Frets99 Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 Nice hat... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Arr0wHead Posted March 27, 2012 Members Share Posted March 27, 2012 I suppose that is the type of thing stupid people would find amusing.....I can just see you sitting at your computer giggling like a little kid at that.... He's accusing you of backpedaling. Calling people stupid, when you miss something that obvious, is a bad idea. Also, ellipses are only 3 dots, and indicate omitted words - not a pause. What you are looking for is a comma. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Skyforger Posted March 27, 2012 Members Share Posted March 27, 2012 Nice hat... Authoritative... Mmmmm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Into Nation Posted March 27, 2012 Members Share Posted March 27, 2012 Nice hat... I think that's a muff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mosiddiqi Posted March 27, 2012 Members Share Posted March 27, 2012 I agree with the post about "Thriller" being the best record of all time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Django Sentenza Posted March 27, 2012 Author Members Share Posted March 27, 2012 A corollary to all this is the development of fuzz and distortion effects. Originally fuzz was a kind of special effect. People weren't terribly expressive with it. If you listen to Davie Allan, you won't be hearing any Gilmour-esque vibrato and bends. That's because he's playing a Mosrite, and they more or less adhere to the shallow angle principle, and people were still accustomed to great clean notes that didn't require ornamentation. As fuzz and distortion effects began to catch on, string size began to diminish. Because of the added sustain, guitarists wanted to imitate the techniques of vocalists and saxophonists. They wanted finger vibrato and three semitone bends. Unlike Guitar George, they wanted to make their instruments cry and sing. Strats came into their own again, and everyone used special effects to compensate for the naturally anemic Stratocaster sound. Somewhere along the way, the principles people once understood about shallow string angles coupled with heavy strings became lost. Clean tone lost its importance. No one played clean anymore except maybe the rhythm guitarist. And if the rhythm guitarist's tone was anemic from sharp angles and thin strings, well that was okay. No one cares about the rhythm guitarists, and rhythm guitarists don't care about good tone. But back before the dark times of tiny strings and sharp angles and ubiquitous Strats, you didn't need distortion to stand out as a lead guitarist. Your clean tone had more authority than the heaviest artificial distortion. For many decades, the principles of great clean tonemanship were lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wok Posted March 27, 2012 Members Share Posted March 27, 2012 Am just gonna re-post this right here: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Django Sentenza Posted March 27, 2012 Author Members Share Posted March 27, 2012 As an illustration, here is the ideal angle range of strings behind the bridge: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Skyforger Posted March 27, 2012 Members Share Posted March 27, 2012 A corollary to all this is the development of fuzz and distortion effects. Originally fuzz was a kind of special effect. People weren't terribly expressive with it. If you listen to Davie Allan, you won't be hearing any Gilmour-esque vibrato and bends. That's because he's playing a Mosrite, and they more or less adhere to the shallow angle principle, and people were still accustomed to great clean notes that didn't require ornamentation. As fuzz and distortion effects began to catch on, string size began to diminish. Because of the added sustain, guitarists wanted to imitate the techniques of vocalists and saxophonists. They wanted finger vibrato and three semitone bends. Unlike Guitar George, they wanted to make their instruments cry and sing. Strats came into their own again, and everyone used special effects to compensate for the naturally anemic Stratocaster sound. Somewhere along the way, the principles people once understood about shallow string angles coupled with heavy strings became lost. Clean tone lost its importance. No one played clean anymore except maybe the rhythm guitarist. And if the rhythm guitarist's tone was anemic from sharp angles and thin strings, well that was okay. No one cares about the rhythm guitarists, and rhythm guitarists don't care about good tone. But back before the dark times of tiny strings and sharp angles and ubiquitous Strats, you didn't need distortion to stand out as a lead guitarist. Your clean tone had more authority than the heaviest artificial distortion. For many decades, the principles of great clean tonemanship were lost. See, I read all of this and understood most of it. Admittedly, I didn't spot it the first time because there were boobs just below. I can only apologise for my genetics. Your points make sense, and I agree for the most part. Perhaps there is more to be considered such as body profiles etc? I believe Fender bodies have gotten thinner and the contours more pronounced since the 50s. As a sort of counter-argument (but a bad one, since it kinda backs you up) all three Iron Maiden guitarists had a pretty authoritative clean tone on the album Brave New World. It was beautiful. But. All three guitarists -though they are known to play heavily modified Fenders- do also use Gibson, Jackson, Ibanez... The list goes on. So in short (I made this point earlier), you can do pretty much whatever you like to a Strat and get it to sound near enough how you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Doctor Morbius Posted March 27, 2012 Members Share Posted March 27, 2012 A corollary to all this is the development of fuzz and distortion effects. Originally fuzz was a kind of special effect. People weren't terribly expressive with it. If you listen to Davie Allan, you won't be hearing any Gilmour-esque vibrato and bends. That's because he's playing a Mosrite, and they more or less adhere to the shallow angle principle, and people were still accustomed to great clean notes that didn't require ornamentation. As fuzz and distortion effects began to catch on, string size began to diminish. Because of the added sustain, guitarists wanted to imitate the techniques of vocalists and saxophonists. They wanted finger vibrato and three semitone bends. Unlike Guitar George, they wanted to make their instruments cry and sing. Strats came into their own again, and everyone used special effects to compensate for the naturally anemic Stratocaster sound. Somewhere along the way, the principles people once understood about shallow string angles coupled with heavy strings became lost. Clean tone lost its importance. No one played clean anymore except maybe the rhythm guitarist. And if the rhythm guitarist's tone was anemic from sharp angles and thin strings, well that was okay. No one cares about the rhythm guitarists, and rhythm guitarists don't care about good tone. But back before the dark times of tiny strings and sharp angles and ubiquitous Strats, you didn't need distortion to stand out as a lead guitarist. Your clean tone had more authority than the heaviest artificial distortion. For many decades, the principles of great clean tonemanship were lost. In other words, Chet Atkins didn't need no stinking distortion! I'd give my right arm to be able to play like this! [video=youtube;n-c66SJPuUI] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Help!I'maRock! Posted March 27, 2012 Members Share Posted March 27, 2012 reruns again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members karma279 Posted March 27, 2012 Members Share Posted March 27, 2012 I agree with the post about "Thriller" being the best record of all time. This Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Django Sentenza Posted March 27, 2012 Author Members Share Posted March 27, 2012 Now that's tonemanship Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members peskypesky Posted March 27, 2012 Members Share Posted March 27, 2012 I love babushkas. holy smokes!!! She is hot. Yet, sadly, flawed. So she can't go out with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members peskypesky Posted March 27, 2012 Members Share Posted March 27, 2012 Am just gonna re-post this right here: as you should. we must be continually reminded of the serious design flaws. this bad design must stop! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Django Sentenza Posted March 27, 2012 Author Members Share Posted March 27, 2012 I think this is a closer analog: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Doctor Morbius Posted March 27, 2012 Members Share Posted March 27, 2012 Irina Shayk FTMFW!!! I love babushkas. Is good looking, yes. But dresses like dirty gypsy. We shall speak of them no more! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members vikingrat Posted March 27, 2012 Members Share Posted March 27, 2012 blah blah...{censored}ing stupid blah blah blah......+1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Django Sentenza Posted March 27, 2012 Author Members Share Posted March 27, 2012 See, I read all of this and understood most of it. Admittedly, I didn't spot it the first time because there were boobs just below. I can only apologise for my genetics. Your points make sense, and I agree for the most part. Perhaps there is more to be considered such as body profiles etc? I believe Fender bodies have gotten thinner and the contours more pronounced since the 50s. As a sort of counter-argument (but a bad one, since it kinda backs you up) all three Iron Maiden guitarists had a pretty authoritative clean tone on the album Brave New World. It was beautiful. But. All three guitarists -though they are known to play heavily modified Fenders- do also use Gibson, Jackson, Ibanez... The list goes on. So in short (I made this point earlier), you can do pretty much whatever you like to a Strat and get it to sound near enough how you want. Hmm, in the spirit of good will I'd like to agree with you about Iron Maiden's awesome clean tone, but I'm listening now and I'm not hearing it. Sorry breaux. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members fanuvbrak Posted March 27, 2012 Members Share Posted March 27, 2012 Hmm, in the spirit of good will I'd like to agree with you about Iron Maiden's awesome clean tone, but I'm listening now and I'm not hearing it. Sorry breaux. stupid {censored}ing stupid comments....are {censored}ing stupid........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members vikingrat Posted March 27, 2012 Members Share Posted March 27, 2012 stupid {censored}ing stupid comments....are {censored}ing stupid........+1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DaveGrima Posted March 27, 2012 Members Share Posted March 27, 2012 I find the vintage 6 point trem very useable if its set up well and you dont go too crazy with it. I find the middle pickup on my Strat very useful as well. Its responsible for all those cool and quacky in-between tones and I think it sounds great on its own. I never accidentally hit the volume knob while playing. One of the tone knobs can be wired to the bridge pup very easily, as I have done to mine. The Strat clean tone is legendary, one of the main reasons to use a Strat, Id say you either have bad pups, a crappy amp, or theyre not set up right. So I disagree with you on just about everything you pointed out. Of course every Strat is different, and its important to get a good Strat with good pups played through a good amp. YMMV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Pascal Posted March 27, 2012 Members Share Posted March 27, 2012 Uncorrect. There is no connection between string angles and tuning stability. If there were, how do you explain the superior tuning stability of Jags, JMs and Gretsches over Strats? You see, as you reduce the angle behind the bridge (and reduce string pressure on the bridge), several things happen to your tone. The first is, you get a much more interesting initial note attack. The attack becomes quite percussive. Even with roundwounds, you get a lovely little "thump" happening with each note you play. People sit up and take notice at that. Instead of the typical clean tone (the anemic Strat or the Muddy Les Paul) you get something that sounds lively and vital. Your tone stands out from the legions of mundanists. It brings to mind the lovely wooden attack of a marimba crossed with the Harp of Asora. Another thing that happens is you lose some of the bass and treble frequencies. This is desirable because it allows your tone to become more focused, and you find that your tone doesn't get swallowed up by the bassist, even when you're playing low notes. The filtering in the Tube Screamer works on this principle, although arguably Ibanez/Maxon went too far with it. Thirdly, you get reduced sustain. Most guitars have FAR too much sustain. If you've ever tried to play a piano with the sustain pedal continually depressed, you can of course intuit the obvious benefits of moderately reduced sustain. A fourth benefit is the addition of overtone frequencies generated by the strings behind the bridge, but I think I've given you enough for now. Nice post! : This said (and in all seriousness), in my experience with archtops and djangoboxes, it is the opposite that is true: the higher the bridge/greater the string angle, the louder the attack, the shorter the sustain, and the more focussed the tone. Lower the bridge enough and your Djangobox will start to sound like a dreadnought: more harmonics, longer sustain, and your tone does not cut through the mix anymore. To achieve appropriate bridge height/string angle, the neck is also at an angle to the body (whatever the technical term for this is... neck break angle?). How do you explain this? Floating bridge/hollow body vs. fixed bridge/solid body? I am full of {censored}? Other? Edit: see for example what I found on a luthier's website (it's actually about mandolins, but you know that archtops are pretty much built like mandolins, right?) Decreasing the string break angle over the bridge lowers the force on the soundboard and, when combined with more limber tone bars provides a smooth mellow tone. Conversely, increasing the string to soundboard angle combined with stiffer tone bars produces a sharp bark desirable for Bluegrass music. Keep in mind that I am talking about very small changes (+/- 2.0 deg max) in string break angle to make major changes in acoustic response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Skyforger Posted March 27, 2012 Members Share Posted March 27, 2012 Hmm, in the spirit of good will I'd like to agree with you about Iron Maiden's awesome clean tone, but I'm listening now and I'm not hearing it. Sorry breaux. No problem. It's most prominent in songs like Ghost of the Navigator and The Thin Line Between Love and Hate. I quite like it, but hey. If it ain't your thing, then it ain't your thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members hi.flyer Posted March 27, 2012 Members Share Posted March 27, 2012 He made "Thriller", man. "Thriller". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.