Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘musicians’

Click for larger image

I just did a review of this awhile ago, but I thought I’d go into a bit from an actual usage perspective.

As I reported in my review, I took it to my weekly solo acoustic gig, and it worked fantastically. I also took it to my Sunday church gig and used it on another guitar: My Fender Stratacoustic, which is a really tough guitar to tune. I also use it regularly in my home studio and it works flawlessly.

Okay, I know. It’s just a tuner. However, what I find so special about it is that it’s the first clip-on tuner I’ve used that is really accurate. Plus, it has Peterson’s sweeteners built in, and to me, the sweeteners make all the difference in the world. Sweetners are minute adjustments to the tuning so that chord intervals sound, well, sweeter. Guitars are generally built to even temperament; that is, they’re set up so that each string is tuned to an exact frequency.

The idea behind the Peterson tuning sweetners is that even temperament is fine until you play chords. We’ve all been there. Tune up the guitar with a standard tuner like a TU-2. The tuning sounds fine. Then you play a chord, and you have to make adjustments so the chord sounds good. The sweetners take this in to account, and instead of tuning to the exact pitch frequency, tune a little off to account for presses on the strings. The result is that when you tune with a Peterson tuner, you rarely make post tuning adjustments. Very cool.

Originally, I thought I’d simply use the StroboClip in my home studio, but I’ve found it to be an invaluable tool for gigs. For instance, as the lead guitarist in my church band, I often do solos with a lot of bending which, after awhile, will make the tuning drift a bit. With my StroboClip, it’s simply a matter of turning down my volume, then doing a quick tune. Oh that reminds me! I totally dig the LCD screen for tuning. Even for how small the unit is, the movement of the checkerboard pattern makes tuning a lot easier than trying to nail it with a bank of LED’s.

Read Full Post »

Audiophiles for years – excuse the pun – have heard cable manufacturers’ and experts’ claims of “cable break-in.” It’s a huge, ongoing debate, though most seem to believe it’s folly. In the guitar world, I haven’t heard of this from cable manufacturers; at least from the brands I buy. But I have heard it from seemingly well-informed musicians who claim they can hear the difference between a broken-in cable and a brand new cable. These people pride themselves on their “golden ears,” and often pull rank by providing their “bonafides” of degrees or what-not to add credibility to their claims. They are so convincing that lots of uninformed, unsuspecting musicians fall prey to their claims and in turn take them as scientific fact. Then in turn spend hundreds, maybe thousands of dollars on super, high-end cables that they’ll “break in,” and magically, their tone will be right. Hey! More power to ’em.

Me? I won’t mince words: I think they’re full of shit.

There is no scientific basis for cable break-in. It’s purely subjective. And with cable manufacturers who make the claim that their cables sound better after they’ve been broken in, to me it’s all just pure marketing bullshit. But some of these “pundits” and their sycophants (I love that word) will bring Einstein into the equation with the following quote:

Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted.

I dig that quote! But then it just points back to the subjectivity of cable break-in. Note that NONE of these so-called experts have ever provided numbers behind their claims. But they’ll take it further with an argument that it’s not the wire, but the insulation that breaks in; that is, the molecules of the dieletric will align to the signal over time. I _might_ buy this for a constant, uniform signal, but audio signals are random, plus the signal’s AC outside of any device in your chain. And again, they don’t have numbers to back this up. Molecules lining up to a random signal? If you buy into that, I have a couple of rental properties in Indiana I’d like to sell you (that’s actually true, and I’m trying to unload, er, sell them).

As I always advise, do your homework and find out for yourself. If you can hear those differences – though most everyone claims they’re psychological as opposed to physical – then I commend you on your auditory acuity. But my question, dear readers – especially for us regular joes – is this: If us mere mortals can’t hear that difference, does it really matter?

Read Full Post »

I’ve had this secret desire to own a Rick Turner Model 1 for a long time, though I never really shared that desire with anyone. For the past few years, my focus on gear acquisition has been on electric guitars and amps, with the occasional acoustic thrown in. But a Rick Turner guitar has always been in the back of my mind.

So what originally led me to this? Well, one guy in my church band plays one, and another is having one built for him right now. My latest conversations with them have led me to consider having one built.

If you’re not familiar with Rick Turner guitars, all you need to do is turn to Lindsey Buckingham of Fleetwood Mac. He has been playing a Model 1 (probably a customized version of it) for years. To me, this is the answer to the hybrid guitar; much more so than the Taylor Tx series. Lindsey uses it for both acoustic and electric, and having heard the guitar live, it does both fantastically well!

One of my concerns about hybrids has always been what I feel is the compromise sound, and I’ve always been a bit disappointed in the electric tones of hybrids. But as Rick’s pedigree includes a stint with Gibson development, he certainly gets the electric part. And amazingly, with the peizo pickup, the acoustic tones when plugged in are incredibly natural sounding.

My buddy’s guitar is going to cost about $2850 before tax for a custom build, if I remember correctly. I don’t have that kind of cash on hand right now, but considering the price and what he’s getting for it (he’s using some exotic woods), that’s not bad at all! My personal taste runs to the standard mahogany, so I’ll see what that’ll cost me. Either way, it looks like I’ll be saving my pennies for awhile. 🙂

Anyway, here’s a video of a Lindsey Buckingham solo as he plays his Model 1:

Update: Got a price list for the Model 1. I’ll be waiting for awhile, but I think the wait will be worth it.

Read Full Post »

My buddy, Jeff Aragaki is totally into the relic thing. and has several guitars that have been aged. He even went so far as to take a brand new R9 (’59 Les Paul Reissue) and rough out the gloss finish! Mind you, he’s a very close friend, and I don’t begrudge what he did to an absolutely fine-working guitar! And I know, I’ve brought up this subject before, asking the question: Do you get the relic thing?

I don’t get it, but there are many people who do, and there are many people who would pay top-dollar for a relic job. For instance, this morning, Jeff sent me this eBay link to a Bill Nash aged Les Paul Standard. The seller is asking $4200 for the guitar. I personally wouldn’t pay that but I’m sure that people who are into aged guitars woudn’t balk at the price, considering the work Bill Nash puts into the process of aging; and there are many who would send their guitars out to Nash or RS Guitar Works to have their guitars aged.

For me, based upon the process description that was provided by the seller, I’d send Bill one of my Les Pauls to have the pickups matched and the frets dressed. I especially like what he does with the neck tone pot, providing a coil tapping pot. After 8, the pot will tap the neck pickup coil. Very cool. But this is the extent of the work that I’d have done. Don’t mess with my finish; don’t apply acid to my hardware. Give me my nice, shiny, guitar!

Read Full Post »

I was answering a comment on one of my videos this morning on YouTube, when I came across a great series on understanding tube amps posted by Old Tone Zone (http://www.oldtonezone.com). It’s a 7-part series, and goes through various features of tube amps. Here’s the first video in the series. If you want to view it with the playlist, go here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yc-78AKIo5A&feature=BF&list=PL2D0A1CC3FC96F1CA&index=1.

Read Full Post »

I finally got some time to post my very first full video review (the Dumble series doesn’t really count because it wasn’t really a review, but more of a demo). So here, I present to you the Sebago Sound Double Trouble 100, an 100 Watt amplifier from a newcomer to the amp business and another entry in the very popular Dumble-style amp genre.

Intro and Feature Walkthrough

Dirty Tone (Master Volume)

Clean Tone and Wrapup

Overall Impression

As I mentioned in the last video segment, I’m giving the amp a 4.5. Tone-wise, it’s a fantastic amp, but personally, I’m just not in pre-amp-only distortion, and like to have the power amp side working in conjunction with the pre-amp side. It’s just a lot beefier and dramatic to me. Cranked up like this, the amp performs wonderfully; and I especially dig using the boost as it seems to add even more clarity and note separation.

For more information on these great amps, check out the Sebago Sound website!

Read Full Post »

I swear by my Aracom attenuator as do many others, and it’s great to see people demonstrating it. This demo comes from a guy in Italy who can cop Angus Young like no other. This dude rocks the house and has several vintage amps and guitars. He’s not just a collector, he’s a bonafide player!

Read Full Post »

My church bandmates were a bit tired of this bluegrass-style “Joy to the World” that we’ve done for the past few years at Christmas Mass, and they asked if we could do a new song. Well… in keeping with our much more straight-ahead rock style, I came up with an 80’s punk version of Angels We Have Heard On High. 🙂 That’ll wake everyone up!

By the way, the guitar (my R8 Les Paul) was recorded in the bridge position through the AWESOME VHT Special 6. I used a 1 X 12 external speaker cab loaded with a Jensen Jet Falcon. The amp was cranked, in the high input, high output, with the booster engaged! HA! It has a much bigger sound than its 6 Watts! It was actually pretty loud in my studio!

Also, MERRY CHRISTMAS!!!!

Read Full Post »

A couple of weeks ago, I did a gear find announcement about the new EH Freeze pedal that essentially takes what you’re playing such as a chord or note and freezes it. The video demonstration was particularly awesome, and very intriguing. Intriguing enough to where I needed to check it out. So I did, and…

I’d rather use a looper. 🙂 The premise is great: Strum a chord, or pick a note, press and hold the button, and what you just strummed is held in place.

When I first saw the video, I was thinking that it would be great for my solo acoustic gigs where I could solo over the frozen chord. But after playing around with the pedal, I realized that I like soloing over live loops than just a single chord. No doubt, the pedal offers some interesting possibilities.

One thing that I found was really cool was using the latch mode while playing chord progressions. In latch, freeze is always on, and each time you press the button the pedal freezes what you’re playing at the time. With chord progressions, it’s cool because it really helps fill the space, but the problem for me – and probably  most players – is that I don’t do just a straight strum. I palm mute, I tap the strings, I pick out bass lines and such, and this is where it’s really tough to use this pedal.

Interestingly enough, lots of bass players have picked up this pedal. For bass, it makes lots of sense because you’re mostly playing single notes at a time. But if you slap or play two- or three- note chords like my bassist does, I think the pedal would get limited usage.

I suppose you could use it to get infinite sustain, but for that, I’d rather use something like the Pigtronix compressor/sustainer. While it won’t give me infinite sustain, it’ll give me enough for my needs. 🙂

So the verdict? I like the pedal, but not enough to actually put it in my chain. Quality-wise, it’s built solidly and that’s not an issue. I think for me, it would get very limited usage, and while I can get it for around $100, there are other things I’d rather use $100 for…

Read Full Post »

Slash Appetite for Destruction Limited Edition Les PaulI subscribe to Gibson tweets and Facebook postings, and yesterday I got an update about three new Gibson Custom Shop Les Pauls that Gibson is releasing. One of these is yet another Slash Appetite for Destruction. Gibson came out with one of these earlier this year that retails for around $4000. It’s a nice guitar in honey finish. This latest addition comes in two flavors – VOS and Aged – and is signed by Slash, with only 100 being made by the Custom Shop. Here’s Gibson’s blurb:

Slash Appetite For Destruction
Working hard to record Guns N’ Roses’ 1987 debut, Appetite for Destruction, Slash was experiencing nothing but frustration trying to achieve the tones he was seeking with a range of contemporary electric guitars he was using. Then someone handed him a reissue-style Les Paul Standard, and that was all she wrote. With this legendary rock machine in hand, Slash laid down the deadliest rock riffs of the decade—propelling songs like “Paradise City”, “Sweet Child O’ Mine”, and “Welcome to the Jungle”—and fired up the biggest-selling debut album of all time in the process.

Slash has been a devoted Les Paul player ever since, throughout his years with Guns N’ Roses and later with Slash’s Snakepit and Velvet Revolver. He has taken a number of Gibson Signature models on the road, and owned and recorded with near-priceless vintage late ’50s ’Bursts. To honor his achievements on the instrument, Gibson’s Custom Shop introduces the Slash “Appetite for Destruction” Les Paul, a guitar made in the image of the axe that launched a thousand riffs.

This one has an MSRP of $9,174 for the VOS and $12,468 for the Aged edition. You can read the details here, in the article entitled “The Guitar That Saved Rock N’ Roll;” hence the title of this article.

I’m sure collectors will get excited by this, and having a couple of Custom Shop guitars myself, I don’t doubt the quality of workmanship that went into producing the guitar. But I am scratching my chin about any of the Appetite for Destruction guitars, and also mildly chuckling. Why? The AFD guitar is a replica of a replica!!! Again, that is not to say that the guitar is bad; in fact, it apparently most closely matches the specs and more importantly the tone of the original guitar as Slash remembers it. Plus, if people are big enough fans to buy the guitar, I say definitely go for it!

By the way, for a more detailed article describing that original replica, you can read it at Premier Guitar! It’s definitely worth the read.

I don’t see these guitars as a real negative against Gibson. I think the fact that Slash played a replica on the album (and subsequent tours), is the ultimate compliment to Gibson. Be that as it may, I still find it amusing that it’s a replica of a replica, and that it took a replica to drive Gibson produce a guitar of this caliber.

As for the AFD guitar “saving rock n’ roll,” let’s be honest: That original replica probably saved Gibson’s ass, as the company’s sales at the time were apparently languishing with all the hair metal and glam rockers turning to Strats, Charvels and Jacksons. Plus, it is well-noted that Les Pauls of the era had some huge quality issues; all serving to draw players away. That Slash found his tone in a Les Paul, and in turn drew in a huge fan base not just to the music, but to Les Paul guitars was a major coup for Gibson.

It’s great that Gibson recognized the importance of that guitar by creating its own replica of it. It’s the implied gratitude of “Thank you for saving our asses!”

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »