Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
- Status
Could you give us a definition of orthogonal for the context in which you used it?
Orthogonal mean perpendicular or at 90 degrees from each other. In chemistry it refers to orientations in space. For those of you that learned atomic theory, there are three different "p" orbitals shaped like a figure 8. The orbitals can be thought to run along a coordinate axis (with the nucleus at the origin), one along x, one along y, one along z axis. The orbitals are orthogonal to each other. The functional ramifications are that if two orbitals that are orthogonal from two different atoms overlap, they will not form a bond since the overlap integrals essentially cancel out. Another way to think about it is that two orthogonal vectors will never intersect - they head in different directions.
So with all that jargon out of the way, my application to the artistic comment is that I see two "vectors" described. In the first case, a rigid set of rules are applied for right and wrong tone and the player plays accordingly. In the second case, an artist has a vision that they are trying to realize, and they play accordingly. Those two approaches to me are fundamentally orthogonal, and the latter is about art while the former is not.
That isn't to say that art doesn't have or need rules. But as my wife tells her students (she is a sculptor on faculty at CalArts), you have to learn the rules so you can break them. Many students show up wanting to "do their own thing" and not learn history or classical approaches. That doesn't really work in the long run. On the other hand you have artists who learn the rules and then are held prisoner by them. Many of these are great technicians and can be pehnomenal players, but likely are not artists. It is a dynamic process though, so the two could meet even if they are orthogonal. Probably the whole curved space thing
as always, ymmv.
So with all that jargon out of the way, my application to the artistic comment is that I see two "vectors" described. In the first case, a rigid set of rules are applied for right and wrong tone and the player plays accordingly. In the second case, an artist has a vision that they are trying to realize, and they play accordingly. Those two approaches to me are fundamentally orthogonal, and the latter is about art while the former is not.
That isn't to say that art doesn't have or need rules. But as my wife tells her students (she is a sculptor on faculty at CalArts), you have to learn the rules so you can break them. Many students show up wanting to "do their own thing" and not learn history or classical approaches. That doesn't really work in the long run. On the other hand you have artists who learn the rules and then are held prisoner by them. Many of these are great technicians and can be pehnomenal players, but likely are not artists. It is a dynamic process though, so the two could meet even if they are orthogonal. Probably the whole curved space thing
as always, ymmv.
Just Thumpin'
Commercial User
- Mar 7, 2008
- 4,534
- 1,664
- Disclosures
- Manager and Partner, Fodera Guitars (10/14/09 - 12/16/19)
Yes, we offer that as an option on any Custom Bolt-on that we build. We will also retrofit any Bolt-on Fodera instrument that we have built (Standard, NYC or Custom). There is a charge for this, obviously.
Just Thumpin'
Commercial User
- Mar 7, 2008
- 4,534
- 1,664
- Disclosures
- Manager and Partner, Fodera Guitars (10/14/09 - 12/16/19)
I certainly did not take your blog as a Fodera bashing. That said, the reality is that we very much try NOT to impart our personal sense of what great tone should be on the instruments. This is why we build so many models, using so many woods in various scale lengths, with varied PUP and electronics set-ups. Interestingly, when building for ourselves, Joey, Vinny and I all have varied sensibilities about what's "right" for us personally.
One person's "rich tone" is another's "fat and bloated." A Fodera that someone admires for sounding "precise and nuanced" might be described by someone else as "overly analytical and cold."
Correct me if I am wrong, but all three Fodera examples that were used in your blog were 4-string Monarchs with EMG Pickups. That is certainly one of the tones available to folks spec'ing a Fodera, but it is but a small fraction of what is available. And, I gather by your blog that you are not a fan of that tone which is totally cool by me. You see that's what we strive for more than anything -- to bring YOUR tone to life. Vic has his own thing going on. It's the sound that he hears in his head. I respect him immeasurably and yet I have my own personal sensibility as to what I want to sound like...
So, as I have said many times before...Viva la difference!
Kindest regards,
J
One person's "rich tone" is another's "fat and bloated." A Fodera that someone admires for sounding "precise and nuanced" might be described by someone else as "overly analytical and cold."
Correct me if I am wrong, but all three Fodera examples that were used in your blog were 4-string Monarchs with EMG Pickups. That is certainly one of the tones available to folks spec'ing a Fodera, but it is but a small fraction of what is available. And, I gather by your blog that you are not a fan of that tone which is totally cool by me. You see that's what we strive for more than anything -- to bring YOUR tone to life. Vic has his own thing going on. It's the sound that he hears in his head. I respect him immeasurably and yet I have my own personal sensibility as to what I want to sound like...
So, as I have said many times before...Viva la difference!
Kindest regards,
J
- Jun 3, 2009
- 3,330
- 399
- Disclosures
- Bassgearu, Music Industry Consulting and Sales. Tech 21, NBE Corp, Sonosphere.
Jason you hit it in the head. First, the live review of the Fodera is what most reviews sound like if you have the amp lower and you are recirding via one external mic. I dont think any bass I own sounds great when I am practicing with the volume low.
Tone is individual. I have never liked the "Jaco Fart Machine" sound although I have always marveled at his technical ability. And as Jason knows I am NOT a jazz guy by any stretch.
One mans treasure is another mans trash. In tone of a bass even more so. Most guys will hate, hate, hate my tone, unless you like my kind of music. And I have both boutique and vintage that all sound the same in my hands.
What I heard in the review was a solid bass with nice even output all the way around with some nice bite. I could clearly hear what I would use as a foundation for cresting tones. Of course I am biased as I know J and the boys and girls at Fodera.
Best sounding and playing bass here on the Jersey Shore is owned by Vinnie Danielle of Cats on a Smooth Surface. Vinnie Fodera and Joey told me recently that was Fodera two or three (do you remember which Jason?) . He plays only covers and has for 30 years. Bass sounds perfect in his mix and the neck is like butter. However to most it would sound more like P bass then "Fodera". But it has all the bones for abt signature tone.
Tone is individual. I have never liked the "Jaco Fart Machine" sound although I have always marveled at his technical ability. And as Jason knows I am NOT a jazz guy by any stretch.
One mans treasure is another mans trash. In tone of a bass even more so. Most guys will hate, hate, hate my tone, unless you like my kind of music. And I have both boutique and vintage that all sound the same in my hands.
What I heard in the review was a solid bass with nice even output all the way around with some nice bite. I could clearly hear what I would use as a foundation for cresting tones. Of course I am biased as I know J and the boys and girls at Fodera.
Best sounding and playing bass here on the Jersey Shore is owned by Vinnie Danielle of Cats on a Smooth Surface. Vinnie Fodera and Joey told me recently that was Fodera two or three (do you remember which Jason?) . He plays only covers and has for 30 years. Bass sounds perfect in his mix and the neck is like butter. However to most it would sound more like P bass then "Fodera". But it has all the bones for abt signature tone.
I truly believe in this statement 100%....This is why I push for musicians / students of music to learn theory!! ...and when you happen to hit a clam...you just say>>I was using the Ethiopian Scale...LOL
Damian Coccio
Supporting Member
Pot officially stirred! An educational experience in musical criticism - the things you throw in as filler to support an individual fact will be dissected to the nth degree - a level of reader engagement and skepticism I can only hope we all share in the wider world of "real" news. Funny to briefly be "that guy" on the internet. 
A few minor responses to save my pride:
Bass guitar was certainly not designed with those extended techniques in mind - and never did I suggest we shouldn't push the boundaries by using them. I was suggesting that anything we do should make a "good" sound (which we've established is a purely subjective concept) and using those techniques "in spite of" tone puts a poor example forward (again imo).
As far as videos I think sound "good" - I presented that Vic video from NAMM 2013 playing the very lyrical solo - I think one of the most amazing bass solos I've ever heard. He uses every extended technique in the book (slap/tap/strum/etc.) but he uses them very tastefully (again, IMO) and as part of a larger musical (and tonal) structure. That video was recorded on a nice camera with a decent mic, which is I'm sure the difference here.
If I could do it again I'd stick with just my thesis - there are a lot of videos out there of good players sounding (what I consider to be) bad! Unfortunately the post became more a criticism of my lack of bass historical perspective and my preference for a slightly more balanced approach to the instrument and technique.
The discourse I WANTED to start was something like this - what are the common elements of what most people agree is a "good" tone?
I think Jason might be right that EMGs are clearly not my sound. I'd be 100% interested in hearing that E5S with the Aguilar DCBs in it though
A few minor responses to save my pride:Bass guitar was certainly not designed with those extended techniques in mind - and never did I suggest we shouldn't push the boundaries by using them. I was suggesting that anything we do should make a "good" sound (which we've established is a purely subjective concept) and using those techniques "in spite of" tone puts a poor example forward (again imo).
As far as videos I think sound "good" - I presented that Vic video from NAMM 2013 playing the very lyrical solo - I think one of the most amazing bass solos I've ever heard. He uses every extended technique in the book (slap/tap/strum/etc.) but he uses them very tastefully (again, IMO) and as part of a larger musical (and tonal) structure. That video was recorded on a nice camera with a decent mic, which is I'm sure the difference here.
If I could do it again I'd stick with just my thesis - there are a lot of videos out there of good players sounding (what I consider to be) bad! Unfortunately the post became more a criticism of my lack of bass historical perspective and my preference for a slightly more balanced approach to the instrument and technique.
The discourse I WANTED to start was something like this - what are the common elements of what most people agree is a "good" tone?
I think Jason might be right that EMGs are clearly not my sound. I'd be 100% interested in hearing that E5S with the Aguilar DCBs in it though
Orthogonal mean perpendicular or at 90 degrees from each other. In chemistry it refers to orientations in space. For those of you that learned atomic theory, there are three different "p" orbitals shaped like a figure 8. The orbitals can be thought to run along a coordinate axis (with the nucleus at the origin), one along x, one along y, one along z axis. The orbitals are orthogonal to each other. The functional ramifications are that if two orbitals that are orthogonal from two different atoms overlap, they will not form a bond since the overlap integrals essentially cancel out. Another way to think about it is that two orthogonal vectors will never intersect - they head in different directions.
So with all that jargon out of the way, my application to the artistic comment is that I see two "vectors" described. In the first case, a rigid set of rules are applied for right and wrong tone and the player plays accordingly. In the second case, an artist has a vision that they are trying to realize, and they play accordingly. Those two approaches to me are fundamentally orthogonal, and the latter is about art while the former is not.
That isn't to say that art doesn't have or need rules. But as my wife tells her students (she is a sculptor on faculty at CalArts), you have to learn the rules so you can break them. Many students show up wanting to "do their own thing" and not learn history or classical approaches. That doesn't really work in the long run. On the other hand you have artists who learn the rules and then are held prisoner by them. Many of these are great technicians and can be pehnomenal players, but likely are not artists. It is a dynamic process though, so the two could meet even if they are orthogonal. Probably the whole curved space thing
as always, ymmv.
Another related but more general definition is 'not correlated'. In my business (statistical consulting) orthogonal designs are the underlying mechanism used in new product testing (and true experimental design in general). One must make sure that the experimental design is such that each feature in the various experimental cells is 'orthogonal' to the other (in other words, independent and uncorrelated), in order to draw the right conclusion (e.g., which features in a new product are most preferred by a consumer, or which features drive superior performance, etc.).
This is why there is so much disagreement on the impact of 'string through body', bolt on versus neck through, impact of wood on tone, etc., etc. on this site. (as a side note, the attempt by Fodera to assess neck through, bolt-on and set-neck by building three similar basses with the different neck designs was a noble, if somewhat flawed effort. It is VERY difficult to design a true experiment when you are dealing with an organic test source (i.e., wood, or humans for that matter), where you have variance across each component (i.e., two maple boards can sound very different, even if they are cut from the same slab. A somewhat better 'test' would have been to have at least one 'replicate' of one of the neck designs, like two bolt-ons made otherwise similarly, so you could get a baseline of the general error using a difference test/triangle test procedure.).
Just FYI!
More on topic, totally agree with Jason's post, of course, that tone is a very personal thing, and there are very few basses, amps or cabs that actually sound bad in an absolute sense. I play an active J , a passive P, and an active, super modern Bart soapbar loaded 'coffee table' bass, depending on the gig (and/or my mood). Totally different tonality, and many would have a favorite and possibly a 'hate' among those tonalities.
One thing I really appreciate about Fodera and Jason is their willingness to not impose a set of values on on their users. It really speaks to a high level of development that transcends conversations about good/bad, right/wrong dichotomies.
So many of our so called personal tone "preferences" are really tied to larger cultural values that are related to socio economic status, ethnicity, privilege, and other things beyond the individual. It takes a great level of human compassion to see that just because we might have personal values regarding what is important in making music (such as what constitutes a good " tone", what "correct" technique is, what ways of making music are "high" vs "low" art) that it does not mean other's values are less valid. When we start to veer into ethnic or sociocentric assertions that we have a discovered an ultimate values system that is applicable to all people in all times, we are surely on the slippery slope to making them less than equal to ourselves, and we should know by now where that leads.
So many of our so called personal tone "preferences" are really tied to larger cultural values that are related to socio economic status, ethnicity, privilege, and other things beyond the individual. It takes a great level of human compassion to see that just because we might have personal values regarding what is important in making music (such as what constitutes a good " tone", what "correct" technique is, what ways of making music are "high" vs "low" art) that it does not mean other's values are less valid. When we start to veer into ethnic or sociocentric assertions that we have a discovered an ultimate values system that is applicable to all people in all times, we are surely on the slippery slope to making them less than equal to ourselves, and we should know by now where that leads.
Just Thumpin'
Commercial User
- Mar 7, 2008
- 4,534
- 1,664
- Disclosures
- Manager and Partner, Fodera Guitars (10/14/09 - 12/16/19)
Vinnie has Fodera #2 -- and the first Fodera bass at that. #1 was a guitar! Hey there Tom!!!
J
J
Just Thumpin'
Commercial User
- Mar 7, 2008
- 4,534
- 1,664
- Disclosures
- Manager and Partner, Fodera Guitars (10/14/09 - 12/16/19)
Just Thumpin'
Commercial User
- Mar 7, 2008
- 4,534
- 1,664
- Disclosures
- Manager and Partner, Fodera Guitars (10/14/09 - 12/16/19)
I think that there are really very few absolutes. IMHO these are...
-Evenness throughout the entire tonal range of the instrument.
-Ability to cut through the mix.
-In tune.
-Sounds alive and acoustically resonant.
Just about everything else tends to be subjective methinks...
J
-Evenness throughout the entire tonal range of the instrument.
-Ability to cut through the mix.
-In tune.
-Sounds alive and acoustically resonant.
Just about everything else tends to be subjective methinks...
J
So true, I really hate when builders try to impose their tonal beliefs on me. I want what I want, not what someone else thinks I should have.
When I ordered my Emperor II a couple of months back, what Jason first asked is what I like to listen to musically and what appealed to me tone wise. Very much opposite of those makers that only do it their way, take it or leave it. I find that very refreshing. Very much wanting the player to be happy rather than being concerned about personal ego. Plus a lot of communication with the customer.
I agree, but Jason, Joey and Vinnie have way more experience than I ever will with tonewoods and electronics and will recommend options based on tonal goals. I think I know what I want, but they tend to have great ideas that ultimately can make my build closer to what I actually want.
I like the collaborative approach to spec-ing/building a Fodera and would not have it any other way. I can't see myself spending Fodera type $$$ and have a builder say "I will spec your bass.... trust me, you will love it."
- Status
