# Is the helix dsp.2 the sweet spot?



## dcfis (Sep 9, 2016)

Trying to compare the helix amongst themselves and with the mosconi. In the helix lineup is the dsp.2 the best bang for the buck? The resolution is less than the pro. But seems like the adjustments to ta and ea are the same


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

if you dont need 10 channels, theres not much reason to get the pro. small features, thats it. (coaxial input being a big one in my personal install).. before deciding on any processor, download their softwares and mess around with them to see which you like better


----------



## sq2k1 (Oct 31, 2015)

Or you could be future proof by buying the additional options....sometimes an install can change and then you think why didn't I buy the bells and whistles....flexibility is a good thing to have at times.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

sq2k1 said:


> Or you could be future proof by buying the additional options....sometimes an install can change and then you think why didn't I buy the bells and whistles....flexibility is a good thing to have at times.


yup. i bought a dsp.2 and within a month i had to sell it because i ended up needing a coaxial input.


----------



## sq2k1 (Oct 31, 2015)

Pretty much used that mentality when I got my mk2.... if I want to go multiple directions, I have the options to do so... I may entertain the idea of doing coaxial one day if I ever decide to give up the p99rs as my main source.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

sq2k1 said:


> Pretty much used that mentality when I got my mk2.... if I want to go multiple directions, I have the options to do so... I may entertain the idea of doing coaxial one day if I ever decide to give up the p99rs as my main source.


I went with a Fiio x5iii and use a Fiio RM1 as steering when coltrols and a modified helix remote (soon to be director) to control volume. coax out right to the helix. best source ive ever had by a long shot


----------



## sq2k1 (Oct 31, 2015)

I may consider something similar.... do a bit of research on my end and see what I decide. I am guessing you are using a director as well....


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

sq2k1 said:


> I may consider something similar.... do a bit of research on my end and see what I decide. I am guessing you are using a director as well....


I will be. Right now I'm using a modofied helix URC 2a

Sent from my VS988 using Tapatalk


----------



## smgreen20 (Oct 13, 2006)

Is the director a must have to make the unit operate or can the DSP unit operate as a standalone?

The Mosconi 6to8 V8 and Cadence DSP4.8 require them to function. 

The 6to8 V8 I acquired has the 3&4 outputs dead. I've tried multiple things. Uninstalled and reinstalled the software, used a different amp, different RCA's, nothing. Speakers test good and play. 

Looking into getting the Helix DSP.2 to replace it. It's within my price range. I do have one more idea to check/test to make sure it's the DSP.
The seller assured me it worked 100% and is willing to give me my money back. If tomorrows test doesn't work, then a refund I will get.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

smgreen20 said:


> Is the director a must have to make the unit operate or can the DSP unit operate as a standalone?
> 
> The Mosconi 6to8 V8 and Cadence DSP4.8 require them to function.
> 
> ...


the director is not required for the processor to function unless you have a non-variable volume source. the mosconi also does not require a controller for it to function. not sure about the cadence


----------



## smgreen20 (Oct 13, 2006)

Good to know about the Helix, but the Mosconi to make any changes you have to have a remote hooked up. I have the 6to8 V8 and the program wont let me in unless a remote is connected. The Cadence is the same as the Mosconi. It states in the manual that you have to have it hooked up to use.


----------



## Hammer1 (Jan 30, 2011)

smgreen20 said:


> Good to know about the Helix, but the Mosconi to make any changes you have to have a remote hooked up. I have the 6to8 V8 and the program wont let me in unless a remote is connected. The Cadence is the same as the Mosconi. It states in the manual that you have to have it hooked up to use.


What changes are you talking about ??. Remote is only needed to change presets or if your using DSP for volume control and sub control. The 6to8V8 can be connected to and tuned with out a remote. I have had a 6to8, 6to8V8 and now a 6to8 Aerospace and never had to have remote connected to have laptop connect.


----------



## smgreen20 (Oct 13, 2006)

My first time connecting it, I got a prompt to connect the remote. Since then, I have not gotten said prompt and as I looked into it today, I can tune and use with out a remote.


----------



## gumbeelee (Jan 3, 2011)

I have ran helix dsp’s with the director and without the director. If you are one that likes to have alot of different setups, the director is a must. If u like just having a main sq setup u r good to go without the director. Also u will need the director if u do not have an external volume control.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## bbfoto (Aug 28, 2005)

gumbeelee said:


> I have ran helix dsp’s with the director and without the director. If you are one that likes to have alot of different setups, the director is a must. If u like just having a main sq setup u r good to go without the director. Also u will need the director if u do not have an external volume control.



The simpler #URC-2A remote will work if he doesn't want to spend the big bucks on the Director remote and he doesn't need more than 2 Presets. Or he can make his own simple remote using the guide posted here in DIYMA.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

bbfoto said:


> The simpler #URC-2A remote will work if he doesn't want to spend the big bucks on the Director remote and he doesn't need more than 2 Presets. Or he can make his own simple remote using the guide posted here in DIYMA.


theres a new version of the remote, the urc-3. much better looking and will be much easier to integrate into a car


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

SkizeR said:


> theres a new version of the remote, the urc-3. much better looking and will be much easier to integrate into a car


I hadn't seen the URC.3. Wow, no contest on which I would choose. The 2A might be better ergonomically, but it looks like much more of a pain to integrate, unless you're just going to leave it dangling loose somewhere in your car. I'd much rather have the simple mounting solution of the URC.3.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

rton20s said:


> I hadn't seen the URC.3. Wow, no contest on which I would choose. The 2A might be better ergonomically, but it looks like much more of a pain to integrate, unless you're just going to leave it dangling loose somewhere in your car. I'd much rather have the simple mounting solution of the URC.3.


Yeah, they never really announced it. Its Just sorta.. There

Sent from my VS988 using Tapatalk


----------



## Syncher (May 26, 2016)

I'm in the same boat looking for the sweet spot-dsp. But I'm confused about whether the DSP.2 will even work for me or do I need the Pro. I've got 2 ways in the front doors and coax's in the back doors and a sub in the way back of a Ford Explorer-- 7 inputs total. The DSP.2 has 6 inputs- can someone clarify if the 7th input (or those 2 coax speakers) means I need the Pro? 
Right now I'm using an old Bit Ten that appears to be dying, plus I want to go active anyways.


----------



## dobslob (Sep 19, 2011)

Syncher said:


> I'm in the same boat looking for the sweet spot-dsp. But I'm confused about whether the DSP.2 will even work for me or do I need the Pro. I've got 2 ways in the front doors and coax's in the back doors and a sub in the way back of a Ford Explorer-- 7 inputs total. The DSP.2 has 6 inputs- can someone clarify if the 7th input (or those 2 coax speakers) means I need the Pro?
> Right now I'm using an old Bit Ten that appears to be dying, plus I want to go active anyways.


That would be outputs, and the DSP.2 (since replaced by the DSP.3) has 8. The inputs would be from the source to the DSP, and the DSP.2 and DSP.3 have 6. If the bitTen (and it's 4 input channels) is working for you then the DSP.2 or DSP.3 will do the job you are looking for.


----------



## Syncher (May 26, 2016)

Thank you for the reply- still a little confused about how the ins and outs are counted but being confused is normal for me. The main thing though is I want to change the setup from passive to active. I want to be able to adjust the tweeters and mids in the front doors individually and iwith the Bit 10 I can't do that without losing the rear stage as I understand it.


----------



## DavidRam (Nov 2, 2014)

(resist the urge to speak my mind)


----------



## FattyBoomBoom (Sep 22, 2019)

DavidRam said:


> (resist the urge to speak my mind)


Just say it man..


----------



## DavidRam (Nov 2, 2014)

FattyBoomBoom said:


> Just say it man..


Nah, man. Everyone already knows I am too dumb for the Helix anyways... Lol


----------



## mumbles (Jul 26, 2010)

DavidRam said:


> Nah, man. Everyone already knows I am too dumb for the Helix anyways... Lol


It's not an intelligence thing... its more like how the left side of the brain talks to the right side. For me, it's musical instruments and trigonometry. One half of the brain understands the concepts, the other half says "not gonna happen!" I've made peace with it


----------



## DavidRam (Nov 2, 2014)

mumbles said:


> It's not an intelligence thing... its more like how the left side of the brain talks to the right side. For me, it's musical instruments and trigonometry. One half of the brain understands the concepts, the other half says "not gonna happen!" I've made peace with it


I'm trilingual (borderline quadrilingual), but Chinese is not one of them. Sometimes I try to understand the advanced and Scientific part of this hobby and I realize I might as well try to learn Chinese at 44 years old. Like you said, "IT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN!" I'm still working on making peace...

Edit: Every time I think I am warming up to the Helix, that damn DIRAC live thread pops up in my face and ruins the moment! :laugh:  :laugh:

See


----------



## mumbles (Jul 26, 2010)

Syncher said:


> Thank you for the reply- still a little confused about how the ins and outs are counted but being confused is normal for me. The main thing though is I want to change the setup from passive to active. I want to be able to adjust the tweeters and mids in the front doors individually and iwith the Bit 10 I can't do that without losing the rear stage as I understand it.


Technically, you can just run two inputs to the DSP, usually they are the L & R front outputs of your head unit. From there, you can split things in the DSP to match your setup. To go active, each speaker needs power, two tweeters would need two channels of power, L & R. The mids would also need two channels, and the sub would need one (or two if you bridge them). Those channels of power are fed by the DSP, so you have 5 speakers in my example above, you'd need a DSP with 5 outputs

Lets talk rear coaxes... two more speakers, so you'd need two more channels of power and two more DSP outputs. Here's where you can get tricky... you can run all 7 speakers just using the two inputs to the DSP, but, you won't be able to fade (adjust volume) the rear speakers in/out. If your DSP has more than two inputs, you can take the rear (faded) outputs of your head unit and run them through your DSP... now you have the same capability for tuning your rear speakers, plus, your can adjust their volume using the head unit fader.

This is admittedly a basic description, but hopefully it clears some things up!


----------



## mumbles (Jul 26, 2010)

DavidRam said:


> I'm trilingual (borderline quadrilingual), but Chinese is not one of them. Sometimes I try to understand the advanced and Scientific part of this hobby and I realize I might as well try to learn Chinese at 44 years old. Like you said, "IT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN!" I'm still working on making peace...
> 
> Edit: Every time I think I am warming up to the Helix, that damn DIRAC live thread pops up in my face and ruins the moment! :laugh:  :laugh:
> 
> See


LOL! Yep, you totally get where I'm coming from!

I usually do my own installs, but with a back injury, I'm going to put my system in Steve Cooks capable hands... I have all the equipment "except" the DSP and am absolutely torn between a Helix and the DIRAC Live miniDSP! Got about a week to figure it out...


----------



## DavidRam (Nov 2, 2014)

mumbles said:


> LOL! Yep, you totally get where I'm coming from!
> 
> I usually do my own installs, but with a back injury, I'm going to put my system in Steve Cooks capable hands... I have all the equipment "except" the DSP and am absolutely torn between a Helix and the DIRAC Live miniDSP! Got about a week to figure it out...



Well, I am not gonna plant any seeds in your mind... I'll let the pros advise you, I don't know ****. Lol

I'll look forward to another awesome Steve Cook install thread!!!


----------



## Syncher (May 26, 2016)

Again- thanks! So if I understand that correctly I can use 2 inputs from the head unit, 2 inputs from those 2 coax speakers and the sub to make a total of 5 inputs used. And I'd be able to adjust each of the 7 speakers individually (gain, eq and ta). 
So if that's right I can use the DSP.3 or any dsp with 6 inputs. 
DIRAC... crikey right when I thought I had it figured out :laugh:


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

DavidRam said:


> (resist the urge to speak my mind)


ima send you a mosconi, arc, and audison processor. In the meantime i'll also call a psychiatrist to make sure theyre prepared :laugh:

ps, this is the 5th time im offering 1 on 1 help, even if its not directly in your car. we can do it in demo mode. Its almost like you dont want to like the equipment you have.


----------



## DavidRam (Nov 2, 2014)

SkizeR said:


> ima send you a mosconi, arc, and audison processor. In the meantime i'll also call a psychiatrist to make sure theyre prepared :laugh:
> 
> ps, this is the 5th time im offering 1 on 1 help, even if its not directly in your car. we can do it in demo mode. Its almost like you dont want to like the equipment you have.


I appreciate you... Problem is I am working 6 days a week, 12 hours a day right now.  I hardly have any time to poke around in the Jeep... The prospect of getting a new Jeep is looming, too, and I am trying to decide if I want to put more time into this one... 

OP, sorry for the thread jack


----------



## dcfis (Sep 9, 2016)

If you got Steve cook working on it ask what he prefers. He will be able to wring out the best in both


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

Syncher said:


> Again- thanks! So if I understand that correctly I can use 2 inputs from the head unit, 2 inputs from those 2 coax speakers and the sub to make a total of 5 inputs used. And I'd be able to adjust each of the 7 speakers individually (gain, eq and ta).
> So if that's right I can use the DSP.3 or any dsp with 6 inputs.
> DIRAC... crikey right when I thought I had it figured out :laugh:


No. You only NEED two inputs from the head unit. They need to be full range left and right. This is simple with an aftermarket head unit. Sometimes not so simple with OE systems. You can do more channels of input IF YOU WANT TO, but it isn't necessary. You can add rear left and right to retain the fader at the head unit and Subwoofer if you want to be able to make adjustments at the head unit. Again, neither are necessary for a fully functioning system, but possible. 

The output side goes to your amplifiers, where you will typically need one amplifier channel per speaker. In your case, that would 7 outputs and amp channels. FL Tweeter, FL Mid, FR Tweeter, FR Mid, RL Coax, RR Coax, Subwoofer. Again, this is on the output side.


----------



## FattyBoomBoom (Sep 22, 2019)

SkizeR said:


> DavidRam said:
> 
> 
> > (resist the urge to speak my mind)
> ...


I’ll take a 1 on 1 question/ answer sesh if he doesn’t want it!? No but seriously [at what point/why/how] in your tuning process do you send the “pulse” signal (without crossovers set.) I saw you do this in your recent Mercedes build and I’ve been looking for this info. It’s separate from time alignment I assume? Can you point me to a link? Thanks in advance, sorry to dump on your thread OP but this is an urgent matter. ?


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

FattyBoomBoom said:


> I’ll take a 1 on 1 question/ answer sesh if he doesn’t want it!? No but seriously [at what point/why/how] in your tuning process do you send the “pulse” signal (without crossovers set.) I saw you do this in your recent Mercedes build and I’ve been looking for this info. It’s separate from time alignment I assume? Can you point me to a link? Thanks in advance, sorry to dump on your thread OP but this is an urgent matter. ?


impulse response? its done with a software called systune and some mics and an interface. Its used to set time alignment. tbh, just use your tape measure. It seriously is just as accurate so long as you know how to use a tape measure.


----------



## FattyBoomBoom (Sep 22, 2019)

SkizeR said:


> FattyBoomBoom said:
> 
> 
> > I’ll take a 1 on 1 question/ answer sesh if he doesn’t want it!? No but seriously [at what point/why/how] in your tuning process do you send the “pulse” signal (without crossovers set.) I saw you do this in your recent Mercedes build and I’ve been looking for this info. It’s separate from time alignment I assume? Can you point me to a link? Thanks in advance, sorry to dump on your thread OP but this is an urgent matter. ?
> ...


Thanks Skeez.. it’s been on my mind since I saw that in your video... can I ask why you choose this method over the tape?


----------



## JCsAudio (Jun 16, 2014)

mumbles said:


> It's not an intelligence thing... its more like how the left side of the brain talks to the right side. For me, it's musical instruments and trigonometry. One half of the brain understands the concepts, the other half says "not gonna happen!" I've made peace with it


You have to tune the left side first and then you match the right side to the left side. 

That’s how you get David to understand a Helix.:laugh:


----------



## Syncher (May 26, 2016)

rton20s said:


> No. You only NEED two inputs from the head unit. They need to be full range left and right. This is simple with an aftermarket head unit. Sometimes not so simple with OE systems. You can do more channels of input IF YOU WANT TO, but it isn't necessary. You can add rear left and right to retain the fader at the head unit and Subwoofer if you want to be able to make adjustments at the head unit. Again, neither are necessary for a fully functioning system, but possible.
> 
> The output side goes to your amplifiers, where you will typically need one amplifier channel per speaker. In your case, that would 7 outputs and amp channels. FL Tweeter, FL Mid, FR Tweeter, FR Mid, RL Coax, RR Coax, Subwoofer. Again, this is on the output side.


Ok I think I got it- thanks for the clarifications.


----------



## mumbles (Jul 26, 2010)

dcfis said:


> If you got Steve cook working on it ask what he prefers. He will be able to wring out the best in both


I've been talking with ErinH about this... Steve is a Helix guy, in fact, he told me he's never tuned a miniDSP before. So, you'd think I'd just go Helix... but reading everyones opinions about the mini makes me want to go that way.


----------



## DavidRam (Nov 2, 2014)

mumbles said:


> I've been talking with ErinH about this... Steve is a Helix guy, in fact, he told me he's never tuned a miniDSP before. So, you'd think I'd just go Helix... but reading everyones opinions about the mini makes me want to go that way.


Here is my opinion as a 3 year+ MiniDSP (non Dirac) user, and 6 month Helix user:

IF you are an accomplished tuner with the brain, experience and patience, you can kill it with the Helix. 
IF have none of the above, like me, the MiniDSP with DIRAC is a no-brainer (pun intended)! 
IF you are gonna let a pro tune it and that pro is experienced with Helix, then choice is obvious.


----------



## jtrosky (Jul 19, 2019)

DavidRam said:


> Here is my opinion as a 3 year+ MiniDSP (non Dirac) user, and 6 month Helix user:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm kind of curious - what are you having a hard time with on the Helix? Is there something in particular that you are struggling with that is Helix-specific? Or is it just that you are having a hard time getting your system to sound right with the Helix in general?


----------



## DavidRam (Nov 2, 2014)

jtrosky said:


> I'm kind of curious - what are you having a hard time with on the Helix? Is there something in particular that you are struggling with that is Helix-specific? Or is it just that you are having a hard time getting your system to sound right with the Helix in general?


I'll pm you, if you'd like? My intention is NOT to bad mouth the Helix, it is an amazing tool in the right hands. The problem is me.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

DavidRam said:


> I'll pm you, if you'd like? My intention is NOT to bad mouth the Helix, it is an amazing tool in the right hands. The problem is me.


Just say it. We can respond with help which will help others who may have the same issue. 

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## DavidRam (Nov 2, 2014)

SkizeR said:


> Just say it. We can respond with help which will help others who may have the same issue.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


I have said it all... I just want to be fair to Helix, their product is brilliant. 

My bottom line is this - I don't want to have to spend hours learning a program and then countless hours tuning to get my system to sound decent. Tuning is my least favorite aspect and the thing I am least skilled at, in this hobby. Plus, I don't want to constantly be a burden to others to help me with my ****... 
Especially, when there is a tool now available that can do what I am not that good at, and do it quickly and effectively.

Edit:
What nobody can help with is the fact that my brain doesn't absorb certain things, and the dsp side of things needs to be very simple and straight forward for me to "get it".

There is no level of fabrication or installation that intimidates me, I am extremely confident in that area AND I enjoy it immensely. The tuning is the thing I enjoy less and less, and where I don't want to spend much time...


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

DavidRam said:


> I have said it all... I just want to be fair to Helix, their product is brilliant.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You at work today?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## DavidRam (Nov 2, 2014)

SkizeR said:


> You at work today?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


Yes, and my entire staff are being idiots, too!!!


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

DavidRam said:


> Yes, and my entire staff are being idiots, too!!!


Call me tomorrow. 

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## jdunk54nl (Apr 25, 2015)

DavidRam said:


> Yes, and my entire staff are being idiots, too!!!



Call SkizeR! 

Or set up a weekend and drive the 5.5 hours to Phoenix and buy a 12 pack for us and we can go over how to use the software in person.


----------



## jtrosky (Jul 19, 2019)

DavidRam said:


> My bottom line is this - I don't want to have to spend hours learning a program and then countless hours tuning to get my system to sound decent. Tuning is my least favorite aspect and the thing I am least skilled at, in this hobby. Plus, I don't want to constantly be a burden to others to help me with my ****...
> 
> Especially, when there is a tool now available that can do what I am not that good at, and do it quickly and effectively.


Don't forget that Helix does have the auto-EQ function, which can get you up and running with a pretty good tune very quickly. You'll still have to manually set TA, xovers, levels, etc - but it does make the EQ part pretty damn easy... Results may not be as good as Dirac, but pretty good nonetheless... Have you tried the Helix auto-EQ at all? 

I also wonder how the quality of the components inside the units compare between the Helix units and the MiniDSP units. Obviously, the quality of the components inside can make a difference in sound quality too. 

In the end, life is too short - and you should get whatever is the best fit for you personally. Nothing wrong with going with a MiniDSP over a Helix if the MiniDSP will just work out better for you! 

I will say - it sounds like Helix needs to step up their game and get some sort of Dirac-like functionality - at least as an option. Right now, MiniDSP seems to have that part of DSP's cornered?


----------



## DavidRam (Nov 2, 2014)

jtrosky said:


> Don't forget that Helix does have the auto-EQ function, which can get you up and running with a pretty good tune very quickly. You'll still have to manually set TA, xovers, levels, etc - but it does make the EQ part pretty damn easy... Results may not be as good as Dirac, but pretty good nonetheless... Have you tried the Helix auto-EQ at all?
> 
> I also wonder how the quality of the components inside the units compare between the Helix units and the MiniDSP units. Obviously, the quality of the components inside can make a difference in sound quality too.
> 
> ...


Yes, Skizer made a video on that on the other forum, and I am gonna check it out one day when I have a day off... I have no problems setting crossovers, t/a and levels with the Helix. Also, I'm quite proficient in REW... 
I am getting to the point where I don't care to spend many hours tuning the traditional route, at least when it comes to EQ and phase (which, I believe, is wildly important in the pursuit of great sound).


----------

