Sorta OT: Why Did/Do Guitarists Reject Synthesizers?

[BbAltered]

For as long as I have been playing keyboards, I have lusted after synthesizer sounds: I wanted to have one and make music with it. I bought my first synthesizer in 1978-9 (an Arp Odyessy), when I was still learning I, IV, and V in all keys. I have been an avid musical synthesizer user ever since. This forum, and others like it, show me that there is a large group of other keyboard players who share my enthusiasm and lust for using synthesizers.

 

It is curious to me that as a group, guitarist have largely ignored synthesizers as a music instrument. All of the classic synthesizers (MiniMoog, ARP2600, Roland Juno and Jupiter, the Prophet, etc.) are all keyboard instruments. I cannot think of any mass-produced synthesizer instrument with an interface made for guitar players - an interesting marketing phenomenon, given that there are a lot more guitar players than there are keyboard players.

 

So why were/are guitar players so blase about synthesizer technology, when lots of keyboard players like myself were/are dedicated to synthesizers?

 

One explanation I have heard is that the early guitar interfaces for synthesizers were horrible to play, and so guitarists never got excited about using synthesizers. While I cannot speak to the problems of early guitar-synth interfaces, we all know that early keyboard-synth interfaces were horrible for keyboardists - monophonic play, no dynamic touch, etc. - keyboard players literally had to learn new keyboard technique in order to use early synthesizers. And yet keyboard players took enthusiastically to the technology anyways - and in doing so in large numbers then motivated the synth manufacturers to improve the keyboards and the synthesizers. No such feedback between players and manufacturers seemed to occur for guitar players.

 

Today, even with great improvements in guitar-synthesizer interfaces, most guitar players continue to ignore using synthesizers and synthesizer sounds.

 

Why is that? Your thoughts here....... .

 

(inb4 "lots of guitarists use synthesizers". They do, but the Pat Methanys and Adrian Belews are the notable exceptions among guitar players. Chick Corea, Herbie Hancock, George Duke, Jan Hammer, Keith Emerson, Rick Wakeman, Zawinal, JM Jarre.....etc., etc., etc.)

[Old No7]

So why were/are guitar players so blase about synthesizer technology, when lots of keyboard players like myself were/are dedicated to synthesizers?

Interesting question...

 

I'll be watching to see what others come up with, but I'm thinking that it basically comes down to something as simple as the "strings versus keys" and what's associated with each.

 

Every guitarist I've ever jammed or gigged with was always more focused on guitar construction, guitar types (and materials or brands), the # of strings, string types and the wide variety of effects pedals they could use -- and some had dozens of them due to their own version of GAS -- but you're right, I never saw any of them try to adapt synth technology to the guitar. Other than those who used voice boxes, like they saw Frampton or Bon Jovi do.

 

It's like the "guitar versus keyboards" players were on parallel paths in their use of technology; but guitarists never really converged on synthesizers like the keyboardists did probably because they already had a plethora of other tricks, tools or technology to change the sonic character of their string-based playing and instruments.

 

Old No7

[ProfD]

IMO, synthesizers gave KB players another voice in addition to acoustic piano and electromechnical KBs. Already being used to playing keys made the transition easier.

 

Beyond clunky guitar/synth interfaces early on, I think many guitar players to this day still reject synthesizers for two reasons:

 

1) synthesizers infringe on their sonic territory especially when played by proficient KB players.

 

2) effects provide guitarists with enough ammunition to synthesize their tone.

 

As a huge proponent of KB players and instruments, I'm totally fine with guitar players leaving our sh8t alone.

[GovernorSilver]

Imost guitar players continue to ignore using synthesizers and synthesizer sounds.

 

Why is that? Your thoughts here....... .

 

(inb4 "lots of guitarists use synthesizers". They do, but the Pat Methanys and Adrian Belews

 

That's because most guitarists are not Metheny or Belew. I'm not even talking about guitar skills here - talking about the creative vision that those guys have, and how they think of music and music production compared to the casual, rock-oriented guitarist.

 

I just watched a bit of a Fender Play advert. Most of the people in the ad say they just want play rock and roll, or write rock songs on guitar. Synths are just not the main instrument in those folks' conception of "rock and roll" - they are not a group that includes us weirdos who are fans of ELP, Genesis, Yes, and other keyboard-heavy rock bands.

 

"Most" people - not just guitarists - do not want to be innovators or otherwise stand out too much from the crowd. It takes some guts, but mostly effort. I don't blame people for not wanting to work harder at being creative - after a fully day of attending to the day job, kids, spouse/partner, bills, errands, chores, etc. they're probably just too drained to be creative and just want to relax with something safe and comforting, like strumming treasured tunes of their youth on guitar.

 

As for synths with guitar interfaces, Roland has been making those for decades, albeit requiring special pickups. Lately they have started competing with EHX in the domain of guitar-driven synths that can produce polyphonic output, without need of special pickup.

 

There have also been guitar-like controllers. Yamaha made the G10 guitar-shaped controller for a bit. Artiphon makes the Instrument 1. Linnstrument is not shaped like a guitar, but does have a guitar fretboard like note layout.

[Docbop]

Early MIDI MIDI pickups were terrible they'd mis-triggered or didn't trigger all. I remember Frank Zappa tried to use a synth guitar and with his playing style using lots of hammer-ons the synth was going crazy. Zappa even got Lee Ritenour to come over and help him try to get it worked out. With guitar and all the triggering issues it was mainly only good for single line playing, getting chord to to trigger right was even worse. I played a bit with one of the Rolands synth guitars and it was fun but not enough to want to spend the time and money on it.

 

I look at it as why bother, got a keyboardist and sometime multi keyboard players doing synth why do you need guitar to add more electronic sounds.

[Morrissey]

IMO, synthesizers gave KB players another voice in addition to acoustic piano and electromechnical KBs. Already being used to playing keys made the transition easier.

 

Beyond clunky guitar/synth interfaces early on, I think many guitar players to this day still reject synthesizers for two reasons:

 

1) synthesizers infringe on their sonic territory especially when played by proficient KB players.

 

2) effects provide guitarists with enough ammunition to synthesize their tone.

 

+1. KB players were eager to adapt synths for many reasons. New sonic palette, portability, etc. By the time synths came along, there had been centuries of diversity in keyboard based instruments sufficient to disassociate the act of pressing a key to produce a sound from any particular timbre. Synths were a desired addition to the keyboardist's arsenal. And KB players have been rewarded for expanding their palette, sometimes to the detriment of other instruments (e.g., not hiring a horn section because the KB can cover the brass parts).

 

In contrast, when consumer synths came along, electric guitars had only existed for a couple decades, and they had always sounded like only an electric guitar. Someone who chooses to play electric guitar as his/her instrument associates the visceral act of plucking/fretting the strings with just the sound of an electric guitar. And then a bevy of guitar effects pedals allow for wide range of customization. Most guitar players don't want their guitars to mimic a trumpet, and most audiences don't want that either. Finally, I think there is much "blame" on the very clunky guitar synth interfaces. Lots of bad technology. Decades of false starts and hassles.

[Morrissey]

Early MIDI MIDI pickups were terrible they'd mis-triggered or didn't trigger all. I remember Frank Zappa tried to use a synth guitar and with his playing style using lots of hammer-ons the synth was going crazy. Zappa even got Lee Ritenour to come over and help him try to get it worked out. With guitar and all the triggering issues it was mainly only good for single line playing, getting chord to to trigger right was even worse. I played a bit with one of the Rolands synth guitars and it was fun but not enough to want to spend the time and money on it.

 

I look at it as why bother, got a keyboardist and sometime multi keyboard players doing synth why do you need guitar to add more electronic sounds.

 

 

Another early adopter was Jerry Garcia of the Grateful Dead. Here's a description of the hassle he went through to play a bit a flute and trumpet sounds in the 80s. All that hassle, and it sounded terrible.

 

 

In 1990 Garcia introduced the 3rd Doug Irwin guitar "Rosebud", named for the inlaid dancing skeleton on the ebony cover plate. It is almost a twin of Tiger, but two pounds lighter at 11 1/2 pounds. (While the shape is identical to Tigers, the body inlay, tone and volume control positions are different.) Though he continued to use Tiger with Garcia Band for about a year, Rosebud became Jerry's full time guitar.

 

Specifications: Under Rosebud is a cavity that houses a gutted out Roland GK-2 guitar synthesizer interface. The carved cocobola top and back are divided by a flamed maple core that has been hollowed out to reduce weight. The maple neck has a vermilion stripe and a 24-fret ebony fingerboard. As with the Wolf and Tiger, the electronics layout and pickups are basically like those of a Strat one volume control, two tone knobs, and a five-way selector switch. Rosebud features three DiMarzio Super II split coil humbuckers. Except for the

 

Schaller bridge, tuners and brass knobs all the hardware is hand-fabricated of brass by Irwin, including the tailpiece, the switchplate, the pickup plate assembly and the jack mounting plates. The GK-2 mates with a GR-50 synthesizer rack mount unit. This is controlled by interacting pieces. Midi volume and synth patch increment/decrement changes (which are the red mini-momentary action switches on the guitar) were generated conveniently by the GK-2 controller electronics. One of the switches were for 'remote' incrementing of the synth(s) patch numbers, the other for decrementing to a different patch. It was possible for Jer to switch between guitar or synth(s) by themselves by use of the volume pots on the guitar or have both at the same time.

 

The GR-50 synth unit was coupled via Midi interface cabling to a Lake Butler Midigator foot-controller. The LB Midigator was used primarily to switch to a patch that was not 'adjacent' to the last patch used. For example, going from patch 9 to patch 33 could not be accomplished by using the GK-2 inc/dec switches in one move, so a foot controller was used for that. The Lake Butler Midigator could be set up to be labeled by song title or 'space1' , where under that label up to 5 different patch changes could be stored and accessed easily.

 

For example, a MIDI patch of Bambu Tremolo on the Korg M1R, with an oboe, a flute, a flungelhorn could be stored under the title of Space1.

 

The MIDI thru port of the GR-50 was cabled to the MIDI in of the Korg M1R. You hear many of the MIDI patches Garcia used on Without a Net and Built to Last. It is located at the bottom of the rack if you look at the guitar picture on the right side of the page.

 

If Jer hit the patch increment button on the GK-2, the patch would be incremented on both the GR50 and Korg M1R at the same time if he used both units on the same MIDI channel (MIDI can support up to 16 channels). He worked with a library of about 500 sounds.

 

All three of Irwin's guitars share Garcia's effect-loop design, which is basically a stereo jack that sends the signal out through the effects and back before it hits the volume and tone controls.

 

http://dozin.com/jers/jers/guitars/rosebud/rosebud.html

[Biggles]

Why not post your thread in the guitar section of this forum?

[jarrell]

I don't think it is a matter of not wanting different sounds. I agree with DocBop; I think if guitar synths came out in the 70's working as well as keyboard synths (no triggering issues, no problems with chords, different articulations and playing styles), and costing the same, they would have been adopted. I know the tracking has gotten better over the years, but not being a guitarist, I haven't followed how well they work today. What has blossomed for guitarist has been pedals and pedalboard multi effects - lots of sonic variance with no tracking issues (that I am aware of).

[dbhoosier]

I'll disagree a bit with Morrissey in that I liked Jerry Garcia's use of MIDI with Rosebud, but the hassle and complexity to use it is an excellent example of why so many guitarist wouldn't bother. That being said, I would hope there would be easier ways today for guitar players that want to get into MIDI synth.

 

This thread brings up some interesting points and perspectives, most of which I agree with. However, some of the most influential synth pioneers in the early 70's were guitar players - Pete Townsend with Who's Next, Gilmour/Waters with Dark Side of the Moon, etc. Problem was that only megastars could afford synthesizers back then (plus the other challenges noted - monophonic, etc.). Clearly synth had its day (and limitations) in the 80's and seemed to disappear somewhat with the emergence/popularity of both grunge (raw) and hip hop (more focus on sampling of others).

 

This motivates me to do a bit more with pure synth and the infinite possibilities in my keyboard playing (versus using various acoustic and electric piano sounds, clav, and B-3 for the most part). I saw a video interview recently with Benmont Tench and he was asked why he didn't do much with synth, and he said he is a long way from fully exploring what a grand piano can do or the drawbars of a Hammond can do, which I can appreciate. Maybe that is how many guitar players feel today - there is so much to try to master. However, it also ends up sounding very much the same and the opportunity for differentiation and unique sonic experiences is lost (particular with just the insane technology capabilities available today versus what I could have only imagined 30+ years ago when I started playing with synths/keyboards).

 

Love this forum.

[KuruPrionz]

Guitarist right here. I am not here to say one instrument is better than the other, I can only make observations based on 50+ years of guitar playing and very little time spend on keyboards.

 

There are many reasons for guitarists not embracing synths to the same level as keyboardists. Keyboardists are accustomed to operating a machine (pressing keys, turning knobs, sliding sliders, etc.) and getting consistent, prepared results.

Guitarists are used to manipulating strings, which are primary tone generators with physical inconsistencies. One can learn to use those inconsistencies to their advantage (Jeff Beck comes to mind) or ignore them at their peril.

 

And let's be real, there are hugely different levels of competence and artistry in both keyboardists and guitarists, no question of it.

 

Keyboardists often play their notes with both hands but they do have other options (more on that later). A guitarist fingers the notes with one hand and plucks, taps, picks with the other hand, a different approach and very different results.

 

What does that have to do with synths? For one thing, a string can be affected in ways that may or may not be controlled in advance. For live work, I prefer a heavy guitar pick. You won't hear it but that pick is actually a "movable fret' and there is a very brief, almost instantaneous moment when the pick strikes the string and generates a note that is much higher in pitch than the fretted note that follows. If the analog to digital pitch conversion is fast enough (like my Fishman Triple Play MIDI controller for guitar), it generates an annoying and unintended "splatting" or "glitch". My solution for that is to use the pads of my fingers to pluck the notes, they do not generate those "movable fret" glitches. I'm not as adept at playing with my fingers as I am with a pick, that results in limiting what I can do with a synth guitar that tracks strings. Using both hands simultaneously to play the instrument also limits what can be done with a synth, a keyboardist can play keys with one hand and manipulate the synth parameters with the other simultaneously. That provides more synth friendly options.

 

The synth guitars without actual strings or with weird plastic "dummy" strings (Casio comes to mind) are an attempt to create a market that has never really caught on. While they have some resemblance to guitars, they are not guitars and every one of them is completely proprietary in the sense that they all approach the concept differently. A guitarist would be much better served in the long run to learn to play keyboards.

 

My compromise was to choose the Fishman Triple Play because it allows me to play a guitar I am used to, there are still compromises in comparison to the predictability of a keyboard synth. Strings are simple complicated, that is part of their beauty but it makes it difficult to translate to a synth trigger.

 

All that said, I wouldn't change anything. I LOVE playing my guitars and only use the Triple Play for recording. I tend to keep it as simple as possible at gigs and there is a world of tones at my fingertips always.

 

Guitarists and keyboardists will remain different animals, nothing has or will change. Cheers, Kuru

[Ken Beaumont]

It took many years for the tracking to get good enough. I have owned several units including an Axon ax100 and a Roland GR-55 that use a 13 pin interface. You have to play differently to get it working well. You have to play precise lines but they track well. But it still can mis-track if you play really fast lines. There are quite a few players out there still using the GR-55 system and older Roland gear. But most guitar players just want to plug in and play. Pedal boards and things like the fractal audio, line 6 and other gear can get you a ton of sonic goodness. When I used it regularly, I did a lot with the AX-100 which is bi-timbrel. You could use a sustain pedal to play a chord as a pad or arp and then solo over it with a different sound from the AX-100 or a sound module I used a roland sonic cell with it. The only thing I liked about playing guitar synth was the fact you could bend pitch very naturally if your playing a violin or cello sound or even woodwinds the sounds were very convincing. You can get that kind of articulation with keys and the pitch and mod wheels or a breath/ribbon controller, but it just comes naturally on a string instrument. In the end I just decided it wasn't worth the effort. So my AX-100 sits in a rack in my studio, just in case I get nostalgic. Guitar synths are a bit like keytars are you a keyboard player wishing you were the guitar player or a guitar player wishing you were a keyboard player? For me, playing both it was only curiosity that drew me to it initially.

[BbAltered]

....I think if guitar synths came out in the 70's working as well as keyboard synths (no triggering issues, no problems with chords, different articulations and playing styles), and costing the same, they would have been adopted. I know the tracking has gotten better over the years,.....

 

Granted, early (1970's) guitar-synth interfaces sucked. But then again, so did the early keyboard-synth interfaces (one hand, single note, no chords, no dynamics, etc.). Yet keyboard players bought what was available, and used it, and consumer interest drove new and better keyboard and synth capabilities (polyphonic play, touch sensitivity, etc.).

 

For some reason, guitarists/consumers never drove synth or interface development to make better guitar-synth interfaces.

 

Also interesting to me: today by a large, guitarist still lean away from using synthesizers, even tho' the guitar-synth interfaces have improved greatly since those early days. Convolution is a big seller for guitarists; synthesis much less so.

[GovernorSilver]

 

For some reason, guitarists/consumers never drove synth or interface development to make better guitar-synth interfaces.

 

That's not true. There has always been a demand from guitarists who use this stuff for more reliable and accurate tracking, responsiveness, etc. It's true that some try then give up because they couldn't hang with the tracking - at the time. But there are others - like Metheny, Belew, McLaughlin, etc. - who stuck with it, yet continued to demand better. Users can demand all they want but demand alone does not solve problems.

 

EDIT: Correcting myself - there was ONE guitarist who did drive guitar synth development and his demands carried great weight: Ikutaro Kakehashi, founder of Roland, Technical Grammy co-recipient (w/ Dave Smith) for inventing MIDI, etc. He was probably the biggest reason Roland never gave up on guitar synths or MIDI guitar while others like Yamaha and Korg dipped their toes in it then shied away.

 

Accurate tracking of pitch and amplitude from a plucked string instrument is much harder problem to solve than tracking pitch from a keyboard. On a keyboard all you need to know what pitch is played is the switch under the key. That's why pitch sensing was the first thing that was developed for keyboards, with velocity sensitivity, pressure sensitivity, etc. gradually being added, while the equivalent for guitarists was left in the dust.

 

Roland MIDI guitar products became useful for guitarist once Roland figured out how to extract pitch and amplitude using Fast Fourier Transform, implemented in hardware including a special pickup that has 6 inputs (one per string). One alternative is to install switches on the guitar frets for pitch detection but that's way more invasive on a guitar than just sticking on a special pickup, and it doesn't solve the amplitude detection problem.

 

EHX was able to start making polyphonic synth pedals for guitarists, after they hired ex-Eventide engineers. Those engineers brought a lot of know-how with them, regarding analysis of guitar chords and how to extract pitch and envelope information from them, so that EHX customers can use any guitar they want, without special pickups. EHX's innovations surely inspired Roland to start making the SY-1, SY-300, and SY-200.

 

You don't need FFT or other compute-intensive analysis to figure out what note a keyboardist played.

[Morrissey]

I'll disagree a bit with Morrissey in that I liked Jerry Garcia's use of MIDI with Rosebud

 

I accept the disagreement. I generally disliked Garcia's choice of synth tones and how he used them, both of which are certainly matters of opinion about which reasonable people can disagree. I'm open to reconsidering my opinion if there are recordings you'd like to highlight as strong examples of his MIDI work.

[dbhoosier]

Love it - "reasonable people can disagree" - right on. I'd have to do a little digging, but some of spring '90 stuff comes to mind or the '89 Warlock shows. Built To Last solos, the Scarlet/Fire from 3/22/90 is really fun and has multiple tones, some of the Bird Songs from that run had nice use of MIDI voices (like 3/25/90). I feel like it added some nice color to the solos or jams versus just more distorted guitar. Guessing you are probably already familiar and just have a different take, which is cool. Cheers.

[Docbop]

Part of the MIDI track is guitarist themselves which is why the two I mentioned Zappa and Lee Ritenour had totally different experiences. Zappa coming from Blue Rock background where clean technique was not the typically mode of operation. Lee Ritenour from what I remember came from a well off family and had great teachers right from the beginning. Lee started off playing classical and Jazz. From what I remember as a little kid he had the legendary Howard Roberts for a guitar teacher, Howard was known for his fast clean picking. So that technique lends itself to MIDI guitar pickups.

 

There is better tracking these days, but it's still requires cleaner picking technique than most guitars care to do.

 

 

I do find it interesting keyboard players have the synth world to themselves and some EWI player, why do you even want guitar players to enter your world? Remember when synth bass got to be the thing, then suddenly bass players started brings small synths to studio and live gigs so they wouldn't lose gigs to keyboard players. 5-string bass was bass players answer to grab some lower notes without resorting to a synth.

 

Maybe we need a thread called "Why to keyboardists want guitarists to invade their turf?"

[Baldwin Funster]

Guitar synths are getting better but they just ain't quite there yet. I got the ehx one. I got an sy300. I also dabble as a synth keyboardist so I got both techs at hand to compare. I'd love it if I could get solid rich sounding pads on a guitar synth. Nope, not there yet. I can get some decent "paddish" things but not close to even an average synthpad from a keyboard.

I'd like to get a really good synth lead sound like a saw wave with slight pulse width mod and chorus. So far nothing really beats a big muff (who's that lady).

The Guitar synths that use a midi pickup are better in sound but can have tracking issues and who wants a big alien parasite stuck on your guitar?

 

So I conclude things are close but since I have a few good pentatonic keyboard synth licks I can weedly deedly with, I generally dont use the guitar synth stuff very much.

[GovernorSilver]

I was just reminded of an interview with Carlos Alomar, in which he speculated that guitar synths are better suited to rhythm guitarists than the lead players. He 's best known for playing rhythm guitar duties David Bowie. I'm guessing Bowie paid his lead guitarists to solo with guitar sounds, not synth sounds, so that may have influenced Alomar's perspective.

 

This video is not from that interview at all, but it's interesting in that he shows how he uses the stuff.

 

[video:youtube]

 

btw, I saw the Return To Forever reunion show with Al Di Meola. I'm sure some guitar geeks winced at the sight of the Roland pickup mounted on his otherwise lovely PRS guitar. In any case, Chick let him get away with playing guitar synth parts once in a while. He later fired Al, not for the guitar synth, but for Al just being Al, lol. He may have just preferred Gambale and Ponty anyway - both were brought into RTF to replace Al.

[mate stubb]

If Bob Moog didn't tack a conventional set of keys on his modules which were then popularized by Carlos, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

[David Emm]

 

Beyond clunky guitar/synth interfaces early on, I think many guitar players to this day still reject synthesizers for two reasons:

 

1) synthesizers infringe on their sonic territory especially when played by proficient KB players.

 

2) effects provide guitarists with enough ammunition to synthesize their tone.

 

I echo #2, especially since EHX began stepping up their game. Those guitar boxes can easily make you sound like a synth stack, including a Mellotron.

 

Stringed instruments stand on their own very firmly, so they're good candidates for enhancement, but not as pure emulators like most keyboards. That's a stretch, but I stand by it. Strings are close to semi-monophonic in many playing situations; keyboards are more often about polyphony. There's a clear difference in the almighty Feel.

 

Oddly, I've heard a few guitarists create gorgeous 'real' string sections via processing. Its less a matter of rejection and more one of serious focus.

[The Real MC]

Most guitar players can comprehend controls marked volume gain and tone. But controls like "attack" "decay" "emphasis" 'pulse width" baffles them.

[Anderton]

Well, from someone who doubles on guitar and keyboard...

 

* The choice of guitar makes a huge difference with tracking. If you have a guitar you love, the last thing you want to do is drill holes in it to mount a hex pickup, and then discover your guitar is so "live" it rejects audio-to-MIDI conversion like a foreign body. You really need a dead guitar with flatwound strings. I don't think anyone has ever gotten guitar-to-MIDI to work with a PRS

* Most synthesizers aren't set up for guitar, aside from the early Yamaha FM ones (TX81Z, TX802). They need to have a mono response, one note per string (hey, that's what guitars do), and have a suitably functional legato mode. Most synths can't really handle MIDI guitar properly, or if they can, most companies (well, with a few exceptions, like Fishman) haven't bothered to create plug-and-play presets for guitarists.

* It's more difficult to create your own presets for guitar than it is to create your own presets for keyboards.

* MIDI 1.0 can't reproduce many guitar nuances - palm muting, pinch harmonics, harmonics, most slides, etc. MIDI 2.0 will likely change that (and simpilify setup) but for now, guitar synths are an expressiveness downgrade.

* You have to program the presets carefully. An attack time covers up a lot of issues, and sure, you can play slow pads on guitar. But a guitarist can learn how to play slow pads on a keyboard, and then have all the other benefits of playing a synth.

 

--------------------------------------------

 

The irony is I did an album called "Forward Motion" back in the 80s that was about 50-50 MIDI guitar and keyboards. As a rule of thumb, if you thought a part was keyboards, it was probably MIDI guitar, and vice-versa. Playing guitar has so influenced how I play keyboards that I frequently find soloing on keyboards can be more satisfying and expressive. I even sample guitar, and play it from keyboards. OTOH keyboards just don't have the same voicings as guitar, and I'd rather play "rhythm guitar" on guitar. I'm not as good on keyboards as guitar, but I'm good enough to play keyboard parts, and use synths for what they do best. I could not play those parts on MIDI guitar, and there are synth parts I wouldn't want to play on guitar.

 

My

[/b] was loaded with keyboards, my upcoming 2021 album is loaded with guitars (and blues harp). Vive la difference, as they say

 

The LinnStrument, though...that's a whole other (and very cool!) thing.

[GovernorSilver]

I don't think anyone has ever gotten guitar-to-MIDI to work with a PRS

* Most synthesizers aren't set up for guitar, aside from the early Yamaha FM ones (TX81Z, TX802). They need to have a mono response, one note per string (hey, that's what guitars do), and have a suitably functional legato mode. Most synths can't really handle MIDI guitar properly, or if they can, most companies (well,.

 

i don't think Al Di Meola was using guitar to MIDI when I saw him play with Return to Forever. Mostly like just the internal Roland synth. I forgot if it was a GR-55 or GR-33. And he might have actually been playing an acoustic guitar with the Roland pickup rather than the PRS, although he does have a history of using solidbody electrics with guitar synths and Synclavier. There was in interview in which somebody compared him to Metheny and his response was "Pat uses synth tones on his Synclavier, I use samples on mine"

 

That's the secret (which Craig already knows but the OP does not) behind Roland's success with guitar synths - always including an internal synth that can be triggered directly, so MIDI is an option rather than a requirement. Direct triggering has always been more reliable for tracking.

[KuruPrionz]

Maybe we need a thread called "Why to keyboardists want guitarists to invade their turf?"

 

And maybe one called "Why do keyboard players think guitarists want to invade their turf?" Because honestly, I've very little interest in that whatsoever. The two instruments are profoundly different, I'm happy to let that be what it is.

I don't want bass guitar to be bass keyboards and I don't want drums to be keyboard drums, etc. That doesn't mean I am against bass keyboards or keyboard drums, they are simply different.

 

As Craig Anderson points out above, guitar synth is just not there yet and there are many reasons that have nothing to do with the sorts of things keyboard players deal with. It is a totally different world and apparently not a well understood one.

 

It's one thing to press a key and a note comes out, which can then be manipulated with various circuits. That's all well and good and beautiful things can happen. I enjoy great keyboard playing, acoustic or electric, whenever I hear it.

Artur Rubenstien, Keith Emerson, T. Lavitz, my friend Diane, all fantastic musicians. There are many that I didn't name but enjoyed.

 

It's another thing entirely to touch the actual note generator with your hands and know how to make it speak. I can instantly and dramatically change basic tonal responses by changing my technique, I don't have to wait for a circuit to respond. It may well be microseconds, but that isn't the same thing at all. In both cases, you need a certain level of proficiency to be able to know what it means.

 

I will admit to not understanding all the important details regarding keyboard performance and that's OK, I don't need to know those things. Having been a guitarist and a guitar technician/luthier for most of my life, it is apparent by reading most of the responses above that keyboard players also do not understand some important basics about guitars and how they work, their quirks, etc. That's OK too but I'm finding that a thread about guitarists not wanting to play guitar synths "interesting" for many reasons.

[Anderton]

The Roland GR-300 was going in the right direction - hex processing, so the tracking was perfect. The string waveform was converted to what was essentially a sawtooth on the upper notes, but as you went down the string in pitch, the sawtooth took up less of the waveform's duty cycle so it became more like a pulse. If you played G on an open 3rd string, it sounded different than playing a G on the fourth string - like a guitar, so the timbres were always rich and varied. The feel and sound was very natural, because it played whatever you threw at it.

 

When Roland was working on the GR-700 with guitar-to-MIDI, I had a long talk with Mr. Kakehashi and said that it was going in the wrong direction - that Roland had truly cracked the code for an instrument that guitarists could love, and he needed to go further in that direction rather than keep trying to convert strings to on/off switches. He saw my point, but he truly believed that MIDI had more potential because of the sonic flexibility that wasn't possible with hex processing. Of course he was right about that, and including the synth module did improve the tracking, but...I'd rather have a playable instrument I love with a limited sonic palette, than one with an unlimited sonic palette that's no fun to play.

[KuruPrionz]

The Roland GR-300 was going in the right direction - hex processing, so the tracking was perfect. The string waveform was converted to what was essentially a sawtooth on the upper notes, but as you went down the string in pitch, the sawtooth took up less of the waveform's duty cycle so it became more like a pulse. If you played G on an open 3rd string, it sounded different than playing a G on the fourth string - like a guitar, so the timbres were always rich and varied. The feel and sound was very natural, because it played whatever you threw at it.

 

When Roland was working on the GR-700 with guitar-to-MIDI, I had a long talk with Mr. Kakehashi and said that it was going in the wrong direction - that Roland had truly cracked the code for an instrument that guitarists could love, and he needed to go further in that direction rather than keep trying to convert strings to on/off switches. He saw my point, but he truly believed that MIDI had more potential because of the sonic flexibility that wasn't possible with hex processing. Of course he was right about that, and including the synth module did improve the tracking, but...I'd rather have a playable instrument I love with a limited sonic palette, than one with an unlimited sonic palette that's no fun to play.

 

 

The other outlier here that I've fiddle with is the Godin nylon string guitar with hexaphonic saddle pickups. Nylon string guitars are typically played with fingers, eliminating the "movable fret" that the pick can become. It had the Roland output socket, it's a MIDI instrument but the nylon strings seem to cure a world of problems. A good friend has one and had a Roland synth module for it. I liked it better than most of the guitar synths I've tried, it didn't have many problems with glitching. I think most of that is simply the nylon strings. Obviously, I can't just put them on my Tele with the Fishman, not magnetic. I've lusted for one of the Godins but I've never owned one.

 

As I recall, Peter Gabriel had a guitar/synth player on tour that used one of the nylon strings to play synth parts on stage with Peter. I wouldn't take my Fishman out for live work, recording you can just try again.

 

I played the ARP Avatar when it came out, there was a seminar in Fresno and the music store I did guitar repair for had an Avatar in stock. A dismal failure, it cost ARP a ton of money that they never got back. Sad.

I want guitar synths to work, hoping you are correct about MIDI 2 improving things. I'll probably have to get a new system if and when that happens.

 

Pitch detection in general has improved, the new BOSS pedal that creates synth sounds from a standard guitar pickup isn't bad.

I wish I enjoyed playing keys as much as I do guitar, then I wouldn't have to worry about these things. I have a couple of decent keyboard MIDI controllers laying around but I only use them if I can't get something done a different way.

It's just not my jam I guess...

[Morrissey]

Love it - "reasonable people can disagree" - right on. I'd have to do a little digging, but some of spring '90 stuff comes to mind or the '89 Warlock shows. Built To Last solos, the Scarlet/Fire from 3/22/90 is really fun and has multiple tones, some of the Bird Songs from that run had nice use of MIDI voices (like 3/25/90). I feel like it added some nice color to the solos or jams versus just more distorted guitar. Guessing you are probably already familiar and just have a different take, which is cool. Cheers.

 

Thanks for these. I admire Garcia for his willingness to experiment and innovate with new guitar technology, especially later in his career. He could've just coasted on his existing rig in the late 80s/early 90s but instead kept exploring.

[GovernorSilver]

I have a Roland VG-99, which can function with regular, mono guitar input, but works best with a GK-series hexaphonic pickup (the add-on pickup that is typically taped or screwed on top of the guitar body). It's an FX processor that doubles as a guitar-MIDI converter.

 

The band I was in briefly experimented with me using the VG-99 to play bass lines on the two lowest strings, synth chords on the remaining 4 strings, and rhythm guitar at the same time. It was a fun experiment but eventually a real bass player was recruited, which was the right decision.

 

The VG-99 has a selection of modeled synths, bass guitars, acoustic guitars, and electric guitars - all of these sounds produced by DSP applied to the 6 string audio inputs. The modeled synths include GR-300, an organ-like model, a DX-like one, and some synth models carried over from the VG-8/VG-88. I thought I would be all over the GR-300 model because I'm a Metheny fan, but I ended up preferring other synth models for most applications.

 

The MIDI output section is apparently the same circuitry as the Roland GI-20 - so, not an Axon, or a Triple Play, but way better tracking than the GR-700. I only used it to experiment with the Korg M3's KARMA section - just send MIDI over to the M3 and observe what its KARMA does with the incoming MIDI. It was fun, but to try to use it productively would take more setup time that I haven't been willing to spend yet - for one thing a lot of the KARMA generators assume your playing chords on the same MIDI channel while the default setup is 6 MIDI channels coming out of the Roland to the Korg.

 

Spending more and more time working on electric violin and acoustic viola for sustained melody parts, and quite frankly, resuming my actual piano playing came hand in hand with reducing my use of the VG-99.

[KuruPrionz]

 

Spending more and more time working on electric violin and acoustic viola for sustained melody parts, and quite frankly, resuming my actual piano playing came hand in hand with reducing my use of the VG-99.

 

The tones available from a real bow on real strings are just the best thing ever. The instant connection of heart, soul and instrument will never be equaled by using reproductions triggered by digital or electronic impulses.

Real guitars also cover a lot of ground, from nylon string acoustic to 12 string to slide guitar to Stratocaster with whammy bar. It's all about that human connection/expression.

 

Synths, whether keyboard or otherwise, will never be that intrinsically expressive, ever.