Guitarists.....

[BTMN]

Re: Guitarists.....

Two things are important too.

1. Having a guitar that is correctly built. Import or domestic, if it isn't put together right with sturdy, reliable parts, or the intonation is off because the neck angle causes you to press the strings so far down to fret the thing, we got a problem.

2. The Touch - How hard or how lightly to fret the notes, strike the notes, mute the notes, and hold the notes.

Put these together in good doses along with time invested playing, it helps.

Edited to add:

<---Livingroom Noodler for 32 years. Love guitars and play for enjoyment and feel no need to be The Fastest, The Next Eddie, or anything other than having a good time and sounding decent on any given night with some friends.

Life IS Good! :23:

 

[The_Sentry]

Re: Guitarists.....

I've been thinking about this.......a musician is a person who can beat on a log and create a rhythym.....so it is a guitarist can strum on just about any stringed instrument, and create a sound that appeals to the masses, if they're a musician........(caveat: a log-pounder with "talent").

Good equipment, bad equipment, it doesn't matter to the guitarist intent on making a sound, but it's easier done with better equipment. We've heard, a good guitarist can make a poor guitar sound good, but not the same with a bad guitarist with good equipment.

My question to the "guitaristas" of the modern age of economics.......i.e. you can't afford top of the line equipment.........do you want to "sound good"......or "BE good"........It may sound obvious, but I was brought up in an environment of "Be, Know, Do"........what say you?

I have a bit of equipment. I've got the Marshall tube amps, the Gibsons.

Do you want to know what I practice with at home most of the time?

A Roland Street Cube and a 400 dollar guitar.

I'm likely to use either. And, no matter how great or poor the equipment is, it can help...but it can't replace long practice sessions which maketh a better musician/guitar player.

 

[blueman335]

Re: Guitarists.....

I think his theory was, he wanted to play like the pros, so play what the pros play. I remember an argument starting because he said his Gibson SG was better than my Epi. Now I never saw nor played his SG, and it may have in fact been a "better" guitar, but my guitar is playable and I like playing it. All and all, I think he just wanted to flaunt his gear, as you said Blueman.

"The pros" play all kinds of things, including imports like Epi's, Deans, Squires, Dan Electros, etc. It's not all high-end gear, and some of the expensive stuff they use was given to them by the manufacturers. A lot of guys with vintage gear, were fortunate to buy it when it was still cheap. For anyone to conclude that by purchasing expensive guitars and amps, that you will therefore sound great, is pretty bizarre. You may still stink. Maybe some of them ought to spend the money on lessons.

I know great local players that use Epi's and other imports, and lousy players that have PRS, Gibson, and American-made Fenders. Any correlation between talent and tools is loose at best. The relationship between family income and the cost of gear is much stronger.

 

[KeeperOS]

Re: Guitarists.....

Good gear can help in two very important aspects.
They can NOT hinder you by being playable AND comfortable to play (what Zerb said plus the right neck contour, thickness, shape, width etc etc)
They can inspire you to play and to KEEP playing. Sure you can do that with a relatively worse gear but you'll be more likely to KEEP doing it if you're having fun with it.

I for one saw GREAT improvement in my playing whenever I invested in better (for me, not necessarily in cost and/or name) gear.
Of course NOTHING can be a substitute to practice.

 

[FrankyBoy]

Re: Guitarists.....

good gear can help in two very important aspects.
They can not hinder you by being playable and comfortable to play (what zerb said plus the right neck contour, thickness, shape, width etc etc)
they can inspire you to play and to keep playing. Sure you can do that with a relatively worse gear but you'll be more likely to keep doing it if you're having fun with it.

I for one saw great improvement in my playing whenever i invested in better (for me, not necessarily in cost and/or name) gear.
Of course nothing can be a substitute to practice.

+1

 

[blueman335]

Re: Guitarists.....

Good gear can help in two very important aspects.
They can NOT hinder you by being playable AND comfortable to play (what Zerb said plus the right neck contour, thickness, shape, width etc etc)
They can inspire you to play and to KEEP playing. Sure you can do that with a relatively worse gear but you'll be more likely to KEEP doing it if you're having fun with it.

I for one saw GREAT improvement in my playing whenever I invested in better (for me, not necessarily in cost and/or name) gear.
Of course NOTHING can be a substitute to practice.

There are plenty of high-end guitars that I wouldn't find to be especially 'playable', due to an overly thin or thick neck, an uncomfortable body size or shape, etc. What each of us calls comfortable varies. Cost has little to do with this. The logic doesn't hold up.

As far as playing better with a new guitar, that may have served as a kick in the butt for you to step up your practicing. The guitar can't take all the credit.

What I agree 100% with is "Nothing can be a substituite to practice." It's not the tools as much as the hands that wield them.

 

[Zerberus]

Re: Guitarists.....

... It's not the tools as much as the hands that wield them.

Generally yes. But it´s also much harder to smack a nail in properly with a makeshift "stone on a stick" hammer than it is with a proper one. And that´s where the "better gear improves playing" statements do have some merit.

I also agree that as soon as it´s a proper hammer that the head won´t fly off of you can do just about anything with it. But like with any other tools, the very cheapest you can find are usually also the ones that wil make your life hell if you take the job seriously.

 

[blueman335]

Re: Guitarists.....

Generally yes. But it´s also much harder to smack a nail in properly with a makeshift "stone on a stick" hammer than it is with a proper one. And that´s where the "better gear improves playing" statements do have some merit.

I also agree that as soon as it´s a proper hammer that the head won´t fly off of you can do just about anything with it. But like with any other tools, the very cheapest you can find are usually also the ones that wil make your life hell if you take the job seriously.

I'm certainly not saying the cheapest possible tools, as I don't care for entry-level guitars. With a hammer, a reasonably well-made $5 one will do the job for the vast majority of people, just as the average guitar player doesn't possess such an incredible amount of talent that he can only express himself with a top-of-the-line instrumnet. I think the price of the instrument probably should be more in line with the talent level. I get annoyed by chronically lousy players with expensive instruments. Their guitars usually aren't set up right (or in tune), they haven't got a clue how to get a decent tone from their amp, and you'd get a similar level of musical quality from a room full of chimps. Too many baby boomers with a tin ear and stiff fingers. Music is a lot more than money.

 

[guitfiddle]

Re: Guitarists.....

It mostly comes down to if you're making your living with it or not.

Keeping with the hammer analogy, a $5 hammer with a wood handle will satisfy all but the most discriminating home DIYer.

For the carpenter up there putting in 500 nails a day or more, a Vaughan or Plumb with just the right grip and shaft to take the vibration is in order.

Same thing with guitars...the lay person might not see the benefit of a guitar that costs 400% more, but the pro who's done his practicing and is really good with a guitar will most times want a really good ride.

 

[Zerberus]

Re: Guitarists.....

I'm certainly not saying the cheapest possible tools, as I don't care for entry-level guitars. With a hammer, a reasonably well-made $5 one will do the job for the vast majority of people, just as the average guitar player doesn't possess such an incredible amount of talent that he can only express himself with a top-of-the-line instrumnet. I think the price of the instrument probably should be more in line with the talent level. I get annoyed by chronically lousy players with expensive instruments. Their guitars usually aren't set up right (or in tune), they haven't got a clue how to get a decent tone from their amp, and you'd get a similar level of musical quality from a room full of chimps. Too many baby boomers with a tin ear and stiff fingers. Music is a lot more than money.

I agree on every point :beerchug:

Though I must admit that as a luthier it doesn´t matter much to me whether the guy can play or not if he can pay for the work he wants me to do. Of course I´ll make alternate recommendations and attempt to talk people out of bad ideas, but ultimately it´s their money, thir decision

 

[KeeperOS]

Re: Guitarists.....

There are plenty of high-end guitars that I wouldn't find to be especially 'playable', due to an overly thin or thick neck, an uncomfortable body size or shape, etc. What each of us calls comfortable varies. Cost has little to do with this. The logic doesn't hold up.

You seem to have missed the meaning of my post completely.

Never did I say that the more expensive gear will necessarily be better in any shape or form.
If you read again you'll notice that I'm putting much more emphasis in exactly that, playability and playing comfort.
You'll also notice that I go on to say, better equipment FOR ME, NOT necessarily in greater cost/name will help improve my playing.

A more appropriate way to word it would be:
"The best equipment will at the very least not hinder you, allowing you to concentrate on your playing while at the very best, will let you have fun and inspire you to keep on playing."

BTW, on the other side I WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE with your later post.
Here in Greece we have a saying: "Silken underwear require "skillful" behinds".
Although there is sth lost in the literal translation I believe the meaning still comes through just fine

 

[blueman335]

Re: Guitarists.....

A more appropriate way to word it would be:
"The best equipment will at the very least not hinder you, allowing you to concentrate on your playing while at the very best, will let you have fun and inspire you to keep on playing."

No doubt you've seen many local guitarists on stage, as I have, and there have been very few times I've seen a cheap guitar hindering anyone, but I've seen many cases where the quality of a guitar was much better then the guy's ability to play it.

 

[blueman335]

Re: Guitarists.....

I agree on every point :beerchug:

Though I must admit that as a luthier it doesn´t matter much to me whether the guy can play or not if he can pay for the work he wants me to do. Of course I´ll make alternate recommendations and attempt to talk people out of bad ideas, but ultimately it´s their money, thir decision

Hey, you gotta make a living, and the DIY's here are a tiny fraction of the guitar-playing population.

 

[KeeperOS]

Re: Guitarists.....

Blueman, again, you keep confusing in a most hardheaded fashion "best" with "most expensive" and "less good/preferable" with "cheap".

While certainly a more expensive gear will probably perform better in the context of what it was meant to do it still isn't what makes it the best for a specific someone.

My best guitar in terms of playability was a dirt-cheap 300€ probably Indonesian-made superstrat.
I incrementally ended up spending MANY times that original cost (about 1500€ in all actually) to make her what I considered better, all that because she has what is to date THE best neck I've ever laid my hands on.

I mean trying to find ways to digitize it so that I can build my next guitar with a neck like hers good.

My most expensive guitar to date (minus the after market mods, otherwise it's her) cost me about 650€, the next 550€, all in all I consider them to be the best in terms of what I wanted them for and only intend to spend more for that single, be-all/end-all guitar which, in effect will be combining all that I love about these guitars into one, after which, that'll most probably be it for me.

 

[The_Sentry]

Re: Guitarists.....

I gotta be honest about this...I don't know if this is "better"..but it's certainly nice having more than 1 guitar because I personally don't feel one guitar can satisfy all tone palettes out there.

They're also great for practicing too. Normally I use .010 to .46 gauge strings on most of my guitars...I've got a couple now that are strung with .011 to .048's, and those are great for strengthening my fretting hand while lightening up my touch. (I may end up going to these strings permanently, or putting them on more guitars.)

I really do think anyone who's halfway serious will probably have at least 1 or 2 high quality instruments in their lifetimes. But for the most part...hey, there's nothin' wrong with the cheaper stuff either...

 

[blueman335]

Re: Guitarists.....

Blueman, again, you keep confusing in a most hardheaded fashion "best" with "most expensive" and "less good/preferable" with "cheap".

While certainly a more expensive gear will probably perform better in the context of what it was meant to do it still isn't what makes it the best for a specific someone.

I think we're in agreement. Right, 'expensive' isn't always the best for a person's particular needs. I just was pointing out that some players, not you, want expensive guitars, and still can't play very good once they get them. They're worrying about gear when they should be practicing more.

 

[Andrew Lamprecht]

Re: Guitarists.....

I've agreed with most of what Blueman and Zerb have said.

You don't need an expensive guitar, it won't hinder your playing but it won't make you much better either. I saw a kid (about 12 yrs old) play in a music store with a Epi LP Special who was playing for about 1 year. Then this 38 yr old guy (recently divorced with a ton of money) had a Gibson LP Custom. He had been playing for about a year as well and he could play a few songs well but the kid trumped him in almost every other category, improvising the kid wasn't amazing but he wasn't bad either and he just smoked the other guy and in chords, the younger kid was teaching him stuff.

Contrary to popular belief you don't need a $3,000 guitar because there is still the chance that you or me could be smoked by that 12 year old kid. Having a better guitar won't make you better other than maybe what sosomething said about thinking that it is no longer the equipment. There is something else in the chain that isn't right.

 

[Jessie Sammler]

Re: Guitarists.....

I think we're in agreement. Right, 'expensive' isn't always the best for a person's particular needs. I just was pointing out that some players, not you, want expensive guitars, and still can't play very well once they get them. They're worrying about gear when they should eb practicing more.

There's nothing wrong with doing both, up to a point. If nothing else, getting that nicer guitar that you want will, hopefully, prove to you that you still need to practice. At the same time, having nicer equipment makes me want to practice more. It takes the excuses away and removes an obstacle. Now, for some people, this could be a dangerous path leading to $5,000 custom guitars and other such nonsense. For me, it stopped with what I have, which I think is fine. I realize that the rest is up to me, and it was worth it all if for no other reason.

I don't do what I do to annoy anyone. I'm not going to gigs or showing up at jam sessions with random people. If I'm not good, I'll offend only myself and a couple of friends. I have no one to support but myself, so the money is really not an issue. So what if I suck? What's wrong with sucking with a little nicer guitar that sounds better to me?

 

[blueman335]

Re: Guitarists.....

you don't need a $3,000 guitar because there is still the chance that you or me could be smoked by that 12 year old kid.

There's always some 12 year old kid that can smoke you, and odds are he'll have a cheap guitar, which only adds insult to injury.

 

[Jessie Sammler]

Re: Guitarists.....

Better to give up playing altogether, to avoid all possibility of embarrassment.: private: