Jump to content


Photo

Lousy Acoustic Sounds - How To Improve?

acoustic jack cable gt8 jtv89

  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#1 janssengr

janssengr

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 14 January 2014 - 01:33 PM

Hi everyone,

 

I might have stumbled on a rookie mistake but: how come my acoustic sounds are so lousy, meaning sounding very boomy, digital and nasal, and not nearly as good as I hear others?

 

My setup is the following:

- JTV 89, updated to HD models

- using normal Jack-Jack cable to 

- Boss GT8

 

On the GT8, I can select (for instance) the Full Range model, which should basically entail the same as plugging straight into a PA (where the GT8 then simply functions as DI)

 

Attached is a short sound sample
- First: the JTV89, Acoustic position 5 (Gibson model) straight into the GT8, Full Range model, all EQ at 50%, no other processing than a little bit of hall reverb- 

- Then: similar, but with the 'Acoustic Processor' of the GT8 engaged. It does get brighter, but it doesn't get much nicer beautiful.

 

In both cases, the acoustic 'feel' is there, especially with single notes, but it doesn't get nearly as realistic as I've heard other people have their JTV sounding (on Youtube for instance, next to the Line6 Demos)

 

What do you think? Is it a cable problem i.e. should I use the VDI cable for acoustic stuff?ps

 

Ps, I had some trouble updating to the HD models, but everything else seems to be fine.

Attached Files


  • 0

#2 vguitars

vguitars

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts

Posted 14 January 2014 - 02:10 PM

doesnt sound to bad to me, I usually run no processing at all, literally none, can you do that with the gt8? No EQ nothing?

 

here is a quick vid of mine variax > Pod HD500 no processing > Audacity 

 


  • 0

#3 diggerbarnz

diggerbarnz

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 122 posts

Posted 14 January 2014 - 03:48 PM

I agree w/vguitars...doesn't sound bad to me...I use the Sean Haley acoustic patch & STILL could be happier, although I haven't tried using 11's on either of my JTV's which is mentioned here alot

You want boomy...I run thru bose L1 w/2 bins...really got milk it like a mouse


  • 0

#4 clay-man

clay-man

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 815 posts

Posted 14 January 2014 - 04:37 PM

I can't believe how people whine about the new guitar models. They sound OUT of this world, nearly identical to actually miccing up an actual acoustic.

 

I actually envy the acoustic sound on the JTV compared to my 600. It just sounds, wow. Like I might as well get rid of my acoustic and just record with a JTV if I have one.

 

Now, I understand if it doesn't sit well in a mix. but that's what EQing is for. 


  • 0

For a minute there, I lost myself.

Radiohead_bear-728286%5B1%5D.png 


#5 Charlie_Watt

Charlie_Watt

    Power User

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1098 posts

Posted 14 January 2014 - 06:45 PM

Been playing the Acoustic models of my JTV through a HD500X into an EV ZLX-12P PA speaker.  Sounds as good as any mic'd acoustic I have heard.  I am not crazy about the 12 string models though.  The lower notes sound electronic to me.


  • 0

#6 pugdealer

pugdealer

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 172 posts
  • LocationPortugal

Posted 15 January 2014 - 12:58 AM

Hi everyone,

 

I might have stumbled on a rookie mistake but: how come my acoustic sounds are so lousy, meaning sounding very boomy, digital and nasal, and not nearly as good as I hear others?

 

My setup is the following:

- JTV 89, updated to HD models

- using normal Jack-Jack cable to 

- Boss GT8

 

On the GT8, I can select (for instance) the Full Range model, which should basically entail the same as plugging straight into a PA (where the GT8 then simply functions as DI)

 

Attached is a short sound sample
- First: the JTV89, Acoustic position 5 (Gibson model) straight into the GT8, Full Range model, all EQ at 50%, no other processing than a little bit of hall reverb- 

- Then: similar, but with the 'Acoustic Processor' of the GT8 engaged. It does get brighter, but it doesn't get much nicer beautiful.

 

In both cases, the acoustic 'feel' is there, especially with single notes, but it doesn't get nearly as realistic as I've heard other people have their JTV sounding (on Youtube for instance, next to the Line6 Demos)

 

What do you think? Is it a cable problem i.e. should I use the VDI cable for acoustic stuff?ps

 

Ps, I had some trouble updating to the HD models, but everything else seems to be fine.

I get you, and I agree!

 

Up until last week I stuck with fw 1.72 because its acoustics sounded muuuuch better to me. After that they just got so bommy, roomy, nasal, that I couldn't like or do anything with them! And I also agree they kinda sound fine when finger picking, but when strummed...GOOOOD, no!!

 

Since last week I've been on fw 2.0, and I'm trying to stick to it, cause I really like the electrics are a LOT better than on 1.72, and I've been trying to workout a patch on my HD500 for an acoustic! I've spent hours on it, and though I'm not 100% happy with it, it's close! I mostly strum when playing the acoustic, so it had to sound good when strummed! 

 

I think you really need to fiddle with EQ and compression to get them to sound right...I'll try to post an example of mine later...


  • 0

#7 janssengr

janssengr

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 15 January 2014 - 01:40 AM

I can't believe how people whine about the new guitar models. They sound OUT of this world, nearly identical to actually miccing up an actual acoustic.

 

I actually envy the acoustic sound on the JTV compared to my 600. It just sounds, wow. Like I might as well get rid of my acoustic and just record with a JTV if I have one.

 

Now, I understand if it doesn't sit well in a mix. but that's what EQing is for. 

 

 

I am actually not whining about the difference between pre-HD models and HD-models, because honestly I bought my JTV at the day the HD models came out and I did the upgrade almost instantly. (actually because I noticed that a lot of people had trouble accommodating the change in tone, and I didn't want to get used to the 'older' sound, while I could have the newer sound).

I am very happy with my JTV - tele, strat and Les Paul sounds are great. Just, the acoustics don't work for me, while I hear very beautiful sounds coming out of them by other players (the Line6 demos and elsewhere on youtube). 

 

So maybe it's just their processing that makes it great. On the other hand: i am happy to know that I don't do anything wrong (otherwise someone would've suggested that by now I suppose), and that the GT8 is not the problem (as many examples are with the HD500) 

 

I think your last remark covers it - generally it doesn't sit well in the mix, so I might have to juggle a bit more with the EQ in the band and recording situations. 


  • 0

#8 pugdealer

pugdealer

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 172 posts
  • LocationPortugal

Posted 15 January 2014 - 04:02 AM

Here's my acoustic example

 

The first sounds you hear are JTV 69 (2.0) to HD500 (my own acoustic patch) to garageband, and the second sound is just JTV 69 (2.0) to HD500 (clean patch with only the same reverb as on the acoustic patch) to garageband

 

All comparison sounds were recorded using the looper, so no difference in sound will have to do with the way I was playing.

 

So far, with my acoustic patch, this is the best I can get the JTV 2.0 acoustic to sound good to my ears!

 

All the sounds were recorded with the Acoustic-1, tone 100%

 

Attached Files


  • 0

#9 arislaf

arislaf

    Power User

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1095 posts
  • LocationGreece

Posted 15 January 2014 - 05:09 AM

I get usefull sounds from the jtv v.2.0 but. the variax had better acoustics though.No need to eq at all from my variax.If you don't believe me, check the ballad of Hades on sound cloud (variax) and the paradox acoustic (jtv)


  • 0

#10 pugdealer

pugdealer

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 172 posts
  • LocationPortugal

Posted 15 January 2014 - 05:19 AM

I get usefull sounds from the jtv v.2.0 but. the variax had better acoustics though.No need to eq at all from my variax.If you don't believe me, check the ballad of Hades on sound cloud (variax) and the paradox acoustic (jtv)

I believe you!!!

 

That's why I stuck for so long with 1.72! But I gotta have this 2.0 over the electrics...they're much better, and specially palm mutting!!!

 

I can kinda live and like this acoustic patch I got going on now...so, I'm happy!


  • 2

#11 arislaf

arislaf

    Power User

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1095 posts
  • LocationGreece

Posted 15 January 2014 - 05:31 AM

Respect!! i agree also that the 2.0 electrics and palm muting is much better (thought i miss the custom gibson and the junior gibson )


  • 1

#12 guitarno

guitarno

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 172 posts

Posted 15 January 2014 - 09:44 AM

So far, ALL the acoustic sounds on the mp3's and video on this post sound pretty good to me. I use the acoustic sounds on my JTV-59/HD500X/L2T a lot, and I like the sounds I am getting in general, but I'm always looking to improve on them.

 

   A lot depends on exactly how you set up the patch on the POD/Amp or whatever you are using for effects & amplification. I have tried out a number of patches from customtone, and many of them are too easy to get distortion if you pick or strum too hard. Also a lot of them sound overly compressed to me.

 

   The clips posted here sound pretty natural and convincing for acoustic emulations. I'd be interested to know what blocks & settings you used. (for those using POD's at least)


  • 0

#13 cruisinon2

cruisinon2

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 759 posts

Posted 15 January 2014 - 10:16 AM

To all those having trouble finding a good acoustic sound...chech out Sean's latest blog entry above. It deals precisely with this issue. And while many wont want to hear this, it may very well be a string guage and/or playing technique issue. It was for me...not only for acoustic models, but other problems I was having with weird overtones while palm muting the A string on high gain settings. The piezos are ridiculously sensitive...extraneous/accidental string noises that wouldnt come thru a mag pickup can result in some odd sounds with these guitars. And the acoustic models seem to require an extraordinarily light touch when it comes to picking and strumming. If you're used to beating on the strings as if it were an actual acoustic guitar, it will probably continue to sound lousy no matter what you do with the amp settings. I had to learn the hard/stubborn way...lol
  • 0

#14 pugdealer

pugdealer

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 172 posts
  • LocationPortugal

Posted 15 January 2014 - 10:58 AM

I'd seen Sean's blog entry!

 

I also use 0.11's, always have on the JTV, and like I said before, the 2.0 or even those after 1.8 sound good to me when picking, but when strummed...jeez, not even close! They're so boomy, roomy...at least to me!

 

I have to EQ a lot before getting the sound I want, and I still haven't got it right! I'm 80% satisfied...for now it's enough to keep 2.0, I'm sure I'll get it just right for me on the HD500 for the acoustics...


  • 0

#15 clay-man

clay-man

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 815 posts

Posted 15 January 2014 - 11:18 AM

My 600 sounds pretty bad when I try to play hard on the acoustics, and those use the old Acoustic sounds.

 

If they sound too boomy, cut off some of the low end with a high pass filter.


  • 0

For a minute there, I lost myself.

Radiohead_bear-728286%5B1%5D.png 


#16 cruisinon2

cruisinon2

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 759 posts

Posted 15 January 2014 - 11:19 AM

I'd seen Sean's blog entry!
 
I also use 0.11's, always have on the JTV, and like I said before, the 2.0 or even those after 1.8 sound good to me when picking, but when strummed...jeez, not even close! They're so boomy, roomy...at least to me!
 
I have to EQ a lot before getting the sound I want, and I still haven't got it right! I'm 80% satisfied...for now it's enough to keep 2.0, I'm sure I'll get it just right for me on the HD500 for the acoustics...

I'd seen Sean's blog entry!
 
I also use 0.11's, always have on the JTV, and like I said before, the 2.0 or even those after 1.8 sound good to me when picking, but when strummed...jeez, not even close! They're so boomy, roomy...at least to me!
 
I have to EQ a lot before getting the sound I want, and I still haven't got it right! I'm 80% satisfied...for now it's enough to keep 2.0, I'm sure I'll get it just right for me on the HD500 for the acoustics...

I hear ya...I had same issue. I've found that strumming needs a delicate touch..and when I say delicate, I mean barrly touching the damn strings...a 'glancing blow', if you will. Took some serious adjustment on my part. Not at all a 'natural' technique...I'd been doing it one way for 25 years...not easy to change gears like that...
  • 0

#17 janssengr

janssengr

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 15 January 2014 - 01:31 PM

The blog is actually a pretty neat bit of information. Thanks for pointing me to it:

 

http://blog.line6.com


  • 0

#18 snhirsch

snhirsch

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 304 posts
  • LocationBurlington, VT USA

Posted 15 January 2014 - 06:09 PM

Here's my acoustic example

 

Nice!  Care to share that patch?


  • 0

40 years of Rock-n-Roll and proud of it!

 

PRS Custom 24 (1990) w/ GK-3 Hex PU

James Tyler Variax JTV-69(k) w/ Strat Neck

Roland GR-55 Guitar Synth

QSC K10 FRFR

 


#19 edstar1960

edstar1960

    Power User

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1195 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 16 January 2014 - 02:37 AM

I'd seen Sean's blog entry!

 

I also use 0.11's, always have on the JTV, and like I said before, the 2.0 or even those after 1.8 sound good to me when picking, but when strummed...jeez, not even close! They're so boomy, roomy...at least to me!

 

I have to EQ a lot before getting the sound I want, and I still haven't got it right! I'm 80% satisfied...for now it's enough to keep 2.0, I'm sure I'll get it just right for me on the HD500 for the acoustics...

 

Have you tried adjusting the global string volumes for the JTV in Workbench HD ?    I think the factory set levels are too hot and all the models benefit from turning the piezo string volume down a bit.  I think the acoustics sound better if string volume is reduced in Workbench.  When I was on v2.0, I used the global string volume to even out the string sounds, and then I used the string volume for each model to tweak further, so for the acoustics, the global vol was down and then I tweaked the volume down some more within each of the model patches.  IMHO they sounded better.   It's certainly worth a try, you can always reset to factory defaults if you don't think it makes a difference that you prefer.


  • 0

#20 nogcox

nogcox

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 16 January 2014 - 10:51 AM

I use my JTV-69 with a Boss GT-100.

 

I am using the Natural Clean patch as base, turn off the pre-amp on the patch and it sounds fantastic.

 

I was playing it a gig and people were impressed by how it sounded like an acoustic guitar.

 

So the key thing is turn off amp modeling on your pedal.


  • 0

#21 ColonelForbin

ColonelForbin

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 473 posts
  • LocationChicago, Illinois

Posted 17 January 2014 - 02:26 PM


So the key thing is turn off amp modeling on your pedal.

 

For the DT25/50 users out there, who have their JTV>HD500>DT25/50, is there a way to set up patches using no amp model? I realize this runs counter intuitive to the manner in which the L6Link is supposed to work, just wondering if there is a workaround that will maintain the single chain of signal, but allow the user to go from "electric" Variax models using elec guitar models and HD500+DT25/50 amp models, to then using the Variax acoustic and eclectic models, in the same signal path and any FX from the HD500 into the DT, but bypassing the PRE amp models, and going straight into the power amp stage? I guess it's worth a try!

 

I recall they used to have some preamp options, from pre-HD era in the X3, like these listed below - an ideal option would be to have some of these choices in the HD realm, and use them as "PRE" models in much the same way the HD amp PRE models are currently used, but these would be better for Variax acoustic tones. However, I don't see that happening any time soon..

 

POD X3 Vintage and Modern Preamp Models based on*:

  • API® 512c with API® 550b EQ
  • Neve 1073
  • Avalon Vt737
  • Requisite Y7
  • L6 Solid State Console
  • L6 Lo-Fi

POD X3 Amp Models based on*:

  • L6 Piezacoustic 2
  • L6 Tube Instrument Preamp

  • 0

"Searching for a distant star, Heading off to Iscandar

Leaving all we love behind, Who knows what dangers we'll find?"


#22 sftl99

sftl99

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 12 posts

Posted 20 January 2014 - 02:40 PM

I like the blog entry simply because it affirms the issue with strumming. I'm a percussive rhythm player when it comes to acoustic and I had hoped to utilize the JTV for that. It just simply does not work for me. The electric sounds are phenomenal and I use them a lot. It would be nice if they figured out a way to get a good modeled strum without having to use the lightest touch ever. 


  • 0

#23 johnnyayyy

johnnyayyy

    Power User

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1374 posts

Posted 20 January 2014 - 05:53 PM

check the ballad of Hades on sound cloud (variax)

 

 

I really like this song. Is it your original composition?

 

It sounds to me like it belongs in a classic Lucio Fulci film like City of the Living Dead or The Beyond maybe - an excellent piece, bravo if you wrote it.

 

And I agree the acoustic sounds better on Ballad of Hades than on Paradox.

 

I am assuming you used the exact same signal path/processing/acoustic model for both tracks. My experience recording has been the opposite, the recordings I have made with the new acoustics sound better to me than those made with my older Variaxes, but I have not recorded and compared anything in the style you are playing here - makes me think maybe the old acoustics will work better for certain things and the new ones will work better for others.


  • 1

#24 radatats

radatats

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 894 posts
  • LocationOrange County, NY

Posted 20 January 2014 - 08:36 PM

 

For the DT25/50 users out there, who have their JTV>HD500>DT25/50, is there a way to set up patches using no amp model?

 

 

Try this patch as a starting point.  You have to keep the amp in channel A on to hear anything in channel B.  If you turn it off, the DT defaults to the internal B amp and we don't want that.  FS1 switches between amp and no amp for your acoustic models by using 2 volume pedals set to zero.  Remember the topology in the DT physical power section is set by the amp in Channel A no matter what is in channel B.  Type I is very different from Type III even with an acoustic!  Play around with it.

 

Make sure you have input 2 set to same for this patch or you won't get any signal in channel B.  

 

This does work but I still have a lot to do to get a good acoustic sound from my 2X12 with Celestion V30's.  I know its not perfect but its a start...

 

http://line6.com/cus...ne/tone/258828/


  • 1

l6+sig+pic-1.png   


#25 arislaf

arislaf

    Power User

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1095 posts
  • LocationGreece

Posted 21 January 2014 - 03:07 AM

I really like this song. Is it your original composition?

 

It sounds to me like it belongs in a classic Lucio Fulci film like City of the Living Dead or The Beyond maybe - an excellent piece, bravo if you wrote it.

 

And I agree the acoustic sounds better on Ballad of Hades than on Paradox.

 

I am assuming you used the exact same signal path/processing/acoustic model for both tracks. My experience recording has been the opposite, the recordings I have made with the new acoustics sound better to me than those made with my older Variaxes, but I have not recorded and compared anything in the style you are playing here - makes me think maybe the old acoustics will work better for certain things and the new ones will work better for others.

Great honor from you to say that, yes, it is my original composition.

 

And again yes, exact same signal path/processing/acoustic model, only difference pre and after HD acoustics.

 

Lucky for me, I have a jtv and a variax 700, so I can use both acoustics at any time :)


  • 0

#26 cruisinon2

cruisinon2

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 759 posts

Posted 29 January 2014 - 08:36 PM

Eureka!!!!!

Ok...so I finally found a way to get a decent acoustic sound, particularly when using really percussive strumming. I started with a stock patch on the 500X. Its in the BASS/ACO/VOC bank : 7B Solo Acoustic 2. The unaltered preset is useless and sounds like someone stepping on a duck, but with enough tweeking I was finally able to get a pretty convincing scooped tone that I can use with a fairly percussive attack. All it really is, is 5 EQ modules strung together, along with a tube compressor and a little reverb, no amp model. Each EQ module is the same (parametric+preamp), but targets a different center frequency. So its a different approach than than the one in the blog which has been discussed above. A bunch of EQs all strung together seems redundant, but it worked for me. With enough twiddling of knobs, I bet some of you guys who've been having trouble will be able to find a usable tone.

I'd post all the specific settings, but everybody's setup is different, I doubt these will work for everybody anyway...that and I did it all listening through a pair of cheap $40 cans, my good AKGs having gone to that big studio in the sky a couple months back. I encourage anybody who has had issues with this to give it a try...I spent more than an hour making really small changes, and playing the same part repeatedly, so dont get frustrated if it takes a while.
  • 0





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: acoustic, jack cable, gt8, jtv89

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users