Line 6 Helix Stadium

[dk_ace]

It's not about things possibly making a difference. But as has been said, we're in the land of diminishing returns in many aspects already. Which was pretty different some years back.

That was said years ago. It was wrong then, and it’s wrong now. Current modeling is not 100% of the real thing of the real amps. We’ll be at diminishing returns when the best of the best say they can’t hear or feel a difference. We are not there today.

People said that Helix was close enough. People said that their newer models hold up well to the axe3. That didn’t stop them from making a new modeling engine and by the accounts so far it is noticeably better.

You are happy with the current tech, that’s great. It won’t stop the people whose job it is to make the modeling better from making the modeling better.

D

 

[Lysander]

That’s an excuse and not a good one. Who the heck decided what IR’s are “supposed to” sound like? The technology isn’t supposed to sound like anything. Also, they don’t sound exactly like close mic’ed cabs either. They have partial data.

Evergreen, but DIs article on this subject explains it perfectly IMHO: https://blog.line6.com/2023/09/15/e...-sound-is-determined-by-your-playback-system/

A well recorder IR will sound indistinguishable from a mic-ed cabinet, and nothing more.

 

[molul]

Line6 artists page (plenty of pros there!):

https://line6.com/artists/

Not sure how many will use Helix, though.

 

[Chocol8]

Diminishing returns still implies there is room for improvement, just that it will take more to get smaller increments. I think that is accurate and will become more so. It will thin the field at the high end and maybe broaden it at the low end.

There is also the related but separate issue of market differentiation. Years ago Fractal modeling clearly sounded closer to real amps. It was a reason to pay more and put up with the user interface. Going forward, they are going to have a harder and harder time selling on just tones, especially amp tones, but I expect the competition will catch up in effects eventually as well.

That leaves things like flexibility, features, power, usability, reliability/robustness, and price as areas companies will compete on. Fractal will still have a pretty good opportunity in this next generation of products. I think Kemper and QC are going to have to change tactics and drop prices, or drop out. I have no idea what Fender’s plans are, but they do have resources to try to stay in the race, but I am not sure it will be worth trying to compete with Stadium and Axe IV directly.

Looking another 10 years down the road, Fractal will have to make a major leap in user interface and user experience because the other gaps are likely to close. Cliff may just retire by then anyway.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

There is no reason speaker emulation shouldn’t be able to sound like a cab AND like a close mic’ed cab depending on user preference. Current solutions mostly fail short of both. There is more room for improvement here than with tube pre-amp modeling.

The laws of physics say otherwise. The sound of a cabinet is more than just the speaker, and to play an IR back will require the use of another, usually unknown speaker on top of that.

The way sound radiates out of its enclosure is going to vary loads based on construction and where it’s positioned, let alone plenty of other smaller factors. I’d say there’s still a good bit of room to improve the modelling of the electrical side of things though. Poweramp modelling is still the area that separates the wheat from the chuff.

 

[Chocol8]

A well recorder IR will sound indistinguishable from a mic-ed cabinet, and nothing more.

They don’t sound indistinguishable. Most current ones have partial reflections, not full, and the IR technology cannot capture and reproduce non-linearities.

The “and nothing more” is yet another opportunity for someone to take speaker emulation further than anything on the market today. There is “more” to be had.

 

[Chocol8]

The laws of physics say otherwise. The sound of a cabinet is more than just the speaker, and to play an IR back will require the use of another, usually unknown speaker on top of that.

The way sound radiates out of its enclosure is going to vary loads based on construction and where it’s positioned, let alone plenty of other smaller factors.

The laws of physics don’t require that you use only IR’s for speaker emulation or that your emulation has to be played back through whatever unknown cheap third party device the customer buys.

You guys are incredibly short sighted here. Kinds like the people who for decades said SS/digital will never sound as good as tubes because…

 

[molul]

They don’t sound indistinguishable. Most current ones have partial reflections, not full, and the IR technology cannot capture and reproduce non-linearities.

The “and nothing more” is yet another opportunity for someone to take speaker emulation further than anything on the market today. There is “more” to be had.

The only true revolution in emulation would soon be being able to fully emulate that sought after "amp in the room" thing.

I don't know if it's still something that should be attempted, though. I've read people saying it's just impossible, and yet other people say "The Fender FR12 and X modeler really delivers that amp in the room feeling".

 

[MirrorProfiles]

The laws of physics don’t require that you use only IR’s for speaker emulation or that your emulation has to be played back through whatever unknown cheap third party device the customer buys.

You guys are incredibly short sighted here. Kinds like the people who for decades said SS/digital will never sound as good as tubes because…

No entirely sure what you’re getting at with regard to speaker modelling. There will always be the issue of the playback device being different to that of what is being modelled, and you can’t really “magic” the sound of a 1x12 open back or closed back 4x12 to a different speaker whether it’s using IR’s or any other method.

Most current ones have partial reflections, not full

Not sure what you mean here either. An IR will reproduce the reflections it captures.

 

[Lysander]

You guys are incredibly short sighted here. Kinds like the people who for decades said SS/digital will never sound as good as tubes because…

Look, none of this is unknown or black magic. Dynamic convolution is hardly a new concept; the reason you don't ever see it applied to speaker simulation is that it introduces a lot of limitations (f.ex. you cannot parametrize) and... there're no real gains to be had. If you want to accurately model a signal going through a speaker+cab, a well recorded IR will already sound pretty much the exact same as the real thing.

Also, most dynamic changes on a speaker don't affect the output per se, but things like input impedance. This is commonly accounted for with speaker impedance emulation (a.k.a. SIC modeling).

The only true revolution in emulation would soon be being able to fully emulate that sought after "amp in the room" thing.

If you want "amp in a room", you need an amp in a room. A FR-12 will never sound like a 4x12", but it will absolutely fool you into believing you're playing a Fender combo with the right combination of model + IR. I know, because it fools me

Anyway, this topic really deserves its own thread if you guys wanna elaborate.

 

[ian_dissonance]

The laws of physics don’t require that you use only IR’s for speaker emulation or that your emulation has to be played back through whatever unknown cheap third party device the customer buys.

You guys are incredibly short sighted here. Kinds like the people who for decades said SS/digital will never sound as good as tubes because…

So if you have to control the speaker and the emulation (a la PowerCab or Kemper Kone) you’re more or less back to an amp/speaker, and again no matter how good a speaker emulation gets, one driver in a box won’t sound like four in a bigger box. Add to that that people are going to judge it based on some personal experience of a particular speaker in a particular cab in a particular space, and matching an imaginary expectation is a fool’s errand. There’s plenty of room for improvement, but IRs aren’t really a weak point unless you want a cab in the room. Working with audio the last thing I want to deal with is some guitar players “ideal” cab sound that captures a 4x12 from behind 10’ and 3’ off-axis with ears that don’t hear anything over 6khz, lol.

 

[Chocol8]

My entire point was and remains that speaker emulation is an area where there is still room for improvement. I know a lot of people love to be dismissive about that, and don’t care or actively don’t want anything better.

We had people making the same arguments about amp modeling, and yet here we are with it still improving.

 

[Digital Igloo]

A few of the people at the anniversary who got a chance to try one out had positive comments on that aspect, but of course their experience may not be mine, and human nature is generally biased towards not crapping on people that have showed you kindness.

There's a lot of truth to this. Can't remember how many times I've said "Seriously, please, BE BRUTAL with us. Don't spare our feelings. We want this as good as it can be" since beta started. We need an army of @James Freeman s.

 

[Mikael Dez]

There's a lot of truth to this. Can't remember how many times I've said "Seriously, please, BE BRUTAL with us. Don't spare our feelings. We want this as good as it can be" since beta started. We need an army of @James Freeman s.

Y'all got any need for beta testers?

 

[GTR37]

There's a lot of truth to this. Can't remember how many times I've said "Seriously, please, BE BRUTAL with us. Don't spare our feelings. We want this as good as it can be" since beta started. We need an army of @James Freeman s.

You can never have enough James Freeman

 

[ian_dissonance]

I sign up every time the opportunity arises. I’m guessing they see my name and go “oh it’s the guy who just wants mathcore noises and plays in double drop fuck”.

 

[TheTrueZoltan!]

There's a lot of truth to this. Can't remember how many times I've said "Seriously, please, BE BRUTAL with us. Don't spare our feelings. We want this as good as it can be" since beta started. We need an army of @James Freeman s.

You want brutal? I give you brutal.

1. The USB roundtrip latency of the current generation of Helix/HX devices absolutely stinks. If you really want the future generation of Line 6 devices to be the centerpiece of people's (home) studios, you have to provide decent low latency drivers.
2. Erm...

sorry, I don't have any more brutality to offer.

 

[ian_dissonance]

T

You want brutal? I give you brutal.

1. The USB roundtrip latency of the current generation of Helix/HX devices absolutely stinks. If you really want the future generation of Line 6 devices to be the centerpiece of people's (home) studios, you have to provide decent low latency drivers.
2. Erm...

sorry, I don't have any more brutality to offer.

Thats a big one though. It’d be nice the the USB audio didn’t feel like a bonus feature.

 

[EOengineer]

Just some thoughts as I revisit Helix Native (as a sanity check if I really want the Stadium).

The newer models are quite good and imo mostly comparable to fractal counterparts. I do find the fractal models still have a weight or depth to them that still just makes it more fun to play.

Some amps like the MKIV are just so different. To me, the Helix Mark IV sounds bad and nothing like the IV on the FAS or how I recall my mark IV sounding. But then again, the helix ENGL Fireball model is absolutely killer. It just seems very hit or miss.

The reverbs in fractal land are noticably better along with the dynacabs. I haven't really jived with the cabs in Helix and often just opt for an IR.

Again, this is on Native so you have to consider input gain.

All in all, I will need to do some more digging. I really hope they release Augora clips before launch or at least an A/B from some YTers. Of course there is always the return window but alas.

The Mark IV lead channel specifically is just…wrong. Not because L6 goofed the modeling, but because they modeled the amp in a configuration that is least reminiscent of the classic mark lead tone we pursue. There’s a pull shift they didn’t engage that would typically add bite and aggression.

This is a prominent reason some of us are hoping they have some folks on staff now that are a bit more up to speed on how to use these amps.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

This is a prominent reason some of us are hoping they have some folks on staff now that are a bit more up to speed on how to use these amps.

Hopefully the new platform means they won’t have to jettison certain features and channels from amps. Mark’s are an amp where it’s really about the whole experience, I pretty much use every push/pull and tinker with every control on my Mark III.

I’m in the minority but I don’t mind the Helix IV too much, at least for what it is. I can get tones I like from it, but it just doesn’t quite feel like a full IV experience (like *sigh* amplitube does).