The ShadowMusic Web Community

Very relevant to Shads fans - listen to how some guitar sounds are only fully formed in their full musical context.

JN

So true!

Very true. I once had a cheap, battered old Yamaha acoustic. I just regarded it as junk really. Then one day I took it into a studio ... added bass, drums, bit of double-tracking and reverb - brilliant. I bought a Martin after that, and it didn't sound any better.

You see people assume that tone is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually, from a non-linear non-subjective viewpoint, it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly, timey wimey ... stuff.

Uncle Fiesta, are you Russell Brand posting incognito?

Don't tell Tony Ramsden

("Tone" as he is known on this site!!)

Yes, I sure do exist! And I daresay some would say Uncle Fiesta's description applies to me!

Cheers.

Tony

Thanks, Jim, all. That was very instructive.

I am taking the video as saying tone by itself is meaningless. It must appreciated in the context of the musical piece. Even that unplugged Telecaster had "tone," uninteresting by itself but perfect in that riff.

Andy

JimN wrote:

Very relevant to Shads fans - listen to how some guitar sounds are only fully formed in their full musical context.

JN

Interesting stuff and true! I made a lot of nearly same experiences in my younger days when I
recorded different music styles ( groups / bands ) in my former studio.

The same is with the vocals etc. ........ the effects too - not only with the guitar !


Hans

Hmmm

Just checked & it's not April 1st

It's a person's point of view of course but not one that makes any sense to me.

Dick.

Sounds like complete nonsense to me.

I liked him much better when he was Popeye.