Jump to content
RandyBrooks

Helix Models you wish they would add...

Recommended Posts

I don't think, even it had ALL of the features of both of those devices, it would be a competitor for either. There's still a MASSIVE price/features difference. All it would do would be to add value to Helix, not detract from the value of either of those devices. 

I'm sure you're right about the more budget-conscious among us.

 

For the rest of us, I'd sooner spend $1500 for everything than $400 for some of those things.

 

And there must be some reason why Line 6 hasn't moved all the effects from the M-13, even if, like the reverbs, they were "simple" ports.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And there must be some reason why Line 6 hasn't moved all the effects from the M-13, even if, like the reverbs, they were "simple" ports.

 

A big part of it is probably the constant requests for amps, amps, amps, on ideascale and other forums. Amps are unfortunately popular. At some point, better sooner than later, I hope Line 6 decidedly dumps the idea of adding more amps, despite their popularity, and uses that gained resource of time for a more focused intent on functionality and currently missing effects. Helix is not just an amp modeler, but a multi-effects (it's how they categorize it on their website) guitar/bass processor.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure you're right about the more budget-conscious among us.

 

For the rest of us, I'd sooner spend $1500 for everything than $400 for some of those things.

 

And there must be some reason why Line 6 hasn't moved all the effects from the M-13, even if, like the reverbs, they were "simple" ports.

The DL4/M13 are a differently-designed product. Intended for integration with an already-existing rig. The Helix is, essentially, designed to be the whole rig. I seriously doubt L6 would consider it a "loss" if someone would rather buy the $1500 product vs the $300-$500 product, and it makes sense to have different items doing similar things in different price ranges, otherwise they would have just EOL'ed the lower-priced floor effects when Helix came out and said "You want a L6 modeler/MFX, buy a Helix". People who don't need amp modeling and 4 FX loops at their feet aren't gonna buy a helix if all they want are some delays, and most people (I would think) aren't likely to add another external pedal to Helix unless a specific sound is absolutely necessary. There are MORE than enough time-based/modulation effects inside Helix to keep the DL4 fans happy, and plenty of the stuff available in M13, even if they're not direct ports. Adding those features to Helix doesn't devalue either end of the price spectrum. Besides, the DL4 and M13 have been around FOREVER and will most-likely go on sale and be replaced at some point in the near future for another similar product in the price range, probably utilizing Helix tech.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A big part of it is probably the constant requests for amps, amps, amps, on ideascale and other forums. Amps are unfortunately popular. At some point, better sooner than later, I hope Line 6 decidedly dumps the idea of adding more amps, despite their popularity, and uses that gained resource of time for a more focused intent on functionality and currently missing effects. Helix is not just an amp modeler, but a multi-effects (it's how they categorize it on their website) guitar/bass processor.

 

Regarding amps, I don't mind if they add a couple now and then although I agree focus needs to be on fixing bugs, new effects, and features and core functionality  -- both new and improvement of existing. Line6 will probably continue to work on new amps and as I already expressed they are always welcome, but I would love to see more attention given to adding more IR slots, increasing the 2048 bit limit, allowing more than one 2048 bit IR on a route, enhancing IR management/backup, adding more parameters that you can control in an IR, etc... Once you start using IRs you realize how much can be done with them and where the Helix's limitations are. I have no idea what limitations the current hardware in the Helix imposes on IR development but there are still a lot of opportunities for the Helix to improve in this arena. The IR capability is a compelling feature on the Helix with room to grow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding amps, I don't mind if they add a couple now and then although I agree focus needs to be on fixing bugs, new effects, and features and core functionality  -- both new and improvement of existing. Line6 will probably continue to work on new amps and as I already expressed they are always welcome, but I would love to see more attention given to adding more IR slots, increasing the 2048 bit limit, allowing more than one 2048 bit IR on a route, enhancing IR management/backup, adding more parameters that you can control in an IR, etc... Once you start using IRs you realize how much can be done with them and where the Helix's limitations are. I have no idea what limitations the current hardware in the Helix imposes on IR development but there are still a lot of opportunities for the Helix to improve in this arena. The IR capability is a compelling feature on the Helix with room to grow.

 

Would there really be much of an improvement with higher definition IRs? Right now you can fit four 1024 IRs in one preset, but that's distributed across both processors. Obviously they aren't going to change the way they use the DSPs, so I don't see how they could go with more than they already allow without severely crippling what else you could add to a path. I suppose they could allow for dedicating an entire processor, or path, to a single IR, but how many more samples would that allow for? Another 2048 (4096) or 3072 (5120)? At 48KHz, that would be 85.3ms or 106.7ms, respectively, where 2048 is 42.7ms. Is that enough to really notice any sort of difference in the end result? I have a hard time noticing a difference between 1024 and 2048. Not to mention, where would the delay and reverb blocks go now? As far as I'm concerned, a tone isn't a tone without those two blocks! Particularly delay. :)

 

One of the biggest functional improvements I can think of them doing is multiple splits per path.

 

For amps, I must admit I'm glad they add the occasional amp as well. For example, the newly added Mesa Mark IV and Archetype Clean. Those two could be the only amps Helix has and I'd still be a happy camper. But I wouldn't be surprised to see them adding more amps that don't exist in the real world, like the Litigator (am I the only one not impressed much by this amp?). Lol.

 

If they have the memory for adding more IR slots, they probably should do that. And an easier, more foolproof way of backing up/restoring IRs, for sure. The way it is now can become messy quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would there really be much of an improvement with higher definition IRs? Right now you can fit four 1024 IRs in one preset, but that's distributed across both processors. Obviously they aren't going to change the way they use the DSPs, so I don't see how they could go with more than they already allow without severely crippling what else you could add to a path. I suppose they could allow for dedicating an entire processor, or path, to a single IR, but how many more samples would that allow for? Another 2048 (4096) or 3072 (5120)? At 48KHz, that would be 85.3ms or 106.7ms, respectively, where 2048 is 42.7ms. Is that enough to really notice any sort of difference in the end result? I have a hard time noticing a difference between 1024 and 2048. Not to mention, where would the delay and reverb blocks go now? As far as I'm concerned, a tone isn't a tone without those two blocks! Particularly delay. :)

 

One of the biggest functional improvements I can think of them doing is multiple splits per path.

 

For amps, I must admit I'm glad they add the occasional amp as well. For example, the newly added Mesa Mark IV and Archetype Clean. Those two could be the only amps Helix has and I'd still be a happy camper. But I wouldn't be surprised to see them adding more amps that don't exist in the real world, like the Litigator (am I the only one not impressed much by this amp?). Lol.

 

If they have the memory for adding more IR slots, they probably should do that. And an easier, more foolproof way of backing up/restoring IRs, for sure. The way it is now can become messy quickly.

 

I had intentionally avoided mentioning Fractal when I mentioned higher bit lengths for IRs because I did not want to start a discussion comparing the two units. But anyway, here goes. Fractal is supporting something that emulates the longer IRs (8192 bits) on the Ax8 which does have the same DSP chips as the Helix. You are correct that they may tie up slightly more resources but not much using Fractal's method of emulation (or so they claim). For those who are more interested in just getting the perfect modeled cab with little to no added effects, perhaps only on certain presets, the larger bit IRs (or some method to emulate them) might be just the ticket. Or, if Cliff's claim is correct the DSP cost might be minimal depending on the implementation. Higher bit IRs would also allow the use of reverb IRs for those who want to experiment with them.

 

Don't know if this is just marketing hype but here is a blurb from the Fractal WIKI. The last bullet point details his contention that higher res larger IRs deliver a more detailed low end in particular and that he has a method of implementing them (or something emulating them) that does not use that much more DSP or storage. I don't think he is necessarily wrong about the merits of higher bit length and I bet future hardware will exclusively use higher res IRs as well perhaps as a form of convolution cab IR that "hideout" and I were discussing in another post.

 

From the Fractal WIKI on IRs"

    • Normal Res: 1024 samples, 20 ms. You can often use Normal Res without a noticeable impact on the tone, compared to Hi Res. The Cabinet block's Stereo mode supports two Normal Res IRs.
    • Hi/Ultra-Res: Hi Res IRs (2040 samples, 40 ms) and Ultra-Res IRs (up to 8000 samples, 170 ms). Hi Res and Ultra-Res IR processing requires more CPU power than mono or stereo Normal Res. But Ultra-Res is more efficient than Hi Res, which results in about 4% less CPU usage with higher resolution! The Cabinet block's Stereo Ultra-Res mode supports two Ultra-Res IRs. Non-Ultra-Res IRs will be processed in stereo mode as Normal Res. If one IR is Ultra-Res and the other not, then the Ultra-Res IR will still processed as UR and the other as Normal in stereo mode.
  • Ultra-Res speaker IR processing is a proprietary technique that enhances the spectral resolution of an IR without adding CPU burden or storage requirements.
  • Ultra-Res IRs do not support size warping, which is why the Speaker Size parameter is unavailable in Ultra-Res mode.
  • Cliff's comments about Ultra-Res (source):
    • "The problem with conventional IRs is that they are too short to capture the detail in the low frequencies. There are those that maintain 20 ms is the maximum length you need to fully replicate the speaker. This would be about 1000 samples at 48 kHz. I disagree with this as I have many IRs here that exhibit significant energy beyond 20 ms. I believe the room has some influence as the low-frequency modes of the room will impact the resulting sound. The amount of this impact depends on the room, the mics, distance, etc., etc. Or perhaps certain speakers have particularly high Qs in the low frequencies. Regardless, it is my opinion that you need IRs much longer than 20 ms to fully capture the "mic'd amp in the studio" sound. My tests show that IRs of 8000 samples are required to fully capture the low-frequency detail. Unfortunately to process an 8K IR in real-time require copious processing power... Fortunately I have developed "Ultra-Res" cabinet modeling. Ultra-Res cabinet modeling provides the frequency detail of a very long IR with little or no added processing power requirements. The following image depicts the response of Ultra-Res cabinet IR processing: ..." (see thread)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I had intentionally avoided mentioning Fractal when I mentioned higher bit lengths for IRs because I did not want to start a discussion comparing the two units. But anyway, here goes. Fractal is supporting the something that emulates the longer IRs (8192 bits) on the Ax8 which does have the same DSP chips as the Helix. You are correct that they may tie up slightly more resources but not much using Fractal's method of emulation (or so they claim). For those who are more interested in just getting the perfect modeled cab with little to no added effects, perhaps only on certain presets, the larger bit IRs (or some method to emulate them) might be just the ticket. Or, if Cliff's claim is correct the DSP cost might be minimal depending on the implementation. Higher bit IRs would also allow the use of reverb IRs for those who want to experiment with them.

 

Don't know if this is just marketing hype but here is a blurb from the Fractal WIKI. The last bullet point details his contention that higher res IRs deliver a more detailed low end in particular and that he has a method of implementing them (or something like them) that does not use that much more DSP. I don't think he is necessarily wrong about the merits of higher bit length and I bet future hardware will exclusively use higher res IRs as well perhaps as a form of convolution cab IR that "hideout" and I were discussing in another post.

 

    • Normal Res: 1024 samples, 20 ms. You can often use Normal Res without a noticeable impact on the tone, compared to Hi Res. The Cabinet block's Stereo mode supports two Normal Res IRs.
    • Hi/Ultra-Res: Hi Res IRs (2040 samples, 40 ms) and Ultra-Res IRs (up to 8000 samples, 170 ms). Hi Res and Ultra-Res IR processing requires more CPU power than mono or stereo Normal Res. But Ultra-Res is more efficient than Hi Res, which results in about 4% less CPU usage with higher resolution! The Cabinet block's Stereo Ultra-Res mode supports two Ultra-Res IRs. Non-Ultra-Res IRs will be processed in stereo mode as Normal Res. If one IR is Ultra-Res and the other not, then the Ultra-Res IR will still processed as UR and the other as Normal in stereo mode.
  • Ultra-Res speaker IR processing is a proprietary technique that enhances the spectral resolution of an IR without adding CPU burden or storage requirements.
  • Ultra-Res IRs do not support size warping, which is why the Speaker Size parameter is unavailable in Ultra-Res mode.
  • Cliff's comments about Ultra-Res (source):
    • "The problem with conventional IRs is that they are too short to capture the detail in the low frequencies. There are those that maintain 20 ms is the maximum length you need to fully replicate the speaker. This would be about 1000 samples at 48 kHz. I disagree with this as I have many IRs here that exhibit significant energy beyond 20 ms. I believe the room has some influence as the low-frequency modes of the room will impact the resulting sound. The amount of this impact depends on the room, the mics, distance, etc., etc. Or perhaps certain speakers have particularly high Qs in the low frequencies. Regardless, it is my opinion that you need IRs much longer than 20 ms to fully capture the "mic'd amp in the studio" sound. My tests show that IRs of 8000 samples are required to fully capture the low-frequency detail. Unfortunately to process an 8K IR in real-time require copious processing power... Fortunately I have developed "Ultra-Res" cabinet modeling. Ultra-Res cabinet modeling provides the frequency detail of a very long IR with little or no added processing power requirements. The following image depicts the response of Ultra-Res cabinet IR processing: ..." (see thread)

 

 

I wonder if Helix's cabs, which I can recall reading somewhere that they are a hybrid IR or something, are similar to this whole idea. Maybe they could use that and apply it to longer length IRs.

 

Or if someone really wants higher quality IRs, it might be worth looking at a dedicated device, such as this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had my Helix for a short while and am loving the sound! But I find myself missing a few of the effect models from my old HD 500. Anybody else feel this way? So, I thought I'd ask; what models do you wish they would add in upcoming fimware updates (hopefully they look over these things)? I'm wishing they would put the boost/comp back; I'm just not getting the push out of the teletronix....and I wish they would put the Memory Man analog mod/delay on that they had on the hd500....the Line 6 version sounds like a flanger to me. So, if the DID look at these forums, and you COULD tell them what you wanted.....what would it be?

 

Kemper Profiling Amp model would be awesome ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kemper Profiling Amp model would be awesome ;-)

 

An amp model of an amp modeler? Interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah right, and while you're at it, give Helix the ability to consume broken glass and crap out diamonds! That would be a cool feature!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An amp model of an amp modeler? Interesting.

 

Note to self: to convey humor, be sure to use Emoji instead of Emoticons.  The ancient Emoticon symbology is no longer used for communication by the population on this planet.  Spock out.  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note to self: to convey humor, be sure to use Emoji instead of Emoticons.  The ancient Emoticon symbology is no longer used for communication by the population on this planet.  Spock out.  ;)

 

Note to self:when responding to a post using the ancient Emoticon symbology that you do understand, be sure to use any kind of Emotiwhatever to let them know you knew it was a joke and was attempting to respond with humor as well.  ;)   :)   :lol:  :D  B)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was so disappointed when I found out that the Helix's amp and effect modeling was only virtual. I wanted an amp 'modeler' that connects to a 3D printer and actually creates the amps and effects I select. Some raw material and 30 minutes later you are the proud new owner of an actual PRS Archon amp and a Univibe. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Put a Mesa Mark V in there, Hughes & Kettner Triamp and Coreblade perhaps, Engl Invader and Powerball for sure (wtf man)... something along the lines of an Earthquaker Devices Afterneath? Some Josh Travis type pitch shifter stuff? Maybe a TS9 on top of the TS808?

 

And in defense of the Helix not having everything that's been in previous devices... everything underwent a complete makeover, which I can only assume means it isn't as simple as carrying over models of amps and pedals that have been there previously. They would also need to be remodeled in order for them not to be screwing us with a repackaged Pod HD. If anything, this could reflect that they should've spent more time modelling more amps and pedals before the release, but after 6 years you probably want to stop spending money and actually see how it is going to be received, and update later, especially competing with Fractal and Kemper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As this is a wish list thread....

 

Any one (or all) of Todd Sharp's JOAT Amps heads! With at least one of his dual voiced 2x12 cabs.

 

The 20RT, sounds incredible. It has outstanding response and feel. Really easy to dial in spectacular sounds with the 5 position Attitude selector, Bite switch, and 6 position Hi Cut and Low Cut selectors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't familiar with JOAT amps, but they look delicious! Second the motion for a Helix version, definitely!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where does the decimal point go in the price of a real one? Always nervous (and a little offended honestly) when you have to write for pricing...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So up w Mesas and the like, but not wildly more?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Some Josh Travis type pitch shifter stuff? 

What is "Josh Travis" pitcher shifter stuff. Most of what I've heard from him is either his weird tuning or just simple m3/m2/M7 static harmony stuff that you can easily do with the pitch whammy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As great as the new litigator amp turned out, I think that Ben should be unleashed to create more original amps, based on different circuits from the Fender that he started with for the litigator.

 

-Max

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is "Josh Travis" pitcher shifter stuff. Most of what I've heard from him is either his weird tuning or just simple m3/m2/M7 static harmony stuff that you can easily do with the pitch whammy.

There's some effect the Axe Fx has that "surrounds" the note you're playing with the note that is a half step above and a half step below or something along those lines. There's a video on it somewhere discussing his tapping technique. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kemper Profiling Amp model would be awesome ;-)

 

Which sounds would you like? Theres over 9000 on RigManager now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's some effect the Axe Fx has that "surrounds" the note you're playing with the note that is a half step above and a half step below or something along those lines. There's a video on it somewhere discussing his tapping technique. 

that can be done with the pitch wham blocks pretty easily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And in defense of the Helix not having everything that's been in previous devices... everything underwent a complete makeover, which I can only assume means it isn't as simple as carrying over models of amps and pedals that have been there previously.

Definitely. If we had to rebuild every amp and effect we've done in the past, Helix would never be released and Line 6 would be bankrupt. Remember, it takes on average a man-month to model an HX amp.

 

Helix is also decidedly NOT the replacement for POD—it's a completely different product in a completely different line. We're not beholden to POD at all, and that means we do whatever is best for Helix and Helix users.

 

that can be done with the pitch wham blocks pretty easily.

 

It's completely trivial with a Pitch/Synth > Dual Pitch block.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Helix is also decidedly NOT the replacement for POD—it's a completely different product in a completely different line. We're not beholden to POD at all, and that means we do whatever is best for Helix and Helix users.

 

Line6 Original Spinal Puppet re-mastered in helix would be my dream come true!!!

thanx for the explanation but I insist...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One effect Line 6 has never modeled is the MXR distortion +. That was a fairly standard pedal in the 70's but have never seen it. It was part of my old rig. That would be fun to see. And how about a Rockman? It is kind of a one trick pony but the Boston tone is one tone I just can't seem to do well. Kind of close but not very well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Line6 Agro (or Aggro)...

Been saying it repeadetly - one of Line6's best and most versatile original models.

Can go all the way from class A to super-saturated (and tight) A/B style distortion...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here's me using the Agro on the XT and X3 in high-gain class A/B-style:

 

https://dackel.bandcamp.com/track/yjm-style

 

https://dackel.bandcamp.com/track/schillsjam

 

(sorry for the bandcamp links, but I do not have those soundsamples anywhere else)

 

 

I hear the new Spider V has the Agro, so porting it to Helix should not be too complicated ;)

Vote for it here:

https://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/The-original-Line6-Amp-with-the-biggest-versatility-the-AGRO!/842434-23508

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I woud like to simply have an Metronome buid in/Software!

Thats it. For lerning licks, everytime in the right time....And maybe with funktions like : Play 5 % faster after 3 minutes practising.

that would be awesome!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I woud like to simply have an Metronome buid in/Software!

Thats it. For lerning licks, everytime in the right time....And maybe with funktions like : Play 5 % faster after 3 minutes practising.

that would be awesome!

 

Just had a thought, but I wonder if it would be possible to simulate metronome using one a tone generator block followed by a tremolo effect... Hmmm... Something to try...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to see the new Peavey Invective amp modeled. The tightness that the amp is able to achieve would be awesome to have on a Helix! I'd also love to see more boutique amps: Jackson, Milkman, Tyler, 3rd Power, Morgan amps etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It might be cool to have a model of Brian Mays Deacy amp, or a Lab Series L3 like the one that B.B.King played.

 

-Max

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...