Jump to content

guitarno

Members
  • Content Count

    208
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by guitarno

  1. I'm currently using Presonus Eris 8's, which are pretty good speakers ($200 per discounted). These do a good job on the acoustic patches, but take some patch tweaking to sound optimum on distorted tones - sound a little too "Crisp" in general, and still looking for settings that give that "In the room" feel. That may be the case with most (all?) FRFR systems. I am still considering the Power Engine 60 as a possible future route for amplifying the 500X. Not really a true FRFR system, but probably gives a more natural amp-like sound and response.
  2. Just curious - How complicated is swapping out this bridge for the stock JTV-59 bridge? Do the piezos terminate with the same connectors that are on the original? It would be a lot more doable for me if it was a more-or-less drop-in replacement. I would hate to have to go out & drop another $200 on an almost brand new instrument for this, but if it's a significant improvement in the modeling sounds, or should I say, a reduction in added extraneous noise, it might be worth it to me.
  3. Excellent, Thanks! :D I have to re-string my 59 - I'll probably try putting on 11's as this was also recommended for improving the acoustic models which I am using a lot. I think I will try this when I put the fresh strings on. I used to use a VG-99 with a Godin LGX-SA, and I had a similar problem and solution. On the LGX-SA, the strings taper down to the body behind the bridge, and go through the body to the back side. That leaves short lengths of all 6 strings behind the bridge, and when driving the VG-99, the piezos were very sensitive to any extraneous vibrations. I used to put a thin strip of rubber under the strings behind the bridge to dampen those vibrations, and it really did seem to help. I have also recently see references to a little clamp that is available (I forget what it was called) to put above the nut, in front of the tuning pegs to do the same function. I may look into putting something on that end too, just to see if it makes a difference. Thanks again! B)
  4. Hi, I'm very interested in what you did to the bridge to decrease resonances, but it looks like the link to the other post is broken now. Can you re-post that info here? Thanks!
  5. I am in a very similar situation to yours. I also recently bought a JTV-59 and a HD500X. I was originally only looking for a better multi-effects unit, and went to try out the HD500X. I also had used some line6's units in the past (guitarport, Pod X3Live), but when I went in to try out the pod, I also tried several of the JTV's they had & was really floored with the JTV models & just the quality of the guitar itself. The two of them together are really a great combination, as you mentioned with the ability of the pod to switch guitar models on the JTV. Lots of options. I wish I had some advise for you but I've just started with both of these and am still feeling my way around both of them. I also tried the DT25 amp briefly, and really did like the amp, but not sure if that's what I will do when my finances recover. I would be very interested in your impressions of using the JTV & HD500 with your Tech21 Power Engines. A pair of these is a setup I've been thinking about for some time. I am a big fan of stereo ambient effects for guitar, and that sounds like a great way to go. Right now, I have a pair of Presonus Eris 8's, or a Egnater Rebel 30 head & 1 12" cabinet for choices to amplify the JTV & Pod. Both have their pluses and minuses. I really like the Eris's, and they do a better job of bringing out the acoustic models of the JTV. They're a little crisp sounding for distorted tones of the Pod. The 1 12" Egnater cabinet does a better job on the distorted tones, but not as nice for the acoustic models, and sounds a little "boxy" in general with the pod, though the amp and cab sound fine running a regular guitar straight in. I have been running the pod into the effects loop return (power amp in) on the Eganter head to bypass the preamp. Not sure I'm satisfied with either approach yet, but I'm still experimenting at this point. I would spend some time playing with the model adjustments you can do in workbench on the JTV models. There are really a lot of variations available there too. Between them all, enough to keep a "Mad Scientist" busy for quite a while! Cheers!
  6. I didn't actually post those settings on Vguitar, I just belong to that site, knew they were there & thought they might help you out. Nothing really special to know about them. I tried them myself, and they seem to be a little more even for volume. I haven't had as much of an issue with this but I'm new to the JTV & am still in the learning mode. I have a lot of experimenting to do in workbench to learn to optimize the models.
  7. If you pull up the "Setlists" view in HD Edit, you can just drag & drop a patch from one setlist to another. You have to be careful that it goes into the spot you intend - I find you have to position it on the border above where you want it to go. It works differently if you hold down control or shift keys while doing this (move or copy). I forget exactly which key combination does which. You may have to refer to the manual for that.
  8. Yes, You should visit the site vguitarforums. They have a section on variax guitars & patches. Someone went through the HD models & "Volume Balanced" them in workbench, and posted them by bank. See the following link: ------>> http://www.vguitarforums.com/smf/index.php?topic=9388.0 Hope that helps. Check out the rest of the site - very good info there! Cheers
  9. Thanks for posting this. I have been noticing that a number of patches people loaded on customtone for "Acoustic" sounds have a propensity to get overdriven real easily. Not a good sound for acoustic guitar. Playing lightly is another matter and a little counter intuitive to me - I tend to gravitate to playing like I would with a real acoustic. Not getting the best results with that either. I guess I'll have to go through this blog post, take some time to digest it all & adjust my thinking & playing style when it comes to JTV acoustic sounds. Some of the acoustic sounds on Sean's videos are outstanding, and I haven't gotten close to those results yet.
  10. I agree also. Less is more. With other effects as well as reverb. If you listen at low levels and add a lot of effects and reverb, when you go to play at performance levels, there's too much of everything and it sounds washed out & muddy. It's sort of like the fletcher-munson curve for bass response. If you mix for it to sound good at lower levels, when you turn up, the mix is overly effected. Which means you either have to develop your patches at concert levels, or get used to putting in less than you think it needs. Actually the "Cut it in Half" technique in not a bad way to go at all.
  11. I bought my JTV-59 at the local GC. Maybe I should have bought from Sweetwater because of their customer service & attention to guitar set-ups & adjustments (not to mention their "Scratch & Dent" sale which would have saved me a few bucks), but the GC near me had 3 JTV's (2 59's and 1 69), and I tried out & inspected the very guitar I walked out with. I'm not sure that I trust GC to do a great job of setting up instruments, but in this case, the one that I bought was very well set up & played and intonated very well, right off the wall. Whoever set this one up did a pretty good job. I have played plenty of guitars at GC where the set up was either done poorly, or maybe not done at all, & just hung on the wall right out of the box. I'm sorry you ran into so many problems with yours. There is a lot of complicated electronics in these guitars & there have been a number of issues being reported with faulty model & tuning switches. Maybe you did get a returned guitar without it being documented. If you get one that is properly set up & without switch problems, I think you would really like it. Maybe you should order from Sweetwater.
  12. That's OK. This is very helpful! Anything that helps show the different choices available in the modules helps me to begin to wrap my mind around it. Thanks for posting this! :D
  13. Excellent! :D B) You Rock! B) That would be a huge help in trying to learn the HD500's layout, signal chain & components.
  14. Well, the responses may have been a little rude, but OMG, I was LMAO to put it in internet jargon! You guys made my day! Hilarious! The OP had a point though, it would be handy as a reference to have a layout or roadmap of how the factory patches were built, just for educational purposes. I really think that most "Factory" patches in almost all effects devices are pure junk, and mostly unusable (the HD500X is no exception), but they are mostly created to show capabilities of what you can do, not practical patches for you to plug into your setlist unaltered. It sounds like he's using the interface on the hardware unit. Using HD Edit is much easier to understand what is going on, at least for me. I have to learn the hardware interface too, so I can change things on the fly, but I don't see making patches from scratch on the unit itself as being very practical. I would probably only make small adjustments on the hardware as needed, but you do have to know how to get to what you need to change to do that. Has anyone ever put together an excel spreadsheet with all the settings (amp & stompbox choices, parameter values, ...) for the HD500? I'm afraid I don't have the excel skills or time to do this, but I have seen it done for other units. It would be a lot of work to put one together. I don't know that you really need one, if you're using HD Edit, but I was curious if there was one already out there somewhere. They can be a good visual learning tool.
  15. Thanks! I appreciate the advice. I'll make sure I check those things when I go to see it.
  16. That's interesting... I started to notice on some acoustic type patches on my HD500x that the variax had some particular notes (F#) that were really dominant when played with other notes. I went into workbench and for the 1st time started adjusting the string levels on one of the acoustic models - I forget the model (position 3 on the pickup selector of my 59). That one always seemed a little boomy and not as usable as the other 6 string acoustics. Adjusting the string volumes really improved that model. Maybe as Rewolf48 said, that is the key to getting a better sound out of the 2.0 acoustic models. I'll have to spend some time playing with the string balances. Also, I'll have to try your suggestions for the amp settings. Thanks for posting this! B)
  17. Blending in the mag's with the modeled sounds can be very good. It brings a more natural attack and feel to the sound that is not always captured in the model. But you absolutely DO NOT want to mix in the mags if you're using altered tunings. Not only can you do this through workbench in the model, but if you're using a HD500, you can have one input set to "Variax" and one set to "Variax Mags" so there's actually 2 ways this can happen (that I know of). Maybe there should be some way to lock this ability out when using altered tunings, but I don't know how much you can idiot-proof things. For now we just have to be aware of this and make sure we avoid it, unless of course, you like playing in two different keys at the same time...
  18. So I am a relatively new Variax owner (JTV-59), and I like the guitar a lot. I also bought a new HD500X at the same time. I do like and use the JTV's acoustic models & alternate tunings, and I have read a number of posts on this forum saying that some people think certain acoustic models were better on the old variax acoustic 700. I recently found a used one for sale in my area, and although I should not even think about it right now, I can't help but think about buying it. I haven't had a chance to see it in person yet, and am just thinking about it now, but if I was to check it out & consider buying it, what things in particular, outside of general condition & playability, should I be checking for in a used variax? Any telltale signs that I should look for in a used instrument of this particular model? :unsure: I don't know if anything else is included with the guitar, like a case, or the power supply box at this point. I also don't know what kind of condition it's in except for what I can see in one fuzzy picture. I'll have to go see it in person to find out. The seller wants $350 for it. Any thoughts on buying a used variax 700 acoustic from anyone?? Thanks! B)
  19. Hi, I don't know if this listing is still active or not - couldn't get the link to work. How much are you selling, or did you sell it for, if you don't mind my asking?
  20. Well, just a further update on my situation in regards to this issue, after updating the firmware on my JTV-59 several times (back & forth between HD & Pre-HD Versions), it seems to me like this is now a non-issue. I still hear it if I am playing quietly, but I can't record it - recordings come out "clean" so the signal being output from the JTV doesn't really contain any "Doubled Notes", I am now only hearing that acoustically. It doesn't end up on the recordings. Earlier I posted the following on my ticket with Line 6 that I opened up on this issue. I'll just post it here instead of re-typing all of this: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yes I have re-loaded the firmware several times to several different versions, using the procedures outlined on the link in your post. Most of the time these updates have gone smoothly, but on a couple of occasions, they have failed once or several times in a row, but in all cases I was able to eventually update the firmware. Since reloading the firmware several times, I have repeatedly tried to record the “Ghost Notes†when I thought I was having a problem, but the recordings came out pretty clean. I will occasionally hear some digital artifacts (warbling or fluttering) in the sound but not really anything like before. The last time I was recording for this issue, I had recorded what appeared to be doubled notes on the top 2 strings. I realized however, that I wasn’t muting the other strings, and when I did that, and re-recorded it with the same model & tunings, the doubled notes were not there, so in that case it was just other strings ringing with a harmonic of the plucked string. I’m not sure what to say about this right now. The “Ghost Note†problem may be a real ghost. When I have heard it and was sure it was something, I go to record it & capture the evidence, and it’s not there. It may be all acoustic resonance after all. This guitar is very resonant – it rings like a bell, which is a good thing, but as far as it relates to the digitally altered tunings, it makes it harder to mask the acoustic sound of the strings. This particular guitar also has a real resonance at F# - the 4th fret of the D (4th) string really dominates when using the acoustic models. I’m finding that I have to roll off the volume of the 4th string to avoid that note from feeding back acoustically when using these models. I also am reducing the 3rd string volume, but not because of a resonance, that whole string is a little louder. I recently played with this guitar in a live setting using the guitar straight into someone else’s amp, dry with no effects and no distortion to speak of, and at the somewhat moderate volume we were playing at, using acoustic models on the JTV, I really didn’t have any real issues. The volume we were playing at which was not really very loud, was enough to mask the un-altered notes. Sorry to be so long winded. I guess for the moment at least, it’s not really a problem. If something changes, I will try to record a sample and send it to you. Otherwise, if I don’t have any more issues in a week or so, I will just close this ticket. Thanks for your time, and sorry to have you spend time on a non-issue on my behalf, but it seemed like this was a real problem. Maybe it was and the update fixed it? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- So I guess that the problem I was having has been fixed by re-loading the firmware (several times). I did initially manage to record this & posted it on my support ticket, and Line 6 Hugo verified that there were extra notes in the recordings I posted, but now I can't get it to record at all, so it appears to be gone! :D That doesn't mean that I can't hear the original notes acoustically from the guitar if I have the amplified volume down low, but if I have it high enough to mask the original notes, and depending on how I am positioned & how I am monitoring, it isn't really an issue. My JTV-59 is really resonant, and fairly loud acoustically for a solid body. Those are traits I look for when buying any guitar, and are good things but it makes it a little harder to block the original non-altered notes out when using the alternate tunings. This is a workable situation for me, and if things stay the way they are right now, I'd say there's really nothing wrong with the guitar. It's just the reality of the situation and basic physics. It would be impossible to completely eliminate the original unaltered notes of the guitar, and you wouldn't want a dead sounding, completely un-resonant instrument. It's just the way it is. As long as extraneous notes are not mixed in with the amplified signal, it isn't really a problem. I'll keep you posted if things change, but for now, it's all good.
  21. Yeah, that was kind of strange. I wasn't expecting that, I assumed it would be more like a STD strat neck profile, one of them anyways, I know there are a lot of different strat necks. The neck profile on the 69 I tried was really big. I don't know if it was an older model or a newer one, or if they changed the neck profile on these at some point. It was just too large to feel natural. Bigger than the 59, and the neck profile on my 59 is bigger than what I'm used to, but the 59 neck feels very comfortable to me.
  22. I have the 59, and I really love it. I originally wanted to like the 69, but I was very interested in using the alternate tunings, and I was a little concerned about a trem bridge being a problem with the tunings. Also, the only local store that actually had variax's to try out had only 3, two 59's and one 69. The 69 had a real chunky fat neck, and I really didn't like the feel of it. It was fatter than the 59 - felt a little like a Epiphone semi neck. The 59 neck is bigger than what I am used to but for some reason it felt very comfortable to me & I like it. One of the 59's they had just felt and sounded great, and that's the one I walked out with. In a way I would have liked to have a trem, but only if it was absolutely stable and stayed in tune, and that's asking a lot for any trem. I have trem on other guitars anyway. I didn't get a chance to see or play an 89, so I don't know how they compare. I thought the model switching on the 59 might be a hassle (need to hit the alt tuning knob to get the other 2 in a bank), but it's really not a problem for me. As someone said earlier if you use it with a HD500X it's even less of an issue, because you can store JTV models in every patch. I think you could be very happy with a 59. Don't know about the 89 as I haven't played one.
  23. I haven't noticed that at all. Haven't been looking or listening for it, but I think I would have noticed right away if it was that dramatic. The guitar I have rings like a bell acoustically, and with the mags. I’ll have to do some comparisons tonight & see if the sustain is any different.
  24. I've bounced back and forth, just to check them out and see what the differences are. I've had trouble running the old (Non-HD) workbench, so I've gone back to 2.0, at least for now. There are some models that are a little better pre-HD, but also a lot of improvements in HD. I guess it's a horse apiece for me right now, and unless I can get the old version of workbench running, the older pre-HD models are less usable if I can't adjust them. I probably would have to load an older version of monkey, and/or drivers, but I haven't managed to weed through all that to figure out what I have to do for the older workbench. Anyway, I'm on HD for what it's worth. I'm new to all of this so I'm not tied into the old models. Some of the older model versions are definitely different, and maybe better (Strats), but I didn't find any that I absolutely had to have. Maybe if I spent more time with them & could adjust them I'd feel different.
  25. I ordered one of these & have used it for a week or so. Very nicely done! :D Works very well, quality components & construction, not to mention the classy braided jacket.
×
×
  • Create New...