GregP

OF course we're interested in clips. Congrats, maygn.

Tee-hee... your name is winger... <giggle> JK, welcome aboard. Cheers for the link; Kiss's live shows were always reportedly great fun. I never had the pleasure. Actually, I loathed Kiss but only because my sister loved them so much and I heard them day in, day out, all the time. Greg

You mean like a chrome/nickel cover? (I didn't see the covers in the photo) Yes, you can and SHOULD pot your pickups with their covers on. That's assuming they're the kind of covers I'm thinking of. Greg

You won't regret it, and you'll feel super-cool taking up a new instrument, too.

Welcome aboard!

Just confirming the above post. Recording to mp3 will be harder on your computer, and if your computer is only 3 years old (mine's older!) you likely have tonnes of room for storage of a 2-hour set. If you really like the file size of mp3, convert it AFTER. Whatever software you are using will be MUCH happier and more stable recording a simple .wav file as opposed to an mp3. Greg

Keyboard (or even QWERTY-to-MIDI keyboard software) is your best bet. Audio-to-MIDI is an extra layer of abstraction that's pretty unecessary for anything you'd use a guitar for. Main drawbacks to using Audio-to-MIDI instead of just using a keyboard (or QWERTY keyboard, even): - A2M not polyphonic. - A2M not fast-- not only one note at a time, but one relatively SLOW note at a time - A2M pitch bend detection dodgy at best-- one of the advantages to guitar is bending strings-- if this can't be tracked, you're better off with a keyboard pitch wheel! - A2M tracking generally unreliable. Glitch from one note to the next, drop-outs, etc., make the experience dodgy. - MIDI information does not contain decay information-- this is sample-dependent. You will want to "sustain" with your guitar the way you normally would, but the end result won't share the guitar's decay characteristics. This leads to unnatural and unexpected results. ---- The only "advantage" to A2M is that you don't have to leave the comfort zone of your fretboard. That's about it. It's a really poor advantage to gain when a keyboard (or QWERTY keyboard) is laid out chromatically anyhow. Even someone who doesn't know much theory can piece together the chords and scales needed for whatever song they're working on. ---- On-topic: the correct answer to the original question has been given above-- it's just an audio signal on this Behringer guitar. Super-inflexible because it uses ASIO drivers, and you can only use one ASIO-compliant device at a time. No voice + guitar, Bass + guitar, or ANYTHING + guitar. Greg

Welcome aboard, Kraut! General advice seems to be-- there's no point doing it to save money, because it's a very expensive hobby. Do it because you're really interested in giving 'er a go. Even if you still need to buy tools, you'll be able to make a beautiful guitar for cheaper than some of the truly expensive customs... but it won't be "cheap" to do it. In many cases your first guitar won't be as playable as a $300 import, though there are plenty of stories to the contrary. But with patience, subsequent guitars (and as I said, sometimes even your first one) can be better than a lot of the factory-made guitars like those by Gibson. Our forum boasts members whose work makes the well-known factory-made guitars look mediocre by comparison. Point being: if you really just want a guitar, save up for it. If you want to BUILD a guitar, you're in the right place. Greg

Yeah, I could tell that sound quality wasn't an issue, so I emphasize my recommendation more in terms of convenience. It's really just as convenient to record and then convert. Mp3 compression, even if it does things "on the fly" will always require additional "calculations" by comparison; hence, stability issues. The only real question I have is: why is mp3 mission-critical? That will solve the mystery.

Yeah. I mainly just don't think it gets you anything. The only advantage to recording direct to mp3 rather than converting is disc drive space. Any computer from the past 10 years or so should be able to easily store a 2 hour set as .wav. Then convert to mp3 after. Greg

Mick, I know it sounds good in theory and all, but you really don't wanna do it. You want to record in 16-bit, 44.1k (CD quality) minimum. I'd say 24-bit, 44.1k actually, but it depends on how you set yourselves up. You can always convert to MP3 later, but you can never reclaim lost quality from lossy compression (ie. MP3, WMA, etc.) Not that it has to be all "precious" and everything, but since almost all software records to .wav anyhow and then "transparently" (ie. it doesn't tell you it's doing this, it just does it) converts to MP3 at the end, you might as well keep the .wav. That way you can use any software at all, and then use any tool at all to convert, split, etc., your MP3. Greg

Given the choice, I say multi-effects. Gone are the days when they sounded absolutely crap, though of course there will always be standalone pedals that do their job better than anything else out there. In addition to the reasons mentioned above (ie. flexibility, convenience), you get a much cleaner signal path using an "all in one" unit. 8 units mean 8 chances for something to add noise to your signal. Greg

You know what, that sums up my feelings way better than I put it myself. That's what's bothering me about it.

Really? I've never seen anyone being anything but honest, but I'm only in the TonePort/Gearbox section. Everyone there KNOWS that the TonePort has flimsy build quality, and just take care not to bang it around. Greg

let's see if i've got this right..the curve that you put into it is better than the one that you took out but it's original before the hypotenuse of the carberator ballbearings were broke..

Sorry to say, but me no likey. The attempt at going asymmetrical is well-noted, but I don't think it worked here. There's something too "pinched together"-looking about having the pointy bits flare out like that, too. Like someone's squeezing their knees together to protect their nuts or something. It's a problematic design... currently, it takes a moment for your brain to figure out if both sides are even. Of course, once you tell your brain to look for the obvious telltale signs, it becomes obvious, but it's that brief moment of ambiguity that tells you that it either needs to be symmetrical or MORE asymmetrical. (think I can use those words a few more times in one post?) Greg

I've spoken with Andy DePaule on a few occasions, and he's always been very honest and genuine. Without having any concrete comparisons, I'd suspect that if DePaule is more expensive, it's due to quality; I'd have gone with "thickness," but you seem to have compared the same thicknesses. I can't imagine Andy ripping anyone off, so whatever his price says, I'm believing that it's fair pricing. It's not that I wouldn't shop around still (hey, dollars talk), but I'd be more suspicious of why MOPSupplies is so cheap rather than why is DePaule costlier. Just a perspective, not an answer. Greg

It's just the terminology he used. You ARE "sanding", but he's saying you need a coarse enough grit that you're removing substantial wood rather than just slowly "smoothing" it to shape. You need a grit with teeth. Greg

Any instructions? Sorry for bumping both identical threads...

Awesome!

Nice blog. Are swedish fish the same as swedish berries?

I have to (to some people's annoyance I'm sure) add that the length of dead string is something I mentioned right on page 1, sans experiments. It might not seem as overt because I didn't use those terms, but when I referred to the "length" of the string, given the same scale length of the fretboard, any additional length is by default "dead" string. So part of the thread is also discussing the "scientific" (using the term loosely because sometime's it's pure logic) reasoning behind why those experiments prove true. Greg

I can't say I'm a huge or devoted fan of Syd Barrett, but I really do enjoy some of the work they did with him onboard. In particular, "Jugband Blues" was a REAL and tangible eye-, ear-, and mind-opener for me when I first listened to it. A friend had made me a Floyd mix tape-- this is when "Learning to Fly" was a current single, so obviously they had already gone through the Waters era and were well into the Gilmour era. And that's what I was really juiced up about. Man, Learning to Fly... there was a song for me... and yet on this compilation tape were a few really.. er... odd songs, including Jugband Blues, Bike, and Astronomy Domine. These were in the days of cassette tape, and I never really got into the fast-forwarding thing, so I'd just listen to them. And damned if they didn't creep into my psyche. Before long, I looked forward to hearing them in the same way that I looked forward to "Learning to Fly" and "Young Lust." I won't pretend that I'm "grieving" per se... but much respect to Syd and I hope he's in a better place, one without the mental illness that was his curse. Greg

No point rushing your decision, per se, but you certainly have more than enough info to go on now. You've done your researching duty. Greg

-1 on smooth transition. I like it the way it is. The angles fit the them and are what make it unique. There are other unorthodox pointy areas as well, and by the time everything's smoothed out, the originality is gone. One could easily make a case for the upper "horn" being too long, too, but I think it's all part of the character. Neat! Greg