Tone Is In The…
- Thread starter smitty_p
- Start date
eSGEe
Ferengi Ambassador of Trade
Thats easy.......... BOTH -- and toss in Jeanie just for the fun of it
eSGEe
Ferengi Ambassador of Trade
BB kings tone -- is always recognizable
but -- markedly different .....through the years..
early tone
mid year tone........
toward the end .......
different guitars--different amps -- different venues--- WAY DIFFERENT BACKING BANDS --- noticeable variances in tone --
still sounds like BB ...........................................................
but -- markedly different .....through the years..
early tone
mid year tone........
toward the end .......
different guitars--different amps -- different venues--- WAY DIFFERENT BACKING BANDS --- noticeable variances in tone --
still sounds like BB ...........................................................
Amp Mad Scientist
Ambassador of Heresy
No matter what guitar or what amp.
Even if it was an Alamo Fiesta guitar and a 68 Lafayette SS garage sale amp....it would still sound like BB.
OP
DING! DING! DING!
You said it exactly correct!
“Variances in tone -- still sounds like BB.”
The differences in tone are due to the things you noted - different guitars, amps, etc.
But, it is still recognizable as BB because…..you are recognizing his stylistic nuances!
Session 5
Ambassador of Strings & Wings
gball
Ambassador of Boogie
He's got an opinion and it is well reasoned and clearly articulated. And I disagree with him.
Jethro Rocker
Ambassador of Live & Loud Action
And that, to me is called style.
Thats why it sounded like him but as you say "noticeable variances in tone." Does that line not say it all?
gball
Ambassador of Boogie
Have you guys ever tried to explain the concept of "guitar tone" to a non-player? It's a really difficult thing to convey because what we all mean when we use that term is related to but still quite different from just "how it sounds."
Jethro Rocker
Ambassador of Live & Loud Action
To me it is how it sounds. Anything past that emcompasses style and technique. Which could collectively be considered tone I suppose.
Session 5
Ambassador of Strings & Wings
Guitar Tonewood Guide
You may have heard of players who swear by the tone of rosewood on acoustic guitars and wondered what the fuss is all about. The guitar community loves to
unboxguitars.com
OP
I would agree that technique can have some impact on tone. For example, a beginning violin player will have pretty horrid tone! The same can be said of a beginning flautist (flute player), saxophonist, clarinet player, and some other instruments. Recently, I tried playing flute after having not played for quite some time. My lip is pretty flabby and my tone was pretty bad - quite breathy and pitchy. So, I need to put in some work to get both my tone and technique back! So, I acknowledge that there is a sense in which technique can affect tonality, but that is limited.
The problem is that guitar players (to include some very well-known players) conflate the terms. The word “tone” is expanded to mean more than it does, and the word “technique” is constricted to mean less than it does. Unfortunately, we have a bad habit of limiting the term “technique” just to concepts of speed and precision. It goes beyond that. I think “style” is a great synonym. All of those subtle nuances - pick attack, vibrato, string pressure, dynamics, phrasing, timing - these are elements of a person’s personal technique, “style”, if you will. That is why a player (BB King being the current example) can play on different rigs which do sound different, yet still sounds ”like himself.” This is what makes him so memorable. In a way, it reveals that people don’t care about the tone of your rig nearly so much as they care about how you play your rig!
Now, I don’t really fault players like Bonamassa and some others for making statements, like “tone is in the hands,” even though it is objectIvely not exactly correct. Too many players chase tone in endless gear acquisitions, hoping to become better players. A statement like, “tone is in the hands” is a good reality check to someone that no amount of gear is gonna make you sound good if you don’t put in the work. By “sound good” I mean the totality of a person‘s playing.
Nevertheless, I don’t think that is reason to keep misapplying terms.
froman5150
Well-Known Member
I have conversed with Mr. Busey and he says "Tone" unequivocally comes from
Totally
Overcoming
Negative
Energy
Totally
Overcoming
Negative
Energy
OP
I usually have not had much of a problem doing that because the lay person’s understanding of tone is usually aligned more or less with what the word actually denotes - the overall timbre and frequency content of the sound. Now, using guitar-specific concepts like ”crunchy” or “dirty” or “jangley” or “spiky” or “grainy” has sometimes drawn chuckles from my non-guitar playing co-workers! But, they usually get “tone” because they all know how the tone knob works on their radios. They all know that a saxophone sounds different from a clarinet, etc. They understand “tone” to mean, well, “tone”.
The problem is that guitar players load ideas into the word that really are more related to concepts of style and personal technique, so we create our own confusion.