Jeffsco

If you do not like the 2.0 Spank versions...roll it back. I personally use 1.9. The 2.o sounded so bad my entire band thought the guitar was broken. Tried to re flash several dozen times...no change. The Spank 2.0 do NOT sound like what I'd expect a Start to sound like (Mark Knofpler, John Mayer, Stevie Ray Vaughan etc.)....so I use 1.9.

Incredibly hard work. Thank-you Matt. I'm very sensitive to the differences in the V2.xx and the 1.9. As I've stated in the many, many posts I've made on the subject...there is a definite difference between the 1.9 and later versions and the 2.xx versions do not sound as what I expect a Strat to sound like in comparision. However I love the 2.1 Acoustics and the Workbench HD. functionality. I'll definitely give this try.

Just wanted to follow up. ..Spent considerable time playing my JTV with v1.9 this past couple of weeks. I am in tone heaven. Version 1.9 sounds incredible to my ears. Everything i put to it works. I've really been exploring the stock Mag pickups as well. Really finding them versatile.. Running it thru my Kemper Profiler and my HD500. Hopefully v2.2 will correct some of the issues being raised, but if not....1.9 sounds great to my ears and I'm not going to l try to get 2.1 to do something it won't.

Let me know if you decide to sell!! <_<

I saw a picture somewhere of a guy with a JTV-69 and he had one of the new Fishman Triple Play Synth interfaces. I'm giving serious thought to that for my own rig.

Yes....it is good news in that regard...and it is going to come down to personal preference. For instance....on the video I love the 2.0 Tele tones as well as the ,Lester,Semi and Rezo. The acoustics in 2.0 are noticably different to my ears as well. I'd actually like to be able to access both the 1.9 and 2.0 acoustics as they all have some strong points. I'd like to thank all the posters for their Input. You've been a big help and I appreciate the respectful way people have approached this. But as I noted above..My go to tones are the Strat and the Rick's and both those sound better in 1.9, to my taste.

Found this video Youtube....It really demonstrates what I am talking about. Check out the difference in the Strat tones starting at 1:08. The Rick tones as well. Now...before anyone says it...I get the whole youtube Compression / lousy sound deal. However...this video pretty much demonstrates what I have been trying to say. Watch, listen and judge for yourself.

I have done some midi sysex updates. The solution was to add some delay via Midi OX in order for the unit receiving the data dump time to receive it all. How does one do that with a JTV? I believe it is a preference issue as half of the profiles really do sound "HD" in comparison to the 1.9. Unfortunately...I rarely, if ever, use those profiles. :rolleyes: I do require a great Strat tone, Tele and a Rickenbacher tone....all of which are dramatically thinner, less distinctive in 2.1. In 2.1 ....The Lester models are incredible, the Acoustics are great, the Rezo's...good.

Interesting....the first thing I noticed was the difference in the volume between the 2.0 and the 1.9 sounds. Several folks who responded to the original post did so as well. This is important because it is a well documented phenomena that the majority of human beings...when asked to compare 2 sound clips...will overwhelmingly identify the one that is LOUDER as being the one that sounds best. Even if they are the same IDENTICAL clip....that is...the same audio sample being used for comparision but one instance of the clip being slightly louder. I've experienced this with a Client while sending him evaluation mixes of a Song we recorded together. I sent him the same 2 mixes ...but had the 2nd mix slightly Louder due to slightly greater Peak Level / Normalize ratio during the mastering process. I had forgotten to provide any description of what I had done to the mixes which was ....nothing....the EQ was the same, Track balance...everything....other than a slightly Louder master track. He responded immediately.....absolutely HATED the EQ, Track balance etc of the "quieter" clip...loved the 2nd clip. I didn't have the heart to tell hm it was EXACTLY the same clip....just turn up your volume knob and see. Ended up with a happy customer and a "greatly" improved mix from the first to the 2nd....LOL! :lol: I've recorded the exact same tests into my DAW...and on blind playback with both myself and others... (all audio samples matched for volume.) the unanimous opinion has been that the 2.1 Strat tones sound "thin" and the 1.9 sound "Fat and Clear". I'm going to re-record the samples this coming weekend and post them for the Forum to evaluate. The more I compare the 2.1 to 1.9....I do think that it is simply a "preference" issue. The JTV seems to be working fine. I doubt it is a "re-Flash issue"....in that you need to reflash it a certain number of times before the JTV "randomly" takes the proper Flash. Electronics just don't work that way....or at least very, very rare. The guys that like the thin,trebly tone of the 2.1 Spank prefer it over the Fat, Woody tone of the 1.9.

Great feedback folks...I appreciate it. Real Zap....I will try as you've suggested...a virgin install on a new computer. I've got a fairly new Laptop that I can try this on that's never had any Line 6 installations.. I'll download a fresh Line 6 Monkey etc and go that route. And no..I didn't take your remarks to be mean or offensive. I do value your input. Phil m: I hear what you are saying and you are correct....what sounds good to one may not to another. That is why I've asked if anyone would be willing to Rollback to 1.9 to see if they experience what I have. It may well be that one person "loves" the sound of the 2.1 Spank and finds that it represents what a Strat "should" sound like. I echo Edstar1960: How do I know that something is wrong with my JTV? I will try to figure out how to post the sound clips to the forum so you can hear what I'm talking about and you can judge for yourselves.

So it seems to me that there are several conclusions that can be determined from my testimony and others... 1. Mine and many others actually own JTV's that are broken....in that they work flawlessly for all Firmware updates except for 2.1...which boggles the mind. That just doesn't make sense. Having to "re-Flash" 4 or 5 times in order to "magically" or randomly cause the JTV to finally "get it"....that just doesn't seem right. I've flashed my at least a dozen times and using a number of ways that other users found that suddenly, miraculously made the JTV "get it". I can't imagine Line 6 putting out a product whos' functionality has as much chance of working as a Vegas Roulette wheel. 2. That the Strat tones and others of 2.1 do sound "thin" compared to 1.9. This is by Design...not a flaw in the software. That would explain why so many of you do not see any problem. Tone is subjective. You may not like the "woody" sound I am clearly hearing in 1.9. You might compare it to a "real Strat" sound clip and find it OK. But that is not what is happening in my 2.1 update. no one would EVER expect you could pull off some convincing Sultan's of Swing tones from 2.1. it sounds like something is broken. The only way to figure this out is to have some happy owners of 2.1 rollback their firmware to 1.9 and to listen to Spank 2. If I'm right it will be a night and day comparison. There will be no mistaking it the difference will be that dramatic. 2.1 will sound "broken" or "thin " in comparison to 1.9. Who knows..you might never go back to 2.1! If mine...and a lot of others...JTV's are Broken... as it concerns their ability to receive the 2.1 Flash update and sound "great"...then we could expect your 2.1 Spank 2 tone to sound even richer, fuller, more Quack (ier)....than 1.9...truly and "HD" improvement. It isn't about whether the 2.1 clip sounds exactly like a "real Strat clip. It's about whether 1.9 sounds rich and full in comparision to 2.1 Would a few of you be willing to try this out and report back to the Forum?

No...it's not the WB bug from 2.0....there is a MASSIVE difference between the Spank tone from 1.9 to 2.1. It's not the bug that has been clearly explained. I'd suggest all those that really like the Spank tones on 2.1 to Rollback to 1.9 and tell me that your 2.1 doesn't sound "thin" or even broken by comparision to 1.9. It is that dramatic. Update: I was advised by others to try to Rollback to a 1.7x version and then go straight to 2.1 to see if that might clear out any "artifacts" or buggy code remnants that might be preventing "proper" 2.1 Firmware update. That was a disaster! it took over a half hour to do so and never fully finished I had to stop the process after 30 minutes and it wiped out the Variax making it inoperable. I managed to load 1.8 into the JTV and that got us back to working again. 1.8..the Spank 2 tones sounded Good....no where near as full and "woody" as 1.9 but not "thin" or "broken sounding like 2.1. Flashed to 2.1 ...dial in Spank 2 and...."thin"... weedy sounding....Chime sounds terrible....Tele......anemic on all tones... Rollback to 1.9....Spank is full rich and woody.y..Like the best of Eric Johnson, Mark Knopler, Stevie Ray V...

So...your suggesting a Rollback to 1.7x and then go directly to 2.1? I'll give it a try....and report back. As it stands..I'm very happy with 1.9 and could live with it....but lets face it..the Workbench HD is a very nice tool to have to use. Thanks Uber Guru....I'll try that out.

But how is it possible you are loading the same Firmware 2.1 as many of us but are not experiencing the thin, weak sounding tone compared to 1.9? I've spent about a half dozen hours over the past few days going thru hundreds of posts in the Forum archive....all detailing the same problems I have noted. I'm not taking about a subjective / is it or isn't it/ type difference in sound. The difference's between 2.1 and 1.9 on my guitar are night and day / black and white/ can't fail to not hear the difference. It's that dramatic. If it was a conventional guitar and pickups and you switched to a pick up combo and it sounded like it does with my 2.1 Firmware update....you'd swear the pickups were dying. I'm not saying all the models sound this way....but at least 3 of them do and the best part of 4 or 5 others... there is only a small difference between the individual pick up Positions. Whereas with 1.9 and my Variax 300 (by comparision)..each of 5 tones for a given model sound VERY different from one another. The Lester and the Acoustic models sound fantastic...truly an "HD" improvement over the previous Firmwares. But on the balance 1.9 sounds far far better.

Good to know stevekc..thanks for posting.

I played with the Workbench to try to get the "quack" happening on the Strat tones for 2.1. It's just not there. I should say that I was using a very basic amp setting to hear the tonality...Clean Deluxe..no frills, no muss, no fuss.... You look at the rich woody tone of Stevie Ray Vaughn, John Mayer, Eric Johnson etc...that's the Strat tone I'm trying to coax out of the guitar. The foundation of that sound is present in 1.9 but 2.1 is just too weak to get there. I even went into Workbench and tried to boost the volume of that pickup combination. All I got was a Louder weak sound. I'd be interested to have some of the 2.1 users who are satisfied with their Strat tones to Rollback their tone to 1.9 and tel me what they think? If their 1.9 sounds as full and beefy as 2.1....then that tells me there is something wrong with my JTV.. Perhaps someone can do that and report back?

Hi folks..thought I'd post my finding in a new thread as I was discussing this in the tail end of an old thread... to recap: I put my new JTV-69 thru it's paces at a rehearsal last weekend. First time I really had the opportunity to stretch it out. I was running the latest version of the firmware...2.1. Myself and all of my bandmates noticed that the Spank / Strat tones sounded thin...as to the point of there being something wrong with the guitar. I had been using a Variax 300 for the past 7 years so I know what the Variax Spank tones sound like. several others....most notably the Chime sounds......sounded weak as well. The acoustics and the Lester sounded great... but most of the tones in the Semi, R-Billy and Jazzbox sounded all much the same. In the Variax 300 they were distinctly different. So last night I did an experiment....I made 3 recordings of myself playing the same passage using the Spank Bridge Middle pickup combo. #1 was the Variax 300. #2 was the JTv-69 using Version 1.9 Firmware and 3 was the JTV-69 using the 2.1 Firmware. I should add that I reflashed the JTV from my HD500 to avoid any possible issues with the JTV USB interface. I haven't had time to post the sound clips here so you'll have to take my word for it. I had a family member , who's not a musician...just a regular set of ears...come by to do a blind listening test and they perception and comments matched mine almost to the word! -JTV-69 with 2.1 sounded very thin and weak -The Variax 300 and JTV-69 ver 1.9 sounded " Fat" - The JTV-69 ver 1.9 and the Variax 300 sounded very close to each other but the JTV69 ver 1.9 sounded clearer. Just to be sure I reflashed the JTV several times back and forth and each time it was the same thing...so we can rule out a "Bad Flash" I think It's speculation to say that there is something wrong with my JTV when using 2.1. as others have alluded to similiar problems. It's only because I had a basis of comparision that I recognized there was a definite difference with the 2.1 software. Using ver 1.9....the Chime tones are all back and sounding "Rickenbacher" again...the Semi and R-Billy and Tele tones sound distinct from one another...that just wasn't happening with 2.1. My only regret is not being able to use the HD Workbench..which really is outstanding. But the guitar now sounds like it should. So...I don't know where that leaves me...Is there something broken with it? Is it possible for Ver 1.9 to sound phenomenal and 2.1 to sound as bad as it does and the guitar still function? I'm interested to hear back from others..

Perhaps I should elaborate....while the Strat sounds with the bridge and middle pickup activated was noticeably thinner and not quieter... (again..comparing it to 7 years of hearing the Variax 300 strat...)... at some points mid song or solo, the sound got even "thinner" . My 2 band mates even noticed and commented on it... was that dramatic....so it wasn't just my subjective perception. Very concerning because I use the Strat Sounds for a good portion of my set list and at present...they are not usable. I'll have to check the version of the Variax...it could well have been on 2.1...I thought it was 2.0...I don't recall at the moment. But whatever firmware version it was on there were a number of things happening that had not been happening before.

Reading this post with a lot of interest. Had my first rehearsal with my JTV-69. I had updated it to version 2.0 and was running into my XTLive . Just so you know..my basis for comparison was my old Variax 300 which I've been playing for the past 7 years and so I am very familiar with what the 300's models sound like thru the XTLive rig.. I was profoundly disturbed by the sound of several of the models on the JTV-69. So much so I thought something was broken.The Strat seemed so thin in contrast to the 300. The Chime settings did not jump out as much. The Lester sounded great but it would occasionally go thin on me....requiring me to quickly switch to the Strat and then back in order to restore the fullness. I really thought something was broken with the guitar. Now....reading thru this post it seems like it might be an issue with 2.0 itself. I do have a POD HD500 and I will try to re-flash the guitar thru it rather than the USB interface. But from the input on this post it would seem like the solution might well be rolling back to 1.9. Any further ideas or thoughts on this? Could it be the XTLive not playing nice with the 69? I did have the XTLive updated to the latest current drivers....

I'm looking for a Spec sheet or document that details the Factory specs for things like Height of the bridge or string height above the 12th fret or Pickup height under the String or neck relief......I'm going to make a few adjustments and I wanted to know how far out my new JTV is

Yea..but in this analogy ..you wake up one morning and realize you were an idiot for leaving the Ex-Wife....See if she'll still take your calls before you go thru any more hassles with the Girlfriend.

I split my signal on my POD XTLIve...one part went to a FRFR Atomic 50 for stage mnitoring and the other went to the PA. Best of both worlds. For your HD500..I'd take the advice of the poster and run into a QSC or some other FRFR cabnet for monitoring.

Not sure if you where addressing me specifically rodney 13....or whether your comments were directed to all the posters in general? I've certainly never posted anything regarding becoming a better player because of gear....not sure how you've gotten that from my posting. I certainly don't hold that attitude. The only thing that makes one a better player is practice and experience playing Live. In regards to gear being less complicated...I plugged in the Kemper and didn't look up for 3 hours. Playing and changing parameters and navigating is very, very easy compared to the HD500. I consulted their manual twice and that was for some extremely deep obscure editing function. Overall... I found it to be an incredibly easy and intuitive piece of hardware to use. Contrast that to the massive PDF handbook that came with my HD500...not to mention Meandbobbo's excellent reference manual, and the hundreds if not thousands of posts from HD users on this forum , trying to understand how their HD works.... That's been my experience....hopefully yours was different? I'm very good with manuals and gear. I'm considered the Go-To guy when people have issues with their guitars and amps. I've modified and built Acoustics, electrics and Guitar amps from scratch... along with 30 years of professional and part time musical experience...so I'm not a newbie in that sense. Line 6 had the opportunity to hit it out of the park with this re-issue. Time will tell if they have. I hope they do...I've been a user of their gear for the past 11 years.

Your right...saying 10x better is a figure of speech. Where as the HD500 was a significant improvement over the XTLive in terms of feel, response..and what I call...the 3 Dimensionality of the sound...the Kemper is that and much more above the HD500. Not to hijack the thread here.....just responding to the posts. For me the biggest issues with my HD500 were the EQ % issues ,the input / Mono / Stereo configuration and what seems to be some sort of Clippng...or running out of headroom at various points in the signal chain or between certain FX.. I can really hear and feel that. Trying to pay attenton to that and TWEAK,TWEAK, TEAK to get it right wasfrustrating and a lost waste of time. The increase in the DSP was a welcome addition but I would have prefered a return to the X3 Dual amp functionality. My X3 sounded better to my ears than the HD trying to do similiar dual configuratons. Just personal taste I suppose.

I gave up on my HD500 and bought a Kemper. Yea...the cost is 4x as much but it smply is WAY easier to use and sounds 10x better. Reading this Forum....I remember why I left the HD 500! Now..it's going to be my Midi Floorboard for the Kemper. VERY disappointed to hear how little they actually changed with the release of the 500x. Very disappointed.