Swindon Music

Unless you are David Gilmore, other than that....Amen brother!

what a load of misguided, pretentious nonsense =P

pedals change the sound, the notes remain the same. also, i have never, ever heard anyone managing to 'hide' being effects who were actually trying to play, simply not possible.

a C on a clean guitar with delay is different to a C on a distorted guitar, they are different to a C on a piano and that's different to a C on a violin and that's a world away from playing a C on a synth set to a couple of detuned square waves and a huge filter sweep with the resonance pretty high.

you use the sounds for what you wish to achieve, not to fit into some cock & bull ideal of how to play guitar, if you are only concerned about the notes, why does the choice of wood for the body matter, the pickups in the guitar, the lead, the amp, the speakers... even the volume you play at alters the sound, pedals are merely an extension of that, if you can create the sound you want without them, that's cool, if you want to go through 15 delay pedals, that's cool. it's only the end result that matters, not the means of doing it.

The last sentence basically sums up my point pretty well. However, our views of 'the end result' are different. I see the end result as being a great piece of music that takes my brain out of whatever it was it was thinking about and into a different place, the notes being the means of doing that. Your idea of the end result, from what you're saying, is the overall sound; where the instruments/effects/whatever is the means. That just isn't how I see and create music, but if that's how you enjoy it - fill your boots.

If I played Mary Had a Little Lamb through 12 different amps on 3 double necked guitars strung back to front with bass strings and midi pickups through 15 synthesisers and £750,000 worth of effects it's still Mary had a little lamb. It's the careful selection of notes that differentiate an original band from a covers band (not that covers band are 'wrong' of course, they serve a purpose).

Plus, I did not say I was only concerned with notes - I said that to me the notes are more important. I see my guitar as tool for iterating melodies and harmonies I have written, rather than as merely a sound to feed into an amplifier. Why amplify a guitar at all if you've got no music to play?

Wank fodder!

what the hell makes you think i see music differently?


yes, it can still be the same notes, but how it sounds is what causes music to effect you in different ways. like how many records are in a pentatonic scale? do they sound the same... no!

i'm not just a guitar player and i won't amplify anything i don't feel will sound good with it and choose to perform it on what i deem is appropriate and with whatever effects necessary to get it spot on for how i want it to sound if i need them.
that's not to say melodies and all that aren't important, but i'm not trying to make melodies work for one or two sounds, which is what the majority of guitarists try to do and that's why guitar is a very dull instrument to listen to generally.

I currently have 18 pedals of varying sorts on my pedal board at present and they make a beautiful sound. If only you bastards out there would give us gigs more people would hear the beautiful sound that I make via my guitars and amp.

Give it a rest you two. Whatever! Each to their own eh.

I think I'll save the other half of that bottle of JD for tomorrow. Goodnight,

Peace, out...

Again your last sentence is what divides us musically.

It depends on what makes music dull for you. If it's the sounds used, then you see music differently to me. It's not wrong or right, but different.

I guess I could say I'm not just a guitarist, though I would never class myself as a singer, in the same way that I don't class myself as a plumber, cause I know f**k all about plumbing. However, I know what I like to hear when I go to see a band; musicians writing great music and enjoying it. If the sounds they use are innovative and great sounding - bonus.

When it comes to 'whats more important' - the melodic and harmonic will always be more important to me than the sonic and timbral. I would rather see a band playing great music through s**t equipment, than a s**t band playing through great equipment. Ergo, the music is more important than the sound to me.

I see what you're saying that alot of musicians are limiting themselves with their tonal qualities by the equipment they use - and I would agree, however alot of musicians don't actually care all that much, because they're busy writing music. Also, alot of musicians don't have the spare cash to start experimenting with various pieces of equipment... I don't for one.

so an album of sequentially arranged sine waves of varying pitches will be forthcoming from Soulsmith ?

Did he come before or after Knuckles?

Ha... funny...

I said that the music is more important than the sound, not that sound was irrelevant - that would be a stupid thing to say

Bum fluff.

You're just trying to up your post count now...

Oh yes, just had another thought about this; classical music.

Alot of classical music is timbrally (if that's a word) very similar, yet is classical music all the same?

Not the last time I checked.

Classic bum fluff

Sean, you need to do alot more spamming to get your counts up.