Are the neon color guitars coming back in style?
There was a time in the 80s when neon-colored guitars sold fairly well. Has that time come again?
Take the Jackson Soloist SLX in a color they call "Slime Green". I call it Neon Green. It is no different than any other Soloist SLX, save for the color, which by the way is not only the body but the back of the neck as well. If you're going to do a "loud color" guitar, you might as well do the whole thing including the neck, which Jackson did do.
Neon colors are green, pink, yellow, orange, purple and blue because those are the only colors you can get to neon-like brightness. The most common were green and yellow.
If for whatever reason I wanted a neon-color guitar, I would go with orange, solely because it's one of the rarest neon guitar colors due to the fact it's not easy to get the mix right, and not easy to make super-glossy. Pictures do no justice as to how cool a neon orange guitar looks that had the paint applied right. And to date, Ibanez is the only company I've ever seen that got neon orange on a guitar body correct. It is only available on high-end models priced at a minimum $1,000 USD, and the color is called Fluorescent Orange.
Does Ibanez currently make any guitars in that color? Nope. Or not at the time I write this. They should because the RG Series takes to it quite well.
Is the neon-color electric making a comeback?
I think so. I see way too many electrics right now in dopey flame-tops and bursts. Neon-color guitars are just one solid color, and we haven't seen any for sale regularly for about, oh, close to 30 years.
Fender (along with Squier) brought back their cool colors like Surf Green, Sonic Blue, Shell Pink, Lake Placid Blue, Daphne Blue and several others. But the other guitar companies stayed with the dopey flames and bursts.
Heck, even Fender had a neon-ish color once. Graffiti Yellow. And oh yeah, it looked real good on a Strat. That would be a nice color to see again from the big F.
Jackson right now is on the map with 1980's-neon color Slime Green. If it sells well, we may see more neon colors sprout up soon. Or if it doesn't capture the attention of the guitar player masses, grab your neon-colored Jackson while you can.
Most of the famous rock songs you know have isolated guitars that sound like crap
An individual most would consider a rock god of sorts is Randy Rhoads. Was Randy a good player? Yes. But his studio tone was total crap.
If you look up what Over The Mountain sounds like with just the guitars heard, it sounds awful. The guitars are nothing but a trebly, clacky, nasty mess.
Why do the guitars sound bad on their own? It's not for lack of guitar playing ability, but rather because they were purposely recorded that way.
And why were they purposely recorded that way? Because it worked better for the overall mix of the song. Or at least what the producer at the time thought was the best mix for the song.
There was a period of time between roughly 1975 through 1985 where nobody really knew how to record highly-distorted guitar sounds. The goal was, "make it sound like it does live", and that was not an easy task. In the end, the guys working in the studio simply guessed at what would sound correct. Sometimes it worked while other times it didn't.
For the recordings where the guessing on how to record highly-distorted guitars did work, more often than not the following is true:
- All the bass is cut right out of the guitars.
- All guitars are played at least twice.
- All solos are also usually played twice.
Why is the bass cut out?
Simple answer. To hear drums and bass more.
What's the deal with the doubling up of guitars?
For whatever reason, playing the same thing twice on two separate tracks magically fixes a lot of guitar sound problems. What once was "thin" now sounds "thicker", what once was "flat" is now "more round", and so on.
I can't really explain in words what happens when you double up guitars. What I can say is that a lot of the famous rock songs you know double up the guitars often, and I do suggest trying it for yourself.
The best example I can give of how good the doubling up of guitars can be is to purposely record two tracks of a guitar riff direct. And by direct I mean direct-to-mixer. No amp, no effects. Just the guitar. You'll be amazed at how much better things sound when you have two guitars playing the same thing.
If you want to try that experiment, remember to purposely cut out the bass so things don't get too "thumpy". And yes, that is one of the reasons guys working the mixing board cut bass out of doubled-up guitars.
Do I personally double up guitars and cut the bass on them?
Depends on the song, but most of the time, yes I do. Since I know there will be bass and drums added in later on, I leave those frequencies "open" for those instruments to fill that sonic space up.
And as far as the doubling up of guitars is concerned, I've known that recording trick for years.
What's the true test of whether a recording is good or not?
Hint: It's not studio monitors.
Long ago back in the 1950s, this thing called a radio started appearing in cars. In the United States, the first radios in cars were AM band only with only one speaker.
The audio quality of AM radio was awful. No bass, almost no treble and mostly midrange is all you heard come out of that oval-shaped car speaker. And since there was one speaker, the sound was obviously monophonic and not stereophonic.
Most table top radios of the era were basically the same way and not much better than what was in the cars. Just a box, two dials (one to tune, one for volume) and one small speaker.
The only people who heard truly good audio were those that had high-fidelity stereo systems at home, and that setup was a record player, separate amplifier, two speakers and usually some means of equalization, even if it was only two-band. However, being that those systems were expensive, most just settled for table top radios and whatever radio was in the car.
Why am I telling you all this? Because it gives insight into how music was produced back then.
Many record producers specifically made a rule that recorded music must sound good on a monophonic crappy AM radio. And that meant no stereo separation, drums that had little to no treble, bass guitar that had a ridiculous amount of midrange in it and booming vocals to cut through it all.
Should you use the same 1950's method to record your music?
Yes and no.
While true there are still devices out there that use monophonic means of audio (smartphones, some laptops, some tablets, etc.), that doesn't mean you should test your audio mono-only. Although I will admit it is the "safest" way to do it.
Instead of using a crappy monophonic means of testing audio, you should use a crappy stereophonic means of testing audio.
For example, listening to your recording through a pair of JLab Buds.
I know what you're thinking. "Those are the worst things to test a recording with, because they're voiced in a way that does not represent the true sound."
Right. That's exactly the point. The ear buds above are voiced in a way that probably adds in unwanted bass as well as other unwanted frequencies. It's crappy speakers like the above that most people use to listen to music with, so if your recording sounds good using proper studio headphones and the crappy buds shown above, you can be pretty sure your recording will sound good everywhere.
Why ear buds?
When I see people listening to music today, they're using ear buds. Whether the audio is being fed from a tiny little iPod Shuffle, smartphone, laptop or whatever-it-is, the buds are what people use for the speakers to get the music to the ears.
True, I'm old-school and like listening to music using external speakers because I never liked ear buds that much. But I recognize that buds are the speakers of choice for most people.
When your audio passes the monitor test and then the crappy-ear-bud test, you're in good shape.
How to get a good recorded sound from a bass guitar the really fast way
I'm going to note up front that this is written from a guitar player's point of view, but it should serve well for bass players also.
If you're a guitar player that records music at home (which most people do), you've found out that using a keyboard for a bass sound doesn't really work that well. You've also found out that detuning your guitar doesn't really work well either.
The quick-and-dirty way to get good recorded bass tone
Do not use an amp. Ever.
This is a total waste of time if the goal is to record the bass quick. Positioning a microphone in front of a bass amp to get just that right bass recording is not a quick process and never has been. Possible, yes, but not easy and not quick. Save yourself a ton of time and plug in direct instead.
Use the tone knob. Always.
It's probably true that the sound you want is to have the pickup(s) volume all the way up and the tone knob all the way down (or almost all the way down).
Guitar players make the classic mistake of turning everything "up to 10" and expect that to work. On a bass, that rarely works. Turn the tone knob down.
Compress. Don't think about it. Just do it.
Unless you have fingers or a pick strike that can get exactly the volume you want 100% of the time, you're going to have notes that are too quiet with others than are too loud. The solution to this is compression. Use this cheap compressor to get that job done.
EQ bass down, midrange up and treble down
With the EQ "flat", the bass will sound awful and overpower everything else. And if using roundwound strings (which you probably will be), every time you move from fret to fret you're going to hear that "schrrrch" noise, and it will be loud in a bad way.
On a 3-band EQ, set bass EQ to 40%, mid EQ to 60% and treble EQ to 40%. You don't have to use those exact numbers, but it generally works out pretty well where the bass will cut through the mix without being overpowering.
Drive it lightly
Overdrive does work on bass if you use it lightly. Ordinarily, a heavy amount of compression should add in just a hint of overdrive. If it doesn't, you can add it in using an overdrive pedal for whatever you have.
The trick however is that it must be overdrive and not distortion. A distortion pedal even on its lowest setting won't work out that well. Light overdrive however will work.
While true you will probably not hear the overdrive in the total mix of the song later, the point to using it is to ensure every single note gets through with even, consistent volume that cuts through the mix properly.
Order of effects?
Overdrive first, compression second, EQ last.
Other bass recording tricks you can use
Pan hard to a side
If you're having a problem with the bass getting buried too much in the mix of your song, pan it hard. As in pan the bass track 100% to the left or 100% to the right.
The bass is one of those instruments where it is absolutely OK to do this.
In fact, if you pan the bass and the rhythm guitar hard to one side, and pan the lead guitar hard to the other side, that kind of mix really works out well.
Do not be afraid to have your bass be a buzzy, "clacky" mess
Fret buzz and fret clack is something you can get away with on a bass guitar and still have it sound good. Best used with overdrive.
Need a 5-string sound but only have a 4-string?
Tune down to B-E-A-D instead of the standard E-A-D-G. Chances are pretty good you'll like B-E-A-D tuning so much that you'll keep the tuning that way all the time.
Which bass works best for the guitar player?
The "Fender bass sound" is the standard, except of course you don't want to spend a grand on a Fender American Standard bass guitar since you're a guitar player.
Squier to the rescue.
There are basically 2 body styles and 3 pickup configurations.
One split-coil pickup (it's split so it acts like a humbucker to eliminate 60-cycle hum but still has single-coil tone), one volume knob, one tone knob; a good workhorse bass guitar. Commonly known as a "P" bass.
2. Jazz Bass
Two straight-coil pickups. I actually like the Jazz over the P. The J-style body is a bit more comfortable (for me, anyway) and you can get more sounds out of it. It's also the same price as the P. The tradeoff is that the straight single-coil pickups can buzz. This bass is commonly known as a "J".
3. P/J bass
Best of both worlds here, mostly. Same price as the above two, has a P pickup in the middle and a J pickup in the rear. I say "mostly" because it's a P-style body and I prefer the J-style, but that's just me. You might really like the P-style body.
If you are absolutely unsure which bass to get, get a P/J whether it's made by Squier or not. Why? Because it covers all the tones you'd want out of a bass. Both pickups on gives you a modern sound, J pickup alone gives you 70's honk, P pickup alone gives you 60's big/bold fullness, and with experimentation with the knobs, you can get basically any sound you want out of it.
I own a P/J bass currently, but at some point I may get a Jazz Bass even though I know the pickups buzz. The J-style body is just really comfortable, and since I'm used to single-coil pickups that buzz and how to eliminate that kind of interference noise, I could deal with the J's buzzy straight-coil singles without a problem.
BONUS 4. SX Ursa 1
The only reason to get this bass is that it's ridiculously cheap, but at the same time made well. SX is a Rondo brand that compared to other like-priced brands actually delivers an instrument that's fairly good. The Ursa 1 unless specified otherwise is a full-size 34-inch scale proper P-style bass.
Note: Ursas usually sell quick because the price is so good for what you get, so if you see one from the link above, get it, otherwise it may be days to weeks before the link shows any in stock again. You can try the SX Ursa 2 if the model 1 doesn't show any in stock, and you might get lucky and find one.
Fender Yngwie Malmsteen strings... worst idea ever?
No, this is not a joke. Fender really did release a set of "signature" Yngwie Malmsteen electric guitar strings.
Is this one of the dumbest things they've ever done?
Let's talk about that.
I'm on YouTube, and I thought I'd go visit Fender's channel since I hadn't been there in a while; I found this video for Fender Yngwie Malmsteen guitar strings, released 14 May 2014, which at the time I write this is 42 days ago, so it's not old.
The video has ratings and comments disabled (which is not the first time Fender has done that with a Malmsteen video on their YouTube channel), and that immediately said to me, "Uh-oh.. this can't be good."
My instinct was right.
Fender, as far as I'm aware, is the first company to have artist signature guitars such as the Eric Clapton Stratocaster. Arguably, that model is the best artist signature guitar they make because it's one of the few that actually improves upon the instrument with features that a lot of players like. Another would be the Eric Johnson Stratocaster, also a true player's guitar. As for the rest of the signature guitars.. eh.. not-so much.
However, this is the first time I've seen Fender totally jump the shark when it comes to artist signature stuff. But maybe that's on purpose. I'll talk more about that in a moment.
Okay, so... the video shows a signature guitar that's been around for a while. But now it can be "accessorized" with signature overdrive pedal, signature strings, signature guitar cable (groan..), signature headstock tuner (double groan...), ugly strap and case with ugly lining.
Now you know, you know the marketing and PR people at Fender were up to something with this. What, exactly? Keep reading.
If you play guitar and play heavy metal at all, you've heard of Yngwie Malmsteen. And you figure out pretty quickly that the internet hates Yngwie Malmsteen. There are many guitar players who absolutely hate that guy. They hate his playing, his attitude, all of it. And when I say they hate the guy, they really hate the guy.
But as much as people hate the guy, fender his artist signature Stratocaster guitar is a good seller. If it weren't, Fender wouldn't still be making it.
I think what Fender is doing here is testing the limits to see how cheap they can go with "signature" before players stop buying. With a Malmsteen product line, Fender has almost nothing to lose because the internet already hates the guy to begin with. Only the most dedicated of fans would even consider buying stuff with his name on it.
If signature Malmsteen strings (which are basically nothing but Super Bullets in a weird gauge set and a black package), cables, bags, headstock tuners and the other kitschy stuff actually sell... well, that just opens up a whole new way for Fender to make money.
Anything classified as an "accessory" is something Fender doesn't have to make. They can simply license use of their logo, have someone else make the whatever-it-is, sell the product, Fender collects the checks and laughs all the way to the bank.
A whole bunch of "signature accessory" crapola may sprout up soon. Fender could work deals with every artist that currently has a signature guitar and "make" everything from strings to signature toilet paper. Wipe your backside with Yngwie's signature toilet paper? Hey, why not. Feel the power of Yngwie's shredding straight up your ass.
On a final note, the dumbest thing Fender "makes" right now is foam ear plugs, and you only get 8 of them. I can get 50 of them for just slightly more. And yes, THEY ARE THE EXACT SAME THING, just without the Fender branding.