Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About AEEX

  • Rank
    Just Startin'
  1. Okay, quite funny how no one really read what I wrote :rolleyes: and everybody's yelling "You can't do that!! Strings flapping in the wind with totally huge amount of fret buzz, way too low for high e, bro." I've been experiementing with different gauge strings for years, and I've noticed that the high e string always has too much tension and IN MY OPINION is pretty unbendable and therefore pretty unplayable. I like when bending strings is easy and optimal. The .010 high "e" at c# is great I tell you. It's not too flappy and you can easily bend it up 2 or 3 semitones without butterflies in your stomach. :wub: "Then why would they make the high e in .010?" Probably because like I said earlier, steel strings thinner than .010 are just too weak (especially when bent) AND the standard EADGBE tuning was probably invented before there were steel strings. I also have a lot of other reasons why C# standard is the best tuning for guitar but you don't really care, I know :lol: But I'm encouraging you to experiement too! In guitar and in life, the "standard" might not be the best thing for you ;) But by the way, if someone here actually has this problem too, I noticed that you can still use alternate tunings in lower tunings if you leave the 4th string to the actual pitch of the physical string, then all the other strings can be in any tuning and it works.
  2. Let me explain this better, fret buzz has nothing to do with this. And I tune to C# because I like the feel of the loose strings for real, I've been playing for 10 years. Now, the 4th string, normally tuned to D works fine with alternate tunings and 12-strings. When tuned 3 semitones down to B it works perfectly with magnetic pickups and also piezos IF I'M NOT using modeled alternate tunings or 12-strings. But again, if I use a physical C# tuning and put a physical capo on the 2th fret making the capo'ed physical tuning Eb standard, the 4th string works again with alternate tunings and 12-strings. So the computer thing inside variax just doesn't read the pitch correctly on the 4th string if it's lower than standard or Eb tuning, causing an ugly sound with two tones a semitone apart from each other. So I guess I'll use a capo whenever I need an alternate tuning or 12-strings, because it actually does solve the problem. (Not the way I wanted though.)
  3. I'm a new owner of Variax JTV-89F (by the way, I also had the 6th string loud resonance sound problem right from the start, just saying...) Sadly, tuning down the string physically, which I always do make the string tension just the way I like, is made impossible to use with modeling. I've been experiementin and seems like tuning the guitar to Eb standard works fine with all the modeling. At D standard some glitching occurs. C# standard is where the problem really starts and unfortunately that's the exact physical tuning I want. For some reason, at C# standard the 4th string gives that ring modulated sound with a wrong pitch. Other strings start glitching also if you tune down even lower. Also, the thickness of the strings doesn't make a difference here. It has to be something with the programming right? Cause again, string thickness doesn't change the problem at all. Modeling still works great with this tuning IF you don't use the alternate tuning knob or 12 strings where the Variax needs to detect the pitch. But that kinda takes away the whole point of the guitar. Before you ask "why don't you use thinner strings and tune to Eb then?", I think a .010 string is way too stiff even at Eb because I like bending notes a lot, It's perfect for me at C# and I don't want to use .009's or .008's because even .010's snap sometimes. Anything I could do to make C# work?
  • Create New...