A McLeod III Posted May 20, 2004 Share Posted May 20, 2004 ......well not really but I thought that would get your attention. Philosophical question. As guitarist, do you feel that technology has detracted from actually playing the guitar; making music with the guitar? Let me see if I can make this make some sense without being long winded? This line of thought occured as Line 6 sent me the latest, greatest info on the new Variax 700. Man this thing looks wonderful on paper. All of the alternate tuning parameters built in, Transposition feature and all the wonderful models! I am a Line 6 fan-cutting edge stuff. But wait......... Guitar Player did a test on the the original Variax and I remember most of these really great guitarist saying that as nice as those features are, it may sound like a Tele for example but it doesn't "feel" like a Tele. I don't know about you, but the feel influences heavily on the way I play. And what about transposing on the guitar and alternate tunings? You can transpose a sound all you want but you aren't retuning the strings so you will still hear that standard tuning while the amplified sound is something different. Tell me that ain't weird! I remember being a young musician in the 70's and playing the piano. Nothing felt better than a Steinway or a Rhodes Stage 76 or even a Hammond. All these boards had a very unique charecter all it's own. The feel that came from these not only came from fluid fingers but the instrument it self. The digital age brought us Juno 60's, Prophets, FM synthesis and sequencers. The music world has never been the same since but......... ......no matter how hard they tried, none of these wonderful machines and all it's technology never brought "realism" to those instruments. It's the same thing I'm finding with this new technology. It really bothers me that all this new technology-new materials, synthisist, modelling is creating tones and sounds....and a generation of musicians that still can't play; they just don't seem to get it. I feel like the artistry is being lost-even in the guitar world. Now I know it's just my ranting; my oppinion, perhaps but you can hear this in much of the music that has become popular today and the industry itself. Has technology gone to far? What do you think? "Life Is Just A Game And They're Many Ways To Play...All You Do Is Choose." SC 1976 Fantom, XP 80, DX7 IIFD w/"E", Ensoniq ESQ 1, Roland Alpha Juno 2, Roland S 10, Korg Triton LE with EXB, GEM RP2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Flier Posted May 20, 2004 Share Posted May 20, 2004 Don't ask me, I don't own any guitar gear that's newer than 1969. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmptinesOf Youth Posted May 20, 2004 Share Posted May 20, 2004 this kinda goes with that, and i see where your getting at but why do amps have all these effects now. Its so hard just to find a head that has two channels and nothing else. Theres the marshall vintage ones but those are like two grand, i meaen if i wat all the extras all just get a pedal..right? technology does suck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guitarzan Posted May 20, 2004 Share Posted May 20, 2004 even though i use a yamaha dg100 amp, i would prefer to have a nice tube marshall or similar sounding amp . my dg100 isn't as loaded down with extra this and that. i just want my guitar in an amp and then use my hands for sound. technology is ok but i want it to be less condiments and more meat!!! http://www.soundclick.com/bands/pagemusic.cfm?bandID=193274 rock it, i will Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InstituteOfNoise Posted May 20, 2004 Share Posted May 20, 2004 Archie... I hear what your saying. I actually help run and organize the Line 6 Usergroup here in Los Angeles and work pretty closely with them. Sure I agree that a Variax sounds pretty close to a Tele, but it doesn't feel like one. Well that's why I own 3 real Teles, as well as a slew of other axes. But I'll tele you when I go to do a show and I need to have 5 different guitar tones for a show, I just walk in with my Variax and one other backup and it's quick and simple. It also alleviates tearing up really nice guitars or getting them stolen. I usually always use "analog" guitars for sessions, unless asked to use the Variax. It's kinda cool though to play a 12 string acoustic model on the Variax and do string bends above the 12 fret like it was an electric. Kind of takes you to an innovative area no one really has done before. I look at it as expanding the palette, rather than giving in to technology. Music is still art no matter how you paint it... Home of the L.A. Line 6 Users Group http://www.instituteofnoise.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A McLeod III Posted May 20, 2004 Author Share Posted May 20, 2004 I.O.N., I feel you on the point about the 12 string and bending that steel. I felt like that too about expanding the pallete. I remember that the first sequencer/workstation I ever owned was an Ensoniq ESQ-1 (Still own it today-use it all the time)Once I upgraded the sequencer memory then bought an Alesis Datadisk SQ, I could have the orchestra at my fingertips. But then I would listen to some of the leading edge keyboardist/producers of the mid-to-late 80's and how they were serious over-killing minimalism in music; just making NOISE and thought what a waste. If we use the technology to expand the art, then the technology is then worthy of the art. I just don't see that happening. Seems like the cutting edge technology is more or less becoming a gimmick to give some of us a worse case of G.A.S. Man , I'm only 44 but Herb Ellis only sounds like Herb Ellis on an ES 175 or Larry and BB only create their signature using a 335. Can't even picture Jimi ever wanting to pick up a Variax (an I am a major Line 6 junkie) Somethings just need to remain sacred, ya' know? "Life Is Just A Game And They're Many Ways To Play...All You Do Is Choose." SC 1976 Fantom, XP 80, DX7 IIFD w/"E", Ensoniq ESQ 1, Roland Alpha Juno 2, Roland S 10, Korg Triton LE with EXB, GEM RP2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InstituteOfNoise Posted May 20, 2004 Share Posted May 20, 2004 Archie, the worst thing about all the Line 6 gear is that when I start using a model a lot that I used to own or never owned, then I all of a sudden want to buy the original. In the last month I keep switching between wanting an old Supro or Gretsch amp, or a Les Paul Std, or an old Tweed Deluxe. Who knows next week? It is painful! Home of the L.A. Line 6 Users Group http://www.instituteofnoise.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billster Posted May 20, 2004 Share Posted May 20, 2004 I don't think it is technology that is the problem, but the users of technology. And sometimes the designers. Technology can make certain things possible that were either previously inconvenient or impossible. For example, I probably will never play with the London Symphony Orchestra, but if I want orchestral sounds in my music, I have options. Maybe not perfect, but I can maybe get the point across and make the next step toward an opportunity to play with a live symphony. However, I can also say: This part is too hard, and probably I will never play it right. But I can chop notes together in Pro Tools and make something resembling the part. That use of technology is not going to advance my artistry very far. Its nice to be able to share a musical idea, but there's a big difference between a performance and just hacking something together with available tools. Sometimes the designers cause me problems. I call it the "Gee Whiz" factor. Like, OK we can do that, but why? Maybe that is closed minded. Sometimes a tool of convenience is for one application, not another. I don't want to hear a true virtuoso play a Variax pretending to be in open tuning, and introducing digital artifacts into the performance. I want to see a virtuoso the their highly specialized thing as over the top as possible. If you are in a wedding band, and play one tune out of 40 in open tuning, yeah, use the Variax instead of carrying two guitars. Finally, there is the learning curve. Any time spent learning how something works is time not spent achieving the intended goal. For my symphony example, the time spent sythesizing/sampling my phony orchestra is time not spent actually playing music, but microscopically dissecting it. I want to play music, not be a computer programmer/mathematician. Even if I'm good at programming, it makes me mad because it seems only vaguely related to making music. Buy my CD on CD Baby! Bill Hartzell - the website MySpace?!?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
synthetic Posted May 20, 2004 Share Posted May 20, 2004 I'm having fun keeping my guitar rig "lo-tech". I have a synth rig with all the latest stuff -- Logic DAW, GigaStudio 3, Andromeda, etc. -- but my guitar rig is 1960's all the way. American Vintage Strat into a tube amp. All the high-tech stuff is just trying to duplicate that setup anyway. Modeling stuff seems to make sense for live playing, though. You can control your sound and volume seperately, and change setups for different songs. And the promise of "cranked Marshall stack through headphones" is tempting. I just don't think it's quite there yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doc taz Posted May 20, 2004 Share Posted May 20, 2004 I like my Zoom gfx-5. I tend to use it as more of a preamp, though, than anything else. I mean, I don't have room for every half stack it can emulate. If I did, I'd be William Gates III. As long as I can justify using something for my own creations, it really doesn't matter. Vintage, Hi-tech, or beating the **** out of a desk with your pencils, it's all just tools for expression, anyway. sevenstring.org profile my flickr page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Outrider Posted May 20, 2004 Share Posted May 20, 2004 Technology. I nearly strangled my lead guitarist a couple of years ago when he brought in his new GT-6 processor. "Listen! (stomp)It sounds like a Marshall! (stomp)..and Eddie Van Halen! (stomp)...and Stevie Ray! (stomp)...and Angus Young! (stomp)...and this one makes it sound like an accoustic!" Swear to heaven that none of them sounded like I thought they should. It only took me 9 months to wean him off the thing and he simplified things considerably. Sounds much better! One of these days I'm gonna change my evil ways... one of these days... http://www.emotipad.com/emoticons/Band.gifhttp://www.weidenbach.net/images/storage/headbang.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guitarzan Posted May 20, 2004 Share Posted May 20, 2004 Originally posted by Outrider: Technology. I nearly strangled my lead guitarist a couple of years ago when he brought in his new GT-6 processor. "Listen! (stomp)It sounds like a Marshall! (stomp)..and Eddie Van Halen! (stomp)...and Stevie Ray! (stomp)...and Angus Young! (stomp)...and this one makes it sound like an accoustic!" Swear to heaven that none of them sounded like I thought they should. It only took me 9 months to wean him off the thing and he simplified things considerably. Sounds much better!my fellow guitar player uses a GT6 through his Peavey amp. now the amp isn't too bad, but i can't stand many of the sounds he gets. its always full tilt gain with no definition. he unfortunatly thinks it sounds good. there are too many gain stages and he uses every one. my dg100 is very natural sounding and the only reason i would want a marshall is i only use 2 of the 8 tones available. so why have 8? http://www.soundclick.com/bands/pagemusic.cfm?bandID=193274 rock it, i will Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave251 Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 Boy, I really struggle with this...here I am, trying to design/build a guitar with a unique and musically satisfying voice. And along comes all this digital modeling, and I realize what kind of mountain I have to climb to get my unique instrument even heard...I mean, here's all these wonderful models of great guitars and great guitarist's tone....why would anyone want to even consider something different... But then I realize, all of the Line 6's and Variaxes and modelers in the world are just two dimensional copies of a three dimensional voice. They are CLONES, not the originals, and I breathe a sigh of relief, knowing, in my soul, that what I do has merit, and that someday, the unique voice that I designed, that I nurture, will someday make great music...probably not by my hand, but just maybe by one of the "greats"...and then Variaxe will have another voice to copy... Two steps forward, one step back....keep on truckin' Dave Wendler Instruments Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lone Chicken Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 Technology is like money: it can make a good servant, but it makes a poor master. I chuckle when the service advisors at my place of employment go into a panic when their computers crash--I'll just whip out my Pilot ballpoint pen and say, "Well, time to go to the 'auxilliary printer', eh?" Anyhow, my rather simple setup does include an Alesis GuitarFX, and since I recently finally figured out how to program the thing (LOL), I have admittedly had a lot of fun experimenting with its capabilities and what all. But, as I shared in the thread entitled "pedals", I often just go with my '03 Fender Standard Strat straight into my Ibanez Toneblaster 25R amp. And, sometimes when I practice, instead of dragging out my "plug-in" gear (I also own an Ibanez V70CE-NT acoustic-electric and an Ibanez IBZ10 acoustic amp with built-in chorus), I'll just get out my old Lark dreadnought acoustic (which I bought way back in 1975 and was the first guitar that I actually learned to play on) and just focus on my music and playing technique (all the while further building up my finger strength and dexerity). Anyhow, it all comes back to being yourself, and sounding like yourself, and although all the new technology that is available can be very useful is augmenting and embelishing your sound (and it can also be quite useful in getting ideas in your head across to others), it is not meant to themselves create or take over your sound, and you should never depend on it at the expense of furthering your own playing and overall musical skills. Robert J. ("Bob") Welch III "If you were the only person who ever lived, God still would have sent Jesus His only Son to die on the cross for YOU, because that is how much HE LOVES YOU!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shoes Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 My paycheck is a return for my technological abilities and has been for the past 20 years so it's hard to dismiss it's offerings. I didn't care for the Kurzweil revolution of Stevie Wonder and what those who marvelled in all it's light had to say about Real Live Session Musicians. That was smug and short sighted. People provide ideas. Technology is only a tool. I'm still looking for proper parts to repair that early '70s Big Muff. It's ugly but has a place in my rig. As for those banks of programmable computations that provide infinite configurations at a single click.... I somehow only seem to handle high tech with my fingers and not my feet. Thankfully my hands are busy with the strings and my feet have been spared the multitasking. One button - one function. I still think guitars are like shoes, but louder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Tom Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 As guitarist, do you feel that technology has detracted from actually playing the guitar; making music with the guitar? YES I'll go further than that - I think that technology in general has gotten to the point where we are starting to serve it, rather than the other way around. I have kinda a love/hate relationship with it. Technology is great when it really improves our quality of life, but when it begins to make us lazy, stupid, becomes a source of angst and frustration, and intrudes on our private lives, we are serving it and embracing technology for the sake of technology. In my opinion, the affordable electronic tuner was the last technology that actually improved the quality of life for electric guitar players. OK, maybe headphone amps for practicing while the kids are asleep. The modelers, tube emulating fuzz pedals, multi-effects, etc (yes, I own some!) are great, but in the grand scheme of things have not contributed to the art of guitar playing, made it a more enjoyable experience, or increased the satisfation we receive from it. In fact, in general, I would say technology has detracted from the "art". I think a lot of our attention has shifted from practicing (that used to be about the only thing you could do with a guitar!) to programming devices, agonizing over which of the 287 boutique fuzz pedals we should add to our rig to get cranked amp tone from that 100 watt amp with the master volume set at "2", reading about guitars that emulate guitars(?!?) on the internet, etc. etc. We spend too much time trying to figure out how to have 57 wonderful tones at our feet, instead of learning techniques of coaxing a variety of tones from a guitar and our bare hands - having our own sound. Think about it - is the state of guitar playing really any better than it was 30 years ago with all the new technology we have now? Is the music created with it any better or more uplifting to the human spirit? is it more enjoyable to play? Are we growing as guitar players or as gadget-geeks? Just my opinion. BTW - I hope I don't sound like one of those old guys who are always saying things that start with "Well, in MY day..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shoes Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 Originally posted by Major Tom: As guitarist, do you feel that technology has detracted from actually playing the guitar; making music with the guitar? YES I'll go further than that - I think that technology in general has gotten to the point where we are starting to serve it, rather than the other way around. Who else but Major Tom could come out with a statement like this! .. hey.. you did manage to unplug Hal so I'll give you credit for putting up a good fight! I still think guitars are like shoes, but louder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chipotle Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 The new generation of sand amps, excuse me, "modelling" amps could take a lesson from the classic tube amps. Don't try and do 100 mediocre sounds, achieve one great sound. Personally, being able to instantly change amps, guitars, pedals, etc doesn't interest me. I'm more excited about something that helps me refine a unique and personal sound, than something that can offer me a plethora of generic tweed/marshall/british/american/etc. sounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guitarzan Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 thats why i bought the DG100. it doesn't try to do the (100 amps) this and that sound. the only effects it has is reverb, tape delay, chorus and trem. there are no menus to scroll through. just pick a tone (clean,crunch,drive or lead) and then turn the tone knobs for your sound. it has its voice and doesn't try to be any paticular amp. any guitar you plug in it sounds like itself. it has given me the tones for any style i feel like playing. it definatley doesn't sound or feel like its solid state or modelling. it sounds like a great amp. this is one instance where technlogy has helped me. mainly because yamaha tried (and suceeded) in making an amp not a toy with tons of gimicks. so technology can be usefull if the designers concentrate on making useful tools instead of toys. i do have a dream amp and this will do nicely until i can get a marshall. my only complaint with my amp is i wish i had a closed back 4x12 cab. combos sound good but the sound i want isn't open back. http://www.soundclick.com/bands/pagemusic.cfm?bandID=193274 rock it, i will Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shoes Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 Okay.. here's a question... Is the Road King part of what you may consider too much technology or simply an interesting take on flex ability. (I've mentioned this amp several times after having found it for the first time and being quite amazed with what it offers) For those who don't know what it does here's a summary: Channel Assignable Progressive Linkage power section featuring 4x6L6 & 2xEL34 - allows selection of either 2x6L6, 2xEL34, 2x6L6 2xEL34, 4x6L6 or 4x6L6 2xEL34 for Power Ratings of 50, 100 & 120 Watts! / 5x12AX7, 2x5U4 4 Fully Independent Channels with 12 Modes (Channel 1=Clean, Fat or Tweed; Channel 2= Clean, Fat or Brit; Channels 3 & 4=Raw, Vintage High Gain or Modern High Gain) I think it's a new tech idea done the old fashioned way, like mom would have baked up. Real modeling.... at a price I still think guitars are like shoes, but louder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madgrinder Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 All of my equipment can be opened up and repaired at home in my garage (aka "Dexter's Lab"). All my goodies are tube or solid state, and I can grab my schematic, my Fluke DVOM, and my soldering iron and repair or mod all as needed. I don't like digital sampling, modeling, or anything that requires software when it comes to music. I prefer my rigs to be "dumb as a rock" They are more reliable that way. ...it's Mr Stabby, da da da da da daaaah, da da da da da da daaaah... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabriel E. Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 I can only speak from experience. Spent a few years working with electronic music using a highly sophisticated (for the time) Kurzweil K2500 workstation. It got hard for me to get anything completed because there were always more options to explore and variables to tweak. After a while I burned out on it and reverted to playing a Telecaster plugged straight into a tweed Fender amp. I found it more rewarding because I was able to get an instant response from the instrument instead of going through various menus and submenus to finally hear some music. Of course I'm not a very disciplined person. There are very musical people who simply use the technology as a tool and move on and there are people who become fascinated by the technology itself. I'm the latter. Another factor is that older technology is easier to grok. While I would never dare open up the keyboard, I feel totally comfortable messing with the electronics of my tube amps. This too is a distraction from playing. I do think that digital editing and pitch correction is allowing for a lot of talentless people to be succesful in popular music. However a shitty song is a shitty song no matter who performs it. You can't hide that. And real talent is always apparent. "You never can vouch for your own consciousness." - Norman Mailer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skipclone 1 Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 Every time someone does something really special with the machinery and it catches on, there`s a dozen imitators waiting to cash in. Often the orignal thrust of the music gets totally messed up-I heard an interview with Nile Rogers where he said that`s what happened to disco-bands like Chic, Heatwave, GQ really had something going but it became a total sellout and a self-parody, thanks to the profit motive. Same old surprises, brand new cliches- Skipsounds on Soundclick: www.soundclick.com/bands/pagemusic.cfm?bandid=602491 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skipclone 1 Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 Anyway, I`d say don`t get this question confused with, `Is there too much music that I don`t like and it`s popular?` Same old surprises, brand new cliches- Skipsounds on Soundclick: www.soundclick.com/bands/pagemusic.cfm?bandid=602491 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.