Are the default values for the deep amp parameters the closest to the real amps being modeled?

[silverhead]

We are curious, just not s much as you. And since you won't find your answer here please go where you might find it. And let us know what Line 6 Support tells you.

[cruisinon2]

22 hours ago, victorcastro1 said:

The lack of curiosity among most of you really puzzles me, really. 

 

Congratulations on being the most curious guy in the room. Fortunately for me, my "puzzling" lack of curiosity has not prevented me from getting what I need from this unit... so I'm content to live with the shame. 

 

Theoretical "optimum" values are exactly that... theoretical. They guarantee nothing with regard to the wholly subjective assessment of tone, and as such, they are essentially worthless. So you can obsess over them if you like, but they're not a magic bullet. And even if they were,  there are none to be found in here,  so droning on about it in this forum will never get you any closer to these mystical values you seek, should they even exist. 

[brue58ski]

On 3/22/2018 at 2:03 PM, victorcastro1 said:

That's interesting, so it would not be crazy to imagine the default values for the deep parameters maybe are not the same as the amps modeled. 

There is actually a technically optimum value for the bias - if that will sound the best is a whole other thing, that's totally subjective. My point is that I think it's in the user's best interest if the amp (model) came stock with the correct bias. 

 

The point I, and many other people, have been trying to make is that there is NO stock bias for a brand of tube amp or any tube amp. This is because a tubes specs are not a consistent thing. Just being used and age will change a tube's specs over time. Even the same kind of tube bought brand new will likely have variations. So the correct bias for one Fender twin won't be the same as another one's bias. This leads to the next logical speculation that the settings in Helix are the ones for THAT PARTICULAR AMP. Or more exactly, that particular amp's tubes. All tubes are slightly different. Just the way it is. Especially with older amps. So each amp should have it's bias checked an adjusted by someone that knows what they are doing. Since bias is different for all amps, I can only believe that in the Helix, 5.0, which is what the default setting is, is what that particular amp's bias was on that day. I say on that day because, again, use and age will slowly change a tubes parameters. The other thing I KNOW is that if you haven't heard from any Line 6 officials here by now, you won't. You'll need to find another way. The forums are a dead end in regard to your particular inquiry.

[brue58ski]

20 hours ago, victorcastro1 said:

 

The lack of curiosity among most of you really puzzles me, really.

 

It has nothing to do with a lack of curiosity. I don't recall anyone saying that. I think most people here realize a dead horse when they see one and are tired of seeing it beaten.

[hideout]

On 3/27/2018 at 1:30 PM, victorcastro1 said:

The lack of curiosity among most of you really puzzles me, really. 

 

We lack curiosity? Hardly. We're just not curious about the one thing that you are curious about. To me at least, the thing you are fixated on is completely irrelevant. I get the sounds that I want and my curiosity lies in experimentation - trying things.  Unusual combinations and effects chains that are impossible to do in the real world, for example. I'm not curious about whether or not the default settings of the extra amp parameters are accurate or true to the real amp because of all the reasons people here have already said. Think about it for a minute. If you're modeling an amplifier, wouldn't you want to start with the device as-is?  Now, I'm not sure if Line 6 owns all of the ams they model (somehow I doubt that) but even if they did, they would have to physically mod the amp first in order for the default settings to be inaccurate.  What possible reason would they have to do that when doing so would basically render that amp a totally different beast than what it was?  Doesn't make sense. 

 

As for you not trusting your own ears, well, no amount of data will help alleviate that. Your ears will remain as fickle as they are now and you'll still experience the same "love it today, hate it tomorrow" bit.  If that is not the case, then the issue is psychological and I stand by my statement that what you're fixated on is really not important with regard to how the Helix sounds.

 

Back to your curiosity comment, without said curiosity, none of us whom are happy with Helix now would have gotten to this level of satisfaction.  You need to be curious about the inner workings of the device to get the most out of it.  Heck, you have to be curious just to even want to try an amp modeler.  You have to want to ask "What if?"  If that isn't curiosity, I don't what is. 

[cruisinon2]

Well that's a relief... seems I'm curious after all. Who knew?

 

And just yesterday I agreed to be on the cover of  the July issue of "Indifferent Sad-Sack" magazine... if they find out I like stuff, it's gonna ruin my interview...;)

[soundog]

The default values for the deep amp parameters are the closest to the real amps being modeled.

 

There.

 

 

[victorcastro1]

On 3/30/2018 at 2:43 AM, soundog said:

The default values for the deep amp parameters are the closest to the real amps being modeled.

 

There.

 

 

Where did you get the information? 

[hideout]

4 hours ago, victorcastro1 said:

Where did you get the information? 

Upstairs on the eighth floor of a four storey building, I'd suspect.   Either that or at the Common Sense Department of his brain.

[cruisinon2]

6 hours ago, victorcastro1 said:

Where did you get the information? 

 

I believe the underlying sentiment behind his statement was "In the name of all that is decent and holy, please let this bring and end to this pointless discussion". Clearly it has had the opposite effect....

[rd2rk]

Victor is a troll. If he wasn't, he'd have responded to the many "open a support ticket" posts as follows:

 

"I have opened a support ticket, and will report back when I get a definitive answer from L6 SUPPORT."

 

The closest he's come is suggesting that I do it for him!

 

He won't open a support ticket because he's a TROLL!

 

Why are we feeding the TROLL?

[cruisinon2]

6 hours ago, rd2rk said:

Victor is a troll. If he wasn't, he'd have responded to the many "open a support ticket" posts as follows:

 

"I have opened a support ticket, and will report back when I get a definitive answer from L6 SUPPORT."

 

The closest he's come is suggesting that I do it for him!

 

He won't open a support ticket because he's a TROLL!

 

Why are we feeding the TROLL?

 

I wonder if he likes Andy Summers...;)

[soundog]

... interesting you should say that, because I learned from Andy Summers that the default values for the deep amp parameters are the closest to the real amps being modeled. Small world, huh?

[hideout]

Oh now you guys are getting brutal... I love it!

[bsewart]

What we need is for the hardware to transmogrify into looking and feeling like the real thing as well.

[brue58ski]

I think there should be a video of each original amp with several volt meters hooked up to each of the deep amp parameter locations, each amp being the exact same original amp that was modeled. Then, we need to make sure, that they are mic'd exactly the same way with the same mic, as they are in the Helix, which wil be recorded directly. And lets not forget that the room, temp and air pressure must be exactly the same as they were when the amp was modeled. Then, as the actual parameters are changed on the real amps, they are also changed in the Helix equally, so we can not only see the original parameters, but, listen and compare the sounds and settings to the ones in the Helix. Of course we also have to make sure that the voltages created in the amps, are exactly the same as the virtual changes in the Helix. And we would do that by hooking up virtual voltmeters to the actual virtual amps in the Helix in exactly the...............................er.............................ummmmmm..............ohhh............maybe not.

[cruisinon2]

17 minutes ago, brue58ski said:

I think there should be a video of each original amp with several volt meters hooked up to each of the deep amp parameter locations, each amp being the exact same original amp that was modeled. Then, we need to make sure, that they are mic'd exactly the same way with the same mic, as they are in the Helix, which wil be recorded directly. And lets not forget that the room, temp and air pressure must be exactly the same as they were when the amp was modeled. Then, as the actual parameters are changed on the real amps, they are also changed in the Helix equally, so we can not only see the original parameters, but, listen and compare the sounds and settings to the ones in the Helix. Of course we also have to make sure that the voltages created in the amps, are exactly the same as the virtual changes in the Helix. And we would do that by hooking up virtual voltmeters to the actual virtual amps in the Helix in exactly the...............................er.............................ummmmmm..............ohhh............maybe not.

 

And all of that for a parameter that he doesn't want to touch anyway, lol...

 

"Well it seems I've stumbled into the 'time well spent' ward..."

-Dr Bob Kelso

[soundog]

Put this on IdeaScale. I'd vote for it.

[amsdenj]

Maybe a way to put this to rest is to assume 5 is a good starting point on a parameter that goes from 1 to 10. Then eperiment to see what the control does. One effective way to do this is to start with the control (any control) all the way down and then play, running the control up to various points and back down again quickly until you can find the point at which the control just starts to “do its thing”. If you can’t hear any difference on the control playing at various levels, speeds and dynamic ranges, move on - its not worth worrying about. If you can fined the point where a control just starts to make a difference, you might often find that going beyond that doesn’t change things that much. The point at which the control just starts to make a difference is often the point at which the amp response is the most dynamic. You might find that useful.

 

[hideout]

5 minutes ago, amsdenj said:

Maybe a way to put this to rest is to assume 5 is a good starting point on a parameter that goes from 1 to 10. Then eperiment to see what the control does. One effective way to do this is to start with the control (any control) all the way down and then play, running the control up to various points and back down again quickly until you can find the point at which the control just starts to “do its thing”. If you can’t hear any difference on the control playing at various levels, speeds and dynamic ranges, move on - its not worth worrying about. If you can fined the point where a control just starts to make a difference, you might often find that going beyond that doesn’t change things that much. The point at which the control just starts to make a difference is often the point at which the amp response is the most dynamic. You might find that useful.

 

Hmmm... but... that's a reasonable approach... what's the point in that?

Then he can't fret about whether or not those default values are accurate or not.

[soundog]

1 hour ago, amsdenj said:

Maybe a way to put this to rest is to assume 5 is a good starting point on a parameter that goes from 1 to 10. Then eperiment to see what the control does. One effective way to do this is to start with the control (any control) all the way down and then play, running the control up to various points and back down again quickly until you can find the point at which the control just starts to “do its thing”. If you can’t hear any difference on the control playing at various levels, speeds and dynamic ranges, move on - its not worth worrying about. If you can fined the point where a control just starts to make a difference, you might often find that going beyond that doesn’t change things that much. The point at which the control just starts to make a difference is often the point at which the amp response is the most dynamic. You might find that useful.

 

This is exactly the approach I take when I make an omelette.

[victorcastro1]

On 4/3/2018 at 8:47 PM, amsdenj said:

Maybe a way to put this to rest is to assume 5 is a good starting point on a parameter that goes from 1 to 10. Then eperiment to see what the control does. One effective way to do this is to start with the control (any control) all the way down and then play, running the control up to various points and back down again quickly until you can find the point at which the control just starts to “do its thing”. If you can’t hear any difference on the control playing at various levels, speeds and dynamic ranges, move on - its not worth worrying about. If you can fined the point where a control just starts to make a difference, you might often find that going beyond that doesn’t change things that much. The point at which the control just starts to make a difference is often the point at which the amp response is the most dynamic. You might find that useful.

 

Tried that, it's the method Matt Schofield uses to dial in his amps. 

 

On 4/3/2018 at 8:54 PM, hideout said:

Hmmm... but... that's a reasonable approach... what's the point in that?

Then he can't fret about whether or not those default values are accurate or not.

 

I've addressed this already in this thread, but making fun of anyone proposing a different idea gets a lot more likes than having a conversation, so I understand you'll probably ignore it once more, but, if anyone else is interested...

It's just a better way to start. If you're used with the Fuzz Factory is useful to know the value for the input impedance should be 10k if it's first pedal that's actually on in the signal chain. If you set to auto, a lot of people have a compressor in the first spot and it will sound dramatically different because Helix will set the input impedance based on that, which would be 1M, and it would sound a lot brighter. The input impedance is a misunderstood feature, most would never look at it to solve the problem, and would try to tame it using EQ's probably... But it would be quickly solved, or at least close to it, if the person knew the proper value for the input impedance. Does anyone really disagree with this? I don't get it. Why should it be different the deep parameters? Yet again - I'm not saying this is the "best" value, just saying it's arguably a much better starting point.

 

BTW, I have very limited technical knowledge, but I could see the crossover distortion using a tone generator and a Oscilloscope VST when I turned the Bias down :) Way cool.