davidb7170

Before I installed 2.62 FW in the 500 (I had already done the 500X), I took a listen of the 500 as it stood, and it was definitely more treble-y than the 500X. The 500X before and after the 2.62 update did not change sonically that I could tell. After the 2.62 FW update on the 500, it was sonically identical to the 500X with the same set lists, same patches, same power amp, same volume level, same FRFR speaker, same cables, same JTV, same VDI cable, Studio Direct mode ON in both units. The only difference was the FW version before, then after. No Global EQ available before, Global EQ OFF after the update to make sure that wasn't coloring the sound. I usually do the Global Reset and recalibrate the pedal when I do FW updates to these units, but could not attest to that being the case with prior FW version in the 500 (it's been a while since the prior update), so don't know if that would be a consideration in the scheme of things... I would be surprised if I didn't, as it's my SOP. When I do patch tweaking, I do it at volume levels definitely above bedroom volumes to get past the Fletcher-Munson effect. Guys, I've been around the block with this, been through the pit-falls of setting up patches at lower volumes not working out at gig levels.... Main thing is, it took care of an issue that I couldn't get around before -- now it's all good. I would not hesitate using either the 500X or the 500 interchangeably now, Dave

That IS odd... I know I was dinking around with my 300 -- probably not hours, but longer than a few minutes. I was making sure it still worked and was comparing the models as they were on the 300 versus how they are on the JTV's. Pretty sure I was hooked with it for maybe a half hour to an hour. Does he use a JTV with the 500 VDI, or just regular guitars into the guitar input? Maybe his 500 VDI has a defect. The 500X should be ok if the unit is up to snuff.... If you have a JTV or other Variax, you might want to try yours in his 500, then 500X to see if your units make his pedals mess up, and vice versa... Dave

I have 2 JTV's, but also still have my Variax 300 -- bought it in 2005. I assume you mean the solid body 300 -- there was also a 300 acoustic -- dunno why they had the same number on 2 models.... I also have the 500 & 500X. I just pulled the 300 out about a month ago -- plugged it into my 500X and it ran fine via the VDI cord & input. I know I ran it on my 500 as well in the past. I've powered my 300 and JTV's with the POD XTL, X3L, 500, and 500X all along. They all have the same VDI specs, including the power. Dave

There are the physical differences to consider besides the switch & knobs differences. The 59 has a mahogany set neck and mahogany body with maple cap like LP's, and 2 humbucker PU's rather than 3 single-coil PU's -- The new Standard will more strat-ish, by far. Mag PU levels will probably be quite a bit lower than the 59, the bolt-on neck will be maple, the body will be ash or alder, double cut-away body rather than the 59 single-cut. The most direct JTV comparison is actually the 69S. The difference in layout there is they moved the alt tuning "top-hat" selector switch above the PU's down with the rest of the controls for 4 knobs below the PU's. Dave

Just to close this one out -- the new FW 2.62 Global EQ now works on both my 500 & 500X. Thanks, DI and L6 Staff! Dave

Thanks DI, but I was asking about the JTV firmware update version 2.21, not the HD500(X) new Variax Set List. That JTV FW update has no issues it updates or fixes on the download page, like there usually is. Just curious. Any info? philryhart -- I did not have the HD 500 Edit show problems on my Win 8.1 machine when hooked to the HD 500. It could be conflict with your OSX machine or software issues with that platform. Hope they come through for you and get it sorted out. Thanks, Dave

Thanks, crusinon2. I don't really have a problem with the 69S neck. The 59 and 69S necks are definitely different. I've heard it discussed about the 69 necks being too small for people. I'm 6'6" and have pretty large hands and can't say I've had the issues others talk about. I have a late 70's Strat, and a 1973 Tele Deluxe (has a Strat neck & the wide-range humbuckers) so I'm used to those as well. I'm not opposed to mods, either -- I swapped the 69S single coils for a set of DiMarzio noiseless -- now there's a world of difference... I will keep it in mind, though. Thanks again, Dave

I have both the 500 and the 500X -- got the 500X because I wanted a backup. I had the XTLive -- bought it in 2005 or 2006 when I got my Variax 300 and had a midi pedal to my FX shoot craps. In 2009, the XTL died at a gig and I had to make due without. The wall wart power input jack on the XTL failed, and left me dead in the water. I went to GC and picked up the new (at the time) X3Live -- was able to import the XTL patches into the X3L. When I got my JTV-59 in 2011 I wanted the better JTV control features of the HD500, so it was not long before I got the 500. Well, with the XTL failure experience in the back of my head, I saw my way clear to buy the 500X when that had just come out, so I could use one as a backup. I also got a JTV-69S in 2012 as a backup to my 59.... I'm an engineer, and tend to think in terms of contingencies... Yeah, I know, but just the way I am... I was able to put my set lists from the 500 into the 500X, and was off. Over time, went through some updates, and my patches evolved, like everybody who tweaks, I decided to put my current set lists into my backup 500 to keep them both alike, but noticed the 2 units sounded different with the same patches. I have a thread on here describing the differences: http://line6.com/support/topic/7649-500-500x-side-by-side-comparison/?do=findComment&comment=53117 Anyway -- I was also looking forward to this latest round of FW and software updates this last week. I did the 2.61 500X FW updates then bought and installed the full model pack set. Found the Global EQ was not doing anything. so when they fixed that with 2.62, it was ready for the HD 500 as well. Got the 500X squared away Tursday, then did the 500 on Friday night, and installed the model packs on that as well -- settled an uncertainty we've been reading about concerning multiple installs -- everybody said we should be able to, and I was able to get it on both. The License manager is a bit fussy -- had de-authorize some stuff to get 'er done. what up with that -- heaven help you if you buy more than 3 things that need to be authorized... jeesh... I digress... I just want to report that with the 2.62 FW updates, the 500 and the 500X now DO sound EXACTLY alike. Before the update, the 500 sounded quite a bit more "treble-y" than the 500X with the same patches. After the update - completely the same. Also with all the updates, I saw they had updates for the JTV's -- updated HD Workbench for the new Standard Variax, but also a FW update for the JTV -- FW 2.21. It's the first one I've seen with absolutely not firmware realease notes. I asked if anybody knew what it was about on the JTV section of the Forum -- nobody seems to -- never heard from Digital Igloo or any other L6 Staffers. http://line6.com/support/topic/12901-jtv-fw-221-whats-new-in-it/?view=findpost&p=90279 Well, I gritted my teeth and updated both the 59 & 69S. I haven't found any bad issues with it, but really can't tell any positive changes, either. Anybody here heard what it was about? Wanted to thank the L6 folks for a fairly smooth update. the 2.60 to 2.61 to 2.62 fixes were pretty timely. My HD500X & JTV update installs went very smoothly. I had 2 USB communication errors when installing the 2.62 update to the 500. I disconnected any other connections to the 500 and made sure the USB cable was firmly in place, and it worked. Thanks, Dave

I have both a 69S and a 59 -- I'm not a tremolo user, so I tightened my springs to lay 69S's bridge on the top of the guitar, effectively blocking it -- I do the same with my strat, works fine. The thing is, these 2 guitars have very different natures -- 59 -- fixed bridge, yes, but also mahogany body and neck, set neck, 2 humbucker PU's, shorter Les Paul-like string scale, hotter PU output. The 69S -- bolted maple neck, ash(?) body, 3 single coil PU's, longer strat-like length string scale, lower PU output... They are different animals. And I have to say the models do not sound identical in both -- very close, but a bit different because of the massive body differences -- they do affect things. they are so different that when I got my 69S, I finally had to set up a whole different set list in my HD 500X -- to get the "same" sounding patches, I have nearly identical set lists -- I took my 59 set list and had to boost the input stages and fiddle with the tones, so I could use either for the same songs. I use one as my broken string backup at gigs. Sometimes I change between them at break time, but I gotta say after over 40 years as a Fender guy, the 69S usually stays in my hands all night -- just feels right. But boy the 59 is a beautiful guitar... Anyway with the bolted neck and strat-like layout of the Standard, I'm guessing it will be absolutely strat-ish... Dave

Well I bit the bullet and upgraded both my JTV 59 & 69S to the new 2.21 FW. I have no bad effects from it. Seems it is a bit easier to get usable tones on my JTV's with Workbench, but it may just be me..... Arislaf mentioned it made it slower to read from the guitar to WB. Well, I don't know if it's actually slower. When I first hooked up my 69S to WB, it seemed to take a long time, but the second time I opened the WB with the 69S, it zipped like I remember. Then when I changed to the 59, it took a while again, then later sessions with that guitar zipped. I think the program must keep a running buffer of the guitar's patches for the next session. When I hooked the other model up after using WB last with the first one, it would recognize a different JTV and have to read the full data for the "new" guitar from scratch. I've had no bad effects from the new FW, though I do wish they'd note whatever changes they felt made it necessary. I ended up loading my pre update presets I had back into the 69S. I had spent a lot of time leveling the volumes of the strings and the patches. Was still not shot with the Spank bank -- I found the strat body makes the pickups lose most of the volume. As a test, I changed the body to the Masonite plank, like I'd heard some else do for the spank -- the volume of the strat PU models jump up. I then tried the Neutral body, still decent volume, then back to the strat body and the volume went WAY down. When I had worked with it before, I found I had to put 2 pickups in series instead of parallel to pump the volume up, then cut the tone pot value to a much smaller value than stock. I would try different volume pot values, and tone cap values to get it where I wanted it, then boost the PU volumes' db adjustments... For neck & bridge only PU's, I used 2 of the same, stacked them in the same position, then put them in series. Anyway, thought I'd give an update.... Dave

Ok -- just opened a support ticket. Basically just copied the text from my post above & inserted into the ticket form -- hope that's ok... We'll see what comes of it. Still, if any other thoughts occur to anyone here, I'd like to hear 'em. If/when they respond and I get some resolution, I'll update. Thanks. Dave

I updated my 500X last weekend with FW 2.61, the new HD 500X Edit, the new JTV FW 2.21 on both my 69S & 59, and the new JTV HD WB, the full set of model packs and everything seems to be working properly, but the Global EQ doesn't seem to be doing anything. I don't have and don't use the L6 Link, I use my 1/4" outputs at line level to a power amp and FRFR speaker. Tonight for practice, I set up with a different speaker, and wanted to use the Global EQ to vary the tone of that speaker a bit. I went to the set up screen on the 500X and turned the Global EQ on, heard it pause a moment, but when I went to change a setting, I couldn't hear any difference. I tried some extreme settings, like dropping or boosting by 12db on several bands, but again no change in sound. Am I missing something? I was expecting to hear the difference as I was adjusting, but nada. I turned the EQ on and off several times, and heard the momentary pause, but no tonal difference to the amp. I read an "EQ No Go" thread that was answered earlier, and read where the user had the L6 Link, and that the EQ doesn't affect that, but thought the 1/4" would work with it. Any ideas? To avoid having to recalibrate the pedal, I did not do a global reset, but have not noticed any problems -- Is that necessary to make the Global EQ functional? I haven't read anyone but the L6 Link folks having issues with it... Thanks for any help, Dave

Ummmm.... Acoustic/electric guitars or the acoustic JTV models.......

Also placement of the volume pedal block before or after the amp block makes a huge difference. Dave

Most of us think in terms of how we personally use it (me included) not in how it can be used. I have a couple gig locations that the hard walls and tight quarters made my patches very boomy. I dealt with it -- in my case with my Crown power amp and FRFR monitor, by using the Crown's high-pass filter and rolling off the amp at about 80 - 90 Hz. I was lucky that the Crown has that. Not all amps do, and not everybody goes into a guitar amp, or direct into the mixer with fold back monitoring or in ear monitoring. I do a send to the sound man for the FOH, and control my stage mix myself. I will probably not make overt use of the global eq so I don't mess up my PA send, but may make minor adjustments if I have to use a different stage speaker -- each have their own tonal differences. I wish we could have independent EQ for the different outputs, but that's not in the cards, so far... We all have different circumstances to deal with. Dave

I'm an engineer, and I deal with equipment where the firmware version is pretty critcal, so I read spec's and the dirty details. Usually, the numbering of FW versions is significant to document the improvement of the equipment's functions and abilities. A FW number change from x.x1 to x.x2 is usually a minor change to fix a bug or small function. x.1x to x.2x usually is a significant change to improve the functions of it, and 1.xx to 2.xx is a major function or large change. I took a look at the FW history I could glean off the download page for the JTV. 1.71 -- Has rolled off the list -- I believe it was pretty early on and shipped with the JTV's, think we had 1.74 also... 1.80 -- Also rolled off the list -- Acoustic update -- pretty siginificant, caused much talk on the boards 1.82 -- 5/16/12 -- Fixed a glitch in the acoustics -- function fix, from a programming standpoint 1.90 -- 11/7/12 -- Palm Muting improvement, and special high gain custom model group for the JTV-89, seemed significant 2.00 -- 8/15/13 -- Introduction of the HD guitar models. Was a total redesign of the JTV modeling system 2.10 -- 4/22/14 -- Needed to allow HD WB to work through the POD HD family -- very significant improvement 2.21 -- 1/16/15 -- Unknown Changes, actually not released to public until POD HD X family FW 2.60 revision on 3/31/15 The change from 2.00 to 2.21 indicates to me a significant functional change, but not a total redesign, plus one minor revision prior to release. It may just be the abiltiy to use HD WB with Firehawk FX and its PC, iPad, & Android interfaces. I wouldn't probably NEED it with the 2.60 500(X) & HD WB updates, but would kinda like to know if I should go ahead with the JTV 2.21 FW, or just pass... I don't have and don't plan on getting the Firehawk FX I'm probably going to wait and see if I have any issues without 2.21 and the new HD X stuff. I am planning on doing the full set of POD HD model packs. I know from my work, that documentation usually lags behind the work... I'm hoping at some point to hear or see the changes stated somewhere -- preferably in the FW notes... You will notice, though that the HD WB version change went from 2.10 to 2.12 in this most recent release to add support for the Variax Standard -- minor revision. I don't believe they're shipping the Standards yet. There is no Firehawk FX software on the download page, but space for it... I'm guessing the JTV FW 2.21 maybe jumped the gun on the download page... Dave

Actually -- the stated 1/6/15 release date is suspect to me, because as I said, I would at least once a week check the available software downloads, and up until last Tuesday's releases, the newest item in the list was the AMPLIFi FW 2.10 releases dated 12/11/14. Stevekc is probably on to something though -- everything in his post really didn't have anything to do with the JTV's EXCEPT the Fire Hawk Floor Processor -- that does have the Variax VDI port, so maybe it's related to that. If that's the case, it would bring up compatibility issues with the early generation of Variaxes, as no new FW has been offered for those, but again the HD Worbench does not work for that generation either.... If it were compatibility issues, I would have expected the FW version to stay in the 2.10 range -- maybe 2.15, but his was more of a major move to 2.21... Just surprised there are no informational notes on the revision, as there normally are.... Curiouser and couriouser... Dave

I have been watching the issues and comments with the new HD X updates, and will probably be doing the updating this weekend when I have time to do an orderly transition so as not to lose patches I've been working on all along, both with the HD500X & my 2 JTV's. In amongst the many software updates and FW updates, I saw this one: Flash Memory Version 2.21 Released 1/6/15 Works with: James Tyler Variax No one that I can see has commented on it, or said what it addresses. The release date is odd as it showed up with the recent group of new stuff late yesterday, and I have been checking from time to time over the past few months to make sure I haven't missed anything. There are no notes as they usually include for FW updates. The last JTV FW update was 2.10 on 4/22/14, and was at the same time as the Workbench software was updated to allow use via the 500(X), etc. Large amount of info on what it was all about. Not so this time. Any thoughts here? When I update this FW, I assume it will reset all the models I've tweaked, so I should (of course) save my tweaked JTV models, I assume? I have tweaked both my 59 & 69S failry extensively.... Curious for input from L6.... Thanks, Dave

The 1/4" outputs are switchable between "Amp" and "Line" levels -- the hotter Line level is what is normally needed for a power amp with no preamp. The XLR outputs are at "Amp" level only, such as needed for mic level inputs of a mixer with its preamps. I was disappointed that the XLR's could not be run at Line level for my Crown PA amp, as it has both XLR and 1/4" inputs. I wanted to use the balanced XLR cables, due to better noise rejection, but have found using 1/4" quality guitar cable not to be a problem, as far as noise goes. If you stay in 20 foot or less length or so, the 1/4" 2 - conductor good quality shielded instrument cable does not cause a noise issue, I've found. Incidentally, I believe the HD PRO X has switchable Line/Amp levels on it's XLR outputs. I did not need a rack mountable unit and the additional floorboard it would require to control it. I've been quite happy with my 500X and power amp combination. If the speakers are FRFR powered monitors, they may have a gain adjustment between Line and Mic level on their XLR inputs. Dave

I've had the same issue with my 1973 Fender Tele Deluxe, my Epiphone LP Classic, and my JTV-59 -- if you normally just leave it in the bridge position (pretty much I do) oxides build up on the other contacts. A few flips and it cleans off the contacts for the up position, and I have my neck PU back. The Switchcraft style 3-way switch is used in most of those 2 PU models. My 78 Strat and my JTV-69S don't exhibit this behavior (at least on mine) with their 5-way switches... The 59 switch is a variation of the Switchcraft-style 3 way, but has some circuit boards on it for the JTV modeling controls. I saw a Line6 3-way JTV-58 switch on Full Compass's website, along with some miscellaneous other JTV parts, so I picked 'em up last year. Have not needed to use them, as of yet... Full Compass took quite a while to ship, so I was glad I didn't need them in a hurry... Their picture of it showed the black tip, but the one I got from them has the same cream colored tip as the on my TSB 59. Other threads here have had people successfully using contact cleaner on the 3-way switches. I've not needed to do that either. A couple of flips has always gotten me back in business. My 2 cents' worth... Dave

I use a Crown XLS 1000 -- similar setup... It expects Line Level, not Amp Level signals -- check your slider switches on the top right side, and use the 1/4" outputs. Turn down your master volume, then slowly bring it up with those settings so you don't hurt your speakers or your hearing. I set my amp to bridged mono and get ~700 Watts theoretically with a single speaker, but with headroom, I figure about half of that (~350 Watts) with a single 8 Ohm speaker, and use the master volume to adjust the level. In really loud events, like outside festivals, etc, I bring a second speaker and plug it into the first for 4 Ohm speaker load, and get a theoretical 1100 Watts -- again figuring half, 550W real world. I NEVER dime it -- it would peel paint. I use PA FRFR speaker/monitors (Yorkville), either on the floor in front of me, or on a speaker stand, and turn it way down for smaller inside gigs....I send Mic Level signal out the XLR to the soundman's system. He's happy, I'm happy... I have a Quilter Tone Block 200 on the way -- should get it tomorrow. Gonna see if that'll work for the smaller inside gigs and practice -- very small physical size & 200 Watts max. Dave

Well, I just ordered a Quilter Tone Block 200.... Going to see if it'll work out for me. I like the concept, and we'll see if it plays better with FRFR speakers than the Class D Crate Power block does. I found I had to use guitar speakers that roll off around 4 kHz to avoid the ragged digital artifacts. One thing I noted at the Quilter Forums was that the 200 Watt rating they claim is from their amp actual internal rating of 400 Watts... Kind of validates my practice of buying a solid state amp with 2X the power I actually want to end up with... I'll comment more after I get the thing and run it for a while.... Dave

Dunno what's up with that. I also have it installed on both of my homebuilt Win 8.1 64 bit and Win 7 64 bit machines, with no real issues.... Just verifying it does work on both platforms. I don't recall any particular install or operating issues for mine. Dave

I went through my models on both my 59 & 69S and leveled the models' levels also with the 2 guitars' mag levels. I set it so there was minimal difference between the models and the mags, plus raised the quieter models and lowered the loud ones. I agree with that camp of thought. The Lesters - especially the bridge position model are so much higher that they tend to stick out like a sore thumb, IMO... Also between the 59 and 69S, just the nature of the HB versus SC mags, there is a pretty large difference in levels. I could not make that go away, so I ended up taking my HD500(X) original set list for the 59, and copied the set list for the 69S and adjusting the levels of the input part of the signal chain up -- turned out to be about 3 or 4 db, using either a tube compressor or preamp FX with neutral tonal settings, but boosting the level. My goal was to have equivalent levels to begin with on the patches. Over time, I have tweaked the tonality of the amps to suit the guitars. I'm pretty happy with the outcome, but continue to tweak and evolve the sounds. I use both guitars out gigging, and when I switch between them, I change the active set list to the appropriate guitar's set. They have essentially the same sounds in the same places for the two instruments. the guitar models that are basically unchanged between the 59 & 69S set lists are my acoustics and banjo patches... I leveled the models mostly by ear rather than a scientific method -- took a long time, and I continue to adjust as the mood hits.... The real boon to this has been the relatively recent development of WB being made to work through the HD500(X) VDI, as the guitars sound different via the 1/4" input versus the VDI input that I use for the switching and powering capabilities. The relative levels of the mags versus models are different on my two JTV's versus the VDI input. Mags are higher than the models on the VDI, while the models are higher than the mags through the 1/4" inputs.... I was never very happy trying to adjust models & levels with the USB interface and monitoring via the 1/4" into the HD500X, only to find the VDI input sounded different... Dave

I have a 59 with the humbuckers, and later picked up the 69S with 3 single-coil pu's. I've been a Fender guy for 40+ years and have constantly fought with PU hum. My Tele Deluxe from 1973 is not too bad as it has Fender's first real HB's designed by Seth Love who worked for Gibson, originally, I believe. My 78 Strat, though was a problem with it's SC's... Love the sound though. When I got my Variax 300 in 2005, as curiosity got the better of me, and the price was in my range, I was pleased by the quietness (lack of hum) of the guitar. It also opened my eyes more to other guitar models I had never had the opportunity to play much.... Mainly HB equipped Gibson's, etc...I then picked up an Epiphone LP Classic -- very nice guitar at about a 5th of the cost of its Gibby cousins with similar features.... Anyway, with all physical pickups, they have differing amounts of noise pickup. Humbuckers way less than single coils, but still there is some hum. Gigging out at that point, I was using 3 guitars, my Variax 300, the Epi LP Classic, and an Ovation Acoustic-Electric. The JTV's were released, and were pretty much a game changer for me. The 59 I have has pretty minimal hum with it's physical mags, but still about what any HB gets. My LP slid to the backup position, and I stopped taking the Ovation. I got to thinking if the 59 broke a string, there many songs we'd have to skip in the sets until I could replace the string at break time, so started thinking about a 2nd JTV. The 69S was released in late summer of 2012 -- being a Strat guy, that one is more in my comfort zone than the regular 69 with the HSS layout, so I bought one. It felt right to me, BUT I realized I had the hum back when using the mags.... Some times worse than others -- neon lights in bars, light dimmers, etc., etc... I had been totally spoiled by the noise rejection of the HB PU's and modeling of the 59, and HB guitars in general. Within a few months, I took the chance and got a set of DiMarzio noiseless single coils and replaced the 69S's original single coils. Other manufacturers make their versions and different models as well. It totally silenced the noise pickup of the 69S. I was amazed, and very pleased. The 69S tends to be the one in my hands all night, and now the 59 is on the stand as backup. I play the mag PU's probably 90% of the time on either guitar, and use the models for specific sounds in some songs, acoustics, banjo's, odd tunings, and such, but the mag sounds are very critical for me. The 69S original PU's were totally fine as far as the sound they had, as with the 59's HB's -- others disagree and change those out.... I was fine with the 69S PU's, but wanted to try to cut the inherent hum that SC's just normally have compared to HB's. Dave