Software has NEVER ACHIEVED Decent Guitar Distortion. Nope.

[runagate]

I know if you handed me an amp, and a compressor and a guitar and all that guitarist stuff it'd take a real good long time to get my head inside all the possible nuances and get anything remotely like what a guitarist would get.

People actually see it this way? I'm really surprised by that. The hardest part of it is feedback control... the "nuance" of the tone has a lot of touch involved, but if you're a guitar player you've got touch hopefully, whether you're playing through an amp or an amp sim.

I didn't mean sonic nuances, I mean all the controls and such add up to a rather exponential amount of possibilities. Trust me I am nooo gear head. Put it in software, though, and I'll straight memorize 100,000 different controls. Why? No idea at all. Seems that different brains like different user interfaces. I didn't even touch computers except to fix them til 2 years ago, no video games, certainly no music.

The thing that seems totally overlooked in this thread, to the degree that I can tolerate reading it, is that there's so much difference between guitarist's gear and objectives just in one genre that there simply can't be an even semi-universally accepted ampsim. I don't even use Freeamp on guitars, myself.

[Empty Uranus]

In the end - it's whatever suits whom.....

I will say this. Do you think Hendrix would have gotten half of his feedback sounds out of a PC?

If you turn up your monitors a little bit and get real close, you have a screaming guitar amp! Really - works pretty much the same, feedback wise.

Or crank it up and yank off the knobs and stand back, but that kinda defeats the purpose, for me!

Man - with all due respect, I just can't agree with that. The main problem with transistor/fake/PC distortion is that it actually gets shittier the louder it gets.

And even though I remarked on some of Hendrix's feedback, I've always considered him to be a highly overrated guitarist. IMHO - he was a much better songwriter than he was guitarist. And by today's standards, his sound sucked. Oh- he had a few songs that his sound was okay - I especially liked some of his cleaner tones - "Little Wing", etc..., but ..... welll........ Don't get me started.

Ritchie Blackmore could wipe Hendrix all over the floor at the same time period - plus - Blackmore got a better sound with his Strat than Hendrix ever did. Again - my a'hole opinion.

BUT. Transistor distortion doesn't react with the wood of a guitar as nicely as tube distortion does. That's justa fact, Jack.

Another thing - with all the attention given to amps, amp sims, yadda yadda yadda, I'm always amazed how one of the most important things of all is always dismissed - the speaker..... In the end - the sound comes from the speaker. Life without Celestions is bad.

FINALLY - I think some of these sims really sound good to people who've never had an amp worth a fu<k. I'm not saying everybody, but some.... Until you've had a GOOD Marshall, Fender, Boogie, or Soldano - you're just not going to understand. (and don't throw me any of that Line 6 horseshit. )

[Lunch Money]

Man - with all due respect, I just can't agree with that. The main problem with transistor/fake/PC distortion is that it actually gets shittier the louder it gets.

Welll.... sort of. If you already think that software simulations sound like crap, this fact will be amplified by hearing it louder. Also, speakers not designed for high dB will rattle and sound like crap, which isn't really the software's fault. But, I'm of the mind that it sounds fine when cranked. More to the point, though, that's a judgement call you're allowed to make, but it has nothing to do with feeding back. Quality of distortion sound and feeding back are not connected.

And even though I remarked on some of Hendrix's feedback, I've always considered him to be a highly overrated guitarist. IMHO - he was a much better songwriter than he was guitarist. And by today's standards, his sound sucked. Oh- he had a few songs that his sound was okay - I especially liked some of his cleaner tones - "Little Wing", etc..., but ..... welll........ Don't get me started.

Ritchie Blackmore could wipe Hendrix all over the floor at the same time period - plus - Blackmore got a better sound with his Strat than Hendrix ever did. Again - my a'hole opinion.

See, we agree here. I love Hendrix. One of my top all time favourites. But I think that his tone had something to be desired on many songs, and the engineering wasn't very good on many songs, either. Blackmore... I don't know well enough to judge. His tone was... OK.

Getting away from strats for a moment, then-- Iommi. Iommi's tone was yuk yuk yuk in my opinion. It broke up in a very "granular" kind of way.

Apparently having tubes and a real amp aren't enough to give you good tone. Yet, Hendrix and Iommi are legendary. Guess it's for some reason other than their gear.

BUT. Transistor distortion doesn't react with the wood of a guitar as nicely as tube distortion does. That's justa fact, Jack.

Nope. You've misled yourself here. The kind of feedback we're talking about is sympathetic feedback. The ONLY factor in the equation is the soundwaves coming out of the speakers and your strings. Basically, those waves are "playing" your strings, and since your strings are being "played", a signal goes out of the speaker, which then "plays" your strings... a feedback loop.

There's no way at all that tubes can make this an easier process. A speaker cone pushing in and out doesn't care if tubes produced the pushing in and out. It doesn't know. It just pushes in and out. Nor do your strings care. They just vibrate in sympathy.

You can get your guitar to "feed back" to a computer-generated sine wave at moderate volumes. It's a physical reaction and nothing more.

THAT's the fact. It's a big mistake to claim something as fact when it's an opinion, and a misinformed one at that.

Now, because I'm the kind of guy who likes to see both sides of the story, I wonder if you're confusing the tone of a feeding back note with the actual process of feeding back. If you like the way your amp responds to a note with increasingly fewer harmonic overtones (as your feedback loop approaches a static wave) then you might like your amp's tone better. But that's hardly a surprise because that's what you've been saying all along. Doesn't mean it's feeding back more easily, though.

Another thing - with all the attention given to amps, amp sims, yadda yadda yadda, I'm always amazed how one of the most important things of all is always dismissed - the speaker..... In the end - the sound comes from the speaker. Life without Celestions is bad.

Well. Celestions aren't the only brand of speakers worth a damn. And that's only a factor if you're mic'ing the amp. Speakers can certainly make a decent amp sound better, I'll give you that.

FINALLY - I think some of these sims really sound good to people who've never had an amp worth a fu<k. I'm not saying everybody, but some.... Until you've had a GOOD Marshall, Fender, Boogie, or Soldano - you're just not going to understand. (and don't throw me any of that Line 6 horseshit. )

You're making the mistake of putting people into the "one or the other" category, and I don't think many of us are. Just because we can talk intelligently about the relative benefits of amp sims does NOT mean that we're saying "real amps suck." Far from it. We'd ALL love to have the real amps, in a real recording room, with the right mics. In order to appreciate the rest of the debate, you have to at least accept with your whole heart that even the sim-advocates are amp- and tone-lovers. If you can't see that, then you're arguing with phantoms rather than the real people I see in this thread.

Greg

[hibidy]

They are all different. But, for every person who can make a "real" amp sound good.....there are probably 25 who can't.

Enter us home recording people......what are we looking for?

As much as we can get for the money, AND a way to get at least decent sound without having the cops called on us........

[Hink]

In the end - it's whatever suits whom.....

I will say this. Do you think Hendrix would have gotten half of his feedback sounds out of a PC?

If you turn up your monitors a little bit and get real close, you have a screaming guitar amp! Really - works pretty much the same, feedback wise.

Or crank it up and yank off the knobs and stand back, but that kinda defeats the purpose, for me!

Man - with all due respect, I just can't agree with that. The main problem with transistor/fake/PC distortion is that it actually gets shittier the louder it gets.

I agree with some this is true, not all....and remember as I respond we are probably close the same age...if you ever had a plexi you would know it was a one sound amp and didn't do that well without a modification...we romanticize an amp that wasn't very good...the tone controls were useless

And even though I remarked on some of Hendrix's feedback, I've always considered him to be a highly overrated guitarist. IMHO - he was a much better songwriter than he was guitarist. And by today's standards, his sound sucked. Oh- he had a few songs that his sound was okay - I especially liked some of his cleaner tones - "Little Wing", etc..., but ..... welll........ Don't get me started.

Ritchie Blackmore could wipe Hendrix all over the floor at the same time period - plus - Blackmore got a better sound with his Strat than Hendrix ever did. Again - my a'hole opinion.

agreed on both points

BUT. Transistor distortion doesn't react with the wood of a guitar as nicely as tube distortion does. That's justa fact, Jack.

no you're wrong about it being fact...it's fun to quote a movie that's older than half of kvr...but that's not a fact...it's totally subjective.

Another thing - with all the attention given to amps, amp sims, yadda yadda yadda, I'm always amazed how one of the most important things of all is always dismissed - the speaker..... In the end - the sound comes from the speaker. Life without Celestions is bad.

More subjectivity that quickly is approaching elitism...I own a tube amp and celestions...I know what's best

- I think some of these sims really sound good to people who've never had an amp worth a fu<k. I'm not saying everybody, but some.... Until you've had a GOOD Marshall, Fender, Boogie, or Soldano - you're just not going to understand. (and don't throw me any of that Line 6. )

I have had a boogie, a plexi, a twin and sold many, many more...do I qualify to enter my opinion?...or is the fact that I think like many guitarists you're being somewhat biased and it's you that probably will never get the fact that the amp sim will get you a good tone, at least if you know wht you're doing. (I think your music is good, but I do not hear any tones that "blow away" my tones )

I take exception with this statement to the extreme and this attitude is why I don't care to seek out another band I'm right, you're wrong...my amp is better than yours

I think some of these sims really sound good to people who've never had an amp worth a fu<k.

you're coming across as a complete snob and making blanketed assumptions...ooooh I have a tube amp...so don't tell me about your sims...ooooh I have celestions....so don't tell me about sims...I have both as well dude and you're the one with your head buried in the sand...not the sim users...people like me with both are what is called open minded...you are coming across very closed minded. Sounds more like you're bragging about your boogie more than you care about the benefits...I can somewhat understand...afterall having a boogie use to be a status symbol...but that was when I was a kid in my mid 20s, seems too me that you miss those bragging rights...this is 2006.

So let's straighten out some facts.

Plexi...one sound amp and those growing up in the 70s as I often got criticized for it...no master volume, very non-responsive tone controls, very subject to "brown outs"...a plexi head still needed a cab and that made a huge difference in sound....again we glamorize celestions without even caring about cab construction...that's objective?...take a fender cab, a marshall cab, a hi-watt cab and a boogie cab from say 1980...put the same celestions in all of them and none of them will sound the same. But the best sounding cab I ever had was a Hi-watt (I hope that's up there with your standards)...it had fanes.

Old Boogies, first let me say I loved this amp (an SOB)...mine had no effect loop, the tone controls were great and the "limit" control was great...one channel, perhaps a two sound amp. Great for live, but not for what I do today.

Twin...great sound but dated, truly again a one sound amp (maybe 2) no effects loop.

Now go out and buy all three...maybe you get a half dozen tones to work with...at what cost 3-4k when you're done? The noise level sucks, the lack of features, the inconsistency of tubes, the effects of heat. I'm sorry dude but I don't think you've given this much thought, you're coming across like "I have a tube amp so I know what a good amp sounds like"...but that's bull if you do not give other things an objective test and you are clearly biased. Instead it should read more like "I have a tube amp and it's the best amp for me"...that would not sound quite as pretentious as you do now, but still I doubt you can get passed the ego part of it...quite frankly you have a one sound amp (two sound at best)...your tone choices are limited and replacement for parts (or for replacing the amp if it got stolen) are through the roof...you've probably never tried...but try getting old Marshall parts out of Korg. I'm not sure about boogie's current parts situation...at least their tubes were pretty consistant (providing you stuck with boogie tubes).

Now go get a POD xt live like I did...I can tailor shape the tone to fit the song, I can save the exact settings so if I do a punch it doesn't sound like a cheap voice over like in movies where somebody dubbed in words to cover the swears for tv. But I don't care for the model names, I care about the sound I get out of it. I don't look for it's shortcomings...I look for it's benefits. I grow with the tmes and am glad I do...I'm not stuck in 1980.

You're dead wrong about speaker selections...in fact the only one with limited speaker choices is you...POD xt live has many choices...unlike your set-up...I can use a cab that sounds twangy, has a bottom heavy sound, a midrange sound...can you?

Have you listened to any of my stuff...block out the production and go straight to the actual tone...can you say state with fact any part of any song that would of sounded better had I used your Boogie, my old Boogie, my old Marshall plexi, my Marshall tube rig? In fact if I told you that I used three different devices on my page would you be able to tell the difference and tell me what each one is?

No offense intended but I think you're more hung up on having a tube amp and boasting about it than you might be about the benefits of amps, PODs, Sansamp, pc sims...it's not the same and unless you've owned an amp as good as mine you could never know...first that's just plain childish, I left that behind when I actually decided to cross the stupid line I drew in the sand (yeah once I was on your side of the fence, but I learned the truth by being open minded). Second I have had amps as good as yours, I'm not rushing out to get those back because the sound was okay, but noisy...if you say when you crank up your tube amp you don't get noise, that's bull...it's a fact of life...if you turn it down real low like you suggested earlier and mic it believe it or not you're losing half the tone (you gotta push the tubes and speakers need a minimum of power to get them to come to life)...but at least you can brag you have a tube amp...that and a buck will get you a soda.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-tube amp...but I am anti-snob and I'm sick of this bullshit that a tube amp is better...hence the owner of a tube amp is better...and I would say right back at yah dude...unless you've given a sim a real non-biased chance (be it POD like or pc sims) maybe it's you that doesn't know what they are talking about. It would seem to me that the person who has a lot of experience with both might have a pretty clear picture, and a balanced perspective. I can understand liking your amp, that's natural..but it does not make you superior so come down off your pedestal and listen to some other opinions...you never know, even us older folks can learn something new.

Recently I had one guitarist here say to me "Hink you say your tone evolves, but I see no sign of it"...talk about lame...look at the date I joined...I started playing in 71...how can anyone judge how I evolved those other 32 years...the truth is I can still get myriad of sounds (not to mention my typical tone) that I love from my two PODS and sansamp, and do it without having to keep my daughter quiet, without worrying about outside noise, can dial it in quick and save it. If the biggest disator strikes and my amp fries I can replace it and the next one will sound the same...put 4 plexi's on 4 cabs (identical) and you will be surprised to find each will sound a little different.

No offense is intended in this post, but the "I own a tube amp" thing is getting lame...it depends more on who's playing it than anything else...if you can't get a good tone from a POD xt, then like I've said before...it's probably not because of what the pod is lacking.

[Lunch Money]

Hink

[Hink]

Hink

[Killvehicle]

Lunch MOney Im not gonna get into all of it but I thoroughly disagree with plenty you have said here. IT seems like you are just filling up a ton of space, I like how you said how HENDRIX would respond to be in todays day and age. And how he would be a kid in a candy store or something., Nope I dont think that would be the case at all. SInce I am not Hendrix I cant say either!! BUt just because he was into studio tricks and technology back then does not mean he would see the technology now as being a good thing. BUt there is no way to argue that, and to get people bowing to your comments was funny as hell. Its all about what is best for your music. I think he would have found what he was looking for many years ago and left most of this new shit alone, but who knows dumb arguement..

And I love how all the old tone SUCKED and all that,and how "I guess it doesnt have to be tubes and real amp to be good tone." PLease thats such an stupid way of thinking. Thats the tone people wanted back then,the tone that was devoloping and I think it is GOOD, and I like Hendrix tone and Iommi's and Townshend's thats what they were hearing, It was just starting to be about pushing amps real freaking hard, and now amps have changed to accomendate that better(or worse), and there is WAY more stomps and B.S like that to make the distortion we hear today. I wouldnt want to hear their music any other way. That music and sound was organic, and individual, I know there is still music that is organic and individual, but turn on the radio or look at who is on the cover of the next guitar magazine, and I hear plastic sterile 'big' tones that are not to be admired at all.

SO on the other side of the argument you might as well take TUBE amps out of the equation since that tone sucked so bad, Whatver, i really dont care anymore. I swear you like to hear yourself talk, to me it was all drivel your last few posts.

And I especially like how you say why is tone so precious? COme on, get a f**king clue.. And how it "has been said If you give a great guitarist a Samick and bandit he can play the shit out of it still" Yeah maybe If he gets a flow and a feeling, or maybe he wouldnt, who the f**k made this FACT?!!
I can go into G.Center and find at least 5 different amps that I totally dig and a dozen guitars that play good for me, Its becasue they give me an ability to let my playing flow, but a bad piece of gear or a completely sterile amp, to my ears, leaves me cold, and it would do the same for the GREATEST guitarists in the world. YOu are rigth its NOT About the gear technically. It is about the flow and energy and imagination of a person, BUT shitty sound, a guitar that feels like a lump of wood is not going to be conductive to flowing energy and therefore would be a blockage of flow. YOu would have to be a f**king god(literally) to pick up ANY instrument and play with YOUR vibe.


ANd hink just saw your post, and its something I have heard before but just to counteract that slightly, I understan how you feel like you are being open-minded and moving forward, but what's not open-minded about appreciating what was done in the past? I grew up in the 80's have been playing guitar since 87' I was born in 78. By all logic I should be closed to all that technology before I was born and into the new technology, and to a degree of course I am, but I have gone bought vintage gear, just recently got me a reel to reel,I still use CUbase SX2 as basically a tape machine, I rarely go into punching or editing, I still take the longer route to accomplish things I want pure takes and energy and this sound and methods inspire me. The pod and amp sims don;t TUbe amps do, you are all rigth when you say how much it would cost to have all those cool amps I dig at G.C. That is a huge problem, but thats why I love my amp, I try not to covet to many things I dont have and cherish the one that I do. (and my amp is a 3 channel amp, I still fail to see how you think it is a one trick pony, but thats another story.)

[Hink]

KV I never said that your amp is a one trick pony...but it does have limitations as well..so doesn't my PODs...my point is that it's possible to take the best ot of two worlds...as for inspiration....I have said it before, I rarely record compared to the time I spend just playing...all those models and choices have inspired me a lot...I have had a lot of fun messing around with the tons of combos....sorry but for me that's inspiring. The energy thing is purely subjective and how you feel, and that's exactly how it should be...but what energizes me and what energizes you may not be the same....again that's the way it should be.

The point is I hate absolutes...one must recognize the difference between opinion and fact...tube amps are not the best, neither are sims...neither one makes anyone better than anyone else, it's about how you put them to use. for instance

a guitar that feels like a lump of wood is not going to be conductive to flowing energy and therefore would be a blockage of flow.

ever hear of Bo Diddly? I think he might disagree...I don't sweat the small things anymore, I don't let obstacles get in my way. I turn them into inspirations, I play guitar...not an amp. I get my enery from playing, not the tone...hopefully I can get the tone to compliment the energy and different tones are going to bring out different types of energy. But if I ever need anything more than the pleasure of playing to energize me I reckon I'll hang it up. My acoustic is one of the ovations without a traditional soundhole...it's really designed for recording and live through an amp as well...as a "'round the campfire" guitar it doesn't have a very full sound...but I have had hours of joy playing it not plugged in. Perhaps it's a threshold kinda thing, it takes more to stop me from playing, I'll find a way.

Back in the 70's and 80's I had a grudge against whammy bars...I used the fact they went out of tune as reason to hide my real problem with them, lack of knowledge, technique and understanding...besides I had 72 Tele Custom...I couldn't let people say I needed a whammy...at that time I had one of the original 4-track cassette decks(Cutec)...it had a fader for each track, pan, assignment buttons, a jack for a pedal (punch) 4 vu meters and 4 TS inputs...I was bored with it and I took it to the store to sell...they gave me more than I thought (I wanted an invader pick-up, at the time it was best way to get the cash)...I ended up buying a Kahler too and routed the body of my tele for it...then I went to the other extreme because I mastered the whammy, once I broke the bar itself during a practice...band practiced stopped because I lost my inspiration (thinking I was 26 or 27/85 or 86), my threshold was too low...after that all guitars for years had to have a Rose....then I got into alternate tunings and that wasn't practical...I bought a hardtail...that was about ten years ago.

It's ironic I use the rose to make this point because it's like tuning a rose...once you've achieved that balance it's sweet, that's just what I did...I went from one extreme to the other than found a great balance somewhere in between. I could type all day about how my views changed on things like that, but each time it ends with a balance.

That's my point, when someone takes a stance firmly on one side or the other they are not seeing the whole picture and only hurting themselves. I'm not getting rid of my PODs and I'm not getting rid of my live rig...together they balance quite nicely...

[Empty Uranus]

Well - I really didn't mean to come across as a music snob, but I've been in this soup a long time, and again - these are MY opinions. Again - I'm having fun listening to these things. Hell - I'm recording with some of them!

As I learned to play, I was really into distortion. I started listening to Sabbath when I was about 8. Have you ever heard any of his old live stuff from the early 70's? You know - where as soon as he turns it up, it fed back so bad it yank your mother's clothes off and stuff them up your little brother's butt?

Well - I felt compelled to play that way for the harder-edged stuff. Though I was able to get some nice feedback happening with foot pedals and things like those old transistor Kustoms ('sup Fogerty!), the feedback was simply more controlable and sweeter when I finally went tube.

If tube amps WERE NOT the shit, then you'd see these little amp sims trying to sound like those old Kustoms and Gorilla Amps.

You don't see folks trying to make tube amps sound like transistor amps.

Going back to Iommi. One thing you have to understand was that he REALLY experimented around with his sounds. If you go back to the very first album (recorded in '69), I challenge anybody to come up with a sound that stands up today as well as that one did.

I didn't care much for the sound on Paranoid. I think that was a case of not pushing the Laney's enough.

MOR was better, though I think he was using fuzz a little bit, and even being strange enough to use the TOP pickup on songs like Sweet Leaf.

VOL. 4 had a shitload of sounds - still - all on the Laney. I was a bit shocked at that. Only reason I know, is because I actually asked him about it on his website.

I loved the sound he was getting on SBS, though. A little less ballsy maybe, but it had the low end grunt I was talking about, and the "Tube Baby" sound.

I'm sorry, I reckon I just got off on a bizarre tangent.

Good sounds? Clapton wrote the book back in '64 when he was with John Mayall. What ever possesed a man to turn a Marshall wide open with a Les Paul?

Anyway - I'm really rambling now. Perhaps I should take my meds.

[Empty Uranus]

Jesus, Hink - the WHAMMY BAR!!!! I got so dependent on Kahler's in the 80's, that I refused to go without one. I had gotten Vai'd out - with pulling it up, etc... Finally got a '81 Les Paul Standard about 12 years ago. What whammy?

Breakin' out o' dat trap, mang!!!!!

[disturb]

All you guitar players are just nuts...

[Hink]

First let me clarify that I still am not a fan of pc sims for two reasons...latency and my pc does enough as it is, why add more tasks to it?

If tube amps WERE NOT the shit, then you'd see these little amp sims trying to sound like those old Kustoms and Gorilla Amps.

Just a little conscending no? "little amp sims". But let's keep it real, like I said I agreed with some on this point...back in the day when you and I started there wasn't much in the solidstate department for good distortion...but there were some...like the Randall CommanderII, the Gorilla was quite popular amoungst many and tbh I liked the Polytones. You might remember when Electro-Harmonix was considered a toy...you bought MXR, you bought Maestro...but EH was for kids...maybe it wasn't that way everywhere but it was around my area. In the late 90's they brought back those padded Kustoms.

But like I say let's keep it real, that solidstate and today's solidstate are two different things and lets' make this perfectly clear...though you can call a POD solidstate and by definition be correct, it's night and day compared to how PODs and the like are today. (for the sake of the conversation I'm using PODs as any modeling hardware, save me from saying and the like) So you can't really put them in the same class.

I left retail in 01, then I sold a lot Marshalls...tbh the best new Marshall for sounds I like was the ATH50 or whatever it's called (solidstate head)...I used to plug into that to wank...the concept of using a LED in place of a tube I think was a defining point in solidstate amps. Some good came of that imo.

You don't see folks trying to make tube amps sound like transistor amps.

nor should you...the two have different strengths...surely if I was going to be as clean as possible I would go with something like the JC120...solidstate...which btw is one of the models in both my PODs. but again, it's a bit tough to call a POD a transistor amp. (A little off topic, but do you have a tube amp for your stereo?)..like I say, I'm not a fan of saying "sounds just like"...it's been that way ever since I can remember...add "the way I" to that and it's a more accurate discription of how I see it "sounds just the way I like it"...different tones have different characteristics that will inspire me differently...so I don't go by the model in PODs...I go by what is geting all the flavors I want for that piece. It sure is nice not to be limited by one amp anymore...

[Hink]

btw you wanna talk about solidstate gone bad He makes great pick-ups but the Seymour Duncan Convertable? Need I say more?

[Lunch Money]

Lunch MOney Im not gonna get into all of it but I thoroughly disagree with plenty you have said here.

Well... that's what we're both doing here, innit? Disagreeing with each other? I reckon you haven't much capacity for critical thought, though, or you'd consider some of the "contrary" information that's been posted instead of just stubbornly (I'm stubborn, sometimes, too, so I can relate, but...) ignoring it. I really don't mind that you disagree with much of what I said. I would hope that you don't mind when people disagree with you, either, but it's hard to tell.

IT seems like you are just filling up a ton of space, I like how you said how HENDRIX would respond to be in todays day and age. And how he would be a kid in a candy store or something., Nope I dont think that would be the case at all. SInce I am not Hendrix I cant say either!!

Look, what I said about Hendrix was is RESPONSE to someone else's assumptions about him. The difference being, based on what we ALL know about Hendrix and his approach to music, mine rings more true. Hendrix was very much an experimenter, very much a fan of recording technology (of course, 16 tracks was a big deal back then, but he loved layering), and very anti-snob when it came to gear. That's all factored into what I said, and it's not just a random uneducated "guess." Many people of authority have agreed on my very points in the past, including biographers and musicians who knew them. It's a matter of record, not of opinion. And for the record, your posts aren't exactly short and to-the-point, either.

BUt just because he was into studio tricks and technology back then does not mean he would see the technology now as being a good thing. BUt there is no way to argue that,

Sure there is. There's just no way to prove it. That's different. People make arguments about myriad things that can't be "proven," because a reasonable hypothesis supported by evidence is still worth something.

and to get people bowing to your comments was funny as hell.

Not my doing. How can you blame ME for that?? Some people found what I said to be intelligent and insightful. Being upset at ME for it doesn't make any sense....

Its all about what is best for your music.

No shit. That's my point. And if you missed it, you need to take your head out of your ass.

I think he would have found what he was looking for many years ago and left most of this new shit alone, but who knows dumb arguement..

Fine... dumb argument... but the difference between my presenting a perspective and yours is that you simply say "I think he would have found what he was looking for...etc" without saying WHY you think that. I at least explained my line of thinking, whether you agree or not. See, you need to realize that opinions really CAN be more or less valid than others. Speaking of "precious," I wonder why people think that the concept of independent thought (ie. having an opinion) automatically MAKES that very thought instantly on the same tier as another more well-founded, supported, and presented one.

And I love how all the old tone SUCKED and all that,and how "I guess it doesnt have to be tubes and real amp to be good tone." PLease thats such an stupid way of thinking.

No, not "all" the old tone sucked. SOME of Hendrix's tone sucked, Blackmore's was OK, and in my opinion Iommi's was awful-- an opinion I'm willing to revise based on EU's recent post on the subject. There are plenty other examples of absolutely FANTASTIC old tone. I addressed a few specific individuals as evidence that tubes don't make tone. People sound good. Gear doesn't sound good by itself. That's a very very big difference from what YOU are claiming I said. I'll put it in point form so that you can understand:

- tubes alone do not make good tone
- great players despite sometimes having lousy tone, have recorded legendary performances and earned our respect

That's it, that's all. No blanket statement about all tubes being bad tone... please read more carefully, and learn to be a critical thinker. 'Cause I certainly don't have the patience to teach you.

Thats the tone people wanted back then,the tone that was devoloping and I think it is GOOD, and I like Hendrix tone and Iommi's and Townshend's thats what they were hearing, It was just starting to be about pushing amps real freaking hard, and now amps have changed to accomendate that better(or worse),

OK, maybe one lesson in critical thinking. You have on one hand your statement that it's the tone people "wanted," implying that they designed it that way. On the other hand, you say that the amps were "just starting" to get to where they are today. You have to complete the thought by marrying up those two concepts: Hendrix, Iommi, Townshend (whose tone I love, by the way), and the rest WERE getting the tones they wanted, but within the limits of what they were capable of. And the recording experience simply wasn't the same back then and had its own limitations to contend with. As a result, their recorded (can't speak to the live tones, cause I wasn't there) tones weren't always brilliant.

and there is WAY more stomps and B.S like that to make the distortion we hear today.

Well, I'm not a big fan of distortion from stomps, though Hendrix and others have a distinctive fuzz sound that I like, because of it.

I wouldnt want to hear their music any other way. That music and sound was organic, and individual, I know there is still music that is organic and individual, but turn on the radio or look at who is on the cover of the next guitar magazine, and I hear plastic sterile 'big' tones that are not to be admired at all.

Well, we agree here. You just don't know it, because you're looking for something in my posts that isn't there.

SO on the other side of the argument you might as well take TUBE amps out of the equation since that tone sucked so bad, Whatver, i really dont care anymore. I swear you like to hear yourself talk, to me it was all drivel your last few posts.

See, this is where you go off the deep end, as if the rest of the post wasn't bad enough. I didn't say that tube amp tone sucked as a rule. I said that you can have tubes and STILL end up with sucky tone. Tubes do not make tone. Got it yet? And apparently you DO care, or you wouldn't have written such a long reply.... and if it's all "drivel" to you, I really don't mind. I know a stubborn meathead when I see one, and your posts really make the picture clear. It's a real difficult time moving forward and learning new things when the first sign of a train of thought you're unfamiliar with or don't relate to makes you think of it as "drivel" rather than an alternative perspective. Good luck with that as you grow.

And I especially like how you say why is tone so precious?

I didn't say that, exactly. Again with the twisting of words. What I was saying was, IF you already have a base tone that's working for you, the difference between algorithmic and convolution cab emulation is such a small factor that it shouldn't really be an issue.

You're not understanding what I'm saying about being "precious." Here, the word doesn't mean "valuable," it means, why be such a chick (sorry, girls) and fret about all these details so much when you should just be plugging in your f**king guitar and playing. I'm sure you agree with that, and yet you're finding a reason to disagree, because you don't like me or the way I post.

COme on, get a f**king clue.. And how it "has been said If you give a great guitarist a Samick and bandit he can play the shit out of it still" Yeah maybe If he gets a flow and a feeling, or maybe he wouldnt, who the f**k made this FACT?!!

I never said it was a fact. Does every opinion in the world need to be introduced with, "In my opinion...". No, it's obvious by context. In this particular case, it's very very commonly said by many professional guitarists that it's not the gear, it's the player. That's all I'm saying. And yes, I really DO think that any good player will still play well even with mediocre gear. They're not sucky little punk-asses (except maybe Al Di Meola) who are going to cry and throw a tantrum because their tone's not perfect. They're just gonna play.

...BUT shitty sound, a guitar that feels like a lump of wood is not going to be conductive to flowing energy and therefore would be a blockage of flow. YOu would have to be a f**king god(literally) to pick up ANY instrument and play with YOUR vibe.

Well, I'll give you a little bit of this one... gear CAN be inspirational and can push your playing. But I don't think you have to be a literal GOD to be able to make the most out of mediocre gear. And note that I rarely (never?) say "shitty," I always say "mediocre" or "passable." There IS a lower limit to quality at which you just won't be able to play effectively at all.

Greg