Who else has given up on versatility?

[Avedas]

I play too many genres so the Helix has been a godsend. I only use like 3-4 different amp sims but I use a lot of different snapshot presets with different gain, compression, FX levels etc. for different situations that have really been worth the trouble. Before I had the Helix for live use I always had to use the JCM800 that every single venue/studio here has, and while it's not a bad amp at all there's only so much you can coax out of it without dragging along a substantial pedal board, and having to fiddle with amp settings mid-set was a huge pain in the ass.

 

[KailM]

I never really cared for versatility, at least for distorted tones. Once I played a 6505 for the first time, that was it. I've owned a 6505+, 6505, and an EVH 5150 III. I always end up dialing in the same tone, essentially, with each one. When I play other heads, I end up dialing them in so I sound practically the same as I do with my 5150s. It doesn't even matter what genre, either, though I predominantly play black metal and death metal. When I'm called to play something in the hard rock or classic rock vein, all I do is roll off my guitar's volume a little and it sounds great with the aforementioned amps. It isn't even so much the tone that changes depending on genre anyway, but moreso how I play.

For clean tones, I'm after a little more versatility, but that comes in the form of ambient pedals. All I need, amp-wise, is a solid clean tone. The pedals do the rest.

 

[Drew]

I’m not necessarily talking about versatility as a player, more of versatility in your rig. And not for the sake of difficulty- for the sake of enjoyment. Anyone can go out and buy an AX8 or a Helix if they save enough cash and have virtually endless options. But how about a show of hands for those of us who decided 1-3 solid tones is plenty? I used to think I’d enjoy myself more having a million options. I owned a pretty solid pedal board. What I found is, the less I messed with my options, the more fun I had. Nowadays, I plug into Nameless and let’r rip tater chip for a while and I’m left with the shitfaced grin you should have after playing.

This has been my attitude as long as I can remember. I basically need three core sounds:

1) A clean tone that can be pushed into light clipping even with singlecoils with the gain up, but is capable of climey clean tones with it further down.
2) a heavy rhythm tone
3) a smooth, singing, sustaining lead sounds.

In a pinch, I could do #1 and #3 and just get by with that lead tone for rhythm work as well. For less driven sounds I have a pickup selector and a volume knob, but on the amp anything else is just candy. 90% of my playtime is in #3 anyway. Effects wise, I have a delay in the loop, but that's it.

There's nothing worse than watching a cover band where they use a different patch for each cover as true to the original tone as possible - doubly so if a few people sing so whoever sounds the most like the original singer takes vocals. It's like listening to a juke box, the band has no personality. Don't be afraid to put some of yourself into the music.

 

[efiltsohg]

I have 1 rig for clean/breakup stuff and everything else I own is used almost exclusively for thrash metal

 

[MetalHex]

There's nothing worse than watching a cover band where they use a different patch for each cover as true to the original tone as possible - doubly so if a few people sing so whoever sounds the most like the original singer takes vocals. It's like listening to a juke box, the band has no personality. Don't be afraid to put some of yourself into the music.

I have to disagree with this, even if you're talking about an original band with one cover song in the list, and not an actual cover band...

If I'm going to watch the Australian Pink Floyd Band, I want them to sound exactly like Pink Floyd. I could close my eyes and swear its actually them. If I'm going to see a Pantera cover band, I want the guitar tone to be scooped and sound like Dime.

But maybe you are talking about a cover band who covers a broad range of popular songs from different bands? This is probably more what youre referring to. Then yeah, I still wouldnt mind if they could sound like every band in that set. I wouldnt want to hear the intro to Fade to Black with a tremolo effect on the guitar, if that's that guys main sound for example. I wouldn't want to hear wah wah in Crazy Train either. I also wouldn't want to hear a Dimebag tone in Crazy Train. Try to sound somewhat like Randy at least.

 

[Drew]

But maybe you are talking about a cover band who covers a broad range of popular songs from different bands? This is probably more what youre referring to. Then yeah, I still wouldnt mind if they could sound like every band in that set. I wouldnt want to hear the intro to Fade to Black with a tremolo effect on the guitar, if that's that guys main sound for example. I wouldn't want to hear wah wah in Crazy Train either. I also wouldn't want to hear a Dimebag tone in Crazy Train. Try to sound somewhat like Randy at least.

Yeah, tribute bands are their own thing, for sure - something I've never really gotten, but lots of people like them and if you're playing in a Sabbath tribute band then you should probably sound as much like Iommi as you can.

Cover bands though, doing a bunch of top-40 covers or whatever... Have your lead tone, your "heavy" rhythm tone, your lighter gritty rhythm tone, and your clean tone, and just stick to that. If you're doing, oh, a Pearl Jam cover and a Stone Temple Pilots cover, you can PROBABLY use the same guitar sound for both, rather than pulling up your Pearl_Jam_04 patch and your STP_12 patch for each. The bands I've seen who try to exactly replicate the tones of the covers they're doing almost without fail have less energy, less personality, and are less fun to see, simply because they're so much more focused on that shit, rather than on plugging in and playing and just putting on a good show.

 

[TheWarAgainstTime]

I have a rig capable of stupid versatility, but I only realistically use a handful of tones and slight variations of them. Maybe 12 or 15 unique combinations/presets of amp channels and pedals. Of course I can dial in specific sounds for covers, but I don't really count that since it's not "my" tone at that point, you know?

 

[Cynicanal]

I can't imagine thinking that 12-15 combinations of amp channels and pedals isn't that many, lol.

(I just counted pedal/channel combinations I can imagine myself actually using these days, and it came out to 8. And three of those are "use channel 1 on the Twin Jet for something that my Studio Classic 20 would do better because I'm feeling too lazy to change what I have plugged in".)

 

[Webmaestro]

Wouldn't say I've "given up" on versatility, per se. I'm just at a point in my life where I probably don't need as much as I once did.

I've been a long time Axe-Fx user (and other rackmount fx units before that), but lately I've found myself just using some really good plugins and going straight into my interface, into my computer + Logic. It's just so damn easy to flick on a single switch now and have a very enjoyable 1-2 hours of jamming. The sound quality of these plugins is getting ridiculous.

As a result, I've been considering selling my Axe-Fx and Matrix FRFR live setup, but I'm still undecided.

 

[TheWarAgainstTime]

I can't imagine thinking that 12-15 combinations of amp channels and pedals isn't that many, lol.

(I just counted pedal/channel combinations I can imagine myself actually using these days, and it came out to 8. And three of those are "use channel 1 on the Twin Jet for something that my Studio Classic 20 would do better because I'm feeling too lazy to change what I have plugged in".)

Mine would be more like 8 if my delay and reverb pedals didn't have midi switchable presets. I can happily get by with a 3-channel amp, one overdrive, a gate, and a delay, but all the extras and midi switching just make it more fun

 

[c7spheres]

The less you need the better you are, to a point and in a sense. That's why all the old blues guys can get by on a basic guitar and a small combo amp, but they're legit. IF you need versatility then go for it. Nothing beats the convenience of stuff like AxeFx type stuff, but nothing beats the big rigs with all the specialty stuff in it. It just depends what you're trying to achieve. Use the right tools for the job you're doing.

 

[LiveOVErdrive]

I find there's a certain bias I get toward non-versatile gear where in my heart I will always believe that the amp that does one thing and one thing only does that thing better than the amp that does three things does any of its three things.

This isn't necessarily true. It's an emotional response. But there's definitely more of a cool factor for me about simpler gear.

 

[Screamingdaisy]

Versatility for me comes with the volume knob on my guitar. It turns a single channel amp from one sound to an nearly infinite variety of sounds from clean to scream. Take a two or three channel amp and treat each channel like a single channel amp, now I have access to multitude of different sounds and textures of clean and gain tones.

I like three channel amps but I don’t go for the stereotypical clean/crunch/lead thing and aim more for Plexi-ish, JCM800-ish, Mark IV-ish with the gain turned up on each channel. With the guitar’s volume knob all three of those channels are clean to lead, and with a volume boost on tap any of those tones can be my solo tone. Add an OD and a fuzz box on top of those three channels and options just keep multiplying.

In the past I tried using multi-effects but I found I tended to use too many effects because it was so easy to use them. With pedals, I don’t want to be stepping on 5-10 different boxes because I switched from clean to lead, so it forces me to choose which couple of stomps are actually needed to help drive the song forward.

Further, I like how pedals make it easier to adjust sounds on the fly. I don’t like how midi typically locks me into a preset sound.

Anyway, I’m not saying this is the best way... but this is what I’ve found works for me.

 

[Screamingdaisy]

And the audience?

I’ve been at gigs where I can see the guitarist constantly tapping on pedals to get different sounds yet none of that translates through the PA. IMO, he probably would’ve had better results if he’d looked up and engaged the audience instead of staring at his pedalboard for 45 minutes.

 

[FILTHnFEAR]

I’ve been at gigs where I can see the guitarist constantly tapping on pedals to get different sounds yet none of that translates through the PA. IMO, he probably would’ve had better results if he’d looked up and engaged the audience instead of staring at his pedalboard for 45 minutes.

I played in a band shortly with another guitarist that went waaaay overboard on the fx and tonal versatility. He was constantly fiddling with pedals between and during songs, missed change ups because he was turning on/off so many of them. He'd show up to practice with new pedals and expect us to wait while he figured them out.

He even went so far as to ask the singer and I to help him hit pedals. Sparking the conversation with him about what a pain in the ass he was being. He told us we just didn't appreciate the dynamics he was trying to bring to the songs. And that was that.

 

[broj15]

Versatility used to be a concern of mine, but as I've gotten older I've realized it's more important to me that I have MY two ideal tones (clean & not clean) as opposed to a bunch of subjective good tones. I have my tone and I do my best to adapt it to whatever situation I'm in. Either way I'm always gonna sound like myself no matter how much I tweak or adjust my amp/pedals, so I should just work on sounding as good as I possibly can. Each part of my signal chain is more or less purpose driven and all work cohesively to help get me as close to "my tone" as I possibly can.

 

[Emperoff]

I went back from modelers to pedals as a semi-compromise. When you have endless combinations of virtual amps & effects, it's normal to be like, "I could tweak this for the rest of my life: best land on a few things and get back to playing". When adding a pedal to a chain, it's deliberate: you're choosing to have it there and will likely be thoughtful about giving it a purpose.

It's simpler but I don't think it's at any loss for versatility. My board features a 3-channel AMT Bulava preamp, and I'll usually have an EHX Big Muff, Boss SD-1 as a boost, and "rotating dirt box for the month". That can make a lot of different sounds without a whole lot of effort.

This. So much this.

AMT preamps are awesome. I have an AMT SS-11A tube preamp in my board with a wah, noise gate (always on), tuner and boost/delay. That's it. People buy modellers to only use 3-4 patches anyway. Adjusting settings on the fly mid-gig is a breeze.

Something that most guys forget is "consistency". I have some live sound friends that always tell me about that guitarist with "fender ambient cleans, Marshall crunch and 5150 dirt" sounds which are pretty much impossible to EQ right. So they have to either focus on one of them, compromise in a shitty middle ground, or EQ the guitar the whole damn gig (which they usually don't care for).

Those same 3 channels in a regular amp or preamp won't probably sound as good as the top dogs in their field by themselves, but they will sound good and consistent between them because they're designed that way.

Cover bands though, doing a bunch of top-40 covers or whatever... Have your lead tone, your "heavy" rhythm tone, your lighter gritty rhythm tone, and your clean tone, and just stick to that. If you're doing, oh, a Pearl Jam cover and a Stone Temple Pilots cover, you can PROBABLY use the same guitar sound for both, rather than pulling up your Pearl_Jam_04 patch and your STP_12 patch for each. The bands I've seen who try to exactly replicate the tones of the covers they're doing almost without fail have less energy, less personality, and are less fun to see, simply because they're so much more focused on that shit, rather than on plugging in and playing and just putting on a good show.

You hit the nail right on the head. One of my bands is just like that (the one that pays off ). We do +4h long shows and I get along just fine with 4 sounds, which are the four channels of my amp. Clean, light crunch (for pop, blues), hard rock and metal distortion. I switch everything with a Boss GT100 which also has two separate "stompbox" switches that I assign to a solo boost and a chorus/delay for some "song specific" shit. That's it.

"Limiting" yourself to that allows you to give your own twist to the songs, since you work with your own tones and are much more confident.

 

[TedEH]

It honestly took me a long time to be able to hear all of these so-called "versatile" tones. It was just fuzzy guitar noise to me. Varying degrees of distortion. I still tend to think that what's being played and how matters so much more than subtle character differences between amps.

 

[Screamingdaisy]

Something that most guys forget is "consistency". I have some live sound friends that always tell me about that guitarist with "fender ambient cleans, Marshall crunch and 5150 dirt" sounds which are pretty much impossible to EQ right. So they have to either focus on one of them, compromise in a shitty middle ground, or EQ the guitar the whole damn gig (which they usually don't care for).

Those same 3 channels in a regular amp or preamp won't probably sound as good as the top dogs in their field by themselves, but they will sound good and consistent between them because they're designed that way.

Hmmm. Never thought about that, but it makes a lot of sense. On bass I try not to mess with my tone too much since I’m DI’d in and it messes with the mix enough I don’t think it’s worth it.

I have heard complaints about guys with modellers that have every patch at a different level. I suppose having wildly different EQ in each patch plays into that as well.

 

[Drew]

Something that most guys forget is "consistency". I have some live sound friends that always tell me about that guitarist with "fender ambient cleans, Marshall crunch and 5150 dirt" sounds which are pretty much impossible to EQ right. So they have to either focus on one of them, compromise in a shitty middle ground, or EQ the guitar the whole damn gig (which they usually don't care for).

Those same 3 channels in a regular amp or preamp won't probably sound as good as the top dogs in their field by themselves, but they will sound good and consistent between them because they're designed that way.

Ha, you know, I've never actually thought about it like that, but you are absolutely right.