the Fly Clone Project

I thought this was pretty interesting:

Cool Video! Thanks for posting this! I love videos like this! It's, of course, really difficult to confound variables when it comes to "tone", and there are actually more variables than he's controlling for, but it's a cool effort nonetheless and I enjoyed watching this!

I'd be lying if I said I didn't watch videos like this without at least a grain of skepticism:

all of those (performance variables) are controlled as tightly as I can

That, unfortunately, weakens many of the objective claims he can make.

One thing of note: without understanding what harmonic content is present in the audio spectrum (with a spectral analyzer), it's difficult to understand some of the not-so-obvious differences like how an instrument will sound in the context of a band. At some point, we've all dialed in that Line 6 amp sound we loved so much when practicing alone only to find that it didn't cut through or sit well once the drums and bass players kicked in. Those are the characteristic guitar-to-guitar differences that might matter most to us as guitarists—if you hear a Fly Deluxe or a Fly Classic through a clean amp, it might not be so obvious how differently they'll respond when they're cranked up, compressed, gated, and distorted, for example.

For what it's worth—and not to hijack this thread—this is the rig we developed and use in our lab for comparing individual guitar components to eachother:


...and we're refining robotic plucking mechanisms to ensure that the performance is the same each time, but even having a modular rig like this only let's you compare "component-to-component in this rig" and not "guitar-to-guitar in the hands of a human player". It's very difficult to make any real claims about how a player arrives at a particular "tone"—it's definitely not the "strings and pickups are the only things that matter" stance that some videos like this embrace.

All good food for thought, @Patzag—look at the rant you've sent me on!

Yeah. I'm not endorsing what he said, but definitely food for thought.
And I think it leaves little doubt as to which elements are most important in electric tone.

Patzag wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 9:59 pm it leaves little doubt as to which elements are most important in electric tone.

Body/neck material, tuners, nut etc are negligible compared to to pups/electronics when it comes to the basic tonal characteristics of a solid body.

There, I said it.

Ima gonna die on this hill

B.S.

Poor Ken! He’s spent his whole career trying to explain that you can’t just make a guitar entirely out of carbon fiber or any ol’ material and expect it to sound good!

Not entirely related, but this video always makes me laugh…and cry a little :

Tone is in the fingers.

Wood matters too- my hill to die on.

The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. But what parts make a difference. I still think “tone woods” is about marketing.

Up to you to decide how much. If you don’t think wood type matters I’m ok with it.

billy wrote: ↑Sat Feb 05, 2022 10:48 am The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. But what parts make a difference. I still think “tone woods” is about marketing.

As many others have summarized in response to this video on other sites: “The best-sounding guitar is the one I’m currently selling.”

My favorite info that’s left out of discussions about tone is that, despite my careful attention to what I can control, the mix engineer is going to cut all the bass below at least 120Hz, boost the mid-range, and shelve all of the high frequencies of my signal after it’s been run through two different compressors.

Lol, no doubt. Sound guy has the ultimate say.

Woe to those who have a sound guy who thinks you’re after his girlfriend. Long story.

billy wrote: ↑Tue Feb 08, 2022 6:57 am Woe to those who have a sound guy who thinks you’re after his girlfriend. Long story.