marcwormjim

Just a random Artec PAF set from a parts box - Put whatever you want in. FYI, I’ve had four JTV89s (multiple return-exchanges due to sub-Squier QC); and none of them had pickup routing deep-enough to lower the stock pickups enough to balance them with the models. A less-invasive option is to air or swap the pickup magnet, or shim the neck and raise the bridge.

I dealt with this issue by swapping the 89’s high-output pickups for a lower-output set. This alleviated the balance issues between the 89F mags and the pickups in my other guitars and, should I want that sound, I still have the factory firmware’s modeled ‘89 pickups to use with the neutral body.

The red is a dark transparent maroon.

^True. This would be a more thriving community, if only every thread didn’t end with needing a support ticket to blow your nose.

I own and have owned many of the guitars modeled in the Variax series. Even in the original line, I had to use Workbench to bring the modeled pickups' and strings' output up or down to what I had the real ones set up for.

The 89F I own is my third (the previous two were returned, before I settled): Each had the same CNC and QC issues ( neck pocket routed too deep to achieve low action, humbucker routes too shallow, action way higher from the factory than other brands at the same price point, Graphtech Floyd unable to be lowered into its route without compromising the pivot point, all three are extremely body-heavy, frets need leveling, etc.). The Variax line has always accomplished the "Swiss army guitar" feature with the electronics constituting most of the cost, but rarely do they come out of the box set up to compete with much cheaper instruments. As others have said, a TLC session with a good tech (and perhaps a neck shim) can make it less of a chore to play. The issue for me isn't that Line 6's official position is to withhold setup specs, but that James Tyler allows his name on it.

Yes; you can either rotate the pups or re-solder the leads, depending on whether or not you wish to keep the screw coils on the outside. If I had to guess, it's because Tyler or someone at Line 6 judged that splitting to the screw coils resulted in either too bright a sound for the 500k analog pots, or perhaps the "Tyler-designed" pups have less of a drop in output with the slug coils selected. In either case, I prefer the outside coils, as well.

I too would be interested in replacing my 89F neck at some point - Please post photos if/when the mod is complete.

I'm going to go ahead and guess you'll be told to open a support ticket.

Chances are you're using two very different sets of guitar modeling - Roll back to firmware 1.9 in the JTV for the 300 algorithms. You'll have to use the old Workbench software, but many people prefer the old electric sounds. I (and everyone used to the pre-2.0 modeling) was in the same boat, but eventually got used to the "HD" models. What initially won me over were the acoustic models. A common compromise is increasing the overall volume of the 2.0 models in Workbench HD.

I only wish they'd been mass-produced in less-morbid colors.

As stated in the OP, this seems a trivial matter - But I'll indulge: Without opening too many specifics up for debate, I feel the JTV line and its marketing was an earnest effort to learn from mistakes made with the original line. i love that the Variax brand exists, but the free market has consistently relegated its game-changing innovations to something niche; and you can't expect the company to double down on devoting advertising funds to subsequent generations of a product line that has never exactly set the world on fire. That's me trying to be diplomatic. My own personal experiences in owning, returning, and reselling Variax instruments since their introduction has unfortunately informed an opinion that I'd rather Line 6 prioritize product quality over taking out a page in Guitar World.

I have multiple rigs, with the smallest being an iPad-based one that fits in a gig bag. The 21st century shows promise. I've found Bias FX iOS to be great for what it is, but with fewer effects and less flexibility than the HD500.

Hello, all. My current rig includes an alumitone and midi-equipped guitar running into a GR-55 for modeling and alternate turnings. The prospect of downsizing to just a Variax is appealing, but I'm hesitant to replace the stock pups with Alumitones, if I can approximate the sound with a tweaked workbench model. Has anyone attempted this?

I owned a 705 and fretless 700, to round out my Variax collection. I, too, found that there just wasn't need for the horsepower they had under the hood to justify using them for anything beyond recording applications - None of the idiosyncrasies of the modeled instruments stood out in a gig-mix and, as I'm sure owners found, I often ended up choosing comfort over tone when it came to which instrument I brought. That Line 6 never bothered with Workbench didn't help sway me from eventually selling them off before any components failed. Ever since, I've just had a Roland GK3B on a 30"-scale six-string; and it's been the best of both worlds. It's a shame I was part of the majority that was more in love with the IDEA of the Variax bass than the executed reality of it.