Content
Thread
Forum
Date
We have a pretty decent train system here on the east coast, but it doesn't go everywhere and many of the trains are dated (read:slow as hell). We don't get new ones for the same reason that most airline companies still use planes from the '60s-'00. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

The only issue is that it makes travelling in what seems to be very dated accommodations for what ends up being a pretty hefty price (From central Jersey to NYC is $20 one way NOT including parking which can easily be another $10. Driving would cost you about $25 round trip in an average car with an MPG of about 20) less attractive as the years progress.

You take the train if you have to go to the airport in Newark or whatever. Otherwise you drive. It's cheaper, faster, and unless you're disgusting, probably a hell of a lot cleaner (yeah, there's fleas on some of the trains).

I think we could do more rail travel, but it would take a massive overhaul of the entire system. I don't think it would ever change the need to drive in rural areas. I used to live in rural Ohio and I know it wouldn't ever work out there. There's just too much space to cover.

I think the better thing to look at is cleaner energy. If we could stop putting heavy taxes on car companies that are pursuing R&D of electric cars under the guise of road maintenance (still an issue, but come on guys... it's because oil is so ingrained into our economy, and you can't tell me that taxing every one of the tens of 1000s of cars that come through the highway system of the east coast every day $1.50 every 20-30 miles doesn't pay for road maintenance...)

Anyway, that's my take on it coming from an east coaster.
We used to play Whisky Pong. 3 little juice glasses on each side. You get pretty drunk and start to hate whisky after about 4 games.

Also Ride the Bus. One of my favorites
Floyd, Hendrix, Beatles.

Ty Segall, although I heard he started doing some acoustic/quieter stuff. Haven't given it a listen but I really dug his psychedelic fuzz rock thing.

I'm digging that newer band Temples, although they only have 1 album out.

Sam Roberts is also pretty sick
You can certainly try some books. I definitely recommend that.

Too many people jump into songwriting (I was one of them) without realizing that there is a whole world of technical know-how that really has nothing to do with being able to play an instrument. It's a skill and an art. Just like it'd be more difficult to get into sculpting without knowing what tools are used and how to use them, it's hard to get into songwriting without knowing what's going on in music and what your options are when you're writing.

I mean, you can certainly write decent and even very good songs without knowing anything about songwriting, but the tools are there, all written out and explained. There's a number of great books on the subject and why not exploit that if you're serious about writing your own music?

That's more of a general thing though, although it'll certainly help with writing better progressions/rhythms/melodies and consistently.

Anyway, back to your first question, I think the advice here's been awesome. A little trick I use to get a good rhythm going is to have a backbeat going in my head (this is generally your snare drum in western music), and a tempo picked out. It helps lock things in a little better. I won't keep a metronome going the whole time, but at least having a count in so you have something to tap your foot to is awesome.
^Fair enough, but even using it as an exercise, I think it's important to take what you find useful (i.e. select phrases and general concepts like rhythmic phrasing) and leave the rest, especially when we're in the classic rock/blues genre.

I've rarely found it useful to learn any piece in that (umbrella of a) genre note-for-note, even as an exercise in learning to play better. Like Cajundaddy (sp?) said earlier, it's more about realizing what phrases are important and getting the feel for the piece and then working off of it.

I don't know. That's just how I've always approached things since the beginning, and I don't think I came out all bad

I agree TS needs to work on his rhythm, feel, and articulation, and you should never ever use 'style' as an excuse to play badly. I wasn't arguing that at all. I was just letting TS know that "giving justice" to a piece (like he mentioned in his comment) shouldn't be playing something note for note.
Quote by danyal92
Yes I do, alot actually. I know there's no jimmy page but page himself but its like "doing justice to the solo" theres no better version of it than the original.

I know i do but the main focus is musicality. Im pretty clear on the difference between a guitar player and a musician as otherwise i would never have created this thread.
e.g. IMO dave mustaine is a guitar player while marty friedman hes a musician! (yes i might get alot of hate for this).


I just wanted to throw in there that "doing justice" to anything in music, aside from more regimented forms of music, shouldn't mean playing it note for note (IMO. I could be wrong here). I worked with a drummer who had this same mentality a few months back and it was dreadful.

Everyone has their own unique style/approach and things they bring to the table, and I believe that "doing justice" to a tune should be done by allowing yourself (your style and approach) to shine through in it.

You aren't Jimmy Page. That's not at all a bad thing. In fact, that's a REALLY REALLY good thing, because that means you have the power to take that tune (or any tune) and add a little 'danyal92' spin to it and make it something different. It may be a little different or it may be very different, but the point is to expand on Jimmy's ideas. Go look up some live takes of Jimmy playing that, or any of his tunes. Even he was always trying to expand on his own ideas and try new approaches. He absolutely never plays that solo the same way twice.

Imagine how 'All Along the Watchtower' (Jimi's version) would have sounded if he was concerned with "doing it justice" by playing it exactly like Bob Dylan did? It would have been kind of boring, honestly, and wouldn't be one of the greatest covers ever recorded. Do many people believe that Dylan's version is better? Sure, but that didn't stop Jimi from doing an awesome cover of it
Quote by Fret Frier
I'm not arguing over what gauge, I agree. I didn't know a new setup would be required just to get new gauges.


Yeah, it doesn't matter much for the plain strings made of the same material (as long as the pitch you're tuning them to isn't changing), but the material, core, and thickness of a wound string can have an effect on intonation.

I'm not 100% on the science of it (that's what the internet is for, right?), but I do know that the core of wound strings varies and the amount of tension needed to tune it to pitch will change (something to do with mass, stress, etc), and when you're changing those two factors, you're looking at re-intonation.

Not to mention increasing string gauge will put more stress on the neck, making a truss rod adjustment necessary. Lowering the gauge will have the opposite effect, of course.

Sorry, I can't give you a better explanation but it's true. I think a quick internet search can give you the info you need if you're interested
I use Cayenne on everything...even toast w/jam.

Quote by pushingthrough
Tumeric!!!!!!!!!!!!.... Just sayin'................


That shit tastes like dish soap and I feel like a 3 year old being punished for talking back when I eat it. No thanks :-/
It seems to happen differently every time for me (the order of events, that is).

Usually it sparks out of a chord progression. I like my 'fancy' chords and Hendrix-style approaches to chord progressions so I usually have something like that going on. I like to imagine a chord progression and whatever colored chords I used as almost a back drop to the song. It's already given the song a mood/feel/vibe/landscape, whatever you wanna call it.

Then I sort of jam on the song for awhile and pick apart what's going on and where it seems to be wanting to go and write it down. I like to use big poster boards and lay one or two out on the floor and just write shit down with a permanent marker as I go. I'll write down the progression, figure out what kind of tempo would be good (moderate, fast, slow, etc), write out what's going on pulse/meter-wise, and jot down some basic notes on structure.

If I feel like It's going to take a 'Verse/Chorus/Bridge' sort of thing and I only have a 'Verse' progression, I'll start figuring out a few ways to go about putting together something for other parts and make decisions like whether to modulate to a different key, use the relative minor, use the whole 'soft/loud' idea, use a progression starting on a non-tonic chord, etc. at that point too. The idea is to get the shell of the song working.

Then I'll usually decide on a good tempo number and start throwing vocal ideas out there. I use a tape recorder, hold the metronome that's on my phone to the tape recorder, count off, and then sing a melodic idea. Then I play it back while playing my electric guitar unplugged to the click so I can hear how the melody sits on top of my progression. Then I'll try different things for hours until I'm completely happy with the melody.

I try to keep the melody within the 3-9 syllable range per phrase and usually only work on 8-10 bars at a time (so like a half-verse. It depends on the progression. I might work in 4s.). That makes it easier to throw lyrics on it later and to make changes if I have to. I'll also put together more ideas than I need with variations on how long the phrases are, where they start/stop, etc.

Also, I think John Lennon said that he takes other people's melodies and '****s them up'. I do the same thing. If I'm totally stumped on where to go, I'll try to find some songs with a similar progression or part of a progression and listen to how they approached it and in all likelihood 'borrow' notes.

Most people say to start with the melody, but I like to adjust along the way and I have a much easier time forming a rhythm/pulse to a tune by just playing with a chord progression and tinkering with it if need be.

Anyway, after that, I'll try to get some 'bum' lyrics going and get something coherent together in Ableton. Then it sits until I'm ready to put final lyrics to it. I'm no poet and it's something I'm still working at, so usually these guys sit and bake for a few weeks/months until I have 'something to say' or whatever the kids are saying these days

I would recommend reading some books on the subject. The one mentioned is awesome (just got done with that one a few months back). The one I started with was 'How Music Really Works'. It's not the most 'correct' book in the sense that some of the info isn't technically correct, but it gave me a foundation in looking and breaking down songs.

As much as there's a creative side to songwriting, there's also a technical side. Your process is your own, but understanding how to do things musically and understand what's going on and what your options are is vital to writing at a consistent quality level.
Try out the Ernie Ball. I used those for years before I switched to an even lighter set (still Ernie ball. Weird gauges lol)

I would go ahead and give it a setup if you know how or have a tech do it (since you bought it on CL and who knows how it was setup).

As mentioned, changing the gauge or tuning will require it to be intonated.

The whole thing that your teacher fed you is bull. You use what's comfortable. If you feel like you're playing with silly string, it might be time to try a thicker gauge. If you can't bend a step up, it might be time to try a lighter gauge. The whole idea is to make music, not to sound cool at GC when you're talking about how you use .13-.56s on your guitar (yeah, the guy at the counter tells me that every time I buy strings... shoot me now...)
Quote by anders.jorgense
It depends on the setup really.

Being a stratocaster owner you will learn what it takes to keep it in tune.

I do little tricks to the vintage style 6 screw bridge where only screw 1 and 6 are tight the others are loose.

The string guide on the head stock are from the latest US Stratocasters.

Fender bullit strings fits the vintage style tremolo system and will not get stuck like regular string brands.

That works wonders as far as keeping my Stratocaster in tune including crazy tremolo work.



That screw idea is an awesome tip man I just did that on my backup MiM to see if it would help. Just ran through Star Spangled Banner with all those crazy dives and shakes and it's still in tune. Not even my MiM w/ locking tuners can handle those bombs without being out of tune.

Listen to this guy OP
The trem on the current MiM models (I believe anything after '11) isn't that bad. Can you do crazy Hendrix 'Star Spangled Banner' stuff and stay perfectly in tune? no. Can you use it for more 'normal' applications and stay in tune? Hell yeah. You just have to have it set up right.

You might also consider locking tuners. I do do some hendrix-ey stuff with my '13 MiM and locking tuners seemed to help immensely with the tuning issues. Before I had them, I actually happened to be in a cover band that did about 90% Floyd tunes. I never had any tuning issues.
Quote by theogonia777
i think any rational person over the age of 12 can agree that the beatles are probably the worst thing to ever happen to music


it clearly said 3 minutes and not 2

i guess listening to the beatles just makes you too stupid to read numbers


Nah, I think it was just the stupidity of that post. I definitely lost a few brain cells reading it

I don't know how many though because I lost my ability to count after I read it.
Quote by zgr0826
Stuff


Lol

Somebody doesn't like The Beatles.

I especially liked that last line. What does the length of a tune or technical playing skill have to do with good songwriting?

Go listen to anything after Revolver and they pretty much got rid of the '2-minute diddy' thing. Most of the songs are around 3-4 minutes, if length is such a huge concern.
1. Do you like The Beatles? Yep
2. Favourite Beatles era? '66-'69
4. Favourite singer? Paul. Lennon's a close second but he can be pretty screechy. Ringo's singing sounds goofy and George doesn't seem to have any defining feature in his voice.
5. Favourite songwriter? Lennon/McCartney can't be separated. Together they were genius. Apart they were 'meh'. A lot like Waters/Gilmour.
10. Favourite solo career? McCartney. Lennon was ok (had arguably better songs), George had about two songs I liked and Ringo looks like he should be in U2 (I have no idea what kind of music he even makes any more)
11. Favourite solo song? Working Class Hero
13. Why do you think they are still so popular after 50+ years? Because they were great songwriters. You can take nearly any Beatles song and cover it in a different style/genre with different instruments and it'll still be good as long as the melody and harmony are left mostly untouched. It's just good songwriting.. period..
Go peruse eBay for some M50s if you can. I've seen them go used for as low as $60 (USD. That'd be like 40 pounds). There's nothing wrong with used cans as long as they work, and I can tell you the M50s are tough. I haven't been kind to mine for the years I've owned them and they still work like new.

I ended up with a pair of M30 last Christmas even though I've had M50s for years. There's no contest between the 50s and the 30s. The 50s sound better, are more solid, more comfortable, and from what I've gathered via watching a number of workshops done by recording engineers/producers, they're the studio standard. Totally worth the investment.
I believe all of them except the 'pocket' version are 1/4" for the headphones. There's also an option on the 2.0 to run it into an amp (AIR mode) as well as a left and right output for running into a PA.

You may want to see if you can get a look at one in a store though I'm not an expert on these guys.
Quote by Tedis1111
Thanks for your response I havent looked into the POD at all, there seems to be a pretty big variation in the price of the POD which would be best for a casual practice style? (I tend to play metal, blues and some clean stuff)

In terms of guitar rig what would cause the latency issues?


The POD 2.0 is the one I've seen the most, and if you're going to be practicing in the dorm, the size isn't going to be an issue. The added buttons and knobs (vs the Pocket POD), makes me think it'd be easier to dial things in and change the sound when need be.

The POD HD is the nicer of the bunch, but seems like it'd be overkill unless you're planning on recording.

As far as latency goes, it just depends on the computer and the DAW. It's not Guitar Rig 5 specifically, but any DAW setup outside of one that uses a purpose built computer and an expensive interface has a good chance of having some latency going on. It's because the computer has to process the sound. This takes time (albeit milliseconds), but it can make practicing with any sort of DAW setup a bitch.
Something like a Line6 Pod would do fine with your headphones I think that's the route most people go. Also, they sound good enough that many metal guitarists use them at shows directly plugged into the PA. No amp necessary.

Guitar Rig 5 would certainly work, but then you're looking into picking an interface (if you're set on this route, a Scarlett 2i2 is the most common choice) and depending on your computer, you COULD run into latency issues, which can be a huge turn off to the idea of even picking up your instrument.

Guitar Rig 5 is normally used in a studio or home recording setting. You have to run it through a DAW. That makes it kind of a bad choice when it comes to a practicing tool.

From a pricing standpoint, there's not much difference between either option.
For reference: The Build Doc (PDF) can be found here. The schematic, parts list, and wiring diagrams are all there.

Ok, question time.

The diode bridge. I totally forgot to order this while I was ordering my other parts. I've done some reading, and it seems that the way these guys are rated, if I were to pick up something that has a higher current and voltage rating, I'd be fine (the one recommended in the build is rated at 1-amps, 100v). Apparently when you're choosing them, you use at least 3x what you think you'll need, and more is fine (albeit overkill).

Apparently Radioshack has one rated at 1-amps, 600v. I might pop over to a little electronics shop that I just found out about and see if they have it first, but if they don't, I just want to make sure that I'd be ok with something like the one from Radioshack.

Also, concerning the diode bridge, I'm still a little confused on how it works, but it seems to be the reason that there's nothing grounded in the wiring diagram. Is that why?

Last thing: I saw a few builds on the nets using the same PCB I'm using that has two resistors put over the diode bridge (going horizontally) and it seems that they're running off DC (which I plan to do anyway) with a wire going from somewhere to the ground on the DC jack. Anyone know what's going on there? If you search google images for "Neovibe guts", it's one of the first ones that comes up.

Thanks in advance
Quote by MaggaraMarine
Remember that your chord progression won't sound "magical" on its own. It will just sound like a bunch of chords. A chord progression doesn't make a song. You need rhythm. You need melody. If you're writing for a band, write for the whole band because single parts won't sound good alone.

Just use your ears. If you want to create a good sounding progression, just listen. What chords do you hear in your head?

^ What I don't like about your post is that you refer to minor key's tonic chord as the vi chord. And the V7-i in minor as III7-vi. Tonic is always the I or i chord (lowercase for minor). Even if the song had a III7-vi somewhere, it should be V7/vi-vi. Just pointing out.

Also, why is the third chord of major a dominant 7th chord? If we are in a major key, the chord built on the third scale degree is most of the time minor. E minor is not rare in C major, nor is E7 but they have whole different functions. E7 is the V7/vi and Em is the iii chord.

And there's no such thing as A# major, D# major or G# major (or there technically is but they have so many sharps that they aren't used - instead of them it would be more reasonable to call them Bb, Eb and Ab major.)

Also, the problem I'm having with that picture is that it doesn't separate major and minor keys. Also, E7 doesn't really belong to C major. G# is the leading tone of A minor. But in C major using G# all the time just doesn't make any sense, unless you are using the E7 as a secondary dominant. As I said, in C major E minor is more common than E7.



Very true. I made the chart for my own purposes as the other ones online are harder to read. I prefer to think of it in terms of sharps (in reference to the A#, D#, and G#). It's a personal thing more than anything.

As far as the III7, I'm looking at the relationships between the notes that make up the chord. The idea is to make the IIIm strong enough to lead back into the VIm. The best way to do that is to change it to a III7. I personally think it works best, especially if the song is in a minor key.

I did mention that any of the chords can be changed to a different variant though

You're right though. Most songs will call for a IIIm.

And sorry. I don't have formal musical training/education. My education just comes from reading books and perusing the internet and making music. I wasn't aware that you generally look at a song in a minor key differently in respect to the roman numerals. I always looked at it from a key signature's stand point. TIL.
Not a detailed/technical explanation, but here's a way to create effective chord progressions:

I read a book called 'How Music Really Works' (I believe the entire book is available free online, or at least I've seen large pieces posted around).

There's a section on chord progressions, and they include a chart called 'the harmonic scale'. It looks a lot like the circle of fifths but actually works in creating good chord progressions (a little known fact is that, although many musicians and even theory teachers believe the circle of fifths can be used to derive chord progressions, it's actually used to show related keys which is more useful in modulation...).

I created this little guy in photoshop and have it taped to my wall so I can see it when I'm writing.

That's the harmonic scale Basically, you have every key. Notice the arrows pointing clockwise. These are important.

How to move through the Harmonic scale:

1.) Pick a key. You should generally start on the I (for a major key) and the VIm (for a minor key)

2.) Start moving. Your main moves are:

- Moving 1 space clockwise is a "Fifths down". Progressions that move in a Fifths down are generally very strong. (i.e. I-IV or III7-VIm)

- Skipping a chord and moving in a clockwise direction is a "Seconds down". These are also strong progressions (i.e. III7-IIm or IIm-I). Moving a "Seconds up" always as awkward as a fifths up, but shouldn't really be repeated in most cases and works best when going from the IV-V or from II-III (creating a cadence).

- Skipping two chords and moving in a counter-clockwise direction is a "Thirds up". These progressions are generally weaker, but are very smooth. (i.e. I-VIm or III7-I)

- Move directly across. This one isn't listed in the book. The trick here is to move directly across. It always works and you'll often see it in progressions. You'll notice there's no chord across from the VII. It doesn't work. (i.e. III7-V7 or IV-IIm)

3.) Mix it up. Your first two chords can be a fifths down and then the next two can be a seconds down. whatever. Following those rules, though, it's a lot harder to make a bad progression.

Now, there's things to remember:

1.) Any of the chords can be substituted for different chords. i.e. the III7 might work better as a IIIm or a III7b5. It's up to you.

2.) Not every move that doesn't follow the rules I stated is a 'wrong move', although wrong moves should be avoided. These aren't hard and fast, but they help.

(Look at the song 'Hey Joe'. It's a Fifths UP progression, although it works. The way it works though, is that all your chords are the same type (all major triads) which creates unity. That's a trick to throw in the tool box )

3.) All songs start by creating a tonal center. This is usually done in the intro. The move V7-I is a perfect cadence (and the III7 and VIm, although not perfect, has the same effect) and will always and immediately establish a tonal center, which will allow you to add chromatic chords (intervals not in the circle, like a bIII) or use not-so-common scales much easier. Another method is to repeat the I chord frequently (often starting on the I).

4.) Choosing chord types that contain similar notes can help with 'awkward' moves. i.e. The move I-III7 can be awkward. Changing the III7 to a IIIm7 or IIIm7b5 can alleviate the awkwardness a little bit.

5.) You don't ALWAYS have to start on the I or VIm. You can certainly start on the V (lots of those 80s tunes did. That D-C-G chord progression makes me want to shoot myself) or something like the IIm. It's up to you. Just remember that you need to establish a tonal center. Melody can play a big role in that (using the 1 4 or 5 of the major scale, and often, can establish the tonal center rather well).
--------------------

Modulation can make a chord progression pop. Lots of songs do it. Look up how. The most common way is the 'gear shift'. Don't do that. It's over-used. It's when they sing the last chorus in a different key

The better approach, IMO is to either use a variant of the VII, like say, VIIm7 to modulate to a nearby key OR to use a turn chord (I think that's the term?), like using a I7 to modulate to a related key.

By related key I mean one of the neighbors on your circle of fifths. You can modulate further, but the easiest modulations are to a neighboring key.

Also, by using the relative minor (or major), you can create a lot of interest. This is also modulation, and is probably the smoothest since ALL of the notes are going to be the same.

--------------------

+1 to looking up cadences. It's important, and knowing how they work can help out quite a bit

Anyway, I highly recommend reading the book I mentioned. It really opened my eyes to a lot of things in music. The first two chapters suck (they're a brief history of music from an evolutionary perspective... shoot me now), but after that, they have a lot of good stuff on how it all works and you'll begin to hear what's going on in a LOT of popular/timeless tunes.

EDIT: Figured I'd also mention that using chromatic chords should be kept to a minimum (1 or 2 chords per progression) and that it's important for them to be brief. If a chromatic chord goes on for too long, it can muddle the tonal center (which sometimes you want, for instance, it can be used to modulate), which can really confuse your listener.
Quote by e32lover
ok thanks for the detailed info, much appreciated. As I mentioned in the 8th post, i'd be wiring 1/4 inch jacks to the switch, not guitar leads.

I still dont understand how what im proposing would not be a true bypass?


Well, I feel like I didn't understand what you were saying the first time (I'm still on coffee #1 this morning). Sorry. I think you do have it sorted. I was just totally thrown by the idea of soldering the leads directly to the switch thing

Just in case I'm still not understanding (sometimes reading what's going on throws me for a loop. I'm more of a visual guy), I'd check out the links and see if what you're saying is essentially what these guys have done and have proven to work.

Anyway, I would totally just do the Wah mod. It sounds like you know enough not to **** it up
Quote by e32lover
well not sure if you noticed but guitar leads contain 2 wires each, one for the positive and one for the negative. 4 guitar leads x 2 wires = 8 wires. Yes I know how to connect it, that is the easy part. Wiring it up internally to the switch is where some experimenting is required.

What im asking is, if I have the guitar lead going to the bypass box, soldered to a common pin on the switch then continuing to the wah pedal (so this part of the circuit is always active), and have the switch simply de activating the return signal from the wah pedal and bridging the "guitar in" to "amp out" on the bypass pedal, would this be the same as a hard bypass (considering there is still a signal being sent to the turned off wah, but nothing coming back from it)

Please someone other than Spambot answer my question he obviously is pretty confused with all the maths here.


Spambot_2 I think linked you to the wrong page. If you're building it yourself, you want this page (second wiring diagram down unless you don't care about an LED indicator).

I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about with 'soldering guitar leads into the box'. That seems a little ridiculous unless I'm not grasping what you're saying. Soldering wires in is a little permanent when you can build something with jacks that takes 1/4" instrument cables lol.

For hookup wire I recommend 22 Gauge. Most people use 24 Gauge, but I find that it breaks too easily. The rest of the parts are labeled.

Check out Tayda electronics for cheap-ey prices on components+shipping (DO NOT go to radioshack. Most of the 'hardware' components (switches and jacks) are not labeled correctly and the prices are often over triple what you'd pay on the nets). I think they have a minimum of a $5 orders.

You can also go to small bear or mammoth but I find them to be a hair tad more expensive (albeit MUCH faster).

EDIT: I noticed the LED size wasn't labeled and the resistor was a little ambiguous in the diagram. I always use a 2.2k resistor into a 3mm LED for my projects. I've seen people using larger LEDs but 3mm is pretty standard size for commercial pedals.

EDIT 2: Spambot_2 linked you to the right page. He just linked you to the long one with lots and lots of different diagrams, but for what I think you're trying to do, the one I pointed out is correct.

EDIT 3: Lol I'm editting this a lot. Anyway, building something like this might be easier, but for the cheapest option, and if you're comfortable with it, you could wire a true-bypass switch directly into the wah. Here is a video demonstrating the process on a Crybaby (which I'm assuming your wah is a derivative of). It's not hard, but it will involve opening up the wah and MAY change the tone ever so slightly (probably for the better, honestly). Anyway, that'll fix the problem and save you real-estate on your pedal board and some money. Plus it's an attractive selling point if one day you decide to sell it.
Pickups. I wanted a vintage sound, so I changed mine out for some D. Allen VooDoo 69s. If you already like the sound of your pups, don't bother.

Other than that, mine plays beautifully. No complaints whatsoever and no need to replace any stock parts.

I ended up adding a 'fat switch' to get some more pickup combos including a 'humbucker' setup (basically runs the neck and middle in series so it gets far less hum and sounds fatter with less high end like a humbucker). It's a fun little mod and you can still run your guitar without any change in the way it normally sounds.

I might end up adding a dummy coil and master tone at some point just to have the option of quieting it down if I end up playing in a bad room, but I'm not worried about it atm.

EDIT: Don't know what year your is, but I wouldn't worry about the trem system throwing you out of tune. People dog on the fender trem systems sometimes (because they're not Fl0yD R05E!) but you can set them up (rather easily) to not go out of tune and to go up as well as down in tune. Look up 'floating a trem'.
Ah ok cool. I guess I'll give it a go. Thanks for the input
This is about as cheap as you're going to get without building one yourself.

Another option is opening that badboy up and wiring a true bypass switch into it, but if you don't know what you're doing or have no soldering experience, don't bother.
Quote by Infinitychord95
Well Im not sure what the CAGED system is but the 4-5 fret idea seems pretty usefull, I'll try it out. Thanks for the input. Oh and by the way, would it be a good idea to relearn the song on a different 4-5 span, or would that be redundant?


It would absolutely help. What you're trying to accomplish is to know your chords all across the neck in different positions.

Taking a song where you already know, for instance, that the chords are C, F, Am, G and then learning that in all different positions is going to drill where those chords are all across the fretboard into your head.
I usually record my mic'd amp, but I can only do that at certain times of day and I figure I can run my guitar straight into the Hi-Z 'Guitar' input (that I just discovered on my mixing board after owning it for 5 years *facepalm*), record that, and then re-amp when the neighbors aren't around.

The problem is, I don't have a reamping box, and from what I've read, I need that to convert the recorded signal back into a Hi-Z signal or my amp's gonna blow up (yeah, I doubt that, but people are dramatic on the internet and I'm not trying to buy a new amp anytime soon).

So, in reading the manual for my mixing board (Allen&Heath ZED10FX), I found out there's a -30Db switch hidden away for the mixer-outs (I guess to connect it to another mixer?). Both are XLR out. Can I run an XLR cable with one of those XLR->TS converter things with the -30Db switch engaged to my amp? Or is that not getting rid of the problem at all (besides the difference in loudness between a Low-Z and High-Z signal)?

Sorry, I'm kinda a n00b with most of this stuff and this impedance stuff makes my head hurt every time I try to read about it (and I never understand any better). If just buying a reamping box is better, I've run out of projects and I saw a pretty cool DIY reamping box I wouldn't mind putting together.
I'm assuming by 'all across the neck', you mean you've been taking a look at the CAGED system.

I'm sorry I don't have any suggested songs, but something that I saw in a Guthrie Govan video awhile back that helped solidify the whole concept in my brain, was to take a song, like the ones mentioned above, and pick a span of 4-5 frets on the guitar. You're now confined to those frets for the duration of the song.

The next time you play the song, confine yourself to another 4-5 frets.

The idea is that pretty much any song's chords can be played within a 4-5 fret span. Learning to play them in a confined space will get you using chord voicings you don't normally use.
+1^

It's kind of a general rule (in any profession) that you get paid for a job. Having to pay to apply for one doesn't make any sense.

Bring some money though. Bands, especially nowadays, aren't made of money. They may ask if you wouldn't mind chipping in. If you don't have the money for it, don't worry about it.
Just do it man. Lots. Go read that page. Maybe pick up some more books on poetry and lyric writing.

But first go buy yourself a spiral notebook and just write. Devote some of your free time to it. Say: "ok. I have the day off. Today I'm just going to write. All day".

I promise that it gets easier and easier and you get better and better.

If you need practical examples, try finding patterns in the music you like. I learned a lot about constructing melodies from breaking down songs by The Beatles. I think the same would apply to the lyrical style you're going for if you study music with that lyrical style.

Most things in music (especially on the composition side of things) can be broken down into different elements and techniques. You just have to find them and learn to manipulate them for yourself.
It's not going to change anything.

If things are getting glitchy when you render it or play it back (Because your computer can't handle all of your live VSTs playing at once), it might be a good idea to bounce them to audio.

You can do this by routing it so that it's recording your midi track (the source) to a new audio track (output). It should keep all of your other added plugins, which are usually the culprit in glitchy playback. You should do this for each individual midi track.

The idea being that it's easier for your computer to play/render stems than it is for it to have a bunch of live plugins/VSTs running.

If your computer's already handling all of your plugins/vsts like a champ, there's no need to do this. Although, getting in the habit of making stems is a good idea.
Just to add on: If you are thinking of getting a Kemper, keep in mind that the profiling for clean sounds isn't exactly where it needs to be yet.

If you watch the demos the dirt (especially the heavier ones) sounds almost, if not exactly, dead on. When they compare the cleans though, it seems like there's almost a loss in signal. The notes don't sustain as well and it sounds noticeably thinner.

So if you play lots of clean stuff, I'd look elsewhere

I don't know. I can be a snob about tone, but I thought I'd point it out.

Honestly? If you're just practicing, I have to +1 the suggestion of getting a Line6 POD. It's going to give you any sound you'll need and it sounds good enough that most of the metal guys in my area just plug those straight into the PA without an amp. If money's not an issue, grab the POD HD rack unit and a little rack that fits on your desk. You'll have headphones and all the FX you need right by your computer so you can dial shit in, read tabs, put on backing tracks, and do yo thang
If she thinks it's tacky, you need to find yourself a new girl.

She should feel special that you're using YOUR gift card to pay for dinner. You could just have easily used it to take your mom or your imaginary best friend to dinner, but no. You chose her
Yep Before I started building pedals, I bought all of mine there. There's all kinds of cool stuff on that site.

Just remember it's also like eBay in the sense that there's different buyers and some of them might suck. Pay attention to their rating before you buy.
Quote by Wormholes
I see three notes in the op.



Two of them are F#, so those are lumped into one.

And yeah, power chords aren't technically chords.

From what I understand, it's only because they imply other notes (ambiguously) when you play them.

The idea is that they were widely used when distortion (fuzz) started to be widely used, and when you play a power chord with distortion, it gets all fuzzy and weird (it's those upper harmonics and stuff), so it 'feels' like there are more notes. They're also kinda cool cause they can imply major or minor triads.

That's what I read, anyway. The book I read it in may have been full of shit though
Gen 1 hands down. Plus, the pokemon looked better before the show came out and they streamlined the look. Remember how evil Charmander looked? And not starters, but Gyrados and Haunter looked bad as **** too.

EDIT: For reference
Depends on what you're going for. If you just have one pedal, I'd wait until you've accumulated more. There's no reason to have a board for 1 pedal that would probably fit in a guitar case, power adapter included.

Usually something that fits 8 ish pedals is enough for most people (after they're past the 'I NEED ALLZ PEDALZ' phase). Something like a PT-1 or PT-2 would work fine. If you're planning on playing ambient/washy music that involves a volume pedal, 4 delays, 2 reverbs, and a plethora of other crap? You should probably get a PT-pro sized board.

If you're planning on just having like 4-5 pedals, a PT Jr sized thing would work.

You'll eventually need a power supply if you're running more than a few pedals (wall warts are a pain in the ass). I'd invest in something decent like a Voodoo Labs PP2+ after you've gotten like 3 pedals. You never know. A year down the road you may need to power 10 pedals and then three months later you only need to power 3. It's just good to have a nice isolated power supply.

I think building one is probably the best/cheapest option. I've heard those GORM boards are the way to go.
Got pissed drunk before my speech final. Had to give it in an auditorium in front of over 100 people.

Aced it.