cnewshadow

Okay guitar gearheads. I'm finally going to be acquiring a guitar worth tweaking to my taste (found a guitar that listed for $1,200 new at a pawnshop for $260).

Here's the guitar in question: http://www.espguitars.co.jp/ltd/F-400FM.html

My plan is to replace the existing Grover tuners with Sperzel TrimLoks, the existing TonePros bridge with a Babicz Full Contact bridge (http://fullcontacthardware.com/fch-tune-o-matic-br... and having the tone control replaced with an EMG Afterburner (I never use the tone control, so I figured I'd replace it with something I WOULD use).

So, that's the plan for the guitar. The Afterburner gives me up to 20db additional gain that I can vary with the control knob. Should hit the front end of a tube amp pretty hard adding that much gain to an already high output EMG 81 active pickup.

I also wanted to get an MXR 10 band EQ to put in the amp's effects loop. My reasoning is that the 3 band EQ most amps are equipped with does not give me enough control over the specific frequencies I want to tweak. I want to scoop the mids with the 3 band EQ and add some of the LOW mids back in with the MXR. I can also add up to another 15db gain prior to my signal hitting the power amp if I want.

My question is twofold:

1) Can you think of any reason why my plan will not work how I want it to?

and

2) Can you recommend a high gain tube amp head that will do what I want here that won't break the bank (so no $5,000 boutique amps)?

This is a follow up to my last question: /question/index?qid=20140...

I'm looking into a tube-based overdrive/boost pedal (Ibanez Tube King).

My question is: What total difference could I expect between running it straight in the front of my amp and putting it in my effects loop?

That would make my signal chain: Tube->SS->SS -OR- SS->Tube->SS.

Also, if I put the pedal in my effects loop, would hitting it with the signal from my amp's pre-amp damage the tube?

It occurred to me after I thought about it a bit that if I hit the tube-based pedal with a strong signal from my pre-amp it would eliminate the need for higher output pickups (making them optional rather than something I'd need to do to get the tone I want). BUT...I don't want to do that if I'm going to fry the tube with too strong of an incoming signal.

Thoughts?

In a bit of a quandary here folks. Hoping some of the more tech-savvy guitarists here can help me out with this.

I just got a new Randall 1503 2x12 combo amp yesterday and have found that it does 90% of what I want out of it.

The only thing it lacks is just that extra little bit of gain to make my guitar scream. The catch: I really like the natural tone of the amp and don't want to bury it under a distortion pedal if I can help it.

I'm looking at a couple different ideas.

1) Getting a tube-based overdrive or clean boost to give my signal a little more oomph. I already know a Tubescreamer or something similar will be useless, as there are no tubes to overdrive.

2) Getting the hottest passive bridge pickup I can find.

3) Both.

I know roughly how Dimebag did it, it involved 2 different EQ boxes (1 in front, 1 in the loop). He used a very similar amp to what I have now for most of his career. But, I don't want to copy Dime's tone. I have too much respect for him to rip him off like that. And I want to sound like ME, not another copycat Dime-clone.

Any thoughts or suggestions that might get me in the neighborhood I want to be in? That would be at the corner of Holyshit Ave and Meltyourface St.

Okay, here's the deal.

I understand quite a bit about music, but most of it is academic rather than practical. If you've been in the Performing Arts section here for a while you've seen me demonstrate that knowledge. Sometimes I have to look something up if I don't remember it offhand, but most of it I know already (I don't answer a question if I'm not sure of the answer, I don't want to mislead someone who is really trying to learn by giving them a BS response).

My issue is I can play something off the top of my head and explain what I did afterward, but I don't think about what the notes I'm playing are while I'm playing it. I've tried planning out what I want to play in advance, but it usually sounds terrible. I have much better results when I wing it and figure out what key and scale I'm using when I get stuck on a part.

Is that normal for a guitarist to do, or do I approach it weird because I'm mostly self-taught?

Another thing that makes it difficult for me is the style of music I play doesn't lend itself well to being easily understood theory-wise. I use a lot of two note intervals rather than harmonic triads, which means that a lot of what I play doesn't fit firmly in any particular key. Since I play in Drop D and use my open low string as a pedal tone a lot of the time, I usually just work with stuff that fits into D or D minor to make it a little easier on myself.

Basically, how much would lessons benefit me with the way I play?

Okay fellow guitarists (or anyone really). This one is just for fun.

Do you prefer guitar players with great technique, guitar players with great feeling, or players with equal amounts of both?

No wrong answers here.

Now for the next part:

Name 3 guitar players. 1 you feel has great technique, 1 with great feeling, and 1 who you believe exemplifies the best of both. The catch: You cannot name the same guitarist for more than one category.

My 3:

Technique: Michael Angelo Batio ( ambidextrous shred master, the guy's nuts)

Feeling: David Gilmour (listen to any Pink Floyd recording and try to argue)

Best of both: Steve Vai (I've never seen anyone use a tremolo in such a natural, musical way)

And.....go!

It's not like alternate tuning is a new thing. Blues players have been using open tunings for slide guitar since the early part of the 20th century.

Tony Iommi detuned his guitar a full 2 steps in the early 70s. And he did it with super light strings, which boggles my mind.

There are examples throughout the existence of the guitar of people tuning them differently.

I can understand trying to steer beginning guitar students away from drop tunings and a bunch of different alternate tunings, because I do so myself. I believe it is important to get the fundamentals down before you start screwing around with alternate tunings.

But what about those players who already know what they are doing, like myself? I mean, I've been honest about my preference for drop tunings, and my reason isn't because I can play power chords with one finger. Do some of you guys think I'm wrong and/or an idiot for tuning my guitar to something other than standard?

Just curious, because I keep running across answers where the person giving advice acts as though tuning a guitar to anything other than standard is a crime against music.

Okay, here's the story: Last year I dropped a guitar I'm very fond of directly on the headstock, which caused some neck and fretboard damage and bent 2 of the tuning pegs beyond repair. Normally not a big deal, but this is a limited edition guitar with uncommonly colored hardware (aged copper). I have already researched it and discovered that I cannot replace the broken tuning pegs with matching ones. The guitar is a Schecter, and they will not sell me replacement parts. I've asked them directly.

Here's a link to a picture of the guitar in question: http://www.musiciansfriend.com/guitars/schecter-gu...

They only made 100 of that guitar, so my odds of finding another one that got broken to get the tuning pegs from it are slim. (Yes, I'm still highly upset that my guitar got damaged, it's a rare guitar and was my engagement present from my wife)

Since I can't get direct replacement parts, I've decided to swap the tuning pegs over to being black. No problem, but it will look silly with black tuning pegs while the rest of the hardware is aged copper.

Now, here's where the subject line comes into it. Since I'm planning on replacing all the hardware to match the black tuning pegs, I figured I might as well upgrade it while I'm at it. I didn't want to swap out parts and destroy the all original nature of the guitar, but the damage it sustained ruined any monetary value it had anyway, so there is no reason not to customize a guitar I already like a lot (and do not plan to ever sell).

I was looking into options for replacement bridges and ran across this: http://www.fullcontacthardware.com/fch-tune-o-mati...

My question is: Has anyone here had any firsthand experience with that bridge? It seems like an interesting idea, but it's kind of expensive so I don't know if I want to drop that kind of money on something if it isn't a noticeable improvement over a basic Tune-O-Matic bridge (you can get the Babicz bridge without the tailpiece if your guitar is string-thru like mine).

I'm also looking into new pickups and knobs, but I already have a good idea what I'm looking for in that department so I don't need advice on it.

Okay, I've asked similar questions before, and I've seen a lot of noobs asking similar questions.

I am well aware that I'm not going to buy a cheap guitar and swap out parts to make it equal to a top of the line guitar, that isn't my goal here.

I ran across a guitar at a music store today that I thought was really quirky and cool. Only one problem: I absolutely HATED the neck on it. It had way too small of a fretboard radius (9.5") and the finish on the frets was atrocious (felt like a saw blade when I ran my hand up the neck). But the body itself is really cool and has exactly the pickup configuration I prefer (humbucker in the bridge and a slanted single coil in the neck). I didn't plug it in, but since it's a $200 Squier I'm operating on the assumption that the pickups are probably garbage as well.

Here's a link to the guitar in question: http://www.fender.com/squier/series/vintage-modifi...

I can get that guitar for $200, and I can get a neck for it made to my specs. I can also get a new humbucker for the bridge if the stock one isn't to my liking. I could also conceivably swap out the bridge for a better one, but I don't see that as being necessary unless I discover a problem with it. I see no real reason to change any of the wiring unless there is a major issue with its quality (unlikely).

My question is: If you really liked the body of a guitar but almost nothing else about it, would you bother going to the effort to make it something you would want to play?

It's kind of a rhetorical question, because I've almost decided that I'm going to do it. Just wondering if anyone else would bother.

I've been considering picking up a side job teaching guitar, but I'm concerned that I don't know enough about it to make an effective teacher.

Here's an answer I provided for someone explaining how to construct chords that shows what I know: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=201311...

Do you think I know my stuff well enough to put students on the right path to becoming good guitar players? It's not about me being embarrassed or anything, I just wouldn't feel right taking someone's money for half-as*ed lessons that don't teach them anything useful.

I think they are.

Based on actual FACTS, not just win/loss records.

The Bengals are 6-2

The Chiefs are 8-0

But who beat the better teams to get where they are? The Bengals, without a doubt.

What do all 8 of the teams the Chiefs have beaten have in common? None of them have a winning record, and the combined record of all those teams is 20-41. In contrast, the Bengals have beaten 4 teams that are either the division leader or in second place (Packers, Patriots, Lions, Jets). The combined record of the teams the Bengals have played so far is 32-29.

It's really easy to go unbeaten with a great defense when you've played nothing but bad teams with awful offenses so far.

You know what they say. In order to BE the best, you have to BEAT the best.

The Bengals have beaten the Packers, Patriots, and Lions so far. All teams that are first or second in their division with winning records. All 3 of which will most likely be in the playoffs this year.

The Chiefs have beaten....how many playoff contenders this year? One? And that's only because the NFC East is really weak and the Cowboys are leading it at 4-4.

The Bengals have already proven this season that they can beat good teams. The Chiefs haven't even played any good teams yet. Their "top ranked" defense gets to start seeing some top ranked offenses in the second half of the year. I'm betting they won't stay "top ranked" for long.

I don't actually have anything against the Chiefs personally, but it's really annoying how their fans are taking their 8-0 start and talking about how no one can beat them. The reality is they just haven't played any teams that don't suck yet.

If the Chiefs start beating good teams, maybe THEN their fans can start getting cocky. Acting like they're the best team now is like a 2rd grader being proud of beating up kindergarteners.

Agree or disagree?

Okay, I'm looking into trying out for a cover band and I need to learn 39 songs as quickly as possible.

Only one problem: I don't play covers as a general rule, so I only know bits and pieces of some of the songs at most. None of the songs I'm being asked to learn are beyond my skill level, but I have a limited amount of time to learn them.

Any of my fellow experienced guitar players have any tips or tricks that helped them learn songs faster? I'm looking to have the majority of them learned well enough to play live within the next month or so.

Okay, I've played electric guitar for a long time. I'm looking into a particular acoustic electric and I was wondering if any of my fellow guitarists have any experience with the models I'm considering.

The models in question are the ESP LTD X-Tone Exotics Woods series. It's exactly what it sounds like: Acoustic-electric guitars made from unusual woods. I'm considering the zebrawood or padauk models.

Has anyone played or at least heard either of those models in person? I'd have to order one online and have it shipped to my local Guitar Center, because they don't have them in stock.

Here's a little more detail about them:

Zebrawood: http://espguitars.com/guitars/ltd-acoustic/ew-z.ht...

Padauk: http://espguitars.com/guitars/ltd-acoustic/ew-p.ht...

Ovangkol: http://espguitars.com/guitars/ltd-acoustic/ew-o.ht...

They retail for between $350 and $400 (exact price depending on specific model), so they aren't a "starter" acoustic, but not top of the line either.

Mostly curious about what kind of tone they have, and if the neck is similar to an electric guitar neck. It describes the neck as a thin U contour, which is how my LTD electric's neck is described.

Relying on my acoustic playing brethren on this one. I know electric guitars pretty well, but I freely admit I don't know much about acoustics.

I like those because:

1) They look pretty sharp (I'm a fan of neat looking woodgrain)

2) I can conceivably afford one.

But if the tone sucks, I'll look into something else instead.

This is mostly for the veteran guitar players who answer questions here.

Why do so many of you seem convinced that any way to learn guitar other than how you did is wrong?

I see many answers that say you MUST learn on an acoustic first. Or that you MUST get lessons from an instructor. Or that you MUST learn how to read music.

I learned on an electric. I took lessons for about 6 months and have been self-taught for the last 17 years. I can somewhat read music, but I didn't learn as part of my guitar training.

I didn't learn the way I'm told people are "supposed" to learn, and I think I've proven through my answers here that I am least a competent guitarist and know what I'm talking about, if not a master or virtuoso (I make no claim to being either).

So, why is there this mindset that there is only one "right" way to do it? I chose the guitar as my instrument for the sheer versatility of it. Only a synthesizer is capable of producing a wider variety of sounds. As such, I see no reason to artificially limit what you can do with it by sticking to a rigid structure of learning and playing.

Some of the greatest guitar music ever recorded was played by people who couldn't read music and taught themselves how to play by ear. I like to try and encourage people to discover things on their own, because I've found that some of the most innovative music is written and played be people who don't know they aren't "supposed" to play it like that.

I'm not trying to be insulting or imply that there is anything wrong with learning the way you did, because that would be a little hypocritical given the question I'm asking. I'm just wondering what leads to the mindset that only one way is acceptable.

Okay, I've noticed a flood of questions from beginning guitar players who seem to think that all thy had to do was pick up a guitar and they'd instantly sound like Jeff Beck.

(Ironically, most of these newbies don't know who Jeff Beck is. Many of the players they like don't know who he is either.)

(No, he isn't the guy who wrote that song "Loser" way back in 1993)

I have a theory about what's causing this phenomenon:

Nothing requires any effort anymore. You don't even have to learn how to read a MAP to drive from one end of the country to the other, you just put the starting and ending addresses into your GPS and it tells you where to turn without having to put any effort in yourself.

Now we have a new generation of kids who don't remember a time when the year started with a 1 instead of a 2. They grew up not having to learn things like how to read a map, or do math, or use their brains for much of anything at all really. They've had gizmos to do that stuff for them their whole lives.

Then they decide they want to play guitar just like their hero. And since they have never had to put any effort into learning how to do something before, they assume that it is just as easy as playing Guitar Hero. Cue the frustrated questions from kids that suddenly realized playing a real guitar isn't as easy as it looks, and that it actually requires some effort.

I also don't think it is a coincidence that it is becoming more and more rare for a really good guitar player to pop up. For the exact same reason.

So, to my experienced musical brethren out there: You think I'm onto something here?

Okay, here's the deal.

I've played guitar for 18 years. Just recently, over the last 5 years or so, I finally began to take it more seriously. I now know more about music theory and how it works with guitar music than at any previous point in my life.

The problem is: I only know all of that on paper. I have trouble applying what I know to my playing.

The further problem: I also have a busier schedule now than I ever have and my available time to practice is extremely limited. I can manage a half hour to 45 minutes a day, and I can play for more than an hour a couple times a week at most.

I can sorta read music. By which I mean I can't sight-read, but if you give me a piece of music and some time to work on it, I can learn it.

So, my question is: What can I do to help me apply my knowledge to my playing better with my limited time available to practice? I don't want to quit playing, but practicing more really isn't an option for me (I work 2 jobs and have a 2 year old son that needs to have his dad around). Getting kind of frustrated with the fact that I know so much more about playing guitar than I used to, and so little time to apply it to my actual playing.

Not sure if anyone will be able to help me with this, but I figured I'd ask anyway.

I've been doing some research into the tonal characteristics of various woods used in electric guitar construction. I know everything I need to know about the more common woods and combinations of woods.

However, I acquired a guitar that has a very unusual wood combination. It has a 5 piece maple/mahogany neck, an ebony fretboard, and a mahogany body. Fairly common combination of woods, right? Here's where the curveball comes in: It has an ebony top over the mahogany body.

Nothing in any of the research I have done even hints that it had ever been done. Ebony is not on the radar anywhere as far as being used for guitar bodies or tops. It is only ever mentioned as a fretboard material. Until I got the guitar I have now (LTD F-2E), I didn't realize anyone had done it before either.

So, any guitar connoisseurs out there have any idea what properties an ebony top confers to the tone of an electric guitar? I know what my guitar sounds like, I just want to know what part of the tone is being provided by which wood.

And don't tell me the wood an electric guitar is made of makes no difference. If that were true, a Stratocaster and a Les Paul with the same pickups installed would sound exactly the same, and they don't. They are made of different woods. (Ash and mahogany, respectively)

Thanks in advance!

I see answers to questions asking for guitar recommendations all the time suggesting Gibson or Fender guitars, with the reason given being that "they are the best".

My question is: Why do so many people assume that because a company is well known and popular, they automatically make the highest quality instruments?

I would think that the opposite would be true, and the smaller companies that still do everything by hand would make the better guitars.

So why is there the perception that Gibson and Fender make better guitars than anyone else when the vast majority of their guitars are assembled on a production line?

I have an ESP LTD F-2E that I absolutely love.

There's only one problem with it: The stock bridge is a piece of junk. It's a licensed Floyd Rose made by ESP for their lower end LTD guitars. It holds tuning reasonably well, but the fine tuners feel very rough and its difficult to get it dead on sometimes.

I was considering getting a Floyd Rose Special for it for a couple different reasons.

1) It is made with the same specs as the Original, just with lesser components.

2) It is available in a finish that will match my guitar's hardware (black nickel)

My question is, will I be able to just drop it in, or will I have to do routing or drilling to make it fit?

Here's a picture of my guitar and its bridge: http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii282/maneating...

And here's a picture of the Floyd Rose Special I'm considering: http://www.guitarcenter.com/Floyd-Rose-Special-Ser...

At first glance, it looks like it should just drop right in, but I'm not 100% sure. Anything else I should take into account before buying the Special?

Just wondering how people justify their elitism when it comes to bashing music they don't personally enjoy.

I'm a metal fan myself. I dislike some sub-genres of metal, and I dislike certain genres of music (rap, country, opera, etc.), but I don't sit around believing that I'm better than other music listeners because of my taste in music.

Just wondering why I'm seeing so many elitists answering questions with derision toward anything they don't enjoy. If you don't like something, why do you feel the need to spend so much time discussing it?