphone out and aux input as a send and return for another effects loop? I think that the way that this would probably work practically is to have one "signal path" which goes guitar input -> internal stuff -> Headphone out. Then have a second signal path which goes "aux input -> stuff -> live outs?" I have a good bit of outboard gear that I currently use with an older POD, and really need to be able to put them in 2 separate loops (one for preamps and gain stages, one for post-amp time based stuff) which I currently can't do. Is it doable with the HD500x? or do I need to go to Helix for that?

Hi all, I am a noobie joobie here so please be kind and thank you in advance for reading this thread. I am thinking about buying the Helix as a replacement for my pedalboard, I have a Marshall JVM410hjs which I love the tone of and play live with a V30 loaded 4x12. The back connections to the JVM are quite versatile and not only have a programmable serial FX loop but also a power amp INSERT, IN and OUT. I want to run the Helix as the main control (forget channel switching for now) and have Fx pre and post preamp via 4 cable method. Is there a way I can utilize the fx loop and the power amp insert to run preamps from the Helix through the power amp insert (obviously minus cab models) and post fx through the loop. Basically making the preamp on the Marshall JVM another 'preamp' in the Helix? Footswitched in via the loop. So all Helix preamp models go through power amp Insert but by using the loop i can use my Marshall's preamp as an added preamp and having the Fx through it? Maybe I'm thinking backwards here and there is an easier way i.e. normal 4 cable method, just wondered if there was any benefit of running it this way, or maybe using the power amp IN will negate the loop. appreciate all your thoughts and feedback. Thank you for listening.

I'm curious what is actually happening if my Helix is set up with a single input (in my case Variax VDI) into a preset where both DSPs are configured to take input from this device in parallel (e.g both set to "Multi"). Let's say on Path 1 I use a clean amp and on path 2 a crunchy one. Is this signal from the guitar shared/split in some way, or have I effectively created the equivalent of two identical guitars feeding two completely separate rigs? I'm trying to understand if this is the same as splitting a single path (Y or X/Y split) or not? Even if it is the same I suppose I could at least take advantage of additional DSP resources by using both inputs from the one source.

Hi All, How will be the routing management ? the same as on POD HD ? Two stereo path ? Thanks

Hey everyone, I'm new to the forums and - after much lurking - finally ready to build my dream guitar. Over the years, Line 6 has received quite a bit of my money. ;) So far, I have/had in my house the following products: - Variax 300 Acoustic - Variax 4-string bass - POD 2 with all the X3 updates - Pocket POD (will purchase on Friday) - POD UX 2 (will purchase this weekend) - Varix 300 Electric ... and if I had any more money, I'd probably spend it on some of the newer Line 6 products. :D Instead, like so many of you, I am looking forward to creating my own dream guitar with the electronics that I have in the Variax 300 (Electric). In the last 20+ years, I have used Ibanez guitars exclusively. Because my JS1000 is too thin for a transplant, I have decided to use a painted RG-type "semi"-blank (no Floyd, only humbucker and jack cavities so far) and an old GIO 25 1/2", 22-fret neck (square pocket) to build the guitar that I really want. Since wizard-luthiers Jeff Miller and Roosevelt Walker (midirose) have all but disappeared from the internet (and I don't have facebook :(), I only have you guys/gals to whom I can address my questions. I would appreciate it if some of my final questions could be answered; and that this list - given how comprehensive it - can help other future builders find their answers, too. --- Ok, here goes: Preparing the Body: 1.) Can I switch between magnetic pickups and the Variax 300 piezos by drilling an additional hole for a killswitch (thus not using them at the same time, of course)? 2.) If I can keep both the magnetic pickups and the Variax piezos, is this body thick enough to route the Variax 300 electronics from the back of the guitar? 3.) As you all know, the electronics of the Variax 300 come in a HUGE triangular shaped box (like a tin coffin). Can I pull the electronics from the coffin, so they fit better into the back cavity? 4.) Can I cut through the knob plate in order to facilitate the positioning of the knobs and the routing? 5.) I have seen a few back cavities in transplants that look like the letter "L" sideways. Any ideas where I can buy that type of template online? 6.) What's the best way to cover that type of "L" cavity? A ply of wood, or simply the material luthiers use for customized pickguards? I think the latter is less work... :P 7.) Do I have to drill 6 holes to hold the string ends, as it is the case for the Variax 300, or can I use a hardtail bridge with piezos (e.g. Graphtech Ghost)? 8.) If I can't figure out how to transplant the piezos from the saddle into a hardtail, how do I measure the Variax 300 "neck pocket - saddle - string hole" distance on a RG body? Does the distance matter? Electronics: 9.) If I cut the electronics into more sizeable pieces, do I need to isolate the cavities/parts with copper/conducive foil, to minimize noise and distortion? 10.) Can I connect my magnetic pickups directly to the Variax tone and volume knobs? (total: 1 tone + 1 volume + 1 model selector), or do I need separate knobs (total: 2 tone + 2 volume + 1 model selector)? 11.) Apart from a killswitch, is there another way to switch between the pickups on stage? 12.) One of my family members is a retired technician. He knows a lot about building TVs, radios and telephones. Will he be able to route the wires correctly? 13.) Are there any wiring templates for the "Variax 300 + two humbuckers" online? 14.) If everything above gets a green light, I'd then need to route/drill Back: - one "L" shaped cavity to hold the Variax 300 electronics - one rectangular cavity for the battery pack Side: - one bigger cavity for the dual Variax 300 jack Front: - two holes to hold the saddle with the piezos - six holes to hold the string ends - three holes for the Volume, Tone and Selector knobs, respectively - one hole for the humbucker selector switch (neck, n/b,bridge) - one hole for the piezo/humbucker killswitch - one small hole for the piezo ribbon that leads to the mainboard unit - two small holes for all the humbucker wires Is my math correct? --- Thanks again for all the help you are providing and for keeping their legacy products alive... one way, or the other. :) I'm looking forward to your answers. VX

I've never bought or tried any line6 products but I'm looking for a new rack FX unit. If I used a POD HD Pro I would intend on having it connected via the 4CM to my amp head (traditional valve head and 4x12) and also to a PA system. I wondered if any of you could answer some questions for me. 1) Assuming that the guitar, microphone and line inputs being used at the same time, can you route the following simultaneously... Guitar signal with fx but without cab modelling to the unbalanced outputs (going to a valve amp and a 4x12) Guitar signal with fx / cab modelling, microphone and line inputs to the balanced outputs (going to a PA system) 2) It is my understanding that the POD HD Pro can also be used as a USB audio interface for DAW. Can it provide separate audio interface signals for guitar, microphone and line inputs at the same time (i.e. can i record a guitar track, a vocal track and a line input track on my DAW simultaneously using the POD HD Pro as my audio interface)? Cheers! Paul

Hello everyone, First time poster. I have an Orange dark terror amp head that I use with a rockcrusher recording load box/attenuator/cabinet emulator to connect to the Helix. I've just moved from a flat with three floors of neighbours above me to a house with a spacious attic room that has become my home studio. I was operating a silent recording setup in the flat but I now want to start using some form of speaker. I'm leaning towards a FRFR speaker (specifically this http://www.andertons.co.uk/speaker-cabinets/pid35447/cid690/laney-iron-heart-irtx-powered-guitar-expansion-cab.asp ) because I figure I might be able to use it with my roland TD30k drumkit as well (although that isn't a priority.) I have enough to buy one speaker but if needed I may invest in two at some point in the future. I mainly want to know whether it's possible to generate feedback from the helix amp and cab models and/or routing the orange head and rockcrusher through the Helix and using a FRFR speaker. I ask because I saw this video of a Helix and cabinet demo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IuX5L8DjtM. The guy definitely seems to be getting some feedback together and having been recording silently for the last 3 years I want to start squealing and howling again. I have two questions as I've never used a FRFR speaker before. I connect the rockcrusher to the helix and use the orange head as an insert block separate from any Helix amp and cab models and FX, sometimes in a mono serial routing and sometimes in a stereo parallel routing as two different amp and cab emulations panned left and right, and sent from the XLR outs direct to my mixer. As such having the ability to connect a stereo signal to the FRFR speaker is important to me but not necessarily outputting a stereo image to my ears (if that makes sense) ie a left and right FRFR speaker. So could I send a stereo signal from the Helix 1/4 inch outs to the stereo FX loop on the FRFR? I don't forsee using the FRFR in any part of the recording as yet (mainly due to not quite understanding how or why I would in preferance to the way I record at the moment eg using the two Helix XLR outs to connect to two channels on my mixer) and just using the speaker for monitoring the helix. Does that mean I have to complete the FX loop ie send a stereo signal back to the helix from the FRFR? I mean as I understand it feedback is the phenomenon of soundwaves from the speaker vibrating the guitar strings and being picked up by the guitar pickups, generating noise through the amp and manifesting as soundwaves from the speaker and then repeating that sequence over and over. 2nd question: is it physically possible to generate feedback using a FRFR speaker and will it damage any of the components in my theoritical rig of guitar > Helix > Orange amp > Rockcrusher > Helix > FRFR speaker and then using the Helix XLR outs to send to my mixer. Apologies if any of these questions seem simple or strange.

I apologize if this was asked previously elsewhere. I tried perusing the manuals and searching the forums... For the last 4 years, I have been using Guitar Rig with Rig Kontrol live. Honestly, I might still be a happy user if NI would keep their products up-to-date and not discontinue their hardware. :angry: I can't do a live show anymore without experiencing bad audio drop-outs and worse. Time to ditch and look elsewhere... One of the cool things I was able to do with GR, however, was route speaker simulation (cab sim, etc.) to ONLY one side of the outputs. My common setup was to run the output with NO cab sim to my on-stage amp, and the output with the cab sim ON to the DI/PA system. The tones were just a little off from each other, but my stage amp has V30's, and so I'd run the V30 cab sim for the house line, and with a little EQ, I was a pretty happy camper. This became the better option, rather than A) Mic'ing the stage cab for the house feed (not a fan), and B] Running the cab sim ON to my amp signal (Redundant yuck.), or C) Using NO cab sim (horrible shrill line out). So obviously, that's my question. Can you, somehow, route the outputs on the HD500X in such a way where the speaker simulation is running to, say, the Balanced XLR output(s) - meanwhile the 1/4" amp outputs disengage any cab sim? Or...is there another option/configuration I'm not aware of that addresses this issue? Thanks for the help!

I have output of the path 1 (1A + 1B) going to the inputs of the path 2. And path 2 is further is split into 2A and 2B. If I send the output of path 1 to either path 2A or 2B, volume level reduces by approx. half. If I send the output of path 1 to 2A+2B, volume level seems fine. I am probably missing some information here. Any idea what is wrong? OR, is this how it's supposed to work?