QC vs Helix

[mercifulfuzziness]

Because of the GAS post .. I started googling QC vs Helix and came across this.

Just an opinion of course but always interesting to read from QC users and Helix users on a very smart forum like this one!

Perhaps things got way better since 3.5 and now all is equal?

“I’ve had the QC for 2 weeks and previously used an HX Stomp with external pedals. Here are a few thoughts if it helps you decide.

From a pure amp/cab/pedal tone perspective, QC is in a totally different league. Way more natural. It’s super easy to get a great tone without much work. Now that I’ve heard the QC in person, I can’t go back. If natural tone is your goal, go QC all the way. But it’s new and missing allot of features (like weak stomp mode options).

With the Helix you’ll quickly see the legacy. Most models are very artificial. The 3 amps that came v3.0+ sound better (like the Fender Princess), but nothing like the QC. I liked it most using it for clean amps, and then using external pedals to get my OD. Also, with allot of tweaking you can make it better. You’ll find you need to replace the cabs with IR’s, etc… Suddenly, it’s not so easy. But the Helix does have PROs. It’s super mature, reliable, and feature rich. The recent models are better, and the effects are awesome.

Personally, if your putting down over a grand I would not want to invest in an old platform at this point. I think the game is going to change and the Helix platform will need updated hardware and CPU to pull it off.”

 

[jellodog]

Uh-oh!

 

[mercifulfuzziness]

Uh-oh!

 

[DieSchmalle]

 

[Sleezy E]

 

[mercifulfuzziness]

 

[GTR37]

Because of the GAS post .. I started googling QC vs Helix and came across this.

Just an opinion of course but always interesting to read from QC users and Helix users on a very smart forum like this one!

Perhaps things got way better since 3.5 and now all is equal?

“I’ve had the QC for 2 weeks and previously used an HX Stomp with external pedals. Here are a few thoughts if it helps you decide.

From a pure amp/cab/pedal tone perspective, QC is in a totally different league. Way more natural. It’s super easy to get a great tone without much work. Now that I’ve heard the QC in person, I can’t go back. If natural tone is your goal, go QC all the way. But it’s new and missing allot of features (like weak stomp mode options).

With the Helix you’ll quickly see the legacy. Most models are very artificial. The 3 amps that came v3.0+ sound better (like the Fender Princess), but nothing like the QC. I liked it most using it for clean amps, and then using external pedals to get my OD. Also, with allot of tweaking you can make it better. You’ll find you need to replace the cabs with IR’s, etc… Suddenly, it’s not so easy. But the Helix does have PROs. It’s super mature, reliable, and feature rich. The recent models are better, and the effects are awesome.

Personally, if your putting down over a grand I would not want to invest in an old platform at this point. I think the game is going to change and the Helix platform will need updated hardware and CPU to pull it off.”

I mean he is not wrong

Yes , they have updated the engine, yes they have increased the over sampling
But you still can’t change the fact it a 10 year old set of processors it’s running on

I think the next Gen product will probably be great but at this point going fwd I suspect the Helix will start to show its age against some new stuff coming out

 

[fiftyshadesofslay]

As someone who’s used both extensively, as far as amp modelling goes they’re essentially on par. Some QC models are better, some Helix are better.

Honestly I think some people just get so swept up in the marketing they can’t think or hear critically.

I will say the only area the Helix shows its age is the DSP, but not for the sound quality. More like it’s easier to hit the DSP ceiling on a Helix, where you have to run some pretty insane chains to hit it on the QC.

 

[TubeStack]

Helix absolutely destroys the QC for effects, in both range/selection and quality.

I’d agree QC amp models are better, but the recent HX JCM800 is pretty damn awesome.

 

[the swede]

Practical features is still unbeatable, I mean… helix. I’ve tried a few modelers but none really come close to the “complete” functionality for practical usage Helix has. Still, just by reading about some of the new modelers that I haven’t tried it’s easy to see they don’t offer the same well developed features. I wouldn’t hesitate to choose Helix today, over anything. Maybe fractal then. But I def have a soft spot for “easier” user interface. As far as sound goes… doesn’t matter much to me. All modelers today sound great to me, good enough for me. But for effects I’d go Helix or Fractal.

 

[Frodebro]

I will never own a Quad Cortex for the simple reason that the way they conducted themselves at launch left a very bad taste in my mouth.

 

[mercifulfuzziness]

I will never own a Quad Cortex for the simple reason that the way they conducted themselves at launch left a very bad taste in my mouth.

 

[GTR37]

Helix absolutely destroys the QC for effects, in both range/selection and quality.

I’d agree QC amp models are better, but the recent HX JCM800 is pretty damn awesome.

Effects wise at the beginning yes but QC has snuck in a few good ones
Like the Circular PCM70 delay , the Dual delay , the Plate verbs and recently the Dimebag wah

Helix has a lot more without question and a lot more variety , but the QC has added a few cool things and the choruses are also pretty solid ,

But yes if there is an area that could be expanded fx is one

 

[ian_dissonance]

This is what people say when they have to justify their purchases to themselves.

 

[Lysander]

But you still can’t change the fact it a 10 year old set of processors it’s running on

Who cares? The software is brand new and (diligently) kept up to date, even when the platform it runs on is not.

As @fiftyshadesofslay pointed out, the only area where Helix is showing its age is raw DSP power. Sonically, i've found it's just as good, if not better, than most of the alternatives out there. I know, because GAS made me buy them all...

 

[GTR37]

Who cares? The software is brand new and (diligently) kept up to date, even when the platform it runs on is not.

As @fiftyshadesofslay pointed out, the only area where Helix is showing its age is raw DSP power. Sonically, i've found it's just as good, if not better, than most of the alternatives out there. I know, because GAS made me buy them all...

But as fifty shades said that
Processor has direct affect on the CPU , so against next Gen products at some point it will show

 

[Frodebro]

But as fifty shades said that
Processor has direct affect on the CPU , so against next Gen products at some point it will show

That depends on the software. Kemper has done amazing things when you consider the hardware they're still running on, which is the original from what, 2011?

 

[TubeStack]

Who cares.

I've recently learned it's all about the converters, anyway. And even Fractal's suck balls.

 

[JiveTurkey]

Who cares.

I've recently learned it's all about the converters, anyway. And even Fractal's suck balls.

Get Zoom'd TM

 

[dk_ace]

The helix models are generally a pretty good representation of the modeled amps. Like any modeler, some models are better than others. They have chosen a path of modeling the amps as they really are, and they’re good at it. That doesn’t mean it will be easy to get a good tone right away, mic an amp in a different room and then go listen to it isolated on studio monitors and you’ll quickly learn that getting a great sound on tape or at FOH is a lot harder than getting something you’re happy with on stage when the amp is not pointed directly at your ears. I found helix models of the amps I know really well to sound and respond like their real counterparts, warts and all.

QC supposedly does a fair amount of filtering to their models which are not found in the real amps. I haven’t verified that myself, but it would explain someone finding it much easier to get good results quickly with. You could do that in Helix too if you just want it to be quick to get a good sound. You lose some things doing that, but you do gain ease of use.

The tricky thing about this is that QC is getting a rep for being more accurate because it’s easy to get a good sound quickly, but it’s the opposite it is easy to get a good sound quickly because it isn’t accurate. Crank a close miced deluxe or Princeton, now crank it again but with a high pass filter in front of it shelving off the lows, a post eq and maybe a touch of post compression. Interesting to see if other manufacturers change away from accuracy if people keep responding to Qc this way. I personally prefer accuracy and then I’ll do the simplifying if I want to.


D