Comparison of the ElectroHelix and 2B

The forum for support and questions in relating to the E-Stim System ElectroHelix
Post Reply
soundcraft
Active
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2021 8:15 am
Location: Cambridgeshire

Comparison of the ElectroHelix and 2B

Post by soundcraft »

I only had my Helix for a few weeks when the opportunity come up to get my hands on a second hand 2B.
I though at first that the 2B would be a replacement for my Helix but I have come to realise they are very different.
Apart from the obvious ElectroHelix that the modes that are described as the same So here is a short break down of what I discovered.

Helix pulse mode

This mode felt as though the Helix had more power at the lower settings then the 2B
I also noticed that the Helix slowest pulse speed was slower then the 2B

Flow (continuos on the 2B)

This mode felt very similar on both boxes however I felt that the 2B had a bit more range
in the feel control.

Milk

Not really a mode I am too fond of but again the helix felt like it got up to a higher power
faster then the 2B and the steps feel very different.


Tease

On the Helix this is my favourite mode. There are similar modes on the 2B waterfall would be the
closest but nothing that comes close to this modes feel.

To conclude although I may come across a bit biased to the Helix the 2B has some amazing modes and I love both boxes.
I find it interesting that they can feel so very different on modes that I would have thought to be the same.

I would be interested how other boxes compare to the 2B There really is no one box that does it all.


VFRman
Active
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2019 9:11 pm
Location: Oxford

Re: Comparison of the ElectroHelix and 2B

Post by VFRman »

Hi Soundcraft
Your comparison, Helix & 2-B is spot on. Reference the "Tease" mode could not agree more. To be fair, I have not spent enough time using the 2-B to write a full review, but promise myself that 2022 will try and use the stereo modes with downloaded programmes. You can read my love of the little helix elsewhere, so much so I have two. I have only had an HFO on two occasions with the Helix combo, but bring in the Doxy vibrator on other occasions. Tease is so versatile & controllable. I love it.
Davespages
Active Developer
Posts: 111
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2020 1:45 pm
Location: Shropshire

Re: Comparison of the ElectroHelix and 2B

Post by Davespages »

soundcraft wrote: Wed Dec 29, 2021 11:56 am I only had my Helix for a few weeks when the opportunity come up to get my hands on a second hand 2B.
I though at first that the 2B would be a replacement for my Helix but I have come to realise they are very different.
Apart from the obvious ElectroHelix that the modes that are described as the same So here is a short break down of what I discovered.

Helix pulse mode

This mode felt as though the Helix had more power at the lower settings then the 2B
I also noticed that the Helix slowest pulse speed was slower then the 2B

Flow (continuos on the 2B)

This mode felt very similar on both boxes however I felt that the 2B had a bit more range
in the feel control.

Milk

Not really a mode I am too fond of but again the helix felt like it got up to a higher power
faster then the 2B and the steps feel very different.


Tease

On the Helix this is my favourite mode. There are similar modes on the 2B waterfall would be the
closest but nothing that comes close to this modes feel.

To conclude although I may come across a bit biased to the Helix the 2B has some amazing modes and I love both boxes.
I find it interesting that they can feel so very different on modes that I would have thought to be the same.

I would be interested how other boxes compare to the 2B There really is no one box that does it all.
I have a couple of 2Bs, was on 2.106 firmware and now 2.122.
I also have an e-stim remote.

On the remote unit PULSE feels.far stronger than the 2b Pulse mode.
I even queried this with Mick at Estim systems and he assured me the waveform in that mode is different between the units despite both boxes having a "pulse" mode.
Post Reply