Kemper/Helix/Fractal users, have you gone fully digital and do you plan to?

Strat_a_tat_tat

Jonathanthomas83 said:

Get a Helix and thank me later.

Why.... are you paying for it? ;-)

Jonathanthomas83

Out of the money I've saved by selling all my unused gear now I have an Axe FX...I would but no ;-)

Strat_a_tat_tat

Jonathanthomas83 said:

Out of the money I've saved by selling all my unused gear now I have an Axe FX...I would but no ;-)

Well... it's the thought that counts. :-)

Sporky

dindude said:

if you can have the real thing then why wouldn't you

Because the real thing is heavier, bulkier, noisier, less flexible and can't produce the same sounds.

guitarfishbay

Sporky said:

dindude said:

if you can have the real thing then why wouldn't you

Because the real thing is heavier, bulkier, noisier, less flexible and can't produce the same sounds.

But if you're just playing at home like Dindude most of those things don't matter, and if he's already got all the sounds he needs then it's a big investment for once every now and then extra sounds 

bloodandtears

as a live performer I like the idea and ease of such stuff.. I've used digital stuff for nearly every gig I've done, and I will perform in Malta this weekend and can relax knowing I only have to take my guitar and modelling pedal, thus reducing the Jam Night nature of such an event.

My concern with the new stuff (AxeFX, AX8, Helix, Kemper, etc), is the latency between patch changes; now I know you can create things such as scenes etc that workaround such things.. but jumping from clean to rhythm to lead is something I have gotten used to. I expect they can do this but have heard of latency issues which rule them out as live performance tools for me.

I really should try them to see what all the fuss is about. I am happy thus far with my POD-FRFR setup..

Jonathanthomas83

guitarfishbay said:

Sporky said:

dindude said:

if you can have the real thing then why wouldn't you

Because the real thing is heavier, bulkier, noisier, less flexible and can't produce the same sounds.

But if you're just playing at home like Dindude most of those things don't matter, and if he's already got all the sounds he needs then it's a big investment for once every now and then extra sounds 

But with that said, he must be on this thread for a reason...he's intrigued enough to be considering it, so it's strange to me to consider it at all if he's happy with his current setup and will only use the other sounds occasionally.

There's no denying that these digital units are intriguing and some of us are like moths to a flame (I definitely was!). @Dindude, I'm certainly not accusing you of this, it's just an observation of guitarists, or rather, gear nuts, in general.

Teetonetal

dindude said:

The Helix LT is now at the price / quality point where it has my interest but if I went for it I'm pretty certain it wouldn't replace my valve amp and pedals. It would get used for headphone practice, easy recording, and "other" occasional sounds.

Why? I can't get away from the fact that for my core tones, if you can have the real thing then why wouldn't you. If I buy one and do end up selling all the pre-historic technology, I'd be the first to admit it on here. (Don't) watch this space.

I use my helix exactly for point 1, it does all those things, but I practice exclusively through headphones. I live in a flat with 2 small kids and only have 21:00 onwards free time for me. Helix is the difference between owning lots of gear that never  gets played, or playing as much as possible.

That said, I still love my valve amps. My live rig is still a pedal board into valve amp. Two reasons: Helix is full integrated at home. I can't face plugging in and unplugging, 2 I rarely play through a good PA capable of taking helix FOH. Which means I0d have to get powered speakers for it. Then what is the point?

However - I'm currently selling my remaining pedals, so that i can buy an LT. This will then be my pedal board and double as an emergency amp solution.  will use in 4cm with an amp.

If I could only have 1 rig due to financial constraints, then helix would win hands down.

guitarfishbay

bloodandtears said:

My concern with the new stuff (AxeFX, AX8, Helix, Kemper, etc), is the latency between patch changes; now I know you can create things such as scenes etc that workaround such things.. but jumping from clean to rhythm to lead is something I have gotten used to. I expect they can do this but have heard of latency issues which rule them out as live performance tools for me.

My understanding is that the Helix, Axe FX 2, and Kemper can all do at least 2 amps in a patch with seamless switching, which works for most people.  The AX8 only has one amp per patch but I think it might do X/Y though I'll be honest I have no idea how fast X/Y Switching via scene is - I have an Axe FX 2 so just use two separate amp blocks for my clean and distortion tones.  You could of course use a clean amp and a distortion pedal and that would be seamless.

I think all scene switching/snapshot switching etc is seamless within a patch, so it only matters if you can't fit everything you need within one patch in one song.  Many people get around this by designing song specific patches.

menamestom

For me, I think from an effect capability it will increase creativity.  The ability to change on the fly and have foot control will be great.  Thinking about most effects I use, it's a no brainer.  I was looking at pedals like EQD stuff that does weird and wonderful stuff.  The Helix may not do exactly the same but it just doesn't make sense to me to keep adding stomp boxes to my board which are DSP based pedals anyway.  When you look at it in that context, it is the price of 4 or 5 Alexander/EQD/Catalinbread pedals.   Plus the Helix will be updated for years to come.

There will still be specific stomps I may want to add (of course I will keep a small 4 pedal board), but the Helix will give me enough variety to mean I don't need anything else, and if I get something, it must have a sound I really want.

Carrying round a helix and a 1x12 combo is no harder than carrying a board, 1 drive pedal and a Helix, so even for effects only it makes sense.

I don't plan to go 'full digital' but at the new price point of the LT I don't need to, I can keep my amps and just use the option as and when I feel like it. Win/win.

Sporky

guitarfishbay said:

Sporky said:

dindude said:

if you can have the real thing then why wouldn't you

Because the real thing is heavier, bulkier, noisier, less flexible and can't produce the same sounds.

But if you're just playing at home like Dindude most of those things don't matter, and if he's already got all the sounds he needs then it's a big investment for once every now and then extra sounds 

I just play at home - taking up less space and having less faff is still worthwhile.

You're right on the sounds front; if you just want guitar-amp then a Helix is overkill (though still not as much money as a lot of amps), but as soon as you want to do a bit more it's a brilliant and actually quite cheap solution. You'd spend as much just getting the same sort of selection of reverbs and delays, let alone adding a switcher with half the flexibility...

guitarfishbay

The control thing is very cool and I think all of them do stuff that would be either impractical or impossible with a normal setup.

Clarky does the most nuts stuff I think, but I've assigned multiple things to a rocker pedal in some patches so I can say reduce the volume (to clean up the amp) and mix in some delay, which also gives a nice clean transition going the other way as you go back to your full drive sound with no delay.  You can set min and max points so that you can't go too far meaning you don't have to worry about cutting your sound out when you rock a volume pedal back.

Danny1969

You can use the expression pedal on the Boss GT10 to control gain or any other function, when you go deep that thing can do a lot control wise. I use mine to switch a Roland SPD sample player so when I hit the Valerie patch on my GT10 it switchs the sample player via midi to the right patch patch so I can trigger the brass. As the GT10 has a large well lit screen this is hand as I'm too vain to wear my glasses at gigs 

I'm sure the Helix has even more control options but it's surprising how good the cheap Boss units are at controlling midi devices, analog amp switching and allowing external expression pedals 

sgosden

bloodandtears said:

My concern with the new stuff (AxeFX, AX8, Helix, Kemper, etc), is the latency between patch changes; now I know you can create things such as scenes etc that workaround such things.. but jumping from clean to rhythm to lead is something I have gotten used to. I expect they can do this but have heard of latency issues which rule them out as live performance tools for me.

with everything set up properly there is no latency at all.

The massive amounts of professional bands who have gone digital for their live rigs is testament to this!

Sporky

Danny1969 said:

I'm sure the Helix has even more control options but it's surprising how good the cheap Boss units are at controlling midi devices, analog amp switching and allowing external expression pedals 

Even the VG-88 had some very neat control stuff, such as turning the wah on when the pedal moved away from fully heel-down, and controlling multiple things at a time. In many respects the Helix is still behind the likes of the GT-10 for control options.

guitarfishbay

Sporky said:

I just play at home - taking up less space and having less faff is still worthwhile.

Less faff is relative to the complexity of the sounds you use and the frequency at which you change them, but taking up less space was a big deal for me too because it allowed me space to put up some decent acoustic treatment.  

Even if a valve amp is a couple of % better sounding it doesn't really matter if the whole environment is several % worse sounding if you're unable to treat it properly due to there being stuff everywhere.

Sporky said:

You're right on the sounds front; if you just want guitar-amp then a Helix is overkill (though still not as much money as a lot of amps), but as soon as you want to do a bit more it's a brilliant and actually quite cheap solution. You'd spend as much just getting the same sort of selection of reverbs and delays, let alone adding a switcher with half the flexibility...

Absolutely, digital is a lot cheaper in a lot of scenarios, even for people who only use parts of digital workflow such as recording with IRs.  For the price of a single typical mic you can get enough IR packs to cover everything you'd feasibly need, and IMO the good ones surpass the results you'd be able to get in a typical small home room.  

Again - doesn't matter if a real setup could be a couple of % better when you compare workflows.  In the time it takes to set up and position one mic, on headphones that are cranked up so you can hear them over the amp, you could've tried a lot of different cabs/speakers/mics/blends sat in comfort listening at a sensible volume level in the context they'll be used.  I genuinely feel it is a superior workflow.  I wouldn't discourage anyone from learning how to place a mic on a guitar cab but being pragmatic I think a typical person just recording at home will get faster and more satisfying results using IRs/cab sims.

fretmeister

bloodandtears said:

as a live performer I like the idea and ease of such stuff.. I've used digital stuff for nearly every gig I've done, and I will perform in Malta this weekend and can relax knowing I only have to take my guitar and modelling pedal, thus reducing the Jam Night nature of such an event.

My concern with the new stuff (AxeFX, AX8, Helix, Kemper, etc), is the latency between patch changes; now I know you can create things such as scenes etc that workaround such things.. but jumping from clean to rhythm to lead is something I have gotten used to. I expect they can do this but have heard of latency issues which rule them out as live performance tools for me.

I really should try them to see what all the fuss is about. I am happy thus far with my POD-FRFR setup..

If you swap an entire heavily filled patch then you get latency. The software is now so big it needs a bit of time to load.

But on the Helix you simply set it all up WITHIN a single patch. Those are called Snapshots.

Using one of mine as an example.

Snapshot 1 is a JCM800 with very low gain, quite a bit of bass and treble in the EQ, mids scopped a bit. Little bit of spring reverb. It's my main clean sound.

Snapshot 2 turns on a TS and at the same time increases the JCM800 amp gain a bit, lowers the bass and ups the mids. It also removes the verb. This is crunch.

Snapshot 3 turns off the JCM800 completely, and turns on a Rectifier and a TS. It also turns on a very short doubling delay as a thickener.

I have it set for 3 snapshots but there can be 8.

My top row is the Snapshots.

The bottom row are set to be stomp boxes - a Phaser, the TS (so I can turn it off at will for S2 and 3, or engage it for S1, a simple delay, and a "Solo" button which with 1 push turns on an EQ block that raises the entire signal and boosts the mids, and turns on a short verb in a parallel path. The solo button can be used on all the Snapshots to raise the output by (IIRC) about 6db.

There is no latency for any of the changes as it all happens within 1 patch.

It's brilliant. The Snapshots allow you to take a snapshot of your current parameter settings and save it. So anything you change - TS drive level, the mid band on a pedal EQ, the presence on the amp, the stereo split on the ping pong is remembered for recall.

guitarfishbay

fretmeister said:

bloodandtears said:

...
My concern with the new stuff (AxeFX, AX8, Helix, Kemper, etc), is the latency between patch changes; now I know you can create things such as scenes etc that workaround such things.. but jumping from clean to rhythm to lead is something I have gotten used to. I expect they can do this but have heard of latency issues which rule them out as live performance tools for me.

If you swap an entire heavily filled patch then you get latency. The software is now so big it needs a bit of time to load.

But on the Helix you simply set it all up WITHIN a single patch. Those are called Snapshots.

Using one of mine as an example.
..
There is no latency for any of the changes as it all happens within 1 patch.

It's brilliant. The Snapshots allow you to take a snapshot of your current parameter settings and save it. So anything you change - TS drive level, the mid band on a pedal EQ, the presence on the amp, the stereo split on the ping pong is remembered for recall.

[snipped a bit for mobile users]

@fretmeister Is there an easy way that identifies which things are changing within a snapshot, that you could see in a basic overview without having to go in to blocks?

I ask because I think you can do some similar stuff on the Fractal but I specifically don't use any of it because it increases the complexity if you needed to change something in a rush.   But the Helix UI looks a lot faster so it might be viable if you don't have to go searching and can see from an overview display.

I've found the most simple way on the Fractal is to use all 8 scenes in a patch with no additional modifiers and then all blocks are doing is switching on and off per scene.  That way if something isn't sounding right it should be easy to know which block to go to, rather than looking for multiple modifiers within a block across several scenes/snapshots.  But the screen on the Axe FX 2 did come from a 1980s calculator.

fretmeister

Yes and no.

You have to look at a block to see what the changes are - but if they are mapped to a footswitch then just touching the switch will show you the assigned blocks and cycle through.

If any item has multiple parameter settings then it shows in brackets on that parameter.

guitarfishbay

Cool.  I think that's pretty decent if you can cycle through on the footswitch.  Pedal edit mode in general seems a pretty fantastic thing for workflow anyway, I don't think anything else does that.