Jump to content
sonospete

Solo advice HELP!

Recommended Posts

Hi Guys

I'm a Helix LT beginner and I love it. However, I'm having difficulty getting a decent solo tone when I boost the volume for the solo itself. I am happy with it at lower volumes but as soon as I increase/boost the volume it looses that syrupy/fluid feel and tone. It seems to clean up a lot and become too sterile. Hope that makes sense ?

Anyway , wondering if you can please point me in the right direction with some ideas I might try. I run it into a stagesource L2t. which I set at 12 o'clock and I set the Helix master at around 12 also. I play a HSS strat and solo on the Seymour Duncan JP HB.   Many thanks in advance and apologies if I haven't provided enough info.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of using whatever boost method you're using (you didn't specify), use the Output Block Level instead. Set the MIN value to, say, -5db (so as to not overdrive the playback device on boost), and the MAX at 0db. Turn up the Helix master (BIG KNOB) to compensate the -5db non-boosted level.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, rd2rk said:

Instead of using whatever boost method you're using (you didn't specify), use the Output Block Level instead. Set the MIN value to, say, -5db (so as to not overdrive the playback device on boost), and the MAX at 0db. Turn up the Helix master (BIG KNOB) to compensate the -5db non-boosted level.

This is my method.  I design all my presets to be -4db at the Output Block.  Then when creating my lead tone from my rhythm tone I add whatever blocks necessary.  Usually for me that means adding the TS808 (boosts mids, but also gives me a looser feel on the 'feel' of playing), adding a Delay block.  

 

Now, depending on what type of gain you are using in the preset, adding that TS808 (usually gain between 0-2.5 and level between 6.0-10) will change the volume of the preset naturally.  The cleaner the preset, the less change I need to make to my -4db output level setting.  My cleaner presets I might only have to make the jump to -2.5db, but the higher gain presets (because of the compression with the added gain) I may need to go to 0.0db.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Many thanks rd2rk and themetallikid for taking the time to reply.  That's great I'll give that a try.  I've been using an amp block and increasing the channel or amp vol  a few db for boost . 

Cheers

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sonospete said:

 

Many thanks rd2rk and themetallikid for taking the time to reply.  That's great I'll give that a try.  I've been using an amp block and increasing the channel or amp vol  a few db for boost . 

Cheers

 

 

i used to use that, however, a few things I learned from the forum and in my own experience...

 

1) increasing the channel volume, while it doesnt change the tone of the amp...it increases the signal that is hitting the next block in the chain, so it may be boosting any effects post-amp and maybe that is where you are losing your tone you had with your rhythm sound.

 

2) I run typically 6-10 core tones and then copy/paste/save those into song specific presets.  Trying to keep amp models and settings straight became a nightmare when I'd be using the same 2 amps in single amp presets and dual amp presets and different channel volumes to keep them even.  Then making tweaks it was hard to remember where my 'home' settings were....so I decided to leave the amp blocks alone once volume matched and find another way.  

 

3) I've done the same thing with output level with a gain block right before the output level spot.  There isnt really a difference other than taking up another block location with a gain block.  My OCD for preset creation likes output volume settings to match and then i KNOW its consistent between presets utilizing the same sound.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again themetallikid. I really appreciate  all the help

 

 I've just adjusted the ouput block to -5db for normal settings and 0db for the boost and it's miles better. Just a small amount of tweaking should now do it. I've also dropped the TS 808 into the mix as you suggested and that sounds great also.  

 

I've always steered clear of modelling amps but for me the Helix (if you perservere) is great, highly intuitive and even addictive.  This is my first post and ask for guidance and you've solved it, so thanks to you all

 

Cheers

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, sonospete said:

This is my first post and ask for guidance and you've solved it, so thanks to you all

 

It's an insanely great forum with many helpful experts, and I've saved this post, which became a tutorial for me as well, in the end.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Newbie LT user here; thank you for this enlightening thread. Im using my LT into a Yamaha DXR12 for rehearsals with a 5 piece covers rock band. The 1/4 inch Line out from the LT goes to the DXR12, acting as my amp in the room, whilst a single XLR out goes to the mixing board which is then forwarded in the mix to our singers who use in-ear monitors,  as well as for recording rehearsals into Studio One.  So far Ive had 4 jams with the band using the LT (I used to use an analog pedalboard into a Matchless Clubman 35) . Im really impressed with the tones of the LT/DXR12, particularly using MBritt`s Helix pack.

However Im really struggling with volume levels, and have not yet understood how to use the LT properly controlling volumes on the fly during rehearsals. I switch snapshots or presets mid-song, and there is sometimes a massive change in volume - in either direction! e.g. Im chugging away on rhythm and volume is fine, stomp on the LT for the solo, and either I blast the ears of our singers, or I disappear in the mix. Then I`m lost... So if it goes too loud, I quickly turn my strat volume right down, but down at 2-3 it obviously loses all its character and sustain. And if my solo is too quiet I stoop down and quickly turn up the big volume knob on the LT.  But that then messes with all the other presets/snapshots, so I tend to end the song with my strat on volume 2 -3, frustrated and confused...

Of course one solution would be to use the LTs expression pedal to control volume, but Im not used to playing with a volume pedal or wah, and even though I can see a volume block in a preset in HXEdit,  sometimes even a couple of volume blocks in the same preset, I find that rocking back the expression pedal on the LT changes nothing...Yes I did read the manual about using the expression pedal, nonetheless I am finding it hard to understand how to make the volume block (or blocks) work on the treadle. YouTube has not shed any light either :-(

 

In this post Ive understood what you are doing: backing off the output block volume by 4 or 5 decibels, and using that as a base to set the big knob level on the LT.  But how are you then boosting levels on the fly?  Are you creating a stomp for the output block at 0 db and just hitting this stomp for the solos? Or are you using the expression pedal, and if so, how to make it work???

Many thanks for any enlightenment and yes, great forum!

cheers

Plunky    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fwiw, my standard method to generate a solo tone out of pretty much every amp tone is to add a pre-boost of some sorts and a post-EQ.

The pre-boost might be an overdrive, a treble boost or a compressor. I'm mostly using the latter with pretty modest compression and just a slight volume boost (IMO the Vetta Comp from the legacy stomps works well), that way I'm getting a bit more "meat". In addition, with the post-EQ block I usually add some mids (always a nice thing for solo tones IMO) and set the final solo volume.

Been doing it like that since almost two decades already, even with my analog setups.

Works a treat. I could post a sample patch and some audio snipplet, in case someone's interested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Plunky and  Saschafranck thanks for your input.

 

Plunky -Hopefully the experienced guys will respond but with my limited knowleadge I use the 4 preset/ 4 snapshot option (global settings) and one of my snapshots is used for solo boost . Here I increase the ouput block from -5db (normal) to around 0db for  the solo on that snapshot only. Being a snapshot you can also add other options (ts808) to obtain your tone/feel.

 

Saschafranck- Thanks for suggestion I'll give that a try as well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, plunky said:

Newbie LT user here; thank you for this enlightening thread. Im using my LT into a Yamaha DXR12 for rehearsals with a 5 piece covers rock band. The 1/4 inch Line out from the LT goes to the DXR12, acting as my amp in the room, whilst a single XLR out goes to the mixing board which is then forwarded in the mix to our singers who use in-ear monitors,  as well as for recording rehearsals into Studio One.  So far Ive had 4 jams with the band using the LT (I used to use an analog pedalboard into a Matchless Clubman 35) . Im really impressed with the tones of the LT/DXR12, particularly using MBritt`s Helix pack.

However Im really struggling with volume levels, and have not yet understood how to use the LT properly controlling volumes on the fly during rehearsals. I switch snapshots or presets mid-song, and there is sometimes a massive change in volume - in either direction! e.g. Im chugging away on rhythm and volume is fine, stomp on the LT for the solo, and either I blast the ears of our singers, or I disappear in the mix. Then I`m lost... So if it goes too loud, I quickly turn my strat volume right down, but down at 2-3 it obviously loses all its character and sustain. And if my solo is too quiet I stoop down and quickly turn up the big volume knob on the LT.  But that then messes with all the other presets/snapshots, so I tend to end the song with my strat on volume 2 -3, frustrated and confused...

Of course one solution would be to use the LTs expression pedal to control volume, but Im not used to playing with a volume pedal or wah, and even though I can see a volume block in a preset in HXEdit,  sometimes even a couple of volume blocks in the same preset, I find that rocking back the expression pedal on the LT changes nothing...Yes I did read the manual about using the expression pedal, nonetheless I am finding it hard to understand how to make the volume block (or blocks) work on the treadle. YouTube has not shed any light either :-(

 

In this post Ive understood what you are doing: backing off the output block volume by 4 or 5 decibels, and using that as a base to set the big knob level on the LT.  But how are you then boosting levels on the fly?  Are you creating a stomp for the output block at 0 db and just hitting this stomp for the solos? Or are you using the expression pedal, and if so, how to make it work???

Many thanks for any enlightenment and yes, great forum!

cheers

Plunky    


There's a number of things that occur to me from reading you post.  Let me give you a rundown of how I manage things with my rig since I also run my Helix in very much the same way as you're running yours...also using a DXR12 as my stage amp/monitor in an 8 piece band.

First, in terms of 1/4 and XLR, in global settings I disconnect my XLR from the Helix master volume knob and set it to mic level.  This sends a full volume signal to your mixing board which can then be gain staged by the sound man to match with the rest of the channels and won't be affected by adjusting the Helix volume knob your DXR12 on stage.  In order to make this work you have to have a consistent volume level on all your patches and snapshots.  The way I do this is by attaching a signal meter to my rig at home when I dial in my patches.  I do this by plugging my XLR out into a mixing board channel and my 1/4" into my DXR12, set my DXR12 volume knob to 12 o'clock, set my Helix volume knob to the position I normally have it when I'm on stage, set my gain/trim knob on my mixing board to 12 o'clock, and adjust my volumes in my patch generally using the amp model channel volume (which won't affect the tone) so that the signal meter on my mixing board is just slightly below 0db (with some intermittent peaks above 0db in the yellow zone of the signal meter.

When it comes to lead tones I rely more on the change in tone (which gives you a perceived volume boost) either through changes in the amp or a boost/distortion block, or a compressor that I engage than I do a specific increase in db which is the thing that often drive a sound man crazy.  I tend to check everything by ear so that the presets and snaps all sound relatively the same and the lead tone stands out but still isn't making much of a difference on the signal meters.  One thing that helps in this regard, especially in larger bands, is that everyone needs to support each other when there are leads being played to give them more room.  For example, if I have a lead in a certain part of a song the rhythm player backs off a bit, as does the harmonica player, as well as the keyboard player as well as the drummer.  Mostly it's not so much volume adjustments as it is simplifying what they're playing or lightening up their touch to give more space.  The same is true if the harmonica or keyboard player has a lead, and I'll accommodate them.  Since all of us come from doing studio work this is all a very natural thing as that's a pretty typical discipline.

This also greatly simplifies the burden on the sound man since he can pretty much gain stage me during sound check and leave me alone after that knowing I'll be consistent in every song.  I use a physical mixing board to do this, but there's also other ways to do it.  Jason Sadites has a YouTube video on this subject using a similar but different approach that actually deals better with perceived volume.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi DunedinDragon a really informative post. I've read some of your previous posts and they are great

 

I especially like your point about the rest of the band backing off and allowing the solo to cut through

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sonospete said:

I especially like your point about the rest of the band backing off and allowing the solo to cut through

 

Just that this usually simply doesn't happen. At least in rock-ish bands, it's pretty much the opposite, especially when it comes to guitar solos. These are often the loudest part of the song. But I'd happily be proven wrong, maybe Mr. Dragon will post some example videos of it happening...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, SaschaFranck said:

 

Just that this usually simply doesn't happen. At least in rock-ish bands, it's pretty much the opposite, especially when it comes to guitar solos. These are often the loudest part of the song. But I'd happily be proven wrong, maybe Mr. Dragon will post some example videos of it happening...

 

How about a reality checK?

 

PROFESSIONALS listen to each other and tailor their performances for the benefit of the show.

AMATEURS and BEGINNERS have no clue how to perform on that level.

We were ALL amateurs and beginners at some point.

Genre is irrelevant. It happens in country bands too.

Classical orchestras have conductors to enforce dynamics.

 

Nobody needs to post anything to disprove your ridiculous assertion.

You claim to be speaking from a position of vast experience (based on your previous posts).

Maybe your experience working with PROFESSIONALS is not as vast as you assert.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In SashaFranck's defense saying it doesn't usually happen is different than saying it can't happen.  It clearly happens if you closely watch video performances of bigger name groups.  I would say it tends to be emphasized more often in certain genres such as country and motown.  But it can apply to any genre.  In rock styles it more about touch dynamics or palm muting to add space.  But I know you can easily see it happening video performances from bands like Joe Walsh, Rolling Stones and even Queen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rd2rk said:

How about a reality checK?

 

Happily so.

 

Quote

Nobody needs to post anything to disprove your ridiculous assertion.

 

Why not? Because you won't find any popular example?

 

So much about a "reality check".


 

Quote

 

You claim to be speaking from a position of vast experience (based on your previous posts).

Maybe your experience working with PROFESSIONALS is not as vast as you assert.

 

 

Right.

So far, you and DunedinDragon are claiming things that apparently usually don't happen (at least not in a rock/pop context).

And you fail to come up with examples (whereas I could just post examples all day long). So, how about that for "experience"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DunedinDragon said:

In SashaFranck's defense saying it doesn't usually happen is different than saying it can't happen.  It clearly happens if you closely watch video performances of bigger name groups.  I would say it tends to be emphasized more often in certain genres such as country and motown.  But it can apply to any genre.  In rock styles it more about touch dynamics or palm muting to add space.  But I know you can easily see it happening video performances from bands like Joe Walsh, Rolling Stones and even Queen.

 

Fine. So there must be countless examples. And what about posting some examples of your own for demonstration purposes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And as far as my "ridiculous assertion" goes, shall we have a look at some of the most famous solos in rock/pop?

What about "Rosanna"? Right, the band is all the way backing off during the solo part.

"Beat It"? Yeah, solo part starts at whisper quiet volumes.

And as Joe Walsh has been mentioned, what about one of *the* most famous guitar solos ever, happening in "Hotel California"? Yeah, now here's a band that's really backing off when the solo parts start.

What's next? "Highway To Hell"? Any Led Zeppelin stuff? Or what about some pop tunes? "Easy"? Or "Dancing On a Ceiling"? "Maniac"?

I could go on forever. New stuff, old stuff, anything in between. In fact, as long as we stay in the rock/pop realm, I can hardly think of any wellknown guitar solo with the band actually backing off.

Ah right, I guess these guys are all amateurs.

 

Fwiw, I am perfectly aware of things being different in other styles - but even in "jam style" Country, Blues, Jazz and what not, while solo parts may start out softly (especially in case they're not just like some 4-16 bar episodes, as in most pop tunes), there's usually a pretty intense built up happening, so at the end of the solo we're all the way back in fullblown territory, hence in need of a sound that will still stand out on top.

 

But hey, sure, saying that most often bands are *not* backing off during a solo is a "ridiculous assertion".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rd2rk said:

PROFESSIONALS listen to each other and tailor their performances for the benefit of the show.

 

Ah, the thing I miss the most; more than many things in life, about playing with my decades long friend and bandmate who had to move away.  The interplay; just knowing it, feeling it; and doing it, without needing words or cues. Always a balance right for the moment.  It wasn't always that way, hehe.  Note: Definitely not professionals, just fortunate enough to have been able to jam together a very long time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sascha, I'm not going to waste valuable heartbeats searching for examples to contest a ridiculous assertion.

Then, to compound the silliness, you post as examples some of the most iconic solos on some of the all-time best-selling albums  - RECORDINGS mixed by a sound engineer - not good enough for Sascha!

 

Let me clarify what I said so there's no mistaking my intent.

 

I defined what I consider as a characteristic of professional players. I neither stated nor implied that on any given night a pro player couldn't put on an amateurish performance.

Who hasn't at some point paid exorbitant ticket prices for such a show? Often because the "pros" showed up drunk and disorderly - DEFINITELY not MY idea of professional!

 

My own semi-professional experience included playing with blues, rock and country bands over a 40 year stretch. In bands of all genres I encountered arrogant, amateurish "professionals" and highly skilled and sensitive (to each other's playing and the needs of the venue and music) amateurs. PROFESSIONAL, in the context of my statement, doesn't necessarily refer to how much money you make, it's an attitude.

 

And bad attitude is not a characteristic of any particular genre. It's a people thing.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SaschaFranck said:

I could go on forever.


Yeah, you could and probably will.
Alexander, you really are becoming tedious.

As we know, opinions are like a$$holes - everybody has one, but you exceed the norm.

I am starting to become very depressed!

Yawn!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, rd2rk said:

Sascha, I'm not going to waste valuable heartbeats searching for examples to contest a ridiculous assertion.

Then, to compound the silliness, you post as examples some of the most iconic solos on some of the all-time best-selling albums  - RECORDINGS mixed by a sound engineer - not good enough for Sascha!

 

Let me clarify what I said so there's no mistaking my intent.

 

I defined what I consider as a characteristic of professional players. I neither stated nor implied that on any given night a pro player couldn't put on an amateurish performance.

Who hasn't at some point paid exorbitant ticket prices for such a show? Often because the "pros" showed up drunk and disorderly - DEFINITELY not MY idea of professional!

 

WTF? What has *any* of this to do with my statement that most often, when there's a guitar solo, the band is *not* backing off?
And fwiw, I can as well post as much examples of the very same things in a live context.

You however simply can't come up with any prove of the opposite - so you're the only one posting ridiculous assertions.

 

32 minutes ago, datacommando said:

Alexander, you really are becoming tedious.

 

So, why do you reply at all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SaschaFranck said:

WTF? What has *any* of this to do with my statement that most often, when there's a guitar solo, the band is *not* backing off?

 

The answer is

 

5 hours ago, SaschaFranck said:

Just that this usually simply doesn't happen. At least in rock-ish bands, it's pretty much the opposite

 

And

 

5 minutes ago, SaschaFranck said:

And fwiw, I can as well post as much examples of the very same things in a live context.

 

Nobody cares

 

6 minutes ago, SaschaFranck said:

You however simply can't come up with any prove of the opposite - so you're the only one posting ridiculous assertions.

 

 

You keep insisting that we JUMP when you bark. That you're setting yourself up to be disappointed is not a ridiculous assertion.

In case you've forgotten what "ridiculous assertion" means, your statement implies that no one has ever backed off to allow a solo, and I can't prove otherwise.

It also implies that your previously supplied "examples" proved something.

Two ridiculous assertions in one sentence.

Go for three?

 

I have a better idea - why don't we agree to disagree?

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, SaschaFranck said:

So, why do you reply at all?


Because it’s a free world and I can - but, before you judge me, make sure you are perfect.
Oh, sorry, you already do think you are!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, rd2rk said:

In case you've forgotten what "ridiculous assertion" means, your statement implies that no one has ever backed off to allow a solo,

 

 

Learn to read before making "ridiculous assertions" yourself, ok?

Nowhere did I ever say that noone has ever backed off to allow a solo. You even quoted the important part of my post yourself: "Just that this usually simply doesn't happen." No idea whether we need to discuss about the meaning of "usually" - but in my book it's equal to "could happen but most often doesn't" - which, quite unarguably, is true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyhow, here's a little patch demonstrating the way I often do soloboosts, namely with a pre-amp compressor (Vetta Comp here) and a post-amp EQ. I slapped them and a delay onto the same footswitch (FS6). As far as the rest of the patch goes, there's some gate behind the amp, might have to be adjusted accordingly. There's also a gain block straight at the beginning, I have one on all my patches so I can quickly compensate for larger pickup output differences. Wanted to record a snipplet - but it's just a test (which I recorded anyway) because my g-string broke (which you can hear at the end of the clip, hence the rather unpleasant ending). And as it's too late, I won't put up new strings now, so you gotta live with it for now. Still demonstrates more or less fine how this approach works with different drives (which I switch between within the clip).

http://www.saschafranck.de/Helix/Soloboost.mp3

 

Soloboost.hlx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, SaschaFranck said:

No idea whether we need to discuss about the meaning of "usually" - but in my book it's equal to "could happen but most often doesn't" - which, quite unarguably, is true.


I don't have dog I this fight, BUT it seems, from what I read, it appears that things are only “usually”, “unarguably” and  “true” in your “book”, according to you.

Yeah, right!

 

EDIT: LMAO - your G string broke with an unpleasant ending. Hope that didn’t fly up your. A$$.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, datacommando said:


I don't have dog I this fight, BUT it seems, from what I read, that things are only  “unarguably” and  “true” in your “book”, according to you.

 

 

I will happily eat my words in case someone proves the amount of cases where whatever bands back off during a solo exceeds the amount of bands who don't. I will even eat my words in case I don't manage to find 10 examples where it doesn't happen for each example of the opposite. Until that point, my statement is "unarguably" true.

 

And fwiw, we're talking about such a bog standard thing here, I'm quite amazed you folks even get all wound up about it. Ever since it's possible, guitarists boost their solo tones one way or the other. Heck, back in the 40s when big band guitarists started to use amps and were allowed to have a solo spot as well, some of those amps had footswitches for the standby function, so they would only be switched on during those very solo passages. Amps have channels labeled "lead" and players not using any such things may backup their volume for rhythm parts and turn it up for solos. Yet some others may just pick harder (think Django Reinhardt).

In a nutshell: Telling me my "assertions" were "ridiculous" or it was common standard that whatever bands would often (?!?) reduce their levels or intensity of playing during whatever solo parts is downright absurd.

And fwiw #2: We all know why this happens. You folks don't like me (which is fine), probably even more so as I harshly criticized DD's choice of words in another thread - so now you're trying to get after me. But pretty please, even if that's fine, you need to try harder. Just that you have a language advance isn't good enough, it takes a bit more cleverness to be sure. All those cheesy reasonings don't even make me raise an eyebrow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, SaschaFranck said:

 

Learn to read before making "ridiculous assertions" yourself, ok?

Nowhere did I ever say that noone has ever backed off to allow a solo. You even quoted the important part of my post yourself: "Just that this usually simply doesn't happen." No idea whether we need to discuss about the meaning of "usually" - but in my book it's equal to "could happen but most often doesn't" - which, quite unarguably, is true.

 

I read quite well. For instance, I know the difference between "stating" and "implying". I also know what you stated initially, including that it was especially prevalent in rock, and what you implied subsequently, that since I couldn't prove that your statement (this usually simply doesn't happen) wasn't true , that it therefore is true.

 

And this statement, at the heart of our failure to communicate, is also arguably false -

 

"but in my book it's equal to "could happen but most often doesn't" - which, quite unarguably, is true."

 

It's only truth is that it's in your book. It's your opinion, that's all.

 

My opinion is based on my experience, yours is based on your experience. We've obviously had different experiences.

 

Our failure to communicate is not going to be resolved by further back and forth, which is why I'm offering an olive branch, which you seem to have chosen to ignore - 

 

Let's agree to disagree.

 

OK?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, rd2rk said:

It's only truth is that it's in your book. It's your opinion, that's all.

 

 

The difference from it just being an opinion: I can back up my statements. Which makes it somewhat more true than just in my book. In case something happens with a likeliness of around 90%, the remaining 10% are unlikely to happen. There's no opinions possible, it's math.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, SaschaFranck said:

 

The difference from it just being an opinion: I can back up my statements. Which makes it somewhat more true than just in my book. In case something happens with a likeliness of around 90%, the remaining 10% are unlikely to happen. There's no opinions possible, it's math.

 

It is only your opinion. There's no objective math to apply.

 

My opinion is based on my experience, yours is based on your experience. We've obviously had different experiences.

 

Our failure to communicate is not going to be resolved by further back and forth, which is why I'm offering an olive branch.

 

Let's agree to disagree.

 

OK?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, rd2rk said:

 

It is only your opinion. There's no objective math to apply.

 

My opinion is based on my experience, yours is based on your experience. We've obviously had different experiences.

 

My opinion is based on evidence (and on experience as well - but that's pretty irrelevant for this case). Which makes up for a huge difference, simply because it's taking us into the realm of objectivism.

 

Quote

Let's agree to disagree.

 

Depends on what we disagree upon.

 

Regarding "most often bands don't back off when a guitar player is having a solo" we can disagree all we want but it wouldn't change a single thing regarding evidence, so there's nothing to agree or disagree with. As said, it's math. And it's even less "ridiculous assertions". And yes, statements such as this are winding me up (at least as much as any online stuff is winding me up - which isn't all that much in general).

We can let this rest. But that's about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, SaschaFranck said:

 

My opinion is based on evidence (and on experience as well - but that's pretty irrelevant for this case). Which makes up for a huge difference, simply because it's taking us into the realm of objectivism.

 

 

Depends on what we disagree upon.

 

Regarding "most often bands don't back off when a guitar player is having a solo" we can disagree all we want but it wouldn't change a single thing regarding evidence, so there's nothing to agree or disagree with. As said, it's math. And it's even less "ridiculous assertions". And yes, statements such as this are winding me up (at least as much as any online stuff is winding me up - which isn't all that much in general).

We can let this rest. But that's about it.

 

Whatever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear, reading these interchanges after adding my first post here, I see the thread completely lost its way and has become a battle of words, who said what, what do they actually mean, I know more than you, etc. Peoples peoples peoples lets go back to respect and opinions and suggestions, like a good forum, as I really want to benefit from all your inputs, and I still have my volume problem with the LT, and I need to get it sorted before our next rehearsal on Thursday!

As a mature (50+) player, I come from the "strat and a Fender twin" old school. My guitar teacher back then was John Perry from the Only Ones (who had a hit single with the Hendrix-inspired "Another Girl Another Planet"), he used this simple setup to amazing effect, no pedals. His Twin would be set quite loud, 4-5 level at least, and his strat would be set at volume 6-7 on the guitar.

This was his "rhythm" tone. When the solo came, he would use his little finger to turn the strat volume up to 10, which substantially increased the volume (and gain/sustain) of his sound. This made the solo jump out of a live mix, but as soon as the solo was over his little finger would ALWAYS move that guitar volume pot back to 6-7. I guess today`s soundman doesn`t often get a player using an old-school technique like this and would be alarmed at the substantial jump in leveIs, but I saw it work perfectly night after night, in both small and large venues. I considered John to be a consummate professional, and I was able to learn this technique, although I never learned to play like him, alas! 

 

It`s clear that with a Helix LT we are in a different era of guitar, with hundreds of great effects and amps available with one stomp, not just John`s rhythm and lead simple setup. But probably cos Im new to all this (< 2 months with my Helix) I have not yet mastered the tricky matter of matching levels on my presets and snapshots. Im not at all in control of the sometimes massive changes in volume which take place when I stomp, most serious of all I don`t yet understand HOW to best "tame the beast" on the fly, i.e what to do when there is a drastic change in levels after hitting a stomp/snapshot/preset. So far, I just fall back to John`s trusted technique of controlling volume from the guitar, but that doesn`t always work properly, resulting in having to turn my strat volume down to 2-3, which frankly sounds crap!

Measures taken so far today in the light of this thread:

1. Global settings XLR output uncoupled from the big volume knob on the LT. Our singers will thank you for giving their in-ears a constant volume, regardless of what I do with the big knob.

2. Create 5 or 6 presets in a new setlist, with my favourite patches which should cover all my basic needs. I really don`t need more (another important lesson!).

3. Match levels of stomps and snapshots inside each of these presets, so that they are all fairly similar in volume.

4. Intend to add a stomp to each preset which I will label "solo". I will program this over the coming days, giving a gain block a try, but also adding a master volume change on the amp block as an alternative stomp, and then seeing which I prefer. 

I cant help thinking that if I better understood how the built-in expression pedal works for volume changing, that would be another solution to all this.  I will persevere with that one too 

and revert after next rehearsal. Thanks for all your constructive inputs!!!    

 

cheers

plunky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, plunky said:

This was his "rhythm" tone. When the solo came, he would use his little finger to turn the strat volume up to 10, which substantially increased the volume (and gain/sustain) of his sound. This made the solo jump out of a live mix, but as soon as the solo was over his little finger would ALWAYS move that guitar volume pot back to 6-7. I guess today`s soundman doesn`t often get a player using an old-school technique like this and would be alarmed at the substantial jump in leveIs, but I saw it work perfectly night after night, in both small and large venues. I considered John to be a consummate professional, and I was able to learn this technique, although I never learned to play like him, alas!

 

First off: From my experience, soundmen are just happy if you manage to balance levels yourself.

 

And then: If the technique of doing most of your tone (and volume shaping) straight on your guitar appeals to you, go for it. Or at least start there.

One thing to consider: Due to the compressing nature of overdrives, the more gain your patch has, the less impact your guitar volume will have on the overall level. At a certain amount of gain, you will likely experience almost no volume changes at all anymore inside the 6-10 range of a typical guitar volume knob, it'll only control the drive of your sound. As a result, this technique won't work too well for pretty much overdriven rhythm tones. Stacking drive pedals (or drive pedals plus amp gain) will usually take you away yet some more.

However, it will likely work fine in case you're after medium gain leads and slightly dirty rhythm tones. Fwiw, I always try to make sure my "barebones" lead snapshot in my patches is working that way, so I can walk around stage and don't have to switch through my pedalboard.

Whatever, in case this approach floats your boat, go for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...