JAN - DEC 2003
© brianmay.com
Next | Previous
|
|
||
JAN - DEC 2003 |
© brianmay.com |
Next | Previous |
On 28/11/03 John S. Laidlaw wrote: |
Greg Fryer replied: Yes it does ring a few bells - a couple of months ago Brian and I were discussing a number of things about the Red Special Trisonic pickups, this being one of them. The Middle Pickup is the one that is Reverse ound/Reverse Polarity. Hope this is of help from the ex-land of Rugby World Cup Champions. Cheers, Greg PS: Because you blokes haven't won any sort of world cup since 1066 we kinda feel sorry for you so we don't mind you hanging on to it for a couple of years til someone from the Southern Hemisphere comes to take it back. Just please make sure its polished regularly and kept out of the sun. Cheers GF |
On 25 September Tim K wrote You see, I have the designs and the plans all drawn From Tim K. |
On 29 September, 2003, Pete Malandrone replied: If you are serious about this, then get a prototype Favourite colour ? Errrrrrrmmmm.......thats just never |
|||
On 25/9/03 1:52 pm, Steve Roberts wrote: Just a couple of things. I know you must be really fed up of the questions but I would appreciate you or Pete's input. I was very dissapointed as when I finally got it and plugged it in, I found that I could not play my effects through the amp. It totally lost all the gain and the sound was a very 'distant' one. I may be wrong but I cant believe that you record everything 'Dry' and add chorus, phaser, delay afterwards. |
On 29 September, 2003 Pete Malandrone repied: Steve The Deaky is recorded dry and the effects, if any, put BM very rarely uses pedals live or in the studio, just Your problem with your VBM1......try turning the gain Bear in mind the TB section on the amp is like an I'm waffling now, ask me another one I can't answer Pete |
|||
On 23 Sept 03, Darren Potter wrote: What made you choose DVDA over SACD for the recent re-mix projects? Many audiophiles are claiming SACD to be a "richer" experience. Its has become of interest because being in the market for a new DVD player, one now has to battle with which advanced CD format to choose. Very few players seem to do both.
|
On 25 Sept 03, Justin Shirley-Smith wrote: Daz I believe it was DTS Entertainment who approached Queen first with regard to remixing (ANATO) in 5.1. DTS Entertainment is a part of DTS that is trying to push the DTS format by releasing important music in that format. Now, I am as cynical as anyone but the simple fact is that the DTS format is very good and I am glad they came to us. I was working with Rory Kaplan from DTS who went to extraordinary lengths to make these projects as high quality as possible - In fact I don't believe there has ever been as much effort in the pure sonic reproduction area on Queen material before and I believe Rory and DTS are partially responsible for opening the eyes of all of us into how these things could be done. The fact that Queen surround mixes only exist on DTS at the moment means that both the DVD-V's and the DVD-A's can be played on the same surround system. The DVD-A's will sound better with a DVD-A player but the DTS still sounds great. All the Queen surround mixes are recorded on Analogue which means we are not locked into either DVD or SACD technology. This means there is nothing technically to stop Queen releasing these surround mixes on SACD. There are many other factors of course..... so don't hold your breath! Unfortunately, we have to put up with these format wars and there are subtle thing going on. I read recently on the internet someone talking about the fact that some combined DVD-A / SACD players play the different formats with (deliberately???) unequal success. How annoying is that? Bye for now |
|||
On 17/9/03 11:50 pm, Pete M wrote: |
On 25 Sept, 2003, Justin Shirley-Smith replied: I have no views on this because I don't know anything about it. If we ever need to "upmix" or "unwrap" a stereo mix into a surround mix again I will look into it. Justin Shirley-Smith |
|||
On 12 Sept 03, Scott Reilly wrote: I'm a bit confused about DTS and 5.1. Can you advise us mere mortals of what we need to get the full sound from our Queen DVD's. P.S budget of £200 for a system |
On 25 Seept 03, Justin Shirley-Smith wrote: Unfortunately it can't be said simply because it is not simple. I will try my best.... I know you can get an all in one system that plays, decodes & amplifies DVD's with dolby digital or DTS and will also play multichannel SACD's. An example would be the Sony DAV-SA30 Home Cinema System at £250 - I haven't heard this particular system but i have heard good reports about the £500 Sony big brother model. This all in one approach is by far the easiest (and cheapest) way to get surround - even if you already have a stand alone DVD player (you can plug the old one into the bedroom tv!). However, you will not If you have previously invested in good stereo speakers it is possible (and advisable) to build a system from this by adding 2 speakers for the back (these can be the same as the front speakers or smaller versions in the same range of that manufacturer - I would want the tweeters and mid range units to be identical for a balanced sound). You I will try to clarify..... for DTS to work.. The DVD player must have a DTS logo on it. You may need to set the Player to output DTS specifically. You probably need to select DTS in the menus of each DVD you play. The DVD player will then deliver DTS data to its digital output. You will need a digital connection between the DVD player and the AV amp. Sometimes these are combined in one box as in the Sony DAV-SA30. The AV amp must have a DTS logo on it. You will need to set the AV amp decode DTS from the relevant digital input. The AV amp will then translate the DTS data into 6 channels of music - left, centre, right, sub, surround left & surround right. It can then deliver these signals to 6 separate speakers. Most AV amps I have seen have a speaker setup page where you can tell the amp what speakers you have. If you tell it you have no centre speaker - it will put that signal in the front 2 speakers equally. If you tell it you have no sub-woofer the same thing will happen. If you tell it you have small front speakers and a sub-woofer it can take all the bass frequencies and put them in the Sub-woofer etc. I hope this helps... Justin |
|||
On 17/9/03 11:50 pm, Pete M wrote: |
On 25 Sept, 2003, Justin Shirley-Smith replied: I have no views on this because I don't know anything about it. If we ever need to "upmix" or "unwrap" a stereo mix into a surround mix again I will look into it. Justin Shirley-Smith |
|||
From: "Laurens Gardeniers" Now, my question is: since on the various records you DON'T hear this hiss, what can I do if I want to record my playing to filter out the hiss somehow ON THE RECORD. Do you use some kind of |
On 4 September, 2003 Pete Malandrone repied: Studio engineers are a clever old bunch and spend much of their time taking the hiss.........and removing it from a guitar take. And yes AC30s are very expensive, as are most class A valve amps.Unfortunately for you chaps, if you wanna sound like the man, you really do need one. Maybe if a few of you got together, Korg UK would do you a deal buying direct. Pete |
|||
From: Joachim Brückner My name is Joachim Brückner. I'm from Germany and I'm not sure if this is the right plattform to discuss a problem of the Amp you created with Vox. But I didn't find an email adress regarding the VBM-1. In detail: I did not check it at my dealer. (I thought that it wouldn't be necessary.) But at home in my studio I was more than surprised. So I brought it back to my dealer. I heard that he sold three of this amps - and all of them returned back to him with the same reason. Do you know about this noise? Did the amp you tested also have this noise? I would pay extra for electronic parts in higher quality. If this would solve the problem. I also sent a mail to Vox but there was no reaction up to now. Please don't missunderstand me - I really like the sound (your sound) but the noise around is too loud. Friendly regards from Stockstadt in Germany (26 °C at 11pm) Joachim Brückner PS The noise sounds like white noise. The noise is also present when no cable is pluged in. The knobs and the switch are at the "favorite" positions as shown in the manual. I know that it is always critical to turn a preamp or a booster to end position but it should not be that loud. I hope this can help a little. |
On 24/7/03 Pete Malandrone replied:
The noise you can hear is exactly how it should be. The original Deaky, or any amp will have that Hiss with the treble boost in line. With the booster output connected to an AC30 (or any amp) the VBM acts purely as a treble booster, in other words the boost hi/low and the boost gain are the only controls that are in circuit. This is the sound that Brian has been using for all eternity. It is noisy, much more than most mortals are used to, but I can assure you that this is correct. This sound is music to my ears as it means all is well in BM guitar rig world. If I had a pound for every time I’ve been asked “MY GOD ! is it supposed to be like that ?” I would be writing this from my palace in the Maldives. You could try winding the boost down a bit, or setting the boost to low, but you will lose a part of THE sound if you do this. If you are gigging at a small venue and the noise is intolerable during the parts when you are not playing, try a foot controlled mute switch after the Vbm1, this will lose the hiss and just give you AC30 noise. Trust me, I’m a doctor (or at least my boss is ) Pete Malandrone |
|||
on 2 Jul 03 D J Worley. wrote: [This letter was to Brian.... Justin Shirley-Smith replied - as opposite with some technical advice.] PS. Have Spent A Bundle On Queen Product Down The Years and Would Like To Thank You For All The Pleasure You Have Brought Me Down Years and Would Like To Thank You For All The Pleasure You Have Brought Me Down The Years So Please Don't Turn Joy To Sorrow. |
On 12 July, Justin Shirley-Smith replied: I have written about this at length in The Game technical notes (which I suspect you have read), but the following might be useful. The AV amps / receivers I have seen all have the ability to direct the centre channel signal equally to the left and right speakers. You do this in the speaker setup mode by telling it you have no centre speaker. Doing this has various advantages - you don't need to buy a centre speaker (spend the money on better remaining speakers) and you don't have to worry about centre speaker positioning - in fact you don't need to worry about it at all. Cheers |
|||
On 21/5/03 4:36 pm, "Chad Tolley" wrote: Hi, I must first say that this web site is great, to keep up-to-date is a hard task I know, so hats off. I have a couple of quick questions about my Burns copy. Firstly after reading the response about there being Gotoh machine heads on the real guitar, can you tell me the model of the Gotoh heads that you use, there seems to be a few, I cannot get the Grovers to return to pitch after doing any diving at all. Secondly I am constantly trying to keep the fret board both feeling and looking 'slick' but find it 'dulls' quickly, the real guitar's fretboard have a lovely greasy shine to it. Is there anything I can coat or treat the fret board with or do to improve it? Thanks |
Dear Chad, The Gotoh heads have no model number that I can see, but the box they came in has the number M6RMC on it. This may be the model or serial number. As for the other problem try a product called Fast Fret by GHS, or just sweat a bit less. Pete Malandrone
|
From: "jason phelan" Peter, |
on 10/4/03 12:30 pm, Pete Malandrone at wrote: Okay, there are no firm plans for a more expensive version of the Burns. It has been mentioned to Brian and myself, and these are the choices that the boss has to make. - Burns make a closer version of the original guitar It’s a tricky one, because whilst there is an undoubted market for the more “pro” guitar players, the original idea was to make these cheap enough for anyone to afford. A more expensive copy may devalue the product and the reason it was made in the first place. Pete |
From: Kevin Donaker-Ring BTW, Jim Elyea tells me he recently interviewed you for his upcoming Vox book. It's been a long time coming. I hope you gave him some good, juicy stuff! |
on 10/04.03 Pete Malandrone wrote: To be honest Kev, I'm such a dreadful player that I don't even sound like
wishing he'd practiced more |
From: "Sue Foxford" Hiya Brian, It's me again, how are you? I need a little advice and I couldn't think of a better person to ask! My hubby has asked for a guitar tuner for his birthday and I'm not sure what to get so I was wondering do you use one and if so can you please recomend a suitable make/model for someone who just plays at home for fun? Hope you can help! Many thanks for your time.Love Sue xxx |
on 10/4/03 11:58 am, Pete Malandrone wrote: Dear Sue, Korg hand held tuners are the best on the market, They are cheapish and accurate. If you have loads of money the Petersen virtual strobe tuner takes some beating. The Korg DT-7 is a good un, try that. Brian, however, has the best guitar tuner available at present.................ME Pete Malandrone – compulsive liar |
|
From: "Nick Drengenberg" What makes me ask this question is remembering an interview with Roger that I read, where he was sent (possibly by yourself) a tape of something Queen, and he said that it sounded really amazing. And it turned out it was the original analog, which made him wonder if automatically assuming that |
on 3/4/03 1:14 pm, Justin Shirley-Smith Dear Nick You seem to have answered your own questions in many ways, but here are some further ramblings! The way I remember it, when we first heard digital audio, we were sold on it because it didn't suffer the noise, hiss, print-through etc. that analogue did - plus it offered some new possibilities of manipulation and convenience such as; multiple copies (no generation loss), easier and better synchronisation and editing etc. It was the same with the general public and CD's: a neater package, easier to use, no clicks, hiss or hum, you could walk on it and it still sounded the same! - these things made CD the success it has been. I believe there was a (deliberately engineered?) confusion between the lack of background noise and better sound quality, when they are two separate things. However, sound quality (faithful sound reproduction) isn't the only aim in recording. For example, it is crucially important to capture the moment / heaviness / passion / attitude etc. which can conspire against perfect sound quality. This is perfectly illustrated by Brian's recent South African story where the studio was not ready to record an improvised jam, and when it was, the feeling was no longer the same - BUT LUCKILY someone had recorded the earlier stuff..... with a dictaphone...! Digital technology allows more opportunity to capture a moment and work on the sound later. Also Queen, in particular, were always wanting to achieve the impossible, and digital technology made more things possible. So there were genuine reasons for switching to digital even when you knew the shortcomings. As Dave Richards always put it; "Two steps forward..... one step back". (Or was it "One step forward... two steps back"?!) There does need to be a distinction made between early digital audio and the latest high resolutions available. Digital audio is a bit like a picture made up from dots. (The sampling rate - kHz - can be seen as the number of dots per inch - dpi - and the bit rate can be related to the number of possible shades for each dot.) If there aren't enough dots - you can see each one, and the picture is a poor reproduction of the original image. If the dpi are increased, there comes a point when the dots are not apparent any more. (44.1 kHz / 16 bit - CD quality - could be seen as an audio equivalent of this.) But if this picture is very closely compared to a developed print of the same image, it can still be seen to be inferior. With better technology, the resolution can be increased further until the defects (blurring etc) of the original image can be seen before the dots become visible, even at high magnification. This is roughly where we are with 192 khz / 24 bit digital audio - the analogue distortions are evident before the digital ones. It is important to remember that analogue audio always had it's own shortcomings. For example, there has always been a trade off between the best treble reproduction at high tape speeds against the fat bass at lower speeds. Having said that, we still make both digital and analogue copies of original masters simply to 'future proof' our archive. In answer to your question, I do believe digital recording and editing are, in their current form, an evolutionary upwarf development from analogue |
|
on 3/4/03 at 22:34 pm Steve Philpott wrote: Subject: Brians Shirts Hi there, My wife was checking up on all the latest BHM news and suddenly shrieked and started raving about Brians shirt that he is wearing in the "Give A Quid" photo. She is willing to "Give a Tenner" if she finds out where the shirt was from ????? Over to you guys ............... Steve Philpott |
From: Ed to Brian's Office: Reply: Sara |
|
on 1/4/03 10:32 am Jason Phelan wrote: Subject: Signature Guitar Hi, Looking forward to a response. Jason Phelan |
Dear Jason, Brian uses both the Burns and the Fryers as spares. The Fryers are the main ones we use because of their superior build quality and feel compared to the Burns, the sound also being a little closer to the Red Special. Bear in mind the Fryers were built as close to exact replicas to the original as possible and this means the neck profile is much thicker than is comfortable for most players ( It feels like a sawn in half telegraph pole when you pick it up ) Brian seems to make it work okay though, don’t you think? The Burns is much more user friendly, neck wise, and has compromises on the tremolo system to keep the price down for the average punter. It is a very good spare guitar to have and is used a great deal as such, but the original is still used for EVERYTHING unless a string is broken , or a song is being played in a dropped tuning for some reason. I’d be lying if I told you that Brian prefers the Burns or the Fryer to the “Old Girl “but both are good substitutes in certain situations. In closing, my advice would be to buy a Burns, but don’t be fooled into thinking this will make you sound like Brian, it won’t. Brian can pick up a 20 dollar, left handed nasty guitar with a cheese grater action and make it sound like him, I play through Brian’s full rig with his guitar and I sound like a strangled kitten. Make your Burns sound like Jason Phelan. Hope this helps you and others |
On 03 April 03, Brian May wrote: I asked my friend Tom Short to write a piece on the Buddhist perspective on the war on Iraq. Tom is my oldest and most trusted friend - and one of the wisest people I know. He has been a Buddhist for over 30 years and has run a meditation group for most of that time, as well as being a life-long PROPER vegetarian. (I wish I could manage that! - after all these years I STILL have a weakness for prawns - and that's not good!) I think the piece Tom has written is very inspiring and I offer it here in full. I hope you all enjoy it as much as I do. Cheers --- From Tom Short: DRAWING THE LINE Following a recent e-mail exchange, Brian has asked me to say a few words about how Buddhism views the current Iraqi war. By way of background, Brian and I have known each other for about 35 years, since college days and I have been a Buddhist for most of that time. Buddhism has a reputation for compassion and non-violence and it therefore will not come as a surprise to know that violence is almost always considered inappropriate. Without going into lots of theory, Buddhism sees many of our problems rooted in the depths of our being in the form of Greed (wanting things that I do not have or wanting situations to be more favourable for me), Hatred (not wanting things or situations that threaten me; this is strongly related to fear) and Delusion/Ignorance (Not seeing situations as they really are but colouring them with my greed and hatred). This trio has been responsible directly or indirectly for most of the non-natural deaths that have occurred since civilisation began. These are truly the fundamental ‘weapons of mass destruction’ and if we are honest we have to admit that we carry them around by the bucket load. Part of the delusion is that I draw arbitrary lines around things and say that is what is inside is ‘mine’ and what is outside is ‘other’. That which is ‘mine’, inside the line, must be protected and increased (greed) and that which is ‘other’ and outside the line is a threat and must be destroyed or consumed (hatred). Examples of things I draw such lines around are: my car, my house, my family, my partner, my team, my country. I am writing from the UK where, like many countries, some people have strong allegiances to football (soccer) teams such as Manchester United, Chelsea, Arsenal, Spurs etc. Much of this is good-natured competition, but sometimes the fans of rival teams have pitched battles in which members of both sides can be seriously hurt. What has happened? I have drawn a line around my team with me inside and the ‘others’ outside. I then have to defend it. Strangely, if there is an international match these rival fans will come together to support the national side. For a while we ignore the smaller line a draw a larger one called England (or whatever your national team is called). Now the threat is the other countries. I had this thought the other day when a newspaper I read said it was supporting ‘our boys’ (conveniently forgetting that women are also involved) fighting in Iraq. Who are ‘our boys’? We draw our line around the British troops; possibly include others from the coalition. But what if I draw my line to include the Iraqi people as well? Why shouldn’t I? The Iraqis feel pain; have families; would probably rather not be involved, just like the Brits. They are people I would probably get on well with if there were no war. I want to draw my line around humanity. Everyone inside is one of us. Everyone outside should be done away with – oops there isn’t anyone outside! Buddhism goes further than this, it says you just imagined the lines – they are not there at all and that you must make some effort to see this. We draw these lines and use them as channels for our greed and hatred. It happens all the time. If you work in an organisation that is divided into departments then you will immediately know what I mean. ‘Those lazy bastards in Purchasing don’t they realise how hard we are working …’. Managers and worker, blacks and whites, them and us – it is a familiar disease. The slogan for this disease is ‘You are either with us or against us’ (sound familiar?). Our lines are sharp, distinct barriers – fuzziness is for wimps! So what should we do? Well, if you have any influence or power I suggest you use it to try and point these things out to those in who drive this current offensive. For the rest of us I suggest we start at home. Let’s do our best to rid ourselves of our own ‘weapons of mass destruction’. For this we need to look at that most intractable line that we all draw - this is the one with just me inside. This is the line that separates me from the rest of creation and thus keeps me in a state of fear and anxiety. How do we deal with this? This is what Buddhism is all about and you can read up the details in one of the many books on the subject. For now, try this experiment for a few days: Take some simple routine activity that you find mildly irritating - these are usually the ones that you put off for a while until someone or something makes you do them. As an example take the washing-up. For a fixed period do the following. Firstly, do the washing up immediately it is appropriate (even if this means missing your favourite TV programme!). Then, instead of distracting yourself with radio or music just concentrate entirely on the washing up. Treat each cup, plate saucepan etc as if it were some precious object. Treat them with respect. Consider the work that went into making them, the thought that went into their design. Likewise, carefully consider the temperature of the water; the amount of washing up liquid needed. Observe the bubbles and feel the texture of the water and the feel of the plates etc. In other words completely lose yourself in what you are doing. This will feel slightly artificial at first and you may detect a degree of resentment arising; just recognise this and keep going. If you persevere with this practice, the process of washing up will cease to be a chore and become something strangely fulfilling – it takes a while and a certain degree of resolve. What is happening? I am starting to rub out that line between me and the washing up! It is then no longer a chore; no longer a waste of my time; no longer a waste of my effort. This sort of thing happens all the time with things that we enjoy and find fulfilling. If I am watching an exciting programme on TV, watching a beautiful sunset or playing the guitar I do not have to make this effort. I become one with the programme, the view or the playing – the line disappears all by itself! The trick is to confront the rest of my life with this same commitment and slowly rub out that line that separates me from everything else. In truth, this is a gradual, lifelong process. It can feel scary because I am losing myself but it turns out I am gaining everything else – there is no longer an ‘outside’ to be scared of, or hate. My weapons of mass destruction become less destructive and that destructive energy gets recycled into love and compassion. This doesn’t sound like its got much to do with the Iraq war but in this world you have to change what can - and that is yourself. The ripples this creates can have a much greater influence than you could possibly think. Try it! You might like to look at the web site for the Buddhist Peace Fellowship at: http://www.bpf.org/html/home.html For a different and very deep view of the war and the Buddhist implications see the wonderful article by David R. Loy at: http://www.mkzc.org/nonDual.htm . In case you do not have time to read the whole thing here is the story with which he finishes the article:
|
31 March 03 Stephan Moller wrote: 1) Did Brian used purely his fingers to play the guitar, or a plectrum, or a sixpence coin? 2) Which Treble Booster did he use? (Greg Fryer, Pete Cornish, ... ?) 3) Has Brian used a slight chorus effect between guitar and amp, or was it the guitar whammy bar? 4) Which and how many Amplifiers where used (Vox-AC30? Deacey Amp?) 5) Has Brian used a power soak between transformer and speaker, to reduce the sound level pressure ? 6) Most important : Which microphone(s), and how where they positioned at the loudspeaker? 7) Was it recorded in an anechoic chamber, or in a living room? 8) Has Brian used additional mixing console effects (Compressor, Equalizer-settings , additional Reverb?)
|
Hi Stephan
-Justin Shirley Smith 1) FINGERS AND COIN PROBABLY - PETE? ------- From Pete Malandrone: These are the answers to Mr Moller's questions, as far as I can recall. Hope this helps |
|||
on 27/3/03 10:55 pm, Justin Whitby wrote: Hi Brian, Since you brought Einstein up.. In conventional physics, light simply falls into a black hole -- just like anything else in space-time and never comes out. That doesn∂t happen in Magueijo∂s universe. According to his calculations, if the varying speed of light theory turns out to be right, light comes to a full stop at the very edge of the black hole; it freezes and never enters the hole. Moreover, since nothing can travel faster than the speed of light - even in Magueijo∂s theory - all other motion halts at the black hole∂s surface too. Nothing falls in. So black holes aren∂t really holes after all. A black hole is like an edge to space, Magueijo explains. "Nothing can come out, but nothing can go in either.∂ For instance, there is speculation that time will go backwards, etc., and that the second law of thermodynamics will no longer be relevant, because entropy will be reversed, etc. What do you think? Or, is it possible that nothing will change except the density of everything, until the whole universe goes back to where it supposedly came from, just a dot? |
On 03 April 2003 Brian replied: OK Folks - you asked for it - my esteemed cosmologist friend Marcus Chown has given me some fascinating answers to the deeper questions you asked. Some of this goes into areas which I truly only dimly understand. I was going to attempt to answer the "Direction of Time versus Entropy" question myself - but it would only have been a rehash of what I had read in Marcus's book. So you guys are much better hearing it from the Horse's mouth. I think we're all very privileged!! I suggest we call a hiatus in this avenue of discussion for while at least, following these interchanges. I suggest we all go off and read Marcus Chown and Stephen Hawking from cover to cover, and then have a long think, and then we'll reconvene this time next year! Ok??!! I've really enjoyed opening this intriguing can of worms - thanks everyone - I might even have to award a prize to the Window Cleaners!!!! Cosmologically yours Dr. Bri
From: Marcus Chown Dear Brian, |
| Well, there we go - serves us all right!!!! ha ha! Cheers Brian |
On 25 March 03 Ralf Ettel wrote: Dear Brian, My question is: Did you choose the Grover Locking-Tuner or did Burns choose them? I ask this because these tuners are very hard to use(you need a coin to lock them), and they cut through thin strings when I turn the knob a little too much. If I turn the knobs less, the guitar is out of tune. |
on 26/3/03 2:44 pm, Pete Malandrone wrote: Ralf, The Grovers were chosen because they provide a locking method at an affordable price. We did look into other locking machine heads but the price was inhibitive. When I first tried the Grovers, I must admit they were a little tricky to use, but with a little practice I have found them quite reliable and easy to get on with. The knack is to let the machine head do it's job, in other words, don't fiddle with the top "screw" part. If you treat them like a normal tuning peg, you will find that the string locks and un-locks itself quite nicely thank you, and you are right, if you then tighten the screw down further,you will break the thinner gauge strings. Another good trick to avoid tuning problems is to give the string an extra wind round the peg, this avoids any slippage. Schallers and Gotohs are probably the best locking machine heads on the market, so if the Grovers bother you that much, and you have lots of spare cash, I can recommend these as high quality replacements. The real guitar is fitted with Gotoh's, but I don't think there is much to choose between them. Hope this helps you, All donations for advice to the Guitar-Techs benevolent fund www.mygodwhatwasidrinkinglastnight.com Thank you See also BRIAN'S REPLY in March letters |
|||
|
||||
on 19/2/03 1:06 pm, Colin Cerexhe wrote: Hi there, QUOTE: Anyway, I just hoped it might be of some use. on 18/2/03 4:47 am, LJGFAB4 wrote: Hope you find them, and hope you can visit some fans in America come 01 August in Irving, Texas -- the next North American Queen Convention! We would LOVE to have you and Roger too!! on 17/2/03 4:50 am, Richard Bennett wrote: Not Multitracks - but might be of interest ? let me know. on 16/2/03 4:29 pm, Luke Mullens com wrote: Luke |
on 25/2/03 12:36 pm, JUSTIN SHIRLEY-SMITH wrote: Dear folks RE: LOST MULTI-TRACK TAPES APPEAL Thanks for all your replies - I'm afraid nothing has turned up yet but PLEASE tell us about any tapes you think could possibly be of interest to us. I'll try to get some photos posted of the sort of tapes we are looking for. Below are my replies to some of the people who responded. To Colin Cerexhe To Lisa J Goodrich To Richard Bennet To Luke Mullens When re-masters are done it is desirable to go back to the Stereo Flat Mix Masters to make new tone and level adjustments dictated by current tastes or technology. This is what happened in in the early 1990's when Kevin Metcalfe re-mastered the entire catalogue for the "Digital Re-Master Series", and again in 1998 and 2001 for Hollywood and Toshiba EMI. It is the Stereo Flat Master Tapes you are talking about and they are indeed missing for Queen 1 and Flash Gordon but don't panic - the original production masters are very good and there is no danger of these performances being lost - I believe a few million copies exist! Best wishes |
|||
|
||||
| on 24/1/03 at 15:49:31 "Arno van der Heijden" wrote: Brian, What brand strings are you using since Maxima went bankrupt? What gauge? What type of slide do you prefer? Glass or metal? Kind regards, Arno van der Heijden |
Ed: Brian said: "Best to ask the man who knows." On 27/1/03 3:47 am, Pete Malandrone wrote: |
|||
|
||||
on 23/1/03 7:16 pm, Jen wrote: Hi Pete Wonder if you have thoughts on these questions.. 1. I've been asked what John Deacon thinks of the new Vox Deacy Amp? |
on 23/1/03 3:51 am, Pete Malandrone wrote: Hi Jen, Q 1. No idea until we send him one, and still then , probably no idea. Q 2. No, not nearly enough gain to go into the big rig, really it's more of a bedroom amp. I would be interested to hear one slaved through an AC 30....Hmmm..... Must try that. Q 3. If he is, it's news to me, Hope all is well in Queen land Pete |
|||
| Next | Previous |