ozbadman

This is what I'm talking about...all these steps to fix 2.0????? Have you tried dancing the hokie-pokie and twirling yourself about while yer at it too???? IMHO Line 6 really dropped the ball on this "upgrade".

Chuckewheat

Well, fumbled it a little perhaps.

See:

http://line6.com/support/topic/2176-hurry-please-i-want-my-decent-strat-back/

BTW 4cast, well picked on the Tele Wide-Range Humbucker. Spot on.

and:

http://line6.com/jtv-59/features

Nice work stevek.

Just for clarity, the pspice model is a model of the effect of the tone control only. It's operating as a filter, and the resonant peak position is unchanged, except in the case of tone control set to 0. In all other cases, the highs are being filtered out using the tone control in various positions.

Additionally, changing the volume control on a passive pickup affects the tone by damping the height of the resonant peak, and gives a similar, but less extreme result as the tone control in that the position of the resonant peak is unchanged.

Adding a so-called "volume bypass cap" actually moves the position of the resonant peak.

Actually a Loudness Control (Fletcher-Munson EQ compensator) was part of the last Line-6 Vetta Firmware.

 

http://line6.com/supportarchive/thread/36600

 Oh wow. Very sweet. Now, do I need a Vetta? Hmmm.

My dad's stereo has a loudness pot!

Actually, I'd love to see a loudness (Fletcher-Munson EQ compensator) stompbox so my HD500 sounds I dialled in in my bedroom could be much closer when I get to a venue, rather than having to adjust the board so much. Anybody want to build one?

The issue of which electrical effect dominates is certainly up for discussion - only a set of analog simulations at various frequencies, pickup impedances, cap values and control settings will reveal all.  Getting a reasonable coverage of the variable space would be a bit time-consuming. Are you aware of any papers on the subject?  It sounds like something that one or more of the botique pickup vendors might have done.  And, now that I think more on it, this is an obvious subject for an undergrad EE paper.  Someone has certainly done this - more likely many someones.

 

And - sorry for any confusion - I'm indeed saying that I want the effect.  I've come to rely on it to dial in on a good rhythm sound.  I generally start with volume full-up and dial in a solo tone, then back down (sometimes way down, depending on how far into overdrive I was) until I get a more zingy rhythm sound.  Sometimes it takes a couple of rounds to converge on something that works.  It's just the way I've always done it.  Again, maybe not for everyone.

Yeah. Sorry, I re-read your original post and it became clearer, so I deleted my post.

Helmuth Lemme has just released his excellent book in English, which I think is a must-read for anyone who's interested in guitar electronics and why different guitars and pickups sound the way they do. "Electric Guitar Sound Secrets and Technology". It was originally in German, so the translations are a bit dicey, but one can work out what he means.

Some of his work is here:

http://buildyourguitar.com/resources/lemme/

So I gather that as of right now, the JTVs keep their characteristic sounds as the volume control is changed (unfortunately, mine is in another country at the moment, and I haven't tested this).

Hey Steve,

Slightly off-topic, (well, miles off-topic) and I don't want to hijack the thread, but I bought the triple-shot rings myself and when I went to install them, the screw-holes didn't quite line-up. Did you have to drill into your 59 to make this fit?

Thanks,

David.

While we're on the subject of cap values, I remain puzzled as to why the Variax does not model volume pot bypass caps.  Many electric guitar models use these to brighten the tone at low settings and I find it critical to getting a good, cleaned-up rhythm sound.  This should certainly have been a simple effect to model.  It doesn't even need to be linear,  a lookup table based on volume pot position probably would have done the trick.

The reason it's important on standard guitars is that turning down the volume knob reduces the peak of the resonant frequency due to it's passive circuit with the cable capacitance. That is, turning down the volume knob actually changes the tone, which is an unintended consequence. It's possible that Line 6 didn't model this (some would say, unfortunate) characteristic and therefore, volume pot bypass modelling is unnecessary. I don't have my JTV to test this but personally, I would prefer they didn't model the volume pot tone variations as it's not very useful. I want my volume to control volume only. I can use tone when I want to change the tone. Does anyone know if the tone changes on the JTVs when you reduce the volume using the volume control? (I'm talking about with clean signals, not an overdriven amp).

Just to clarify: on Strats, although the middle pickup is reverse wound, the magnets are also installed reverse polarity. Thus, any selection with the middle pickup is IN-PHASE, not OUT-OF-PHASE (but it does kill hum).

Brian May used neck and middle out-of-phase for the Bohemian Rhapsody solo, but it's not his normal sound. Basically, it kills a lot of the low end sound due to the signal cancellation. It doesn't kill it all due to the space between the pickups ensuring they don't pick up the identical sound. Plus, Brian's pickups are in series, not parallel. Out of phase results in a thinner sound than people generally find useful.

Chris, thanks again for doing the video. I only wished you would have done a few models side-by-side with before and after scenarios playing the same riff (like you did for the acoustic models upgrade). Also, I agree that too much gain (distortion) will make it hard to discern the differences. Anyway, I'm still grateful  :D

This guy did a side-by-side comparison of a selection of the models between 1.9 and 2.0

http://line6.com/support/topic/2074-v2-hd-comparison-video/

How about a model (or 2+) or the Brian May Red Special?

Nice job. Thanks for doing this.

Hi jeff,

It's quite a bit of work, so perhaps somebody else could do it. The reason it's done this way is that the original Variax sheet was done this way, so there was less to change. When I first saw the Variax one it seemed odd to me too, but I definitely got used to it so that now it looks quite normal. One of the great advantages to doing it this way is that most of us are right-handed. That means that the neck is going to the left when I'm holding the guitar: Just like in the pictures. Therefore, I can look at the picture, and instanly know where to put the pickup selector. With all the guitars turned around, the pickup selector wouldn't match the orientation of the guitar, unless we also swapped the left-to-right order of the guitars but if we did that, I'd have to rotate the image in my mind every time I was trying to set the selector switch correctly.

I don't know if that made sense, but hopefully. :)

Cheers,

David.

Thanks swing_girl

The png has been updated with the corrections noted by swing_girl.

Any further corrections, please post them here.

Cheers,

David.

Thanks swing_girl.

I couldn't find the new information. I'll update this today and re-submit.

Just to let people know who've already downloaded it, the original version had a white hole in the middle of one of the strats. I've replaced the image with this fixed if you care to download it again.

Man, you're quick Silverhead. First time I forgot to press the final "attach this file button". It's attached properly now.

I put this image together based on the old Variax models poster that I (and I think others) like to use. If there are any errors/corrections/requested changes, please post them here. Cheers, David.

Hi,

Variax 500 and JTV are not compatable. You would need to use Workbench HD for your JTV. I doubt Workbench HD would work for the Variax 500, but I haven't tried it.

The electronics on-board the JTVs and thus the modelled sounds available are the same for all models (59, 69, 89, etc.), now that the new firmware has been released.

The differences between various JTV models (59, 69, 89, etc) are:

- each model has different magnetic pickups

- each model has a different look and feel, and knobs in different positions and configurations

- some models have whammy bars, some do not

- the lettering on the alternate tuning selector is different on the 89 models (more drops, instead of open tunings). Therefore, default open tunings are different on the 89s compared to the others.

I don't play metal so someone else will have to contribute here, but I hope this helps a little.

Well that's a nice way to say that, but I'm thinking that it took them just as much time to get signals out of the plastic interface as it would have getting the same signals out of a pod. So much better when they are tweaked together. Key words here however are "they decided"... And I sure can't dispute that can I... ; ) I can tell u that I'm really liking that spank #2 now. Less mud to my ears than before.

While I can understand your frustration, all I can say as someone who used to work in Software, is every single thing you do, no matter how small, takes some amount of time. I for one am glad they released it now, rather than having us waiting for another few weeks to also get it working for the POD only people, especially as all JTVs are shipped with the interface cable. If Line 6 waited until everything was perfect and finished, we still wouldn't even have the POD HD500. :)

Use one of these, as posted by Line 6 in the forum:

http://line6.com/support/topic/124-user-created-dt-editors/

I haven't heard of this before, so it definitely looks like a hardware fault to me. It's some sort of intermittent problem like a bad connection or a dry solder joint, Either way, I'd be swapping it for another one. You could try calling the Line 6 support line. They're very helpful, but I would imagine they're going to tell you to send it back.