MiroslavKloud

Hi, I think that the image is sufficiently accurate. 1 and 3 - signal, 2 - GND.

We have been waiting at least for such the response for so long. But still thank you.

Well done. Now you're very close to clarify of the mystery.

JTSC777, you're right. But this forum is no longer about to solve the problem by Line 6. This is a skeleton in the closet of management of the company. It's about their actual behavior towards a customers. LINE 6, you had two good possibilities for to behave: 1: Solve your problem Or 2: Explicate the reasons why this can not be solved and to offer some satisfaction. You have chosen the third way: lies and empty promises. I have still liked LINE 6 and I have great respect for the work of your engineers. But customer support is shameful. I believe that the problem will be solved, but not to your credit - the greater will be your ignominy.

It is perfectly explanation. Missing only explanation of the mechanical causes. It is here: https://youtu.be/7cDAYFTXq3E Or here: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Ia6IhSU4JB8/UfhANeZPbyI/AAAAAAAAZ5U/teBjIwlgIs4/s1600/2-13-waves-longitudinal.gif

Absolutely accurate. Thank you.

Last post at my video on YouTube: :)

I repeat it again and again and I do not know, how else I able describe it. Plink has the mechanical origin. It occurs naturally in all strings, on any guitar, any bass, any piano... Sometimes more, sometimes less - there are many factors which affect it. But very essence is determined by physical laws. For most musical instruments this is not a problem. But piezo pickup is very sensitive to this type of vibration. In fact, the "plink" occur not only on the E6 string but also on A5 string. At the A5 string is it removed in eletronica. The same should happen also on the E6 string, but here it just does not work - ERROR. Some guitars have due to a mechanical reasons only hushed plink on the E6 - these do not have a problem. Otherwise, there is nothing that could save similarly, as it works well on the A5 string.

Yes and no. It is a mechanical problem which exists on all guitars and on all strings, but differs in intensity. But we have the same problem, the differences are only in the intensity. Yes - Longitudinal Wave. But that does fix the problem on the A string. I tell again: Anyone can do this simple test. For this you need only three things: 1. An arbitrary guitar 2. Ball of your finger 3. Your ears https://youtu.be/lHm3Tj-pa8I The time since 0.40 till 0.52

This is a mistake. The question is not: "Why doesn't the A string do it?" Because the A string also do it. So the question is: "Why the mechanical problem that proven to exist on the A string, doesn't affect on the output signal from the guitar?" In all the sound samples that I have heard, the problem is on the same frequency.

An earlier anecdotal information from Line6 (from Yamaha): Slovak original text (you can use Google Translator): Perhaps the problem is insufficient memory in the guitar - therefore, they perhaps are not able to solve this problem.

Good work! :)

That is perhaps the reason why they do not want (not able) to solve our problem.

Bloody likely! At least another 200 posts.

My guitar was in the Line 6 service 11 weeks. The bridge and the piezo pickup were exchanged been previously.

I wonder how Line 6 would behave towards customer with this problem if he had JTV-US Custom.

These potentiometers have a common power supply - this can be the location of the problem.

Here you can vote: http://www.ranker.com/crowdranked-list/companies-with-the-worst-customer-service?&var=3

Line 6 and Hewlett-Packard. The two companies in California and so different behavior towards customers.

Not. The input of the operational amplifier must be grounded. If you leave R1 and C1 out, R15 in XT ensures grounding. Input impedance is not changed by adding a second operational amplifier. If you use the R1 and C1, the input impedance will be 500K. This may not be harmful, but I see no reason to do this. According to me it is not necessary, at the outputs of both operational amplifiers is zero DC voltage. The capacitor can be used, if so, should have at least 2.2 microfarads. But certainly it is necessary resistor between pin 1/7 (U18), and 3/6 (master volume).

My proposal

Yes. But I would not use C1 and R1 - R1 would have been parallel to the R16 in XT. To the second circuit diagram I will return tomorrow. Edit: I mistakenly wrote R16, R15 is correctly.

I have a problem I do not understand exactly how you want to use exactly this. I'm not good in English. If you want to use the signal from the junction of R20 and R25 and bring this signal to the input of external guitar effect - here is the signal 3x stronger than on the guitar input. It may cause unwanted overdriving. It is not good do feeding an external signal directly to the output of the operational amplifier (U18). If you want use the MASTER VOLUME also for external audio, I recommend to interrupt the connection between pin 1 (U18-A) and pin 3 of the master volume and inserted here a resistor - for example 1k and the external signal connect also through 1k resistor. And the same for the second channel. This causes a slight decrease in overall volume, but it will work.

I opened my POD 2.0 again - the circuit is identical with the XT, only here are used a different values of resistors and it does not matter. R92 in POD 2.0 = R110 in XT (also R107 and pin 2 on U28-A) R94 in POD 2.0 = R109 in XT (R104 and pin 2 on U27-A) I recommend the input resistors 20 kohm for gain = 1 Higher value of the resistors = lower gain. Beware of mixing the signal from the XT and from the external effects - here can be a problem with phase shift.

Hi, this schematic I have not longer available. I did a "reverse engineering" and I sketched on paper the schematic of amplifier for the headphone output. But I threw away it. If you have the schematic for XT, send it to me, maybe I can help you.