Hi-Fi Lessons (2): Useful Numbers

You will wind up learning a bunch of numbers by heart:

The sensitivity of your speakers in dB / m at 1 watt 

The diameter of your speakers' woofer and tweeter 

Twice the power = 3dB volume increase 

10 times the power = 10dB increase = "twice as loud"

30dB = what you think is silence - but actually isn't 

40dB = when no-one is talking on a new train 

50dB = it's not quite loud enough 

60-70dB = about the loudness of a normal voice. Or my acoustic guitar. 

80dB = the volume audio reviewers say they listen at - until their partners yell "TURN THAT DOWN" 95dB = the volume of the taped announcements on London Underground trains

343 m/s = speed of sound (roughly) at sea level 

Frequency = 343 / wavelength in metres; wavelength in metres = 343 / frequency;

27.5 Hz = frequency of lowest note on the piano, and known to music (outside stunt instruments) 

41 Hz = lowest note on double bass 

261 Hz = middle C - literally the middle of the piano keyboard, and the note between the treble and bass clefs in the Grand Clef 

440 Hz = note the oboe plays for everyone else to tune to, otherwise known as "A440" 

4,186 Hz = frequency of highest note on the piano, and known to music (outside stunt instruments)

Hi-Fi Lessons (1)

My hi-fi journey began when I realised that some music seemed to be coming from a corner on the upper right hand wall rather than from between the speakers. if you try to solve the same problem, here are some of the things you will do or realise...

You will measure every distance in your room when you start working on speaker positioning and room acoustics.

The stereo soundstage is real. It is, however, fragile. You really do have to be in the right place, and not move around a lot.

For a given room, there's only one right place for the speakers to be, and you have to keep moving them around until you find it.

You will re-arrange the furniture in your room (I'm assuming you live alone or have a Room Of Your Own) so you can set up the Magic Triangle with your speakers and listening position.

You will download a dB meter app.

Having the speakers in phase is real. In phase, the sound comes from between the speakers. Out of phase, there's nothing in the middle, and the sound comes from between each speaker and the nearest wall.

You have a dominant ear.

Sub-woofers improve the sound of classical recordings.

Room reflections are a real thing, which is why the Magic Triangle is a thing.

Of course the people marketing expensive room treatment panels and insulation are going to say that "soft furniture and carpets are not good enough".

Acoustics as an engineering practice does not apply to "small rooms", which, unless you live in a mansion, yours will be.

As for that stuff about wires... comes from telecommunications, which uses frequencies several orders of magnitude higher than hi-fi, when stuff like insulation capacitance matters. At hi-fi frequencies the effects are undetectable.

If you think that worrying about noise from computers via the USB is silly, plug a laptop into your Boss Katana via the USB control, and turn the channel from "Clean" to "Crunch" or even "Brown". Convinced? I was. The same goes for the Scarlett 2i2 interface.

Timeless Albums

What makes a "Timeless" album? When you play it, you enjoy it, it speaks to you, and there's no nostalgia involved. It seems it could have been made today. The rules are: one album per artist, except Bob Dylan, Miles Davis and John Coltrane, because respect for the Greats. John Mayall is there twice because The Beano Album is there for Eric Clapton. Picking a timeless Beatles album is arbitrary, as is picking one by Joni Mitchell, The Rolling Stones, John Martin, Van Morrison, and probably others.

I wavered over Cream / Traffic / Eric Clapton. The Bind Faith album is an All-Time Favourite, but it is of its time, as are the Cream albums. The Beano Album is the Blues, so it's Timeless. There are many fine albums from the 80's, but many of them sound like 80's albums, and while that puts them on the All-Time Favs list, it disqualifies them from the Timeless list. Except the Loose Ends and Level 42 albums, which get by somehow. I had The Crusaders' Chain Reaction on the list for a while, until I accepted that, ATF it may be, it has that 70's sound to it. Saraya's self-titled first album was there, until, let's face it, for all it's an ATF, it's as big-hair 90's as a band can get. Thriller is a Classic, but it is of the time. Some Classics are Timeless, and some are not.

I get that a Gen Z hearing ABC's The Lexicon of Love might be blown away by it, and hear it as a contemporary album, in the same way that we now hear the Beatles as the best indie band in the world, but this is about how I hear it.

Kinda by definition of what the list is, the majority are going to be from decades very past. I have Park Hye Jin, Charli XCX, Keep Shelly In Athens, and DJ Seinfeld from the last two decades, just to convince you that I am listening to new stuff. Just be thankful I haven't put Jason Aldean's Highway Desparado on the list.

Anyway, here's the list...

Abandoned Luncheonette - Hall & Oates 70's 

After Bathing At Baxters - Jefferson Airplane 60's 

Astral Weeks - Van Morrison 60's 

Band of Gypsies - Jimi Hendrix 70's 

Bare Wires - John Mayall 60's 

Bedrock - John Digweed 90's 

Before I Die - Park Hye Jin 10's 

Bless The Weather - John Martyn 70's 

Blood On The Tracks - Bob Dylan 70's 

Greatest Hits Vol 2 - Bob Dylan 60's 

Blues Breakers (Beano Album) - John Mayall 60's 

Broken Social Scene - Broken Social Scene 90's 

Blue - Joni Mitchell 70's 

Can't Buy A Thrill - Steely Dan 70's 

Crash - Charlie XCX 20's

Dark Side of the Moon - Pink Floyd 70's 

Everybody Knows This Is Nowhere - Neil Young 70's

Genie - The B. B. & Q. Band 80's 

Getz Giberto - Stan Getz 60's 

Goats Head Soup - The Rolling Stones 70's 

Hot Rats - Frank Zappa 70's 

In A Silent Way - Miles Davis 60's 

In Love With Dusk - Keep Shelly In Athens 10's 

Kind of Blue - Miles Davis 50's 

King of the Delta Blues - Robert Johnson 40's 

Level 42 - Level 42 80's 

Live at the Village Vanguard - John Coltrane 60's 

Mirrors (Remixed) - DJ Sienfeld 20's 

Rubber Soul - The Beatles 60's 

Solid Air - John Martyn 70's 

Second Toughest In the Infants - Underworld 90's 

So Where Are You? - Loose Ends 80's 

St Dominics Preview - Van Morrison 70's 

Texas Flood - Stevie Ray Vaughn 80's 

Timeless - Goldie 90's 

Zodiac Variations - John Dankworth 60's

JD Vance to Europe: You Have Been Served

My old heart fluttered when I read JD Vance's speech to the Munich Security Conference. You can find a transcript here.

tl:dr

As far as Vance is concerned, there are three major threats facing the West:

1) Mass immigration 

2) The creeping loss of freedom in the UK and Europe, where an unaccountable administrative class with a contempt for ordinary people, has acquired legislative power and is using it to enforce what look like Soviet-era restrictions on freedoms 

3) Oh, yes, that whole Russia-Ukraine thing. And maybe China as well. And spending proper money on defence.

The USA will ally with and defend countries that share its values, and right now it's not looking much like the UK and EU are respecting those values. So should UK and EU-area politicians carry on enforcing Soviet-era censorship and treating the electorate as fodder for their projects, the USA will walk away from defending it.

Which seems like a perfectly sensible position to me.

Learning Electric Guitar: Let's Talk About Ability

Playing classical music, the difference between me (or better, someone who can actually play with their right-hand fingers) and the latest crop of graduates from the music schools, who go on to record a CD of guitar music by composers who were once named only in the lesser-read pages of Groves, is one of degree: they can read music better, interpret better, play the notes with more confidence and accuracy, their technique is smoother. (The same might be said of the latest crop of Berklee graduates as well.) I know what to do to get to where they are, even if I don't have the energy to do it.

That attitude, when carried into rock or even jazz, is mis-directing. It means a focus on technique, and specifically fingerboard virtuosity. Berklee has convinced everyone that jazz is about music theory and the fingerboard technique to apply that theory.

But rock, folk, soul, funk, dance, ambient, post-rock, country, and many other generes, are not about technique. They are about music first. The technique enables the music, but does not direct it. There are some consummate professionals in country and jazz, but they aren't there because they can shred.

They are there because they can do what's needed, and contribute when it's needed.

The difference between me and Tim Pierce, Steve Lukather, Larry Carlton, Chris Spedding, and Steve Cropper... and that's a silly way to even start a sentence. It's not that they play better than I do. I could learn all the scales and chords and music theory and it still would not begin to close the gap. They have better ears and can hear what the chords are and what they need to play over those changes. They can compose breaks, riffs, solos, and in some cases, songs that got to the top of the charts. They understand and can play within the conventions of genres from blues and funk to rock and country. They can hear a solo or a song a couple of times and play it back. They can hear the effects another guitarist is using, and work out how to get those effects. It's the whole package; they are simply much better musicians and much more complete craftsmen.

While I was playing my trusty old acoustic, I never thought about all that. Taking up electric made me aware of it. I don't mind not having the chops, but finding out there was so much else I didn't even know about, and have subsequently turned out not to be so good at, has been... if I'm honest... disheartening.

Learning Electric Guitar: So Now Let's Make Some Music

The classical guys are trained to play the notes other people wrote. That's how classical music works now - though in the past, the composers were also often virtuoso performers (nobody ever shredded better than J S Bach) and the instrumentalists fill in chords and bass lines from the barest notation, while the singers were given a tune and expected to improvise around it. Mmmmm. Sounds familiar.

Contemporary classical is not how rock and jazz work.

If you learn and play the Rikki solo, you're either in a tribute band (when the closer to The Skunk the better) or you're not, in which case, you're just imitating The Skunk, and it's lame.

   

Putting something that recognisable, and that good, in the middle of an otherwise competent but not inspiring song would distract from the song. Nobody would remember anything else. Oh, yeah, that's the song where they use the Rikki solo. The song needs its own solo, as generic as it may be, and people will say "nice guitar". That's what the guitarist is hired to provide.

This is partly about the law. In rock and jazz, the Rikki solo and its like are protected by copyright - that can be worth the cost of enforcing. In classical, either the copyright has run out, or the fees are cheap, or it's not worth the cost of enforcement. Which is why all those string quartets can play Bartok and Beethoven quartets without bankrupting themselves, and why it is worth the musician's time learning to interpret them, and learning to read music in the first place. (Something similar applies to jazz, when it is treated as a classical form.) Rock musicians often don't read because they are not in the business of reproducing other people's music faithfully and interestingly.

Professional guitar-playing is about being able to learn a piece of music quickly; adapting your tone to the needs of the band / song / studio; and composing or improvising solos, breaks and backing phrases as needed. (Also showing up on time and ready to go, behaving well and getting along with everyone - but that's pretty much standard operating procedure in any job.) The fundamental skill in rock guitar, even more than jazz, is the ability to make music. Even a four-note phrase between the lines of the verse. (Especially that, now I think of it.)

The technique and music theory is an enabler for that. You can know a zillion scales and chord extensions, but if you don't have the taste to apply them when needed, you may as well stick to the basics. The distance between learning the technical stuff, and actually playing, is huge. It's about one's ability to hear what is going on, and play something that fits in with it.

Noodling ("improvising or playing casually on a musical instrument") is primarily therapeutic. How many people sit through a slow movie with an acoustic in their lap, playing scales, riffing chords and phrases, to fill out the time between plot points? Electric guitars open up the possibility of noodling with tone as well. One can noodle one's way into learning the Turkish Diminished Locrain scale, or into getting the cowboy chords at the tenth fret. It keeps the hands in and the fingertips hard. One can spend an hour comparing Santana's tone on the CD with what's coming out of the DAW or the digital pedalboard. One can noodle with aplomb, and one can noodle so badly that one disappoints oneself. (Sighs. Puts down guitar. "Time to do the washing-up".)

Learning Electric Guitar: Welcome to Tone.

Classical players do not have to deal with tone. Almost all acoustic guitars of the same size with the same strings sound almost the same. Pluck or pick near the bridge, and all of them sound snappier and twangier. Pick near the bottom of the fretboard, and all of them sound rounder and smoother. (This also applies to electric guitars, because it's physics.) It takes about ten minutes to appreciate the range of tones available from an acoustic, and another ten to convince yourself that, yes, resting your hand on the soundboard does take a little off the treble frequencies.

Start by trying each type of string, from flat-wound to pro-steels, to get an idea of what each one sounds like. I would stick to one string maker to keep the variables down. And try 9, 10, and 11 gauge. (Yes, it makes a difference. 9's feel thin against the fingers and a way easier to bend.) Play DR Blues 9's or 10's and you may never buy another brand again. 

 
I understand that kids these days do not buy amplifiers. They buy an interface (say a Focusrite Scarlett 2i2), plug it into their Macbook, make all the modifications in Garageband or some other DAW, and listen over a £69 pair of headphones via the interface loopback. This is one way to do it, and I understand that this is now taught in primary schools, or is just intuitively obvious to anyone under fifteen. The weakness in this method is headphone quality. If you do go this route, get decent headphones, say, Sennheiser HD560S or better. You ears will thank you.

Amps. Valve vs solid state vs modellers, Fenders vs Marshalls vs Vox vs Roland JC's vs Boss Katanas vs the list is endless. 

(Fender Blues Junior)

You Tube demos and reviews are a reasonable starting-point. YT audio is heavily-processed and that's before your laptop or phone soundcard gets at it. If an amp sounds bad on YT, it most likely will sound bad in your room. You should try them out in a store, but only if the resident shredder is being quiet.

The amps in You Tube demos are always cranked. Those lovely crunchy rock tones can only be obtained at 85 dB and more - just look at the dB meters in the background of Andertons videos - and with a valve amp. Half the time, there are pedals as well, but those might not get mentioned. Below that, you will only ever get a clean tone, with maybe a pinch of distortion from an effects pedal. It will sound different, but it won't sound... glorious. If you're playing jazz or blues, it's fine. But if you want that big stadium-rock / metal sound... you will need to record into a DAW, apply the effects there, and listen over headphones. Learning to use a DAW well does not happen in an afternoon. Or sound-proof your room.

Well-meaning people will suggest a Katana. 

It is excellent value for money, it has a pre-amp volume, a Master volume and an attenuator / power control, so it provides lots of bites at the volume control cherry. It has decent effects - many based on BOSS's own pedals, so they should know - built in, and control software that lays everything out really well. The only thing you need to know is how to EQ it so it provides a reasonable approximation to a "real" amp. 

The majority of recorded guitar sounds you have heard have been played through Fender amps, with Marshalls and Vox's a distant second and third. Fender amps are bright, light, clean, and like a sunny day on the beach. Marshalls are darker, heftier, distort more readily, and are like a funfair at night. Fenders are an easier place to start. To get close to that sound with a Katana (I don't know about the other modelling amps) takes implausibly extreme EQ settings. (See this post for details.) However, the base level valve amps (a Fender Blues Junior or a Fender Vibro Champ) are at least twice as much as a Katana or other modelling amp. 

Guitar amps are loud. For the same wattage, nearly twice as loud as a pair of hi-fi speakers. 1 watt through a 12-inch Celestion speaker 

will produce between 95-100dB, which is well into Health and Safety territory. 1 watt. You don't need 2, let alone 100. Watts are used as a proxy for build and component quality: within the same manufacturer and range, mo' watts generally means mo' quality. A Fender Blues Junior provides 15 watts, and the Vibro Champ provides 5 watts. That means the Blues Junior is about 5dB (i.e. not a lot) louder at full power than the Vibro Champ. All the volume is in the first watt. 

Having chosen your amp (on the basis of reviews, what your mates said, budget, volume, weight, and looks, as well as how it sounded in the store) you need to get a sound you like from it. This will not be done in an hour. You need to hear how the the sound varies with how high or low you have the guitar turned up, what effect the tone knobs have, and what effect the amp EQ controls have. Hearing the all-important difference between gain and volume, and finding out when to use gain (as little as possible).

Later on you can buy a digital multi-effects pedal, such as the Helix HX Effects, 

to start experimenting with effects. Compression, distortion, drive and fuzz; chorus, flanger, tremolo, phaser, and weird stuff like ring modulators. Reverb and delay. Those rabbit-holes go deep. Or if you never want a pension, you can buy separate pedals.

Now watch a video that explains how the guitar sound you hear on your favourite track is not actually what you think it is. What goes on in the mixing desk, and the mastering process, can make more difference than anything you're doing with your pedals. What it takes to sound good in your bedroom rehearsal space on your own, is not what it takes to sound good when playing live, and when in the studio.

It's all good nerdy fun. But it's a much bigger workload than guitarists had back in the 1960's. No-one tried to sound like anyone else, and there were almost no pedals. Now it's not enough to learn someone else's notes, you also have to get a good approximation of their tone. Effects were made in the studio by huge bits of equipment that cost as much as a house did back then. Now every guitar player needs to be their own sound engineer - until they get into the studio, if they ever do.