Feeds:
Posts
Comments

When Gibson first came out with the robot a few years ago, there was a lot of debate about it. Personally, I didn’t see it as more than something that would allow Gibson to charge lots of money for a guitar that had it. My buddy Phil has a robot guitar and he loves it. Me? Based on what Phil has demonstrated, the system is definitely cool; not only does it tune, but it will give you alternate tunings as well. The alternate tuning bit is pretty cool IF you play in alternate tunings. I do dropped D occasionally, but rarely go to open G or E. Actually, I don’t ever do anything other than dropped D on electric, though I do use a few alternate tunings on acoustic at times. So for me staying mostly in standard tuning, I don’t see too much use for it, and besides that, my Les Paul stays in tune quite well.

To play devil’s advocate a bit, let’s take this Les Paul Standard 2010 Limited guitar. Nice looking guitar. It retailed street at around $3600 – $3700 while it was available. Now mind you, this is a Gibson USA Les Paul Standard. Not a custom shop model. I could see paying that for a brand-new custom shop historic model, but not sure I’d pay that for a regular ol’ Gibby USA guitar. A Les Paul Standard without the robot system goes for $2000 to $2800, depending upon the Standard type. So is the robot worth over a grand?

Yeah, I know that there are LP Studios with the robot. But as a guitar, I feel that’s a step down from a Standard. Call me a cork sniffer, but I’d never buy a Studio. I’ve played several over the years, and they just don’t live up to my personal expectations of a Les Paul. Maybe it’s psychological – I don’t know.

But Studio or Standard, I’m just not sure the extra grand is worth it…

Just this email from Fender this morning. Usually I take my time with manufacturer ad emails, and this particular one was no exception. So I waited until a few minutes ago to read the email, and my mind stopped dead in its tracks. For on my screen in front of me was a Strat that has finally blown me away. Don’t get me wrong, I love my American Deluxe Strat. For single-coil work and especially the Kinman pickups it has, I get some freakin’ awesome tones.

But I was always thinking that I would love a Strat that had two humbuckers as opposed to the HSS; in fact, my wish was to have an HSH. My thought was that I would love a Strat that always had the fat tones of a humbucker, while still retaining that Strat vibe, and lo and behold, here was a picture of a brand-new American Standard Hand Stained Ash Stratocaster® HSH!!!

Talk about getting some serious GAS! Not only does it have the HSH pickup configuration, it has an alder body, a maple neck, and a rosewood fretboard: Exactly how I like my Strats! Fender lists it at $1569 MSRP, but I’ve seen some stores online advertising it pre-order for $1149.

You can read details on the Fender product page.

Damn! Just when I was over my latest GAS attack with my DV Mark Little 30 L34, here comes more gear that’s seriously – and I mean seriously – giving me GAS.

I’ll take the Wine Red one, please!

Though I’m pretty satisfied with my current rig – actually, I’m pretty settled now as far as pedals are concerned – that doesn’t mean that I don’t look to see what’s out there. While surfing this morning before going off to work, I came across the new Voodoo TC line of pedals from Roger Mayer. These pedals feature huge knobs for changing the main pedal parameters, and they’re meant to be changed with your foot!

What a cool concept! No more bending over to change the drive on a drive pedal or the intensity or pulse of a vibe. Not only that, the Voodoo TC line has this retro, art-deco look, and sporting colors that were apparently inspired by 1950’s Chevy’s!

There are nine pedals in the line thus far, and from what I can tell from the descriptions, they’re heavily inspired by Jimi Hendrix tones, with a few drive pedals, a vibe, and an octavia. But there is one specifically geared towards bass distortion.

For more information, check out the Roger Mayer TC Series page. There are a couple of videos on the page from the Japan Music Fair, with one of the videos being an interview with Roger Mayer, explaining the motivation behind the pedals.

At service this evening, though we didn’t have the full complement of players and singers, and our only percussion was a tambourine and shaker, there was something special about it. The band just felt tight. Unlike other weeks, we didn’t have all that much rehearsal time before Mass started, but despite that, like I said, I just felt we were tight. It was real crowded as well, as it doubled as a special service for kids coming up in the church; there were lots of folks that were not regular attendees. But we must’ve been doing something right because they got as into the music as we did.

Inspired, on the last song, we did Matt Maher’s “Your Grace Is Enough” and near the end of the song, I hit the switch on my EWS Little Brute Drive and started playing lead lines, then ended with kind of a long solo. But it felt and sounded so good with my Les Paul wailing, I kind of lost track of time. 🙂 After Mass, I just laughed and said, “Rock and roll!”

After I looked back on it afterwards, I realized that I really had a breakthrough this evening in that sometimes you just have to go for it. Doing that long lead was something I had never done. Oh, I’d play lead lines in the middle of a song, but to close out the service with a solo was something that I just never did before tonight. Mind you, it’s not something that is going to be part of the formula for me from now on, but the point is that if it truly feels right in the moment, just go for it. The other guys in the bad were with me, and they went along on my little journey. I could literally feel the great energy of the moment, though they did cut me off because I admitted went on a little long – I think I did a 32 bar solo.

But no matter, those moments don’t come often, and when they do, like I said before, you just have to go for it.

It is with great sadness that I report that Ronnie Montrose passed away yesterday, March 3, 2012. He had been battling cancer for years, and it is believed he finally succumbed to the disease. My friend, Jeff Aragaki called me this morning to report the news. He and Ronnie had formed both a business and personal friendship last year, as Ronnie was going to be using Aracom Amps (he was introduced to them through “Mean” Gene Baker of Baker Guitars, with whom Jeff is good friends. He even had Jeff build him a prototype pre-amp to take with him on the road to plug into back-line amps so he could take his tone with him.

According to Jeff, Ronnie was one of the most down-to-earth people he’d ever met. None of this rock star ego, Ronnie was easy to talk to and very humble, considering his contribution to rock and roll.

For those of you who are unfamiliar with Ronnie Montrose, his group was Sammy Hagar’s first big gig. Ronnie wrote classic songs (which Sammy made popular), such as “Rock Candy” and “Bad Motor Scooter.” His guitar playing was phenomenal and his tone was unique.

A few years ago, listened to an interview Ronnie did with Greg Kihn, where Ronnie was remarking on Greg’s comment about him having a very distinctive tone. He talked about sitting in a studio with Santana, and messing around with Santana’s guitar, and how even with Santana’s gear, he sounded like Ronnie Montrose. Apparently, Santana was pretty impressed. But Ronnie was just a humble and unassuming dude and took the praise in stride.

I was hoping to tag along with Jeff when Ronnie was to play next at a local club in a couple of weeks in hopes of doing an interview for this blog. Sadly, that’s not going to happen. Though he never made huge after the 70’s, his had a huge influence on rock and roll, and he will without doubt be missed by those who knew and knew of him. Rest in peace, Ronnie!

I was reading what was a ostensibly a big ad on learning to be a great singer, when I read the following words:

Singers are only singers because they have the guts to be one! What about natural talent? You may have heard that if you were not born with it, you won’t have the natural ability to sing. It’s simply not true! If you apply yourself with the passion and discipline it takes, you too can become a great singer.

I thought about that, and thought about my own progression as a performer. I’ve been working the same weekly gig at a local restaurant going on 12 years now. It’s a solo acoustic gig where I play both guitar and piano, and of course, sing. In that gig, I cover all sorts of songs ranging from opera, show tunes, rock and country ballads to classic rock. It’s a great gig where I get to play a lot of different genres. The first couple of years, I was really low-key about doing the gig, happy to get my hourly gig wage, and if I got tips, that was great. I’d do the covers as faithful to the original as I could and things were good. But the problem was that I started to get bored. Real bored.

So I decided one day to “own” the songs; still perform them according to what I felt was the original vision of the songs, but add my own feeling to them. When I was just thinking about doing this, I was admittedly a little nervous. What if people didn’t like what I was doing. It wasn’t as if I’d be performing the music so completely different that it wouldn’t be recognizable, but it would be my own interpretation of the music.

So one day, I just decided to go for it. I was nervous as hell. But I went for it in spite of my fears. It was the best decision I ever made. People seemed to like what I was doing, and they rewarded me in kind with some pretty nice tips.  But irrespective of the tips, I learned something very important as a performer since building up the courage to “own” the songs I play: What separates a good performance from a mediocre performance is literally having the courage to put yourself into the song; all your passion, all your love, all your pain, all your joy. Everything you are.

Whether you’re playing an original or a cover makes no difference. One might argue that if you’re doing covers you want to stay as close to the original as possible. I disagree. If all you’re just doing is copying, then you’ll just be an imitator. I’ve seen lots of cover bands in my day, and the best I’ve seen are the ones that don’t follow the covers note-for-note. That said, if you’re doing a tribute band, then note-by-note precision is probably important, but for dance/bar bands, I think capturing the general spirit of the song is good enough and note-for-note precision should take a back seat to really playing and expressing yourself.

Of course, “owning” a piece can backfire. But that’s the risk you take when you do own a song. It takes guts to do it, but in the end, I fully believe that when you’re expressing YOU in the music you play, you’ll have a much greater impact on your audience than when you just play the song.

I was in Guitar Center last week, trading in my Gibson Nighthawk for my wonderful DV Mark Little 40. While I was talking to Nick , the trade-in guy, a gentleman walked asking if he could play an ES-175 that was hanging on the wall. This particular one was a vintage 1952 ES-175, and it was gorgeous. After the guy was done playing it, since Nick was trying to get an appraisal, he placed the guitar on the padded desk in front of me. Of course, I couldn’t help myself. I picked it up and started playing it. It was A LOT lighter than I expected – much like an acoustic, and the action was fantastic! I didn’t get a chance to plug it in, but it had a nice, natural voice from what I could hear from the dude that was playing it before me.

I didn’t think I’d like an archtop, but I was really digging playing that guitar. There was a certain vibe about the guitar, and being that it was 60 years old, really added to its charm. It was in truly great condition! In any case, it had a super fat, gorgeous sound. If I had the $4k to buy one of these gems, I’d jump at the chance.

Here’s a great example of the sound of an ES-175:

By the way, the guitar being played above is a two-pickup version that didn’t come out until 1953. The one I played was a 1952 with a single P-90. Here’s a history of the ES-175.

Tuesday Meanderings…

I read an interview with Antonio Gallardi, “The Wine Advocate” magazine’s new California critic in which he responded in the comments section following the interview, “A pro has to be able to tune out everything and focus just on what is in the glass. I have had several instances where wines showed better in my office than they did at the properties.”Mr. Gallari was speaking in reference to a question that was asked him about maintaining his objectivity when he tastes wine at an estate.

Since I write about both wine and guitar gear, objectivity has always been an important factor for me. I started writing about gear primarily because I felt that the mainstream gear rags seemed to be beholden to their advertisers; giving more than favorable ratings to gear that my own personal tests didn’t favor as much. With wine, though I don’t feel as if – at least for the ones I regularly read – wine critics don’t fall into this trap. But even when reviewing wine, whether at home or at a winery, having no predisposition towards a wine is absolutely important to me. For instance, I went to a local winery near my home this past weekend, and ended up tasting with a friend who just happened to be there at the same time. He and his wife are wine club members, and they were looking to get a bottle. Though the winery’s Cabernets were popular, and something they mildly pushed, I wasn’t all that impressed with them, so instead recommended the Tempranillo, Terolgego, and their lower price, non-library Zinfandel purely based upon the merits of the wines’ characteristics which appealed to me.

Congruently, with gear, I’ve spoken to lots of manufacturers over the five years I’ve run this blog. Many send me gear to review, but you’ll notice that while there are lots of reviews here, there aren’t nearly as many as I’ve actually reviewed. The reason is that I like to play nice, and I’ll never publish a review that’s less than 4 Tone Bones. When I do review something that I don’t like, I notify the manufacturer, give them feedback, and make suggestions on what could be better. I’m also absolutely honest with them when I talk to them the first time and communicate my process. I do realize that I can get pretty excited in my reviews, but I only publish what I consider to be the best gear.

The point to all this is that objectivity goes a long way. Especially with gear, you hear and read about so much hype that it’s difficult to maintain your objectivity. I know I’ve succumbed to the hype several times, and I have a lot of gear that I just don’t use or have sold off. Luckily I never went so far as to sell everything to get a Dumble amp. Though it is truly impressive (and I know my videos didn’t really capture the sonic and dynamic magic of the amp), my own amps and several others I’ve tested come close enough to those dynamics that there’s no reason to spend over $40k.

Had a great time with the Little 40 this evening at my weekly church gig. I set the amp to full clean-headroom on the Continuous Power Control, cranked the master, then set the gain to a little before the edge of breakup so that a normal, light strum would still be fairly clean with the volume knobs on my R8 both set to halfway. Of course, at that setting, I had to use my attenuator because while it would work just fine in a club, it would be way too loud for church. But that’s okay because the amp retained all of its dynamics and tone.

Also, with the way I set up the amp, I could strum lightly or play fingerstyle and be clean, then get a nice overdrive by digging into the strings a bit. Then I could get into overdrive completely by rolling on either of the volume knobs on my guitar. Then for leads, I used a footswitch to activate the boost which saturates the power tubes by hitting the amp with 10dB of gain. Like my Aracom amps (and vintage Marshalls, for that matter), when the power tubes saturate, lots of sonic goodness occurs. The signal compresses – with the Little 40, it’s not too much, but the sound definitely “feels” a bit beefier – but more importantly, you get very nice sustain and these subtle harmonics and overtones get added into the signal that are total ear candy!

Once I set up the amp, I didn’t have to do any tweaking. My guitar was my control center, which is how I like it. But it does require that an amp be extremely responsive to dynamics, both from a playing perspective and from volume knob adjustments. It delivered all that in spades!

Here’s another extremely important tidbit that I hadn’t mentioned yet: The amp weighs just under 16 pounds! Dammit! That’s lighter than my attenuator! This is something that Marco De Virgiliis (DV Mark’s designer/owner) is known for in the bass world. For instance, my bassist uses a Mark Bass Little Mark II as his go-to bass amp head. That amp produces BIG sound, and it weighs less than 6 1/2 pounds! The Little 40 and its smaller and larger brethren follow the same pattern.

To top all that off, the amp looked so damn cool as DV Mark installed orange LEDs on the board that you can see through the amp grille-work. I tend to be fairly utilitarian about gear, not really putting too much stock on looks, but not only does this amp sound and play killer, it looks great on stage!

And speaking of stage, I actually did two gigs with the Little 40 today. The first gig was a mother-daughter church service at a local high school. Since there were lots of people attending, the service was held in the performing arts center, so I was up on stage. Before the gig, I had to run home really quick to pick up some sheet music that I left in my printer. When I returned, I looked at the amp on stage from the back of the theatre, and just smiled when I saw the extremely cool orange glow emanating from the amp. It was TOTALLY SICK!!! For that gig, I played all clean: Max headroom, Master full-on, then Gain set to pretty low. I controlled volume with my Gretsch’s master volume. The difference with that gig was that since we were doing a few different styles of songs, I adjusted the EQ to fit the songs. This is yet another area where the amp shines. You can dial up all sorts of different tones with the very-usable EQ! Nice!

Finally, if you happen to do some research on the Little 40 or other DV Mark amps, you’ll notice that it has just a single pre-amp tube (ECC83), which indicates that there are  solid state components in the amp. There are. You can see them; plus everything’s mounted on a PCB board. But who the f$%k cares when the amp sounds this good and performs so well? Besides, he does list the other ECC83 in the power section – which I totally missed at first. The important thing to note is that while there are solid state components being used, the important parts involved in the amplification are valves.

But solid state components? I know, we all suffer from cork-sniffing; especially with tube amps. But I’ve gotten over it. As JKeith Urban’s guitar tech said in an interview, “If it sounds cool, then it is right…” Especially with the DV Mark Little 40, I’m getting the level of performance and sound quality that I get out of my Aracom Amps, and like my Aracom gear, I paid less than half the price for the features I got with the amp compared to other boutique gear manufacturers’ wares. The Little 40 retails at $799.

So what about my Aracom Amps? Well, I will definitely still be using them. The DV Mark has a completely different tone than my Aracoms, which are based upon vintage Marshall amps; specifically the Plexi style, Blues Breaker amps. While I most probably will use the DV Mark the most on stage because of its flexibility, my other amps will still get lots of use in the studio, though the VRX22 will also get lots of stage time because it too is extremely flexible. As for the other amps, no other amp does creamy-smooth overdrive like my PLX18. When I need high-end bite, which I like to have for funky rhythm lines, I can’t think of any better amp to give me this than my VRX18. And thus far, none of these amps is collecting any dust as I’ve been using them all this past week to complete the demos for my new album.

Damn! It just occurred to me that I’m really trying to justify why I have all this freakin’ gear… 🙂 Or maybe I’m just rehearsing what I’ll be saying next to the wife when she queries me about my gear. Ha! ROCK ON!

No, this is not one of those excited-puppy-dog-with-a-new-toy types of posts, though with the way I’m feeling about the Little 40, it could very well be. But excitement aside, I did another test of the amp early this morning. I’m not a big believer in doing demo clips for demo clips’ sake. I do them because people ask for the raw sound, but when I started GuitarGear.org, I did it with intent of evaluating gear within the context of its application; specifically, how I might apply it to my own rig. My thinking has always been that unless you’re actually using the gear, you never really know how it performs.

So this next test was done to get a feel for the dynamics of the amp within the context of a song. I recently finished demo production of a song I wrote several months back called “I’m in Love with You Lord,” but hadn’t gotten around to create a finished recording until this past week. The one thing about that song is that it has a gradual build-up in feel and intensity as it progresses, and the electric guitar track plays an important role in this as it is the instrument – besides my vocals – that drives the emotion of the song. And my personal requirement was that I needed to do the entire electric guitar part in a single take, which means the amp has to be ultra-dynamic.

Originally, I recorded this with my Aracom VRX18, which performed flawlessly. But I wanted to try out the DV Mark with the song to see if I could achieve the same level of dynamics that the VRX18 had. Not only did it deliver, I’m probably going to use it as I love the snarling dog growl it delivers. 🙂 Here’s the song: