Jump to content
Jeffsco

Big difference in Strat tones from version 2.1 to 1.9...

Recommended Posts

Hi folks..thought I'd post my finding in a new thread as I was discussing this in the tail end of an old thread...

 

to recap: I put my new JTV-69 thru it's paces at a rehearsal last weekend. First time I really had the opportunity to stretch it out. I was running the latest version of the firmware...2.1. Myself and all of my bandmates noticed that the Spank / Strat tones sounded thin...as to the point of there being something wrong with the guitar. I had been using a Variax 300 for the past 7 years so I know what the Variax Spank tones sound like. several others....most notably the Chime sounds......sounded weak as well. The acoustics and the Lester sounded great... but most of the tones in the Semi, R-Billy and Jazzbox sounded all much the same. In the Variax 300 they were distinctly different.

 

So last night I did an experiment....I made 3 recordings of myself playing the same passage using the Spank Bridge Middle pickup combo. #1 was the Variax 300.  #2 was the JTv-69 using Version 1.9 Firmware and 3 was the JTV-69 using the 2.1 Firmware.  I should add that I reflashed the JTV from my HD500 to avoid any possible issues with the JTV USB interface.

 

I haven't had time to post the sound clips here so you'll have to take my word for it. I had a family member , who's not a musician...just a regular set of ears...come by to do a blind listening test and they perception and comments matched mine almost to the word!

 

-JTV-69 with 2.1 sounded very thin and weak

-The Variax 300 and JTV-69 ver 1.9 sounded " Fat"

- The JTV-69 ver 1.9 and the Variax 300 sounded very close to each other but the JTV69 ver 1.9 sounded clearer.

 

Just to be sure I reflashed the JTV several times back and forth and each time it was the same thing...so we can rule out a "Bad Flash" I think

 

It's speculation to say that there is something wrong with my JTV when using 2.1. as others have alluded to similiar problems. It's only because I had a basis of comparision that I recognized there was a definite difference with the 2.1 software.

 

Using ver 1.9....the Chime tones are all back and sounding "Rickenbacher" again...the Semi and R-Billy and Tele tones sound distinct from one another...that just wasn't happening with 2.1. My only regret is not being able to use the HD Workbench..which really is outstanding. But the guitar now sounds like it should.

 

So...I don't know where that leaves me...Is there something broken with it?  Is it possible for Ver 1.9 to sound phenomenal and 2.1 to sound as bad as it does and the guitar still function?

 

I'm interested to hear back from others..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Strat tones are different between 1.9 and 2.1 (well, 2.0, the HD update). It's a different guitar they modeled from one to the other, and it's just different. Personally, I really like the new Strat. It actually sounds more like the actual Strats I own.

 

The other thing is that the levels between the models in the HD update are not nearly as equal to one another as they were prior to the update. So if you had tones on the HD500 built around a certain model on the JTV, you'll likely have to adjust those tones to get it to sound the way you want it.

 

The other thing to consider is that everything can be adjusted in Workbench.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also feel the strat model sounds much worse.  The position 1 semi hollow too, at least for me.  I haven't fiddled with them in workbench though.  May still be able to coax better tones from them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I played with the Workbench to try to get the "quack" happening on the Strat tones for 2.1. It's just not there. I should say that I was using a very basic amp setting to hear the tonality...Clean Deluxe..no frills, no muss, no fuss....

 

You look at the rich woody tone of Stevie Ray Vaughn, John Mayer, Eric Johnson etc...that's the Strat tone I'm trying to coax out of the guitar. The foundation of that sound is present in 1.9 but 2.1 is just too weak to get there. I even went into Workbench and tried to boost the volume of that pickup combination. All I got was a Louder weak sound.

 

I'd be interested to  have some of the 2.1 users who are satisfied with their Strat tones to Rollback their tone to 1.9 and tel me what they think? If  their 1.9 sounds as full and beefy as 2.1....then that tells me there is something wrong with my JTV.. Perhaps someone can do that and report back?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This matches my opinion too.

 

 

 

 

-JTV-69 with 2.1 sounded very thin and weak

-The Variax 300 and JTV-69 ver 1.9 sounded " Fat"

- The JTV-69 ver 1.9 and the Variax 300 sounded very close to each other but the JTV69 ver 1.9 sounded clearer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting.

 

I had issues upgrading - the sounds I was getting from 2.1 did not match what I expected.  I didn't know if it was due to an error during the upgrade or if it was an error in my JTV.    I also noticed a big difference in relative string volume between low E and high E on many models - with the lower thicker strings being much louder than you would expect and causing the models to sound unbalanced due to having too much bottom end and barely any top end.

 

I know that they modelled different guitars and they changed the underlying modelling code when 2.0 came out to fully exploit the HD models.  So things were different and were going to sound different through my pre-existing patches and set up.  But I still could not get my head around how big the apparent changes were and how different things sounded, and unfortunately, not in a good way.

 

I tried several re-flashes.  Oddly enough things seemed to improve - but not the string volume difference.  But never to the point where I was ecstatic about the new models and could hear they were much better.  I ended up using Workbench HD to adjust string volumes and to boost pickup volumes on some of the models - this also went some way to improving things - but again I don't think I have quite cracked it or got the models sounding like all the demo's from Sean Halley!

 

I don't know if I have a faulty JTV or if I have just been unlucky and keep getting a bad flash update.    I really wish there was some way I could find out for sure.  Meanwhile, I am persevering with 2.1 and will be tweaking my models some more when I get a chance.     I am still not as comfortable with the 2.1 models as I was with 1.9 - for some reason the 1.9 models just don't require the tweaking to get them to sound good. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

people say the same thing about the older pod's (2.0) being easier to dial in as well...

i think the older modeling tech required more liberties with the models, and produced a more idealized version of things....

the newer modeling in many cases also includes some of the nuances of the authentic stuff...

often not fitting into that idealized category that many of us long time modeling users have become accustomed.

I've heard many people complain about volume differences in the HD models...

I like that, it's more authentic... having had many guitars over the years, and currently sitting on about 30...

I'm confident in saying that they do not all play at the same volume.

in fact often times the dynamics are what sets them apart.

 

that's not to say that the difference in string volume from model to model is normal....

or that people are imagining these things...

just saying that much of the differences, are intentional.

 

i personally love the 2.1 update...

but haven't had the issues that other have.

 

   I am still not as comfortable with the 2.1 models as I was with 1.9 - for some reason the 1.9 models just don't require the tweaking to get them to sound good. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i personally love the 2.1 update...

but haven't had the issues that other have.

 

But how is it possible you are loading the same Firmware 2.1 as many of us but are not experiencing the thin, weak sounding tone compared to 1.9? I've spent about a half dozen hours over the past few days going thru hundreds of posts in the Forum archive....all detailing the same problems I have noted. I'm not taking about a subjective / is it or isn't it/ type difference in sound.

 

The difference's between 2.1 and 1.9 on my guitar are night and day / black and white/ can't fail to not hear the difference. It's that dramatic. If it was a conventional guitar and pickups and you switched to a pick up combo and it sounded like it does with my 2.1 Firmware update....you'd swear the pickups were dying.

 

I'm not saying all the models sound this way....but at least 3 of them do and the best part of 4 or 5 others... there is only a small difference between the individual pick up Positions. Whereas with 1.9 and my Variax 300 (by comparision)..each of 5 tones for a given model sound VERY different from one another.

 

The Lester and the Acoustic models sound fantastic...truly an "HD" improvement over the previous Firmwares. But on the balance 1.9 sounds far far better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are no local retailers that carry variax.  I have thought about ordering a second one from the online retailer I purchased mine from just to see if that guitar sounds the same. I also have problems with warble.  Wouldn't be fair to the retailer though....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there have been bad flashes, and even users that ultimately had hardware issues.

I think that the HD models can stress the hardware and unveil defects that weren't obvious with the lesser firmwares...

(in no way an official statement....)

my theory based on nothing more than knowing that some users have had experiences like yours and others have not.

just because you've seen a handful of posts, or even pages and pages of posts (by the same users in multiple threads...)

does not mean that the overall experience is like yours...

 

notice... i'm not saying you don't have any issues... just that those issues cannot be assumed to be typical....

especially in the manner in which you suggest... being that they gradually change tone... (far from a common complaint.)

i would try several reflashes... even all the way back to 1.7x then directly forward to 2.1, keep no models.. etc

i've seen reflashes do wonders... although not fix everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So...your suggesting a Rollback to 1.7x and then go directly to 2.1?  I'll give it a try....and report back.

 

As it stands..I'm very happy with 1.9 and could live with it....but lets face it..the Workbench HD is a very nice tool to have to use.

 

Thanks Uber Guru....I'll try that out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

some have even baby stepped up through the firmwares to get there...

but yeah i've flashed from an older version to a newer version...

because the structure of those updates are significantly different it tends to overwrite lingering bad flash parameters (in my experience)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

people say the same thing about the older pod's (2.0) being easier to dial in as well...

i think the older modeling tech required more liberties with the models, and produced a more idealized version of things....

the newer modeling in many cases also includes some of the nuances of the authentic stuff...

often not fitting into that idealized category that many of us long time modeling users have become accustomed.

I've heard many people complain about volume differences in the HD models...

I like that, it's more authentic... having had many guitars over the years, and currently sitting on about 30...

I'm confident in saying that they do not all play at the same volume.

in fact often times the dynamics are what sets them apart.

 

that's not to say that the difference in string volume from model to model is normal....

or that people are imagining these things...

just saying that much of the differences, are intentional.

 

i personally love the 2.1 update...

but haven't had the issues that other have.

 

Like you, I expect the different models to have different volumes like the real guitars - eg: Les Paul being louder than strat, tele, etc - and that different strings within a model will have different volumes like real guitars.  My JTV had these characteristics with v1.9 and earlier.

I also expected that the models would sound different when I moved to v2.0 and later, and that they would sound improved in subtle ways to bring out more nuances to make them sound even more realistic, as per the demo's I had heard and the experiences related in the forums.

 

What I didn't expect was for some of the models at v2.0 and later to sound "odd" or "wrong"  or that the string volumes would be very different from low E to high E, and that I would need to go into Workbench to tweak them to balance out the string volumes and get them to sound more like my real guitars.  I am no stranger to having to reflash or the fact that this process sometimes mysteriously fixes problems - and I have done that with the fw releases and seemed to get some improvement though not 100% everything falling into place and all sounding better improvement I had hoped for based on the demo's and the reports in the forums.

 

What I can't understand is why this should be, especially when I didn't have issues with the earlier releases.   I would love to know for certain if I had a 100% successful flash upgrade, and if I had a completely 100% error free JTV.  Then I would know that the v2.1 sounds I am getting are the correct ones and I would have to decide whether to live with them or roll back.  However, I still have this nagging doubt that somehow the flash upgrade still did not work 100% or that my JTV does have some subtle error that is causing the v2.1 sounds to not shine to their full potential.

 

I guess that is just the nature of the beast though - it's high tech software and electronics combined with a physical guitar and physical playing technique and finally amplified in a huge variety of ways - there are thousands of variables that come into play making each user's experience totally unique.  We all expect to have exactly the same experience and output because we all have the same software and electronics BUT we overlook the fact that each guitar is physically unique, we have different strings and different playing techniques and use different amplification.   

 

I have no doubt that v2.1 is great - I have heard the numerous demos and have read the many positive experiences on this forum - I am close but not quite at the same experience as those demos but I am sticking with it and hoping that I will iron out my issues by putting in some more hours and maybe reflashing a few more times.  

Edited by edstar1960

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have two 59's the same for both of them .There is no goo in ver 2.1 , it's like a stainless steel counter top, do yourself a favor and save yourself some headaches stick with 1.9 and quit worrying , I tried and tried but my results mimic yours to the t

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've tried both the 2.0 and 2.1 updates several times. I just can't force myself to like any of the HD models, with the exception of the  bridge position Tele and Lester models. Everything else sounds thin or too hyped in the highs, with some sort of slight ambience in the tone which I really dislike. I keep finding myself going back to 1.71 as I prefer the non-HD acoustics as well. Would be nice if Line6 could give us the option of using the non-HD models but with all the other improvements that came with the 2.0 firmware.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've tried both the 2.0 and 2.1 updates several times. I just can't force myself to like any of the HD models, with the exception of the  bridge position Tele and Lester models. Everything else sounds thin or too hyped in the highs, with some sort of slight ambience in the tone which I really dislike. I keep finding myself going back to 1.71 as I prefer the non-HD acoustics as well. Would be nice if Line6 could give us the option of using the non-HD models but with all the other improvements that came with the 2.0 firmware.

 

Can't please everyone. It 's like asking them to make a POD X3 have the features of a POD HD. It's not going to happen.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't please everyone. It 's like asking them to make a POD X3 have the features of a POD HD. It's not going to happen.

 

Not a good comparison - POD X3 and POD HD are entirely different hardware platforms so yeah of course they are going to be different. AFAIK, all JTV's are using pretty much the same processor and electronics.

 

I do realize L6 can't please everyone but it seems like there is a pretty high percentage of users who don't like the 2.0 models. Maybe future JTV updates could try to address that in some way is all I'm saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a good comparison - POD X3 and POD HD are entirely different hardware platforms so yeah of course they are going to be different. AFAIK, all JTV's are using pretty much the same processor and electronics.

 

I do realize L6 can't please everyone but it seems like there is a pretty high percentage of users who don't like the 2.0 models. Maybe future JTV updates could try to address that in some way is all I'm saying.

 

Still, it would hold back any future progress of the JTV. I'm sure it they can't afford to have 2 sets of modeling in 1 firmware. Besides, I would prefer they include more models that you can add via Workbench.

 

I would suggest them to add another strat to the mix, instead of add the old one back. Maybe a more modern strat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still, it would hold back any future progress of the JTV. I'm sure it they can't afford to have 2 sets of modeling in 1 firmware. Besides, I would prefer they include more models that you can add via Workbench.

 

I would suggest them to add another strat to the mix, instead of add the old one back. Maybe a more modern strat?

 

Yes, definitely a +1 on both of those suggestions!   :)

 

Would be great to have more models that can be added via workbench, and I think in particular having 2 Strats (50's and 60's versions) to choose from would go a long way towards keeping people happy.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, definitely a +1 on both of those suggestions!   :)

 

Would be great to have more models that can be added via workbench, and I think in particular having 2 Strats (50's and 60's versions) to choose from would go a long way towards keeping people happy.

 

For sure. I think the technology is good, I just think it's probably some of the guitars they're modeling.

 

I know the guitars they used aren't the ones from the original modeling, so it's obviously going to be different from the old firmware.

They could model some other versions of those guitar models and maybe add in completely new guitars. Still waiting for a Jaguar and Jazzmaster.

 

As for whoever stated the 300 and the JTV sound the same, the modeling is the same. MAYBE tweaked, but it's the same. The different is because of the piezos in the JTV being higher quality than the old Variaxes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

..Not a good comparison - POD X3 and POD HD are entirely different hardware platforms so yeah of course they are going to be different. AFAIK, all JTV's are using pretty much the same processor and electronics...

correct me if i'm wrong, but i believe jtv uses more powerful/next-gen processor+completely upgraded electronics than the old variaxes (like pod hd over pod x3 does).

 

generally speaking, the jtv has next gen hardware, but when she was released the v2.n hd firmware/workbench was not ready, so she initially was matched 2 the old workbench 'n flashed with the old v1.9 f/w, which of course  was underrated regarding the hardware potential,  consuming only a small portion of the available horsepower.

 

so may b clay-man's comparison is a good one...

 

just guessing...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've tried both the 2.0 and 2.1 updates several times. I just can't force myself to like any of the HD models, with the exception of the  bridge position Tele and Lester models. Everything else sounds thin or too hyped in the highs, with some sort of slight ambience in the tone which I really dislike. I keep finding myself going back to 1.71 as I prefer the non-HD acoustics as well. Would be nice if Line6 could give us the option of using the non-HD models but with all the other improvements that came with the 2.0 firmware.

 

With v2.0 they replaced the underlying modelling engine software to work with the newly engineered HD models which they loaded in at the same time.  So, even if we were given access to the older models I don't think they can work with the v2.0 and later firmware, likewise, the new v2.0 models won't work with the pre v2.0 firmware engine. That's my guess but I may be wrong.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With v2.0 they replaced the underlying modelling engine software to work with the newly engineered HD models which they loaded in at the same time.  So, even if we were given access to the older models I don't think they can work with the v2.0 and later firmware, likewise, the new v2.0 models won't work with the pre v2.0 firmware engine. That's my guess but I may be wrong.   

 

The HD acoustics worked with the old modeling engine but I still don't bank on them putting in the old models.

 

It's a waste of space, honestly. I get that some people like 1.9 more, but I think it was time for Line 6 to move on.

Having that much more horsepower and no real overhaul of the modeling is just a slap in the face to Variax users, so I'm glad they finally got around to making new gen modeling. It's been 10 years, there's been massive improvements in technology.

 

I frankly like how more crisp the new modeling is, probably more accurate too. It's what gives the JTV the edge over the other modelers out there.

 

I really am happy Line 6 keeps pushing itself further despite people being fine with what they had before.

Can you imagine what it'd be like if they didn't?

Look at BOSS, all their stuff sounds embarassingly outdated, their modeling sounds tinny and thin, sounds like it's uses the same technology it has 10 years ago. They had that much time and yet they refuse to upgrade their equipment to utilize better more realistic technology.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The HD acoustics worked with the old modeling engine but I still don't bank on them putting in the old models.

 

 

True! They were introduced with v1.8.   Thanks for reminding me!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bottom line - if you like the old 1.9 models better, stick with 1.9.  If you like the 2.1 models better, stick with 2.1.  It's your choice.  I prefer 2.1.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was fiddling with my 69 last night and was switching between position 4 on the spank model (v2.1) as well as the mag pickups.  I find it hard to believe (although some clearly do)  anyone would prefer the spank model over the mag pickups.  The spank model has almost none of the standard quack (played clean) that I and most people expect from strat pickups.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you sure you are not suffering from the earlier WB bug that turned off one of the pickups in the 2 and 4 position.  That eliminated the quack.  The 2 and 4 position sound very good on my JTV9s. (v2.1)  You can go in with WB and mess with the pickups and change the sounds a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I've heard demos of the quack positions that sounded bad and good. Obviously if it's lacking quack your firmware is broke.

 

I personally thought the old firmware has too much quack on the middle position on the Les Paul for my taste.

 

I don't have a JTV though. Just my opinion based on what I've heard, and I honestly really want a JTV for the HD modeling and alt tuning knob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No...it's not the WB bug from 2.0....there is a MASSIVE difference between the Spank tone from 1.9 to 2.1.  It's not the bug that has been clearly explained.

 

I'd suggest all those that really like the Spank tones on 2.1 to Rollback to 1.9 and tell me that your 2.1 doesn't sound "thin" or even broken by comparision to 1.9. It is that dramatic.

 

Update: I was advised by others to try to Rollback to a 1.7x version and then go straight to 2.1 to see if that might clear out any "artifacts" or buggy code remnants that might be preventing "proper" 2.1 Firmware update. That was a disaster! it took over a half hour to do so and never fully finished I had to stop the process after 30 minutes and it wiped out the Variax making it inoperable. I managed to load 1.8 into the JTV and that got us back to working again.

 

1.8..the Spank 2 tones sounded Good....no where near as full and "woody" as 1.9 but not "thin" or "broken sounding like 2.1.

 

Flashed to 2.1 ...dial in Spank 2 and...."thin"... weedy sounding....Chime sounds terrible....Tele......anemic on all tones...

 

Rollback to 1.9....Spank is full rich and woody.y..Like  the best of Eric Johnson, Mark Knopler, Stevie Ray V...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last summer, after the HD update was first released, there was a lot of discussion/debate about this. So in order to help try to get to the bottom of it, I made some sample recording comparing the HD Spank model to a real Strat here: http://line6.com/support/topic/2351-battle-of-the-quacks/

 

As you can see from the results of the poll, the results were almost 50/50 with people guessing which was the real thing and what was the Variax. So that tells me that Line 6 did a very good job of making the Strat sound like a real Strat. Maybe people prefer the older model of a Strat to the real thing? I don't know... I do know, though, that Line 6 wouldn't have spent all the time and energy to develop the HD models just to have them sound like slightly tweaked versions of the old models.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it seems to me  that there are several conclusions that can be determined from  my testimony and others...

 

1. Mine and many others actually own JTV's that are broken....in that they work flawlessly for all Firmware updates  except for 2.1...which boggles the mind. That just doesn't make sense. Having to "re-Flash" 4 or 5 times in order to "magically" or randomly cause the JTV to finally "get it"....that just doesn't seem right. I've flashed my at least a dozen times and using a number of ways that other users found that suddenly, miraculously made the JTV "get it". I can't imagine Line 6 putting out a product whos' functionality has as much chance of working as a Vegas Roulette wheel.

 

2. That the Strat tones and others of 2.1 do sound "thin" compared to 1.9. This is by Design...not a flaw in the software. That would explain why so many of you do not see any problem. Tone is subjective. You may not like the "woody" sound I am clearly hearing in 1.9. You might compare it to a "real Strat" sound clip and find it OK. But that is not what is happening in my 2.1 update. no one would EVER expect you could pull off some convincing Sultan's of Swing tones from 2.1. it sounds like something is broken.

 

The only way to figure this out is to have some happy owners of 2.1 rollback their firmware to 1.9 and to listen to Spank 2. If I'm right it will be a night and day comparison. There will be no mistaking it the difference will be that dramatic. 2.1 will sound "broken" or "thin " in comparison to 1.9. Who knows..you might never go back to 2.1!

 

If mine...and a lot of others...JTV's are Broken... as it concerns their ability to receive the 2.1 Flash update and sound "great"...then  we could expect your 2.1 Spank 2 tone to sound even richer, fuller, more Quack (ier)....than 1.9...truly and "HD" improvement.

 

It isn't about whether the 2.1 clip sounds exactly like a "real Strat clip. It's about whether 1.9 sounds rich and full in comparision to 2.1

 

Would a few of you be willing to try this out and report back to the Forum?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the fact that you had issues flashing successfully, likely indicates an issue...

i think it may be an issue with your computer preventing the successful transmission of the flash...

i would try a completely virgin system, install line6 stuff from nothing and try again.

obviously you probably won't want to etc... given your experience here...

but based on what you're saying i think it would be a worthwhile endeavor.

 

and expecting the update to sound " richer, fuller, more Quack (ier)"

is a subjective interpretation... you basically want it to sound more to your liking...

when the objective here is more accurate to the modeled guitars... (whether you like it or not.)

 

the solution is quite simple.... and stated many times...

if you like 1.9 stay there.

i'm not saying that to be mean or offensive in the least... it's very honestly a decision for you to make for yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It isn't about whether the 2.1 clip sounds exactly like a "real Strat clip. It's about whether 1.9 sounds rich and full in comparision to 2.1

 

 

I would disagree with this. This is what the whole point of the Variax modeling is - to emulate the sounds of the modeled guitars as much as possible.

 

Now, the one thing is that there's no single Strat sound that is *the* Strat sound. People will argue that certain tones are the pinnacle of that, but, really, if Line 6 went down that road, I think they'd just be asking for endless headaches. The best they can do is give the best representation of the specific guitars they modeled and allow us to edit them to our liking in Workbench.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have liked all the demo's I have heard of v2.0 and v2.1  and the blind test phli_m provided was proof that the HD strat model does produce a convincing strat sound.

 

However, I have found that my v2.0 and v2.1 installs just did not sound like the demo's and examples I have heard - certainly not after first flash attempts.  Even after tweaking and adjusting they somehow don't seem quite right.  I have managed to improve things so they are not at all bad but I am still not confident that my JTV is reproducing the HD models in the same way as others or as intended by Line6.   If I could get the flash install and the JTV verified as 100% correct then I would just have to accept that the difference is just in my own ears and make a choice accordingly but unfortunately that's not possible, and because others have complained about exactly the same thing, I wonder if there is some bug or component failure playing a part here.   Especially as pretty much all the people who have hit the problem are long time experienced Variax players.  I wish there was some way we could find out for sure.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great feedback folks...I appreciate it.

 

Real Zap....I will try as you've suggested...a virgin install on a new computer. I've got a fairly new Laptop that I can try this on that's never had any Line 6 installations.. I'll download a fresh Line 6 Monkey etc and go that route. And no..I didn't take your remarks to be mean or offensive. I do value your input.

 

Phil m: I hear what you are saying and you are correct....what sounds good to one may not to another. That is why I've asked if anyone would be willing to Rollback to 1.9 to see if they experience what I have. It may well be that one person "loves" the sound of the 2.1 Spank and finds that it represents what a Strat "should" sound like.

 

I echo Edstar1960: How do I know that something is wrong with my JTV? 

 

I will try to figure out how to post the sound clips  to the forum so you can hear what I'm talking about and you can judge for yourselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phil m: I hear what you are saying and you are correct....what sounds good to one may not to another. That is why I've asked if anyone would be willing to Rollback to 1.9 to see if they experience what I have. It may well be that one person "loves" the sound of the 2.1 Spank and finds that it represents what a Strat "should" sound like.

 

Well, I played quite a few gigs with my JTV prior to the update, so I was very familiar with what the 1.9 models were like. I didn't have any huge issues with them, though.  I was actually involved with the beta for the HD models, and I played a few shows with them prior to their being released to the public. My experience with them was that I felt they were overall just more dynamic feeling, and to me it just seemed that the whole guitar felt much more responsive and lively. Again, this wasn't just from testing it out in my basement (not that there's anything wrong with that). It was from using the guitar at gigs. So I remember last year when there was some negative reactions to the HD models, I was quite surprised. I actually remember telling one of the other testers before the release that I was excited to hear users' reaction because I thought on the whole it was such a big step above where they had been.

 

So I don't know. I kind of agree with Zap. I think that some of it has to be that the update doesn't sound the same on every guitar. Or perhaps it is preference? It's hard for me to say without hearing someone's JTV in person.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Listening to the quack demo again, I think it's very pretty much "spot on" but I CAN hear a bit of a dip in the frequencies that people like in the quack sound, but it's extremely, extremely subtle. 

 

I still agree with phil, but I also think, maybe Line 6 should have tried it's hardest to model the same guitar models as 1.9. It's obvious that there's a lot of different versions of those guitars were modeled for the HD version, some even have different pickups.

 

I don't know. Have you tried tweaking in workbench, I mean, that's one of the reasons why it's there, to tweak your guitar to your liking...

I thought the tele on my 600 could sound brighter and more further from the strat sound so I pushed the pickups towards the bridge a bit, and it was perfect.

There's no reason why you can't do something like this with your Variax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

heck no! i love the wide range tele and that's all new to v2 :)

 

i did swap the pickups on the 335 model for the less paul pickups, so i guess i wasn't 100% happy...

but the new workbench made that more pleasant than the previous version.

 

much like Phil, I was also in on the beta, and felt the dynamics and response was just way improved.

as well as the differences from 1 model to the next... some very similar sounding models in the older firmware.

 

 I also think, maybe Line 6 should have tried it's hardest to model the same guitar models as 1.9. It's obvious that there's a lot of different versions of those guitars were modeled for the HD version, some even have different pickups.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

heck no! i love the wide range tele and that's all new to v2 :)

 

i did swap the pickups on the 335 model for the less paul pickups, so i guess i wasn't 100% happy...

but the new workbench made that more pleasant than the previous version.

 

much like Phil, I was also in on the beta, and felt the dynamics and response was just way improved.

as well as the differences from 1 model to the next... some very similar sounding models in the older firmware.

 

I agree, I was talking about the other stuff though, like the Strat and 400, all the ones that are obviously supposed to be like the guitar they modeled in 2003, but was the closest option. The wide range tele is great.

 

I do know the reason though. It'd cost too much to get the same guitars as before. They obviously don't have those guitars anymore, and a lot of them if not all of them are vintage guitars that are rare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×