Best method of setting patches levels to the same volume??

[lungho]

Which ever one of these is the end of your chain, simply move the block selection cursor over it and adjust the output level.

[jpdennis]

On ‎2‎/‎3‎/‎2016 at 8:43 AM, PeterHamm said:

Best way?

fire up an FRFR at gig volume.

Use a dB meter.

Even better? Play through the system and have the sound guy give you feedback from patch to patch.

 

Working with the sound engineer has worked best for me.  Thanks Peter for the reinforcement as I never know the best way but I really like your videos and respect as well as appreciate your opinion. 

[jpdennis]

On ‎2‎/‎7‎/‎2016 at 2:14 PM, Nos402 said:

I've had GREAT results using the Orban loudness meter (free download). As many others have stated, usually meters aren't terribly reliable as loudness, EQ, etc. will affect perceived loudness but I equalized all my patches using the Orban loudness meter, and they were all VERY close at my next gig. I generally just use the amp model's channel volume to make the adjustment. It's the best results I've ever had in my 30+ years of playing. 

 

Thanks Nos402.  I'm heading to the site after I leave the forum.

[SWyke]

First time posting, hi everyone!

I had this exact problem too, I first tried a decibel meter on my phone but then I stumbled across this bloke’s video on youtube. He uses a free DAW plugin called called MLoudness Analyser. I downloaded it and used it through my DAW (Reaper in my case but I guess it’ll work with the any DAW). 

I just followed what the bloke said in the video and it then gave me a great starting point by allowing me to adjust and save every preset and snapshot to pretty much the same final volume, then I just needed a to make a few minor adjustments by ear next time I practiced with the band and then of course did the final save on any presets/snapshots that I’d had to tweak.

From then on, whenever I’ve created a new preset at home I’ve done it with Reaper on the laptop hooked up to the Helix from the start, so I know I’ve got that ball-park starting volume, whichever Helix amp I choose, before making the final volume tweaks by ear next time I practice with the band. 

 

 

[Digital_Igloo]

The Output block's Level parameter is probably the most transparent place to level presets, but if you don't have Dynamics blocks after your amp, there's a good chance you can just turn the Amp's Channel Volume knob. (It's completely transparent and doesn't affect the amp tone in any way.) This is how I quickly level my presets in the studio:

1. Press the AMP button and turn Knob 6 (Ch Vol).
2. Press SAVE twice.
3. Switch to an adjacent preset and repeat steps 1 and 2. Rinse and repeat.

IMPORTANT! Meters do NOT help when leveling presets; in fact, they often make preset level jumps WORSE, because they lack the ability to compensate for how perceived loudness is often radically affected by your playback system's frequency response, playback volume, acoustics, location of your ears with regard to playback system, whether you're playing with other musicians, how close they are, what notes they're playing at any given point in the song, etc. If you play live, the ONLY way to properly level presets is at the venue, playing at gig level, with the band, with your ears. No amount of technology will give you a free lunch.

[PeterHamm]

18 minutes ago, Digital_Igloo said:

IMPORTANT! Meters do NOT help when leveling presets; in fact, they often make preset level jumps WORSE, because they lack the ability to compensate for how perceived loudness is often radically affected by your playback system's frequency response, playback volume, acoustics, location of your ears with regard to playback system, whether you're playing with other musicians, how close they are, what notes they're playing at any given point in the song, etc. If you play live, the ONLY way to properly level presets is at the venue, playing at gig level, with the band, with your ears. No amount of technology will give you a free lunch.

 Can somebody pin this to the top of every single discussion board in the universe.

 

[zolko60]

Meters do help in leveling presets or anything that needs to be precisely leveled. There are very good free K-weigted loudness meters of Youlean or TB Pro Audio so if you use DAW and don't trust your ears feel free to use them.

 

[Digital_Igloo]

10 hours ago, zolko60 said:

Meters do help in leveling presets or anything that needs to be precisely leveled.

Meters are great for lots of things, but hot garbage for leveling presets.

 

Say you're in the studio, and the meters tell you Preset 01A is 4dB louder than Preset 01B. You get to the gig, and now Preset 01B sounds way louder! What gives?

 

01A may have a ton of low end energy which registers higher on the meter. 01B may be more mid heavy and the monitor at the venue may have a bump in those frequencies. The rest of the band may be playing softer when 01B is active or maybe they're playing in a different register whereas when 01A is active, everyone is playing in unison and drowning each other out. Maybe there's a resonant frequency in the room that causes those peaks in 01B's curve to jump. Dozens of things affect perceived loudness of presets (even temperature and humidity!), and meters account for only one of them.

 

Here's an analogy: Say you're in a closet and your spouse says "banana" right into your ear, half an inch away. Now you're in a loud club, and even when shouting "WATERMELON!" into your ear, you can barely hear them. Now which one would've registered higher on a meter, banana or watermelon?

 

This is why we've been hesitant to add output meters in Helix. People will actively misuse them for leveling presets and then claim they're inaccurate. Not having output meters forces users to level presets by ear, which is the ONLY correct way to do it.

[cruisinon2]

1 hour ago, Digital_Igloo said:

This is why we've been hesitant to add output meters in Helix. People will actively misuse them for leveling presets and then claim they're inaccurate. Not having output meters forces users to level presets by ear, which is the ONLY correct way to do it.

 

Hallelujah! Thank you... I've been saying it for years, but everybody still wants a foolproof glowing-LED solution.

 

Though at this point, I have to say the odds of finding myself in a closet with the wife are slim to none. We'll need a new analogy...;)

[gunpointmetal]

2 hours ago, Digital_Igloo said:

This is why we've been hesitant to add output meters in Helix. People will actively misuse them for leveling presets and then claim they're inaccurate. Not having output meters forces users to level presets by ear, which is the ONLY correct way to do it.

output meters might not be a great idea, but a "clip meter" as an insert between blocks would be cool....

[PeterHamm]

46 minutes ago, gunpointmetal said:

output meters might not be a great idea, but a "clip meter" as an insert between blocks would be cool....

You don't need this if you gain-stage properly. If you boost every block a few dB you can create problems eventually, but it's hard. Most of the "clipping" issues I hear about is from people forgetting that pesky "headroom" parameter in their delays or some such.

 

[zolko60]

3 hours ago, Digital_Igloo said:

Say you're in the studio, and the meters tell you Preset 01A is 4dB louder than Preset 01B. You get to the gig, and now Preset 01B sounds way louder! What gives?

If the meter is telling me Preset 01A is 4LUFS louder than 01B it is. If I feel 01A is lost in the mix what can I do about it?
- Use Preset 01B which is set for different purpose?
- Set my monitor louder?
- Come closer to my monitor?
- Ask monitor guy to set my monitor louder?
- Change the venue?
- Lower the humidity?

;)

4 hours ago, Digital_Igloo said:

Dozens of things affect perceived loudness of presets (even temperature and humidity!), and meters account for only one of them.

Yes, but we are not talking about percieved loudness of presets but leveling them. Leveling in this case means settiing them to uniform level, not to mix context. K-weighting and windowing are the most precise methods so far. If leveling is subjective, venue, monitor,  temperature, humidity dependent so relying on ears does not bring anything to the equation or brings that important factor which can't be done away of the particular sitiation anyway.

Maybe an electic gutar needs G-weighting (to be invented) and guitars tuned B dropped needs another weighed meter... OK, enough. Use your ears! :D

[Digital_Igloo]

2 hours ago, zolko60 said:

Yes, but we are not talking about percieved loudness of presets but leveling them. Leveling in this case means setting them to uniform level, not to mix context.

Leveling in this context is ensuring that when you switch from preset to preset or snapshot to snapshot, your playback level doesn't jump out, get buried, or otherwise sound jarring or egregious in some way. If you only play by yourself in a controlled environment with the same guitar and playback system every time, leveling is much easier. But as soon as you change instruments, playback systems, environments, number of other musicians playing with you, or a dozen other factors, your meticulous leveling—whether you did it with a meter or your ears—goes out the window. Suddenly presets that were just right are too soft and others are too loud. Meters don't account for any of that.

 

But if you and all your friends are robots, then sure. dB values are all you need.

[spikey]

20 hours ago, zolko60 said:

Meters do help in leveling presets or anything that needs to be precisely leveled. There are very good free K-weigted loudness meters of Youlean or TB Pro Audio so if you use DAW and don't trust your ears feel free to use them.

 

Luv this guy- has some very good video tutorials on Helix via YT.

[cruisinon2]

13 hours ago, zolko60 said:

Yes, but we are not talking about percieved loudness of presets but leveling them. Leveling in this case means settiing them to uniform level, not to mix context. 

 

Seriously... what practical, real world use would this serve? In the end your ears and your brain will determine relative loudness of one patch to another, whether you like it or not. Perceived loudness is all that ever matters. So unless you really enjoy constantly having to adjust volume in every different scenario you find yourself in, setting every patch to some arbitrary dB value accomplishes what exactly?

[zolko60]

3 hours ago, cruisinon2 said:

So unless you really enjoy constantly having to adjust volume in every different scenario you find yourself in, setting every patch to some arbitrary dB value accomplishes what exactly?

If everything is so subjective and eviroment dependent as Digital_Igloo claims than "offline" leveling hardly makes any sense. If leveling does not mean setting average percieved loudness apart of enviroment, what corresponds to some arbitrary LUFS value,  then our disscusion is about taste and feel.

The are two methods of leveling the preset loudness, right? The first is using ears, the second is using sophisticated K-weighted loudness meter.
Everybody can try both of them and compare the results. One can even use metering first and correct it by ear.
If the claim is "Some preset loudness is 4LUFS louder than another one but the percieved loudness is just the opposite" - well, it needs some evidence. I can not just choose to believe in this.
I use my ears for leveling but I observe people ask about metering. K-weighted metering is the only loudness metering that works. It is now used for broadcast and streaming because it makes leveling as precise and objective as it can be. 

[PierM]

16 hours ago, Digital_Igloo said:

Meters are great for lots of things, but hot garbage for leveling presets.

--------

This is why we've been hesitant to add output meters in Helix. People will actively misuse them for leveling presets and then claim they're inaccurate. Not having output meters forces users to level presets by ear, which is the ONLY correct way to do it.

 

With all the due respect, Line6 should not take actions like that to babysit their userbase. As flagship unit, you should offer a full professional product with everything covered properly, then if there is people who doesn't know how to use it, isn't your problem, as soon as you properly provide documentation.

 

Give us meters as Fractal does please, just do it, would be a great tool to control signal flows, excessive noise floors coming from some path, clipping, etc... 

 

[PeterHamm]

7 hours ago, cruisinon2 said:

 

Seriously... what practical, real world use would does this serve? In the end your ears and your brain will determine relative loudness of one patch to another, whether you like it or not. Perceived loudness is all that ever matters. So unless you really enjoy constantly having to adjust volume in every different scenario you find yourself in, setting every patch to some arbitrary dB value accomplishes what exactly?

Exactly...

There are musicians, and then there are measurebaters. Musicians listen to music, measurebaters look at numbers on a screen.

The photo world has these people, too. They take ugly photographs but know all the measured specifications of all their lenses.

Guys, you don't need the meters. Sorry you think you do. You don't.

And if you use them for so-called "leveling", you will really get yourself in trouble in an actual live environment.

[PierM]

And here you go the fanboys! ROFL!

[cruisinon2]

28 minutes ago, PierM said:

And here you go the fanboys! ROFL!

 

Call it what you will, and hurl all the insults you want, but this has nothing to do with L6. I couldn't care less about brand loyalty, and I've had more rigs than I can can count over the years...most of it from other manufacturers. I didn't obsessively meter patch levels on any of that gear either. Wasn't necessary then, and it isn't now.

[PierM]

27 minutes ago, cruisinon2 said:

 

Call it what you will, and hurl all the insults you want, but this has nothing to do with L6. I couldn't care less about brand loyalty, and I've had more rigs than I can can count over the years...most of it from other manufacturers. I didn't obsessively meter patch levels on any of that gear either. Wasn't necessary then, and it isn't now.

 

Saying meters are useless, in a machine that does offer 2 instrument input, mic input, 4 send 4 return, digital input, digital output, multi channel USB routing, 4 paths, 2 xlr out, 2 1/4" out, L6 link.... and more... it's really something hideous to say, but you are free to say what you want really, I'd still enjoy to have advanced metering.

 

I do have any sort of toy connected to my Helix, and having meters for each input and out available, would be a great help to balance, level, find and isolate problems, just everthing a meter does. That's like a mixer without meters.

 

Isn't about being obsessed, it's about keeping signals under control when you move your rig all the time and you don't want to use the volume knob to trial and error your routing.

 

 

 

 

[PeterHamm]

43 minutes ago, PierM said:

Isn't about being obsessed, it's about keeping signals under control when you move your rig all the time and you don't want to use the volume knob to trial and error your routing.

You will still need to futz with levels even after you get them "perfect" with meters.

I learned way back before I used Helix that my ears and my sound guys ears were way > than any meter.

[gunpointmetal]

I've never seen a sound guy on a modern board gain stage solely by ear. They either have real meters, or at the very least a clip meter, as well meter/clip indicators at the outputs, probably a frequency analyzer, and they use a combination of meters, ears, and common sense. And meters on their compressors, gates, etc etc etc.

 I can see where DI is coming from with thinking people will get into trouble with it and complain but. . . 

3 hours ago, PierM said:

 

With all the due respect, Line6 should not take actions like that to babysit their userbase. As flagship unit, you should offer a full professional product with everything covered properly, then if there is people who doesn't know how to use it, isn't your problem, as soon as you properly provide documentation.

and as far as

1 hour ago, PeterHamm said:

There are musicians, and then there are measurebaters. Musicians listen to music, measurebaters look at numbers on a screen.

Well its a brave new world where a lot of "musicians" (that term should always be applied loosely on a guitarist forum) who are also recording/FOH engineers, working with custom IEM set-ups, work with uneducated sound guys in less than ideal situations etc etc etc where all that "measurebating" comes in handy (get it, handy, because 'bating). Dialing everything by ear is why I usually can't stand on a guitarist side of the stage at a lot of shows. If that guy had a frequency analyzer and a db meter he might not have dialed is amp to sound awesome where his microphone is set up and like hot dog lollipop everywhere else. 

[PierM]

24 minutes ago, PeterHamm said:

You will still need to futz with levels even after you get them "perfect" with meters.

I learned way back before I used Helix that my ears and my sound guys ears were way > than any meter.

 

 

Sorry I never said I need level meters to measure ambient sound, or sound pressure in a room, or to measure loudness. If you have a pedal, or a external looper which is sucking your signal, isn't something you debug with ears. You need either metering, or you can start messing with cables and patches to see where the signal is being interrupted. Same with noise floors, and mixing different sources in a complex patch, which is routing outside the Helix.

 

Signal monitoring isn't rocket science. It's ABC in any multi input/output device.

 

Wish people who's so paternalistic with other users would at least know what they are talking about.

 

[PierM]

Just to be clear, I think Helix isn't just a pedal board for guitarists. I am a guitar player, but I also use synths, loopers, and any other kind of s..t, and I'm with Helix because his tremendous routing abilities. When you play with multiple sources, and you route in and out into many external tools etc... Metering can be a life/time saver.

 

You can see here the typical mess I do have coming back and forth from my Helix... XD

 

[Digital_Igloo]

7 hours ago, zolko60 said:

If everything is so subjective and environment dependent as Digital_Igloo claims than "offline" leveling hardly makes any sense.

Correct. You have to level your presets in situ. Anyone expecting to mitigate surprises at a gig by leveling in their presets alone in their studio or practice space (whether by ear or with a meter) is gonna have a bad time.

3 hours ago, PierM said:

Saying meters are useless, in a machine that does offer 2 instrument input, mic input, 4 send 4 return, digital input, digital output, multi channel USB routing, 4 paths, 2 xlr out, 2 1/4" out, L6 link.... and more... it's really something hideous to say, but you are free to say what you want really, I'd still enjoy to have advanced metering.

I don't think anyone's saying meters are useless—I'm certainly not. I just maintain that they're useless (actually, worse than useless—detrimental) when used specifically to level preset and snapshot changes.

[zolko60]

14 hours ago, Digital_Igloo said:

Correct. You have to level your presets in situ.

That is extraoridinary claim especially when people use IEMs which vastly reduces the in situ conditions influence. Well... this is art, not science so extraordinary claims require no evidence or a banana anegdotal evidence is convincing :) I am waiting for some yt video titled "Why leveling the presets is only effective during a gig sound check" ;)

[Digital_Igloo]

11 hours ago, zolko60 said:

That is extraoridinary claim especially when people use IEMs which vastly reduces the in situ conditions influence.

Even if you move the goalposts to speak only to those who monitor through controlled playback systems like IEMs (which, considering the audience here, is likely a small contingent), leveling presets and snapshots by ear, in situ, will still provide much better results than using meters.

[craiganderton]

In the studio (this is not applicable for live performance), I use LUFS metering (not K-System, which is quite different) to balance preset levels. DI is correct about needing to use your ears, but I wanted a way to be able to step through presets rapidly in the context of a song, without having to adjust volume after each switch, so that the level would at least be "in the ballpark." After finding a candidate preset, then I tweak the final volume by using the channel faders, not the Helix.

 

I balanced the presets In my Amazing Multiband Helix Preset Pack, which are designed to work well with chords, by using a combination of peak and LUFS metering, and then doing final tweaks by ear. Regardless, as DI points out, how you perceive level will be different compared to how the LUFS algorithm perceives level. Still, to my ears, it's closer to reality than either traditional peak or RMS metering.

[kraftybob]

I'm new to the Helix and came across this thread as I'm trying to get some volume consistency across my presets/snapshots as they vary widely from one to the other.  Quite a lively discussion.  Fortunately, I've only just begun creating and downloading presets so I want to learn good habits before I go too far.  

 

Putting aside meters, listening with your ears, etc. for a moment, and while I'm mostly a home player, I understand that "leveling" at home is only a starting point and adjustments need to be made from there for the various scenarios I may be in.  From what I've read channel volume and Output Block adjustment seem to be the main adjustment points - got it!  My question is, is there a best practice regarding where to set the main large volume knob when leveling volume?  I've read people keeping it at 10:00, 2:00, all the way up, etc. but I don't know the Helix well enough yet to understand the implications of having it set at 10:00 vs all the way up (not enough headroom, introduce digital noise, etc.)

 

My setup is 4CM into a Marshall DSL40C.  Some patches use only effects and the Marshall clean and OD channels, and others bypass the Send/Return block so the signal goes straight into the FX Return.  Please note that I have no intention of moving to a FRFR speaker so I'm looking for advice taking into consideration my current setup.

 

Edited to add:

I spent some time tonight messing around with leveling the volumes.  I quickly realized this is not something you should do late at night at low volumes.  With the volume knob at 9:00 or so I had to set my OD channel/master volumes pretty high (8-10).   Problem is when I got to my clean patches I couldn't get them loud enough to keep up with the OD patches.  

 

When I get some time alone at home and can move some air I'll set the volume knob higher (1:00 or so to start) and set the clean patches first.  Then re-adjust the OD patches to match.  Probably better to have the master/channel volumes lower so I can dial-in some headroom later on if I need it.

[litesnsirens]

I think it depends on your situation.  I for instance play in two bands both of which use no amps (modelers for guitar and bass) and electronic drums (Roland TD-20).  So, while there are dynamics based on the actual musicians’ playing it’s pretty consistent and there are no volume wars.  I use a different preset for every song, so there’s lots to level.  I use my ears to compare and level a few patches that represent various gain stages,  I observe how they register on a decibel metre and then go through all my presets and use the meter as a reference to level all the patches.  I recognize it’s still not going to be perfect but in my environment it gets me really close.

[cruisinon2]

14 hours ago, kraftybob said:

I spent some time tonight messing around with leveling the volumes.  I quickly realized this is not something you should do late at night at low volumes.  With the volume knob at 9:00 or so I had to set my OD channel/master volumes pretty high (8-10).   Problem is when I got to my clean patches I couldn't get them loud enough to keep up with the OD patches.  

 

When I get some time alone at home and can move some air I'll set the volume knob higher (1:00 or so to start) and set the clean patches first.  Then re-adjust the OD patches to match.  Probably better to have the master/channel volumes lower so I can dial-in some headroom later on if I need it.

 

Yeah, volume is of paramount concern. And the percieved loudness of one patch to another is what matters, which is why meters are of little to no practical use. But regardless, the percieved loudness of different frequency ranges is a weird phenomenon which varies drastically with volume... and with clean vs dirty tones, as you discovered. A dirty tone will always seem louder than it's clean counterpart, even if they both register the same on a dB meter, again demonstrating their limited utility...so always set your clean volume first. Also, since the decibel scale is logarithmic, you need to do all your leveling at (or very close) the volume at which you intend to use your patches. Otherwise every time you switch gears between home and gig levels, your relative patch/snapshot volumes will be all over the place again. I gave up years ago and now I just keep separate set lists for each scenario. It's more initial grunt work, but in the end it saves time, aggravation, and constant back and forth tweaking.

[kraftybob]

Thanks guys. Yeah, I’m going to start with the clean tones first, then work my way up through crunch to heavy. 

 

I’ll set a few clean and dirty when I can play loud at home, and then lower the main volume knob to see how they sound at normal home levels. If they still sound good relative to one another I’ll continue doing that. If not, then maybe I’ll copy my presets and have a set for loud and soft. Although that seems like a pain to maintain. We’ll see. 

 

Thanks again

[cruisinon2]

10 minutes ago, kraftybob said:

If not, then maybe I’ll copy my presets and have a set for loud and soft. Although that seems like a pain to maintain. We’ll see.

 

Well you only have to do it once, and the alternative is re-leveling everything between home and gigs/rehearsals. The former is far less work in the long run.

[Heavyville]

On 2/3/2016 at 11:43 AM, PeterHamm said:

Best way?

fire up an FRFR at gig volume.

Use a dB meter.

Even better? Play through the system and have the sound guy give you feedback from patch to patch.

 

I set my rig at gig volume or simply LOUD and use an SPL meter, i may have a DAW open to see the meter but thats beacuse i like shiny things and lights, but I use these as tools to confirm what my ears are telling me.  It speeds up my workflow alot too.   Honestly for me, i've only done it once with a playlist I create for a cover band i'm in.  I made 45 song specific patches and level matched them before the gig, slight adjustments at the venue too. 

 

normally I copy "good" presets that I trust and generlly only use my ears to level match if the a main variable changed. 

if its going into the DAW I like a specifc DB hitting the hard drive. 

[kraftybob]

1 hour ago, cruisinon2 said:

Well you only have to do it once, and the alternative is re-leveling everything between home and gigs/rehearsals. The former is far less work in the long run.

 

Valid point if once you set it up you don't make a lot of changes.  Thinking about it further I guess once I have it setup I don't think I would constantly be adding/changing things so maybe not as bad as I initially thought.  I'd just have to go in knowing that anytime I add a patch/preset I have to do it twice.

 

1 hour ago, rucmas said:

I use these as tools to confirm what my ears are telling me

I did the same thing.  I ended up using an SPL meter app on my phone to at least get in the ballpark.  Then I further adjusted based on what I was hearing.  I just have to do it again at louder volumes next time :)

[brue58ski]

Back in the day, and I'm assuming this is still true, meters don't really give a totally accurate display of what the level is because they don't show the actual loudness. The circuits in meters tend to have a band of frequencies that it uses to make the meter move. Or (as I recall) if it tries to do a total average of every frequency, that tends to dillute what that actual loudness is. One way to show this would be to put some white noise through the Helix in an FX return and put an EQ right after it. Monitor it with the meters. Make sure all of the frequencies are at 0dB in the EQ. then turn one of the EQ bands up a bit and sweep through a bunch of frequencies. If I'm right, the meter will fluctuate unevenly through the sweep, showing what frequencies the meter emphasizes. If I'm wrong the meter won't fluctuate from the initial boost of the EQ band as you sweep through the frequencies. It's been awhile since I was taught that so I could be wrong. But based on many of the responses I suspect what I learned is still true. I'm not sure if I'm stating this very well. Meters are good for getting you in the ballpark as far as leveling all of your patches but your ears are the best way. Another factor I thought of is power. Different frequencies require different amounts of power. Lower frequencies need more power to hear at the same level (or is it perceived level). The meter you're reading your Helix directly from doesn't have that issue. It's just showing you the levels of the frequencies before they hit your power amp or speakers. One thing I also learned is there is no such thing as a completely flat power/amp speaker. So depending on the design of your amp/speaker you use, different frequencies will be emphasized/de-emphasized and this will happen after the meter. Then there's the Fletcher/Munson curve and room EQ which will color your sound after the meters, making them another cause for the meters to be inaccurate. Am I forgetting anything?  I'm not sure if I'm explaining this very well but take it for what it's worth. Meters can get you kind of close but using your ears in the environment your playing in, at the level you're playing at, is  really the only way to get your final levels.

[kraftybob]

@brue58ski - EQ'ing white noise is an interesting idea - hmmmm.  To your point though, I only used the meter to get my patches close to each other and then adjusted by ear.  The patches I created were pretty close from the beginning, but some of the patches I downloaded were all over the place regarding volume.  

 

I'm pretty sure I'm on the right track and feel much more comfortable about this whole volume leveling thing.  Prior to this I used the M13 (selling it now), which was stomp boxes only, so aside from adjusting the level on a few of the effects, I didn't have the volume leveling issue.

 

Thanks to all for the info.

[Metal-Cellista]

On 6/14/2019 at 5:41 PM, Digital_Igloo said:

I don't think anyone's saying meters are useless—I'm certainly not. I just maintain that they're useless (actually, worse than useless—detrimental) when used specifically to level preset and snapshot changes. 

this is a kind of "use your ears" - argument. i think "support your ears" (with your eyes) is a much faster aproach, although the ears should always have the last word. i beleve we can agree on that.

 

On 6/13/2019 at 6:53 PM, Digital_Igloo said:

People will actively misuse them for leveling presets and then claim they're inaccurate.

have to admit this one, thinking of the tuner history and the rougth tone in the diskussion back then. but you could implement an optional lufs/level meter and label it as "experimental" in the setings menu. so the people you mentioned will tend to avoid it and otherwise no one can complain about malfunctioning ;)

 

I think, this topic is much wider than just level metering. it's the whole complex of visual feedback. like gain reduction, frequency-rta and much more. this all woud be no problem to implement and would give mighty tools in the hands of some. but in your philosophy for this unit it seems to be explicitly not intended.

I think i get your idea of leaving the helix unit more like a representation of a classical guittar gear and purposely seperating it from classical FOH/DAW tasks. maybe thats part of why the interface is so intuitive. that thought makes me understand your desicion even though I disagree.

because now i know why, i may accept it and stop waiting for it. I may find a workaround with a DAW on a tablet but it took me a year and a half to get to this point and find your view on this topic here. @Digital_Igloo with respect to all the ideascale submissions in this direction i hope you line6 guys consider to communicate this decision more prominently. maybe in the FAQs. so you could shorten this frustrating "but why?"- phase for others on their jurney;) cheers.

[codamedia]

It disturbs me that DI takes the stance that meters are useless. That's not the open mind I would hope to exist with someone closely connected to product development at Line 6. 

 

Of course our ears are the final judge (yes, I need to make sure that is clear)... but in my experience meters are a tremendously valuable tool for establishing the base level when setting up a preset. When i get to rehearsal... only a small tweak here or there is ever needed.  Some common sense goes a long way. It's up to you to know the relationships between your presets... not just set them all to the same level on a meter and expect it to work.

 

In my experience....

• Ears should be trusted "in context". This would be in a rehearsal or on a stage at proper volume. 
• Ears LIE "out of context". Trying to setup tones without the reference of stage or rehearsal.

EG: How often have you setup a distorted lead tone at home by ear, only to take it to the stage and find that "screaming lead" gets buried in context with the rest of the band. If you put a  METER on what you just setup... you will find that you set your lead (by ear) substantially quieter than the normal tone even though it sounded balanced. If you use the meter to balance the level it will sound way too loud on it's own... but in a mix, it's actually much closer to being right. NOTE: The same applies to a compressed clean sound... and every type of tone will apply differently. 

 

There is no right way or wrong way.... find a method that works for you and use it. I really wish DI and Peter wouldn't tell everyone that uses a meter they are wrong for doing so. I know it works REALLY WELL for me to set the base level for the patch.