Tweet
This scenario isn't unusual, I see (& do the odd bit of work for) some very talented players, with great tone, who either set control & tone knobs by eye, rather than ear...
...or stick to certain numbers because they "always have"... or because they saw/heard someone else with those settings & it influenced them greatly early on - despite the fact that they personally don't sound anything like the source of the settings (though they might sound great themselves) & that 2 models of the same amp can sound quite different even when working properly.
It doesn't take anything away from their talent, but occasionally it can wrong foot them with an unusual amp/set up, that doesn't meet their preconceptions. E.g. their amp might get a new volume pot with a slightly faster/slower taper and they'll try and convince you that the amp is malfunctioning, when all they might need to do is adjust the pot...some folk I've met would appear to be keener to jump off a cliff than turn a pot up/down by half a mark.
I think it's largely part of the human condition to try and set/recognise visual patterns, for a sense of reassurance/security and it's not unusual for some really talented players to be quite insecure/superstitious. Put it down to artistic temperament.
Also, even for a lot of pro players, it is difficult for them to retain a certain TONE in the memory...pitch isn't a problem, but often I'll hear guys say, "Hey, this sounds just like (insert artist of choice)", but when you A/B to a reference it usually doesn't, though it might share some attributes with the quoted tone (even a single note can be quite complex, with regard to harmonics/envelope/level of drive etc). Not that that in itself bothers me, I try and take people's tone & assess it on IT's own merits, if it sounds good it IS good...irrespective of how much it does/doesn't sound like an artist that they may have been influenced by. It can be infuriating though, when someone has a great tone themselves, but they permanently bang on about this player or that player...seemingly unaware that they'll never sound like them in a million years. Oops! On reflection, I might have to include myself in the latter part of that one...& apologies for anyone else shifting uncomfortably around in their seats right now...YES, I MEAN YOU! :-).
For instance I have been at live recorded gigs & the sound that comes off the CD bears little relation to what came off the stage on the same night, once EQ'd in the studio.
On some rare occasions you'll come accross a player with an unholy tone, they'll say "yeah, I can get a great sound out of anything, I just use this old such & such guitar/amp...", next time you see them they have a new bit of kit & they sound totally different (tonally that is - phrasing & note choice, musicality might be as strong as ever) and they may never hit that initial sound ever again. Let's face it, we probably all have a favourite album/session by a player where they hit our perception of tonal nirvana...whether that session was the same for them may be a very different matter (you can often hear something in a session that causes you to change approach & never retread some old ground ever again). It can be just part of someone's musical journey/growth.
Personally, I find that numbers on dials can confuse the issue, sometime you should try just shutting your eyes & dialling in the controls, from your regular start point (I start with bass then work up). See where you end up... then see how/if it works in stage
Back to SRV - weren't a couple of Diaz's tweaks to the 65 RI Vibroverb to switch/pull the normal channel V1 tube (rebiasing V2) & using a 12AX7 in the PI? I don't doubt SRV did use a 5751, at least at some time, but I have heard guys get ball park with AX's in a BF circuit.
So, short story long, just because someone is talanted & has great tone, doesn't mean that they're not infallible in other ways, like the rest of us mortals.
...or stick to certain numbers because they "always have"... or because they saw/heard someone else with those settings & it influenced them greatly early on - despite the fact that they personally don't sound anything like the source of the settings (though they might sound great themselves) & that 2 models of the same amp can sound quite different even when working properly.
It doesn't take anything away from their talent, but occasionally it can wrong foot them with an unusual amp/set up, that doesn't meet their preconceptions. E.g. their amp might get a new volume pot with a slightly faster/slower taper and they'll try and convince you that the amp is malfunctioning, when all they might need to do is adjust the pot...some folk I've met would appear to be keener to jump off a cliff than turn a pot up/down by half a mark.
I think it's largely part of the human condition to try and set/recognise visual patterns, for a sense of reassurance/security and it's not unusual for some really talented players to be quite insecure/superstitious. Put it down to artistic temperament.
Also, even for a lot of pro players, it is difficult for them to retain a certain TONE in the memory...pitch isn't a problem, but often I'll hear guys say, "Hey, this sounds just like (insert artist of choice)", but when you A/B to a reference it usually doesn't, though it might share some attributes with the quoted tone (even a single note can be quite complex, with regard to harmonics/envelope/level of drive etc). Not that that in itself bothers me, I try and take people's tone & assess it on IT's own merits, if it sounds good it IS good...irrespective of how much it does/doesn't sound like an artist that they may have been influenced by. It can be infuriating though, when someone has a great tone themselves, but they permanently bang on about this player or that player...seemingly unaware that they'll never sound like them in a million years. Oops! On reflection, I might have to include myself in the latter part of that one...& apologies for anyone else shifting uncomfortably around in their seats right now...YES, I MEAN YOU! :-).
For instance I have been at live recorded gigs & the sound that comes off the CD bears little relation to what came off the stage on the same night, once EQ'd in the studio.
On some rare occasions you'll come accross a player with an unholy tone, they'll say "yeah, I can get a great sound out of anything, I just use this old such & such guitar/amp...", next time you see them they have a new bit of kit & they sound totally different (tonally that is - phrasing & note choice, musicality might be as strong as ever) and they may never hit that initial sound ever again. Let's face it, we probably all have a favourite album/session by a player where they hit our perception of tonal nirvana...whether that session was the same for them may be a very different matter (you can often hear something in a session that causes you to change approach & never retread some old ground ever again). It can be just part of someone's musical journey/growth.
Personally, I find that numbers on dials can confuse the issue, sometime you should try just shutting your eyes & dialling in the controls, from your regular start point (I start with bass then work up). See where you end up... then see how/if it works in stage
Back to SRV - weren't a couple of Diaz's tweaks to the 65 RI Vibroverb to switch/pull the normal channel V1 tube (rebiasing V2) & using a 12AX7 in the PI? I don't doubt SRV did use a 5751, at least at some time, but I have heard guys get ball park with AX's in a BF circuit.
So, short story long, just because someone is talanted & has great tone, doesn't mean that they're not infallible in other ways, like the rest of us mortals.
).
Comment