Sujet Interessant: Pourquoi Satriani a laisse tomber Marsall
- 33 réponses
- 12 participants
- 2 463 vues
- 1 follower
rondecuba
318
Posteur·euse AFfamé·e
Membre depuis 20 ans
Sujet de la discussion Posté le 21/07/2004 à 10:56:11Interessant: Pourquoi Satriani a laisse tomber Marsall
J'ai trouve cette interview sur le site musician's friends en me documentant sur le marshall 6100 que je cherchais d'occasion.
Si on en crois l'interesse, Marshall est tres loin d'avoir fait des efforts pour le garder comme client. Curieux non?
Guitar.com: Have you retired your Marshall amps?
Satriani: Yeah, they were very problematic. Through the last two or three tours, they'd make weird noises all of a sudden and they wouldn't work, and we couldn't get anyone to really understand the amp problem fully, especially Marshall. Every time we were in England, they would service the amps for us, but it would never quite be the same. It started to really bother me and so did the fact that they routinely said they were not interested in making a modified version of that amp for me. I finally said this is ridiculous. I've only got two of them and they're almost impossible to find. The 6100 model wasn't a very popular Marshall amplifier, and they weren't anywhere near interested in trying to revive it. So I finally said, do I really want to play through amplifiers that have a dwindling supply? There were some problems about it and I thought I could get a better version of it somehow. Once I started talking to Peavey, I realized that I had the ability to do it through James Brown. The largest problem I'd had was that I always record with tube amplifiers in the studio, but when I went out on tour, I was using the smallest tube section of a Marshall head. I was using an orange Boss distortion box to get my gain, and it helped on a number of levels, but there was always this sort of negative that I always tried to circumvent. Then James Brown and the guys at Peavey had a way of giving me the things I was looking for with an all-tube head. So it was like, wow, if you could do that, I'd gladly retire the Marshall stuff.
For a while, I was wondering if maybe I should become a collector of the 6100s, if that's what it's come down to. So James really saved me from that fate because I never really wanted to be a collector. I don't like that whole idea of playing things that are old and antique, and there are only two of them. It gets to me after a while and I thought all these things that I grew up listening to that were great, and you think about Hendrix. The guy would play a Fender guitar and when a new pedal would come out, he'd plug into it. And so I kept thinking that if Jimi were today, he'd be playing some new stuff. He'd be taking advantage of this. So I thought it was better to try and change the world than to try to hold it in some old space and try to cling. It's sort of an egotistical thing to say I'm going to make an amplifier with my name on it, and it's going to be great. It makes you kind of laugh at yourself. But practically speaking, if there's an amp that I know does exactly what I want, and I can get as many of them as I need wherever I am in the world, that's practical.
Si on en crois l'interesse, Marshall est tres loin d'avoir fait des efforts pour le garder comme client. Curieux non?
Guitar.com: Have you retired your Marshall amps?
Satriani: Yeah, they were very problematic. Through the last two or three tours, they'd make weird noises all of a sudden and they wouldn't work, and we couldn't get anyone to really understand the amp problem fully, especially Marshall. Every time we were in England, they would service the amps for us, but it would never quite be the same. It started to really bother me and so did the fact that they routinely said they were not interested in making a modified version of that amp for me. I finally said this is ridiculous. I've only got two of them and they're almost impossible to find. The 6100 model wasn't a very popular Marshall amplifier, and they weren't anywhere near interested in trying to revive it. So I finally said, do I really want to play through amplifiers that have a dwindling supply? There were some problems about it and I thought I could get a better version of it somehow. Once I started talking to Peavey, I realized that I had the ability to do it through James Brown. The largest problem I'd had was that I always record with tube amplifiers in the studio, but when I went out on tour, I was using the smallest tube section of a Marshall head. I was using an orange Boss distortion box to get my gain, and it helped on a number of levels, but there was always this sort of negative that I always tried to circumvent. Then James Brown and the guys at Peavey had a way of giving me the things I was looking for with an all-tube head. So it was like, wow, if you could do that, I'd gladly retire the Marshall stuff.
For a while, I was wondering if maybe I should become a collector of the 6100s, if that's what it's come down to. So James really saved me from that fate because I never really wanted to be a collector. I don't like that whole idea of playing things that are old and antique, and there are only two of them. It gets to me after a while and I thought all these things that I grew up listening to that were great, and you think about Hendrix. The guy would play a Fender guitar and when a new pedal would come out, he'd plug into it. And so I kept thinking that if Jimi were today, he'd be playing some new stuff. He'd be taking advantage of this. So I thought it was better to try and change the world than to try to hold it in some old space and try to cling. It's sort of an egotistical thing to say I'm going to make an amplifier with my name on it, and it's going to be great. It makes you kind of laugh at yourself. But practically speaking, if there's an amp that I know does exactly what I want, and I can get as many of them as I need wherever I am in the world, that's practical.
dioneae
191
Posteur·euse AFfiné·e
Membre depuis 20 ans
21 Posté le 30/07/2004 à 22:19:01
on en tient un bon le lachez pas
Durandboutin
507
Posteur·euse AFfolé·e
Membre depuis 21 ans
22 Posté le 31/07/2004 à 09:21:05
SALUT
complétement d'accord avec notre ami BARK AT THE SPOON....
tous les moyens sont bons pour rester populaire, et garder un compte en banque fourni comme avant....
ça n'enléve pas les qualités de SATRIANI....il n'est pas le permier à commercer ainsi...
PASCAL
complétement d'accord avec notre ami BARK AT THE SPOON....
tous les moyens sont bons pour rester populaire, et garder un compte en banque fourni comme avant....
ça n'enléve pas les qualités de SATRIANI....il n'est pas le permier à commercer ainsi...
PASCAL
Chuck Van Damme
7956
Je poste, donc je suis
Membre depuis 22 ans
23 Posté le 31/07/2004 à 10:27:12
C'est probable mais on peut se demander pourquoi il ne l'a pas fait plus tôt. Si c'était uniquement une question d'argent, il n'aurait pas attendu d'être sur 'le déclin'
Durandboutin
507
Posteur·euse AFfolé·e
Membre depuis 21 ans
24 Posté le 31/07/2004 à 10:39:30
SALUT CHUCK
oui, c'est vrai, pourquoi avoir attendu ???
aussi, il est trés difficile d'être objectif quant à sa propre popularité, surtout quand on a été idolatré...il faut peut-être un certain temps pour se réveiller...
enfin, je dits ça ...en non connaissance de cause, n'ayant toujours été....rien
PASCAL
oui, c'est vrai, pourquoi avoir attendu ???
aussi, il est trés difficile d'être objectif quant à sa propre popularité, surtout quand on a été idolatré...il faut peut-être un certain temps pour se réveiller...
enfin, je dits ça ...en non connaissance de cause, n'ayant toujours été....rien
PASCAL
addagio
5904
Je poste, donc je suis
Membre depuis 21 ans
25 Posté le 31/07/2004 à 15:07:02
Pourquoi satriani a attendu???Et pouurquoi ne serait ce pas la marque de gratte ou d'ampli qui n'aurait pas attendu...que ne ferait on pas pour redorer son blason...
regardez peavey, qu'ont ils sorti de bien depuis oulalala les bandes alu en deco? van halen est plus la...ils manquent serieusement d'un personnage charismatique pour pas se faire bouffer...satriani tombe à pic, quoi qu'on pense de lui il est à la base du G3 quelle promo de fou! de plus il reste quoi qu'on en dise un guitariste phare qui casse pas les roubignolles de tout le monde avec un matos "vintage"...
regardez peavey, qu'ont ils sorti de bien depuis oulalala les bandes alu en deco? van halen est plus la...ils manquent serieusement d'un personnage charismatique pour pas se faire bouffer...satriani tombe à pic, quoi qu'on pense de lui il est à la base du G3 quelle promo de fou! de plus il reste quoi qu'on en dise un guitariste phare qui casse pas les roubignolles de tout le monde avec un matos "vintage"...
Chuck Van Damme
7956
Je poste, donc je suis
Membre depuis 22 ans
26 Posté le 31/07/2004 à 19:41:24
Je veux dire par là que ce n'est pas uniquement pour le fric qu'il a décidé de faire un ampli Satriani à mon avis, sinon il aurait déjà demandé depuis des années à être sponsorisé comme tous les autres. Après, c'est pas un philantrope non plus
dioneae
191
Posteur·euse AFfiné·e
Membre depuis 20 ans
27 Posté le 02/08/2004 à 12:20:27
Hop
tant qu a faire autant mettre la photo du nouveau bébé
plus d'info ou sur le site Peavey
tant qu a faire autant mettre la photo du nouveau bébé
plus d'info ou sur le site Peavey
rondecuba
318
Posteur·euse AFfamé·e
Membre depuis 20 ans
28 Posté le 02/08/2004 à 12:23:51
Non, en fait il a voulu un modele signature parce qu'il en avait marre qu'a chaque G3, Vai se la pete avec son Legacy.
Du coup au prochain G3 il pourra lui dire "moi aussi j'ai mon ampli et il a un canal de plus que le tien!"
Du coup au prochain G3 il pourra lui dire "moi aussi j'ai mon ampli et il a un canal de plus que le tien!"
Harlequin
3236
Squatteur·euse d’AF
Membre depuis 21 ans
29 Posté le 02/08/2004 à 14:18:55
Qqun l'a essayé le bébé? Vous pensez qu'il tient le coup comparé à ses mesa? Je me demande s'il enregistre réellement avec...
rondecuba
318
Posteur·euse AFfamé·e
Membre depuis 20 ans
30 Posté le 02/08/2004 à 14:32:09
Pas encore essaye.
D'apres ce que j'ai pu en lire, ca n'est pas un monstre de gain. Ca serait un XXX avec moins de gain et un meilleur clair.
D'apres ce que j'ai pu en lire, ca n'est pas un monstre de gain. Ca serait un XXX avec moins de gain et un meilleur clair.
- < Liste des sujets
- Charte