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.

[quote=”lee_UK”]And what you fail to understand is, it’s only you me and Bass that are reading this thread, everybody else went home days ago…. did’nt you notice? Hello.. anybody there?? lol[/quote]

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.

YOU added a response that plonked the thread firmly back in the public eye, it was all set to simply slide into obscurity, you even asked me to reply – YOU did this, not me.

p.s. Have a go at answering my question instead of beating yourself up all the time.

I acknowledge your compromised position and the fact you struggle to compile any convincing reply. It is an extremely difficult question to answer and most people in here would be unwilling to tackle it. YOU are the one that came back and asked me to respond, I did, now you duck out, but I understand why. You quoted the figures and ‘facts’, they were challenged and you are unable to back them up. My own personal belief is that you read my response and have no clue how to reply.

Not comfortable losing face, but put this one down to experience.

One final point that I need to clarify. Using effects has made me tighten my technique and definitely broadened my range and ability. Why, how? There is no set we play that doesn’t demand a change of instruments mid-song. We do a 70’s prog rock set with 4 changes from electric to acoustic (during the ELP/Genesis/Yes section), a step on the pedal and I switch from electric to acoustic patch – I simply wouldn’t have time to physically change instruments. If I play any wrong notes, these are instantly highlighted – it is just me, nothing is masked or smothered. This is why I use effects, ease of use, not to hide behind. Jimmy Page used a double-neck specifically to play Stairway for this very reason, both necks were in reach without changing instruments – the same is true for me only I do it another way.

As for being offended, I live on mainland UK not Tracey Island. I control my own internal state not other people and certainly not via the pages of a chatroom.

[quote=”talljackhole”]John Lennon is cool. I presonally don’t know how great of a guitarist he is though so I can’t really say anything about him. But I do know, stuff about kaki. And although I may have not heard lots of types of genres, I can say that I haven’t heard anything of her style or skill on acoustic ever. But of course, I admit, I’m not that old either. But still.[/quote]

I think you meant ‘was’.

Neither John nor Paul were great guitarists at the time of The Beatles. George was unquestionably the most accomplished of the three (yes I know there were four, but he was a drummer). In fact, George routinely introduced a new chord/series of chords to John and Paul and it was that new ‘sound’ that often prompted them to write a song around it/them.

It is often easy to forget/dismiss/not even consider that the 50’s/60’s were almost completely devoid of instructional material. There was sheet music of course, but no internet, no tab sites, NO tab, just a couple of books (such as Bert Weedon’s Play In A Day) and certainly no cheap ‘good’ guitars. It is quite astonishing that guitarists of any memorable quality emerged from that era at all.

Having been rushed this morning when I responded (see above), I would hate for you to be even more confused than you already appear to be.
The dictionary definition refers to the word TONE, the definition being divided up into different areas and that is how it relates to the music association and the definition does not relate to the word ‘music’.

A couple of final points;

There is a new pedal out developed in conjunction with Eric Clapton called ‘Crossroads’. Plug into this and you sound just like Eric – NOT play like Eric, SOUND like Eric, i.e. the same tone. It isn’t marketed on sound 1/10th like him.

Finally, lee_uk summed it up beautifully in a thread further down entitled Gear Brag and to directly quote him

‘…..which one came out on top?? by far?? yep the THD, the tone was unbeliveable, there was a portrait of Baden Powell above the stage…..’

Well, if the amp produces unbelievable tone and is just 1/10th of the overall, then surely the 9/10th’s made up for by the guitarist completely nullifies a good amp? If that is true then all a good guitarist has to do is evoke the mystical 9/10ths and ANY amp will sound unbelievable – right?

All you have to do know is list exactly how that is achieved and to use Lee’s example once more – what do Metallica do to produce tone with technique?

Enough sabre rattling, posturing, credential flourishing – stop waffling, be specific – detail exactly what you mean??

[quote=”lee_UK”]Like i say, im not having a go, if effects are your thing then thats fine, i just find that you can become dependent on effects, a good delay and infinate sustain can hide a lot of sloppy guitar playing, but you can get creative with it too. The burden i said is meant to be carrying all this stuff around while you are gigging, batteries running low, effects packing up, short patch cables going faulty and it all has to be set up in the correct order, im not critising anybody for using all this stuff, it just seems to be a shame that all a lot of guys talk about is what effects does Metallica use? what delay does Brian may use? How do i get a sound like Slash? when i think you will agree, that 90% of their sound comes from their technique, and not a little red box with a 9v battery.
No offence intended on my earlier post.[/quote]

I certainly have taken no offence.

Covering mistakes is not something I would consider to be a priorityand certainly not the main reason to purchase an effect. I am also a bit unsure what you mean by ‘carrying all this stuff around’ – my GT6 lives in its own carrying bag, comes out of the back of the van, through a door and onto the stage – hardly the equivalent of a 50kg rucksack then up the side of Ben Nevis! As for battery power (and as I have solely quoted the GT6 throughout for live work) – the GT6 has no battery compartment = no batteries, I plug straight into the unit then into the PA/whatever system we are using = no patch cables.

The reason people ask about a guitarist’s ‘sound’ is because that is what they want to sound like – and no, I do not agree that it is 90% technique. You quote Brian May as an example, the main reason he sounds like he does is because of the very specific amp and homemade guitar setup he uses with its unique switching system.
I believe tone is 10% technique and 90% equipment = the reason Burns have made a copy of The Red Special and Vox an amp, is because that combination allows you to virtually acquire the ‘tone’.
The last time I saw Pink Floyd live, I watched in awe at Gilmour play, BUT he ONLY achieved that sound because of the HUGE array of effects he was plugged into. Yes of course, he is a master of space and phrasing, but Gilmour sounds like Gilmour because of a great many 9v batteries and little red boxes – on the other hand, I use just one gold box and no batteries.
You could argue that we all ‘rely’ on things hanging together whilst we play, we rely on string not breaking = I have broken several whilst playing live, I had a valve amp = it died twice whilst playing live.

Effects are not a dependency, they are part and parcel of the modern genre. Every strat owner manipulates the sound every time they reach for the whammy bar – is this a mistake masking technique designed to hide their bum notes?

Yes yes – some players hide behind racks of flashing lights, but many do not.

The worst piece of equipment I purchased was an electronic chord generator – essentially a calculator type doobery that displays a pictorial representation of any chord that you can’t fathom out yourself.

You can’t see the display in any room lighting as it floods the screen with flare.

The batteries are gobbled up in seconds.

It takes ages to work through the daft screen options to arrive at the key and type of chord you want displayed.

I gave it to my dog to chew.

The whole music thing is a huge convoluted monster that turns more beginners away than anything else.

Most scales are learnt using ‘shapes’ (especially ones like the Pentatonic scale). Although the word ‘penta’ means five, this does not refer to the number of shapes but the notes in the scale, but your question is what are the ‘shapes’?

Imagine trying to learn every note of a scale all over the fretboard in one big lump – to make this a lot easier, scales can be/are broken up into user friendly chunks and to use the pentatonic scale as an example, there are five shapes that all link together. The idea being, that you learn one shape, then the next and so on until you know them all. The good thing about this, is that the shapes remain identical no matter what key you decide to play in, so learn all five shapes and you know all 12(15) keys.
The other point is that the shapes remain true for both major and minor keys, the only difference being that the minor key is situated three frets lower – so if you are playing in C major, the relative minor key is 3 frets along at A.

This is highly simplified and apologies if it just makes the water even more muddy.