I Give Up....How Does Martin Tallstrom Get His Unique Tone

[AZ715]

There are a number of truly accomplished fingerstyle guitar players in the world, and I am in awe as I view their videos. However, despite their great technical skill, I've noticed that only a handful of these folks are overwhelmingly lauded for the emotional expression people find in their music. They play differently, bringing out their guitar's tones in ways that tug at the heart strings. Just take a look at the many comments under their YouTube videos, and you'll see how moved people are by their music. (Jimmy Quango is a player who comes to mind.) For the life of me, I can't produce those tones. Maybe someone here can help.

One of these folks you are probably familiar with is Martin Tallstrom. In case you are not, here is a video that represents his work fairly well:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvsADBlmJdI

I understand that some of his emotional mood is created with effects, but much of it can only be explained by his technique. I can mimic playing the notes, but I sure can't sound like Martin. (Nor will I ever...I get that.)

Any ideas how to create these sounds?

[rick-slo]

Nothing unusually in the playing tone creating wise. You really have to consider how things were recorded, room treatment, the post recording effects added (reverb, possible synth mixed in), a guitar with or without a pick-up being part of the sound, etc.. Lots of reverb used on the example you gave.

[JonPR]

Originally Posted by AZ715

Any ideas how to create these sounds?

1. have an expensive, well made guitar (with new strings!)

2. use a good quality mic (or two).

3. add reverb to your recording, and maybe some compression too

Otherwise, the technical aspects are to do with timing and articulation.
But however good and sensitive your timing and articulation are - and however nice your guitar is - you won't sound as good as this without those recording effects.

IOW, his skill is not just in his fingering, it's knowing how to get the best recorded sound, and how to process it afterwards. A lot of that is personal to him - having a certain kind of overview of how he wants to sound, to be thinking on that level. That's why he sounds different from another player who might have the same skills and the same equipment.

[Doug Young]

What I hear in this is terrific phrasing, expressiveness and dynamics control. The actual guitar "tone" is fine, but not what stands out to me. Tone, attack, phrasing, dynamics, etc are often somewhat difficult to untangle. Aside from the basics of recording - room acoustics, good instrument, mic placement, reverb, etc, I'd suggest playing along with him phrase by phrase. Isolate just one measure and play it with him, record yourself and compare your playing to his and repeat until you start to get the sound. Then do the next measure. To some extent, everyone's phrasing is unique, you may never sound just like Martin, but you can come closer, if that's what you want.

Incidentally, either this is "fingersync'd" or the track on his CD is the audio from the video. They are exactly the same, even the little grunt at the beginning. Something about his picking hand looks to me like it's not quite producing the sound we're hearing, so he may be playing along with the recording. What this means as far as the sound goes, is that it may not have been recorded with the mic setup you see. Just a guess, tho.

[rick-slo]

Here is a recording of Martin playing without all the post recording tweaks added and probably in a fairly normal room acoustically wise. Fine playing but tone wise more real life.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZMpNKSO2d4

[AZ715]

Gosh, I really appreciate the quality of the replies to my query!! Thank you!!

Having thought about the points made by Derek, Jon and Doug, I guess I'm inclined to think everyone is correct. To my ears, Martin's emotional expressiveness is enabled by both the effects he applies, and through his distinctive playing on pieces like "Angel." (Granted, Derek's posted video does sound pretty "normal," but I can't help thinking that it's just not an emotionally expressive song.)

To enhance the expressiveness in my play, I'm going to give the "measure by measure" approach that Doug described a try. So far in doing so, I'm miles away from capturing the nuances I hear in Martin's play. The effects definitely help, though.

Thanks, again!

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by AZ715

GTo my ears, Martin's emotional expressiveness is enabled by both the effects he applies, and through his distinctive playing on pieces like "Angel." !

Reverb usually helps! I think it was Chet Atkins who called it "talent", as in telling the recording engineer, "Can you add a little more talent to that track?" But I think it's really an enhancement that works best if there's the right sounds going on in the first place.

I go thru the exercise periodically of trying to match the sound of a recording that catches my ear. You look at everything - what guitar was used, what mics, if I can find out. What's the mic placement? What effects are used? What's the EQ curve look like? And so on. All this helps, but what I almost always inevitably find out is that I can't duplicate someone else's sound unless I work really hard to nail their phrasing. Even with something simple, that's often easier said than done, everyone just has their own touch. So usually, I fail completely, but I usually learn something from the exercise, and more often than not, it's about my playing more than any gear of effects or settings.

[_zedagive]

He's using a Tonewood Amp.

[rick-slo]

I think it's better to think of and treat tone and expression as quite different, though complimentary and quite often additive, things.
This is more when factoring in the realm of post recording tweaking. If you don't distinguish what's causing what, where there is overlap
and where there isn't, it will be a hard road to get to where you want to be.

For example an important aspect of tone is discussed by Michael Chapdelaine here: https://acousticguitar.com/video-les...et-great-tone/

Him doing that with added effects (pickup blended in, a little reverb, etc..) on this recording:

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by rick-slo

I think it's better to think of and treat tone and expression as quite different, though complimentary and quite often additive, things.

Agreed, but hard to separate. And in the original video, what appeals to me is the expression, not the tone (but that's maybe just me). Michael Chapdelaine used to have a great written essay on tone up on his site, but it seems to have dissappeared.

I once heard a different take on tone from Ed Gerhard, I've forgotten the details, but the gist of it was that once a string was ringing, the tone was kind of a non-event, and almost indistinguishable from even another instrument (I'm probably not saying this right since that strikes me as somewhat unbelievable), and that what really affects our perception of tone is the attack - hence, phrasing, dynamics, right hand attack and much more affect what we hear as "tone". Wish I had a recording of that discussion, I recall it as very interesting, with some demos of what he was talking about, and I'm probably not quite relaying it correctly.

in any case, I don't think the "tone" of Martin's recording is just due to reverb :-)

[rick-slo]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

Agreed, but hard to separate. And in the original video, what appeals to me is the expression, not the tone (but that's maybe just me). Michael Chapdelaine used to have a great written essay on tone up on his site, but it seems to have dissappeared.

I think you are referring to this essay:
http://dcoombsguitar.com/Temp/ToneChapdelaine.pdf

Let's just say it's not uncommon for listeners to mix the two up as to causes and effects.

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by rick-slo

I think you are referring to this essay:
http://dcoombsguitar.com/Temp/ToneChapdelaine.pdf

Ah, fantastic, you saved it! I was looking for it recently for some students and couldn't find it.

Let's just say it's not uncommon for listeners to mix the two up as to causes and effects.

Right, exactly. And who knows, maybe what the OP is hearing that he likes is just the reverb...

[Gitfiddlemann]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

in any case, I don't think the "tone" of Martin's recording is just due to reverb :-)

Agree wholeheartedly. An often overlooked point in many of the threads I see, and not just about Martin Tallstrom.
A lot of the emphasis usually involves "What guitar is he/she using?", or "What kind of effects on this or that recording?".
Truth is, most of what appeals to a listener rests mostly in the player's hands. And if that player happens to also make tasteful use of effects, or uses effects to complement the vision they have for the piece, all the better. This is where I think Martin Tallstrom resides. He's first and foremost a very talented player and musician.
There's nothing worse to my ears than someone trying to use effects to compensate for poor or sloppy playing. It's very obvious too, and it never works.
People that play well don't need any effects to sound good. But if they add effects for a purpose, it can sound even better. Case in point: Martin Tallstrom

[usb_chord]

I opened this thread and did a ctrl +f search for the word "dynamics" and it looks like Doug already has my thoughts covered on this. Martin would sound just as fabulous without reverb. His touch and dynamics are some of the best I've heard in the steel string flat top world. Really great right hand that's very tidy and his movements with both are very efficient. I agree with whoever mentioned that sometimes his videos look synced. I'm more curious about his setup (string height, neck relief, string gauges, etc) then anything, given how effortless his "attack" often looks.

Here's a fairly dry recording. His tone, touch and timing are all still very much intact -



Look how disciplined and versatile his right hand is -

[JonPR]

As someone who might have implied (with unintended cynicism) that it was largely about effects, let me adjust my emphasis...

I did add "Otherwise, the technical aspects are to do with timing and articulation." - and those are critical of course.

What I meant about that first video is that the quality of sound in that video is at least partly about the effects applied. The technical skill is taken for granted, while the effects add a sense of polish.
Sometimes the beauty added through a combination of carefully applied compression and reverb can have a greater appeal - like adding sugar and cream to coffee can end up being more about the sweetness and creaminess than the coffee...

The later videos are a much better demonstration of how much his sound depends on his dynamic control and articulation, shorn of superfluous effects.

And it really is as simple as just working on that control. It goes way beyond getting the right notes in the right order!
When you learn a piece of music, getting the whole thing successfully under your fingers - and fully memorized - is just the start. Once you've learned to play it, that's when you start learning how to perform it. The notes and everything are taken for granted, and you begin working on the dynamics and expression. You start owning it. It's not all a conscious process, but it eventually becomes about your personal feelings about the piece, as much as the piece itself.

This is the kind of thing which - IMO - really sorts the pros from the amateurs. It can be hard to define but you know it when you hear it (like here). It all sounds natural and easy, because he's worked on it so much - much more than you might think.
It's like any aspect of guitar technique in that respect, which is that the more you practise something, the more your fingers learn the optimum pressure and movement required. You move, gradually, from conscious effort to subconscious ease. It's as true for an F barre chord, as it is for entire pieces like these. You can spend weeks, months, working on that F barre before it feels easy and natural. You have to work on entire tunes the same way before they can become as effortless and natural - which is when you can apply feeling.
But that kind of practice on one piece also results in being able to improvise something with the same sensitivity. I.e., after time, the sensitivity of articulation itself becomes a natural part of the way you approach any tune.

In short - as ever - it's all about practice!