Helix JCM800 2203 Request Thread (FW 3.70 new Brit 2203)!

mikah912 said:
I've watched multiple YT shootouts between the Helix and Fractal JCM800 where there just isn't much daylight in-between.
Click to expand...
tlj.jpg
 
James Freeman said:
Click to expand...

So interesting to hear the difference in top end and upper mids on these. Not the only differences, but the ones that are IMO most significant as I don’t often crank the gain all the way up on a 2204 as it can get mushy.

The resultant difference in FEEL is hard to describe too. The L6 2204 just ain’t right.
 
James Freeman said:
Click to expand...

Helix 2204 simply doesn't sound like a 2204, the midrange emphasis is in the wrong place with those mods. For my tastes, the Helix 2204 sounds worse at low gain and higher gain - it doesn't give what I'd want from that amp.

The 2204 mod model also suffers from some of these characteristics, I wish both were replaced with better sounding circuits.
 
Nope, the feel is not there, the gain character is not there, the ACDC crunch is not there, the cleanup is not there, and the boosted 80s Metal rip is not there, nothing is THERE with the Helix Brit 2204 model.
 
Was it the same modded 800 modelled in the flextone amps? I had a flextone ii for a while and the 800 was the amp I used most.
 
partytrain said:
When you realize there is an entire thread dedicated to sh1tting on your favorite/most used amp in the helix….

View attachment 7818
Click to expand...
There’s no shame if the Helix 2204 is the sound that’s closest to the dream tone in your head. Nobody is here to yuck your yum. Roll with it loud and proud.

All the kicking and screaming here is more for the folks that are looking for a specific set of behaviors known to be part of the 2204 sound that are absent in the Helix representation, leaving like 40+ years of guitar tone unrepresented in what is otherwise a pretty comprehensive modeling package.
 
I have to say I admire the dedication here to lobbying for a revised 2204 in the Helix. I can see why some people might like the existing model, if they're going for a darker/heavier sound, but a classic representation of a 2204 it is not.

I'd also really like a Silver Jubilee to round out the Marshalls, but accurate stock representations of a Plexi and 2204 should be table stakes nowadays for top-tier modelers like the Helix.
 
SwirlyMaple said:
stock representations of a Plexi and 2204 should be table stakes nowadays for top-tier modelers like the Helix.
Click to expand...
Basically the TLDR for this thread. You nailed it.

There are so many things to LOVE about the Helix platform, but having become increasingly a Plexi/800 guy over the last decade and acquiring great physical representations of those circuits…I have to admit that Helix isn’t getting it done. Not even close.

Furthermore, the multi-year effort of a good handful of us who have respectfully and meticulously contributed audio examples, measurements, and historical context across many threads on many forums with no acknowledgement or response from L6 leaves a chunk of us feeling unseen.

It’s not like this is some rare boutique one-off circuit, or the Mark IV with its hundreds of pull knob and rocker switch combinations. We’re talking about 2 single channel circuits that together represent DECADES of the overall arc of the electric guitar tone story.

If L6 feels there is no value in representing that history in their “historical collection of the most important amps” then I’m afraid many of us who’ve hung on will be left with no other choice than to invest our hard-earned gear money into one of the several other companies out there who do get it.

There are other important circuits that L6 goofed by opting for modded or oddly configured settings (dual recto, Mark IV) that they’ve largely been given a pass for. Having found those tones in my $400 Tonex I’m finding it harder to ignore the shortcomings. When you are as slow shipping releases as L6 is, there isn’t room for bad decisions…and L6 has made some poor decisions.
 
Last edited:
James Freeman said:
I don't understand why Original models have priority over fixing/updating existing sub-par or even broken models?
I'm not asking to adopt Fractal's approach, but can we evolve from the stone age please.
Click to expand...
Particularly when fixing the Marshalls, Dual Rectifier, and Mark IV (there are obviously others) would IMO approach or supersede new models in terms of usefulness.
 
Man don't get me started on the Mark IV.

No "Pull Fat" on the tonestack despite the fact the "Cali Texas" model has THREE tonestack shifting options.
Presence was modeled PUSHED for the Lead channel which break negative feedback, not the classic Mark IIC+ mode.
Mistakes were made.

They can fix the Mark IV Lead channel right now by using the Rhythm 1 poweramp to have the classic IIC+ response, which is ALREADY MODELED.

A lot more info here:

Helix Talk

Very neat! What are you using the dual switch for? Good question :idk Also serves a reminder for the overly-entitled that this is NOT Helix. It’s like Grogu… it’s a Line 6 Grogu. People want to call it baby Helix… but it’s a Pod
thegearforum.com thegearforum.com
 
James Freeman said:
Man don't get me started on the Mark IV.

No "Pull Fat" on the tonestack despite the fact the "Cali Texas" model has THREE tonestack shifting options.
Presence was modeled PUSHED for the Lead channel which break negative feedback, not the classic Mark IIC+ mode.
Mistakes were made.

A lot more info here:

Helix Talk

Very neat! What are you using the dual switch for? Good question :idk Also serves a reminder for the overly-entitled that this is NOT Helix. It’s like Grogu… it’s a Line 6 Grogu. People want to call it baby Helix… but it’s a Pod
thegearforum.com thegearforum.com
Click to expand...
Ohhh…I’m aware.

I’m not sure if it’s a selection bias issue in the user research phase of their testing, or too much faith being placed in the personal preferences of staff, or just some gaps in amp knowledge, but yeah…mistakes.

1685870792982.jpeg
 
EOengineer said:
Particularly when fixing the Marshalls, Dual Rectifier, and Mark IV (there are obviously others) would IMO approach or supersede new models in terms of usefulness.
Click to expand...
Invective Crunch! By far the biggest issue for me with any Helix amp models. For all the problems with the Marshall’s, at least they’re accurate to their amps. The Invective crunch sim is completely unusable and broken in its current state (unless you are looking for an amp that sounds like a broken fuzz pedal).

And totally agree on the original designs - absolutely no interest to me, and not something I’d spend money on. I hadn’t really thought about it much, but it actually bothers me a bit thinking that Line 6 are prioritising inventing new models of amps no one asked for or knows anything about over getting the most classic, most commonly recorded amps of all time in order.

I can see the appeal of making original models, but more so for the fun of it. Not the direction I’d want line 6 to take, but if the goal really was to design new amp circuits I’d prefer something like what Neold do, where they build a one off real unit and fine tune that, and then model the real unit. The custom inventions just leave too much scope to sound bad and not like I want an amp to sound like
 
MirrorProfiles said:
Invective Crunch! By far the biggest issue for me with any Helix amp models. For all the problems with the Marshall’s, at least they’re accurate to their amps. The Invective crunch sim is completely unusable and broken in its current state (unless you are looking for an amp that sounds like a broken fuzz pedal).

And totally agree on the original designs - absolutely no interest to me, and not something I’d spend money on. I hadn’t really thought about it much, but it actually bothers me a bit thinking that Line 6 are prioritising inventing new models of amps no one asked for or knows anything about over getting the most classic, most commonly recorded amps of all time in order.

I can see the appeal of making original models, but more so for the fun of it. Not the direction I’d want line 6 to take, but if the goal really was to design new amp circuits I’d prefer something like what Neold do, where they build a one off real unit and fine tune that, and then model the real unit. The custom inventions just leave too much scope to sound bad and not like I want an amp to sound like
Click to expand...
Big ups for the Neold stuff. I love their warble and several other color plugins they’ve put out. I use them all the time.

Anyway, yeah…I think the L6 originals are cool…but any effort thrown into engineering those while not rectifying major decision errors in previous efforts leaves me with some concerns over their prioritization practices.

As a software engineer, it smells a bit like feature addiction - a dogmatic belief that new features are the only thing that drive platform adoption. It’s an increasingly present practice and I’ve seen it kill platforms and companies entirely. I hope everything is ok at L6.
 
Coming from Helix to Fractal I can say this for sure they have done really great for Marshall and Mesa Models
I have not explored all the amps but so far I can say this with assurance the ones i have tested out, they all sound fantastic
I cant say if they are accurate or not not as I've never played through any tube amp, but having used Marshals and Mesa in the Helix I do prefer the Fractal
:idk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

James Freeman
Modeler Time Domain Response Analysis
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
murphy brown
M
Fireproof
Fractal Audio Firmware Update Thread
144 145 146
Replies
3K
Views
178K
TSJMajesty
TSJMajesty
Back
Top