-
Listen to your soundman. He hears what you can't hear - the overall FOH mix.
Bedroom tone and stage tone are different.
-
05-03-2018 10:09 AM
-
Try spending more time practicing your guitar unamplified. If the acoustic sound of your guitar doesn’t inspire you then you need to move on to one that does. I had a Benedetto Bravo for a while that I never enjoyed playing unplugged. As a result I was never happy with the amplified tone, so I sadly had to sell it. It was inherently too bright. But to address your immediate problem you do, as many have suggested, need to consider the amp you’re using, the pickup in your guitar, how you set the tone controls on your amp as well as your guitar. Broaden and deepen your listening skills by spending time listening to all the jazz giants, becoming familiar with the whole history of jazz. All the greats have very distinctive and personalized sounds. Don’t limit yourself to guitar players only! There is a beautiful, mysterious, and magical way that spending lots of time listening deeply to great players of all instruments, old and new, will aid you in finding your own sound and voice. More practically, never set your tone knob on zero; mud will always be the result.
Last edited by El Fundo; 05-03-2018 at 10:59 AM.
-
I concur with a lot of what has been written already. The tone required on stage in order to be heard with the rest of the band is much brighter than you can use at home. Listening to the guitarists that you cited, none of them sound like they're playing with the town control on zero. It sounds more like it's on eight or nine. One way to think about it is that when you're playing onstage, your tone is not for you- it's for the listeners. What you are hearing on stage 2 feet from your amp is very different from what people are hearing in the audience. Your bandmates will hear you better, too.
I hear a lot of jazz guitarists using this woofy tone with the knob set on zero and sounding flat, dull and lifeless at gigs. Even Jim Hall's tone was rather bright, even though he is renowned for having this dark warm friendly sound. A lot of that sound was not from the tone knob but from his choices in chord voicings and where he played notes on the neck.
I had a bit of a personal epiphany recently in trying to get an even warm sound across all 6 strings. If the EQ is good for the plain strings, the wound strings sound dead and wooly. If the wound strings sound good, the plain strings are too bright and harsh. I've been experimenting with brighter wound strings so that those strings are closer to the treble strings in sound. Then as I adjust my tone, all of the strings are affected more equally, rather than the usual situation where the plain strings are what we tend to balance for in seeking a dark warm "jazz" tone- because they are the brightest- and the wound strings end up sounding muddy because they were much darker to begin with. I can get warm and retain definition.
-
Good points. The tone knob only cuts high frequencies, but the real need may be to boost warmer frequencies. A parametric EQ can be very helpful. Or an amp with Bandaxall style tone controls.
Originally Posted by jorgemg1984
-
I'd suggest turning the tone control up.
Split the signal.
Run one side into an amp that you'll use as a monitor. Turn down the treble there. You have to hear a sound you like.
Run the other side to the PA either directly or by mic'ing another amp.
Then, explain your desire to the FOH guy and hope for the best.
-
^ I was going to suggest something along these lines -- turning up the tone control and splitting the signal into a brighter feed for the FOH and a darker feed for your monitor/amp. Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
-
Not everyone would agree that the acoustic sound is some kind of indicator. I like a solidly hollow-body electric tone, not just a louder acoustic tone. I have played lots of archtops, typically ES175s, with a very uninspiring unamplified tone, but plugged in, they were wonderful. Originally Posted by El Fundo
Continually insisting on linking the unamplified sound to the amplified tone will almost always lead to an amplified tone that is unremarkable. You gotta let the pickups and amp do what they do. If you want acoustic, buy an archtop with no pickup.
-
I used to own that exact model of guitar. I liked it's size, it's playability and it's appearance. It was a good value for the money. What I didn't like it was that it wasn't a particularly lively sounding guitar and that it was hard to get a "fat" sound out of it. I thought the problem was primarily due to the pickups, and that a pickup upgrade would solve the problem. Ultimately I decided to switch to another guitar because the cost of upgrading two pickups made a different guitar more appealing to me. Originally Posted by Ezequiul
I'm not one to bash the OP for his guitar choice, but on that HJ650 platform I have to agree that the pickups are the weakest link in the package. The guitar itself is a good instrument, and while I have to admit that mine was not particularly lively sounding in an acoustic sense, I have to agree with L-S that that's not a major concern for a guitar with two top-mounted pickups. I think that a pickup change would transform that guitar into a much more tonally satisfying instrument. The only reason that I didn't go that route is because I ran across another guitar that suited my needs better. Originally Posted by LtKojak
I agree that turning up the tone control, and then shaping with a 5-band EQ might be the ticket for getting that added midrange definition while being able to tame the top end.
-
I’m aware that there are exceptions to this rule, ie, a solid body, where the electronics play a much more prominent role. My reason for suggesting this is that if an archtop gives a pleasing acoustic tone and you become accustomed to its natural sound then you can set the amp and guitar tone knobs to where you can at least approximate what is in the guitar acoustically. Of course, as soon as you plug in, the electronics will color the tone. My 275 is much darker, both acoustically and electrically. I find that I have to turn the tone knob much higher than with other archtops I have. Like you I had a VOS 175 and it sounded great both acoustically and plugged in. I had a Guild X-700 which had a pretty thick solid carved spruce top which sounded okay unplugged, yet amplified it was amazing. But I also had a Corona-built Guild X-500 whose acoustic sound, being pretty uninspiring, could not be saved no matter how I EQ’d it. The Benedetto was too bright either way. My Andersen Streamline was jaw-droppingly beautiful both ways but I did have to add a tone knob since I lean more toward the dark side. Main point is a bright sounding archtop is going to be bright through an amp and rolling down the tone knob will sound unnatural. But I’ll admit to being mystified by what makes a guitar “right”. Some sound great acoustically but suck when plugged in and vice versa. Some, like my 275 are awesome plugged an unplugged. I do know that the elusive search for tone is ongoing and I hope the OP finds his way. Originally Posted by lawson-stone
Last edited by El Fundo; 05-03-2018 at 05:02 PM.
-
I sympathise with the OP and also with the soundman. I have worked as a live sound mixer for many years for a number of well known artists, so I've seen that side of things.
If your goal is to communicate your music to your audience, you'll need to compromise and brighten the tone up a bit. Otherwise your guitar will be mired in the lower midrange, a region that is inhabited to some degree by many other instruments and overtones. If your sound has no attack and definition, it will get lost in the mush. Also, that frequency range (250-500) is often the first thing the engineer will cut to give the overall mix more clarity.
In other words, you're making both your jobs harder.
It is certainly appropriate to tell the soundman what you're going for, tone-wise, but you need to give him a little more frequency range to work with. Maybe you can place your amp so that you're not hearing the highs so much.
-
Buen Dia
Sounds like you're dealing with a classic issue that we all encounter
I've often found that the tone I love for playing at home is too muddy to work with a band .... I love the sound of a neck pickup, but with a rock band switching to the bridge pickup delivered the tone I wanted
And the rig that sounded so good with my swing bands ..... Heritage Sweet 16 into a Carr rambler ... was painfully bright when I powered it up at home
Buena suerta
-
One point that resonates with me is the issue of too much energy in the low-mids.
I hear amateur and semipro archtop players do that often. I don't know what they're hearing, but in the audience it can be a lot of low notes that are unpleasantly muddy. Too close to the bass and the pianist's left hand.
It seems to me that there's an excellent chance that the soundman is responding to something that's real and needs a solution.
To my ear, even Freddie Green's sound is more trebly than that. It sits nicely isolated in the mix, in the sense that it isn't competing with the piano or bass.
I play a lot with full rhythm section and horns and I like a comping sound that doesn't have a lot of lows. For soloing, it depends on how the band sounds in the room. Often, the low notes don't come out sounding near as good as I imagined. But, if the band is playing quietly, the drummer isn't taking up too much sonic space, the bass player is staying in the low register and the piano is sparse, it can work great. Of course, Wes didn't seem to have this problem.
-
Wes's tone was pretty bright, the thumb taking some of the sharpness out of the attack. He even turned the neck pickup around to try to brighten it up more at one point.
-
Hi ezequiel!
First time writing here, english is not my first languaje so i try to make it as clear as i can.
I agree with various tips already given to you.
First of all change the neck pickup. Dont even doubt about it, its gonna be a several upgrade. The ones that came in that guitars simply lack definition and character. Not necesary a top of the line, boutique builder, extra expensive one, just one good enough to play profesionally, i seriously doubt the original samick ones are at the level of your actual needs.
Other thing you may consider trying is a volume pedal. Lots of modern giging musicians use them for finding the sweet spot on the fly. With the tone full roll down you lose actual volume, or at least it is perceived as such. Every place has different acoustics or even the same place change night to night. Crank up a little more the amp, leave it there and then play with the volume until you find the spot.
For last but not least, dont forget the psichological aspect of the" tone search". You already made up your mind about your sound but you identify it with a visual reference, the number on your tone knob. If its not on zero you already think its not "the sound" youre going for. Forget about the number or position of the knob and think every time you play there its gonna be different acoustics!
Take the advice of the sound guy, dont ignore a professional who is doing his job and gives you a tip. If he is a bad professional i can asure you he wouldnt say anything, cause he wouldnt care.
Mucha mierda con la busqueda! Y avisa donde tocas para ir a ver!
Enviado desde mi SM-J700M mediante Tapatalk
-
Another reason for needing a brighter tone than you think you need is that the projection distance of sound depends heavily on the frequency. The higher the frequency, the more it is attenuated by distance, by IIRC a square factor. Low notes travel much further than higher ones. Elephants use very low frequency sounds to communicate over miles, while crickets can only be heard for a short distance. The treble tones from a guitar start being lost in a few feet, and what sounds good, with decent treble at a couple of feet sounds very different to an audience tens of feet away, and certainly hundreds of feet. If you're playing for an audience, IMO you need more treble than you think you need, by a wide margin, because your ears and theirs are in different places.
-
True that. When I started playing, my cousin, who is a few years older than me, advised me to turn up the treble a little more than seems reasonable, because these frequencies are the first to get lost. Originally Posted by sgosnell
Gesendet von iPad mit Tapatalk
-
You're not really getting what I meant. You are still talking as thought the acoustic sound is the primary sound, and the electrified sound is somehow the second-order sound that is judged by how well it matches the unamplified sound. But that's not it. Originally Posted by El Fundo
I like the ELECTRIC sound of a FULL HOLLOW BODY guitar. I don't like solid bodies. The hollow body has a peculiar resonance that interacts with the strings which in turn end up sending a different signature to the pickups. It results from the open body of the guitar, but it is not necessarily correlate to the acoustic tone. That's also why laminate and solid can sound different. That crazy feature by which the hollow body and arched top picks up the vibration of the strings through the bridge (and other points too) bangs it around and then selectively alters via a resonant feedback loop back through the bridge and tailpiece--that all produces a very complex vibration pattern of the strings that in turn is captured by the pickup.
That's the sound I just love. Joe Pass on his ES175, Jim Hall on his, Wes Montgomery on the L5, it's is first and foremost an electrified sound, and one that is hard to duplicate exactly on a solid body. You can do it of course, pretty close, but it's not what the solid-body "wants" to do.
I also love the acoustic sound of an acoustic archtop, but I don't want my electric sound merely to duplicate that. That means you only have one sound.
The doctrine that "acoustic sound predicts good electric sound" is just not true, and no amount of everyone repeating it over and over like it's the Apostles Creed will make it true. But my experience is that I-and others who prefer the electric sound-can empathize totally with people who really crave that acoustic tone, but acoustic devotees usually cannot even fathom why someone would love the mainly amplified tone of the archtop.
Stop comparing them. Just let each sound be what it is, and if you wish, cultivate an appreciation of each. But I think telling someone to judge the amplified tone by the acoustic tone is a mistake. That's no way to pick a primarily amplified guitar.
-
As I agree with mostly all of your post, just would like to mention, that there are certain properties of a guitar that can already be judged by playing it unplugged. Originally Posted by lawson-stone
Sustain, resonance (in lack of a better word, I mean the opposite of "dead" I think most guitarist will understand) and a couple of others.
Though I totally agree, that these do not predict the electric sound you get plugging it in.
But we're getting off-topic here...
:-)Last edited by DonEsteban; 05-05-2018 at 03:05 PM. Reason: typo
-
Not really off topic at all. He asked how to get a fat jazzy sound. Someone replied that you need a guitar that sounds good acoustically first... I thought that was not accurate. The "fat jazzy sound" in almost every case turns out to mainly be a very electric sound with a fatness that you don't get from an acoustic. It's the synergy that a big hollow body and a pickup create. Originally Posted by DonEsteban
-
Like said before - in the room volume level the tone is fine but easily can get too muddy on higher levels because of acoustic laws.
In other words the more you amplify any wide-range sound (guitar in this case) "the more" bass and low end of spectrum you will hear.
This graph shows the rule:
That's why every sound engineer won't be happy with your tone knob at 0
The truth is also that every stage and venue sounds different so better get used to play your best even if you don't like your sound sometimes.
-
I agree with almost everyone who says turn up the treble, especially live. I would also add -- turn down the bass, way way down!
There a tone I call the "smoke" tone that is a really great sound if you can get it. This is what I mean:
A lot of what can make it work when turning the tone pot all the way down is volume, volume, volume. You need a monsterous amount of headroom, like a Twin. Also, the amp has to be tuned correctly, i.e. more low rolled off than you think and more treble than you think and probably as much midrange as you can get. On the guitar, pickups, pots and caps will make a difference. Note in the above clip the guitar is using p90's which have far more midrange than humbuckers.
-
Don't argue with the soundman, especially if he's experienced working that venue. Assuming he has good ears, he knows the venue and how it responds both empty and with a crowd of people.
I'd give him a little more trebles to work with, or drop the body of the neck pickup and then raise the pole-pieces back up to height to give a little more clarity to the sound. The latter approach is going to be more subtle. I'd avoid the EQ approach myself, but if it works for you, it works.
-
When you get a good sound acoustically (and I don’t mean volume) and become accustomed to hearing it that way, it gives you a reference point for how to set your tone controls to get closer to that sound when plugged in. I’ve been experimenting with that with my 275. Unplugged it has such a sweet and balanced frequency response and I’ve found myself dialing my tone in on gigs until it sounds more like the natural acoustic sound of the guitar, which prevents me from dialing in too many low/low mid frequencies due to habit. That’s all. Originally Posted by DonEsteban
Last edited by El Fundo; 05-05-2018 at 06:42 PM.
-
Yeah that's the magic ! Originally Posted by lawson-stone
I also think FAT strings make for a fat sound
Esp true for the top strings
-
" I guess thick strings can get a big sound, but they also tend to sound "bangy". I use very thin strings - almost like a "rocker"—and try to draw the sound out by playing easily with as few pick-strokes as possible except for accents, etc."
Jim Hall said that. Elsewhere, he mentions an .11 E string.
If we rate "fatness", maybe Jim would rate below, say, Wes and Pat Martino, but his sound was fat enough for me.
My impression is that going up a gauge or two, like from 10 to 12, never solved the problem. That is, if I thought the sound was too thin at 10, I still wasn't satisfied at 12. Higher than that, and I'd be physically uncomfortable with the tension.
There may be other variables to address before string gauge.
Reply With Quote
“Shearing style”
Today, 05:26 PM in Comping, Chords & Chord Progressions