Line 6 Sounds Suck! Line 6 Sounds Are Great!

[unichord]

Originally posted by Blackbelt1 Less than half of the respondents guessed correctly. I'd like to see more musicians close their eyes and let their ears be the judge

So true!

I couldn't tell the difference either.

I was a self-professed gear slut too - till I came across the combination of Vetta / Variax. If a guitarist can't get good sounds out of that combo - they're just not trying.

[Mats Nermark]

Hi,

I don't use a POD but I do use the Boss GS-10 which is the best modeller for my needs.

To get more natural dynamics (as I get with a real tube amp) I use the boost of my T-Rex M

[Anderton]

>

 

That's certainly true, and I agree 100%. However, let's get back solely to what plays back from a recording for a second. If people honestly can't tell the difference between a simulated Strat or Les Paul and the real thing in a blind test, or a simulated JCM800 or the actual amp, then those people have no business saying that the tone sucks. They can certainly say the experience of playing through a simulator sucks and be able to back that up simply by saying "And that's the way I feel about it." Who can argue with that? But if someone who says a simulated tone sucks can't tell the difference, then one certainly CAN argue with those conclusions. If someone can nail a blind test, then by golly, they've earned the right to say whatever they want

 

It's like the tube pop quiz thing I mentioned earlier. Oddly enough, the people who were most vocal about the greatness of tubes were the ones who usually chose the modeled sound, because I had modeled a sound that had the characteristics people associated with "tubes." The one guy who got it right was Bob Seal, the guitarist for Clear Light, a band back in the 60s. He had no axe to grind and no agenda, he just knew his sounds and had a great set of ears. Good guitar player, too!! And the only person other than my daughter to whom I ever loaned a guitar.

[mandoman]

Originally posted by RockViolin Dude. Tap tempo and such are controllable. From the floor. Big ass green display. It is xtra $ tho.

 

 

Duh, obviously tap tempo is the exception - or if you sacrifice your volume/wah pedal to control a parameter.

I'm talking about parameters not assigned to tap tempo or the rocker - some paramaters can be difficult to tweak in a live setting.

 

Actually, I'd say tap tempo is one of the best features to come out of the digital revolution.

[Lee Flier]

Originally posted by Anderton If people honestly can't tell the difference between a simulated Strat or Les Paul and the real thing in a blind test, or a simulated JCM800 or the actual amp, then those people have no business saying that the tone sucks. They can certainly say the experience of playing through a simulator sucks and be able to back that up simply by saying "And that's the way I feel about it." Who can argue with that? But if someone who says a simulated tone sucks can't tell the difference, then one certainly CAN argue with those conclusions. If someone can nail a blind test, then by golly, they've earned the right to say whatever they want

Well I will cop to being one of those golden-ears types who has taken quite a few blind tests (not just with amps but recording gear and such) and nailed most of them. But, as I've said with these tests before, I still don't think it's all that relevant because the parameters of the test often aren't relevant.

For instance... I probably couldn't tell the difference between a PRS through a cranked Soldano, and a simulated Soldano. Partly because I don't much care for that sound to begin with so am not as familiar with it as other amps, and partly because by all accounts, high gain distortion seems to be easier to model than lower gain. So if Line 6 were to post a blind test on their web site using these examples, and say they've "won" because most people couldn't tell the difference, I wouldn't put much stock in that.

Same seems to be true at the squeaky clean end of the spectrum... lots of people are happy with a clean Twin type sound on modellers and I think that's also not as hard to emulate.

Trouble is that I don't personally live at either end of that spectrum. I like mostly single coil pickups through mostly lower gain amps that have a fair bit of distortion but not a whole lot. e.g. most Fenders other than Twins, Vox, Ampeg, Hiwatt. Ken mentioned his Carr Rambler which falls into that category... and it's that kind of distortion that modellers suck at (though I agree with Ken that the Vox ToneLab does a better job than most, it's still not quite there). I would venture that most people who don't like modelling are people who are into those types of sounds, and most of them/us could probably nail a blind test that was based on those types of sounds.

I also think the difference is hugely apparent playing live. Funny thing, when I was up at Bose headquarters doing my "PAS orientation," they had a "Bose house band" demonstrating the system which played a mix of classic rock, funk, blues and that sort of thing. They had two guitarists, and there was a POD XT Live clearly visible on the stage. No amps, in keeping with the PAS paradigm. I was sitting next to another guitarist, a young guy who played in a kind of Americana/roots band, and we were needless to say pretty curious as to how the guitar tones were going to sound.

So the first guitarist in the band goes to take a solo on a blues song. The guy had made a valiant effort for many moons (as we found out later) to tweak some vintage sounding patches out of his XT Live, and he's a great player with dozens of big name credits, and certainly knows what a tube amp is supposed to sound like so no diss on him... but man, the sound was disappointing. I exchanged glances with the guitarist I was sitting next to and our faces both clearly said: "Bummer." It wasn't cutting through the mix and was just flat and mushy sounding in the context of the other instruments. Of course, we hadn't heard the Bose system before either, so we thought, "Maybe it's that." Even though all the other instruments sounded great.

Then guitarist #2 steps up for a solo. All of a sudden, instant goosebumps. The tone had that perfect edge-of-your-seat breakup, soaring sustain and could be heard clear as a bell over the other instruments.

Guitar Boy and I look at each other and both say, "There is NO WAY that is anything but a tube amp. NO way whatsoever." Either of us would've bet the mortgage at that moment that we were not hearing any kind of modeller and no modeller was capable of that kind of tone. Or if there was, it was something brand new and we were willing to buy one on the spot.

Turned out that guitarist had a little 2 watt Emery tube amp which had been placed inside an isolation cabinet along with a mic, so that it could be miked through the Bose system. The iso box was behind a curtain so it couldn't be seen.

Now Line 6 and Bose are very much on board with each other, they have a partnership and I suppose it was their intent with this little demonstration to show that with the PAS, a modeller could compete favorably with a tube amp. Instead it proved quite the opposite.

Later on during the trip I had a chance to tweak the XT Live (which I hadn't tried yet at that point) and play through that rig myself, it certainly did nothing to change my opinion. Neither have any subsequent experiences with it. So... whether you will be happy with these things or not REALLY depends on the context and (as we've already covered) what kinds of sounds you're looking for in the first place.

[percyexpat]

i think digital modelling has a lot of maturing to do, not because i think its bad but because the whole thinking is flawed.

an absolutely 100% perfect amp model can only ever be the equal of what it is modelling, by definition. i look forward to when a package becomes available where you can truly create new possibilities and stretch the power of digital music to its limits. max/msp goes some way towards this in many respects. the line6 variax in its tuning customisations and things is another example of digital doing something non-digital technology couldnt ever possibly do. this is what really excites me about digital technology.

[UstadKhanAli]

Originally posted by Anderton The real question for me is what is the "satisfaction factor"? With amps, a lot of people like the "kickback" -- but that's something I've never seen measured, or on a spec sheet, and I doubt that I ever will. Is it a function of sag? Bias? Having a transformer in there? Does it happen with open back as well as closed back cabinets? Does a closed back cabinet add mechanical compression? I understand why a lot of people think that just plugging into a tube amp is the height of simplicity, but it's not. The variables in there make going into an amp possibly the most complex preset ever.

I think perhaps the choice of which amp to plug in to is the more complex part. But quite frankly, right from the gate, if I plug in to my Carr Rambler, it sounds good. On any setting. On any volume. And *that* part is simple. Obviously, I'm aware of the fact that this reacts differently depending on which guitar I plug in, etc. - but then, so does everything else.

And I don't know if you can measure some things on a spec sheet. My guess is that part of it is a not very easily perceived complexity and variability in the sound coupled with how the amp reacts when the player is in the room with it, which a modeler might not do. Maybe it's because amps have existed for decades and decades, a lot of time to get something right...and digital modeling has been around a comparatively short period of time. Maybe it's the whole package - the amp, the enclosure, the whole thing, and how it interacts with everything else. Maybe the modeling of an amp is not as good as a real amp (the point of my writing that I prefer 5-year aged Wisconsin cheddar to Velveeta). Maybe it's all of the above and more. Maybe it's because amps are what God truly intended...

And I'm not an extremist who believes that the only good guitar sound is through an amp. I recognize the strengths of a modeler, its strengths, its conveniences, its bang for the buck, its many variables, and its ability to do some things that amps cannot (and obviously vice versa). I do not turn my nose up at someone who uses a Vetta or a Vox ToneLab (I use one!) or a Johnson or whatever. If they are getting good tones out of them - and the good players usually are - great.

[UstadKhanAli]

I am somewhat of an oddball when it comes to modeling. Though certainly modeling high-quality amps interest me - and why not? - what truly interests me is the ability to model something that cannot or does not physically exist.

What would a 30-foot tall guitar sound like? What would it sound like through an amp with speakers that react much quicker than speakers physically can in real life? What would that sound like with one speaker miced through gelatin? What would an amp sound like if you could mic it in the Taj Mahal with the Grand Canyon just outside the balcony (and mics surrounding the balcony and the Taj Mahal)? Can we make a model of an amp with a speaker that is torn or slashed?

Can a guitar create wholly synthetic sounds that don't sound like a guitar or a keyboard or anything that anyone has heard before? Can a guitar be made to resonate differently than is possible? Would that sound good? Can an amp do this?

[Blackbelt1]

Originally posted by Lee Flier Blackbelt, But again... for a musician the end result isn't the only part of the equation, the experience of playing is. I would still beg to differ that certain amp sounds can be modelled well at all... but even if they could, there's still the question of whether the responsiveness and the process of playing through a modeller is as satisfying for the musician, and therefore doesn't get in the way of an inspired performance. The answer to that question is different for every musician, but it's silly to call somebody a Luddite and resistant to change just because they subjectively prefer an older tool over a newer one.

I don't know what a "Luddite" is but it doesn't sound flattering.

Lee, you're an experienced musician who plays live quite often and you can probably play rings around me. I think my post was aimed more at the journeyman musician who buys a tube amp and bashes modeling tools because all of their buddies say
"modeling sucks and you need tubes to sound great." I feel that if someone genuinely prefers specific equipment for the "mojo" it brings or because someone's discernment is above that of the average musician then more power to 'em.

In addition to my Variax, I have several Strats, a Gretsch w/Bigsby, and some other guitars. I have reasons to play them all. I also have 3 amps in addition to my Pod XT Live. They too get used. My point is this: modeling is here, it's good technology, and for the general population of musicians, you can add quite a bit to your arsenal with these fantastic tools. I've got 3 amps and 12 guitars, but thanks to the Pod XT Live/Variax combo, I effectively have all of those other sounds I use too, and otherwise would be lacking.

After playing in bands throughout my younger years, I took on a mortgage, had a couple of sons, and carved out a career directing live network television shows. My guitars went in storage or got sold and I basically noodled around on an acoustic I kept handy, for 12 years. Then in 2004 I received a Guitar Port for Fathers Day and my passion for playing was ignited. I've added guitars, amps, a Pod XT Live, the Variax, and recording gear to my living room in the past 2 years, and I realized a goal earlier this year when I went back onstage doing some open mic nights.

With the Variax and Pod XT Live, I can walk into a venue and play acoustic, electric, slide, etc...emulating a wall of Marshalls or a small Fender Tweed. I'm finding more and more songs to perform that involve 12-string acoustics, switching to Strats, switching to LPs - all in the same tune. I couldn't think of pulling these tunes off live as a one-man act a few years ago and now I can. It's also much easier to record here at home with this stuff (and believe me hearing yourself during playback can be very humbling).

I think the modeling stuff is good enough to fool most ears, as was proven in Dr. Simon's experiment; sure, there will be exceptions. I'm not advocating throwing Gretschs and Marshalls away in favor of Pods, I'm simply saying, move them over a bit and scoot some of these modeling tools next to them to expand the creative options.



~Blackbelt

[RockViolin]

Originally posted by mandoman Duh, obviously tap tempo is the exception - or if you sacrifice your volume/wah pedal to control a parameter. I'm talking about parameters not assigned to tap tempo or the rocker - some paramaters can be difficult to tweak in a live setting. Actually, I'd say tap tempo is one of the best features to come out of the digital revolution.

 

 

The thread was movin fast. I missed that your using XT Live. "Duh" taken. All the same. I don't see what is hard about pressing a button to call up a parameter. Or 2 buttons to call up a sub. You press a button or 2 and twirl a knob. How hard is that?

If such things are truly a challenge for you, go back to pedals.

[Kiwiburger]

the microwave oven was just a gimmick. This is 2006 ...

I believe this is the best analogy yet: the Pod is very comparable to a microwave oven. A tube amp would be more like your conventional electric stove.

 

When the microwave ovens arrived in the '80's, it was the latest and greatest thing, and we all went microwave crazy. Now, 20 years on, we are finding out that microwaves destroy good vitamins. Also, they are very unhealthy because they over-cook some parts of the food and undercook other parts. That destroys the nutritional value, and allows harmful bacteria to survive the process.

 

But it confirms all along what we knew anyway - microwaved food just tastes bad. Sure - you can use microwaves to prepare some fast foods in a hurry. And most people won't notice or care. Unless you try to cook chicken legs or something - the grossest thing i've ever seen is bloody sawn off chicken stumps cooked in a microwave oven (a failed culinary experiement by a long ago flatmate).

 

A short time ago I decided to invest in some stainless steel steamer saucepans - 1950's technology. We were so suprised at how much better vegetables taste now - far, far superior to microwaved.

 

So yeah, i'm a Luddite. A Microsoft Certified F'ing Luddite, and proud of it.

[percyexpat]

Originally posted by UstadKhanAli I am somewhat of an oddball when it comes to modeling. Though certainly modeling high-quality amps interest me - and why not? - what truly interests me is the ability to model something that cannot or does not physically exist. What would a 30-foot tall guitar sound like? What would it sound like through an amp with speakers that react much quicker than speakers physically can in real life? What would that sound like with one speaker miced through gelatin? What would an amp sound like if you could mic it in the Taj Mahal with the Grand Canyon just outside the balcony (and mics surrounding the balcony and the Taj Mahal)? Can we make a model of an amp with a speaker that is torn or slashed? Can a guitar create wholly synthetic sounds that don't sound like a guitar or a keyboard or anything that anyone has heard before? Can a guitar be made to resonate differently than is possible? Would that sound good? Can an amp do this?

yep, exactly that is where this technology should be going but it sadly doesnt seem to be.

[UstadKhanAli]

Originally posted by Blackbelt1 I'm not advocating throwing Gretschs and Marshalls away in favor of Pods, I'm simply saying, move them over a bit and scoot some of these modeling tools next to them to expand the creative options. ~Blackbelt

Isn't that what Lee was saying?

"Nobody's suggesting that modelling should just go away, so long as amps don't go away. But again, it's silly to argue taste with someone, and a lot of the posts in this thread are just trying to use some objective standard to justify one's own taste, as if you're *sure* everybody in the world would love modelling if they just were more open minded, or invested enough time tweaking, etc. Some people just don't like them, and it's not the end of the world nor should anybody really have to justify why they like any piece of gear or don't like it. Same with modelling, if you prefer the sound over an amp then more power to ya."

[MrKnobs]

Originally posted by RockViolin Someone, I think it was Mr. Knobs, said that tone was not in the fingers, hand. A blanket statement that set me going. He's been all kicked back this entire time since his post. He's probably making a human interest study of it all.

Nothing so sinister, just can't be here all day. I have serious obligations to meet over on OJ, you know!

I stand by my statement, but perhaps I should explain a little more carefully.

HERE is a short clip of David Grissom demo'ing some gear for BadCat Amplifiers . I have hosted this clip temporarily on my own website because the Bad Cat site is temporarily all screwed up as they change service providers. In fact, I wanted to show you two much simpler clips but I couldn't find those in my browser cache. This clip will have to do.

Note the slightly overdriven crunch tone at the beginning of the clip. This is a class A, EL84 tube amp breaking up slightly, giving a touch of distortion while letting the notes of the chord be heard clearly. It happens to be a sound that I very much like and find useful in my own stuff of late.

As I mentioned, I've recorded many, many people using PODs. I'm working with a very well known guitarist right now and he used a POD on his initial tracks, strictly as a guide while tracking bass and drums.

Neither he (an extremely experienced musician and long time POD owner) can get the type of sound you just heard in the Grissom clip using a POD. I've tried for many hours and I can't either - and I used to make a fairly substantial chunk of my living programming patches for various multieffects units and amp emulators.

Having said that, maybe YOU can. If so, please do. Put up a clip of your best effort getting the slightly overdriven Fender Blackface / Matchless / BadCat Class A tube sound. I'd really, really love to hear it because I don't particularly enjoy having to set up a loud amp in my studio, move several mikes around a lot, and try various takes to get the sound. And I definitely don't enjoy taking heavy tube amps to shows and carrying them up metal fire escape stairs on the ass end of third floor clubs.

I WANT modelers to work, I really do. I've proved my sincerity (and my wishful thinking) buy buying many of them over the years.

Now let's get back to fingers and tone.

I admire David Grissom and his tone like a lovestruck teenage boy admires the delicate curves of his girlfriend's supple young body. Well, maybe not exactly like that but you get the idea.

In the clips I wanted to play for you, Grissom plays some very simple chord melodies that ANY moderately competent guitarist, even ME can play. The tone is beyond gorgeous, and it is not a tone I was able to get out of a POD, a VG-88, or any of the amps I owned at the time.

So I conducted the obvious experiment. I read on the Bad Cat site exactly what David had played through, I learned the simple parts and practiced every nuance of them until I got it right, and then I went to the local boutique amp dealer and assembled the exact gear the website said was used for the clip.

Guess what? I played the simple parts and I sounded 99.99% identical to David Grissom playing those simple things. Everyone else who was there at that test agreed with my assessment.

It didn't have a damn thing to do with whose fingers were playing the parts. Again, any reasonably competent guitarist who took the time to carefully learn the parts including the subtle nuances could have done the same.

Am I a great guitarist like David Grissom? Not even remotely. Can I play a simple chord melody based on G, C, and D major chords with all the right phrasing, inversions, and hammer-ons/pull offs exactly like David probably did in his sleep for the demo? Yes, I can. Did it sound the same? Absolutely, because I was playing exactly the same thing though exactly the same gear.

Why? Because Dave was using maybe 1% of his talent playing the simple part, which was a fair match for 100% of mine. The "tone is in the fingers" variable of the experiment was all but eliminated by what he chose to play.

Do modeling boxes capture some tones that classic amps make? I'd say yes, or at least maybe, if you're talking about comparing recorded sounds on tape. Do modelers capture the sound of a tube amp being lightly overdriven? If one does, I've yet to hear it.

Please post a clip and prove me wrong. You have the clip I linked above as a reference, and I hope to post the two simple clips as soon as the Bad Cat site is back up and operational.

And finally, a big shout out to James at Bad Cat. Great product, super guy, wonderful support after the sale. Love you man, hope you don't mind me temporarily hosting one of your demo clips.

Terry D.

P.S. One more thing. You all know I just can't resist getting in trouble, so here I go again.

I just got through reading my copy of this month's EQ mag. Hidden in there near the back is a review of the Sequis Motherload, which has been getting great buzz as the next greatest thing for capturing amp tone without miking a speaker (the last greatest thing was the Palmer box).

I have to tell you I had the hots for this thing pretty bad.

The review is the usual careful magazine treatment, calculated to not offend any possible sponsor. So, as always, you have to read between the lines. If you normalize for that reality, I'd say it's a negative review. Craig and Lee will get on my case for this, but I'm sticking to my guns. Read it yourself, and see if you don't agree.

[Blackbelt1]

Originally posted by UstadKhanAli Isn't that what Lee was saying?

Yes, but I am clarifying my own earlier post. I wanted to point out that the modeling stuff is an integral part of my rig to me, but it's not my ENTIRE rig.




~Blackbelt

[Lee Flier]

Yep Terry... that tone is exactly the kind of thing I was talking about that can't be done with a modeller, at least not any that I've heard yet. And if anybody can prove me wrong I'd be happy to hear it too.

As for the review, I didn't write it and I haven't read it, so no comment, other than (as I've mentioned before) that I don't know anyone who writes reviews that way "so they won't offend a sponsor" but because they realize they're writing for an audience with a lot of different tastes. If I were reviewing a Line 6 product, I might personally think it sucks compared to an amp and I'd probably mention somewhere in the article that I'm a tube amp snob, but that having been said I wouldn't just say "it sucks," I'd try to focus on the positives because some people MIGHT, and do, find them useful. Even you and I do in certain instances (like scratch tracks). And I wouldn't be doing this so as not to piss off Line 6 (after all I'm sitting here in this forum basically trashing them right now ), but because I don't consider it my job in a review to impose my taste on anybody. I consider my job to tell people what the product does and doesn't do, what it's like to work with it, where I found it useful and where I don't. And let people make up their own mind.

But then, I haven't read the review and don't know who wrote it, so I could be wrong in this instance.

[RockViolin]

I don't doubt I could get quite a few violinists to back me up on the aspect of fingers and tone, at least as it is relevant in the violin world. But I seem to be the only one here right now. I am starting to believe it matters less with the electric guitar. And that starts me down a path I don't want to go. I've ticked off enough guitar players already just with my username! If the energy of the player, their flesh, and blood, and soul are so removed as to be inconsequential, then isn't that kind of sad? All that matters is your guitar, amp, string guage, etc. You really don't think those big snausages of B.B. King's have any effect?

Lot's of references to people who "have a POD". The XT PRO since upgrade just kills my POD original. They are getting closer. But I was mad that it was limping when I got it. And that I had to buy a new computer to load in the upgrade. And for the money, it should have been loaded with the model packs.

" Dammit Jim, I'm a violinist, not a guitar player."

Nice clip. I'll see what i can do.

[MrKnobs]

Originally posted by RockViolin If the energy of the player, their flesh, and blood, and soul are so removed as to be inconsequential, then isn't that kind of sad? All that matters is your guitar, amp, string guage, etc. You really don't think those big snausages of B.B. King's have any effect?

 

 

But can a guitarist express his (or her) flesh, blood, and soul playing a simple open G chord? If the answer is "yes," as I believe it is, wouldn't that expression combine all sorts of things besides fingers, including choice of exactly where to play that chord, how much to let it ring, what inversion, any vibrato added, and what guitar and amp to play it through? Might not another guitarist be able to exactly copy those (fairly limited) choices through the same equipment and sound (almost) exactly the same for that limited passage?

 

I think the answer is "yes" to that also.

 

The difference is, David Grissom thought of it, created that style, whereas I just copied him.

 

And just to go the more mundane route for a moment, let's also keep in mind that the violin is a more expressive instrument than a guitar in many ways. For one thing, you have no frets which gives more choices. For another, you're playing an acoustic instrument with profound resonances you can work with to express your own style.

 

By the way, no argument from me about violin tone. I'm presently working with a violinist on our new album who has the most beautiful tone I've ever had the pleasure to record. She can make either her nice acoustic violin or her Fender slab sound nearly the same.

 

Terry D.

[RockViolin]

I saw an (almost) in your post. We're getting there. And you did include fingers in your list of variables. That was all I wanted. And yes, those Fenders are hunks. I have a Barbera 5 string ultralite that is just great. For me anyway. Seriously, I will actually give the demo you asked for a shot. But it's prolly not relevant, as its a violin. And if I can't get the POD XT to even compare, I'll post it anyway and fess up.

[Lee Flier]

Originally posted by RockViolin I don't doubt I could get quite a few violinists to back me up on the aspect of fingers and tone, at least as it is relevant in the violin world. But I seem to be the only one here right now.

 

 

No, you're not. I think fingers are hugely important to a player's sound, and please point out to me where I've said they aren't. There's absolutely no doubt you can give the same guitar and amp to 10 different players and have them play the same song and it will still sound very different.

 

But that's independent of the fact that gear makes a difference AS WELL.

[RockViolin]

I'm not? Do you play the violin as well Lee? And for my part, regrets for the earlier heaviness. Nice to meet you, and MrKnobs!

[mandoman]

Originally posted by RockViolin The thread was movin fast. I missed that your using XT Live. "Duh" taken. All the same. I don't see what is hard about pressing a button to call up a parameter. Or 2 buttons to call up a sub. You press a button or 2 and twirl a knob. How hard is that? If such things are truly a challenge for you, go back to pedals.

 

 

I do primarly use pedals because I like all of the controls visible and ready to change without going through menus. But more so, they sound WAY better than any line 6 effect. Line 6 may lead the way on amp models, but most of their effects models suck donkey balls.

 

They should have made the pod xt's display bigger, than maybe I wouldn't gripe so much about the inerface.

[MrKnobs]

Originally posted by RockViolin I'm not? Do you play the violin as well Lee? And for my part, regrets for the earlier heaviness. Nice to meet you, and MrKnobs!

Our pleasure, I'm sure!

Terry D.

[Lee Flier]

Originally posted by RockViolin I'm not? Do you play the violin as well Lee?

Ahh I misunderstood... I thought you meant you were the only one who was saying tone is in the fingers. I guess you were saying you seem to be the only violin player!

But no, I don't play the violin, although I did for a couple of years as a kid. My cousin does it properly though... he's recently retired from the Boston Symphony in which he played for 43 years.

Are you familiar with Theressa Anderson? She's out of New Orleans and plays some pretty crazy electric violin.

Anyhow nice to meet ya!

[Anderton]

>

 

Well first of all, I really like the sound in your clip. I have a definite preference fo those slightly overdriven, crunchy sounds; the whole scooped/1000% distortion never got to me. I also consider those slightly overdriven sounds to be the toughest test of ANY distortion device -- tube, solid state, modeling, etc. As was pointed out, it's easy to get either extreme of the curve, but the middle's a bitch.

 

I did NOT try to emulate the sound of your clip, but I thought I would at least attach a file using an overdrive preset I like a lot. When it comes to slight overdrive I am partial to the somewhat more aggressive/bright AC30 kind of sound, so that's reflected here. Also I'm using humbuckers rather than single coil. But I do like this sound, to my ears it's a nice combination of "clean distortion" and a little trebly, Yardsbirdsy-kinda edge.

 

Sorry about the 96kbps MP3, but given that I can attach only a 102k max file, I went for length over fidelity.