Major factor in great sound is ? ? ?

[oldguy]

OK, I was just playing my Agile LP style, then my MIM Strat, through the Traynor YCV-40, and with a couple quick tweaks to the amph's EQ, they both sound good to me. The Agile needs a bit lighter touch of the fingers than the Strat, which seems to actually benefit from heavy handed playing, even though they're both strung with 9's, and the action is set medium-low. Then I add some reverb and a dash of delay, and I'm liking it better still.
Here's the thing, tho.... I can also take either axe, plug straight into the amph, no effects, no reverb, nothing......... then crank it up till it just begins to break up, hit the strings hard, and.......... it sounds good, a different kind of good.
So if you were to prioritize, which do you think plays the greatest role in the "tone chasing chain"....... the type/quality of the guitar....the amp being used....the effects added to the sound.....the ability of the player.....or are they all of equal importance.
I'm interested in what all the other Fretter's think, so what's you're opinion?

[just strum]

It's difficult to not choose the players ability because that would include someone that has never played, so in that case players ability would be #1.

However, for this survey, I assume some ability to string chords and notes - I chose the effects used.

[oldguy]

Interesting, I was thinking earlier that Joe Satriani or David Gilmour surely couldn't sound the same w/o effects, no matter how good an amp or their ability. I mean they'd sound great, no doubt............ but probably not what we've come to expect sound-wise.

[warren0728]

i had to choose all of the above because i think all factor in to "that sound"

effects into a crappy amp won't sound as good as a decent amp with no effects....quality of guitar doesn't necessarily mean expensive (as we all know on this forum) but does make a difference in "that sound" too as well as playing ability and such.....not sure one component can be singled out as the best....

ww

[street music]

I would have to say all the above, because all things must be considered in it on my end. A poor amp won't make a below average guitar sound that much worse but a great amp can help a low end guitar, the player's ability can always have effect, and then if using effects that's just cosmetic changes.

[just strum]

IMHO - I think "all of the above" should be removed. I feel this question has a one is a greater factor than the rest, although we will not all agree on that one factor.

[marnold]

Ability has to be first. Someone posted a video which Satch playing cheap equipment and he sounded like . . . Satch. Past that I've become convinced that the amph has to be second (or first if you are considering purely gear).

[duhvoodooman]

Ability has to be first. Someone posted a video which Satch playing cheap equipment and he sounded like . . . Satch. Past that I've become convinced that the amph has to be second (or first if you are considering purely gear).
+1! My opinion exactly! :AOK:

[street music]

Yes, I agree ability is #1, that is for the song or riff to be good.

[just strum]

I guess this should have been looked at from a mechanical/electrical standpoint. As I noted in my original post, this thread would include someone that has never touched a guitar, so ability is the obvious. Beyond ability I think it's effects.

[tot_Ou_tard]

Ability is #1 by a long shot.

As I slowly get better, my gear (which hasn't changed in awhile) sounds a whole lot better.

My guess is that amp is #2, guitar #3, effects #4.

[Lev]

Interesting, I was thinking earlier that Joe Satriani or David Gilmour surely couldn't sound the same w/o effects, no matter how good an amp or their ability. I mean they'd sound great, no doubt............ but probably not what we've come to expect sound-wise.


You might be interested in this video, Joe Satriani playing a pretty crappy Pignose Guitar through a digitech RP unit.

D9v5e1TTwts

[Tone2TheBone]

That gave me gas!

;)

[scgmhawk]

Assuming ability is #1, I would vote for Amp having a slight edge over effects. Looked like Joe S. was in some guy's kitchen? What's up with that?

[Gil Janus]

Assuming ability is #1, I would vote for Amp having a slight edge over effects. Looked like Joe S. was in some guy's kitchen? What's up with that?

When you gotta play, you play, no matter where you are :master:

From my limited point of view, I would rank factors as:

1 - playing ability
2 - guitar and it's setup
3 - amp
4 - effects, if any, and again their setup

That's why I voted for all of the above. :beer:

Gil :cool:

[Ch0jin]

I haven't Introduced myself yet so sorry for jumping in before I'd done that, but this one of my favorite topics so I had to weigh in as a result of a recent experience.

If you remove the player from the equation I'm tempted to rate amp over guitar as a really bad amp has the potential to make any kind of input sound bad, whereas a poor quality guitar into a good amp can produce useful sounds. Just my opinion mind you. If you factor in the player, then it's all about the player before anything else. By way of example consider Dimebag from Pantera. His "thing" was taking an inexpensive guitar and a *gasp* solid state amp and using his skill to rip out some amazing metal work.

However...

I think when it comes to gear, the combination of various items can make or break "tone". For example. I build my own FX pedals (amongst other things) and one of my current fav's a simple germanium fuzz that I've tweaked to sound just how I want (think early Black Keys to classic stoner like Fu Manchu) when it's fed into either of my tube amps. I took it to a mates place and as his "good" gear is in the studio we had to use his old stuff. So I plugged into my fuzz telling him how amazing it was going to sound, then to my horror, when fed into an old fender solid state amp it sounded horrible.

So as important as the kinds of gear u use, so is the way you combine the various parts in the chain. :)

[Spudman]

What is great sound? ;)

[Ch0jin]

"What is great sound?"

Is there really an answer to that question? I'd say an individuals definition of great sound would be almost as unique as a fingerprint.

It's like that other question that most people often regret asking me (because the answer generally takes the rest of the night)

"Whats your favourite band/kind of music?"

"What, like at home, in the car, in the gym, at a club, over dinner, when I'm down, up, pumped, chilled, with a lady, with my mates......" etc etc."

What is great sound? I don't know how to define it, but I know when I hear it.

[Plank_Spanker]

I chose "all of the above" since we're talking about great sound. The player's ability is the lion's share of the sound, but not the complete picture. A good player can sound good playing an Acme twang-o-matic through a spark-o-matic amp.........................but I'll bet he'll sound much better through better gear.

The player's ability is the foundation, the guitar, amp, and FX are there to ice the cake.

"Great sound" is an inscrutible quality to define. We all seek it; we know it when we hear it; but please don't ask us to define it! :D

[Katastrophe]

I chose "all of the above" since we're talking about great sound. The player's ability is the lion's share of the sound, but not the complete picture. A good player can sound good playing an Acme twang-o-matic through a spark-o-matic amp.........................but I'll bet he'll sound much better through better gear.

The player's ability is the foundation, the guitar, amp, and FX are there to ice the cake.

"Great sound" is an inscrutible quality to define. We all seek it; we know it when we hear it; but please don't ask us to define it! :D

Perfectly put, Plank.:rockon:

I do have to mention that Satriani says "That was painful," at the end of the recording. Great gear doesn't make a player great, but it sure does make it easier to reach full potential.