Tone vs Feel: Which is more important for you?

Charlie4

I was checking out some gear videos on YouTube and noticed some guys significantly improving over the course of a few months/year etc. The improvement, it seems, correlated with them getting better gear. Better gear doesn't make you better, however the more sensitive response that you get from your gear does - more sensitive dynamics etc. I'm thinking that Guthrie Govan can make a Squire Strat and Roland Cube sound amazing, however he wouldn't have developed such a fine touch without the a great guitar/amp responding better to his playing.

A great amp most often does have a sensitive response and great tone, however something like a Roland JC 120 sounds great but won't bring out all the nuances that say a Dumble would. (Unfair comparison, but merely an idea).

If you could choose only one, for you as a player, which do you value most for your gear: How it sounds or how it feels?

(old forum) Poll Results: Tone vs Feel

Tone: 4
Feel: 11

Chocklit_Thunda

Both. I once played a Jim Root tele and by golly gosh it was the 2nd best feeling tele I've ever played (my one is the 1st for me) but I prefer Celine Dion to the awful tone from those EMG's....

But then again, to answer your question, feel is much more important. Guys like Seymour Duncan and the inventor of the Roland Cube have solved the problem of cruddy valve amp tone that many suffer from ?

The improvement, it seems, correlated with them getting better gear.

I don't think this is the case. I think the two seem to progress parallel to one another. They get better as time goes by. As time goes by and as musicians research and learn more, they tend to get better gear (until they finally find tone nirvana in Cort).

Arno-West

Trick question this. You should rephrase it as:
Van Halen or Van Hagar? Same difference.
I can't vote on this. Tone and feel make up the essence of any guitarist's unique style of playing. Impossible to decide which is more important.

Charlie4

Chocklit_Thunda wrote: Both. I once played a Jim Root tele and by golly gosh it was the 2nd best feeling tele I've ever played (my one is the 1st for me) but I prefer Celine Dion to the awful tone from those EMG's....

But then again, to answer your question, feel is much more important. Guys like Seymour Duncan and the inventor of the Roland Cube have solved the problem of cruddy valve amp tone that many suffer from ?

The improvement, it seems, correlated with them getting better gear.
I don't think this is the case. I think the two seem to progress parallel to one another. They get better as time goes by. As time goes by and as musicians research and learn more, they tend to get better gear (until they finally find tone nirvana in Cort).

The thing I meant in regards to them getting better with better gear was their articulation - making more use of harder/softer picking to pronounce a phrase. A Great sax player, Paul Desmond, has such a distinctive, personal tone because he is directly connected to the instrument, every breath, how different they may be determines how a note will sound. For me it's getting as intertwined with the instrument as possible. It will never be on the same level as a woodwind instrument but there are other ways to get closer - A lower output pickup as opposed to those EMG's you were referring to.

The closer the connection from player to instrument the more satisfying the experience.
Nah mean?

NorioDS

I definitely found it easier to improve as I got better gear! In terms of electric guitar, I started out on a Starfire guitar + amp and, as soon as I upgraded the amp, I was able to do more and so I did. The same happened (only FAR more dramatically) when I replaced the Starfire with an Ibanez. And even more dramatic improvement came after getting the Ibby set up properly.

So I'd DEFINITELY say that good gear (not the best, just good) helps you LEARN faster.

I can't at all choose between the feel and tone, though. I love a guitar with buttery soft action but I also want sexy tone to go with it or it won't be fun to play.

And, in my opinion, once you've developed your playing style, almost any guitar will do and you'll still sound like you. Give me that old Starfire and I'll sound very similar to how I sound now. So I think the gear you learn techniques on might influence how you use all future gear.

PeteM

??? I don't understand the exercise. To me, tone and feel are inextricably linked, so it is impossible to make a decision. I make what gear I have available to me at the time do the talking/communicating.

NorioDS

PeteM wrote: ??? I don't understand the exercise. To me, tone and feel are inextricably linked, so it is impossible to make a decision.

I think he means like, for example, an Ibanez guitar has a certain feel and that might feel good as you play it but it doesn't have the tone you're looking for. So he's asking: Which is more important to you.

But I don't see the point of a guitar with an amazing tone if it doesn't feel right when I play it or a guitar that feels amazing but sounds kak. There's just no point.

Charlie4

PeteM wrote: ??? I don't understand the exercise. To me, tone and feel are inextricably linked, so it is impossible to make a decision. I make what gear I have available to me at the time do the talking/communicating.

Well, the whole topic is very subjective to say the least. What I mean in terms of feel is: Compare a violin with a double bass, the way jazz guys play them, both can have great tone, however the overall control on a violin is much more touch sensitive.

Tone and feel are not always as closely linked as you would think. Take a high gain amp for example, a guy playing metal in the general sense wants a high gain tone, however whether he picks softly/hard it's almost nullified due to so much compression.

An interesting example would be to take a guy like Eric Johnson and let him play a Peavey 5150/Engl Savage cranked up and hear how it sounds. It's probably safe to say that the genre you play would often determine which is more important: Tone/feel (touch sensitivity) or usually both.

sharonzaz

what if i told you that most of your tone come from your feel (and fingers)?

PeteM

Norio wrote:
PeteM wrote: ??? I don't understand the exercise. To me, tone and feel are inextricably linked, so it is impossible to make a decision.
I think he means like, for example, an Ibanez guitar has a certain feel and that might feel good as you play it but it doesn't have the tone you're looking for. So he's asking: Which is more important to you.

But I don't see the point of a guitar with an amazing tone if it doesn't feel right when I play it or a guitar that feels amazing but sounds kak. There's just no point.

Exactly.

PeteM

sharonzaz wrote: what if i told you that most of your tone come from your feel (and fingers)?

domhatch

sharonzaz wrote: what if i told you that most of your tone come from your feel (and fingers)?

this.

i will say this though; i tend to favour playing with my fingers rather than a pick, whether i'm playing my sg, my goldtop, or my lp custom (all tokais). they all have a similar neck profile, similar setups, and while the tone of each guitar is completely different, my expression is pretty similar regardless of what i'm playing. (that is to say, pretty kak.)

but i'm working on it. i have awesome guitars, two great amps, and i'll get there one day
dh|

Squonk

domhatch wrote:
sharonzaz wrote: what if i told you that most of your tone come from your feel (and fingers)?
this.

i will say this though; i tend to favour playing with my fingers rather than a pick, whether i'm playing my sg, my goldtop, or my lp custom (all tokais). they all have a similar neck profile, similar setups, and while the tone of each guitar is completely different, my expression is pretty similar regardless of what i'm playing. (that is to say, pretty kak.)

but i'm working on it. i have awesome guitars, two great amps, and i'll get there one day
dh|

How's Dom the Pianoman coming along ?

Doomsower

Charlie4 wrote: The improvement, it seems, correlated with them getting better gear.

I had a similar experience, but in my case it involved justifying the expense.
"O crap I just spent all that cash I better practice like a nut!" ?

domhatch

Squonk wrote: How's Dom the Pianoman coming along ?

well, here's the thing. to get back to any kind of 'competitive' level, i'm going to have to invest some sirrrrrious time and energy into this venture. not less than 4-6 months, i reckon. initially i was figuring on 30-40 tunes under the fingers, but i think keira's right - closer to 100. that's gonna take time. i'm gonna see how many i can get done by the end of the year - and done proper like - and take it from there.

it's also gonna take some financial investment; music books, etc. i don't really read sheet music, but if i have the chords and the melody, i'm good to go. i can fandango the rest well enough.

essentially, don't expect too much news on the subject until next year. but the offset is that i reckon the effort i put into songs on the piano should pay off on the guitar too. not directly, perhaps, but in the long run.

thanks for askin'!
dh|

Malkav

Charlie4 wrote: Tone and feel are not always as closely linked as you would think. Take a high gain amp for example, a guy playing metal in the general sense wants a high gain tone, however whether he picks softly/hard it's almost nullified due to so much compression.

An interesting example would be to take a guy like Eric Johnson and let him play a Peavey 5150/Engl Savage cranked up and hear how it sounds. It's probably safe to say that the genre you play would often determine which is more important: Tone/feel (touch sensitivity) or usually both.

I feel this isn't the most accurate example, mainly because Eric Johnson's lead tone is pretty compressed, there are multitudes of "metal" players out their who may use high gain tones but have far more dynamic range for their picking.

PeteM

Charlie4 wrote: Compare a violin with a double bass, the way jazz guys play them, both can have great tone, however the overall control on a violin is much more touch sensitive.

I think this questionable.

PeteM

domhatch wrote: but the offset is that i reckon the effort i put into songs on the piano should pay off on the guitar too. not directly, perhaps, but in the long run.
dh|

This

domhatch

PeteM wrote:
domhatch wrote: but the offset is that i reckon the effort i put into songs on the piano should pay off on the guitar too. not directly, perhaps, but in the long run.
dh|
This

spankew, pete.

IceCreamMan

Van Halen is infinitely better than the abomination which was van Hagar......so one can choose lol

To me feel is more NB of the 2 ...yes it's a package but a great sound guitar which is kak to the touch is going to get on my tits...

So feel ,one can always mod the tone with gear but u can't mask a kak feel...