Helix 3.2 when?

[James Freeman]

DI mentioned Presets in his recent AMA post so that mostly answers my question whether the stock cabs will be replaced in Factory presets or even as the default stock cabs in Helix in general.

I will also say that the addition of good cab modeling to the existing IR loading capability prolongs the HX Stomp usefulness years after it's EOLed, a great sounding and versatile cab modeling is super useful where there is no access to a PC to load IRs, and even dare I say, makes IRs obsolete if a very specific sound is not needed.

It will be interesting to see how many cabs they already done for 3.2, and personally I really want to see some 4x12 loaded with G12-65 and G12-80 form the 80s for that Thrash Metal sound, no IR vendor has 4x12 with G12-65 to offer, they all do the same Mesa OS 4x12 with V30 for the billionth time and I'm sick of it.
Also, all the great Vox, Fender, Combo, etc. cabs Line 6 have, that will be a very welcome addition as I think that's the weakest area of IR vendors.

 

[the-trooper]

DI mentioned Presets in his recent AMA post so that mostly answers my question whether the stock cabs will be replaced in Factory presets or even as the default stock cabs in Helix in general.

I'm beginning to wonder if it's cabs at all, since he said "it's not much on paper", and if you ask me new cabs would be pretty fucking much, on paper and on Helix.

 

[molul]

I wonder if the addition is that all cabs have a new switch control to select between the old and the new style. That sounds like "not much on paper" but could also deliver a sonic leap, and respect your user presets while changing the factory ones.

EDIT: and recalling what Ben said in a recent video about IRs, maybe they just added IRs to all cabs and you can select between the cab simulation and the cab IR with just one click.

 

[James Freeman]

It occurred to me that the Factory presets demonstrate almost all the stock cabs;
I wonder if Line 6 modeled all of them including the Bass cabs?
I also wonder how the Amp+Cab block will operate now?
And what about the Dual Cab, how is that going to work?

 

[the swede]

DI mentioned Presets in his recent AMA post so that mostly answers my question whether the stock cabs will be replaced in Factory presets or even as the default stock cabs in Helix in general.

I will also say that the addition of good cab modeling to the existing IR loading capability prolongs the HX Stomp usefulness years after it's EOLed, a great sounding and versatile cab modeling is super useful where there is no access to a PC to load IRs, and even dare I say, makes IRs obsolete if a very specific sound is not needed.

It will be interesting to see how many cabs they already done for 3.2, and personally I really want to see some 4x12 loaded with G12-65 and G12-80 form the 80s for that Thrash Metal sound, no IR vendor has 4x12 with G12-65 to offer, they all do the same Mesa OS 4x12 with V30 for the billionth time and I'm sick of it.
Also, all the great Vox, Fender, Combo, etc. cabs Line 6 have, that will be a very welcome addition as I think that's the weakest area of IR vendors.

Indeed… I always considered preser 01A to great in all its simplicity. It’s one of the better amps and better stock cabs and just a simple good sounding preset…
If the update makes that preset so much better one would “get lost” in it, it’s a difference that goes well beyond the previous “resolution update” that only the most discerning ears could notice. As you said, this may very well indicate that presets won’t be compromised but will sound better.

Dare is say… before the update is even here… they went above and beyond… again.

 

[dronerstone]

@Digital Igloo will the sonic overhaul affect the HX FX just as well?

 

[James Freeman]

As you said, this may very well indicate that presets won’t be compromised but will sound better.

Which directly lead to the next question of how they are going to handle Dual Cab which even Metallurgy doesn't have to compare with.
Dual cab + two mics per cab + XY per mic... that's a lot of IR's to preload, I don't think that's doable.

I guessume there will be a selection of:

1. Dual cab + Single mic per cab. One per DSP path like current Helix dual cab.
2. Single cab + Single mic. Two per DSP path like current Helix single cab.
3. Single cab + Dual mics. One per DSP path, similar to Metallurgy.

The Dual variants (mic/cab) will have Pan controls and true Stereo operation that the current Helix cab blocks lacks.
Just guessing, but it's probably the most efficient way to update to new cabs without breaking old presets.

We still don't know if they added anything regarding IR mixing, panning, blending, stereo, etc.
Maybe IRs get an overhaul too.

 

[the swede]

Which directly lead to the next question of how they are going to handle Dual Cab which even Metallurgy doesn't have to compare with.
Dual cab + two mics per cab + XY per mic... that's a lot of IR's to preload, I don't think that's doable.

I guessume there will be a selection of:

1. Dual cab + Single mic per cab. One per DSP path like current Helix dual cab.
2. Single cab + Single mic. Two per DSP path like current Helix single cab.
3. Single cab + Dual mics. One per DSP path, similar to Metallurgy.

The Dual variants (mic/cab) will have Pan controls and true Stereo operation that the current Helix cab blocks lacks.
Just guessing, but it's probably the most efficient way to update to new cabs without breaking old presets.

We still don't know if they added anything regarding IR mixing, panning, blending, stereo, etc.
Maybe IRs get an overhaul too.

My prediction is a better sounding single cab block, period. It’s probably optimized to be within the dsp usage of the current. Functions re single/dual will basically stay the same to not confuse or break eventual dual setups.

One thing they could add is a stereo/mono parameter within the dual cab block to solve the old “sun to mono” thing.

I would prefer your nr 3. One cab but being able to use two different mics is mostly enough for any given thing.

I understand though if some need option nr 1, for their “I want the sound of two different speakers and cabs” needs.

 

[the-trooper]

My prediction is a better sounding single cab block, period.

 

[BenIfin]

As I've said before I have *zero* inside knowledge but am wondering (3) three key things:-

a => did they re-shoot all their Cab IR's from scratch ?
b => did they re-shoot them whilst connected to their "ideal" Amps to "imprint" the Impedance impact into each new Cab IR ?
c => oh ... and just for James F. ...... have the Amp algorithms also been improved so those of us that use IR's will also get an improved sonic experience ....... :)

I have *no* idea.

Guess we'll all find out soon enough.

All the best,
Ben

 

[James Freeman]

I would prefer your nr 3. One cab but being able to use two different mics is mostly enough for any given thing.
I understand though if some need option nr 1, for their “I want the sound of two different speakers and cabs” needs.

All three options are useful whether for versatility (tone, routing) or DSP conservation.

edit: Technically option no.1 "Dual cab + Single mic" is no different tahn no.3 (metallurgy) if you select the same cab.
So... the current cab block doesn't have to change almost at all.

oh ... and just for James F. ...... have the Amp algorithms also been improved so those of us that use IR's will also get an improved sonic experience ....... :)

"Sonically Audible Engine Improvements"

 

[the-trooper]

have the Amp algorithms also been improved

DI said nothing was done on amps to change tHe fEeL. So I'ma guess, no?

 

[Sleezy E]

and even dare I say, makes IRs obsolete if a very specific sound is not needed.

"James Changer"™

 

[the swede]

So... the current cab block doesn't have to change almost at all.

haha exactly! But if the sound changes to the better. It’s all good to me. I don’t even use IRs anymore, as it is now.

 

[BenIfin]

DI said nothing was done on amps to change tHe fEeL. So I'ma guess, no?

Yep - I read that ..... but "feel" -vs- "tone"/"sound" are completely different things ... so I'm hoping he selected his words *very carefully* when he wrote that :) .... whenever D.I writes or hints about anything to do with Helix or Helix FW .... my take is that he is very precise in what he does says but *even more precise in what he doesn't* say ...

Hoping I'm right .... :)

Ben

 

[GTR37]

Perhaps they have learned and applied a new modelling technique that they didn’t have prior to Helix core and therefore it is across all the amp models and presets

I still think the Metallurgy cabs are coming but not convinced that is the big sonic update or at least it’s not all of it

 

[jellodog]

I too often fall to thinking around the subject of "why IRs? - surely it must be possible to algorithmically model a cab?". I wonder if Line 6 has cracked it

IRs are a decent short cut for sure and they work, to a degree. And if cabs were to be modelled in code, you'd still have to painstakingly measure the interaction of speakers, their cabs and microphones. It would be an arduous undertaking, but it _must_ be possible, no? It's a tough problem, for sure.

Would it even sound better? I don't know, but there might be a pay off in added clarity and realism.

 

[BenIfin]

Perhaps they have learned and applied a new modelling technique that they didn’t have prior to Helix core and therefore it is across all the amp models and presets

I still think the Metallurgy cabs are coming but not convinced that is the big sonic update or at least it’s not all of it

^^^ Agreed

Ben

 

[jellodog]

I sold my Helix LT and my Stomp and bought an FM3 early this year; but I have to say, @Digital Igloo's comments concerning the "Sonically Audible Engine Improvements" in the 3.2 update have really given me something to think about!

VERY intrigued.

 

[zib]

Lost beta ?