Achieving valve tone with solid state plus..?

[JeezyMcNuggles]

Whilst I agree with you, more speakers = more impractical.

No. Matt's right. Raise the 210 off the ground, and you might as well play through a one 8 combo. In fact, the one 8 might even sound fuller on the ground next to it.

 

[FunkHead]

I would try the Helix in front of the Peavey instead of the Effects loop at Rehearsal/Jams.

 

[dirtychinchilla]

I would try the Helix in front of the Peavey instead of the Effects loop at Rehearsal/Jams.

So use it as a pedal? I'm using a dual amp sim in it

 

[FunkHead]

So use it as a pedal? I'm using a dual amp sim in it

I would think it'd be worth a try. Or put Darkglass B3K out front. Even without the Helix that'd have plenty of Heft.

 

[dirtychinchilla]

I would think it'd be worth a try. Or put Darkglass B3K out front. Even without the Helix that'd have plenty of Heft.

I'm a one pedal man.

 

[burgerdj]

My analog Sansamp still does a remarkable job IMHO. However, I really have not looked hard for a substitute so there may be better options out there.

 

[Medicine Man]

Imho, most of the allure of the SVT stack comes from the big displacement of the fridge itself, which to many guitarists is "better tone." 4 times the speakers lets you push more mid lows, and the sealed fridge has a lot of low rolloff. You can emulate the sound by adding a bit of tranparent overdrive, HPF and compression reasonably, but as they say, there is no replacement for displacement. I found that my SVT at low volumes through a 2x10 sounds pretty similar to a class D through the same.

 

[agedhorse]

I would try the Helix in front of the Peavey instead of the Effects loop at Rehearsal/Jams.

The Helix really is intended to replace the amp and speaker voicing if you are using the amp and cab sims on it. The biggest issues I see are ending up with the amp/cab sim on top of an amp/cab voicing, resulting in muddiness of stacked voicings.

 

[agedhorse]

Have you got any examples of this? I'm inclined to agree with you having experienced it myself.

Mostly hearing them live, while providing audio for touring shows. Done well, modeling can be quite convincing, but the learning curve is usually very steep.

 

[dirtychinchilla]

The Helix really is intended to replace the amp and speaker voicing if you are using the amp and cab sims on it. The biggest issues I see are ending up with the amp/cab sim on top of an amp/cab voicing, resulting in muddiness of stacked voicings.

So I'm running no cab sims for that reason - it sounded awful - and I can of course cut out the amps from the loop. One thing I love, though, is that I can split the frequencies of my signal. So I tend to apply the effects to the low end (sounds good to me) and keep the high end clean. Either way, my the lower frequencies aren't being sapped by different effects.

 

[bherman]

IMO the weak link in your rig is the Fender 210 cab. I think that a higher quality cab would make a big difference in your overall sound. Since you are in the UK, a Barefaced cab is a no brainer. A pair of Mesa Subway cabs would do the trick also (2x112 or a 112 + 115).

 

[dirtychinchilla]

IMO the weak link in your rig is the Fender 210 cab. I think that a higher quality cab would make a big difference in your overall sound. Since you are in the UK, a Barefaced cab is a no brainer. A pair of Mesa Subway cabs would do the trick also (2x112 or a 112 + 115).

I'd love to buy Barefaced, but sadly my budget will likely never accommodate that! Mesa even less so!

 

[707GK]

I put this little guy on my pedalboard for the same purpose. It has achieved the goal I was trying to achieve.

 

[Eddie LeBlanc]

You might try a Markbass Compressore. It is a Tube Compressor.

 

[FunkHead]

The Helix really is intended to replace the amp and speaker voicing if you are using the amp and cab sims on it. The biggest issues I see are ending up with the amp/cab sim on top of an amp/cab voicing, resulting in muddiness of stacked voicings.

Agreed. But putting the Helix in the Effects loop is simply changing the order and still using the Peavey Pre.

 

[dirtychinchilla]

Agreed. But putting the Helix in the Effects loop is simply changing the order and still using the Peavey Pre.

As far as I can understand, I am bypassing the Peavey pre-amp with my set up. Perhaps my terminology is not quite correct - it's in a send return loop, and all the controls on the amp are inactive aside from the volume.

 

[FunkHead]

As far as I can understand, I am bypassing the Peavey pre-amp with my set up. Perhaps my terminology is not quite correct - it's in a send return loop, and all the controls on the amp are inactive aside from the volume.

Only when you plug bass > Helix > Effects return. If you Use Bass > Peavey Front input and then effect send > Helix > Effects return, then you are still using Peavey Preamp.

 

[dirtychinchilla]

Only when you plug bass > Helix > Effects return. If you Use Bass > Peavey Front input and then effect send > Helix > Effects return, then you are still using Peavey Preamp.

I'm doing the former. My bass goes into the Helix, then I have send/return connected to the amp/Helix and that's it.

 

[mexicanyella]

For all I know, some people like the OP’s guitarist can in fact detect an instant, non-adjustable deficiency in anything lacking tubes, but I have my doubts.

There are soooo many parameters you can adjust in something like a Helix that I suspect quick replies of “just get a tube amp” to be knee-jerk reactions. Confirmation bias. Anti-modeler/pro-tube amp confirmation bias does have a characteristic ring to it, and I hear it in this thread.

Maybe more to the point, the OP seems to have space, budget and transport limitations that strongly favor working with what he/she already has. Since that listed gear includes a hugely flexible front end, a powerful back end, and limited cab size/weight/displacement, maybe the focus should be more on “how can I approach a sound like _____ in a _____ playing situation with a Helix, 1,000-watt Peavey head and 2 x 10
Cab?”

To answer something like that, the focus probably needs to shift off of “achieving a valve tone with solid-state gear,” because what seems to be getting lumped in with a preconception of “valve tone” is physical cab/driver displacement, dirt, compression and EQ. With a Helix, or any number of other modelers, attaining a whole range of dirt, compression and EQ possibilities should be do-able with tweaking, and listening in a given band mix. Screw how valve-y it sounds or not...how does it fit the mix?

The cab will still be a limitation, but if that’s all that’s available because you drive a Miata or have to carry it up and down 9 flights of stairs and the service elevator is broken...what can you do with what you’ve got?

Probably need more info on how loud it needs to be, what it’s supposed to keep up with in performance, whether it’s getting some PA assistance or is the sole source of bass reproduction. That will help determine how much can be expected and what limitations need to be accepted.

 

[FunkHead]

I'm doing the former. My bass goes into the Helix, then I have send/return connected to the amp/Helix and that's it.

I don't quite understand. Why would you run the send to the helix. You should Just plug the bass into the Helix and the helix into the effects return.