Considering Helix and goodbye valve amp!

John_A

Love my Helix (have I said that?). But would probably get on just as well with a AxeFX or Kemper, or more than likely the new Akai, the point is technology has now got to the point you can ditch the valve amps and sound better without them, not just close, but better.  The only way I'd go back to proper amps is if I was playing massive venues, at the Dog n Duck, there's no contest

digitalscream

John_A said:

Love my Helix (have I said that?). But would probably get on just as well with a AxeFX or Kemper, or more than likely the new Akai, the point is technology has now got to the point you can ditch the valve amps and sound better without them, not just close, but better.  The only way I'd go back to proper amps is if I was playing massive venues, at the Dog n Duck, there's no contest

Ironically, at massive venues you'll have a better PA and better monitoring, and they'd actively be happier if you had a modeller with a DI output - more control of the on-stage volume, so better clarity.

It's only the venues in the middle (where monitoring sucks, but you're still running everything through the PA) where you'd find an advantage running valve amps, I think.

professorben

digitalscream said:

John_A said:

Love my Helix (have I said that?). But would probably get on just as well with a AxeFX or Kemper, or more than likely the new Akai, the point is technology has now got to the point you can ditch the valve amps and sound better without them, not just close, but better.  The only way I'd go back to proper amps is if I was playing massive venues, at the Dog n Duck, there's no contest

Ironically, at massive venues you'll have a better PA and better monitoring, and they'd actively be happier if you had a modeller with a DI output - more control of the on-stage volume, so better clarity.

It's only the venues in the middle (where monitoring sucks, but you're still running everything through the PA) where you'd find an advantage running valve amps, I think.

And if you found the tone you like with an amp,
im a huge 11r fan, I think the delays are amazing and love the modulations, I've A/B the Mesa pre amp models against my real Mesa pre amp, and it's just a flavour difference.
the Headrush looks awesome, but I just dunno if I could give up my real amps, my current set up allows the silent stage if I needed to....

and i I feel clarity is not the be all and end all of great sound reinforcement.

John_A

At big venues my real amps wouldn't be stopping the singer hearing what he was doing as we only can use one vocal monitor because of space restrictions, deafening everyone on the left hand side of the room, and breaking my back carrying the cos the roadies would be doing that. 

I didnt think I'd be giving up real amps, my jtm45 and pile of pedals sounded lovely, but the Helix sounds better to me, and to the audience the overall sound is miles better than it was

jgmouton

I've tried the Helix and other modelers.  They are convenient pieces of rig but they really do not sound and feel as good as the real thing. Far from it!  Youtube videos are misleading in that respect.

John_A

jgmouton said:

I've tried the Helix and other modelers.  They are convenient pieces of rig but they really do not sound and feel as good as the real thing. Far from it!  Youtube videos are misleading in that respect.

I Own the Helix   They are convenient pieces of rig and they really do sound as good as the real thing. Feel is subjective, and if you are used to a 4x12 behind you it's going to be different, but using a good monitor on stage it feels like an amp

welshboyo

Another Helix owner here, I haven't sold my trad rig (amp anyway, pedals - Strymons, Fulltones etc etc long gone)

Couldn't be happier and actually love the options of running ampless or with an amp if I so need to  - I'm always running FOH direct via an IR anyway so its either a "real" amp feeding that or a modelled one.

The comment above about feel is absolute rubbish IMO, I struggle to tell the difference and if I'm honest, the modelled amp gives a little more consistency and is somehow easier to manage in the heat of a gig - the monitoring used in this scenario is crucial.

I initially started out with the Fractal stuff and was a little apprehensive about L6 being the poor relation - I couldn't have been more wrong - just as good IMO - they all have their party pieces I suppose, but for me, the Helix does it all and is a piece of piss to use - just last night I decided between sets to radically change what I run in various snapshots - could have taken a good hour to get all of that right with other systems - Helix with the UI and touch gig took me all of 5 minutes!!

Best, most inspirational piece of gear I have bought for a long long time

Rocker

I never saw or tried a Helix but my gut feeling is that a small valve amp behind you, at volume your guitar feels and behaves better. Feedback or whatever, when you experience this you know what I mean. And is it really necessary to have so many sounds a click or two away? Do you have to sound absolutely like SRV or whoever?  My few cents worth. I might change my mind if I got to try a Helix.....

TTBZ

For me the appeal isn't having all those different sounds available at your feet but more the consistency of tone at any volume, without needing to cart in a heavy valve amp which needs to be loud and pushing some air to not sound fizzy and flat. 

I'm definitely interested in a Helix and powered monitor for home and band use (once I can afford it). Do you still get real amp feedback and the "feel" through a powered monitor ? 

John_A

TTBZ said:

For me the appeal isn't having all those different sounds available at your feet but more the consistency of tone at any volume, without needing to cart in a heavy valve amp which needs to be loud and pushing some air to not sound fizzy and flat. 

I'm definitely interested in a Helix and powered monitor for home and band use (once I can afford it). Do you still get real amp feedback and the "feel" through a powered monitor ? 

Exactly - I use one patch for the whole night apart from a few U2 songs, it 'feels' great on stage, and the out front sound is better than I've ever got with a real amp, it takes me 5 mins to set up, the on stage balance is loads better as I'm not relying on backline for anything other than monitoring.

And yes, a powered monitor will still feedback musically like a proper amp.

John_A

Rocker said:

I never saw or tried a Helix but my gut feeling is that a small valve amp behind you, at volume your guitar feels and behaves better. Feedback or whatever, when you experience this you know what I mean. And is it really necessary to have so many sounds a click or two away? Do you have to sound absolutely like SRV or whoever?  My few cents worth. I might change my mind if I got to try a Helix.....

Sound just like me before I jumped in and tried one, I was wrong

gearaddict

John_A said:

At big venues my real amps wouldn't be stopping the singer hearing what he was doing as we only can use one vocal monitor because of space restrictions, deafening everyone on the left hand side of the room, and breaking my back carrying the cos the roadies would be doing that. 

I didnt think I'd be giving up real amps, my jtm45 and pile of pedals sounded lovely, but the Helix sounds better to me, and to the audience the overall sound is miles better than it was

Do you go straight to the PA with the helix?

John_A

Yes, straight in to the PA with a Yamaha DXR10 as an on stage monitor, I can change my stage volume independently of the main feed from the Helix.

Teetonetal

Rocker said:

I never saw or tried a Helix but my gut feeling is that a small valve amp behind you, at volume your guitar feels and behaves better. Feedback or whatever, when you experience this you know what I mean. And is it really necessary to have so many sounds a click or two away? Do you have to sound absolutely like SRV or whoever?  My few cents worth. I might change my mind if I got to try a Helix.....

Ah, but you see the problem with that argument, is that it's based on assumption not real world experience. You gut feeling is wrong. Stick helix in a decent sound system and there you are, playing guitar with a really great, inspiring sound backing you up. 

I mainly use 1 or 2 core sounds on helix, then build a virtual pedal board around it. In fact I have a grand total of 4 patches saved. Of which one is a template, one of for acoustic. The units offer a lot of sound design possibility, but you don't have to use it.

That said I still mainly gig an amp / pedalboard rig, I just like the look of it more. 

Cabicular

The thing is you can do both (and I do) I run a couple of Valve amps on stage and use the FX returns (or in some configurations I have a stereo Marshall poweramp in our mixer rack) So I run real valves and guitar speakers on stage and then out front I send the emulated outs with the cab and mic sims on them.
You don't have to lose the valves if you go Helix

Cabicular

Cabicular

Here is my set up when I was using the Fryettes

Sporky

digitalscream said:

Each to their own - there's also the engineer in me which says it's better to solve the actual problem than to implement a workaround as a "feature"

Aye - I do get that. But the engineer in me says "why waste half your DSP on spillover when you could use it to have better models, or more effect blocks... Horses and roundabouts. What'd be nice is having the choice - only use one path on the Helix and get gapless and spillover, or use both for the extra processing.

Rocker said:

And is it really necessary to have so many sounds a click or two away? Do you have to sound absolutely like SRV or whoever?

I didn't go Helix to sound like anyone else (though it does all sorts of classic sounds very nicely). I wanted flexibility; I enjoy crafting patches as much as I enjoy playing. The Helix makes both very simple and rewarding.

JonHosker

Think I am Helix bound - helpful stuff here

digitalscream

Sporky said:

digitalscream said:

Each to their own - there's also the engineer in me which says it's better to solve the actual problem than to implement a workaround as a "feature"

Aye - I do get that. But the engineer in me says "why waste half your DSP on spillover when you could use it to have better models, or more effect blocks... Horses and roundabouts. What'd be nice is having the choice - only use one path on the Helix and get gapless and spillover, or use both for the extra processing.

This is true. However...as a real-world example from what I was planning when I still had a band: you're the only guitarist in a band and you want to run in stereo to fill the sound out. You want one amp for your clean with stereo delay, two for your rhythm with a different stereo delay (switchable in/out) and one or two for your lead sound with stereo delay, with spillover on all of them. With the Helix solution, you're limited on the lead sound to one amp (only four signal paths), and with that many amp models running you'll hit a DSP limit pretty quickly (from what I've read in the monstrous Helix thread).

Ironically, all of this is do-able with a single amp using different patches on the GSP1101, which is vastly underpowered compared to any of the big-hitters. With the way it's configured, I'm guessing that delays are rendered ahead in the audio pipeline...which is something I'm surprised none of the big names do with their units. It requires extra DSP power yes (you're effectively rendering faster than real-time), but nowhere near as much as the (assumed) Headrush solution and is a lot more solid than the Helix approach.