Left-handed Variax
Adrian Clark
educational value. Smile politely until told otherwise.
I'm currently borrowing a new left-handed Variax from Line 6. It's the
original type (in this case, black with pearloid scratchplate) rather
than the new 700 model. A few thoughts follow (which are mostly relevant
to right-handed people too)...
1. Considering that this is (whether you like it or not) one of the most
important developments in guitar history, it's pretty amazing that
there's a left-handed model. L/H Parker Fly or Ibanez Jem, anyone?
2. Even more amazing is that there's only been a year's delay between
the launches of the right- and left-handed models. It took Paul Reed
Smith over 10 years to relax his "you never see a left-handed grand
piano" attitude.
3. The guitar itself is well made and finished, notwithstanding the
vagaries of personal taste. Beautifully balanced, both sitting and
standing. The neck has quite a fat 'vintage' feel, but not overly
clubby, while the fretboard is flattish, but not as much so as Ibanez's
Wizard I, for example. Even though I love my RG550 (with Wizard I) I'm
not averse to chubbier necks. Most importantly, the neck is
unfinished... this is a Very Good Thing.
Frets are slightly wider than standard Fenders; I'd prefer them wider
still (Fender necks make me play in a particular way; on a versatile
guitar, I want to feel versatile) but they're well finished, so the neck
feels fast and comfortable. Fret edges have a "new" feel, but not so far
as to feel sharp.
(Also, I've just got in from the shops and haven't switched any gear on
yet. I'm sitting here, noodling acoustically on the thing... that tells
you a lot about the guitar's quality)
4. Sensible control layout. I'd like the volume a tad closer to the
strings (and a looser pot would be nice) but it's not inconvenient.
5. I *really* like the set of sounds on here. The only major omission, I
feel, is the lack of something from the "superstrat" family. The RG/Jem
design (basswood body, HSH with high-output Dimarzios and the Ibanez
5-position wiring) is iconic enough to justify inclusion in the Variax's
palette, I think.
Still, the rest of the sounds are excellent. Are they accurate
recreations? Who knows... who cares? They sound good, and I'm more
impressed with the Variax going into my amp than I have been with my
guitar going into any of the Pod products.
This has made me think that maybe digital modelling works better the
earlier it is in your signal chain. I always preferred to plug my amp
modellers (particularly the GP100, back when I used it) into a Joe Meek
box before recording it; the models seemed to need that extra bit of
'dirtying up'. Here, though, you have the whole preamp/poweramp/speaker
chain coming after the digital clever bit, and I'm impressed.
6. The only general reservation I have is this... a large part of any
guitar's sound comes from the player's own response to how the guitar
feels in his/her hands and how it sounds to his/her ears. Here, the
sound element is still true, but whatever you hear, your responses are
tempered by the fact it's always a Variax in your hands. The Gibson J200
and National Tri-Cone sounds are lovely, but the 10-gauge strings make
me play in ways I'd never be able to play on those guitars for real
(where I'd prefer the feel and resonance of 13s).
However, it only takes a slight shift in thinking to see the above as an
advantage. I can switch to a Strat sound and play licks that might feel
incredibly uncomfortable on my Strat. Likewise for an acoustic.
7. Miscellaneous musings... they made a Bass Pod; I wonder if they'll do
a Varibass? They ought to have a way of reversing the angle of the Strat
model's bridge pickup, so you could get the Hendrix-style 'upside-down
Strat' sound. The lack of pickups means that the top looks naked,
despite the fetching scratchplate. The lack of tremolo initially seemed
a bit odd, but then I realised that almost all of the models are based
on non-trem guitars. If they ever included an RG/Jem model, this policy
would need to be reassessed.
Adrian
--
___________________________________
http://www.spaghetti-factory.co.uk
Steve Dix
wrote:
>A brief idle moment between jobs, so I've decided to post something of
>educational value. Smile politely until told otherwise.
>
>I'm currently borrowing a new left-handed Variax from Line 6. It's the
>original type (in this case, black with pearloid scratchplate) rather
>than the new 700 model. A few thoughts follow (which are mostly relevant
>to right-handed people too)...
>
Will this shiny toy be coming to Wigan with you?
Please?
--
http://www.mp3.com/simpletons http://www.mp3.com.au/TheSinistrals/
http://www.snorty.net/ http://www.stevedix.de/
UKMG/(B)R[6x-]!M!S(J)(F) E8?1A3?2B2K2?1 GAS+ C= P= G= B+ R+/= M+ S++(--) r-(--)
Jonathan J Quick
news:1g4dc4s.9z2g401i6t5asN%sfo...@hotmail.com...
>
> 1. Considering that this is (whether you like it or not) one of the most
> important developments in guitar history
I think this is an astoundingly inaccurate statement. The Variax does
nothing that the Roland VG8 series hasn't been doing for ages. The only
difference is that with the Variax the electronics are integrated rather
than being a (somewhat clumsy) bolt-on with an external processor. The
Variax isn't doing anything new, it's just an improvement of existing
technology. Are you on the Line 6 payroll or something?
JJ
Email: jj at jjquick dot com
Home: www.jjquick.com
Adrian Clark
> I think this is an astoundingly inaccurate statement. The Variax does
> nothing that the Roland VG8 series hasn't been doing for ages.
Ah, but I said "guitar history", not "amp/multi-effects history".
> The
> Variax isn't doing anything new, it's just an improvement of existing
> technology.
True, but then you could say the same about the Parker Fly or Fender
Telecaster. Or indeed, the VG8, which was only applying technology
already available in the synth market.
> Are you on the Line 6 payroll or something?
No... I just like this guitar. By the same token, I'm not on the Ibanez,
Apple, Cornford, FMR Audio or Zappa Family Trust payrolls... ;)
Adrian Clark
> Will this shiny toy be coming to Wigan with you?
Unfortunately not... pressures of having agreed to do too many things by
dates too close for comfort means I won't be able to make it up there
this year.
adrian
Jonathan J Quick
>
> > I think this is an astoundingly inaccurate statement. The Variax does
> > nothing that the Roland VG8 series hasn't been doing for ages.
>
> Ah, but I said "guitar history", not "amp/multi-effects history".
The VG8 also has guitar modelling, and was the first unit to do so (as far
as I know). The Variax has just re-packaged the idea. Convenient of you to
forget the VG8's guitar/pickup modelling section btw :-)
> > The
> > Variax isn't doing anything new, it's just an improvement of existing
> > technology.
> True, but then you could say the same about the Parker Fly or Fender
> Telecaster. Or indeed, the VG8, which was only applying technology
> already available in the synth market.
The Parker Fly is just a slightly different shape of electric guitar - the
Telecaster was something very new at the time. Are you suffering from some
kind of temporal confusion? Anyway generally development is a gradual
process, but you appear to be presenting the Variax as some kind of new or
revolutionary concept. It isn't. It's an old idea done better.
James Screaton
> as I know). The Variax has just re-packaged the idea. Convenient of you to
> forget the VG8's guitar/pickup modelling section btw :-)
>
the Variax, and sometimes innovation is not *what* but *how*.
The printing press didn't do anything new, but it did it more consistently,
quicker etc
However, I have no experience with either the VG8 or Variax, nor any real
need to want one, so I'll shut up now :)
Cheers
James
Jonathan J Quick
news:bp0crl$jur$1...@hermes.shef.ac.uk...
>
> Does the VG8 model as many different guitars? Its certainly much bigger
than
> the Variax, and sometimes innovation is not *what* but *how*.
> The printing press didn't do anything new, but it did it more
consistently,
> quicker etc
> However, I have no experience with either the VG8 or Variax, nor any real
> need to want one, so I'll shut up now :)
The VG8/88's guitar modelling is really excellent imho - you can create
virtual guitars with a whole variety of pickup types and placings. The
Variax is probably less versatile in terms of configurability, but then you
don't have to stick an extra pickup on it to get the guitar models. The
downside of the VG8 was always the need for an additional pickup, plus the
relatively high cost. Roland didn't really do themselves any great favours
with the marketing either... they should have unbundled the guitar modelling
section way before the Variax came out. I'm just wondering if the VG8 was
the first amp modelling unit as well btw? It's certainly been available for
much longer than anything by Line 6 has existed...
David Morton
sfo...@hotmail.com (Adrian Clark) wrote:
> 1. Considering that this is (whether you like it or not) one of the most
> important developments in guitar history
It's a repackaging job. It does nothing more (indeed it does rather less)
than the Roland VG8 did at its launch in 1996.
David Morton
(James Screaton) wrote:
> Does the VG8 model as many different guitars?
It (and the current VG88) lets you create your own! And it does guitar
models *and* amp models *and* effects...as well as different tunings.
David Morton
> The VG8/88's guitar modelling is really excellent imho - you can create
> virtual guitars with a whole variety of pickup types and placings. The
> Variax is probably less versatile in terms of configurability, but then
> you
> don't have to stick an extra pickup on it to get the guitar models.
Please Sir, Please Sir, look at this Godin Sir! No GK2 stuck on the front
of this.
Adrian Clark
> It's a repackaging job. It does nothing more (indeed it does rather less)
> than the Roland VG8 did at its launch in 1996.
Well, it does it differently. And I'm getting considerably more pleasure
from the Variax than I did from the pickup modelling features on the
VG8, which disappointed me (although the rest of that unit certainly
didn't). I agree with James - innovation isn't just the "what"; it's
often the "how".
Odd to see people defending the VG8, though; back in 95, I met with
nothing but sceptical resistance when I tried to tell people how
wonderful it was. Of course, the initial 2 grand price tag may have been
a reason for that!
David Morton
sfo...@hotmail.com (Adrian Clark) wrote:
> Well, it does it differently. And I'm getting considerably more pleasure
> from the Variax than I did from the pickup modelling features on the
> VG8, which disappointed me (although the rest of that unit certainly
> didn't). I agree with James - innovation isn't just the "what"; it's
> often the "how".
I have no problem with you preferring whichever floats your boat. What I
find very VERY odd, in many of the Variax threads here and elsewhere, is
the historical revisionism.
Posts that seek to make Roland's VG series an 'un-product': Line6 invented
guitar modelling, and are the greatest innovators of the age, and anyone
who doesn't agree is a luddite.
> Odd to see people defending the VG8, though; back in 95, I met with
> nothing but sceptical resistance when I tried to tell people how
> wonderful it was. Of course, the initial 2 grand price tag may have been
> a reason for that!
A VG88 with V2 software and a GK2A is £699 from GAK.
Adrian Clark
> Posts that seek to make Roland's VG series an 'un-product': Line6 invented
> guitar modelling, and are the greatest innovators of the age, and anyone
> who doesn't agree is a luddite.
I hope my post didn't give that impression; after all, I used a Roland
GP100 *daily* during 1996-2001, and still rate the COSM models highly.
As you say, though, there's a lot of hype and user reactions out there
that lack historical awareness.
Bob Sherunckle
"David Morton" <dmo...@well.com> wrote in message
news:memo.2003111...@feynman.morton.org.uk...
Or the Roland Ready Strat - like wot mines is. The VGA3 amp does some VG8
stuff as well.
Justin Otto
> The VG8/88's guitar modelling is really excellent imho
That, as far as I can see it, is the crux of this thread, surely?
You, David and Bob prefer the Roland device, and all Adrian has done is
say that he likes the Line 6 one.
Without wishing to concern you but you guys are starting to sound
worryingly fanatical about this. Sorry, but that's the way it's reading,
right now.
Pay your money, take your choice.
Roland = seems more flexible.
Line 6 = seems simpler.
How's that? :-)
J.
Bob Sherunckle
"Justin Otto" <justi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2003.11.13....@hotmail.com...
I don't own any of them. As a matter of fact, I possibly never will. At the
end of the day I use out of phase strat, bridge p/up strat, synth only and
synth mixed with out of phase. That's all I use just now. Could do with
amplified acoustic sound sometimes and just this evening I've discovered
that my preferred luthier will fit a Fishman powerbridge to the strat.
That'll be me fixed for all I need. Job Done.
Julian @ home
> A brief idle moment between jobs, so I've decided to post something of
> educational value. Smile politely until told otherwise.
>
> I'm currently borrowing a new left-handed Variax from Line 6. It's the
> original type (in this case, black with pearloid scratchplate) rather
> than the new 700 model. A few thoughts follow (which are mostly relevant
> to right-handed people too)...
>
Adrian - in your usual way, you have put the words together that I tried to
convey last week during my Variax Diary.
I am sure that the roland setup is good - but the instant accesability of
the Variax is it's obvious selling point. The idea of having to retro fit a
pickup etc. to another guitar simply does not appeal. I know I can buy a
roland ready strat, but for some reason this just doesn't appeal. Why is
this? I don't know. A RR Strat is about the same cost (IIRC) as a variax, so
discount price. It must be, as has been discussed on this thread, timing.
The roland setup may simply have been ahead of it's time.
Also, my impression (having never really investigated) of the roland is that
even by 'labelling' itself as a synth, it sounds overly complex. I loved the
idea of one rotary switch plus 5-way blade giving all the options. I don't
know how the Roland functions, but I have the impression it is more complex.
I had a variax, plugged it into the footswitch, plugged that into my amp.
Simple as that.
Variax fan? You bet. Should I investigate the Roland gear? You tell me.
Cheers
J
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.538 / Virus Database: 333 - Release Date: 10/11/2003
Jonathan J Quick
> say that he likes the Line 6 one.
> Without wishing to concern you but you guys are starting to sound
> worryingly fanatical about this. Sorry, but that's the way it's reading,
> right now.
> Pay your money, take your choice.
> Roland = seems more flexible.
> Line 6 = seems simpler.
> How's that? :-)
Not good enough! The point is not who is best, but who was *first*. Line 6
seem to be viewed by many as the inventors of amp modelling, and now with
the Variax inventors of guitar/pickup modelling, when in fact they invented
neither, just furthered other people's concepts. A fairly typical case of
credit-stealing... I don't suppose by any chance Line 6 are an American
company? Adrian's original post held the Variax up as "one of the most
important developments in guitar history", which I think is a false claim as
it doesn't offer anything new whatsoever.
Adrian Clark
> Adrian's original post held the Variax up as "one of the most
> important developments in guitar history",
Which I think it is. Note *one of*, not *the*.
Adrian Clark
> Adrian - in your usual way, you have put the words together that I tried to
> convey last week during my Variax Diary.
Which I've now read. I should pay attention more...
> Variax fan? You bet. Should I investigate the Roland gear? You tell me.
I'll always advise people to try the Roland/Boss alternative to
*anything*, because it always sounds good, even if the relative
complexity might put you off in the end.
Five by Five
"Adrian Clark" <sfo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1g4dc4s.9z2g401i6t5asN%sfo...@hotmail.com...
> 1. Considering that this is (whether you like it or not) one of the most
> important developments in guitar history, it's pretty amazing that
> there's a left-handed model. L/H Parker Fly or Ibanez Jem, anyone?
>
> 2. Even more amazing is that there's only been a year's delay between
> the launches of the right- and left-handed models. It took Paul Reed
> Smith over 10 years to relax his "you never see a left-handed grand
> piano" attitude.
>
Hear bloody hear, big cheers to Line 6 for having the balls to do this.
jk
Five by Five
> guitar modelling, and are the greatest innovators of the age, and anyone
> who doesn't agree is a luddite.
>
Whereas of course anyone daring to say that maybe the Variax is not bad
invariably gets a 15+ long thread (like this one) telling them how wrong
they must be?
jk
Julian @ home
> Julian @ home <jm...@sol.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Adrian - in your usual way, you have put the words together that I tried
to
> > convey last week during my Variax Diary.
>
> Which I've now read. I should pay attention more...
Slapped wrists - but pretty much the same conclusion.
I started out *knowing* that this thing was a complete gimmick, and a waste
of money. I now want one.
> > Variax fan? You bet. Should I investigate the Roland gear? You tell me.
>
> I'll always advise people to try the Roland/Boss alternative to
> *anything*, because it always sounds good, even if the relative
> complexity might put you off in the end.
>
That's my experience with the various footpedal type modellers I've tried.
Had a GT3 (?) for a while, and gave up eventually. Too complex!
Steve White
>Not good enough! The point is not who is best, but who was *first*.
That's one point, another is who is "furthering the ideas". I doubt very
much you could call it stealing. None of these companies is so dumb they
wouldn't patent or copyright any genuinely *new* ideas. Problem is that the
modeling process almost certainly boils down to applying the same principles
to guitar sounds as someone else did before hand, to some or other
waveforms. That doesn't mean the people furthering the ideas, and building
upon them, deserve less credit.
That's my 2 peneth anyway.
Steve W
icarusi
> Posts that seek to make Roland's VG series an 'un-product': Line6 invented
> guitar modelling, and are the greatest innovators of the age, and anyone
> who doesn't agree is a luddite.
I wonder how the Roland and Line 6 patents stack up against each other, or
if Line 6 have licensed anything from Roland?
Icarusi
--
remove the 00 to reply
Jonathan J Quick
>
> > Adrian's original post held the Variax up as "one of the most
> > important developments in guitar history",
>
> Which I think it is. Note *one of*, not *the*.
Well it's about as much as a "development" as a tunamatic is from a floating
bridge... an existing concept, redesigned. I have to say I'm still astounded
that Roland didn't do the Variax idea yonks ago, I think that company's
marketing department really needs a kick in the pants. What was all that
crap about the VG8... "the music industry's best kept secret", I mean why
keep something a secret if you want to sell it? Insane...
Adrian Clark
> I have to say I'm still astounded
> that Roland didn't do the Variax idea yonks ago, I think that company's
> marketing department really needs a kick in the pants.
Mmm... it's bizarre. And when you think how long it took them to apply
the GK2A idea anywhere else... I don't think those pedals did all that
well, but even so, they must have appeared four years after the VG8. And
I still can't understand why they didn't follow up the GP100 when they
brought out the other updated COSM stuff (GT6, ME33 etc). The G-Major
didn't have a direct rival!
Jeremy at work
For God's sake does it REALLY matter? If no-one had ever "credit
stolen" by building what had gone before, we wouldn't HAVE the
electric guitars we play today!
You seem determined to defend the VG88 very vigorously - are you sure
you're not on the Roland payroll?
jk
Jonathan J Quick
news:a602c475.0311...@posting.google.com...
>
> For God's sake does it REALLY matter? If no-one had ever "credit
> stolen" by building what had gone before, we wouldn't HAVE the
> electric guitars we play today!
Huh? Can you perhaps expand on that ludicrous statement?
> You seem determined to defend the VG88 very vigorously - are you sure
> you're not on the Roland payroll?
You seem to be trolling - are you sure you're not just arguing for
argument's sake? I'm defending creativity, and opposing credit-stealing. I
don't care who the actual companies are.
Five by Five
> "Jeremy at work" <fiveb...@firenet.uk.com> wrote in message
> news:a602c475.0311...@posting.google.com...
> >
> > For God's sake does it REALLY matter? If no-one had ever "credit
> > stolen" by building what had gone before, we wouldn't HAVE the
> > electric guitars we play today!
>
> Huh? Can you perhaps expand on that ludicrous statement?
>
Ok, expansion:
Many (or indeed most) guitar historians regard the Rickenbacker 'Frying Pan'
to be the first electric guitar.
Played much on yours lately JJ? Or do you by any chance play some other
guitar, which was subsequently developed by some "credit stealer" from the
principles established in the frying pan?
Similarly, the Fender Broadcaster is considered the beginning of the
'modern' electric. Got one of those JJ?
The guitars we play today are built on the fundamentals established by the
pioneers. Hence my original "ludicrous" statement.
> > You seem determined to defend the VG88 very vigorously - are you sure
> > you're not on the Roland payroll?
>
> You seem to be trolling - are you sure you're not just arguing for
> argument's sake? I'm defending creativity, and opposing credit-stealing. I
> don't care who the actual companies are.
>
Hmmm, so when an allegation you're quite happy to hurl at Adrian comes back
at you, suddenly it's trolling?
jk
Jonathan J Quick
news:Sebtb.8405$lm1....@wards.force9.net...
>
> Many (or indeed most) guitar historians regard the Rickenbacker 'Frying
Pan'
> to be the first electric guitar.
Gosh, I really must remember that George Beauchamp didn't invent the
electric-pickup-equipped *Hawaiian* guitar, and that the first solid-body
electric guitar that wasn't a lap steel was actually designed by Les Paul.
No idea who that guy Lloyd Loar was...
> Played much on yours lately JJ?
My Les Paul? Yes.
> Or do you by any chance play some other
> guitar, which was subsequently developed by some "credit stealer" from the
> principles established in the frying pan?
Now you're just being silly - subsequent electric guitars from the Les
Paul/whatever onwards have not been presented as having invented the
concept. What we have in Line 6 is a company that many mistakenly think have
*invented* guitar modelling with the release of the Variax, when in fact
they haven't, they've just reworked existing technology built from other
people's ideas. Many people also seem to think they invented amp modelling,
and they most certainly didn't do that either. The fact that they've
arguably done both types of modelling better than anyone else is irrelevant.
> Similarly, the Fender Broadcaster is considered the beginning of the
> 'modern' electric. Got one of those JJ?
Nope, but were I to get myself a Telecaster it'd pretty much the same as the
Broadcaster all those years ago... although anyone who thinks the
broadcaster was the beginning of anything except mass production of electric
guitars needs a history lesson. Just like Ford didn't invent the automobile,
Fender didn't invent the electric guitar.
> The guitars we play today are built on the fundamentals established by the
> pioneers. Hence my original "ludicrous" statement.
Actually your answer is even more ludicrous than the original statement...
why do you think I need to own something to acknowledge its existence and
seminality?
> Hmmm, so when an allegation you're quite happy to hurl at Adrian comes
back
> at you, suddenly it's trolling?
Adrian described the Variax as one of the most important developments in
guitar history, I pointed out that it wasn't. What really pisses me off is
that Line 6's own advertising for the Variax presents it as revolutionary,
which is nothing less than a marketing scam... in fact I think there may
even be one completely false claim in their Variax overview...
Andy Bettis
In article <bp3lt7$1i8gf2$1...@ID-76383.news.uni-berlin.de>,
"Jonathan J Quick" <ne...@takisunchis.com> wrote:
> [snip]
>
> Adrian described the Variax as one of the most important developments in
> guitar history, I pointed out that it wasn't.
Perhaps not one of the most important developments in guitar
_technology_ but if lots of people buy and use a Variax this might
perhaps make it more 'important' than the Roland systems that, despite
their obvious merits, have not tempted a large number of guitarists.
Looking at synths (which seems appropriate here), the models that caught
on tended to be the ones with a usable interface rather than a
completely new paradigm. I would argue that the Mini Moog was far more
revolutionary than the big modular jobbies for exactly this reason.
> What really pisses me off is
> that Line 6's own advertising for the Variax presents it as revolutionary,
> which is nothing less than a marketing scam... in fact I think there may
> even be one completely false claim in their Variax overview...
It seems to me that most 'revolutionary' products have precursors that
for some reason didn't catch on, and for a revolution you do need the
active involvement of the proletariat.
Comrade Andy
George Weston
> "Five by Five" <jkn...@NOSPAM5x5.org.uk> wrote in message
> news:Sebtb.8405$lm1....@wards.force9.net...
> Adrian described the Variax as one of the most important developments in
> guitar history, I pointed out that it wasn't. What really pisses me off is
> that Line 6's own advertising for the Variax presents it as revolutionary,
> which is nothing less than a marketing scam... in fact I think there may
> even be one completely false claim in their Variax overview...
>
> JJ
To quote from one of Adrian's earlier posts:
> Variax isn't doing anything new, it's just an improvement of existing
> technology.
So what's the argument?
George
adrianfoden
> Many (or indeed most) guitar historians regard the Rickenbacker 'Frying
Pan'
> to be the first electric guitar.
mmmmm 'Frying Pan'
:)
Bob Sherunckle
> Adrian described the Variax as one of the most important developments in
> guitar history, I pointed out that it wasn't. What really pisses me off is
> that Line 6's own advertising for the Variax presents it as revolutionary,
> which is nothing less than a marketing scam... in fact I think there may
> even be one completely false claim in their Variax overview...
>
> JJ
To paraphrase - from above - "Adrian described the Variax as one of the most
important *developments* in guitar history"
Surely the single most important word in the above statement is
"development" ? Not invention or "the first modelling guitar system in the
world ever". It's a development of an idea originally implemented by Roland
using a stick on ( or occasionaly built in ) pickup.
As the owner of a factory fitted integral GK2A equipped Roland Ready Strat,
guitar modelling is a concept I am more than a little interested in.
Personally I think there are three possible outcomes from this point in the
timeline of guitar modeeling "developments". Either the whole concept dies
on it's feet or there will be a VHS / betamax war between the two standards.
Now obviously, I think that the non integral nature of the roland system
makes it more flexible and ulimately more desirable. Conversely, The Variax
approach being self contained is muh more usable and IMHO more likely to
sustain and possibly increase it's foothold in the market. I see the Roland
approach as Betamax - technically superior and much appreciated by
afficionados of the whole concept but ultimately unlikely to be anything
other than minority. The Variax is VHS - easy to use, more aggresively
marketed and, well the only one to have because all your mates have got one.
(sortova, if you know what I mean ).
Gary Wright
>
> Adrian described the Variax as one of the most important developments in
> guitar history, I pointed out that it wasn't. What really pisses me off is
> that Line 6's own advertising for the Variax presents it as revolutionary,
> which is nothing less than a marketing scam... in fact I think there may
> even be one completely false claim in their Variax overview...
I think what L6 are claiming is revolutionary is that no other product has
actually modelled 20+ electrics and several acoustic products actually
*within* the guitar. If you stick 6 AA batteries in it, you can plug it in
to any amp you like and it will do its stuff. You can change pickup
selection with the pickup selector on the guitar. The tone control on the
guitar works relative to the model. The Roland stuff does all the
processing in an external box. And rather a chunky one at that. Change the
pickup position on your guitar on a GK2 equipped electric and it does
nothing for the modelling. Nor does the tone control. L6 are claiming it's
the 'first digital modelling *guitar*'. NOT the 'first digital modelling
*system*'. Big difference.
Under this description, the title of 'first digital modelling guitar' is
true. You can fit the GK2 onto your Les Paul, but that doesn't technically
make your LP a modelling guitar. And if we're splitting hairs here (which
seems to be the case) then you cannot say that L6's claims are false; I
don't know of a prior product that processes 6 individual strings to model
different guitars *within the instrument*. And no, I don't count the Casio
stuff from the 80's, as that was converting pitch to midi.
I've been reading reviews by Adrian for several years now. I've always
found them fair, though I don't always agree with his opinions. IMO, he
seems to favour COSM modelling to the stuff that L6 do. Having owned two
Roland products that had amp models in them (GT-3, BR-8) and two L6 products
(Pod Pro, Pod XT), I personally think that the L6 stuff wins hands down.
But that's my ears. Yours and Adrians will obviously be different, and
we're all perfectly correct. To accuse him of being on the L6 payroll for
enthusing about a product and claiming it to be important is a bit strong.
I can plug my Variax straight into the PA and get convincing acoustic tones
followed by a resonator. All without anything parked on the floor. Tell me
another current product that can do that or accept the 'first digital
modelling guitar' label to be true. Because it is.
Personally, I don't care if it's the first or the last. Bang for the buck,
it is currently the best IMO, and that's why I bought it. I tried a VG88
and didn't much like it. It had that Roland sound which you either like or
don't. The L6 stuff also has a particular sound to it that you will either
like or not. I just happen to prefer the latter.
Gary
icarusi
news:bp18ta$1jgn1b$1...@ID-76383.news.uni-berlin.de...
> Well it's about as much as a "development" as a tunamatic is from a
floating
> bridge... an existing concept, redesigned. I have to say I'm still
astounded
> that Roland didn't do the Variax idea yonks ago, I think that company's
> marketing department really needs a kick in the pants. What was all that
> crap about the VG8... "the music industry's best kept secret", I mean why
> keep something a secret if you want to sell it? Insane...
I don't think they could, until recently. The Variax has relatively
*massive* DSP horsepower compared to the VGs, and will work off AA cells.
Roland could never get their kit small enough or efficent enough to mount
independently inside a guitar, but they could now if they wanted to. I'm not
sure how they'd manage the control layout/implementation though? Not one of
Roland's strong points.
Jonathan J Quick
news:%OStb.9252$lm1....@wards.force9.net...
>
> I don't think they could, until recently. The Variax has relatively
> *massive* DSP horsepower compared to the VGs, and will work off AA cells.
> Roland could never get their kit small enough or efficent enough to mount
> independently inside a guitar, but they could now if they wanted to.
I'm sure they always could have, the problem always was they wouldn't
unbundle the VG8's facilities... I bet they could have produced a pickup
with guitar modelling built in if they'd actually bothered to. Hey now
there's a thought... a bridge humbucker or s/c with a neat little pcb
that'll fit in your control cavity and give you add-on guitar modelling
without the need to abandon your favourite instruments. Let's just see who
is first to release it :-)
> I'm not
> sure how they'd manage the control layout/implementation though? Not one
of
> Roland's strong points.
To Roland "ergonomics" is just a word in the dictionary, and one they've yet
to look up at that...