Whats better? editing on computer or on the Helix

[bartnettle1]

What do you prefer?

 

[vmoncebaiz]

I was 100% all about editing on the Helix itself vs the Editor, the only thing that I thought the editor did more quickly was renaming things.

 

I recently started messing around with the rack version of Helix and there the editor really earns its keep.  Since Helix Rack is most likely hooked up to (or at least near a computer) it makes a lot of sense to use it.

[duncann]

For me, it's the editor by far.

 

There's a couple of problems with it yet, but it's so close to being nearly perfect. I can't seem to figure out how to cycle through the parameters of a block using only the keyboard. I think there should be three TAB panes: preset list, signal chain, and block detail. Unless this functionality is there but I'm missing something. Haven't found it yet.

 

I also wish that when using the plus and minus keys for a parameter, or the up/down arrows using the mouse, it would increment/decrement everything by one unit, regardless of what that unit is. Right now if the unit is dB or milliseconds it jumps several values.

[Digital_Igloo]

Hardware.

[roscoe5]

Hardware, unless I am working with my DAW and I want to keep my hands on the keyboard and mouse.

[HonestOpinion]

Depends on what I am doing. For preset or scribble strip naming, large changes or changes to multiple presets, changes to preset order within a setlist, bulk copies of presets from one setlist to another, or the initial building of a preset from scratch, definitely the Editor. I also prefer the editor when I am just sitting around tweaking presets on my own. For practice and gigs, footswitch assignment, final fine tuning of a preset's sound(guitar in hand for this) and I/O selections, and other activities more targeted to live performance, definitely the Helix.

 

I have to hearken back to one of my ideas on Ideascale which was to move the amp block's "Master" volume parameter on the Helix to the first page where it could be adjusted in tandem with the "Drive" parameter, and put the "Volume" parameter on the second page.  It still annoys me to have to switch pages on the Helix to get the blend of the "Master" and "Drive" parameters to my liking. For that reason I prefer to adjust the amp block with the editor where all parameters are accessible from one page. I suppose I could use the Helix footswitch edit mode to get everything in the amp block showing at one time (Nope! "Master is on the second "page" there as well). If only the Helix had one more parameter knob!

 

Vote for it here: http://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Put-Master-volume-on-the-same-page-as-the-Drive-in-amp-model/788502-23508  (Not the extra knob, although that would be nice but swapping the location of "Master" and "Volume" in the amp block pages)

[jpdennis]

I'm at about 75% hardware and 25% software. Hardware for most tone setting patches.  I use the software to load a base patch in two or three locations to play with for fine tuning.  Then I may use the software to replace a pitch shift with a wah and save & export then import into another spot so I have two similar patches ... one with wah and one with a pitch shift.  Then I use the software to rename them.

 

And yes I have been maxing out the dual DSPs with many of the tricks I have learned in this forum (thus the wah in one and pitch shift in another system).  Thank you all for that.

 

Dennis

[willjrock]

Editor. It allows you to skip steps otherwise not possible on the hardware.

[klangmaler]

Both!  (...always these A / B questions :P)

[billlorentzen]

I use hardware mostly because I don't always have my computer on, but I really should use the editor more now that it's working so well, because I can hear better when I'm front and center with my studio monitors.

[amsdenj]

Individual patch adjustments are easily done on the Helix. And its important to be fluent navigating the Helix device since you're going to have to do that in a live session. I went to one of the Line6 Helix demo sessions at Guitar Center and marveled at how fast the demonstrator could make changes.

 

For navigating multiple patches, the editor is much better. I really wish it could have two windows open at a time, one connected to the Helix and the other off-line so its easier to compare and copy between patches.

[jasdadgad]

Individual patch adjustments are easily done on the Helix. And its important to be fluent navigating the Helix device since you're going to have to do that in a live session. 

 

This is a good point.

 

Those of us who got the Helix before the editor came out are akin to people who learned how to do math before the advent of calculators.

 

It's important to be fluent in editing on the Helix for those awkward moments when you don't have a computer handy.

[spikey]

Yes you should know Helix front panel, but the editor for me makes adjusting Helix patches a snap.

[hideout]

I think it depends on how you feel about your back.

[spikey]

yea the floor model is harder on the back hideout... Why I went with the rack.

[klangmaler]

I think it depends on how you feel about your back.

...and your neck ;)

[hideout]

yea the floor model is harder on the back hideout... Why I went with the rack.

True. The rack does put the interface closer to your eyes but if you gig, the penalty is setup complication and one extra device (pedal controller) to pack around. I suppose, if you're going to edit the standalone pedal unit at the gig and want to use the software editor, you'll have to pack a laptop. Alas, there is no perfect solution. Whaddayagonnado?

[sammycraig]

I am all about the editor. For me I just love sitting back in my favorite chair and running patches from there. I can keep my Helix on the ground so that I can test out the patches I am creating. It just feels more natural to me like that.

[jaminjimlp]

I like using the editor to adjust tones of patches by putting a looper block at the front of the chain and recording something and playing the loop and then dialing in the preset I guess you could use re-amping to do this as well, it really beats strum, tweak, strum method... I also used it hooked up to my pro tools with the redwires MIXIR2 plug in to mix IR's and one night drove the wife crazy because it was about a 20 sec loop  :lol: its kinda like having someone play your guitar wile you fiddle with the FX

[HonestOpinion]

I like using the editor to adjust tones of patches by putting a looper block at the front of the chain and recording something and playing the loop and then dialing in the preset I guess you could use re-amping to do this as well, it really beats strum, tweak, strum method... I also used it hooked up to my pro tools with the redwires MIXIR2 plug in to mix IR's and one night drove the wife crazy because it was about a 20 sec loop  :lol: its kinda like having someone play your guitar wile you fiddle with the FX

 

Great way to use the looper and editor! I will definitely be adopting this one.  Surprised I hadn't thought to do that already as that is how I often edit presets directly on the Helix.

[klangmaler]

Great way to use the looper and editor! I will definitely be adopting this one.  Surprised I hadn't thought to do that already as that is how I often edit presets directly on the Helix.

 

I find it usually better to compare sounds not playing (simultaneously).

This is something you learn when working in a studio:

Sometimes you need a certain 'distance' to your own sound ( & playing) -

and reference sounds and recording help to develop a 'fair ear'.

Changing the loop (with a DAW no prob) helps getting no brainworm :blink:

[bartnettle1]

I imagine that on the PC is best for loading IRs into the Helix as well?

 

On my HD 500 I found that on the unit I would come up with very good raw tones and never run out of DSP

but via EDIT could really blow out the DSP with some effects settings much easier to get creative on.

 

Thanks for the answers. 

[PeterHamm]

I use a hybrid approach. There are some things (most specifically anything that involves typing a word) that are easier in the editor, and when I'm setting up a footswitch to go between two states on an amp or verb or delay (or all of those) I find using the editor easier IF I can see the front of the unit at the same time (so I don't have to write stuff down).

That said, if I could only have one or the other??? The Hardware by FAR! Those knobs and buttons are faster than using a mouse on a screen for virtually everything.

 

But I have the rack, so even then I only have to bend over if I want to use the touch-sensitive footswitches.

[bartnettle1]

Seems be to have the unit on the ground at our feet for playing and the computer at desk height for editing.

 

How about those whom gig with it live would it be best to be skilled in editing on the unit more so for quick on the fly tweaks.