Robben Ford Discussion

[Daved]

OK, let me bring up a topic for discussion amongst you gearheads. Something I have wondered about for some time now...

In all my years of working with many a variety of guitarists, and listening to a gazillion different players on vinyl and CD, Robben is the first of which I have worked with, that if you were to sum up the importance of his guitar sound amongst the fans in one word, seems to me would be... TONE.

Everybody wants his "perfect" TONE. All the ampbuilders want to duplicate the Dumble amps perfect TONE. The TONE is "in his fingers." This player has incredibly wonderful TONE. That amplifier's TONE totally sucks!

"I can't stand to listen to this player because his TONE sucks so bad!"
"That player's TONE was as near to perfect as you can get!"

And on, and on, and on, and on....

So, here's my question:
Just what exactly define's perfect tone and why does that seem to be the most important element in defining a great player?

I mean, I, PERSONALLY, think some of the most fantastic sounding quitar ever done was by player's with gear that would make most of you apparently, as far as I can tell, puke blood!

For example, there is MUCH music Robben absolutely will NOT listen to because he finds the quitar sound and playing "painful" or "unlistenable" when I find it exhilerating, definitive, imaginative, exciting, and original... "perfect" for it's application.
Is THAT what defines "perfection"... it's application to any particular genre of music? Can't be. Robben's tone is as far from Bloomfield's as it is from B.B. King's as it is from Gatemouth Brown's, etc., etc. And, as far as I am concerned they are ALL "perfect" tones. So why is Robben's MORE perfect than the others? And if his is perfect for blues, then it must also be perfect for jazz, and rock, and pop, and all the other styles he plays. But that would then again mean that his guitar tone is the only perfect tone for all music.

As far as I can tell, what seems to me to be generally defined as "the perfect tone" actually lends itself towards the mundane, or downright boring.

If the perfect tone is, the perfect waveform so to speak, then where are the defining characteristics of individuality and creativity?
Why it's in the way the performer works that perfect tone, you might say.
But, if the perfect color were TAN, there is only so many ways that ANYONE can paint canvasses of tan and keep it interesting or distinctive.
You don't HAVE to like blues and reds and yellows, but that doesn't make them any less valuable or "Perfect" or necessary. If nothing else, they enhance, increase, and clarify the importance and/or interest of the primary TAN, making them all perfect in their place.
You know, there was a time when BLUE was considered an inferior color and it's use in painting was frowned upon until Rembrandt said "F*** that!" and painted his "Blue Boy" masterpeice, setting the artworld on end and opening up whole new vistas of expression for future artists.

Wouldn't only one "perfect" in a broad sense actually tend to be more genericly acceptable, with fewer overtones of individuality, or offense, or distinction? And how can you have more than one "perfect"?

It actually makes me sad that Robben and so many others wall and box themselves off from other ideas and tools because they don't find them "perfect" in their scheme of things. If something is "perfect" than all else is inferior.

It also tends to start limiting the audience because little is provided for other tastes. An element of adventure can possibly seem to be lacking when the same "perfection" is used over and over.

There is a Steely Dan album that I absolutely HATE because, in my 20 plus years in this business, it is consistently used ALL the time, by virtually EVERY front-of-house sound person in the business to 'tune' the sound system. Why? They tell me because it is the most "perfect" recording of sound ever done. I find that hard to believe that it has never in the last almost 4 decades been at least matched, if not surpassed. AND, it lost all excitement and originality and interest for me many, many, many years ago.

Again personally, I find some of the most enjoyable guitar work thruought the years are, to me, some of the rawest, subversive, imaginative, exotic, and/or extreme quitar/amp tones that the creative mind can come up with.

Webster's defines "tone", when applied generally to music as:
"1 : vocal or musical sound of a specific quality; especially : musical sound with respect to timbre and manner of expression"

So what define's "Perfect" tone over any other tone? What makes any one guitar tone better than any other?

Where or when does perfect tone quit being subjective (Websters again: "Subjective - (1) a: peculiar to a particular individual b: Personal (2) a: modified or affected by personal views, experience, or background b : arising from conditions within the brain or sense organs and not directly caused by external stimuli c: arising out of or identified by means of one's perception of one's own states and processes"), determained by the ear of the beholder, and become clearly defined such as to say "I am trying to attain the perfect tone" and every other guitar player knows exactly what tone you are speaking of?

Don't get me wrong, Robben's "sound" is wonderful and I love his licks & chops, but to me there are other "tones" that I find more far more exciting, original, distinctive, and memorably "PERFECT".

So, isn't "perfect tone" PURELY subjective, different for each and every performer and listener? If so, then how can any ONE tone be the perfect one?

Just some thoughts I ponder and peruse upon occasion.
Comments...?
_________________
B C-ing U!
( }:-Daved
"This boy's diseased with rhythm!" -Bing Crosby (Road To Rio, '49)

[Red Suede]

What you say is true Daved. It's just that this is the Robben Ford Discussion Group. There are many others that I like and hate also, so things are taken in the context of this group. I love the Ramones, Kings X, Neil Young, etc, but I presume it's not discussed here because no one asks about other players per se.

[Daved]

I know, Red,

But, that's what I want to understand. Nobody ever seems to go on & on about the guitar TONEs of those others and how perfect those tones are and how impossibly hard it is to duplicate the perfection of those tones, even in discussion elsewhere (the "sound" yes... but the "tones", no).

I've dealt with and understood the "sound" of an artists and/or their gear since I first took an interest in music. But, it's only since I've come into Robben's world that I see this obsession with "tone" as if it were a whole different element that can make or break by qualifying the "sound" of an artist or a piece of gear.

I often hear "I don't listen to that band/artist because I don't like their sound", but I rarely hear "I don't listen to that band/artist because I don't like their tone".

Someone might say "Hey, Brian May's Vox is a great sounding amp", but someone else might counter that with "Yes, it is, but Robben's Dumble has perfect tone".

Why is Robben's tone so much more perfect than theirs, to the point that PERFECT TONE seems to be pretty much the most common definition of his sound.

Why do people love the sound of the Ramone's and Neil Young, but gravitate towards Robben because of his perfect tones? What about his Tone defines PERFECT making those others inferior? Why is his perfect and their's are not?

What exactly is PERFECT TONE such as Robben and a handful of others can get it, but no one else can, making those others "unlistenable" or "painful"?

Who else has "perfect tone"? Larry Carlton? The Grateful Dead? Korn? David Gilmore? Tony McPhee? John Cippolina? Ted Nugent? Santana? The Ventures? The Cars? Paul Simon? Led Zepplin? Jimi Hendrix? Les Paul? John Mayer? Nirvana? Black Sabbath?
If they all do, then what is the common 'perfect' factor? If any ONE of them has "perfect tone", then why do the others not? If none of them do, then why are they 'imperfect' tones? They are all very different and few, if any, are marvelled over their 'Perfect tone". Their "sounds", yes... but their "Tone"... no.

Why is any one "sound" a better or more perfect "tone" than another?

What defines "Tone"... and beyond that... "perfect tone"?
Is the word "Tone" merely another word for "Sound"? And if so, why is it used almost exclusively with artists like Robben? ("I want Robben's tone" versus "The guy sounds like Jimi Hendrix"?).

Carlos Santana LOVED the sound of Mesa-Boogie for decades, but when he heard Robben's Dumble he personally told me, quote: "Now I know where he gets that incredible tone!", and ran right out and bought himself 2 of them.

Fender and Marshall and Vox and many others are not tauted for their incredible "TONE!"... their "sound", yes... but not their "TONE!"... yet Dumble and Two-Rock and others are. Why? What is so perfect about their tone that makes them a superior tone-amp over Silvertone or Pignose or Peavey (Which CAN be great "sound"-ing amps in the proper application)? Many artists DON'T like the Dumbles... does that mean, then, that they DON'T have perfect tone? Or is it that they DO have perfect TONE, but a lot of artists just don't like their SOUND. Or, maybe the artists DO like their sound, but don't want perfect tone?!?! I'm sooo confused!

What exactly does this mean... "There are a lot of great sounding players, but none of them have Robben's perfect TONE."
Or this... "There are a lot of great sounding amps but none of them match the Dumble's perfect TONE."

Why is the word "tone" used to describe, and praise, Robben and Dumble, and why is the word "sound" used to describe, and praise, the Beatles and Vox?

Maybe I'm just not clear on the difference between the "sound" of an amp or guitar or player... and the TONE of a guitar and amp or player, which seem to be addressed as two separate things.
_________________
B C-ing U!
( }:-Daved
"This boy's diseased with rhythm!" -Bing Crosby (Road To Rio, '49)

[FatTeleTom]

I can't speak for others, but I certainly don't believe there is one, true, perfect guitar tone. I enjoy lots of different guitar styles and tones, and some tones are "perfect" for certain settings, but wouldn't work in other settings.

That being said, I do think there are a handful of guitar tones that are particularly powerful, moving, and just plain pleasing to my ear--Robben's and Brian May's probably being my two favorites.

There really is something about the classic Robben and Brian tones--a fluid, harmonic richness maybe? I don't know--too hard to describe. But there is 'something' there.

And I don't think it's accidental. I suspect that Brian and Robben have both worked very hard to achieve tones they hear in their heads, and have found ways to marry their personal styles with the right equipment to achieve spectacular results--ways to say what they want to say, they way they want to say it. It is an integral part of their personal artistry.

And yeah, it does seem like guitar folks get a little "tone obsessive" sometimes--and probably Robben fans are more guilty of that on average.

But I think most of us appreciate the player and the music above all--the "tone" issue being icing on the cake. At least that's the way it is for me.

Oh, and it's not unique to guitarists either--consider "Strad" mania in the violin world!

[Daved]

That explanation certainly makes sense. And lends itself towards the meaning of tone in the same way I have come to see it.

So, in other words, TONE is purely subjective, determined by the listener and therefore there is no such thing as PERFECT TONE by definition, except when viewed as such by the listeners ear in each and every separate instance.

Just another way of saying "I like that sound". So the person trying to acheive "Perfect Tone" is kind of chasing a personal sonic mirage which moves from song to song, application to application, emotion to emotion. Right?

What is "perfect tone" in one song or on one album, is not necessarily perfect tone in the next? And, it would follow, what is perfect tone for one listener is not necessarily "perfect Tone" for the next?

Great point on the Strad reference, BTW.
_________________
B C-ing U!
( }:-Daved
"This boy's diseased with rhythm!" -Bing Crosby (Road To Rio, '49)

[Daved]

[davidS]

I think of sound as being tied to a certain instrument. For example; a Les Paul has a certain sound, Strats have their sound. Amps the same. I kind of know what to expect if I see a Marshall amp v. a Fender. On the other hand, I feel that tone is the combination of the particular guitar, amp, and most importantly, the player. Robben will sound like Robben whether he is playing his Dumble, Deluxe, Les Paul, or Tele. But his tone will vary slightly based on the gear.

Whether I like someone's tone or not is based on the tone that I hold as the "perfect tone." I think each person has a tone in their mind that is just "it" for them. For me personally, Clapton's Cream live Crossroads is the sonic DNA that is forever burned into my soul. That is my Holy Grail.

While I enjoy many different tones, there are certain styles that I just can't listen to even if their tone is "right" for that particular style, ie Metal.

Robben's tone to me can go from the sweetest clean to the fattest, vocal, and distorted tone while still retaining clarity. This to me is a Dumble amp signature. Since I will most likely never have the luxury of owning a Dumble I do my best to approximate Robben's tone with my Fuchs or Deluxe/Zendrive combo. But, the one missing ingredient to this formula is Robben's touch which I will never be able to duplicate because he is he and I am me.

[Richard Harris]

Davids, I think you nailed the lid on this discussion. Right on!!!

Richard

[Sweet_emotion16]

if i were to define the perfect tone for a lead guitarist its whatever suits his certain style... not just that but also something that has a slightly different sound from everything else.. to ..

i think robben has perfect tone .. i think SRV has perfect tone.. im much more partial to claptons bluesbreaker tones then his currant ones .. i think as sloppy as hendrix's sound was i think he had perfect tone.. because without that sound he wouldn't be what he was.. it defines him..

speaking from my opinion, tone for a guitarist is just as important as your playing style.. you use it to reflect that certain style and your personality...
_________________
www.myspace.com/gregory49

[gdolim]

I really want to jump in here but I'm not sure I have the answer to the question being asked - TONE vs. SOUND. Part of the answer is "Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder."

Having said that and without harping on the obvious, there are a number of variables which go into producing a guitar player's sound. There's the player, the amp, the speakers, the guitar, and to a lesser extent, even the strings on the guitar.

Now, there are good guitars and exceptional guitars, with every bit of grey inbetween. Same with amps and players. BUT, I think something unique and special happens when you mate an exceptional guitar with an exceptional amp with an exceptional player. Maybe that something special can be described as "tone". I don't know nor am I claiming I do.

Maybe the quality of the sound being produced can be described as tone, but again I think this is subjective.

I've experienced exceptional guitars and amps when mated together first hand and was blown away with the quality of the sound! I don't claim to be an exceptional player or even a good player. Robben is an exceptional player, though, and look at what happens when he is mated with exceptional guitars and amps!!

Yes, it is subjective. Not quite as obvious is what happens when exceptional players are mated with exceptional gear, but it can be stunning!

Peace.

[FatTeleTom]

[Red Suede]

The only thing about this is Robben has a bunch of different tones that he's gotten over the years. My friend John prefers the Yellowjackets with the Yamaha transistor amps and the 335, my friend Mike likes the Super 400- Bassman(?) years. Both these guys know tone, like most of Robbens through the years, but like anyone they have their personal favorites. I had the privledge of helping Robben pick out a Les Paul a couple of years ago and I asked him what he used on "The Worksong" solo and he had this puzzled look on his face, and said,"you really like that"? Turns out he used Garth Weber's Blackface Super, yellow Roland overdrive pedal, and the yellow spruce top Fender that he gave Garth some years ago. That's one of my personal favorite tones. A big part of Robben for me is his note selection, and then the tones he gets, because the tones are in our heads, and we will invariably try to get them with whatever the equipment is at our disposal.

[JohnnyZ]

Daved wrote:
Carlos Santana LOVED the sound of Mesa-Boogie for decades, but when he heard Robben's Dumble he personally told me, quote: "Now I know where he gets that incredible tone!", and ran right out and bought himself 2 of them.

Just curious, did Carlos feel that his tone improved after buying the Dumbles? Was he happy with his purchase? Does he still use his Dumble(s)?

[Leftbender]

I think the perfect tone does'nt exist in the way it is mentioned in this topic. Specially for guitar, which is a very expressive insturment. I agree that tone is a combination of person + gear. A novice, given very expensive and professional gear will make sound. A good player given crap stuff is able to make tone. This means, to me, that tone is a result of experience and expression. To be able to use this experience and expression you need sound. Your sound. To be able to find your sound you need gear. So making tone is not easy and perhaps unreachable for many. I believe there is something like "good tone". But this is not a constant factor and has no boundaries. Sinatra had good tone. Coltrane and Miles had good tone. But not always. Good tone can be a very pleasent experience, but is momenterally. It fits the moment within the music it belongs to. Those who make good tone often, are the best. They reach the heart. The perfect tone would be the perfect experience, and there fore unlikely.
_________________
"Don't play what's there, play what's not there" Miles Davis

[BlueRunner]

But FatTeleTom, "Princess Bride" IS the best movie ever made! Well OK, it's a two-way tie with "Casablanca."

I used to have a line I'd throw back at folks who got all tech-oriented with how amps produced their sounds. I'd say, "Yeah ... well I have just three words for ya'. 'Hound Dog Taylor.'" Then at a pre-show dinner with a member of this BBS who sells and services some highly-prized botique amps, he replied, "But BlueRunner, do you have any idea how much work it takes to design and build a new amp that sounds like a 45-year old Fender Twin that's fallen out of the back of a pick-up truck on the back roads of Louisiana 100's of times?"

Yes, tone is an equipment thing. But it's also an attack thing (i.e., what you do with your fingers on the strings), and a guitar thing (i.e., Tele v. LP), and something even more. A bunch of you have hit the nail on the head with the concept of hearing a sound in your head (or heart), and then assembling the right combination of pickups, speakers, effects pedals, tubes, capacitors, etc., to be able to put in through the listener's ear and into his or her head (or heart).

Perhaps another answer to Daved's unanswerable query is that the best "tone" is produced by artists who truly and deeply care about just what the audience is hearing. Or to put it another way, lesser artists just play (or sing) the notes. The best artists play inside the folks who are listening.
_________________
- BlueRunner