The Myth Of Tone "All In The Fingers"

[Tone Taster]

Originally posted by bpark@prorec.com:

But when I moved to the THD and Fulltone and Reverend, suddenly I "Got" it. Touch and responsiveness plays a part in the equation, too.Bill

How 'bout this.

 

Play through a Crate Head going through a Peavey Cabinet with Scorpion Speakers

 

NOW, with the same exact "touch & responsiveness" you referred to, play through your THD through a cabinet with tone tubby speakers.

 

Then tell me what's up

[Kramer Ferrington III.]

Originally posted by Caputo:

the statement regarding a guitarist's tone being "all in the fingers" has no concrete, measurable preponderance of evidence as does the position that one's tone is rooted in these main variables:

Oh, ferchrissakes!

 

Have you NEVER had the experience where some guy at a jam session is playing this really hot sounding but cheap looking guitar?

 

You say "wow, that guitar sounds great! Can I have a go on your guitar?".

 

The guy agrees, lets you play his guitar and as soon as you start playing, you realize you're sounding like shit. Same guitar, same amp. Different players, completely different tone.

 

 

So much for "concrete" and "measurable" preponderance. No need for a slide rule, you can hear the difference.

 

Tone is in the fingers, though of course, a nice rig helps. The only reason why I'd bring up acoustics is simply because EVH can climb off the stage, grab my nylon string acoustic and play it a thousand times better than I can. So the rig does not have THAT much of an influence.

 

It's a fact of life, and it's not about to change any time soon.

 

We really should define what we mean by "tone", otherwise these discussions can drag on for years on end.

[Bluesape]

Originally posted by Guitarzan:

now that he is free from Peavey is he going to play some reworked Fender amp? His last endorsement deal was the Charvel guitars. Charvel is part of fender.

if he had thought for a moment he could have went to Marshall and ironed out a deal. they probably wouldn't have cared what he used for a guitar. but seeing he is "with" Fender i think it would be more difficult endorsing another brand of amp.

but this is only speculation. i have no idea what deal he has/had with Fender in regards to the Carvel guitars.

Jeff Beck endorses Fender Guitars and Marshall amps. I'm sure EVH has enough clout to work out a similar deal, if he so desired.

[Tone Taster]

Originally posted by Vince C.:

EVH can climb off the stage, grab my nylon string acoustic and play it a thousand times better than I can. So the rig does not have THAT much of an influence.

[/QB]

The position of Different Player - Same rig keeps getting hammered

 

However, the position of SAME player Different Rig seems to get swept under the rug

 

Since the "magical, mystical source" of tone is in the fingers, then rig choice would just be an unnecessary step

[Kramer Ferrington III.]

Originally posted by Caputo:

 

However, the position of SAME player Different Rig seems to get swept under the rug

 

Since the "magical, mystical source" of tone is in the fingers, then rig choice would just be an unnecessary step

I think we are having a basic semantics problem here. I am starting to believe that what you call "tone", I call "sound".

 

As in "you need a Tele and some sort of Fender amp to get 'that country sound'", but even if I had the same gear as uhmmm... Waylon Jennings, I wouldn't necessarily sound like him. You definitely need certain key pieces of gear to get a certain "sound". You'd have a lot of trouble trying to get that "heavy metal sound" with a super clean Fender amp, for example. I fully agree with that part of your post.

 

But to me, "tone" is a function of how you actually play the notes. How cleanly you pick, how well you press the strings against the frets and so on.

 

I don't know if you've ever played any wind instruments, but if you had, the point would be pretty obvious.

 

If you are playing (say...) trumpet and your embouchure (ie the pressure and whatever of your lips and cheek muscles) is not correct, all your notes will be weak and possibly off key. You can actually "tune" up or down by as much as a semitone simply by how you blow a note.

 

That, to me, is "tone", and you hear it as soon as a good guitarist starts playing. The notes are better defined, clearer, more precise and with better sustain. By comparison, beginners' notes sound muddy and uncertain.

 

As I said, I think it's all a problem with semantics.

[fantasticsound]

Originally posted by jrob:

Originally posted by fantasticsound:

But it is true and measurable (albeit unneccesary to measure) that given the same rig and settings, two different musicians can sound very different, just as two musicians on the same acoustic guitar can sound very different, tonally. In that way, some tone emanates from the musician's fingers.

Originally posted by fantasticsound:

A great musician will sound great on pretty much any instrument (though better on quality equipment) and a mediocre musician will sound mediocre no matter what gear he/she plays.

When people say that "tone is all in the fingers", they are usually trying to make the second arguement ... not the first.

I agree.

 

I'm not the first to state the following, but I believe it should be reiterated. We're talking about two very different concepts.

 

Attitude.. personality.. unique voice.. Whatever you call it, it's all in the fingers. This has little to do with tone, as the "X" player picks up any guitar and always sounds like "X" comment.

 

Tone is, of course, largely about the gear and settings used. Think of it like an algorithm overlaid on everything you play. It's a paradigm.. a set of parameters that govern what timbres are possible from any given guitar/amp/effect combination. A perfect example would be amp modellers. They overlay particular sounds on whatever is input. (Not that they're perfect, but you get the idea.

 

Within that paradigm, your fingers (touch) may create a wide variety of sounds. (As bpark mentioned, expression is more limited on multi-effects boxes than fine, boutique-type amps.) BTW - bill, I had the same epiphany when I first played a Gibson GA-15RV over lunch at Gibson corporate. I never knew what I was missing until I had the chance to work a fine, class A tube amp with a P-90 equipped instrument.

 

You'll always sound like you, not matter what timbre emanates from your rig. But that tone is, by definition, a range of sounds inherent to any given instrument/amp/effects setup.

 

Fingers = Personality, voice

Gear = Tonal parameters

Gear + Fingers = specific tone of any given player.

 

Make sense to you?

[A String]

I think Vince nailed it here. It seems that some are referring to the "sound" you get from a certain set up while others are referring to the "tone" or tonal qualities you get through technique.

[Flashback]

Originally posted by Vince C.:

We really should define what we mean by "tone", otherwise these discussions can drag on for years on end.

How about a sticky, a Glossary of Terms.

 

It would be a bit of work for someone but there is some really nice ground work being laid out right here, once again!

[musicalhair]

A lot of great points, Bill Park, Ellwood, PaulDil, Jrob and many many others.

 

I think "Your tone is all in your fingers" is not meant to taken as a "absolute" but as a quick warning.

 

Ted Nugent once said that he was so knocked out by EVH that he went out and bought all the same gear EVH was using and when he plugged in to it he still sounded like himself and nothing like EVH.

 

What I think "tone is in your fingers" means is simply that your tone starts their with you. You are going to sound like "you", and when your first learning you don't sound like you anymore than you don't walk like you when you first learn to walk.

 

Eventually as you listen to yourself play and keep working on it you find the way you and your fingers make music on this instrument and you sound like you. On classical guitar it don't go much further than that but neither can it be more obivious.

 

On electric, I think the idea that your tone is in your fingers is an instruction to listen and practice a lot while not plugged in. Once your playing is not "beginer" level you might be able to make choices that will be best suited for you.

 

These choices are all the factors included above, strings, pick ups, picks or fingers and nail length, where and on what angle you pick, your fingerboard fingers and any thing you might do up there, your cable your stomp boxes and amp, and then your room and mics and everything else.

 

I think once you have "your tone" established in your fingers you will be drawn to gear that enhances "your tone". You may have different sounds, especially if you go from playing say in a "trio" and than you would in a two guitar heavy metal band. But if you adopted a sound that betrayed your "tone" (or what ever you want to call it at this point) you'd feel like a guy dressed up in an ill-fitting halloween costume.

 

I also think that this is why some of us here make such a big deal about "quality" gear, becuase it seems to take good gear to keep us sounding like we want to sound without sucking the "us" out of our tone. This is why some of us can pick up a $5 Multi effect unit and talk about how great it is, and others find it worthless. IF we are to talke such reviews seriously then we can only ASSuME the $5 box didn't destroy this person's "tone".

 

Bill Park's point about Santana's tone being essentially the same (especially since say Abraxis) through three guitars and at least two amp set ups is important and something I always thought about and point to when considering this issue.

 

The point of "tone is in your fingers" is to discourage beginers from thinking that gear is going to make them sound better when they don' play properly or even well yet, and to remind all of us that there is no magic box. Even when one buys a great amp, we have to sit downt with it for a long time and get to know it. Ellwood talks about this in the Marshall thread, but it is equally true for any amp, and pedal any combination of pedals and any guitar.

[Billster]

The way you attack the strings with your picking hand, and the way you handle the strings with your fret hand after that affect the way your amplification and (if present) effects respond.

 

So IMHO, your fingers are the beginning of the process. If you pay attention, you can tailor your equipment to resond more fully to the touch you apply to the instrument.

[PBBPaul]

I saw Robben Ford last night.

 

He was playing a Les Paul and sounded remarkably like he did when I saw him playing a Tele.

 

I don't think it's too much of a myth.

[Guitar55]

A great rig can help an average player sound better.

 

A great player can make an average rig sound better.

[Guitar55]

Originally posted by Vince C.:

...If you are playing (say...) trumpet and your embouchure (ie the pressure and whatever of your lips and cheek muscles) is not correct, all your notes will be weak and possibly off key. You can actually "tune" up or down by as much as a semitone simply by how you blow a note.

 

That, to me, is "tone",......

Wouldn't that be INTONATION ?

[Tone Taster]

Originally posted by fantasticsound:

[

Fingers = Personality, voice

Gear = Tonal parameters

Gear + Fingers = specific tone of any given player.

I believe that the above equation is sufficient to cap it off for a consensus.

 

What sayeth guitar players?

[PBBPaul]

Aye

[musicalhair]

Oy

[A String]

I can agree with that.

[GtrWiz]

Originally posted by Caputo:

Originally posted by fantasticsound:

Fingers = Personality, voice

Gear = Tonal parameters

Gear + Fingers = specific tone of any given player.

I believe that the above equation is sufficient to cap it off for a consensus.

 

What sayeth guitar players?

+1

[Ricochet]

My wife apparently believes tone is in the fingers. She's put out a huge pump bottle of "TONE" lotion by the sink in the bathroom.

 

I'll let you know if it works.

[Tone Taster]

Originally posted by Ricochet:

My wife apparently believes tone is in the fingers. She's put out a huge pump bottle of "TONE" lotion by the sink in the bathroom.

 

I'll let you know if it works.

Hey, as long as some stuff doesn't ricochet on to one of our computer screens. Tell her to take it easy on that thing with each pump

[BillWelcome Home Studios]

Originally posted by Caputo:

Originally posted by bpark@prorec.com:

But when I moved to the THD and Fulltone and Reverend, suddenly I "Got" it. Touch and responsiveness plays a part in the equation, too.Bill

How 'bout this.

 

Play through a Crate Head going through a Peavey Cabinet with Scorpion Speakers

 

NOW, with the same exact "touch & responsiveness" you referred to, play through your THD through a cabinet with tone tubby speakers.

 

Then tell me what's up

Is this meant to be confronttional? Okay I'll play. Usually if someone wants to present a premise and others offer other points of view, the original poster responds with vaildations of their points of view or offers opposing viewpoints. You've chosen to take the "Right By Vigorous Assertion" stand.

 

Well to start with, I'd never own such sucky equipment, let alone play through it. THAT is "what's up".

 

Meanwhile, you may have heard of Joey Gushecky. Joe sat in with a local band, taking the guitarists' rig, which was a Crate and a Squire strat. The kid tried to save the settings, because Joe sounded like Joe, which was significantly different than the kid who owned the gear. So that is what the fuck is up.

 

Your premise may be limited by your experience, I don't know. But it is easily and demonstrably disproven by several simple means that have been offered here, none of which you have adquately responded to or discounted. So that is what is up.

 

It is cool to have an opinion, but why ask for oposing viewpoints if you don't want to hear them and are incapable of responding to them in a logical and rational fashion?

 

Bill

[BillWelcome Home Studios]

Originally posted by Caputo:

Originally posted by bpark@prorec.com:

But when I moved to the THD and Fulltone and Reverend, suddenly I "Got" it. Touch and responsiveness plays a part in the equation, too.Bill

How 'bout this.

 

Play through a Crate Head going through a Peavey Cabinet with Scorpion Speakers

 

NOW, with the same exact "touch & responsiveness" you referred to, play through your THD through a cabinet with tone tubby speakers.

 

Then tell me what's up

I responded directly to this post.

 

If it was not meant to be confrontational, then perhaps I misread it. But it contains all of the elements to which I replied.

 

 

Bill

[Tone Taster]

Word Up

 

Peace

 

Sorry If i came off like that

 

I believe that these are the reasons why this is called a forum

 

We hash through different ideologies/positions/viewpoints and HOPEFULLY look at things differently than before

[fantasticsound]

Why do I get the feeling that Caputo was agreeing with you, Bill, but confused the meaning you ascribed to "touch and responsiveness".

 

I took that phrase to mean that a player with a dynamic technique has considerably more control of dynamics on a high quality tube amp than on modellers or ss amps due to limitations of the latter.

 

Going on all of that, Caputo, didn't you mean to compare how the same player, playing first through a run-of-the-mill rig (Peavey) sounds vs. his boutique amp (THD)?

 

If that is the case then you shouldn't have used Bill's phrase you quoted. You seem to have used it to describe the player's technique rather than the amps' characteristics.

 

Or am I missing something else?

[fantasticsound]

Sometimes bbs's can be a bitch when the same words come across to a reader in a vastly different way than intended by the writer.

 

Frankly, I lost a job over just such a situation, via email.

 

Let's try to give each other the benefit of the doubt until we ask for clarification of comments that appear to be adversarial. This seems to be happening a lot lately, and believe me, I've been guilty of mistaking intent and lacking necessary clarity in my posts, too. But I keep working at it.

 

Sorry to temporarily hijack the thread...

[Gifthorse]

If your tone is in your fingers you will know when you pick up an acoustic. Listen to EVH on anything where he plays acoustic and it still sounds just like him

[musicalhair]

Wow, that is a lot of work and a few too many toes getting stepped on or appearing to get stepped on or nearly getting stepped on just to "prove" that the old adage "Tone is in your fingers" doesn't tell the whole story.

 

The point of that line is that regardless of what gear you have you will at best sound like you, and when you find the right gear for you you will really sound like 'you' and when you play through less good gear you will sound like you through less good gear. You might make that gear sound "great" to someone else, and you might get the most out of it, but that just means that you have to learn how to play before you can learn to really use any gear well.

 

You won't sound like anyone else unless you are just not listening honestly. You might sound "almost" like someone else but you will be choosing the minimize the differences and focusing on the similarities. AT best you can sound like someone else only in isolated instances.

 

The adage "tone is in your fingers" is meant to deter people from running out and buying someone else's rig. Ted Nugent claims he did that do sound like EVH and he still sounded like himself. Santana chaged guitar and amps a few times and still sounds like himself.

 

I think it is obivious that anyone who can play will know the differences between amps and all the other things we use. What is also obivious is that beginers often can't hear the benefit of a real quality amp and gear. Read the reviews at harmony central, there isn't piece of crap over there without it's share of kids screaming about how great it is. THey haven't learned to listen to themselves and havent' learned to actually play correctly. That could be someone wacking-off on guitar for 10-20 years as much as it can be someone that just got a guitar today. When someone comes in and says their Behringer amp and chinese squire and $10 Multi effects unit sounds great, we know they haven't developed as players or really listened very deeply. We know they've ignored their fingers.

 

It is wrong to say that "tone is in your fingers" or even "tone is all in your fingers" is a myth. The fact that so many kids can't tell the difference between a crappy solid state hunk of junk and any number of great and expensive amps is proof of it. Once you know tone is in your fingers and you develop as a player you can appreciate the differences and make the best choices for you, and find the gear that plays to your strengths.

 

Just because different amps sound different doesn't mean tone isn't in your fingers. The last thing you want to do is to send some kid off on an amp quest when he should be making sure his fingers are nice and rounded on the neck and that he is fretting notes on his finger tips except when he is doing something else that prevents it like a bar or a partial bar and all the other things that lead to playing right.

 

Why EVH sounds like he does now and not back then is not my problem nor his apparently. He is not "the exception" to any rule and he doesnt' prove any point on either side of this. besides, there is only one side: your tone is in your fingers, once you establish it you can make the best choices for gear and not be fooled by crap pretending to be gear. I'm shocked anyone thought that we ALL didn't already know all this. I'm more shocked that anyone actually tries to question it.

[Tone Taster]

Originally posted by musicalhair:

I'm shocked anyone thought that we ALL didn't already know all this. I'm more shocked that anyone actually tries to question it.

Okay, I am seeing the semantical aspects even more

 

Let me present this with me, then

 

Caputo plays a 62 Strat w/ Lindey Freilands through a Dumble plugged into a Birch Cabinet w/ Tone Tubby Speakers

 

One minute later (in the same mood/personality - barring schizophrenia, mania and prior to the effect of any psychotropic medication); he plays the same musical passage through a Peavey Bandit with a Squier Strat.

 

The way I understand it, there is going to be a HUGE discrepancy in "tone" BARRING any finger activity.

 

I am understanding my original position regarding the "source of tone" from a same cat/different rig perspective and NOT a different cat/same rig perspective

 

I believe the latter position has to many variables due to

skill, hand size, finger fatness, pick preference, etc. . .

 

The former position seems to eliminate the variable altogether and narrow it down to the

 

Wood type & finish of the neck

 

Pickup Selection/Blend

 

Amplification

 

Speaker Configuration

 

 

Now is that more "sound" than "tone" or what?

 

Tell me what's up

[BillWelcome Home Studios]

Originally posted by Caputo:

 

Peace

 

We hash through different ideologies/positions/viewpoints and HOPEFULLY look at things differently than before

 

Bill

[musicalhair]

Originally posted by Caputo:

Okay, I am seeing the semantical aspects even more

I don't know what that means, actually. I don't think it is simply a question of semantics, I don't think I'm calling something "sound" or "tone" as much as I'm saying ... well ... something else.

 

 

Originally posted by Caputo:

 

Caputo plays a 62 Strat w/ Lindey Freilands through a Dumble plugged into a Birch Cabinet w/ Tone Tubby Speakers

 

One minute later (in the same mood/personality - barring schizophrenia, mania and prior to the effect of any psychotropic medication); he plays the same musical passage through a Peavey Bandit with a Squier Strat.

 

...

 

Tell me what's up

OK, here is how I see it. We don't play these amps and guitars and strings in the same manner say Howard Hughes might have fondled the latest Hollywood starlet wearing one inch think rubber gloves. He, in that situation, might fondle each one the same way because their be no real correlation between what he was fondling and his fingers. he'd be fondling the gloves in essense. If we played guitar with such gloves we'd be in that same situation, of playing some phrase exactly the same way.

 

What we do is different. We listen to what is really the "reaction" of the things between our fingers and the sound coming out of the speaker. We don't ever just walk up to an already plugged in guitar and play our phrase "blindly". From the very first sound we make we are processing information in our head and we make adjustments. We have a range of sounds that we might find acceptable and go for those. We might start tweaking knobs, we might see what we ourselves can do to get a sound we want. If we think we either don't have the time for all that or think such efforts are fruitless we'll just play the notes on the guitar and instinctively do what we can with our fingers to create what we want with what we have.

 

How successful we are at this either in our own mind or in the minds of any "audience" will depend a lot on how well we got to know our fingers, how we worked on our brain-fingers-ear-brain connections-- and really how open minded we are (we could just through a hissy fit over the cheap gear and walk off, or we could waste the night way bitching internally, or we could and should "adapt"). When we talk about someone being a good guitarist, we are really talking about their brain-fingers-ear-brain connection. I can't speak for what you'll get out of the Peavy Bandit but I'm confident that what I think of it will really have more to do with your brain-finger-ear-brain connection than it would with any idiosyncracies of the gear in question. I'm confident that you'll manage the gear as well as your brain-finger-ear-brain connection will enable you to, provided you are approaching it open mindedly.

 

I'd say that good gear allows you to get a lot more out of your brain-fingers-ear-brain connections than bad gear. I'm actually sure of it. I have an "American Woman" pedal, and while I find it fun and interesting I'd also bet that a lot of people would find it not much more than a fart box. I might actually agree but I can coax some wierd stuff out of it. The sample on their page of Henry Kaiser shows what he can do with it, so "fart box" is in the nose of the beholder, or fart box is in the fingers of the fondler but I'm grossing myself out now.

 

The differences in the sounds between the Dumble and the Peavy will not only be about the gear but what the artists can coax out of it.

 

I used to get a photography magazine called "Zoom". They'd publish photos of various artists work and feature photos that won various competitions around the world. some were taken with homemade pinhole cameras and some were taken literally with off the shelf disposables. It isn't the camera, nor is it all the other stuff but it is the artist's ability use and coordinate all the other stuff that counts.

 

My objection isn't that in essence you're saying that good gear matters-- it does--, but that the importance of our "fingers" or really our mind-finger-ear-mind connection is being minimized.

 

The sooner people develop those connections, the sooner they see the Peavy Bandits of the world for what they are and see Dumbles (if they're ever so lucky) for what they are.