Just for fun: What do you think is coming in the next update?

[MusicLaw]

Please just fix the existing cab and mic models. They are the worst sounding of any amp modeler i own, including software. If not for IRs, it wouldnt get used much.

 

What are you listening to the Helix with? I'm new to the Forums and haven't read all your posts.

[Digital_Igloo]

Definitely MIDIpants®.

[drew_tnbd]

I'm hoping for new reverbs so I can feel 100% comfortable about flogging my Blue Sky. Then a few more delays (and improvements to the reverse delay) and I can flog my Timeline too! ;)

[zooey]

Well I wouldn't say I think it's coming necessarily, but IMO the elephant in the otherwise wondrous Helix room is IR management.

 

Last night I spent a while setting up to check out a bunch of presets and IRs I've collected. Quite a pain.

 

You first have to figure out which IRs you currently have loaded that are used by presets you're keeping. I did that by exporting all the individual presets I want to keep, then I wrote a tool to list out all the IR slots used by any preset file in a recursive set of directories, and which preset files use them.

 

Then you need to reconcile all your IR developers' naming systems so you can know where they came from and what their original names were, then apply a 3 digit sequential prefix to them all so Helix loads them in a repeatable order. Once you've done that, you can load them in, then remap the IRs used by each preset to the new locations of any IRs you moved.

 

Not all those steps are necessary in all cases, but the bottom line is that this is way not automatic or user friendly, and it's tedious and error prone at scale.

[Verne-Bunsen]

Please just fix the existing cab and mic models. They are the worst sounding of any amp modeler i own, including software. If not for IRs, it wouldnt get used much.

 

I find this kind of interesting. I have a pretty healthy library of IRs from Ownhammer and Red Wirez and, honestly, find them to be a bit overrated. More than half of the time I prefer the sound I'm getting out of a stock cab configuration (typically two cabs in parallel) over the same patch with IRs. Often I find the IRs sound very "boxy" or have a "playing in a tin-can" sort of hollowness about them. The stock cabs sound more "open" to me, more like hearing a guitar amp and less like a recording of one. Interesting how we can all have such different experiences with the same stuff!

[gkinder]

Well I wouldn't say I think it's coming necessarily, but IMO the elephant in the otherwise wondrous Helix room is IR management.

 

Last night I spent a while setting up to check out a bunch of presets and IRs I've collected. Quite a pain.

 

You first have to figure out which IRs you currently have loaded that are used by presets you're keeping. I did that by exporting all the individual presets I want to keep, then I wrote a tool to list out all the IR slots used by any preset file in a recursive set of directories, and which preset files use them.

 

Then you need to reconcile all your IR developers' naming systems so you can know where they came from and what their original names were, then apply a 3 digit sequential prefix to them all so Helix loads them in a repeatable order. Once you've done that, you can load them in, then remap the IRs used by each preset to the new locations of any IRs you moved.

 

Not all those steps are necessary in all cases, but the bottom line is that this is way not automatic or user friendly, and it's tedious and error prone at scale.

 

Amen to this!!!  The IR support in Helix/Editor is pretty bad....an integrated library to sort, manage, and call IRs on the fly would be nice in addition to list set of the IRs currently in use and in which patches.... 

[spikey]

Tuner for my Editor...

[kensington]

Please just fix the existing cab and mic models. They are the worst sounding of any amp modeler i own, including software. If not for IRs, it wouldnt get used much. 

 

 

I find this kind of interesting. I have a pretty healthy library of IRs from Ownhammer and Red Wirez and, honestly, find them to be a bit overrated. More than half of the time I prefer the sound I'm getting out of a stock cab configuration (typically two cabs in parallel) over the same patch with IRs. Often I find the IRs sound very "boxy" or have a "playing in a tin-can" sort of hollowness about them. The stock cabs sound more "open" to me, more like hearing a guitar amp and less like a recording of one. Interesting how we can all have such different experiences with the same stuff!

 

Agree. After using ownhammer, red wirez, 3sigma...you name it, I'm now back to the stock cabs because I find them easier to tweak, and in the end sounding better than 3rd party IR's. So, not sure what willjrock is doing, but he's doing something wrong.

[zooey]

I find the stock cabs and mics quite usable, and it's way easier to tweak them than to sift through a completely insane number of IRs.

 

Bottom line for me is that both cabs and IRs are super useful, glad we have both options, but I certainly don't find the built-in cabs to be a huge sore point, and for those that do, you can load external IRs. It's the best of both worlds.

[jasdadgad]

Oh, please, please, autovolume.  I bought an M5, an M13 and several of the DL4's (they keep breaking!) solely for that beautiful autovolume.

 

Come on.  I know you know how to do it.  

 

Yes, I can still do the send/return thing with my M5 (which works swimmingly, by the way).  But it's extra cables and weight.

 

Are you reading this, Santa Claus?

[steevo1977]

More of a personal wishlist for this update and those to come:

 

1) Variax workbench integration would be ace

2) HX reverb models - Especially a tweak-able spring

3) Multi-waveform LFO that can control chosen parameter/s of amp/effects

4) Feedbacker

5) Treble boost (maybe like the compressor with treble boost from Pod series)

6) Signal metering at all stages would be very nice

7) Another phase - not based on phase 90/100

8) Slicer effect like on the Pod series - using tremolo isn't cutting it the same

9) maybe a physical limitation but I would love to be able to use Variax at same time as SPDIF input.

10) some more niche effects would be cool to add to the palette.

 

Overall I think Helix is shaping into the most amazing music tool I have used.

[musiclover7]

I think they are going to give us some sort of HD reverb. I would love to see a high end reverb modeled in the Helix, but time will tell..

 

Like others, I would love to see some sort of metering included. Over all volume sure, but maybe some visual for the compressors as well, so we can see visually what they are doing with the sound, when they are kicking in etc.. I doubt we'll get any of this, but it would be awesome.

 

My final hope has to do with the tuner. I really want the ability to either set a global input, or save the tuner input along with the patch. I am sick of having to bend over every time I change instruments in order to set the tuner input. I am probably alone here too, so not holding my breath on getting this in a new release, but there is no law against hope and optimism.

[phil_m]

Definitely MIDIpants®.

 

DO YOU SEE MY PANTS?

NO WAY YOU MISSED THEM

MY PANTS ARE A TOUR OF THE SOLAR SYSTEM.

 

[rickthestick]

Signal level metering is a must, at least on the output but through the chain would be awesome.

Another clean amp, just one more please.

Variax Workbench integration.

Slow Gear simulation would be cool.

MIDI tempo sync, how was this left out?

 

The Helix is an amazing unit. It has literally changed my life, I won't bore you with the details but it's true. Thank you Line 6!

[talonmm]

DT amp integration.

 

DT integration means I would buy a 2nd Helix immediately (one for home studio, one for playing gigs).  not only would they sell more helix units but they would also sell more dt25 and 50's and keep that wonderful amp and technology relevant for their new high end modeling product.

[spikey]

Better DT integration in Helix would raise the asking prices of those DT amps overnight on Ebay, and might actually get Line 6 amp assy lines busy again in the factory.  :P

[datacommando]

MY PANTS ARE A TOUR OF THE SOLAR SYSTEM.

 

Oh, yeah - Definitely MIDIpants®. +1

 

Tried the Space Pants – and I wound up with a very bad case of the asteroids! Sore "Lollypop" –  Eek!

[greenspiderforce]

For my preference, what I would like to see...

 

1. New Reverbs, mimic Strymon type reverbs and spacey type reverbs.

 

2. VHT Pitbull Ultra Lead Model(needs just one more metal amp!)

 

3. Mimic a Darkglass B7K for all the bass guys or even a Sansamp type block.

 

4. Space Pants!

[WickedFinger]

One serious note on something I wish the Helix had is a slope curve rolloff instead of hard hi and low cuts, While I get recording mavens like to position a tone right in a defined slot. Real speakers do not cut off frequencies and all this low and hi cut stuff honestly bugs the crap out of me then they feel they have to use FRFR speakers on a shaved frequency response. How about a cut or a slope IR option guys??? 

And working on the Reverbs HX would be cool even a better HX delay, just one each would be cool, and highly tweakable. 

Wondering if they can incorporate the newer polyphonic tracking that Digitech and EGX use, even TC has it now, who needs these copies of old cheese pedals that were monophonic glitch outs anyway? Personally I could care less bout the penchant need to copy and mimic the lore of old, create something masterfully great sounding and tweakable and who cares if it a copy mimic of some crap fest old tech. HX baby. Bring it. 

[HonestOpinion]

Oh, yeah - Definitely MIDIpants®. +1

 

Tried the Space Pants – and I wound up with a very bad case of the asteroids! Sore "Lollypop" –  Eek!

 

Navigate towards Venus and avoid Uranus.

[datacommando]

Navigate towards Venus and avoid Uranus.

 

Excellent -LMAO!

[bsd512]

One serious note on something I wish the Helix had is a slope curve rolloff instead of hard hi and low cuts, While I get recording mavens like to position a tone right in a defined slot. Real speakers do not cut off frequencies and all this low and hi cut stuff honestly bugs the crap out of me then they feel they have to use FRFR speakers on a shaved frequency response. How about a cut or a slope IR option guys??? 

 

 

 

I've seen a few claims on here about this behavior from hi/lo cuts, and I'm assuming you're talking about speaker cabs and IRs.  Are you basing this on something confirmed by Line 6?

 

I can swear if if I use high cuts on some IRs I like and use, I'm still getting higher frequencies than that what I set the cut to, they are just rolled-off and more muted.

 

So I did a little experiment to test the extreme - I set the low cut to 500 hz and the hi cut to 500 hz on a random IR, and I'm still getting a range of frequencies - quiet, but still there.

 

So I'm thinking the hi/lo cuts are already "rolled off" and not hard cuts.  Is your (and others) experience different than that?  I'd be real surprised if the hi/lo cuts were implemented as unnaturally sounding hard-cuts.

[talwilkins]

DO YOU SEE MY PANTS?

NO WAY YOU MISSED THEM

MY PANTS ARE A TOUR OF THE SOLAR SYSTEM.

 

 

This is all kinds of ****ed up :wacko: 

Love it!

[HonestOpinion]

I've seen a few claims on here about this behavior from hi/lo cuts, and I'm assuming you're talking about speaker cabs and IRs.  Are you basing this on something confirmed by Line 6?

 

I can swear if if I use high cuts on some IRs I like and use, I'm still getting higher frequencies than that what I set the cut to, they are just rolled-off and more muted.

 

So I did a little experiment to test the extreme - I set the low cut to 500 hz and the hi cut to 500 hz on a random IR, and I'm still getting a range of frequencies - quiet, but still there.

 

So I'm thinking the hi/lo cuts are already "rolled off" and not hard cuts.  Is your (and others) experience different than that?  I'd be real surprised if the hi/lo cuts were implemented as unnaturally sounding hard-cuts.

 

I think you may well be right and they are "rolled off" to some extent but I have no idea how that is implemented without someone doing some diagnostics. I think it would be nice to have some control over it through a tapered cut with some settable parameters like the one I proposed on Ideascale. If L6 wants to chime in on how high/low cuts have been implemented on cabs and EQ blocks on the Helix I think a lot of people would be interested. I am curious what they think of this whole discussion.  A lot of folks have been talking about this lately and a better understanding of how low/high cuts and EQ in general operates and intersect with amp, cabs, and IRs on the Helix might be really educational. 

[hideout]

Hey all. It's me, Mr. Broken Record.

I hope a Global Effects Return is included. One that is unaffected by patch changes so that a playing loop from an external looper will continue to play regardless of patch changes.

[WickedFinger]

I think you may well be right and they are "rolled off" to some extent but I have no idea how that is implemented without someone without doing some diagnostics. I think it would be nice to have some control over it through a tapered cut with some settable parameters like the one I proposed on Ideascale. If L6 wants to chime in on how high/low cuts have been implemented on cabs and EQ blocks on the Helix I think a lot of people would be interested. I am curious what they think of this whole discussion.  A lot of folks have been talking about this lately and a better understanding of how low/high cuts and EQ in general operates and intersect with amp, cabs, and IRs on the Helix might be really educational. 

I would love to know what if any is the curve slope. I do not really cut my highs apart from ultra high end which just adds hiss and noise outside the guitar range. 

As I am not recording tracks these days so really trimmed EQ cuts are not something I need or relish.

The behavior of normal speakers is key to me in accurate modeling. Since we are not producing signal or frequencies really outside the range of what the guitar can do sans +/- octave effects, one wonders why hi cuts are needed in the first place. I always cut the ultra low end as that just robs wattage and anything below the lowest notes I am producing are just sub sonics as far as I am concerned. Wondering does the Helix have a built in sub sonic filter?? 

IRs are some what a mystery to me at times as to the why and premise. I mean do I really want to have the sound of some cheese speaker with terrible rolloff, bad efficiency and really notable coloring, not me.

Seems counter-intuitive to use a highly technical advanced modeling technology to mimic and copy something rather outdated and inferior like for example the Whammy or an older octave pedal, why would you want to match something that did not track for crap because it is a monophonic tracking technology pedal?

Then lollipop the Whammy in the Helix does not track right on Eb???

If you were going to model something then why not the newer Whammy V with its detune circuit that is polyphonic and no more bad tone buffer?

How about the newer octave pedals that are also poly tracking? Why this constant reach back into time for pedals and effects that quite frankly sucked and were used really because it is all there was as an option? 

And why can one not move the "mic" across the speaker as I have seen on 3rd part IRs and other modeler units? Where is the Helix "mic" IR virtually positioned? 

Personally I would prefer an optimized highly tweakable amp with a range of tube sounding gains over the copy mimic of an old amp. I get the nostalgia and the inability to move on but using such advanced modeling technology to capture and reproduce something a half century or more in lower technology seems somehow to be trying very hard not to progress to the future.

My fav models in my GSP1101 unit were the Digitech optimized clean tube models, they were really glass sounding so much better than the copy of Fender's and what not. But I know this largely falls on deaf ears as we must continue to produce technology for the masses which have no idea of what it is. Ooooooo, it sounds just like the 1950s....or a crap pedal I hated when it was new. 

[HonestOpinion]

I would love to know what if any is the curve slope. I do not really cut my highs apart from ultra high end which just adds hiss and noise outside the guitar range. 

As I am not recording tracks these days so really trimmed EQ cuts are not something I need or relish.

The behavior of normal speakers is key to me in accurate modeling. Since we are not producing signal or frequencies really outside the range of what the guitar can do sans +/- octave effects, one wonders why hi cuts are needed in the first place. I always cut the ultra low end as that just robs wattage and anything below the lowest notes I am producing are just sub sonics as far as I am concerned. Wondering does the Helix have a built in sub sonic filter?? 

IRs are some what a mystery to me at times as to the why and premise. I mean do I really want to have the sound of some cheese speaker with terrible rolloff, bad efficiency and really notable coloring, not me.

Seems counter-intuitive to use a highly technical advanced modeling technology to mimic and copy something rather outdated and inferior like for example the Whammy or an older octave pedal, why would you want to match something that did not track for crap because it is a monophonic tracking technology pedal?

Then lollipop the Whammy in the Helix does not track right on Eb???

If you were going to model something then why not the newer Whammy V with its detune circuit that is polyphonic and no more bad tone buffer?

How about the newer octave pedals that are also poly tracking? Why this constant reach back into time for pedals and effects that quite frankly sucked and were used really because it is all there was as an option? 

And why can one not move the "mic" across the speaker as I have seen on 3rd part IRs and other modeler units? Where is the Helix "mic" IR virtually positioned? 

Personally I would prefer an optimized highly tweakable amp with a range of tube sounding gains over the copy mimic of an old amp. I get the nostalgia and the inability to move on but using such advanced modeling technology to capture and reproduce something a half century or more in lower technology seems somehow to be trying very hard not to progress to the future.

My fav models in my GSP1101 unit were the Digitech optimized clean tube models, they were really glass sounding so much better than the copy of Fender's and what not. But I know this largely falls on deaf ears as we must continue to produce technology for the masses which have no idea of what it is. Ooooooo, it sounds just like the 1950s....or a crap pedal I hated when it was new. 

 

I don't think your sentiments fall entirely on "deaf ears". Others on this forum have also asked for the new digital "virtual" amps that for example Line6 created on earlier MFX and the Vetta. Amps perhaps inspired by but not based on anything in the analog world. Imagination is pretty much the only limit with what one could create with entirely new digital effects. There is definitely great potential for creating entirely new sounds with all the benefits the digital universe can bring. I also think there is plenty of room for "classic" analog amps and pedals that were full of unique character that is still hard to authentically capture. Yes, sometimes that character came from aging capacitors, germanium chips, odd transistors, weak batteries, voltage fluctuations, worn speaker cones, and the like but they managed to get some really "warm" fantastic sounds. I don't think the new and the old are mutually exclusive and I am happy to see them both on the Helix.

[zooey]

Broken record here re IR support...

 

Did some more IR work today, and hit a misbehavior I I haven't seen before. I wanted to update all my IRs. In the file system, they all had a 3 digit sequential number then a space at the start, but Helix messed up their order anyway when I did them all at once. I had to drag them into the editor in groups or roughly 20 at a time. PITA.

 

Also, the length limit on IR names really needs to be raised. You need a 3 character prefix for numbering, plus a space after, and at least 2 to abbreviate their source (I keep a text file on the abbreviations I use), plus a space after. So before you get to the original name of the file, you've used 7 chars. Besides the desirability of preserving the original name so you can tell which one it was, the original names typically call out the cab make, sometimes cab size, speaker make, speaker size and count, plus the mic used, mic distance, and position relative to the cone, so preserving all of that is really useful. Longer names, please!

[knoxdaz10]

i want that gurthrie govan wah rocker 5 pedal he has. that sound is great!! but can i make it with the autowahs in the helix? because i cant seem to getthere

[spikey]

Cab Lab for Helix!

 

http://www.fractalaudio.com/p-cab-lab-ir-mixer.php

[knoxdaz10]

Cab Lab for Helix!

 

http://www.fractalaudio.com/p-cab-lab-ir-mixer.php

hell yea. this!

[WickedFinger]

I find this kind of interesting. I have a pretty healthy library of IRs from Ownhammer and Red Wirez and, honestly, find them to be a bit overrated. More than half of the time I prefer the sound I'm getting out of a stock cab configuration (typically two cabs in parallel) over the same patch with IRs. Often I find the IRs sound very "boxy" or have a "playing in a tin-can" sort of hollowness about them. The stock cabs sound more "open" to me, more like hearing a guitar amp and less like a recording of one. Interesting how we can all have such different experiences with the same stuff!

I know I have tried a few here and there for free which scares the bejesus out of me if I paid for them as they were just not that amazing and by tweaking on the Helix ones I seem to do just fine. I hate most of the mics and what they do to the sound but I use what gets me closest to what sounds right for me. Many of the cabs IR or otherwise never sound all that great to me. I usually find myself picking a couple favs and the mics I can stand and just use them for most of the amps. I guess its a world of the recording maven DAW chaps as I sure find it god awful easy to ruin the sound of an amp tone with the cab sim/IR or a bad mic, wish there was a better methodology. Does anyone know how Radial JDX 48DI's do it when they tap the speaker line for recording (not basic DI) do they have some sort of cab voicing or IR in the circuit, I would like something like that w no cuts and no tweaking seems much easier. I've used speaker line taps before and I got some good recordings. MIcs tend to lollipop me off more than anything. 

[jeremyzinn225]

I would like to see tone matching like bias does.

[arislaf]

I hope something big will come cause it takes too much time already..

[klangmaler]

All of 'em:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ATZFVWUAWM

Big enough? :D

[HonestOpinion]

All of 'em:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ATZFVWUAWM

Big enough? :D

 

LOL, yeah, bring it!!! To be inevitably and swiftly followed by endless discussion on the forum regarding their authenticity and what was missed in the most recent update. Looking forward to the next firmware release with the usual anticipation and formless dread! ;)  

[Digital_Igloo]

All of 'em:

What a killer video; thanks! Added a bunch of these to the gargantuan backlog. That Subdecay Harmonic Antagonizer is massive-sounding.

[cruisinon2]

What a killer video; thanks! Added a bunch of these to the gargantuan backlog. That Subdecay Harmonic Antagonizer is massive-sounding.

Lol...quite the assortment. I'll never truly be happy though, until somebody builds an FX pedal that will make my guitar sound like an over-ripe avocado blasted into a peat-bog with a compressed air cannon...ugh.

 

Seriously, what would one actually do with most of that crap?

[hideout]

Seriously, what would one actually do with most of that crap?

Two words: Sound Design

[cruisinon2]

Two words: Sound Design

A job I'm glad I don't have, then.

 

And I still want my avocado pedal...;)