Can Helix mimic the Mimiq?

[Thurston9]

 

TC Electronic Mimiq

[ZSchneidi]

Currently no way.

There are several idea requests online for this feature but don't expect it anytime soon.

 

Any approach using delays or pitch shifter won't work.

Because doubling is building one the effect that the two or more signals differ from each other.

[jbuhajla]

I would say that you can come close. There are 4 paths within Helix to play around with. Using the simple delay with short delay times and zero feedback an be utilized, as well as reverbs with the decay set to zero and the predelay short. I am going to be spending a little time this weekend experimenting with Helix, I'll add this one to my list. 

[steevo1977]

http://line6.com/support/topic/24066-anyone-else-using-pitch-echo-as-a-mimiq/?hl=mimiq

 

Adjust to suit...

[Thurston9]

Cool thanks!

[ZSchneidi]

The problem with this approach is that you basically use the same input signal twice.

Which is by definition no double tracking effect.

 

But it may work for you.

I tried this and must say that pitch shifting or rev/delay kinda setups mess up the sound

completely.

[FlyingsCool]

The problem with this approach is that you basically use the same input signal twice.

Which is by definition no double tracking effect.

 

But it may work for you.

I tried this and must say that pitch shifting or rev/delay kinda setups mess up the sound

completely.

 

So I'm confused.  The question was can the Helix mimic the Mimiq?  It seems to me the Mimiq uses the same input signal twice (or three times as the case may be).  Are you saying it's not?

[jbuhajla]

The problem with this approach is that you basically use the same input signal twice.

Which is by definition no double tracking effect.

 

But it may work for you.

I tried this and must say that pitch shifting or rev/delay kinda setups mess up the sound

completely.

There is only one input signal. You use the same signal in parallel to cascade short delays of varied delay time. You cannot cascade the delays in serial because you are then effecting each delayed signal as well, and it gets all jumbled up.  

[ZSchneidi]

Your are absolutely right here. 

The miniq sure uses only one signal thats the whole point of this pedal.

But I highly doubt that its algorithm only rely on delays and pitch shifting.

I guess they have some magic cristals in that thing or something.

[jbuhajla]

Your are absolutely right here. 

The miniq sure uses only one signal thats the whole point of this pedal.

But I highly doubt that its algorithm only rely on delays and pitch shifting.

I guess they have some magic cristals in that thing or something.

You are probably correct that they are using more than just delay, but you can do those things as well. I am looking forward to fiddling around with the concept this weekend. 

[ZSchneidi]

Maybe record some bits with that patch and let us listen too maybe its not even bad ^^

[steevo1977]

I strongly believe that Mimiq uses small delays and pitch differences with a bit of frequency sculpting to create its effect. (The settings the demonstrator is using in the OPs video is very HAAS-like; not a great sound imho but in a mix (live or recorded) it would sound fine I'm sure)

 

I think Pitch Echo gets really close to this. I will have a play about tonight and see if I can get some presets together and maybe if I can be arsed record some of them.

 

A quick setting (updated from my original post slightly) is as follows:

 

Pitch at zero

Cents +/- around 1.5 to give a variance

20-30ms delay

20% feedback

Adjust mix and Scale to suit (I have mix at 20% and spread at 50%)

[jbuhajla]

I had a couple of minutes last night to play around with the concept. I am using all 4 paths. I dropped in the Plexi-Bright amp/cab model (the only change I made was low cut at 120Hz and high cut at 10kHz). Both amp/cab models are identical. 

 

Path 1A is just dry to the amp

Path 1B is simple pitch shift, slight pitch change sharp a few cents, with a 25ms delay, assigned to a foot switch

Path 2A is simple pitch shift, slight pitch change flat a few cents, with a 30ms delay, assigned to a foot switch

Path 2B is simple pitch shift, no  pitch change s, with a 35ms delay, assigned to a foot switch

 

This setup has a mono output because of the amp/cab models at the end of the chain. I did no panning to get any kind of spread. I only had a few minutes to mess around with it, but it sounded pretty close at this point. I did change the delays to 20, 25, 30ms respectively because it was sounding a little "phasey". It sounded a little tighter after that.

 

I think it was a good start to something useful. I may start to incorporate one simple pitch block at the front of some of my patches with a slight pitch offset and delay to widen the sound a bit. 

[ZSchneidi]

Could you record something to let us listen to this ?

In my experience patches from others often don't work on my setup.

Its always kinda sound thin and a lil off.

[jbuhajla]

Could you record something to let us listen to this ?

In my experience patches from others often don't work on my setup.

Its always kinda sound thin and a lil off.

I really don't have time. That's why I just used a very simple setup with almost all default settings (except for the specific ones I mentioned). You can slap it together in a couple of minutes and give it a go. 

 

There's no reason it should sound thin at all. I monitored the sound of this preset through two JBL EON 610s and also in some cheaper AKG headphones. I was using my SSH strat, sounded good in all positions. I was NOT trying to duplicate the tone in the original posted video. I almost never try to duplicate a tone. I just build presets that sound good to me. Just default blocks with a couple of parameters tweaked. 

[datacommando]

The problem with this approach is that you basically use the same input signal twice.

Which is by definition no double tracking effect.

 

But it may work for you.

I tried this and must say that pitch shifting or rev/delay kinda setups mess up the sound

completely.

ADT has been around for many, many years. How it works is by taking the original signal and copying it to another track, but rather than being a straight duplicate, the signal is delayed by a few milliseconds and slightly modulated. This is basically the technique described by Steevo1977 in post #12, above.

 

This link may clear up any misunderstanding about how ADT was developed by Ken Townsend at Abbey Road Studios.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_double_tracking

 

So, pitch shifting, delay and reverb rather than mess up the sound are integral to the overall effect!

[ZSchneidi]

I might give that one a try.

Biggest problem with that is one weak point of the Helix.

As far as i know i can only open and close one parallel signal patch per path.

for this i need to go to a first parallel patch and return it before the amp. And

after the amp I would need a second parallel patch for the two IRs im running.

 

Or is there a way to do that ?

[datacommando]

I might give that one a try.

Biggest problem with that is one weak point of the Helix.

As far as i know i can only open and close one parallel signal patch per path.

for this i need to go to a first parallel patch and return it before the amp. And

after the amp I would need a second parallel patch for the two IRs im running.

 

Or is there a way to do that ?

 

Sorry, but there still seems to be some confusion about this ADT effect. Plus I don't understand why you think there is a "weak point" anywhere in the routing on Helix. This can all be done without any parallel paths. Not necessary at all.

It's really quite simple -  a mono guitar (or whatever) signal is fed into a stereo delay line where, for example the Left channel is unaffected dry signal and the Right channel is delayed and modulated slightly.

Maybe this video can clarify what you seem to be unsure/confused about.

It's a basic studio technique that has been used since the 1950's when it was done with analogue tape - now we have digital tools to do the same job, more easily.

[ZSchneidi]

Sorry, but there still seems to be some confusion about this ADT effect. Plus I don't understand why you think there is a "weak point" anywhere in the routing on Helix. This can all be done without any parallel paths. Not necessary at all.

It's really quite simple -  a mono guitar (or whatever) signal is fed into a stereo delay line where, for example the Left channel is unaffected dry signal and the Right channel is delayed and modulated slightly.

Maybe this video can clarify what you seem to be unsure/confused about.

 

 

It's a basic studio technique that has been used since the 1950's when it was done with analogue tape - now we have digital tools to do the same job, more easily.

 

You may be absolutely correct with what you saying. I don't wanna disprove you.

But and there is the big BUT. The ADT effect is in my eyes totally useless crap. I hope you don't feel offended. 

This is not against you or this approach. This may work for some people or genres.

 

But there is a reason every serious production don't use this kind of technique for double tracking.

Every single recording tutorial over the last years i saw went the hard way to record to individual track or even more

for like guitar riffs and stuff.  Especially for Rock and Metal kind of genres. In modern djent they even tend to quad tracking.

Although almost no one would even notice that. And there is no algorithm and nothing that will do the trick here.

 

I might be wrong at this point. Its just to make the point that the delay trick might work technically.

But the result is pure garbage.

[datacommando]

You may be absolutely correct with what you saying. I don't wanna disprove you.

But and there is the big BUT. The ADT effect is in my eyes totally useless crap. I hope you don't feel offended. 

This is not against you or this approach. This may work for some people or genres.

 

But there is a reason every serious production don't use this kind of technique for double tracking.

Every single recording tutorial over the last years i saw went the hard way to record to individual track or even more

for like guitar riffs and stuff.  Especially for Rock and Metal kind of genres. In modern djent they even tend to quad tracking.

Although almost no one would even notice that. And there is no algorithm and nothing that will do the trick here.

 

I might be wrong at this point. Its just to make the point that the delay trick might work technically.

But the result is pure garbage.

 

Ha ha ha, that's amazing!

Well, I must say that I don't feel offended by your response, although I do find it a little narrow minded. I simply wanted to clarify the idea of a technique that is common studio practice. You don't like the explanation of how it works, or the results that it achieves, that's fine - not a problem for me.

 

What I cannot understand is how you could hope to justify a statement like, "But there is a reason every serious production don't use this kind of technique for double tracking." I really am truly amazed that you can say that when its been used by just about every performer who ever used Abbey Road Studio. Does this mean that George Martin, The Beatles, Pink Floyd etc., are wrong and their use of ADT is as you say, "is in my eyes totally useless crap" and "the result is pure garbage." That's an outstanding observation from a musician.

Good luck!

[Joepeggio]

I do most of the techniques mentioned here, and in stereo they work very well.

 

The problem I have is when collapsing back to mono, for instance when the venue/bar/club is mono only. I find bad phase issues that double tracked guitars do not have a problem with (separate sources).

 

The Mimiq seems to sound good in mono as well. Just some experiences I've had. Anyone know which would work best mono?

[ZSchneidi]

Like i said no offense. I didn't mean that these studios are wrong.

And this is my opinion. I said it may work for certain genres etc.

[datacommando]

I do most of the techniques mentioned here, and in stereo they work very well.

The problem I have is when collapsing back to mono, for instance when the venue/bar/club is mono only. I find bad phase issues that double tracked guitars do not have a problem with (separate sources).

The Mimiq seems to sound good in mono as well. Just some experiences I've had. Anyone know which would work best mono?

You are totally correct about collapsing back to mono. It's due to the science of Physics, that's just what happens. When the signals cross at the same frequency, they cancel each other out. It's a trick they use with varying degrees of success to remove vocals from karaoke tracks. IIRC back in the 1980s some slick producer used to record a track of the studio recording space with the vocalist performing a take. Then they would record the same set up with no vocals, BUT with the phase inverted on the signal. Theory was that when two tracks were mixed together the phase cancellation would create the "perfect take".

I don't know how it works on the TC Electronics Mimiq box, as I have only seen the video demos, but let me just say that TC are a top flight team when it comes to delay FX, they may have some magic!

Here's some info from Universal Audio that explains it a lot better than I can.

http://www.uaudio.com/blog/understanding-audio-phase/

[datacommando]

Like i said no offense. I didn't mean that these studios are wrong.

And this is my opinion. I said it may work for certain genres etc.

As noted - No offence taken - it actually made me laugh.

Plus as everyone knows, opinions are like belly buttons - everybody has one.

Note: I have to say belly buttons because if I type A$$h%les it come up as lollipop on here.

[zooey]

Some phasing etc is inherent in those kinds of effects. The Sound On Sound review of the Mimiq talks about subtle flanging:

http://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/tc-electronic-mimiq-doubler

 

Doubt there's any magic sauce, just well done optimization.

 

I think the key is making the delay long enough to minimize flanging, but short enough that it doesn't​ audibly separate from the original.