Are we trying to 'create', or 'recreate'?

thisisguitar

I sometimes worry that in my quest for tones I may be trying to sound too much like someone else. When trying to explain what sounds I'm trying to get I normally mention a Gilmour, Johnson, Mayer and Vai sound.

Does anyone else worry that they are spending to much effort recreating instead of creating tone?

It's seems difficult to find something new in our music when guitarists are so often looking backwards.

Just a thought...

Drew_TNBD

To me, there is such a freedom and real emotional connection to the world of guitar. When the rest of the world is obsessing about loudness, dubstep wobbles, sidechain compression, and superstring trance patches.... it's a good feeling to just unplug from all that, plug into a valve amp and get your noises that way.

Even better in a band, when you're all synchronizing together. I don't see it as looking backwards. I see it as escaping from the doldrums of where the rest of the world of music is going.

guitarfishbay

Having contemplated this a lot over recent times -

I really don't think there are very many 'original' tones.  When we get down to it, it is all variation on a theme for the most part - especially with bread and butter sounds.  If a piece of music calls for something more radical then there is more scope for potentially creating something unique I guess, but most of the time people are really just finding different ways to achieve similar end results within most genres. 

I've come to accept that I can't out imagine the sounds I've heard on the albums I like, I can only hope to recreate a ballpark tone to those which is tailored to suit my own playing and the music I create.  I'd call this re-imagination as opposed to creation or recreation, and I don't think that it is a bad thing.

This is of course a large generalisation and it depends on what your definition of a new sound is.  I'm quite finely tuned to hearing small differences in sounds but that doesn't mean I believe every small difference makes a new tone.  I'd be lying if I said I didn't want to get the best tone I can get though, that isn't how GAS works!

guitarfishbay

Basically I think if a musician is a creative type (I am more of a creative type than I am an engineer) that actually creating the music is more important than trying to find a new tone.  If you can find the tones that allow you to express your creativity then you're free to create music - which is ultimately the end goal, not creating the tone.

Arguing which inspires which is like the chicken and egg situation, sometimes one inspires the other and vice versa.

But ultimately, tones are just the vehicle for musical creativity and how thoughts are manifest into sounds.  IMO anyway.

Stop worrying, get a nice sound and make some music.  Or do endless A/B tests, spend lots of money and drive yourself mad.  Both options are available!  You have to know what your priorities are at the end of the day, are they making tones or making music?  For some people it is both, and for some one more than the other.  If it is one more than the other I think there is wisdom in focusing on getting good at the one you care more about, because life is too short otherwise.

I could just be talking shit though, it is late.  Plus I still want a 5150 even though I don't need one...

ICBM

Same as guitarfishbay, although I'd still say that's Create. That doesn't mean I look to make 'new' sounds, but I have no interest whatever in 'nailing' tones - obviously I take cues from players I like, and listen to how they use their sounds in their music, but when I play those sorts of sounds, just getting into the same ballpark is easily close enough - after that it's just whether I like it or not and whether it works for what I'm trying to do. I try to get the best tone I can for what I'm doing, but how close to 'best' is good enough depends on the context as well.

I equally have no interest in playing cover songs note for note or sticking to the original arrangement. Or structure, or even chord progression sometimes! And I don't usually mind if the singer changes the words or the melody a bit either… so there would be no point in nailing the tone exactly anyway.

(I hope that doesn't sound arrogant or like I'm trying to be too 'artistic' - it's not meant like that at all, it's that I'm not good enough to reproduce something accurately, so I prefer to do something different, that's me.)

ThePrettyDamned

I don't try to nail other sounds. It's a fruitless and expensive exercise that will most likely end in disappointment because I don't play like my idols.

The boutique pedal industry is, for the most part, built on recreating sounds from the past. I don't really understand this - some are great effects, but I'd rather they innovated and created cool new effects. Some are doing this, but I always cringe when I see another tubescreamer with 'premium components'.

A lot of folk also chase the sound in their head, rather than just trying to sound good or great even. I make sounds that work for me, and I know I sound good. I would not necessarily sound better with different gear, just different. Nothing wrong with trying to better yourself, but it can be painful watching people spend silly money to sound like someone when they already sounded great with a sound that suited the music.

frankus

Victor Wootten kinda points to recreation being creation - we're never going to sound just like someone else - that's an illusion we tell ourselves whe we're trying to immitate what we love... sometimes immitations are better recieved than the original and for different purposes.

If you slavishly recite or deliberately eschew what's been before it's undeniably influencing your sound.

octatonic

Ulrich Teuffel (German luthier of much weirdness) commented that a lot of guitarists are not so much creative but involved in the 'business of re-enactment'- much in the same way that people have historical re-enactments- dressing up in armour and running through the New Forrest with a plastic sword.

I see the parallel there- it is just a different set of norms that people aspire to.

Guitarists tend to be a pretty conservative lot (although not as conservative as violinists).

digitalscream

I think I've been playing so long now that I can't remember whether the tone I look for (and have at the moment) is a recreation of somebody else's or just something I like.

It's no doubt heavily influenced by the people I listen to most, but...why worry about it? Does it really matter? Unless you're becoming a carbon copy of your favourite guitarist, I still don't see it being a problem. Hell, even if you are, that can be a good thing and quite the money spinner (get thee a tribute band).

Given the guitar industry's obsession with vintage gear and looking backwards, I strongly suspect it's nigh-on impossible to come up with a "new" tone anyway.

octatonic

digitalscream said:

I think I've been playing so long now that I can't remember whether the tone I look for (and have at the moment) is a recreation of somebody else's or just something I like.

It's no doubt heavily influenced by the people I listen to most, but...why worry about it? Does it really matter? Unless you're becoming a carbon copy of your favourite guitarist, I still don't see it being a problem. Hell, even if you are, that can be a good thing and quite the money spinner (get thee a tribute band).

Given the guitar industry's obsession with vintage gear and looking backwards, I strongly suspect it's nigh-on impossible to come up with a "new" tone anyway.

Check out David Torn.

Catthan

Imho there are a few "fundamental" tones which have been defined by the player (music) and the gear used for smth..

Take the Beano Album,, A LP, a JTM and EC's bluesy licks in which you can hear the Kings.

You can hear some of that in later players but with slight variations in tone, phrasing etc.

Then it's Hendrix, a Strat through a JTM, you will find some of that elsewhere too

EVH etc..

And that's the nice thing about it, you can take sb else's gear and settings and still sound different.

So, uniqueness and creativity comes from the music and each one's sensibilities. Not how you set a pedal.

And it's good practice to start from what's been done, played etc before developing your own stuff be it licks or sounds.

e.g. you can dial in EJ's violin tone, get the gear etc.. won't sound really great unless you play the licks..

But wait, am I going to become an EJ clone? NOt if you don't want to! the point is to come up with permutations on whatever you learn.

iow, creating tone (as in sound+playing sensibilities) is smth that demands practicing as well

thisisguitar

I think things are different for guitar because so much has been done. The days of an innovator (guitar) coming to the forefront of popular music ended a long time ago. Arguably Tom Morello would be the last one, and he did it by making the guitar sound as much like a turntablist as possible. 

I do agree we tend to use fundamental tones, and that the passion with which we make play music is, for the most part, more important than the sounds we use to do it. 

Speaking of vintage gear I'm as guilty as anyone of buying/coveting the stuff… as my bank account will show! 

We all know David Gilmour would sound much the same through any rig. (be funny to see him with a Dimebag Darrel Dean playing Comfortably Numb though ;-)

Drew_TNBD

I don't think I ever set out to purposefully recreate a tone. If I did, I'd be playing a Silverburst Les Paul through a combination of Diezel Vh4 and Marshall Superbass!

I don't deny that my influences have shaped the way I view guitar tone. But I think those influences and interests came about because of who I am, not because of who they are. You're basically never going to hear me play plexi-crunch-blues-jazz type stuff... ever. Just isn't me, so regardless of how much of that stuff I'm exposed to (and it's deliberately very little, because I think it is wank) it wont affect me as much as a new Tool album, or finding out that ISIS used Fryette amps, so 'holy shit... I have to go and get me a Fryette amp.' Or by realizing 'holy shit... so many of my influences used Marshall amps, I'll go and get a Marshall....'

Influences count for a lot. But it's still you making the decisions at the end of the day.

Also a tone has nearly *never* inspired a song for me. A part or a whole song gets written, and I then find tones to fit. I am writing music literally *all the time* - I come home, and in between rinsing Battlestar Gallactica, getting my bonk on, or eating food.. I'm playing guitar. This is how I explain my GAS to myself anyway... coz I don't always have the tone to hand that I am looking for - hence buying the EVH, hence buying the F-1, hence buying several delay pedals spanning the last few years.

I'm sure it'll never end. Humans have a symbiotic relationship to technology, and all of this stuff is just a result of that. It's no different than buying shoes, or tennis rackets, although arguably more art comes from the music gear than the footwear!

mike_l

digitalscream said:

I think I've been playing so long now that I can't remember whether the tone I look for (and have at the moment) is a recreation of somebody else's or just something I like.

 

Probably a combination of both. You buy the gear you like (sound wise) based on your ears. So, for example,  you wouldn't buy a super-high gain amp for a Pink Floyd covers band.

guitarfishbay

Drew_fx said:

I'm sure it'll never end. 

There is but one solution.

digitalscream

mike_l said: 

Probably a combination of both. You buy the gear you like (sound wise) based on your ears. So, for example,  you wouldn't buy a super-high gain amp for a Pink Floyd covers band.

I probably would. It just wouldn't be the usual kind of Pink Floyd covers band

That's something I don't understand, to be honest - all the people who are obsessed with getting exactly the right tone for every cover they play. The punters notice the vibe more than the tone, so even when I was in a covers band I'd still make sure I used the tones which made me feel more comfortable rather than trying to emulate the record.

RocknRollDave

I think a lot of guitarists - musicians in general - start out trying to sound like various other artists and it's their shortcomings in achieving this that lead to them accidentally creating their own "voice".

A lot of bands that went on to be great started off as little more than not-quite-nailing-it copies of their idols. And yes, Beatles, I include you in that.

Maxi

Ive always loved valve tone but also really like Valve state , Im also pretty fond of digital and solid state distortion into loads of different methods of amping , I grew up listening to hard rock and metal then later got into thrash and death metal and now find my self going backwards towards styles of music I never paid enough attention to the first time round (mainly 70's music) I just find the guitar sounds were more individual back then , obviously the medium was still a guitar amp but the attitudes towards the guitar were way less copied or imitated than they are these days ...its just a wave generator so should be as flexible as any other in theory .

Ive been thinking about this a lot recently , one of my ambitions is to explore ways of painting pictures (textures) with sound , I could just use my Korg triton and mess around with loads of out board gear but that wouldnt be where my heart is .

Still love the guitar but quite bored with established PRODUCER mentality because even if one is to write the most original musical content the chances are it will still be dished up with a typical layer of icing on top . Better off forgetting about the herd unless your prepaired to run through the shit .

Fusionista

There are classic sounds (tele/fender, LP/Marshall etc) and signature tones (Three Kings, Clapton Bluesbreakers etc).  I started off trying to re-create tones (Rory Gallagher, Ritchie Blackmore, Jimmy Page, Mick Box) but along the way found that certain of my guitars with certain amps produced sounds which pleased me. However those tones were not always acceptable to the bands I was playing in.  Also the tones themselves sound quite different depending on the mix.  So for example my latest live recording sounds ultra-clean and spanky, which was primarily caused by a small venue and not being able to turn up.  Frankly not my personal signature tone at all!

hugbot

Creating new sounding tones is nowhere near as worthwhile an exersize as creating new sounding songs IMO.

JayGee

I look for sounds which sound good with the song I'm playing and the band i'm playing it with and which are accessible without too much tap-dancing or knob-twiddling between songs. 

I don't think anything startlingly original in itself comes out of this but sometimes I end up with something which is unfamiliar in a particular context (we're a covers band by the way...) but which works anyway and I can live with that quite happily...  :-)