Poll: What affects tone the most?

[FrankenFretter]

This has been done to death, I know. But it hasn't been done this week on this forum, and this is on my mind at the moment, so why not?

I think a lot of things make a contribution to your tone (we're speaking strictly electric here, I'm out of my league when it comes to acoustic talk). There are those that are in the camp that believe that the finish on a guitar makes a difference in the sound you hear. Some would argue that the strings, or the capacitors, or the cord that you're using is very influential. Most of those people would have some kind of statistics or factoids to back them up. I'll put in my two cents, and that's all it's worth, so take that at face value; I think that the player is the most significant part of the tone, followed by the pickup(s). I notice that no matter which guitar I'm playing, or what amph, I usually sound pretty much like me. Pedals, volume, settings on the amph...those can all be part of that, but in the end, it just sounds like me. Not that it's good or bad to sound like me, but I have a certain way that has become comfortable to me, and somehow that has a familiar tone, no matter what's in my hands.

What say you, Fretters? Where does the tone come from?

 

[sunvalleylaw]

Player. I think with any instrument, the great players sound like themselves. Guitar is no exception.

 

[oldguy]

Player. I think with any instrument, the great players sound like themselves. Guitar is no exception.

Agreed. It's more in the fingers than in the gear.

 

[FrankenFretter]

Alright, simmer down fellas. Let's keep this civil!

 

[Eric]

I voted for amp, but really, I think it's how you adjust things. I usually tend to go for the same things in tone and as a result I sound like me, but a lot of that has to do with what things I seek out and how I set up the amp and/or guitar (pickup selector, knob positions, etc.).

 

[deeaa]

I think that's not a question you can answer properly without some clear agreement on what is tone, and how fundamentally do you address the issue.

If you think of it pragmatically and logically, of course it is the amph. There is simply no way you can sound like Steve Vai on a nylon-string mic'd thru a PA system, to put it bluntly. Or sound like an acoustic guitar master if all you have is 'extreme metal' VOX amp plug with nothing but ultra-gain sound. The amph _has_ to be in the ballpark for the tone required. That's why I voted that.

If, however, we're discussing the tone as an element that distinguishes between players and their tones, given that they can use something that is suitable for their overall needs as to achieve, say, a driven or clean tone, yeah, no question about it, it's definitely in the fingers. I think most experienced players agree, despite their level of skills, that they tend to sound much the same no matter how much gear changes they make - as long as it's in the ballpark.

 

[guitartango]

Brian May (Queen) once gave his guitar to Hank Marvin (The Shadows) to play, now Hank is a Stat player and he still sounded like "Hank Marvin", so it is the player and not the guitar.

 

[Tig]

What? No takers for the "The finish, i.e. poly vs. nitro, etc." choice?
This place (thankfully) sure ain't TheGearPage!

 

[R_of_G]

I'll answer this question the way I always do, by allowing Marc Ribot's comments about Bill Frisell answer it for me...

"... every guitarist who has ever heard Frisell has wondered how he managed to get his guitar to produce notes that swelled in volume as they sustained, like a violinist or horn player, instead of steadily fading, like the notes on everyone else’s guitar. There was talk by the bar of a clever use of compression, echo, or volume pedals. I believed this until I heard him produce the same effect on an acoustic guitar, at which point I gave up trying to understand."

So yeah, it's the player.

 

[Zip]

Remember this old story - Ted Nugent once asked to play Eddie Van Halen’s rig when the two were touring together. When asked what he sounded like, Ed replied, “Ted Nugent.”

With the right equipment/setup, I can get pretty close to that brown sound. But I don't sound like EVH. On the neck pup, with the dials turned just right, I can get the woman tone all day long. But that's EC's tone, not mine. So I think a lot is subjective. I mean, every noise has a tone. A Strat played straight into a First Act 10-watter sounds like an ex-wife yelling. It's awful, but it has tone :thwap

 

[Tig]

A Strat played straight into a First Act 10-watter sounds like an ex-wife yelling. It's awful, but it has tone :thwap

:rollover
:applause

 

[marnold]

I agree about the player part, but I like typing "amph." Amph, amph, amph.




Amph.

 

[FrankenFretter]

Okay, someone voted for wood, but nobody's fessing up. We do all understand that this is the wood that the guitar is constructed of, yeah? Not the wood that is in your pants. Just to clarify.

 

[Eric]

You can click on the number of votes to see who voted for what. I personally think wood does matter, at least a little bit. Probably not enough that you couldn't overcome it with a little bit of EQ and some other adjustments, but it does seem to matter.

As with most things in the guitar, IMO it's not about what you can and can't do with a given guitar, but more what a guitar's natural tendency is. You can make a lot of guitars sound like a lot of others, but you might need big EQ changes, treble boosters, etc. But some guitars just do what you want without a lot of fuss or adjustment. It's in that (the 'right tone right away') where I think stuff like wood matters.

 

[mapka]

Okay, someone voted for wood, but nobody's fessing up. We do all understand that this is the wood that the guitar is constructed of, yeah? Not the wood that is in your pants. Just to clarify.

I am guilty as charged! Voted for wood for two reasons. First I have my Hagstrom as example number one. Put this in the hands of a good player and compare it to my LP and you can hear the darkness of the Mahogany in the tone. I am sure that there are many other factors in play here, but I have been told that comparing the tone of a Swede (what I have) to an Ultra Swede which uses different woods and the tone is completely different. All the electronics are the same as is the neck so the only real difference is the wood.

My second reason for choosing wood is that I was watching a program on a local luthier who makes not only guitars but mostly violins, mandolins, and cellos. He was very adamant about not only the wood he used but also how the grain pattern was and how he carved the wood. He makes beautiful instruments and they are used by many professional players.

 

[FrankenFretter]

I am guilty as charged! Voted for wood for two reasons. First I have my Hagstrom as example number one. Put this in the hands of a good player and compare it to my LP and you can hear the darkness of the Mahogany in the tone. I am sure that there are many other factors in play here, but I have been told that comparing the tone of a Swede (what I have) to an Ultra Swede which uses different woods and the tone is completely different. All the electronics are the same as is the neck so the only real difference is the wood.

My second reason for choosing wood is that I was watching a program on a local luthier who makes not only guitars but mostly violins, mandolins, and cellos. He was very adamant about not only the wood he used but also how the grain pattern was and how he carved the wood. He makes beautiful instruments and they are used by many professional players.

I think that in an acoustic guitar (or violin, viola, cello or mando), there is definitely a larger part played in the tone by the wood it's constructed of. It's not that I disbelieve that it makes a difference in an electric, I just think that it's fairly subtle for the most part. I agree that mahogany does have a darker tone to it than maple, but I think that pickups make more difference than the wood. And I absolutely do not buy into the finish making a difference in an electric. Again, in an acoustic it would probably be a real factor, but "letting the wood breathe" with a nitro finish reeks of propaganda to me. I do have to admit, however, that I like the look of an old, cracked nitro finish. On the other hand, I loved the look of Rory Gallagher's Strat, and it had almost no finish on it.

 

[Tig]

I am sure that there are many other factors in play here, but I have been told that comparing the tone of a Swede (what I have) to an Ultra Swede which uses different woods and the tone is completely different. All the electronics are the same as is the neck so the only real difference is the wood.

I might be wrong, but the Swede and Ultra Swede also have different scale lengths. 24.75" and 25.5" respectively.

 

[mapka]

I agree about the paint. I have only one nitro finish (strat and maybe my Telie. Not sure what they were using in 88). Compared to other Strats the pups make more of a difference IMHO

 

[Tig]

Probably not enough that you couldn't overcome it with a little bit of EQ and some other adjustments, but it does seem to matter.

Speaking of EQ, there's a video tour of Billy Gibbon's gear by his guitar tech where he shows how they make every guitar sound almost exactly like his Pearly Gates Les Paul. They have pre-programed EQ's (Gold Lune Frequency Analyzer and two DigiTech Mono 28 programmable EQs) that adjusts the levels to match the Pearly Gates' frequency profile. His 1 pickup single coil Tele, Gretsch BillyBo, fuzzy Gibson, etc., all end up sounding the same. It makes me wonder why he owns over 800 guitars... Ah, because he can!

 

[Eric]

I might be wrong, but the Swede and Ultra Swede also have different scale lengths. 24.75" and 25.5" respectively.

I think it's the Super Swede that has 25.5" scale. IIRC, the Ultra Swede is an LP with a basswood body.

 

[Tig]

I think it's the Super Swede that has 25.5" scale. IIRC, the Ultra Swede is an LP with a basswood body.

Yep, you are correct! The Swede and Ultra Swede are both 24.75".

 

[deeaa]

I guess I would say that the woods _complement_ the sound of the instrument, they do not really change it all over that drastically. They have their share in the tone shaping, yes...but, you can build a strat out of Mahogany only and it can still sound like a strat. You can build a Les Paul out if maple only - hell even 100% acrylic, or even stone for that matter - and it can still sound like an LP should.

Still, if you're gonna build a totally spanky twangy Tele for instance, it's gotta have an all maple neck...in some extremes woods do matter much - but IMO more so in the neck than the body. The effect of woods is often exaggerated, I think it's more akin to whether you car has real leather seats or vinyl, than something really significant. Leather won't make the car go any faster but it can make the driver feel better and need to adjust the AC unit less same with guitar woods - if the woods are just right for the sound intended, you need less EQ, and if they're just whatever, well, it might in some cases even make it hard to chase the particular sound.

But I'll say this: if I wanted an extreme all-round guitar, it would have to be a strat type thang with many different woods used.

 

[Perfect Stranger]

I couldn't disgree more with this poll. A player canNOT effect tone. The tone is a result of the device making the sound. Take two different players and have the play the exact same notes on any guitar, the same way, and the tone will be the same. The technique can be different, the style can different, lots of things can be different....but the tone will be the same because the same instrument make the same notes.

I could pick up Robert's guitar and have the same exact "tone" as him.....I can't play like him at all.....but the tone will be the same. My hands cannot make the sound brighter, or mellower, or crunchier, or overdriven.....but the pickups, pedals, and amps can. Saying that a player can personally change the tone is just ludicrous to me.

 

[Tig]

My hands cannot make the sound brighter, or mellower, or crunchier, or overdriven.....but the pickups, pedals, and amps can. Saying that a player can personally change the tone is just ludicrous to me.

I wish I had a video camera. I get a wide variety of resulting tones with different pick attacks, and even more with the many finger style attacks I enjoy. There is even a limited range of overall gain (crunchier) changes just by the intensity that strings are attacked. Add adjusting the guitar's volume knob and the entire range of gain is in reach when playing through a decent amp.

Anyone who has not experienced the above hasn't tapped into the possibilities of their gear and the techniques available to us all. Think outside the pick.

 

[Eric]

Take two different players and have the play the exact same notes on any guitar, the same way, and the tone will be the same.

I think the point is that this never happens. Even if it's just touch or phrasing or chord voicings, everyone has something different to offer with their playing. Most of the time that trumps what brand of overdrive pedal you're using.

I could pick up Robert's guitar and have the same exact "tone" as him.....I can't play like him at all.....but the tone will be the same. My hands cannot make the sound brighter, or mellower, or crunchier, or overdriven.....but the pickups, pedals, and amps can. Saying that a player can personally change the tone is just ludicrous to me.

The other thing, which I touched upon earlier, is that I think part of the tone-is-in-the-fingers argument is that people tend to adjust amps to suit their personal taste, so everything ends up sounding pretty similar. I know I do this.

Ultimately, I'm with deeaa in that you need to be within the ballpark of the type of music you want to play, which is mostly dependent on amp. After that, what makes you sound good or bad or able to be identified comes down to how you set up and play your guitar, at least part of which can be considered your hands/fingers.

 

[R_of_G]

I wish I had a video camera. I get a wide variety of resulting tones with different pick attacks, and even more with the many finger style attacks I enjoy. There is even a limited range of overall gain (crunchier) changes just by the intensity that strings are attacked. Add adjusting the guitar's volume knob and the entire range of gain is in reach when playing through a decent amp.

Anyone who has not experienced the above hasn't tapped into the possibilities of their gear and the techniques available to us all. Think outside the pick.

That's exactly my thinking behind the belief that tone is in the hands, and really, that's just the picking/strumming hand, there's another 50% of the equation on the other side. In my ever-present desire to learn to play funk better I realize how much of the sound comes from what I do with my left hand (aside from the obvious) whether I'm playing plugged in or not. I can certainly use effects to enhance that, but I'm plenty funky without my wah-wah too.

 

[FrankenFretter]

Ah, finally some friendly controversy. These discussions wouldn't be much fun if we all agreed on the subject. Carry on!

 

[Spudman]

I have a good example. A popular band/ festival and recording artist was playing our company Christmas party years ago. I and another employee got up to play a few songs. I used all the guitar player's gear and never touched a thing on his rig. After the set he came up to me with eyes wide and wanted to know what I changed to get the guitar to sound so much bigger and fuller than it normally does for him. You should have seen the look of shock on his face when I told him that I hadn't touched a thing.

 

[Tig]

In all fairness, there is an additional component to so called "tone". (I think the word is sometimes over used or too easily applied across a wider spectrum than necessary)

The other part of "tone" falls into the gear category. From strings: materiel, gauge, ,coatings, design, etc.; scale length, action, bridge design and material, fretboard material, pickups: location, design, windings, magnet types, placement, etc.; guitar electronics: pots, wiring, capacitors, circuit design, etc.; body and neck woods, shapes, thickness, etc., etc...

Then we could list the same for amps, tubes, circuits, speakers (a huge part of tone alone), and on and on...

So yes, the gear certainly is a part of the equation, but so is the player.

 

[Perfect Stranger]

You just made my case FOR me. You get all of those tones BECAUSE of how the equipment picks up the vibrations and transmits them out thru the speaker. ANYONE doing the same things will have the same tone.....simple as that. If both people use the same attack, same volume knob settings, yada yada yada then they will have the same tone. It is NOT the person making the tone, it's the equipment making the tone based on what the person is doing to it.. The person is simply changing what is going INTO the equipment....not the tone.

*NOTE* Sorry, I was trying to reply to Tig's post #24