#1
|
||||
|
||||
Barking Up The Wrong Tree?
Am I alone in thinking that the quest for a really great, live-electrified/amplified acoustic tone is something of a fool's game? That we quest for an inherently ironic if not downright foolish Quixotic mirage: the attempt to have an "acoustic" sound that is, in fact, "electric" and thus no more "acoustic" than any other electric guitar?
At its most extremely, ironically bizarre I offer the modern bluegrass approach of a single lg. diameter mic that is so prone to feedback that all the musicians must use in-ear monitors. In other words, all the musicians *entirely shield themselves from the acoustic sound of their expensive acoustic instruments* while they pretend that they are an old school acoustic band. There is something really weird about this: that we have to invest in all kinds of complex, often digital, technology toward the purpose of a pure illusion: that we are projecting a "natural", "acoustic" sound to the audience. When I get to thinking this way I think that perhaps a better solution was discovered way back in the 1940s in, say, the large bodied archtop jazz guitar with a couple pickups, fed thru a nice tube amplifier. The 60s made us all think that "electric" guitar meant really loud and often distorted, but that's really just one, relatively unique sound, and certainly not what the electric guitar was invented to do in the first place. I think what keeps me goofing with my acoustic tone quest rather than simply bringing an electric and amp up on stage is that I want to create an illusion of "folk music" because that's what people expect from singer songwriters. But really, I could probably much more easily nail a very pleasant, equally mellow sound from an entirely electric set-up. I mean, heck, the middle position of even a Telecaster or Strat is actually a very sweet "acoustic" sound that often beats the pants off of so many of the quacking piezo setups I've heard...including even those on high profile venues like Austin City Limits. Do any of y'all ever think about this? Are we missing the forest for the trees? Am I just looking for an excuse to buy a big ol' jazzbox? td |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Forget the big ole jazz box. Get a custom made (fretboard spacing of your preference) Wendler electroCoustic and have him put a Lashbrook Naturacoustic bridge on it. Check out demo #1 of the Lashbrook guitar.
http://www.lashbrookguitars.com/cbguitar.html Here's the Wendler website: http://www.electrocoustic.com/ Alternatively, you could get the big ole jazz box and have the Lashbrook bridge added. In either case, it will sound somewhat different than a well-amplified conventional acoustic. Even with the most string-oriented pickups, the nature of the guitar still makes a difference with respect to amplified tone and note decay. As far as "bad" piezo sound at big concerts go, it may well be that the guitar is being EQed for optimum venue sound, and that the direct (from mixer to recorder) sound is somewhat more trebly. I've noticed that with my own direct-from-mixer recordings of live shows. Gary |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I decided not to miss the forest for the trees, personally. I just bought a decent dual source rig for each guitar (K&K dual source with mic and minis) and then decent preamps. I'm not trying to get my PA and amp to sound identical to my guitars, just very guitar-like. That is evidenced by the fact so many other guitarists want to know what I've got in it later because it sounds so ''guitar-like''. Then I don't mess with them...I just go play. I teach all my students the 30 second rule... You have 30 seconds to capture the audiences attention...if you don't have their attention in 30 seconds, they don't care what kind of guitar you own, or what pickup is in it. If you do have their attention after 30 seconds, they still don't care what kind of guitar you have or what kind of strings are on it, or what the pickup is that's in it...they just want to hear music. Once I realized that, my quest for ''perfect'' sound was simplified... |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
But your second point is, I'm sure, really what it's all about: focus on musicianship and performance and don't sweat, too much, the small stuff -- that Quixotic amplified tone. ...when I'm onstage I forget entirely about the gear and simply have fun, and it's really only between shows that I obsess about my gear. But obsess I do. We practiced with a drummer yesterday for the first time, and we'll have to see where that goes. I picked up the Tele for a few tunes but am still really just more comfortable with an acoustic in hand when I sing. Our harp player has made leaps and bounds as a performer and, on songs where harmonica fits, at least, he is increasingly keeping things interesting. In other words, I think the "ideal" solution to my woes is to put together a fun, interesting group of players and focus on "playing music" rather than "getting a great acoustic tone". I *suspect* that an internal mic would work great for the mellow fingerpicking stuff I do but that it would be really problematic for the harder driving, rhythmic stuff (I don't want to invest another couple hundred bucks to only, once again, find I was best off with the K&Ks solo). I also re-realized y'day that I really hated my tone while pumping my own vox/guitar thru my 12" Peavey powered monitor...so, since we were practicing in my basement "studio", I simply switched it off and played thru my tiny Fostex studio monitors; what an improvement! So maybe it's my speaker system, and not my pickup, that is holding my tone back. Unfortunately, I haven't found a Bose, SoloAmp, or Bagamp to try out...within a six hour drive. ...and thus I return to this endless quest Last edited by tdrake; 01-18-2010 at 11:21 AM. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
I think there's great acoustic tone out there - and "great acoustic tone" means something different to everybody. However, tone is only part of it. I've thought about using something thin like a T5 or a Carvin AC375 on stage for comfort, since an amplified acoustic doesn't always sound like itself anyway. But, even if one of those had exactly the plugged in sound I'm looking for, I still want the feel and dynamics of a real acoustic guitar. I've led worship from behind a Telecaster a couple of times, and it sounded amazing, but it just didn't feel like strumming an acoustic guitar. So, I'm still looking for the best way to amplify an acoustic guitar that I like when it's unplugged.
__________________
"You've got to be oh so smart, or oh so pleasant. For 35 years, I was smart. I recommend pleasant." - Elwood P Dowd What I Got: Larrivee Mahogany/Spruce Satin Parlor Martin OMC-16GTE Martin DSS-17 Alvarez MF60CEOM Fender Special Run Standard Jazz Bass - Flame Maple top - Tobacco Burst (Moderately modified) |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
If there is a perfect electric guitar out there it is the Tele. I played a 1958 Tele for a whole lotta decades but never heard anything even remotely acoustic sounding come out of it.
My favorite attempt at getting an acosutic sound out of a solid body electric is a friend's Tele on which he installed Mike Christian piezo saddles. I love the sound he gets when he adds a bit of neck pickup to the mix which, if I recall, required wiring the tone pot to work as a master volume. What I have never got is why folks who are buy all those electronic gizmos to put in the signal line of their plugged in acoustics just don't get it over with and buy an electric.
__________________
"You start off playing guitars to get girls & end up talking with middle-aged men about your fingernails" - Ed Gerhard |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Gary |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
http://www.fender.com/products/searc...tno=0144500305 This one employs the Aura IC technology, though I don't see it mentioned in the Fender webpage specs. The Sweetwater ad mentions the Aura. http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/TeleAC3SB/ The rosewood bridge is what's curious to me. They are apparently attempting to take a page out of the Lashbrook Naturacoustic bridge's book. Gary Last edited by guitaniac; 01-18-2010 at 12:33 PM. |