Originally posted by 2D_MASTERI guess so...but I didn't get that from your initial comment, because I was talking about effects on the guitar part of How Soon is Now, and you said effects are icing on the cake.
Back to the Icing "argument". Which I don't understand why were are arguing, we both agree that sometimes the effect can be considered 'Icing' some times not, yes?
Didn't you read you read my post? I wasn't talking about the whole song...maybe you were, but that wasn't clear.
Here's my reply to your first post which you haven't replied to...
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
??? I NEVER said it made the "song" good by itself....I said it was in large part the way the effects were used that the song was as iconic as it is.That's the most distictive element of that song...and it wouldn't have been "How Soon is Now" without that elemnent. Kinda like half the Depeche Mode songs wouldn't be what they are without what's been done with the effects...APART from the song writing. I've been talking about the GUITAR in that song...what makes the GUITAR as amazing as it is...what might be the "icing on the cake" involving the GUITAR (which is what it appeared you meant by saying effects are just the "icing", since you were the one who said I can't compare pedal pushing or knob turning on a GUITAR with Segovia). Well, if it's done in a creative and innovative enough way, the skill, talent and work it takes to use effects is comparable to playing and transposing Bach.
And something ELSE that's playing with effects and button pushing and knob turning is basically techno. That's what it is. And if you take a song like "Rez" by Underworld, you see how much talent, hard work, and skill is needed to do something as incredible as that song.
Did you even listen to it??? (I somehow doubt it...even though it was indicated you should to better get the point).
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I guess so...but I didn't get that from your initial comment, because I was talking about effects on the guitar part of How Soon is Now, you said effects are icing on the cake. Isn't that what you meant?
If the exact same song existed, without the amp effect on the intro, would it be as good? No? Then it's "icing" on the cake.
I think, by icing, he just means additional part that made the song much better, not that it didn't matter, but I can't speak for him.
-AC
Re: Re: Effects...just "icing" on the cake? (or) not comparable to playing Bach?
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER1) Well what I was referring to was this ,"How soon is now" was a good song already. Sure the effects that Johnny Marr used (which were pretty standard for any Smiths song) were not what made the song. Johnny Mar's distinctive way of playing guitar did. I agree the effects he used is what made the song that much better.
There I quoted myself again. I was talking about the whole song hence "was a good song already". Yes, I understand that the tremolo effect added to the song, it made it 'that much better'. What problems do you have with my post? Because this could be a dead argument.
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriOMG.
If the exact same song existed, without the amp effect on the intro, would it be as good? No? Then it's "icing" on the cake.
"Icing on the cake" is some distortion on a bass, or is a simple reverb on the bed track of a song...NOT something that pretty much DEFINES the song...which is the case with How Soon is Now.
It is the most recognizable part of the song and gives it the feel and rythm (JUST LOOK AT THE MARR QUOTE) that typifies the song.
You couldn't GET the rythm by just playing the chord.,..the rythm COMES FROM the effect.
You're so wrong AC it's amazing.
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
OMG.You couldn't GET the rythm by just playing the chord.,..the rythm COMES FROM the effect.
You're so wrong AC it's amazing.
you should read the quote, it wasn’t just the effects it was a ‘stomping’ rhythm that Marr HIMSELF had to emulate
"As a kid I was fascinated by Hamilton Bohannon's 'Disco Stomp' and 'New York Groove' by Hello, and I wanted to make something with that stomp….It all came together - the tremolo and the stomping groove…”
He was emulating the guitar styles of somebody else’s music, coupled with the effect, that’s what made the song, BOTH things.
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
You have no idea what you're talking about, and if you haven't read the initial argument, then your ipinion on the discussion is uninformed.It's ALTERING what's been played...OBVIOUSLY...but what you do with how you alter it CAN (not always...but if done creatively and innovatively) create a rythm, a mood, or even a sort of MELODY with certain effects, that ISN'T there with playing a strum...and the EFFECT can essentialy become what's doing the music making...what's being done creatively in the music making process...what's giving the personality and meaning to the music.
How the hell would you know what I have read?
Originally posted by 2D_MASTERWho says he was the one making the rythm though
He was emulating the guitar styles of somebody else’s music, coupled with the effect, that’s what made the song, BOTH things.
Listen to the rythm...it's mostly the effect, it's not him strumming it. It's almost mechanical and sequenced...what it's meant to sound like.
And even if in this example it isn't the effect that produces the rhythm, it is in other examples.
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
OMG."Icing on the cake" is some distortion on a bass, or is a simple reverb on the bed track of a song...NOT something that pretty much DEFINES the song...which is the case with How Soon is Now.
It is the most recognizable part of the song and gives it the feel and rythm (JUST LOOK AT THE MARR QUOTE) that typifies the song.
You couldn't GET the rythm by just playing the chord.,..the rythm COMES FROM the effect.
You're so wrong AC it's amazing.
Don't keep cutting my quotes in half, you moron.
"If the exact same song existed, without the amp effect on the intro, would it be as good? No? Then it's 'icing' on the cake.
I think, by icing, he just means additional part that made the song much better, not that it didn't matter, but I can't speak for him.".
That's what I said, that's what I meant.
Also, rather than keep telling everyone they're not musically inclined, are you gonna post your own music or not?
Originally posted by Bardock42
On a different note, wouldn't pedals be considered part of playing guitar? I mean...how are the effects different from...playing a C or something?
Because you're not playing anything with a pedal, you're pressing it or you're not pressing it. It doesn't create any sound, it doesn't create any music. You create and play on the guitar, you alter with a pedal.
-AC
Originally posted by PezmergaI said it because you just dropped in and made a lame-ass point instead of putting something on the table...hence supspecting that "maybe" you didn't read the post. That's why I said "'if" you haven't read the post.
Why say it at all unless you are 100% sure? It seems like you love making statements that are baseless and completely wrong.
Originally posted by Bardock42
I do, Backfire, I do.On a different note, wouldn't pedals be considered part of playing guitar? I mean...how are the effects different from...playing a C or something?
Why do you ALWAYS assume everyone either misreads or skips your posts?
It's not just Pez, you ALWAYS do it. Yet, hypocritically enough, you accused 2D of cutting stuff out of your posts when he replied the other day.
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Exactly
"Because you're not playing anything with a pedal, you're pressing it or you're not pressing it. It doesn't create any sound, it doesn't create any music. You create and play on the guitar, you alter with a pedal.".
It's part of the act of performing with a guitar USUALLY, it's not part of playing the guitar. You can play guitar without a pedal, you can't play a pedal without a guitar.
-AC
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I said it because you just dropped in and made a lame-ass point instead of putting something on the table...hence supspecting that "maybe" you didn't read the post. That's why I said "'if" you haven't read the post.
Why waste time saying what eveyone else has already said? I already had to read you post the same thing 20 times or so. I figured I'd just post my opinion. I mean there isn't really anymore I can bring to the table that someone else hasn't brought up already.
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Who says he was the one making the rythm thoughListen to the rythm...it's mostly the effect, it's not him strumming it. It's almost mechanical and sequenced...what it's meant to sound like.
Marr implied that himself by using the word 'and' , meaning they were two separate things. And anybody who has played with a tremolo knows that it doesnt create the rythm, they player does. Just like the player has to decide when the right time to step on a WAH-wah pedal is.
Just to clear 2D...the discussion started from this...
-"The effect itself won't make the song sound cool, how you use it will."
-"I know effects are not 'doing all the work' effects are 'icing on the cake'. Who cares if you have shit music and all the effects pedals (and can use them) in the world?"
So how was I supposed to get anything "song" out of that?
But whatever...it SEEMS we are in agreement now as to what's what.