heres a flashback for ya brother, i met them a few times back in the day, Leslie signed all my mountain albums, so many high times with these boys, shared a few dubes with em too, lol
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.
We've lost the old school sound.
- Thread starter wolfkeller
- Start date
-
- Tags
- old old school school
JPJ played Heartbreaker through a Leslie organ amplifier - not some old school bass amp. Although clean tones are in style with modern manufacturers, you can get plenty of distorted sounds in modern gear. You just have to try out gear and make it work for you the way the previous generation of bassist did for themselves. There's definitely nothing wrong with today's gear. Making the sound in your head happen with your equipment is a skill you have to learn. Much of the gear from previous generations wasn't nearly as good as the gear from today.
Im with you, I much prefer traditional tones and I go for a classic "Fender Bass" sound...I have a really nice passive Fender P bass I play through a v3 Rumble rig, its very Fender-y and totally nails that classic sound. I play a large variety of rock/pop from the 60's - 90's, and most of the original recordings have classic passive P and J tones.
The difference has as much to do with the evolution of recording technology as it does with the gear.
One of the most overlooked facts of what I call the "analog era" is that all that old classic gear, the sounds the OP pines for now, was full of flaws, inconsistencies in component values, noise, and so forth. That applies to the instruments, amps, cabs, the recording gear, everything. All of those flaws and inconsistencies interacting, X bass through Y amp into Z board or whatever, all analog circuits with manual control, is what created the tonal characters of that era -- and it took a lot of effort to create them. I recall a story about Jimi Hendrix trying some of the first Muff pedals; he tried like a dozen before settling on a few he liked, because they all sounded different. Flaws and inconsistencies...
Now, in today's "digital era", processors and algorithms do much of the work, and the technology is much more consistent and precise. The drive from audiophiles has been to create the cleanest, most faithful, most precise sound reproductions possible, and that in turn has...well, I don't want to say "sucked the soul out" of music, but it has certainly affected it. Now it actually takes an effort to create a lively tone that stands out, to do something different, because the evolution of the technology has been toward making everything the same. Hence all us gearheads, and particularly us pedalheads, chasing the tones we hear in our heads, which (consciously or otherwise) are based on tones we remember from the past. Hence the constant debates over analog vs. digital pedals, passive vs. active basses, tubes vs. class D, and so forth. We seek the tones of the past, while the technology of the future actively fights us in doing so.
It is what it is, I guess...
One of the most overlooked facts of what I call the "analog era" is that all that old classic gear, the sounds the OP pines for now, was full of flaws, inconsistencies in component values, noise, and so forth. That applies to the instruments, amps, cabs, the recording gear, everything. All of those flaws and inconsistencies interacting, X bass through Y amp into Z board or whatever, all analog circuits with manual control, is what created the tonal characters of that era -- and it took a lot of effort to create them. I recall a story about Jimi Hendrix trying some of the first Muff pedals; he tried like a dozen before settling on a few he liked, because they all sounded different. Flaws and inconsistencies...
Now, in today's "digital era", processors and algorithms do much of the work, and the technology is much more consistent and precise. The drive from audiophiles has been to create the cleanest, most faithful, most precise sound reproductions possible, and that in turn has...well, I don't want to say "sucked the soul out" of music, but it has certainly affected it. Now it actually takes an effort to create a lively tone that stands out, to do something different, because the evolution of the technology has been toward making everything the same. Hence all us gearheads, and particularly us pedalheads, chasing the tones we hear in our heads, which (consciously or otherwise) are based on tones we remember from the past. Hence the constant debates over analog vs. digital pedals, passive vs. active basses, tubes vs. class D, and so forth. We seek the tones of the past, while the technology of the future actively fights us in doing so.
It is what it is, I guess...
Ok, OK. I am not at all even trying to suggest that modern gear is bad, or crap or anything like that. I know all about the newer stuff having od channels and all that. 95% of what I've heard is just different levels of fuzz. Big difference. So, a new modern amp that has an OD channel that actually sounds like Of not fuzz and fizz or tin in most cases. Hell, even a good pedal. Name 1. Darkglass for example fuzz.
I play pretty modern gear and I guess my sound could be described as fairly modern -- certainly not what you hear in the Mountain recordings posted above, even though I dig those old tones a lot in the context of that music, as made by those players (I'm jamming out to the Mountain ciips as I type this).
I think that discussing those sounds as solely a result of equipment limitations misses some of the point, though. Sure, they were limited in how clean or full-range a tone they could achieve, but their playing evolved hand in hand with that. If I pick up an old P-bass and play it through an old amp, it makes me want to play differently than if I pick up a modern six string and run it through a clean, 3-way rig. I wouldn't want to hear John Fogerty singing Nessun Dorma any more than I'd want to hear Luciano Pavarotti singing Born on the Bayou... or, put another way, if you had a voice like Pavarotti's (or Fogerty's), it might influence some of your musical choices. Not that Luciano couldn't have been into roots rock or John into opera.
I don't want to speak in absolutes. I'm sure that there were plenty of players in the 70s who would've loved to have access to the tonal options we have today -- people whose musical visions could have been better realized. There's also compelling modern music being made that draws on the older sounds. Even though I described "my" sound as fairly modern, I still (in my mind, anyway) take some cues from those old sounds and old players I like, even if what comes out isn't the same.
I think that discussing those sounds as solely a result of equipment limitations misses some of the point, though. Sure, they were limited in how clean or full-range a tone they could achieve, but their playing evolved hand in hand with that. If I pick up an old P-bass and play it through an old amp, it makes me want to play differently than if I pick up a modern six string and run it through a clean, 3-way rig. I wouldn't want to hear John Fogerty singing Nessun Dorma any more than I'd want to hear Luciano Pavarotti singing Born on the Bayou... or, put another way, if you had a voice like Pavarotti's (or Fogerty's), it might influence some of your musical choices. Not that Luciano couldn't have been into roots rock or John into opera.
I don't want to speak in absolutes. I'm sure that there were plenty of players in the 70s who would've loved to have access to the tonal options we have today -- people whose musical visions could have been better realized. There's also compelling modern music being made that draws on the older sounds. Even though I described "my" sound as fairly modern, I still (in my mind, anyway) take some cues from those old sounds and old players I like, even if what comes out isn't the same.
Dude, you nailed it. There it is. Sooo many talk about "your" tone but "my" tone didn't get me wanting to play in the first place! Those old sounds are in my head. My whole question was simply why, with all the tech now, can't companies recreate those sounds w modern gear? Cuz they don't want to? Maybe. GK definitely bucks the norm I'll say that. Their amps, esp RBs are a major difference to most everything out there.
And do it without the distortion.
That being said, it's that big fat clean tone i'm after.
I could go on, but who would listen.
The cellist Anner Bylsma touched on the increasing homogenization of certain aspects of modern life in his introduction to Bach, the Fencing Master... cultural as well as technological, and each influences the other, of course.
If big, fat, and clean is what you feel drawn to, then you should heed that call. Not everyone has to shoot for the same star.
Alright, I'm getting a guitar Synth for my bass and sampling the "tone" of a vibraphone and THAT will be my tone, for metal ofcourse w/flats tuned to Kb
Because it was the flaws of old analog technology that gave those old tones their musical character, while the modern technical drive (and the music industry behind said technical drive) is geared toward mass produced perfection. We may listen to an old piece of music and say it sounds perfect, but what we really mean is that it has character. It has differences that stand out and make it unique. It has flaws, and the flaws make the music.
Listen to some recordings under the Daptone record label. They manage to track some incredibly vintage sounding recordings, so it's not like it's a lost art or anything. For more mainstream examples, Mark Ronsons studio credits with Amy Winehouse should be enough to convince at least a few that it's still doable. If you're looking to mainstream rock for revivalist recording techniques and tone, it's probably best to look elsewhere. Besides, there isn't much good music to be found in that category these days anyway, IMO, depending of course if you consider what you hear on every day corporate radio "mainstream". The Alabama Shakes manage to a get a super thick, syrupy vintage P bass tone. They're also worth a listen. It's out there, you just have to know where to look.
Yeah I currently run a Heritage SVT and it sure don't have the kind of sound I've been talking about.
Lets all get into the way back machine now.
Tubes, Yehhhhs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.
Keith playing a Precision through an SVT.
Sure some of you have seen this posted in other threads, but hence, it will be posted again.
