The Great Ongoing Guitar Thread

[Pork Rind]

Originally Posted by WordMan

Hey Pork Rind - what do you think of your H&D? I have played a few; well-made guitars (for other Dopers: Huss and Dalton are a small-production guitar company, like Santa Cruz and Collings, turning out high-end acoustic guitars based on popular design standards that originated mostly with Martin and Gibson, but with their own spin on it). Does it follow a Martin D-18? If so, how does it compare? How chunky/slim is the neck?

And I love the photos of the '37 Gibson I found online - what can you tell us about it (how does it sound and play, too?) and how come you are selling it?

Oh hell. I just typed, and lost, a long reply. I'll try again in the morning when motivation returns.

Short answer:
Huss and Dalton = D-18 + extra goodness.
Gibson L-37 = Cool looking - uncomfortable v neck * thin midrangey tone.

[WordMan]

Originally Posted by Pork Rind

Oh hell. I just typed, and lost, a long reply. I'll try again in the morning when motivation returns.

Short answer:
Huss and Dalton = D-18 + extra goodness.
Gibson L-37 = Cool looking - uncomfortable v neck * thin midrangey tone.

Aw man - I want the long reply!

That H&D sounds wonderful. I have been playing a few D-18s lately - I am a mahogany guy.

As for the Gibson - well, I love me a V neck - I would love to get a mid 30's L-00 to go with my '46 LG-2 someday - but I hear you about the tone. I recently played a 1926 L-4 which was so well made and had a wonderful handful of a neck, but it had that thin tone where you could tell the design was not quite there yet from a "modern guitar tone" standpoint...

...and Ogre - no worries. Since this is more FYI and not a deal going down, I have no problem saying that I will probably list the Burny for ~$800. Great guitar - solid maple top with a flamed maple veneer, solid mahogany body, great medium-sized neck (this is the guitar that really drew my attention to neck profiles and the fact that, as a feature, it really matters to me - I have come to love huge necks, but this one is nice, medium and perfect). Original pickups and standard wear - all in all a great guitar, especially when compared to your average similarly-priced Gibson at Guitar Center (I am a Gibson guy, but have always said you need to play a bunch to find a good one). I am just not playing humbucker Les Pauls right now and can put the guitar funds to other uses...

[Robot Arm]

While we're speaking of guitars for sale, one of my favorite musicians is selling one of his early guitars. It's a Martin J-40M, even used on one of the group's early recordings. I'm still just picking my way through my first instructional book, so I'm not in a position to truly appreciate it. Just thought I'd pass the word along in case anyone wanted to check it out.

[kevlaw]

Originally Posted by kevlaw

My teacher taught me a bunch of blues & boogie woogie rhythms that are a lot more pleasing to play (to me at least) than Ode to Joy and Minuet in G. I still use them for warm ups when I practice.

When I get a chance, I'll try to track one down.

Sorry for the delay, I was travelling on business.

Here goes... (my first ever tab...be gentle)

Originally Posted by Jimmy Reed

|--------------------------|--------------------------|
|--------------------------|--------------------------|
|--------------------------|--------------------------|
|--------------------------|--------------------------|
|--2-2---4-4---2-2---4-4---|--2-2---4-4---2-2---4-4---|
|--0-0---0-0---0-0---0-0---|--0-0---0-0---0-0---0-0---|

|--------------------------|--------------------------|
|--------------------------|--------------------------|
|--------------------------|--------------------------|
|--------------------------|--------------------------|
|--2-2---4-4---2-2---4-4---|--2-2---4-4---5-5---4-4---|
|--0-0---0-0---0-0---0-0---|--0-0---0-0---0-0---0-0---|

|--------------------------|--------------------------|
|--------------------------|--------------------------|
|--------------------------|--------------------------|
|--2-2---4-4---2-2---4-4---|--2-2---4-4---5-5---4-4---|
|--0-0---0-0---0-0---0-0---|--0-0---0-0---0-0---0-0---|
|--------------------------|--------------------------|

|--------------------------|--------------------------|
|--------------------------|--------------------------|
|--------------------------|--------------------------|
|--------------------------|--------------------------|
|--2-2---4-4---2-2---4-4---|--2-2---4-4---5-5---4-4---|
|--0-0---0-0---0-0---0-0---|--0-0---0-0---0-0---0-0---|

|--------------------------|--------------------------|
|--------------------------|--------------------------|
|--------------------------|--------------------------|
|--4-4---4-4---4-4---4-4---|--2-2---2-2---2-2---2-2---|
|--2-2---2-2---2-2---2-2---|--0-0---0-0---0-0---0-0---|
|--------------------------|--------------------------|

|--------------------------|-----2---2----------------|
|--------------------------|-----0---0----------------|
|--------------------------|-----2---2----------------|
|--------------------------|-----1---1----------------|
|--------------0-0---1-1---|--2--2---2----------------|
|--0-0---4-4---------------|--------------------------|

If you are just starting out and playing two strings at a time is hard for you, just skip the lower note. It'll still sound pretty good.

Likewise, if the B7 at the end is tough too (HINT: it _is_ tough) - just play the B on string 5.

Have fun! I did!

Hmmm...It occurs to me that I don't know the policy for posting copyrighted stuff. I'm guessing that this rhythm is so old that it would be out of copyright anyway, but if I am breaking the rules, I hope someone will let me know and I'll post it on my blog and link it here instead.

[E-Sabbath]

Originally Posted by WordMan

E-Sabbath - two things:

1) [...] Ovations are slammed for being not all that great.

2) What you are asking for, in your question about electric guitar types, is something that I refer to as "What are the major electric guitar "food groups"?" It is a twisty road with lots of YMMV, but if you want to go there, I may have time in the office next week...

I'm actually more familiar with Ovation mandolins, to be honest. Which I could swear do have a bowl-like body.

And yeah, that's a long question. But now that I've managed to swear this starcaster under control (Filed down the frets, and now I'm tearing the bridge apart a bit and it's slowly working better) I am curious about the other possiblities out there. I've got till my tax return comes in.

[squeegee]

Originally Posted by kevlaw

Hmmm...It occurs to me that I don't know the policy for posting copyrighted stuff. I'm guessing that this rhythm is so old that it would be out of copyright anyway, but if I am breaking the rules, I hope someone will let me know and I'll post it on my blog and link it here instead.

I'm pretty sure nobody has a copyright on twelve bar blues in A. Its the most generic blues pattern in the universe. Don't even worry about it. The big no-no that I've seen here is posting complete lyrics for a song, not tabs.

[kevlaw]

I just recorded Albatross in Garage Band.

As always, when I play it to myself it feels really good but then when I come to try to record it, it feels really rushed.

Anyway, here it is, my first try: albatross.mp3

I'll try it again next weekend.

[WordMan]

Originally Posted by E-Sabbath

I'm actually more familiar with Ovation mandolins, to be honest. Which I could swear do have a bowl-like body.

And yeah, that's a long question. But now that I've managed to swear this starcaster under control (Filed down the frets, and now I'm tearing the bridge apart a bit and it's slowly working better) I am curious about the other possiblities out there. I've got till my tax return comes in.

Okay - I will think about this and write something up tomorrow. I think I will start a separate thread that this one is linked to, so that particular topic doesn't hijack this general guitar thread...

And kevlaw - I will give it a listen tomorrow...

[E-Sabbath]

Dude, that's what this thread is for. Everything and anything guitar. It can't be a hijack!

Today, I unearthed my books from the last time I tried to learn guitar. Turns out the good fake book I had? Hal Leonard.

Then I wandered into the music store to get a chromatic tuner. I saw a Rock Band music book. I looked through it and went, "Huh, it's only snatches of the songs, but I _can play these_. This is good!" It's Hal Leonard in association with Harmonix.

Then I found The Complete Guide to Guitar and Amp Maintenance.

... yeah. Hal Leonard, and it tells me and shows me exactly what I have to do with my bridge.

Does this guy publish any bad books?

[Robot Arm]

Originally Posted by E-Sabbath

Does this guy publish any bad books?

I have this one in my shopping cart at Amazon, despite getting only 2.5 stars. It sounds like it covers some material that I'd like to learn once I get a little more advanced. I'll keep an eye out for it at the guitar stores, maybe look through it before I buy it, or find something better.

[LawMonkey]

Well, I'm back in the states and the proud owner of a new Epiphone Les Paul Special II, with a Valve Junior amp on the way from Musician's Friend. Yet to get any lessons set up--hopefully in the next week here.

Everyone's mentioned the importance of proper setup on a new guitar. My uncle, who visited last night and fooled around with it, said the same thing. What's a reasonable price for this kind of work, and what should I expect the tech to do? My father, who's recently decided to get back into playing, has been dealing with this rather fanatic local luthier who just quoted us $200, which he then brought down to $150. More than the guitar itself cost, and, well... while I don't doubt he does good work, it sounds a bit crazy to me.

I'm looking forward to getting started on this road--it's been fun reading this thread.

[Le Ministre de l'au-delà]

Originally Posted by E-Sabbath

Dude, that's what this thread is for. Everything and anything guitar. It can't be a hijack!

Today, I unearthed my books from the last time I tried to learn guitar. Turns out the good fake book I had? Hal Leonard.

Then I wandered into the music store to get a chromatic tuner. I saw a Rock Band music book. I looked through it and went, "Huh, it's only snatches of the songs, but I _can play these_. This is good!" It's Hal Leonard in association with Harmonix.

Then I found The Complete Guide to Guitar and Amp Maintenance.

... yeah. Hal Leonard, and it tells me and shows me exactly what I have to do with my bridge.

Does this guy publish any bad books?

I'm not sure how much, if any, Hal Leonard stuff I have. The other hugely important publisher is Mel Bay.

Does anyone else suffer from an addiction to guitar-related DVDs and books?

[WordMan]

Originally Posted by Le Ministre de l'au-delà

Does anyone else suffer from an addiction to guitar-related DVDs and books?

Well, it depends - I don't buy theory "how to" books because I have found my own way over the years. Not sure why, and I respect and see the value of lessons, etc, but it is what has worked for me. Same with watching youtube How To videos or those clips from Arlen Roth I get from Gibson.com and occasionally share with you guys - I watch 'em once or twice, take from them what I can, and then move on. Weird.

BUT - I *love* history and encyclopedia type books on guitar! The History of...well, anything - specific brands of guitar, amps, guitar effects - you name it. I have a very big library of those...I love learning about the evolution of the guitar in general and specific brands.

And E? I am inclined to stick with a separate thread - simply because it will be easier to refer to with a link if I have to bring it up later - which happens often enough to be a consideration. Also, this is your thread and a good, smart, ongoing, general topic guitar thread - I don't need to come it and hork up a big breakdown of guitar groups and take it over. I have enjoyed the variety of topics and the multiple-topics-at-once nature of this so far...

It's all good...now I gotta get back to the Honey-Do list before the Super Bowl...

[E-Sabbath]

Your call man. Makes sense to me.

[BigShooter]

Originally Posted by LawMonkey

Well, I'm back in the states and the proud owner of a new Epiphone Les Paul Special II, with a Valve Junior amp on the way from Musician's Friend. Yet to get any lessons set up--hopefully in the next week here.

Everyone's mentioned the importance of proper setup on a new guitar. My uncle, who visited last night and fooled around with it, said the same thing. What's a reasonable price for this kind of work, and what should I expect the tech to do? My father, who's recently decided to get back into playing, has been dealing with this rather fanatic local luthier who just quoted us $200, which he then brought down to $150. More than the guitar itself cost, and, well... while I don't doubt he does good work, it sounds a bit crazy to me.

I'm looking forward to getting started on this road--it's been fun reading this thread.

For a basic setup, $200 is ridiculous - I don't care how good the guy is. I usually charge around $30 - $40. That includes a string change, treating the fretboard (if it's rosewood), neck adjustment, action set to your preference, intonation, pickup height adjustment, and a good all-around polishing.

I would charge extra if a fret level or a new nut is needed. But most new guitars (unless they're utter crap) shouldn't need anything but the basics...

[tacoloco]

Originally Posted by BigShooter

For a basic setup, $200 is ridiculous - I don't care how good the guy is. I usually charge around $30 - $40. That includes a string change, treating the fretboard (if it's rosewood), neck adjustment, action set to your preference, intonation, pickup height adjustment, and a good all-around polishing.

I pay about $35 around here for a setup. And like you said, more if I need/want the frets dressed.

What I usually do is get one good setup when I buy a new guitar and then maintain it myself after that.

"The other hugely important publisher is Mel Bay."

When I was learning to play bass, more years ago than I like to admit, my teacher used the Mel Bay electric bass book. It contained examples such as "this is the pick"

[Robot Arm]

Originally Posted by tacoloco

"The other hugely important publisher is Mel Bay."

When I was learning to play bass, more years ago than I like to admit, my teacher used the Mel Bay electric bass book. It contained examples such as "this is the pick"

I poked around on that site a little bit, looking for a their equivalent of the very beginner book that I'm using. Couldn't find one. Everyting seemed to be divided into styles and methods. I'm just starting; I don't even know what style I want, yet.

[kenobi 65]

Originally Posted by LawMonkey

Well, I'm back in the states and the proud owner of a new Epiphone Les Paul Special II, with a Valve Junior amp on the way from Musician's Friend. Yet to get any lessons set up--hopefully in the next week here.

Congrats! That's the guitar I got last year when I started playing. I still struggle with the low E buzzing a bit, though I suspect at least half of that is my fingering technique.

I concur with several other posters...a good basic set-up shouldn't be putting you back that much. I had the tech at my school set up my Special II for me, once I learned that such was actually needed, and I think he charged $40.

[WordMan]

I started the thread on Guitar Food Groups - please pile on as you see fit.

kevlaw - where is Albatross? I tried clicking on the link and ended up at While My Guitar Gently Weeps...

[kevlaw]

Originally Posted by WordMan

kevlaw - where is Albatross? I tried clicking on the link and ended up at While My Guitar Gently Weeps...

Huh. That's weird. Here's alink that goes directly to the mp3 file.

http://www.raggedclown.com/blog/wp-c.../albatross.mp3

[WordMan]

Originally Posted by kevlaw

Huh. That's weird. Here's alink that goes directly to the mp3 file.

http://www.raggedclown.com/blog/wp-c.../albatross.mp3

Got it - sounds good. Nice intonation and bend work, and you are clearly trying to pace yourself correctly. You're coming along!

[kevlaw]

Originally Posted by WordMan

Got it - sounds good. Nice intonation and bend work, and you are clearly trying to pace yourself correctly. You're coming along!

Thanks! The hardest part for me on that song was keeping time. When I play it unaccompanied I can really emphasize the sustains and the haunting feel of the piece, but playing it over a rhythm I feel terribly rushed. I am constantly worrying about how I am going to get my fingers to the next chord in time without losing the ringing from the previous chord.

It's a fun piece. The second take will be better :-)

[squeegee]

I've noticed when playing my new Epi Dot that it seems like this guitar has much more dynamic range than my other guitars. It really makes any inconsistent picking attack jump out at me. I really need to work on picking at a more even strength on this guitar or the dynamics are all over the place, particularly on the low end. On, say, my Tele, there's a decent amount of articulation, but overall much more forgiving and manageable.

Is this common for semi-hollow guitars? Or am I picking up a strength (or weakness) in Epi Dots?

[Clothahump]

Originally Posted by LawMonkey

Everyone's mentioned the importance of proper setup on a new guitar. My uncle, who visited last night and fooled around with it, said the same thing. What's a reasonable price for this kind of work, and what should I expect the tech to do? My father, who's recently decided to get back into playing, has been dealing with this rather fanatic local luthier who just quoted us $200, which he then brought down to $150. More than the guitar itself cost, and, well... while I don't doubt he does good work, it sounds a bit crazy to me.

I have a Takamine 6-string and a Takamine 12-string. I've taken both to a local (well, kinda local. They're about 20 miles from my house) luthier and have been highly impressed by the results and the quality of work done. Both times, the cost for the setup was around 50 clams.

Shameless plug for them. If you live in the Houston area, they are great: http://www.thetexasguitarcompany.com/index.html.

[WordMan]

Originally Posted by squeegee

I've noticed when playing my new Epi Dot that it seems like this guitar has much more dynamic range than my other guitars. It really makes any inconsistent picking attack jump out at me. I really need to work on picking at a more even strength on this guitar or the dynamics are all over the place, particularly on the low end. On, say, my Tele, there's a decent amount of articulation, but overall much more forgiving and manageable.

Is this common for semi-hollow guitars? Or am I picking up a strength (or weakness) in Epi Dots?

Hmmm - no, it is not common, but I don't think it is a problem, per se - it may have something to do with the setup. Maybe one of your pickups is too close to the strings or something, or the geometry of a 335 is different, so your picking hand is right over the pickup with it, whereas it is not quite in the same place on your Tele.

Is your son still taking lessons from that experienced guy? If so, I would definitely demonstrate the contrast between the Tele and the 335 to him, so he can see both the guitars and your playing approach in action. Again, I really suspect that this is a minor issue. 335's ARE dynamic, but hearing you contrast that with a Tele the way you do doesn't seem quite right - as I state in that Food Groups thread, Tele's are the ones that leave you no place to hide.

One last idea: it may sound stupid, but try rolling off the Volume on your 335 to about 8 on the pickup(s) you are using. Humbuckers have a higher output; depending on the type in your Dot, they may simply be louder and you happen to notice it because the higher output loudifies (that's the technical term ) flaws in your technique. In other words, if you scrape the string with your finger or miss a chord placement, a louder guitar makes those mistakes sound...louder.

As context, when gigging, there are two big pains (among many): Switching between guitars where one has a hotter output vs. the other - we all wish we had a Fender/Gibson switch on our amps so the levels stay the same when we switch guitars. The other pain is switching between pickups on a guitar when one is set up hotter than the other. For the latter, a classic example is a Fat Strat, i.e., a Strat with a humbucker at the bridge - switching from the BRIDGE pickup to the neck pickup is an exercise in Volume-knob twiddling mid-song...sigh.

Hope this helps and report back if it makes sense...

[squeegee]

Originally Posted by WordMan

Hmmm - no, it is not common, but I don't think it is a problem, per se - it may have something to do with the setup. Maybe one of your pickups is too close to the strings or something, or the geometry of a 335 is different, so your picking hand is right over the pickup with it, whereas it is not quite in the same place on your Tele.

This is possible; I haven't messed at all with the setup, and I'm favoring the neck pickup for those tubey jazz sounds, and that pickup is closer to the strings. Another data point is that I play a setup with a subwoofer, and this axe has so much bottom end compared to my other guitars that I may be getting that woofer to oomph a little more, which can skew your perceptions of loudness quite easily.

as I state in that Food Groups thread, Tele's are the ones that leave you no place to hide.

Sure, but they're light in the bottom end, so it may be entirely a deeper-bass issue and the tele may not be a good comparison.

One last idea: it may sound stupid, but try rolling off the Volume on your 335 to about 8 on the pickup(s) you are using.

Not stupid at all, and I do this all the time. I don't like the bark of the humbuckers for some stuff, so I roll it down a bit. Hell, you taught me some of that lesson!

Humbuckers have a higher output; depending on the type in your Dot, they may simply be louder and you happen to notice it because the higher output loudifies (that's the technical term ) flaws in your technique. In other words, if you scrape the string with your finger or miss a chord placement, a louder guitar makes those mistakes sound...louder.

Yeah, I think the buckers are skewing my perceptions a bit. I was perennially used to buckers until I bought my Tele, and now single coils sound perfect to me, and buckers sound like crap. A lot of the reason for the perception shift is that I configure my other equipment differently to match the single coil tone, and going back to buckers can be disorienting. OTOH, I do play my Schecter C-1, dialing it back a little, and can make that shift pretty well. I guess I'm still getting used to this guitar and its new way, which is different from the way of my Tele OR my Schecter.

[WordMan]

Originally Posted by squeegee

This is possible; I haven't messed at all with the setup, and I'm favoring the neck pickup for those tubey jazz sounds, and that pickup is closer to the strings. Another data point is that I play a setup with a subwoofer, and this axe has so much bottom end compared to my other guitars that I may be getting that woofer to oomph a little more, which can skew your perceptions of loudness quite easily.

Sure, but they're light in the bottom end, so it may be entirely a deeper-bass issue and the tele may not be a good comparison.

Not stupid at all, and I do this all the time. I don't like the bark of the humbuckers for some stuff, so I roll it down a bit. Hell, you taught me some of that lesson!

Yeah, I think the buckers are skewing my perceptions a bit. I was perennially used to buckers until I bought my Tele, and now single coils sound perfect to me, and buckers sound like crap. A lot of the reason for the perception shift is that I configure my other equipment differently to match the single coil tone, and going back to buckers can be disorienting. OTOH, I do play my Schecter C-1, dialing it back a little, and can make that shift pretty well. I guess I'm still getting used to this guitar and its new way, which is different from the way of my Tele OR my Schecter.

All of that totally makes sense. I know you are happy with your rig, but the woofiness you hear out of your humbuckers would end up sounding better if and when you got a tube amp and learn how to play it (the amp) as much as the guitar. Sorry for being a weenie about it.

Having said that, I have been going through a long term hiatus with humbuckers and am only now open to seeing them back in my life (what is this, a soap opera?). Tele pickups and P-90's (and P-90's in Tele's - both of my T's have them in the neck position) are so much more articulate and alike in their responsiveness to knob tweaking. Humbuckers are rarely as much - although much more so in 335's vs. Les Paul. But I played a recently-made Les Paul the other week in the local Guitar Center that just blew me away - I immediately started to try to make a play for it but can't execute the haggling I need to right now . But they are out there; but for the most part you have to find your spots. I really like middle position; bridge V at 10 or so, Tone ~7; neck V at 8.5 and T ~8. On 335's you get almost a Strat-like quack (i.e., similar to Strat positions 2 or 4 - Knopfler land) that works nicely; on LP's, if you have some nice overdrive going, you get this buzzy, thick, bluesy Freddie King thing. Or if you lower your A string to G and play just the middle 4 strings (Cheater's G tuning), you get wonderful Stonesy/Crowes-y tones...

...they can be fun

[MwNNrules]

I lost the original version of this post because I worked on it too long, and it logged me out when I pressed "submit reply". I've noticed this tendency before, and I usually copy the text just in case, but I was in a rush, so I forgot. In any case, I had made a rather long second version of my list of greatest guitarists of each decade. It had an introduction, and satisfactory explanations for my choices. Ah well, better luck next time. I don't feel like spending a good spell of time trying to get what I had back, so here's a bare-bones version of the revised list:
The Greatest Guitarists of Each Decade, according to MwNNrules
1900s - Agustin Barrios Mangore
Sureness of selection: low.
Former selection: none.
1910s - Andres Segovia
Sureness of selection: low.
Former selection: none.
1920s - Blind Lemon Jefferson
Sureness of selection: low to medium.
Former selection: none.
1930s - Robert Johnson
Sureness of selection: medium.
Former selection: Robert Johnson.
1940s - T-Bone Walker
Sureness of selection: medium.
Former selection: Muddy Waters.
1950s - Chuck Berry
Sureness of selection: high.
Former selection: Chuck Berry.
1960s - Jimi Hendrix
Sureness of selection: high.
Former selection: Jimi Hendrix.
1970s - Jimmy Page
Sureness of selection: high.
Former selection: Jimmy Page.
1980s - Eddie Van Halen
Sureness of selection: high.
Former selection: Eddie Van Halen.
1990s - Dimebag Darrell
Sureness of selection: medium to high.
Former selection: none.
2000s - Derek Trucks
Sureness of selection: low to medium.
Former selection: none.
Well the list surely would have been better with explanations, but at least it stands. Here's the previous version for comparison: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...d.php?t=550053. Feel free to comment, question, or criticize.

[E-Sabbath]

Strumming is surprisingly hard to practice. I'm sure I'll get if if I keep going for it.

And if you have to go for an entire decade, I say Slash is a far better player than Eddie. Eddie had a gimmick. Slash has talent.

[Pork Rind]

Originally Posted by Pork Rind

Oh hell. I just typed, and lost, a long reply. I'll try again in the morning when motivation returns.

Short answer:
Huss and Dalton = D-18 + extra goodness.
Gibson L-37 = Cool looking - uncomfortable v neck * thin midrangey tone.

Originally Posted by WordMan

Aw man - I want the long reply!

That H&D sounds wonderful. I have been playing a few D-18s lately - I am a mahogany guy.

As for the Gibson - well, I love me a V neck - I would love to get a mid 30's L-00 to go with my '46 LG-2 someday - but I hear you about the tone. I recently played a 1926 L-4 which was so well made and had a wonderful handful of a neck, but it had that thin tone where you could tell the design was not quite there yet from a "modern guitar tone" standpoint...

So better late than never, right?

Let's start with the L-37 which just sold. There were several things about that guitar that I just didn't care for. First, as part of Gibson's 'budget' line back in the '30s, there were some inbuilt compromises, mostly in body size. It was a small bodied guitar, just over 14 inches at the lower bout. So it didn't move a lot of air no matter what you did, especially in the bass. It did one thing, and one thing only, and that's cut through the mix with a percussive, upper-midrange sound. That's just what archtops were for back then. Nothing wrong with that, but as I'm mostly interested in working on my flatpicking, there was not a lot it could do for me. Add to that the deeper neck than I like, and the incredibly low frets, I was always a bit frustrated after playing. One the other hand, one of the resident instructors at the shop that sold it banged out a few minutes of some jazzy comping and it sounded great. But I don't and can't play like that. So I took the money instead. Got $1,500 for it!

The Huss and Dalton is definitely from the vintage D-18 mold. Probably most comparable to the D-18GE in that it has the scalloped, forward shifted bracing. Better than the Martin (in my opinion) in that like a lot of the small shops, a lot more time can be put into tuning the top. I found the Huss and Daltons (and Collings too) that I tried to be more consistently excellent than the Martins, which seemed to be a bit more variable. The H-D also has a little boost to the mids and highs that I heard described as a D-18 with the presence turned up a bit. All I know was that I thought I was looking for a rosewood guitar, and tried some fantastic ones including a couple of Santa Cruzes and a HD-28LSV that looked like it had been dragged through gravel, but found this particular guitar just jumped out at me. I couldn't stop playing it. Close second was a Santa Cruz Vintage Artist, also a mahogany guitar, which I guess goes to show that I had no idea what I was looking for when I started out.

The neck on my H-D is pretty modern feeling. I'm not sure how better to describe it. It's not delicate feeling, but I wouldn't call it chunky either. I dunno the radius, but would say it feels more like the 12" radius neck of my Legacy than the 7.5" neck on the ASAT. It's nice and wide too, prob about 1.75 at the nut. I wish I were better at describing the sound though, it's hard for me to get much past rich, full, warm. I'm no great player, but I find it impossible to get a bad sound out of this guitar, any volume level and anywhere on the next. It just sounds sweet.

But I'll admit that over the past week or so, I've been almost exclusively screwing around with the Bluesboy, since it's the newest addition, and the first Tele-style guitar I've ever had.

[Robot Arm]

Originally Posted by E-Sabbath

Strumming is surprisingly hard to practice. I'm sure I'll get if if I keep going for it.

I was having trouble with it too (I admit I neglected those exercises a bit in favor of playing melodies) but in the last week or so I'm starting to actually sound like something. Now I need to start mixing in some rhythms or bass note strums.

E (can I call you 'E'?), do you strum along to a recording, or just practice it in isolation? I really like playing along to the CD that came with my practice book. That gives a lot more variety than just drilling on a couple of simple patterns.

The only problem I have is that the strumming on the recordings is very, very faint. Even if I'm not playing along I have to struggle to hear it, so I'm not sure how it wants me to find a strumming rhythm that works with the melody.

[E-Sabbath]

I've got a CD, but mostly I've just been listening in my head to various Rock Band songs and trying to match the tempo.

[Le Ministre de l'au-delà]

Okay, so I guess it's just me on the how-to books and DVDs. Fair enough. The odd thing is that I'm someone who is forever telling people to get themselves to a real live teacher. (It's okay - I work up stuff from these kind of books and take them to my teacher. We're both forever on the search for yet another way to express the concept...)

I would say, also, that this is one of the things that marks me as a classical guy who plays a bit of jazz rather than a true jazz guy - I'd way rather read a transcription and tweak it than have to do my own transcribing.



Which brings me to an interesting question I'd like to throw out - what are the preferences of the various Doper guitarists in terms of reading music? Notation? Tab? Chord symbols? Something entirely different? I know this can be a real can of annelids, but I'm curious...

I read bass and treble clef fluently and sight read well. I also read tab, not as fluently as notation, but still well. My chart reading is good, but I prefer to woodshed a chart so I don't end up cycling through the same first position chords over and over.

My humble opinion, your mileage may vary, etc., etc. - I think it's a very good idea for a guitarist to learn to read both notation and tab. There is much snobbery in the classical guitar world about tab, and it gets up my nose, esp. seeing that all the Renaissance music for lute, vihuela, theorbo, et al was written in tab. One of the huge advantages of reading Dowland and his pals in the original tab is you, the player, get to choose your own durations.

And for the record, I don't think reading music makes you a 'better' guitarist, nor do I think playing entirely by ear makes you a 'worse' guitarist.

So where's everybody else on the reading graph?

[E-Sabbath]

I can sort of read music. I used to be able to, but it mostly vanished, much like my Ukrainian.
So I'm learning again.

[WordMan]

Originally Posted by Pork Rind

So better late than never, right?

Let's start with the L-37 which just sold. There were several things about that guitar that I just didn't care for. First, as part of Gibson's 'budget' line back in the '30s, there were some inbuilt compromises, mostly in body size. It was a small bodied guitar, just over 14 inches at the lower bout. So it didn't move a lot of air no matter what you did, especially in the bass. It did one thing, and one thing only, and that's cut through the mix with a percussive, upper-midrange sound. That's just what archtops were for back then. Nothing wrong with that, but as I'm mostly interested in working on my flatpicking, there was not a lot it could do for me. Add to that the deeper neck than I like, and the incredibly low frets, I was always a bit frustrated after playing. One the other hand, one of the resident instructors at the shop that sold it banged out a few minutes of some jazzy comping and it sounded great. But I don't and can't play like that. So I took the money instead. Got $1,500 for it!

Totally makes sense - some guitars were made for tones or uses that are less, well, useful today unless you play that style of music. Cutting mids through a jazz combo is a different beast vs. most guitar uses today. I would love a mid-30's L-00 as I said before, but I play some acoustic blues which that guitar is well-suited to, but when I try to play "normal" strummy acoustic stuff on one, it sounds like it was made of a cheap cigar box (which, by the way is a 'nother whole weird category of guitar being revisited these days...)

The Huss and Dalton is definitely from the vintage D-18 mold. Probably most comparable to the D-18GE in that it has the scalloped, forward shifted bracing. Better than the Martin (in my opinion) in that like a lot of the small shops, a lot more time can be put into tuning the top. I found the Huss and Daltons (and Collings too) that I tried to be more consistently excellent than the Martins, which seemed to be a bit more variable. The H-D also has a little boost to the mids and highs that I heard described as a D-18 with the presence turned up a bit. All I know was that I thought I was looking for a rosewood guitar, and tried some fantastic ones including a couple of Santa Cruzes and a HD-28LSV that looked like it had been dragged through gravel, but found this particular guitar just jumped out at me. I couldn't stop playing it. Close second was a Santa Cruz Vintage Artist, also a mahogany guitar, which I guess goes to show that I had no idea what I was looking for when I started out.

The neck on my H-D is pretty modern feeling. I'm not sure how better to describe it. It's not delicate feeling, but I wouldn't call it chunky either. I dunno the radius, but would say it feels more like the 12" radius neck of my Legacy than the 7.5" neck on the ASAT. It's nice and wide too, prob about 1.75 at the nut. I wish I were better at describing the sound though, it's hard for me to get much past rich, full, warm. I'm no great player, but I find it impossible to get a bad sound out of this guitar, any volume level and anywhere on the next. It just sounds sweet.

But I'll admit that over the past week or so, I've been almost exclusively screwing around with the Bluesboy, since it's the newest addition, and the first Tele-style guitar I've ever had.

The issue of acoustic guitars made of rosewood vs. mahogany is a whole 'nother area of geekery. Rosewood is just the accepted standard and mahogany is the Chevy to rosewood's Cadillac. That is utter marketing crap - they are simply different tone categories and rosewood has gotten more pricey, with Brazilian Rosewood getting Holy Grail status - deserved in the rosewood genre, but a different beast vs. mahogany. I have, over the years and lots of experimenting, realized I am a mahogany guy - who knew? But getting over that hump has saved me a lot of grief since I was programmed as a kid to assume I was supposed to seek out RW guitars, yet didn't quite get what I needed from them.

I really liked the H&D's I have played - quality small-shop guitars; I LOVE Santa Cruz guitars, but am totally biased since the factory is about 20 minutes from my parents' house and I just took a "tour" there a few months ago (tour = free to walk around and ask questions; for a geek like me, very cool).

The necks on both guitars are excellent - medium with a super-comfortable profile. If you are a medium-neck guy, which about 95% of the population is. Again, over the years, I have come to realize I like big honkin' necks - they had their day in the sun about 70 years ago, so my finding my 1946 Gibson acoustic was wonderful. I love the feel and, IMHO, like what a big neck does for the tone - but I know I am in the exception category, not the rule.

Bluesboys rock - G&L's are great and anything based on the Tele platform is aces in my book. What kind? Semi-hollow or solid? Those G&L pickups or a humbucker in the neck and Tele-style at the bridge? Does it have that deep V neck profile? Based on what you have said about your preferences, I would assume not, but I have played a couple of G&L V-necks and enjoyed them...

[WordMan]

Originally Posted by Le Ministre de l'au-delà

Which brings me to an interesting question I'd like to throw out - what are the preferences of the various Doper guitarists in terms of reading music? Notation? Tab? Chord symbols? Something entirely different? I know this can be a real can of annelids, but I'm curious...

Catching up on a few Great Guitar posts one-by-one; sorry for the chain of posts.

- I can read chord forms
- I can decipher tab, but it takes working out
- Can't read music notation to save my life

I would *love* to be fluent in this area and agree with you that a player is better off the better they are in this area. Definitely one of those "don't do as I do, do as I say" areas for me - i.e., don't read prideful arrogance in my "I don't need to no stinkin' tabs or scores" statement - my playing is weaker because of the lack.

I have just never been able to make it stick - I will get grounded to learn a specific song or lead or something and then it just disappears. I haven't kept the language use up to keep it fluent.

In terms of what I do to figure out a song: get on line and find the (invariably incorrect) tabs, and couple that with a search on youtube for some schmo showing their version of how to play it. Run through tabs once or twice, then compare that to the youtube schmo (to be fair, some guys who are trying to market their lesson-teaching abilities are actually quite good).

Once I have a feel for the major landmarks of the song, I just turn my back and start noodling. I am looking to find two things: The essential groove of the song, regardless of the chords being played. Yeah, that means "rhythm" but groove is more than that - it is getting the rhythm wired into your body so you can truly rock the song. At the same time, I try to decide which of the dozens of guitar parts that are on the recorded are the key ones - i.e., many/most recordings have far more guitar tracks layered in, right? So which ones "make" the song?

A key then, for me, while I am playing the chord forms, wiring the groove and picking out the essential parts, is to listen for tricks. Is this a weird tuning? Is the player doing something up the neck with drone strings that the tab doesn't reflect? What is going on with the tone - is the player using stompbox effects that contribute to more than just the tone - e.g., a delay adding notes that are played too fast to do otherwise? Nothing is more than trying to play the Stones before knowing how to rock an Open G tuning for the songs after about 1969 or so...heck, recently (and I can't believe I am actually acknowledging this) my band had to learn KISS' Rock n' Roll All Nite. I do my basic checks on line and start playing the song and the chords are just...harder than any KISS song has a right to be . As I keep listening I stop and think "hey - is this in Open G?" so I switch to my Cheater's G tuning and the song falls into place while I am playing it - brainless and automatic, like any good KISS song should be.

So, Le Ministre - I have no idea what to do with what I am saying, meaning: I do woodshed and figure stuff out, but I am after things that I would call "street smart" - i.e., the groove, the rock voicing of the chords and the tricks. Oh - and how to cheat on parts that sound too hard. If I can find a way to cheat, I am ALL about that.

[WordMan]

Oh - and continuing to reinforce my assertion that Jeff Beck is the best damn electric guitarist working today, I give you an article from the Sunday New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/ar...ic/14beck.html. Gotta love it when Joe Perry of Aerosmith says "Beck is so much better than any other guitar player it is not even worth discussing" and George Martin, the Beatles' producer who also produced Beck says "when I think electric guitar virtuoso, I think of Jeff" - yes indeed.

I am finally going to see him this Thursday at Madison Square Garden - he's on a mini-tour with some other guy... - I am squealing like a little girl at the thought of it. Speaking of little girls, he is NOT touring with Aussie bass phenom Tal Wilkenfeld - not sure why; he has a female bassist who played with Prince, though, so I suspect all willl work out fine...

Also, rare for me, I am going to a concert tomorrow (Monday) night, too - Jim Campilongo - a Telecaster monster who has taken up Monday-night residence at the hipster, uber-cool East Village / Ludlow St club, The Living Room. He is releasing a new CD, Orange and this is the release party/gig. It's been getting raves (Fender is releasing a Campilongo sig Tele at the same time - how cool would it be to rate a sig model?)...

I will come back with reports when I get a chance...

Oh - and tomorrow or during the week, I will post a link to the teemings article on guitar geekery I contributed to the new issue...

...and I just showed my newly-12-year-old son how to play Ramble On - how cool is that?

[Pork Rind]

Originally Posted by WordMan

The issue of acoustic guitars made of rosewood vs. mahogany is a whole 'nother area of geekery. Rosewood is just the accepted standard and mahogany is the Chevy to rosewood's Cadillac. That is utter marketing crap - they are simply different tone categories and rosewood has gotten more pricey, with Brazilian Rosewood getting Holy Grail status - deserved in the rosewood genre, but a different beast vs. mahogany. I have, over the years and lots of experimenting, realized I am a mahogany guy - who knew? But getting over that hump has saved me a lot of grief since I was programmed as a kid to assume I was supposed to seek out RW guitars, yet didn't quite get what I needed from them.

Yup. I assumed that rosewood was what I wanted, probably because the only really nice guitars I had played at the time were rosewood. My mahogany experience extended only to the no-name beater dread that I dragged to college with me. So I was quite surprised to find where my preferences lie.

Somewhere out there, there's a six part video talk given by Richard Hoover of Santa Cruz that I'll try to find the link for. Among other topics, he goes into the rosewood v mahogany deal. He contends that mahogany as a species is in much, much worse trouble than is commonly believed. He said that Brazilian rosewood was a sacrificial lamb in the CITES treaty as it only really had use in instruments, while continued harvesting of mahogany had the weight of the furniture industry behind it. I'll try to find the link.

I really liked the H&D's I have played - quality small-shop guitars; I LOVE Santa Cruz guitars, but am totally biased since the factory is about 20 minutes from my parents' house and I just took a "tour" there a few months ago (tour = free to walk around and ask questions; for a geek like me, very cool).

One of the reasons that Santa Cruz was on my short list was because that's where my wife is from. Now, she's very supportive of my crazy hobbies, but she doesn't get why a guitar might cost more than $250. But she was very interested in the hometown aspect so the lid was off the jar, so to speak.

The necks on both guitars are excellent - medium with a super-comfortable profile. If you are a medium-neck guy, which about 95% of the population is. Again, over the years, I have come to realize I like big honkin' necks - they had their day in the sun about 70 years ago, so my finding my 1946 Gibson acoustic was wonderful. I love the feel and, IMHO, like what a big neck does for the tone - but I know I am in the exception category, not the rule. [/quote]

I want to like big necks, but it just hasn't worked out for me yet. Maybe because the bulk of my experience with a larger neck was with that L-37, which I generally disliked. I can't go guitar shopping for a while now, so I need to stay content with what I have.

Bluesboys rock - G&L's are great and anything based on the Tele platform is aces in my book. What kind? Semi-hollow or solid? Those G&L pickups or a humbucker in the neck and Tele-style at the bridge? Does it have that deep V neck profile? Based on what you have said about your preferences, I would assume not, but I have played a couple of G&L V-necks and enjoyed them...

It's a solidbody (I thought I would prefer the semi-hollow, but it turns out no) with the Seymour Duncan Seth Lover at the neck and the G&L MFD at the bridge. That middle position, where you get both pickups, that's the [/i]business[/i] right there. That sound is what drew me to that particular model. The Tele-style tones out of the MFD are just a bonus. Now I gotta learn some appropriate licks, as this is the first guitar of this style that I've owned. The neck is the G&L 7.5" radius vintage C, which isn't shredder thin, but not what I'd call beefy. The G&L v necks don't work as well for me as on electric, I developed the bad habit of brining my thumb over the top occasionally for muting and fretting purposes, but my hands aren't big enough to do that with a V.

[Le Ministre de l'au-delà]

Originally Posted by E-Sabbath

I can sort of read music. I used to be able to, but it mostly vanished, much like my Ukrainian.
So I'm learning again.

Alex!?!

[squeegee]

Originally Posted by Le Ministre de l'au-delà

Which brings me to an interesting question I'd like to throw out - what are the preferences of the various Doper guitarists in terms of reading music? Notation? Tab? Chord symbols? Something entirely different?

When I was learning guitar as a teenager, I could read music (if slowly). The problem was that there was a vast sea of notation books written for simple piano that were just plainly wrong when it came to guitar pieces. Some had chord symbols, but even these were hit or miss. I have a pretty good ear, so I just learned to figure out pieces on my own, which is what I still do. Now there's a vast sea of tabs out there, and I'll use them sometimes, but prefer just noodling around and working out the tune on my own.

[MwNNrules]

Originally Posted by E-Sabbath

And if you have to go for an entire decade, I say Slash is a far better player than Eddie. Eddie had a gimmick. Slash has talent.

The '80s was a hard choice for me. The '60s had Hendrix (the most iconic guitarist of that era regardless of who was better technically, and iconicity was taken into account along with several other factors), and there has hardly ever been a greater combination of man, moment, and music (and really that was what my list was about: who represented the times the best). The '70s was a little harder, but using the same factors that I used to choose Hendrix (skill, iconicity, influence, fame, and other nuances of that sort) pointed to Jimmy Page for me. It seemed like a solid choice, but it is hard to see Jeff Beck, Carlos Santana, Richard Thompson and others of the time ignored (Clapton comes to mind, although by the '70s, he was doing his solo routine, which I find less interesting and appealing than his work with Cream and Derek and the Dominos). The '80s was an even tougher choice. I can pick Hendrix and Page for the '60s and '70s and be cool with it, but the '80s is a vaguer, less clean cut choice for me. You have Mark Knopfler (a solid guitarist, if more traditional and less memorable than some of the people who were working by that time), Kirk Hammett, Angus Young (it's easy for some people to dismiss him because of his schoolboy outfit, but he's better than a lot of people like to think), Johnny Ramone (not talented in the way Hendrix and Page were, but undeniably an influence in the music industry), and Slash, who I heavily considered for both the '80s and '90s. Maybe Van Halen is a gimmick (I don't feel qualified enough to comment), but I thought he summed up the '80s in a way that none of the others did.
I could probably put Slash in for the '90s and live with it, although I think Dimebag Darrell is really cool. Slash is arguably more skilled, and undeniably more iconic, influential, and famous, so maybe I ought to have put him there (he did do a lot of good work with Guns N' Roses in the '90s). I think my reasoning for putting Darrell in there may have been because he developed a kind of iconic status among heavy metal fans (although with that reasoning I could've just as easily put Kurt Cobain, who I think is less skilled than Slash or Darrell) after his death, and I know I wanted heavy metal represented somewhere (some would say Van Halen is metal, but I dunno). I feel really good about my choices for the '50s, '60s, '70s, and '80s, but the last two decades I went back and forth on. It might be easier to do a list like this in retrospect, but there's something to be said for living the moment instead of looking back on the moment.
And I haven't got a clue if Derek Trucks was the right choice for the 2000s. He's got as much skill as any modern guitarist, but it may be too early to judge.

[kenobi 65]

Originally Posted by Le Ministre de l'au-delà

Which brings me to an interesting question I'd like to throw out - what are the preferences of the various Doper guitarists in terms of reading music? Notation? Tab? Chord symbols? Something entirely different?

I know how to read treble/bass clef notation, though not terribly well. I spent several years in the handbell choir at church, and that's mostly where I learned it. In my year of playing the guitar (I got my LP a year ago today!), I haven't really done much that required me to learn how the notes on the clefs relate to the strings of the guitar. It's something I'd like to learn, eventually.

Mostly, I've been learning the guitar via tab, but I've been almost exclusively learning rock guitar, so it seems to work so far.

[WordMan]

Pork Rind - all good. If you find that Hoover link, that would be cool; I have seen a few other "guitar makers discuss wood" clips; there is usually a fact or two to glean, and I appreciate his approach to guitar making...

As for wanting to like big necks - I hear you; there are certain features that seem to evoke the right attitude or should be able to bring the right feel, but ultimately it has to work for you. As a thumb-over-the-top guy myself, I just find them very comfortable...and I don't see it as a bad habit at all; just a choice - I was never meant for shredding anyway.

And MwNNrules? Look, you don't want to be that Dead Poets Society poetry book, do you? The one where Robin Williams has the students read how to calculate the total area of awesomeness of a given poem by rating various factors and producing a quantitative score? Slash is a great, great player on a number of levels, as is EVH - picking one is kinda not the point; have a favorite, sure, but listen to both whenver the mood hits.

...but for what it is worth, in terms of influence, Slash doesn't hold a candle to Eddie Van Halen. Done. End of story. Slash was part of a huge band and brought attention back to Gibson Les Pauls (even though his was a replica on Appetite - either way, anything that brings attention to Les Pauls is coolness in my book), and he brought attention back to cool, Aerosmithy, bluesy-based lead work and also to great tone; unlike folks like Dimebag, Slash really "gets" classic guitar tones.

However - when EVH came on the scene in '78 or so, everything changed - the way that guitars looked, sounded, and were played and manufactured completely changed. The best analogy might be Michael Jordan - when he blew up, and his Air Jordan shoes hit - everything about hip fashion (from tighty shorts to baggy; shaved heads, etc.) shoes (from "neato" to billion-dollar industry and huge endorsement deals, etc.) changed. THAT is what EVH did to guitars - hair metal traces back to Van Halen - heck the entire 80's. Whereas G n' R kinda reached back a bit further and reminded people of the first 4 Aerosmith albums...but that is very different from leading a whole new style of lead guitar...again, not even close.

[Pork Rind]

Originally Posted by WordMan

If you find that Hoover link, that would be cool; I have seen a few other "guitar makers discuss wood" clips; there is usually a fact or two to glean, and I appreciate his approach to guitar making...

I found it here. No way to link directly, but if you click on "Artisan Videos" toward the right, it will take you to a page that will then link to the Richard Hoover talk. It's in six parts, so set a bit of time aside. I think you will really like this.

Note: The audio and video are very poorly synchronized.

[Pork Rind]

Too late to edit: The discussion of the problems with mahogany are toward the end of part 2. To me, that's the most interesting part, as I was not aware of the problems with mahogany availability and production. He says he's trying to replace his use of it with California Sycamore.

[MwNNrules]

Originally Posted by WordMan

And MwNNrules? Look, you don't want to be that Dead Poets Society poetry book, do you? The one where Robin Williams has the students read how to calculate the total area of awesomeness of a given poem by rating various factors and producing a quantitative score? Slash is a great, great player on a number of levels, as is EVH - picking one is kinda not the point; have a favorite, sure, but listen to both whenver the mood hits.

Well I've never seen that movie (I've heard about it though - will watch it when the opportunity arises), but I get what your saying. It's not worth overthinking, but I'm just amusing myself.

...but for what it is worth, in terms of influence, Slash doesn't hold a candle to Eddie Van Halen. Done. End of story. Slash was part of a huge band and brought attention back to Gibson Les Pauls (even though his was a replica on Appetite - either way, anything that brings attention to Les Pauls is coolness in my book), and he brought attention back to cool, Aerosmithy, bluesy-based lead work and also to great tone; unlike folks like Dimebag, Slash really "gets" classic guitar tones.

My line of reasoning for almost picking Slash (twice at that). I take it you prefer Slash to Dimebag Darrell - out of curiosity, is this just a matter of tone preference for you or do you dislike heavy metal, or what?

However - when EVH came on the scene in '78 or so, everything changed - the way that guitars looked, sounded, and were played and manufactured completely changed. The best analogy might be Michael Jordan - when he blew up, and his Air Jordan shoes hit - everything about hip fashion (from tighty shorts to baggy; shaved heads, etc.) shoes (from "neato" to billion-dollar industry and huge endorsement deals, etc.) changed. THAT is what EVH did to guitars - hair metal traces back to Van Halen - heck the entire 80's. Whereas G n' R kinda reached back a bit further and reminded people of the first 4 Aerosmith albums...but that is very different from leading a whole new style of lead guitar...again, not even close.

That's basically what I figured, although God knows that I would have had to have lived through the '80s to really know.

[E-Sabbath]

Originally Posted by Le Ministre de l'au-delà

Alex!?!

Sorry, man. I picked up a bit of Ukranian when I was dealing with the Prince-in-exile. Long, long story.

[WordMan]

Originally Posted by MwNNrules

Well I've never seen that movie (I've heard about it though - will watch it when the opportunity arises), but I get what your saying. It's not worth overthinking, but I'm just amusing myself.

Dude, if you read any of geek-out posts, you know I am alll about amusing myself when it comes guitar. Party on.

My line of reasoning for almost picking Slash (twice at that). I take it you prefer Slash to Dimebag Darrell - out of curiosity, is this just a matter of tone preference for you or do you dislike heavy metal, or what?

I love metal - didn't I share that post about Walk and also that one about great players with lousy tone? Dimebag is a monster - great Texas Groove playing in a metal context. The biggest issue for me is how his tone his produced - with Slash and the players up through EVH, their tone is much more organic - even though it is electric, it is a combination of wood, a pickup meant to be a microphone to the guitar's vocals (humor me) and some crackly analog tube circuitry. Dimebag's tone is based on overwound pickups and a heavily overdriven amp - his guitar functions more as a white-noise manipulator. He's basically further along a spectrum of how much distortion he saturates his signal with, but since the tone is often created using non-organic-sounding components, he approaches his playing technique differently.

I would describe Dimebag's tone as interesting and useful, but not organic and as warm sounding. If EVH's tone is infamously referred to as the "Brown Sound" I would describe Dimebag's as neon green with black stripes.

That's basically what I figured, although God knows that I would have had to have lived through the '80s to really know.

There are some high spots, but a lot of EVH wannabees who overplayed like nobody's business - no different from listening to Aretha and then hearing the new R&B singers who over-warble (over-melisma if you wanna get technical) and leech the feeling out of the song...

[WordMan]

Originally Posted by Pork Rind

Too late to edit: The discussion of the problems with mahogany are toward the end of part 2. To me, that's the most interesting part, as I was not aware of the problems with mahogany availability and production. He says he's trying to replace his use of it with California Sycamore.

Cool - thanks. I will check this out when I can...

[Robot Arm]

Originally Posted by Le Ministre de l'au-delà

Which brings me to an interesting question I'd like to throw out - what are the preferences of the various Doper guitarists in terms of reading music? Notation? Tab? Chord symbols? Something entirely different? I know this can be a real can of annelids, but I'm curious...

How do people play the guitar and not read music?

I played viola back in junior high and high school, and I must have a pretty good memory, because I know the notation pretty well. (I don't remember which line goes with which note, but I'm not using the alto clef now, so it doesn't really matter.) And then I took a guitar class with mostly complete beginners. It was really interesting to hear the questions they asked about music. ("If C-sharp and D-flat are different names for the same note, now do you know which name to use?" Stuff like that.) I don't remember anyone ever explaining to me exactly what a 'key' is in music, but once I figured it out it was pretty simple. I think it would help a lot to start those sorts of classes with just a few minutes to explain things that every musician takes for granted, and then the staff and the nomenclature makes a lot more sense. I've even though of how I'd go throught it as a teacher.

It was a short class, so the teacher didn't have a lot of time to get to anything more than some easy chords (although, there are quite a few of them), and some mixed quarter- and eighth-note strums. And since then, the book I've been learning from uses the staff (although I've looked ahead, and it does have tabs later). I can see the appeal of tabs, but it also seems like it would be kind of limiting.

One thing I had to get over, and that kinda surprised me, is that on the viola the open strings are always on a space within the staff, first finger was always on a line, etc. It was really catching me out the first few weeks on the guitar that the open strings didn't follow that pattern.