Tone Snobs

[J M Fahey]

I don't find both facts are tightly related to each other.
Like most of you, I know many bad players, a lot of musicians with bad tone, a few very good players , of which most but not all have good tone.
Personally I know no bad players with good tone.
If anything, I find a correlation between *years spent playing* and tone.
Most guys I've known as players for 20 to 40 years, play with good taste and sound good, mainly because most stick to proven success formulas: Strats or 335 into Twins, or LP, 335, SG into Marshalls , in both cases playing quite loud. They sound quite acceptable into a Valvestate 8080 or a Peavey Bandit too.
The absolute *worst* , sickening, puke inducing tone comes from guys in their teens to, say, 25 Y.O., who use Pods or "all in one pedalboards" as pedals, which they are not, plugged into a Valvestate, MG or cheap SS Fender.
They play with this horrible, buzzy, no-mids, white-noise sound with a smile on their face because they *think* they sound good, just because they selected Preset # 437, "Korn with a Dual Rectifier playing the Madison Square Garden on July 27, 2008"
Well, most will dissapear, some will play and sound better in the future.
Natural Selection.
Note: a POD can furnish excellent sound, if used properly.
A Grammy and Oscar winning friend of mine, travels from USA to Patagonia discovering bands for major recording companies, with a POD, some small mics and a notebook in his bag.
Results are excellent. Of course, the definitive records are made with the best equipment available ... for the happy 1% who gets the record deal.

[Steve Conner]

They play with this horrible, buzzy, no-mids, white-noise sound with a smile on their face because they *think* they sound good

Well, I've been there My brother and I used to share a guitar rig, and we would always argue over the midrange. He wanted it up as far as it would go, and I wanted it down as far as it would go. We couldn't agree on what was "right". Now with the wisdom of age, I know that scooping the midrange is terribly uncool, but I do it anyway when nobody is looking.

If you turn up all the knobs as far as they'll go on a Marshall Super Lead, the tone you get is kind of scooped. The tone stack gives it a bass and treble boost, and the resonance of the cabinet gives it a good deal of extra thump too. But it's not as extreme as the sound that some metal guys use. There's still enough midrange left to cut through, and I guess the fact that it's 100 watts with a full stack of speakers helps.

The other day I was in a guitar shop, and I noticed they had a ZT Club. I asked if I could try it, and the guy said, "It's a jazz amp, you'll need a jazz guitar." He handed me a Peerless hollowbody guitar with P90s and told me to go ahead. There was one of these shredder guys playing through a giant pedalboard somewhere else in the store, so I decided it was time for a jazz vs. metal sound-off. The Club sounded great, and drowned him out completely because it actually had midrange. After a few minutes another customer came over and told me, "That amp sounds brilliant son", so I reckon jazz won that day.

The ZT Club is a digital amp, and it kind of changed my opinion of what DSP could do. It's amazingly loud and it has a nice breakup when you crank the preamp gain right up. I think the designer focused on emulating just one nice vintage amp, rather than cramming it full of multiple patches.

[pdf64]

Hey, don't diss Jimmy Vaughan!

'suffice to say the last time I saw Jimmy Vaughan on stage with some great bluesmen I thought it was some comedy '

No it's not sufficient to say that - it's totally unfair to judge someone's contribution on the basis of such an appearance. It's the career highlights that have to take precidence in such a judgement, not the low points, however public theose might be. Maybe if Peter Green had been put in that situation, you'd have been similarly unimpressed?
And you haven't said whether you've taken into account the early Fabulous Thunderbirds records in your judgement of Jimmy Vaughan's work?
I've not been captured by what he's done since, but those 1st 2 Fab T'Birds albums (Girls Go Wild and What's The Word) are in my 10 most played albums, the vibe, feel and subtlety of the whole band, the immediacy of the performance and the quality of the songs - just make it the 'go to' record when I want a dose of the real stuff. And yes, it's a damn fine guitar tone.
Jimmy didn't have the dazzling technique of his brother, but the the way he uses his musical intelligence to work within the limitations of his technique, to create a guitar part that fits perfectly within the song, is more of an inspiration to me.
So irrespective of anything subsequent to those records, for me he's paid his dues and earnt whatever respect he's now given.

[Wilder Amplification]

One of my favorite Jimmy Vaughn/Fabulous T-birds performances -

YouTube - Fabulous Thunderbirds-04-London Live

Gotta admit he's definitely the master of guitar through a Leslie cab.

[Five_E35]

I've come to realize that tone is also in the mind. I've been playing long enough to have forgotten more songs than I remember. Quite often I'll noodle away at some long forgotten song selecting the right gear and effects to get the tone just right. In my mind it IS right, but then for some reason(a chord or something), I'll drag out the CD and discover I'm not even close. Once I hear it, I'm usually able to get it. It's not subtle - often as drastic as switchging from a Strat to a Gibson ES or going from fairly clean to significant distortion. Happens with a lot of different artists. Anyone??

[cminor9]

I saw Jimmy Vaughn once. He was playing some show with Buddy Guy and some New Orleans group called the Radiators (the Rad is pronounced with a short a, as in radical, they were pretty good). I seem to remember Jimmy Vaughn held his own in that show. Of course, it's hard to top Buddy Guy, the headliner of that show, but I enjoyed Jimmy Vaughn very much.

I think his appearance is a bit comical, with the pompadour and all. But I seem to remember reading somewhere that his brother was seen as a bit of a caricature before he was widely respected (some white dude in a cowboy hat playin the blues, this we've gotta see! Hey wait, he can actually play...)

[olddawg]

Well first off they focused on getting their playing right. They knew if their playing wasn't up to snuff no amount of gear or component swapping would ever save them.

Once their playing was down it was quite easy getting 'that tone'.

A lot of 'that' tone is just the natural sound of that particular gear combination. Take Jimi Hendrix for example. A Marshall Super Lead, a Strat, UniVibe and a Vox Clyde McCoy wah will get you that naturally if the playing is right. No component swapping needed.

Then look at Jimmy Page...again...Marshall Super Lead cranked and a Les Paul just naturally sounds like that if the playing is right.

As the old saying goes..."'Tis not the dress that makes the woman, but the woman that makes the dress". This goes to state that a woman can't just put a dress on and automatically she's blessed with a wonderful body. She will make the dress look stunning if the shape of her body is already stunning (kinda brings ya to the whole "Honey do these pants make me look fat?" and you know the real answer but are also full and aware of the consequences should you reveal that answer).

This goes the same for guitar players. "'Tis not the gear that makes the playing sound great, but the player that makes the gear sound great".



Thanks for the sig!

Unless you have a live recording or saw them live they didn't use that equipment, and even then not all of the time. They used small amps in the studio. Page was fond of telecasters. I saw Hendrix using a wall of Dual Showmans ith a Flying V. Tone is in the hands.

[Chuck H]

Oh my, have we ever become a bunch of tone snobs eh?

Someone said that they've never heard a bad player with good tone. It was also said that most good players have good tone. Well...

This is exactly the kind of distinction that faces amplifier design. I make great effort to be as objective as possible and so I HAVE heard bad players with good tone AND good players with bad tone. It's a very common mistake even among the initiated to confuse bad playing with bad tone and good playing with good tone.

Of course we still have to consider personal tastes and preferences so it ALL remains subjective.

Obvious examples of good playing and bad tone would have to include any recordings done by Pete Townshend or Randy Rhoads. I could rest my case there.

Can't give examples of bad players with good tone because no one ever recorded them.

As amp designers it is, I think, our job to be at least this discearning. You can hear it in the modulation of a single note most times.

As a caveate, most great players do have a wonderful way of finding musical properties in any tone and exploiting those qualities. I do have my favorite examples of 'bad tone made useful'. Like the guitar solo in Sympathy for the Devil. God that was awful tone. Perfect for the song. Is this because that's the way "I" know it to be or because the tone and effect actually "fit" there? Who cares? Still, when designing amps I think it's important to recognize the differences and subtleties in all this. I do believe there is a blanket definition of good tone that oscillates around different styles of music. But some might consider this a generic tone also and so they're after something different, even if that means bad (tone). And if they're a great players they'll probably make it work and fans will research it trying to sound equally bad, uh good, I don't know...

Chuck

[Pedro Vecino]

Quality of the tone is defined by the application. Music comes first and is what gives dimension to the tone or take it off.
Regarding the "golden ears" .. hearing education exists. It´s not free or falls from the sky. If you work editing synth presets handling 300 parameters at once four hours a day, you develop a lot more listening and analysis over the sound that those who work designing car headlights or making pizzas.
With amplifiers development you should be able to play very well and have a lot of musical resources in many different styles. Without this platform is practically impossible to do something good and what is more important: to know for sure. Good sounds remain forever. Even be maintain until the next day :-)
Finally, the quality of musical perception through hearing education has no direct relationship with the knowledge of electronics. It´s common to seek to move a tone effect to a certain electrical parameter or group of them (a good thing to compose a method) but if is intended to determine its existence is a waste of time and a bad card for those who work with sound. Ear prevails because it´s the real way through which sound is perceived. All senses can be developed and hearing is no exception. IMHO
Regards

[Chuck H]

OK... If I understand correctly what your basically saying is that educated ears are absolutely real. I can buy that. But to hear guitar amp tone the finite details would seem to me very different from commercial sound engineering. For example, can someone with educated ears in sound engineering tell me if the amount of crossover distortion in my overdrive is "correct"? Would it depend on other parameters, and could he/she tell then? How assymetrical should my clipped wave form be to allow the right harmonic balance? Ahhh, that's a good one because it reqires the listener to understand a physical property. Not that there is a difinitive for this property. So I guess this is where the "golden ears" proclaimation comes from. At least as it applies to guitar amps. As for audiophile gear I would say that it's very possible to have "educated ears" but no such training (other than experience) exists for distorted guitar amplifier tone. And what a complex subject that can be too. Not to defend the golden ears concept, quite the contrary. I think that deciding if you like a tone or not is easy and we should all do that for ourselves. But trying to replicate the qualities of existing examples of "good tone", IMHO, requires an understanding of the circuits that make it happen and observation of parameters in testing conditions. Otherwise we would all just be slapping amps together and junking the bad sounding ones with no guidance for improvement.

FWIW I think that a good clean tone for guitar can be broken down quite easily. EQ and envelope of attack. And that's it. Obviously you do need an amp that can accurately reproduce the signal from a guitar pickup. So with respect to good clean tone there is a lot to be said for the guitar being used since this will be where the nuances of acoustic properties will be like sustain and resonance. So when I think of amplifier tone as it applies to guitar amps I think mostly of distortion properties. JMHO

[Gaz]

Can't give examples of bad players with good tone because no one ever recorded them.

Ha, you know that's not true. 'They' played a lot of money for some poor guy to record them, or most likely, they recorded themselves (starring them, using their own amp, and posted it on a forum somewhere! (but not this one, of course.)

[jmaf]

Hey, don't diss Jimmy Vaughan!

'suffice to say the last time I saw Jimmy Vaughan on stage with some great bluesmen I thought it was some comedy '

No it's not sufficient to say that - it's totally unfair to judge someone's contribution on the basis of such an appearance. It's the career highlights that have to take precidence in such a judgement, not the low points, however public theose might be. Maybe if Peter Green had been put in that situation, you'd have been similarly unimpressed?
And you haven't said whether you've taken into account the early Fabulous Thunderbirds records in your judgement of Jimmy Vaughan's work?
I've not been captured by what he's done since, but those 1st 2 Fab T'Birds albums (Girls Go Wild and What's The Word) are in my 10 most played albums, the vibe, feel and subtlety of the whole band, the immediacy of the performance and the quality of the songs - just make it the 'go to' record when I want a dose of the real stuff. And yes, it's a damn fine guitar tone.
Jimmy didn't have the dazzling technique of his brother, but the the way he uses his musical intelligence to work within the limitations of his technique, to create a guitar part that fits perfectly within the song, is more of an inspiration to me.
So irrespective of anything subsequent to those records, for me he's paid his dues and earnt whatever respect he's now given.

I got a message from another member of the board, where he tells me how one magical performance he saw changed how he felt about JV. He said he had the same impression I had before he got to know more about JV. I guess I compare him to his brother, especially since the performances I saw JV is trying to play like SRV, so he probably was out of his game there.

It's about taste and what emotions a certain artist brings out in you. In my particular case JV has been the subject of this thread(Edit: let me clarify this: he fit in the subject of this thread in my opinion, not has been the subject - sorry, english as second language), and believe me when I say I look forward to seeing a performance by him that'll change my heart, but so far neither his tone or his playing have moved me in any way, though he's enormously famous and respected.

[Chuck H]

+++ I'll concede. More so now than ever with information tech for distribution and the relative ease of setting up a small recording studio. If I think about it there is occasionally a song that pops up on a Canadian station I listen to here in the PNW. That station seems more open to playing lesser known artists be they bad or good. And sometimes in an unknown song I'll hear a tone I like and think "ahhh, this could be good" only to find the guitarist isn't very good and that always leaves me flat.

[Five_E35]

Maybe Golden Ears was born during the HiFi gear manufacturers 'spec wars' during the 60s & 70s? Then Digital came along and people could actually hear what was never there in the first place. Digital did have an effect on instruments, amps, and tube equipment used for recording.

FWIW Re JV - In the T-Birds, he used to play Strats through Super & Twin Reverbs using a pick. To capture an older blues style, he's switched to playing with fingers using a capo on whatever fret lets him play like open E. A Strat through Twin reverb gets kind of thin and uneven doing that, but a couple of Matchless amps fattened things up. He's also been using a Fender Coranado(ES335) and some other guitars lately.

A lot of fans want players and bands to sound just like the good old days, but players do change over time. Consider that Harrison was quoted in a Strat book saying, he disliked his Gretsch through Vox sound and was glad Clapton brought him a Strat. He used a Tele & Twin Reverb for the rooftop Concert.

[sixstringnick]

check out this site Tube Amps, Tube Guitar Amps, ThunderTweak Amplifiers Ace has best of both, tone and chops.. Cool dude too called him once to ask advice, he was very obliging.He told me his first amp he built is still his favorite. I dig that.