Battle Of The Quacks

[phil_m]

I took some time today to record a few samples of the infamous 2 & 4 posiitons from the Variax and compared them to the real thing. The real thing in this case is a 2012 American Standard Strat with Fat 50s pickups.

 

I recorded these going through my pedalboard into my Deluxe Reverb Reissue (using a Cannabis Rex speaker in case anyone cares). I used a Sennheiser E609 along with an MXL ribbon mic. Those are going into my UX2, and I'm using the Modern preamp on both mics with the compressor in the chain just to prevent clipping. The only effect I have on in my pedalboard is a clean boost going into the amp. The reverb is from the amp.

 

I'm not going to say which is which at this point. On each clip I start in position 4 (neck and middle) and then go to position 2 (middle and bridge). I tried to play pretty the same thing in both clips, but they are a little different.

Quack1.mp3

Quack2.mp3

[ozbadman]

Thanks for posting the clips.

 

I too will have a guess. I find Quack1 a bit smoother and I imagine that's the real strat too. The second sounds a little digital to my ears. That being said, I really hope I'm wrong as that would mean I have Quack1 at my fingertips :)

 

Perhaps you could add a poll here to see who thinks which is which before you do your reveal.

[phil_m]

Good call on the poll... I've added one.

[guilhordas]

phill , the quack of jtv has workround right ?

[Charlie_Watt]

It only needs the work around if you have used Workbench.  It's fine after the download only.

[phil_m]

Nothing has been altered in Workbench in the model recorded here. It's just the stock HD Spank model.

[guilhordas]

strange because the original 2.0 I can not this quack at all , only when I got the workround

[guilhordas]

1 is the real thing

[ozbadman]

Not that I'm asking you to do any more work Phil, but it would have been interesting to have v1.9 (or Variax 700) version in the mix as well.

[TheRealZap]

My understanding of the workaround, is that its only required if you plug the guitar into workbench HD, it's workbench HD that causes the need for the workaround.

some have said that was not the case for them... but that's what i was told from L6

[Charlie_Watt]

That is my understanding too.  My strat sounds in 2 and 4 have both pickups on.  I have not connected to WB and I don't plan to for the near future.  (Until it's fixed)

[guilhordas]

but in my case , as soon as I did the update I already noticed that there was no quack , the 2 and 4 positions were sounding strange even before connecting to the workbench

[guitar4u]

Interesting to see so many votes for #1. I picked #2 ("Quack2") as the real one within the first few seconds, without even hearing the other one. That's because #2 has a low-end that I've never heard the Variax replicate; furthermore, #1 ("Quack1") has that hi-fi sound that is almost too clean (i.e. digital) to be real. As sure as I am about these picks, it wouldn't surprise me at all to be wrong! These blind listening tests always put things in perspective ;)

[Abraxas1975]

Hi all,

I haven't read it through, but heard the clips and I can hear some of the sparkle of the piezo pickup in the Quack 1 sound.
I would say that the real thing is quack 2.
To my personal tastes, anyway, I prefer the quack1 sound...

Just my 2 cents from Italy.

[phil_m]

Well, it's been over 24 hours now, so I guess I'll reveal what's what.

 

Quack1 is the Variax, and Quack2 is the American Standard Strat. More people ended being wrong than right in the poll, so I guess kudos to Line 6 here.

 

There is actually a giveaway in the tracks if you listen close enough. On the real Strat track you can hear the hum from the middle pickup kick in when I slide the 5-way switch past it. In the Variax track it's quiet through the change.

[ozbadman]

Nice job Phil.

[Charlie_Watt]

I guess the HD modeling is pretty convincing if we can't tell the real strat from the electronic copy!  I thought both sounded good though.

[Crusty_Old_Rocker]

I was expecting this your revelation :rolleyes:

in any case IMHO the 1.9 Strat is better than both Quack1 and your real Quack2

so from me more kudos to the past 1.9 Line6 work, and not only for the Quacks

 

I'm often flummoxed by comments like this.  The aim of the modelling is to sound like the real thing, not some caricature or derivative of the real thing.  Similar comments have been made in the past about the amp modelling, where people have preferred sanitised amp modelling rather than "warts and all" amp modelling where some chariteristics of the modelling (e.g. power capacitor bleed) were acurately included in the modelling, but people wanted those true characteristics removed.

 

If people prefer to have a Strat model that doesn't actually sound like a Strat, where does that leave those who do want the modelling to accurately reproduce the true sound of the real thing?

 

I recognise that it's all about preferences and individual tastes, but if the aim is to reproduce the sound of a real Strat and people struggle to differentiate the two, then I belive the modelling has achieved its goal.

 

BTW, I have an American Deluxe Strat and the Variax does a great job of sounding plenty Stratty to me.

 

Cheers,

 

Crusty

[Crusty_Old_Rocker]

who told you that the previous Strat model doesn't sound exactly like a Strat, maybe doesn't sound exactly like yours, but personally I think that sounds like a very nice Strat..

What JTV and Strats are you currently using in your comparisons?

 

Having owned and played many Strats over the past 37 years, I do have a bit of an idea of what a strat sounds like. My current Strat is a 2008 American Deluxe V Neck.

 

I also have owned a Variax 600 and still currently have a Variax 700 and a JTV69. The Strat model on my Variax 700 comes from Ron Huisen's "Patch Creativity Bundle". I replaced the Strat model on my Variax 600 and Variax 700 with that Strat model becuause Ron's version sounded more like my real Strats than the official Variax versions (which are what was in v1.9 on the JTV).

 

I won't have to use Ron Huisen's Strat patch on my JTV69 with the HD modelling because it now sounds more like the Strat I currently own and the many other Strats that I've owned and played over the years.

 

But, that's just me. I'm more than happy to let others prefer the stock v1.9 Strat, to each their own. However, I found the v1.9 Strat wasn't as accurate as Ron Huisen's patch, but I find that I don't need to alter the v2.0 Strat to get an accurate Strat sound out of it.

 

I just wanted to clarify that I actually have, sitting right next to me, a Variax 700 with the equivalent of the v1.9 Strat (in the FACTORY bank) plus Ron Huisen's Strat patch (in the USER bank), a JTV69 with v2.0 firmware and a real live Fender Stratocaster for direct comparisons that I have made using a variety of real and modelled amps. Based on those comparisons, I find the JTV69 v2.0 firmware the most consistent with my real live Fender Stratocaster.

 

Cheers,

Crusty

[dkemusic]

I wouldn't go so far as too say the v1.9 doesn't sound like a Strat.  Whether you've been playing for 37 years, or 1 doesn't make it any less accurate a model than the 2.0 version (and I've been playing for 48+ years).  As to which is better I think they're both good, just different from each other.

 

Dan

[Crusty_Old_Rocker]

I wouldn't go so far as too say the v1.9 doesn't sound like a Strat.

 

Dan

 

You're right, it's just that Ron Huisen's patch sounded more consistent with my genuine Fender Strat.  They do all sound Stratty.

 

I'm just providing the outcome of my direct comparisons between Variax 700 (v1.9 equivalent), JTV69 with v1.9 and v2.0 firmware and a genuine Fender Stratocaster all of which I have with me right here and now, that's all.

 

Cheers,

 

Crusty

[Crusty_Old_Rocker]

so in the end it is probably more a matter of personal taste than accurate modeling

 

Then fire up Workbench and adjust your JTV to make a guitar that suits you personal taste.  What JTV do you have?

 

You're not constrained to the defaults.  Ron Huisen got the Variax to sound more like a Strat than the default, so you can certainly make the JTV sound less like a genuine Fender Strat to suit your personal taste.  It's all good.

 

Cheers,

 

Crusty

[Charlie_Watt]

That's the wonder of workbench!  You can significantly affect the tone of the models and balance the string volumes to your own taste.  If you don't like the 2.0 Strat then change it!  My guess is that the default models sound very much like the guitars that Line 6 used to generate them. 

[Crusty_Old_Rocker]

I prefer to stay with my japanese 700 (fw 1.70 equivalent = 1.9 just for the electrics) for now..

 

the 700 included Strat sounds already good for me and doesn't need any fixing/customizations..

I use/used the workbench to correct all the 12 strings models (doubled strings volume/tuning balance), and to make new combinations/customizations with the given parts..

I'm a little confused. Why are you playing the 700 when you could roll back your JTV to 1.9?

 

Why can't you roll your JTV back to 1.9?

 

Cheers,

 

Crusty

[johnnyayyy]

Two things:

 

1. Interesting that people are still voting on this after the correct answer has been revealed...

 

2. The real Strat sounds like it could benefit from a minor pickup adjustment - I bet the middle pickup is adjusted low to keep it out of the way of picking, if so raising it a tick might have made it more difficult to hear a big difference between the two recordings.

 

Yes, I am in effect saying the real Strat sound could be improved to make it sound as good as the JTV, deal with it... :lol:

[pinoguitar]

I guess it's thing of taste and adjustment. And Strat is not Strat.

But I dial another body in Workbench and everything is fine for me again.

First is the orig. v2.0, second is my body changed.

Spank_JTV_model.mp3