ilovefuzz.com

I personally only use pickups that have alnico magnets cast in the sand from the sahara (because of the superior mineral content adds a subtle rounding off of my high end and a tightening of the frequencies around 250hz) and hand wound by Tibetan monks at over 7,000 ft above sea level (thinner air less oxygen content adds those haunting mids).

AlexGlassLungs wrote: I personally can’t get past the perfect robotic feel of digital sounds,

I feel you on this, I hate digital pedals that sound too perfect. But I like using digital pedals that sound glitchy/broken. Boss PS-2 for example. or an older Digitech Whammy. Digital pitch shifting can get very weird and produce some wild sounds.

Wow, such chummy chattiness here.

ok alex, real talk. we come from the same place. we love sound and making sounds. we love to find new ways of making our tones sound better, more expressive, more us. the way there isn't easy though, and there isn't just one road. hell, there is no one goal either.

i'm guessing english isn't your native language and you might have trouble expressing your intentions because of that. and that makes you sound like a dick. you probably sound like a dick way better than most of us here, because of your pure analog path to your matchless. that's cool. but there are as many ways to sound like a perfect dick as there are people.

take a few deep breaths and stop shitting on other peoples tonal preferences for a while. it might make it easier for your asshole. it might also make it possible to converse on making sounds, different tonal goals and the ways people try to achieve them. if that's what you wanted from this thread?

AlexGlassLungs wrote:At this point the square wave forms of digital are so small I can’t tell but I can tell how they react with my other pedals and my amp and most of all my signal

AlexGlassLungs wrote:Scatterwound also adds a slight warble effect to your ringging our chords that you do not get from a machine wound. But besides that you are correct. I prefer the natural brilliance from my pickup than achieving that through a pedal. There is something extra in natural sounds than manipulated sounds and it’s something you can’t always pickup in a recording.

How are you defining "natural brilliance" between two parts of an analog electronic circuit? Pedals, amps, and pickups are all electronics humanly designed to achieve sounds.

I have never heard this warble in scatter wound vs machine wound pickups. But warble is more commonly created by slightly off intonation, inconsistent pressure between strings, or even how you move the neck of your guitar as you hold the chord. But again, all different ways of achieving similar effect. If that pickup thing works for you, great!

And if this sound can't be picked up in a recording, which is arguably more accurate than our ears, I personally do not see the point?

Ghost Hip wrote:

AlexGlassLungs wrote: I personally can’t get past the perfect robotic feel of digital sounds,

I feel you on this, I hate digital pedals that sound too perfect. But I like using digital pedals that sound glitchy/broken. Boss PS-2 for example. or an older Digitech Whammy. Digital pitch shifting can get very weird and produce some wild sounds.

FINALLY! Someone who has partially answered the question of what I’ve been asking since the beginning THANK YOU! “What is your theory and why?” You use digital to achieve a certain sound that an analog pedal can’t achive but notice the difference between analog and digital totality. This is exactly what I’ve been trying to achive in this thread. I will now get burned for something else, standing by...

Still waiting on a definition of a digital buffer.

This thread is a headache.

RIFFS > toanz anyway so save your money, smoke a J, and play.

AlexGlassLungs wrote:

Ghost Hip wrote:

AlexGlassLungs wrote: I personally can’t get past the perfect robotic feel of digital sounds,

I feel you on this, I hate digital pedals that sound too perfect. But I like using digital pedals that sound glitchy/broken. Boss PS-2 for example. or an older Digitech Whammy. Digital pitch shifting can get very weird and produce some wild sounds.

FINALLY! Someone who has partially answered the question of what I’ve been asking since the beginning THANK YOU! “What is your theory and why?” You use digital to achieve a certain sound that an analog pedal can’t achive but notice the difference between analog and digital totality. This is exactly what I’ve been trying to achive in this thread. I will now get burned for something else, standing by...

I DID IT, GUYS.

:

AlexGlassLungs wrote:If I put my Matchless up against my friends Marshall DSL it is noticeably way better in tone and it’s not even debatable, that doesn’t mean he should buy a Matchless, it just means that something out there sounds better.

Are you even reading what you're writing?

vallaton wrote:ok alex, real talk. we come from the same place. we love sound and making sounds. we love to find new ways of making our tones sound better, more expressive, more us. the way there isn't easy though, and there isn't just one road. hell, there is no one goal either.

i'm guessing english isn't your native language and you might have trouble expressing your intentions because of that. and that makes you sound like a dick. you probably sound like a dick way better than most of us here, because of your pure analog path to your matchless. that's cool. but there are as many ways to sound like a perfect dick as there are people.

take a few deep breaths and stop shitting on other peoples tonal preferences for a while. it might make it easier for your asshole. it might also make it possible to converse on making sounds, different tonal goals and the ways people try to achieve them. if that's what you wanted from this thread?

I again never once told anyone they were wrong, I’ve only defended my opinion that was attacked over and over. I also have no shit on anyone’s opinion. I may have debated when they’ve voiced their opinion, yes.

As far as my native language goes, I’m trying to respond at light speed from a cell phone , so things ave been typo’d, misspelled, amongst I’m sure many other things.

As far as being a dick goes, yeah 100% I’m a total dick, but I have not once told anyone they’re wrong or shit on their opinions other than slight debate

AlexGlassLungs wrote:
No, and this thread was a great example of how we aren’t all looking for that. Some of us are looking for Siq Toanz, others just want to see how much noise they can make, and some just want to play their guitar and really don’t care. I’m not bashing what anyone wants to do with their guitar, stick it up your ass and strum it with your toes if you want. I’m interested in a guitar players theory behind their sounds. Some people here don’t have any and that was very apparent, and that’s fine because getting sucked into how and why your Guitar makes the sounds it does and how it’s affected by even the smallest things is obsessive and probably not good for my health. This isn’t the place for that so I’ll just come here to help everyone jerk off to ezhi&aka pedals and stick my finger in the butthole of Industrialectric. I’m a part of that too I guess...

You’re getting it.
You’ve started a conversation by positing your strongly biased opinion, but decrying anyone who answers you with their different, but equally biased, opinion.
But they’re theory is right there in their answer. You’ve just got to read a little between the lines.

Your “theory” is like that of the old Renaissance painters; consumed with the mastery of the form. The best paints from Florence, the finest horsehair brushes from Arabia... that’s the only way people can fully realize how deep your understanding for chiaroscuro shading or perspective. That’s a fine way to appreciate your art. After all, you’re in good company with the likes of Michaelangleo and all the other “Ninja Turtle” painters.

But, you must concede that there will be pushback, a “dumbing down” of your ideal, and that’s where the theory of most of this forum lies... the aural equivalents to Gauche, Surrealism, and Dada.
This forum is essentially a urinal laid on its side, and signed.
Warhol didn’t paint a bunch of soup cans. He printed them.... in response to what he felt was the over commercialization of art.
Is it any less art? In form, sure, but in idea... in theory, no.
Art (painting, music, trash sculpture or scrapbooking) isn’t defined by its means. It’s defined by its ends... by the message it wishes to covey.

Perhaps if you wanted a more open discussion on the topic, you wouldn’t lash out fellow forum builders who hadn’t, until you mententioned them rather lewdly, been part of the conversation at hand.
But... that’s just my opinion, man.

DRodriguez wrote:

AlexGlassLungs wrote:Scatterwound also adds a slight warble effect to your ringging our chords that you do not get from a machine wound. But besides that you are correct. I prefer the natural brilliance from my pickup than achieving that through a pedal. There is something extra in natural sounds than manipulated sounds and it’s something you can’t always pickup in a recording.

How are you defining "natural brilliance" between two parts of an analog electronic circuit? Pedals, amps, and pickups are all electronics humanly designed to achieve sounds.

I have never heard this warble in scatter wound vs machine wound pickups. But warble is more commonly created by slightly off intonation, inconsistent pressure between strings, or even how you move the neck of your guitar as you hold the chord. But again, all different ways of achieving similar effect. If that pickup thing works for you, great!

And if this sound can't be picked up in a recording, which is arguably more accurate than our ears, I personally do not see the point?

By natural I mean there is not ANOTHER thing in my chain to fix something or change something to get the sound I want. To do that I need another pedal on and my signal is running through another circuit like a pedal.

D.o.S. wrote:Still waiting on a definition of a digital buffer.

Most digital pedals are buffered bypass and not true bypass.