mshilarious
Banned
Somebody should program that ridiculously expensive Gibson robot guitar to randomly retune while the instrument is being played . . . or do the same thing with DSP in a Variax or something. Anybody done that yet 
Outlaws
New member
It would be nice if you could have a foot controller for divebombs.
mshilarious
Banned
That's a really good idea. I don't see why it wouldn't be possible with that technology.
ez_willis
.
because it would cost a shitload for an effect that you'd barely ever use. and it's a stupid idea.
mshilarious
Banned
meh, the cost of the technology will drop, it always does.
M1Fanatic
Digital whaaa?
Yes, but the price of Gibson guitars is forever. 
MuttLite
Banned
Just because it gets cheaper it doesn't mean the idea gets better. ez point#2 still applies..
mshilarious
Banned
MuttLite
Banned
Creative persons always find a use for new toys
Instrument evolution is driven by composition not new toys.
mshilarious
Banned
Not really. The sax was once a new toy. And the piano. And the hipshot. And the pickup . . . Gibson invented a new toy, they just couldn't figure out what to do with it. Alternate tunings isn't clever enough to warrant the price, but full remote control of tuning . . . that has lots of creative possibilities.
ocnor
Lord Of The Thighs
Squire has been making guitars like that for years.
MuttLite
Banned
Congratulations, you are now flying in the face of decades of accepted musicological debate without a single "real" and researched context on which to to base your premise. You go for it. I could do with another laugh.
The examples you put forward are pathetically inacurate..Where do you get this shit?
mshilarious
Banned
Whatever mutts. You willing to put any money on my contention that digitally controlled mechanical tuners will soon find a creative use? Or you just flapping your jaw because you don't like me?
MuttLite
Banned
Don't like you? What I don't like is people who take a stance just for the fuck of it and when they get pwnd they pretend they have a level of exellence far beyond their understaanding and then post a shit loads of pretentious bollox as a smoke screen.
Notice, I rarely if ever take on a debate in which I am not well grounded. Do you see me in the mic forums offering my lack of understanding? Or in the drum boards talking about that shit? Or even in the mixing forums offering my 2 cents? No, and thats because I read, identify and accept others level of understanding and defer to it. I stick closely to what I know. It's a life skill and one that seperates...
You on the other hand are all over a specific debate like a fucking rash without the first idea what you are talking about other than a little bit of reading and an over inflated sense of the scope of your expertise..Whats to like? You carry on it's funny.
G
ggunn
Crystal Flavolian
Wow.... Just wow.
Since when did music get all serious? I'm just fine with the notion that the development of a new instrument might instigate a new way of playing. If not, so what? Musicology is a bit of a joke, anyway, IMO.
mshilarious
Banned
Oh come now, Mr. muttley, were it not for artists you would be making furniture. And very fine furniture it would be; for I have seen your work and it's something I could never afford nor justify the purchase given my talent.
But nevertheless, furniture, and some fat pensioner would plop their arse onto it and pick up my handiwork, a remote control, and turn on the latest episode of Britain's Got Talent, except there wouldn't be any talent because there never would have been an artist.
I think it's well within reality that Gibson has sorely underestimated (and overpriced) their technology. I think a lot of artists would enjoy the ability to remotely trigger a pitch bend--up or down--within a chord they are fingerpicking. For most chords now, that is often impossible for an increment and completely impossible for a decrement of more than maybe a quarter tone. So why deny the artist that possibility? Seems luddite to me.
Also, if you don't like my earlier examples, how about tape recorder, helicopter, and Autotune?
But nevertheless, furniture, and some fat pensioner would plop their arse onto it and pick up my handiwork, a remote control, and turn on the latest episode of Britain's Got Talent, except there wouldn't be any talent because there never would have been an artist.
I think it's well within reality that Gibson has sorely underestimated (and overpriced) their technology. I think a lot of artists would enjoy the ability to remotely trigger a pitch bend--up or down--within a chord they are fingerpicking. For most chords now, that is often impossible for an increment and completely impossible for a decrement of more than maybe a quarter tone. So why deny the artist that possibility? Seems luddite to me.
Also, if you don't like my earlier examples, how about tape recorder, helicopter, and Autotune?
Outlaws
New member
Who did you pwn? No one knew what a guitar was supposed to sound like until someone invented it. After it was built people started making music on it. What about delay? People make music in sync with the delay. But nobody composed a song that required delay and then went and invented tape delay.
For how smart you think you are you are you logic is a bit flawed.
50 years ago you would be one of those people who said rock and roll was just a bunch of noise.
ez_willis
.
wtf? you guys think too much. a divebomber effect built into a guitar is stupid. i thought i already told you guys that???
ez_willis
.
C
clivus
New member
Robot retuning 'on the fly' might be a cool thing, but the absolute coolest retuning trick I have seen was at the Chet Atkins Appreciation Society several years ago when this British jazz guitarist (whose name I have long forgotton) perfectly changed tunings twice by hand mid-performance without missing a beat on a fairly uptempo chord/melody solo. Blew everyone away.