|
magiccarpet posted:I found a great 'this is how to actually use your Katana' playlist yesterday. Bless the algorithm as this channel has like no subs. Thanks to SA mangling YouTube URLs automatically, paste this after youtube.com/ to get to the actual playlist: /watch?v=fSXptVyyKtQ&list=PLEsQwPX7Nw45U44t3uYTeQFAH63HC0pUA And thank you for sharing that amazing resource!
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 20:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 02:21 |
|
|
Thumposaurus posted:Have you triple checked the measurements on your firefly lp? I haven't done jack! CHUCK WAS TAKEN posted:Well, I got a G&L USA Legacy, as it seemed to be a substantially better deal than any s500 or Fender that I could find PICS or else. I love G&Ls man. Chip McFuck posted:The 60s has been the standard Les Paul wiring since, so if you're already comfortable with modern Gibson/LP-clone controls then you could stick with that without having to adjust to anything.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 21:40
|
|
|
Captain Apollo posted:PICS or else. I love G&Ls man. It's this https://reverb.com/item/31717774-g-l-legacy-usa-2016-himalayan-blue I'll post pics of it with my Vox when it comes in. Seems like a pretty safe bet that if I don't drop it or let my cats piss on it that I can sell it for that or even more for the rest of forever if I don't love it, but I expect to love it. I may try to find a set of their MFD pickups at some point, because I am really interested in them e: I'm not really one for acquisition (pedals not withstanding), so this is my first new guitar since I was 11 years old. I made it 20 years without buying a guitar, but I have really, really wanted something with single coils lately. I think it's justified CHUCK WAS TAKEN fucked around with this message at 22:22 on May 21, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 22:17
|
|
|
CHUCK WAS TAKEN posted:It's this does it come with that case?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 00:11
|
|
|
Helianthus Annuus posted:does it come with that case? lol i hope so
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 00:17
|
|
|
Baka, you have a really awesome way of breaking down and concisely explaining complex systems. That was really well put.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 00:31
|
|
|
former glory posted:Baka, you have a really awesome way of breaking down and concisely explaining complex systems. That was really well put. Yeah, I am glad I came to the guitar thread, as I have started trying to study up on theory, and these posts are excellent
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 04:15
|
|
|
thanks peeps, I try not to overcomplicate stuff (that isn't that complicated once you get it, I'm pretty bad at music!) but when you get going there ends up being a lot to talk about, so that's nice to hear! Although I should have just done the notes like x23xxx, I was gonna do something with scales and then didn't... honestly knowing a little bit about why things work gives you some ideas and tools to work with, you don't necessarily need to know ~theory~ but that's all based on this kind of thing anyway, working out why stuff works and what you can do with it
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 05:39
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:thanks peeps, I try not to overcomplicate stuff (that isn't that complicated once you get it, I'm pretty bad at music!) but when you get going there ends up being a lot to talk about, so that's nice to hear! Although I should have just done the notes like x23xxx, I was gonna do something with scales and then didn't... As someone pointed out earlier, theory is descriptive, it tells you why stuff sounds good, not how you should play. Remember that you are always allowed to play whatever sounds cool, even (especially) when it doesn't fit the theory.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 07:48
|
|
|
I was getting stew mac ads with the prices in euros for a while. I blame you.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 14:01
|
|
|
Helianthus Annuus posted:(seinfeld voice) whats the deal with counterpoint? Check out that book that I linked in my last post. I think it's way easier to get the gist of why counterpoint is useful/important if you avoid the rules used by classical composers at first and follow a simpler set of conventions. I mean really, you don't need to know much more than: 1) 3rds and 6ths are consonant harmonic intervals 2) 5ths are slightly less consonant and tend to "fuse" together. The reason why you avoid "consecutive parallel fifths" (i.e. consecutive power chords on a guitar) in classical music is pretty much the same reason they work so well in rock music: we tend to hear them as a single "thick" melodic line instead of independent lines. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with them. 3) 4ths are kind of consonant and kind of dissonant. Compared to a 3rd or 5th or a 6th they seem dissonant, compared to the other intervals they seems consonant. 4ths are weird. 4) Other intervals are less consonant and should be "avoided" (unless you want dissonance). That's not a perfect guide. The tritone (= flat fifth) is insanely dissonant, different flavors of sevenths have a different degree of consonance or dissonance, the voicing of the notes relative to the other melodic lines (i.e. the "inversion") has a big impact, etc. Oh and rhythmically, counterpoint is traditionally divided into different "species". I forgot which is which and I'm too lazy to look it up, but there's like: 1) one-to-one counterpoint, where each note in one melody has a single note in another melodic line, 2) one-to-two counterpoint where each note in one melody has two notes in another melodic line, etc. To get started, pick some simple melody and write another melody on top of it that only uses notes that are a third/sixth up or down from the notes in the original melody. Start with one-to-one or one-to-two correspondences. Try to vary the motion too, such that when the original melody moves up the new melody either repeats or goes down. Then write a third melodic line that matches both the original one and the one you just wrote. It's sort of like solving a musical sudoku or something, but at the end you should have something reasonably interesting. Now go back and look at what you wrote and figure out what the "chords" are, and be shocked that you weren't thinking about chords at all yet wrote a "chord progression" that makes sense. Don't try to keep things perfect though. Like if you're doing (e.g.) one-to-two counterpoint on a melodic line in C major, and you have a half note C in the original melody ("cantus firmus"), you could do E then F as quarter notes in the new line. Also, if you end up making a big jump in one of the melodies (I think "big" in classical music = more than a fourth but I might be misremembering that) it's generally good practice to follow that note with a half step/semitone step in the other direction. (Moving by seconds is "stepwise motion.") Like I said I'm not a master of classical composing or anything, and it's true that any rules are descriptive, but these are more like restrictions than rules and plenty of great art can be produced under self-imposed restrictions. Helianthus Annuus posted:i asked my bass friend "where does the harmonic minor scale come from?" [...] I really think it's useful to look at it as if there's only one minor scale, with variable 6ths and 7ths based on context/function/need. Like, that's how the dead dudes in wigs thought about it, but more to the point, there's nothing "wrong" with playing (e.g.) i-iv-VII-III-VI-ii(dim)-V(maj)-i (Can you tell that I really like this progression? It's everywhere in Bach but that's not where I learned it. Tangentially, those sequenced arpeggios are a bitch to play.) even though those chords don't really exist in either the harmonic or natural minor scales alone. Like, in Am, Amin-Bdim*-Cmaj-Dmin-Emaj-Fmaj-G#diminished is my default "chord palette" even though there's no single scale you can harmonize to get those chords. *The sweep picking shapes for a m7b5 chord are borderline impossible in some inversions so I usually play what is technically a G#dim chord in place of the Bdim if I'm not in the neighborhood of one of the playable shapes. In a metal context it doesn't matter but your mileage may vary in another context. Edit: One really neat trick that was alluded to but not explained somewhere in the last page or two is that an interval of X above a note is the same note as the interval 9-X below a note. So a third down is a sixth up, a fourth down is a fifth up. The quality of the intervals will depend upon the scale that you're in but it's a handy trick. This makes more sense on sheet music than a fretboard though. Gnumonic fucked around with this message at 22:03 on May 22, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 21:55
|
|
|
I love the practical theory posts but do no understand half of what’s written. Here’s a q: how can I learn what The Roman Numerals feel like? I see people write out progressions but I can’t relate them to sound.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 02:32
|
|
|
Have you ever heard the first part of the marriage song? dun DUN DUN DUN That’s I then IV IV IV Or the first chord to the 4th chord So I’m the key of C C F F F Because C = 1 D = 2nd E = 3rd F = 4th G = 5th A = 6th B = 7th The second part of the marriage riff is 1 5 3 4 So that’s C G E F You can also play the the same song in the key of like F F = 1 G = 2 A = 3 Bb = 4 C = 5 D = 6 E = 7 F = 8 (octave) So 1 4 4 4 Written I IV IV IV Is F Bb Bb Bb The second part of 1534 Written I V III IV Is F C A Bb Last thing. If you are writing a song in the major scale, you can do this with chords. If you’ve been playing guitar for awhile you know some chords are the majors and some are the minors. In the Roman numerals, anything in capitals is MAJOR and anything lowercase is MINOR. Here’s a classic example. Key of C major I ii iii IV V vi vii(diminished) So chords in C major are C major, d minor, e minor, F major, G major, a minor, biminished
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 03:25
|
|
|
well why not posted:I love the practical theory posts but do no understand half of what’s written. Translate chord progression to songs that you already know into numerals. Simple songs are best at first, because the numeral nomenclature can be misleading or unwieldy if you run into key changes or weird chords. beer gas canister fucked around with this message at 04:20 on May 23, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 04:18
|
|
|
well why not posted:I love the practical theory posts but do no understand half of what’s written. i recommend you play with this for a while https://hookpad.hooktheory.com/
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 07:00
|
|
|
Gnumonic posted:counter point can you use counterpoint to improvise a harmony on guitar? i wonder whether there is a guitar exercise that would teach me how to think in these terms on the fly
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 07:04
|
|
|
Helianthus Annuus posted:can you use counterpoint to improvise a harmony on guitar? i wonder whether there is a guitar exercise that would teach me how to think in these terms on the fly Not really, counterpoint is more about looking at the whole composition and writing multiple lines simultaneously paying attention to individual harmonies on each beat, the collective harmonies on each beat, the overall movement of reach line, and how all of the lines are moving together. It's complex stuff, it's be like "improvising" a fugue. edit for more information look up Fux's Gradus ad Parnassum at your local library Baron von Eevl fucked around with this message at 17:05 on May 23, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 17:03
|
|
|
A huge part of being able to improvise stuff like that is muscle memory and everything in that realm of body mind connection imo. It needs to be as natural as breathing. Bach was doing it and c’mon he wasn’t anything that special right? Right??? 
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 17:06
|
|
|
i know a guy that can improvise 4 part counterpoint, but he's a pianist, and was transcribing entire oscar peterson solos by ear at 16, so... i can't imagine that 2 part counterpoint can be that difficult tho, as long you're familiar with the vernacular of baroque music. the limitations of counterpoint make it fairly predictable and there aren't that many ways to move through cadences with only two voices without breaking any rules.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 17:21
|
|
|
Yeah, I mean two part isn't too bad, but guitar's not really an instrument well-suited to counterpoint as opposed to more basic harmony. Counterpoint is about having multiple melodies going independent of each other but coalescing into a single harmonic structure. I tend to think of fifth species counterpoint when I think "counterpoint" and that's the sort of thing you generally need to sit down with the sheet music or like piano roll and structure.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 17:49
|
|
|
I like it when you play a lot of notes right after each other and they sound really cool
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 20:48
|
|
|
you know the blues songs where it’s like duh na na duh na na NAH DUH NA? i love it when they do that
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 20:49
|
|
|
landgrabber posted:I like it when you play a lot of notes right after each other  landgrabber posted:and they sound really cool 
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 22:01
|
|
|
lol
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 22:21
|
|
|
The secret is to play as many notes as you can as fast as you can, that way you'll end up getting more of the good ones!
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 22:26
|
|
|
Baron von Eevl posted:Not really, counterpoint is more about looking at the whole composition and writing multiple lines simultaneously paying attention to individual harmonies on each beat, the collective harmonies on each beat, the overall movement of reach line, and how all of the lines are moving together. It's complex stuff, it's be like "improvising" a fugue. fair enough, and that was my expectation. but i still wanna hear gnu's answer to my question Stark Fist posted:i know a guy that can improvise 4 part counterpoint, but he's a pianist, and was transcribing entire oscar peterson solos by ear at 16, so... your post makes me think my time would be best spent learning songs that were composed contrapuntally. i.e., actually learn to play classical guitar  maybe i could pull off 2 part counterpoint playing and singing at the same time...
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 22:28
|
|
|
Gnumonic posted:The secret is to play as many notes as you can as fast as you can, that way you'll end up getting more of the good ones! Evidence: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j74mxqvxRDQ&t=197s
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 22:31
|
|
|
^^ lol I dunno anything about counterpoint beyond the basic idea, but you could always practice playing melodies with a harmony note a fixed interval above or below it. So start playing a scale where for every note you play the one a 6th above it or whatever, and then try to play something with more jumps in it. Build up that awareness of which pitch you need to pair each note with, and where to find it. Once you can do that fairly comfortably you could start playing around with things like playing an ascending and descending line together, or both ascending but one of them only moves every second note, things like that or learn to tap and play another melody with your right hand! Gnumonic posted:The secret is to play as many notes as you can as fast as you can, that way you'll end up getting more of the good ones! "there were at least 3 good songs in there"
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 22:38
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:I dunno anything about counterpoint beyond the basic idea, but you could always practice playing melodies with a harmony note a fixed interval above or below it. So start playing a scale where for every note you play the one a 6th above it or whatever, and then try to play something with more jumps in it. Build up that awareness of which pitch you need to pair each note with, and where to find it. That's good stuff to practice, but that's not counterpoint. The idea of counterpoint is that the lines are moving effectively independently of each other, not just a melody line that's got a variable harmony off of it. Like the other line should have a different rhythmic pattern as well.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2020 04:44
|
|
|
Are most overdriven lead guitars (say for a solo?) in modern rock / pop always double tracked these days to get them that extra thickness, or is that not actually the case? I know that often I'll listen to a melody, even with Archetype Plini and a bunch of effects, and it still sounds a little light. However double-tracking EVERYTHING is also a hassle, especially when it's a tricky technical part that you're lucky to get tracked correctly even once.. Tips?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2020 05:51
|
|
|
DreadCthulhu posted:Are most overdriven lead guitars (say for a solo?) in modern rock / pop always double tracked these days to get them that extra thickness, or is that not actually the case? I know that often I'll listen to a melody, even with Archetype Plini and a bunch of effects, and it still sounds a little light. However double-tracking EVERYTHING is also a hassle, especially when it's a tricky technical part that you're lucky to get tracked correctly even once.. Tips? The only reason to double track a solo is for harmonizing. Instead boost the mids on the lead channel and cut the other tracks a little bit at the same frequency.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2020 06:08
|
|
|
Baron von Eevl posted:The only reason to double track a solo is for harmonizing. Instead boost the mids on the lead channel and cut the other tracks a little bit at the same frequency. Wait, really? My impression was that people double-track the same guitar parts, or even quad-track them, so that they can be hard panned and create more stereo width, while not being the same exact chunk of signal. Sure, you can harmonize, but that wasn't the use case I was thinking of.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2020 06:10
|
|
|
DreadCthulhu posted:Wait, really? My impression was that people double-track the same guitar parts, or even quad-track them, so that they can be hard panned and create more stereo width, while not being the same exact chunk of signal. Sure, you can harmonize, but that wasn't the use case I was thinking of. You wouldn't generally double track a solo, sure rhythm parts and the parts that get written up as "lead" parts that aren't solos, generally not solos. Feel free to split the signal into two amps (real or virtually) and pan those, but solos are generally single tracked. edit: seriously though, less distortion and boost the mids, that's the secret sauce Baron von Eevl fucked around with this message at 06:16 on May 24, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2020 06:13
|
|
|
More delay and reverb imo. If you're feeling fancy, only put them in one channel and keep the other dry.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2020 07:44
|
|
|
I don't know poo poo but more people should crank the mids it sounds good
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2020 09:30
|
|
|
All I have to share is an old memory. Other bands (not mine) had the money to go into studios in NC and the advice to the guitarist went something like this: you can bring your 1/2-Full stacks. But when you track rhythm, settle into using this 8" or 10" combo and do it at least three times. Track it perfectly like George Lynch. Go. And I heard those demos and they sounded gigantic. The rhythm guitar parts were a wall of amaze-balls, and you'd think they were big amp stacks if you weren't told otherwise. This was all before digital editing so I can't personally vouch for any of it; but suffice to say I do not doubt it after having spoken to people involved in those sessions. Not sure what the take-away is. They had good mids, Wowporn.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2020 16:49
|
|
|
Baron von Eevl posted:That's good stuff to practice, but that's not counterpoint. The idea of counterpoint is that the lines are moving effectively independently of each other, not just a melody line that's got a variable harmony off of it. Like the other line should have a different rhythmic pattern as well. I meant more kinda like "get used to doing this" so you start thinking about playing multiple things at once, and keeping two lines in mind - like even just parallel ascending lines requires knowing where the half steps need to come in, and if you start doing them in opposite directions then it gets even harder to internalise that pattern. It messes with your head and that's a good reason to practice it! Is counterpoint usually composed though? Like is it normal for people to improvise that kind of thing, or is it mostly planned? And does playing a melody and a moving bassline under it count, or is that a mehhh not really
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2020 17:01
|
|
|
IMO 4x12s are great for the way they sound when they're physically in front of you but when micced small combos tend to not have as much muddy low end poo poo that would need to be cleaned up in a mix anyway.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2020 17:55
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:I meant more kinda like "get used to doing this" so you start thinking about playing multiple things at once, and keeping two lines in mind - like even just parallel ascending lines requires knowing where the half steps need to come in, and if you start doing them in opposite directions then it gets even harder to internalise that pattern. It messes with your head and that's a good reason to practice it! improvised counterpoint happened in the baroque period. Bach was noted as one of the foremost improvisers in Europe, though he probably didn't perform improvisations often. counterpoint is typically composed. melody + bass line is part of counterpoint, but there are very specific rules governing how it works. it's more involved than "match the chord changes with both notes" - in the baroque period, they didn't HAVE chord changes as we think of them today, just rules governing consonant vs dissonant intervals, and how to configure melodies to enhance and avoid specific intervals at specific times. the chord progressions that are common today grew out of the "rule following" sounds of counterpoint, and gradually the rules became less important so we're left with ii-V-I etc. Baroque music did actually include a good deal of improvisation, but it was mainly expressed in the treatment of ornaments and melodic decoration. they wouldn't just shred a solo out or something, but it was there. figured bass markers left room for improvisation too, in accompaniment parts. it works almost the same way we use lead sheets today. e; it's been years since my music history courses so i may not be characterizing all of this perfectly... i'd consult a baroque music expert first for more info. beer gas canister fucked around with this message at 18:12 on May 24, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2020 18:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 02:21 |
|
|
oh interesting, thanks! It's weird that you say they didn't really have chord changes ( I get what you mean but), I kinda associate that period - maybe wrongly? - with those really structured CHORD. CHORD. CHORD. CHORD cadences, that have a really recognisable sound because they're following the kind of rules that say "use a dominant to move back to the I" or whatever. Or did it sort of all come together like that during that period? I guess I also associate Bach with the formalisation of music theory through all the work he did on it (I never studied any of this this is quiz show trivia levels of knowledge here) that gives progressions a particular sound if you follow it. One of the worst things about music theory is once you learn the rules, you end up with stuff that sounds dated because of that, and none of the music you like seems to be written to that pattern - later you learn how to break those rules / learn more about what the rules actually are, but before then it can be a bit "...wait this sucks!"
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2020 19:03
|
|