---Okay, guys and gals.  Here's a warning.  I feel like ranting a little bit today, so if you don't wish to hear me ramble on in a sea of wordiness and self-righteousness, then move on to another section of this site.  If you are up for the ride, then read on.....
 
 

---The 20th anniversary of MTV's first broadcast occurred on August 1, 2001.  I remember the first time I ever saw MTV.  I was spending a weekend at my grandfather's house.  It was incredibly entertaining to see a channel that did nothing but play non-stop music videos 24 hours a day.  Music and its personalities have always affected society and promoted change in many areas.  After all, part of the nature of rock and roll  has been about rebellion and questioning the norms of society.  Unfortunately, I find MTV to be a little too influential in today's society and if it reflects how most people think, then we have some problems folks.

I will keep this rant brief.  MTV isn't about music.  And VH-1 isn't doing much better either.  It's about trends and a lot of crap.  You can't turn on MTV today and just find pure unadulterated music videos like the good old days.  It's a bunch of game shows or dance parties with freakish looking hosts who don't have last names.   Some call it akin to soft-porn (by the way, has Britney had any surgery? What's the latest on that?)  When videos are actually played, the screens are split with pictures of teenagers dancing in swim wear and incessant advertising with all sorts of logos is superimposed upon the television.  Whatever happened to people who just wanted to see the video?  I could care less what will be coming on in an hour and I don't need to see that MTV is having a "Win a free BMW" contest more than once per show.

VH-1 ticks me off too.  Every show is a countdown of something.  "Top 100 VH-1 Lists of All-Time" should be their next topic as far as I'm concerned.  If I have to see one more account of how Faith Hill and the Dixie Chicks have crossed over into popular music, then I think I'm gonna hurt my tv set.  Some of the Behind The Music shows are informative, but where are the pure music videos or concerts?  Storytellers is okay from time to time, but straight-ahead music is very hard to find on these channels.

The reason MTV had to create another channel with M2 is because they screwed up the original concept, much like Coke and Coca-Cola Classic.

Remember the good old days when the astronaut planted the MTV flag on the moon while the power chords riffed on?  Does anyone actually remember when J.J. Jackson's hair was stylish (maybe not a good example)?  Then you could see Devo whipping things without some 13 year-old kid fawning over why she likes a particular member of N-Sync in a split-screen.

I know that I can just turn it off if I don't like it, and I often do that.  I feel cheated though, because MTV had a good thing going a long time ago and has taken it away.  I want my MTV!
 
 

---Last year, I posted some personal impressions about the continuing amp and effects modeling craze that seems to have hit most musical companies on the planet.  I thought I would update some of my feelings about these devices after another year of experience with various examples.

Just about every major musical manufacturer is offering their version of something which emulates classic sounds.  "Get all the sounds of your favorite classic amps in one convenient package using our proprietary (insert fancy trademark such as A.S.R. or "Authentic Signal Replication") technology," they all seem to say.

On a theoretical level, the whole concept of being able to digitally replicate a lot of classic sounds and place them into one compact product is quite admirable.  I still believe that units such as the Line 6 POD or the Roland VG-8 for example, have their places in the world of music.  I detailed my own applications for these types of processors as being primarily convenient in nature.  If I need to record or play something at late hours of the evening without disturbing people around me, a box such as the POD is a cool device, because it sounds a lot better than plugging a guitar directly into a mixing board or some cheap headphone amp. If I were to go over to someone's house for a rehearsal or to work up some basic song arrangements where I could plug a POD into a mixer, it would allow me to leave the heavy amps and effects at home.  However, when tone cannot be compromised, the POD stays at home in a drawer.

The bottom line for me is that there are some situations where I must weigh the "convenience" issue against the "tone" issue.  Without intending to sound condescending, tone always matters to me.  Every time I pick up a guitar, I would like to think that I have access to the best sound possible.  That doesn't mean that I always have the sound that I'd like to hear, but I want to make sure that my equipment is not limiting what comes out of my hands in any way.

I have a very open mind to technology as long as it doesn't get in the way of creating a soulful and organic feeling of sound.  Notice how I used the word "feeling" to describe something we hear.  I don't necessarily mean how sound makes the audience feel as much as how the player feels when he is creating the sound.  Feel is extremely important to all guitarists because it is the instantaneous aspect of music which inspires what we will play next.  We react off of what we are feeling.

Some players may not want what I describe as an organic feel.  Some might prefer a heavily-processed sound that alters the signal dramatically.  There is nothing wrong with that because everyone has his own style and approach.  No matter the style or taste of the player, he wants something that feels good to him and allows unhampered creativity to flow through.  For me, I need to play gear that allows me to react to what I'm hearing.  I can find that situation most often when I am playing a tube amplifier with perhaps a few choice effects pedals.

I have played a number of emulating devices and have been very receptive to exploring them in different environments.  My conclusion is that none of them will achieve what they are intending to simulate as well as the original product can..... at least to me. You can be the head of a big musical company and tell me to my face that your new digital product is as good as a classic amp.  You can swear that you have found the technology to make a computer sound like a real '59 Fender Bassman amp.  The fact is that no one has been able to successfully build this to date.

The reason new amp modelers don't live up to their hype is because Leo Fender got it right the first time.  (Somebody got the wheel right the first time too!  When it's right, it's right.)  Now that's not to say that Leo wouldn't be embracing new approaches to sound today.  I think he would have been developing new ideas as he always did.  The interesting thing about innovation is that it always starts with a fresh idea that tends to push through boundaries in a controversial manner.  When Leo introduced the Stratocaster, it was regarded as some bizarre futuristic instrument that would not appeal to the masses.  Look at it today.  It is the most popular design in the world.  The Strat will always be around because it is timeless and just about perfect in form and function.  Sure, it has influenced new hybrids on its theme, but the basic 3 single-coil design which originated in the 1950s is still the ideal guitar to a lot of people, including myself.

Understand that I'm just using Leo Fender here as one example, because there have been other companies and pioneers of the same era who have had big effects on music which still reach to us today.  Leo's amp designs have always remained in the hearts of  true music enthusiasts because they are simple and toneful.  The irony is that makers of digital amps are paying the ultimate tribute to the old designs by trying to replicate them.  In their own ways, they are pushing the boundaries of technology in hopes of finding something new.  The difference, is that when you have a new technology that doesn't outperform something that has been around for 50 years, it indicates that more work needs to be done to fulfill its potential.  AND THAT IS MY POINT.  Emulators have a long way to go before they can achieve the great promise they hold.

It is also the reason that I have been using things such as Carr Amplifiers, because these reflect the simple virtues that are timeless and effective in the process of making sound.  Economics, which does make the world go around I guess, has negatively affected the way that products are made today.  Big companies are all about maximizing profits and mass production.  Smaller boutique companies also want to maximize profits.  There is nothing wrong with that.  It's just that big companies need to crank out enough product to meet their costs and realize a profit (again, everyone needs to do that). However, in order to accomplish this in the world of amps, they have to use more automated components and production techniques than smaller companies do.

There is an endless debate between the merits of handmade point-to-point wired (PTP) amps and printed circuit board (PCB) designs.  I really don't know if there is a difference in tone between these two techniques.  I do know that PTPs are easier to work on and tend to be more durable.  If a PCB cracks due to stress, the whole thing must be replaced.  Regardless, I feel better using a product that features great handmade attention to detail.  A good boutique amp often seems to address the things that bigger companies neglect.  They have soul.  The small boutique builder isn't big enough to let his passion be consumed by making the big bucks. Think of the analogy of eating a great homemade meal made by your grandmother as opposed to going to McDonald's.
 

Are you ready for the deeply philosophical angle on things?  (Drum roll............)
 

I see some interesting parallels between the concept of amp modeling and the state of music today.  Is it me or have bands become extremely bland and boring for the most part?  There are always exceptions to the rule because many talented musicians labor in obscurity while decidedly inferior personalities are all over radio and television.  It seems to me that musicians these days are either trying to blatantly emulate artists of past times or they are not offering anything groundbreaking that will stand the test of time in the future.  It's very similar to amp modeling.  We're looking back to the past because we are not satisfied with what's going on today.  Perhaps it's a microcosm of bigger cultural issues.  I will, though,  acknowledge that every generation seems to sneer at something that ultimately becomes a classic, such as Elvis Presley.  But then there are those things in life such as the Ford Pinto or the Chevy Vega.......

I get really frustrated at reading the catalogs from music stores and seeing the abundance of companies trumpeting their newest emulators using their patented technology that took years to develop.  Yeah, it took years to develop.  About fifty.  Why aren't people making future classics now?  Where are the amps of today that are so good that they will be classics tomorrow?  Where is the great classic music of the future that relies on talent and melody instead of the brooding "I just walked in off the street in my pants that are hitting the ground and I can't play so I'm really cool" vibe?  (Did I just say that?)

Let me clarify this:  Everything seems disposable to me these days. It is reflective of the fact that we are more consumed by convenience and profit, than attention to detail and enjoying things on a soulful level.  Just look at everyone talking on their cell phones in restaurants.  Technology is supposed to make things better, but it only makes things more complicated and serves to take us away from simplicity.  I am really torn because you can't always live in the past.  There is a balance between emulation and innovation that needs to be realized.

Lest you think I have blown this whole thing way out of proportion, understand that I am not against amp modeling as a solution for convenience.  All-in-one products that offer tons of digital sounds can be very valuable for the beginning guitarist who is learning about sound and can't afford a bunch of amps. They can also be useful to part-time players who perform in cover bands and need a variety of sounds.  Professionals could also benefit by modelers in certain situations.  Just don't try to tell me that amp models will replace what they try to copy on a permanent basis.

Why are the amp and effects companies continually trying to model the past?  If the past is so great, which some of it is, why not just make the past again?  Again, it's partly an economics issue.  Some suppliers of parts are no longer in business, and the cost of true replication is prohibitive to making a profit.  This is why many things that are driven primarily by money are not satisfying to the soul in the long term.  I want my soul to be satisfied, especially when something as soulful as music is involved.

My soul is more apt to be satisfied by playing a nice tube amp than a Line 6 POD.  That about sums it up.
 
 

Jason