Pedals vs Songwriting

[npfrs]

 

So, I rented a Marshall Class 5 for fun over the Canada Day weekend and I've been plugging my guitars direct in (or a single pedal like a Mastotron or Echorec in-between) and came to a realization that, as much as I love pedals (having near 30), I'm not sure they add to my music in a highly significant way. Songs I write and think "Yeah, I'd loop this here and add some POG on top and etc, etc" sound just fine played direct in. Sure, they're a little less flashy but... so?

 

Adding textures/layers on top of loops and using all my pedals to warp my guitars sound is really fun but, at the end of the day, does the audience really need all that? I can make my electric guitar sound crazy and they nod along but when I take out a cello bow and bow my archtop through a simple delay - 3 sets of applause.

 

I feel like I'm having a pedal crisis of faith over here.... are you there Nels? It's me, Jon.

 

 

 

 

(FWIW I posted this on TGP and now am ostricized from the board)

[sparkfriction]

i feel you.

i was never a big pedal guy in my projects/bands... same with writing and recording my own stuff. Pedals are just tools - and yeah i love this tools!

i cant help you, but let me say... it is ok!

since i try to clear out my pedals, everything is connected again and it is pure fun.

the writing process is for sure the key... for example... think in melodies and not in "designed sounds"

other example - Buckethead songs are full of effects (delay, filter, phase shifter etc.) but all the songs works and delivers on acoustig guitars too.

[companyman]

When I am inbetween bands I distract my self with pedals.

[Urinate Forever]

i've been focusing more on using my hands to get more unconventional sounds. It's been working.

[Phil O'Keefe]

 

---

npfrs wrote:

 

 

So, I rented a Marshall Class 5 for fun over the Canada Day weekend and I've been plugging my guitars direct in (or a single pedal like a Mastotron or Echorec in-between) and came to a realization that, as much as I love pedals (having near 30), I'm not sure they add to my music in a highly significant way. Songs I write and think "Yeah, I'd loop this here and add some POG on top and etc, etc" sound just fine played direct in. Sure, they're a little less flashy but... so?

Adding textures/layers on top of loops and using all my pedals to warp my guitars sound is really fun but, at the end of the day, does the audience really need all that? I can make my electric guitar sound crazy and they nod along but when I take out a cello bow and bow my archtop through a simple delay - 3 sets of applause.

I feel like I'm having a pedal crisis of faith over here.... are you there Nels? It's me, Jon.

 

 

 

 

(FWIW I posted this on TGP and now am ostricized from the board)

 

---

 

 

Here's a thought - if it's a really good song, you can probably convey it adequately to an audience with nothing more than a (gasp!) acoustic guitar and your voice... so no, IMHO, you don't need pedals to get a song over to your listeners, but they do offer different sounds and textures, which can be very helpful from an arrangement standpoint. 

 

 

[V]

---

Phil O'Keefe wrote:

---

npfrs wrote:

 

So, I rented a Marshall Class 5 for fun over the Canada Day weekend and I've been plugging my guitars direct in (or a single pedal like a Mastotron or Echorec in-between) and came to a realization that, as much as I love pedals (having near 30), I'm not sure they add to my music in a highly significant way. Songs I write and think "Yeah, I'd loop this here and add some POG on top and etc, etc" sound just fine played direct in. Sure, they're a little less flashy but... so?

 

Adding textures/layers on top of loops and using all my pedals to warp my guitars sound is really fun but, at the end of the day, does the audience really need all that? I can make my electric guitar sound crazy and they nod along but when I take out a cello bow and bow my archtop through a simple delay - 3 sets of applause.

 

I feel like I'm having a pedal crisis of faith over here.... are you there Nels? It's me, Jon.

 

 

(FWIW I posted this on TGP and now am ostricized from the board)

---

 

 

 

Here's a thought - if it's a

really

good song, you can probably convey it adequately to an audience with nothing more than a (gasp!) acoustic guitar and your voice... so no, IMHO, you don't

need

pedals to get a song over to your listeners, but they do offer different sounds and textures, which can be very helpful from an arrangement standpoint. 

 

 

---

Kinda. I dunno it's pretty hard to even play some songs in certain genres without some kind of effects. 

 

Like, yes, you can play blues or classical or rock songs on acoustic and usually get away with it if they're decent.

 

But then you try to play something like surf or shoegaze or psychedelic on acoustic and while the song might still be just fine, it's no longer a surf or shoegaze or psychedelic song. 

 

True miserlou on acoustic guitar is still a good song but it's not really the same song anymore without spring reverb and clean electric guitar.

 

I guess what it comes down to is that, to me, different effects wind up equating almost to different instruments. When I play a fuzz I don't play like I would when I am playing clean. It's just a different set of rules entirely. Some things sound like **** with fuzz some things sound like **** clean. 

 

[hangwire]

My very broad oversimplification of effects is the lead gets effects to fit in with the basic pattern/structure which does not generally have effects as it is percussive/rythymic

[MacBradley]

This whole topic is kinda a foreign aproach to me...if I have an idea, sometimes it can be played on a guitar with out a pedal, sometimes without a capo, sometimes without a pick, sometimes with.  Also, it can sometimes be broken up into multiple instruments, or if physically possible played all on one guitar/keyboard/bass/ect.

 

Songs are songs.  They can be written without an instrument being touched.  FX pedals are just one tool in the subset of guitars that can be used, for both physical playing possibilties and tonal options.  By an extension of the same logic; why do you need a guitar even then, as opposed to a bass, or piano, or your vocal chords and a multitrack recorder, or just a sheet of staff paper?

[eti313]

---

npfrs wrote:

 

 

Adding textures/layers on top of loops and using all my pedals to warp my guitars sound is really fun but, at the end of the day, does the audience really need all that? I can make my electric guitar sound crazy and they nod along but when I take out a cello bow and bow my archtop through a simple delay - 3 sets of applause.

 

You need some more extreme effects

[Danhedonia]

Hoping people will forgive my high-handedness.

I've tried to explain this to many people - western popular music (e.g., rock songs) are dependent on the emotional resonance of the lead melodic part.  If that's a voice, it won't matter what you do to the guitar behind it; it will still sound nice one way or another.  If the guitar part is the meaningful melody, then FX can play a significant role in communicating those emotions.