Innovation

stimpsonslostson

Are guitarists technophobic? 

We drone on about 59s, preCBS, vintage correct wiring etc, obsess over valve amps, seem distrustful of innovation (G-force, Variax, Evertune, multiFX etc) & even things like new body shapes are derided (Musicman St Vincent)

In most other fields everyone races for the latest upgrades/updates- why not here? 

Is it holding us back? 

I'm asking as I was considering buying a Variax JTV & a couple of other guitarists have said "it may play well & sound good, but I'd rather have a "real" guitar". 

Tenebrous

Are we really that distrustful about multiFX/modellers anymore? 25 years back, sure, you weren't going to get a great sound out of a modeller/FX unit compared to a proper amp, but I think we've reached a point now where even some of the most ardent of tube purists can accept the value of something like the Helix/Kemper, even if they might not necessarily buy one themselves. And the Helix threads I've seen are always full of former digital naysayers who've made the jump after trying one for themselves.

HAL9000

I'm normally a Fender man, but am certainly not bothered about things being 'vintage correct'. As much as Leo got things right there are some things (such as truss rod adjustment at the heel) which are an inconvenience. I like (probably because of the familiarity) the Tele, Strat, Les Paul, etc shapes - they just look right - but am happy to have some modern twists.

I know it's horses for courses but I like that an electric guitar is, at heart, a simple beast. IMO things like the Variax, or robot tuners for that matter, detract from that simplicity. 

In answer to your question... No, I don't think it's holding us back - the Variaxs, St Vincents, etc are in the shops for those who want them, but also so is the more traditional stuff. 

guitarmangler

Well, yes and no. If you want the ‘classic’ looks and if you want that sound from the 50’s/60’s then get the same gear they used originally is pretty useful. If you’re into lots of different styles or genres then the variax etc will be useful otherwise you’ll have a house full of gear .

Plus , new innovations are not always better ( this is coming from someone who owns headless guitars, a helix and owned a non tube amp for the last 18 years)

Different genres of music will use different gear. The metal guys love the evertune, amp modelling, fishman pickups, fan frets etc . They seem quite happy to adopt new technology if it works. 

 

guitarfishbay

There’s no free lunch, every new innovation changes something some people liked about established designs.

digitalscream

I'm always up for innovation in the details. I just find that there are often issues with everything.

Robot tuners - make guitars headstock-heavy, and aren't reliable enough that you can just trust them without checking and adjusting.
Evertune - weight, fugly, and hard to retune in the middle of a set.
Variax - I like my feedback, which means that using it for switching tunings is a bit of a nightmare.

On the other hand....

Modelling - works perfectly for me, solved many problems.
D-Tuna - I never lift up with a Floyd, so makes going to drop-C# from Eb tuning a doddle.
Modern ergonomic designs - no more blocks of wood getting in the way of my hand at the dusty end etc

p90fool

I don't like vintage frets, and I'm on a never ending hunt for something which responds like a real amp but in a portable package. I also like and use multi-fx, so I'm a bit of a mixture I guess.

The thing is, the guitar has a recognisable tonal pallette which works in an infinite variety of styles just like a piano does. 

Maybe guitars are not the ideal platform for making great tonal strides, perhaps we should leave all that to the keyboard operators, who, incidentally, are usually still jealous of us anyway. 

Bigsby

Most musicians want a new instrument to sound like their last instrument (that's why they played it), feel like their last instrument (so they don't have to relearn playing it), and as a consequence, they'll tend to want it to look the same (or at least 'traditional'), as that's indicative of the first two conditions being met.

Things were different for electric solid body guitars in the 50s and 60s - they were being played in different ways, in different contexts, and within emerging musical styles. Culturally things were different too, with a desire for change and a feeling of optimism after two terrible world wars; newness and change were positive and welcomed.

By the 70s the solid body electric had settled into particular popular sounds in different musical styles, and we were back to approaching it like most instruments, wanting new ones to offer the same sound, feel and look as the last one (or at least, not be radically different). Of course, this is a generalisation, but as such, it applies to the general solid body guitar market.

guitarfishbay

digitalscream said:

I'm always up for innovation in the details. I just find that there are often issues with everything.

Evertune - weight, fugly, and hard to retune in the middle of a set.

Weight really isn’t bad when you remove wood to fit it. The two guitars I’ve had it fitted on came back broadly the same in feel. 

Its not really suitable for alternate tunings quickly unless you evertune low and then tune above with the tuning peg. eg set it for drop D then tune up to E when needed. You lose the evertune functionality but the string should be tighter and work ok. I think Ola England does that for whatever his tuning is.

You wouldn’t need to retune to the same note in the same gig. I don’t even always retune my guitar between weekly rehearsals, all I do routinely is reset the bend sensitivity.

Looks are personal, I think they look ok in black or nickel, I find the chrome they use too shiny for me

Modellista

I think this has to do with using the appropriate equipment for repertoire. Orchestral musicians wouldn’t look right with skeleton instruments made of carbon fibre. Although those who try and update the classical repertoire like Vanessa Mae can get away with a more modern instrument. 

So - because a lot of guitarists play repertoire either entirely written or at least based on blues and rock n roll from the middle of the 20th century, it seems appropriate to use an instrument that matches such a time period. Hence Strats and Les Pauls. 

The ‘80s brought us a lot of innovation and changes to the basic specification of instruments, pointy headstocks and Floyds were certainly novel then and have stuck around for certain genres. 

The few times I played in the band of a grime artist I instinctively wanted a modern instrument to match the genre so I ended up with a Yamaha RGX A2, which was way ahead of its time in many respects, although of course I do acknowledge to the untrained eye it just looks like a Strat, albeit space age. 

Its the reason I have a lot of time for Millimetric Instruments for bringing properly modern design to the guitar.  It’s been a long time coming and I hope they are successful. They are far more accurately able to claim they are genuinely  updating the design of the guitar for the 21st century, rather than just rehashing the Strat and painting it a Tesla colour. 

digitalscream

guitarfishbay said:

digitalscream said:

I'm always up for innovation in the details. I just find that there are often issues with everything.

Evertune - weight, fugly, and hard to retune in the middle of a set.

Weight really isn’t bad when you remove wood to fit it. The two guitars I’ve had it fitted on came back broadly the same in feel. 

Its not really suitable for alternate tunings quickly unless you evertune low and then tune above with the tuning peg. eg set it for drop D then tune up to E when needed. You lose the evertune functionality but the string should be tighter and work ok. I think Ola England does that for whatever his tuning is.

You wouldn’t need to retune to the same note in the same gig. I don’t even always retune my guitar between weekly rehearsals, all I do routinely is reset the bend sensitivity.

Looks are personal, I think they look ok in black or nickel, I find the chrome they use too shiny for me

Sorry, should've been more explicit. My guitars are all too thin to handle an Evertune mechanism, because I want to save weight; just having a guitar capable of housing an Evertune means more weight, unless even more money's spent chambering it etc.

Also...the bottom string is where I most need Evertune-like functionality (I have no idea why, it's just the one most likely to go out of tune on all my guitars), so losing that for half the set defeats the point.

I'm totally aware that it's unreasonable to expect a mechanical system to solve all these problems - my point is that, for my requirements, the innovation is insufficient to solve the problems inherent in my use cases. Since I'm pretty sure that I'm not the only one with these requirements, that could go some way to explaining why such innovations (which, let's face it, are pretty bloody clever) aren't more popular than they are.

Roland

stimpsonslostson said:

Are guitarists technophobic? 

The answer is always going to be “yes and no”. Some people are trying to recreate their youth, and are comfortable with “vintage correct”. Some players have “their sound”, and don’t want to move too far away from it. Some like to take advantage of new developments. Some like to try new ideas. 

Put me in on the latter group. I’m most interested in playability. In the 70s I was very keen to get rid of valve amps because they were hot, noisy, and prone to failure. My interest in multiFX was about ease of switching and minimising cable and battery failure. It’s taken 40 years, but those are now solved. Nowadays I’m interested in improving guitar designs. 

digitalscream said:

Robot tuners - make guitars headstock-heavy, and aren't reliable enough that you can just trust them without checking and adjusting.
Evertune - weight, fugly, and hard to retune in the middle of a set.

Rather than improvements in the guitar these tuning systems seem aimed at people who haven’t learned to set up and tune their instruments. Improved tuning would be things like higher ratio tuners.

earwighoney

This is something which seems to crop up now again.  

Some technology has been able to be improved upon (reinventing the wheel perspective) but there have been a lot of new technological advances which have been embraced eg clip on tuners, CNC, other tools (eg nut files), closed back tuners/high ratio tuners, modern fretwire (EVO Gold, SS etc), Digital FX and so on, isolated power supplies, coated strings, Phosphor Bronze strings (if you see 1974 to be modern!), geared pegs, roasted maple/spruce etc. 

I'd maybe some guitarists around have avoided some of the above, but I'd say the majority out there have taken advantages of some of the modern technological advancements. 

earwighoney

IMO, technology has come along a long way since this 



A Broadcaster from 1950, which is probably a superb guitar.  

BUT LOOK AT THE NUT!!!!  

IMO, modern files are a great thing. 

Winny_Pooh

If we cast our net out further and compare other instruments you could argue that the guitar in most present guises (remarkably diverse!) tuned EADGBE has reached a refined "natural state" rather like a violin or saxophone and any big changes turn it into a different instrument. 

For that reason, if still popular, most guitars in 2059 will still fall into these general camps:
Dreadnought, nylon classical, archtop, strat, tele, thinline, LP/PRS