guitarno

That sounds really good! Nice playing as well! Did you have to turn down the string volume in workbench? Someone earlier posted that the graphtech piezo's were hotter & he had to lower the output to make them usable. Thanks for posting the clip! B)

Hey Slockrem, Thanks a lot for your detailed reply. Very interesting steps taken to make sure it's reversible. This is always an issue on guitars of any value, and nice to be able to undo the change down the road if you choose to or want to sell it later on. I love my JTV, but there are some little anomalies with the modeling and alternate tunings that sometimes are agrivating. Some of them may be due to the current bridge design, or the piezos. I was wondering about what options for changing or replacing the piezos were possible. Thanks again, and keep us posted! B)

I'm glad this is working for you. Please keep us informed and give us more details! The guitar is a JTV-59 (Korean), right? Exactly what model Graph Tech bridge did you use? What steps, or other mods did you have to do to make this work? What did it cost you? How does this bridge change affect the acoustic models tone? I'm not sure if you are aware of the "Ghost Notes" issue some JTV users have experienced, or if this has happened to you, but if so, did the bridge swap change anything for the better? Anything you can clarify on any of these points would be appreciated! B)

Katie, Interesting tail piece! Let us know how it works out for you, and post some pictures of the finished project if you can!

Nyuk, Nyuk, Nyuk... :lol: :D :lol: !

Thanks for re-loading that file on Soundcloud. Much easier to get to there. The sounds are definitely different, it’s subtle, but it’s there. In this recording it sounds to me that the midrange in the 2nd section is a little muffled & woofy for lack of a better term. It has a sort of an unusual character to it, and not really authentically acoustic sounding. To me, the 1st examples have some of the same midrange tone to them, but to a lesser degree, and they do sound a little better in this clip, a little thinner and clearer. I started to notice this in my own acoustic patches recently. I wasn’t really aware of it before, and was pretty happy with the acoustic sounds, but there is this midrange overtone to them just like in your example. Something that maybe needs to be EQ’ed out to make it sound better. Unfortunately I am not an expert at EQ, and I don’t have a definitive answer, but I’m sure there are a few EQ bands that need to be adjusted to get this midrange honk out, and that it would improve the acoustic tone.

Yes, I agree, the host you have this file on is not a great place to share files. First they wanted to download some junkware onto my machine, then I need to "Sign on with Facebook" to get the file. I'm not willing to jump through hoops to listen to this. Maybe you should post it to to a reputable site like dropbox, or soundcloud.

Well, I cut the overall string volumes by 3Db on all strings just for starters. I've played with that for a day or so, but not really feeling or hearing much difference yet, maybe a little, but I'll have to play with it some more. I'm a little supprised that 3Db made as little difference as it has. As you said, I'll have to experiment a little to find my sweet spot.

Sounds good! Thanks for posting the clip. Seems to sit really well in the mix & sounds pretty authentically acoustic. I'll have to experiment with lowering the overall string volumes in workbench. How far did you end up lowering the string volumes (in Db) in workbench to get them where you like them?

So you lowered the string volume "Globally" in the HD edit program for all the models, or just for the acoustic models? Does lowering the string volume, whether globally or just for the acoustics allow you to avoid having to use a lighter touch when playing the acoustics?. I found that playing lighter definitely helps, but I find this hard to do in a live context. I normally have a heavier playing style and find it difficult to play as lightly as needed by the acoustics when playing live.

I use a JTV59 into a HD500X and into a single L2T. I've used this for practice and live gigs for the last year or so, and I have no regrets (except for the hole in my wallet). I would love to have stereo, but for live use with a band I find it not as important as I thought. I went this route mainly for the acoustic models in the JTV, which I use a lot with my current band. The L2T performs very well for that, and I routinely get compliments from band mates & listeners on how good it sounds. It's worked out to be very practical for me - I have a rolling case for the L2T, and it is much preferred to using a traditional guitar amp for the acoustic models. You could use a number of other FRFR PA type speakers, and I can't comment as to how the L2T would compare to "Speaker X", but the switching capabilities & interoperability between the 3 pieces give you lots of usable options live.

Yes, Thanks very much for posting. I will have to give them a try. The spank models on the newer workbench versions have certainly given people plenty of issues.

Not sure if there's a video for this, and not sure you really need one - it's pretty straight forward, but you MUST use the L6Link connection between the HD500 & L2T speaker. Here's the link to all the tutorial videos: http://line6.com/support/page/kb/_/general-faq/line-6-video-tutorials-complete-list-r202 Not sure about wireless, but the VDI cable allows you all sorts of control possibilities that I don't believe you can get any other way, like switching JTV models (stored in your HD patches), using the JTV volume & tone controls to control various HD parameters in real time. I've used home made VDI cables made by members on this form. They work fine. Don't know about the DMX cable. Obviously any cables you use would have to meet or exceed specs for each, but beyond that I don't think who supplys them is an issue.

I'm in the Milwaukee, Wisconsin area. A bit far for an in person trial run I'm afraid.

Yes, exactly what Zaphodboy said above. See posts #30 & #31 in the following thread for more info: http://line6.com/support/topic/1678-hd500x-l2t-correct-settings/

I've see a few posts where people have swapped out a compound radius strat neck from Stew Mac, and they were very happy with them. Relatively inexpensive also. http://www.stewmac.com/Materials_and_Supplies/Bodies_and_Necks_and_Wood/Electric_Guitar/Necks/Replacement_Neck_for_Strat_Guitar.html If I had bought one of the 69's I was looking at, I might have done the same. As you said, there are a number of advantages in the 69 model.

I actually wanted a 69 when I went to the local GC to try them, but I found the necks on the 2 69's they had there way too chunky for me. I thought the neck on the tobacco sunburst 59 that I tried there (and eventually bought) felt a lot better and more natural. I prefer the sound of single coils (hate the noise though), and I really wanted a vibrato bar, but I was also concerned that the inevitable tuning issues with a vibrato bridge would make the alternate tunings less usable, so I chose the 59 for all those reasons. I'd love to have a SSS Strat style JTV, but can't afford to buy another guitar right now. Your trade offer is tempting, but I don't know how I'd feel about giving up my 59... Tempting though...

You can use whatever speaker mode you thinks sounds best for any particular patch. I use the PA, Acoustic Guitar, and Electric Guitar modes depending on which HD500 patch/JTV model I'm using. If you set a speaker mode with the HD500 linked (by L6Link Cable), and then save the patch on the HD500, it will remember the speaker mode setting and automatically set it for you the next time you switch to that patch. You HAVE to be connected by the L6Link Cable for this to work!

Yes, that also looks like a good possibility. I wasn't aware of those. Not a bad price if they sound good. You probably don't need the effects with the HD500, but they could come in handy. The mixer section is also a plus if you are going to run other things through them.

I use the L2M speaker with my HD500X and I get very good results, but as was said earlier, not a cheap option. You could also use any pair of good quality studio monitors (I have Presonus Eris 8's), and that works pretty well, but studio monitors are a little delicate to use live (exposed speaker cones). I have heard good things about the Alto's and the Mackie Thump's as well, but I don't know anyone using them with a HD500. The QSC's are really nice, but also very pricey. Any good quality FRFR PA speaker will probably work OK - some are better than others, and it's a little subjective as to which ones you think sound best. Any of them will probably sound better than a guitar cab, but you have to EQ a little different when using them. Your best bet would be to take your HD500 to the store that has some locally and try them out in person. Use the "Studio/Direct" output mode for starters, and try out a couple of patches that you're familiar with, that sound good through headphones to you, so you have something to compare to. You can use just one FRFR speaker, unless you really have to have stereo, to keep the cost down.

I installed an Earvana nut on a guitar I owned years ago. I was also impressed with the improvement in tuning. I had not really considered this for my JTV 59, because I don't have any major intonation problems with it. To tell the truth I kind of forgot about the Earvana nuts. I think that because tuning and correct intonation is so critical to the success of altered tunings on the Variax guitars, Earvanas might just be a great way to make a practical improvement to a JTV. I'll have to think about putting one on my 59...

Another method that works pretty well is the FX Loop block. This only works if you're not already using it for something else. Put a short jumper cable form the FX Loop "Out" to the FX Loop "In" jacks. Put the FX Loop block somewhere in the chain. You can put it before an amp, or overdrive stompbox to get more drive, or if you don't want to change the overall tone, just make it louder, put it at the very end of the chain. Set the level controls of the FX Loop block: I'm not looking at it right now, so I don't remember exactly, but there are 2 controls: Input & Output or something like that. I normally set one at unity or no gain, and one to +3db or +6db or whatever level you need. You'll have to experiment with these settings to get what you want. Assign the FX Loop to one of the footswitches to turn it on and off. I've used this many times & it makes a good booster. Don't forget the patch cable or it won't work. B)

I agree with radatats statements above: "Disconnect pedal 2 first. After it is reset and calibrated you can reconnect pedal 2 and it should be good. If it acts up again try just disconnecting and reconnecting pedal 2." This is also what I have found. It's a little weird, but the assignments end up being backwards some times. Un plug the mission pedal (pedal 2 input), plug it back in, and it will be corrected. Then save your patch & it should be OK after that.

Yes I agree with that. The "Virtual tunings" eliminate a number of physical issues like slackened strings buzzing that can happen with regular alternate down-tuned strings. There are some definite advantages with "Virtual tunings" that won't happen with a Tronical unit. With the JTV you can do outlandish things like drop all strings 2 full steps to "C" tuning without slack string issues. Not really practical with physically tuned strings of the same gauge.

That's a real interesting situation. I do find myself thinking exactly as post #2 - My initial reaction is that this would defeat the purpose of JTV alt tunings & make no real sense, but I'll have to admit because of the issues brought up by the OP, it DID cross my mind briefly. I do wonder how well mechanical alt tunings work compared to the JTV virtual alt tunings. Obviously they would be more "Authentic" sounding, but also more limited. I would be very interested in the OP's opinions & comparisons of alt tunings between his "Tronical" guitar and the JTV! :unsure: Please give us your impressions!