The Helix sounds are awesome from a modeling, clarity, realism point of view. My problem with it is the DSP limitations and that some models don't play nice together and cause the result to go into this weird unusable alien distorted sound. I was not able to 'break' the B3n I had or Overloud's TH3 I use now like I could without effort in Helix Native. That Native has an artificial DSP limit to be compatible with the hardware models is silly. I can make these great split chains of effects in TH3 and everything just works. In Native you run out of DSP after 2-3 pedals and an amp/cab sim.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
New: Zoom B3n Multi-Effects
- Thread starter CharlieC
- Start date
-
- Tags
- b3n multi-effects zoom
The Helix sounds are awesome from a modeling, clarity, realism point of view. My problem with it is the DSP limitations and that some models don't play nice together and cause the result to go into this weird unusable alien distorted sound. I was not able to 'break' the B3n I had or Overloud's TH3 I use now like I could without effort in Helix Native. That Native has an artificial DSP limit to be compatible with the hardware models is silly. I can make these great split chains of effects in TH3 and everything just works. In Native you run out of DSP after 2-3 pedals and an amp/cab sim.
It is only partially isolated. Plug in an analogue effect alongside the B3N and you'll likely get the dreaded whine. Not all effects are susceptible but those that are don't play nice.
There is a whole thread on isolated power supplies on here - I believe someone actually took one apart. My guitar player bought one and even though he didn't have the B3Nm, he did have other digital pedals mixed with some analogue. Noise city - he sold the Donner and ante'd up for the MXR/Dunlop unit. I personally like the one spot pro.
Zoom are releasing a new B1 Four and B1X Four at NAMM. They are an update to the B1on and B1xon.
Would be nice. This is a problem that plagues just about every digital modeler/multi-effect made in the last 10 years...that I know of. I'm guessing if there were a way to implement it, the big boy players like Fractal, Line 6, Boss, Kemper would have this feature. I do know the AxeFxII introduced an output level meter that was weighted so that you could better balance your presets and various gain stages (clean, dirty, etc.), but still a manual "by ear" process with the meter being a visual aid.
I think that sounds easier than it really is. First off, where is unity? Is it the average of the effects you currently have dialed in, or is it the one with the highest setting where you want all of the rest of them to be? Or maybe the lowest setting? What if all of the effects' respective volumes don't scale together, such that one gets louder or softer faster than another?
While it would be nice to have such a control, I think it's a pipe dream without much basis in reality, sad to say.
I've had the Zoom B3n for a year now, and gigged regularly with it.
After hearing The B3n side-by-side with The Line 6 Helix stomp - there is no comparison!
The Helix effects eat Zoom's effects/sims for breakfast, lunch & dinner!
Even the ability of The Helix for midi & effects loops, which adds very important connectivity & versatility (Zoom will NEVER get this part right, as they don't listen to customers and are too cheap/unmotivated to do so).
Look just how big The Zoom G5n is - and still zero midi/fx loop connectivity on its empty input panel!
There is a depth, responsiveness, fidelity, and connectivity in The Helix line that Zoom effects just cannot touch.
The Zoom sounds nice, until you place a Helix next to it for direct comparison - that's when the difference becomes abundantly clear - that there is a big difference in class and realism.
But, there is also a difference in price + $/£300!
The ONLY reason I've stuck with the Zoom B3n is because of Zoom's vastly superior 6 pedal switching capability.
It's hilarious to me that people mention how great it is to have a Micro-Helix, but the first thing they all have to do is buy an additional switching pedal that doubles its size - just to be able to use it on a gig!!
A Zoom 'B3n-sized' Helix Stomp, with 6 pedal switches, would be the perfect size for a MultiFx (+ nobody would need an additional bulky footswitcher pedal just to use it).
If you are used to switching & scrolling effects/patches on the fly, the Helix Stomp is embarrasingly poor.
But, if you are a "3 patches only/set at home & forget" kind of guy, then the Helix is vastly superior (in my opinion).
Even the guy who started this thread (Charlie C), has sold his zoom b3n, bought a Helix stomp, and hasn't looked back!!.....
Last edited:
Well, you'd have to expect that the HX Stomp, being about 3x the US cost of the B3n, would have some distinct advantages over the B3n since it is using the same amp/cab/fx algorithms as the flagship Helix. I agree, if you can get it done with a 3 button pedal and you *don't mind spending* the extra cash, then sure, the HX Stomp is a great choice.
If you're more cash-strapped, the B3n is a worthy option, though. What it comes down to - at least for me - is that my performances, tone, and general outcome of my gigs has been no different whether I've used an AxeFxII or a B3n (or a G5n). It's all good. What matters is how skillful you are at getting your tools to do what you want them to do, and I've had no problem with the Zoom stuff.
As mentioned, a bigger problem for me is the lack of switches and WYSIWYG on the multi-fx pedal. Though I really enjoyed the Atomic Amplifire, their original 3 - button version was far too limiting and I had to move on.
FWIW, and speaking of Atomic Amplifire, they've just added an SVT bass amp model via latest firmware. The 6 button version - which features MIDI, USB editing, XLR and 1/4" (L & R both) outputs and an insert loop - is going for $499 US. The 12 button version is $599 US, same as HX Stomp. Atomic is known for holding its own against the "big boys", so no slouch in terms of quality. It all depends on what you want, can afford, and how you intend to use it.
If you're more cash-strapped, the B3n is a worthy option, though. What it comes down to - at least for me - is that my performances, tone, and general outcome of my gigs has been no different whether I've used an AxeFxII or a B3n (or a G5n). It's all good. What matters is how skillful you are at getting your tools to do what you want them to do, and I've had no problem with the Zoom stuff.
As mentioned, a bigger problem for me is the lack of switches and WYSIWYG on the multi-fx pedal. Though I really enjoyed the Atomic Amplifire, their original 3 - button version was far too limiting and I had to move on.
FWIW, and speaking of Atomic Amplifire, they've just added an SVT bass amp model via latest firmware. The 6 button version - which features MIDI, USB editing, XLR and 1/4" (L & R both) outputs and an insert loop - is going for $499 US. The 12 button version is $599 US, same as HX Stomp. Atomic is known for holding its own against the "big boys", so no slouch in terms of quality. It all depends on what you want, can afford, and how you intend to use it.
Well, for one thing, line level inputs on a mixer are usually TRS, so converting to XLR would be unnecessary. The better question might be, "If line level is so great, why do so many FOH people insist on DIs to convert to mic level?"
Setting it such that the volume bypassing all effects is the same as going through them, based on some reasonable average across the frequency spectrum based on psychoscoustic principles would be enough.
Moving the goal posts and a straw man in one comment, congrats
But I'll play along. Because they're nubs. Line level unbalanced connections over distances can pick up a lot of noise negating any SNR gains from the higher voltage level. Balanced line levels are superior though since they are noise free, like mic connections, and have a higher SNR than mic connections.
Now let's allow the thread to get back on topic
I know those are trendy terms to use in an online forum, but not really relevant in this case. This isn't an argument. It's a series of questions and answers. I greatly appreciate your answers, but they're wrapped in defensiveness and condescension. And I don't even know what "Because they're nubs" means. What I do know is that we bass players have for so long had it etched into our brains that we must DI.Moving the goal posts and a straw man in one comment, congrats
But you did answer my original question. The Stomp TRS outputs are switchable between mic and line levels. Thank you.
What he is trying to say is - most line levels like those from your bass are unbalanced - typical of only 2 wires and the plug end show 2 sections known as tip and sleeve or TS. The TRS connection or Tip Ring Sleeve carriers 3 wires similar to a stereo cable or a 3 prong mic cable. Because 2 wires carry the signal (the other one is shield / ground) with a TRS cable any noise generated is usually cancelled out. A long cable run is more likely to acquire noise so a TRS line level run is great, a mic level (also 3 wires) is great, an unbalanced line out from your bass is likely not great and getting worse, the longer the cable is. Add to this the capacitance added to a passive bass and it will kill your tone on top of it.
nub is his short form for newbie or someone without as much experience. He may have been taught to use mic levels without knowing why and thus sticks to only what he's been previously told.
Hmmm....it looks like ZOOM floated this briefly, and then pulled it off their site:
Dedicated rhythm and looper locations. Those who liked the previous design of the B3 will certainly enjoy this I'd think....depending on the price, of course.
Dedicated rhythm and looper locations. Those who liked the previous design of the B3 will certainly enjoy this I'd think....depending on the price, of course.
thanks for that - I’m primerally the 3 patches set up and forget guy. Playing at church direct into the desk with no back line and IEM, the ability to set up something to model an amp and cab is really valuable tool in making sure the bass is used in the right part of the mix - otherwise a digital desk is far too powerful tool in the hands of a volunteer sound tech!I've had the Zoom B3n for a year now, and gigged regularly with it.
After hearing The B3n side-by-side with The Line 6 Helix stomp - there is no comparison!
The Helix effects eat Zoom's effects/sims for breakfast, lunch & dinner!
Even the ability of The Helix for midi & effects loops, which adds very important connectivity & versatility (Zoom will NEVER get this part right, as they don't listen to customers and are too cheap/unmotivated to do so).
Look just how big The Zoom G5n is - and still zero midi/fx loop connectivity on its empty input panel!
There is a depth, responsiveness, fidelity, and connectivity in The Helix line that Zoom effects just cannot touch.
The Zoom sounds nice, until you place a Helix next to it for direct comparison - that's when the difference becomes abundantly clear - that there is a big difference in class and realism.
But, there is also a difference in price + $/£300!
The ONLY reason I've stuck with the Zoom B3n is because of Zoom's vastly superior 6 pedal switching capability.
It's hilarious to me that people mention how great it is to have a Micro-Helix, but the first thing they all have to do is buy an additional switching pedal that doubles its size - just to be able to use it on a gig!!
A Zoom 'B3n-sized' Helix Stomp, with 6 pedal switches, would be the perfect size for a MultiFx (+ nobody would need an additional bulky footswitcher pedal just to use it).
If you are used to switching & scrolling effects/patches on the fly, the Helix Stomp is embarrasingly poor.
But, if you are a "3 patches only/set at home & forget" kind of guy, then the Helix is vastly superior (in my opinion).
Even the guy who started this thread (Charlie C), has sold his zoom b3n, bought a Helix stomp, and hasn't looked back!!.....
The hx stomp also has going for it the DI capabilities, audio interface and the fact if I feed it into a FRFR speaker it can be a guitar rig as well as a bass rig. Obv that would mean selling my amp and getting something more FRFR ... but it’s something I’m tempted by
You're welcome.
Well then, The Helix Stomp is your best bet!
Be careful on these forums, as I've discovered that some forum members are actually affiliated with Zoom, but pretend to be objective customers!
You'll see them all over the internet, basically advertising Zoom products under the guise of "interested customers"!
Any mild criticism you make of a Zoom product - these posters/members will be right there to downplay your observations and convince everybody else that the zoom product is better than it actually is.
You'll even see them comparing budget Zoom products with gear that is clearly superior (Kemper, Axe FX, Helix, Headrush etc), and trying to convince people that there is little/no difference in quality!
Ask yourself: why would these members be on various forums like: (Talkbass, Basschat, The Gearpage, Gearslutz, etc) always posting release material directly from The Zoom Corporation, pasting the same comments on each forum, and passive-aggressively defending every zoom deficiency in quality?
You will also notice that their comments receive "likes" from the exact same people everytime they post something regarding a Zoom product on talkbass!
I'm glad that some forum members have finally noticed this questionable behaviour, but were wise enough to ignore the hyperbole and buy The Helix anyway....
Last edited:
About the Headrush.... I can confirm there was litlle to no difference in sound, at least in the sounds my guitar player tried. He's a boutique pedal guy which isn't super-impressed with zoom (especially distortions) but find the Headrush soundwise on the same level ....
