Rudi

On the subject of the aforementioned song. I was very disapointed in the faster alternate picking sound in the main solo. I reasoned that it was down to sound modeling latency of the Boss 1600cd (which uses GT-6 modeling). However, I find that playing the Hofner the same way produces a similar undesirable sound. There is no latency here as the playing is entirely acoustic. Its hard to describe, but its as if the full sound of the note needs space to unfold, but cant. The technique I am talking about if what the metal fraternity call 'speed picking'. Sound fine with a nylon string acoustic and with a compressed electric sound. It just doesn't work well with this sort of animal. In itself it doesnt bother me massively. I have no problem moderating speed on the Hofner, but I am puzzled and bothered about what is really going on here .

Cheers Mike. Chris Spalding says that adding a pre-amp (or similar) but keeping the gain down at zero can still raise the mids and lows just enough to enhance the overall sound.

Looks like fun. I glimpsed a couple of these during my guitar venture a few days ago. While at the Guildford shop I picked up a reduced Line 6 Pod HD400. I have been trying to get my head round it ever since. I’m getting there but I expected it to be pretty straightforward. It’s actually more difficult than the old departed Boss GT-5 ever was, and that had a rep for being awkward 15 years ago. Isn’t progress about making things easier? I’ve actually had to gen up on some electrical engineering just to understand the advanced manual (which is not in the box, it has to be downloaded). Anyway, despite all that. I am a fan of new tech for music and this demo had me very interested, because it directly compares the real thing to the simulation using various techniques. It exactly the sort of evaluation needed for the variax; and it does a good job IMO. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPCxiVSRnZQ If I were to try one I would use the acoustic simulator first. This is a difficult thing to model. Of those I tried before: They sound just like an acoustic, but…. If you play it hard or softly, it sounds the same, with only a little difference in volume. OK, even certain acoustics might not sound much different, but I choose mine based on how it sounded played hard. If you wonder what I’m getting at here, imagine Bert Jansch’s playing. Also certain techniques will elude the modelling. Here is such an example with an electric technique. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQEHbFc0bZs

Ha ha! So it includes the entire wiring loom & pots. To me a pickguard is just a bit of adornment. My strat had a dark piece of inner ply inside a white sandwich. I still miss the sound it made.

It should work that way. But I once ruined a Deep Purple concert for a friend because I didn't agree that the guitarist was good. It should make no difference how good a musician it takes to make music, but for some reason we appreciate, or even need, to perceive the struggle. Otherwise why would so many players pull faces when playing? They don't do that when they practice. There are many who could not come to terms with the realisation that their heroes are only averagely skilled.

Hi Dave, Ha ha! Yes I suppose it does seem strange. But the distortion I use is quite mild. I did use a H&K Tube Factor years ago at a Jam night. This was a pub that was noted for metal-heads. I didn’t want to play that night I so didn’t bring my guitar. But I was persuaded to anyway and used someone elses. He had one of these Tube Factors. I played 3 songs (Changing Man / All Along the Watchtower / Knocking on Heavens Door). When I hit the Factor 2 button, it sounded insane. So unless I do another gig like that, I will stick to the modest Factor 1. Jimmy Herring uses one of these (likewise on F1) and to my ears his tone is the most beautiful I have ever heard. Needless to say, I still don’t sound anything like him. He has some tech-head-sound-elf that works magic for him. I have been playing jazz on the arch-top every day since buying it, mostly acoustically. I absolutely love it. And yes, I now play every major style to some degree, including classical.

I think it could have been done without altering the melody.

Hughes & Kettner Tube Factor: REVIEW. I spoke of this in a recent blog entry. When my ancient Boss GT-5 was killed at the last gig of 2014, I ordered one of these. Now the GT-5 is a completely different animal to the Tube Factor, so its not exactly a replacement, but just a change of approach. The TF is just a pre-amp. Nothing more nor less. Its an expensive one. Its also been around for quite a while. I had some trouble finding one. The main thing about the TF is that it uses a vacuum tube at its heart. Though in the UK we would call this a 'valve'. SInce my old Fender amp (Fender Stage 112 se) is solid state circuitry only, I thought I would add a tube/valve component and see if it performs better than the amps drive channel*. (*Some people are of the mistaken opinion that the 112 se has tubes, it was advertised as a 'hybrid' in the shop I bought it from) The TF is very simple in operation. It doesn't use batteries, and is supplied with a PSU. It appears to power up when plugged in as the logo lights up immediately. It is actually just on standby. The tube/valve itself is visible through a transparent window on the front of the unit. It has a dim orange glow. It has 2 stomp buttons. The first turns on (engages) the unit. The second engages the 2nd drive 'factor'. The 2 'factors' are low & high gain levels. The green light indicates factor 1 and the red light factor 2. Factor 1 is subtle. Factor 2 is higher distortion. There are three dials to control the sound. These are DRIVE, OUTPUT and VOICING. DRIVE: this determines the gain (distortion) level. OUTPUT: This moderates the volume. A higher DRIVE setting will increase the volume, so the OUTPUT can back it down again. VOICING: This sounds like compression to me. Its a useful extra control. I dislike a lot of compression, but a little can sound sweet and help separate the guitar from the other (live or studio) instruments sounds. Its a high quality unit. String separation is pretty good, even at higher drive levels. It does have a tone that's distinct from the amps own drive channel. Its very subtle but very appealing too. Now I tried out several tube amps before I bought the Stage 112, and I preferred the sound of the 112. Ok, maybe I'm a philistine, but my ears did the choosing. The point is that the amps drive channel sounds PDG. The sound difference is difficult to describe, but once I found the sweet tone I forgot about the TF completely and just enjoyed playing for an extended period. For me that sweet tone was using factor 1 with about 45% gain and 30% voicing. The sound inspired me to just keep playing. So the TF was worth the £219 price tag ($338). The amp was of course set to its clean channel. I tried two guitars with the unit, a '95 Jackson soloist XL (the gigging guitar) and a Jackson Elite (the studio guitar). The soloist sounded best using the neck PU with the tone on full treble. That PU is a passive single coil Jackson type. The Elite sounded best using the bridge PU with tone at 50% and the presence** at 100% (** 'presence' is a guess. Jackson don't give instructions or explain anything). That PU is a Seymour Duncan active humbucker. I couldn't find a good demo of the TF, but this is one of the better ones. I like the tone achieved at the 2.00 minute level. None of what you hear on this resembles the sounds I got from my rig. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9u-qK5b3Z8v Conclusion: The tube sound is certainly there. It is as I said a subtle sound. I only slighter prefer it to the Stage 112 drive channel. I have rarely used the the amps drive channel live (the dead GT-5 slaved the amp on its clean channel). The unit itself is robust and is pretty big for a single stomp box. The PSU though, has a light thin cable. Good enough for its job certainly, but I would have preferred a heavier gauge outer 'skin' to stand up the rigours of live use. It would be a nuisance have to source a replacement in the future. My Rating: SOUND : 9/10 VALUE FOR MONEY: 4/10 VERSATILITY: 2/10 (you cant easily swap between factors 1 & 2 because the volume will need adjustment) BUILD QUALITY: 6/10 (would be 8/10 if the PSU was better). Note: In addition to the IN & OUT jack sockets. there is a third REMOTE socket. I will be giving the TF its public debut at the next Blown Out gig. I dont know when that will be yet, as unusually, we have no 2015 bookings yet.

Unless you are speaking wholly in metaphors, I disagree. Something with its own being & feelings is not a description of a song that I can recognise. You could consider a song to be an entity in an abstract sense, but perception of what a song means to people is different thing altogether. Its the listener who has feelings about the musical construct, not the song itself.

N1CO, When I am playing a a solo at a gig you can be sure that I am fully focused upon what I am doing. So is everyone in the band. I recall once our tenor saxophonist playing a solo, and the Alto player tickling him from behind and shouting "w*%ker w*%ker" in each ear. Afterwards, he had no idea what had happened. Playing at home can be that way if I find something that interests me. I never used o be able to divide my attention when practicing, but Ive been playing for 45 years now and the fingers know where to go without me ordering them about. As a youngster I would be in a state of nervous tension trying to learn a new technique. As a matter of fact I experienced it again recently when I tried a metal method of arpeggio sweep picking. I love the sound but am not sure its worth the effort. Its also a nasty sort of feeling; its exhausting. At its best playing music is meditative. Improvisation is anyway.

I practice with the TV on more than not. I only started watching TV at home again in October (this is too complicated to get into here). 90% of the time I can watch TV and understand everything thats going on both with the TV and with the guitar. 10% of the time I will find myself going down a musical path that needs my full attention. Then I will miss the TV prog. But its always the guitar thats the distraction, never the TV. When playing normally at home (no TV) time disappears. Hours can pass; hours that only seem like minutes. At such times I feel great. There are other times when my playing seems staid and useless. Those are the short practices.

Curious. I had often wondered about chord patterns and reasoned it would impossible to police as so many are common to so many songs. I explained this on the development of 'It Doesnt Matter What I Sing', when my head was swimming with other songs that shared the same chords. I still changed a few chords, but it now seems that I needn't have been so fussy.

Do you also use biab for recording? If so, is that a legal maze?

Jockey Full of Bourbon : Tom Waits

Hi Mike, Flatwound: Yes, the flatwounds mentioned in #26 are whats on the Hofner now. I have used them before too. String bends: I was not being serious. Just making the point that string tension is high. not sure what this means Mike. Scale: I have no problem stretching to make chord shapes (I might do if I revisited the Mikey Baker ones). No I have the opposite problem as I said. biab: This an accompaniment program, right? I practice unaccompanied. Its worked well for the last 45 years. I can imagine any accompaniments easily enough. If it has other uses I'm not aware of maybe Ive missed your point here. (BTW, and I don't use a computer for recording either. I use a siab). As far as learning goes generally, I said that my Jazz chop are basic, but they're not that basic. I'm not looking to emulate anybody. I just want to broaden & enhance what I already do. Most of what Ive done has been not mainstream but more influenced by Sam Rivers or Dave Holland. Its true that I am now looking backward to mainstream again (when you say 'traditional jazz' I take you to mean mainstream' not dixieland), but I want to learn to inform my own tunes, not become a sideman and spend my remaining years learning the real book. I do like the videos that you have shown though. I would much prefer to learn stuff this way.

I think 'chords' when playing jazz melody. Sometimes even modal stuff if I possibly can. The Frank Vignola clip is superbly presented. The '2 hands view' is exactly whats needed. Nice one Mike. Guitar: Getting used to that taut action. String height is still pretty low, but the tension is high with those fatter strings. Its amazing what you can adapt to when you try. At first my hands tired quickly, now I have discovered and accustomed to that 'just firm enough' pressure. I wont be attempting many string bends though! So far as the scale things goes, I find the opposite problem to you. I cant scrunch up my fingers close enough at the upper positions. My hands are not large. I know one player with massive hands who plays an SG. It looks like a toy in his hands, but he manages just fine. I cant. Strange eh? Maybe you are using some shapes that I dont? On that subject. My first book on jazz guitar was a Mickey Baker one. I’m 98% sure this is the book. Written in 1955. I got hold of it in about 1973. I never got further than the chords as I don’t sight read music. But it was some of those chords that got me frustrated. Some shapes were hard to stretch to. I was using a strat then so its likely that it was a longer scale than what he used (Gibson probably), but at that time all I could reason is that he was ‘showing off’ by showing some finger busting shapes that ordinary mortals couldn’t do. I ended up working out simpler shapes for the same chords, though I will have forgotten many of these by now. I never found much use for some of them anyway. I thought it was a weird book http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/0825652804?*Version*=1&*entries*=0 This fellow thinks more of it than I did. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkHa35W8cP8

aranders, Solved it yet? I had similar problem with my condenser mic. It drove me crazy. Mine was an intermittent hiss, and it varied in intensity. It was like listening to wind gusting outside. It turned out to be condensation. My studio is often very cold. Now I keep the mic in a warm room in the winter months. If this is what is happening to you, you may need to put the mic into a warmer environment for a couple of days (no not the oven! ) before trying again. Good luck.

Rich's evaluation is great. I was struck at how close the 2 vids were tonally. I changed the strings this morning' supplied were: New are: E 046 E 052 A 036 A 042 D 026 D 032 G 017 G 024w B 013 B 016 E 010 E 012 Quite a difference. I had to raise the action again to finally lose all the low E buzz. I had wondered if the nut height was correct. I mentioned it to the luthier I am using. I had to collect my Jackson today anyway so he said bring it over and lets see. He said the nut was fine as was the neck. So simple height adjustment was the correct solution. Perhaps the fretboard really is ebony then? My jazz chops are basic. You recommend Rich S. then Mike?

The Jazz guitar quest was completed today. and the above Hofner HTC-J17 got the gig. Myself and bandmate Pete went to Farnham today and looked over a bunch of archtops. I played 4 fat-boxed guitars. a D'Angelico, two Peerless models and the Hofner. Only the cheaper of the Peerless was seriously considered. That was the New York model. Its was well over twice the price of the Hofner. Those other guitars were a shorter scale. I like a longer scale. The D'Angelico was also altogether smaller in neck width. All the guitars were set up and had very low action. Too low in my view as all exhibited fret buzz in several places. I was wrong about the Hofner having an ebony fingerboard though, its doesnt. It seems closer grained than most rosewood, but it could be rosewood. It seems very odd that Hofner would make both the tailpiece and the scratchplate from ebony but not the frets? Strange. There was a major issue with the Hofner though. Intonation past the 12th fret was sharp. I asked the salesman if he had another, but he didnt. He took it to another staff member who repositioned the bridge. I didnt see him do this, but could tell by the imprint of the former position that he had shifted the bridge backwards towards the tailpiece by nearly half an inch. This solved the problem completely and I bought it there and then. They through in a set of flatwound strings too. Back home again. After taking Pete home I played the Hofner from 4 -7pm and grew to like it more and more. I have measured the 'new' scale at 25.5". (Seems logical now.) I raised the action at the low end, though the low E is still a little bit buzzy, everywhere else is sweet and still just as playable. Tomorrow I will change the strings anyway for the flatwounds. I think these are a heavier gauge, so may fine tune a little more then. The little PU sounds pretty good. I agree with Matt Raines (previous post YouTube reviewer) that even at lowest bass setting, its not muddy at all. String volumes are even, and clean. The wood (even inside through the f-holes) is evenly patterned maple. Build quality is better than I had expected. Not sure the tuners are that good, they were slipping when I played it in the shop, but the strings are new. After playing it at home, the strings more settled now. I'll keep an eye on the tuners. I started off just wanting a jazz sound. I didnt care how I arrived at it, but having now played a large archtop, I find it very satisfying. All I need to do now is learn some proper jazz. I thought I could until I heard that Matt Raines feller. He is so good.

Here is the issue as I perceive it. 1/ The music is the only consideration. It doesnt matter how you get there. Its the result that counts. Employ 3 handed drummers and 4 sided triangles if you need to. 2/ Perception about music. It can mean that you want to know that the soloist struggled to get that brilliant take. Or that an impossibly speeded up passage ruins such an illusion. I struggle with this myself. If I record a difficult unaccompanied solo guitar piece, there are little bits and pieces that are imperfect. So I'm faced with the following choice. 1/ Make 50 or 60 takes and hope I get one really good one. 2/ Double track it by recording the melody (fingers) separately to the counterpoint (thumb). This way it comes out perfect and gets done quicker. The problem with 1/ is that I can get tired of the music and lose enthusiasm for it, resulting in a spiritless take. The problem with 2/ is my ego. I struggled for many years to learn how to fingerpick this way, and now people will assume that I cheated because I wasnt good enough to play it properly. Take your choice.

David is right in that you could almost certainly find a pedal / preamp / processor to give the SG a sound you approve of. Sound quality is a personal thing and it can drive you nuts. To avoid all that, consider what Tom suggests. Why not re-evaluate if the SG is something really want?

It only matters if you intend to publish the music and get an orchestra to play it. Then it has to be realistically arranged. If you are happy to leave it as it is then do so. Why limit yourself to what real musicians can do if they never have to play it?

Now this is affordable, and I hope to find one on Monday. Monday is dedicated to the actual jazz guitar quest. Both vids are reviews and I really like the sound in both of them. Its encouraging that the sound is pretty much the same in both too. On the + side, the Hofner has a 25.5" scale and an ebony fingerboard. I love ebony fretboards. They can stand up to all the abuse I give them. Rosewood cant, and its better used on backs & sides.

you bet Tom, WE had 2 grim gigs during the winter. We just couldnt connect to the people there. Ok some individuals came up after and said nice things, but we usually measure success on how many people dance, and we usually get that.

Last gig of the year: Friday 19 December 2014 Club V Fareham Recreation Ground. Denny’s 60th birthday bash. Denny himself is in a covers band, and they opened for us (Blown Out). I was very glad that people did get up and dance to them. Though it was at the last song! This was their first gig, and they did well. They did one of the songs we do ‘Mama Told Me Not To Come’, so the party heard 2 versions that night. Club V is a wonderful place. It’s got 2 control rooms for DJ/audio & lighting engineer, a nice big stage and all the power sockets you could wish for. Noise is not an issue as its set in open ground and surround by fields. A buffet was provided which the drummer and the alto sax player made for straight away (as usual). We played 2 sets, though I think we should have played longer. It was pretty good and everyone enjoyed it. The only problem is… As we were clearing the stage, our bass player Paul toppled my glass of soda water into my stomp box. It was a nearly a full pint too. Fortunately it was powered down and unplugged by then, but I spent a good couple of minutes shaking water out of it. I took it home and left it by a radiator. The box is an aged Boss GT5 which has served me with only one minor breakdown in 15 years. It has now died however. It cost close to £600 when new, but they are no longer made, and Boss gave up servicing them when it was superseded by the GT6. The current unit is the GT100 and it’s a good deal cheaper than my old GT5. However, none of my carefully crafted patches will work on anything else and I am unlikely to be able to source another GT5 easily. So, I have decided to go about things differently from here on in. I have ordered a Hughes & Kettner Tube Factor. This is basically just a pre-amp with a vacuum tube (valve = uk) at its heart. Every music retailer are out of stock or no longer supply them. Except one; GAK still offer it. However, even they had to order one from Germany. I’m looking forward to trying it out, and I will probably want a reverb unit of some sort too, but haven’t selected which one of those yet. I may review the Tube Factor later.