Se connecter
Se connecter
Mot de passe oublié ?
ou
Créer un compte
ou
Se connecter avec Facebook
Notifications
< Retour vers Amplification guitare
Agrandir
Amplification guitare
Guitares
Amplification guitare
Produits 7 585 7,6k
Actu 2 466 2,5k
Articles 227 227
Médias 324 452 324,5k
Tutoriels Tutos 413 413
Avis 17 867 17,9k
Petites annonces Annonces 1 483 1,5k
Forums 28 408 28,4k

Sujet Interessant: Pourquoi Satriani a laisse tomber Marsall

  • 33 réponses
  • 12 participants
  • 2 464 vues
  • 1 follower
Sujet de la discussion Interessant: 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.
Afficher le sujet de la discussion
31
Ben satriani ne pousse pas bcp le gain de toute manière, je suppose que sa destination première est le solo, donc pas besoin du gain du rectifier :rocket:
32
Apparement le clean serait celui des Peavey Classic, le crunch celui du XXX et le lead serait un peu le même canal point de vue gain (peut-être un poil plus), mais avec une couleur un peu différente qui convient mieux aux leads.
Voilà une démo de cet ampli par l'ami Satch en personne :
Peavey JSX
33
Je ne suis pas un technicien des amplis, mais je trouve que sur le dernier live a denver, le son crunch de l'ampli est bien différent d'avant, et a mon gout personnel, beaucoup plus "riche".
Donc son choix se justifie pleinement d'un point de vue musical.
34
Eh oui je ne suis pas un spécialiste des amplis xxx et xyz3000... cependant, il me semble que marshall n'est pas une si mauvaise marque. pour le guitariste de base qui peut pas se payer l'ampli à 10000 balles, c pas un mauvais choix. G eu un peavey une fois qui m'a coûté cher : une bonne grosse daub... Pour ceux de ce forum qui idolâtre Satriani : les gars soyez pas sectaire, la guitare c'est pas du sport. Satriani le sait ok mais pas le tas d'admirateurs qui viennent le voir en concert pour ses triples croches. Mais bon de toute façon ça musique instrumentale ne révolutionne que dal. Franchement, on l'aime bien mais sa musique, ça sent le générique de série télé. Alerte à malibu, ça doit être lui d'ailleurs ;-)