Pasquale Grasso reverb?

[lesyeuxnoirs]

I am sure that this must have been asked but I can't seem to find the answer...

But does anybody know what, if any, reverb (pedal) PQ uses with his Vintage 47 amp? I have listened to a lot through headphones today and I am sure that there's at least a hint of reverb on some recordings/performances. I understand, of course, that it might have been added after the fact but asking on the off chance if somebody on here happens to know

[John A.]

Look at this video:

Pasquale Grasso Trio - Live at Mezzrow Jazz Club - 11/10/2025 - YouTube

No pedals, and no sound of reverb. I’m 99.99% sure any reverb you hear on his recordings is added in the mix. That’s nearly always how it’s done unless you’re specifically trying to use reverb as an effect (e.g. twangy/boings spring reverb) rather than to add a subtle sense of space.

[Christian Miller]

It’s the special ‘Mezzrow reverb’ which is the exact size and proportions of a smallish jazz club in New York City. Probably best for rack mount rigs.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bmw2002]

I saw him in a trio setting a week ago tonight at The Katherine Hepburn Cultural Center here in Connecticut (and was pretty close to the stage). I didn't notice any pedals between the guitar and the amp. Wonderful show.

[brent.h]

He said once in an interview that his only pedal was a footstool. Love it.

[Christian Miller]

He said once in an interview that his only pedal was a footstool. Love it.

Fake news. He has a dynarette guitar cushion. Expensive but it’s the only way to get the tone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[djg]

Fake news. He has a dynarette guitar cushion. Expensive but it’s the only way to get the tone.

what tone?

[Christian Miller]

what tone?

How dare you. Every spotty oik in my vicinity is going for pure midrange. It’s the future.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GuyBoden]

I can't understand why any Jazz guitar player would be dismissive about Pasquale Grasso's exceptional playing.

[John A.]

I can't understand why any Jazz guitar player would be dismissive about Pasquale Grasso's exceptional playing.

Q: How many guitar players does it take to change a light bulb?
A: That should be me up there on that ladder.

[sgosnell]

I can't understand why any Jazz guitar player would be dismissive about Pasquale Grasso's exceptional playing.

I think the jokes are zipping by well above your head.

[joe2758]

I think the jokes are zipping by well above your head.

and, either way it was just about tone not his playing at all. Joe Pass at times had terrible tone, he is still considered to be a decent player

[GuyBoden]

I think the jokes are zipping by well above your head.

I didn't think it was a joke, but I do know that Pasquale Grasso's incredible playing is 'zipping ' well above my head.
Some folk have always been down on his tone and the trio's tone.

[sgosnell]

I didn't get the impression that anyone was dissing Grasso's tone, just making jokes about guitar players and tone in general. Text is a terrible medium for expressing humor, it's so difficult to give context and tone of voice.

[Christian Miller]

and, either way it was just about tone not his playing at all. Joe Pass at times had terrible tone, he is still considered to be a decent player

TBH what I have learned is that a lot of what constitutes jazz guitar tone is in the room. Which sort of relates to the topic of this thread (no I CAN do it sometimes.)

What makes a lot of the older guitar players on Blue Note etc sound nice is that the amp is often NOT close mic'ed on those old records, and the rooms are good sounding rooms. So you get a natural space to the sound.

Joe Pass used to plug straight into a PA. Actually, with an ES175 that sounds a lot better than you would think. Live you naturally get some ambience from the venue. However, if you then listen to the DI'd signal it would be absolutely unforgiving. Joe was a legend and still sounds great of course, but it''s not a flattering sound. No-one sounds their best without a bit of room.

I heard one from Lage Lund the other day, probably one of the players whose tone I like the most. It was a live outdoor gig close miked on the amp and just sounded very tight and dry. Even if you put reverb on that it still lacks dimension.

Re: Pasquale's sound - it's not a sound I personally seek to emulate (although lots of younger players do), but there's an interesting concept behind it. He's fairly quiet in the mix, and having this very mid range sound allows him to sit under the level of the drums while still cutting through. I think he's hearing the guitar like an upright piano.

[nyc chaz]

What is it some kind of sacrilege to say you don't like Grasso's tone?I've never cared for it but saying that doesn't cast shade on his playing ability.Growing up i was a big Joe Puma fan but quite frankly at times Joe sounded like he didn't know there was a tone knob on his guitar or amp.

[GuyBoden]

What is it some kind of sacrilege to say you don't like Grasso's tone?

Yes.

(I can make jokes.)

[John A.]

TBH what I have learned is that a lot of what constitutes jazz guitar tone is in the room. Which sort of relates to the topic of this thread (no I CAN do it sometimes.)

What makes a lot of the older guitar players on Blue Note etc sound nice is that the amp is often NOT close mic'ed on those old records, and the rooms are good sounding rooms. So you get a natural space to the sound.

Joe Pass used to plug straight into a PA. Actually, with an ES175 that sounds a lot better than you would think. Live you naturally get some ambience from the venue. However, if you then listen to the DI'd signal it would be absolutely unforgiving. Joe was a legend and still sounds great of course, but it''s not a flattering sound. No-one sounds their best without a bit of room.

I heard one from Lage Lund the other day, probably one of the players whose tone I like the most. It was a live outdoor gig close miked on the amp and just sounded very tight and dry. Even if you put reverb on that it still lacks dimension.

Re: Pasquale's sound - it's not a sound I personally seek to emulate (although lots of younger players do), but there's an interesting concept behind it. He's fairly quiet in the mix, and having this very mid range sound allows him to sit under the level of the drums while still cutting through. I think he's hearing the guitar like an upright piano.

I think you might be overstating the importance of room sound on recordings. For instance, Van Gelder was known for close mic'ing, using plate reverb, and processing (eq, compression) pretty heavily, though his recordings got less colored sounding over time. Also, I'm pretty sure that JP playing directly into the PA was something he only did in his latter career. FWIW, I saw him twice solo -- the first time was in '81, with the Ibanez guitar through an amp. The second time was shortly before he died with the Epiphone signature guitar direct to the PA. I don't remember whether there was reverb on his sound, but given the location (Blue Note in NYC), I'd guess that there was. He also played some of the time acoustically.

I like PG's sound. In general, I like that sort of mid-rangey, tweed-amp kind of sound.

[rrbasic]

I can’t find anything wrong with Pasquale Grasso but my listening isn’t really analytical, it's purely for pleasure.

[Christian Miller]

I think you might be overstating the importance of room sound on recordings. For instance, Van Gelder was known for close mic'ing, using plate reverb, and processing (eq, compression) pretty heavily, though his recordings got less colored sounding over time. Also, I'm pretty sure that JP playing directly into the PA was something he only did in his latter career. FWIW, I saw him twice solo -- the first time was in '81, with the Ibanez guitar through an amp. The second time was shortly before he died with the Epiphone signature guitar direct to the PA. I don't remember whether there was reverb on his sound, but given the location (Blue Note in NYC), I'd guess that there was. He also played some of the time acoustically.

I like PG's sound. In general, I like that sort of mid-rangey, tweed-amp kind of sound.

I’m talking about a mix that features a load of room mic of the sound bouncing off flat surfaces etc, but a sense of an acoustic space. This is hard to get in old live recordings from the mixing desk than studio recordings for obvious reasons. These days there are more options for doing stuff to the sound. Even in the 60s they added a bit of reverb to live Wes.

So I’m going back to one of my reference recordings for great classic jazz guitar tone - Midnight Blue - and I’m hearing a three dimensional guitar sound which feels like it’s in a space - but with no reverb. There’s plate reverb on the sax but none I can hear on the guitar.

My sense of it would be that if this is close mic’s there’s a lot of leakage through the other microphones and that gives the guitar more three dimensionality in the mix. But honestly I don’t know. I would have said the mic was backed off a bit from the speaker and put off axis as well, but clearly you are more informed.

If I compare this sound to Kenny on his live Village Vanguard record - why does it sound so much less 3d to my ears? It sounds dynamically quite flat too somehow. If both were close miked only what gives? Quality of the microphone? Was Van Gelder just that much of a genius?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mr. beaumont]

I’m talking about a mix that features a load of room mic of the sound bouncing off flat surfaces etc, but a sense of an acoustic space. This is hard to get in old live recordings from the mixing desk than studio recordings for obvious reasons. These days there are more options for doing stuff to the sound. Even in the 60s they added a bit of reverb to live Wes.

So I’m going back to one of my reference recordings for great classic jazz guitar tone - Midnight Blue - and I’m hearing a three dimensional guitar sound which feels like it’s in a space - but with no reverb. There’s plate reverb on the sax but none I can hear on the guitar.

My sense of it would be that if this is close mic’s there’s a lot of leakage through the other microphones and that gives the guitar more three dimensionality in the mix. But honestly I don’t know. I would have said the mic was backed off a bit from the speaker and put off axis as well, but clearly you are more informed.

If I compare this sound to Kenny on his live Village Vanguard record - why does it sound so much less 3d to my ears? It sounds dynamically quite flat too somehow. If both were close miked only what gives? Quality of the microphone? Was Van Gelder just that much of a genius?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Midnight Blue is a wild example...RVG had to be experimenting with something there, and caught lightning in a bottle. Kenny, or any guitar player for that matter, never sounded like that on Blue Note before or after. Kenny always sounded great to me on Blue Note but man that record is something special.

[John A.]

I’m talking about a mix that features a load of room mic of the sound bouncing off flat surfaces etc, but a sense of an acoustic space. This is hard to get in old live recordings from the mixing desk than studio recordings for obvious reasons. These days there are more options for doing stuff to the sound. Even in the 60s they added a bit of reverb to live Wes.

So I’m going back to one of my reference recordings for great classic jazz guitar tone - Midnight Blue - and I’m hearing a three dimensional guitar sound which feels like it’s in a space - but with no reverb. There’s plate reverb on the sax but none I can hear on the guitar.

Listening to that now through headphones -- for sure there's a lot of plate on the sax and either none or way less on the guitar on the solos. I wouldn't hazard a guess as to how it's mic'ed, but it sounds dry enough to be close-mic'ed to me.

My sense of it would be that if this is close mic’s there’s a lot of leakage through the other microphones and that gives the guitar more three dimensionality in the mix. But honestly I don’t know. I would have said the mic was backed off a bit from the speaker and put off axis as well, but clearly you are more informed.

Definitely not better informed, just more recently googled. The stuff I've read suggests that in the original living room studio RVG did more stuff to prevent leakage (close micing, baffles, etc.), but in the later purpose-built space (post-59) he relied more on the acoustics of the room.

If I compare this sound to Kenny on his live Village Vanguard record - why does it sound so much less 3d to my ears? It sounds dynamically quite flat too somehow. If both were close miked only what gives? Quality of the microphone? Was Van Gelder just that much of a genius?

Supposedly he was very secretive about mic'ing. He wouldn't allow photos of his studio set-ups and would even do things like hide secret mics inside Neuman mic bodies. So I have no insight there. Probably worth noting the Vanguard record is live at the Vanguard (duh) and the engineer is credited as Phil Macy, whereas Midnight Blue was recorded at the later RVG studio and engineered by him, so there are enough differences there that it's probably impossible to pinpoint any one reason they sound different (other than obvious stuff like the plate reverb on the sax).

[Rickco]

"For instance, Van Gelder was known for close mic'ing, using plate reverb, and processing (eq, compression) pretty heavily, though his recordings got less colored sounding over time. "
Id like to know where that info came from, We lived near him and my father was at his studio several times, never heard he was "known" for close micing many of his live BN recordings would have had to be close miced or all you would have heard was the broad at the bar that couldnt shut up. Micing decisions are based on phase relationships more than anything else. Back in Rudys BN days there wasnt much "processing" being used, mic placement was based on phase, environment and knowing how to deal with bleed. Modern digital recording uses close micing and processing mainly because its hard to find a great sounding room and people are used to a processed sound now. No offense but Van Gelder was known for some of the greatest jazz recordings ever in some of the toughest acoustic environments, they werent "colored" he knew how to mic. Al Schmidt "close miced" also in the studio using omnis! I just attended a symphony performance in a large concert hall I have been in many times, they usually use (if anything) a Decca tree and some spots. This time they had a KSM32 on almost every instument very close. I know the sound man and asked him about it, he said the touring company was in charge and just wanted him to send the over 50 mono tracks for them to mix and master themselves! The point is there is no correct way to mic, each mic placement has to be considered relative to environment etc. Rudy certainly knew this.

[bluejaybill]

"For instance, Van Gelder was known for close mic'ing, using plate reverb, and processing (eq, compression) pretty heavily, though his recordings got less colored sounding over time. "
Id like to know where that info came from, We lived near him and my father was at his studio several times, never heard he was "known" for close micing many of his live BN recordings would have had to be close miced or all you would have heard was the broad at the bar that couldnt shut up. Micing decisions are based on phase relationships more than anything else. Back in Rudys BN days there wasnt much "processing" being used, mic placement was based on phase, environment and knowing how to deal with bleed. Modern digital recording uses close micing and processing mainly because it's hard to find a great sounding room and people are used to a processed sound now. No offense but Van Gelder was known for some of the greatest jazz recordings ever in some of the toughest acoustic environments, they werent "colored" he knew how to mic. Al Schmidt "close miced" also in the studio using omnis! I just attended a symphony performance in a large concert hall I have been in many times, they usually use (if anything) a Decca tree and some spots. This time they had a KSM32 on almost every instument very close. I know the sound man and asked him about it, he said the touring company was in charge and just wanted him to send the over 50 mono tracks for them to mix and master themselves! The point is there is no correct way to mic, each mic placement has to be considered relative to environment etc. Rudy certainly knew this.

This is pretty much what I would have thought, Rudy knew his room, knew his gear, and probably there would have been some bleed as well. His piano sound is iconic, pretty much the sound of jazz piano for a decade, but it isn't really that great of a piano sound, there are probably blankets over the soundboard or other methods other than that reduce bleed.

The live recordings were in somewhat unfamiliar and non-optimal rooms, with a need to reject audience noise as much as possible. All live recordings are a compromise between the spontaneity of the performance and the limitations imposed by the acoustics.

Regarding orchestras, I have done several of those sessions, and the preferred method is the Decca tree as you say, and then spot mikes over either sections or pairs of instruments. The conductor is mixing "in the room" as if he is doing a live orchestra performance, which of course he is, bringing up and down instruments by gesture.

Ideally the mixer can rely on a correctly placed tree, which is a beautiful aural mix of an orchestra, and just use the spot mikes as a slight push during the sections where they need to be emphasized a bit.

[Christian Miller]

"For instance, Van Gelder was known for close mic'ing, using plate reverb, and processing (eq, compression) pretty heavily, though his recordings got less colored sounding over time. "
Id like to know where that info came from, We lived near him and my father was at his studio several times, never heard he was "known" for close micing many of his live BN recordings would have had to be close miced or all you would have heard was the broad at the bar that couldnt shut up. Micing decisions are based on phase relationships more than anything else. Back in Rudys BN days there wasnt much "processing" being used, mic placement was based on phase, environment and knowing how to deal with bleed. Modern digital recording uses close micing and processing mainly because its hard to find a great sounding room and people are used to a processed sound now. No offense but Van Gelder was known for some of the greatest jazz recordings ever in some of the toughest acoustic environments, they werent "colored" he knew how to mic. Al Schmidt "close miced" also in the studio using omnis! I just attended a symphony performance in a large concert hall I have been in many times, they usually use (if anything) a Decca tree and some spots. This time they had a KSM32 on almost every instument very close. I know the sound man and asked him about it, he said the touring company was in charge and just wanted him to send the over 50 mono tracks for them to mix and master themselves! The point is there is no correct way to mic, each mic placement has to be considered relative to environment etc. Rudy certainly knew this.

That's what I would have thought. This comes from my own experience which is that I am always happiest with my guitar sound when there's some room mics as well as a mic on the amp - there's a local studio that does this nicely. And this is in quite a dry, but nice sounding room. Mic the box too! Wouldn't work for very modern/electric and affected stuff.

For me recording stuff at home, I find IR's very useful on a DI'd sound.

I'd also have expected the current obsession with absolute isolation to be a relatively recent phenomenon because as you say, a by-product of many modern studios not having great sounding live rooms, and also because it is such a godsend when money and time are tight that you can fix takes, and the music is often now much more ambitious, complicated and virtuoso. The bigger problem than the guitar here for me is that this doesn't work for drums.. you do need a good sounding space for jazz drums IMO. So so many jazz albums that get put out on a budget get let down by the drum sound.

But then... this is my idea of close miking gone wrong and it's contemporary jazz guitar with drive. It's brutal. Moreno is a great enough player to get past it, but it's notable that none of his other records have his guitar sounding like this. It has to be a conscious choice for everything to be so dry (Nigel Godrich with Radiohead on In Rainbows influence maybe?), but it's especially brutal on the guitar which is mercifully low in the mix. I would be unhappy with this sound going out on a commercial recording.

This is nothing to do with the calibre of the players who are all world class.