GregP

<laff> I wasn't saying that guitarists COULDN'T grasp extra positions. I was merely saying that for some people, the simpler the better. Which is part of the appeal of Telecasters for many people (not all.. some teles are right hotwired and complicated!), or the appeal of EVH's "one 'bucker, one volume knob" approach. (well, 2 buckers ever since he 'gave in' to EBMM) So it's not a matter of capability but of taste. Cool bit of thinking with the 4-way. I'll just use the 5-way. <laff> Greg

Mattia- it's one of the well-known limitations of ASIO, unfortunately. It doesn't mean you can't have 2 or more on your machine, or switch between them, but you won't be able to multi-track with more than 1 ASIO device at a time. A workaround that some companies have used is to have a unified driver. It's the driver that's the key, really-- if you have 2 or more M-Audio products from the "Delta" range (which includes the Audiophile), you can use them together because they all use the Delta Driver. As far as your sequencer goes, it would see it as just one device with multiple ins and outs. But when you use products from different manufacturers that have different drivers, this concept becomes tricky at best. I wouldn't be surprised if are some sorts of hacks and/or workarounds at the grassroots level, but nothing officially supported by the ASIO spec or the manufacturers. The TonePort will be more expensive than the GuitarPort, for sure. I wouldn't hold your breath for the TonePort unless it really looks like it'll suit some need beyond the basic needs you've mentioned, Gorecki. There will be 2 models, one of which will be more expensive than a PODXT, and one of which will be somewhere in-between. The cheaper one still features an additional microphone pre-amp, headphones, 1 or 2 VU meters (I can't remember if the cheap one had 2 also), and a more rugged enclosure. Greg

I can't speak from first-hand knowledge, but everything I've read and learned about the GuitarPort indicates that there won't be licensing problems with buying a used one. Install the software, and your Guitar Port becomes a new device. If you're running, say, Cubase, You select the Guitar Port as your recording device. HOWEVER, Remember that for low-latency recording on a PC, the standard is still ASIO drivers for your sound device. This is what GuitarPort uses (it also includes other drivers, but in a recording package you will probably be using the ASIO). The ASIO spec does not allow for multiple ASIO devices to be recorded at the same time. In other words, you'll be doing the guitar parts all alone (which is fine for most people, including me) and not alongside, say, a singer or a bassist. Greg

By the time you do that, you might as well have a 5-way superswitch and use the PRS style of wiring, I'd imagine. The cool thing about the Petrucci is that it's nice and simple-- only 3 choices. Greg

Have you upgraded to Tracktion 2 yet? Not sure if you can still do it for $20, but you might be able to! The best thing added for guitarists: loop record mode, so that you can play your solo for 2 hours and then either take the best one or cut up bits and pieces of your 2-hour marathon. Greg

Awesome, Sabre. I have dual-monitor, but it's pretty sad: 15" LCD (which is cool beans! It's not 19" or even 17", but at least it's LCD and it didn't cost me a dime!) and 15" CRT, both at 1024X768. Ideal? Nope. But once you go dual-monitor, it's tough to go back. Soundblaster Live will do the trick, but I have to say (against my better judgement because I don't at ALL want to sound like I'm putting your setup down... I used an SB for quite a while, successfully!) that surely an entry-level "pro" (or "prosumer" if you don't despise that term) card is on your shopping list? And if you're shopping for a card, this $240 MBox is a good option. Greg

It looks so simple, but alas schematics are greek to me. I really need a 'beginner site for reading schematics and building simple electronics' website. Greg

That Navajo one for Jo Lee (already mentioned by Stalefish) is truly awesome, IMO. I wonder if Jo himself knows that "teh" is the "h4xXorz l337" way of writing "the", though, or if it's completely unintentional. Back to guitars... That Queen one is right cool, too! The only thing really Brian May about it that I can tell, though, is the pickups and the fact that it's a type of Double-Cutaway. Or is it just me? That has nothing whatsoever to do with the greatness of the guitar, though. Greg

I don't mind piping in to say that $240 shipped is a steal for anyone looking to get into using your computer as a studio. The hardware unit itself is worth it, and you don't HAVE to use Pro Tools LE. I don't know Parker at all, but I AM a digital recording enthusiast, and I'd love to see some of you peeps step up from the SoundBlaster input (which works fine for playing around and having a good time, not trying to insult anyone here!) to a proper recording setup! Greg

No, Jester, the literature is accurate. It doesn't ONLY generate treble signal, but DOES have an effect in the time domain. The reason I didn't recommend it as a "guitar effect" is because the guitar has a limited frequency range. Sure, it can add new harmonic content based on partials, but that's only half the picture. It's the half of the picture that makes a guitar signal sound a bit different, but it's still only half the picture. The other half of the picture requires a wider frequency range to work. Read on: A sonic maximizer is more useful over an entire mix. It will split the frequency ranges into bands, and then shift them in the time domain. Since the treble frequencies are "sent" first and your ears get them first, they're more present than the bass frequencies. This adds a sensation of clarity to your mix. The catch, as it relates to guitar effects? Well, if your guitar is only producing one range of frequencies (particularly when you're playing lines rather than full chords, but in general like any instrument, a guitar has limited range), then there's not enough of a noticeable split that CAN be made in frequencies which will create the time-domain effect. <takes deep breath> Maximizers and exciters were very heavily used in the 80s to add clarity and definition to a mix. It's a big part of the 80's sound. If you really want to sound like the 80's, put stereo imaging and harmonic excitement effects all over your final mix. To recap: - as a guitar effect, it's not useless, but it IS subtle. I wouldn't get one unless it was cheap (OK, for $20, you got a good bargain and I would've bought it, too!) and until I had already purchased the basics like a compressor and wah, some of the optionals (like chorus and flanger), and a few different flavours of overdrive. If your effects-bag is already full to the boobies, by all means see what a harmonic exciter can do for your tone. - as a mixing tool, it's a fast and sometimes effective way to get certain effects and a certain kind of polish to a song, but it should be used sparingly and with good taste in mind, because it WILL leave a distinct mark on your track if caution isn't taken Greg

I wouldn't use EITHER of them as a "guitar effect". If you're planning on doing some home studio recording, they could be worthwhile, but there are a million of other pieces of kit I'd buy first. Greg

This one looks OK: http://www.behringer.com/NR100/index.cfm?lang=ENG Can't set the attack, but that's OK because most of the time you're going to keep it set for fast attack anyhow. The switchable option between "mute" and "reduction" is cool, though I can't imagine what the "reduction" part will actually do other than change the response of the threshold. There's always good old Boss: http://www.bosscorp.co.jp/products/en/NS-2/

Noise gates are so dead-basic in terms of technology that there isn't really (in my opinion) much difference between them. They all have the same controls: 1. Threshold: basically, you allow your guitar to hum, and then you turn this just until the hum disappears. Basically, you're manually telling your Gate what your "floor" is. 2. Attack: determines how quickly the gate "closes" when the threshold is reached 3. Release: determines how quickly the gate "opens" when you're playing actual notes. Basically, it's like having a guy at a volume knob with super-human reflexes and response time, who goes "shoot, he's not playing, there's that hum!" and turns the volume down on you. The technology's not sophisticated enough to worry about brands, just get something cheap (IMO). Mind you, if you get something TOO cheap, it will be generating its own hum. It's worth mentioning that it DOES affect the natural ability to express yourself on guitar. Gone will be those sorrowful and lengthy decays of your note. Because your note will probably still be "ringing out" but at a lower volume than your hum. But since your gate is configured for a certain threshold, it will slam the door shut on your decaying note. For certain styles, a gate actually ENHANCES the effect, though. Nu-Metal-ish "chugga chugga" riffs sound awesome with a noise gate, regardless of whether or not you're having hum issues, because with aggressive gating you get that super-clean "WHAM" in your face riff, interspersed with DEAD SILENCE when the gate shuts. Makes certain kinds of riffs sound great. But makes bluesy expression with volume swells and decaying notes suck. Greg

Lyrics are tough. Even when you think they're brilliant, you look the next day and discover they're crap after all. The secret is probably to write through the crap, because SOMEONE's bound to think it's brilliant. Greg

A few thoughts: 1. If I'm understanding you right, I'm having the EXACT same probelm right now. At my old place, my guitar would pick up hum from my CRT monitor. Of course, when I turned off the monitor OR stood at the correct angle, it more or less went away. At my NEW apartment, turning off the CRT monitor doesn't help, and I have to be standing in EXACTLY the right spot with the guitar angled exactly the right way. Someone said to me that it might be do to a combination of a) poor wiring, which isn't something I'm in control of; and concrete walls, which apparently contain and reflect electromagnetic interference. By standing in the right spot and at the correct angle, I'm in the spot where the electromagnetic signal is reflecting and arriving the least. Unfortunately, there's probably little you can do about it. 2. Regardless of the source of hum, a compressor/limiter will ALWAYS make it worse rather than better. Look at it this way: the compressor's job is to boost a signal when it starts to get weaker (sort of... actually what it REALLY does for the most part is boost the whole signal all the time but then tame the peak, so that it sounds more consistent and you don't notice the fade-out tail as much) When it's just the hum (you're not playing your instrument), the humming signal is being amplified. Unless you can eliminate all interference and poor wiring (I haven't yet), the closest you can get to noise elimination is a noise gate. A noise gate is just an illusion, though. It will silence the hum when you're not playing, but when you start playing it's back and at full volume. The difference is that you don't notice it as much when you're actually playing notes, but it IS there in the background. Greg

Awesome, LGM! That Mark Wood guy seems pretty cool and articulate.

Spalt-tastic! My girlfriend was in the room when I was looking at the pic on the first page, and she said, "Oh, I LIKE that!" and she's not usually enthused about geetars. Guess I'll have to splat it up some day. Greg

I've potted a pickup before, and it was mainly parrafin with a touch of beeswax in it. I didn't measure out the proportions "exactly"... I mean, it's wax. Use mainly parrafin and add some beeswax. It shouldn't be rocket surgery! Yes, you will get wax all over the metal cover, but it will just scrape off (using plastic or wood, not another hunk of metal!!) and then you just "polish" (as already mentioned) the residue away with whatever method you feel comfortable using. I just used a cloth and some elbow grease. Greg

Anybody who's interested in virtual amps (ie. through the computer rather than as a standalone) has got to check out this thread at the K-v-R forum: Page 1 of 47 (and going strong) It's just continuing discussion and details (and mp3 demos) of a virtual amp that's being released 3rd quarter this year (or was it 4th quarter?). He's constantly taking submissions for demos, too, so if you record a completely dry demo track, yours might end up in the thread. Here's the latest demo, demonstrating heavy power chords: http://dimitar.audioshot.net/MoreChugaChuga.mp3 Unfortunately, it won't be free. But for ~$200 USD, I'm almost sold on it. I'll wait for the demo so that I can try it for myself, but it's fairly convincing. You wouldn't know that's just a dry guitar signal being processed through a plug-in if nobody told you. Also, while this demo is for a crunchy 'metal' (sort of) sound, the developer is more of a blues, jazz, classic-rock oriented guy, so it should end up being very versatile. Greg

Looks fantastic!

I'm not loving the design, but I like that it's unique. Greg

Nice! That guy can sure play! He loves flipping that switch on and off... whatever it is. <laff> Greg

I thought it was looking "good" already, but not really something that was grabbing my by the short and curlies. NOW, I'm thinking that it's one of the most kick-ass custom paint-jobs ever. Love it. It's enough to make ME want a 'tank' guitar! Greg

Hey, are you the same LOTS that used to post at the Guitarist forums? Greg

I went Mailloux. Top job, mate. The detail is astonishing in its simplicity and execution.