LarryUK Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 I've been to a dealer today. I was chatting to the salesman and I mentioned about the guitars being Plek'd. He said only the 'lower' guitars are Plek'd. Not the custom shop. I thought all of them were Plek'd now? I saw a nice Traditional in Honeyburst there. They also had the 'Melvyn Franks' model. It looked nice. But three times the price of a Traditional? No thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest FarnsBarns Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 You're correct, the dealer is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 Yeah, I don't understand what makes a "signature" model more theoretically valuable. The funny thing is, some folks buy 'em. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryUK Posted March 11, 2011 Author Share Posted March 11, 2011 He tried to justify the price by saying the custom shop are totally hand made. They should be for the price though. They had the Don Felder model for £7k. I wouldn't pay it even if I had it. I like the Traditional. I'm owed £5k. When it comes I may treat myself. I've said it before. You can't tell the model if you don't look at them. You may say the pickups are different etc. Rubbish. A good set up and you wouldn't tell the difference. If one pup is different. Adjust the tone etc to compensate. I'd bet anyone. If you sit there blindfolded and I passed you the guitars plugged in with effects. You could not tell the difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WahKeen Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 I saw a nice Traditional in Honeyburst there. They also had the 'Melvyn Franks' model. It looked nice. But three times the price of a Traditional? No thanks. That's just plek'd... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lungimsam Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 He tried to justify the price by saying the custom shop are totally hand made. They should be for the price though. They had the Don Felder model for £7k. I wouldn't pay it even if I had it. I like the Traditional. I'm owed £5k. When it comes I may treat myself. I've said it before. You can't tell the model if you don't look at them. You may say the pickups are different etc. Rubbish. A good set up and you wouldn't tell the difference. If one pup is different. Adjust the tone etc to compensate. I'd bet anyone. If you sit there blindfolded and I passed you the guitars plugged in with effects. You could not tell the difference. I totally agree. I bet the same for all 10,000 signature strats that are out there too. Reminds me of a funny story: If I remember correctly, Toni Iommi said the first Sabbath album was mostly done on his Strat, until a pickup went bad on it. Then he switched to an SG. And I always thought that was great SG tone on the album, because his whole career you see him with an SG in his hands. Ha ha! I couldn't tell you which parts were with which guitars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silenced Fred Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 now I'm perplek'd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbreslauer Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 I totally agree. I bet the same for all 10,000 signature strats that are out there too. Reminds me of a funny story: If I remember correctly, Toni Iommi said the first Sabbath album was mostly done on his Strat, until a pickup went bad on it. Then he switched to an SG. And I always thought that was great SG tone on the album, because his whole career you see him with an SG in his hands. Ha ha! I couldn't tell you which parts were with which guitars. true. also, I read that Hendrix recorded "purple haze" with Noel Redding's Telecaster. there's an image for ya! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKoor Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Now guys, throw rosewood/maple fingerboard and poly/nitro finishes into this mix. What a hilarity. In reality most people couldn't tell the difference between LP and Telecaster, unless they are played in ideal condition. Yet they somehow find very important to fixate themselves to some esoteric guitar issues... the funniest part of it all is - they are serious about it. PS. sorry if I offended anyone, that wasn't my intention I tried to be humorous about all this . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryUK Posted March 12, 2011 Author Share Posted March 12, 2011 I used to be a biker (given up now). It was comical to see Fireblade's, GSXR100's etc with expensive rearsets and race pipes etc. All power enhancing, weight saving and expensive. Then you see a 20 stone bloke get on the bike. Ridiculous waste of money. The same can be said for guitars. This p'up thing. Most of them can be made to sound the same through tone settings on the amp. When you start putting pedals into the equation changing p'ups is stupid. Only on a clean sound would you tell the difference and then that maks no difference unless you play them side by side. It's in the hands. Full stop. That's why we're on this forum and not on the top 100 guitarists list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy R Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Now guys, throw rosewood/maple fingerboard and poly/nitro finishes into this mix. What a hilarity. In reality most people couldn't tell the difference between LP and Telecaster, unless they are played in ideal condition. Yet they somehow find very important to fixate themselves to some esoteric guitar issues... the funniest part of it all is - they are serious about it. PS. sorry if I offended anyone, that wasn't my intention I tried to be humorous about all this . Not offended at all and agree for the most part. I can usually pick out when someone has used a single coil vs a humbucker on a recording and sometimes even if it was a tele or strat style guitar. Not always as pointed out it depends on how many effects, kind of amp, tonal settings etc.. and style/context that were used to record the song. Again, not always... for example I admittedly didn't know that Page used his Tele to record the solo on Stairway to Heaven... I think some of he more esoteric things can be noticed by the player themselves through their own rigs and the way they play. I think the more you play through your own rig the more you will notice subtle differences. I could definitely pick out the difference between maple necks and rosewood necks, pickups, etc... through my rig. Can the tone be compensated for with effects and EQ ... Yes... but there is a tonal difference between changing something in your signal chain that has a "Naturally" created EQ/Tonal frequency boost/dip as opposed to trying to boost or cut frequencies to match a certain "tone" In other words EQ's are always a subtractive device. You are never really adding anything with an EQ. When you "Boost" a frequency you are only removing or "highlighting" certain frequencies by subtracting the frequencies around it. That being said given the example of a rosewood versus maple... If you were looking for a brighter ( more treble ) tone you will get a more natural sounding "brighter tone" with a maple neck because those high frequencies are already there. Can this difference be heard by others ... I doubt it. Too me it's more about how "In Tune" you are with your own rig... IMHO I think it is better to find guitars effects, amps, speakers, etc.. That allow you to get the tone you want as naturally as possible with the least amount of processing and EQ. So "Ideally" you would be able to plug your guitar into your amp have the EQ set flat and get the tone and gain/distortion/overdrive without the use of additional pedals. ( I'm not talking about delay, phase. etc...) So I do believe that some people can and do hear the differences in their own rig between some of the more esoteric things... Now back to the point... Could I hear those things and be 100% sure of what it is from a recording NO! Agreed. I always thought it was funny that people think that just because something is vintage that it will make them get the same tone as they hear on an old album. I usually point out that the guitar/amp/effect/speaker wasn't 30/40 years old when it was recorded originally. That nitro wasn't all age checked and cracked then... Those Output Transformers and filter caps were new at the time... etc... I'm not saying that design changes, newer building processes, component changes etc... don't make a big difference in tone. Sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worst. Sometimes things do start to actually sound better ( IMHO) as they get older but the point is I would bet they don't sound the same as when they were new... My 10 Cents... Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kimbabig Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 I used to think the intro to Lazy by Deep Purple, was an overdriven guitar with a phaser. :unsure: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy R Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 I used to think the intro to Lazy by Deep Purple, was an overdriven guitar with a phaser. :unsure: Well at least you were thinking like a guitar player! I learned all the guitar riffs to that once. Never thought about the keyboard parts. So overdriven guitar, phaser, maybe an octaver, slight delay and verb?... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WahKeen Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 It's in the hands. Full stop. That's why we're on this forum and not on the top 100 guitarists list. Hey, speak for yourself... And for that matter, that's why Cobain is in a top 100 list and Joe Satriani is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryUK Posted March 12, 2011 Author Share Posted March 12, 2011 Hey, speak for yourself... And for that matter, that's why Cobain is in a top 100 list and Joe Satriani is not. That's down to who chose the list. But, could you pick Satriani's playing out in a bunch of others? I bet you could pick Page's, Joe Walsh's, Gary Moore's. For example. I've never really listened to Cobain. He wouldn't 'blow' my mind though!! B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Now guys, throw rosewood/maple fingerboard and poly/nitro finishes into this mix. What a hilarity. In reality most people couldn't tell the difference between LP and Telecaster, unless they are played in ideal condition. Yet they somehow find very important to fixate themselves to some esoteric guitar issues... the funniest part of it all is - they are serious about it. PS. sorry if I offended anyone, that wasn't my intention I tried to be humorous about all this . Point taken. The truth is, there can be and is a big difference and some of us are quite serious about it. Do we go too far? Yes, we do, and we deserve to be laughed at. The knowledge some of us obtain in the quest/hobby of tone could often be put to better use, like building a rocket to go to the moon, but we prefer guitars and amps. But just because one chooses to play music and learn to play the guitar does NOT mean that there are not differences in quality and tone when you have the knowledge of all this seemingly useless information. It would be nice if you listened to those who spend thier time tweaking and experimenting and gave us a little respect because we have sacrificed valueable practice time and brain space to learn about this stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fl00dsm0k3 Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 what does Plek'd mean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 AWESOME! ANDY IS BACK WITH THE LONG POST!!!! I agree with the points here for the most part but would also like to add to it. There is a lot to the philosophy of eq's being a subtractive thing, but we can also extend that to anything we are adding to the signal. Your example is considering a passive device, but the same could be said for an actual boost. It is entirely possible to add frequencies to the signal, but if we don't lose them in the first place and don't have to "add" anything we preserve more of what we can not replace, and most of this is in the actual performance. I always found the maple/rosewood thing about fenders interesting, and much like the rosewood/ebony thing about gibsons. I personally find that in the cases where poeple refer to a rosewood board as brighter, it is because in practicle use through an amp the maple has more natural brightness that lends the amp to have a lower treble setting, producing more upper mids, while the rosewood boards in having a higher treble setting on the amp produces more "snap" and a more peaked treble. I find this with ebony/rosewood boards on gibsons as well. As for the vintage sound thing, there is defintely something to it. There may be a difference in tone cause by age, but I think what is more significant is that when we have reissues like the bassman reissue and others we expect them to sound close to the origionals, and there are usually things about them that are so different they cannot sound like them, for instance when they are turned up. The result is that we tend to THINK we know what a vintage amp sounds like because we are told it is, but it is a far cry. In the cases when we are lucky enough to hear the real deal, and play it, It is surprising how close it is to what the sound we imagine, and how much we tend to miss with all of the misinformation about how close some things are supposed to be in comparing new vs vintage. It may be more a quality or knowlegde thing than an age thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WahKeen Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 That's down to who chose the list. But, could you pick Satriani's playing out in a bunch of others? Lol, of course I, and a ton of others could pick him out... Same for Malmsteen, Vai, EVH, even Gilbert. Ah, shredders sound alike... I see. Don't think so. I bet you could pick Page's, Joe Walsh's, Gary Moore's. For example. And all the others that try to sound like them? I've never really listened to Cobain. He wouldn't 'blow' my mind though!! B) Yey! You got one right! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest FarnsBarns Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 what does Plek'd mean A Plek machine preloads the neck as if it is strung then measures and grinds the frets to extremely precise tolerances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy R Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 AWESOME! ANDY IS BACK WITH THE LONG POST!!!! There is a lot to the philosophy of eq's being a subtractive thing, but we can also extend that to anything we are adding to the signal. Your example is considering a passive device, but the same could be said for an actual boost. It is entirely possible to add frequencies to the signal, but if we don't lose them in the first place and don't have to "add" anything we preserve more of what we can not replace, and most of this is in the actual performance. Good point of clarification I was speaking from a passive point of view... Also agree that you can "Actively" boost a signal but IMHO you would only be boosting what remains of the original ( pre-boosted ) signal frequency not really "Adding" It seems to me an impossibility to truly add something that did not exist in the original signal but am willing to concede I could be wrong. I think we both agree that it is better to have it and remove it if you don't want it than it is to lose it and try to add it back later somewhere in the signal chain/path. I always found the maple/rosewood thing about fenders interesting, and much like the rosewood/ebony thing about gibsons. I personally find that in the cases where poeple refer to a rosewood board as brighter, it is because in practicle use through an amp the maple has more natural brightness that lends the amp to have a lower treble setting, producing more upper mids, while the rosewood boards in having a higher treble setting on the amp produces more "snap" and a more peaked treble. I find this with ebony/rosewood boards on gibsons as well. As for the vintage sound thing, there is defintely something to it. There may be a difference in tone cause by age, but I think what is more significant is that when we have reissues like the bassman reissue and others we expect them to sound close to the origionals, and there are usually things about them that are so different they cannot sound like them, for instance when they are turned up. The result is that we tend to THINK we know what a vintage amp sounds like because we are told it is, but it is a far cry. In the cases when we are lucky enough to hear the real deal, and play it, It is surprising how close it is to what the sound we imagine, and how much we tend to miss with all of the misinformation about how close some things are supposed to be in comparing new vs vintage. It may be more a quality or knowlegde thing than an age thing. You kind of lost me a little on this one but will continue you for the sake of thought provoking conversation. The problem that you and I have is that we are not old enough to have been able to hear these things with our own ears when they were new. Let's use the analogy of wine for this one. I think we would both agree that if you start with something terrible age isn't going to make that much difference but if you have something that is pretty good to begin with it has a pretty good chance of improving with age. We only have recordings and what our perception of what that tone is/was. The problem is there is no way to tell unless there is gear that has been in some kind of cryogenic time lock we could hear. So given your Bassman example maybe that is the way they sounded originally 30 or 40 years ago?.. It would depend on how exacting the reproduction is... If we were to sit them side by side with a vintage original I think we would both probably choose the vintage due to changes in wood/speakers/finish/pickups/electronic components etc... that happen naturally over time. Like the wine it is usually a more "musical" improvement. Back to you Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 Andy: The point I am attempting to make concerning the vintage equipment comes down to the fact that very few of us are lucky enough to get to be intimate with them, eother owning or playing, and even of those in many cases they need work done to sound "correct"-like bad caps or totally different types of speakers. I am in the same boat as everyone, in that there is a lot of things I think I know what they sound like but really I don't, because I am going on what I have read or heard about. In the cases where I have heard or played the real deal, I am often surprised to find that it really DOES sound like a genuine sound like the recordings or playing of what I have listened to in ways that are obvious. There are effects of aging, both good and bad, but I think for the most part we are led to believe that the reason the "reissues" don't sound as good is attributed to this, but in every case I have found this is actually not the truth at all. It is almost entirely the result of not knowing how or not being able to replicate the origional. In this way, we are led to believe certain things about what makes a "vintage" sound that are far from what it actually is. This leads us to other ways of trying to reproduce the sound that take us further away I think. SO, as you have said, even if I was old enough to have had one of these amps when they were new, chances are I woulnd be able to remember what it sounded like if I were to have to say how it was different 30 years later. But when I or anyone else gets lucky enough to actaully get to play one, for the most part we all instantly recognize it when we hear it as a sound we are familiar with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryUK Posted March 13, 2011 Author Share Posted March 13, 2011 I once borrowed a Marshall 50 head. I had two gigs in one night and only one amp. That head was the best sound I've ever had. It was clean but dirty. Not 'fuzzy' dirt but 'that' sound. He wouldn't sell it to me, so I've never had 'that' sound since. It could have been the acoustics of the room as well. It was a large gig 1000 plus. But I loved that sound. All I used was a Mxr micro amp for solo's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 I am feeling that. Do you remember what amp it was? what model? We just TOTALLY hijacked this thread, didn't we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy R Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 Andy: The point I am attempting to make concerning the vintage equipment comes down to the fact that very few of us are lucky enough to get to be intimate with them, eother owning or playing, and even of those in many cases they need work done to sound "correct"-like bad caps or totally different types of speakers. I am in the same boat as everyone, in that there is a lot of things I think I know what they sound like but really I don't, because I am going on what I have read or heard about. In the cases where I have heard or played the real deal, I am often surprised to find that it really DOES sound like a genuine sound like the recordings or playing of what I have listened to in ways that are obvious. There are effects of aging, both good and bad, but I think for the most part we are led to believe that the reason the "reissues" don't sound as good is attributed to this, but in every case I have found this is actually not the truth at all. It is almost entirely the result of not knowing how or not being able to replicate the origional. In this way, we are led to believe certain things about what makes a "vintage" sound that are far from what it actually is. This leads us to other ways of trying to reproduce the sound that take us further away I think. SO, as you have said, even if I was old enough to have had one of these amps when they were new, chances are I woulnd be able to remember what it sounded like if I were to have to say how it was different 30 years later. But when I or anyone else gets lucky enough to actaully get to play one, for the most part we all instantly recognize it when we hear it as a sound we are familiar with. Las is a cool guy from what I can tell and I'm sure he would give us the "Get a room guys" post if he wants us to quit. Las??? Warning the following is purely opinion and conjecture on my part and might just be the ramblings of a "winning warlock" SYK - I am playing the "Devils Advocate" here in this discussion to some degree as I actually have some "Vintage" gear Marshalls etc.. I think part of the uniqueness of a lot of vintage gear is how inconsistent they are to begin with. Especially Marshall, Fender and Gibson. There was a lot of " Use whatever you have left or can get" going on back then so it is not uncommon to have drastically different sounding amps and guitars from the same runs. That's why you hear a lot of older musicians talking about "Good Marshalls and Gibsons etc.." They may have had a different value cap or resistor somewhere or inconsistent pickup winds and wraps... blah, blah blah, I think part of the "problem" with the newer gear is that the replication/manufacturing process has gotten so good that everything sounds the same and when everything sounds the same that sound starts to become sterile... I also have a 50 watt Marshall plexi reissue and a JTM 45 Clone MetroAmp that I built. Between my Original Marshall 73 100 Watt Super Leads ( they are original PTP and same specs as 69 Plexis) a 76 100 Super Lead the 50 watt Plexi Reissue and the MetroAmp JTM 45 Clone IMHO the 50 Watt Plexi Reissue sounds the worst and the JTM 45 Clone sounds the best. Never played a vintage JTM 45 so I have nothing to compare it to. BTW - The 73's sound nothing alike. I have a 69 Marshall 4/12 cabinet and a couple of 76 Marshall 4/12 cabs. The 69 sounds the best... I would guarantee you that that cabinet sounds better ( Now) because the speakers have had a ton of play on them and the cabinet has completely settled. I would also guarantee that I could build the same cabinet identically and load it with period correct NOS 25 watt greenbacks and it won't sound as good as the 69 cabinet. I think it would sound good and I think it would sound like the 69 did in 69. Just like I think in 30 years my JTM clone will still sound good (maybe better maybe worst) but it won't sound like it does today. Now let's talk guitars I think you could feasibly clone a 59 Les Paul Standard with vintage wood and NOS pickups and parts and it still won't sound identical to a vintage 59. It will be close to sounding like what a "typical" 59 sounded like in 1959. It will sound good and will sound better over time as the finish cures and glues settle and pickups demagnetize and the wood is vibrated and " Played" etc... Point is that it sounded good to begin with and the nature of most guitars is to improve as they are played and age. I also don't think the 59 clone will not sound that dramatically different from whatever Gibson would reproduce right now. I think acoustic guitars are the most telling. I bet if you had 2 Martin D-28's that sounded as close to each other as they possibly could. If you stuck one in a case and didn't play it for 30 years and you played one everyday for 30 years that the one that has been played will sound significantly better to the one that sat in the case. I think the one that sat in the case might sound better than a brand new D-28 as it has time for the finish and glue to cure again... blah blah blah So I come back to the point that it's not that vintage gear didn't sound good to begin with but I don't think we know what it sounded like new and if anything it most likely sounds better now than it did then,,, It's an inherent thing in guitars. Back to you Stein.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.