Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘guitarists’ Category

When recording, use the tools you need!

Posted in amplifiers, amps, aracom amps, attenuator, gear, goldie, guitar, guitar attenuators, guitar gear, guitar gear reviews, guitarists, Guitars, Music, musicians, new song, tagged , , , , , , , , , on December 28, 2009| 5 Comments »

I’ve been working on a new instrumental for over a month now, called “Strutter.” I think I’ve probably made 50+ recordings of the song, and even though I dig the melody I’ve come up with, I’ve always thought it needed something… more… Couldn’t put my finger on it, but none of my recordings of the song were working for me completely. After I finished recording this final cut which I’ll share below, I believe a lot of my “frustration” had to do with me wanting to only use a single guitar and amp for the recording since I play this song live with only a single guitar.

But it’s different in the studio. I have a lot of options open to me, so I decided to break down and instead of recording the song in its entirety with a single take with a single guitar and amp, I recorded the two different parts of the song with two guitars and two amps. The result knocked my socks off! So the lesson learned is in the studio, you can be truly creative, and for me, I’ll use the tools I need in favor of what I’d like to have. Anyway, here’s the song:

Gear:

Rhythm: Fender MIM Strat / Aracom VRX22 (6V6) Clean Channel
Lead 1 : Squier Classic Vibe Telecaster 50’s (bridge) / Aracom VRX18 (EL84) Channel 2 (Master cranked / Volume 3pm)
Lead 2 : Saint Guitars Messenger (bridge) / Aracom VRX22 Channel 2 (Master 4pm / Volume 3pm)

All guitars were recorded at bedroom level using the Aracom PRX150-Pro attenuator, with no effects. Estimated output of any of the amps was less than 1 watt! That unit is absolutely amazing!!!

Small room reverb was added during production to give a more spatious effect to the lead tracks, and absolutely no EQ was applied to the guitars.

Description:

This song was originally inspired by an image of a supa-mac-daddy-pimp dude struttin’ his stuff down the avenue. 🙂 At least that was the kind of vibe I wanted to capture: 70’s-style guitar-plugged-straight into the amp. It’s a raw kind of tone.

From a structure/feel point of view, what I was after with this song was a contrast in textures. The Rhythm track uses the VRX22 clean channel for that snappy clean attack. For the Lead 1, I wanted use the creamy smoothness of the VRX18 combined with a single coil, and take advantage of the awesome decay of the tube rectifier. For Lead 2, there’s nothing like the pure balls-out sound of the VRX22 drive channel played with a bridge humbucker. The distortion though is ultra smooth, but very complex.

I should be the Aracom Amps poster boy!

I just realized that this song could be an Aracom Amps VRX amp line demo! I make no secret that these are my amps of choice (I have three of them). Jeff Aragaki’s amp designs are absolutely killer – that’s why I buy his equipment.

Read Full Post »

Considering buying an attenuator? Don’t just look at the absolute price…

Posted in amps, aracom amps, attenuator, GAS, gear, gear reviews, guitar, guitar gear, guitar gear reviews, guitarists, Guitars, Music, musicians, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on December 18, 2009| 12 Comments »

There’s an unspoken battle raging on The Gear Page forum about which is the best “popular” attenuator on the market. Yeah, everyone claims theirs is the most transparent, and frankly, that’s true for very low levels of attenuation. But for really cranking down on the volume, my money, of course, is on the Aracom PRX150-Pro. To me, not only is it the most transparent attenuator based upon head-to-head comparisons of some of the popular attenuators done by me and others, and also being the safest with its input AND output impedance matching, it is also the most cost-effective attenuator out there. Don’t believe it? Well, the numbers don’t lie. When you consider the versatility of input/output impedance selections vs. cost of the unit that the PRX150-Pro offers, it’s simply no contest.

Let’s have a look at the numbers shall we?

Cost Per Impedance Selection Combination
Attenuator Price # Impedance Combos. Cost/Imp. Combo
THD HotPlate $329.00 1 $329.00
Alex’s Attenuator $350.00 1 $350.00
Faustine Phantom $799.00 3 $266.33
Aracom PRX150-Pro $650.00 16 $40.56

Clearly, based upon the number of impedance matching selections, the PRX150-Pro is the clear winner in terms of value. Even if the Aracom unit only had three impedance matching selections, it still will have 9 different available input/output impedance selection combinations, and each combination would only cost $72.11; still far below the competition!

Furthermore, let’s say the PRX150-Pro didn’t have output impedance matching, reducing its impedance matching combinations to 4. It still outperforms the competition in terms of value at $162.25 per selection!

Let’s compare the PRX150-Pro with the Alex’s attenuator for example. People love the Alex’s attenuator, and I understand it works great. But you have to get 4 of those units to match the impedance matching capabilities of the PRX150-Pro. In absolute cost terms, yes, the PRX150-Pro costs more. But with respect to value, well, you can’t hide from the numbers. The same thing applies to the THD HotPlate (though I have other reasons not to like this product). As for the Faustine Phantom, it has more versatility than the Alex’s by far, but it’s also very expensive, and it is unclear whether or not you’ll get one in a timely fashion. Some people have been waiting for theirs for several months.

Sometimes you have to spend more to get much more, and in the case of the Aracom PRX150-Pro, you’re getting A LOT more!

Disclaimer: I will say this again that I am not an employee of Aracom – I’m a faithful customer because of the superior product Jeff produces.

Read Full Post »

Got GAS because you’re not happy with your amp’s tone? Before you sell it…

Posted in amplifiers, amps, Amps/Amplification, aracom amps, EL84, GAS, gear, guitar, guitarists, Guitars, instruction, NOS, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , on December 16, 2009| 1 Comment »

There are two things you should consider doing before you decide to get rid of it. I’ve done this on two amps, and have ended up keeping them both.

1. Change your speaker(s)

Let’s state the obvious: An amp’s speaker produces the sound, but it is amazing how many people I’ve come across who don’t look at replacing this vital component first when they’re not happy with their tone. I know, evaluating speakers is tough, and a lot of the time, you can only rely on people’s words and frequency response charts. I actually find frequency response charts useful in making a decision on a new speaker. If I want more mid-range and presence, I’ll look at speakers whose frequency response charts are big in the mids and high-mids, with a much more smooth bass response curve, like the Jensen P12N. If I’m looking for more bottom end, and a slightly scooped tone, I’ll look for a speaker that has those kinds of characteristics, such as the Fane Medusa 150. Of course, you have to hear the speakers in the end to decide if they work for you, but the frequency response chart is a good place to start.

2. Change your pre-amp tubes

I’m a NOS tube fanatic. To me, there’s nothing like the build and tonal quality of a good NOS tube. The ones I’ve chosen tend to have a bit less gain than newer tubes, and they break up so much more smoothly. But that’s just me. I want a smoother overdrive tone, whereas someone else may want a harsher tone. To each their own on this. However, changing tubes – especially pre-amp tubes – can have a profound effect on your tone. Like speakers, you have to try several before you find ones that fit your tastes, but it’s worth it once you do. And note, with respect to tubes, you get the most bang for your buck by replacing the pre-amp tubes as opposed to the power tubes. I use JJ power tubes for practically all my amps, and you know what? I’ve never replaced any of them because I just haven’t seen that much tone improvement by replacing them.

Where I have seen LOTS of improvements is in replacing the pre-amp tubes, as you’ll see below…

As I stated above, I saved two of my amps from the chopping block. Yeah, I had to spend a bit of money to save them, but save them I did. My most recent “save” experience was with my Aracom PLX18 BB. This amp is based upon the classic Marshall 18 Watt Plexi “Bluesbreaker.” When I first got it, I loved it, but one thing that I didn’t quite bond with was the fizz that the amp naturally produced. I really dug the mild distorted tone of the amp, but there was just something that wasn’t quite “right” when I’d crank the amp all the way.

So the first thing I did to bleed off some of the highs was to replace the stock speaker. The Red Coat Red Fang is a nice, bright speaker, but brand new, it’s pretty harsh, and I didn’t want spend a lot of time breaking it in. But even still, the amp was naturally bright, and with a bright speaker, I just didn’t feel it was a good fit. As luck would have it, I had another speaker on hand, a Fane Medusa 150. The thing about this speaker is that it has a real strong, tight bass response. Once I had it installed, I couldn’t believe my ears! It really balanced out the brightness of the amp, and curbed a lot of the fizz.

But there was still some fizz left. Knowing that there were JJ’s in the pre-amps, which have a lot of gain, my thought was that they were throwing a lot of gain at the EL84 power tubes, which can get fizzy when driven hard. So I swapped them out for a set of NOS circa 1959 GE and RCA long plate 12AX7’s, which are oh-so-smooth and a have a bit less gain than the JJ’s. The result was simply magnificent!

That clip was recorded with the Aracom PLX18 BB, and using my LP copy Prestige Heritage Elite. Sorry, I don’t have a “before” clip, but before I did those two simple modifications, the amp produced a ton of fizz that I just couldn’t connect with, even though I loved the dynamics when it was fully cranked. Now, I can crank that puppy up, and get those rich tones with no fizz.

Read Full Post »

Take it to the limit…

Posted in amplifiers, amps, aracom amps, attenuator, gear, guitar, guitar attenuators, guitar gear, guitarists, Guitars, Music, musicians, PRX150-Pro, squier classic vibe telecaster, VRX22, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , on December 8, 2009| 4 Comments »

I walked into my garage/studio this morning and looked over to my gear – there’s a lot (though probably not as much as I’ve seen from other gear sluts’ pictures). Peering over my collection, the thought struck me: What if I could only have one of each type of gear… What would I choose? What would be the basis for my decision?

After ruminating on this subject over breakfast and coffee, I decided that I’d choose the gear that gives me the most versatility with respect to tone and usability given the various types of music I play. So based upon that here are my choices:

  • Squier Classic Vibe Tele 50’s
  • Aracom VRX22 with 1 X 12 Cab
  • BOSS TU-2 Tuner
  • Aracom PRX150-Pro Attenuator

Those four things will get me through any gig or recording session. Not to say that they’re my favorite pieces of gear, but that combination will give me the most versatility with respect to versatility and usability.

What? No Goldie? Man, I love that guitar, don’t get me wrong. But that guitar is so heavy, I don’t gig with it unless I’m at a place where I have to sit down. The Tele, on the other hand, is super-light, and with its pine body, it’s very resonant, so I can get thick, almost humbucker-type sounds to nice trebly tones. Goldie offers that up and more, but she loses on usability in a variety of venues due to her weight.

The Aracom VRX22 happens to be my favorite amp in any case, but it’s my favorite because of its versatility. Once I had Jeff do the footswitch mod so I could switch between channels, and remove the clean channel from the master volume, there’s nary a tone – except for super heavy, high gain – that I can’t produce with that amp.

With respect to my TU-2 tuner, yeah, I know, there are much better ones out there, but it’s what I’ve got. But despite that, I’d rather be in tune than to have a cool effect, so that pedal would stay.

Finally, the Aracom PRX150-Pro attenuator will always be a part of any rig I put together because it allows me to set limits to my max volume in any venue. Since I play mostly small to medium venues, this box is essential for dialing in just the right amount of volume for the house. And even if I have to play at super low volumes where the Fletcher-Munson effect comes into play, I can rest assured that when my amp is miked, I’ll get my true tone.

I was actually surprised by my own choice of guitar primarily because Goldie is such a tone machine. But for as much as I move around when performing, lugging a heavy guitar is definitely not my cup of tea; especially if it makes me throw out my back, which I did a couple of weeks back. But it also says loads about that Squier Tele. I’ve got some great guitars, but that little $329 wonder creates such awesome tones and it plays so great, that it’s a clear winner. I might’ve gotten lucky with my particular guitar because I’ve read some user reviews that their tone is inconsistent. I’ll play a few more to see how that holds up.

Read Full Post »

Studio Test: Squier Classic Vibe Telecaster 50’s

Posted in gear, gear reviews, guitar, guitar gear, guitar gear reviews, guitar reviews, guitarists, Guitars, Music, musicians, new gear, squier classic vibe telecaster, telecaster, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on December 6, 2009| 3 Comments »

When I first talked to a guy at a shop about this guitar (it’s someone whose word I’ve learned to trust over the years) about the Squier Classic Vibe Tele, one of the first things he said was, “For the guys who know tone, this is one of the best kept secrets in the industry.” That, from a guy who pedals high-end Fender custom shop axes. His only nit about the guitar was the same as mine: The frets seemed a little small. But other than that, the guitar was a player in his opinion; and so it was with my own estimation of this wonderful little guitar.

Squier is supposed to be the budget line for Fender, and traditionally have been tagged as beginner guitars. But the way this guitar looks, feels, plays and sounds, there’s nothing beginner or budget about it. The build quality is excellent. There are no split or jagged joints or uneven painting. This guitar looks and feels solid. And it’s light, weighing no more than 7 pounds with its pine body and maple neck.

I was excited about this guitar when I first played it, as evidenced by the high marks it got on my original review. I couldn’t believe that a guitar with a street price of $349 could actually be this good. But the one thing that struck me about it was not just its looks, but its tone. This ain’t your typical, thin Tele twang machine. This guitar has balls. The pine body resonates – a lot – and that adds a fatness to the tone that is completely unexpected! Even in the bridge pickup that really brings out the twang, the Classic Vibe Tele sounds like a bridge humbucker with just a touch of twang!

Since I was able to bring one into my studio, I decided to record a couple of clips to demonstrate how fat this guitar sounds…

The first clip features the Tele clean in the neck pickup for both rhythm and lead, though I dirtied up the lead part just a tad.

This next clip demonstrates how the guitar sounds through a fully cranked up amp (Aracom VRX22 with 6V6’s). The three parts feature the neck, middle, and bridge positions of the same chord progression, respectively:

Finally, here’s my new song Strutter again with the Tele played in the bridge position through my Aracom VRX22:

As you can tell from the clips, “thin” is just not part of this guitar’s modus operandi. It’s actually unsettling at first because when I’ve played Tele’s in the past, they were pretty bright and thin. But this guitar just sings and resonates all day long! Must be the pine body. But who cares! It’s a player, and for the money, you just can’t go wrong.

Read Full Post »

It Takes Two to Tango… Revisiting the Fane Medusa 150

Posted in amplifiers, amps, Amps/Amplification, aracom amps, attenuator, EL84, fane, GAS, gear, gear reviews, goldie, guitar, guitar attenuators, guitar gear, guitar gear reviews, guitar reviews, guitarists, Guitars, musicians, PLX18 BB, prestige guitars, PRX150-Pro, speakers, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on December 2, 2009| 2 Comments »


When I first reviewed the Fane Medusa 150, though I gave it a pretty good rating at 4.5 Tone Bones, I wasn’t really blown away by its tone because of its big bottom end, and recommended that the speaker be put into a 2 X 12 balanced out by a speaker with more top-end sparkle. What I didn’t consider was how it could be used to balance out the tone of a naturally bright amp.

Take, for instance, my review on the Aracom PLX18 BB Trem. One of the nits I had with the combo was that the Eminence Red Coat Red Fang was way too bright for the already naturally bright amp, causing me to bleed off highs when I was mixing the song. FYI, EQ’ing my guitars in my recordings is usually a real no-no with me because I like the pure sound of my guitars and amps on a recording. The only things I’ll add in production are reverb or a touch of delay if necessary. I love the tone of the PLX18, but that speaker just didn’t work for me.

Enter the Fane Medusa 150. That speaker is actually on loan from Tonic Amps. I’ve actually had it for a few months now, and I keep on forgetting to drop it off at Darin’s new place. Well, it looks like I’m probably going to buy it off him after all because I swapped out the Red Fang for the Medusa 150 in the PLX18, and suddenly the seas parted and a way was made clear! The PLX18 tone was completely transformed! Instead of being a purely bright amp, the PLX18’s tone became much more balanced. The highs and high-mids were still present but were much more tame. This resulted in a much richer tone.

As you may know, I’ve been working on a new song called “Strutter.” I actually had the song completely recorded, but I hadn’t finished it because I just haven’t been completely satisfied with the lead guitar tone. When I got the PLX18, I knew it would be the amp I’d use to record the song. But with the stock speaker, and even with my Jensen P12N, it still wasn’t cutting it for me. I even mentioned that the amp loves the Red Coat “The Governor,” and it does, but I still wasn’t completely satisfied. Now, with the Medusa 150 in the cabinet, I’ll be completing the song. Let’s compare, shall we?

Here’s the original, recorded with the PLX18 BB with the stock Red Coat. I’m playing my LP copy, Prestige Guitars Heritage Elite:

Now, here’s a clip of the song with the Fane Medusa 150. I’m playing Goldie in her bridge pickup:

Sorry for the differences in volume levels. But where the Red Fang has much more presence, and an in-your-face presentation, the Medusa’s tone is so much more three-dimensional and more refined. The mids and highs are still present and incredibly articulate, but they’re so much less piercing! And one thing that I noticed immediately with the Medusa is the clarity of the notes through the entire EQ spectrum, whereas the Red Fang seemed to lose a bit of clarity at high-gain settings – especially when I play those transition chords. Note that the amp and mix settings stayed completely the same between the two recordings, and both guitars were played through the Trem channel which was completely dimed. I also removed the wah from the second clip because I didn’t feel the need to mix it up. For that part, I did stack my KASHA Overdrive and Geek Driver overdrive pedals, but set to unity gain, and to add just a touch of compression and sustain. Not much, but just a touch.

So what’s the moral of the story? Simple: Amp and speaker combinations are critical to good tone. Some speakers, like my P12N work with a bunch of different amps. But some speakers, like the Medusa, work much better at balancing out certain amp characteristics. I’ve learned a good lesson here: You have to try out gear in different configurations and situations. Had I not tried to experiment with the Medusa, I probably would’ve just passed it off as a good speaker that belongs in a 2 X 12 cabinet with a bright speaker.

For more information on Fane speakers, talk to Darin at Tonic Amps! Tonic is the North American distributor for Fane speakers.

For more information about the incredible Aracom PLX18 BB Trem, please go to Aracom Amplifiers.

By the way, both clips were recorded at conversation levels using the fantastic Aracom PRX150-Pro attenuator, by far the best attenuator on the planet, from my perspective. I just couldn’t live without this device!

Now, both amp and speaker get:

Read Full Post »

Nothing Like a Well-Seasoned Cast Iron Pan…

Posted in GAS, gear, guitar gear, guitar gear reviews, guitar lifestyle, guitar reviews, guitarists, Guitars, Music, musicians, new gear, tagged , , , , , , , , , , on November 22, 2009| 1 Comment »

I just finished cooking my lunch of Potatoes O’Brien which consists of diced potato, onions and red and green peppers. You fry up the mixture in hot pan with a bit of oil, seasoning to taste until the potatoes turn golden brown. When they’re done, I like to sprinkle a bit of shredded cheese, and I also like to add some chopped bacon for a nice contrast. Very tasty indeed!

If you’ve ever cooked with potatoes in a regular frying pan (not the non-stick kind), it can be a painful process because potatoes have a proclivity to stick. But I have a great cast iron skillet that has been seasoned from years of frequent use, and sticking is not part of its modus operandi. It has taken years of care and cooking, and keeping the pan lubricated to where the oils and the fats from the food have worked into the pores of the metal. It is now a masterpiece of cooking utility, and I’d be heartbroken if it got ruined.

The same thing can be said of a guitar. When you first get it, it’s all shiny and new – though I suppose that doesn’t count for relicked guitars, as they’re supposed to already be broken in… But even if they’re vintage-ized, out of the box, they’re still new, the new gear “feels” new, and thus needs time to season through use. Woods take time to settle. Oils have to work into the neck and fretboard, etc., etc..

Especially with a fretboard, it takes time to work the oils from your fingers into the pores of the wood and fret metal. Ever wonder why new fretboards feel “sticky?” They need lubrication. I read in an interview with Neal Schon of Journey fame that he actually rubs a piece of salami on a fretboard to help break it in! Now THAT’S about seasoning! Ha!

Moreover, I just don’t feel a guitar will actually sound right until it has really broken in through regular use and exposure to all sorts of environments. When I first got my MIM Strat, “Pearl,” I loved her tone, but after playing her for over five years now, her tone to me is so much more mellow than when I first got her, and the frets and neck are nicely broken in from regular use. She’s just a dream to play.

One of my kids once asked me why I get so attached to my guitars that I give them names. I told them that I give my guitars names because I’ve spent so much time seasoning them, like I do with my “special” pan. They all know that my cast iron skillet is “Daddy’s special pan” so when I gave them the reason, they immediately understood.

It doesn’t end with just a guitar, though I focused on that. Amps – and especially speakers – take a long time to truly season. But that’s another discussion altogether. 🙂

Read Full Post »

Blues With Brains Journey Update

Posted in guitar gear, guitar gear reviews, guitar instruction, guitar lessons, guitarists, Guitars, improvisation, inspiration, instruction, learn guitar, Music, musicians, new song, tagged , , , , , , , , , on November 16, 2009| Leave a Comment »

bwb
As I’ve mentioned in the past, I purchased Chuck D’Aloia’s “Blues with Brains” series. After a month, I still haven’t moved past Volume 1, but that’s only because I’m going slowly and methodically with the process. Besides, the one thing that I found is that Chuck throws A LOT of stuff at you in a very short period of time, and I’m one of those types of learners that has to let information soak in before I can move on.

There aren’t any step-by-step lessons in this series. It’s very free-form, which I find is totally cool. But as I mentioned above, there are several places where Chuck throws in lots of material in a short span of time, so I’ve found myself going back and forth and listening and practicing for a couple of days before moving on. This is a real change of approach for me because I’ve operated by this little saying for quite awhile: “If patience were a virtue, I’d be a slut.” 🙂 But this time ’round, I made a conscious decision to not move on until I could execute on what the teacher was talking about proficiently.

What about the fruits of my labor? Well… I know I’ve used this clip before, but it’s a good example of applying what I’ve learned:

Excuse the obvious mistakes, the song’s not really in a finished state (can’t decide what guitar/amp combo I want to use). But here’s what I’ve learned so far that I’ve applied to this song:

  • I now pay lots of attention to the current chord being played and playing notes that “fit.” I used to be a real pattern player – especially the minor pentatonic – but I’m learning to break free of those patterns.
  • I’ve lately put a lot of emphasis on learning various triad shapes up and down the neck. This not only helps with getting the proper fingering at a particular place, but it also helps in coloring.
  • I’m also learning to let my solos breathe. One thing that I haven’t heard Chuck mention yet – though he’ll probably share it – is taking some time to let my idea sink in, then playing to build on it. Yeah, that song is somewhat composed, but it came about through playing over the rhythm track underneath. The themes you hear are ideas that I came up with while just playing around!

Regarding that last point, that is probably the salient point that I’m getting out of the lessons thus far, and that is taking an idea, then developing it and building upon it. It’s incredibly freeing!

 

Read Full Post »

New Gear: StageTrix Pedal Fastener

Posted in buying gear, effect pedals, GAS, gear, gear announcements, gear find, gear reviews, guitar, guitar accessories, guitar effects, guitar gear reviews, guitar pedals, guitar reviews, guitarists, Guitars, Music, musicians, new gear, pedalboard, pedals, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on November 13, 2009| Leave a Comment »

stagetrix-pedalfastener

Click for full size view

I wrote about StageTrix Pedal Risers awhile ago, and how they elevate the back row of your board to make your pedals more accessible. I’ve been using them since, and they really are a godsend! I did mention that they already came with the fastener already installed, so all you have to do is place the riser.

I really like the fastener they’re using. For one, the material is thinner than most kinds you buy at a store, which means it shapes well to contours. Another thing – and more importantly, in fact – is that the glue StageTrix uses on the fastener can withstand up to 200 degrees Fahrenheit. That’s the best thing. We’ve all had the experience of getting velcro glue on our fingers. It’s a gooey mess! Well, that’s solved with the Pedal Fasteners.

For $9.95, you get a pack of three (click on the picture to get a full size view). You can install a fastener with the middle, or you can remove the middle part, and only use the fastener on the edge of  your pedal. Very cool stuff!

For more information, check out the StageTrix Products site!

Read Full Post »

Where Does Tone Reside Part II

Posted in gear, gear reviews, guitar, guitar gear, guitar gear reviews, guitar tone, guitarists, Guitars, Music, musicians, RV-7, Strat, Tone, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , on November 12, 2009| 4 Comments »

A couple of months ago, I wrote an article entitled, “Where DOES TONE Really Reside?” where I discussed the equipment vs. fingers religious debate that seems to rage on the forums now and again. I meant to follow up on that article much earlier, but well, life happens and it’s easy to get sidetracked, so here’s my follow-up:

Tone is NOTHING without music.

Music gives tone a context. Here’s a good test of this statement:

  1. Set your rig up to your sweet spot; that is, where you think it just sings to you, no matter what you play.
  2. Start plucking out random notes, not trying to be musical at all. Could be some dissonant scale of some sort, or just randomly plucked notes. Do some bends and such. Ugly, right?
  3. Now, without changing your settings, make music with that tone. You could comp some chords, or do some melodic lead.

For example, here’s a clip I quickly recorded that demonstrates the steps. In the clip, I’m playing my Strat through a Hardwire reverb, into a Reason Bambino on the Normal channel, at just the edge of breakup. The tone that this produces is silky smooth, but responds to attack and volume increases with just bit of grind. I’ve been using this setting quite a bit lately. It creates a very three-dimensional sound.

The first part – thankfully – is very short, and is just random plucking of notes. Without touching anything on my guitar or amp, in the second part, I do a little chord comping and create some music.

The point to that little exercise is that in both parts, the tone I’m producing – at least to my ears – is gorgeous. But flat-out tone with no context well… it just plain sucks!

So put everything together, where does tone reside? As I stated in the first article, it’s in both your gear and your fingers, but ultimately, you have to give it context, and that’s applying that tone to music. But keep in mind that beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. What is considered “great tone” is a purely subjective thing.

Cheers!

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »