FX Pedals or a lack of them

[Twisteramps]

Re: less IS more.

I use a delay for some solos (tapped tempo, dotted eight note single repeats mixed about 33%) and flange/chorus where the cover song needs it. I also like chorus on my cleans. I do it at the amp because I don't really use monitors onstage, and I like to hear the effects at the source.

I would let a soundguy do it, but we have around 100 songs in our list and sometimes change the set on the fly according to how well it's being received by the crowd. It would take a soundman quite awhile to get all the cues and such down, and we make little enough as it is without giving a soundguy a cut too.

Pete

[Boxcar Willie 84]

Re: less IS more.

I don't have a ton of pedals but I use effects all the time. It's just how I play, and it fits the songs we write. I don't think it sounds bad live and no one has ever complained. I have too much going on with my sound to rely on the soundguy when I use effects, so pedals it is.

[Fragle]

Re: less IS more.

here's some more real life input: basically 90% of the shows i've seen at least one of the bands had an fx freak on guitar. this includes bands such as dream theater who tend to have a great live sound. having that said, basically the only fx i was able to hear were wahwah, and some kind of pitch shifter (steve smyth used one for "bittersweet feast", nevermore). all the other fx e.g. chorus tend to get LOST. period. they can sound great on the record, but as far as i'm concerned they muddy up the live mix. the only (!) time i was able to hear all kinds of fx was when i saw mercenary opening for nevermore (one of the guitar guys had a rack consisting of a triaxis, 2:90, as well as a g major and some more stuff), but that was only because i was right in front of him and his cab, AND because he was super loud so i could hear his backline sound.

/rant [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[lerxstcat]

Re: less IS more.

If you don't like using effects, fine. If you do, also fine. Using them tastefully is really like playing an additional instrument.

There IS no wrong or right, but I will say that I've seen lots of bands whose use of effects was very prominent and noticeable in a live setting. Rush comes to mind as one who
uses them well and you can definitely hear them crystal clear in concert.

[toejam]

Re: less IS more.

[ QUOTE ]
and some kind of pitch shifter (steve smyth used one for "bittersweet feast", nevermore).

[/ QUOTE ]
That would be a Whammy pedal. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[toejam]

Re: FX Pedals or a lack of them

[ QUOTE ]
I've gone through having tons of pedals, having no pedals, using the latest processor, and back again about 50 times. Finally settled on a Boss GT-6... this way, it's all there if I need it, but not in the way if I don't.

[/ QUOTE ]
Same here, except I settled on the GT-8. I like to use some chorus, reverb and delay on my clean sounds. For my distorted sounds, sometimes I'll use a little reverb, delay or tremolo. And, of course, I love using wah for solos once in awhile.

[Endrik]

Re: less IS more.

I could only imagine how Pink Floyd would sound without the effects.

[tgreensl1]

Re: less IS more.

I use a Boss rackmount processor and run the pitch shifter all the time with the pitches all on zero and it creates a huge sounding guitar even with my 5150 on 2. It sounds stupid but works very well.

[Fragle]

Re: less IS more.

"If you don't like using effects, fine. If you do, also fine. Using them tastefully is really like playing an additional instrument.

There IS no wrong or right, but I will say that I've seen lots of bands whose use of effects was very prominent and noticeable in a live setting. Rush comes to mind as one who
uses them well and you can definitely hear them crystal clear in concert. "

i second that. i think my post had too much of a "nuff said" attitude to it...i didn't mean to bash anyone who's using fx, really.

and regarding that rush comment...well, i'm not into rush (except YYZ or whatever that instrumental is called...it kicks ass), and as a matter of fact i haven't seen them live (yet)

[Final Sacrifice]

Re: less IS more.

[ QUOTE ]
I use a Boss rackmount processor and run the pitch shifter all the time with the pitches all on zero and it creates a huge sounding guitar even with my 5150 on 2. It sounds stupid but works very well.

[/ QUOTE ]
Which one do you have? I have the SE-70, and I'll give that a try next time.

[tgreensl1]

Re: less IS more.

GX-700 I also run some delay and a hint of chorus, then my noise gate is up a ways, it is dead silent but when you play it is very nice.

[StarRider]

Re: less IS more.

I've seen so many great guitarists that a big part of their sound
was the use of efx. David Gilmour's live use of efx........amazing.
Franks Marino's Real Live CD, check it out and hear a masters use of efx
Alex Lifson, seen him more times then I can remember
His use of Phase, Flange, Chorus is outstanding
He was a major influience of mine as far as efx go
Eddie Van Halen.....I just can't imagine him without a Phase 90

Efx to me are as important to a song as the hooks and riffs
Live as well......

[hippietim]

Re: less IS more.

Effects rule. Effects suck. It just depends on my mood. Fortunately effects can be turned on and off easily, thus accomodating all my moods.

[toejam]

Re: less IS more.

[ QUOTE ]
I use a Boss rackmount processor and run the pitch shifter all the time with the pitches all on zero and it creates a huge sounding guitar even with my 5150 on 2. It sounds stupid but works very well.

[/ QUOTE ]
Not stupid at all. In the past, I've used a chorus pedal, or the chorus built in to my old Marshall Valvestate 8240, with the depth and speed knobs on zero, and it created a slight doubling effect/thicker sound which I enjoyed a lot.