But...it's an ELECTRIC guitar, man...

I give you RESIN WOOD (and -- I have owned MANY guitars from 40.00 P.O.S to vintage Gibson --- this thing plays and sounds AMAZING )
all original -- 100% ---(except the strings)
if I was told tomorrow -- "HERE -- this is your ONLY guitar forever" ...........................I would be like, er ......o.k. "cool"
Norlin era
bolt neck
simply ..................................................works, period
Sonex 180 and mesa.jpg
 
Sp8ctre said:
I still think it's minimal in electrics and the original statement I was discussing was an electric guitar that was dead acoustically could still be a fine instrument plugged in.

If in fact the wood plays a part it will play it's part whether dead acoustically or not...
Click to expand...
This is true I suppose. I thought the original argument was that the guitar had no effect whatsoever on the tone and it was only the electronics. I guess I misread the post.
 
gball said:
I was having this conversation with an old playing buddy. He claims that if he picks up an electric guitar and it doesn't "sing" acoustically then he won't even plug it in, no matter how nice it plays. I contend that you have no idea how an electric actually sounds unless it is plugged in (and two of mine are absolute crap acoustically but sound magical through an amp, and I've played others that rang out beautifully unplugged but were dogs when jacked). What say you TTR'ers?
Click to expand...

you are right. plus loads of other factors the player himself induces on the sound.
 
eSGEe said:
I give you RESIN WOOD (and -- I have owned MANY guitars from 40.00 P.O.S to vintage Gibson --- this thing plays and sounds AMAZING )
all original -- 100% ---(except the strings)
if I was told tomorrow -- "HERE -- this is your ONLY guitar forever" ...........................I would be like, er ......o.k. "cool"
Norlin era
bolt neck
simply ..................................................works, period
View attachment 47453
Click to expand...


Adrian, I give you Block Wood


It is really for heavy metal but this guy plays Spanish music on it.
 
I know that my homemade Les Paul and the Chibster are almost indiscernible on a recording, and both use the same Epiphones H8BN/H6BN pickup combination.

I like being able to switch guitars without the need to re-EQ everything.

Can't tell you why they sound so similar...
 
Robert Herndon said:
I know that my homemade Les Paul and the Chibster are almost indiscernible on a recording, and both use the same Epiphones H8BN/H6BN pickup combination.

I like being able to switch guitars without the need to re-EQ everything.

Can't tell you why they sound so similar...
Click to expand...

My two Les Pauls sounds remarkably dissimilar. The '79 has T-Tops, and is the very essence of '70's and '80's hard rock; with crunch its instant Thin Lizzy or UFO, crank the gain a bit and magically you are Glenn Tipton or Matthias Jabs. The '16 has '57/'57+ and is radically different; less aggressive, less compressed than the T-Tops, but more open and shimmery in the top end. Better suited for more modern sounds. And I guess that's to be expected since both guitars and their pickups are very much of their era. Think about it - why was Gibson putting 300k and 100k pots in Les Pauls at that time? It's not because they were cheaper, it's because of how the guitars were being used - plugged into gigantic stacks ripping your face off. A lot of us have had the experience of a too-bright guitar in that environment and it ain't fun to get the balance right, but every time I plug a Norlin Les Paul into a firebreathing amp it's imediately "yeah, that's the ticket"
 
gball said:
My two Les Pauls sounds remarkably dissimilar. The '79 has T-Tops, and is the very essence of '70's and '80's hard rock; with crunch its instant Thin Lizzy or UFO, crank the gain a bit and magically you are Glenn Tipton or Matthias Jabs. The '16 has '57/'57+ and is radically different; less aggressive, less compressed than the T-Tops, but more open and shimmery in the top end. Better suited for more modern sounds. And I guess that's to be expected since both guitars and their pickups are very much of their era. Think about it - why was Gibson putting 300k and 100k pots in Les Pauls at that time? It's not because they were cheaper, it's because of how the guitars were being used - plugged into gigantic stacks ripping your face off. A lot of us have had the experience of a too-bright guitar in that environment and it ain't fun to get the balance right, but every time I plug a Norlin Les Paul into a firebreathing amp it's imediately "yeah, that's the ticket"
Click to expand...
Great point gBall..in this serious gear war i went through..learned a lot..pair things up when they were made..use them how they were used..results are spot on...force other things to emulate..well..it just chases the original..but each person has a dif aspect of this gear thing.. what they like doing & thats the fun of it. Have come to conclusion, least things in the signal path... more i like the sound & the consistency from day to day as the music gets made ..then transfers to the band setting
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top