Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Robin Nahum

Members
  • Content Count

    412
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Robin Nahum

  1. Thank you. Will follow up and advise. R
  2. I have started playing out at a jazz workshop and am noticing that my 2002 ES345 hums if I am not touching the strings. It is plugged into a Henriksen JazzAmp using a good quality cable. And swapping the cable doesn't make a difference. The pickups are not original. A pair more to my taste have been swapped in by a very good luthier. Do other 345s do this? Is there anything I can do? R
  3. A 330 would be an excellent candidate for not having f-holes - if you can live with the unusual look. Unlike their humbucking cousins, 330s don't have the centre block and I have found them prone to feedback especially at the volume levels where P90s start to bite. Certainly nicer than gaffer tape over the f-holes. R
  4. Don't know. If I was looking at buying one I'd be checking out each for playability, tone and build quality.
  5. Hi Alan, I think I read somewhere that they are 57 Classics. Fairly standard choice for Gibson's laminate archtops. But if they were to sound anything like the 57 Classics in my 2002 ES345 and I wanted to play jazz, I'd be swapping them out for something that more closely captures the tone of a bucker from that period. I have tried Tal Farlow models from time to time. I didn't get a sense that they had some "unique" quality compared to other Gibson laminate archtops such as a 175 or a 350 - or even a 335/345/355. I think the idea is that you buy one if you are after a laminate box with 25 1/2" scale length. R
  6. Don't know that I'd consider volume pedals and tuners effects.
  7. When I was an undergraduate in the early 70s, studying late into the night, I used to tune in to a very mellow jazz program called Music to Midnight where I heard the likes of George Benson, Wes Montgomery, Joe Pass, Barney Kessel, George van Eps and (gulp) Tony Mottola. The latter's arrangements were often schlocky but, like the others, he had that great archtop tone. (So were a lot of Wes's by this time, sadly.) This didn't translate into buying records by these guys except for a couple of Freddie Hubbard CTI albums featuring George Benson, where I would listen to George's solos over and over again. And I had a tape of Joe Pass's Intercontinental. Despite this early exposure, I failed to take up jazz guitar at this time (d'oh). I even ignored a divine intervention in the form of being able to try out a Super 400 on sale for $AU400 and noticing how easy it was to get that great tone; the guitar spoke to me and I wasn't listening. I was young and easily seduced by Led Zeppelin, the Mahavishnu Orchestra and Weather Report.
  8. For a Wes-style tone, my unqualified recommendation would have to be a blackface or early silverface Fender Pro Reverb. http://www.thevintagesound.com/ffg/pro_reverb_bf.html By "early silverface", I mean the pre-76 models with the tube rectifier. (Have a look. Don't assume that because it has a master volume, it has an SS rectifier. The 74-76s had the MV and TR.) These run 2 x 6L6GCs and 2 x 12s and have an output of 40W. They have an underspecced output transformer and a single tube rectifier (GZ34 or 5U4) that needs a bit of time to respond to transients because of the bigger load ("sag"). The circuit design combined with the 12s (mine has been retrofitted with Weber 12F150s) gives a very warm tone. All of this results in each note "blooming" into the room rather than "punching through" as might be the case with an amp fitted with a SS rectifier or a Vibrolux with the 10" speakers and lower output wattage. Through a Pro, my 345 gets as close to an L5 as I need. The good news is that Pro Reverbs never achieved cult status and can be found at reasonable prices. The only downside is the weight (60lbs) and possibly the size. If you want something with tubes and a similar sound but with 1 x 12, you could look at the Heritage (yes they make amps too - or they used to) Kenny Burrell model. For solid state, my recommendation would be a Henriksen JazzAmp. I thought about a Polytone but was advised that these have maintenance issues, and that the Henriksen is the better buy nowadays. RN
  9. Some other questions.

    What kind of music do you play?

    Why does it have to be a 175?

  10. Hi zeppe1983. Thank you for the invitation.

    I agree with Alan. Each ES175 has its own personality and it is risky to buy one without trying. And with a second hand one, you will also want to check that it is in good order.

    RN

  11. I have been looking into other books on live sound besides Fry's (see my dunkworld post above) and have been mightily impressed by Bill Gibson's The Ultimate Live Sound Operator's Handbook. http://www.amazon.com/Ultimate-Operators-Handbook-Leonard-Guides/dp/1423419715/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1298353270&sr=8-1 This book is well written and very good at explaining how to get a great sound, as well as how the bits work. It comes with a DVD that provides audio or video demonstrations of the topics he discussess. I also bought a copy of the Yamaha reference but on first examination, I am getting the impression that it explains lots of technology but is not strong on what to do at the gig. RN
  12. I'm not a great one for effects but when the mood takes me, I use an AnalogMan-modified Tube Screamer through a Digitech DigiDelay on the Tape Reverb setting. The addition of the delay pedal adds a whole new dimension to the overall sound and takes you into serious Jimmy Page country - and at low volume levels if you require. RN
  13. 355s also have Varitones but block inlays and a big diamond on the headstock.
  14. I guess we also need to clarify what we mean by "solo". Does this mean simply playing guitar by yourself following a chart, or does it mean improvising possibly over some kind of backing? There was certainly solo guitar in the 1700s as in playing a chart by yourself: http://www.sheetmusicplus.com/title/Classical-Guitar-Treasury-Solo-Guitar/3852436 Louis Armstrong is generally credited with the idea of playing an improvised solo in a jazz context. Prior to that, jazz musicians soloed - but following a chart. Before jazz, there was improvisation. One style is the taqsim - long and elaborate improvised intros but played on the oud. http://books.google.com.au/books?id=56yJyyy1MEIC&pg=PA14&lpg=PA14&dq=taqsim+on+guitar&source=bl&ots=FeBYk6kAns&sig=2KUpGHL5s9m_eCB9H7xaUCy2mGc&hl=en#v=onepage&q=taqsim%20on%20guitar&f=false What I am wondering then is whether there were improvisations on guitar. This article talks about improvisation over flamenco but seems to suggest that it is a new idea. http://prsync.com/hober-smith/flamenco-guitar-solo-article-17494/ RN
  15. A very interesting story. Happy to hear that your L5 is sorted. RN
  16. +2. Clever clever composition and amazing playing. My band is about to bring A Remark You Made into the repertoire.
  17. Hi DB, I too would consider staying away from an amp with a large battery of built-in effects and focus your amp budget on getting a really good sounding tube amp. As you get into electric guitar, you will have plenty to go on with before you need to think about effects, and a good tube amp will offer you a range of colourings anyway. You can purchase the effects you need, and which sound right to you, later. There is never any shortage of second hand effects for sale. RN
  18. Probably the one that has stuck most, because of the amazing bell-like quality of her voice, is Yungchen Lhamo. http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=yungchen+lhamo&meta=&aq=0&aqi=g8&aql=&oq=yungchen+&gs_rfai= She lived in Australia for a while after escaping from Tibet where she was regarded as a Buddhist diva. I had the great fortune to hear her live. Om Kalthoum the Egyptian diva Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan, the great Qawwali singer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXQz1yTSGA4 RN
  19. Great thread! I am happy to report that my wife and I are on a jazz journey together. She had classical piano lessons when she was young and learned to read and play the music written by "the people in wigs and stuff". Just before we got together, she attended a night time jazz class out of curiosity, and encountered lead sheets. They (and all the talk of 2-5s) made absolutely no sense to her and she put jazz piano in the "maybe come back to this later" basket. I had already started on jazz lessons by the time we got together, had got to know a few players and was able to introduce her to a jazz piano teacher. After a while, she started attending the jazz workshop where I was cutting my teeth and we also attended jazz classes - which made a whole lot more sense this time. We are now working out with our own quintet. As she reflects on playing jazz, she feels that the lessons she had when she was young, while they taught her to read which is important, didn't really teach her about the more compositional aspects of music such as the harmonisation of scales, why that note or scale goes with that chord. It would be interesting to hear from other forum members whether their kids are still leaning to read at music lessons or are (also) learning to compose. Do we play together just the two of us, outside of the band? Not so much. Guitar and piano tend to cover the same ground and we find it hard to agree that we are going to play a piece straight and not fuss about timing. We really need our bassist to sit in and "arbitrate". RN
  20. Hi guys, Thanks for replies. I don't have a problem with technology and effects per se. I really enjoy players like Bill Frisell, John McLaughlin or Fred Frith to name a few. But these guys have got their chops down. What I have a problem with is selling excessive technology to people who don't. I don't want it made illegal or anything. It's just that I'm conscious of having wasted a lot of time on unfocussed guitar-related activities and would like to say to people, especially those starting out, "Don't get distracted". The reason that people don't do the things above is that they are out of reach to most. Musical instruments are generally not - and offer a great source of enjoyment for player and audience. The prospect of making money is the least of a list of reasons for playing a real instrument. Because it says something about the way we live that might have a broader impact. Another example is people watching reality TV shows about cooking rather than actually cooking using fresh ingredients. That worries me in that it is about moving away from authentic experience - and has public health implications. Sigh. Thanks for responding. RN
  21. I know, "it's what the market wants" and all that, but I don't get Gibson's hi-tech guitars. I suppose that an argument can be made for auto-tuning that it is more convenient if you use a variety of tunings on stage but I wonder how many people buy them for that reason. And the new Firebird with the digital interface. It just seems to be about something other than playing guitar - as in strumming, chords, melody lines, soloing and arranging. Most disturbing of all are those Rock Star games with the dinky copy of an electric guitar that you play into a computer. Why not just buy a guitar and amp and learn to play with um... other people. It's a lot more fun (I would have thought), probably healthier and you might make a buck. RN
  22. What about that Gibson ad with the jaded Indian (as in South Asia) prince on his wedding night who is besotted by the Les Paul being played by one of the band members? RN
×
×
  • Create New...