[Harp-L] Re: Which harp mic is most feedback resistant? (Richard Hunter

[Greg Heumann <greg@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Richard - you're absolutely right. Sorry if I sounded snide.

/Greg


> I respect Greg enormously and am in fact a very satisfied  
> Blowsmeaway customer.  That said, Greg's comment about "People who  
> play through digital effects boxes to manufacture their tone for  
> them" makes me say whoa.
>
> Let's get something straight.  Digital effects boxes "manufacture"  
> tone exactly as much, or as little, as analog effects boxes or tube  
> amps.  They're all electronic devices.  Every one of them takes an  
> electronic input signal, does something to it, and pushes a modified  
> signal out. There's nothing inherently purer or less "maufactured"  
> about a tube amp where this is concerned.  A tube amp is as  
> electronic as a semiconductor; there's nothing "natural" about a  
> vacuum tube.  Neither tubes nor semiconductors grow in corn fields,  
> at least not the last time I looked.
>
> If you're using an electronic device of ANY kind, you're using it to  
> produce a sound that you couldn't produce otherwise. In that sense,  
> ANYONE using an electronic device is using it to "manufacture" a  
> different sound than they started with. Whether that simply means a  
> louder version of your acoustic harmonica tone, or something nearly  
> unrecognizable as a harmonica, or something in-between, is up to the  
> artist.  Chet Atkins doesn't sound much like Jimi Hendrix, but  
> they're both using very similar technology, and neither one of them  
> is producing a sound that's "natural."
>
> The fact is that artists have been using tube amps to produce  
> ("manufacture"?) new sounds since the 1930s.  Harp players have  
> learned the technology very well, to the point that we now have  
> purpose-built tube harp amps that reduce some of the problems (like  
> feedback) that resulted from using amps designed for electric  
> guitar.  Digital modeling technology is about a decade old, and  
> guitar and bass players are all over it, but harp players are behind  
> the adoption curve, as is apparently the tradition.  (Guitar players  
> began using tube amps in the 1930s, I believe; Little Walter began  
> his innovative experiments with tube amps in the late 1940s.)  We  
> don't yet have purpose-built digital modeling technology for harp  
> players--there's no device currently on the market that models the  
> behavior of a Sonny Jr, a Harp Gear, a Wezo, a Meteor, etc., etc.--  
> though the patch sets I build for Digitech devices, and the patches  
> other players have built for their Line 6 and Zoom devices, are a!
>  step in that direction. And the results are already very good--dare  
> I say it, better-sounding than a lot of the tube amps that harp  
> players currently carry to their gigs.
>
> At some point, the digital technology will be as familiar to harp  
> players as tube technology is now.  The stuff is too good, too  
> inexpensive, and too convenient for it to be otherwise.  In the  
> meantime, let's recognize that especially from the audience's point  
> of view, the technology used to make the sound is a lot less  
> important than the nature of the sound, and NONE of it is "natural."  
> What the digital gear provides is lots, and lots, of great sounds  
> for a very small investment compared to older generations of  
> technology.
>
> In the meantime, let's stop pretending that one form of electronica  
> is more "natural" or less "manufactured" than another.  If you  
> prefer certain sounds to others, great!  That's what it means to be  
> an artist--you make choices and you put them in front of an  
> audience.  But it has nothing to do with what's manufactured and  
> what's not.
>
> I have no doubt that tube amps will remain staple tools of all sorts  
> of musicians until we run out of electricity.  I certainly love  
> mine.  I also have no doubt that modeling technology will  
> increasingly be a staple for harmonica players--as it already is for  
> guitarists, bassists, and vocalists at all levels of artistry and  
> industry success. I spent the weekend tweaking my Digitech RP350  
> side by side with my Ron Holmes-modified Crate VC508, the latter  
> being a terrific little beast of a 5 watt tube amp.  There's no  
> doubt that the RP350 through my Peavey keyboard amp sounds different  
> from the Crate--among other things, the Peavey has a 15" speaker  
> that puts out a lot more bass then the 8" Weber in the Crate--but  
> there's also no doubt in my mind that very few listeners, maybe  
> none, would be able to tell in most cases that the RP350 was not a  
> "real" amp.  I will illustrate this point with a Youtube video that  
> puts the two systems side by side within the next two weeks. Stay  
> tune!
> d.
>
> Regards, Richard Hunter