| Author |
 Topic  |
|
zentropa
Gold Member
USA
837 Posts |
 Posted - 03/26/2008 : 07:34:22
|
quote:
i was about to attck zentropa for seemingly bashing advancement in sound design technology but maybe we should save it for another thread...
i'll spill my lil' treatise and then feel free to bash away.
i don't see much of the modern advancement in sound design technology to really be much of an advancement when it comes to actual quality of sound. there's a billion ways now to approximate the much revered tones of certain instruments and amplifiers, but approximate and replicate are different things.
technological advancement and efficient production methods rarely contribute towards things like... analog sound reproduction/amplification/creation.
a few examples:
1. point to point wiring vs. circuit boards. circuit boards are definitely a much more efficient means of producing amplifiers, but most would agree that good old fashioned point to point wiring both sounds better and is easier to fix/maintain. i know many with strong ties to their vintage twin reverbs but none with strong ties to their resissue twin reverbs.
2. solid state vs. tube power. tube amps weigh twice as much as solid state amps and need much more frequent maintenance. tube power also is less "true" in its sound amplification since there's less head room and they have a tendency to overdrive when played loudly... but then again, i don't consider this a bad thing.
3. dialed-in vs. user-controlled. an easy example of this is the CE-2 vs. the CE-5. while i enjoy both pedals and the CE-5 gives a slew of tonal options beyond the CE-2, the CE-5 never quite captures the rich, lush, warm chorus sound that was made famous by the CE-1 and CE-2... which were somewhat the reasons (along with true amp chorus) that chorus became a popular effect. i find that whenever i sit down and futz with a CE-5 i end up dialing in as close of a tone to a CE-2 as is possible from that pedal... while i also tweak CE-5's to give some sort of leslie rotary speaker sound, i would prefer to have a CE-2 and a separate pedal for a rotary speaker sound without having to adjust knobs for 20 mins to get settings that are "perfect" for what i want. too much user control allows for a large variety of bad sounds.
4. digital vs. analog. not really sure if anyone wants to debate the merits of each and which one generally harbors superior sound so i won't write anything unless it's brought up. consideration of the value of onboard digital effects conjures up images of guitarists using rackmount heads with digitech legends... and i'd rather keep those images out of my head :)
5. modeling amps vs. the real thing. i realize my view is skewed on this as the first decent modeling amps (not counting direct boxes w/ cabinet simulators in this) were prohibitively expensive and the actual amps they were modeling were relatively cheap. prices have since changed a bit but there's still deals to be found. when the cyber twin first hit the market it was ~$1100 new and at that time you could get say... a vintage twin reverb and marshall jcm800 setup to A/B for around $1000 (with other budget options available as well). i admit i'm a bit archaic when it comes to my tone preferences but hey, i'm a straight up rock 'n' roller and to me, a strat through a super reverb and a gibson through a marshall is what i want. even now you could grab a 70's musicman amp + a sovtek mig for around $700 or a twin reverb and a mig for around $850. beyond the monetary side... most modeling amplifiers are based upon a recording of a particular amp being played at a particular volume with a particular instrument in a particular style with a particular microphone and mic placement, etc. i remember hearing a story (which may or may not be true) about the cyber twin... and how they almost went to production with a wrong '59 bassman sound. they were demoing the prototype to a well-respected studio engineer who heard the '59 bassman model and told them it was wrong. they told him he was wrong and they took him to the sound booth where the '59 bassman they had used for their reference recording was and "proved" to him that the cyber twin's reproduction was accurate. he informed them that the '59 bassman was broken (some component was bad) and upon further investigation, he was correct and there was a bad component causing the amp to sound different. they dug up a working '59 bassman and were able to correct the problem before it was mass produced.
the major underlying problem to me is that every amp has its own dynamics and tones at different volumes and will sound differently depending upon how far away you are standing from it, what angle you are to it, etc. reproducing an amp at a fixed volume with a fixed angle, let alone with a solid state power amp approximating a tube power amp... just never really does it for me.
6. flavors of the month vs. tried and true. i will say that manufacturers do have to try to come up with new ideas/effects in order to advance tone, but sometimes i'm puzzled at those ideas. only time will tell if something like the metal core will displace the metal zone or if it will end up being seen as our era's digital metalizer in the year 2025. i would really dig it if boss brought back some of their oldies just as ibanez finally reissued their 9 series pedals.
7. technological advancement vs. ic chips. the jrc4558d chip was a low-cost, low-fi op amp chip that just happened to find its way into some early overdrive pedals (as well as tons of old electric devices). if there had been a better, more readily available, cheaper, cleaner, more efficient chip that was widely used back then would we be where we are now with guitar tone? like electron tube technology, "better" and more efficient technology is emerging... but how much will that benefit us? i read somewhere that they expect the chip used in the DM-2 is probably going to go extinct within the next year or two due to the fact that they haven't been produced in years due to lack of demand and better available chips that perform the same functions.
flame on :) |
|
|
pedals 4 pv
Platinum Member
Canada
1351 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2008 : 08:06:26
|
So I get it! The more money you spend the better gear you get. Who knew? |
 |
|
|
zentropa
Gold Member
USA
837 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2008 : 08:16:22
|
haha.
very true statement unless you are like a friend of mine that spent $1200 on a line 6 modeling stack w/ foot controller. in some cases spending less is more :) |
|
|
|
Dr. Bob
Moderator
Australia
6593 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2008 : 09:04:22
|
Hi zentropa
Not wanting to discount or diminish your comments & feelings, on the other subjects.
But is your CE-5 the analog BBD type, or the later digital one?
No-one ever seems to mention this fact, when they speak of CE-5's
I have the analog BBD CE-5,
for me it's another addition to my sonic palette, and part of my ever growing collection of Chorus pedals.
Most here know of my fondness for the CE-2.
I've bought lots of them to date.
The engineers just did something really right, with the CE-2.
On the subject of analog vs digital.
I'm a tube guy, Fender's & 6L6's are my tone choice.
But I won't discount the use of Digital modelers like the Line 6 POD or the Roland COSM & Korg REMS multi-effects.
For me, & as I stated earlier, it's all about adding & expanding to my sonic palette.
Regards Dr. Bob |
|
|
|
zentropa
Gold Member
USA
837 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2008 : 09:22:56
|
Thanks for the comments Dr Bob.
i kind of created this thread as a joke but was hoping it would be an open exchange of opinions. i know i'm rather opinionated but i always like to have justification for said opinions.
as for the CE-5, i don't currently own one but i've had about 5. four were analog and one was digital. the analog ones were my favorite "in production" boss chorus pedals. the digital one seemed to thin out a bit and added some reverb to the tone. they all are capable of slightly different tones but if i had to choose a CE-2, CE-5, or CE-5A i would go for the CE-2. the most frustrating part of the analog CE-5's i had were that i would spend 20 minutes or so tweaking them to perfection (and being bull-headed and unwilling to put marker on my pedals to mark their spots) some random friend would always manage to start fiddling with the knobs and ruin my dialed in sound :)
i don't mind modelers for recording and/or for having a compact setup and/or for budgetary constraints, it just bothers me that they are often purchased new at full price by newer players who haven't had the chance to experience what some of the actual gear sounds like. it's one thing to have em if it's adding to/expanding your sonic palette, it's another if it's your only only sonic palette as some of the higher end modelers often cost as much as an entire set of pedals.
i've just always found that technology tends to hurt sound more than help it. i still listen to records :) |
|
|
|
Dr. Bob
Moderator
Australia
6593 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2008 : 10:15:22
|
Hi zentropa
For years I have been experimenting with different multi chorus setups.
I have talked about it before, many posts ago.
I split my signal 3 ways, using a simple resistive splitter,
I then I run that into a least (3) CE-2's,
all set slightly differently.
I then remix the signal back to mono & then off into any other pedal-s/effects.
The setup is really only practical in the studio or at home.
The end result is my version of a Tri-Chorus. & can be hypnotic to listen to, as the clocks all run into & out of sync.
I know a real Tri-chorus is really more than 3 chorus's, but it's best I was able to do on a budget.
I have bee thinking of making the resistive splitter, fully FET buffered, but that's another rainy day project.
As for my digital gear, as you may know, I get it all pre-loved, sometimes otherwise (not working).
I have a collection of various name brand Multi's that I dig out now & then.
But I have 2 GT-3's same ROM & PCB revision.
One sounds like all the hype you read about these old Boss Multi's
The other one KILL's & I really mean kills, the mid & highs on the guitar.
(5) Wet blankets over speaker box tone.
Same setup same patch - same everything, I guess I can blame it on some Crappy Gremlin electro cap.
I know you own-owned a lot of high end boutique gear & pedals.
Somewhere during a long lost GAS attack, I was lucky enough to acquire an Arion SCH-1  stereo chorus pedal,
have you ever heard-used-owned one of these?
Don't confuse these with the current SCH-Z reissues
My one gives my CE-2's a run for their money, it's a very lush watery tone.
Brings my old Tele to life.
As for Knob twiddling friends ) I spent 11 months dialling in a somewhat usable tone into my CS-3 (the only Comp I had at the time).
I went to get some drinks for a visitor, & when I came back, Yes! He had 12 o'clocked all the controls.
Many times, when Tone Newbies come over, I get out the 52RI Tele, a 10 foot lead, and warm up the Fender 75.
Open up that master control, & back off the vol. on on the Tele & rip off a few songs.
 WOW listen to all that those tones?????? What pedal-s are you using?
Just home made "Black Lead" .. I don't know that pedal? Who makes that pedal?
Did you get it on evilbay?
Ok enough said.
Regards Dr. Bob |
Edited by - Dr. Bob on 03/26/2008 10:17:04 |
|
|
|
FRANZONI
Double Platinum Member
Ireland
3543 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2008 : 12:53:59
|
Hi all... I agree with a lot of zetropas post but i find for me these days on the recording at home front that the pod xt pro and my tascam DP-01 digital 8 track very handy as i don't disturb the house and also going over some of my old recordings from other bands i was in over the years,the quality of the guitar sounds i can get now are IMHO much better and most of these recordings were done in studios..... where i do agree is that it's very hard to beat a good guitar-pedals-valve amp combination for gigs..i've tried lots of different processors,solid state amps that are supposed to recreate valve ones etc..and it's very hard to beat a valve amp for warmth and sound quality(i also think that the older amps are better from a 'less is more' approach..ie...less bells and whistles and also are much easier to maintain..  .)....on the issue of the sheer volume from valve amps especially the older marshalls etc,i'm going to try the joe bonamassa trick of a piece of perspex in front of the speakers...i'm also going to cut a large opening in the back of my 2x12 cab and put the lower efficent greenbacks that were originally in it back in....i'm hoping to do all this before sundays gig so i'll let you know how it pans out,although getting my hands on the perspex might be a problem........... |
Edited by - FRANZONI on 03/26/2008 12:57:46 |
|
|
|
Mr Arkadin
Bronze Member
United Kingdom
119 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2008 : 13:56:10
|
Well yes if we all had infinite budgets and no neighbours then i'm sure we'd all have Marshall stacks that go to 11. As it is my Podxt Pro gets some decent tones at reasonable volumes. My Marshall combo is an AVT so is not all valve (oh yeah, i can't afford a car or roadies either), so size, weight and cost do factor in in the real world. What did we do in the old days? Well we probably played very quietly, not really knowing how it sounded till we got into a rehearsal room once in a blue moon.
Now analogue verses digital. There's a can of worms. First off you have to differentiate between 'true' sound and 'coloured' sound. Modern digital systems reproduce what you put in: GIGO. Analogue tape has some nice characteristics that luckily the human ear finds pleasing. However it is not reproducing the signal without coloration, it's just lucky that the colour it adds is pleasing. Ironically engineers spent years trying to negate the colouring effects of analogue tape with various EQs, noise reduction, bias adjustments. Now of course we want all those artifacts (for that is what they are) back.
So for rock music pushing the tape to saturation feels good. However for classical music i would say a digital system represents more honestly what you put in. Of course if you put in a saturated sound into your digital system it would reproduce it quite happily, so the argument against digital recording systems as being harsh etc. is frankly bollocks.
So if i had the money/somewhere where i could play loud i would have all valve amps. Would i seek out MIJ over MIT pedals? No (although i might pay someone to do it  )? Would i record to analogue tape? No chance - far too much hassle (i've been there done that). Would i use tape and valve emulations on my digital recorder? You betcha.
Oh and sometimes having something 'crap' like a Digital Metalizer can be fun. |
Edited by - Mr Arkadin on 03/26/2008 13:56:48 |
|
|
|
FRANZONI
Double Platinum Member
Ireland
3543 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2008 : 17:21:53
|
| Not meaning to be rude but i got my early 70's marshall for �100,same as my '61 selmer and i paid �350 for the musicman combo...i also carry all my own gear in and out of gigs as well as the rest of the rig and i lug it out of the van a 3.00am and later some mornings so it won't get damp lying in the back of an old transit.... like i said i agree with digital not being all bad and i certainly would never look down my nose at someone using a solid state amp but valve gear IS affordable if you search for it and are willing to drive a hard bargain and maintain it..... i also have access to a marshall solid state combo and while it is a very good amp..there is no way it compares with my superbass head for sound quality.... |
|
|
|
zentropa
Gold Member
USA
837 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2008 : 17:24:29
|
quote:
The end result is my version of a Tri-Chorus. & can be hypnotic to listen to, as the clocks all run into & out of sync.
sounds like you could appreciate the band don caballero, their later stuff especially. instrumental math rock 4-piece... often having playing in 2-3 different time signatures at once (e.g. 1 guitar, bass, and drums in 6/8, 1 guitar in 7/8, overlaps every 42 notes for 6 notes before deviating and returning).
quote:
have you ever heard-used-owned one of these?
heard one, never owned one. i suffer from obsessive compulsive disorder with bits of anal-retentiveness. having matching pedals by 1 manufacturer happens to be one of those things. they do sound sweet though :)
quote:
I went to get some drinks for a visitor, & when I came back, Yes! He had 12 o'clocked all the controls.
makes you want to throttle em :) it's when i wish many of these 4-6 knob pedals had 1-2 knobs with the other ones dialed in. either that or having a pot control LESS range of variation so that 1/4th of the range would be "money" vs. 1/50th of the range.
quote:
i find for me these days on the recording at home front that the pod xt pro and my tascam DP-01 digital 8 track very handy as i don't disturb the house and also going over some of my old recordings from other bands i was in over the years,the quality of the guitar sounds i can get now are IMHO much better and most of these recordings were done in studios.....
i agree in the studio setting a lot of things have improved greatly. having owned a reel to reel 16 track at one point, i would have greatly prefer a digital 16 track simply due to tape cost. the nice thing about recording with a modeler is that you are often going direct and getting the simulation of a mic'd amp set to its "signature" settings. works for recording, but a lot of the live dynamics of it don't transfer well to gigging. i would be 100% down with it if they were marketed more towards the recording audience instead of the fledgling musician thinking they are buying the swiss army knife of tones and dropping $200-400 into new modeling gear rather than some sweet sounding used analog pedals.
quote:
i'm also going to cut a large opening in the back of my 2x12 cab and put the lower efficent greenbacks that were originally in it back in....i'm hoping to do all this before sundays gig so i'll let you know how it pans out,although getting my hands on the perspex might be a problem
good luck :) i spent quite a few practice sessions with my combos facing a wall and only getting sound out of the open backs :)
quote:
if we all had infinite budgets and no neighbours then i'm sure we'd all have Marshall stacks that go to 11.
people are often surprised at the live rigs i've helped buddies put together on tight budgets. back when i used to find marshall jcm800 and super lead jcm900 heads in the $425 and under range... nowadays its digging up sovtek migs in the sub-$350 range. there's a lot of very affordable deals to be had with a bit of digging and a bit of patience.
quote:
As it is my Podxt Pro gets some decent tones at reasonable volumes.
i agree here. my marshalls haven't seen a volume past 2 in several years now.
quote:
Oh and sometimes having something 'crap' like a Digital Metalizer can be fun.
not disagreeing here, but for actual live use on guitar, i rate it amongst the worst inventions of all time. i know several synth players as well as electronica/industrial musicians that really dig on it. hitting more than 1 string on a guitar with it on can be disasterous :) |
|
|
|
Heart and Soul
Silver Member
USA
369 Posts |
Posted - 03/27/2008 : 04:22:57
|
| ah, i didn't notice this thread until just now...bollocks, i'll be off to do some data colling for school but i shall have my say when i return!!!...haha, but seriously it's not that much of a big deal...it's looking like this is getting to be a quality thread though... |
|
|
|
zentropa
Gold Member
USA
837 Posts |
Posted - 03/27/2008 : 05:08:32
|
quote:
I know you own-owned a lot of high end boutique gear & pedals.
just re-read and noticed this line. i don't know if i'd consider any of what i've owned boutique (i'm not a snob that spends $4k on amps because anything less than a bogner would be unthinkable) and $700 on some hand wired boutique effects pedal. i'm a budget rocker through and through and being thrifty (and often shrewd) is the only reason i've been able to own some nice stuff.
i didn't really start buying nice gear until 1997 or so and i pretty much quit buying guitars and amps by 2002/2003 (except summer '07 when i got a peavey 5150 2x12 combo for $380). i'm generally more proud over what i got for the money rather than what i got. i'm not made of money so most expensive purchases have involved getting rid of a previous purchase(s).
examples (digging through memories)
8 les pauls... les paul standard new w/ohsc $1179 2000, les paul standard new w/ ohsc $1249 2001, les paul studio new w/ ohsc 2000 $699, '94 les paul studio used 10/10 $699 w/ hsc, '98 the paul sl new w/ gig $279, '97 les paul standard used 9/10 w/ ohsc $950, ~'95 gibson all american les paul used 9/10 $449 w/ hsc, '92 les paul studio lite used 8.5/10 w/ hsc $560.
9 sg's... 2000 sg standard new $719 w/ ohsc, 2000 sg standard new $799 w/ ohsc, 2000 sg standard ltd ed. new $749 w/ ohsc, 2001 sg standard new $699 w/ ohsc, '97 sg standard used 8.5/10 $575 w/ hsc, '96 sg standard used 9/10 $699 w/ hsc, '98 sg special used 7/10 w/ hsc $375, '97 sg-z used 10/10 $575 w/ ohsc, '98 sg-x new w/ gigbag $300.
10 vintage fender tube amps... '68 twin reverb 8.5/10 $525, '76 bassman 10 9/10 $379, '64 champ 9/10 $149, '65 vibro champ 9/10 $169, '73 twin reverb 6/10 $425, '67 bassman 9/10 $225, '66 bandmaster 8/10 $299, '75 dual showman reverb 9.5/10 $275, '63 princeton 8/10 $129, '69 princeton reverb 8/10 $179. also had an '89 super 60 1x12 combo that wasn't vintage but a steal at $279 in 10/10 condition and original footswitch.
to relate these examples back to my original post... with enough digging almost anyone can get a high end rig for the price of a mid end rig. i used to do beginner guitar lessons and one of the things i always pushed on my students was to seek out high quality gear that could be purchased at a budget price (i often helped them in their searches).
quote:
it's looking like this is getting to be a quality thread though...
i was hoping this would spark some interesting discussion :) still waiting for your attack :) |
|
|
|
FRANZONI
Double Platinum Member
Ireland
3543 Posts |
Posted - 03/27/2008 : 11:24:02
|
quote by zentropa..."just re-read and noticed this line. i don't know if i'd consider any of what i've owned boutique (i'm not a snob that spends $4k on amps because anything less than a bogner would be unthinkable) and $700 on some hand wired boutique effects pedal. i'm a budget rocker through and through and being thrifty (and often shrewd) is the only reason i've been able to own some nice stuff. "
...quote by franzoni..."but valve gear IS affordable if you search for it and are willing to drive a hard bargain and maintain it....."
looks like were singing from the same hymn sheet bro'... |
|
|
|
FRANZONI
Double Platinum Member
Ireland
3543 Posts |
Posted - 03/27/2008 : 13:51:02
|
| Just as a matter of interest as a lot of our U.S. forumites probably have better access to the secondhand fender amp market..is the price on the older amps like the 70's silverface twins starting to go up or is it only the smaller wattage tweeds that are still commanding the big money...?? the reason i ask is that theres a fender concert II (rivera era) going for 500 euro in a buy and sell mag here... as far as i know this is one of the last point to point wired amps fender made..... the reason i like PTP is purely from a maintainance issues like broken pots etc..are easier to change out as their not connected to any PCB's...... it's only a head ..there is no cab included.....?? sorry if this is too far off topic..... |
|
|
|
zentropa
Gold Member
USA
837 Posts |
Posted - 03/27/2008 : 15:23:38
|
Franzoni:
i was buying/selling/trading tons of gear from '99-'01 and i can say that the prices have gone up across the board on most items but not all items have increased by the same margin.
in the past 7 years, twin reverbs seem to be up about 50%. however, the evil twin is only up about 25% and items like reissue twin reverbs and silver face super reverbs are actually down about 20%. pro reverbs are also down about 10-20%. small fender amps as well as heads are up over 100%, but i believe a lot of that is due to them being undervalued in the past.
i rarely see items like concert II's, but i know most of the rivera items have gone up (again, they were undervalued 8 years ago and demand was starting to build back then along w/ MIJ strats).
one thing i would seriously consider... the dollar is so weak right now that as long as there's reasonable customs/duty/brokerage fees in different countries that it's probably worth buying stuff from the US and having it shipped (assuming it's of a size that is reasonable to ship) as buying power of the euro vs. dollar right now is in the euro's favor.
MIJ ibanez RG guitars are one item that is due to "break out" pricewise in the near future as they are still undervalued.
if you have a specific list of items you want me to investigate pricewise let me know.
|
|
|
|
FRANZONI
Double Platinum Member
Ireland
3543 Posts |
Posted - 03/27/2008 : 18:08:59
|
| Cheers......... |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
i was about to attck zentropa for seemingly bashin
