15 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >
 |
| 15. |
No subject |
Dec 31, 2003, 12:53 |
space captain |
|
|
actually Im a recording engineer and have been for the past 3 years at a professional studio
so go wank yourself to sleep
_____________________________________________
Give me slack. Or kill me. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
______________________________________________
"When the bomb drops it'll be a bank holiday
Everybody happy in their tents and caravans
Everybody happy in their ignorance and apathy
No one realizes until the television breaks down..."
- SUBHUMANS |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 14. |
Re: No subject |
Dec 31, 2003, 12:36 |
the_nemesis |
|
|
You obviously have no experience. yes, use a couple of SM57's to mic the front of the cabinet but adding a RE-20 behind the cabinet to pickup some bass and mix that signal with the rest of the SM57's adds a very interesting Oomph IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 13. |
No subject |
Dec 31, 2003, 09:59 |
space captain |
|
|
what are you taling about? the RE-20 is a peice of shit mic... youd be better off using a SM52 to mic the cabinet
_____________________________________________
Give me slack. Or kill me. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
______________________________________________
"When the bomb drops it'll be a bank holiday
Everybody happy in their tents and caravans
Everybody happy in their ignorance and apathy
No one realizes until the television breaks down..."
- SUBHUMANS |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 12. |
As for that stupid Ethernet port... |
Dec 31, 2003, 03:47 |
the_nemesis |
|
|
Who fucking care about getting an Ethernet port on their Les Paul guitar? I mean, all serious guitarists have guitar amps with good old 1/4" jacks with that good old noise -- maybe the sound is nastier than a pure digital sound -- but that makes the sound so nice. Anyone that ever tried recording guitars professionally will tell you that a good old Marshall, Mesa-Boogie, whatever your style is, amp, decently miced, with a RE-20 as a bass mic behind the amp, etc. beats any fucking stupid digital "POD/guitar amp simulator" setup. Jesus H Christ nothing beats a good old amp nicely miced in a good studio room.
It's all about getting a *CLEAR* nasty sound -- the artifacts created by the analogue system -- even better when you record on 24-track analogue tape for example -- make the sound so full, and it will beat ANY digital setup, EVER. Anyone with a bit of experience in recording, like me, will tell you so.
Nastiness, that doesn't get in "clearness" way, will make the sound better than any clearer source. There's something about the good old analogue sound that is warmer than any other all digital recording. Nastiness.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 11. |
hehe |
Dec 31, 2003, 03:39 |
the_nemesis |
|
|
I may as well, post for , that I never bought Metallica's Load [of shit], I just looked at a friend's Load booklet. Never will I give money for that huge POS that turned Metallica from "OK we were kinda sellout on the black album" to "We are fucking fags and we admit it"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 10. |
Re: The 100-Megabit Guitar |
Dec 31, 2003, 03:37 |
the_nemesis |
|
|
[iAlso, Rivers Cuomo is hardly a Les Paul player, and neither is Kirk Hammett.
Who fucking cares about Kirk Hammett? Is there any other solo guitarist more overhyped than him? Anyone that has studied music theory, like me, will tell you that Kirk Hammett just plainly, badly SUCKS.
Wow he's pulling out "amazingly fast" licks... can he do something as melodic, as well thought out like John McLaughlin for example? Give me a break. Kirk Hammett is a fucking fag, and the Load booklet just proved it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 9. |
Re: The 100-Megabit Guitar |
Dec 30, 2003, 21:54 |
JediLuke |
|
|
Go for it man, recording is pretty easy. I record on the computer without any digital guitars, I just use my Marshall as a preamp and go from there directly into my sound card. Good old Les Paul serves me well.
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/imjediluke
~Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 8. |
Re: The 100-Megabit Guitar |
Dec 30, 2003, 20:50 |
tariff |
|
|
I've been listening to the industrial group Fear Factory for a few years now, and I believe I read in an interview that they use this digital technique for recording their riffs. I could be wrong however. But whatever they've been doing, I love the deep, "brittle" sound that they are able to capture. An example of what im talking about: http://angelfire.lycos.com/weird2/skinnyd0g/demanufacture.mp3
I've been itching to pick up a guitar for years and start recording some of my own riffs, and this digital method seems very attractive to me, at least for starting out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 7. |
Re: The 100-Megabit Guitar |
Dec 30, 2003, 20:02 |
JediLuke |
|
|
I had the same thought, then I figured that if you could plug it into your computer without using an amplifier, you could save the cost of buying an amp in the first place
That's the thing, they weren't very explicit about it. It's a pain in the ass, they're talking about a technical issue but trying not to use technical terms. I'd assume the guitar has an onboard preamp, which is interesting. And I guess you can still plug it into an amp traditionally? Will we start seeing guitar amps with ehthernet jacks on them? Crazy.
I dunno, I'm not about to trade my Les Paul standard in for something fancier.
Also, Rivers Cuomo is hardly a Les Paul player, and neither is Kirk Hammett.
~Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 6. |
Re: The 100-Megabit Guitar |
Dec 30, 2003, 18:04 |
illGotten |
|
|
*sigh*
...wouldn't pick the 100-Megabit guitar.
I hate punsturbating.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 5. |
Re: The 100-Megabit Guitar |
Dec 30, 2003, 15:36 |
Nonicknameforme |
|
|
The Magic guitar is basically a gimmick that claims to make average guitar's into excelent ones. Since it can enhance the digital signal it creates. So they can use a signal enhancing algorythm making the tonal potential of even a very shoddy made guitar, quite high.
Magic will save Les Paul up to 50% in costs.
The question is: why do they need to make such a desperate move?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| "I'm too much of a narcisist to really hate stupid people." |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 4. |
Re: The 100-Megabit Guitar |
Dec 30, 2003, 14:52 |
nin |
|
|
You guys can have the guitar, I'll take that dual-layer burner... 
http://www.petergabriel.com/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RollinThundr Apr 17, 2013, 12:25: Eh really tossing stuff like that in there only to get your panties all bunched up. If you really want to call that trolling sure.
Mr. Tact Apr 17, 2013, 12:33: Pretty sure that's the definition of trolling... |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 3. |
Re: The 100-Megabit Guitar |
Dec 30, 2003, 14:39 |
Skookum |
|
|
I had the same thought, then I figured that if you could plug it into your computer without using an amplifier, you could save the cost of buying an amp in the first place. However, anyone who would buy this guitar would probably still want to get the sound associated with a more traditional setup. Therefore, it would be better to use your original guitar and plug it in to your 'puter the hard way. The popularity of the Les Paul is all about its original tone and style, which is why other manufacturers have been copying it for so long.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 2. |
No subject |
Dec 30, 2003, 12:34 |
space captain |
|
|
it will take 50 years before someone will
_____________________________________________
Give me slack. Or kill me. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
______________________________________________
"When the bomb drops it'll be a bank holiday
Everybody happy in their tents and caravans
Everybody happy in their ignorance and apathy
No one realizes until the television breaks down..."
- SUBHUMANS |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 1. |
The 100-Megabit Guitar |
Dec 30, 2003, 12:30 |
illGotten |
|
|
If given a choice, I wouldn't pick the 100-Megabit guitar.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
15 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >
|
|
Twitter 
