Community: Message List - Is this normal?

Re: Is this normal?

support@line6.com — Sat, 16 Feb 2013 21:39:10 GMT

I think with the V-capo feature, you have to be open to a tiny bit of synthetic feeling.

Virtually every single pitch shifter out there sound a little weird when pitching ABOVE the incoming signal's real pitch.

Basically with most pitch shifters pitching up, they're playing the input fast, and then in really small intervals it resets back in time.

example:

imagine the numbers represent segments of the signal. It cuts it up into pieces and rearranges it.

normal signal....: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9

pitch shifted up: 1 2 3 2 3 4 3 4 5 4 5 6 5 6 7 6 7 8 7 8 9

Notice how numbers repeat.

It runs the input really fast then goes back a little, this is to give the illusion of a higher pitch while staying being in time.

When you do this, it will sometimes give a stutter effect, which is what you're hearing in the sample the person posted.

I know pitch shifters are different in how the process stuff, but most basically follow that example.

I have to say though, the down tuning is SPOT on.

Re: Is this normal?

support@line6.com — Fri, 15 Feb 2013 17:52:31 GMT

Okay i'll settle down.... i just heard "the sample noodle" for the first time,,,lol

I can live with that, In a mix and strumming,,, i would be shocked if anyone in our church would notice...i'm back to being excited about it...

Re: Is this normal?

support@line6.com — Tue, 12 Feb 2013 17:00:40 GMT

Actually, pitch shifting requires latency because it needs to actually read some of the sound wave to analyze it and shift it. Some pitch shifters have a latency option, and the less latency you use, the more bad it sounds.

That's because it has less time to observe the waveform and shift it properly.

So latency in pitch shifting doesn't really have to do with the processor speed, but just how much a pitch shifter reads until it uses that data to shift correctly.

Remember that pitch shifting does a little bit of tracking, and tracking requires latency to be good. The more time it has, the better it will track, regardless of processor speed.

While a processor will help, it isn't the determining factor of how good a pitch shifter will sound.

A processor might be fast, but it can't read into the future, it needs to see what notes and frequencies you're playing before it can determine what to do with it correctly.

Re: Is this normal?

support@line6.com — Mon, 11 Feb 2013 22:59:47 GMT

I think that your assumption about comparing the two models is not right....Because the two guitars have different processing power...Dual core processor of JTV handles all the algorithms for shifting while the single core and slower processor of V600 produces the latency. It's a matter of h/w and algorythmic programming...So the question has to do...Is the dual processor of JTV capable of handling such events with no latency and sound quality? This is hard for us to answer

Re: Is this normal?

support@line6.com — Fri, 08 Feb 2013 17:15:54 GMT

I think the Variax is amazing when downtuning, but not uptuning. It sounds way too warbly and poor.

I've heard some good DAW pitch shifter plugins that pitch up well (ReaPitch, Pitchwheel) but like I said, they have a lot of latency.

It is possible making the pitch shifter function in the Variax 0/near 0 latency is causing the upper pitch shifting to sound poor.

I said how my Variax 600 sounds better, but it has a tiny bit of latency, while the JTV has almost none, so that's probably why it sounds more warbly.

Re: Is this normal?

support@line6.com — Fri, 08 Feb 2013 12:50:18 GMT

"Not only can you set your tuning higher up, but you could also acess 22 notes up on each string, unlike using a real capo"

You can set each string in the range -12 to + 12 relative to what it is actually tuned to, that is up to 1 octave Up or Down with the 12 fret used as the standard tuning position.

Show me how to use a Capo to give a C below the root E based tuning...

But using the guitar alone it is a bit tricky getting +12 which needs to use the 24th fret on a JTV69 with only 22 frets.

The setting is relative to standard tuning - so if you have tuned down to Eb and then want to use the Virtual Capo you have to treat the 13th Fret as the baseline position.

Or you use an HD500 which allows you to set the virtual capo on a patch by patch basis directly.

Re: Is this normal?

support@line6.com — Thu, 07 Feb 2013 21:41:25 GMT

I really don't get what's so hard about using a real capo. All you need to do is clamp it close to the fret and have it intonated right if you don't want to retune your guitar.

The virtual capo thing would be pretty nice though. Not only can you set your tuning higher up, but you could also acess 22 notes up on each string, unlike using a real capo.

Re: Is this normal?

support@line6.com — Thu, 07 Feb 2013 20:42:10 GMT

Yes, klarkkentster, it was the main reason for me, too. And though the additional points made here about physical capos are helpful, that only applies to pitching up all strings the same amount. Other than that, its re-tuning strings or accepting the limitations of the alt-tuning process. Again, my main gripe is that it just doesnt work as advertised.

Re: Is this normal?

support@line6.com — Thu, 07 Feb 2013 01:36:39 GMT

I grabbed a Shubb at my local music store... so I am prepared either way.

Still waiting for my new Jtv 69 to show up.

Re: Is this normal?

support@line6.com — Wed, 06 Feb 2013 14:47:56 GMT

I agree about the shubb capo.
Especially with jumbo frets like on the JTV-59. I really noticed this when I started playing a schecter c1+ several years ago.
It has the jumbo frets and using the cheap kyser capo I had always used caused all my notes to be sharp.

I got a shubb, and I LOVE it. I just wish it had the ability to clip on the headstock like they kyser. Its not nearly as "one hand" friendly, but I can use it without re-tuning. I still use my kyser on my acoustic guitar, but it does not touch my electric.

From my experience, virtual capo on the 5th fret is way too high for digital pitch shifting.
I've used digital pitch shifting in software programs for years, and I've always found that 1 full step (2 frets) is about as much as much I would want to shift in either direction. Any more than that and it really starts to sound "warbally".
As a rule, I use my capo to "transpose up", and I only use virtual capo If I need to tune down. I never use alt tunings other than 1/2 step down. Any more than 1 full step down and I just go ahead and learn to play my part in another key. Basically, I still use a capo when I would normally use a capo, but I use virtual capo to keep from re-tuning.

I think it was a bad idea for Line 6 to call this feature "virtual capo". I dont think it was intended to replace the use of a capo, but more likely intended to aid in creating custom alt tunings and drop tunings.