Jump to content


Photo

Now Available: Variax Hd Upgrade And Workbench Hd Software


  • Please log in to reply
423 replies to this topic

#401 The_Doc_Rock

The_Doc_Rock

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 31 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 05:58 PM


 

 

 

Surely you hear a difference between, say, the guitar in Money For Nothing vs. the guitar in Sultans of Swing...? I think the pickups used for those two songs may have contributed at least a small amount to the diffference in sound...

 

 

Oh yes - don't get me wrong.  Of course different pickups sound different.  That's one of the reasons I have a guitar collection (at least, that's what I tell my wife) B)

 

And yes, the pickups certainly contributed to the sound of "Money For Nothing". But while it's hard to put proportions on it, I'd guess that 10-20% of the sound was due to the pickups, and 80-90% due to the fact it was MK playing it.

 

I think my point may have been missed somewhat. The point was that I interpreted the initial post in this part of the thread as asking what the pickups were in "MFN" so that @arislaf could change the JTV pickups in order to sound like that track.  And my interpretation was obviously not quite what he was getting at, for which I apologized.

 

I've been guilty (many years ago, though) of thinking that I could sound like somebody else by changing guitars, amps, pickups, etc - but I've learned since then that most of anyone's sound is due to the player. Some are more recognizable than others.

 

Anyway - back to the main point of this whole thread - the puzzle as to why some people's upgrade to v2.0 of the firmware sounds really bad, while others' sounds great.  It would appear that I'm not the only one with the problem, going on some of the posts earlier in the thread, but my support ticket didn't manage to come up with a solution. So I'm happy to stay on v1.9 and wait for v2.1 before trying again.


  • 1

#402 arislaf

arislaf

    Power User

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1095 posts
  • LocationGreece

Posted 16 September 2013 - 03:49 AM

Guys I have a question, regarding the topic. i am on 2.0, and while all the other guitars sound like the video (the official from line 6), the jazzbox sounds more fat at my jtv...almost like the 1.9 version.Although I went 2 times to 1.9 and again to 2.0, everything remain the same...


  • 0

#403 guilhordas

guilhordas

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 364 posts
  • LocationBrazil

Posted 16 September 2013 - 03:04 PM

here with me, in 1.9, 4 position jazztone was very fat, now at 2.0 lost a lot of fat, I liked much more  1.9

Guys I have a question, regarding the topic. i am on 2.0, and while all the other guitars sound like the video (the official from line 6), the jazzbox sounds more fat at my jtv...almost like the 1.9 version.Although I went 2 times to 1.9 and again to 2.0, everything remain the same...


  • 0

Jtv 69 , pod hd 500, suhr S3,prs custom 22, Gibson SG standard 96, fender plus strat 93


#404 toasterdude

toasterdude

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 829 posts

Posted 16 September 2013 - 06:17 PM

I seem to remember when the beta was getting close to being final, someone made a joke about how threads would soon be divided by how great 2.0 is or how some prefer 1.9. Some beta testers sort of hinted that 2.0 was such a big step, that would not happen.  So much for being an expert. . . . .lol. . .


  • 0

#405 azur1964

azur1964

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 11 posts

Posted 17 September 2013 - 01:42 AM

I tested still the version 2.0.

The result is always it same: The sounds lack really body.

Afterwards I find harm that line6 had modeled the micros of 69 rather than micros one true "strat." Likewise, the micros of the 89 are less well modeled. Actually the problem it is not necessarily the selected guitars. I only punch some line6 such a guitar had chosen rather than another it is the global result which does not satisfy for me.

The sounds lack cruelly of body and flush resounding. They are playable steps or too much little. The version 1.9 had its qualities despite a resounding general component that I was finding at my ear to ring a bit plastic.

Actually in relation to démo official of the version 2, JTV89 only by no means rings the same so many on the resounding level on the quality of the sounds.

I hope that LINE6 is going to take my as well as complete considerations in account which were deposited, for it is not really good that an updating changes the things at all at the complete (and not in better )

Cordially.


  • -1

#406 arislaf

arislaf

    Power User

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1095 posts
  • LocationGreece

Posted 17 September 2013 - 03:12 AM

I tested still the version 2.0.

The result is always it same: The sounds lack really body.

Afterwards I find harm that line6 had modeled the micros of 69 rather than micros one true "strat." Likewise, the micros of the 89 are less well modeled. Actually the problem it is not necessarily the selected guitars. I only punch some line6 such a guitar had chosen rather than another it is the global result which does not satisfy for me.

The sounds lack cruelly of body and flush resounding. They are playable steps or too much little. The version 1.9 had its qualities despite a resounding general component that I was finding at my ear to ring a bit plastic.

Actually in relation to démo official of the version 2, JTV89 only by no means rings the same so many on the resounding level on the quality of the sounds.

I hope that LINE6 is going to take my as well as complete considerations in account which were deposited, for it is not really good that an updating changes the things at all at the complete (and not in better )

Cordially.

The truth to be said, they did modeled the JTV 69s pickups, and not a spanks .

 

here with me, in 1.9, 4 position jazztone was very fat, now at 2.0 lost a lot of fat, I liked much more  1.9

I would offer to trade our 69s, but i really don't like the lake blue color :)


  • 0

#407 toasterdude

toasterdude

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 829 posts

Posted 17 September 2013 - 03:49 AM

If that is true it is nuts. Why would Line 6 give more importance to magnetic pickups than the modeled sound?

 

Also a decent amount of players ask about or change the pickups in JTVs. None of my JTVs have any stock pickups. Why would I want the modeling to sound like pickups I swapped out?

 

 

 

The truth to be said, they did modeled the JTV 69s pickups, and not a spanks .

 

I would offer to trade our 69s, but i really don't like the lake blue color :)


  • 0

#408 arislaf

arislaf

    Power User

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1095 posts
  • LocationGreece

Posted 17 September 2013 - 04:12 AM

If that is true it is nuts. Why would Line 6 give more importance to magnetic pickups than the modeled sound?

 

Also a decent amount of players ask about or change the pickups in JTVs. None of my JTVs have any stock pickups. Why would I want the modeling to sound like pickups I swapped out?

Don't get me wrong, nothing official stated by L6. this is my opinion because I have the 69S, and it really sounds similar. Same stated from azur. Also, the line 6 official video shows that the 2.0 version is similar with the jtv 69 that the guy tests... After all of these, i believe with pretty confidence that they modeled the jtv 69 mags and not the strato.

 

And yes, I hate both the mags of the 69 and the modeled strato.


  • 0

#409 TheRealZap

TheRealZap

    Uber Guru

  • Line 6 Expert
  • 15395 posts
  • LocationClemmons, NC USA

Posted 17 September 2013 - 04:14 AM

it's not true of the 69....

but they did model the 89 pickups...

because of the ability to alt tune...

there really was no other guitar in the collection to approximate an 89....

like the spank does the 69 or the lester does the 59's

 

If that is true it is nuts. Why would Line 6 give more importance to magnetic pickups than the modeled sound?

 

Also a decent amount of players ask about or change the pickups in JTVs. None of my JTVs have any stock pickups. Why would I want the modeling to sound like pickups I swapped out?


  • 0

#410 psarkissian

psarkissian

    Line 6 Staff

  • Service Engineer Moderator
  • 184 posts

Posted 17 September 2013 - 07:34 AM

I don't worry about how close or how far off the Models are from the real ones that I own,.... they're close enough for me.

A guitar that does makes the sounds that it does, what these do, they way they do it (and I own a 69 and two 59's),.... it's bloody marvelous!

 

Okay, so I'm a little biased because I'm the JTV tech here at Line 6, and I own three JTV's. They feel good, play good, and when I get done servicing one I get to test play them. It's hard to stop playing them. And this new Workbench HD has some cool features to boot.

 

It's easy to get wrapped up in the minutia of it all.

 

In the end,... it's all about the playing!

 

 

 

-P.B. Sarkissian

 


  • 0

#411 Charlie_Watt

Charlie_Watt

    Power User

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1106 posts

Posted 17 September 2013 - 08:52 AM

I do not own any vintage guitars that were modeled in the JTV so I have no direct comparison.  I like the models we have.  Are they perfect?  No.  Are they fun and do they sound good?  Yes.  I will welcome further improvements when they are available and I will play with Workbench to adjust the models to be more to my liking.  I have been a Variax owner since the 500 came out and this is very cool technology.


  • 0

#412 Junis

Junis

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 80 posts

Posted 17 September 2013 - 10:00 AM

someone is having this problem on workbench? sound model that try to change is muted and I get this message
Some expert?

 

thanks

 

Attached Files


  • 0

#413 TheRealZap

TheRealZap

    Uber Guru

  • Line 6 Expert
  • 15395 posts
  • LocationClemmons, NC USA

Posted 17 September 2013 - 11:00 AM

just a wild guess... but it probably doesn't like the symbols in your tone name... try removing the @


  • 0

#414 Junis

Junis

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 80 posts

Posted 17 September 2013 - 11:21 AM


I did not named the preset, when I go to save the preset, the workbench creates this name and mutes the sound


just a wild guess... but it probably doesn't like the symbols in your tone name... try removing the @


  • 0

#415 TheRealZap

TheRealZap

    Uber Guru

  • Line 6 Expert
  • 15395 posts
  • LocationClemmons, NC USA

Posted 17 September 2013 - 11:23 AM

In that case, i would assume that your flash upgrade did not take properly. I'd suggest re-flashing.


  • 0

#416 arislaf

arislaf

    Power User

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1095 posts
  • LocationGreece

Posted 17 September 2013 - 11:23 AM

Try reinstaling the fw


  • 0

#417 arislaf

arislaf

    Power User

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1095 posts
  • LocationGreece

Posted 17 September 2013 - 11:24 AM

In that case, i would assume that your flash upgrade did not take properly. I'd suggest re-flashing.

Argh, you got me for 3 seconds.. Good one ;)


  • 0

#418 Junis

Junis

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 80 posts

Posted 17 September 2013 - 11:47 AM

re flash JTV or workbench? the strange thing is that it started giving this problem a few days ago. was normal before


  • 0

#419 arislaf

arislaf

    Power User

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1095 posts
  • LocationGreece

Posted 17 September 2013 - 11:48 AM

The guitar of course..


  • 0

#420 diggerbarnz

diggerbarnz

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 122 posts

Posted 23 September 2013 - 05:15 PM

all this "headbanging" trying to get this to download...finally I slow down & realize it DOESN'T work w/XP


  • 0

#421 clay-man

clay-man

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 833 posts

Posted 23 September 2013 - 06:57 PM

all this "headbanging" trying to get this to download...finally I slow down & realize it DOESN'T work w/XP

 

Seriously? I use XP though.


  • 0

For a minute there, I lost myself.

Radiohead_bear-728286%5B1%5D.png 


#422 diggerbarnz

diggerbarnz

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 122 posts

Posted 23 September 2013 - 07:05 PM

wtfrikk? thats the message I get...before that it's always click on accept & download...then error 404 page not found

 

I've tried 3 browsers - firefox IE chrome - after accepting ....NADA


  • 0

#423 TheRealZap

TheRealZap

    Uber Guru

  • Line 6 Expert
  • 15395 posts
  • LocationClemmons, NC USA

Posted 23 September 2013 - 07:19 PM

the site has issues sometimes with satellite internet connections... not sure if that applies... I suspect some sort of network issue....

what file are you trying to get? maybe i can link you direct or put it in dropbox or something.


  • 0

#424 diggerbarnz

diggerbarnz

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 122 posts

Posted 23 September 2013 - 07:24 PM

apparently I have workbench 1.73 - was trying to get the HD one...& just tried 1.75 workbench...same result & YES SIR...I use satellite

dagan.haddad@gmail.com or daganhaddad@hotmail.com

Many thanks if you can help!!


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users