Helix and stagesource L2t

[archisc]

Please advice:

 

1) Connection between Helix and stagesource speakers.

2) Settings in Helix. Global eq needed?

 

I connect between them using 1/4", leaving all L2T preamp eq flat and selected PA mode. Helix is set to line out.

 

However, I find there are some harsh high frequency that is hard to get rid of. it sounds wonderful with acoustic guitar and regular audio input.

[ColonelForbin]

Have you tried the Line6 link connection? That would be my first choice. L6 link from Helix to first L2, L2 link out to second L2 link in. Should auto configure itself to stereo.

 

Though, it's worth noting the L6link doesn't transmit USB streaming audio. Or, at least, HD500 does not, and when I asked if Helix did, got no definitive answer.

[deadlocked]

I have a Helix and an L2T.

 

I go through L6 link between the Helix and the L2T, No Global EQ on the Helix and then let the L2T auto-select the best mode depending on speaker orientation (I have mine on its side, angled towards me). If you use the L6 Link cable, the Helix and L2T should auto-negotiate the best mode to set the speaker to.

 

If you do go down this route, make sure all patches that have an amp actually have the Amp+Cab block or separate Amp and Cab blocks; if you use the pre-amp blocks and no Cab, the sound will be unbearably harsh and buzzy.

 

Also, I noticed that the high frequency driver is under the power LED (if the L2T is standing upright), so you could always place a sheet of paper or other dampening cloth over it (cover areas on the front of the L2T until you find the sport where the harshness stops), but this is bound to make you lose high end on acoustic models as well, so YMMV.

[Rewolf48]

L6Link on Helix doesn't get USB 1/2 according to the words on page 44, but does according to the diagram.  A bit confusing for those of us who haven't had a single Helix delivered to customers yet, like the UK

[jaminjimlp]

Since I got the Helix Friday I have had it hooked up to 2 L2M's with the L6 Link and it is in stereo and I have used it as my PT12 interface and it comes through Stereo (steaming through USB) and sounds great, if you use it run it on PA/Reference (FRFR), they are phenomenal speakers... You

"must have" 2 of them if you have not heard the Helix in stereo the you are missing a lot... put on some head phones if thats all you got and check it out. I plan to use it  live with my M20D same as I did with my 11 Rack

[AParedes]

the L2 are a great solution, that is what many of the factory presets were written with. Personally I have had great results with just XLR out, which is something we tend do do in beta-writing before all the digital i/o is sorted out.

 

I haven't found a need for global EQ (so far), but the need for EQ will change depending on the vvenue and the volume you are playing at.

 

stereo guitar is always fun, but as many people don't have access to stereo outputs (i.e. single speaker, not enough channels at smaller clubs) I tend to write all the main patches I do in mono, but can be switched to stereo pretty easily after the fact. remember that almost all effects prior to a single amp will be "mono", effects after the amp modeling tend to be better options to listen for stero imaging (i.e. rotitaing speakers, tremolo, delays, etc.)

[astroturf]

I am using the L3T and found that setting the global eq high pass filter to 6000 and using the XLR instead of the L6 Link helps with the harshness.

 

One poster mentioned that covering the tweeter helps. I can confirm it does help but at these prices, seems a bit ridiculous to have to use a mechanical solution.

 

I am going to order a CLR Neo as soon as they have them and see how that does, I'll post results if anyone is interested. Either way I plan to abandon the StageSource and if the CLR doesn't work, the Helix as well.

 

 

[HonestOpinion]

I am using the L3T and found that setting the global eq high pass filter to 6000 ...

 

I think astroturf intended to recommend setting the high "cut" (low pass) filter to 6000khz and I agree. I generally like the cut somewhere between 5-8khz. I find that with any full range cabinet solution, be it FRFR or PA, on many patches you will need to set the high cut filter aggressively or the Helix will sound harsh.  To me this is just the nature of the beast and the same with any MFX capable of generating a full range signal. Maybe some manufacturers already design their presets with this cut or implement it automatically behind the scenes but you may need to explicitly include it with your Helix presets depending on the instrument, preset, and what amp or full range cab you are playing through. To me, appropriate high cuts are just part of good preset design and not "building them in" does offer maximum flexibility but does require slightly more effort by the user to get the sound right.

[vmoncebaiz]

I have luck setting the high cut as mentioned above.  Anywhere from 5-8k as HonestOpinion stated seems pretty good for all of my guitars and speakers I've been playing through.  I also like low cutting 80-95hz.  Those are just generalt global EQs I like to get the FRFR set up to sound more like a traditional guitar cab.  If there's a specific guitar cab or speaker you like, you can easily find their specs online and set your high cut close to what theirs would be.

 

For the L2 specifically I also like to cut a little bit around 2-2.2k in the global EQ.  I also prefer it sideways on the floor, tilted up and in PA/Reference mode.  I've been going XLR to its analog in.  If you're using the L6 link, using an AES/EBU (110ohm) cable might help. 

[billbassler]

Suggest using Line 6 LINK connection/chaining. No need to mess with the global eq. Perfect as is. I've never had any hint of harshness that was mentioned. I guess if you think that you detect harshness then you can try to remove it. And as deadlocked said. Set orientation per speaker orientation.

[astroturf]

I think astroturf intended to recommend setting the high "cut" (low pass) filter to 6000khz and I agree. I generally like the cut somewhere between 5-8khz. I find that with any full range cabinet solution, be it FRFR or PA, on many patches you will need to set the high cut filter aggressively or the Helix will sound harsh.  To me this is just the nature of the beast and the same with any MFX capable of generating a full range signal. Maybe some manufacturers already design their presets with this cut or implement it automatically behind the scenes but you may need to explicitly include it with your Helix presets depending on the instrument, preset, and what amp or full range cab you are playing through. To me, appropriate high cuts are just part of good preset design and not "building them in" does offer maximum flexibility but does require slightly more effort by the user to get the sound right.

Thank you, you are correct, I meant cut! I would have to politely disagree with 'this is just the nature of the beast'. If they are simulating cab + mic setup the frequency should be set to mimic the actual cab without having to look up the cab's frequency response. The reason I went from Class D + Cabinet to FRFR was to use different cabs. However, I can go from that setup (granted I only have 5 cabs as my sample size) to the FRFR and the sound needs a lot of adjustment to even come close, setting HPF/LPF, eq adjustments. I can go Helix + Class D + Cab + Mic -> PA XLR and my ears have yet to bleed.

 

I'll admit my expectations maybe off. I have been playing for over a decade exclusively on various Line 6 Pod  + Various Amps + Various Cabs but assumed I could replicate what can be heard with headphones with an FRFR and reduce gig baggage. Maybe I can with some more tweaking. Unfortunately, I like playing more than tweaking so my ultimate answer maybe to limit my options and go back to Class D + Cab.

 

Suggest using Line 6 LINK connection/chaining. No need to mess with the global eq. Perfect as is. I've never had any hint of harshness that was mentioned. I guess if you think that you detect harshness then you can try to remove it. And as deadlocked said. Set orientation per speaker orientation.

 

I started with the LINK and it was harsh. I then read it needs a special cable and the AES setting. So, I got one and set the setting. Little difference. So, I went to XLR. While the output was not nearly as loud as it was when using LINK it was much less harsh but still ear piercing. I have also tried the L3T on the floor and standing up, towels draped over the tweeter. Tried the various settings (except I have not tried the cab sim on it).

 

It sounds OK now, but not what I was expecting. Though, I am going to try the Helix direct into my PA next to rule out a crappy L3T.

[HonestOpinion]

 

... If they are simulating cab + mic setup the frequency should be set to mimic the actual cab without having to look up the cab's frequency response. ...

I absolutely agree, I would prefer they customized the settings for each cab's frequency range to more accurately emulate the original cab. These cabs are essentially IRs and perhaps the software they use to create the cabs does take this into account. That does not always seem to be the case though judging by how bright or boomy they often are without cuts although changing the mic can make a big difference; that still begs the question however of whether the cabs are actually reflective of the speakers they are modeling's true frequency range. I suppose if when selected the cab came up with a default high and low cut set per the speaker's specs this would still offer the user the flexibility to adjust it to taste. This would cut down on the amount of fiddling required and make different cabs even more distinctive. Of course, depending on how your preset is setup you may still require cuts elsewhere in your signal chain in addition to the cabinet cuts.

 

I then read it needs a special cable and the AES setting. So, I got one and set the setting. Little difference. So, I went to XLR. ...

Although I use AES cables and they are recommended for the digital L6 link, I also find any decent quality XLR cable will do in a pinch. I too rarely notice any significant difference when using and XLR vs. AES. They say the XLR cables become less reliable with a digital connection as the length and number of them employed (chained for instance between Line6 speakers) increase .

[lawrence_Arps]

I absolutely agree, I would prefer they customized the settings for each cab's frequency response to more accurately emulate the original cab. These cabs are essentially IRs and perhaps the software they use does take this into account. That does not always seem to be the case though judging by how bright or boomy they often are without cuts although changing the mic can make a big difference; that still begs the question however of whether the cabs are actually reflective of the speakers they are modeling's true frequency range. I suppose if when selected the cab came up with a default high and low cut set per the speaker's specs this would still offer the user the flexibility to adjust it to taste. This would cut down on the amount of fiddling required and make different cabs even more distinctive. Of course, depending on how your preset is setup you may still require cuts elsewhere in your signal chain in addition to the cabinet cuts.

 

Although I use AES cables and they are recommended for the digital L6 link, I also find any decent quality XLR cable will do in a pinch. I too rarely notice any significant difference when using and XLR vs. AES. They say the XLR cables become less reliable with a digital connection as the length and number of them employed (chained for instance between Line6 speakers) increase .

its important to remember that  you are hearing the "dry" tone that an engineer might hear when micing the cab - be it live or in the studio.  Most engineers will cut the lows on a guitar channel. Likewise with the highs  - is the sound of mic X on Cab Y actually the sound that the engineer would end up with in the mix?  The Tone from the Helix (Amp and cab) might be very accurate as to what the engineer would hear on first bringing the channel up but maybe not what it might sound like after a bit of EQ!  I think the trend of softer sounding ribbon mics on guitar is an indication of this.

[HonestOpinion]

Thought I would also mention that although the cabs model's frequency response across a good part of the audio spectrum may be true to the original cabinets, it is the edges of the frequency range which seems to be too open ended and not nuanced enough. It seems that the high and low end is where the frequency response is not necessarily as accurate or reflective of the way the frequency response drops off dramatically and eventually cuts at the low and high ends of the frequency range on a real guitar speaker.

 

Although you can use a combination of parametric and graphic EQ along with a high/low cut to more accurately emulate the steep downward slope on the high and low ends of a speaker's frequency response, it would be ideal if you had a high and low cut filter that allowed the shape or slope of the cut to be tapered such that you could get it to sort of look like the frequency response graphs on for instance the Celestion speaker website. Ultimately both frequency response and frequency range interact in getting an accurate cabinet model.

[cruisinon2]

I'll admit my expectations maybe off. I have been playing for over a decade exclusively on various Line 6 Pod + Various Amps + Various Cabs but assumed I could replicate what can be heard with headphones with an FRFR and reduce gig baggage.

You can...but it'll probably take a fair amount of "knobulating" before you get there. Sometimes mic/cab combinations that you wouldn't think too use for a certain tone ends up being just what you're looking for. Normal rules don't apply with this stuff...

 

It sounds OK now, but not what I was expecting. Though, I am going to try the Helix direct into my PA next to rule out a crappy L3T.

I doubt there's anything wrong with the L3T...FRFR is just a different ballgame. Once you figure or what works for you, dialing in tones will become just as second nature add it was on your old rig.

[billbassler]

My guess is cruisinon2 is stating the obvious/is on target/it's a different ballgame. FRFR systems will generally function as intended; with flat response and a full range of frequencies. The result of using FRFR instead of a guitar cabinet with a very limited frequency range and enhancement of certain frequencies is that FRFR will reproduce what it's provided. So it will be capable of reproducing both guitar cab sounds along with effects such as digital reverb.  These items are not reproduced so well by a cabinet intended only of guitar. So someone used to hearing strictly guitar cabinets may perceive an issue with an FRFR. And of course some are better than others.

 

I can say that I've various guitar cabinets through the years and moving to FRFR was different for sure. But not that much. Using FRFR with effects etc might result in a more "recorded" sound. But this mostly due to effects processing we typically use around the core guitar tone. Turn all of this off and you can have a pretty believable amp tone from the Helix a majority of the time. Perfect? No but very good. Exactly like a tube amp in the room. Not exactly. But very close in most respects. Some of the Helix effects may not be so authentic. But some are really exceptional. Built in cabs IMHO maybe not so great either. Dull and flat. I usually use 3rd party IRs.

 

The main thing is that you first have to EQ the elements within the patch. Or maybe for a room. For those saying the L2t sounds absolutely horrible, maybe something is really wrong with something you've set up. In my experience the L2t sounds quite good and certainly not horrible by any reasonable estimation. The L2t FRFR it sounds like what it is; a PA. And a decent one. It faithfully reproduces the Helix amps, cabs, effects and ambience. In many ways that's good thing. All elements are reproduced with better fidelity than with a guitar cab. I generally like to involve effects in my sound. I plugged into an L2t with AES Line6 link and never had any need to touch the global EQ. There is no harshness at all. It seems we're using the same chain? L2t reproduces a very solid representation of the fairly organic sound that it receives from the Helix. I only wish I had two of them but a goal is to haul around as little as possible so it's just a stage monitor per se. If you're using a guitar cab and/or amp with Helix or only the Helix preamps you're missing a lot of what it offers. If you can only settle for a "real" amp sound and not the range of things Helix offers it's understandable, and Helix probably isn't for you.

[shatters]

Ok I finally got the L2t, and love it.

At home low volume excellent. And at Studio with band very loud volume excellent!

 

Here is my issue:

Helix > AES/Line6 link > L2t, L2t in PA mode, yes it has more volume than using the XLR in line, but it seamed to add my dist/OD sounds to be hotter..(Clean sounds were fine) Like I feel I would need to go into all my presets and turn down the Dist/OD Gain. But that would change my XLR output sounds to have less drive from OD.

It reminded me of like adding more gain before my Guitar amp.

Wondering if this was an effect from such high volume through AES to L2t with the band?... (And I'm using an AES cable) And yes I have EQ'ed with the knowledge of the Fletcher Munson effect. And I do cut the highs around 5-10k depending on each preset. This seems to only be something in the OD or volume.

Maybe mid EQ issue with higher volume???

 

My Goal is to have this setup:

Use my L2t as my Stage Guitar monitor (Just like an Amp), and XLR out to FOH, and use the volume knob on Helix to change Volume to L2t only. And sometimes I use In Ear Monitor from FOH mixer.

Also sometimes with small venues, my helix will not go to FOH, just our Vocals do. So I would need full volume to compete with my Overly loud rhythm guitarist on the other side of drums, lol.

 

I'm starting to lean towards 1/4 out (Volume knob to 1/4 only) to L2t. XLR out to FOH. Anyone using it this way 1/4 cable maybe 10' to 20' length?

 

I would like to use the Line6 Link to L2t, but I think I'm running into what I stated above, and the use of volume knob only controlling the L2t only.

 

I might of answered myself, but I haven't tried the 1/4 to L2t. I probably should get a TRS cable too.

[ColonelForbin]

I imagine it's because the L6link is summing left and right to mono

[shatters]

I imagine it's because the L6link is summing left and right to mono

Thx Colonel, I haven't had the chance to test again, I seen someone, I think use the EQ to sum to mono at end of his path.

But when using L6Link, with only 1 Lt2 it auto sums?

So would using the EQ sum to mono help? If it is one of the EQ's.

[deadlocked]

Thx Colonel, I haven't had the chance to test again, I seen someone, I think use the EQ to sum to mono at end of his path.

But when using L6Link, with only 1 Lt2 it auto sums?

So would using the EQ sum to mono help? If it is one of the EQ's.

Using one L2T, the output is auto-summed to mono, you do not "need" to do anything to sum it  to mono yourself, unless you want something like left channel to L2T and right to FOH and want both L&R to output the same signal.

 

You can do stereo using two L2Ts if you daisy-chain the L6 Link output of the first L2T into the second L2T. I have seen this in documentation, but I do not have 2x L2T to test this, so I am not sure which L2T would become the left channel and which one would be the right channel.