Posts by Monkey_Man

  • Stomps and guitars

    I still love you, if that's any indication. LOL


    Hey, I'd only half-written that post when I accidentally submitted it - you may want to read it now that I've finished. Sorry about that, bud.

  • Stomps and guitars

    Well, the Acoustic comparison isn't fair, Ingy. I thought we were talking about the (acoustic) models on the electric guitars, comparing the original Variax series with the JTVs. I tried to get that original acoustic, but due to unavailability had to settle for the Variax700 (electric) which I kept for 3 years.


    The FW on the JTVs cannot be installed on the original series, which is why I sold the Variax700. I literally left Plink City™ for, if you'll forgive the phrase, a "more realler(!)" world. Due to quality-control issues, I owned a '59, '69, original '89, back to the '69, then two FL-equipped '69s and finally back to the '69 I'd spent years "fixing". Those 6 guitars, with all the setting up and fiddling around trying to fix a lot of stuff, which included extremely long waits for parts, cost me 5 or 6 years. I settled on the '69, which I managed to set up so that it chimed like Big Ben.


    The complaints you refer to, all of which I read and which came down to personal preferences, were about changes brought about to the model tones, some of which were completely replaced as opposed to tweaked, when the FW left the 1.x realm and entered the 2.x, "HD" era. To most ears, some models sounded better, and some had lost some mojo but didn't necessarily sound bad.


    All the hoopla you referred to pertains to this change in the JTV FW only; the 2.0 FW I mentioned only arrived several years after the JTVs hit the market, and the 1.8 (I think it was) FW most had installed by then was very good; many went back to it 'cause models critical to them felt less organic with the 2.0 update. IMHO the JTV 1.x FW models were in a league well above that of the original Variax series.


    As for the 700 Acoustic vs the JTV acoustic models, I can't make a judgement as I haven't heard both. It's irrelevant to me anyway 'cause I'm super-impressed with the JTV ones. Honestly, I didn't expect them to be so very good considering that they're coming from an electric guitar. Even the string scratchiness and the way it feels on chord changes is astonishing. If you think it's crap, I strongly suggest you reassess it, just for the sake of general knowledge as I know you're already set for acoustic options. For me, of course, it's a no-brainer as I can't afford a decent acoustic guitar and had already committed to the L6 guitars.

  • [SOLVED] Allow rating Rig Exchange profiles using Rig Manager

    Thankfully, as you know, I haven't any of that sort of functionality with my installed (Mac) apps, Skoz, so I can marvel at your technological dexterity.


    Also, don't spoil that image we've all enjoyed of your sitting there counting every stat and collating it all in your brain, then plotting the charts manually from memory.


    In fact, I'm convinced this is what you do. :D

  • Kemper is fine but sorry, I can't stand G string... really... enough.

    Of course, Don.


    On my budget, with no transport, and for "in a pinch" use on crappy gear (you should see my bike; it's held together by cobwebs), it works, as would olive oil or even lard. Rancidity doesn't matter when everything's rusted anyway.


    To be clear, I wasn't recommending the practise; I was responding to Tim's ChapStick question.


    I agree that you can't go wrong with graphite. BB Nut Sauce seems like a no-brainer too.

  • I just can't seem to leave this song alone (Dire Straits content)

    If you ask him nicely, he may be able to supply, for a small fee of course, charts detailing every significant trend in your life going back as far as you can afford; it's up to you how deep you wanna go - for Skoczy there is no limit! :D


    If you don't get this, Rob, keep reading the forum and it'll come to you. If not Skoczy could provide a detailed log of all relevant posts, their "like" rates, timeline clustering and so on. Well, if anyone could, it'd be our Skoz.


    On top of this prodigious talent, he's a champion non-verber too. Confused? I think you know the answer - ask Skoczy for all relevant charts.

  • Bogren Digital Contest

    Still haven't had a chance to analyse the video, Sticky.


    Your explanation confused me further 'cause as soon as I hear anything about music theory my brain switches off... or scrambles, or something.


    This weekend I'll get the magnifying glass out and have a look. :D

  • The other camp - Axe-Fx II Quantum 2.00 Public Beta Deux

    Damn! I haven't even watched the clip but that bass line popped straight into my head (bass-playing background) when I saw the title, and now I'm supposed to go to bed? And sleep? Cripes!


    Quote from Gandalf_The_Blond

    Because this is very hard to do. Static no load values do not relate to whats going on. By measuring you can be altering something. Temperature will change values. Having a complex signal going thru a system designed to copy, make it louder, and unique will change component values in real time. This is where any serious component modelling would start. Factor in current eddies etc. it gets complicated fast. Certainly possible, but all of these factors would need a lot more code and processing to cover it properly. Using ears and guesstimating cuts down on this a lot. I think i remember some discussion here about it being difficult or impossible to get separate values for the interaction between an amp and a speaker, and those can be viewed as only 2 components.


    Thank you for commenting, Gandalf.


    I seem to recall years ago several companies' claims of having modelled all components. L6 for amps, Korg for synths and many others. I was therefore questioning why Cliff chose to guess values previously and only now decided to address the "difficult" work of actually measuring them. If he can now, why couldn't he before?


    You can see where I'm coming from, yeah? If you're going to put out the most expensive modeller ever, with the most processing power ever and purport to employ component modelling, why would you be lazy about it and not tackle the "hard stuff", especially when others have done so?


    The question is rhetorical, of course, and I don't expect an answer as only Cliff would know. I'm so over these FAS vs Kemper debates now and have surely had quite enough. I'll continue to monitor the threads for the entertainment value they provide and may well succumb to being seduced into responding once in a while, but I'm going to make a concerted effort to avoid getting too deeply into defending the Kemper.


    I trust my ears - I have to as I'm staking my livelihood on it, and I've no doubt as to who offers the best "digital" tube-amp sounds. Every time I got sucked into one of those debates I felt deflated before I even began typing as I knew I'd be flogging a dead horse. I mean, if I can hear aunty-titty-city (and feel it) with my Kemper, why should I try to convince anyone of it? Sure, I can state the fact that this is the case, but the rest is up to whomever is concerned. It's like trying to help folks who don't want to be helped. I spent 27 years trying to help extremely hopeless alcohol and drug cases, where all others had given up, in order to learn the "can't help others unless they want to help themselves" lesson. Interestingly, if my final project hadn't have died, I'd probably still be the sucker bobbing in his wake trying to correct all the damage left behind... and lending money... and wasting hours every day pontificating... and being abused.


    It seems my past has had an influence on my anti-titty-tube to this FAS vs Kemper thing, having sensitised me to the extent that I feel deflated more or less instantly when I feel I'm wasting my breath. This is surely progress for someone who once was perfectly happy to piss into the wind for years on end!


    I'm just over it Big Brother G. Hope you're well mate and thank you for listening (poor sod!).

  • Dear God - I hope it gets better than this!

    Quote from OhG

    There are some profiles out there (including some that are factory installed) that make me think Helen Keller created them.


    Those Keller profiles are Killer, mate.


    Down here in Jungleville I use her DeafTones Series™ packs for free old-age-home gigs. If they're not gonna pay, neither am I.


    Then there's busking. I'm not gonna waste Bert or Guido on a bunch of tone-deaf baboons... again, for free.


    The DeafTones Series™ packs are just the ticker for the aged, and just the ticket when you know the audience isn't going to appreciate your prodigious talent. :D


    Anyway, it's back to the organ grinder for me; I've gotta get some practice in...

  • Stomps and guitars

    We'll have to disagree, Ingolf, which TBH isn't something I feel comfortable with 'cause I think you're such a nice guy!


    IMHO the guitar models are in a different league altogether. Not quite chalk and cheese, but close.


    The acoustic models are so radically better my dead grandmother could hear the difference... from her grave... whilst I play 3 blocks away... underwater... wearing leather gloves... using a feather pick... whilst taking a nap...


    Quote from paults

    @Monkey_Man How is the dynamic response of these newer Variaxes? My 500 always felt very compressed to me.


    I can't say how much of this was due to the models themselves, Paul, but whether it's the improved resolution of the newer models (which are new, not just updated), more sensitive piezos or their mounting / positioning, to me it (the dynamic range) is clearly better.


    As of FW 2.0 L6 called them HD models, if that means anything. It may imply greater dynamic-range and amplitude resolution, as well as a frequency-bandwidth improvement.