Bassleft is a big bollock

Welcome to the thread where disagreeing with another POV doesn't hijack some other poor burger's innocent topic. I was going to call it 'dictionary corner' but decided to land a punch on my own chin instead, to get the ball rolling.

Wasp, there is an irony to this unfolding tragedy. For starters, I was not being in the least sarcastic about you or anyone else. I intended that, for a competent player, FX are a handy tool in replicating tone/sound, without having to buy half the world's 'vintage' amps. However, I would not like a reader to think that a stompbox (modelling or otherwise) is some panacea that "true bypasses" actually bothering to learn a bit of technique.

Either our wires got crossed (I freely admit my writing style is a bit abstract) or perhaps you do disagree; that the pedals hold the key. If the latter is the case; fine, that is your POV and I don't happen to subscribe to it. Not really worth getting into 'chatroom' yah-boos about, just a diff of op.

Secondly, you make an interesting point that many of the "15 best guitarists" quoted had little to go on. I was thinking the same. They might be lucky to have had a Dansette in the bedroom, yet they developed an innovative 'classic' style of their own. For my own tastes, I prefer current players to do the same. Again, it's just a POV. If you disagree, that's fine but you don't have to reach for the red button about it.

BTW, quote Lee's best bits. "I played all four notes that BB King has played..." :lol:

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

It has never been my intention to suggest or accept that using pedals/effects negates having to learn to play. I picked up my first guitar in 1964 and never even used a pedal until the mid 90’s.

As I have clearly explained in the other thread, my main primary focus for using the GT6 is simply because I physically cannot switch instruments fast enough – I need to have access to an acoustic sound in less than a second, a stomp on the appropriate patch and I do. It isn’t about creating a wall of dirt to hide behind, gone is any gain, reverb, we are in the ‘clean’ zone – the musical equivalent of The Full Monty – all blemishes are apparent. I appreciate some players hide behind effects, but using them has made me a more rounded and competent player.

I am at a loss to identify the reasons anyone is against effects in the hands (or rather feet) of an experienced player? Hendrix – perhaps the most revered and worshiped player of my generation (and your’s) – the key to his sound was effects.

Effects complete the spectrum for me, no song is now out of bounds, there are no cadence faltering breaks whilst equipment is fumbled with, one song finishes, the next starts. They opened the door allowing me to play Ralph McTell, Sabbath, Echo and the Bunnymen, one Willie Nelson song and Muse all in the same set – WITHOUT swapping my guitar;

We know exactly what is on the table as far as what has transpired thus far, there have been well over 300 views of the ‘other’ thread, yet despite having ample opportunity to counter my view – no specifics have been presented by any one person to ‘disprove’ my view.

Lee tried an exercise in damage limitation with the old ‘bored’ ruse asking if we could simply kick the thread into touch? Yet he carries on responding with paragraphs of text saying that we are going over the same old ground, when in fact he refuses to even attempt an answer.

To say that by some magical and mystical intervention, guitarists are able to evoke 9x the influence with their fingers over their rig is an astonishing view given that Lee responds to other subjects with some authority – for this is exactly what we are asked to accept. My view is that he plucked the percentage from the ether, and he is happy to sit in the hole he dug for himself with those words. Unfortunately the longer he stays in it, the more dirt gets kicked in his face which is unfortunate for he seems to be a decent human being

In the latest Guitarist magazine in the Santana interview (page 56) – it states;

Hence Santana’s new tone requires two valve amps, a Boogie and a Dumble, wired in series. “The Dumble gives me the belly tones and the chest tones, which is the tenor saxophone and the Boogie me the head tones which is like a soprano.”

If the fingers have 9x more influence, then why bother with such equipment, why a PRS, why not a Squier?

Technique is what you do to manipulate the strings, tone is how those manipulations are interpreted by the equipment’s settings.

Regards the other poor burger’s (?) thread you mention. Far better to have titled it more precisely – if it is designed to get useful responses about pedal trends, then heading it ‘My First Post’ is a bit self-defeating.

By the way, self-flagellation is always an excellent defusing tactic. Nice ploy.

i still stick by my 10-90 statement, the fact i was trying to state is this, there are a lot of younger players who have come on here over the years wanting to part with cash to sound like their guitar heroes, they wanted to know what kind of cables they use what kind of effects, and if those effects have the geranium resistors or not, OK so you need a reverb unit and a delay to sound like Will Sargent but more importantly you also need to know how he plays Villiers terrace (probably the best song ever written) with a staccato effect using pick tecnique, does anybody realy think that if you get hold of a 68' strat and a marshall head and a fuzz face you can realy sound like Hendrix? lets say for instance you take a classicaly trained musician and give him hendrix's rig, and then say now play purple haze all the way through from start to finnish, theres the sheet music, get on with it., how would that sound? probably 10% hendrix 90% mush. 90% of a players TONE is in the fingers, for that you need to be able to mimick his technique to get his tone, but i dont think you need the full Brian may setup to sound like him, 90% his technique.
The fact you learned in the 60's would have helped you enourmously, because you probably played a lot of clean to begin with and over the years you developed your technique, effects werent around as much in the 60's as they are today, i learned to play in 77' aged 11 after hearing The sex pistols Never mind LP, Steve jones had a fantastic tone, helped my double tracking a blown out fender twin, but it was his fingers and pick attack playing Holidays in the sun, Burt Weedon would have had problems playing it. In 77' all i had was an accoustic and learned a lot of rock technique on that, my family never had the money to buy effects pedals and our school band made do with what we had, but we could still sound like The Jam even though by that time we had 3 very cheap electric guitars and 6 watt practice amps, a very very cheap drum kit and no microphone, we sounded like them because we studied their technique and not their backline. And i wasnt having a go at you for using a GT6, as i said i had a GT5 a few years ago, and now own a ME50, its a great box for what it is, so im not anti-effects, but i stick by my 'play like him to sound like him' statement, the old 10-90 rule.
Your last post on the original thread was good and readable, so in answer to this please dont overdo the quotes " " , especialy when the quote is just a single post away, OK so lets discuss the 10-90 staement.

I was thinking along similar lines to Lee. I don't doubt that both he and I could see that you'd played your dues and, again, both he and I use and appreciate pedals. However, there are those who think that spending money and stepping on the switch will "make them just like (insert famous player)". A lot of overblown advertizing drivel can be the cause of this, resulting in disappointment and an expensive piece of kit lying in the cupboard. With some digital cure-alls, the depreciation can be alarming. In those circs, there's nothing wrong with a "It ain't as simple as that" post.

I don't get hung up on %s myself, but if we can discuss the merits of this vs that sensibly, a little bit of decorum would be nice. I suggested the switch because it had become a hijack of a slightly different topic. Also, this is "Guitarsite forum", not a chatroom for "Ha! You answered me back, that means you're provocative. Ha! You're staying silent, that proves I've won and EVERYONE can see that" stuff.

If I may say so, and call it a smokescreen if you like, it really is very boring to read. Saying that 300-whatever people have viewed without posting; ergo, they all agree with you - that's one way of looking at it. Another (and trust me, it is more likely) is that 300-odd have clicked, looked, rolled-eyes, and left. The one poor geezer who did chime in got yet another patronizing blast and (worse) a C+P of what he'd just trawled through. It's unpleasant, and counter-productive. I'm quite happy to put forward my "Layla" POV, in a straightforward, non-combative way. Too much to ask that differing ops are in the same vein?

im sure most of those 300 viewed through morbid curiosity, motorway rubberneckers, i dont feel this is very constructive either, we both have different points of views on the subject and always will, you believe you can acheive the best part of guitar hero tone through a pedal and i dont, this could go on longer than a womens UK no1 vs womens UK no2 rally on a first serve at wimbledon.
More balls please bass.
oh no sorry, that 11yr old prodigy saw you off! :lol: i still dont know how or why you owned up to that one, and i still have a quiet chuckle every now and then.

Crikey, Lee :lol: . If you remember me muttering that an 11 y.o. beat me at tennis, I'll have to be more careful about what I say :oops: . I doubt if it was technique, though. The git probably had a better racquet.

Its all in the fingers Bass, not the racquet ! :lol:

My George Foreman grill certainly doesn't give me the same perfectly grilled sausages as he gets. It's definitely 1/10th grill and 9/10ths ability with grills.

The same works for tones Ywasp. Or maybe you are both at the wrong ends of the scale and it would be fairer to even it to half and half, with slightly more in Lee's favor.

There really isn't anymore to add, it's just peoples opinions. Could you match Clapton's tone with little more than an effect, I highly doubt it. More than 9/10ths of the clapto-super-box.

I could never understand the 'Lean Machine' George looks a bit of a porker to me, not exactly a lean guy is he? strange choice for a celeb endorsement, or have i overstepped the mark there? he still looks like he packs more of a paunch than a punch, of course he's still a super guy, and a credit to society...phew. :shock:

Farino, you were the "poor geezer" I referred to above. I hope you don't get your sausages post 'flamed' by an "obviously you don't heat the griddle in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions (www.Iactuallybothertolookthisup.com)" post. Hope not, but it could happen :)

I have made my position as clear as it could possibly be – equipment produces 9/10ths of tone.

I have viewed perhaps 15 – 20 guitar sites that detail what guitar note is, what constitutes it and how it is achieved. EVERY SINGLE ONE without exception says exactly what I say.

You continually say otherwise and not once have you even attempted to supply one iota of detail, despite opportunity after opportunity. Like a Christian who ‘believes’ who is pressed to say supply details, no-one comes up with an answer as to what = nothing. ‘It’s all in the fingers’, is the glib response every time.

I too say that a pedal will NOT make you sound EXACTLY like any named guitarist, it being an approximation given the obvious variations of variables in the chain, guitar, pickups, strings etc etc, of the original.

What is very common is that you raise a point and when I respond you seem to forget/ignore that you initially raised it;

Lee said in the other thread;
‘And what you fail to understand is, it's only you me and Bass that are reading this thread,’

I said;
‘Exactly 48 hours ago the views held steady at 153, today, now, at the time of writing = 289.
The numbers unfortunately disprove your theory. Sorry.’

Then I am accused of;
‘Saying that 300-whatever people have viewed without posting; ergo, they all agree with you - that's one way of looking at it.’

Complete pants, I merely pointed out that it clearly was not ‘you me and Bass that are reading this thread’ – in fact the number stands now at 350. I did not say or imply anything about agreement whatsoever, JUST that 100’s of people were viewing the thread.

My position could not be clearer, I agree that a small percentage of guitar tone is evoked with the fingers in conjunction with the pick and have supplied copious detail, not just based upon my belief system but many others too.
Your position is clear too. You say one thing based upon a percentage you supplied, i.e. the fingers provide 9x more influence over tone than equipment. I ask you to detail what the fingers do that produce that? Nothing is supplied whatsoever, not one scrap, no tiny morsel of an idea or notion, zippo, zilch, just days of rhetoric, squirming and cries of being bored.

You now want to ‘…..take it bit by bit.’? You’ve already had the chance to do that in spades.

Well, quite simply no thanks. You are backed into a corner of your own making and it is up to you to get out of it – and no way is it a case of we simply disagree, I have supplied masses of detail, you have not supplied any.

Start supplying details of the magical 9x finger power, or you are blethering amongst yourselves.

The viewers of this entire situation await you to ‘put up, or shut up’ – there is no ‘bit by bit’.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions. Do not include any spaces in your answer.
Image CAPTCHA
Copy the characters (respecting upper/lower case) from the image.

Contact | Contents | Privacy Policy | Forum

This site is published by Hitsquad Pty Ltd. Copyright © 1999 - 2017 , All Rights Reserved.