How come there isn't more surf music?

As far as I know, there is no popular music genre that ever truly dies. For any genre you can think of, there are fans of it even if it's not the popular music of the moment.

What is surf music exactly? It's a weird combination of rock, fast-pace blues, Middle Eastern, Arabic, Mexican and Hawaiian styles.

The first name in surf music is The Ventures, and the second is Dick Dale, but there are many others such as The Chantays, The Beach Boys (obviously), Jan & Dean and so on. But when it comes to "the sound of surf", The Ventures and Dick Dale nailed it best.

While surf music was before my time, the more I research it, the more I understand how huge it was in the early 1960s. From 1961 to 1966, surf music was everywhere, or at least it was here in the US. It was the "rebel music" of the time that all the kids were listening to. Beach fun, fast cars and good times was what it was all about.

Everyone likes surf music because it just sounds cool and it's a happy kind of style. So why is it that people don't play it more?

Well, it's not that surf music is "too old", because every popular music genre resurfaces about once every 25 to 30 years.

The reason you don't hear surf directly has to do with the fact it's not easy to play and it's a tough sound to pull off.

The guitars

Surf is a 100% Fender sound, meaning it's either played on a Squier Jazzmaster, Fender Jazzmaster, Squier Jaguar or Fender Jaguar. And for a good long time it was very difficult to acquire one of those guitars. Today, sure, you can grab yourself one easily and buy one right now. But from about 1975 all the way up until 2000 it was next to impossible to find one because they either weren't made or were custom-order-only.

Yes, that means for 25 years these guitars were for all intents and purposes unavailable.

The Jazzmaster's original run was from 1958 to 1980, then production stopped, then resumed in 1984 and has been made ever since. However, you almost never saw Jazzmaster guitars after their heyday in the 60s. Only very recently, as in from 2012 to present, do you now see Jazzmasters in guitar stores.

The Jaguar's original run was from 1962 to 1975 and then production of the guitar was outright stopped until finally being made again in 1999. There are absolutely zero Jaguars that were made from 1976 through 1998. But even after the Jaguar was reintroduced to the market, many guitar stores were really reluctant to carry it. It really wasn't until there were affordable Squier versions that Jags started popping up more.

Was it grunge music that brought back the Jag? Unquestionably, yes. While that has nothing to do with surf music, were it not for Kurt Kobain playing a Jaguar, it's probably true Fender never would have made the guitar again. Seeing a top-selling artist playing a guitar Fender used to make got younger players everywhere buying up every single vintage Jag they could get their hands on as they were the only ones available. And because the Jag's shape is the same as the Jazz's, players were buying up those like crazy as well.

Anyway, for surf it's Jazz or Jag, assuming you even like either one of those guitars to begin with.

The reverb

Spring reverb was a new thing back when surf music was popular, so players used it like crazy, usually with the highest setting where you can hear spring clanging. My DigiTech GSP 1101 has spring reverb programmed to such a degree where spring clanging is actually included in the modeling. It's actually quite accurate. DigiTech really knows how to do spring reverb right in the digital domain.

The playing style

Even when you have the right guitar and the right effects, you have to know how to play the right chops.

Surf music sounds easy to play, but it's not. It's a tone that's clean and "bitey", so every single chord and note you play has to be dead accurate.

The best way I can describe surf playing style is that it's a combination of full-bodied chords and fast single notes, jumping between those two constantly. There's a lot of minor chords involved, and those chords have to be struck with a pick at a fast-medium pace, like a wave.

Then, on top of all that, you have to make it work with a buzzy-by-nature guitar with in-your-face reverb.

Not easy.

Having the right guitar helps a lot. Jag or Jazz. Can be done with a Strat as an alternative, but not easily because you don't have the "slow" vibrato. Can't be done with a Telecaster because it has no vibrato.

Ultimately, it's the difficultly level involved with playing surf that makes it not heard more. Bands by nature stick to the easier stuff. And surf music is not easy.

permalink

Counter-Strike is possibly the best worst game ever made

Was I ever a gamer? Yes. Back in the 2000s I did spend a lot of money on one particular game, Counter-Strike.

How much did I spend? Well, there was one point where I was spending almost $80 a month for it for something like 4 or 5 months. Why so much? Because I rented my own 16-man gaming server (meaning up to 16 players could play at once) on a service known as ReconGamer. Don't bother searching for ReconGamer because that place is long dead. They just up and decided to quit the game hosting business with no warning one day, screwing over anyone that sent them money. Fortunately, I had canceled my account with them before that happened.

Now for those who don't know what Counter-Strike is, here's a crash course.

Okay. So this game is released back in 1998, Half-Life. That game by the way is still very, very good and I still replay it every so often. Counter-Strike started off as nothing more than a mod of Half-Life. The game spread like wildfire, gained massive popularity and quickly became the #1 first-person-shooter multiplayer game on the internet.

The best version of the game is 1.6, and to this day is almost always in the top 10 of all games played on Steam.

I started playing CS back when the 1.6 release was a new thing, and before there was a requirement to use Steam just to play it. The old network was a system called WON, which means World Opponent Network.

WON is gone, but a user-created recreation of it, WON2, does exist. And yes, you can play CS 1.6 on it as a "Steamless" version of it exists.

Have I ever played CS on WON2? No. All the players I knew on CS were in New England, and when I moved to Florida in the mid-2000s, there was nobody down here who played CS, so I basically just quit the game.

There was a time however when I played almost nothing but CS exclusively. I was really, really into it. While I never got that good at the game, the point is that I was having fun. Well, mostly.

What made CS the worst?

The single biggest problem with CS is that since it was a mod, it was ridiculously easy for any stupid kid to program a cheat even with just minimal programming skills. Being there was zero quality control when it came to the CS mod, there were always cheaters in public servers.

What made CS the best?

When playing with friends, CS was a very social thing and it was genuinely fun. Also, when you were on a team matched against a team at around the same skill level as yours, matches were great. Again, lots of fun.

Some of the best times were when you would trick the other team into doing something just by strategy so you could win a match.

The way CS works when playing on the "T" side is that you either try to reach site A or B. In an example where my team tricked the other to win the match, one time I told my team, "I'm going to run over near A and make a lot of noise. You wait, and when I signal, run over to to B as fast as you can."

The match started, I ran over using no stealth near site A, then threw a grenade and started firing my weapon. During this time, my team was silently moving towards B. The entire opposing team ran to where the noise was, and just before they slaughtered me I told my team to start running to B, and fast. My team had reached B before the other team had any clue what was going on, secured that site and won the match.

When you can pull things off like that, it's really cool.

Team play on CS is a combination of strategy, stealth and having the right team proficient with the right weapons. The right combo makes all the difference.

After CS, I quit gaming

I didn't "rage-quit" gaming because of CS. I quit because that was the last game I played that any of my friends did. But like I said, when I moved, I didn't know anyone here that played it. In America, CS was mainly played either in New England, Texas or California. As for other parts of the US, including Florida, not-so much.

Another reason I don't game anymore is because I don't use a PC anymore and haven't for some time. I use a laptop (a Lenovo ThinkPad E430, for those interested) for everything. Laptops are obviously not good gaming machines, but that's not what I bought it for. I bought it to do real work on it, which I do almost daily.

Will I ever get back into gaming?

I doubt it. The only kind of gaming I do these days is play a few rounds of Bejeweled Blitz and not much else. Other than that I play some of the older games I have in my Steam Client. Mostly Star Wars stuff.

It's like I said, I just grew out of gaming for the most part.

And by the way, there is no such thing as as "Gamer 4 Life!" All gamers eventually quit for one reason or another and that's just the way it is.

permalink

Guitar Review: Gretsch G5445T Electromatic Double Jet

If you can believe it, I never played a guitar with a Bigsby vibrato system on it until today. Also, before today I never played a Gretsch guitar before either.

Why haven't I played a Gretsch until now? Two reasons. First, I never really think about Gretsch when in the guitar store, and second, I'm not really into semi-hollow or hollow bodied guitars, but... this Jet is in fact a solid-body.

While I was in the guitar store (Sam Ash Tampa), in addition to trying out a Fender Jazzmaster, I also tried out the Gretsch you see above since they had one hanging on the wall.

So okay, here we go, my review on the Gretsch G5455T Electromatic Double Jet.

Expensive?

Nope. It's the same price as a Mexico-made Fender Standard Stratocaster or Fender Standard Telecaster...

...but it sure looks expensive, no doubt about that. In person, it looks even better, even in black. If you're wondering if there is another color, there is. Gold. And if you think the black one looks good, it would not surprise me if you instantly bought the gold version upon seeing it; it's a guitar that turns heads easily. I guarantee you that very few (if any) other guitar players you know own an axe that looks that cool.

I'll put it another way. If you want a guitar that says, "I want a guitar that gets noticed anywhere I go with it", you can't do any better than a gold Gretsch Double Jet, because it could pass for a $2,500 guitar easily even though it's priced far less than that.

Fit and Finish

Good. Feels solid. I couldn't find any obvious flaws. In fact, I couldn't find any flaws at all.

Weight

Pretty close to "boat anchor" heavy. It's a solid-body with weight reduction (meaning it is chambered), but it has a heavy Bigsby vibrato on it.

Still a comfortable player even though heavy? Yes.

Sound

Spanky and twangy. It has set of what Gretsch calls "Blacktop Filter'Tron humbucking pickups".

Given the pickups are humbuckers however, it's not single-coil style "spank". More like a rockabilly sound rather than a surf sound is the best way I can describe it.

Neck and Fretboard

Even though the scale is slightly short (24.6-inch short, which is slightly shorter than typical Gibson 24.75-inch), it doesn't feel like a short-scale.

I felt very comfortable whizzing up and down the neck. In addition, this guitar responds great to finger-plucking. You can do snap-back style plucks and this Double Jet just loves that.

I had no issues holding chords or soloing, nor did I have any issues accessing higher frets. This particular Gretsch design is a "just right" for what it is.

Using the Bigsby

Okay, now to the meat and potatoes of why I tried this guitar in the first place.

The Bigsby vibrato that is on this particular Gretsch is the B50 model. There are, if you can believe it, 13 different models of vibrato that Bigsby makes. And some guys like to know which Bigsby is outfitted. Well, on this guitar, it's the B50.

I am used to a vibrato arm that swings out of the way when not in use. The Bigsby vibrato arm does not do that. Wherever you place it, that's where it stays unless you swing it out of the way yourself.

For some players, that's perfect because they like a vibrato arm (a.k.a. "whammy bar") that does not move and always stays in the same spot. For me, I actually prefer an arm that swings. As such, I had to get used to the fact the arm doesn't swing.

One thing the Bigsby does better than any other vibrato is that you can pat instead of grab to use it. What that means is that with a minor tension adjustment, you can simply use one or two fingers to lightly pat down the arm whenever you want vibrato. The reason you can do this is because the arm is wide, like the end of a small butter knife; this allows plenty of room to rest your finger on so you can pat instead of grab like you would with Fender vibrato arms.

Yes, you can adjust how much or how little tension you want, and that adjustment is stupidly easy to do.

But is the Bigsby on this Gretsch usable?

Yes, absolutely. Ridiculously easy to use and the strings stay in tune as long as they've been stretched out properly. Because the strings have a rolling point before the bridge, you can use the vibrato all you want without any nasty string "kinking" at the nut.

The B50 on the Double Jet is very usable and genuinely a joy to play once you adjust the tension to what you feel most comfortable with. All you have to do is decide whether you prefer a firm or soft feel for Bigsby tension and that's pretty much it.

There really is no learning curve to using a Bigsby system since it's just a tailpiece. All your intonation and string height stuff is handled separately at the bridge.

Electronics

This is the only part that may confuse some players, but once you understand how it works, it's easy.

On the top horn is a simple 3-way pickup toggle switch. Bridge, Bridge+Neck or Neck. Easy enough to understand.

It's on the bottom where things get interesting.

Near the back of the guitar are TWO volume controls (one for bridge, one for neck) and ONE master tone control.

Then, on the bottom horn (under the neck pickup) is a master volume.

Now if you're totally confused by this, here's how to make real simple sense of it for beginners new to how Gretsch does electronics.

Method 1: Use the master volume all the time.

1. Turn "Volume 1" and "Volume 2" all the way up.
2. Turn the master tone control all the way up.
3. Adjust volume with the master volume knob and never touch the other three.

Method 2: Never use the master volume control.

1. Turn the master volume control all the way up and then never touch it after that.
2. Turn the master tone control all the way up.
3. Adjust "Volume 1" and "Volume 2" as desired.

There is no right or wrong way to use a Gretsch. You will either use the master volume control all the time or just turn it up all the way and never touch it.

Where players get confused is that they think the three knobs at the rear of the body are Stratocaster "Master Volume/Tone/Tone" knobs. They're not. It's "Volume 1/Volume 2/Master Tone", with the master volume knob set far away under the neck pickup.

"I'm confused! Which should I use?"

If you're just totally confused, just use method 1 above as it's the easiest.

As for why the master volume is separated so far from the other knobs, that's just a Gretsch thing. They probably designed it that way originally so it was really obvious where the master volume control was.

Anything bad about the G5445T?

The tuners are a bit crappy. Not bad, but just.. well.. they could be a little bit better.

Yes, they are easy enough to use and felt okay when using them, but were a little stiff. Then again, this was a guitar I just picked up off the wall at a Sam Ash, so... maybe with change of strings to my preferred string set (which is Dunlop DEN0942 by the way), the tuners would have worked better with those.

Also, the tuner buttons felt a little small. I could grab and turn them easily, but still, they felt somewhat toy-like. But maybe the smaller size is a Gretsch thing. I'm not sure.

The only other thing I could complain about would be the weight of the guitar. It's heavy. While the guitar isn't big by any means, she has some weight to her.

Verdict

Above-average. Great look, great tones, easy to play. A small learning curve with the electronics layout, but easy enough to figure out.

For the nit-pickers wondering whether the guitar is more "Gibsony" or "Fendery", it's neither. Gretsch is Gretsch. There is no one part of the guitar where I think "this is Fender-like" or "this is Gibson-like". As I said, Gretsch is Gretsch. It may be a brand owned by Fender Musical, but believe me when I say there isn't anything about the Double Jet that's been ruined by who owns the brand.

I'll say it another way. The G5445T is absolutely not a "Gretsch-looking Telecaster". Not at all. And that's a very good thing. It's cool, different, a total head-turner, and totally a bargain for what it's selling for.

For those of you that want something really different but really cool at the same time that's not a Fender nor a Gibson that will impress the hell out of anyone who sees you with one, get a Gretsch G5445T Electromatic Double Jet. Black or gold, your choice. I played the black one, but if I were buying, I'd order a gold; it's the same price as the black one.

permalink

Guitar Review: Fender Classic Player Jazzmaster Special

Today I headed out to Sam Ash and while there I tried out two guitars. One was a Fender and the other a Gretsch. I'm writing about the Fender first.

The exact guitar I tried out was a Mexico-made Fender Classic Player Jazzmaster Special in 3-color Sunburst finish.

Appearance

The first thing to know about this guitar is that pictures on the internet do it no justice, as it looks way better in person. Even in brand new condition without a scratch or mark on it, it totally captures that "looks like a pawn shop guitar" look. The color and look of this particular Jazzmaster is 100% correct.

Weight

Almost the same as the Squier Vintage Modified Jazzmaster I own, which is around or a little over 8 pounds. In other words, heavier than a Stratocaster or Telecaster which usually weigh in at around 7.5 pounds.

In plain English: A bit on the heavy side, but not "boat anchor" heavy.

Neck/Fretboard/Frets

Feels identical to the Squier because it has the same measurements and same gloss coating. This particular Fender does not have a satin urethane neck finish. But that's fine because the neck feels great.

As for the fretboard and frets, it's just ever-so slightly rounder on the board and ever-so slightly "fatter" on the frets.

Buzzy?

Barely. It's not nearly as buzzy as the Squier, mainly because of the bridge which is a Fender Adjust-o-Matic. This is not a true-to-vintage Jazzmaster bridge. I'll talk more about this in a moment.

All Jazzmaster guitars with the old-school vibrato do buzz because that's just the nature of the way they are. The only way to have a buzz-free Jazzmaster is to play one that has no vibrato on it whatsoever, such as the Fender American Special Jazzmaster, which is a hardtail with no vibrato at all.

I will say however that the one I played today is the least-buzzy Jazz I've ever put my hands on. That Adjust-o-Matic bridge really gets the job done, but changes the way it plays, which again I'll get to in a moment.

Fit and finish

100% proper front-to-back. Fender Mexico makes a good guitar, and this Jazzmaster doesn't disappoint.

Sound

Other than the Adjust-o-Matic bridge, the pickups are why Fender calls this a "Special" model. What's loaded in this Jazz are labeled as "Special Design Hot Single-Coil Jazzmaster" pickups, according to Fender specifications.

What does that mean? I have no idea. But I can tell you what it sounds like.

In the lead (down) circuit position, the best way I can describe the voicing is that it's more "smooth" than the Squier Jazzmaster pickups while still retaining good treble response. However, to my ears it doesn't have as much "honk". And I like honky-sounding Jazzmaster pickups.

The rhythm (up) circuit position is, I admit, more usable than on the Squier version. Because of the hotter output, you hear more treble out of the rhythm circuit when in use.

Basically put, yes, it sounds like a Jazzmaster, although not as honky as I would like it to be.

Truss rod hole placement weirdness

This is something so subtle that it's really easy to miss, but important to know.

Notice on the headstock that there is no truss rod hole. That's because it's on the heel of the neck.

The upside to this is that it contributes to the vintage look. The downside is that it can be a major annoyance to adjust the truss rod.

Why do I label this as weird? Because it's a vintage-inspired thing on a guitar that's more modern than vintage and not a reissue. It's just plain weird Fender would do this on the Classic Player Jazzmaster Special.

Vintage or Modern?

Modern, no question about it. Looks totally vintage, which is exactly how it should look, but feels and sounds totally modern.

My issues with the Fender Adjust-o-Matic bridge

The entire reason Fender even bothered putting this bridge on the Jazzmaster was in response to players who said the original was buzzy and unusable.

I own a Squier Jazzmaster with the true-to-vintage bridge. Buzzy? Yes. Unusable? No. Very usable, if you know how to play a Jazzmaster correctly. And most guitar players these days are unfortunately so stupid they can't even figure it out, so they cried to Fender, Fender buckled and slapped on an Adjust-o-Matic.

When I went to use the vibrato on this Fender, it felt totally wrong and sounded totally wrong. While the Squier with the proper vintage-style bridge has beautiful, smooth operation and nice overtones, the Fender version just felt "short" for lack of a better description...

...and that's because it is literally shorter, spacing-wise.

The vibrato-to-bridge spacing on the Squier model with its vintage style Jazzmaster bridge is normal for what it should be, mostly if not exactly following vintage specifications. On the Mexico Fender with the Adjust-o-Matic bridge, the spacing is shorter. And on the American Fender '65 model with the vintage-style Jazzmaster bridge, the vintage spacing is obviously used.

Why does the Mexico model have shorter vibrato-to-bridge spacing? Probably to decrease buzz and prevent string ring before the bridge...

...and that's exactly what I personally don't want taken away from a Jazzmaster.

Now for some players out there, the Classic Player Special Jazzmaster is perfect because it directly addresses the two largest complaints people have about the Jazzmaster guitar, that bring bridge buzz and before-the-bridge string ring.

But or me, the vibrato with the shorter spaced setup operates so differently that it almost feels foreign.

After I strummed around on the Classic Player, yes I was able to get along with it all right. I could still get nice, smooth vibrato after getting used to it...

...but ultimately I felt it to be "too modern" for my liking.

Now again, some players will really, really like the Classic Player. But that short-spaced vibrato in combination with the differently-voiced pickups just didn't work for me.

Is it worth the asking price?

Tough to say.

This is a Mexico-made Jazzmaster, and it's priced significantly higher than a Mexico-made Strat or Mexico-made Telecaster.

What I can say is this:

1. In 3-tone Sunburst, wow, what a looker. It is an insanely good-looking guitar, because it's like I said, the thing looks pawn-shop perfect even in brand new condition.
2. It does sound correct, even though not as honky as I'd like it to be.
3. It is easier to deal with compared to the vintage vibrato/bridge setup.
4. It is a quality-built guitar, no question about it.
5. I guarantee you will not care that this is a Mexico-made and not an American-made, because the look, fit, feel and finish are totally spot-on.
6. I can easily see this guitar becoming a collectible in the future because it's a unique thing in the Fender line, especially for a Jazzmaster.

But is that enough to justify its price?

For some of you, just the look of the guitar alone makes it worth its asking price. This guitar comes in only two colors, 3TSB and Black. Don't even bother with the black one. Get the sunburst. Even if you bought this guitar, never played it and just hung it on a wall for display, people would say "WOW!" each time they saw it. Yes, it truly does look that good in person.

For me, no it's not worth its asking price. But if it had the true-to-vintage vibrato/bridge setup and traditional vintage-voiced pickups, then yes, it would be worth its asking price.

If the price of the Fender Jazz scares you off, get the sunburst Squier version instead. And if that particular Squier scares you off because of its true-to-vintage setup, the Fender Modern Player HH Jazzmaster in Black will be just the thing you want.

The Modern Player guitar in particular looks great in black because it has a maple fingerboard with block inlays, and it has almost the same price point as a Mexico-made Strat or Tele. And, strangely enough, it has the proper spacing for the vibrato/bridge setup even with an Adjust-o-Matic on it. Also, the truss rod hole is at the pegboard and not the heel for easy adjustment.

What do you miss on the Modern Player? No rhythm circuit on top, but that's fine because it would "mud out" humbuckers too much anyway even if it were there.

Final verdict

I give the Classic Player Jazzmaster a rating of "above average". Looks perfect and fit/finish are very good, but that vibrato/bridge setup and pickup voicing just does nothing for me.

permalink

Rich's movie review of Airplane II: The Sequel

This is not about the first movie, Airplane! It's about the second one, Airplane II: The Sequel.

For a long while I've known that the original writers of the first movie, that being Jerry Zucker, David Zucker and Jim Abrahams, had absolutely nothing to do with the second movie. And as far as I know, none of them have even seen it because they positively refused to even give it a look. If I remember correctly, I believe the Zucker brothers said in an interview that they knew right up front the second movie would be a total piece of crap and refused to make it. But the studio went behind their backs and made the movie anyway. That ticked them off, and rightly so.

The first movie, Airplane!, is a total comic masterpiece. Truly. That movie was made in 1980 so it's a 34-year-old flick. However, it was written so well and the timing and gags are so good that it's still funny even today.

As for Airplane II: The Sequel... not so much.

I think the last time I actually sat through this whole movie was probably either in my early 20s or even my teens. Yeah, it's been that long.

Here's the interesting thing this time around. It's my first time viewing the movie fully uncensored. Every time I've seen this movie in the past, it was always the "edited for television" version.

So what do you get in the uncensored version? You see some breasts, hear some mild cussing, and see the Elaine character smoking weed.

You would have to be high to be able to laugh at this movie because it's just bad. While the first movie was great, this one just tries way too hard to be funny. There's a lot of forced humor going on.

Some parts of the second movie are funny, but not many. You'll laugh a little bit here and there, but it's nowhere near as good as the first one.

The biggest problem with the second movie other than the forced humor is that it's so woefully dated. What the writers decided to do was shove in any popular culture reference they could at the time the movie was made, which was 1982. Nobody under the age of 35 would be able to catch all the references, so most of the time it just doesn't work.

Even I didn't know all the references. The one I didn't know was that the main theme music used in the movie is from Battlestar Galactica (1978). I only found that out now just by seeing the reference in the end credits. I never watched that show, which is why I didn't know it before.

The film was made simply to cash in on the hit that the original Airplane! was. The script was probably rushed together, and the writers not only rehashed but outright copied jokes right out of the first movie, did it often, and did it badly.

Obviously, I didn't see this movie originally when new in the theaters because I was too young in '82. Instead, I saw it on television years later as one of those summer runs that networks used to push out when the regular television seasons were over.

My kid self thought this movie was funny. My adult self barely finds the movie funny at all, and it's probably the last time I'll ever watch it.

permalink