AlanRatcliffe
I had great success using a GT-Pro. It is all in knowing how to program them.
However, don't forget that most guys don't want to program something. Some will get attacks of the heebie-jeebies if a pedal has more controls than a Tube Screamer. One of the reasons electric guitar is so popular is that it's simple to plug and play. A couple-o-stomps and an amp is all most people need. And there ain't nothing wrong with that.
Some of us are more adventurous by nature though and like players who use effects as a big part of their sound (Gilmour, Belew, Stevens, Fripp, The Edge). Many of us (particularly we "gentlemen of a certain age") went through building a pedalboard one effect at a time, learning how to use each by the time we could afford the next. Some of us delved into guitar synths, MIDI, piezos and studio techniques. Eventually you reach the "colossal pedalboard stage" and that's when rack gear and multieffects came into play. And that's where we have the decided advantage - being tinkerers by nature and also having worked with each effect singly until we know how do just about anything (I don't think I ever even unsealed the manual for my GT-Pro).
Where the problem comes in is when the average or new player, who just wants to plug 'n play is handed a modern multieffect (often because of a better "value" compared to buying a slew of pedals). He goes from 0 - 100 on the learning curve, all in one fell swoop. He is suddenly faced with what is quite honestly, a bewildering complexity of buttons, knobs menus, sub-menus and a whole lotta new effects that he's never encountered before - all rounded off with some shoddy "presets" that were created in a rush to get the unit to market. Is it any wonder bad tones result? Or that he misses some small but very important detail like turning off amp and speaker sims before plugging into a combo amp?
This is why I try and persuade guys to go for a few simple stomps and an amp first, before delving into the multieffect world. I also tell guys with multieffects to turn everything off but the amp and speaker sim and use to learn them first. Then work with one effect at a time, learning how each works thoroughly before switching it back off again and moving on to the next effect - it simulates the natural learning process I (and others) went through to get where I am now.
DonovanB
Alan Ratcliffe wrote
This is why I try and persuade guys to go for a few simple stomps and an amp first, before delving into the multieffect world. I also tell guys with multieffects to turn everything off but the amp and speaker sim and use to learn them first. Then work with one effect at a time, learning how each works thoroughly before switching it back off again and moving on to the next effect - it simulates the natural learning process I (and others) went through to get where I am now.
So back to the original question (6 pages ago ? ) If Redant doesn't want top buy an amp and stomps, a simulated package will do?
Alan I'm curious about your opinion on amps like the Roland Cube with built in effects?
chris77
Wow, Alan, you described me to a T there! I bought a Zoom gfx5 from a friend a while back. His setup was just guitar-fx-pa, and when I played through it, it sounded great to me. But the settings and patches he used sounds bleh with my gear, and with so little time to play as it is I just dont see myself twiddling away for hours to find my own preferances. So mostly I just plug into my Fender G-dec and enjoy myself. (Great little amps those for bedroom musos, really!) I've since dusted of an old Boss sd-2 and bought a boss bluesdriver pedal as well, and with a turn of a knob or two can conjure up something I like in seconds. So ja, less is sometimes more.
AlanRatcliffe
DonovanB wrote
So back to the original question (6 pages ago ? ) If Redant doesn't want top buy an amp and stomps, a simulated package will do?
Yes it will - but it depends on what he's going to be most comfortable using.
Alan I'm curious about your opinion on amps like the Roland Cube with built in effects?
They're great - although I do regard them more as practice amps than pro gear. The little Microcube is one of the best practice/bedroom/starter amps ever. Very, very well designed from a usability perspective. The simplicity is great for noobs or anyone who wants quick, decent sound and they line out a decent tone that can be used with PA for band practice. The lack of FX control is a bit frustrating for me (as it is on many, much more powerful processors), but they are not designed as FX powerhouses, so that's OK.
As I've mentioned, I like the Microcube, but the 20 and 30 seem a bit pointless power-wise if you don't DI (and more than a little boxy sounding), while the 60 and 80 are great up to band practice levels or stage use in a pinch/on a budget. I don't have much experience with the Blues Cubes, but Riaan was getting good tones out of his at Graemestock.
redant
Hi Everyone,
Thanks again for the input. I believe I am almost there. I spent some time today on a Cube, as well as on the GT-10.
DIing is always a bad idea, doubly so with a distortion pedal and triply so with a Metal Zone.
Considering that this GT-10 has the "amp simulations", does that mean I can actually go direct to the PA, or will I still be better off going through an amp first (as far as tone and sound is concerned) ?
RedaNT
AlanRatcliffe
Yes, the GTs and PODs and the like are amp/speaker simulators and work very well (many say best) into any "hi-fi" type amplification system like PA or studio monitors. Completely different approach to DIing with a DI box and/or a distortion pedal.
DonovanB
redant wrote
Hi Everyone,
Thanks again for the input. I believe I am almost there. I spent some time today on a Cube, as well as on the GT-10.
RedaNT
So what did you think of them?
redant
Thanks for the inputs. Your knowledge has helped me in making this decision.
As for those two products, in easy terms - here are some thoughts:
The Cube is really awesome, and has it's own really unique sound. Also makes for light travel and you won't need much else other than your axe and the cube as it has the basic effects, built in tuner and two channels. It is arguably made with practice or the beginner in mind, but depending on your needs, I can easily see this amp playing a bigger role than just that.
The cons are obviously the limit in variety -and depth of the effects, as well as the fact that you'll have to switch between channels with your hand (somewhat remediable if you buy a foot-switch).
Personally, I like to tinker and tweak. It is probably the longer road, with a bigger learning curve, and it might take years to really see and use all the features of the GT-10, but I think it will be a nice challenge.
I don't need to tell anyone here that the GT-10's features are exhaustive, and I also liked the overdrive / distortion sounds on it (compared to my Zoom anyway).
I'm also in favor of switching between sounds and channels, without taking my hands off the strings. Oh and I've never had the privilege of having a foot volume control, so looking forward to having that option (apparently the wah on that is also pretty good). And since I can go directly into the PA with the GT-10, my packing weight will probably be less if I end up not using my 1-ton Peavey amp.
Consider also that these two items are roughly in the same price class (around R4000).
I realize I am comparing an amp with a multi-effects pedal here, which is not fair. But this was, and still is, the two things that I have to choose between right now, and maybe this little comparison will help someone else in the same boat someday.
I will sleep on it until the shops re-open on Tuesday, but for now, I have decided on the GT-10, and by that, I really mean I have opted for the multi-effects processor over the amp with built in effects / amp with stomp boxes in array. By no means am I putting the Boss brand above others. I simply don't have time to start testing between Boss, Digitech, Pod X3 etc.etc.
However, many reviews and surveys online, put those brands in the same league as far as variety, price and sounds are concerned, and that will suffice for me.
Will let you know how this pans out.
reDant
redant
Hello again.
Just some quick feedback.
I've had my GT-10 for about a month now. Really awesome thing.
It got me back into my guitar.
It also got me very close to the sound that I was looking for.
Our two piece band have been working hard and making good progress, and you will see us perform soon in Durban area.
First gig lined up at the end of May.
Really amped to play live again - first time in about 13 years.
The redant
PeteM
redant wrote
Hello again.
Just some quick feedback.
I've had my GT-10 for about a month now. Really awesome thing.
It got me back into my guitar.
It also got me very close to the sound that I was looking for.
Our two piece band have been working hard and making good progress, and you will see us perform soon in Durban area.
First gig lined up at the end of May.
Really amped to play live again - first time in about 13 years.
The redant
Great stuff Redant. Let us know where your going to be playing.
Malkav
just to throw in my 2 cents, I have a GT-10, had an 8 - sold it when the 10 came out - then regretted it - then realised that the GT-10's parameters don't function in the same way that the 8 does (I think this is stupid cause I had to relearn the whole damn thing) however once I had gotten over the cold feet (marriage analogy ?) I sat down and did the grunt work and now I've never been happier - The important part to me is that the gains sound organic and have a great harmonic complexity, something that the 8 lacked IMO (sounded a little processed, even after I tweaked the hell out of it I found it would sound great for like a high gain sound but then roll your volume and tone and the weaknesses came out).
Later I was told that the GT-10 has a far superior processor and where as the 8 had 1 algorhythm for the entire frequency spectrum the GT-10 has dedicated algorythms spread across the various frequency bands and can therefore more realistically interpret dynamics etc. Of course it takes a while to figure how to get the gain sounds to not sound like a half-cocked wah pedal but once you've got it down it behaves a lot more realistically - to the point where in fact it only really sounds better when you're runnning at high volume, or at least running it's preamp sim through it's chops on the volume control.
I run mine straight into the front of my amp, so I guess I'm not utilising it's full potential (never mind my crazy 12-step phaser with reversed delay clean sounds or my ring modulator with humanizer chinese bell sound - bjork inspired me to find that one ?) but I know for a fact now that I've learnt how to operate the 10 I'd never want to go back to the 8. Yes I'll admit that a nice valve amp would probably sound better but I like Mesa Boogies and a) can't afford a triple rec and b) don't see a point because a) you''ll never get to wind a 150 watt mesa to the point where it's even close to working and b) the drunk people in your audience actually give more of a crap about how good the music you're playing is than how amazing your tone is, I mean yeah personally I like having a nice tone but realistically even on an okay sound you can still pull off an amazing performance!
Not that it has anything to do with this thread but I think that far too much importance is placed on gadgets and to be honest not enough on the actual music and the playing. The heroes of the guitar world that had the tones that set the benchmark just plugged in and went because yes they couldn't afford better etc, but at the end of the day the desire to play music was far greater than the emphasis put on equipment. Even Guthrie Govan, who in my opinion has some of the most gorgeous tones I've ever heard prefers to pilot from his fingers using his volume and tone pots than his feet. No offence to anyone on this forum but I'm pretty sure he's a better guitarist than anyone on here and has better tones and you don't see him doing the tango on a million pedals ever.
I think all the improvements in gear are great and I'm all for them but really who cares if you're using a zoom or a BOSS at the end of the day it's really the communication of your art that matters, as Frank once said "Shut up and play yer guitar" and by now we should all know that you don't argue with Frank.
I apologise for waffling, was just on a tangent ?
singemonkey
Congrats redant. There's a lot of potential in a unit like that.
Re the importance of gadgets: a lot of it's just that they're easy to talk about, and compare, and natter about. I think the majority of forum members realise that the tone's not the real story. It's a luxury. Look what Robert Johnson achieved on his department store guitar.
With electric guitars, it does need to be mentioned that the pioneers were usually using fantastic amplifiers - even the cheap practise amps like the Fenders and Gibsons were pretty phenomenal. So just plugging in and playing was probably a good way to get phenomenal tone.
But if tone isn't that important to the audience - generally - it can be quite important in inspiring you as a guitar player. I got a Boss/Fender '63 Spring Reverb pedal just recently. Now I can't plug in any more without banging out some Dick Dale licks; because the sound is finally spot-on for heavy surf guitar. When you hear yourself sounding good it can inspire confidence in your playing - which is good for your playing.
I read some advice to record vocalists dry, but put some compression and reverb through their head-phone signal. Reason being, when they sound better to themselves, their increased confidence improves their performance. I think that's one of the key values of good tone.
DonovanB
singemonkey wrote
When you hear yourself sounding good it can inspire confidence in your playing - which is good for your playing.
+1... You always feel great and play great when you sound great, even if you think you sound great it's good enough.
@Chad we'd all like to hear how you've done that? ?
Malkav
@ Singemonkey - I completely agree, new tones and nice ones at that really are an inspiration to work with and hear, I'm just saying that I know too many players who spend too much time comparing notes about all the expensive gear they have but don't actually do what's important - which is play the stuff. In fact I know quite a few players who have amazing rigs (valve amps etc.) and are barely above "beginner" level in terms of playing but have in fact been playing for years longer than I have (and I'm pretty average) and the moment you start a gear chat with them they can generally talk gear till the cows come home but can't keep a basic rhythm down when strumming a I - IV - V progression? I personally think this is a fairly sad state of affairs, and yes I get playing for ones enjoyment but not being able to play a simple rhythm when you have over R20k in good gear? I don't really think that's excusable.
@ Donovan - Done what? ?
DonovanB
this
after I tweaked the hell out of it I found it would sound great for like a high gain sound but then roll your volume and tone and the weaknesses came out
and how you get certain tones out of a GT10... come on, it's not windows, or any other kept secret... ? share your experience, there are plenty here who have them and could do with a different insight.
singemonkey
Chad Adam Browne wrote
@ Singemonkey - I completely agree, new tones and nice ones at that really are an inspiration to work with and hear, I'm just saying that I know too many players who spend too much time comparing notes about all the expensive gear they have but don't actually do what's important - which is play the stuff. In fact I know quite a few players who have amazing rigs (valve amps etc.) and are barely above "beginner" level in terms of playing but have in fact been playing for years longer than I have (and I'm pretty average) and the moment you start a gear chat with them they can generally talk gear till the cows come home but can't keep a basic rhythm down when strumming a I - IV - V progression? I personally think this is a fairly sad state of affairs, and yes I get playing for ones enjoyment but not being able to play a simple rhythm when you have over R20k in good gear? I don't really think that's excusable.
No kidding. That's kind of the position I found myself in. Look, I could hold down a I - IV - V and I had a few tricks, but considering the great gear I had, and how long I was playing, it was just starting to get embarrassing. The practise thing is all important. A lot of great guitarists are smokin' by the time they're 19. How does it happen? 6 hours a day in their bedrooms with their guitar while everyone else is watching TV.
Of course, once you're out of school, it's very difficult to put that kind of time in. Especially when there's no real prospect of serious financial reward. But I just shook myself off one day and decided that I'm gonna damn well get to the level that would impress me in another player before I'm 35. So no 6 hours a day for me. But enough time every week that I can really notice improvements from one week to the next.
Some people are just gear nuts. That's ok. It can be a little annoying when you know of people who play brilliantly who are struggling with crappy gear. But people can spend their money however they like. For me though, it was about the music, and then suddenly being able to afford the gear I wanted kind of shamed me into pulling finger and becoming a real guitar player.
