# Tremolo vs No Tremolo



## etlie (Sep 22, 2008)

I don't see a lot of people with tremolo's on their guitar and I wondered why. The way I see it tremolo's give you a really cool effect, but is there any disadvantage to having tremolo?


----------



## Brendan G (Sep 22, 2008)

Some do not like having the hassle of setting up tremelos (especially Floyd Roses) or the tuning problems that some tremelos have when you use them.


----------



## ibznorange (Sep 22, 2008)

the extra setup time makes them totally not worth the effort unless youre going to put it to use


----------



## TonalArchitect (Sep 22, 2008)

It's preference. 


I for one will never, ever, ever EVER, EVER!!!!!!! have one on a guitar again. Especially floyds. 

Little bastard things. . . . 

I personally don't find much use for the trem bars, and don't really like the effect produced by them. 

Others love them and use them to great effect.

So it's just preference, and yeah, I know... never say never. . . .


----------



## wannabguitarist (Sep 23, 2008)

I don't really do any whammy bar antics but I like having it there. I don't change tunings that much (switch guitars) so the extra tuning stability is nice and it's really to rest my hand on. The setup doesn't bother me to much and I think they look cool as well.


----------



## JBroll (Sep 23, 2008)

Setup and sound changes. Some do not want this.

Jeff


----------



## twiztedchild (Sep 23, 2008)

couldnt you just bypass having a Floyd or any other trem by buying the Whammy Pedal?


----------



## ibznorange (Sep 23, 2008)

twiztedchild said:


> couldnt you just bypass having a Floyd or any other trem by buying the Whammy Pedal?



only if you have A) incredible foot dexterity or B) incredible trem-use limitations


----------



## Scali (Sep 23, 2008)

I have a Floyd-style tremolo on all but one of my electric guitars (that one is a Les Paul, so not much of a choice... although now there is the Axcess ).

I almost feel naked without a tremolo. Not that I use it all that much (and I can't stand people who use a tremolo for vibrato on their notes... Use your finger!)... but I like to spice up my playing with some dives or whistles or such every now and then.


----------



## leonardo7 (Sep 23, 2008)

You lose so much sustain with a tremolo but this can be solved by putting a wood block in there. My fav thing about a tremolo is the fine tuners.


----------



## Scali (Sep 23, 2008)

leonardo7 said:


> You lose so much sustain with a tremolo but this can be solved by putting a wood block in there. My fav thing about a tremolo is the fine tuners.


 
Not in my experience.
A good knife-edge tremolo can give really good sustain. The ZR7 on my S7320 isn't bad either when it comes to sustain.
You might lose a bit of sustain, but not all that much.
A well-built tremolo guitar can easily out-sustain a poor fixed bridge guitar. My Gibson M3 seems to actually have MORE sustain than my Les Paul.


----------



## Demeyes (Sep 23, 2008)

Its a lot of hassle to make tuning changes on the fly with a floyd. Lots of people don't spend any time learning how make adjustments or even string changes on them properly so they tend to give them a bad rap. I like having a mix of both so I can have the best of both worls. I only have 1 7 string with a floating bridge but I would have more.


----------



## sakeido (Sep 23, 2008)

No one has mentioned trems kill tone? 
I find trem use really annoying for the most part. Dive bombs, dime squeals, huge vibrato, all that stuff sounds lame. But the part I really don't like is how a trem will instantly make any guitar sound half as good as it would have been with a stop tail or tune-o-matic.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez (Sep 23, 2008)

That's pretty subjective. I find lots of players with trems have great tone. It's pretty hard to say "This guitar would have had better tone with a TOM" unless you install a TOM, play/record with the guitar, then route it for a Floyd, record it, and compare. If you feel the need for a Floyd, get a guitar with one. If you can't be bothered with it, get a guitar with a TOM/hardtail. I actually LIKE tinkering with my Floyd for string changes


----------



## sakeido (Sep 23, 2008)

Oh but I did  well, my buddy did. He has an Epiphone Les Paul that he put a floyd on. Still sounds good, but I thought it sounded way better before. I've noticed every double locking trem guitar I've had also has this weird plucky pick attack and a weird buzziness to the sound (even after a tremol-no install) that I've never had with my TOM guitars.


----------



## Scali (Sep 23, 2008)

Depends on the trem you use, I suppose.
Ibanez trems tend to have a different, darker and warmer sound than OFRs for example. Different materials, different design.

And ofcourse there are pickups that compensate the sound of an OFR.


----------



## sakeido (Sep 23, 2008)

You can't compensate for the sound changes an OFR causes. It makes a fundamental difference in how the strings will respond to being struck by a pick, for one, and it greatly changes the tonality of your guitar. You go from having your strings anchored in tonewood, with a bridge anchored in tonewood... to having your strings clamped on both ends, one end of which is suspended by springs and is only connected to tonewood by ball bearings or even worse, knife edges. 
I've played OFRs, Ping Floyds, Ibanez ZR7, Edge Pro 7, Lo-TRS 6, generic licensed floyds, all of them have the same fundamental problem.. You give up tone and responsiveness for the ability to raise and lower the pitch of your strings by pushing or pulling on a bar. They all suck. The only trems I've played that are any good are the Parker trems, and the EBMM JP7 trem with piezos, and I still prefer fixed bridges.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez (Sep 23, 2008)

A good chunk of my favorite players have Floyds and I like their tone, and I like my tone with a Floyd, I think it just goes to personal preference, not "They suck".


----------



## 7 Dying Trees (Sep 23, 2008)

couldn't live without a floyd to be honest, too much fun for phrasing et all. That and ridiculous tricks


----------



## Scali (Sep 23, 2008)

sakeido said:


> You can't compensate for the sound changes an OFR causes. It makes a fundamental difference in how the strings will respond to being struck by a pick, for one, and it greatly changes the tonality of your guitar. You go from having your strings anchored in tonewood, with a bridge anchored in tonewood... to having your strings clamped on both ends, one end of which is suspended by springs and is only connected to tonewood by ball bearings or even worse, knife edges.
> I've played OFRs, Ping Floyds, Ibanez ZR7, Edge Pro 7, Lo-TRS 6, generic licensed floyds, all of them have the same fundamental problem.. You give up tone and responsiveness for the ability to raise and lower the pitch of your strings by pushing or pulling on a bar. They all suck. The only trems I've played that are any good are the Parker trems, and the EBMM JP7 trem with piezos, and I still prefer fixed bridges.


 
Actually, knife edges are better than ball-bearings, because the contact area is really small, and it is auto-centering. This gives a very good transfer of movement from the bridge to the studs (quite similar to how the TOM transfers the energy via studs into the heart of the body).


----------



## sakeido (Sep 23, 2008)

Of all the double locking trems I've played the ZR still sounded the best, but it never approached my tone benchmark SLSMG even after I put a bareknuckle in it


----------



## Scali (Sep 23, 2008)

sakeido said:


> Of all the double locking trems I've played the ZR still sounded the best


 
That may well be your personal taste, but we were discussing physical properties here, not taste.

Ball-bearing tremolo's were invented for two reasons:
1) They avoid licensing costs from Floyd Rose, bringing the total cost of the tremolo down (no longer an issue as the patent has expired recently, I believe).
2) A big problem in FR tremolo's is that the material for the knife edges needs to be very hard, else they get dull, and your tremolo stability and tone will suffer. This makes a good FR tremolo very expensive, and all cheap clones are inherently going to wear out. Ball-bearings are a cheap solution that doesn't suffer from wear, and still gets a pretty good overall sound, although not as good as a hardened knife edge.

That's why you'll mainly see the ZR tremolo on cheap guitars... Guitars that would normally have had a Lo-TRS tremolo. Herman Li specificially chose the Edge-Zero over the ZR on his signature guitar because he felt it had a better tone/sustain...
Straight from the horse's mouth:


Herman Li said:


> The Edge-Zero gives the guitar a very different tone/sustain compare to the ZR.


----------



## Lee (Sep 23, 2008)

Tremolo with a Tremol-No is the answer


----------



## sakeido (Sep 23, 2008)

Doesn't matter why it was invented, how much it costs or how it will sound "in theory." Tt still sounds different to me, but it was just less bad than the knife edge trems I've tried.


----------



## jymellis (Sep 23, 2008)

i like both trems and hard tails. i want a seven string iby S with the zr. they all have a purpose. play it and if you like it buy it.


jym


----------



## JJ Rodriguez (Sep 23, 2008)

Scali said:


> That may well be your personal taste, but we were discussing physical properties here, not taste.
> 
> Ball-bearing tremolo's were invented for two reasons:
> 1) They avoid licensing costs from Floyd Rose, bringing the total cost of the tremolo down (no longer an issue as the patent has expired recently, I believe).
> ...



While I'd agree with you on all those counts, I wouldn't use anything Herman Ri had to say as proof of anything


----------



## Scali (Sep 23, 2008)

sakeido said:


> Doesn't matter why it was invented, how much it costs or how it will sound "in theory." Tt still sounds different to me, but it was just less bad than the knife edge trems I've tried.


 
It all comes down to personal taste. As you see, Herman Li prefers the Edge Zero.
I'm quite happy with the ZR7 on my S7320. It certainly is a good tremolo, and probably a big improvement over the Lo-TRS that was on the S7420.
However, I'll never know what the guitar would be like with a LoPro Edge. The LoPro Edge is my favourite on 6-string guitars. Excellent tone, sustain and stability, and very accurate feel to it. Very comfortable to play, and it looks great too.

The LoPro Edge is actually the reason why I went Ibanez. I wanted a trem guitar, and I tried a lot of them... Being a Les Paul player, I was very demanding about huge tone and sustain. I tried many Jacksons, Washburns, ESPs and all that... and eventually landed on an RG570CT, which just had 'it'. It played great and had an incredible tone, unlike most other guitars I tried. The tremolo probably had a hand in that.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez (Sep 23, 2008)

I prefer the feel of the OFR's I've tried to the Lo Pro, but I have to admit, replaceable knife edges is a genius idea. Who cares if the trem is 20+ years old if it's in good shape and you can slap a brand new set of knife edges on it?


----------



## st2012 (Sep 23, 2008)

I dont use the bar much at all on mine but if I play one of my fixed bridge guitars now it feels really odd and uncomfortable particularly when palm muting.


----------



## noodleplugerine (Sep 24, 2008)

I've noticed the tone sucking that sakeido is talking about, and agree that fixed bridges are definitely the way to go for superior sound.

Also, I like the elevation of a Tom, more comfy.


----------



## Scali (Sep 24, 2008)

noodleplugerine said:


> I've noticed the tone sucking that sakeido is talking about, and agree that fixed bridges are definitely the way to go for superior sound.


 
I was just saying that the point was valid, but the proportions in which it was portayed, were not.
I won't argue that fixed bridges can in theory sound superior.
However, when people start to claim that tremolo's sound like shit by definition, that's something I won't accept.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez (Sep 24, 2008)

Scali said:


> I was just saying that the point was valid, but the proportions in which it was portayed, were not.
> I won't argue that fixed bridges can in theory sound superior.
> However, when people start to claim that tremolo's sound like shit by definition, that's something I won't accept.



What are you talking about? This guitar is OBVIOUSLY going to sound like shit:


----------



## sakeido (Sep 24, 2008)

Scali said:


> I was just saying that the point was valid, but the proportions in which it was portayed, were not.
> I won't argue that fixed bridges can in theory sound superior.
> However, when people start to claim that tremolo's sound like shit by definition, that's something I won't accept.



They'll always sound worse than the same guitar with a fixed bridge would  The KxK might sound better than other trem guitars, or a cheap fixed bridge guitar, but it would certainly not sound better than that same guitar would with a Hipshot 7 string hardtail. Even if you put a tremol-no on it, it still doesn't sound as good as a string-through-body bridge would.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez (Sep 24, 2008)

No one's arguing it's going to sound better, or worse for that matter, we're just saying it's different. I have hard tail guitars, and I have trem guitars, and I like the sound I get from both equally as well. It's just personal preference.


----------



## Scali (Sep 24, 2008)

sakeido said:


> They'll always sound worse than the same guitar with a fixed bridge would  The KxK might sound better than other trem guitars, or a cheap fixed bridge guitar, but it would certainly not sound better than that same guitar would with a Hipshot 7 string hardtail. Even if you put a tremol-no on it, it still doesn't sound as good as a string-through-body bridge would.


 
I don't think anyone is arguing that fact.
The point is more that to a lot of people, the difference in sound isn't a big deal, and being able to use a tremolo is, so they still go for the tremolo version (in fact, especially with 7-strings, there seem to be more tremolo guitars available than fixed-bridge ones, so that's probably what most players demand).

Heck, take me for example... I started out with a Les Paul, and my playing style has always revolved around huge tone with insane amounts of sustain... But these days I mainly play on tremolo guitars, which still deliver my signature huge tone and sustain. And I can't wait to get my hands on the Les Paul Axcess.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez (Sep 24, 2008)

Scali said:


> I don't think anyone is arguing that fact.
> The point is more that to a lot of people, the difference in sound isn't a big deal, and being able to use a tremolo is, so they still go for the tremolo version (in fact, especially with 7-strings, there seem to be more tremolo guitars available than fixed-bridge ones, so that's probably what most players demand).



I'll argue the fact  I absolutely don't find it "better". I haven't done a test on the same guitar routed for a Floyd after having a TOM, but I have about 10 guitars, with 3 string through, and 4-5 tremmed ones. My Floyded guitars sustain just fine. I'll concede the fact that it might have less sustain, but I've never run out of sustain when I needed it  I mean, how long do you really need it to sustain? If I'm holding a note that long, I'm generally trying to get feedback anyways  If you need to hold the same note and not pick it indefinitely, get a sustainer or ebow


----------



## Scali (Sep 24, 2008)

JJ Rodriguez said:


> I'll argue the fact  I absolutely don't find it "better". I haven't done a test on the same guitar routed for a Floyd after having a TOM, but I have about 10 guitars, with 3 string through, and 4-5 tremmed ones. My Floyded guitars sustain just fine. I'll concede the fact that it might have less sustain, but I've never run out of sustain when I needed it  I mean, how long do you really need it to sustain? If I'm holding a note that long, I'm generally trying to get feedback anyways  If you need to hold the same note and not pick it indefinitely, get a sustainer or ebow


 
Yes, I suppose we're saying the same thing:
In theory a fixed bridge will probably deliver more sustain, but in practice decent Floyd guitars will deliver more than enough.
I think other factors, such as type of wood, construction, mass and even pickups have more effect than the type of bridge itself.
My Ibanez RG570CT sustains like a maniac because it has an alder body instead of basswood.


----------



## ibznorange (Sep 24, 2008)

sakeido said:


> They'll always sound worse than the same guitar with a fixed bridge would  The KxK might sound better than other trem guitars, or a cheap fixed bridge guitar, but it would certainly not sound better than that same guitar would with a Hipshot 7 string hardtail. Even if you put a tremol-no on it, it still doesn't sound as good as a string-through-body bridge would.



Oppinion, being a fact since always 

quantify how good they both sound and well talk


----------



## sakeido (Sep 24, 2008)

ibznorange said:


> Oppinion, being a fact since always
> 
> quantify how good they both sound and well talk



I'm pretty sure I've said "IMO" already and thought that people knew this was all my opinion anyway

I'm also quite sure I'm the only person in this whole thread who has heard the exact same guitar before and after a trem.. and it definitely sounded worse with the trem on it. 100% all other factors equal, same pickups, same player, same guitar, it went from being a tone monster to being above average.. gave up low mids, a nice growl and a meaty bottom end for annoying upper mids and a plucky string attack. Sustain has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.

I have an exceptionally narrow definition of what a good sounding guitar is, so that is playing into what I'm saying a lot


----------



## AVH (Sep 24, 2008)

Some floating trems will have more than adequate amounts of sustain, but as stated earlier, it's absolutley true that hardtails will sustain more and just have a general, better percieved 'tone' than floaters. I've clearly demonstrated this to customers I've done trem blocking for, especially when flush-mounting the bridge plates on Strats (damn things). 
I used to really dig Floyds, but spending years as a tech working on a dozen+ of them per week has made me like them.....not so much anymore


----------



## JJ Rodriguez (Sep 24, 2008)

sakeido said:


> gave up low mids, a nice growl and a meaty bottom end for annoying upper mids and a plucky string attack.



I prefer upper mids, and lots of attack, therefor OFR's are obviously better on every guitar ever 

I see what you mean, I mean, you're removing a chunk of mahogany, it's going to change the sound in a big way. I still don't think it's "better". Look at all the people who prefer basswood for their guitar bodies. I personally hate basswood, doesn't mean mahogany is any "better".


----------



## Scali (Sep 24, 2008)

sakeido said:


> I'm also quite sure I'm the only person in this whole thread who has heard the exact same guitar before and after a trem.. and it definitely sounded worse with the trem on it. 100% all other factors equal, same pickups, same player, same guitar, it went from being a tone monster to being above average.. gave up low mids, a nice growl and a meaty bottom end for annoying upper mids and a plucky string attack. Sustain has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.
> 
> I have an exceptionally narrow definition of what a good sounding guitar is, so that is playing into what I'm saying a lot


 
His point is that you should at least quantify what 'good sounding' is, under your definition.
I don't think I could even do that for myself. A guitar is such a complex thing, and the sound is comprised of so many factors. I can name some guitars that I think are 'good sounding', but they don't necessarily have a lot in common, at least specwise. So a correlation between sound and specs is hard to define.


----------



## sakeido (Sep 24, 2008)

Scali said:


> His point is that you should at least quantify what 'good sounding' is, under your definition.
> I don't think I could even do that for myself. A guitar is such a complex thing, and the sound is comprised of so many factors. I can name some guitars that I think are 'good sounding', but they don't necessarily have a lot in common, at least specwise. So a correlation between sound and specs is hard to define.



My tone yardstick is my SLSMG (mahogany neck through mahogany wings, ebony board, 25.5" scale, tune-o-matic with Seymour Duncan Blackouts) with a close runner up being my old LTD PB-500 (mahogany body, 3/4" flame maple top, mahogany set neck, rosewood board, Seymour Duncan Alnico II Pros). The tone just has to be BIG.. chunky, heavy palm muting sounds but still a hefty bit of brightness to balance it out.
I can't stand dark sounding guitars (Charvel with Nailbomb, 2077XL with Miracle Men), really plucky sounding guitars with metallic overtones on all the notes (S7320 with Lundgren, S7320 with Nailbomb), extremely thin sounding guitars (ESP Custom Shop SRC7, maple neck/alder wings/ebony board, holy fuck did I ever not like that thing) or really balanced guitars with no real balls or bite (EBMM JP7) 
I owned all of those and spent a lot of time with them.. I think I've got it hammered down pat now


----------



## Scali (Sep 24, 2008)

Well, funny enough, I like Les Pauls (probably close to your SLSMG and LTD PB-500), but I do like the S7320, even with stock pickups. In my case it actually sounds a bit darker and bigger than the Les Paul on the bridge pickup... but the neck sounds a tad brighter, probably because of the bolt-on neck and the fact that the neck pickup is ceramic. Gives it a bit of a Stratty twangy attack... not bad in itself really. I can just roll down the tone knob a tad to get more of a Les Paul-like honk.


----------



## ibznorange (Sep 24, 2008)

sakeido said:


> I'm pretty sure I've said "IMO" already and thought that people knew this was all my opinion anyway
> 
> I'm also quite sure I'm the only person in this whole thread who has heard the exact same guitar before and after a trem.. and it definitely sounded worse with the trem on it. 100&#37; all other factors equal, same pickups, same player, same guitar, it went from being a tone monster to being above average.. gave up low mids, a nice growl and a meaty bottom end for annoying upper mids and a plucky string attack. Sustain has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.
> 
> I have an exceptionally narrow definition of what a good sounding guitar is, so that is playing into what I'm saying a lot



fair enough, you were just making it all sound so factual 

fwiw, ive gotten to play several guitars pre and post trem installation dude


----------



## JoshuaLogan (Sep 29, 2008)

Haha, from what I've seen in a bunch of threads sakeido seems to believe his opinion on everything = fact.

Anyways, about trem vs no trem, I'll take a trem every time. It adds so much more capability to the instrument. Fixed bridge guitars feel incomplete to me. People argue that it makes the tone more thin and bright, but it's not really an issue if it's a good quality trem on a thick sounding guitar, especially considering you can just EQ in more lows and low mids.


----------



## Scali (Sep 29, 2008)

JoshuaLogan said:


> Anyways, about trem vs no trem, I'll take a trem every time. It adds so much more capability to the instrument. Fixed bridge guitars feel incomplete to me. People argue that it makes the tone more thin and bright, but it's not really an issue if it's a good quality trem on a thick sounding guitar, especially considering you can just EQ in more lows and low mids.


 
You could even select some darker-sounding pickups, and not have to touch the EQ.
Also, the amount of brightness that a tremolo adds, varies greatly from one type to the next. Different materials, different construction, different design... it all comes into play.

I personally select guitars for their (acoustic) tone as a whole. If it sounds good, it is good. I've collected quite a few great-sounding (and sustaining) tremolo guitars over the years.

I actually enjoy the different sounds that different guitars deliver. I originally started out on a Les Paul, and my basic tone is fine-tuned to that guitar still. All my other guitars are set up in a way that I can plug them in with the exact same settings, and they all sound great right away, they just each have their own personality.


----------



## 74n4LL0 (Oct 6, 2008)

JJ Rodriguez said:


> What are you talking about? This guitar is OBVIOUSLY going to sound like shit:



Of course it's going to sound like shit...
...It doesn't have the strings


----------



## JJ Rodriguez (Oct 6, 2008)

74n4LL0 said:


> Of course it's going to sound like shit...
> ...It doesn't have the strings


----------



## sakeido (Oct 6, 2008)

JoshuaLogan said:


> Haha, from what I've seen in a bunch of threads sakeido seems to believe his opinion on everything = fact.
> 
> Anyways, about trem vs no trem, I'll take a trem every time. It adds so much more capability to the instrument. Fixed bridge guitars feel incomplete to me. People argue that it makes the tone more thin and bright, but it's not really an issue if it's a good quality trem on a thick sounding guitar, especially considering you can just EQ in more lows and low mids.



Yeah good luck trying to EQ one guitar to sound exactly like another

Did you read the thread.. particularly the post where I said "this is all my opinion?" BTW my opinions come from what I take to be observable facts. 

The "capability" it adds to an instrument is really pointless and obnoxious to me. 

Dick.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez (Oct 6, 2008)

I don't think the capability is pointless or obnoxious, I love doing flutters, dive bombs and harmonics squeels. It's just another form of expression


----------



## Ramsay777 (Oct 6, 2008)

JJ Rodriguez said:


> I don't think the capability is pointless or obnoxious, I love doing flutters, dive bombs and harmonics squeels. It's just another form of expression


----------



## stux (Oct 6, 2008)

I have an RG1527 right now with a trem, my first floating bridge guitar. Its very nice but I won't be buying a guitar with a floating bridge again unless its unavoidable. Horrible to setup, not as nice to play on as a fixed bridge and I never use the trem.


----------



## 7 Strings of Hate (Oct 6, 2008)

it sounds like there are alot of guys that are afraid of trems. setting them up, learning to use them ect...

with some time, they are easy to set up, and the benefits of the tricks you can do with them are amazing.

if we are going the "tone sucking" route, i think thats kind of a bs excuse. a million zillion killer players have used them and no one is burning their records. 

people are to fanitacial about their "tone", to be honost, people can get so anal about it, i cant stand the fucking word tone anymore.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez (Oct 6, 2008)

I don't like the *tone* of your messages 7SoH. Try to *tone* it down a little.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez (Oct 6, 2008)

stux said:


> Horrible to setup, not as nice to play on as a fixed bridge and I never use the trem.



Learning to set them up takes a bit of time, but after awhile, you just learn the tricks to it and it's easy, especially if you're using the same gauge of string and tuning, it's pretty much just slap the strings on and go. Not as nice to play on...well, that's a matter of opinion. I prefer how a trem feels under my hand, and I really like the flatter radius, helps with my picking especially. 

Most importantly though, if you never use it, that's nothing to fault anyone for, it's just not your thing. If you can find another guitar that suits your needs better, and you don't feel having a trem is a necessity, then don't bother. I think that's pretty much what this entire conversation boils down to.


----------



## Harry (Oct 6, 2008)

74n4LL0 said:


> Of course it's going to sound like shit...
> ...It doesn't have the strings


----------



## Scali (Oct 7, 2008)

7 Strings of Hate said:


> people are to fanitacial about their "tone", to be honost, people can get so anal about it, i cant stand the fucking word tone anymore.


 
Yea, I think the guitar or amp's tone isn't even that important. It's more about the conviction with which you play I guess.
For example, I've had various comments on my Guitar Rig video that the tone was so good. Personally I don't think the tone is all that great. There's a rather fake metallic sound in that tone that I don't like. However, you don't quite hear that when you play these long notes with bends and vibrato (and with decent intonation ofcourse). Then the guitar appears to sing, even though the tone isn't that great.


----------

