Boston Guitar Sound? Tom Scholz?

[mannydingo]

Again, I agree with you for the most part but I do believe that vibrato, finger pressure and pick attack are part of "tone". Santana once said that you could take his exact setup and sound nothing like him. I've experienced this myself when I let a youngster play my setup.

 

 

None of what you guys are saying is inaccurate. You are right that the youngster is going to sound different. If he's a beginner or just has less experience, his playing will reflect that. It's going to sound MUCH worse. Tone-wise, however, it's not going to change. What your're going to have is a hard time hearing the tone because of the bad playing that's annoying your ears. This is EXACTLY why if you or I get on Santana's rig it will sound nothing like him. And, if a novice player gets on his rig, his bad playing might be mistaken for bad tone. Bad playing does not change the equipment's tone. Tone, for musical equipment, is already a misnomer as it is. Let's not make it even more so.

 

A couple of decades ago, tone was just the eq on musical and home musical equipment. Remember, Bass, Midrange and Treble? Now it's used by most guitarists to signify the texture of the sound a guitar amp makes according to the amount of gain. This last year, it's now moving to the guitarist's actual playing. Pretty soon, the ability of the guitar player will be called tone and it won't even be used to describe the equipment's sound or even a combination of guitarist's playing and the amp sound. "Hey, did you catch that guy playing on that acoustic guitar with no other equipment? Man, that guy has good tone. No one plays as good as he does."

[chaosStrings]

Just one example at how "technique" (= fingers) has an impact on the sound:

 

Pick attack does affect the tone. Pluck at the bridge or at the fingerboard and there will be a difference. I often pick over the neck pup, other guitarists on the middle one (of a strat), since it gets in the way.

 

Furthermore, picking lighter or harder will of course have an impact on the sound. This effect may be limited with ultra-clean or hi-gain distortion, but is definetly noticeable on bluesy settings.

 

To make a long story short, picking technique has a fundamental part in the equalization pre-distortion, which, if you know the Rockman/Sansamp/any other amp gear design, is a key to the final sound.

[bigdaddyd]

A good example of the Rockman is Jeff Beck's recrding of the song "People Get Ready". I'm pretty sure there is some rockman on the track.

 

 

I would love to see some evidence of this.

[mannydingo]

 

Just one example at how "technique" (= fingers) has an impact on the sound: Pick attack does affect the tone. Pluck at the bridge or at the fingerboard and there will be a difference. I often pick over the neck pup, other guitarists on the middle one (of a strat), since it gets in the way. Furthermore, picking lighter or harder will of course have an impact on the sound. This effect may be limited with ultra-clean or hi-gain distortion, but is definetly noticeable on bluesy settings. To make a long story short, picking technique has a fundamental part in the equalization pre-distortion, which, if you know the Rockman/Sansamp/any other amp gear design, is a key to the final sound.

 

 

About the closest thing to a good argument for the other side--finally!

Ok, good points there and, you're right, picking in certain areas of the string length will give you different tone. However, we are still in the same debate. Why, well because this argument came about from us guitarists saying "Man, that amp has lousy tone" or "I'm getting really good tone out of my amp". It also comes from one of saying things like "That guy has always been a great guitarist but his equipment has been giving out bad tone ever since he changed from a Mesa Boogie to a Marshall". See, in other words, it was already written in stone that "tone" meant the sound coming from equipment and mostly it is speaking of the preamp/amp. My examples on this post speak of the example of the SAME guitarist(meaning the same playing ability)sounding good or bad depending on the equipment. When we speak of tone, we are generally speaking of the EQUIPMENT and the TONE it provides. Sheesh, it's so associated with equipment that even bad sounding distortion is part of that "amp tone" term use.

[Sun Devil]

nothing personal ... but the Rev'rend is FAMOUS for bul{censored}ting people about his gear. perhaps even INFAMOUS. just my .02 ...

True! One of many that do so.

But there may be a basis for this story. An old Guitar Player magazine I have has an interview with Billy & his Tech complete with some pics of some of the gear they used in the studio around that time.

One thing they mentioned in passing was a Rockman was mixed in with several other amps for a bit of ambient chorus.

There are some Z.Z. recordings around that time that sure sound like they have a bit of Rockman w/chorus in the mix.

[Spizzledude]

Stupid thread caused stupid me to buy that stupid Rockman today.

[CME]

Not really... have you actually heard the Digitech, or any other 'modeling' from back then? Line 6, and maybe Johnson, made the first such devices that didn't make you want to stab yourself in the face.

 

 

Okay going a bit off topic but just some FYI. Johnson Amps was subsidiary of Digitech. I believe it's Digitech's 2120 guitar preamp that is almost identical to the JM150/250 amps. Just fwiw I still own a JM250 and is a rather usable amp. I've just found I need some moderate distortion and some pedals. Not tons of amps and fx in one.

[mannydingo]

Stupid thread caused stupid me to buy that stupid Rockman today.

Which one did you buy?
How much did it cost?
Was it from ebay? If not, where?

[fatfat]

[chaosStrings]

Stupid thread caused stupid me to buy that stupid Rockman today.

 

Pics or it's a Guitar Ace reissued by Dunlop.

[petejt]

True! One of many that do so. But there may be a basis for this story. An old Guitar Player magazine I have has an interview with Billy & his Tech complete with some pics of some of the gear they used in the studio around that time. One thing they mentioned in passing was a Rockman was mixed in with several other amps for a bit of ambient chorus. There are some Z.Z. recordings around that time that sure sound like they have a bit of Rockman w/chorus in the mix.

Cool.



I think the consensus came down to that the main tone on Eliminator was a Legend solid-state hybrid amp, which was double-tracked and then later post-processed with modulation effects to shake it up a bit, which I suspect was the Rockman.

[Razsan]

While probably an ok piece of gear, unless your plan is to use the unit strictly in the studio, I would NEVER buy something like the rockman. Recording magic and live playing are 2 different animals. I'll use the pignose as an example. I'm old enough to remember it being allegedly used by various artists only to buy it and realize what an utter piece of junk it was.
If you want to sound good in a controlled setting, get a modeler...if you want to sound good live, get a Marshall. Mesa, Fender, etc. and forget these little toys. Have a nice day

[Spizzledude]

 

Which one did you buy? How much did it cost? Was it from ebay? If not, where?

 

 

It's a little blue faced cigarette sized pack that has been mounted in a rack for live playing. Looks like the original Rockman, whatever that was. Paid 25 locally. Looked it up: X-100

[RUExp?]

This gets very Boston/Rockman like sounds too.



http://www.bossarea.com/other/be5.asp

[therabbit]

I also said it before and I will say it again. Finger technique has NOTHING to do with tone. You're mistaking bad playing that makes things sound bad with bad tone. You can get a guy with the right equipment and using it correctly(not talking fingering)and the sound will be good even if his playing sucks. You will have to stop listening to him but only because of his bad playing. In other words: Bad playing with good tone makes listening annoying and Bad tone with good playing also make listening annoying. The playing does not affect the tone. Another way to prove this is simple: Get two guitarists, one is an excellent player and the other one has poor technique. However, only now have them both do an open-A power chord and that's it! Technique will play NO role here because it's just one strike of one simple-to-do chord. Keep in mind the worse of the two players isn't a complete beginner either. Equipment and set-up ONLY will make the difference in tone. Once again, if the lousy guitarist goes on to play a full song, his playing will ruin everything but not because of tone. Why do I feel this post is going to do NOTHING to make you think differently?

 

 

I don't have the time to waste reading all of your posts after this but try telling professional string players like violinists and cellist that technique doesn't affect tone.

 

Since you like the comparison analogies I'll give you one:

 

A friend of mine who was an okay guitar player with a lot of money bought a Taylor acoustic that was one of the expensive models (I don't remember now which one or how much but I think it was over $2,000 in the '90s). I had an early Tacoma which almost no one had heard of at the time. We were playing at his house when his wife commented how much more low end and full my guitar was which really ticked him off. He kept trying to did into the lows but couldn't get it happening. He asked to play my guitar so we switched. Then he got really frustrated because when I played his Taylor it had more low end than my Tacoma did when he played it. Swapped back and my guitar had more bass again.

 

So, if technique doesn't affect tone what was going on?

 

You really should educate yourself.

[fumpy]

I can't really say I "use" Rockman gear, as I just started playing again after 8 years off. But I hack through an XP-100 combo. Best amp ever. I also always run my rack gear through a Rockman Stereo Chorus. Most awesome chorus ever!

Also, I run a Rockman EQ in from of my Univalve. Probably the best guitar eq.

[Razsan]

But I hack through an XP-100 combo. Best amp ever .

 

 

Not that I'm a betting man, but I dare say roughly 99.999999999999999% of all the guitar players that ever lived would disagree with you.

[The Anomaly]

I don't have the time to waste reading all of your posts after this but try telling professional string players like violinists and cellist that technique doesn't affect tone. Since you like the comparison analogies I'll give you one: A friend of mine who was an okay guitar player with a lot of money bought a Taylor acoustic that was one of the expensive models (I don't remember now which one or how much but I think it was over $2,000 in the '90s). I had an early Tacoma which almost no one had heard of at the time. We were playing at his house when his wife commented how much more low end and full my guitar was which really ticked him off. He kept trying to did into the lows but couldn't get it happening. He asked to play my guitar so we switched. Then he got really frustrated because when I played his Taylor it had more low end than my Tacoma did when he played it. Swapped back and my guitar had more bass again. So, if technique doesn't affect tone what was going on? You really should educate yourself.

 

 

This.

 

I'll go one better. The other night, I was messing with a sliding double stop type of lick. I realized that the note on the B string was kind of hard to play with my index finger, so I tried it with my ring finger instead. The note instantly had more treble to it, and the actual tone (EQ) was just different.

 

That was the same player on the same guitar using the same hand, just a different finger!

 

I've always been in the "fingers" camp because my friends don't sound like me on my gear and vice versa, but I never heard such an alarming difference from just myself before. It was kind of crazy.

[therabbit]

This. I'll go one better. The other night, I was messing with a sliding double stop type of lick. I realized that the note on the B string was kind of hard to play with my index finger, so I tried it with my ring finger instead. The note instantly had more treble to it, and the actual tone (EQ) was just different. That was the same player on the same guitar using the same hand, just a different finger! I've always been in the "fingers" camp because my friends don't sound like me on my gear and vice versa, but I never heard such an alarming difference from just myself before. It was kind of crazy.

Robben Ford does a lot of things with his third finger which would be easier to play with his fourth finger but he feels his third finger gives him a better tone.

[jaytee123]

Not true. The producer of those albums has debunked that myth.

 

So now we're going to believe the producer? Yup, he's going to give up secrets...

 

Get a Gibson Les Paul, plug it into a Rockman, and play The intro to "Rough Boy"... It's a rockman.

[Flogger59]

True! One of many that do so. But there may be a basis for this story. An old Guitar Player magazine I have has an interview with Billy & his Tech complete with some pics of some of the gear they used in the studio around that time. One thing they mentioned in passing was a Rockman was mixed in with several other amps for a bit of ambient chorus. There are some Z.Z. recordings around that time that sure sound like they have a bit of Rockman w/chorus in the mix.

 

 

I remeber that interview. They made an "amp cabin" with a ton of different amps, even the top had amps facing down, with a mic in the middle of it all. They would pull power cords to turn off the amps that they didn't want at the time, and ran a Rockman for good measure. Eliminater definately has Rockman all over it, it's hard to miss that sound.

[fumpy]

Quote:
Originally Posted by fumpy
But I hack through an XP-100 combo. Best amp ever.

Not that I'm a betting man, but I dare say roughly 99.999999999999999% of all the guitar players that ever lived would disagree with you.

Actually, I would disagree myself. It's not even my favorite amp I own. Not sure what I was thinking. But in certain instances, for that nasally Boston-type tone, it does work well.

[Razsan]

Quote: Originally Posted by fumpy But I hack through an XP-100 combo. Best amp ever. Actually, I would disagree myself. It's not even my favorite amp I own. Not sure what I was thinking. But in certain instances, for that nasally Boston-type tone, it does work well.

[headshot76]

So now we're going to believe the producer? Yup, he's going to give up secrets... Get a Gibson Les Paul, plug it into a Rockman, and play The intro to "Rough Boy"... It's a rockman.

 

 

If you read the info from the producer, you would have no reason to doubt him. He gave up plenty of "secrets" about working with ZZ Top.

[teemuk]

I remeber that interview. They made an "amp cabin" with a ton of different amps, even the top had amps facing down, with a mic in the middle of it all. They would pull power cords to turn off the amps that they didn't want at the time, and ran a Rockman for good measure. Eliminater definately has Rockman all over it, it's hard to miss that sound.

 

 

It seems so, because Rockman indeed was not used on that album...

 

 

The full story of the making of Eliminator (the politics, the chicannery, the technical aberrations, the high social drama, the exodus, the payback) is one that I cannot tell. Even if I could, there certainly wouldn't be room for it here! It probably won't even make it into "the book" (or the movie). Just don't forget that truth is often stranger than fiction! However, I will address certain specific musical or technical issues, and I'll begin with your guitar amp question. THERE WAS ABSOLUTELY NO ROCKMAN USED ON THIS RECORDING! Not a little bit, not a tiny bit; NOT ANY. I don't know how these stories get started. Billy may indeed have used Rockman at a later date, after I left the situation, but I did not allow it when I was working with him. He did bring one in to try, but I was not satisfied with the sound, compared to an amplifier. The amp used, almost exclusively, on Eliminator was a Legend. This was about a 50 watt hybrid unit, employing a tube/valve preamp, and a transistor power amp. This is the amp which has a finished wood case, and a rattan-type cane grill. It has one 12" Celestion speaker. Legend were later bought by, or at least distributed by, Gibson, but they were independent when we started using them. I still have this amp; it is almost new. A couple of years ago I plugged one of the Eliminator guitars into it, just to see...there was the sound! The guitars were custom built by Dean. Dean were out of Chicago, and were trying to break into the high end (a la Jackson, PRS) market. They were very nice, albeit different, instruments. Subsequently however, they got a contract with Sears to make guitars, so they opted for the big bucks, Korean manufactured, low end market instead. But the ones we used were very nicely made. There were two which we employed. One was somewhat like a cross between a Flying-V and a Moderne shape, very long "ears," and the other was a sort of a warped, pointy Stratocaster-y shape. Both guitars had a single DiMarzio Super Distortion high output pickup, and almost no controls. I don't think there is even a tone control...what would you need one for? They have big, heavy, brass bridge/tail pieces bolted into the body. These guitars were very live, very resonant, and would verge on resonant feedback at all times; they were also very hard to keep in tune because of this. But they were always alive. Billy has the first one mentioned, and he gave me the latter, which I still have. The guitar was recorded with basically only one setup; one amp (Legend), one speaker (12"), one guitar (Deans, the two were almost exactly the same), one mic (AKG 414B-ULS, I still have it) in one position (about 5" from the cone, placed at a slight angle off axis), one mic pre (the SpectraSonics console). 98% of ALL guitar on this album, whether lead or rhythm was done this way. Any variations were from the player himself, who, remember, did not even have a tone control. That's how good Billy was back then. We did use very briefly a small amp by Ross, but we didn't like it much, and I think only a tiny part or two was kept from this, if any. The rhythm guitars were done in a precursor-to-Protools style. Short phrases were played, and then double tracked, onto one set of tracks, and then the chord change/next phrase was played on a second set of tracks. This allowed a seamless transition between changes; since the Deans were so close to feedback at all times (acoustically, through the fairly loud JBL monitors), we couldn't even lift the fingers to change chords! Then I would trim the edges of each section by punching in and out to silence at the beginnings and ends of the phrases (somewhat analogous to "trimming the region" today). This method also "eliminated" to a degree the loud harmonic squeaks between chord changes. The punch in/out points, if done exactly perfectly, made for a primitive cross fade of probably 10-20 ms, and ended up sounding very different as rhythm guitar, sort of like a big train rolling down a track, almost out of control; without knowing how it was done, one wouldn't really realise why it was different. For the leads, as always, there was a lot of punching done. The bass was mostly played either by Billy or by me, and was either a bass instrument, or a Moog Source (the Source was a Mini Moog [rhymes with 'Vouge'] analogue synth with digitally controlled parameters...I still have this, too). Synth chords were played on a Memory Moog (polyphonic Mini). Billy sang great, different vocals, as usual, and the harmonies were done either by Jimmy Jamison or by me. There are a MILLION more things which could be told about this distinctive album, but as mentioned, most of it is probably better left unsaid. But one interesting thing, at least to me, was the recording of "Legs." We had tried it a couple of ways unsuccessfully at Ardent, so I decided to try a new approach. I had a 24 track studio in my attic at home, so I took Billy's lead guitar and vocal home on a 1/2" two track L/R ("samples"). I recut the entire track myself, and then hand flew in Billy's parts onto the track. This meant careful timing of the play button on my MCI 1/2", for each and every phrase, as after a few seconds, they would drift out of sync. I mixed it there through my Soundcraft 1200 console (these were also the mic pre's) onto the MCI 1/2". The multitrack was also the Soundcraft 2" machine, which I really loved. Then I did a totally different version, which became the long "dance mix" later released to clubs, and it is now included in the new box set. Later, I saw a review of this dance version credited, to Jellybean Benitez ...go figure! Anyway, that's a lot about Eliminator for now. Thanks for your interest! Terry

 

 

- Excerpt from:

http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/m/45901/0#msg_45901: