A Curious Observation

[DunedinDragon]

It seems to me there tends to be three types of users that use the Helix.  Once group focuses on their live sound and the other focuses on recording in their own studio.  The third group does both, recording and live.  And it makes me wonder if some of the folks that have a problem adjusting to the way Helix does things is due to a lack of exposure or experience involved in recording.

 

Here's what brings me to this idea.  There are quite a number of us that are perfectly fine using FRFR speaker setups.  It doesn't bother us, but more importantly it's somewhat critical to the way we build our patches because we tend to build them the same way as we would for recording them.  In that case you kind of need  a setup that allows you to hear things very clearly like you would in the studio in order to tailor the sound precisely.  Also this group has a distinct advantage in understanding the the tools and techniques involved in the Helix because it mirrors a lot of what we've been doing in the past in order to get a good capture in the studio.  Things like cabinet arrangements/mixes, mic types and mic placements are things we come to the party already familiar with.  If someone primarily works live they tend to let the sound guys work on that stuff and aren't really hands on.  They just concern themselves with what they hear on stage.  But that really may be a disadvantage when it comes to getting everything you want out of the Helix because there are many tools and techniques that aren't as prevalent in the typical live environment as that are in the studio.  Examples might be compressors, gates, limiters and various styles and uses of EQ.

 

The reason I bring this up is we tend to see a lot of new people struggling getting the sound they want out of the Helix and maybe the answer for many of them might be to encourage them to at least study recording techniques if not to get involved in doing some recording.  It sure seems to me that it might provide them with some really important skills and knowledge they can use in creating patches for live performances that don't frustrate them.

 

What do you think?

[StruckingFuggle]

There used to be a series of books callled "The Missing Manual". I think you just volunteered to write the missing manual for Helix.

 

I'll send you $19.95 when it's ready.

 

 

I'm coming from the "thousand live gigs" side of the island. When I record I have always used Guitar Rig or Amplitube direct. I never mic up my live rig for recording. Too loud, too fussy.

 

To me, Helix feels much more like pulling Amplitube out of my Mac and using it live than it does pulling my live rig into a DAW. It functions very well as a direct recording modeler.

 

It doesn't function nearly as well as a live rig for those of us used to blasting away with 4x12s and 100 watt heads. Not without a lot of tweaking (which is antithetical to most of us that blast away with analog gear).

 

The big shift happened for me when I stopped thinking of it as an amp. It's my headphone feed from the control room while I'm recording. So now my duties have essentially doubled. I have to craft a great tone, and I have to be the engineer that mics up the cab. I'm now the sound guy in addition to the guitar player.

 

I think you're exactly right. If I'm going to wear the "sound guy" hat too, I better get some eduction.

 

So when will you be publishing the Helix Missing Manual? :)

[Doug6String]

DunedinDragon - great observation!  I'm in the middle, so I'm lacking both sets of skills!  I haven't played live for 20 years and in my home recording for the past decades, because of work, wife, kids... I didn't play much and never developed the recording skills I need now with the newest tech.  IRs (incl Helix Cabs) have really helped me begin to understand mics and placement and the impact on sound.  I just said this in another post, but Helix gives "too many" options.  For me, the result was that I initially screwed up more of my sound than I should have and this Forum straightened me out.  I'm on the right learning path now and am improving my tone and recording techniques weekly, which gets back to your post.  I absolutely agree with your suggestion on new people and learning about recording, which applies to me.  I don't know about using a Helix live, but if your a home recording"artist" like me, unless you want to use the helix like a simple effects pedal, this takes some serious time and effort to really understand and control the Helix.  And I'll add one last thing - having someone else you trust listen to what you do and provide feedback is essential.  Just last night a colleague from this forum send me some example recordings using one of my fav presets (my creation) and I realized I have been hurting my tone with too much EQ.  I couldn't hear that in my own playing, but when someone else used my patch and showed me the issue, it really jumped out!

[PeterHamm]

...maybe the answer for many of them might be to encourage them to at least study recording techniques if not to get involved in doing some recording.  It sure seems to me that it might provide them with some really important skills and knowledge they can use in creating patches for live performances that don't frustrate them.

 

What do you think?

 

 

I think the very last part of what you say here should be a pinned post!

[Verne-Bunsen]

I believe it's forum member PeterHamm that is fond of saying "It's not supposed to sound like an amp in the room, it's supposed to sound like an amp in the next room mic'd up and monitored in this room". Or something along those lines. That was the big revelation for me. Once I changed what I was listening for, I changed how I was crafting tones and everything got better. Like many of us I'm sure, I go back and listen to the stuff I recorded a year ago that sounded so good to me then and I cringe a little. Heck, I listen to stuff I recorded a month ago and I hear what I'd do different today! It's been a steep but enlightening learning curve. I think you're right, some directed training in the recording arts would be highly beneficial.

 

<Speak of the devil! PeterHamm's post came in as I was typing mine...>

[PeterHamm]

I believe it's forum member PeterHamm that is fond of saying "It's not supposed to sound like an amp in the room, it's supposed to sound like an amp in the next room mic'd up and monitored in this room". Or something along those lines.

 

 

yup, I probably lifted that from someone else, but that's what I've been saying for years and years about modeling.

 

I think part of the reason I love modeling so much and actually actively dislike real amps is because I do a LOT of recording.

[lulu_m]

Good point indeed!

 

I do believe some studio skills, or at least a studio approach, will definitely help some people out for recording and live.

I'm doing both, studio production for my work and playing live gigs and have no big problems to get the sounds I want going FRFR!

 

I made a little instructive video that can help others dial in their sound on the Helix. It just cover some tricks and my English is not the best, but I do believe the first and last part can help in showing​ basic studio tricks (like dialing in an amp sweet spot and using detailed EQ) to help to sculp your sound in a FRFR situation.

 

There are so many other things that can help people out there, like playing a HIFI reference track (some good mixed one) trough your FRFR monitors!! If it sound good to you (as you know how this track needs to sound on your thousand's dollar worth HIFI setup ;-)) than Tweeknyour patches and NOT use a global EQ for that! If the reference track sucks, try to make it sound good by global EQ, or buy better ones!

 

Just my 2c, but I know others here did make some very good contributions and helped with tips and tricks! We need some sticky page to converge all this helpful knowledge I guess.

 

For the ones that are interested:

 

[DunedinDragon]

Appreciate all the feedback and I think we're on to something here.  I personally hope we can use this to help folks overcome the huge learning curve they encounter with the Helix.  It's encouraged me to rummage through some of my old links that helped me so much when I was getting started doing recording and live sound engineering.  They'd be nice and handy to hand out to folks struggling with some of these problems.

 

As far as writing the "missing manual" I doubt I'm ready for that.  I'm still learning as well.  As anyone will tell you, it never stops.  There's always something else that someone has discovered you never thought of.  I even had to chuckle to myself after reading Doug6String's post about using too much EQ.  I've known using too much EQ can make things sound too synthetic and that's why I try to avoid EQ as much as possible and handle it in other ways (different cab or mic combinations, etc.).  But it just so happened I was working on a patch today that I felt I just needed a touch of EQ to correct a specific problem.  After reading his post and knowing my proclivity to take EQ too far, I went back to that patch and sure enough, I'd over-corrected my EQ.  As soon as I flattened it out it sounded much more natural.

 

But that's what I mean, I think we can all help each other out this way....

[HonestOpinion]

...Just last night a colleague from this forum send me some example recordings using one of my fav presets (my creation) and I realized I have been hurting my tone with too much EQ.  I couldn't hear that in my own playing, but when someone else used my patch and showed me the issue, it really jumped out!

 

 

...There's always something else that someone has discovered you never thought of.  I even had to chuckle to myself after reading Doug6String's post about using too much EQ.  I've known using too much EQ can make things sound too synthetic and that's why I try to avoid EQ as much as possible and handle it in other ways (different cab or mic combinations, etc.).  But it just so happened I was working on a patch today that I felt I just needed a touch of EQ to correct a specific problem.  After reading his post and knowing my proclivity to take EQ too far, I went back to that patch and sure enough, I'd over-corrected my EQ.  As soon as I flattened it out it sounded much more natural.

 

...

 

I strongly agree with these two posts. This has been my experience as well and applies to mixing sound at the board as well. If I am not judicious with my EQ as well as low and high cuts it can result in a very artificial tone. As soon as I hear a tone that is too "digital" one of the first things I go looking for is an EQ cut or boost (usually a cut in my case) that is too severe.

 

I also try to keep in mind what my tone will sound like in a live setting which keeps me from overdoing the cuts particularly on the high end that may sound fine when I am designing my presets but fail to cut through or have any character with a full band. It took a while but I have finally internalized to some extent what that difference needs to be for a preset intended for stage. Sometimes the final sound still needs tweaking once I get with the band but it tends to be closer than when I first started setting up my presets.

[Lachdanan0121]

Totally!

My background is recording.

Coming at the helix from an engineer perspective rather than just a guitarist removed many of an arbitrary barrier in my understanding of the equipment.

 

I know that this is not exclusive to me.

[HonestOpinion]

It seems to me there tends to be three types of users that use the Helix.  Once group focuses on their live sound and the other focuses on recording in their own studio.  The third group does both, recording and live.  And it makes me wonder if some of the folks that have a problem adjusting to the way Helix does things is due to a lack of exposure or experience involved in recording.

 

Here's what brings me to this idea.  There are quite a number of us that are perfectly fine using FRFR speaker setups.  It doesn't bother us, but more importantly it's somewhat critical to the way we build our patches because we tend to build them the same way as we would for recording them.  In that case you kind of need  a setup that allows you to hear things very clearly like you would in the studio in order to tailor the sound precisely.  Also this group has a distinct advantage in understanding the the tools and techniques involved in the Helix because it mirrors a lot of what we've been doing in the past in order to get a good capture in the studio.  Things like cabinet arrangements/mixes, mic types and mic placements are things we come to the party already familiar with.  If someone primarily works live they tend to let the sound guys work on that stuff and aren't really hands on.  They just concern themselves with what they hear on stage.  But that really may be a disadvantage when it comes to getting everything you want out of the Helix because there are many tools and techniques that aren't as prevalent in the typical live environment as that are in the studio.  Examples might be compressors, gates, limiters and various styles and uses of EQ.

 

The reason I bring this up is we tend to see a lot of new people struggling getting the sound they want out of the Helix and maybe the answer for many of them might be to encourage them to at least study recording techniques if not to get involved in doing some recording.  It sure seems to me that it might provide them with some really important skills and knowledge they can use in creating patches for live performances that don't frustrate them.

 

What do you think?

 

I think you are right. Recording skills and techniques are very complementary to live sound skills and definitely provide additional tools and ideas for perfecting your live sound on a device as complex and flexible as the Helix. Options typically available and learned from in a DAW can be especially helpful when you employ blocks that use more controls than a typical three knob stomp. The reverse is also true, live sound skills can contribute to studio applications. All of that should probably be balanced with making the Helix as plug & play as possible but also providing depth and options for more complex operation. Not every musician is inclined towards being a techie and there is a point of diminishing returns where designing presets starts to monopolize playing time. However, the more you know the faster you can get to a great tone. Like you, I feel I am always learning something new from this forum and others and unfortunately also forgetting something I will have to be reminded of.

[DunedinDragon]

 

I also try to keep in mind what my tone will sound like in a live setting which keeps me from overdoing the cuts particularly on the high end that may sound fine when I am designing my presets but fail to cut through or have any character with a full band. It took a while but I have finally internalized to some extent what that difference needs to be for a preset intended for stage. Sometimes the final sound still needs tweaking once I get with the band but it tends to be closer than when I first started setting up my presets.

 

This has been exactly what I've discovered as well.  I have to intentionally remind myself to keep a certain amount of brashness in the highs or it will get buried live with the band.  It even tends to show up muddy when recording it.  Some of that I believe has to do with the nature of using a FRFR speaker to dial in tones.  I've learned to stand further away from the speaker and typically off-axis, sometimes with my back turned toward the speaker and I get closer to what it will sound like live without having to adjust as much.

[brue58ski]

This has been exactly what I've discovered as well.  I have to intentionally remind myself to keep a certain amount of brashness in the highs or it will get buried live with the band.  It even tends to show up muddy when recording it.  Some of that I believe has to do with the nature of using a FRFR speaker to dial in tones.  I've learned to stand further away from the speaker and typically off-axis, sometimes with my back turned toward the speaker and I get closer to what it will sound like live without having to adjust as much.

 

I can't count the times it sounded great in my "bedroom" alone but the sound got completely engulfed live with the band, because of this.

 

I think this all boils down to what I've always thought, especially with the sounds like an amp, doesn't sound like an amp, to FRFR or not FRFR, etc., discussions and all of the new technology in the past decade or two.

 

The thought is this; if it sounds good, it is good. Doesn't matter how you got it (razor blades to the speaker cone anyone?). Just matters if it sounds good. Which means the only really important and essential part are peoples ears. But because of this, you do have to be heard. That's where some rules in regard to the physics of sound apply. In the studio, they could sculpt the sound so it fit. With real amps live, not so much. We are now in a position where we have many of the sound sculpting advantages of being in the studio. But you do have to get out of the "amp in a room" mentality and switch to an "amp in a room, mic'd and monitored in a studio control booth" mentality, if you're going to go in this direction.

 

There will always be the "amp is best" school out there. I just think it's a bit close minded. but whatever, they can have it. Going the amp sim direction is not a character flaw even though it is often treated as such. For me, it is a good time to be a guitar player compared to what we had to deal with decades ago.

[Lachdanan0121]

I can't count the times it sounded great in my "bedroom" alone but the sound got completely engulfed live with the band, because of this.

 

I think this all boils down to what I've always thought, especially with the sounds like an amp, doesn't sound like an amp, to FRFR or not FRFR, etc., discussions and all of the new technology in the past decade or two.

 

The thought is this; if it sounds good, it is good. Doesn't matter how you got it (razor blades to the speaker cone anyone?). Just matters if it sounds good. Which means the only really important and essential part are peoples ears. But because of this, you do have to be heard. That's where some rules in regard to the physics of sound apply. In the studio, they could sculpt the sound so it fit. With real amps live, not so much. We are now in a position where we have many of the sound sculpting advantages of being in the studio. But you do have to get out of the "amp in a room" mentality and switch to an "amp in a room, mic'd and monitored in a studio control booth" mentality, if you're going to go in this direction.

 

There will always be the "amp is best" school out there. I just think it's a bit close minded. but whatever, they can have it. Going the amp sim direction is not a character flaw even though it is often treated as such. For me, it is a good time to be a guitar player compared to what we had to deal with decades ago.

Nailed it!

I Don't think I could have said it any better.

[MojoAxe]

My application is "live only". My Helix is relatively new to me so I'm still in the tweaking stage and fine-tuning my patches. I don't do any recording on my PC and I've never connected a set of headphones to the Helix or run it through powered studio monitors. My setup is probably as simple as it gets; guitar into the Helix, output into the return of my Friedman Dirty Shirley (which is connected to a 1-12" cabinet).

While tweaking patches, I've experimented with cab sims and IRs and I although I can hear their effect on the tone, I'm finding it easiest to simply use a preamp sim in the patch and adjust the EQs to my liking. I think my ears are probably too blown to pick up the subtle differences in adjusting the microphone types, distances, etc within the cabinet simulators. Besides, once the band starts is playing those effects will be lost in the mix anyway. I just try to keep things simple and adjust the helix to sound as closely to the desired amp tones that I have in my head and so far, Helix is doing a really good job of achieving that.

[brue58ski]

My application is "live only". My Helix is relatively new to me so I'm still in the tweaking stage and fine-tuning my patches. I don't do any recording on my PC and I've never connected a set of headphones to the Helix or run it through powered studio monitors. My setup is probably as simple as it gets; guitar into the Helix, output into the return of my Friedman Dirty Shirley (which is connected to a 1-12" cabinet).

While tweaking patches, I've experimented with cab sims and IRs and I although I can hear their effect on the tone, I'm finding it easiest to simply use a preamp sim in the patch and adjust the EQs to my liking. I think my ears are probably too blown to pick up the subtle differences in adjusting the microphone types, distances, etc within the cabinet simulators. Besides, once the band starts is playing those effects will be lost in the mix anyway. I just try to keep things simple and adjust the helix to sound as closely to the desired amp tones that I have in my head and so far, Helix is doing a really good job of achieving that.

 

i think if you do use a regular guitar amp, I think you should start with a preamp only in the Helix. Once you get to as good as you think it will get, start adding cabs and seeing how they sound. They, more often than not, don't make it better but when they do, in my experience, it has made a big difference.

[MojoAxe]

i think if you do use a regular guitar amp, I think you should start with a preamp only in the Helix. Once you get to as good as you think it will get, start adding cabs and seeing how they sound. They, more often than not, don't make it better but when they do, in my experience, it has made a big difference.

As I mentioned, the Helix is relatively new to me and I haven't had as much time to tinker with it as I like. I have done experimentation with different cabinets sims and observed both a shift in tone as well as volume with some of them. My brain says, "why place a cabinet sim in front of a power amp that is feeding an actual speaker cabinet", but I think I need to just regard the cabinet sims as tone modifiers rather than speaker cabinets.

[brue58ski]

As I mentioned, the Helix is relatively new to me and I haven't had as much time to tinker with it as I like. I have done experimentation with different cabinets sims and observed both a shift in tone as well as volume with some of them. My brain says, "why place a cabinet sim in front of a power amp that is feeding an actual speaker cabinet", but I think I need to just regard the cabinet sims as tone modifiers rather than speaker cabinets.

 

Yes. That's exactly how I approach it when using a regular guitar amp. Again it doesn't always work but when it has, the sound has really popped in my experience.

[DunedinDragon]

I can't count the times it sounded great in my "bedroom" alone but the sound got completely engulfed live with the band, because of this.

 

I think this all boils down to what I've always thought, especially with the sounds like an amp, doesn't sound like an amp, to FRFR or not FRFR, etc., discussions and all of the new technology in the past decade or two.

 

The thought is this; if it sounds good, it is good. Doesn't matter how you got it (razor blades to the speaker cone anyone?). Just matters if it sounds good. Which means the only really important and essential part are peoples ears. But because of this, you do have to be heard. That's where some rules in regard to the physics of sound apply. In the studio, they could sculpt the sound so it fit. With real amps live, not so much. We are now in a position where we have many of the sound sculpting advantages of being in the studio. But you do have to get out of the "amp in a room" mentality and switch to an "amp in a room, mic'd and monitored in a studio control booth" mentality, if you're going to go in this direction.

 

There will always be the "amp is best" school out there. I just think it's a bit close minded. but whatever, they can have it. Going the amp sim direction is not a character flaw even though it is often treated as such. For me, it is a good time to be a guitar player compared to what we had to deal with decades ago.

 

Definitely spot on observations.

 

I've noticed over the last 3 years going from the HD500 where I first started using FRFR speakers and into the Helix I've had a steady migration into studio and live sound disciplines which has definitely affected what's been my preferred tone over the years in live performance when I was using traditional amps.  For example I now tend to sit my guitar in a bit higher frequency register than I used to in order to give space to the vocals and allow the guitar the space to be heard without mushing together with the bass or with the rhythm guitar.  I've also dialed back a lot of gain knowing that with more clarity and articulation I won't need as much volume to be heard in the mix.  Nor will I end up saturating the sound in the space I'm in.  I'm also less likely now to use volume as a way to have my leads heard.  It's more about a tighter frequency control that will naturally stand out instead of a whole lot of extra volume.  These are all things I learned in the studio but am now able to incorporate into my live performance due to the control I have with the Helix.

 

I'm not there 100% of the time yet, but 80 or 90% of the time I end up nailing it and the whole band blends great!!!  Just like a studio recording.

[DunedinDragon]

As I mentioned, the Helix is relatively new to me and I haven't had as much time to tinker with it as I like. I have done experimentation with different cabinets sims and observed both a shift in tone as well as volume with some of them. My brain says, "why place a cabinet sim in front of a power amp that is feeding an actual speaker cabinet", but I think I need to just regard the cabinet sims as tone modifiers rather than speaker cabinets.

 

Yeah, in your circumstance that's probably the best way to think of cabinets and mic's.  If you use a Celestion V30 cab sim with a Royer R121 ribbon mic, you aren't going to sound much like either by the time it comes out of your cabinet, but it will likely give the cabinet something better to work with.  The only limitation is that the sound going to the board if you go direct from the Helix isn't going to match the cabinet sound you're getting on stage.  And if you mic the cabinet you're going to get further modification of the tone going to the board due to that mic and it's placement on your cabinet.  That's the kind of stuff that drove a lot of us to just go to using a FRFR speaker.

[amsdenj]

Very nice thread, thanks for starting this @DunedinDragon. Just a few quick points to add.

 

A small FRFR, say one or two 10's with horns like many of us use will never sound or feel like a 4x12 cabinet. Its just physics. But that said, most of us can't use that 4x12 anyway because we're playing small clubs or churches were we're often space and stage volume limited. We can however use Helix to make the best of that situation and deliver quality to our listeners, not focus on ourselves.

 

Another issue is that if you're protecting your ears, and you should be, you're using ear plugs or IEMs so you're not going to hear that amp in the room anyway. Neither is your audience except for a few well placed audience members who are also risking damage to their ears. We should be kind to our audience! So too much focus on amp in the room isn't really going to help you that much in the gig or recording session.

 

But perhaps the most important thing is that "amp in the room" is often too focused on the tone of the specific instrument, sometimes at the expense of the band as a whole. When doing mixing, we're trying to carve out space for all the different tracks in a way that contributes to the overall song. We rarely solo a specific instrument to do compression, EQ, reverb, delay, etc. because its how the track fits into the context of the song and everything else that's going on that's important. For example, we often use high and low pass filters on guitars that make them sound thin and dark when soloed. But they sound great in the mix because they are no longer competing with other instruments that fill in those frequencies in a manner that better suites the song. This is one of the reasons that patches made at home by yourself don't translate well to a live band situation.

 

Now if you're Matt Schofield, Robben Ford, Waren Haynes, Oz Noy, Eric Clapton, etc. and you're the focus of the band, then by all means focus on your tone and don't use a Helix. For most of us, this is just not what we should be optimizing.

[MojoAxe]

For example I now tend to sit my guitar in a bit higher frequency register than I used to in order to give space to the vocals and allow the guitar the space to be heard without mushing together with the bass or with the rhythm guitar.

It took me a while to finally get this through my head. Whether it's creating patches on a multi-effects or dialing in actual amplifier settings, I've always been guilty of dialing in too much bass. Why? Well because when I'm tweaking tones while playing my guitar alone in a room it just sounds better to have a good solid bottom end. The problem is that once I'm with the band a bassy sounding guitar contributes to a mushy sound. The bass player has the low frequencies covered, so I've finally learned to pull some of the bottom end out of my guitar in order to create a tone that is more crisp and better defined.

[rvroberts]

Hey Dunedindragon,

I think you are correct as far as it goes - but I find half the problems are from people with no idea of studios, and the other half have no idea of analogue gear! When people ask stuff related to pedals and amps, a lot of it is because they have no experience of a range of valve amps with a batch of pedals. Cause you can do anything in the Helix, (and sometimes breaking all the rules can do something interesting) people ask weird stuff like why does my wah sound weird after my delay. Why does my marshall sim distort above 5........I'm possibly over exaggerating, but half the stuff here is like that.

How do I get the sound of so and so.............Ever thought of looking at a video of them and see what they use on stage to get that sound?

So it is a mix - lack of studio knowledge but also lack of real world amp experience - which is half of what we are simulating.

Incidentally, I think that if you got enough power in your FRFR setup, you can get a pretty solid kick in the guts 4x12 felling if that's what you are after......

Obviously though most of the sounds people point at are the result of an amp and some pedals, mic'd, compressed, EQ'd and delayed in some way..... after the amp.........they just don't realise that.

Just sit in a mastering suite for a few hours.

[lulu_m]

Very nice thread, thanks for starting this @DunedinDragon. Just a few quick points to add.

 

A small FRFR, say one or two 10's with horns like many of us use will never sound or feel like a 4x12 cabinet. Its just physics. But that said, most of us can't use that 4x12 anyway because we're playing small clubs or churches were we're often space and stage volume limited. We can however use Helix to make the best of that situation and deliver quality to our listeners, not focus on ourselves.

 

Another issue is that if you're protecting your ears, and you should be, you're using ear plugs or IEMs so you're not going to hear that amp in the room anyway. Neither is your audience except for a few well placed audience members who are also risking damage to their ears. We should be kind to our audience! So too much focus on amp in the room isn't really going to help you that much in the gig or recording session.

 

But perhaps the most important thing is that "amp in the room" is often too focused on the tone of the specific instrument, sometimes at the expense of the band as a whole. When doing mixing, we're trying to carve out space for all the different tracks in a way that contributes to the overall song. We rarely solo a specific instrument to do compression, EQ, reverb, delay, etc. because its how the track fits into the context of the song and everything else that's going on that's important. For example, we often use high and low pass filters on guitars that make them sound thin and dark when soloed. But they sound great in the mix because they are no longer competing with other instruments that fill in those frequencies in a manner that better suites the song. This is one of the reasons that patches made at home by yourself don't translate well to a live band situation.

 

Now if you're Matt Schofield, Robben Ford, Waren Haynes, Oz Noy, Eric Clapton, etc. and you're the focus of the band, then by all means focus on your tone and don't use a Helix. For most of us, this is just not what we should be optimizing.

 

This ^^^ :-), merci Amsdenj

[DunedinDragon]

Hey Dunedindragon, I think you are correct as far as it goes - but I find half the problems are from people with no idea of studios, and the other half have no idea of analogue gear! When people ask stuff related to pedals and amps, a lot of it is because they have no experience of a range of valve amps with a batch of pedals. Cause you can do anything in the Helix, (and sometimes breaking all the rules can do something interesting) people ask weird stuff like why does my wah sound weird after my delay. Why does my marshall sim distort above 5........I'm possibly over exaggerating, but half the stuff here is like that. How do I get the sound of so and so.............Ever thought of looking at a video of them and see what they use on stage to get that sound? So it is a mix - lack of studio knowledge but also lack of real world amp experience - which is half of what we are simulating. Incidentally, I think that if you got enough power in your FRFR setup, you can get a pretty solid kick in the guts 4x12 felling if that's what you are after...... Obviously though most of the sounds people point at are the result of an amp and some pedals, mic'd, compressed, EQ'd and delayed in some way..... after the amp.........they just don't realise that. Just sit in a mastering suite for a few hours.

 

Honestly this is a whole different category of users I hadn't really considered, but you're right.

 

I'm actually astonished in some cases how some users have found themselves trying to work a Helix with so little experience.  But we musicians tend to be such gear heads we'll jump in head first to the new cool technology sometimes without really understanding what it really is, or really does.  I really hope these type of users have the patience and the drive to master this incredible piece of gear, but I would at least hope they would start by reading the manual!!!!   :o