Axe-Fx III vs Helix

steadystate said:
At all? No one? Ever? Including me?

A contender is any appropriate product available for audition and in the buyer's price range. It isn't each and every product on the market. For some people, neither the Axe III nor the Helix are contenders because of the price. I know I've tried everything I could find in my price range that I could demo in person. And if I decide on something and a better product comes along, nothing will prevent me from changing my mind, selling the original gear, and buying something else. I know of musicians here in town who do the same. We compare each other's gear as well.

And sure, plenty of people buy the first thing they see because of price/convinience/recommendation/whatever and are totally happy with it for many years. No blanket generalization applies to everyone.
Click to expand...

It was your blanket generalization I took issue with lol.
 
To answer the OP. I have both, plus a IIXL+. I find it easier to get sounds I enjoy with the Fractal products. I can get sounds I like out of the Helix, but it takes more work and often complicated patch chains to get there. If I could only use one for the rest of my life I would pick Fractal.

But I don't, and the Helix with a Variax is just the thing for learning new material, or just plating through my favorites and never having to switch guitars because I'm playing 4 songs in different tunings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jon
Yeah I still have a variax - there's nothing else that does what it does, and that's why I still have it.

It's a tool, just like the axe or helix

I will say that yes, each tool has its own niche, but use a Stanley and use a Klein and well, not all tools are created equally.
 
mehegama said:
What you describe here is just anecdote. Can you please explain by feel what do you mean, in your own use cases?
Click to expand...
I meant that the axe responds to your touch with every little nuance of your playing - there's no other modeler I've used out there at ANY price range that has that level of expression

Even if they sound the same, the feel is VERY different, and yes that might be just my own personal experience, but countless others here too have mentioned the same thing
 
i just watched a bunch of helix tone creation videos. everyone adds multiple EQs with various routing to "fine tune" the sound. 3 - 5 additional EQ blocks to get a "base tone." seems strange that that's needed. "alright making a new preset from scratch, first thing i do is add the 3 EQs in these places, and put an LA Comp at the end too." shrug

there's still a "klunkiness" to the clipping though. it sounds very harsh to me. i picture a thick tooth'd comb vs a fine tooth comb. that's the main difference i hear and experienced when making tones for my friend on his helix. i just couldn't get the smoothness i wanted.

again, usable? sure. sounds good? some of it did. to me, just Amp + Cab with basic settings in the Axe-Fx has a better sound.

just my opinion. hopefully it's ok to share that.
 
chris said:
i just watched a bunch of helix tone creation videos. everyone adds multiple EQs with various routing to "fine tune" the sound. 3 - 5 additional EQ blocks to get a "base tone." seems strange that that's needed. "alright making a new preset from scratch, first thing i do is add the 3 EQs in these places, and put an LA Comp at the end too." shrug

there's still a "klunkiness" to the clipping though. it sounds very harsh to me. i picture a thick tooth'd comb vs a fine tooth comb. that's the main difference i hear and experienced when making tones for my friend on his helix. i just couldn't get the smoothness i wanted.

again, usable? sure. sounds good? some of it did. to me, just Amp + Cab with basic settings in the Axe-Fx has a better sound.

just my opinion. hopefully it's ok to share that.
Click to expand...

Don't know what videos you watched, but multiple EQ blocks is most certainly NOT the normal case. If you want to see somebody in action making excellent Helix presets, check out a whole lot of videos by Jason Sadites, excellent Canadian guitarist. Another one to check out is Richie Castellano (Blue Oyster Cult) - lots of good videos of him creating great tones. Also our very own Marco Fanton from this forum. He uses both.

All these "differences" people claim to be able to hear - would be very interesting to (a) run some blindfold tests, both playing and just hearing, and (b) do some waveform measurements to see if all the talk of different clipping, smooth/harsh, etc actually exist, or if it's just peoples' over-active imagination. Oh, and confirmation bias, of course... ;)

I stick with my original idea - the two devices are different, not "better", the AxeFx3 is probably more powerful in terms of DSP and capabilities. But neither is BETTER than the other - just different - in exactly the same way that your favourite guitar is not better than mine.
 
Doc Rock said:
but multiple EQ blocks is most certainly NOT the normal case. If you want to see somebody in action making excellent Helix presets, check out a whole lot of videos by Jason Sadites
Click to expand...
from his video:
Screen Shot 2020-10-27 at 10.42.35 PM.png
2 EQs and a compressor at the end.

he came up with the "crossover" method when the Helix first came out so you could cut or boost the frequencies on separate paths. now it's baked into one of those EQ blocks.

no issue with what he's doing as it gives the sound he needs. but that's what i've seen in almost every video i watched tonight.

Doc Rock said:
All these "differences" people claim to be able to hear - would be very interesting to (a) run some blindfold tests, both playing and just hearing, and (b) do some waveform measurements to see if all the talk of different clipping, smooth/harsh, etc actually exist, or if it's just peoples' over-active imagination. Oh, and confirmation bias, of course... ;)
Click to expand...
been there, done that, picked the right ones over and over. why not just... believe what someone is saying?
 
Same, been there, done that, plus Cliff has posted lots of measurements of various products on the forum, and if you can't hear it, the graphs speak for themselves

How do we know he's not lying? Well we don't, but I hear it, and he's an engineer, not a marketing guru, he looks at data objectively, not try to bias a graph to sell you something

Matter of fact he has told people if a competitor's products are better suited for them. If that's not honestly well....
 
jon said:
Same, been there, done that, plus Cliff has posted lots of measurements of various products on the forum, and if you can't hear it, the graphs speak for themselves

How do we know he's not lying? Well we don't, but I hear it, and he's an engineer, not a marketing guru, he looks at data objectively, not try to bias a graph to sell you something

Matter of fact he has told people if a competitor's products are better suited for them. If that's not honestly well....
Click to expand...
can you point me to those posts? I would be interested to see these comparisons.
 
<sarcasm alert>

A fine-dining restaurant isn't better than McDonald's. It's just "different". Let's all dismiss the idea of objective standards of quality. They don't exist.
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't get too outraged at multiple EQs. Wanna count the user-adjustable EQs in the Axe III amp block alone?

Jason's crossover strategy is useful to him, since he likes to think about post-amp EQ that way, but it's by no means necessary. I won't say nobody else uses it, but it's not at all universal.

Fact is, pre- and post-EQ is a fundamental part of rock guitar tone, whether it's separate blocks and/or user-controllable or not.
 
steadystate said:
A fine-dining restaurant isn't better than McDonald's. It's just "different". Let's all dismiss the idea of objective standards of quality. They don't exist.
Click to expand...
that analogy would have held if the 2 alternatives here were of similar magnitudes to Macdonald's vs fine dining. They clearly are not. To me is like 2 fine dinning places with different cooking style.
 
mehegama said:
that analogy would have held if the 2 alternatives here were of similar magnitudes to Macdonald's vs fine dining. They clearly are not. To me is like 2 fine dinning places with different cooking style.
Click to expand...
That's my point. They are clearly in a different league, just as the Axe and Helix are to me. I don't think they are comparable.

My post was meant to be a general critique of the "there is no better, just different" theory gone too far. To be fair to Helix, I probably should have said Applebee's.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jon
The Helix is ok; but 10 tons of pre-amp blocks and post amp blocks in Helix-land is an absolute real thing. So much eq'ing and compression to try and tame that disembodied distortion and weird mid range and low end. Ugh. The Fractal amp block is, in general; beyond reproach. I have some Fractal twitches/triggers for sure; but tone is NOT one of them. Leon 5 minute tone vids that are actually, you know; 5 minutes...versus tons of Helix "how to vids" for basic tones that should not take 37 minutes to dial in. The ease of use argument that always gets touted in Helix's favor pretty much flies out the window as a direct result of all this surgical eq bs. YMMV and all that; but it has rang true for me from early HX days to now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jon
Dave Merrill said:
I wouldn't get too outraged at multiple EQs. Wanna count the user-adjustable EQs in the Axe III amp block alone?
Click to expand...
Having them available is different than “needing” to use them in every preset you make.

I’m only mentioning it as I’ve seen it in many videos where they say “wanna make a great helix tone? Here’s what you have to do.”
 
JiveTurkey said:
The Helix is ok; but 10 tons of pre-amp blocks and post amp blocks in Helix-land is an absolute real thing. So much eq'ing and compression to try and tame that disembodied distortion and weird mid range and low end. Ugh.
Click to expand...
I used to have to do this with the Ultra. When I tested the Helix, I used a single eq before the amp, and no effects after. I was testing the raw amp models and comparing them to the III with the same IRs. In this context, there is no comparison. Helix can sound good with a good player playing a good tune in a good mix. Pete Thorn's demo is pleasant to listen to, but it's the song and the playing that really stand out. Love that guy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JTI
steadystate said:
I used to have to do this with the Ultra. When I tested the Helix, I used a single eq before the amp, and no effects after. I was testing the raw amp models and comparing them to the III with the same IRs. In this context, there is no comparison. Helix can sound good with a good player playing a good tune in a good mix. Pete Thorn's demo is pleasant to listen to, but it's the song and the playing that really stand out. Love that guy.
Click to expand...
In a mix; I actually like using Native. A lot! I can strip back all the usual garbage blocks in presets that seem to be necessary when playing it in person. Multiple tracks seem to kind of "smooth over" a lot of the problems I have with it; for whatever reason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom