davidb7170

Sozeg -- Thanks for your note. I kind of got the impression from the other comments that I was "imagining" it, but really don't think so. It does seem to be a more "full" sound with the 500X versus the 500 and the same exact patches. I have not had time to create any sound samples of this, and frankly it would probably get a "meh" response from others. I also find it easier to get good results with the 500X than the 500, so that is why I focussed on the new over the old, and it became quite apparent to me anyway that there is a difference. With the 500 as my backup plan, it would work "OK". I tried different output settings, and found the combo power amp to add in some fullness, but also added some harshness, raspyness, or fizz to the distortions not present in the studio setting. Another thought I had was to get an EQ pedal that can take line level between my pedal and the power amp to add a little bottom when using my backup 500. It seems to be across the board on the patches, which is why it would be great if their was a global EQ for the 500/500X, as everyone and their dog has been asking Line6 to include, but I think that is beating a dead horse at this point. I have considered an EQ before, as I have a couple of gig venues with rooms that really make the 500X too boomy, and need to roll off some bass. I found that my Crown XLS1000 has high and low pass filtering built in, so in those situations, I use the highpass rolling the bass off at 95 or 100 Hz. I also keep the high pass mode on in normal use, rolling off at 50 - 60 Hz, as my "full range" Eminence Beta 12LTA speaker has a resonant frequency at 45 Hz where speaker impedance nears Zero, and had my 500X pop a speaker when I had the burst of noise, talked about elesewhere on the forums. With the frequency on the amp high pass rolled off at 50 - 60 Hz, I had a similar burst not kill my speaker -- it red lined the amp which switched off with peak control. The XLS1000 puts out about 700 Watts at 8 Ohms bridged, the speaker is rated at about 225 Watts RMS 450W "music program", and double that for peak. The burst was not affected with turning down the 500X main volume (I had it at less than 50% when it went) and I was not quick enough to kill the power to save the speaker that I popped. I have 2 Beta 12LTA's that I use in parallel when doing outdoor shows, and the amp in bridged mode will rate at 1100 Watts into 4 Ohms. This sounds like a lot of Watts, I know, but I have found to get an amp with twice what I think I need if using solid state (especially Class D) amps versus tube amps.... I was simply making an observation on the 500 versus 500X, and have been very satisfied with both. The thing is you have to know the equpment you're working with to avoid the pitfalls. Thanks, Dave

Well, the sounds are compatible, the algorithms work, the amp models and FX are set the same on the 2, and yet there is a tonal difference in my 500 compared to my 500X. Everything - JTV guitar, VDI cable, patch, amp, speaker are the same. The only difference is 500 or 500X. It is workable, but still different. Even if the DSP is doing the same thing, there can still be minor differences in the output stages that amplify the final output to the outside world -- tonal response differences could enter the picture there, after the DSP does it's thing without being intentional. All the features work properly, but the sound is a bit different. I was not expecting it to be so. Huh, maybe mine's different than everyone else's..... Dave

I just tried doing the download, changing the extension, and loaded it into my workbench and WB took it (not connected to my 59, but offline). So that worked for me. Didn't know if it would, but seemed to. I noticed I messed with the string levels on the bridge position, but not the other positions, but did mess with the pots, pickup output levels and patch levels to bring it up in volume. I remember messing with the patch string levels more on my 69S. Dave

I will try to attach.... Ok, The system did not allow the attachment on a ".bnk" file, so I changed the extension to ".txt" and it apparently allowed it. I don't know if if it buggered anything, but save it, change the extension from TXT to bnk and see if it's useable... I hope so... Anyway, it's my first attempt, but I was happy to get much closer than before. Good luck, and let us know if it worked. Dave Spank DWB on 59 2014 05 04bnk.txt

I know others have compared the 500 & 500X in side by side comparisons when the 500X appeared on the scene, but I don't recall anyone mentioning what I've observed, so far.... I used my 500 for a couple of years after moving up the models from the XTL to the X3L, then the HD500, and was very comfortable with it, but having experienced a failure of the XTL at a gig, had in the back of mind, I'd need a backup in such a case with the 500. At that time is when the 500X came out, and I opted for it, seeing as it was the latest in the line and the same patches were useable in both. I like the new switches, but never had any issues with the old. I did not usually run up against the DSP limits on the 500, so that was not a huge factor. I transferred the patches from the 500 to the 500X and went from there, and as usual, with continued tweaking of sounds, and going from a mid-heavy guitar speaker to a more full range speaker to address some tonal issues with the acoustics of the JTV's again, the settings as I had them "drifted" apart over time. Recently before the latest firmware updates, I figured I would take my now current patches in the 500X and synch them back into the 500, so I could have an exact duplicate setup in my 500. I noticed that the 500X compared to the 500 was fuller with more "body" -- hard to define, exactly, but more bottom end with the same JTV, same Studio output, same Crown XLS1000 power amp, and same full range speaker, and same patches. The 500 sounds a bit more "trebly" than the 500X. I tried the acoustic patches, and they were about the same between the 500 & 500X, but the patches with amps seemed to sound different. I messed with different output modes, and found the closest I got was with the 500 set to Combo Power Amp In, but the distortions seemed "raspier" with this setting, but it was the best I could do. I considered maybe I should re-install the FW version, thinking something might be afoot there, but by that time the latest batch of FW was out, so I save my Set Lists and updated the 500 & 500X and my 2 JTV's to the latest with the ability to use HD Worbench with the HD500(X) and Link revisions, etc., did the updates to both. I reloaded my Set Lists, and did the global resets and pedal calibrations, but the tonality differences were the same between the 500 & 500X. Has anybody else noticed this? To preserve the use of Studio out, will I need to tweak the bass levels up on all my amped models for the backup 500 unit? Any ideas are welcomed. Thanks, Dave

I also had to tweak my strat models to make them more useable. I have the 59 and the 69S, and due to my use of mostly the mags, I wanted the models to be about on the same footing level-wise with the mags, so I could use them fairly interchangeably. Because of the inherent level differences between the 59's hum buckers (hotter) and the 69S's single coils I had to do them independently. On the 59, I lowered the Lester levels so they generally matched the mags, and raised the weaker output Spanks alot (and others) to get in the same ballpark with levels. I appreciate the attempt of the modelling concept to try to match vintage sounds & levels, but in practical use, they varied too much to switch between models without the levels (too much or too little) getting in the way. I had to do the same with the 69S's models, but to match the lower general level of it's all single coil pickups. While I was at it, I messed with tone & volume pot values, and cap values in HD Workbench to either take out the harshness (roll off the thinness) or brighten up the sounds of the models to my liking. It seems changes in these make more difference than I remember when trying it before. If I want the tame the harshness, I lower the tone pot value. If I lower both volume & tone pots to the same value, it doesn't seem to change the tone, but changing one relative to another does make a difference. , I've not explored the effect of the cap values as much, yet. This is all subjective, of course, but I came up with very decent, very useful Tele, Strat, Les, etc. tones. Because of the 59 & 69S mag level difference, I have 2 nearly identical Set Lists -- each tweaked for the relative levels of the 2 different JTV's mags and their associated models. I use both at gigs and switch between the guitars and Set Lists when I change guitars between sets or if I break a string during a set -- I've never (knock wood) had to switch due to string breakage in the time I've had the JTV's. The ability to adjust the models while plugged into the VDI of the 500X is a long-awaited vast improvement, as using the USB interface was difficult, because (for me anyway) the model versus mag levels are not the same using the 1/4" analog output, and it's interaction with the HD500X's Guitar In jack as with the VDI on my 2 JTV's. I also adjusted the model patches' relative string signal levels as needed and it offered quite a bit of balancing out of weak strings versus strong strings and helped with bass or treble heavy tonality -- some I think is due to the piezo signal variances. I was able to reduce the "plinkiness" of some models by lowering string levels as well. I'm still not a 100% there, but feel better about the overall tonality of the models I've messed with, and will keep at it... I do pick with some force and notice this also accentuates that issue, so I try to lighten up my pick attack, but often fall into old habits. I'm using the latest HD500 & 500X firmware, and the latest with the the 2 JTV's, and the latest revised HD Workbench. My "sign" that I was getting better tone was a few times in the process of tweaking when I thought I had the mags on, only to see the model light was lit.... That was new for me. Dave

I have used my Variax on the VDI input and a 2nd regular electric guitar (my backup) in the "Guitar In" and a 3rd acoustic/electric in the "Aux In". I would set my patches for the electric Guitar In & Variax to "Variax and Guitar In" (or whatever the wordage is) set to "Input 1" with "Aux In" off, then roll the volume on the guitar in use (Variax or Regular) up and the other one full down. When I used the A/E guitar I'd have a patch for it with the "Aux In" input on the HD500(X) turned on to "Input 1" in the patch. Any of the 3 guitars were usable with the tuner in a HD500 patch with the input active to "Input 1". IMO the only time a dual path with different guitars assigned to Input 1 and Input 2 and different effects paths would be very useful would be with 2 people playing the different guitars at once. This isn't anything I'd be doing, so I just set up different patches for different instruments. My 59 & my backup Epi LP are so close in their pickup tonality & signal level that I used the same patches for both. The only ones I couldn't use the LP on, of course were the special tuning patches for the JTV. I'm not doing the multiple guitars anymore, as I have 2 JTV's (a 59 & 69S) that I switch the VDI cable between sets. Both guitars give me very good acoustic sounds, and I found a very good patch on the L6 Custom Tone site that someone put a lot of good work on -- uses no "amp", but a lot of good EQ, reverb, and light chorus on. Kudos to the author of that -- with some very minor tweaking and settings for the different acoustic models, I get very good acoustic sounds. I have left my AE at home for a few years now, since I found that patch. It was one of those "aha moments" when I found that one... I don't remember the name of it -- maybe someone here on the forum does... My 2 cents... Dave

Ditto -- on my 59, I change them all at once - also clean & oil the fret board, since I got it in 2011, no problems. The neck is solid as a rock and has never been affected. When I got my 69S in late 2012, it was a bit of a shock to have the trem bridge come off its pins (with a snap! by the springs), so I take off the inner 4 strings and clean & oil the finger board with the low & high E's still holding the bridge in place, then put on the 4 inner strings and they hold the bridge in position so I can replace the high & low E's last. Never have that problem with my Strat, as it is the type (late 70's) with the classic 6 screws holding the trem block bridge in place instead of the 2 point trem blocks on this and many other strat-like guitars... Dave

I had the XTLive with case, needed to replace it due to failure with an X3Live -- the X3L would not fit in the XTL case, so I bought the X3L case (wider side to side, narrower front to back than the XTL case) -- both from L6. Replaced my X3L with an HD500 -- it fit in the both the XTL and the X3L cases - go figure.... Bought an HD500X so now have my 500X in one case and my now backup 500 in the other. Tight fit on both of them, but they do work. I was surprised because the X3L definitely would not fit the XTL case , and the HD500(X) is apparently in between the two in size... Dave

I've never had use switch cleaner either -- a few flicks of the switch always did it for me. The switches would do this after extended times of not being moved, like if I didn't play one for months and it sat in its case or hung on my wall racks, collecting dust -- my regular guitars, mostly. On the 59, I use mainly the bridge mag PU and have patches set up on my HD-500X for the models I use, so it can go for quite a while without being switched physically, but the one or 2 times I had it happen, it cleared right up with a couple of flicks of the switch. My 69S has not done it that I specifically remember, but my strat has, but only after months hanging on the wall -- I have Hercules wall hangers for 4 guitars on display in my man-cave. If you regularly use the switches, just the normal switch movement keeps the contacts clean and you probably won't see this too often. My Tele Deluxe that I've had since 1973 has a regular LP style switch, and my LP switch are both your standard Switchcraft good quality switches, and they both have done it.... My point is, if switch movement doesn't clear it up for the mags, you may actually have a bigger problem that needs looking into -- the best place to start is with the manufacturer -- this case for the JTV's, Line6. This is not a switch that can be just replaced by a Switchcraft 3-position switch as used in LP's, because it has more going on. If you take the switch access cover off the back of the 59 and look inside, you'll see a switch with a printed circuit board attached and more leads (at least mine is like that). If it's a 69 or 89 with a 5-position switch, they are also not your stock strat switches. When I replaced my 69S's single-coil PU's with DiMarzio noiseless units, I saw 2 rows of contacts on the 5-way switch, not one row like inside my strat. Just relating my experience with this, is all..... Dave

I've had my 59 since May 2011, it has a December 2010 mfr date per the S/N, it had the initial bad 3-way switch issue - returned for correction, has been solidly performing since then. The guitar has been through all the available firmware updates since then, and I've never seen a change in the behaviour of the physical pickup selection.... The firmware updates mess with the models and some of the features and functions of the controls (volume and/or tone controls as HD500(X) parameter controls, etc.). I do still periodically have to exercise the the switch for the physical pickups to get the neck PU to come back, but like I said, this happens on my regular guitars too, so I never saw it as anything but an occasional annoyance. The 5-way switches on my 69S (October 2012) and strat will do it, but never as often as a 3-way switch in the 59 and other guitars - typically LP or Tele styles. I'm guessing you may have moved the switch enough to clear the oxidation away for now, and it may come back. One way to see if it is the electronics or just the phyiscal switch will be the next time it shows up, unplug the VDI or remove the battery so when you plug it in with a 1/4" cable the electronics are off, and see if the mag PU's still have the switching issue. Without power, the JTV is a passive guitar through the 1/4" like any other electric guitar. If you still have the switching issue, it'll likely be the dirty contacts on the mag PU side of the pickup selector switch... Dave

Quick notes -- Also ensure that the plug end of the replacement power cord physically fits your HD500X obviously, but if it sticks out too far, you'll be putting more mechanical stress on the socket leading towards a future failure. The most important thing to make sure of is that the polarity of the replacement 9V DC, 3A minimum power supply matches the unit. You will brick your unit if you reverse the polarity (the + or - to tip or sleeve). Just a head's up. Dave

This is just a comment on modeling not this particular JCM issue.... I rarely go to the custom tone facility here, as I have rarely found anything that I could download and just use. I have gotten some great ideas from the tones, which I got some years ago, and still use extensively, and thanks to the contributors on that, but what I found is, I download something that I'm interested in, and I think What were they thinking?? -- this is no where even close!! The basic problem is the tone may sound great to a particular person, and will sound great on their setup, but as others have noted, the variables are way too many to be able to count on to hear the same thing from user to user. The person who uploads it has a sound in their head they go to with the equipment -- guitar (brand, output level, tonality, JTV, regular electric, single coil, hum buckers, JTV model or Mag PU's), connection (analog or VDI if JTV), actual amplification for the signal (tube, solid state, guitar amp - in the front or in the power section or 4 cable method, or full range pa type amp), physical speakers (guitar (midrange peaks), or full range (flatter, more even response)), actual cabinets, the actual room, or stage you play in, into recordings or into a live situation - higher or lower volume levels even make a speaker react differently, and the ear reacts differently. While the only thing in common for the uploaded tones between us is the POD HD 500 or 500X.... I'm a weekender for gigs, but have been at it for over 40 years, now. Over time with the PODs I had (XTL, X3L, HD500, HD500X), I've come to some basic tones for the types of music I play. I do a very clean country tone with a hint of edge at the top of the volume pedal, for blues I use an edgier version of the same, but with drive up a bit for more bite, for 70's 80's rock, I do a distortion tone - tight, not a rumble, and a heavier distortion for that end of the spectrum. I have some very nice acoustic sounds with the JTV and HD that I am very happy with. I haven't really gone with the JCM amp models, as it is not an amp I was ever drawn to in RL - Not my particular cup of meat... Then for other uses, I have patches for other effects in or out -- variations on the basic patches or forced tunings on the JTV. One thing I've noticed is that the majority of tones on the custom tone area are fairly distortion heavy. I practice for hours on a song to get it right, but don't spend tons of time to get the exact tone of a special amplifier for a 3 minute song.... That amount of detail gets wasted on an audience - it would only be for me, and I have a palette of sounds that pleases me. I've got a certain tonality in my head that is my base, and oddly enough, when I tweek other models in the 500X or on an amp in a music store, the base sound I always end up with with most amps either sounds like the tone in my head, or if not achievable with that amp or model I move on to another amp, unless I'm specifically looking for something radically different. It all is coming down to personal preference, and I don't expect others to read my mind and just know what I'm happy with. I definitely agree with ratatats -- the individual makes the tone, it's their choices of equipment, settings, and playing techniques that vary widely, and make wildly varying final outcomes. Until you're happy with it, you have to keep tweeking, or if that doesn't get you what you want, change something to chase your tone. No one can do it for you, and only you will know it when you hit it. If it was easy, anybody could do it.... ;o) Dave

I have periodic issues with my 59 switch, also with my LP switch, my Strat 5 way switch, my Tele Deluxe 3 way switch.... If not moved, all switches get oxidation build-up that creates a contact resistance, that lowers the volume -- sometimes to the point of muting it totally. I exercise the switches on my 59 & 69S, and my other guitars. On the JTV's I also use the HD 500X patches to switch the guitar patches, but if that is the what you do exclusively, the physical switch will move rarely, and be more likely to have oxidation problems on the unused position(s). On my LP, I use the bridge pickup the most, and when I switch to the neck, I sometimes have this problem. With a few flicks of the switch, just the action of switching cleans the contacts. Same with my 59. Not as often with my Strat and JTV-69S. Spray cleaners will clean it up, but only temporarily, just like working the switch, sooner or later, the oxides accumulate again. Now if that doesn't get it working again (exercising the switch or cleaning), then you would likely have more of a problem, rather than an annoyance.... Then it would need to be fixed. I had the early bad switch issue with my 59, and physical pickup switching was never an issue, only the model switching went whacky. The 59 and other JTV switches are not usual guitar pickup switches that can be replaced with normal switches, they have 2 different sets of contacts for the physical pickup switching and the model switching. Anyway, that's my 2 cents.... Dave

I use FS5 through 8 for patch switching, and FS1 through 4 for FX on/off. I do switch between patches a lot -- depending on the song, of course. Electric to acoustic on the JTV patches, clean to distortion, etc. When I need an unusual combination of patches, I go up to a new bank and put the ones I need side by side. I keep the ones I usually use on bank one, then roll up or down with the up/down switches for the different groupings. Been doing that for years, ever since my XTLive. Very handy... I was a bit confused by the question of top row versus bottom row. To me, FS1 - FS4 is the top row (FX On/Off switching), and FS5 - FS8 is the bottom row (patch switching). Whatever floats your boat... I marked the poll for "I use both rows", but that may not be the right response.... Dave

No, the 500 & the rest of the PODs are USB 2 or earlier, but the USB 3 interface on the PC's and Mac's of the past year or so when it became more standard is USB 3, which is backward compatible to the earlier USB versions. I build my own desk-top PC's. My 500 & 500X are compatible with both my latest PC with USB 3 on the front ports and my prior PC build with USB 2 on the front. One thing I do notice about my USB 3 versus 2 machines -- to reach my HD on the floor, I used to be able to use a USB extension cable on my USB 2 machine, but it does not work from my USB 3 machine, so when I hook up to the 500, I set the HD on a chair to get it within a single USB cable length of the PC, and it works fine... The USB 3 slows down to communicate with earlier versions. I use my 500X out gigging, and have not had issues with any noticeable lags when switching between patches, even when switching the JTV models per patch. Dave

It is true that XLR is better at noise rejection, but the down side of the 500 & 500X is that the XLR cannot be switched between mic & line level output, like the 1/4" output can. I run my 500 & 500X straight into a Crown XL1000 amp, but when I tried the XLR (which I would prefer to do), found it could not provide line level signal that the amp needed to drive properly. With the 1/4" set to Line level, the amp gets what it needs to get proper signal out. I have been using the 1/4" out with a standard good quality 20 foot guitar cable with no bad affects. From what I understand, the rack-mounted Pro & Pro X have the ability to send line level via the XLR, but I don't consider that a viable product for me, as other than a couple of differences between the 500 and the Pro, I'd need a rack, a Pro, and a foot controller added on, for a significantly higher price tage to achieve the same outcome from what I have now. If the XLR noise vs 1/4" was a biggie, I probably would have gone the Pro direction, but it has not been the case. For mic level signals to a PA or something else with a pre-amp, XLR will be the best, as signal to noise levels are way more noticable at that volume level. Note -- I do send to our soundman's board via the XLR out and I always lift the ground with the switch to avoid ground loop issues as Charlie pointed out... My 2 cents. Dave

I use my 2 JTV's (59 & 69S) ALL the time for gigging and at home. I'm a weekender, but for over 40 years... I have other good guitars, my original Tele Deluxe from 1973, and a late 70's strat that I used for many years, plus a Variax 300, Epi Les Paul Classic (good guitar), and a cheapy Epi LP Special, I picked up for cheap at GC because it has P90's... I rarely consider selling off old guitars to finance new guitars... Did that once with a 67 Gretsch Country Gentleman and have been kicking myself ever since... I get attached to my axes, and while I'm currently playing the heck out of my JTV's (lately my 69S more than my 59 -- new guitar syndrome), I never discount pulling out my old ones again, and re-fall in love with 'em over again... I shy away from super high priced stuff like relic'd Fenders (stupid idea to me, to pay high price for a rusted, scabbed up guitar -- I like 'em shiny and new...), or some model associated with somebody famous... For me it's a good usable guitar, not something I'd be afraid to actually play for fear I might lessen it's value in some way. I had bumps along the way with the 59, but they were ironed out, and I changed my 69S's pups out with noiseless single coils, so I'm not afraid of working on my guitars, either.. My 2 cents... Dave

I agree with crusinon2 above, it will depend on your preferences in guitar styles. I have both the 59 and the 69S, and like them both. I got the 59 first, then later the 69S when it first came out. I use the mag pups probably 80 to 90 percent of the time, and the models for alternate tunings plus special sounds, like acoustics, banjos, etc. The 59 is a beauty, love the hum buckers. I changed the single coils on the 69S to noiseless single coils, after being spoiled by not having to deal with hum... I have been a strat player for many years, and after using an Epiphone Les Paul for a few years, I got the 59. I do find myself gravitating to the 69S more, lately. Old habits, I think... When I compare the models on both guitars, I do find minor differences between them, mostly due to the different materials and construction styles of the two instruments. I have not found them to be very distinct when using them out live at gigs, and take both out, one to backup the other in all settings. My 2 cents.... Dave

This is the translated text from Russian to English for the OP's question: In general the situation is, I decided to flash USB Firmware, produced an error with cable supposedly reconnect and reconnect no longer happen. Tried on the beech retraces settings .... nothing. It is possible to restore it? Valid question. Maybe someone can them.... Dave

I replaced the single coil pup's in my 69S with some DiMarzio silent single coils, and they have been great! The original pickups sounded fine, but I had been spoiled by hum buckers and the single coil hum is just a fact of life (usually). I use the mag pups on my 69S and 59 I'd say 90% of the time.... I use the models for some special sounds and tunings, and acoustics, of course. I will probably replace the SC's in my Strat at some point, as well... Dave

Eastern Iowa -- Davenport -- on the Mississippi River... I bugged you a few times, and you always helped with my issues. You even gave me a call once to work on an issue with me. It is greatly appreciated. Thanks, Dave

Hi Rich!! Good hearing from you, man. I, like many here have always enjoyed your insights and help over the years. Take care and be well. Dave (Fellow Iowan...) ;o)

I wouldn't especially hold my breath for the Android or Windows apps, if I were you. You'll notice that a few years out on the StageSource stuff, and still the only devices mentioned there are Apple iPads or iPhones. Where are the Android or Win Apps for those? Why should we expect it to be any different with this AMPLIFi? The only mention I've seen was in the Anderton's video, and they aren't exactly "official" spokesmen for Line 6... Might just be wishful thinking. Just a thought. Dave

+1 to the responses on the XPS supply. On the Gator case, I purchased a Gator hard shell strat-style rectangular case (similar to http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/GCElecA/) when I got my Variax 300 in 2005 and it worked fine. By the time I got my 59, I was primarily using an EPI LP guitar, for which I got an SKB LP style case (similar to http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/SKB56/) when I purchased that guitar. I kept the EPI in the LP case, and put the 59 in the Gator rectangular -- it was a "universal" case without the molded form-fitting space for a strat type guitar, so the 59 fit in in the Gator fine. Then, about a year ago, last October, I got the strat style 69S, and am taking both the 59 & the 69S to gigs now, so I swapped the 59 into the LP style SKB, and the 69S into the Gator. Either guitar fits in the Gator rectangular case, but only the 59 of the 2 JTV's fits in the SKB LP style case. Dave