What is it with this obsessive deal with sounding JUST like . . .

Henry I admire you for saying this.

Once you're within striking range, the obsessive quest for great tone is a bad excuse for worse playing.
Yes, I've seen a lot of guys virtually throw the guitar away in quest for that tone. It's a game. It's like a bunch of guitar nerds (I love them!!!) who can tell you what Eric Johnson's signal chain is or the gauge of SRV or they fact that Hendrix' sound was due to him playing it upside down and the pickup relationship changed, or the speakers, drives -- I mean OK! WHAT ABOUT THE GUITAR!!?? Guys forget about PLAYING THE GUITAR! Most guys can tell me so much more about amps and strings and winders and tuners and tubes and cabs and pedals and cables and picks more than I'll ever know or have interest in knowing. They can tell me everything but playing of the guitar. So many of these guys know an handful of chords and don't know the names of any of them! LOL. It's fine. I have students, many students who are like this. Guys who come up to me after the gig asking all the wrong questions, AFAIC. YMMV!
 
Interesting thread. Henry, having Mingus as a friend and mentor would certainly strengthen the "do it your own way" streak in you and I'm sure that's a big reason why you were drawn to one another. Mingus has long been one of my favs. I think people have effectively explored a lot of the reasons to cop someone else's tone. I've tried to do it a few times, always because I just loved a sound and wanted to see if I could make it. Also, to see what I'd learn about that sound. It was a revelation to me when I discovered drive pedals almost 3 decades ago. Suddenly all these sounds I loved, but couldn't begin to get from only a Silverface Princeton Reverb were available. A huge part of tone is in the hands, but we are for the most part playing ELECTRIC guitars here and the interaction of guitars, amps and effects is a big of electric players' sounds. With the Axes, many people have a chance to explore whole rigs that would never have been available to them without really serious $ and often the time to completely reconfigure one great rig into another.
Great post MikeyB59! Mingus definitely changed my life Thank god it happened so early in my life! I always stripped down to practicing acoustically, just taking the guitar without the electronics. So of course I ignored the electronic side, admittedly to my detriment I guess. At least as far as electronics, but it helped as far as guitar. You know, it's like I'm ready for the quest now! My hands know what they're doing! for the most part.

I can count the pedals I've ever had! From the beginning: Maestro Phaser, Maestro Ring Modulator, Dunlop Cry Baby, Fuzzbox, Dynacomp, tubescreamer, Roland chorus, RC Booster. All ancient except for the RC. Just never been a thing. I always worked. I could read and play well. Mainly jazz but a lot of session work, freelance gigs and some band stuff. It was always playing for me.
 
Without reading all the answers in here...it's just human nature, Henry! The flock. It's how our species function. Whether it be guitar playing, opinions, clothing, behaviour, etc etc. Try making religion work with everybody making their own "sounds" 8)
 
Without reading all the answers in here...it's just human nature, Henry! The flock. It's how our species function. Whether it be guitar playing, opinions, clothing, behaviour, etc etc. Try making religion work with everybody making their own "sounds" 8)
Yeah. Then some people have to step out on their own away from the maddening crowd . . .
 
I can count the pedals I've ever had! From the beginning: Maestro Phaser, Maestro Ring Modulator, Dunlop Cry Baby, Fuzzbox, Dynacomp, tubescreamer, Roland chorus, RC Booster. All ancient except for the RC. Just never been a thing. I always worked. I could read and play well. Mainly jazz but a lot of session work, freelance gigs and some band stuff. It was always playing for me.

Playing well is the bottom line to me. Anybody who can scrape together the money can buy great pedals, guitars, amps, an Axe or 2, etc.. In the scope of things you could obsess about and spend $ on, guitar gear isn't necessarily that expensive (though I might not have said that when I was younger and had less $;-). It's not like loving small jet aircraft, exotic sports cars, 2nd houses and on and on. Many people can afford the gear.

Not so many people can afford or want to spend all the time it takes to master an instrument. As my best teacher, Mike Elliott (amazing jazz guitar player...student and friend of Johnny Smith and top Twin Cities jazz guitarist in 60/70s before becoming Gibson rep and Nashville studio guy - now deceased. Did lots of duets with Howard Roberts, pals with Pat Martino, etc.) used to say, "Have you heard the one about how it's getting so you can't walk down the street without running into another great jazz guitarist? Well, no, you haven't because it's hard. There aren't many people who persist." He'd say that when I was bitching about some chord or tune being hard or not understanding some concept he was trying to get across.

If you were playing with Mingus and he gave a damn about you as a musician, I'm guessing you practiced and/or played all the time then. He certainly didn't suffer fools well from what little I know about him. It's easier to buy a new guitar sometimes than confront the fact that I still struggle playing the ones I already have. For me, playing well (or trying to) remains the deal, so I've got to practice or I get depressed. My guess is that because you practiced and got really good at the instrument, you're able to be expressive without needing the effects. They're just little colors to play with, not the fundamental thing for your approach. All the pedals in the world can't help you read, have good time or know how to play in an ensemble.

If you want to start a Mingus stories thread in the lounge, I'd love to read it.
 
I can list every amp/pedal I've ever owned: 71' Custom Charger solid state bass amp with a 15" speaker, Dan Electro Fab Tone DD1 Distortion, Boss MT 2 distortion, Line 6 POD XT Live, Line 6 Vetta II combo, Axe FX Ultra.

None of those were in a quest to copy anybody else' tone. The Charger was free, but only one channel. After a year of playing ONLY clean, I bought the Fab Tone 'cuz I was like, "HOLY CRAP DISTORTION IS AMAZING!" upon hearing it. I don't even know what happened to that pedal, but eventually I "upgraded" to the MT2. The combo of the MT 2 through the 15" bass amp was my sound for years. When the XT Live came out, some friends were raving about it, so I picked it up. Within 2 months of playing that through headphones, I had a Vetta II on order. For 6 years, I basically used 2 channels: Clean and Distortion. Got the Axe and now I have a 3rd channel - Classic Crunch. I use the coil tapped pickups in my guitar to create different sounds within those 3 patches.

My philosophy is as long as I capture the character/style of the sound, (I.E. don't use high gain for Bryan Adams), it'll work.

This month's Musician's Friend catalog has an really cool interview with Tom Morello and he talks about his guitar rig. All of his stuff was stolen before his Rage Against the Machine days, so he went down to a local music shop and bought what they had, which was an old Marshall 2205 and a Peavey 4x12. He hasn't changed his rig in 20+ years; instead, he just learned how to do everything with that setup. The guitar on a lot of RATM's is a crappy $300 Mexican Telecaster. Do what you can with what you have, regardless of how "Authentic" it is as long as you like it.
 
What's so wrong with nailing the tones of some of the best and most famous players, nailing the playing of some of the best and most famous players, developing your own style in large part as a result of combining the best of the styles of those whose work you've studied and nailed, and developing your own signature tone in large part from learning to copy the tones of the best and most famous players out there and morphing those into your own unique tone?

What I'm mostly hearing here in the way of criticism for copying other artists tones and playing are excuses for being lazy. If it makes you feel better to say "I don't want so and so's tone" instead of putting in the work to get it then by all means, don't go for it. It's almost like saying "I don't want an education. School and studying the knowledge acquired by others who came before me so that I might someday build on that knowledge is a waste of my time".

Some of the best players in the world started out copying the tones and playing styles of famous players that came before them. Some of the worst famous players of late plugged in a fuzz box, played a few chords, screamed really loud and got lucky.

This is dumb thread - a bunch of excuses to wallow in ignorance and criticize those who choose not to.

Do you think Cliff Chase came up with digital signal processing from scratch, or do you think maybe he studied and copied the work of others who came before him and then used what he learned by taking the best of it, expanding on it and combining many of the pieces to write the code for the AXE?

Try this. Nail the tones of the most popular guitar players who ever lived, learn their songs and solos note for note, and go see how many offers you get to join a paying band vs. someone using their "own" tones and improvising the songs.
 
I always preface my posts on topics like this with comments about my newbie and bedroom player status so everyone knows I have no experience playing in bands, cover or otherwise. It’s an interesting topic and even though I am not nearly as adept as all of you playing wise it does bring back memories of many hours of being a consumer. Huh you ask? :) Let me explain.

I’m no spring chicken, and I remember in my youth stacking up the 45’s and playing them endlessly for hours on end wondering “how did they do that?”. I was exposed to all kinds of music as a child as my mother was a classical and Motown fan and my father was more traditional country and classic rock and roll. No, I’m not talking the Stones, Led Zep, or The Who but Elvis, Jerry Lee, and Chuck Berry etc. In those days there was no worldwide media or internet where you could hear any song at any moment. You heard a song on the radio and saved your pennies to buy 45’s and LP’s. What does this have to do with the topic you ask? :) Let me explain.

Those were times when the electric guitar was booming onto the scene. The British invasion was taking root and stars were on the rise. Every one of the future rock gods who created “their sound” did so the same way consumers obtained their pleasure with the music. They bought the 45’s and LP’s and played them over and over wearing out the vinyl and needles. Go revisit some of the articles about Jimi, Eric Clapton, Pete Townsend, Jeff Beck, etc. and they all say the same thing. I had my cheap 25 dollar (enter brand here) guitar and tried to emulate Chuck Berry, Buddy Guy, Robert Johnson etc. It was not so much the sound either as it was the playing style. They couldn’t sound EXACTLY like their heroes because the equipment was not readily available to them. They often talk about how they eventually could play the songs note for note. In other words, they learned how to play.

The amps and guitars of the 40’s and 50’s were becoming readily available to the players. At this time the gear started expanding. More guitar companies popped onto the scene. Amps were expanding boundaries and becoming more innovative. In other words, new sounds were becoming available. And many up and comers created “their sound” at this time. But really, how many are there that you can hear a couple notes or strums and state “oh that’s so and so”. Not a whole lot when you consider the numbers who have tried. It was a time in music where history, style, technique, and technology all merged and some iconic “sounds” were created in the process. New ground was broken almost daily.

The technology was also finding its way to the consumer. Home stereo units, yes STEREO were becoming more common, TV’s were finding their way in to the average users homes. It was the mass media explosion of the times. One must not forget about the recording side of this topic either, innovative techniques were being incorporated and a lot of experimentation was happening. It became much bigger than what could be heard over a simple transistor or car radio. This was a transition time for these artists where they went from trying to emulate their heroes note for note to creating new and “mind blowing” sounds.

Nothing has changed. It’s all circular. The only difference is that now it’s so much more saturated. We have the internet where you get the latest 10 seconds after it’s created. People have amazing technology at their fingertips in their bedrooms. I have gone from stacking 45’s to having a recording studio in my home and I am just Joe average.

So while I can see where players today want to emulate and even copy their heroes note for note just like their heroes did before them, especially when playing in a cover or tribute band, I also see somewhat of laziness or lack of motivation to break new ground like our guitar gods did in their day because we as enthusiasts have this technology that our stars have and can actually reproduce their sounds quite easily in our own homes and get satisfied with that.

I personally think, with the technological innovations we are seeing produced today that we are very much on the brink of a “new sounds” era just like our mentors were decades ago. The saturation of the internet definitely makes coming up with something unique much more difficult to accomplish but for every thousands of guys trying to copy Eddies sound to a T there are many more that will take it, expand on it and take it their own direction. And with all the innovative gear that is being created, it’s not a matter of if but when the next “your sound” will be produced. Heck, if I ever learn this damn instrument, it could be ME!!!!! :shock

Yes, I rambled again. My bad....
 
Last edited:
I think the term "Cover Band" pretty much sums it up. IMO, if you're doing a cover of a popular tune, you should do your best to nail it in every way. If you're creating your own music, then you most likely would not want to come off sounding like someone else? Then there's the grey area, which can be interesting, like when a band like Metalica does an old Black Sabbath tune, but heavier. Fortunately for all of us, whichever camp we belong in, the Axe can do it all :)
 
Last edited:
Whether it is conscious or subconscious, isn't the tendency to imitate our influences what defines a "genre"?
 
No hostility at all Henry, I just think it better to tell everyone how unique you are on another forum.

Cheers

If that ain't hostility, Jack, I don't know what is! It might be weasly, passive-aggressive, snarky, condescending hostility, as opposed to straight up, head's up hostility, but that only makes it tackier. You owe this forum an apology for your astounding lack of civility.
 
By the way; IF YOU ARE IN A COVER BAND, I get it! Yeah, you wanna make it sound like the record.

I've never made a lot of money in music (though I did get a NYFA fellowship, which paid some bills), but that's OK - I have made art that I am proud of. It has all been original (I can play maybe 8 songs that I or my brother didn't write). I am ignorant, musically illiterate, and probably lazy and morally reprehensible, but I've made music I am proud of, that doesn't sound like anyone else's. That was (is) a priority for me - to be original, to not play covers, unless I molest them significantly.

We all have our priorities. I just wish I heard more variety here. I listen to soundcloud after soundcloud posting on here, and it's all Satch, Eddie, Vai etc.

My mom (who was in advertising) always said: nothing sells like mediocrity. She was right...
 
Whether it is conscious or subconscious, isn't the tendency to imitate our influences what defines a "genre"?
Brilliant. Absolutely. And I'm not saying I TRY not to sound like anybody. That's not my point -- to myself. The point is I don't go out of my way TOP SOUND LIKE some else.

I think genres are different. I might be wrong though. Whether you're playing funk, rock, pop in it's myriad forms, swing, bop, country, there are ways to play them or you don't gig. Whatever best fits the song and the style. But that's not the same thing as copping someone else's whole play book. I always tried to take it from the position that I was a studio musician called to make the date instead of whoever it was who actually did it. That made it fun and creative for me. But if I'm expected to play like a robot with no ME in there - no. Get Ableton Live and program the guitar. I'd go nuts. But once again -- THAT'S JUST ME FOLKS. I can admire anyone else does this. I'm not being critical of anyone else. Seriously. Go back a read and see if you can see where I criticized anyone who does this. Nope. Not me.
 
Funny about influences. Zappa was a HUGE influence on me. But I sound nothing at all like him. Except for some early stuff, he doesn't sound too much like Varese or Lightning Slim either, though they were seminal influences for him. I think sometimes, at least when you're lucky, the influences become internalized, mix with the germinal creative force of the divine, and come out pretty much utterly unrecognizable from their antecedents.
 
Hendrix was a huge influence on me. I don't sound a thing like him. Chick Corea was a huge influence as was Jarrett, Coltrane. Not a thing like them.
 
@ henryrobinett. Well said, dude.
Maybe it's because it's fun to sound like your [guitar-playing] idol, especially if your gear has sucked until now. Indeed, I would say copying your idol is a good starting point. Like Scott, I couldn't care whom I sound like, but I find in many cases the obsessiveness of tone seekers is a bit too much for me and can even be slightly disturbing. Me, I'd rather chase the very disturbing tones in my head! By the way, we all have 'propulsion'. This a Spanish word I learned when I used to study flamenco: it means how hard you hit the strings, the angles of your fingers, your nails' thickness and width, etc, etc. That's also an VERY IMPORTANT part of tone.
I remember the flamenco Juan Martin mentioning a player [can't remember his name] who is an amateur. He works in a day job down the docks, i.e. hard labour. He plays flamenco at night. Now Juan says the guy isn't a 'concert' player, he's not clean enough, he makes mistakes and his technique is a bit rough, but fair enough, he doesn't have all day to practice, you see. What is great about him is his the life and vibrancy in his playing because it's for pure enjoyment, and because of his heavy day job, he really batters the strings like no other flamenco. A unique player with a unique tone.
I also remember the story of someone who got to a gig early. Said the roadie set up the guitar, played it, tuned it, it sounded like sh*t. Then the actual player came out for a quick practise and the difference was immense. THERE was the tone all of a sudden! The dude also found this remarkable because he noticed that in the intervening time between the roadie going away and the band member picking up the guitar, NO adjustments were made to the gear!
 
1234, you bring up another tangential point: the obsession with technique. Some of the greatest music I've ever heard was played with 'imperfect technique'. Segovia, on the other hand, played like a robot. I'll take John lee Hooker anyday...
 
The first cover band I played in was 3/4 made up of friends I went to school with and the philosophy was if we were going to play the 'anthems' of the eighties then we'd treat them as 'anthems' and play them note for note and try to get as near to the original sound as we could - not that we ever got that close sound wise to begin with because we were pretty skint.

I won't go as far to say it was the right thing to do - but when you know that 3 or 4 other guys are going to tell you 'Are you sure thats the correct chord/run/note? I make it this ...', you learn a fair amount of discipline due to the peer pressure - that's a good thing.

Immodest of me perhaps, but it worked too - we became known for the way we played songs and given that our competition was a bunch of bands who had held residencies in the pubs/clubs for years and years and were playing the same old sets but with all the enthusiasm gone and tempos approaching light speed just because they were in auto pilot waiting for the break for a pint or 2 or the end to get paid and go home.

Many years have passed since then, but there's still a bit of that discipline left in me and if I'm playing a cover then I like to be able to look out and see other guitarists in the audience looking at my fingers trying to see where and what my fingers are doing if I nail a guitar part just right. To be able to get somewhat near the recorded tone would be the icing on the cake ..... not essential by any means .... but the musos in the audience would maybe appreciate it - which makes me appreciate it too! Dancing girls and gaping musos - thats the pub band life!

It all depends on the song I guess .... sometimes we messed about and turned a song into a reggae version or made a metal song sound rock or whatever and it sticks ... a proper cover 'version' and any originals we threw together would have new tones develop during the writing/rehearsing.

I see nothing wrong in using your equipment to do whatever you want to do with it to make yourself happy (well as happy as guitarists can ever be with their tone ... fickle gits as we are).
 
Some people enjoy the process of trying to nail something like that down. I don't see how anyone on either side can sit there and put down someone's preference as to either side of the discussion though. It's two different processes, two different people with two different objectives. Doesn't make one better than the other, it makes them different.

I love to make my own patches and tones. Hell, that is why I can't bring myself to buy something like the KPA because I can't handle someone doing the work for me in terms of creating what I want to hear. But I'll sit there and pick something that I hear and try to emulate it on the AxeFXII. Most of the time I don't get all the way there, but along the way I end up with something that I like a lot. It's a great starting point and sometimes it's great and sometimes its not so great, but I enjoy the process nonetheless. I've never really wanted to get to the point where its indistinguishable from the original recording. But I'd never sit there and act like my personal approach makes me more of a musician or less 'mediocre'. That's just plain offensive. And just to set the record straight I'm a mediocre musician on a good day.

If everyone did everything the same way it would be boring as hell and if everyone did everything completely differently then we'd have disorder and chaos and no one would know how to do anything. It takes a combination of both types.

The only part of any of this that really ever gets under my skin is when someone will dismiss or bash a piece of gear because they can't make an exact duplicate of a recorded tone.
 
Back
Top Bottom