Top three guitar misunderstandings/myths for 2010

[deeaa*]

Here's what I think people usually (choose to?) believe about guitars and amps and are badly mistaken or simply aren't thinking things through. And it seems to me that even if they do know these things they still seem to willfully ignore them when looking for that right elusive 'mojo'.

1. Guitar wood importance
2. Guitar pickup magic
3. Tube distortion importance

Explained:

1. Woods do change the sound even on electrics, but only a little. They matter the most if the material is totally not suitable, like soft plywood or any material that lacks a solid consistency, or just too soft for necks. You need good solid necks for sure. But between OK materials, you can build a guitar out of stone (I have) and it sounds just fine. Plastic, compressed paper mass, spruce, ash, aluminum, whatever. Leo Fender chose his woods because he wanted the cheapest and the least resonant ones to fight feedback, not for tone.

2. Guitar pickups do change the sound, probably the most on an electric. BUT people seem to think there is some mystery to it and one 200$ pickup is better than the next. This is wrong in that ALL that matters is a.)what magnets b.)what principle(bucker,single, stacked, active, P90 and combos) c.)cover and screw sizes/staggers etc. and the most important D: output power. If these things are pretty much equal it's nigh impossible to tell similar pickups apart.

3. Tube overdrive seems to be something everybody covets and speaks of, and most any modelers boast to mimic. While nobody remembers or wants to remember that pure tube distortion by and large sucks big time. YES tubes sound great but it's mostly the output where they're needed. And you need volume to get that. But hardly anybody EVER used 100% tube setups to get good overdrives. From Jimi Hendrix to ACDC to bloody beatles and Brian May, whatever, it's always been about clipping diodes at some point, usually by pedals or in the preamp. Now remember I love tube amps myself too and tubes are the s**t in rock guitar sounds but PLEASE stop talking about 100% tube as if it's a good thing, you NEED solid state clipping too to get any decent rock tones. And if you're playing a modern Marshal 100W JMV or whatever thing at under 100db levels, trust me, it ain't the power tubes that make it sound like that. It's the SS part of the amps driving the pre tubes or alone for the most part. Hell you can even have D/I outs on these amps so believe you me, the tubes aren't used for those AT ALL because if they were given 400V with no load they'd BLOW UP. I suspect also the pre tubes run lo-volt then. You can really only hear tubes when you push the poweramp or pre tubes but even then it will only sound great with a little SS in there. The freakiest idea by amp industry ever is to have a SINGLE tube preamp and a SS power stage when it should be VICE VERSA to get that real tube sound. BUT in 99% of those 'tube pre' systems the tube is just for show, ran on low voltage and barely in the circuit really. Trust me they do NOTHING for the sound. On many you can even just rip out the tube and notice no difference. It's just for show no matter how much the maker boasts real tube. Music Man had it right with the amps that had SS pre's and tubes for power.

Any other suggestions for the top 3 guitar myths?

[marnold***]

I'm not knowledgeable enough to claim this, that, or the other thing is a myth. However, I've wanted double-blind tests on a lot of things for a long time. I keep hearing rumors that such tests have been done and the results are too embarrassing to release. If that is the case, then shame on us all.

I would like to test the old poly vs. nitro finish for both tone and sustain.

Digital vs. analog effects (especially distortion and time-based effects) and see if anyone can tell a difference--both with guitar alone and in a band situation. My #1 pet peeve is when someone says an effect sounds too "digital" especially when there's nothing digital about it.

Maple vs. mahogany vs. alder bodies. I'm not talking about weight. I mean have the same neck, electronics, hardware, etc. Blind test to determine a) is there any difference in tone (either clean or with distortion), b) if so, can anybody tell which is which, c) if so, is it even perceptible in a band situation?

You could go on for days with this. Obviously the body wood thing doesn't even begin to take weight into consideration. And get people with Eric Johnson-esque ears to do this too.

Once again, I'm not saying I know the answer. I'd just like to ask the question.

[Heywood Jablomie]

So many more myths that are so stupid that they all could be number 1.

Nuts, bridges, saddles, cables, covered vs. uncovered pickups, wires, caps, bridge pins..... Don't get me started.

[deeaa*]

Maple vs. mahogany vs. alder bodies. I'm not talking about weight. I mean have the same neck, electronics, hardware, etc. Blind test to determine a) is there any difference in tone (either clean or with distortion), b) if so, can anybody tell which is which, c) if so, is it even perceptible in a band situation?

You could go on for days with this. Obviously the body wood thing doesn't even begin to take weight into consideration. And get people with Eric Johnson-esque ears to do this too.

Once again, I'm not saying I know the answer. I'd just like to ask the question.

The body thing I have once tested quite well.

It's the same with all of them. Strictly speaking, they aren't myths, really, because in the end _everything_ has an effect on tone. The myth is just how large a difference people think _one_ difference can make. Basically, in scenarios where people exchange U.S. strat pickups to a seymour first, then DiMarzio the next and keep on changing them pups. DON'T do that I say, it will never change much whatever you try, a strat is just fine with strat pickups! Want something else, build your own or get an Ibanez - that'll give you differences.

I know for a fact mahogany and alder body sounds a bit different, yet the difference is so small it's a fraction of turn on a treble knob and you won't know which is which.

The catch is, while pretty much none of these small details really has any discernible differences, they do make up whole entities.

You can put a mahogany body on a strat an nobody can hear the difference. BUT if you start stacking other of these small changes...at some point it just won't be a strat no more. Together all these little details make up a sound such as the strat sound. But alone, a single change is quite insignficant.

So I'm not saying on the whole they are insignificant, quite the contrary really, but just that it's plain funny to put so much weight onto a small detail in a structure or whatever, as alone they really are very small details.

All in all, pickup style and position, scale length and string angles at bridge and neck seem to me to be the biggest factors in guitar sounds.

Pretty much any guitar with relatively straight strings over saddle/bridge pieces will sound very much like a strat if equipped with any single-coils with apertures and distances the same as on strat, at least if the scale is about right.

Pretty much any guitar with strings bent over saddle and bridge and, well, almost any pickup will sound quite gibsonesque if the scale is right.

But I've tried...putting a strat pickup on gibson scale & build will not sound at all like a strat. I tried it with my LP. It's nothing like a strat. It's easier vice versa - a strat-type guitar can sound a lot like gibson with a strong bucker but still, there's some of that 'twang' there due to the scale I presume, no matter what.

[Robert****]

That you need humbuckers to get a fat guitar tone for rock.

[rkwrenn]

My #1 myth would be:

Buying your way to good playing.

Cheers

[oldguy]

I've read so many things regarding sound and tone.......... I don't know if they'd be called myths, or what category they fall into.
Removing the trem cover from a Strat, removing the paint from the trem cavity, using almost-dead batteries in effects pedals, .009's vs. .013's on string gauges, types of woods, brands of tubes, nut material, fluctuation in wall voltage, slides made of glass, brass, bone........... these things I believe make a difference. AAMOF I know some of them do because I've experienced it. Enough of these things combined make a big difference. I removed the thick plastick-y goop-type finish from one Strat copy yrs. ago and refinished it w/ danish oil and stripped and tung-oiled the neck.......... I could tell the difference immediately, it had a more open, airy, acoustic sound, and it wasn't my imagination.
A lot of other "myths"?------I couldn't say, because my ears probably just aren't that good.
But, do I believe there are people who can see subtle differences in shades of colors that I can't see? You betcha, been there, done that.
Do I believe there are people who can tell if just a dash of one ingredient has been left out of a recipe, even though I can't taste it? Yep, it's happened.
So why should I say "this" or "that" makes no difference in sound when another person swears they can hear a difference?
I do what works for me, I play what I like, there are no rules.
If someone else says gold plated hardware sounds better than nickel plated, more power to 'em. Just because I don't hear it doesn't make it untrue.
Why spend time trying to convince them it makes no difference if they think it does?
I'd rather be playing, anyway.

[Lev]

Excellent post Oldguy - you are a man of great wisdom!

[just strum]

I was going to post something similar to OG. There are no myths, if you think it is better, than it is better. If it sounds better to you, than it obviously sounds better (to you).

Scientifically the myths could be proven false, but often it is also sprinkled with opinion.

So we can go into 2010 arguing wood, saddles, pick-ups...

In the end it is what we, as individuals, think is best.

[wingsdad]

Sorry to burst bubbles about any & all of the ad-infinatum debatable myths guitar woods, finishes, magic pickups of one type or another, holy grail amps and/or fx...but, IMHO, regardless of the equipment involved, the ultimate key to tone lies in the player's hand technique. And at that, probably most important is controlling pick or finger attack.

To test this, take the exact same rig, with everything set the same. Player 1 plays a passage. Hands guitar & pick to Player 2 to play exact same passage. The two players may extract totally different 'tone' simply by techinque.

[Brian Krashpad]

I would like to test the old poly vs. nitro finish for both tone and sustain.

Wait, someone has actually contended this with a straight face?

I can see thickness having some teeny tiny effect, but the chemical makeup of a finish affecting the sound waves in any way that a human ear could tell? Methinks not.

[epi0205]

I do what works for me, I play what I like, there are no rules.

Absolutely!

[Plank_Spanker]

I was going to post something similar to OG. There are no myths, if you think it is better, than it is better. If it sounds better to you, than it obviously sounds better (to you).

Scientifically the myths could be proven false, but often it is also sprinkled with opinion.

So we can go into 2010 arguing wood, saddles, pick-ups...

In the end it is what we, as individuals, think is best.

But we have to have something to argue about!

[just strum]

But we have to have something to argue about!

We always have strings!!!!

[oldguy]

and picks!!!!!!!

[deeaa*]

I removed the thick plastick-y goop-type finish from one Strat copy yrs. ago and refinished it w/ danish oil and stripped and tung-oiled the neck.......... I could tell the difference immediately, it had a more open, airy, acoustic sound, and it wasn't my imagination.
...snip... Just because I don't hear it doesn't make it untrue.
Why spend time trying to convince them it makes no difference if they think it does?
I'd rather be playing, anyway.

Well I could say that you probably also used new strings and maybe also adjusted the guitar better/intonated it anew etc...I honestly doubt the finish had anything to do with the sound per se.

BUT you're right...sometimes it doesn't have to be an actual change. Maybe the different finish also somehow coaxed you to use a better vibrato or a different touch than the cold, stiff finish before? Go and figure. It's not about just definite changes, it's the feel, the spirit, the...everything else about it, and if the change indeed makes you sound better or play better, well all the better! Nobody can say it doesn't do that for you.

[oldguy]

No, it changed.

[Plank_Spanker]

Myths:

All chambered Les Pauls suck

The tone is all in the guitar -spend big on the guitar, go cheap on the amph..........just about any amph will do

Black is the coolest sounding color..................................

[just strum]

Myths:


Black is the coolest sounding color..................................

I knew it all the time.