Where should I buy a Helix DSP Mini in the US?

[vactor]

the Helix stuff seems to have some serious tech behind it, as nobody else implements all pass filters in a similar way. i find some parts of the GUI interface a bit ... 'clunky', especially compared to the JL Tun software, but Helix does some _really_ amazing stuff in those DSP's.

[jtrosky]

the Helix stuff seems to have some serious tech behind it, as nobody else implements all pass filters in a similar way. i find some parts of the GUI interface a bit ... 'clunky', especially compared to the JL Tun software, but Helix does some _really_ amazing stuff in those DSP's.

That's kind of funny - I find the complete opposite - to me, the Helix software is just so clear, easy to follow and pretty polished - whereas I wasn't a fan of the JL Tun software - I found it confusing and hard to follow when working with another member on their tune. :-)

Maybe it just depends on what software you used first and became used to.

Specifically, I find the channel routing in the Tun software to be confusing - with all of the long lines that you have to try and follow to see what inputs go to what outputs, for example. Check boxes that aren't really labeled as to what they are for, etc. I just found it confusing and hard to follow.

[vactor]

i think you hit the psychological nail square on the head, a lot depends on whatever your first exposure is. either way, the things that the german guys are doing in DSP hardware and software is pretty damn amazing. i also like what ARC does in their pro level software, but they have yet to implement all pass filters on the outputs, which i find rather strange. but the new DSPs available really are a step up overall from what was available previously. would be nice if development kept apace with regards to updates for all of them. but we are somewhat spoiled for choice.

[ozzuneoj]

The user base here seems more reasonable than most audio forums so I don't feel like I'm kicking a hornet's nest by asking this question, but...

Should I care at all what RCA cables I use to go from my DSP to my amplifiers? I will only need two sets right now (one set for front stage, one for subwoofer), and they will only need to be 1-2 feet long depending on where I put everything. I have a pile of RCA cables, like anyone would. Nothing fancy at all. Probably not twisted-pair... some probably shielded, some probably not. It's hard to say. They're mostly just home AV stuff.

At 1-2 feet in length, is this likely to make any difference whatsoever in a vehicle? Looking at cables online it looks like "fancy" looking cables are a minimum of $10 for 3'. I don't really care that much what they look like. This may come as a surprise, but I'm not trying to impress anyone with my 13 year old stereo equipment hidden in a custom built compartment in the floor of my 11 year old Hyundai Santa Fe. I don't think anyone will care what the cables look like unless I post pictures of the setup online (which wouldn't please everyone, no matter what I did). So unless there is some very clear reason to use one cable over another, I don't see the point in spending $20-$40 for a few feet of cable.

I will say that both of my amps mention using twisted pair cable, but they seem to be referring to running cables 10+ feet from the head unit to the amplifier. For such a short run I don't know if it matters if they are twisted pair. I don't even know if my old ones were after all the years I used them...

To go along with this question, I have always run a stereo pair of RCAs from the sub output of my head unit to my mono subwoofer amplifier. What is the best way to do this with a DSP? It will be receiving a stereo signal from an Android head unit via spdif. I looked at the software and it seems like it would be up to me whether I choose to send it all to a single sub output or to two. I'm not sure what the difference would be though.

[Jdunk54nl]

Cables don’t matter unless you have issues. I’ve seen people use original ninetendo cables and their system sounds great.

as far as sub, that depends on how your amp needs a signal. I run a mono signal that then gets split with a y adapter because my amp said it needs both connections. Some can just use a single mono input. I would run two channels of dsp but need the channels for other things. In reality though, it doesn’t matter.

[ozzuneoj]

Cables don’t matter unless you have issues. I’ve seen people use original ninetendo cables and their system sounds great.

as far as sub, that depends on how your amp needs a signal. I run a mono signal that then gets split with a y adapter because my amp said it needs both connections. Some can just use a single mono input. I would run two channels of dsp but need the channels for other things. In reality though, it doesn’t matter.

Thank you! I figured as much. I'll have channels to spare on the DSP.2 so I'll just send them both.

I'm sure I will have a thousand more questions, but in the PC-Tool on the IO screen, what is the difference between the main routing and digital routing screens? Since I'll be using optical, I won't have any other inputs at all. I will need to find a comprehensive (English) guide for this program. It looks extremely intuitive though.

[Haakono]

For subwoofer output can send them both as a stereo signal from 2 channels on the dsp, and let the mono amp do the summing of signals. Or you can sum them in the dsp software (just drag and drop both left and right input to the same output channel and it will sum the output signal from both input channels, at least from analog signals, not sure how it goes with digital).

[jrwalte]

Since you have the DSP.2, there is no reason to run sub only on channel G. It makes sense with a DSP.3/mini because the sub FX features only apply to one channel, fixed by the software. A limitation in their software I don't understand. The FX features should be virtual and be able to be applied to any channel.

[jtrosky]

Since you have the DSP.2, there is no reason to run sub only on channel G. It makes sense with a DSP.3/mini because the sub FX features only apply to one channel, fixed by the software. A limitation in their software I don't understand. The FX features should be virtual and be able to be applied to any channel.

Agreed! It almost seems like it's a hardware limitation for some reason... I too wish that I could apply the FX features to different and/or multiple channels. I kind of wish that they would just add virtual channels to the DSP, unless that too is a hardware limitation....

[jtrosky]

Thank you! I figured as much. I'll have channels to spare on the DSP.2 so I'll just send them both.

I'm sure I will have a thousand more questions, but in the PC-Tool on the IO screen, what is the difference between the main routing and digital routing screens? Since I'll be using optical, I won't have any other inputs at all. I will need to find a comprehensive (English) guide for this program. It looks extremely intuitive though.

Regarding the routing... I too use an optical connection. Really, you can use either the main routing table or the digital routing table. It really only matters if you are going to have more than one type of input (so if you had both analog and digital inputs) - so that you could control which one is active, etc. If you are only going to use a single optical input, the results are the same whether you use the Main or Digital routing table.

Personally, I use the main input now for my setup.