Upgrading... (or changing as a better word)

[MayPRS]

So...

 

I've been using the HX Effects as my main effect unit for some time now. 

 

I would like to try out/expand into the amp + cab realm, as a unit I can take anywhere and just plug into a mixer and have my sound.

 

Helix LT or Floor (but probably LT) are obvious choices but, I'm not gonna lie... the Fractal FM-3 sounds absolutely amazing. Even factory presets are superb and the amps are just to die for.

 

I know this is a Line6 forum but wanting to upgrade which route would you go? Bare in mind that I want/need the best amp + cab emulations as possible, in this price range of course, so I can ditch the heavy amps.

 

3.5 firmware wanted me to stick with Helix (already know my way on HX Edit, etc) but, when I hear those FM-3 demos, oh man... in total honesty I didn't heard the 3.5 amps + cabs (I read that the cabs really improved)...

 

Thoughts?

 

P.S. - I don't want to start a debate or discussion of Line 6 vs Fractal - it's really not the point. Just the best unit I can buy in the 1400-1500 EUR Range. if any of the mods/admins find this topic out of place or have any concern - please delete it!

 

 

 

 

[SaschaFranck]

Would you run the unit along with your HX Effects?

If so, you could as well consider 1-2 of the mini-modelers along the lines of a Strymon Iridium, Atomic Amplifirebox (even if the company at least sort of s***s) or whatever. You could easily connect two of them in the loops of the HX Effects. And you could still enjoy the easy editing of the HXFX. With all the HX series drives, you should be able to get plenty of great tones just out of 1-2 baseline amp models.

 

As far as the FM3 goes, yeah, I gotta agree, the Fractal amp modeling is absolutely great. And while most people (myself included) often aren't able to distinguish a Fractal unit from a Helix in A/B listening tests, I think playing either does reveal some differences. I absolutely think that Line 6's modeling is fine, but Fractals is (or rather feels) extra-fine. Had an Axe FXIII borrowed for a few days and it was super great playing fun. And yes, I liked it a bit more than the Helix.

Anyway, if you need decent on-unit editing, the Fractal stuff is really, really bad. Yeah, it's been improved a bit, but compared to most others it still feels like being thrown back at least a decade or so. For me, that's an important thing to consider.

[silverhead]

No concern about this being out of place. It may devolve into a Fractal vs. Line 6 debate but I hope not. You've made your intentions clear.

 

I note that although you mention the Fractal FM-3 twice, it's not clear whether you already own one or are considering purchasing either Fractal or Line 6 as your upgrade. Can you please clarify that? How do the Line 6 demos sound to you compared to the Fractal?

 

One thing you could do is download the Helix Native plug-in product and take advantage of the trial period. The Helix LT or Floor sounds identical to the HX Native, and you will have the advantage of knowing exactly how it will sound using your equipment in your environment. The Fractal demos don't give you that. Any online demo (including the Line 6 ones) will sound different in your own environment when the demo-ed device is used with your equipment in your environment. There are many reasons for that, but it's true. There are plenty of posts here about people who initially have difficulty getting the marvelous sound of the demos after buying the equipment.  The HX Native trial will let you hear exactly what you'll get.

 

The bottom line is that both Fractal and Line 6 will deliver excellent sounds. The differentiators might be your planned usage of the device. Mainly live performance? Mainly studio? How important is the UI to you, and how do you like those after comparing both? What about moving your tones from studio to stage? Is that important to you? If so, does Fractal have anything like Helix Native that will make that seamless?

 

[MayPRS]

On 11/10/2022 at 5:22 PM, silverhead said:

No concern about this being out of place. It may devolve into a Fractal vs. Line 6 debate but I hope not. You've made your intentions clear.

 

I note that although you mention the Fractal FM-3 twice, it's not clear whether you already own one or are considering purchasing either Fractal or Line 6 as your upgrade. Can you please clarify that? How do the Line 6 demos sound to you compared to the Fractal?

 

One thing you could do is download the Helix Native plug-in product and take advantage of the trial period. The Helix LT or Floor sounds identical to the HX Native, and you will have the advantage of knowing exactly how it will sound using your equipment in your environment. The Fractal demos don't give you that. Any online demo (including the Line 6 ones) will sound different in your own environment when the demo-ed device is used with your equipment in your environment. There are many reasons for that, but it's true. There are plenty of posts here about people who initially have difficulty getting the marvelous sound of the demos after buying the equipment.  The HX Native trial will let you hear exactly what you'll get.

 

The bottom line is that both Fractal and Line 6 will deliver excellent sounds. The differentiators might be your planned usage of the device. Mainly live performance? Mainly studio? How important is the UI to you, and how do you like those after comparing both? What about moving your tones from studio to stage? Is that important to you? If so, does Fractal have anything like Helix Native that will make that seamless?

 

 

i don't know own a FM-3, just the HX Effects.

 

Nice advice on the Helix Native, I might try it indeed. Only live performance... one thing I like to have is the ability to change things prior to the gig itself (like on soundcheck or rehearsal).

 

On HX Effects I found it very hard to do it using the unit itself, I use HX Edit for all the stuff... which sometimes is annoying because I need an adjustment and then I have to take note or remember it, and connect to PC when I get home... but then I cannot test again under the same environment.

[PierM]

Sell the HXFX and buy the Floor or LT.

 

Fractal has better presets maybe, but I seriously doubt you couldnt get a very similar amp tone dialing with Helix, especially with latest firmware.

 

Also, Helix wins in terms of ADAC latency.

[SaschaFranck]

On 11/10/2022 at 6:37 PM, MayPRS said:

On HX Effects I found it very hard to do it using the unit itself

 

Hm, I don't think you'd love an FM3 much more then, at least not regarding the on-unit editing aspect. When it comes to just that, I think it's either a Helix Floor/LT, a Headrush or maybe a Boss GT-1000 along with Boss Tone Studio on a tablet. All others pale in comparison. But as said, that's just the on-unit editing aspect, which defenitely isn't all.

[SaschaFranck]

On 11/10/2022 at 6:43 PM, PierM said:

Also, Helix wins in terms of ADAC latency.

 

When it comes to just that, there's pretty much nothing like the GT-1000 (oh well, and the Iridium and the NUX Amp Academy, but I guess we can rule those out for now).

[PierM]

On 11/10/2022 at 6:50 PM, SaschaFranck said:

 

When it comes to just that, there's pretty much nothing like the GT-1000 (oh well, and the Iridium and the NUX Amp Academy, but I guess we can rule those out for now).

 

Yep. When it comes about latency, GT1000 kicks everyone's lollipop.

 

 

[rd2rk]

Try all three. Buy the one that sounds best to YOU.

 

If latency is an issue, and you can FEEL (because I don't believe you can HEAR) 1ms of latency, then if you can't decide between GT and Helix, get the GT.

If you can't decide between the GT and FM3, get the GT.

If you can't decide between the Helix and FM3, get the Helix.

 

When I play thru plugins (Scarlett AI), I'm getting 7.6ms latency, and it feels fine to me.

I don't think that the 3ms difference between the GT and the FM3 would matter to me if I liked the SOUND of the FM3 better than the GT.

 

The 2ms latency of my Helix is negligible.

 

If you're a super-shredder and Yngvie is your idol, YMMV.

[SaschaFranck]

I'm pretty sensitive to latency and my current setup features 2 modelers in series, coming in at 2ms each (Amplifirebox or NUX Amp Academy and an HX Stomp for spatial FX), at least for leads. Works fine, even under headphones. I still take care of those values not getting any larger though, because there's always the odd moment, when more latency is added (digital consoles, less than ideal DSP controlled monitors and what not).

[Paulzx]

On 11/10/2022 at 4:55 PM, MayPRS said:

So...

 

I've been using the HX Effects as my main effect unit for some time now. 

 

I would like to try out/expand into the amp + cab realm, as a unit I can take anywhere and just plug into a mixer and have my sound.

 

Helix LT or Floor (but probably LT) are obvious choices but, I'm not gonna lie... the Fractal FM-3 sounds absolutely amazing. Even factory presets are superb and the amps are just to die for.

 

I know this is a Line6 forum but wanting to upgrade which route would you go? Bare in mind that I want/need the best amp + cab emulations as possible, in this price range of course, so I can ditch the heavy amps.

 

3.5 firmware wanted me to stick with Helix (already know my way on HX Edit, etc) but, when I hear those FM-3 demos, oh man... in total honesty I didn't heard the 3.5 amps + cabs (I read that the cabs really improved)...

 

Thoughts?

 

P.S. - I don't want to start a debate or discussion of Line 6 vs Fractal - it's really not the point. Just the best unit I can buy in the 1400-1500 EUR Range. if any of the mods/admins find this topic out of place or have any concern - please delete it!

 

 

 

 

 

I've looked at this scenario myself but elected to stay with my Helix due to funds really but also in the meantime I've become better at dialling it in too.

 

Anyway, if you really want the absolute best whatever the cost, it would have to be Fractal to be honest. The A-list artists using their stuff speaks for itself, plus if you go over to the Fractal forum, take a look at how many ex Helix owners there are there, that also tells a story because it doesn't really happen the other way around.

 

Said it many times, Helix is still best bang for buck but the concensus is pretty clear over there with owners of both, which is better sounding, even if it is fairly close

[PierM]

On 11/10/2022 at 8:45 PM, Paulzx said:

 

I've looked at this scenario myself but elected to stay with my Helix due to funds really but also in the meantime I've become better at dialling it in too.

 

Anyway, if you really want the absolute best whatever the cost, it would have to be Fractal to be honest. The A-list artists using their stuff speaks for itself, plus if you go over to the Fractal forum, take a look at how many ex Helix owners there are there, that also tells a story because it doesn't really happen the other way around.

 

Said it many times, Helix is still best bang for buck but the concensus is pretty clear over there with owners of both, which is better sounding, even if it is fairly close

 

Dont want to open another fractal can of worms, but when you spend 3, 4, or 5K on a piece of hardware, that it's also being used by your guitar heroes, you have the most powerful placebo effect available on the market, right there.

 

On a blind test, you'll get completely different numbers. :)

 

StatingTheObvious Mode OFF/

[DunedinDragon]

I've been saying this for a while now that modeling technology, at least at the premium level, is more or less and even playing field.  You can achieve the sounds you're after on any of them once you know them and are confident in how to dial them in and get what you want.  There are some differences in certain areas.  For example Fractal tends to provide a wider range of tunable parameters than the Helix (which may not be such a plus for some people) whereas Helix tends to have the most easily understandable and comfortable paradigm for dialing in sounds.  In practice you will probably never encounter anyone in the audience that will know or care about the difference, so your best bet is to get the one that best suits your needs and the way you like to work.

[HonestOpinion]

On 11/10/2022 at 12:52 PM, PierM said:

 

Yep. When it comes about latency, GT1000 kicks everyone's lollipop.

 

 

 

 

Great chart, thanks! Are those numbers across the bottom milliseconds? If not, the chart doesn't really indicate when latency becomes audible.

[PierM]

On 11/10/2022 at 10:58 PM, HonestOpinion said:

 

 

Great chart, thanks! Are those numbers across the bottom milliseconds? If not, the chart doesn't really indicate when latency becomes audible.

 

yes, all bars are in reference with the bottom milliseconds scale.

 

 

[SaschaFranck]

Fwiw, some folks mix up device latency with audio interface latency. Even if partially releated, these are very different things. Just sayin'.

[HonestOpinion]

On 11/10/2022 at 5:20 PM, SaschaFranck said:

Fwiw, some folks mix up device latency with audio interface latency. Even if partially releated, these are very different things. Just sayin'.

 

So true! The latency between your guitar and the output of your modeler, is a different measurement than the one from your modeler's USB output to the DAW when using your modeler as an audio interface.

 

Also, just the physical distance from your sound source introduces latency. Approximately 1ms per foot. That means if you are, for example, five feet away from your monitors, then the 5ms you just improved by tweaking your audio interface, ASIO/driver settings, could just as easily have been picked up by wearing a pair of headphones :-) You're probably using headphones but just saying. A fair amount of latency can be introduced even when you are using your combo amp, FRFR, or even studio speakers, depending on how far you are from them.

[SaschaFranck]

On 11/11/2022 at 12:25 AM, HonestOpinion said:

Also, just the physical distance from your sound source introduces latency. Approximately 1ms per foot. That means if you are, for example, five feet away from your monitors, then the 5ms you just improved by tweaking your audio interface, ASIO/driver settings, could just as easily have been picked up by wearing a pair of headphones :-)

 

Well, that could be a can of worms we're opening here. DAW introduced latency through headphones is something pretty different from physical distance latency, at least usually - simply because the latter comes with further audible clues (if we'd really open that can of worms, we could as well introduce visible clues, but lets keep that out for now...), whereas electronically caused latency doesn't. Which is why a bit of a room ambience sometimes does a great job in masking that effect.

 

But that's still not all there is to it. When monitoring through speakers at moderate levels, you will likely still have a bit of sound straight from the guitar attacks left, so that could become your "rhythmic anchor", whereas when listening through headphones, it's likely that the sound coming out of them will become your main reference. Hence, we may compensate for latency or we may not. And btw, compensating for DAW-introduced latency isn't exactly a good idea because that "manual compensation" will be recorded, and as a result, it'll be a tad early on playback (because on playback, the DAW compensates for latency). This is quite different to real life latency compensation, when what you actually hear will be recorded.

 

Now, with modern technology and generally small latency numbers, all that might not be too relevant timingwise, so we may probably only have to get used to it, but still, IMO it's a good idea to be informed about the various aspects and implementations of latency.

[Kilrahi]

On 11/10/2022 at 12:45 PM, Paulzx said:

 

I've looked at this scenario myself but elected to stay with my Helix due to funds really but also in the meantime I've become better at dialling it in too.

 

Anyway, if you really want the absolute best whatever the cost, it would have to be Fractal to be honest. The A-list artists using their stuff speaks for itself, plus if you go over to the Fractal forum, take a look at how many ex Helix owners there are there, that also tells a story because it doesn't really happen the other way around.

 

Said it many times, Helix is still best bang for buck but the concensus is pretty clear over there with owners of both, which is better sounding, even if it is fairly close

Yeah ... and then in a blind test those cork sniffing fools fail every time. 

 

They can keep their Fractals. Their loss.

[HonestOpinion]

On 11/10/2022 at 9:13 PM, SaschaFranck said:

 

Well, that could be a can of worms we're opening here. DAW introduced latency through headphones is something pretty different from physical distance latency, at least usually - simply because the latter comes with further audible clues (if we'd really open that can of worms, we could as well introduce visible clues, but lets keep that out for now...), whereas electronically caused latency doesn't. Which is why a bit of a room ambience sometimes does a great job in masking that effect.

...

 

Was not even entertaining the thought of headphone induced latency. Horrors! The primary area in which that is relevant is whether you are outputting to them from your audio interface, computer/sound card, or HX, output. Just referring to the fact that headphones get the sound source closer to your ear than monitors/speakers. And I definitely draw the line at the inter-headphone latency comparison video (although I hear the Beyerdynamic headphones are 7 nanoseconds faster than the Tascams, but don't quote me) :-) That is one video I don't think I will be earmarking for review. You do bring up an interesting point regarding "further audible clues" though.

[SaschaFranck]

On 11/11/2022 at 4:15 AM, HonestOpinion said:

The primary area in which that is relevant is whether you are outputting to them from your audio interface, computer/sound card, or HX, output.

 

No, I wasn't talking about that kinda stuff (which might even be irrelevant, at least for a long time being...), but...

 

On 11/11/2022 at 4:15 AM, HonestOpinion said:

Just referring to the fact that headphones get the sound source closer to your ear than monitors/speakers.

 

Yeah, but the main aspect IMO still would be that, once latency occurs, when using headphones it comes without any further audible clues. In other words: When you move a meter away from your amp, your monitor speakers and what not, the sound is likely gonna change quite a lot due to completely changed reflections - which is an audible clue that the distance to your sound source has changed. And because we're used to deal with these audible clues of distance (or rather even "trained by evolution", because some years ago you just had to be aware of these kinds of distances when that saber-toothed fellow was approaching from behind). As a result, we're likely just able to accept distance in the physical realm kind of easily.

But once you get 3ms more of latency through your headphones (which pretty much exactly equals 1 meter), there won't be any change in sound, the latency is just added on top, so that can become irritating quite fast. Add to this that when wearing headphones, you're losing the last bit of audible connection to your actual picking attack even at household levels.

 

Thing is, even when the musical timing issue isn't relevant anymore (and quite likely we could spend another lifetime on debating when exactly musical timing becomes an issue, whether it's only an issue once someone hears it or whether there's "sub-implications", how we compensate for it once it shows up, etc...), which I assume we could at least for now agree on, would be the case once we're talking latency differences of, say, 2-3 ms (otherwise we wouldn't be using modelers at all), our ears and brains are still incredibly sensitive to time-related things. Possibly the most blunt example: When you close your eyes and someone is talking to you from very close distance (like, the heads just a handful of centimeters apart), you will instantly notice when that person will move left or right by just a few centimeters, even in an anechoic chamber (with all reflection clues removed), possibly even more so.

 

Also, as an example out of my personal experience: When playing some rhytmically relevant stuff through a patch with a sharp attack through a sound enhancing all attacks (like a super clean amp) using plugins and through headphones, I can almost reliably tell whether my host's buffer size is set to 32 or 64 samples. We're talking about the difference between 4.6ms and 6.0ms here. And well, while I like to think of myself as being a timing-savy player (who wouldn't...), that's *way* below anything I'd consider myself noticing in whatever possible raw timing tests (in fact, there's some of those tests online, which can be quite revealing).

So, how comes I can still pretty much reliably tell about the difference (I'd roughly say in around 80% of all cases in a direct A/B comparison, I once even had a mate switch a delay of 1.5ms on/off while I was playing)? My personal explanation would be that our senses (in this case those of my picking hand) are almost as trained to deal with time and distances as our ears are (which, historically, would make as much sense because we defenitely need to hit our saber-toothed friend in time with our spear - waste just a handful of ms and you're qualifying for further issues...).

Interestingly enough (and to take that to yet another level/layer, but I told ya, can of worms and so...), all that is still working with our typical reaction time being *way* above anything we're dealing with here (typical reaction times between perception and reaction are in the range of 0.3-0.4 *seconds*, IIRC), so there must be a higher instance in our brains, lining things up and sorting them in a fashion that we can still perform with proper musical timing, such as in "getting into the groove" or so. Which might as well explain why we (at least that's most common among the folks I know, myself obviously included) often aren't "in the pocket" on the first few beats of, say, a recording, making it a good idea to already start the picking movement (ideally in the air) during count-in.

 

Fortunately, at least we're not singers. Because in that case we'd also be talking about headphone introduced phasing (which can sometimes be avoided by actually *raising* latencies, go figure).

 

Very interesting stuff IMO.

[rd2rk]

Related (I think) - the first time I used an EHX Pitchfork for Eb tuning I thought "OMG! This latency is horrible! How can anybody use this thing?"

It wasn't until I stood up and cranked the volume that I realized I was hearing the string before I was hearing the note. Once that was no longer a problem, the latency was still horrible, but I was able to compensate with note timing (NOT Yngvie here).

[SaschaFranck]

On 11/11/2022 at 9:54 AM, rd2rk said:

Once that was no longer a problem, the latency was still horrible, but I was able to compensate with note timing

 

And yet another can of worms...

That clearly is possible to a rather large extent (fun test: set your DAW's buffersize to 1024 and try to play through that in time...). But IMO it's raising another question: Do we actually want to compensate for latency all the time, does it do our playing any good? It surely doesn't matter much in case we do it every now and then - but considering anything that might appear logical, if we'd do it all the time, we'd likely get used to playing early. Which I think of as being quite less than ideal.

Implication #2, I mentioned this above already: If you compensate like that for a plugin/host-introduced latency (so what comes out of your monitors when recording sounds as if it aligns perfectly), the recording itself will be early (as everything will be recorded the way it comes into your DAW - which in this case will be your early picked DI guitar signal).

[Paulzx]

On 11/10/2022 at 8:19 PM, PierM said:

 

Dont want to open another fractal can of worms, but when you spend 3, 4, or 5K on a piece of hardware, that it's also being used by your guitar heroes, you have the most powerful placebo effect available on the market, right there.

 

On a blind test, you'll get completely different numbers. :)

 

StatingTheObvious Mode OFF/

There's a reason why the biggest artists use fractal, its the benchmark for modelling, there's no shame in being honest here.

There's no point trying to diminish the reality of it. If all modellers were considered of equal quality those artists wouldn't all be using the same o e would they?

 

Helix is perfectly good at a lot of stuff but it's not the best thing out there.

[Paulzx]

On 11/11/2022 at 3:00 AM, Kilrahi said:

Yeah ... and then in a blind test those cork sniffing fools fail every time. 

 

They can keep their Fractals. Their loss.

What are you talking about? A lot of those Cork sniffing fools as you call them, used to be here using helix devices, some still do but they are well placed to make the comparison and its one way traffic. Nobody sells fractal gear to go Line 6 do they?

[HonestOpinion]

On 11/11/2022 at 6:27 PM, Paulzx said:

... Nobody sells fractal gear to go Line 6 do they?

 

Actually, yes, they do. No denying how great Fractal devices are. I had the Fractal Ultra before the Helix. Although I appreciate the depth of the Fractal's options and the effort and expertise poured into the amp/cab modeling, I ended up infinitely preferring the ease of use of the Helix. The Fractal ended up being strictly a studio tool and rarely even that. The UI and simplicity of use on Helix has absolutely drawn many users to it, even from Fractal. Not to speak of the lower price although that is probably going to be less of a factor since the release of the FM9 with a price competitive with the Helix. Some Fractal users defect due to option paralysis on the Fractal stuff. There are also many folks who have multiple modelers and appreciate each one for their respective strengths.

 

The "ecosystem" has also been a big draw for Line 6.  Powercab+, Variax, and Native all provided additional incentives to invest in the Helix. Very cool when parts of a system can exchange data and share control elements.

[rd2rk]

On 11/11/2022 at 4:21 PM, Paulzx said:

There's a reason why the biggest artists use fractal, its the benchmark for modelling, there's no shame in being honest here.

There's no point trying to diminish the reality of it. If all modellers were considered of equal quality those artists wouldn't all be using the same o e would they?

 

Helix is perfectly good at a lot of stuff but it's not the best thing out there.

 

On 11/11/2022 at 4:27 PM, Paulzx said:

What are you talking about? A lot of those Cork sniffing fools as you call them, used to be here using helix devices, some still do but they are well placed to make the comparison and its one way traffic. Nobody sells fractal gear to go Line 6 do they?

 

 

You're sounding very much like a troll. If you love FAS so much, what are you doing here?

[zappazapper]

I don't think you're going to get better sonics from the amp & cab sims of another product, at typical settings. I looked into Fractal stuff for a bit and the difference seems to be in the depth of parameters they offer. "Power Tube Grid Bias" and "B+ Time Constant" and stuff like that. There's a certain type of player that will be able to navigate parameters like that and create subjectively "better" tones than the Helix has to offer. There's also a certain type of player that will use parameters like that to cook up the most god awful caterwauling you've ever heard. Not every player is honest about which category they fit into. The point is, at normal, reasonable settings, it would be mostly impossible to convincingly declare one unit "better" over another. 

[SaschaFranck]

We could possibly argue about which modeling we like better, which is more authentic, more "complete" and what not until the cows come home, but I gotta say one thing about the Fractal units: IMO (which might be terribly different from other opinions) they got their factory presets, their model defaults and their model presets just right whereas Line 6 hasn't. Some of the model defaults in the HX-verse just sound absolutely horrible to my ears (Mail Order Twin, what's that? A completely broken amp they pulled out of some trash? And did someone try to play metal on the Fullerton and Grammatico amps and saved their attempts for us to enjoy? George Benson would run away when plugging his guitar in this version of a JC-120 and Brian May might file a lawsuit for wrecking up his favourite amp so much... etc.).

I have missed the 3.5 factory presets, maybe at least those are a little better, but so far anything straight out of the box sounded *way, way, way* below the league the Helix is trying to play in (which it actually in fact is playing in - or at least could). And yeah, I checked with a whole variety of kinda standard guitars.

Once you've deleted all the factory presets and set up your own templates and model defaults, things are an incredible lot better.

[Kilrahi]

On 11/11/2022 at 4:27 PM, Paulzx said:

What are you talking about? A lot of those Cork sniffing fools as you call them, used to be here using helix devices, some still do but they are well placed to make the comparison and its one way traffic. Nobody sells fractal gear to go Line 6 do they?

 

It's pretty clear what I was talking about. I was calling those people victims of snake oil - idiots or fools. Take your pick. 

 

To be more specific, I have no problem with anyone who tries all the devices and says, "I prefer THIS one." Whatever that may be. Fractal, Helix, Quad Core, Kemper, Headrush . . . Boss . . .

 

However, to claim some sort of superior sonic superiority? 

 

It's a load of crap. 

[Paulzx]

On 11/13/2022 at 3:17 AM, Kilrahi said:

 

However, to claim some sort of superior sonic superiority? 

 

It's a load of crap. 

It's not a load of crap, it's the opinion of many people who have owned both and chosen to move because one sounded better than the other.

The Helix does a lot of things better than most competitors, but it isn't the best thing out there when it comes to reproducing amp tones, it's pretty good

but it's not the best.

[PierM]

Yawn

[SaschaFranck]

On 11/14/2022 at 2:07 PM, Paulzx said:

but it isn't the best thing out there when it comes to reproducing amp tones

 

Sort of off topic:

 

I know this is likely considered blasphemy round some parts of the modeling world, but is that really all that important?

All I know is, that for me, it isn't.

Fwiw, this is also why I have a sweet spot for the Boss modeling. The best sounding amps and drive boxes in their units IMO are those not trying to be literal copies of existing devices.

And on my recent pedalboard, the amp model I'm using for all my driven tones is a pretty much modified (as in using pre- and post-EQ plus some custom-made IR) Bassman of an Atomic Amplifirebox with some (real) pedals slapped in front. Apart from a completely clean tone (which is provided by another pretty much modified Super Reverb coming from a NUX Amp Academy), I hardly ever need anything else (I could use the Stomp in addition but only ever do so for certain rare recording situations).

For me, as long as it feels well while playing, offers enough flexibility to get everything I need done and sits well in a mix (especially live), that's all it takes.

 

In the end, for me (<-!) the usability aspect has turned out to be much more important than whatever super accurate amp replications. And for my use case, with my current setup pretty much all usability boxes are checked (apart from some that, interestingly enough, are almost exclusively related to the HX Stomp, even if I like it quite a bit in its role as an almost-only-FX unit).

 

Now, I know that's just me (well, maybe not just me, but still...), but when lurking around the modeling world's various channels, I can't help it but think that this almost endless quest for whatever perfect amp emulations is keeping away at least quite some people from concentrating what all this at least originally was almost certainly about: Playing guitar, ideally through some nice sounding pieces of gear. It often seems to be along the lines of "Until I don't have amp XYZ at my disposal, all of my rock star attempts must be brought to a halt!"

I'm not saying it's necessarily like that, I'm also not adressing anyone in particular, but that's the impression I often have.

And as far as myself is concerned, ever since I decided to not use a one-size-fits-all-in-one-box modeler anymore (even if I still own the Stomp), I'm playing more than ever throughout the last 2-3 years. Fwiw, partially related, in my case it also seems to massively help that I simply don't have to use any editors and what not for any common things anymore. It's all knobs, directly exposed WYSIWYG style, sitting next to me (my pedalboard is raised to chair level at home).

[PierM]

On 11/13/2022 at 4:17 AM, Kilrahi said:

 

It's pretty clear what I was talking about. I was calling those people victims of snake oil - idiots or fools. Take your pick. 

 

To be more specific, I have no problem with anyone who tries all the devices and says, "I prefer THIS one." Whatever that may be. Fractal, Helix, Quad Core, Kemper, Headrush . . . Boss . . .

 

However, to claim some sort of superior sonic superiority? 

 

It's a load of crap. 

 

 

Fractal engineering seems stuck to '90 in terms of sound design offered by their modeled pedals. Weird. For the kind of music I play, I couldnt be a fractal user, ever. They just dont have stuff I need. Maybe in the early 90, when I was a trash metal kiddo. :D

 

Line 6 are constantly looking around, and keeping the pace also with modern pedal design, which is what keep me linked to that brand.

 

Amp tone is just the very basic atom of a guitar tone, I will never understand the obsession around it....

[SaschaFranck]

On 11/14/2022 at 2:51 PM, PierM said:

 

 

Fractal engineering seems stuck to '90 in terms of sound design offered by their modeled pedals. Weird. For the kind of music I play, I couldnt be a fractal user, ever. They just dont have stuff I need. Maybe in the early 90, when I was a trash metal kiddo. :D

 

Line 6 are constantly looking around, and keeping the pace also with modern pedal design, which is what keep me linked to that brand.

 

 

Hm, dunno. Might be true for the pedals and amps, but otherwise I always thought that Fractal was pretty much on the front edge. I mean, they're offering really excellent FX and things such as modulators, allowing you to do some pretty nifty things - the only other modeler coming at least sort of close in that aspect would be the GT-1000 (and in plugin land Guitar Rig, which is a modulation monster, too bad they almost stopped developing it). There's not too much to be had of that kinda stuff in HX land. Sure, some neat FX, but being able to modulate parameters would certainly bring them to quite another level.

 

Quote

Amp tone is just the very basic atom of a guitar tone, I will never understand the obsession around it....

 

Agreed - but as said above, aren't the things around the core tone something Fractal is just as strong at?

[PierM]

Oh sure, I was specifically talking about modeled pedals. Hardware side, I would be an idiot to say something bad about it. :)

 

The overall palette of sound design, offered by today fractals, is pretty much the same rock/metal/fusion oriented palette as 30 years ago. Which is good for the vast majority of guitarist of course. Was just underlining the obvious; to each his own. :)

[rd2rk]

I like broccoli. And brussels sprouts.

And hot dogs and pizza.

NY pizza of course. The problem is that most places that claim to be NY style pizza are FOS.

Nobody wants to eat that. Well, obviously SOME people do.

[SaschaFranck]

On 11/14/2022 at 6:27 PM, rd2rk said:

are FOS

 

What in the world does that stand for?

[rd2rk]

On 11/14/2022 at 10:47 AM, SaschaFranck said:

 

What in the world does that stand for?

 

Hint: What most politicians are Full Of. Besides hot air, although that is often a side effect when someone is full of it.

[SaschaFranck]

My bad - that was so easy I should've gotten it...