This 6 vs. 2 point tremolo talk..

[Cagey]

I don't think he's complaining about the reality of it as much as how abused the term itself is. It seems nobody can talk about anything without referencing tone somehow, like it's some sort of magic talisman. Makes people crazy. "If I change my pickguard screws from chrome to black, will it affect my tone?"  Well, yeah, if you're Eric Johnson. He can hear when they change light bulbs in the men's room at that Shell station on 8 mile road in Detroit all the way down in Texas. Or, so he would have you believe. Of course, the nimrods who repeat that stuff are just entertaining him.

I would do the same thing. I used to know some "reporters" and "journalists". You can feed them damn near anything and they'll eat it up with a spoon and regurgitate it on the general public as if it's god's own truth. They don't know any better. They're trained to write, barely. They don't know anything about anything else. They're just skilled, attention-starved parrots.

 

[JamesL]

I don't think he's complaining about the reality of it as much as how abused the term itself is. It seems nobody can talk about anything without referencing tone somehow, like it's some sort of magic talisman.

Well said. haha +1

 

[pabloman]

My PRS trems work just as smooth and are just as stable as any 2 point trem I've ever owned. Plus they have great tone :guitarplayer2:

 

[mayfly]

I'm going to start saying 'vibe' instead of 'tone'

 

[Superlizard]

I don't think he's complaining about the reality of it as much as how abused the term itself is. It seems nobody can talk about anything without referencing tone somehow, like it's some sort of magic talisman. Makes people crazy.

So where's he reading the term "tone" whereupon it's being used (as you say) as some sort of magic talisman here - thus causing
him to complain?

I found that statement very odd considering this is a guitarist forum - it'd be the same as if I were a chef posting
on a foodie board and said, "anyone else here tired of hearing the term 'flavor'?"  :icon_scratch:

 

[Cagey]

It's entirely possible he's found out that The Unofficial Warmoth Forum isn't the only musician-oriented forum on the 'net. I know, I know. It's strange, but true. But, I'll give you that your analogy is appropriate. You can't talk about musical instruments without talking about tone any more than you can talk about food without discussing flavor, or paint without discussing color. Still, the term does seem to be overused, often as a justification to do or not do things that either wouldn't affect it, or have so little effect as to be insignificant, or in support of lame, insupportable practices. The capacitor construction argument comes immediately to mind. The idea that capacitors of identical capacity have a different "tone" based on whether they're made of mylar, paper over oil, polystyrene, etc. is just ludicrous.

 

[Superlizard]

It's entirely possible he's found out that The Unofficial Warmoth Forum isn't the only musician-oriented forum on the 'net. I know, I know. It's strange, but true. But, I'll give you that your analogy is appropriate. You can't talk about musical instruments without talking about tone any more than you can talk about food without discussing flavor, or paint without discussing color. Still, the term does seem to be overused, often as a justification to do or not do things that either wouldn't affect it, or have so little effect as to be insignificant, or in support of lame, insupportable practices.

Sure there's snake oil being sold... but that's nothing new.  But if you know your "trade" well enough, it should be a non-issue beyond getting a chuckle
out of seeing the next Edward Van Heusen Tone pickup or Jimi Certified strat.

The capacitor construction argument comes immediately to mind. The idea that capacitors of identical capacity have a different "tone" based on whether they're made of mylar, paper over oil, polystyrene, etc. is just ludicrous.

Depends on how picky about your tone you are, and how deep into this hobby you want to get.    :icon_jokercolor:

I'm not gonna stamp the cap argument (or carbon-comp vs. metal film resistor argument) with a 100% "your tone will radically change" seal, but I have no doubt there's
a very slight difference because I have taken the time to test some of these theories.  Different composition caps for example will affect the smoothness of the treble - when I put together my JTM45 retro PTP kit, I specifically slapped ceramic caps in strategic areas because of their effect to provide more "crunch" on the top end.   Paper-in-oil is typically smoother treble.  Guys who build amps usually prefer Orange Drops for the Fender sound, etc...

The other thing that must be pointed out is that when it comes to these slight tonal quality changes that one can do with quality hardware and/or
different composition materials, the average Joe weekend-guitar-wanker playing his Superhighoutputbucker loaded guitar thru his
Death Metal Uberdistortion stomp thru his SS Crate fuzzamp with the gain cranked to 11 but the master vol at 1 isn't gonna hear a
damn difference - His tone is so compressed and distorted that you could play a cardboard Danelectro thru the same rig and get the same exact tone.

 

[Superlizard]

Check this out (just one example):

http://www.skguitar.com/SKGS/sk/CapTest/CapTest.htm

 

[stubhead]

Interesting that Mr. Lizard specifically mentions using cheap ceramic caps because they're nastier....

specifically slapped ceramic caps in strategic areas because of their effect to provide more "crunch" on the top end.   Paper-in-oil is typically smoother treble.

Both Leo Fender and Jim Marshall were businessmen who quite understandably used the cheapest components they could get in bulk that could do at least an adequate job. They used point-to point wiring because there was no way (for them) to make etched boards cheaply back then. And Fender amps were designed to stay clean as possible, up to the limits of most of their components - which is why booster pedals used to be so popular - you needed one to kick a Twin Reverb into distortion.

So, very much of what's marketed is specifically designed to duplicate or surpass the sounds of cheap components driven past their design limits - It's somewhat amusing to hear about a $400 stompbox that's supposed to sound like the cheapest, smallest old tube amp driven past it's specs to death-rattle point.

P.S. I suspect Cagey & Senior Lizardo may be talking about caps in different contexts - in am amp, some of the tonal* circuitry has caps with power running through them, while in a passive guitar tone* circuit the cap is just bleeding off to ground. And in that context, I agree with Cagey - putting a $20 oil cap in a guitar seems awfully suspect, in terms of "improving" the tone*.

*(Darn hard to avoid, isn't it?) :blob7:

 

[mayfly]

just say 'vibe', man.

 

[drewfx]

Check this out (just one example):

http://www.skguitar.com/SKGS/sk/CapTest/CapTest.htm

One example of what?

A useless pseudo-scientific test lacking any of the controls real science requires?

 

[Superlizard]

Interesting that Mr. Lizard specifically mentions using cheap ceramic caps because they're nastier....

specifically slapped ceramic caps in strategic areas because of their effect to provide more "crunch" on the top end.   Paper-in-oil is typically smoother treble.

  Yeah, they're "grainier" with the treble, which to me = "crunchier top end".  My Marshall's gotta crunch or it ain't a Marshall!  :icon_jokercolor:

Both Leo Fender and Jim Marshall were businessmen who quite understandably used the cheapest components they could get in bulk that could do at least an adequate job. They used point-to point wiring because there was no way (for them) to make etched boards cheaply back then.

Very true and still holds true today.  I don't think some people realize that in today's modern, hi-tech world, guitar gear manufacturers
still cut costs by using the cheapest components.  It's like they assume since it's the 21 Century, any gear made is superior
to 20th Century gear.  The real question is, are the cheapest components found in the 20th Century superior to the cheapest
components found in the 21st Century?  My estimated guess is that in some cases, yes.  Not to mention construction techniques...
Is PTP superior to PCB?  Tonewise, no - but construction-wise and repair-wise yes.  etc...  seen these new amps?  A lot of
them look like laptop guts on the inside.  Ribbon cables, PCB-mounted t00b sockets, PCB-mounted jacks, etc...

 

[Superlizard]

Check this out (just one example):

http://www.skguitar.com/SKGS/sk/CapTest/CapTest.htm

One example of what?

A useless pseudo-scientific test lacking any of the controls real science requires?

I didn't know tone-testing different cap constructions required real science.  Hell, I didn't know anything
guitar/amp related required real science before it would be acceptable as fact. 

Would you have preferred he posted a pic of himself in a white lab coat with a bunsen burner on the table for authenticity?
Or perhaps he should have thrown each capacitor in a particle collider for maximum accuracy... :icon_jokercolor:

He basically echoes what I have been saying - these audible differences are small, but there nonetheless.

Bottom line is many people can hear the differences.  Sure, some companies jump on this and
sell snake oil to make a profit.  But said snake oil should have no bearing on the fact that some people
can still hear a difference.  The difference is there regardless if "Vintage Guitar Inc" sells paper-in-oil
caps at $100 a pop or not.

Overall, I take a middle position on all this tone stuff.  I do not sit on the neophyte side who pooh-poohs
everything tone-related and just buys name-brand cuz it "r0x0rz", nor do I sit on the audiophool side who
claims that gold-plated dog doo sounds better than regular dog doo.  Some concepts I pish-poshed until
I actually did some testing of my own; then changed my mind.  Some concepts have a minimal tone
effect, but I cannot deny there is an effect.  Some concepts are pure hogwash/snake oil.

But if you care about your tone, you should experiment and study every aspect of your gear.
The problem is, that takes effort.  It's far easier to mock people on the internet who fuss over
every little aspect of their gear (because they care about their tone) than to break out the soldering
iron and do your own experimenting.

 

[drewfx]

Check this out (just one example):

http://www.skguitar.com/SKGS/sk/CapTest/CapTest.htm

One example of what?

A useless pseudo-scientific test lacking any of the controls real science requires?

I didn't know tone-testing different cap constructions required real science.  Hell, I didn't know anything
guitar/amp related required real science before it would be acceptable as fact. 

Would you have preferred he posted a pic of himself in a white lab coat with a bunsen burner on the table for authenticity?
Or perhaps he should have thrown each capacitor in a particle collider for maximum accuracy... :icon_jokercolor:

He basically echoes what I have been saying - these audible differences are small, but there nonetheless.

Bottom line is many people can hear the differences. 

I would agree that many people think they can hear the difference.

And that at least that guy bothered to measure the capacitances of different caps before testing.

But if you know anything about human audio perception, you know that you can't use a phrase like "small but audible difference" without also adding "confirmed by double blind (or ABX) testing" if you want it to mean anything. People don't like to do proper tests because it's often a pain in the neck to do so, and they often go in "knowing" the result so they don't see why it's necessary.

"Casual" listening tests are useful for making subjective judgments, but they have been demonstrated time and again to be completely useless for drawing any conclusions regarding small but (supposedly) audible differences.

The point is, if you want to show graphs and whatnot to try to add the weight of science to your conclusions, you have to have proper controls and dot all your i's and cross all your t's. One of the reasons the common man has such a poor view of science is because so many people do science poorly.

I'd love it if you could show me a test of passive tone caps where people:

1. Did properly controlled, repeatable double blind or ABX testing.
2. Took objective measurements that confirmed the subjective DBT/ABX test results.

Such a test may well exist, but I've yet to see it. And that doesn't mean there isn't an audible difference, but there's so much snake oil all across the world of audio that I'm going to be skeptical of any "small, but audible differences" until someone bothers to prove it.  :rock-on:

 

[JamesL]

Geez.... Stuff like this makes me sorry I made a small joke....

Sorry If I offended anyone. :dontknow:

 

[Superlizard]

I'd love it if you could show me a test of passive tone caps where people:

1. Did properly controlled, repeatable double blind or ABX testing.
2. Took objective measurements that confirmed the subjective DBT/ABX test results.

I've got a better idea:  Why don't you do your own test? 

Which is pretty much what I was saying at the tail end of my last post...

I'm certainly not going to bend over backwards trying to convince someone with extreme
particulars about how a given test is conducted and presented.

Such a test may well exist, but I've yet to see it. And that doesn't mean there isn't an audible difference, but there's so much snake oil all across the world of audio that I'm going to be skeptical of any "small, but audible differences" until someone bothers to prove it.  :rock-on:

Again, you could prove it to yourself; right or wrong - why does someone else have to prove it to you?

 

[drewfx]

I'd love it if you could show me a test of passive tone caps where people:

1. Did properly controlled, repeatable double blind or ABX testing.
2. Took objective measurements that confirmed the subjective DBT/ABX test results.

I've got a better idea:  Why don't you do your own test? 

Which is pretty much what I was saying at the tail end of my last post...

I'm certainly not going to bend over backwards trying to convince someone with extreme
particulars about how a given test is conducted and presented.

Such a test may well exist, but I've yet to see it. And that doesn't mean there isn't an audible difference, but there's so much snake oil all across the world of audio that I'm going to be skeptical of any "small, but audible differences" until someone bothers to prove it.  :rock-on:

Again, you could prove it to yourself; right or wrong - why does someone else have to prove it to you?

Actually I would probably do that if I had a bunch of fancy caps with identical capacitance lying around. But I don't, and I'm sure as hell not going to buy a bunch of ridiculously priced caps just for testing.

But the point is, if someone wants to act like something is a "proven fact", they shouldn't get offended if someone asks for the proof. I really have no problem with someone saying "I really believe I can hear a small difference". The problem I have is when people (to be fair, not necessarily you) want to make very strong statements about "small, but definitely audible differences", but will neither soften their wording nor offer any reasonable proof when questioned about it. I just don't get that. :icon_scratch: It's a philosophical point - if you can't prove something, then it's a belief not a fact. I certainly don't expect people to have to jump through hoops to "prove" everything they say; but if there's honest widespread skepticism on an issue (like this one), I do expect people to either back up what they say or admit they can't.

And it works both ways - if I said, "There's no way anyone could ever hear a difference!", it would be 100% fair to ask me to prove that. But I wouldn't say that, because I really don't know.

It's all good.  :headbang1:

 

[Wyliee]

just say 'vibe', man.

I'm with you Mayfly.  It's Friday afternoon here and I keep walking past my new Gecko body in the paint area..... and wondering to myself, "Is it done yet?"  No?

ccasion14:

 

[mayfly]

And I'm putting the finishing touches on a new Mayfly amp!

It's sure to have excellent vibe.  ccasion14:

 

[mayfly]

Teaser:  The first new Mayfly Amp built in many years:

Custom woodwork by Cagey.

It has awesome vibe!