Audio Myth Buster Thread

Greg_L said:
Lol. I really don't know. I only know his "hits" and none of them, not one note, does anything for me. I can appreciate good tone in songs I don't like. Like Boston. Lol. Cheesy songs, but epic 70s rock guitar tones. I can't say I've ever appreciated Santana tone.
Click to expand...

Mark this day on your calendar. I whole-heartedly agree with you on Santana. He's one of my biggest "don't get it" guitar players.
 
Boston's guitar tone???!!! That nasal, 1k jacked to the moon, no highs, no lows, washed in chorus guitar tone? Talk about solid state tone...

Yes, I know he was using Marshalls to amplify his effects processors live in the 70's, but he quickly went solid state after Don't Look Back came out. He's stayed that way ever since.
 
Yeah, for some reason I like those cheesy overdriven Boston tones. It's over the top. The meandering harmonized leads and layers upon layers of guitar shit. It's awesome. :D
 
famous beagle said:
Mark this day on your calendar. I whole-heartedly agree with you on Santana. He's one of my biggest "don't get it" guitar players.
Click to expand...

Are you talking about his "tone" or his music that you don't get...?

Tone is so subjective and variable....it's hard to really comment on a player entirely on his tone.
I mean...someone like Beck is a great player, but IMO, his thin, squeally tone annoys the piss out of me...but I wouldn't judge him entirely by that.
 
miroslav said:
Are you talking about his "tone" or his music that you don't get...?

Tone is so subjective and variable....it's hard to really comment on a player entirely on his tone.
I mean...someone like Beck is a great player, but IMO, his thin, squeally tone annoys the piss out of me...but I wouldn't judge him entirely by that.
Click to expand...

In Santana's case, it's the whole package. Actually, his tone is more acceptable to me than his playing is. It's really his playing that's actually boring to me. I always want to like him, because every time I read interviews with him, I like what he has to say, and he seems as though he feels music very deeply. But then I listen to him and think ... "what's the big deal?"

To each his own.
 
The woodstock era stuff was great and the high point of his career. Elevator music in later years.
 
famous beagle said:
In Santana's case, it's the whole package. Actually, his tone is more acceptable to me than his playing is. It's really his playing that's actually boring to me. I always want to like him, because every time I read interviews with him, I like what he has to say, and he seems as though he feels music very deeply. But then I listen to him and think ... "what's the big deal?"

To each his own.
Click to expand...

He is certainly not a flashy/dazzling player.
I think a lot of his playing follows the whole Latin melodic vibe...simple melodies without the frills.
At times...it could come off boring if you are expecting more.

There are a few classic songs of his where I think his playing is quite good, and even inspired to a point...but even those are not what anyone would classify as WOW! "brilliant" guitar playing.
He plays lead guitar like a singer would sing.
 
Santana was the perfect player for a drummer like me to learn how to play guitar. His playing is so simple and not fast that I was able to learn a lot of his solos. Him and David Gilmour. I think Gilmour is way more awesome than Santana, but everything he plays is in that pentatonic (I think) blues position that allowed me to pretty much play along to everything he did as soon as I learned a bit of guitar. I'm not putting either of them down. Easy and simple doesn't necessarily mean bad.
 
I used to go see him in the 70s at the Cow Palace in the SF bay. Great shows.

Last I saw him was at the Hollywood Bowl. I was looking forward as i hadn't seen him in years.

Ended up bummed out. Great band, great musicianship, but the fire of earlier days was gone. Felt more like I was at the Playboy Jazz Festival.
Also didn't play a single one of the songs that put him on the map.
 
I saw Santana live at the Forum in about 1978 or something like that. His bass player passed out while standing on the drum riser. Went down face first, didn't even brace himself with his hands. He bounced once. After the song, Carlos said "Our brother's feeling a little weak tonight" and they got a roadie or guitar tech to finish the show on bass. :D
 
All tube guitar amps are variations on the same circuit. The first Marshall was the same circuit as a fender bassman, but made with parts that were available in the uk.

Every guitar amp is essentially some forms of either the fender take or the Marshall take on that circuit. The differences come in when you decide to put the toe stack before or after the preamp, which power tunes you decide on and how many preamp tunes you cascade into each other to get the gain you want. It's all details like that that make the differencesong between all the amps.
 
RAMI said:
Him and David Gilmour. I think Gilmour is way more awesome...
Click to expand...

Yes.
I was thinking the same thing earlier when I was posting.
Gilmour plays in the same style, though I agree, he's more technical and can depart from the pure melodic playing and do some abstract stuff too (no surprise being in PF).
You can hear them "singing" out the melodies with their playing....rather than just running through licks and repetitive patterns.

In my early years, I was way more into the melodic stuff...which is rarely "flashy". Then of course, you start to develop a desire to add some "flash" and speed, so you end up doing more licks and runs and pattern stuff. So lately I've been getting back to more of the melodic, having gotten bored with licks and runs...but I try to blend the two as much as I can.

Anyway, I get where Santana and Gilmour and those kind of players are coming from...just as I get the guys who basically just "riff through".
I'm also very fond of guys like Page, who are somewhere in the middle of all that, but add another dimension that's very raw and full of focused intent, and it works even when their playing is sloppy. Neil Young is like that too...nothing to WOW! you with...but man, he really knows how to drive it home no matter how ragged it is...and they both got some serious tone.

I'll take tone and raw playing intent over perfectly executed technical playing that comes off more as a gymnastic competition....of course, the guys who like that stuff will say that it's full of emotion, etc...but I just never hear it.



Chili said:
I remember an interview eons ago where he said he tried to emulate Diana Ross' singing style.
Click to expand...

I didn't know that! :cool:
That's nice to know, because that's how I always heard his playing, like someone singing through the guitar.
 
Farview said:
All tube guitar amps are variations on the same circuit.
Click to expand...
There are only so many ways to wire a tube to act as an amplifier, and frankly only one really good one that also gives high input and low output impedance. I guarantee that it was not Leo Fender who first figured it out. In fact, the original guitar amp designs are adaptations (read rip offs) of tube radio/hi-fi designs that were pretty well developed by the time people figured out the magnetic guitar pickup thing.
 
miroslav said:
Yes.
I was thinking the same thing earlier when I was posting.
Gilmour plays in the same style, though I agree, he's more technical and can depart from the pure melodic playing and do some abstract stuff too (no surprise being in PF).
You can hear them "singing" out the melodies with their playing....rather than just running through licks and repetitive patterns.

In my early years, I was way more into the melodic stuff...which is rarely "flashy". Then of course, you start to develop a desire to add some "flash" and speed, so you end up doing more licks and runs and pattern stuff. So lately I've been getting back to more of the melodic, having gotten bored with licks and runs...but I try to blend the two as much as I can.

Anyway, I get where Santana and Gilmour and those kind of players are coming from...just as I get the guys who basically just "riff through".
Click to expand...
Yeah, the only Santana song that I can think of that comes close to actually rocking is "Hope You're Feeling better". It's my favorite Santana tune. I like a lot of Pink Floyd, though, mainly "Dark Side", I do love that album.
From what I can hear, it seems that the difference between those two guys is that Santana slides up to a note, and Gilmour bends up to a note. I love Gilmour's bends and double bends. As a non-guitarist, I've realized how hard, and important, it is to bend accurately.
 
Farview said:
All tube guitar amps are variations on the same circuit. The first Marshall was the same circuit as a fender bassman, but made with parts that were available in the uk.

Every guitar amp is essentially some forms of either the fender take or the Marshall take on that circuit. The differences come in when you decide to put the toe stack before or after the preamp, which power tunes you decide on and how many preamp tunes you cascade into each other to get the gain you want. It's all details like that that make the differencesong between all the amps.
Click to expand...

How closely does Mesa follow that pattern? There seems to be a whole lot more going on inside those things.
 
Well they started off based off a modded Princeton, and got more complex as time went on.
But the roots are in fender.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top