phil_m wrote:

 

So much sanctimony and bravado have coalesced around this issue, it's really quite funny.

 

Everyone's ideas are great and should never be questioned! Does that make you feel better?

 

I didn't just fall off the guitar apple cart yesterday, you know. And I don't appreciate being talked down to like I'm a moron. I've engineered and produced albums before, and I've played with plenty of talented people on some decent size stages. I've been around the block a few times gearwise, and I've learned a few things about what works and what doesn't.

 

I listened to the samples, and frankly, I wasn't overly impressed with any of them. I try not to talk badly about other people's stuff, so that's why I hadn't commented before.

 

The whole idea I am reacting against is the one you originally put forth in this thread - that having a match EQ tool would enable people to "nail the sound" they are trying to emulate. That may or may not be true - it's probably the latter. It may help you get there, but there are a number of other tools that will help you get there as well. And where did I ever say that EQ was bad? I simply didn't. I don't even know if you know what you're really arguing for or against anymore.

Huh?  No, every idea should be questioned.  But all you're attempting to do is OT the thread and say "Look at me everyone!'.

You haven't actually posited any questions, only seeming random statements phrased as if they were actual legitimate counterarguments (what to is anyones guess).  In discourse we call this a strawman argument, anyone looking at them in the cold light of day would only say "meh" and "irrelevant".  Now you're attempting ad-hominem (also baseless unless you were only reading your own posts which do sound pretty sanctimonous) together with what's called a plea to authority which isn't very impressive.

The only relevent thing you've brought to this thread (after much pressing) is that you aren't impressed with the examples posted.  I get the feeling though you probably didn't listen to them till now as it's taken you this long to get on point.  The thing is that's the only interesting thing so far.  I mean I'd love to know exactly what you didn't like about them that's actually relevent to this thread and Match EQ, they sounded pretty much spot on in terms of tone to the originals played at the ends of the tracks for the most part, unless you're going to start admitting that Match EQ doesn't stop you sounding like yourself now.  It's no skin off my nose if you go to town on em, I had nothing to do with them.  This is an area I'd like to discuss and expand on in the thread (and I'm sure others would too), not the other halfbaked stuff.

Of course I do have access to a Match EQ though and I'd be happy to make more using any source and desination you care to offer and Logic's Match EQ if you want to hear what it does, what it's limitations are etc.

Lets go over your various statments/arguments and hopefully put this sideshow to bed:

1) My statement : Match EQ allows you to match an existing eq curve, it makes it easy for a coverband to nail that tone.  Your argument : Copying an existing tone is bad, you wont sound like yourself.

Not only is your argument not really relevant to the former but neither of your statements actually makes any sense, nor are they backed up by anything other than "I say it so it must be true".

First off, in the context of the original statement if you're in a cover band then sounding like someone else is kinda the point, i.e. fundamentally not bad but the actual goal of the exercise.  Secondly it's bloody hard not to sound like yourself no matter what you go through, let alone a subtle EQ effect.

It's like someone saying "So you need vanilla to make this vanilla ice cream." and you going "No!  Vanilla is bad, if you add vanilla it wont taste like cream anymore.".  Not only is it completely missing the point, it's just so flawed and incorrect there's no way to even begin to answer that, it's off the map in some completely different conversation.

Second applying a tone curve is no different to using the inbuilt speaker sim, and far less drastic than applying any one of the FX blocks which are all attempts at copying existing equipment.  I've never yet been accused of not sounding like myself no matter how many layers of FX I've added not even when emulating Robert Fripp.  Everyone sounds like themselves no matter how they play and what they play and even what they play through, your body is your own it has it's own breath, it's own rythm, it's own temprement.  I don't feel that I sound like John Williams when I play a classical guitar even though I've totally nailed his signal chain, I doubt you would either.  You hav to resort to likeminded hyperbole to even get into the ballpark with what you're claiming.

Third copying is not a bad thing.  Where on earth did you get the twisted idea that it was?

Copying is how evolution happens, more importantly it's how you learn.  New ideas and musical styles don't pop into existence out of nothing, they the evolution of existing ideas and sounds that people copy, for example You Really Got Me came from Ray trying to play Louie Louie.  It's how Hendrix learnt from Bach and Muddy Waters.  It's how music stays alive and relevant and doesn't go up it's own jacksie.  Music should inspire people to want to move their feet and want to pick up that guitar.  The motivation is always to sound like that cool thing you heard.  It's normal, it's natural, it keeps things fresh, it stops it from having to start all the way back at the beginning again with 'bang rock on other rock make sound good ug ug ug'.

So lets scale things down a little and look at copying an existing tone.  This is at heart what the Pod HD is there to do.  You can use it however you want but each effect, each amp is an attempt at copying something else.  Even the amps it copies are in fact copies of other amps, mostly the fender bassman circuit.  So far I've not seen many complaints on this forum of people fretting over how they no longer sound like themselves when using the Pod.

Lets play the game and make the assumption that you're right and no-one could in their right mind ever want to play covers - Why would someone still want to recreate the sound of another guitarists setup on an album?  It doesn't take the most creative person to come up with 'Because they like the sound and want to use it as a starting point for their own music'.  I've also stated a whole slew of other creative uses for a Match EQ in an earlier response to you (that you ignored), I don't think it needs to be repeated.

2) My statement : It's called Match EQ, Your argument : EQ is a crutch (i.e. bad) and broad EQ shouldn't be used, Match EQ is like a steak knife.

I really don't know where to begin with this one (post 13 in the thread).  It's like you attempted and failed to attack the "Match" part of the name, so now you attack the EQ part?  I'm really scratching my head at this luddite behavior.  I mean if you want to know or understand more about what it is then feel free to ask, but just coming out with random negative statements that aren't even relevant to the thread makes little to no sense to me.

Hey it's the internet, but jeez, please stop trying to derail, you can always make your own threads you know?

Match EQ wont make you sound like Clapton just like playing a classical guitar wont make you sound like John Williams even though you've totally nailed his signal chain  It's just a tool as others have explained.  It can help you nail a tone but it's gonna leave you as far away from nailing a style, riff or song as when you started.  It's also a useful creative tool, just like every other FX block on the Pod HD.  If you personally can't think of uses for it then instead of making obviously uninformed definitive statements that "it's not useful" try asking others for examples of how it could be useful.  That's a legitimate way to question or counter argue (if by that point you feel you know enough to have a valid informed oppinion).  Otherwise you'll just come across as ignorant.

If you need to know more about Match EQ, want to argue with me that it can/can't be done on the HD because X, that Match EQ sucks and Y would be better or even want to hear what it sounds like with different bits of music then there's plenty of room for that, be prepared for a counterargument though that you should also question your own ideas, I love a good disussion with plenty of intelligent back and forth and learning going.  But if you're just going to post barely relevent stuff, grabbing on to random phrases that pop out at you from the miasma in the hopes of showing the world you have an opinion then please, just go elsewhere, and lets get this thread back on track and topic.