A more appropriate assessment is that a tube amp fails in a predictable way,
and as it fails (speakers break up, transformer sags, etc) it produces a
sound that seems to emanate from the interaction of the player, guitar and
amp. But it's like using a soften function on a digital photo. While the
photo may become more pleasing on the overall view, it's actually less sharp
and less detailed. Or, maybe it's more warm than true to the color, or
whatever. That's why guitar players like what they hear when they've
cranked the amp up to get the transformer to sag and why they are dumping
100 watts into vintage 25 watt speakers, etc.
I know because I bought my first electric guitar in 1961 (still have it) and
so I have some serious guitar playing under my belt too. But the fact is
that I've dealt with hundreds of guitar players over the years, and to a
fault most rock players simply have no ability to determine WHY they like
the sound of an overdriven amp, they just do, and mostly, to be totally
honest, is because it hides most of the stuff they do wrong, and allows they
to pin their perceived playing abilities on the amp's ability to hide what
they don't do right.
I'm sure you've run into situations where players sound good on a Les
Paul/Marshall combination but when they get hold of an acoustic, they can't
play for a good ****. They explain it as a difference in the way the
guitars are set up, but the fact is they never learned good guitar technique
in the first place. They are jammers.
The reason I say this is that, like I said, I've dealt with tons of players,
and the best ones are the ones that know the guitar inside and out, can use
an amp or not, and can make any music they play sound good.
Now I'm not doubting your abilities, Al, I'm just making a generalized
statement here from my experiences over the years. Guitar players are a
dime a dozen, but good guitar players are more like $100 per pound. Gantt
Kushner, here locally in DC is an example of a good guitar player. His amp
is a Bogner, and while it can crank and kick with the best of the blues boys
in town, it's capable enough to allow him to do anything his playing
abilities can come up with. Then there's Steve Abshire, Paul Bollenbach,
Paul Winger, and a number of other fantastically good players that can sit
in on any session or live event without so much as a "what key" statement.
I'd say fully 98% of the guitar players out there don't fit this mold.
So I'd suggest that the tale of the vintage guitar amp is a tale of minimal
pages in the runes of guitar playing. While certain amps seem to work best
for the majority, it's the spectacular that belie the myth.
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
"play-on" wrote in message
...
On 29 Nov 2004 21:34:04 -0500, (Mike Rivers)
wrote:
In article
writes:
Umm, c'mon Mike it's about more than 'attitude'. It's about TONE.
This goes hand in hand with "attitude" when it comes to guitar
players.
also most impossible to explain. In general tube guitar amps just feel
better, more organic to the player. Kinda like the difference between
a real piano with nice action and a digital piano with nice action.
Not that there aren't decent soild state amps. But there's just
something 'bout them tubes.
This is "attitude" for sure.
No Mike, it's not. Listen, I've been playing as a pro guitarist for
over 30 years, and I have tried just about every amp over the years.
Tube amps are a "feel" thing -- as he said, it's a bit like keyboard
action. A tube amp, when pushed, pushes back a little bit and the
guitarist can play with the dynamics of this. It's kind of like
having a giant tube compressor.
Al