A little help from my Helix friends...am I on the right track with this concept?

[xmacvicar]

Hey Helix crew. I am a firehawk FX user and I HAVE posted this in the FHFX forum but I did not receive any feedback. I think this topic is a bit bigger than the FHFX and applies more to the Helix and guitar rigs in general thats why I am coming to you all for help. Please mods, I am just hoping to get some answers on this topic to see if I am on the right track so please keep it in this forum!

 

I am further down the rabbit hole with the Firehawk FX. Truth be told, I have been following alot of the Pod HD500x and Helix training videos on youtube due to the massive lack of presence the Firehawk seems to have out there in the wild. There is really very little available on it compared to these other devices.

 

One helix video I came across was normalizing patch volumes using your computer DAW/interface. I found it very valuable. You can see that video here: 

 

Reading up around the Helix forums as well lead me to realize alot of people use their computer DAW to set patch volumes. The general consensus is, because this is a DIGITAL device (I still have a hard time realizing I have to treat this thing differently than a standard amp, because of digital clipping) is that your patch volumes should hit about -12DB on your DAW input meter with your most authoritative strum - when you whack at your strings the hardest it should peak about -12 db. This gives you a clean digital signal with room for spikes higher if it happens.

 

I run my FirehawkFX into my Yorkville YX10P floor monitor with the following consistencies:

 

Master volume output (main red rings) = 50%

Guitar volume (white volume ring) = 50% (or the exact middle of the dial)

 

The FHFX has 3 volume controls for those not familiar with it. I think this is where the whole thing starts to fall apart for me. There is the overall MASTER volume knob, easy. Then there is the WHITE volume knob which controls the guitar signal volume into the device (line 6 says this is for balancing your guitar sound with bluetooth audio streaming, a major 'feature' of the FHFX/amplifi line) and the PINK volume for control the patch or amp channel volume which does not affect tone.

The whole point of this post is to determine where the white volume/guitar volume knob should be set. I am not really using the FHFX to jam along to bluetooth tracks. I am treating this device like a live gigging device and this whole topic is in relation to original patch creation and patch volumes. Line 6 can't give a definitive answer on where the white volume ring should be set. Peter Hanmer wasn't able to give really an answer on this on his youtube page, Paul Hindmarsh also wasn't really keen on an answer for this either when I chatted with him on FB.
 

So I decided to get clinical with it based on the patch volume video done by Ben listed above. I connected my FHFX to my computer and loaded up Reaper. I armed the tracks and started playing with patches and volumes to see what the signal was in the channel. I wanted to measure currently how the patches were setup in relation to the guitar input volume  (white ring) and how they were reading digitally.

 

For the sake of consistency I decided to set the while volume for the guitar input at 50% signal as a constant when creating patches.

 

With my guitar input volume right in the middle, I noticed that basically all my patches as they were designed previously were clipping HARD - way past -12db. Amps' that I had set for Channel volume slider at 70% or sometimes 50% (which seems to be the norm based on every line 6 tone creation video on youtube) had to be brought down generally into the 20-25% channel volume range for the signal to hit that -12DB marker on my DAW.

 

Theoretically then...with alot of the amp channel volumes down much lower, I can push my Firehawk master output volume (red ring) higher, which from what I am reading online would give me a better signal to noise ratio overall. Would you agree with this?

 

So that leads me to the following questions regarding 'digital guitar' rigs. With my guitar volume set globally at 50% on the FHFX it seems like the patch channel volumes are SO low in this configuration. However there is an interplay here between the guitar input volume and the channel volume. If I decrease the white ring guitar input volume, then naturally there is less signal to the Firehawk and therefore the channel volumes would have to come up higher to compensate to get a stronger signal to peak around -12db. If i dropped the guitar input volume to say 20%, the amp patch channel volumes would have to come back up so that the signal would be about -12DB in the daw. Would both of these situations sound the same in the end? Is one better than the other?

 

I assume at this point that having the patch volumes lower like this WILL reduce digital clipping and probably make my guitar sound better overall. With a much higher powered FRFR like the Stagesource L2M or Yamah DXR12, I would be able to push a louder cleaner signal into it by having the ability to run the overall master volume (red ring) higher. 

 

Anybody have any feedback on this? I am new to digital guitar rigs so please bare with me as I try to sort this out with a little help from my friends! Thanks crew  :D

[cruisinon2]

Anybody have any feedback on this? I am new to digital guitar rigs so please bare with me as I try to sort this out with a little help from my friends! Thanks crew :D

I'll say one very simple thing... set the volume(s) wherever they need to be so that your patches are balanced, and everything sounds the way you want it. No one gave you a concrete answer because there isn't one. Please don't take this the wrong way, as I'm not being trying to be flippant or dismissive...but there is more hand wringing and wasted energy regarding where to put volume knobs than just about any other topic that comes up around here, and it baffles me. If it sounds good to you, then it is good... turn it up until the levels are sufficient for the task at hand, and be done with it. If it starts to clip, dial it back a bit, and don't obsess over the number some meter spits out...they lie anyway. Run the same signal through 3 different meters, and you'll get 3 different numbers. Let your ears tell you if things are where they're supposed to be... trust me, it works.

[silverhead]

I agree with cruisinon2 here. It's easy to fall into analysis paralysis in the digital world. I try to focus on the sound in the way cruison2 describes. I know some people would like the ability to measure a metered signal level at each point in the chain but beyond a certain point that approach seems like a lot of wasted time, thought, and effort to me.

[xmacvicar]

I'll say one very simple thing... set the volume(s) wherever they need to be so that your patches are balanced, and everything sounds the way you want it. No one gave you a concrete answer because there isn't one. Please don't take this the wrong way, as I'm not being trying to be flippant or dismissive...but there is more hand wringing and wasted energy regarding where to put volume knobs than just about any other topic that comes up around here, and it baffles me. If it sounds good to you, then it is good... turn it up until the levels are sufficient for the task at hand, and be done with it. If it starts to clip, dial it back a bit, and don't obsess over the number some meter spits out. Let your ears tell you if things are where they're supposed to be... trust me, it works.

No offense taken! Thanks for sharing - I appreciate any info at all :D

[jbuhajla]

I adjust my volumes to get them close using DAW. I then tweak to taste with my ears. I set my main volume knob (that controls XLRs to FOH) to 2:00 and have a marker on my unit so I am sure to have it on the same setting every time. That also gives me a little headroom if needed (we have limed sound persons running our board). 

 

The DAW approach is effective for getting you close. 

[HonestOpinion]

Agree with everything said here although I still think level meters would be handy for at least getting in the right ballpark until fine-tuning by ear.

I wonder if someone will eventually develop a "Perceived/Subjective Fletcher-Munson meter" that takes into account the way the human ear responds differently to various frequencies as the signal level increases as well as accounting for the frequencies, particularly in the human voice range, that we are most sensitive to. A meter like this instead of giving an objective readout on signal output levels would give a subjective number based on algorithms that accounted for not only the output level of the patch but also the frequencies the human ear is most sensitive at varying volume levels.

This would allow you to level up your presets to perceived volume level rather than the actual output signal level. For example, presets with a more pronounced mid/high end would receive a higher perceived volume rating. Just speculating here. A meter like this would take quite a bit of fine tuning. Not expecting Line6 or anyone else to produce anything like this anytime soon.

[xmacvicar]

 

The DAW approach is effective for getting you close. 

 

Sorry...close to what? The proper levels for not clipping or proper levels for normalization across all patches? Or both? lol

[jbuhajla]

Sorry...close to what? The proper levels for not clipping or proper levels for normalization across all patches? Or both? lol

Both. Once you figure out your gain staging from your guitar input all the way through the FHFX, you won't have clipping, then you do the same across patches for normalization. I am not familiar with FH so I am not sure the best way to do that. 

 

On Helix I connect to Reaper via usb 1/2, put in my amp/cabinet and set it to about -12dB with my desired amp sound. I then check the dB with each individual effect to get around -12. I then tweak by ear each of the combinations. 

 

I do not have any "digital clipping" with this method, and each of my patches are "normalized". 

[cruisinon2]

Agree with everything said here although I still think level meters would be handy for at least getting in the right ballpark until fine-tuning by ear.

 

I wonder if someone will eventually develop a "Perceived/Subjective Fletcher-Munson meter" that takes into account the way the human ear responds differently to various frequencies as the signal level increases as well as accounting for the frequencies, particularly in the human voice range, that we are most sensitive to. A meter like this instead of giving an objective readout on signal output levels would give a subjective number based on algorithms that accounted for not only the output level of the patch but also the frequencies the human ear is most sensitive at varying volume levels.

 

This would allow you to level up your presets to perceived volume level rather than the actual output signal level. For example, presets with a more pronounced mid/high end would receive a higher perceived volume rating. Just speculating here. A meter like this would take quite a bit of fine tuning. Not expecting Line6 or anyone else to produce anything like this anytime soon.

That would be a swell idea if perception were a uniform experience for us all, but it's anything but...you'd never get such an algorithm to work reliably from one person to the next because we don't all hear and interpret sounds the same way. The old fashioned way works, all day long. When it comes to judging relative volumes of two patches, there's absolutely nothing that you can do with a dB meter that you can't accomplish with your ears.

[amsdenj]

There's a simple way to gainstage something like Helix or HD500. Simply bypass all blocks in the patch. Then enable/bypass each one, one at a time and make sure they are more or less unity gain - the overal volume doesn't change that much between block on/off. If you need a block to do a boost, start by cutting the output level of the block and get the boost by removing the cut. Then uses the meters on your PA/FRFR to gainstage its input for no clipping, and adjust the master volume for how much sound you need in the room. Use the DAW metering (or simpler a SPL meter in your phone) to balance the levels between patches as needed.

[HonestOpinion]

That would be a swell idea if perception were a uniform experience for us all, but it's anything but...you'd never get such an algorithm to work reliably from one person to the next because we don't all hear and interpret sounds the same way. The old fashioned way works, all day long. When it comes to judging relative volumes of two patches, there's absolutely nothing that you can do with a dB meter that you can't accomplish with your ears.

 

The difference in how different ears perceive volume definitely occurred to me as one of the variables that would make a "perceived output meter" less than perfect. There are some commonalities though such as the more sensitive range in our hearing for the human voice as well as the Fletcher-Munson curve that are fairly universal; even if there are variances from one ear to the the next. Those universal characteristics of human hearing if accounted for would allow a meter like the one I was describing be a better more accurate tool for leveling presets than a simple output level meter.  Ears works just fine too though. I just figured that if my job is going to be replaced by a robot one day it might as well start with my ears...  ;)

[pipelineaudio1]

Sorry for the necrobump, but thanks for this topic!

 

I was setting some tests using the Firehawk with its ASIO driver (also in REAPER of course) and noticed that all of the stock presets went over 0dBFS in REAPER

 

I can't find any actual metering in the firehawk, so I was hoping someone knew of a block diagram showing where potential overloads could be hiding based on their position before and after various volume knobs.

 

I can set for unity, but as that unity is as far as I can tell, unreferenced, I could be blowing it at the wrong point. Any hints? Anyone know a reference level for the XLR outs, or perhaps where in the interfaces dB scale 0vu would be?

[HonestOpinion]

50 minutes ago, pipelineaudio1 said:

Sorry for the necrobump, but thanks for this topic!

 

I was setting some tests using the Firehawk with its ASIO driver (also in REAPER of course) and noticed that all of the stock presets went over 0dBFS in REAPER

 

I can't find any actual metering in the firehawk, so I was hoping someone knew of a block diagram showing where potential overloads could be hiding based on their position before and after various volume knobs.

 

I can set for unity, but as that unity is as far as I can tell, unreferenced, I could be blowing it at the wrong point. Any hints? Anyone know a reference level for the XLR outs, or perhaps where in the interfaces dB scale 0vu would be?

 

"Necrobump" that is hilarious! Just in general I think many of us would like to see Line6 add proper metering indicators of some kind on the entire HX line of equipment.

[pipelineaudio1]

I just realized that the FHFX seemed to want to be in 48khz...any chance there's some goofiness going on with SRC making the overs? I'll try and retest with it at 48khz. I don't see a sample rate indicator on the Firehawk or remote though....oh to be left in the dark in this day and age of information....gak