“Tone is in the fingers” my ass. (RANT)

braintheory said:
It is a silly and not very productive debate I agree, but his nuances, which I do very much admire aren’t the tone itself, they just highlight and bring out certain aspects of the core tone that’s from the setup. There were times where his tone was amazing, other times where I felt it wasn’t great, but in both cases his nuances and overall playing were about as good to me, so once again I distinguish between quality of playing and quality of tone rather than overgeneralize as a single package. With Yngwie this is especially important since he often had great tone and nuanced playing, while the musical content/ideas itself I feel isn’t that good, so there’s a lot to break apart with him
Click to expand...
I said it million times.

Even I can play a SINGLE CHORD through say EVH’s rig and that would be his tone. I would dare anyone distinguish is that one chord being played by me or the man himself while he was alive in a blind test.

What is in his fingers is his skill, soul and style. And that we can not replicate.

Maybe we should precisely define what we mean by particular words, so there would be no misunderstanding?
 
CrystalSky said:
I said it million times.

Even I can play a SINGLE CHORD through say EVH’s rig and that would be his tone. I would dare anyone distinguish is that one chord being played by me or the man himself while he was alive in a blind test.

What is in his fingers is his skill, soul and style. And that we can not replicate.

Maybe we should precisely define what we mean by particular words, so there would be no misunderstanding?
Click to expand...
Yeah most guys don’t distinguish. It seems if the playing or music itself is great and the tone at least is isn’t terrible then they’ll think the tone is great. If the playing is awful and the tone is amazing, they’ll just notice the poor playing
 
braintheory said:
Yeah most guys don’t distinguish. It seems if the playing or music itself is great and the tone at least is isn’t terrible then they’ll think the tone is great. If the playing is awful and the tone is amazing, they’ll just notice the poor playing
Click to expand...
I would love to one day have an experiment on this topic with one of the greats to put a scientific and proof based end to misunderstanding.
 
I will say this . I have beginner students with $99 Epiphone beginner guitars with $2 pickups that plug into my Hermansson or vh4 and the tones are incredible. It was definitely eye opening
 
Last edited:
MadAsAHatter said:
Dimebag is a great example of phenomenal playing skills and a tone that sounds like ass. Or was that his fingers that produced the shitty tone?

Just as @braintheory has said many times so have I... Tone a technique are two different entities which people can't seem to separate.
Click to expand...
Vulgar Display has amazing tone . I love it . But it’s all subjective
 
CrystalSky said:
Even I can play a SINGLE CHORD through say EVH’s rig and that would be his tone
Click to expand...
That’s the thing, you hope and want this to be true but it isn’t. Everyone would be able to tell. Because tone is in the fingers.

My brother in law makes all my amps sound like dogshit. Because he sucks.
 
MadAsAHatter said:
Dimebag is a great example of phenomenal playing skills and a tone that sounds like ass. Or was that his fingers that produced the shitty tone?

Just as @braintheory has said many times so have I... Tone a technique are two different entities which people can't seem to separate.
Click to expand...
Randy Rhoads is another example. Not that I think his tone was bad at all actually, but just nothing amazing to me either. It was his musical ideas that did it for me, but that didn’t fool me into thinking his tone was as good
 
tallcoolone said:
That’s the thing, you hope and want this to be true but it isn’t. Everyone would be able to tell. Because tone is in the fingers.

My brother in law makes all my amps sound like dogshit. Because he sucks.
Click to expand...
Even on single chords? Man we gotta conduct an experiment, a BIG one!
 
tallcoolone said:
IMO yup. And why see that as a bad thing? Do you want your Am chord to sound like everyone else’s Am chord?
Click to expand...
I just can’t imagine someone can’t properly play a single chord. Only if novice. Experiments needed to shut this topic once and for all.
 
CrystalSky said:
I just can’t imagine someone can’t properly play a single chord. Only if novice. Experiments needed to shut this topic once and for all.
Click to expand...
It’s not about what’s ‘proper’ man, it’s about the ‘you’ that your playing adds. No ‘right way’ to play music, right?
 
tallcoolone said:
It’s not about what’s ‘proper’ man, it’s about the ‘you’ that your playing adds. No ‘right way’ to play music, right?
Click to expand...
Well, there is some basic understanding of technique to this I think.

Somehow we know when someone plays that chord like shit and when someone other plays it right.

I am trying to stick to materialistic part of it when talking anout experiments, not touching the philosophy part.

Classic music has some “feel” instructions on sheets, so I there are some small group of right ways to play something. Play MoP with flimsy atrack and alternate pick it and you reduce a masterpiece to shit.

This is quite complex topic, but I very much believe some demystifications might happen thtough thorough experimenting. If only I was in USA and had means to do it, with a piece of “knowing right people” to top it off…
 
CrystalSky said:
Classic music has some “feel” instructions on sheets, so I there are some small group of right ways to play something. Play MoP with flimsy atrack and alternate pick it and you reduce a masterpiece to shit.
Click to expand...
Part of the reason I’m not a fan of classical guitar. Guys like Christopher Parkening are incredible players but are following a strict formula I’m not into. Art/music should never be binary IMO— “right” or “wrong”
CrystalSky said:
Somehow we know when someone plays that chord like shit and when someone other plays it right.

I am trying to stick to materialistic part of it when talking anout experiments, not touching the philosophy part.
Click to expand...
It’s not philosophy, it’s tone and technique. And IMO those two are inseparable. SRV didn’t bend strings or play chords the same way Andy Summers does. They added their own flavor which is recognizable. The reason the statement “tone is in the fingers” annoys folks on gear boards is that it adds a factor into the equation that isn’t quantifiable and that can be frustrating. If that is true it might not be even possible to achieve certain holy grail tones—even with the right unobtainium gear.

Great players sound great, regardless of the gear. Below average players sound below average no matter what gear they are playing through.
 
tallcoolone said:
Part of the reason I’m not a fan of classical guitar. Guys like Christopher Parkening are incredible players but are following a strict formula I’m not into. Art/music should never be binary IMO— “right” or “wrong”

It’s not philosophy, it’s tone and technique. And IMO those two are inseparable. SRV didn’t bend strings or play chords the same way Andy Summers does. They added their own flavor which is recognizable. The reason the statement “tone is in the fingers” annoys folks on gear boards is that it adds a factor into the equation that isn’t quantifiable and that can be frustrating. If that is true it might not be even possible to achieve certain holy grail tones—even with the right unobtainium gear.

Great players sound great, regardless of the gear. Below average players sound below average no matter what gear they are playing through.
Click to expand...
Classical guitar has come a very long way since Parkening. By today's standards he would be an amateur player. If you look the great classical players today there are lots of different approaches and technique styles that all can work very well for different players. If anything it's often said today in classical guitar that "no one size fits all". It was more in the old days of Segovia and Parkening where they had a my way or the highway attitude (and again they wouldn't be considered good players anymore, too sloppy and uncoordinated technically, but good with warmth and feeling). Parkening didn't have great tone anyway (too thin and naily). The funny thing is with classical guitar I think there is more truth to the "tone is in the fingers" saying, but I never actually heard anyone in the classical guitar field actually say it lol
 
tallcoolone said:
Part of the reason I’m not a fan of classical guitar. Guys like Christopher Parkening are incredible players but are following a strict formula I’m not into. Art/music should never be binary IMO— “right” or “wrong”

It’s not philosophy, it’s tone and technique. And IMO those two are inseparable. SRV didn’t bend strings or play chords the same way Andy Summers does. They added their own flavor which is recognizable. The reason the statement “tone is in the fingers” annoys folks on gear boards is that it adds a factor into the equation that isn’t quantifiable and that can be frustrating. If that is true it might not be even possible to achieve certain holy grail tones—even with the right unobtainium gear.

Great players sound great, regardless of the gear. Below average players sound below average no matter what gear they are playing through.
Click to expand...
0 percent bothered. In fact I would be happy if you could get half decent sound out of 50 dollar ibanez combo with fingers, but it doesn’t work, I have one and I tried. Even free phone software sounds lightyears better.

So basically it should be indistinguishable whether one plays different amps or what?

If there is no severe underqualification, I suppose one can reach sound of some legendary players at least in a single chord situation.

Help me conduct experiments anyone.
 
Another example is Paul Gilbert. Many guys love his playing, but I’ve only heard others say not good things about his tone. I guess his fingers are no good too lol

One of the most inspiring classical guitarists for me is Yamashita. It’s almost universally agreed on that his tone was awful, but he had so much fire and passion in his playing that I still love listening to him
 
Last edited:
braintheory said:
Classical guitar has come a very long way since Parkening. By today's standards he would be an amateur player. If you look the great classical players today there are lots of different approaches and technique styles that all can work very well for different players. If anything it's often said today in classical guitar that "no one size fits all". It was more in the old days of Segovia and Parkening where they had a my way or the highway attitude (and again they wouldn't be considered good players anymore, too sloppy and uncoordinated technically, but good with warmth and feeling). Parkening didn't have great tone anyway (too thin and naily). The funny thing is with classical guitar I think there is more truth to the "tone is in the fingers" saying, but I never actually heard anyone in the classical guitar field actually say it lol
Click to expand...
Shows how much I know haha. I switched to classical piano back in the 90s, just a better way to enjoy the compositions
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top