"Tube amps are inherently better sounding than any sort of digital modeling."
I haven't thought this was the case ever since I learned just how much processing goes into a guitar track to tweak it before it sits in it's final place in a mix. In the context of a studio situation with a knowledgeable engineer, you will almost never hear the same tone the guitarist hears as he/she's recording. It is always tweaked to the point that the source of the original tone doesn't matter that much anymore (this assumes quality equipment all around, of course). that engineer will make that tone fit the song, as well they should. For my recordings, I am trying to de-mystify this dark art.
The Axe FX just couldn't sound as good as the 5150 in person. But if you're micing the amp rather than direct in, you're stuck with that base. Whereas it's easier to re-mold the digital sound into whatever you want it to be.
Perhaps I should qualify this: As great as those amps are, I am not ever trying to replicate a 5150 or any other "real world" amp. That's just not my goal. I only want my noise to sound great, and I can more readily dial in something suitable from an all-in-one solution (time, cost, convenience, etc.). I'm sure that there are subtle differences from a Kemper to the real deal JCM it's emulating. The silliness (to me) lies in all of the intense arguing about it all, especially since the orginal tone being emulated goes through the "studio filter" before it hits your ears anyway. Trying to match an amp to an artist's tone, then vehemently arguing your position just seems silly to me if you're not tweaking to be part of a recording.
Sounds good = is good.
Why dick around trying to capture Eddie's tone? I'll never sound like him (or anyone else but me).
"Tube amps are inherently better sounding than any sort of digital modeling."
I haven't thought this was the case ever since I learned just how much processing goes into a guitar track to tweak it before it sits in it's final place in a mix. In the context of a studio situation with a knowledgeable engineer, you will almost never hear the same tone the guitarist hears as he/she's recording. It is always tweaked to the point that the source of the original tone doesn't matter that much anymore (this assumes quality equipment all around, of course). that engineer will make that tone fit the song, as well they should. For my recordings, I am trying to de-mystify this dark art.
The Axe FX just couldn't sound as good as the 5150 in person. But if you're micing the amp rather than direct in, you're stuck with that base. Whereas it's easier to re-mold the digital sound into whatever you want it to be.
Perhaps I should qualify this: As great as those amps are, I am not ever trying to replicate a 5150 or any other "real world" amp. That's just not my goal. I only want my noise to sound great, and I can more readily dial in something suitable from an all-in-one solution (time, cost, convenience, etc.). I'm sure that there are subtle differences from a Kemper to the real deal JCM it's emulating. The silliness (to me) lies in all of the intense arguing about it all, especially since the orginal tone being emulated goes through the "studio filter" before it hits your ears anyway. Trying to match an amp to an artist's tone, then vehemently arguing your position just seems silly to me if you're not tweaking to be part of a recording.
Sounds good = is good.
Why dick around trying to capture Eddie's tone? I'll never sound like him (or anyone else but me).
I wasn't aware people spent time arguing, except on the internet. LOL
PS - why do -I- go for a particular sound? Because it makes playing fun, enjoyable, worth doing.
If playing guitar isn't fun, enjoyable, or worth doing, then I don't want to do it.
Most people can't hear the difference between two different types of woods used in a solid body electric guitar (e.g., Alder vs Basswood). I doubt I'm the only one to believe this and I think it's hard to prove for/against as there are so many variables to control for.
[mention]tonebender[/mention] I remember BB King talking about T-bone Walker and how he wanted to sound like him. He studied and studied and practiced a lot. He figured out he'd never play like him so he would play like BB.
fatjack wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 10:26 am
@tonebender I remember BB King talking about T-bone Walker and how he wanted to sound like him. He studied and studied and practiced a lot. He figured out he'd never play like him so he would play like BB.
I've heard at least a few great players talking about being able to sound like someone else but realizing they needed to put their own signature spin on the sound. There's a great Hot Licks video tutorial with buddy guy where he plays licks that he picked up while learning the blues. Every single one is from a different artist. And I recall him talking about how he put his own spin on it. I swear I've heard Mayer talk about such things as well. And he can really do a good job of mimicking other players when he wants to.
fatjack wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 10:26 am
@tonebender I remember BB King talking about T-bone Walker and how he wanted to sound like him. He studied and studied and practiced a lot. He figured out he'd never play like him so he would play like BB.
I've heard at least a few great players talking about being able to sound like someone else but realizing they needed to put their own signature spin on the sound. There's a great Hot Licks video tutorial with buddy guy where he plays licks that he picked up while learning the blues. Every single one is from a different artist. And I recall him talking about how he put his own spin on it. I swear I've heard Mayer talk about such things as well. And he can really do a good job of mimicking other players when he wants to.
It seems to be a law of the universe that it is better to be the best version of yourself than a mediocre imitation of someone else. It is a cornerstone of my personal cosmology that life revolves around differences.
fatjack wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 10:26 am
@tonebender I remember BB King talking about T-bone Walker and how he wanted to sound like him. He studied and studied and practiced a lot. He figured out he'd never play like him so he would play like BB.
The potential for differences is infinite in number, and infinitely small. I read an interview with Billy Duffy of The Cult. He has a guitar tech who is a pretty decent player himself. One day the tech was trying to duplicate one of Billy's licks, on Billy's equipment, with Billy present. He couldn't get it quite right, even after watching and watching, and trying repeatedly. Eventually Billy said "How are you holding the pick?" The tech said "the normal way". Billy said - "That's it. I've started holding it sideways......"
Gearlist: My Gear:Electric Gibson '13 studio dlx hsb Gibson '79 flying V Gibson '06 sg faded Gibson '15 LP CM w gforce Epiphone Casino coupe Epiphone dot studio Fender USA strat w mjt body _w Original body 81 Fender lead II Firefly spalted 338 Squier affinity tele bsb Squier strat std relic Squier subsonic baritone Agile al2500 albino Agile al3001 hsb Sx ash Ltd strat Sx ash strat short scale Sx ash tele Sx callisto jr Dean vendetta Washburn firebird. Ps10 Johnson trans red strat Johnson jazz box Vegas Seville explorer Inlaid tele flametop bigsby tele wood inlaid neck 23
Acoustics new Eastman acoustic Sigma dm3 dread x2 (his and hers) Fender 12 str Ibanez exotic wood Silvercreek rosewood 00 Ovation steel str martin backpacker acoustic Johnson dobro
You need a guitar that "looks' like what was used in the original song. I never played a major scale until I picked up a telecaster. Got a strat to play srv through the 80s. Now I play mostly gibson and never play srv. Was just working on man on a silver mountain and guess what? Surprise! I'm back on a strat! I know its STUPID but it's just so subliminal. No wonder politicians find us so easy to manipulate.
Gearlist: My Gear:Electric Gibson '13 studio dlx hsb Gibson '79 flying V Gibson '06 sg faded Gibson '15 LP CM w gforce Epiphone Casino coupe Epiphone dot studio Fender USA strat w mjt body _w Original body 81 Fender lead II Firefly spalted 338 Squier affinity tele bsb Squier strat std relic Squier subsonic baritone Agile al2500 albino Agile al3001 hsb Sx ash Ltd strat Sx ash strat short scale Sx ash tele Sx callisto jr Dean vendetta Washburn firebird. Ps10 Johnson trans red strat Johnson jazz box Vegas Seville explorer Inlaid tele flametop bigsby tele wood inlaid neck 23
Acoustics new Eastman acoustic Sigma dm3 dread x2 (his and hers) Fender 12 str Ibanez exotic wood Silvercreek rosewood 00 Ovation steel str martin backpacker acoustic Johnson dobro
1. Back around maybe late 2000's I was starting to get into playing electrics again after some years off (and selling off all of my stuff in the 90's). I found Rondo and in my had I was going to buy a single guitar (at the time it was one of those 24-fret SX guitars that looked a bit like PRS). In my mind I was going to become an "all around" guitar player, using same guitar for all styles. HAHAHA, I never bought that guitar, but ended up with a bunch of different Rondo guitars and basses
2. Every time I watch a video, whether it's on theory or learning a specific song, I always feel like I'll totally master it... until I start to actually try... Learning can be both a rewarding and inspiring AND discouraging. I'm at the inspired stage for now
3. I have this irrational belief that some day I'll finish all the guitar mods that I have in my head (and for many of which I've had the parts since 2011 or 2012).
Blackened wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 4:03 pm
A neck-thru guitar has better sustain than a bolt-on. Thought that was the case. I was wrong.
How the hell is that not obviously true? Sometimes I think it may be the inverse.
It actually is. There have been many experiments conducted that have shown that bolt-on construction can actually out-sustain a neck-through or set-neck guitar. I tested this myself between my Rickenbacker 4003 and Fender Jazz Bass, and later my Thunderbird against a few of my bolt-on basses, and the bolt-ons out-sustained the neck-throughs every time. It's not very scientific, and I don't think you can make any absolute rules, but as counter-intuitive as it sounds, you can't really make the claim that bolt-on guitars have inferior sustain when compared to set-neck, or neck-through guitars.
Finally escaping the People's Republic of Kalifornia!
Blackened wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 4:03 pm
A neck-thru guitar has better sustain than a bolt-on. Thought that was the case. I was wrong.
How the hell is that not obviously true? Sometimes I think it may be the inverse.
It actually is. There have been many experiments conducted that have shown that bolt-on construction can actually out-sustain a neck-through or set-neck guitar. I tested this myself between my Rickenbacker 4003 and Fender Jazz Bass, and later my Thunderbird against a few of my bolt-on basses, and the bolt-ons out-sustained the neck-throughs every time. It's not very scientific, and I don't think you can make any absolute rules, but as counter-intuitive as it sounds, you can't really make the claim that bolt-on guitars have inferior sustain when compared to set-neck, or neck-through guitars.
Apologies for getting back so late on this. Been a busy couple of weeks!
Neal Moser, (renowned luthier who created the BC Rich Bich way back in the day as well as several other guitars) Ran some tests and used some audio measurement tool in a sound proofed recording studio so there was nothing to interfere. Sorry, I don't rememeber the name of the tool, it was too long ago. Anyway, the bolt on neck consistently had a lengthier sustain. Now it wasn't something that was so substantial you would care, but the sustain was in fact longer.
I still prefer NT guitars. I think they look better and they are more comfortable. Missing out on some barely imperceptible bit of sustain isn't anything I'm too worried about. Take from that what you will.
Blackened wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 11:56 pm
Anyway, the bolt on neck consistently had a lengthier sustain. Now it wasn't something that was so substantial you would care, but the sustain was in fact longer.
Yeah, that bears mentioning as well... Sustain is such a red herring, and arguing about it is like bickering over which brand of battery makes your pedals sound better, or how gold plating on your cable plugs appreciably improves your tone.
All three methods of guitar construction produce more than sufficient sustain... I've never played a song that required me to hold a note for 27 seconds, and if your guitar has all the sustain of a banjo, it's not because it has a bolt-on neck. Something else went terribly wrong when the guitar was being built.
Finally escaping the People's Republic of Kalifornia!
Mossman wrote: ↑Sun Sep 06, 2020 1:01 pm
Yeah, that bears mentioning as well... Sustain is such a red herring, and arguing about it is like bickering over which brand of battery makes your pedals sound better, or how gold plating on your cable plugs appreciably improves your tone.
This reminds me of a comment I once read. I got into planting fruit trees. When you buy the young saplings, they consist of a rootstock and a grafted scion with a visible graft joint. Some people say to orient it towards the sun at planting. So I went searching about it. And somewhere in the forums someone said this: "that sounds like something rose gardeners might say. those people are nuts."
