Why was Randy Rhoads' tone so crap?

[the crush 36]

https://soundcloud.com/dv_hicks/i-dont-k ... ar/s-n33Yv ok i hope i did this right let me know here is just guitar track for i dont know the orgional recording from Blizzard of OZ ill post a backing track without the guitar next and i would like to add randy is my all time favorite when i first heard crazy train thats what made me pick up the guitar and i play in a ozzy tribute band called sins of a madman and play most everything from blizzard and diary

https://soundcloud.com/dv_hicks/i-dont-k ... al-backing ok here is i dont know with everything but guitar track now everyone can add the tone they want!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Epic]

.....the fact that tone is placed before MUSICIANSHIP on nearly every online "community" related to guitar makes me sick. I've noticed discussion of actual music and theory is backseat to superficial nitpickings of tone.

Clearly, you are on the wrong forum. Please see upper left corner of your monitor screen - you are currently on "Rig-Talk".....

Um, I'm referring to Rig-talk.com as a whole. Now compare the post count of this forum to the music and theory forum, which is also...like...in rig talk...tell me if you "notice" anything.

I've got a buddy who is a great "musician". But.................he is terrible with tones. I can't listen to him for more than a tune or two. His tone is a terrible mess.

For me they go hand in hand. You have to be able to write a song, but people also have to "listen" to the song.

Offensive tone is, well, offensive.

I agree with that 100%, and apparently RR had an awesome live tone, I'm not a fan myself and have no idea. Regarding your buddy, if his tone is THAT bad...throw him a freakin' bone! I've yet to see a bad player with good tone

Playing music, Engineering, Producing, Writing, & Performing are all different facets that those with more than a hobbyist mindset, should-- imo consider seriously, and not casually dismiss-- BUT being good at one facet does NOT by default make someone good at the other facets.

In "Reality"-- Being a "Theory" genius doesn't equate to being a monster player, writer, engineer, or performer either-- doesn't hurt, but doesn't mean much if one isn't talented to begin with... Can't teach talent.

I agree with you completely, but being a "theory genius" isn't necessary. SRV, BB king, Clapton, etc. most of MY major influences are anything BUT theory brainiacs, but the time they DID put into their craft is why they are so celebrated and appreciated to this day. I remember reading somewhere that Clapton would put hours into just ONE note, manipulating it a million different ways to get the tonal effect he wanted...his goal was to play the blues at its purest form, drawing inspiration from the likes of Robert Johnson, who could play anybody under the table on a freakin shoe box and rubber bands if he wanted. On the flip side, dream theater and the like wouldn't exist without those who push the limits of music both technically and rhythmically, but I would say Mr. Petrucci and Mr. Clapton both took their playing equally serious, but to different ends. All that fantastic gear petrucci is famous for using (Mark iic+, his sweet ibanez from the early days, etc.) was NOT the same gear he cut his teeth on.

I seemed to have rubbed some people the wrong way with my comments, and it's fine if somebody feels I've somehow stepped out of bounds by suggesting more focus be put on musicianship in a ::gasp:: gear forum, they are entitled their own opinions, and I can take the flames firing my way like a big boy. As far as the original topic goes, I feel like your post explains exactly the situation, you can't blame Randy for what ended up on that record...he's a guitarist not an engineer...he was at the mercy of those responsible for the finished product, and unfortunately it taints whatever legacy he's left behind. Never heard his live tone, but apparently it was fantastic so .

At the end of the day we are all here because we have similar interests, and as brothers of the six string I'd gladly give the shirt off my back to any of you! Frankly, its easy to jump all over the case of somebody with my position, and I can't fault those who have for doing so, but it's in my nature to share my thoughts, however unpopular, and I look forward to contributing to this forum in the best ways I know how. It won't be long before I start posting videos of my gear reviews, at which time my tone may be ripped apart by you sharks.

 

[Epic]

Um, I'm referring to Rig-talk.com as a whole. Now compare the post count of this forum to the music and theory forum, which is also...like...in rig talk...tell me if you "notice" anything.

If you had been around for longer you would know, but since you weren't, you wouldn't.

Glad to help

I ain't losing any sleep, lol.

Rig-Talk the main forum has been around for 6-7 years at least now, and people come to this site to view that forum. The theory forum is just over a year old and barely anybody knows about it. Plus gear and tone is much more fun to talk about than playing styles and people don't get so defensive about gear and tone as they do about what playing style is better than another. Just look at this very thread, you can't even discuss someone having poor tone without fifteen people getting belligerent and arguing aimlessly that he was a great player. Who gives a flying whale, we're talking tone here, not style.

Like I said, I'm pretty new to forums, so the history of this place and its various forums eludes me. If this place is 6 years old, than that is over 100,000 posts a year on this forum. If the music and theory forum is only a year old, well you can kinda see how lopsided the discussion is. Thats totally fine I suppose, but as a lover of music it just sort of shocks me. You can't a statement like "Why was Randy Rhodes tone such crap" without inviting this sort of discussion. Hence all the pictures of worms in this thread. From what I noticed, people get defensive about tone and gear all the time, so I don't quite buy that argument.

 

[rlord1974]

At the end of the day we are all here because we have similar interests, and as brothers of the six string I'd gladly give the shirt off my back to any of you! Frankly, its easy to jump all over the case of somebody with my position, and I can't fault those who have for doing so, but it's in my nature to share my thoughts, however unpopular, and I look forward to contributing to this forum in the best ways I know how. It won't be long before I start posting videos of my gear reviews, at which time my tone may be ripped apart by you sharks.

No worries, man. We're all big boys here (wait, there's Laura too! ) that just like bustin' chops. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions - be them gear or theory related. Welcome to the forum.

As an aside: Is there REALLY a theory section on Rig-Talk? I've never noticed!

 

[Badronald]

Regarding your buddy, if his tone is THAT bad...throw him a freakin' bone!

I stopped talking to him. His tone is so bad i "defriended" him.

 

[chumbucket]

https://soundcloud.com/dv_hicks/i-dont-know-guitar/s-n33Yv ok i hope i did this right let me know here is just guitar track for i dont know the orgional recording from Blizzard of OZ ill post a backing track without the guitar next and i would like to add randy is my all time favorite when i first heard crazy train thats what made me pick up the guitar and i play in a ozzy tribute band called sins of a madman and play most everything from blizzard and diary

https://soundcloud.com/dv_hicks/i-dont-k ... al-backing ok here is i dont know with everything but guitar track now everyone can add the tone they want!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think that backing track is from the new versions where Sharon had them replace Bob Daisley and Lee Kerslake's parts so that OZZY INC. wouldn't have to pay them performance royalties (even though they wrote Ozzy's best and most memorable songs).

 

[Ventura]

It's not so much lopsided as it is gear obsessiveness is easier to 'get into' on the grander scale of the masses as we know it, than theory. Theory's a personal thing, an intellectual thing - we can discuss the compositional works of many to any degree of minutiae, it's just as subjective and just as arbitrary. Perhaps more people are better versed in understanding hardware than software, to make an apropos analogy.

Whatever, it's all Rig-Talk really, innit?!?!

 

[Epic]

[/quote]
No worries, man. We're all big boys here (wait, there's Laura too! ) that just like bustin' chops. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions - be them gear or theory related. Welcome to the forum.

As an aside: Is there REALLY a theory section on Rig-Talk? I've never noticed!

[/quote]

Lol, yah it's hidden around here somewhere...thanks much for the welcome!

 

[Zachman]

I agree with you completely, but being a "theory genius" isn't necessary.

I agree... but it appeared to me as though you seemed to make an issue of it, as though it was relevant in this thread-- since the topic was tone. It didn't appear to me, that you were talking about recording engineering theory and practices.

SRV, BB king, Clapton, etc. most of MY major influences are anything BUT theory brainiacs, but the time they DID put into their craft is why they are so celebrated and appreciated to this day. I remember reading somewhere that Clapton would put hours into just ONE note, manipulating it a million different ways to get the tonal effect he wanted...his goal was to play the blues at its purest form, drawing inspiration from the likes of Robert Johnson, who could play anybody under the table on a freakin shoe box and rubber bands if he wanted.

Perhaps, but his recorded tone sucked too. I would say that if he came out today he'd go for a better tone, if it were up to him... at least I hope he would.

On the flip side, dream theater and the like wouldn't exist without those who push the limits of music both technically and rhythmically, but I would say Mr. Petrucci and Mr. Clapton both took their playing equally serious, but to different ends. All that fantastic gear petrucci is famous for using (Mark iic+, his sweet ibanez from the early days, etc.) was NOT the same gear he cut his teeth on.

Seems to me you're not addressing the thread topic, rather making the case that great players can have bad tone, re:R. Johnson. I know I prefer (an admittedly subjective term) Clapton's tone in the old days to his current tone.

I seemed to have rubbed some people the wrong way with my comments, and it's fine if somebody feels I've somehow stepped out of bounds by suggesting more focus be put on musicianship in a ::gasp:: gear forum they are entitled their own opinions, and I can take the flames firing my way like a big boy.

On a theory forum, I could see your point as being valid, but this is a gear forum, and obviously the thread topic having NOTHING to do w/ music theory, doesn't really make your case a very strong one, imo.

As far as the original topic goes, I feel like your post explains exactly the situation, you can't blame Randy for what ended up on that record...he's a guitarist not an engineer...he was at the mercy of those responsible for the finished product, and unfortunately it taints whatever legacy he's left behind. Never heard his live tone, but apparently it was fantastic so .

At the end of the day we are all here because we have similar interests, and as brothers of the six string I'd gladly give the shirt off my back to any of you!

Some who've come in as new members, have had trolling as their clear objective goal-- leaving the "similar interests" concept, not too likely-- as their main priority.

Frankly, its easy to jump all over the case of somebody with my position, and I can't fault those who have for doing so, but it's in my nature to share my thoughts, however unpopular, and I look forward to contributing to this forum in the best ways I know how.

While I agree there are MANY who rather converse about gear on a gear forum, rather than discuss music theory, outside of a theory forum-- go figure...

It seems to me that you were addressed the way you were because of your attitude, and off topic comments, addressed to the entire forum.

It won't be long before I start posting videos of my gear reviews, at which time my tone may be ripped apart by you sharks.

That is entirely possible, however due to the nature of your position and comments, I would think it's your performance which will likely be scrutinized, as well as your "Tone". There are some EXTREMELY talented and highly skilled players here, who are also well versed in the other facets of making music, and the music business such as: writing, performing, & engineering.

I wish you well, and suggest as a new guy that you attempt to integrate into the forum society-- rather than agitate. There are some really really cool people here, as well as some fantastic resources of info. Better to NOT alienate them. Allies are better.

 

[Epic]

Well I apologize if I've strayed so grossly off topic in this silly thread and upset the forum gods. I went ahead and googled this very topic, and really its all been discussed before.

How can you slam Mr. Johnsons tone...he layed that wonderful music down in the early 1900's, lol! That seems so silly to me!

I'm not trying to troll anyone. If anything this is a provacative thread that just begs for a wide variety of responses, and I would rather express my opinion than assimilate into ANY internet "society." I'm here because I love music and I LOVE the guitar, that should be good enough. Intense discussion should be celebrated, not condemned, the fact I strayed from the topic of tone and may have commited a cardinal internet sin is the only valid complaint anyone can have here, I understand that and will be sure to keep that in mind when posting in the future. Otherwise, I just wouldn't let my opinions upset you that much. Nobody agrees on everything all the time, nor do people adhere to the same concepts or worldview, there are as many different personalities as there are people, and I believe thats a GOOD thing. Thanks for the well wishes, and hopefully we can grow to be understanding towards eachother as times go on, and hopefully you'll realize that I'm not just trying to be a douchebag

 

[Zachman]

Well I apologize if I've strayed so grossly off topic in this silly thread and upset upstanding forum members.-

Fixed....

No need to be defensive, snippy, nor offensive.

I went ahead and googled this very topic, and really its all been discussed before.

Not sure what your point is. Perhaps you're suggesting-- If a topic has ever been discussed (anywhere), it's not to be brought up again?

How can you slam Mr. Johnsons tone...he layed that wonderful music down in the early 1900's, lol!

Because I think his tone sucked! You seem unable to discern the difference between me discussing his tone, as opposed to me discussing his musical talent, proficiency as a writer, player, as a performer, or his contributions to music, and rather lump it all into the "Tone" category.... I never discounted his relevance.

That seems so silly to me!

See above post

I'm not trying to troll anyone.

Jury's still out on that... I hope this is true

If anything this is a provacative thread that just begs for a wide variety of responses, and I would rather express my opinion than assimilate into ANY internet "society." I'm here because I love music and I LOVE the guitar, that should be good enough.

If anything, it seems like your opinion could've/should've been focused toward the thread topic. As it was, it seemed you were more interested in engaging in talking just to hear the sound of your own voice.

Intense discussion should be celebrated, not condemned,

I haven't seen anyone condemn intense discussion. Are you trying to be intentionally obtuse, to continue further hijacking of the thread-- or are you unaware of it?

the fact I strayed from the topic of tone and may have commited a cardinal internet sin is the only valid complaint anyone can have here,

Got it!

The abrasive attitude of the new guy, with off topic, snippy and passive aggressive (imo) comments, to some long standing members, isn't a "Valid" issue to you.

I understand that and will be sure to keep that in mind when posting in the future. Otherwise, I just wouldn't let my opinions upset you that much.

I happen to agree that music theory is a worthy topic to discuss. Ever consider starting your own thread, instead of hijacking one that CLEARLY has nothing to do with your opinion about theory's priority rating over all other considerations? (HIGHLY suggested!)

Nobody agrees on everything all the time, nor do people adhere to the same concepts or worldview, there are as many different personalities as there are people, and I believe thats a GOOD thing. Thanks for the well wishes, and hopefully we can grow to be understanding towards eachother as times go on, and hopefully you'll realize that I'm not just trying to be a douchebag

"Not just trying to be a douche bag"? In addition, what else are you trying to be?? (Rhetorical... Never mind)

Here's to "Hoping" that rather than continue to "try to be a douche bag", you'll choose to be something a bit more pleasant, in the future.

 

[Epic]

Was going to comment but...

...people are getting mad.

Who is getting mad? If anyone is getting mad, they need to relax. This is the interwebz for the love of God. The whole point of forums is to breed discussion and, the last time I checked, we are all entitled to our own opinion on matters.....

PEACE

+1

 

[Zachman]

Was going to comment but...

...people are getting mad.

Who is getting mad? If anyone is getting mad, they need to relax. This is the interwebz for the love of God. The whole point of forums is to breed discussion and, the last time I checked, we are all entitled to our own opinion on matters.....

PEACE

+1

 

[rupe]

I think Randy looked cooler than Eddie

 

[Badronald]

I think Randy looked cooler than Eddie

Not even close. The bow ties? The polka Dots? The girl high heels?

 

[Anonymous]

I think Randy looked cooler than Eddie

Truth! Those giant bow ties and polka dot vests were sweet...

Steve

 

[rupe]

I think Randy looked cooler than Eddie

Not even close. The bow ties? The polka Dots? The girl high heels?

Yeah, not as cool as overalls and striped knee socks

Didn't take as long as I thought for somone to not "get" my post

 

[rupe]

I think Randy looked cooler than Eddie

Truth! Those giant bow ties and polka dot vests were sweet...

Steve

 

[skoora]

https://soundcloud.com/dv_hicks/i-dont-know-guitar/s-n33Yv ok i hope i did this right let me know here is just guitar track for i dont know the orgional recording from Blizzard of OZ ill post a backing track without the guitar next and i would like to add randy is my all time favorite when i first heard crazy train thats what made me pick up the guitar and i play in a ozzy tribute band called sins of a madman and play most everything from blizzard and diary

https://soundcloud.com/dv_hicks/i-dont-k ... al-backing ok here is i dont know with everything but guitar track now everyone can add the tone they want!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Do I have to sign up to download that backing track?

 

[srinivassa]

I should really start listening to a lot of 80s metal if I want to continue on this board. I never even knew before who Randy Rhodes was, apart from the Plexi mod and the Jackson guitars.