1st live show with Helix

[steelstringer]

We played an outdoor gig last night, and I used the Helix straight to the mixer (XLR out). It was a marked improvement in tone over any setup that I have used, so I'm pretty excited to start tweaking things today. I used the Mark IV rhythm 1 for a clean and pushed it with the Timmy OD; that tone was very nice.

 

On the not so nice side was the JCM 800 tone. It sounded almost like a fuzz pedal (not crisp/defined). Could that have something to do with the amp master volume setting? Or the channel volume? It seemed like I was overdriving the channel on the mixer (master volume of the amp at 70, channel volume at 90, Helix volume knob at about 10 o'clock). Any thoughts on what could cause that sound? Thank!

[willjrock]

"Seemed like" or in fact were over driving the mixer channel? Big difference.

[willjrock]

Your channel volume isnt going to have an effect on your tone unless you are driving something further down the line, like a mixer channel or an effect block placed after the amp.

 

Though there isnt an audible difference,  try to keep your master volume knob closer to 2 Oclock to full.

 

There is probably no need to raise your channel volume as you have done. Adding to the possibility of clipping your mixer channel.

 

Have you tried a JCM 800? Maybe you just dont like that sound.

 

What Cabs are you using? 800 in to Helix cabs doesnt sound very good without a lot of tweaking.

 

For your reference, here is an 800 patch i use once in while. I uses an IR though.

 

 https://www.dropbox.com/s/jamiz9engvuqk9s/800%20test.wav?dl=0

 

 

 

Just some random thoughts/questions. I dont expect you to answer them all.

[steelstringer]

Thanks for the response. I am actually using two cab sims- the fender 1x12 and the Mesa 4x12 (blending the two by using an a/b split). The tone was nice through a powered speaker when I built the patch (XLR connection), so that is why I was surprised by the fuzz (almost big muff) tone through our PA.

[willjrock]

Helix cab sims or 3rd party IRs?

[steelstringer]

I am using Helix cabs. I want to explore/tweak before exploring the IR world.

[specracer986]

I like to keep my guitar volume down around 6 or 7 so I have a little room to adjust. Sometimes when I get with the band and I suddenly can't hear myself, I'll crank the guitar volume and create too much over drive with certain patches to the point of becoming muddy and losing definition. Is it possible your guitar volume was higher than when you built the patch?

Also, the amp master volume controls amp distortion, so if you want cleaner, lower the amp master volume and raise the amp channel volume.

[willjrock]

Helix cab sims are going to make your job a lot harder. You could search custom tone fro some artists or amp styles you like. Even if its just to compare to your stuff for now. Thatll help you some, but if you grab some free IRs i think you'll immediately see how much easier it is to dial the sound you want. In the modeling world, the cab/ir weighs of much more importance than it does in hardware form. Probably close to 70% of the sound comes from the cab. Especially when you have similar sounding amps.

 

I bet you find most of what you want here. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1XgNa5vH3j1QnRobm1xXzBHZXM/view?usp=sharing

They are as good as most of the redwirez

or ownhammers that you'd buy. 

 

Heres another link, but FWIW id just stick with the one pack for now. http://line6.com/support/topic/26822-free-irs/

[ricksteruk]

I think the gain on the JCM 800 models is way over the top - so I'd say be careful with the gain knob setting.

 

I think gain on 5 on the Helix JCM 800 is more distorted than a regular JCM800 with gain on 10.

 

[steelstringer]

So, I just started tweaking the JCM patch and I guess I did have the gain way too high (6) and the master was too low. But it's still not great. Better, but not quite there. I am kind of digging the Archetype lead amp, though. So many possibilities.

[njglover]

So, I just started tweaking the JCM patch and I guess I did have the gain way too high (6) and the master was too low. But it's still not great. Better, but not quite there. I am kind of digging the Archetype lead amp, though. So many possibilities.

 

Mess with the low and high cuts on the cab blocks, too. I find that, for most stock cabs, I need to be pretty aggressive with the high cut, usually bringing it to 13 kHz or lower before that fizz goes away. IRs will get you a lot closer to where you want to be, generally, but it's not impossible to get good sounds with stock cabs. I generally use one Mesa 412 IR I got from Ownhammer and sometimes stick in a stock cab depending on the tone I want. Kind of a shame - the stock cabs use way less DSP, so it would be nice to use those more.

[DunedinDragon]

If it sounded good through a powered speaker then in all likelihood the channel on the mixer wasn't gain staged correctly and was likely being clipped by the mixer's pre amp.  That has to be adjusted during sound checks using the gain or trim knob to ensure the signal itself isn't coming into the board too hot.  Normally you would do this by turning on the PFL (pre fader listen) button and then watch the signal for that channel on the meter to ensure the signal doesn't exceed the input limits.  This is a separate adjustment from the actual volume fader on the channel.

[willjrock]

  Kind of a shame - the stock cabs use way less DSP, so it would be nice to use those more.

Im not arguing with you because im surely confused. as per my "DSP limited" thread, but im trying to see how this benefits us? I guess i havent come to a point where im seeing any DSP benefit from using native Helix cabs as opposed to IR's. Can you provide an example or create a scenario where i can relate to what you are saying a little better. Especially the dramatic end of the scope, because my personal experience has been that IRs and native arent that far apart DSP wise. Be nice to have a meeter :)

[Joepeggio]

If it sounded good through a powered speaker then in all likelihood the channel on the mixer wasn't gain staged correctly and was likely being clipped by the mixer's pre amp.  That has to be adjusted during sound checks using the gain or trim knob to ensure the signal itself isn't coming into the board too hot.  Normally you would do this by turning on the PFL (pre fader listen) button and then watch the signal for that channel on the meter to ensure the signal doesn't exceed the input limits.  This is a separate adjustment from the actual volume fader on the channel.

^^^^^^

[zooey]

Im not arguing with you because im surely confused. as per my "DSP limited" thread, but im trying to see how this benefits us? I guess i havent come to a point where im seeing any DSP benefit from using native Helix cabs as opposed to IR's. Can you provide an example or create a scenario where i can relate to what you are saying a little better. Especially the dramatic end of the scope, because my personal experience has been that IRs and native arent that far apart DSP wise. Be nice to have a meeter :)

Leaving DSP aside, there are some other key differences between IRs and native cabs. You're probably aware of all this, but just to say it for folks new to all this...

- Helix cabs have microphone type and distance settings, while those are baked into an IR. You have to choose a different IR to change them.

- Each Helix cab is a different block type, so in order to change cabs with a footswitch or snapshot, you have to add all the cabs you want to the preset, DSP permitting, then enable and disable them. On the other hand, which IR is selected is just a parameter for the IR block, so it can be changed by snapshots, footswitches, or another controller, and selecting a different IR for every snapshot doesn't use any more DSP than using the same IR for all of them.

- Backing up, restoring, and managing IRs in general is a pain currently...

 

Major IR management issues:

- Selected IRs are remembered by position only, not by name, so you have to make sure to back up your IRs and restore them to the same positions when doing a firmware upgrade or backing up in general.

- There's no way to see which IRs are in use and which aren't, so it's hard to know which ones you can replace if you want to make room for new ones.

- If you want to reorganize your IRs, for instance to make room for a new package of them, you have to manually figure out which patches use ones you want to move, and manually edit those patches to point to the new locations. Not fun.

- IR names are too short to preserve the names vendors give them, much less to add a short prefix indicating their source (AL=Allure, CEL=Celestion, OH=Ownhammer, etc).

- IRs aren't included in a full bundle backup, so you have to back up and restore them individually. (Note that bundles aren't the best way to back up before firmware updates, because they include the factory presets too, which you probably don't want to overwrite, since they're often updated by new firmware. Except for the new-firmware case, they are the simplest and quickest way to back up "everything", but as noted above, they don't include IRs. They also don't include your global settings; there's no way to export or import those currently, you have to write them down.)

 

We all hope for better IR management tools in the future, possibly as part of Helix Native, coming "soon".

 

That said, Helix gives you the choice of either one, which is great.

[willjrock]

Leaving DSP aside, there are some other key differences between IRs and native cabs. You're probably aware of all this, but just to say it for folks new to all this...

- Helix cabs have microphone type and distance settings, while those are baked into an IR. You have to choose a different IR to change them.

- Each Helix cab is a different block type, so in order to change cabs with a footswitch or snapshot, you have to add all the cabs you want to the preset, DSP permitting, then enable and disable them. On the other hand, which IR is selected is just a parameter for the IR block, so it can be changed by snapshots, footswitches, or another controller, and selecting a different IR for every snapshot doesn't use any more DSP than using the same IR for all of them.

- Backing up, restoring, and managing IRs in general is a pain currently...

 

Major IR management issues:

- Selected IRs are remembered by position only, not by name, so you have to make sure to back up your IRs and restore them to the same positions when doing a firmware upgrade or backing up in general.

- There's no way to see which IRs are in use and which aren't, so it's hard to know which ones you can replace if you want to make room for new ones.

- If you want to reorganize your IRs, for instance to make room for a new package of them, you have to manually figure out which patches use ones you want to move, and manually edit those patches to point to the new locations. Not fun.

- IR names are too short to preserve the names vendors give them, much less to add a short prefix indicating their source (AL=Allure, CEL=Celestion, OH=Ownhammer, etc).

- IRs aren't included in a full bundle backup, so you have to back up and restore them individually. (Note that bundles aren't the best way to back up before firmware updates, because they include the factory presets too, which you probably don't want to overwrite, since they're often updated by new firmware. Except for the new-firmware case, they are the simplest and quickest way to back up "everything", but as noted above, they don't include IRs. They also don't include your global settings; there's no way to export or import those currently, you have to write them down.)

 

We all hope for better IR management tools in the future, possibly as part of Helix Native, coming "soon".

 

That said, Helix gives you the choice of either one, which is great.

You are gold brother. It'll take a minute to digest, but a definite help to see it on paper as such. Thanks.

[zooey]

You're welcome, glad to help :)

 

Couple of other points:

- The way most people put their IRs back in the same order is give them a 3-digit prefix, 001, 002, etc. In general that lets you drag a whole directory of them on the Helix app, and have their order stay the same. There are tools to do that in the file system before importing them into Helix, like this one for Windows.

- That doesn't always work perfectly. I'm not certain of the specifics, but maybe if the IR file on disk has a Title attribute, Helix will use that as the IR name instead of the filename. I haven't had that happen a lot, but it has happened to me for certain. The Bulk Rename Utility mentioned above says it can work with mp3 ID tags, which may be a way around that, but I haven't tried those features.

[steelstringer]

If it sounded good through a powered speaker then in all likelihood the channel on the mixer wasn't gain staged correctly and was likely being clipped by the mixer's pre amp. That has to be adjusted during sound checks using the gain or trim knob to ensure the signal itself isn't coming into the board too hot. Normally you would do this by turning on the PFL (pre fader listen) button and then watch the signal for that channel on the meter to ensure the signal doesn't exceed the input limits. This is a separate adjustment from the actual volume fader on the channel.

Thank you for this info.

[njglover]

Im not arguing with you because im surely confused. as per my "DSP limited" thread, but im trying to see how this benefits us? I guess i havent come to a point where im seeing any DSP benefit from using native Helix cabs as opposed to IR's. Can you provide an example or create a scenario where i can relate to what you are saying a little better. Especially the dramatic end of the scope, because my personal experience has been that IRs and native arent that far apart DSP wise. Be nice to have a meeter :)

 

I've run into it mostly when I want to switch between amps. For example, I can have a dual rec into an IR on the left and an AC30 with it's stock cab on the right but I can't have both into separate IRs. Or maybe I could if they used different paths, but the way I currently have it setup I cannot. Becomes a bigger problem when using reverbs and delays as those tend to use up more DSP than, say, distortions.

[Rocco_Crocco]

We played an outdoor gig last night, and I used the Helix straight to the mixer (XLR out). It was a marked improvement in tone over any setup that I have used, so I'm pretty excited to start tweaking things today. I used the Mark IV rhythm 1 for a clean and pushed it with the Timmy OD; that tone was very nice.

 

On the not so nice side was the JCM 800 tone. It sounded almost like a fuzz pedal (not crisp/defined). Could that have something to do with the amp master volume setting? Or the channel volume? It seemed like I was overdriving the channel on the mixer (master volume of the amp at 70, channel volume at 90, Helix volume knob at about 10 o'clock). Any thoughts on what could cause that sound? Thank!

Maybe the Fletcher Munson curve is rearing its ugly head again. At higher volumes, Highs and lows sound more pronounced. Roll off the hi cut on the speaker block to 5 or 6 and see if that helps.

[steelstringer]

Yes. The highs and lows are now tamed a bit, both on the cab and parametric eq. Also, I switched to the Archtype amp, which is a smoother sounding high gain to me than the JCM. But I am learning that you don't need the gain very high on these amp models. I have it on a 4, and it's nicely compressed and crunchy.

[glideman]

I'll pick the Archon model over the 800 any day of the week... JMHO...