If you didn’t recognize Slash immediately by the black top hat and cascading black curls, you’d know who it was the moment his pick struck string. There is a
| ||
There is no one out there more deserving of this honor. Besides representing a stalwart champion of the Les Paul, Slash has been recognized as a character on the culture-changing Guitar Hero III video game and continues to be featured on the covers of music publications around the world. But at the heart of it all is a simple and wide-eyed guitarist who remains a bit baffled by all the accolades. In fact, he is still trying to figure out what happened.
“I didn’t have any sort of far-reaching goals when I first started playing,” Slash explains, laughing at the notion. “I was busy with the task at hand which was just learning how to play the guitar and that seems to still be the case. I guess because I’ve persevered over the years, I’ve probably just stuck around for so long that I’ve finally been recognized as someone who won’t go away.”
That’s highly doubtful. Did it require a lot of refining to come up with this final version of your signature model? Was it a situation where you were hands-on showing the Gibson people necks and wiring pickups and doing that kind of thing?
You know what happened? There are basically four Slash models at this point: there’s the Gold Top which is coming out and the other ones that I did not too long ago. And those are just after years and years of refining my own Les Pauls. So it was very simple to sort of go down and hang out with the boys over at Gibson in the Custom Shop and also Gibson USA and go, “This is specifically what we need to put on this guitar and how we need to do the neck,” and so on and so forth. It’s like I’ve been developing my own Les Pauls over the years for myself and so we just modeled these guitars after particular favorites of mine.
Let’s talk tech for a moment: Certainly there’s a specific kind of neck you look for on your Gibsons. Can you describe what that is?
Well, as far as the neck goes, there are a few different standard cuts for a guitar neck; there’s not a huge amount of them. And the ones that I prefer aren’t too wide or too thick. There are some and we always call it, for want of a better word, we compare it to a baseball bat; something that’s a little bit more flat and a little thinner so it just fits in the palm of your hands for somebody who doesn’t have like tentacle-sized fingers (laughs). I don’t know what the measurements are but I think the ‘58s and ‘59s have a bigger neck and when you start looking at the sixties and later, they get smaller. And I think that’s what we modeled ‘em after.
In terms of the woods that were used, it’s composed of maple …
Maple top, mahogany body and a rosewood fingerboard.
Can you describe in personal terms how those woods sound to you? These are heavier woods as opposed to Strats that tend to be built from ash and alder.
Les Pauls are mostly known for mahogany bodies and maple tops. And as far as the quality of the wood goes, that’s a Gibson trademark because they always use good quality wood. I don’t know technically about this wood and that wood; that’s beyond me. But what I familiar with is the fact that mahogany which tends to be pretty dense is what they’ve been using for years. And as a result, Gibson guitars invariably sound good. They’re pretty consistent. But I don’t know which part of the tree it is (laughs).
Who does?
If you talk to a guitar maker, he’ll tell ya!
So the weight of the instrument is a contributor to the tonality and also something you look for.
I used to think that but apparently it’s sort of a myth; you can find a light guitar that resonates great as well. But just from my experience, I’ve always found that the heavier ones have always sounded better to me. But I guess that’s a very personal thing. I think part of the reason why I like heavy guitars, I like to feel the weight of it over my shoulder. I’m just used to picking up a Les Paul and knowing that it was gonna be pretty heavy. And so if you pick up a Les Paul and it’s unbelievably light, I feel like I’m being gypped.
Pickup-wise you’ve been a longtime fan of Seymour Duncan, right?
Yeah; the same pickups I’ve always used. There are so many different kinds of pickups; the one that you identify with the most is usually the one you stick with. And that’s been the case with me. I’ve been using the same Seymour Duncan pickups since the very first Guns record.
Seymour Duncan and Slashphoto: Gibson |
They’re called Alnico IIs and all I really know about them technically is that they’re medium to low output pickups. So, they’re really gruff instead of being way high output which gives you that sort of obvious heavy metal kind of thing. Obviously, totally low output pickups which are jazz pickups or whatever, they’re somewhere in between so they’ve got a good, sort of edgy rock sound. And then you sort of pack that with the amp and you get more of a rough, gravelly kind of sound.
So, it’s by cranking the Marshalls that you’re really getting the overdrive and the dirt in your sound.
Yeah, I mean I crank the Marshall. I’m not looking for the ultimate distortion kind of experience; I’m looking for something that’s a little bit more gravelly. So, I get the gain (but) I don’t crank the gain on the Marshall (100-watt JCM Slash 2255 Signature Model head) all the way either. I turn it usually between 6 and 7; usually at 7, there’s a peak. So it’s not totally cranked all the way up. And I get a lot of edge from that and then the pickup is giving off basically a very honest guitar sound without over-emphasizing anything in particular.
Have you ever had the chance to sit down and talk with Seymour about pickups and stuff like that?
We haven’t really. He’s actually approached me a couple times to design a pickup; just to come up with a new idea for a pickup. I’ve been using the Alnico II since the first time I ever stumbled across it and that wasn’t by trial and error; they just happened to be in the guitar that I got, that I recorded the album with. I still use (that guitar) and it still has the same pickups in it. And I started using those pickups in every Les Paul after that and the old cliché, if it ain’t broken, don’t fix it. So I’ve never been able to design a new set of pickups for Seymour Duncan because I just don’t have any new ideas. We’ve talked about it and still end up back at the Alnico II.
Have you ever talked guitar with people like Joe Perry and Jimmy Page?
I was joking about this recently – whenever I hang out with guitar players, the last thing we want to talk about is guitars. I think guitar players are an interesting breed because we’re all very aware of how many of us there are and we’re also very aware of what the other guys are doing or what their sound is like and blah blah blah. But it’s almost like a magician kind of thing; no one really talks about what they do. I’d actually think it was rude if I was to inquire too much as to what Jimmy has got in his guitar or Billy (Gibbons) has got in his guitar or Joe has got in his guitar. You know it’s funny. Recently I was doing a show with Velvet Revolver in South American and we were playing with Aerosmith. And Brad (Whitford) pulled me aside and he goes (in conspiratorial whisper), “What kind of Les Paul is that?” And I was like, “It’s just a Les Paul, dude.” But even if I had an answer, I probably wouldn’t have said it, you know. No, that’s not true! It’s funny, there is like this silent language that guitar players have and we just sort of don’t really go there unless it’s very specific.
Why do people tend to separate between Gibson guys and Fender guys? Do you think it’s because of who somebody is listening to? Or do you think some players just tend to be more Gibson kinds of guys than Fender guys? Do you have any ideas why that might be?
That’s a really great question. For me personally, I don’t know about everybody else. Guitar players get together and that’s the last thing really we want to talk about; we usually talk about cars. Guitars are very personal and when I first started out, I didn’t know anything about guitar playing. I almost didn’t even start playing; I was initially supposed to play bass because I really didn’t know that much of the difference between the two. But I was leaning towards the Les Paul because particular guitar players that I liked used Les Pauls and also sounded really cool. So, they were cool and they sounded good.
Not to say that I didn’t like Strats back when Jimi Hendrix and David Gilmour and guys like that all used Strats. But there was something about guitar players that used Les Pauls that had a certain kind of thing to it.
The first couple of years, I think the first guitar I got was a Les Paul copy. And then I went through a BC Rich and I had a Fender and I had a Les Paul; those were the main three guitars that I had over the first two years that I started playing. And I always gravitated back toward a Les Paul; it just felt comfortable to me. It immediately reacted the way that I wanted it to compared to other guitars. I just used to fumble around with a Strat for hours trying to get it to the point where I was comfortable with it.
So, it’s just one of those things that the particular instrument that you as a person, as an individual, identify with, you sort of get the thing that you want out of it. And at some point, I think around the time that Guns N’ Roses started, I got a hold of a used Les Paul that used to belong to Steve Hunter from Alice Cooper. And that was like my main live guitar in the clubs for a few years and I think at some point during those crazy days, I hocked it. And then I had a handful of guitars: I had a couple Jacksons and a couple BC Richs, and I went into the studio to do Appetite For Destruction. We were doing the basic tracks, sort of like the throwaway guitar tracks but you all play together to get the bass and drums. And listening to playback in the cans, those guitars sounded horrible (laughs). You know?
And I never really liked ‘em live either; there was a couple of gigs I did live. So I was desperate to find a guitar and my manager gave me a Les Paul and I just fell right into my comfort zone and we made the Appetite record. And I haven’t really messed around with other guitars too much since.
A guitar player then, is really a product of what he listened to when he was first starting to play. You talk about listening to Hendrix and Gilmour and hypothetically you could have been a Fender player. But do you think, when it was all said you done, you would have ultimately made the switch to Gibsons? Can you hypothesize for a moment?
I would have ended up with a Les Paul. I mean I was raised on David Gilmour just as much as Jimmy Page and as much as Jimi Hendrix. All those guys come from the same ilk of screaming rock and roll blues guitar players even though they don’t all play the same guitar. And from Johnny Winter to Jimmy Page to Rory Gallagher to Gary Moore to Joe and Brad, they’re all doing some variation on that same theme.
But the Les Paul, something about the combination of looks and sound that I just gravitated to the Les Paul without even thinking about it. The first electric guitar I ever bought was (that) Les Paul copy and I think I first discovered the beginnings of where my sound was at with that guitar. I mean I like Ted Nugent, too, but I never thought once of ever getting a Byrdland.
And there are guitar players that I don’t even know the names of just because I’ve never really investigated them. There’s a certain sound in the seventies and some of the obvious guys that we don’t talk about as much but have almost as big an influence was Mick Ronson. I always talk about this song, Manfred Mann did this version of the Bruce Springsteen song …
“Blinded by the Light.”
That outro guitar solo, that guitar solo is killer (performed by Dave Flett). There’s a seventies rock guitar sound which still always smacks of a Les Paul to me even though I don’t even know if it is for sure.
Obviously Mick Ronson did all that Bowie stuff on a Les Paul and it’s probably a safe bet to think that the Manfred Mann song was done with a Gibson as well.
There’s a couple other like great one-hit songs that came out in the seventies; I’m thinking about it now and I can’t think of the name but I heard it in the car the other day. It was another song I grew up on and they all had these killer guitar solo breakdowns towards the end or something. I think that had a lot to do where “Sweet Child O’ Mine” and whatever came from. But that all sounded like a Les Paul to me; the weighty single-note kind of screaming thing. A Strat has a very identifiable sound, it sounds great, but there’s something that really touches me about a Les Paul.
For a lot of years, you actually used a custom Les Paul copy.
Well, yeah, there’s three that I actually have. They were just really brilliantly made Les Paul replicas. What happened was, I had those replicas on the road with me for the first Guns N’ Roses tour in ’87 through ’88 and I beat the hell out of these guitars. I didn’t want to put them through the wringer any longer so I went to Gibson and asked them if they would give me a couple Les Paul Standards. They said, “Well, we’re not gonna give ‘em to ya, but we’ll sell ‘em to ya.” And one of them is the one that the new Inspired By Slash Model is modeled after. Once you find a good guitar you stick with it. But that guitar has been on the road with me from ’88 all the way up until the first Velvet Revolver tour and then I got some new Les Pauls. Because those were getting to that point and they were such good guitars, I didn’t want to destroy those completely.
But the new Gibson stuff, like everything I’ve gotten, the new Slash models, are brilliant. They come out of the box and I take them on the road and they work great.
Can you look back at the records you’ve made and point to a track as being the single greatest Les Paul sound you ever created?
Well, you know, like the Appetite record since it was our first record and that was like the initial kickoff sound for the band. And that’s just a basic Les Paul sound with a Marshall and not a lot of bells and whistles. Especially because I hadn’t been playing for that long at that point and its just got that whole raw kind of thing to it. And then over the years, I’ve gotten better as a guitar player, the equipment comes and goes, but there are always certain tracks that you go, “That’s basically what I would like to sound like.”
You could WIN a Limited Edition 25th Anniversary DL4 from Line 6! Enter by November 18, 2024.
DL4 MkII Delay Stompbox Modeler Special Edition 25th Anniversary Silver
Delivering legendary delays, the green DL4TM modeler has been ubiquitous on pedalboards worldwide since launching in 1999. Designed to continue inspiring creativity, the limited and collectable 25th Anniversary DL4 MkII, in a special edition silver, boasts all the same powerful features as the DL4 MkII, but also comes with a hand-numbered label, a keychain, and a DL4 MkII product sticker.
Not only is it more compact than the original DL4, it offers 15 legacy and 15 new delay effects drawn from the HX® family of amp and effects processors, plus bonus reverbs, all derived from the latest Line 6 sound design labs. Looping, SD card expansion and a host of I/O options aim to carry the DL4 legacy forward.
Jeff "Skunk" Baxter expands his acclaimed first-ever solo album, Speed of Heat, with a brand new Storytellers Edition, featuring brand-new commentary tracks.
For over five decades, audiences worldwide have marveled at Baxter’s inimitable and instantly recognizable guitar playing and generational songcraft. His output spans classic records as a founding member of Steely Dan and member of the Doobie Brothers in addition to hundreds of recordings with the likes of Donna Summer, Cher, Joni Mitchell, Rod Stewart, Dolly Parton, and many more. During 2022, he initially unveiled Speed of Heat, showcasing yet another side of his creative identity and introducing himself as a solo artist.
On the Storytellers Edition, his fascinating commentary pulls the curtain back on both the process and the message of the music. This version traces the journey to Speed of Heat and its core inspirations as shared directly by Baxter in the form of detailed anecdotes, candid stories, and insightful commentary on every track.
The 12-songalbum, co-produced by Baxter and CJ Vanston, is a riveting and rewarding musical experience that features a host of brilliantly crafted originals co-written by the guitarist and Vanston, as well as inspired versions of some of the great classics. Along the way, Baxter is joined by guest vocalists and songwriters Michael McDonald, Clint Black, Jonny Lang and Rick Livingstone. Baxter notably handled lead vocals on his rendition of Steely Dan’s “My Old School.” Other standouts include "Bad Move" co-written by Baxter, Clint Black, and CJ Vanston, and “My Place In The Sun”, sung by Michael McDonald and co-authored by McDonald, Baxter and Vanston.
As one of the most recorded guitarists of his generation, Baxter’s creative and versatile playing has been heard on some of the most iconic songs in music history, including “9 to 5” by Dolly Parton and “Hot Stuff” by Donna Summer.
The stunningly diverse collection of material on Speed of Heat presents a 360-degree view of the uniquely gifted musician.
STREAM / SHARE / PURCHASE HERE.
Beauty and sweet sonority elevate a simple-to-use, streamlined acoustic and vocal amplifier.
An EQ curve that trades accuracy for warmth. Easy-to-learn, simple-to-use controls. It’s pretty!
Still exhibits some classic acoustic-amplification problems, like brash, unforgiving midrange if you’re not careful.
$1,199
Taylor Circa 74
taylorguitars.com
Save for a few notable (usually expensive) exceptions, acoustic amplifiers are rarely beautiful in a way that matches the intrinsic loveliness of an acoustic flattop. I’ve certainly seen companies try—usually by using brown-colored vinyl to convey … earthiness? Don’t get me wrong, a lot of these amps sound great and even look okay. But the bar for aesthetics, in my admittedly snotty opinion, remains rather low. So, my hat’s off to Taylor for clearing that bar so decisively and with such style. The Circa 74 is, indeed, a pretty piece of work that’s forgiving to work with, ease to use, streamlined, and sharp.
Boxing Beyond Utility
Any discussion of trees or wood with Bob Taylor is a gas, and highly instructive. He loves the stuff and has dabbled before in amplifier designs that made wood an integral feature, rather than just trim. But the Circa 74 is more than just an aesthetic exercise. Because the Taylor gang started to think in a relatively unorthodox way about acoustic sound amplification—eschewing the notion that flat frequency response is the only path to attractive acoustic tone.
I completely get this. I kind of hate flat-response speakers. I hate nice monitors. We used to have a joke at a studio I frequented about a pair of monitors that often made us feel angry and agitated. Except that they really did. Flat sound can be flat-out exhausting and lame. What brings me happiness is listening to Lee “Scratch” Perry—loud—on a lazy Sunday on my secondhand ’70s Klipsch speakers. One kind of listening is like staring at a sun-dappled summer garden gone to riot with flowers. The other sometimes feels like a stale cheese sandwich delivered by robot.
The idea that live acoustic music—and all its best, earthy nuances—can be successfully communicated via a system that imparts its own color is naturally at odds with acoustic culture’s ethos of organic-ness, authenticity, and directness. But where does purity end and begin in an amplified acoustic signal? An undersaddle pickup isn’t made of wood. A PA with flat-response speakers didn’t grow in a forest. So why not build an amp with color—the kind of color that makes listening to music a pleasure and not a chore?
To some extent, that question became the design brief that drove the evolution of the Circa 74. Not coincidentally, the Circa 74 feels as effortless to use as a familiar old hi-fi. It has none of the little buttons for phase correction that make me anxious every time I see one. There’s two channels: one with an XLR/1/4" combo input, which serves as the vocal channel if you are a singer; another with a 1/4" input for your instrument. Each channel consists of just five controls—level, bass, middle, and treble EQ, and a reverb. An 11th chickenhead knob just beneath the jewel lamp governs the master output. That’s it, if you don’t include the Bluetooth pairing button and 1/8" jacks for auxiliary sound sources and headphones. Power, by the way, is rated at 150 watts. That pours forth through a 10" speaker.Pretty in Practice
I don’t want to get carried away with the experiential and aesthetic aspects of the Circa 74. It’s an amplifier with a job to do, after all. But I had fun setting it up—finding a visually harmonious place among a few old black-panel Fender amps and tweed cabinets, where it looked very much at home, and in many respects equally timeless.
Plugging in a vocal mic and getting a balance with my guitar happened in what felt like 60 seconds. Better still, the sound that came from the Circa 74, including an exceedingly croaky, flu-addled human voice, sounded natural and un-abrasive. The Circa 74 isn’t beyond needing an assist. Getting the most accurate picture of a J-45 with a dual-source pickup meant using both the treble and midrange in the lower third of their range. Anything brighter sounded brash. A darker, all-mahogany 00, however, preferred a scooped EQ profile with the treble well into the middle of its range. You still have to do the work of overcoming classic amplification problems like extra-present high mids and boxiness. But the fixes come fast, easily, and intuitively. The sound may not suggest listening to an audiophile copy of Abbey Road, as some discussions of the amp would lead you to expect. But there is a cohesiveness, particularly in the low midrange, that does give it the feel of something mixed, even produced, but still quite organic.
The Verdict
Taylor got one thing right: The aesthetic appeal of the Circa 74 has a way of compelling you to play and sing. Well, actually, they got a bunch of things right. The EQ is responsive and makes it easy to achieve a warm representation of your acoustic, no matter what its tone signature. It’s also genuinely attractive. It’s not perfectly accurate. Instead, it’s rich in low-mid resonance and responsive to treble-frequency tweaks—lending a glow not a million miles away from a soothing home stereo. I think that approach to acoustic amplification is as valid as the quest for transparency. I’m excited to see how that thinking evolves, and how Taylor responds to their discoveries.
The evolution of Electro-Harmonix’s very first effect yields a powerful boost and equalization machine at a rock-bottom price.
A handy and versatile preamp/booster that goes well beyond the average basic booster’s range. Powerful EQ section.
Can sound a little harsh at more extreme EQ ranges.
$129
Electro-Harmonix LPB-3
ehx.com
Descended from the first Electro-Harmonix pedal ever released, the LPB-1 Linear Power Booster, the new LPB-3 has come a long way from the simple, one-knob unit in a folded-metal enclosure that plugged straight into your amplifier. Now living in Electro-Harmonix’s compact Nano chassis, the LPB-3 Linear Power Booster and EQ boasts six control knobs, two switches, and more gain than ever before.
If 3 Were 6
With six times the controls found on the 1 and 2 versions (if you discount the original’s on/off slider switch,) the LPB-3’s control complement offers pre-gain, boost, mid freq, bass, treble, and mid knobs, with a center detent on the latter three so you can find the midpoint easily. A mini-toggle labeled “max” selects between 20 dB and 33 dB of maximum gain, and another labeled “Q” flips the resonance of the mid EQ between high and low. Obviously, this represents a significant expansion of the LPB’s capabilities.
More than just a booster with a passive tone, the LPB-3 boasts a genuine active EQ stage plus parametric midrange section, comprising the two knobs with shaded legends, mid freq and mid level. The gain stages have also been reimagined to include a pre-gain stage before the EQ, which enables up to 20 dB of input gain. The boost stage that follows the EQ is essentially a level control with gain to allow for up to 33 dB of gain through the LPB-3 when the “max” mini toggle is set to 33dB
A slider switch accessible inside the pedal selects between buffered or true bypass for the hard-latch footswitch. An AC adapter is included, which supplies 200mA of DC at 9.6 volts to the center-negative power input, and EHX specifies that nothing supplying less than 120mA or more than 12 volts should be used. There’s no space for an internal battery.
Power-Boosted
The LPB-3 reveals boatloads of range that betters many linear boosts on the market. There’s lots of tone-shaping power here. Uncolored boost is available when you want it, and the preamp gain knob colors and fattens your signal as you crank it up—even before you tap into the massive flexibility in the EQ stage.
“The preamp gain knob colors and fattens your signal as you crank it up—even before you tap into the massive flexibility in the EQ stage.”
I found the two mid controls work best when used judiciously, and my guitars and amps preferred subtle changes pretty close to the midpoint on each. However, there are still tremendous variations in your mid boost (or scoop, for that matter) within just 15 or 20 percent range in either direction from the center detent. Pushing the boost and pre-gain too far, particularly with the 33 dB setting engaged, can lead to some harsh sounds, but they are easy to avoid and might even be desirable for some users that like to work at more creative extremes.
The Verdict
The new LPB-3 has much, much more range than its predecessors, providing flexible preamp, boost, and overdrive sounds that can be reshaped in significant ways via the powerful EQ. It gives precise tone-tuning flexibility to sticklers that like to match a guitar and amp to a song in a very precise way, but also opens up more radical paths for experimentalists. That it does all this at a $129 price is beyond reasonable.