1 Helix - 2 Guitarists

[cdiddy5000]

So I have a Helix inbound, and am interested in using each of the 2 paths as 2 independent signal chains. I have read quite a few posts of people doing this for the purpose of running a mic signal thru. While what I want to do (in a basic sense) is simple, my biggest concern is being able to control the 2nd independent path from an external MIDI controller. This MIDI controller would be used to control various aspects of the 2nd chain by the other guitar player in my band. has anyone tried doing something like this?

[Digital_Igloo]

Should be a piece of cake. Each of you get a Path/DSP.

[mkornell]

That should be pretty easy to do, depending on what you mean by "various aspects". The signal chains are independent, as in they process signals independently. But a single Helix preset covers both signal chains. So the 2nd guitar couldn't change the loaded preset for just the 2nd signal chain. But he could change any parameter on any block (or the active/bypass status of a block) in the 2nd (actually, either) signal chain, including expression control.

[cdiddy5000]

Should be a piece of cake. Each of you get a Path/DSP.

I agree this will be easy. I have spent the better part of the last month digging into the manuals, and I was pleasantly surprised how well designed this unit is! Keep up the great work!

 

That should be pretty easy to do, depending on what you mean by "various aspects". The signal chains are independent, as in they process signals independently. But a single Helix preset covers both signal chains. So the 2nd guitar couldn't change the loaded preset for just the 2nd signal chain. But he could change any parameter on any block (or the active/bypass status of a block) in the 2nd (actually, either) signal chain, including expression control.

 

When i say "various aspects", I am specifically referring to the individual FX blocks in the 2nd chain. I know that via the Helix foot switches, I can control the on/off states of each (or multiple) blocks in either path. I also know, based on the MIDI section of the manual, that I can send out a MIDI CC to toggle these switches from another controller or external source. What isn't too clear to me is whether or not the FX blocks can be assigned a CC value (or are assigned fixed values internally) that would allow for them to be toggled externally without having them mapped to a switch. The scenario I have in my mind is that I want to have the ability to have all the IA switches control FX blocks in my dedicated signal path whereas the other guitar player can do the same via their MIDI controller. Is this doable?

[Verne-Bunsen]

I don't know about the MIDI aspect, but the problem I've run into is getting the second guitar to sound right without any input impedance. With two passive pickup equipped guitars, the Aux-In isn't much use so the second guitar ends up using a loop return as an input, and there is no impedance parameter there. Unless I've missed something, which is always possible...

[mkornell]

...

What isn't too clear to me is whether or not the FX blocks can be assigned a CC value (or are assigned fixed values internally) that would allow for them to be toggled externally without having them mapped to a switch. The scenario I have in my mind is that I want to have the ability to have all the IA switches control FX blocks in my dedicated signal path whereas the other guitar player can do the same via their MIDI controller. Is this doable?

 

Yes, doable. You can assign CC#s to blocks in a preset so they can be turned on or off via MIDI. This functionality was added in the firmware 2.10 update.

 

From the release notes:

 

Block Bypass via MIDI—Individual processing blocks can now be enabled/bypassed via incoming MIDI CC messages. Click the Bypass Assign tab. Move the MIDI In slider to choose the desired MIDI CC. Incoming CC values 0-63 will turn the block off; values 64-127 will turn the block on. Note that some MIDI CCs are reserved for global functions and cannot be selected.

[cdiddy5000]

Yes, doable. You can assign CC#s to blocks in a preset so they can be turned on or off via MIDI. This functionality was added in the firmware 2.10 update.

 

From the release notes:

 

Block Bypass via MIDI—Individual processing blocks can now be enabled/bypassed via incoming MIDI CC messages. Click the Bypass Assign tab. Move the MIDI In slider to choose the desired MIDI CC. Incoming CC values 0-63 will turn the block off; values 64-127 will turn the block on. Note that some MIDI CCs are reserved for global functions and cannot be selected.

That's awesome. I must have missed this in the 2.10 manual. For my own reference, what page can that be found on?

[cdiddy5000]

I don't know about the MIDI aspect, but the problem I've run into is getting the second guitar to sound right without any input impedance. With two passive pickup equipped guitars, the Aux-In isn't much use so the second guitar ends up using a loop return as an input, and there is no impedance parameter there. Unless I've missed something, which is always possible...

Anyone have ideas on a workaround for this? The other guitar player switches between a passive pickup electric and an active pickup acoustic.

[Rewolf48]

Loads of impedance devices around such as this one which only has two options: 

 

http://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/motu-zboxdi-impedance-corrector

 

Or the one that everybody made so much fuss of about 5 years ago - the radial dragster: 

 

http://magazine.dv247.com/2010/05/04/radial-dragster-review/

 

He would do best with two leads and just turning down the guitar not being used as the active acoustic should be fed into the Aux input with the high impedance.

 

You could easily make your own if you are that way inclined.

[PeterHamm]

I don't know about the MIDI aspect, but the problem I've run into is getting the second guitar to sound right without any input impedance. With two passive pickup equipped guitars, the Aux-In isn't much use so the second guitar ends up using a loop return as an input, and there is no impedance parameter there. Unless I've missed something, which is always possible...

 

 

This is what I discovered when I tried to plug my electric guitar into the BACK of Helix.

 

Only one of the sounds will be "without compromise". That said, if one of the guitars is an acoustic or an active bass, you're golden! Just use that aux input.

 

And no, there isn't a workaround at this time.

[cdiddy5000]

That's awesome. I must have missed this in the 2.10 manual. For my own reference, what page can that be found on?

Disregard, looks like I found this info on page 43.

[cdiddy5000]

Loads of impedance devices around such as this one which only has two options:

 

http://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/motu-zboxdi-impedance-corrector

 

Or the one that everybody made so much fuss of about 5 years ago - the radial dragster:

 

 

http://magazine.dv247.com/2010/05/04/radial-dragster-review/

 

 

He would do best with two leads and just turning down the guitar not being used as the active acoustic should be fed into the Aux input with the high impedance.

 

You could easily make your own if you are that way inclined.

Has the radial unit been known to work specifically in this application with the Helix aux input and/or one of the FX loop returns?

[PeterHamm]

The Dragster has been called snake oil by some, but I have a feeling in this particular instance it might really do something noticeable.

Somebody try it and tell us!

[cdiddy5000]

The Dragster has been called snake oil by some, but I have a feeling in this particular instance it might really do something noticeable.

 

Somebody try it and tell us!

One thing that I am curious about in regards to this topic is if that would actually be necessary when using the FX return input. If a guitar, regardless if it is an acoustic electric or a passive pickup equipped electric, is first plugged into a tuner and then into the return jack, wouldn't it be treating the signal similarly as if the send/return were used to include an external drive pedal?

[Rewolf48]

That is not the issue.

 

A passive electric guitar creates a signal through the pickups and then after the built in volume and tone circuits it goes down an Resistive Capacitive circuit to your target device. The resistive capacitive circuit is called a "Guitar Lead" and it is resistive reducing the signal level and to a lesser extent introducing noise (which is why nobody uses a 300' lead) and capacitive because you have two wires in very close proximity and a capacitor can pass a high frequency signal across it - which means that the longer the cable the duller the sound.

 

Both of these effects are dependent on what is completing the circuit - the guitar circuit itself and and the impedance of the device being plugged into. You change the impedance at the guitar level with the tone knob but you get a similar effect at the other end of the cable too.  A high impedance input reduces the effect of the cable and to a degree the guitar controls and results in a bright sound, a low impedance enhances the effect and gives a duller sound.

 

This is a gross simplification, but the impedance at the other end of the cable can dramatically impact on the warmth of the guitar sound, and that is why the Helix allows you to change it - but only on the Guitar input.  To get the same effect on the other inputs including FX return (or on your AD/DA Converters for your PC when running Helix Native) you would need an impedance adaptor before the target device.

[cdiddy5000]

That is not the issue.

 

A passive electric guitar creates a signal through the pickups and then after the built in volume and tone circuits it goes down an Resistive Capacitive circuit to your target device. The resistive capacitive circuit is called a "Guitar Lead" and it is resistive reducing the signal level and to a lesser extent introducing noise (which is why nobody uses a 300' lead) and capacitive because you have two wires in very close proximity and a capacitor can pass a high frequency signal across it - which means that the longer the cable the duller the sound.

 

Both of these effects are dependent on what is completing the circuit - the guitar circuit itself and and the impedance of the device being plugged into. You change the impedance at the guitar level with the tone knob but you get a similar effect at the other end of the cable too. A high impedance input reduces the effect of the cable and to a degree the guitar controls and results in a bright sound, a low impedance enhances the effect and gives a duller sound.

 

This is a gross simplification, but the impedance at the other end of the cable can dramatically impact on the warmth of the guitar sound, and that is why the Helix allows you to change it - but only on the Guitar input. To get the same effect on the other inputs including FX return (or on your AD/DA Converters for your PC when running Helix Native) you would need an impedance adaptor before the target device.

Thanks for that simplified, yet thorough explanation. How does this work out when using the FX send/return to patch in an external pedal? Is a low impedance signal being sent thru the pedals and back to the return?

[cdiddy5000]

So basically using a direct box would theoretically solve the issue at hand?

[PeterHamm]

...To get the same effect on the other inputs including FX return (or on your AD/DA Converters for your PC when running Helix Native) you would need an impedance adaptor before the target device.

 

And who knows if that would work...

 

 

So basically using a direct box would theoretically solve the issue at hand?

 

 

Nothing solves the issue at hand if you want the absolute best electric guitar signal into Helix. That can only be accomplished with the Guitar In Jack. That's in my experience at least.

[Rewolf48]

Did you read the SOS Review on the first link?

 

 

 

Feeding the ZBox into my M-Audio interface and playing a Strat with the same cable I'd use live, the high-impedance input caused a very small drop in signal level, combined with a softening of the very high‑frequency components, taming the usual DI glassy edge. The result felt pretty natural, and made the guitar feel more 'springy' to play. A more noticeable level drop was evident with the low-impedance input, and I didn't like the subjective result as much, although clearly this depends on the type of guitar you plug into it.

Using a guitar with humbuckers, I got a similarly improved feel, and both inputs gave viable results, though the two were very slightly different in tonality. Again, the overall sound seemed smoother without actually being dulled down and, curiously, the strings felt somehow easier to bend. These changes were quite subtle, but in all cases I preferred the experience of playing through the ZBox. It should work equally well with bass guitars, but probably won't give any significant improvement for instruments with active pickups.

 

As also explained in the same review with respect to a direct box:

 

 

An electric guitar's tone is complex, but something that contributes to it is the electrical loading on the pickups. Guitars with passive pickups need to be fed into something with a reasonably high input impedance (like an amp!), to avoid placing too great a load on the pickups. That's why active DI boxes and audio interfaces with instrument inputs are often designed with an input impedance of 1MΩ or higher — but loading the guitar too little at the amp end of the cable can result in a thin tone, with an over-glassy high end. MOTU aim to tackle that problem with the ZBox, which is designed to emulate the impedance of a dual-input amp (probably a Fender Twin). It is fitted with both high- and low-impedance input jacks: the instructions suggest trying both inputs and using the one that sounds best for your guitar.

 

All this device is doing is providing a variable Impedance circuit outside of the Helix and it is little different to this recommendation for interfaces to use with Helix Native from somebody who has definitely played with it a bit; Helix native is obviously missing the variable impedance circuit that the hardware version has:

 

https://www.thegearpage.net/board/index.php?posts/23445268/

[Verne-Bunsen]

The zbox looks like a rather elegant solution, and for the price it can't hurt to give it a whirl. Thanks for posting that!

[Thurston9]

Interested i this topic.

[cdiddy5000]

At the risk of being redundant, would this path be a better option? Guitar>DI>mic input? Would that be better than guitar>FX return?

[PeterHamm]

At the risk of being redundant, would this path be a better option? Guitar>DI>mic input? Would that be better than guitar>FX return?

 

 

Never tried it, but I think that it would still sound "off". 

 

That said, it's worth trying!

[MusicLaw]

There is also the option to use a Line 6 Relay G10 Wireless unit that has two outputs. One is 1.4" with a 10' CableTone capacitance applied. The other output is an XLR output without any CableTone applied. Both are simultaneously active and may be used at the same time!

 

The G10 wireless is convenient in its own right, and could be used to connect a 2nd Guitar to the Helix, either, via XLR through the Helix's Mic XLR In, or via the G10's 1/4" Output to the Helix's 1/4" Guitar Aux In or FX Return.

 

Line 6 does not publish the specs for the two G10 Outputs (Voltages, Line vs. Instrument Levels, Impedence, etc.)

If DI or another Line 6 Rep cares to provide addtional info that would certainly be welcome.

[zooey]

Hmmm, I have a roughly unity gain buffer in my guitar, just so tone stays consistent when you turn down. It makes the guitar output low impedance, very much less affected by cable and amp capacitance. However, it does result in extended highs in relation to a guitar without one.

 

I wonder if this box actually loads the guitar like a cable plus traditional guitar amp input, in which case it would have no effect on a buffered guitar. The other possibility is that it directly simulates the frequency response you'd get from that environment, which might be perfect for my situation.

 

I've accepted the trade-off of extended top end in return for consistency, figuring I could deal with it in sim-land, but this might be a more elegant solution.

[Thurston9]

Any updates?  Has anyone tried any of these options and come with a good solution?

[CraigGT]

Ok, with my engineer's head on, why couldn't you just put a terminating resistor in the Helix end jack plug, assuming the Helix input is a higher impedance than required of course.

 

Craig

[kwelduvel]

All very interesting! Got me thinking too :)