Life in the Land of the Rising Sun

Thursday, April 02, 2009

And a New Fiscal/School Year Begins...

...on a very gra/ey and miserable day that quickly turned cold and blustery. At least I was able to get my shopping for my wife's birthday done.

Speaking of getting things done, I managed to submit two songs to that home recording contest last week, "Herald of the Dawn" and "Quite Enough". I also prepared a CD and forms to offer "Secret Identity", but I wasn't able to deliver it in time, so it'll have to wait till next year. I'm still happy to be able to participate in this.

Speaking of getting music done, I finished another tune today. The inspiration is probably a number of different things, but I felt like kicking out the stops and being a little more intense this time in any case. The song is called "Which Do You Fear". It was a lot of fun to make, and if I'd had a bit more time I'd probably submit this to the contest, too. Anyway, give it a listen and tell me what you think! (More info is available on my Minstrel's Muse site.)

Next on the agenda is the music club's big, annual concert this Saturday followed by the actual start of classes for the new school year next week.

posted by The Moody Minstrel at 1:39 AM

20 Comments:

  • Happy Fiscal New Year!

    I enjoyed the background jamming in the song.

    By Blogger Don Snabulus, at 6:14 AM  

  • Haha! It's grEy and rainy here today also.

    I liked the intro to your track. I realized why after you mentioned Sibelius on the other website.

    Right, this was full of typos - time for dinner. Ack! Thank goodness for the backspace key.

    By Blogger Olivia, at 6:56 AM  

  • Well, it was a good tune except for two things. One, the vocals were washed out by too much echo and reverb. You need to bring the vocals up front. Vocals are generally up front so people can hear the lyrics. Point number two. THe guitar started to bottom out and growl in an unclean way some times. I attribute this to your amp or pedal. Its obviously transistor based. For some reason, there have been songs written with just awful distortion sounds that became great hits. Take "Spirit in the Sky" for instance.Even in the day that song was written, other artists were using amplifiers with superior tube sound. The tangible difference between a guitar amp that is all tube compared to transistor or even transistor tube hybrids is not something that be explained, it can only be heard and felt. I do not know if your current amp is tube or not. I do know that an affordable tube amp with 60 watts output power and a single twelve inch speaker is made by B-52, it is the AT-112. Not too long ago I had the AT-212 which was a hundred watts with two twelves. I had to trade it in after a minor dip in finances. But on the other hand, the newest amp is smaller, lighter, and sounds just as good. You may not be able to find it in Japan. Don't let that stop you. There may be good tube amps in Japan I haven't heard of

    By Anonymous Dave, at 2:18 PM  

  • Snabudon
    Thank you!

    Olivia
    It was kind of cool being able to start the song during my break at work and then bring it home and finishing it!

    Dave
    Point number two. THe guitar started to bottom out and growl in an unclean way some times. I attribute this to your amp or pedal. Its obviously transistor based.

    Forgive me for laughing at this because my "amp" (ampS, actually) is a COMPUTER!!! You obviously didn't read the detailed explanation on my Minstrel's Muse site. (In the future please do before trying to give me advice like this!) Since 2004 ALL of my electric guitar recording has been done using a Line 6 PODxt, a digital amp emulator programmed with several vintage and modern amp and effect models.

    There are six different guitar parts in "Which Do You Fear". Just to summarize, the setup I used looks like this:

    Principal rhythm guitar - Fender Strat SSH (bridge pickup, which is a DiMarzio super distortion humbucker) using a model of a Mesa/Boogie Dual Recto amp (a standard of modern heavy metal, switchable between tube or transistor modes in the real thing, but the POD only has the "modern" transistor mode included) boosted with a Big Muff fuzzbox for a Smashing Pumpkins-esque, grungy growl.

    Rhythm double left - Fender Telecaster (both pickups) using a model of a 1950s Fender Deluxe (TUBE) amp (i.e. a jangly sound) with a little delay added.

    Rhythm double right - Fender Telecaster (both pickups) using a model of a 1940s Valco Supro (TUBE) amp reportedly used by Jimmy Page on the first Led Zeppelin album (i.e. a slightly tinny tube distortion sound).

    Principal lead - Epiphone SG (bridge pickup) using a model of a Soldano SLO-100 Super Lead (TUBE) amp, which has additional built-in (TUBE) distortion for a uniquely punchy sound.

    Ensemble lead left - Strat SSH (neck pickup) using the Mesa/Boogie Dual Recto with added (model) MXR "red" compressor and (real) wah pedal.

    Ensemble lead right - SG (neck pickup) using the Soldano again but with a little delay and compressor added (model) plus (real) wah pedal.

    You may have noticed that, of the amp models I used, only the Boogie Dual Recto is a transistor amp (because the POD doesn't include its "vintage" tube mode). It's no doubt the "growl(ing) in an unclean way" sound you're talking about, especially with the Big Muff fuzzbox added, but hey...that's exactly the sound I wanted!

    Listen to my song "Day Whatever" for another good example of that sound.

    The only bona fide amp I have right now is a 110-watt Yamaha tube amp which actually sounds quite nice, though I like its clean tone better than its distorted one. I rarely use it.

    By Blogger The Moody Minstrel, at 11:19 PM  

  • Sorry...the two "ensemble lead" parts seem to be reversed. The SG/Soldano is the higher voice.

    By Blogger The Moody Minstrel, at 11:36 PM  

  • I spend years and thousands of dollars experimenting to get the best tube sound, and you're telling me that you like it that way. (Reaches for frying pan and bangs self on head!) SO, good, you have a tube amp. This is what you do. You take a good microphone and stick it in front of the speaker. That is how studio professionals do it. I know that a guitar effects box or computer that can simulate a guitar sound, but I am telling you, its not a good sound to me. Maybe just a matter of taste, I suppose. AND DAMN IT you should have good ear to pick that sort of thing up. Your ears haven't been thrashed by years mechanical equipment banging and screaching. Trust me. Treasure the vintage sound of real tubes.

    By Anonymous Dave, at 5:31 AM  

  • I've always welcomed your opinions, Dave. You have also given me plenty of good advice over the years. But if you're going to talk down to me like that, you'd better make damned sure you're really in a position to do so. If this were simply a matter of you saying, "I just don't like the guitar sound you're using; try a different one," it would be one thing. However, if you go this far:

    I spend years and thousands of dollars experimenting to get the best tube sound, and you're telling me that you like it that way. (Reaches for frying pan and bangs self on head!) SO, good, you have a tube amp. This is what you do. You take a good microphone and stick it in front of the speaker. That is how studio professionals do it.

    At the risk of sounding nauseatingly arrogant, Dave, in case you've either forgotten or somehow haven't heard, I'VE actually not only watched first hand but have also DONE professional studio session work. I've done it for acquaintances and friends who have professional releases on the market. I might add that I have also performed onstage with a professional soundcrew using rented equipment far beyond either of our price ranges. Then there's also the fact that I have at least one coworker who has experience working as a professional sound engineer...and has taught me a lot. I know the routine of miking amps, trust me. I've helped others do in the studio and on stage. I have even done it in my own home recording in the past. Yes, I know you took that studio recording class at CCC, but that doesn't make you more of an authority on this subject than me. Not by a long shot. I'll happily listen to your advice, but a patronizing attitude from you is neither welcome nor warranted.

    Tastes differ. That's definitely the truth. They also change over time. I remember back when we were working(?) in the same band, and we were in kind of the opposite situation, i.e. you had a distortion box that produced a super-saturated sound you said was "excellent!!!". I thought it sounded like styrofoam in a blender. Who knows; I might actually like it now. I don't use a grungy sound in all my songs (as you can hear if you listen to them), but I DO use it when I think it fits. A lot of modern artists that I like use such a sound, and it has influenced my own approach.

    You would probably prefer it if I used a late-70s Marshall sound for everything, but that's not my style. If I want a warm, gentle, or vintage pop sound, I use a Vox model. If I want a bright jangly sound I use a Roland Jazz Chorus model. If I want a peppy jangly sound I use one of the old Fender models. Gritty blues? Fender Deluxe, maybe with an Ibanez Tube Screamer. A rich but balanced sound that is jangly yet driven? Matchless. A peppy vintage rock sound? Fender Bassman. A punchy, art rock sound? Hiwatt. Classic rock? Marshall Super Lead, possibly "jumpered". Basic hard rock? Marshall JCM-800, maybe with a distortion pedal if I really want to get noisy. In-your-face heavy? Boogie or one of the Line 6 fantasy amps. Aggressive and commanding? Soldano or Marshall JMP-1. Angst-driven dirt? Boogie with either a Tube Screamer or Big Muff. And the choices go on and on.

    You say you've spent years experimenting to get the "best" (in your opinion) tube amp sound. That's great, and I commend your effort. Someday I hope I can actually hear what you've come up with since the late eighties. As for me, I've spent years experimenting with layering different guitar sounds to create different textures for a wider variety of artistic possibilities. I would offer as some of my personal favorite examples the song "You, Me, We", a (damaged, unfortunately) recording from a decade ago in which I layered a heavily driven Marshall (yes, a real amp) with a very light tube preamp, "How Does Your Mother Feel Now", an even older recording in which I layered something like ten totally different guitar parts, "Open Halls", in which I used ironic combinations (principal guitars using modern amps distorted out of existance as a joke, solos played on vintage amps with clearer sounds for an even bigger one, but I've always like it), and "What's On It", in which I had a ball having the guitar parts "evolve" from a mild-mannered Matchless Chieftain to all kinds of different things. I had lots of fun making those that I wouldn't have had if I'd stuck with only one amp setup.

    Besides, wasn't it you who griped at me not so long ago that my sound is "too identifiable"? And yet here you are trying to limit my options?

    As for my switching to a "real" amp instead of the POD, to me it's just not worth it for a number of reasons:
    1. The POD is a lot more convenient as it is designed for direct-to-board recording as well as performance through an amp.
    2. You said it yourself: you've spent years and thousands of dollars trying to get the sound you like. As a family man with a career plus lots of (mostly music-related) activities on the side, I have neither the time nor the funds to spare for that.
    3. My amp is large. It takes up lots of room, meaning it's a pain in the butt to stow out of the way and get out again. The POD rests comfortably on its own shelf in my "studio" and stays there all the time, ready to use at a flick of a switch.
    4. The PODxt includes models of several different vintage and modern amps as well as vintage and modern effectors, plus I can use it with my effect pedal collection. In other words, I have a lot more choices to play with than I would if I limited myself to one amp.
    5. Even if I did force myself to use only the one amp, I'd still try to get a sound that I like. That means I'd probably go out and buy a Big Muff fuzz box, etc., and wind up spending even more money only to have you bitch at me for using a sound that "doesn't sound good to [you]".
    6. I'd have to rent a studio every time I wanted to record using the amp. I couldn't do it at home. Even if the neighbors didn't bitch about it (and they probably would), FIL and my wife definitely would. And trying to record the "real" amp at a low volume would negate the whole point of the issue. With the POD, on the other hand, I can dial up whatever amp I want and crank its pre-amp, power amp, and tone stack up to full, boost it with compressor and overdrive pedals, and not have to worry about a thing except possible hearing loss if I forget to turn the headphones down.

    Well, thanks for the comments and advice, anyway. I look forward to hearing more of them.

    By Blogger The Moody Minstrel, at 1:00 AM  

  • Sorry, the link to "What's On It" is fixed here.

    By Blogger The Moody Minstrel, at 1:04 AM  

  • What do you mean, a type A, type B, or type AB tube amp?

    By Anonymous Arthur, King of the Britons, at 2:01 AM  

  • A, dammit!!!

    By Anonymous Matchless, at 2:09 AM  

  • A, B, or AB you say? Yes!

    By Anonymous Budda, at 2:14 AM  

  • What about A/D?

    By Anonymous Vox, at 2:17 AM  

  • You're all a bunch of jerks!

    We didn't think they'd notice when we replaced our preamp tubes with a diode. Whiners!

    By Anonymous Marshall, at 2:19 AM  

  • Yes, its a matter of taste. But what I hear sounds rather plastic. And I'm not saying all guitars should sound the same or like they came through a marshall.

    What I am saying is that the transistor based sound sounds cheap. It sounds like "I didn't want to shell out the bucks for decent equipment." I know that is not the case because the guitar box you describe is not cheap. And you may wonder what burr I have up my ass for such a trivial thing.

    You've been writing songs now for several years. In all those years your best albums were before you started to record on your computer. That forced the guitar to be a dominent center of the song. The result is that the song was not all dolled up with cheap effects. Take this latest one. You describe the use of six different modes of guitar processing. You have been wrapped up in the technical aspect of the music and not focusing on the core. As it is, your songs are starting to run into one another. Before long, they will all sound the same.

    There is also an emotional aspect of your music which has changed very much from when we were jamming in your garage. Power. I don't mean power as in volume. I mean power as in style.

    Finally, you have to ask your self this:

    Do I play music as if I am the only one who hears it and therefore I only need to please my self, or do I play music because I want to stimulate my audience and please them?

    By Anonymous Dave, at 4:25 AM  

  • Moody, the reason why I am making this difficult is because we are friends.

    No one else would dare do what true friends do to each other.

    By Anonymous Dave, at 2:35 PM  

  • What I am saying is that the transistor based sound sounds cheap. It sounds like "I didn't want to shell out the bucks for decent equipment."

    This is also a question of taste. The funny thing is that there are a lot of people who actually prefer the transistor amp sound. That's why Marshall, after first saying, "Oops, our bad," and going back to producing tube-based JCM-800 amps, put out new amp models that were transistor based because of consumer demand. That's why the high-end Boogie amps offer both tube- and transistor-based rectifiers with a toggle switch to choose between them. Guitarists that are tone freaks like tube amps (and man...some of the tones my friend Paul gets on his Fender HotRod Deluxe and Goldtone amps...WOW!!!!). Those who just want a hard crunch tend to go for transistors.

    Actually, most of the time I prefer a tube amp sound. That's why the amp model I probably use the most is the Matchless Chieftain, a type A tube amp with excellent sound. I really like the Matchless DC-30, too...also a type A tube amp. (And I would buy one if I became a performing artist on guitar.) But if I want a late 90s/early twains style grunge distortion, I will use the setup that produces it, i.e. a Boogie amp with a Big Muff.

    You've been writing songs now for several years. In all those years your best albums were before you started to record on your computer.

    Also a matter of taste. I've had quite a number of people tell me they like my more recent stuff much better, probably the majority of those able (and willing) to compare.

    That forced the guitar to be a dominent center of the song.

    The guitar is STILL the dominant center of the song. I just use it differently. I try to create textures rather than simple, rhythmical riffs. It's like painting instead of drawing with black ink. I might also add that I've had more than one guitarist, most I know that have heard my work, tell me that they like my guitar sound from 2003 (when I first started using a Yamaha guitar processor and then the POD) MUCH better than anything I recorded before that. The reason? More punch. More power. More versatility. A less "phony" sound. Better tone on the lead solos. These were all comments from experienced guitarists.

    The result is that the song was not all dolled up with cheap effects.

    I could and probably should take offense at that. The idiom "dolled up" here particularly rankles. I don't really use "effects" so much per se. I used effects like chorus, phaser, delay, harmonizer, etc. a LOT more back in the mid 90s. Listen to "How Does Your Mother Feel Now" again. I recorded that in 1992...on a 4-track cassette recorder. More than a dozen guitar parts, all using the same amp but with different effects. An amp emulator is NOT the same as an effect. It is an amp. This is one of the facts of the 21st century. There are even amp models on the market now that have amp emulators built in as their primary circuit, and they are gaining in popularity. Welcome to NOW.

    If you look over the list of guitar parts again, you'll notice that the main difference was the amp model I used. If I were to use the actual amp in question (i.e. if I went out and bought or rented a Boogie Dual Recto, Soldano SLO-100, '50s Fender Deluxe, and Valco Supro, I'd get virtually the same sound. The POD is not a perfect replacement of the real thing, but it's a damned good approximation...even to the point of producing the same noise peculiar to the amp model in question if you use single coil pickups!).

    I might also add that the Big Muff fuzzbox is NOT cheap. It costs more than anything I currently have in my stompbox collection...which is rather large. A Marshall Shredmaster (tube distortion pedal) would be even more expensive, and I'd love to have one of those!

    You have been wrapped up in the technical aspect of the music and not focusing on the core.

    So just what IS the core, Dave? The rhythm guitar track? The bass line? The vocal part? I treat the whole item as a work of art, not just a vocal part with added accompaniment or guitar jam with added vocals.

    As it is, your songs are starting to run into one another. Before long, they will all sound the same.

    What's really ironic is how many people have told me my OLDER songs sound the same, and that my newer stuff is almost TOO varied! My friend (and DAMNED awesome guitarist) friend Paul here in Japan says he thinks my Open Halls CD is by far my best simply because it's NOT varied, but is rather all based on guitar rock...created as a test run of the POD!

    There is also an emotional aspect of your music which has changed very much from when we were jamming in your garage. Power. I don't mean power as in volume. I mean power as in style.

    Power as in primitive. I'm just not as interested in that style of music as I used to be. Back in the mid 90s I recorded a CD of tunes from our high school and early college days, kept as raw as possible to emulate the sound we were trying for at the time. It was fun to make, but it's rather embarrassing to listen to. We were awfully naive back then. That was a phase I outgrew.

    Finally, you have to ask your self this:
    Do I play music as if I am the only one who hears it and therefore I only need to please my self, or do I play music because I want to stimulate my audience and please them?

    Oh, boy...another patronizing "ask yourself" line...

    Maybe you should ask yourself: "Did what I just said make sense?" Considering we were talking about songwriting and home recording, rather than onstage performance, I'm more than a little baffled by this. When I perform onstage I play music to stimulate the audience, mainly because I'm usually performing someone else's music, and if I went off in my own world I wouldn't be asked to do it again. That is the nature of a performer.

    On the other hand, when I compose music in my home studio (which is NOT a stage performance) my main objective is that of any artist of any medium: to try to give tangible substance to what I think and feel inside. I've heard it described as "the impossible search for perfection". I try to create something that, in my opinion as the creator, sounds and feels "right". It may or may not agree with others' sense of "right", but that's not really why I do it.

    I'm sure I would do things differently if I were a commercial songwriter who earns money kissing ass to the status quo. (Actually, come to think of it, I already HAVE earned money...quite a bit, actually...doing that very thing. I co-wrote and co-recorded a laughably commercial song which was still on the charts in Hong Kong last year! I and the professional songwriter/producer who hired me both had a good laugh about it, but hey...it's his bread and butter. It was my playtime and lucky windfall.) I don't harbor any illusions about being a famous commercial performing artist when I work with my own recordings. It's a project I do for FUN and PERSONAL GROWTH. And if people actually enjoy what I do, so much the better. So far, with a few noted exceptions, I've been very fortunate in that respect.

    We're just going to have to agree to disagree on some things.

    By Blogger The Moody Minstrel, at 6:37 PM  

  • Oh, and since we've run the guitar discussion into the ground, I guess I should take this opportunity to mention another point:

    I didn't use any echo on the vocal parts. I used a very small amount of reverb (80% dry mix). I did, however, double the vocal tracks, i.e. I recorded them twice and panned them apart. That imparts a natural delay and is a very old technique.

    Just thought I should mention that.

    By Blogger The Moody Minstrel, at 11:39 PM  

  • I'm just beating you over the head because you will probably win that contest and get a recording contract. Which means you will get a producer.

    Try to imagine your FIL as your producer and you will think I've been very kind. ;)

    By Anonymous Dave, at 3:37 AM  

  • Well thank you for your optimism. Seriously. Frankly, I don't think I stand an Avon lady's chance in Kandahar of winning considering the competition I'm up against, but it would be nice if I at least got one of the runner-up awards.

    I realized today that there might be a problem with the monitors I use in my "studio". The sound they produce seems to be quite different from what comes out of the stereo later. I may try remixing some of these more recent tunes such as "Perspective" (which was my first all-digital recording and clearly shows my fumbling about).

    By Blogger The Moody Minstrel, at 1:49 PM  

  • Yes, if your studio monitors color the sound of the mix in any way, quality will suffer.

    By Anonymous Dave, at 5:44 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home