SRV's "In Step" tone - too processed?

[cber1517]

I picked up some SRV discs over the holidays and have noticed that Stevie is using a chorusing effect on his tone on "In Step." Not every track, but several. I think I read somewhere he used the Roland Dimension D for this release. I personally prefer the Fender Vibratone he used previously.

I guess my point is this - the fact that he used 32 different amps for this release is ironic because I think his overall tone on this release is my least favorite. I think he used a Bassman on a lot of tracks also. I do love his clean tone on "Riviera Paradise" but everything else sounds real compressed or processed to my ears. :dunno

I'll still take SRV any day over most anything else when I don't know what to listen to and "In Step" has incredible songs on it. Maybe it's the fact that it was also recorded digitally that makes it sound weird to me?

Grab your coffee and discuss. Thanks!!

[majordelt]

I picked up some SRV discs over the holidays and have noticed that Stevie is using a chorusing effect on his tone on "In Step." Not every track, but several. I think I read somewhere he used the Roland Dimension D for this release. I personally prefer the Fender Vibratone he used previously.

I guess my point is this - the fact that he used 32 different amps for this release is ironic because I think his overall tone on this release is my least favorite. I think he used a Bassman on a lot of tracks also. I do love his clean tone on "Riviera Paradise" but everything else sounds real compressed or processed to my ears. :dunno

I'll still take SRV any day over most anything else when I don't know what to listen to and "In Step" has incredible songs on it. Maybe it's the fact that it was also recorded digitally that makes it sound weird to me?

Grab your coffee and discuss. Thanks!!

Hard to imagine discussing any negative aspects of something so Iconic and timeless. What was wrong with Charlie Christians tone or Wes Montgomery's tone on certain albums?? Or Hendrix on are you Experienced?
Was there too much hiss? too much tape warble?

The answer to me is NO..they are what they are.. Imperfections and all.
Timeless works of art by the most influential guitar players in the history of recorded music..

[DiazDude]

Hard to imagine discussing any negative aspects of something so Iconic and timeless. What was wrong with Charlie Christians tone or Wes Montgomery's tone on certain albums?? Or Hendrix on are you Experienced?
Was there too much hiss? too much tape warble?

The answer to me is NO..they are what they are.. Imperfections and all.
Timeless works of art by the most influential guitar players in the history of recorded music..

Agreed..It's a snapshot in time and the way he wanted it.

[traviswalk]

I still love the tone he got on "Let Me Love You Baby", would love to know the exact amp brew for that one. Very punchy sound to it and a great drive.

[flyingvees]

The fuzz certainly shown through more on that album and it seemed like his notes weighed a ton....:drool

[cber1517]

Hard to imagine discussing any negative aspects of something so Iconic and timeless. What was wrong with Charlie Christians tone or Wes Montgomery's tone on certain albums?? Or Hendrix on are you Experienced?
Was there too much hiss? too much tape warble?

The answer to me is NO..they are what they are.. Imperfections and all.
Timeless works of art by the most influential guitar players in the history of recorded music..

Completely agree with you - I'm just comparing this particular recorded tone with SRV's recorded tones prior to "In Step." I'll still take this tone any time if that was his tone all along but my point is it seems to have changed somewhat with this particular recording. I know so much goes into recording guitar tones - room size, mic placement, amps, etc. - it just seems like a departure from Texas Flood, CSTW and Soul to Soul.

[GtrWiz]

Definitely my favorite of all his records! I love that almost every song has a completely different guitar sound, yet the tone is all his.

To me, that is the difference between "tone" and "sound".

[Dog Boy]

For my taste I think the eq on some tracks is a bit over the top. Still a great album with great music.

[Teleplayer]

I liked most of Stevie's tones, regardless of the album. His tones on "In Step" were certainly more polished than is other albums - and I was a huge fan of his fuzzy lead tone on "Leave My Little Girl Alone" - but I still thought In Step had some great material and playing on it.

I always felt that In Step was sort of taking Stevie to an entirely new level regarding the commerical viability of his product. The song writing and overall album production were very different from his previous efforts - much slicker all around.

Of course, NOTHING beat seeing him live at a big venue, where he cold really "air it out" and get all of his amps cooking. That was like a force of nature.

[splatt]

¡OMG, yes!

personally,
i really think that
you should email stevie,
let him know.

dt / spltrcl

[TBoneDeluxe]

He's notorious for not answering his emails.

[ethandt]

The fuzz certainly shown through more on that album and it seemed like his notes weighed a ton....:drool

+1

I absolutely love the fuzz tone he gets on the solo for Leave My Little Girl Alone.

[theflyingturtle]

I think it's fair to say that, like all musicians, he was growing, changing, and experimenting. No one stays the same forever, he had access to more resources, money, and new technology all the while music tastes and preferences are constantly changing. As much as tracks like Ain't Gonna Give Up on Love or Texas Flood are almost iconic blues tracks for a variety of reasons It seems clear that he wasn't a one trick pony. I think it was a snapshot of his playing at the time, I just wished we could have all seen what it would have evolved into.

[karmadave]

My favorite SRV album. Stevie had really matured as both a musician, songwriter, and person...

-KD

[thesweetness]

I picked up some SRV discs over the holidays and have noticed that Stevie is using a chorusing effect on his tone on "In Step." Not every track, but several. I think I read somewhere he used the Roland Dimension D for this release. I personally prefer the Fender Vibratone he used previously.

I guess my point is this - the fact that he used 32 different amps for this release is ironic because I think his overall tone on this release is my least favorite. I think he used a Bassman on a lot of tracks also. I do love his clean tone on "Riviera Paradise" but everything else sounds real compressed or processed to my ears. :dunno

I'll still take SRV any day over most anything else when I don't know what to listen to and "In Step" has incredible songs on it. Maybe it's the fact that it was also recorded digitally that makes it sound weird to me?

Grab your coffee and discuss. Thanks!!

I actually agree with this idea. I never really gave much thought to the sound being "processed", but when I listen to In Step I hear the 1980's finally taking its effect on the RECORDING, not so much the tone. Go back and listen to the drums in crossfire, it sounds like double trouble was using the sound engineer from the band Europe or something.

[Luke]

Being sober and all he probably missed the fuzziness had had been hearing in his head previously.

[GtrWiz]

I actually agree with this idea. I never really gave much thought to the sound being "processed", but when I listen to In Step I hear the 1980's finally taking its effect on the RECORDING, not so much the tone. Go back and listen to the drums in crossfire, it sounds like double trouble was using the sound engineer from the band Europe or something.


See, my vote for the most 80's sounding recording is Soul To Soul, all that reverb makes it unlistenable for me...

[ReddRanger]

my favorite srv album. Stevie had really matured as both a musician, songwriter, and person...

-kd
+1.

[pete692]

I love that album, and I think he has some HUGE tones on it. Alot of stereo chorus, fantastic fuzz. But his cleans on that album are great as well. It's not like he's running a pod into pro tools or anything.

[bigpat13]

I would agree ith a few people here that In Step is probably my favorite SRV album and I actually prefer his tone on it to his earlier tone. To each his own, though. The album just sounds like a great evolution for him; a more mature, well-planned, well-produced effort than ever before. It brings a tear to my eye to think about what he would have continued to become over time had he not been taken from us so early :cry:

[cber1517]

Can you guys imagine a SRV record produced by T-Bone Burnett?
Whew! That man makes everything sound so natural and organic. His recordings "breathe" instead of sounding compressed to death.

[SLBlues]

I picked up some SRV discs over the holidays and have noticed that Stevie is using a chorusing effect on his tone on "In Step." Not every track, but several. I think I read somewhere he used the Roland Dimension D for this release. I personally prefer the Fender Vibratone he used previously.

I guess my point is this - the fact that he used 32 different amps for this release is ironic because I think his overall tone on this release is my least favorite. I think he used a Bassman on a lot of tracks also. I do love his clean tone on "Riviera Paradise" but everything else sounds real compressed or processed to my ears. :dunno

I'll still take SRV any day over most anything else when I don't know what to listen to and "In Step" has incredible songs on it. Maybe it's the fact that it was also recorded digitally that makes it sound weird to me?

Grab your coffee and discuss. Thanks!!

I posted a similar observation many months ago and got much the same responses. I agree "In Step" is great. But, I also agree it sounds very processed/produced to me when compared to his live recordings. SRV's live recordings were much more dynamic IMO. More grit, feeling, and soul. I think he really fed off a live audience and the difference in the studio recording is pretty obvious to me.

[pete692]

If anything, I feel that In Step was Stevie finally stripping away some of his derivative blues rock tendencies and finding a voice of his own. All the current white blues boy crowd can imitate his early stuff, but no one has really tried to tackle In Step. IMO his tone is very organic and true on this album.

[pete692]

You know it's funny, but when I look back over years of my own guitar recordings, I can see huge evolutions of my tone choices, some of them good, some of them bad, but at the time I was convinced that I had acheived "my tone." I'm sure most guitarists are the same way. Maybe on In Step, Stevie had grown tired of the tubescreamer into a super reverb all the time and wanted to experiment. Many of the songs on the album are more adventurous and creative than his previous albums, and I'm sure that his tone and gear choices had alot to do with that process. Still, none of the effects on the album sound in any way gimmicky to my ears, most of them are quite traditional (he's still using a fuzz face-who else is playing a fuzz face on a major label release in 1989?). A guy like Stevie wasn't going blast Mary Had A Little Lamb or Pride and Joy rewrites until the day he died. He was in the midst of a growth spurt on that album, and I for one liked the way he was moving.

[jcs]

big vinyl listener here, on a daily basis...that said i was a bit let down with 'in step' initially but it came around quickly to be a fav in no time...there are no 'bad' srv recordings imo!!

[pete692]

big vinyl listener here, on a daily basis...that said i was a bit let down with 'in step' initially but it came around quickly to be a fav in no time...there are no 'bad' srv recordings imo!!

Just a quick note- they remastered it ten years later in 1999 with 4 live bonus tracks (Life Without You with a super extended outro is totally smoking) and an interview. The remaster sounds much better than the original release. I still have both.

[Guitar James]

Love the In Step tones. Much more mature songwriting and he was going in a very positive direction. Shame he could not follow it up with more killer material.

[Smakutus]

¡OMG, yes!

personally,
i really think that
you should email stevie,
let him know.

dt / spltrcl

Come on OP.. Don't you know you're only supposed to talk about things you really really like here.

Jeff

[rob2001]

I'll reflect the idea that there is no "bad" sounding SRV. Different, yes. But i'm thinkin it's just an artist following his instincts and doing different things.

So many times you see an artist or band get trashed for not sounding like they always did. (not the case here) But take a look at all the greats and you'll usually see them go through sonic changes with everything. Clapton, Page, Beck, Knoffler etc... They all went through changes and it's in their recorded history. Even Jimi in his very short recording history took massive left and right turns in production. Some stuff sounds like on SM 57 hanging from the cieling while other stuff, (Cry of Love for example) is a production masterpiece.

The sad truth is, SRV left too soon and i'm sure his music and production would have run the gammit if he were still here. Personally, I dig a raw sound as well as a super polished sound. He worked well in both sonic arena's. I obviously wouldn't know for sure but i'm guessing there was a well thought descision made to have a more "modern" sound on In Step.

FWIW, i'm immersed in recording these days and I give much thought to production and it's impact. I've come to the conclusion that what is played far outweighs production. Lot's of reverb, or not wouldn't matter if the songs sucked. IMO, SRV's music most definitly does NOT suck!

[cber1517]

Come on OP.. Don't you know you're only supposed to talk about things you really really like here.

Jeff

Silly me!

:rolleyes:

[Alvis]

I was never a real big fan ,but I bought that album (on cassette tape) at a truck stop in Jackson MS when it was new

I thought it sounded great on tape
His comeback/sobriety record
It's a damn shame what happened .I saw him a week before the accident,It was a great show

[ReddRanger]

You know it's funny, but when I look back over years of my own guitar recordings, I can see huge evolutions of my tone choices, some of them good, some of them bad, but at the time I was convinced that I had acheived "my tone." I'm sure most guitarists are the same way. Maybe on In Step, Stevie had grown tired of the tubescreamer into a super reverb all the time and wanted to experiment. Many of the songs on the album are more adventurous and creative than his previous albums, and I'm sure that his tone and gear choices had alot to do with that process. Still, none of the effects on the album sound in any way gimmicky to my ears, most of them are quite traditional (he's still using a fuzz face-who else is playing a fuzz face on a major label release in 1989?). A guy like Stevie wasn't going blast Mary Had A Little Lamb or Pride and Joy rewrites until the day he died. He was in the midst of a growth spurt on that album, and I for one liked the way he was moving.
I think that's kind of the thing...he was beginning to experiment and evolve. Don't forget, he also recorded Family Style with Jimmie around the same period, which to me was also kind of a new direction. On both In Step and Family Style...I feel like I hear more of their Texas roots and a shift in gears from what they were doing before.

I think Stevie was right on track and taking his career to a whole new level. I wish we could have seen more.

[Roadeye]

No - it was clean as he was at that point, much like his Live Alive tone was very effected when he was under the influence.

[jcs]

'family style' was a cool record produced by nile rodgers...it shows srv had a lot of potential ahead of him...it didnt hurt having jimmy for a brother,the first 4-5 t bird records are killer!

[gkoelling]

Come on OP.. Don't you know you're only supposed to talk about things you really really like here.

Jeff

I think you've missed the point.

[Smakutus]

I think you've missed the point.

Yeah you're right.. I'll write my "I'm leaving, never to come back, because this place is so negative" speech tomorrow.

Jeff

[jzucker]

i agree with the original poster. By In Step, SRV had gone to lighter strings and it sounds like the lead channel in a mesa boogie amp. I didn't like Wes' tone when he used both pickups and played through SS amps either. Just because someone's great doesn't mean they are beyond any constructive criticism.

[splatt]

Just because someone's great doesn't mean they are beyond any constructive criticism.

but, in this case:
i'm pretty sure that SRV
is well beyond any constructive criticism,
at this point.

dt / spltrcl

[Guitar Slinger6]

Stevie played with thicker fatter tone when it was a three piece to help beef it up, when Reece joined adding the fat B3, Stevie changed up the tone a bit. If he had not Stevie and Reece would be stepping all over one another. Thus his tone change, I went through it myself.

[gkoelling]

Yeah you're right.. I'll write my "I'm leaving, never to come back, because this place is so negative" speech tomorrow.

Jeff

Bye

but, in this case:
i'm pretty sure that SRV
is well beyond any constructive criticism,
at this point.

dt / spltrcl

Thank you

[OldSchool]

He's notorious for not answering his emails.

That is SO wrong........forgive me Stevie! But I did Laugh..........http://www.thegearpage.net/board/images/icons/icon11.gif

[OldSchool]

but, in this case:
i'm pretty sure that SRV
is well beyond any constructive criticism,
at this point.

dt / spltrcl


Dude.......your killing me..........http://www.thegearpage.net/board/images/icons/icon11.gifhttp://www.thegearpage.net/board/images/icons/icon10.gif

[pete692]

This thread inspired me to put on the headphones and listen to the record with fresh ears, and I gotta tell you, respectfully-YOU GUYS ARE NUTS. I do want to thank the person that started this thread though, because I haven't listened to In Step in about 2 years. It's going back in my car immediately.

[GA19RVT]

I became an SRV fan when his first record, Texas Flood, came out. I also saw him a few times then, too. At that time, it was a revealation because here was a stone bluesman wrenching maniacal tones from "stock" Fender gear--a Strat and a Vibroverb, all turned to eleven. We loved it back then because it was pure and raw. The way it seemed at the time was that with each succesive recording SRV got more processed and the tone got more "squished" into a weird zone where the Fender tone was kind of lost and his guitar was permanently in the out-of-phase pickup position. Soul to Soul still had some ripping neck-position wailing (see "Change It") but then Live Alive came out and that seemed to be the epitome for this type of tone. By the time of In Step I had kind of gotten out of my fanship, but I did get to meet the man at that time and was able to tell him I was glad he was back, to which he said, "me too!" So, for me, my dislike for In Step was tempered by my gratefulness for just having a new SRV record.

Looking back, and listening to the albums, I'm still a fan of the early stuff--tone-wise--and I leave the later cuts for those who may have been just discovering SRV at the time those track were released. That's kind of how I demarcate it, that people who got into him early like the early tone and dislike the later tones. The people who got into him later, or after the fact, seem OK with the later tones.

[pete692]

i agree with the original poster. By In Step, SRV had gone to lighter strings and it sounds like the lead channel in a mesa boogie amp. I didn't like Wes' tone when he used both pickups and played through SS amps either. Just because someone's great doesn't mean they are beyond any constructive criticism.

what's it gonna take to finally debunk the "heavy string mojo" bullcrap.

You listen to the lead tone on Crossfire and look yourself in the mirror and tell yourself how the skinny strings make it sound "wimpy." That's about as desirable a tone as any I've ever heard.

[Steve73]

It has been awhile since I listened to In Step, but I never found the guitar processed on it. The only one I remember was the Leslie on 'Wall of Denial'. Besides that, it just sounds like pretty straight guitar to me with some added verb after the fact.

Now, the drums, that is another story, they do sound a little dated. My fav SRV record though for sure.

[Smakutus]

Bye

I'm not going anywhere.. Don't get your hopes up.

Thanks,
Jeff

[cber1517]

Good thoughts here (mostly.) I hadn't thought of SRV perhaps trying to compliment the keyboards with his tone of In Step. Perhaps the chorus effect was to brighten up his tone to mix better with everything else.:dunno In any case, I strongly agree the songs were incredible on this release. I'm still not a big fan of Family Style compared to all his other work but then again, this was a project with Jimmie so who could expect it to sound like Double Trouble?

Just because someone is no longer with us doesn't mean they are exempt from critical discussion or evaluation. In fact, I think it validates their influence on music history and guitar players overall. :dude

I always enjoy a good SRV thread on here so thanks and keep it up! I'm glad it made some of you rediscover In Step.

:phones

[JohnK24]

I picked up some SRV discs over the holidays and have noticed that Stevie is using a chorusing effect on his tone on "In Step." Not every track, but several. I think I read somewhere he used the Roland Dimension D for this release. I personally prefer the Fender Vibratone he used previously.

I guess my point is this - the fact that he used 32 different amps for this release is ironic because I think his overall tone on this release is my least favorite. I think he used a Bassman on a lot of tracks also. I do love his clean tone on "Riviera Paradise" but everything else sounds real compressed or processed to my ears. :dunno

I'll still take SRV any day over most anything else when I don't know what to listen to and "In Step" has incredible songs on it. Maybe it's the fact that it was also recorded digitally that makes it sound weird to me?

Grab your coffee and discuss. Thanks!!

From all that I have read about that recording session, I'd image the tone coming from those multiple amp rigs, cranked to the max were causing microphone distortion and that the compressed nature of the final product was a result of trying to "tame" the signal. I do like the energy of that CD, and the newly clean SRV was such an untapped resource that we unfortunately got to hear and see so little of....

[jzucker]

Stevie played with thicker fatter tone when it was a three piece to help beef it up, when Reece joined adding the fat B3, Stevie changed up the tone a bit. If he had not Stevie and Reece would be stepping all over one another. Thus his tone change, I went through it myself.

I don't agree at all that his tone was thicker and fatter. He just changed. He got sober, he cleaned up and wanted a change. No problem with that and no problem with honest comments about it.

[jzucker]

what's it gonna take to finally debunk the "heavy string mojo" bullcrap.


Take a chill. Do you pray to him also?

[wildschwein]

what's it gonna take to finally debunk the "heavy string mojo" bullcrap.

You listen to the lead tone on Crossfire and look yourself in the mirror and tell yourself how the skinny strings make it sound "wimpy." That's about as desirable a tone as any I've ever heard.
So, around that time he went down from 17s to what - 12s or 11s? I'm not too sure that he would have dropped all the way down to 8s or 9s.

[jzucker]

but, in this case:
i'm pretty sure that SRV
is well beyond any constructive criticism,
at this point.

dt / spltrcl

He is but that doesn't mean the criticism isn't constructive. It's like analyzing a coltrane or wes solo when they play a note they didn't mean to play. Do you worship the wrong notes? You might admire what they did before and after that to turn a wrong note into a right note and make the whole piece into something of beauty but why candy-coat your analysis of it? All I'm saying is "have good intentions and state what's in your heart."

NOTE - This is different than just saying "MAYER SUCKS"

[majordelt]

but, in this case:
i'm pretty sure that SRV
is well beyond any constructive criticism,
at this point.

dt / spltrcl
Precisely...whats left behind is Archival. It's like discussing D'Jango's tone and what if anything he should have done differently.

[jzucker]

Precisely...whats left behind is Archival. It's like discussing D'Jango's tone and what if anything he should have done differently.

No, it's nothing like that. You're missing the entire point. These guys aren't deities. It's ok to say what you like and don't like about it. Even 'Trane played a note he didn't mean to play every once in a while. It's ok to acknowledge it. As usual, these discussions just turn into chest beating. I'm outta here.

[majordelt]

No, it's nothing like that. You're missing the entire point. These guys aren't deities. It's ok to say what you like and don't like about it. Even 'Trane played a note he didn't mean to play every once in a while. It's ok to acknowledge it. As usual, these discussions just turn into chest beating. I'm outta here.

I didn't think we were discussing aspects of the mans playing. I thought it was about his tone.. I don't know, seemed like a pretty sincere discussion to me. I didn't detect any chest beating..I know I wasn't.. I guess what I meant is I look at them not as "Deities" but as players who contributed something Major to the world of guitar..and of course I agree it's OK to say what you like and don't like. However, "constructive" criticism is most always for the benefit of the person being criticized.. I definitely agree though that some people tend to Deify certain players..We are all just Humans after all.

[Seakayak]

A classic TGP thread. In my humiliating opinion*, the guitar wasn't as forward in the mix, on average to previous recordings, and this is what strikes people as processed or compressed. Compare the song Texas Flood to Crossfire, for example. Or, don't.

*Opinions expressed in this post are the sole opinions of myself. If you take offense, you are ugly and your breath stinks. And your string gauge is too small.

[TheArchitect]

i agree with the original poster. By In Step, SRV had gone to lighter strings and it sounds like the lead channel in a mesa boogie amp. I didn't like Wes' tone when he used both pickups and played through SS amps either. Just because someone's great doesn't mean they are beyond any constructive criticism.

1) It most certainly does not sound like the lead channel of a mesa.
2) Critiquing an album almost 20 years after the guy died is the pinnacle of pointless nonsense. Exactly what is constructive about it? The man was evolving like every player does.

If the OP doesn't like it fine. Thats his opinion. However, the post comes across as if the OP is some sort authority on the topic who knows more then SRV did about what sound was appropriate for the album. Clearly none of us are, including you, which is what people are reacting to.

[Thwap]

Honestly, never noticed it.

I just dig everything the man did, and I just kinda get lost in the whole thing.

Sweeps me away, so my analytical side disappears.

[dougg]

I just read an interview with someone who participated in the recording of In Step, and they actually mentioned the use of the Dimension D chorus. I remember them saying something along the lines of, they used it, but sparingly - it was either to complement the use of a Leslie speaker, or they used the Leslie speaker for the most part but only a little bit of the Dimension D when they wanted to subtly fatten the sound a bit.

If I remember correctly, in the same interview whomever it was mentioned that SRV & the band were anxious about using digital technology to record the album, but when they did a blind A/B test, they all thought the digitally recorded stuff sounded best. Can't remember where I read this, but I'm sure it's in one of the guitar mags I have sitting around here - I'll try to dig it up.

FWIW, I think SRV's sound is every bit as raw on In Step as on Texas Flood. The guy could go into the studio and knock stuff out because he had phenomenal talent - IMO, what you hear on the album is a guy plugging a Strat into an amp and playing the hell out of it. Any effects are secondary to the guy's actual ability.

[big mike]

I love that CD. The tone is killer, the songwriting and execution is superb.

[splatt]

A classic TGP thread. In my humiliating opinion*, the guitar wasn't as forward in the mix, on average to previous recordings, and this is what strikes people as processed or compressed. Compare the song Texas Flood to Crossfire, for example. Or, don't.

*Opinions expressed in this post are the sole opinions of myself. If you take offense, you are ugly and your breath stinks. And your string gauge is too small.
hey, i don't think your opinion is humiliating;
in no way do i think you should feel humiliated
for posting something of value:
insight, perception, etc,
whether musical or technical or what-have-you.

criticism can certainly offer value for participants
who are motivated to have their own playing edified,
thereby.
if that motivation isn't present & visible, though,
then what, precisely, is at the core of it?

it seems like such threads as this
show tendencies to become focussed on
chest-thumping & flag-waving of fanboys v. haters
--- no matter how polite or "reasonably" presented ---
in which the primary thing revealed
is simply who-likes-what.....
which, i'd say, doesn't usually offer much in the way
of "constructive criticism",
as regards the enrichment of
our own music & our own musical lives.
or, does it?

i'm not a fan of SRV; neither am i a hater.
my acerbic remarks were meant only to
offer my own perspective on
the nature of musical discussion on TGP.

it doesn't matter, but..... talk is cheap.
taking action on the thought behind talk
is a bit more, well..... expensive.

if there's anything in a thread like this
that helps anyone pay more attention to their
own playing & their own music in a constructive way,
i'm all for it:
i only meant to be "constructively critical",
as regards the nature of the thread, directly.

dt / spltrcl

[Trainwreck]

SRV was Awesome in every way...His music is so Soulfull...I think he just kept getting better and better...He was like most of us and was always looking for the most TONE he could find out of what ever he was using...Wish he was still with us all...R.I.P..SRV...

[majordelt]

I love that CD. The tone is killer, the songwriting and execution is superb.
+1 here man!

[daphil]

I use to love SRV. Regarding In Step, it has that typical later 80's commercial sound. It bothers you, or not.

[DavidG]

I became an SRV fan when his first record, Texas Flood, came out. I also saw him a few times then, too. At that time, it was a revealation because here was a stone bluesman wrenching maniacal tones from "stock" Fender gear--a Strat and a Vibroverb, all turned to eleven. We loved it back then because it was pure and raw. The way it seemed at the time was that with each succesive recording SRV got more processed and the tone got more "squished" into a weird zone where the Fender tone was kind of lost and his guitar was permanently in the out-of-phase pickup position. Soul to Soul still had some ripping neck-position wailing (see "Change It") but then Live Alive came out and that seemed to be the epitome for this type of tone. By the time of In Step I had kind of gotten out of my fanship, but I did get to meet the man at that time and was able to tell him I was glad he was back, to which he said, "me too!" So, for me, my dislike for In Step was tempered by my gratefulness for just having a new SRV record.

Looking back, and listening to the albums, I'm still a fan of the early stuff--tone-wise--and I leave the later cuts for those who may have been just discovering SRV at the time those track were released. That's kind of how I demarcate it, that people who got into him early like the early tone and dislike the later tones. The people who got into him later, or after the fact, seem OK with the later tones.

Spot on, imo.

[OldSchool]

I think for that album he had like 30 amps set up in series or something so its gonna sound a bit compressed with so many diferent amps all playing at once, a few notes here and there lasting a bit longer then others. At the time, Stevie Dug it . Its what he was hearing and feeling at that time. So I wouldn't want it any other way. You hear it differently? Go grab a Mic and a guitar and go do your thang............:phones

[Guitar Slinger6]

I don't agree at all that his tone was thicker and fatter. He just changed. He got sober, he cleaned up and wanted a change. No problem with that and no problem with honest comments about it.

Nothing but respect for you (and I mean that), but you are wrong on this. SRV wanted to open up more (I like the added B3) and have more possibilities. But if you will go back and listen to the "Couldn't Stand the Weather" CD or better yet the CStW tour (the one he collapsed on from drugs) or any of his previous recordings, and add a B3 in with the mix and what would happen. SRVs guitar would have been lost in the mix, he had still had a thick sound on "In Step" but it was not like the previous stuff. SRV changed how he approached a song with "In Step" Reece gave him freedom to expand the sound. But it is still what it is, his strings were 11s instead of 13s, and he opened up the sound a bit. I happen to love "In Step", it was more of a band sound than SRV with a backing band. Like I said, nothing but respect for you, but on this one your wrong.

[cber1517]

Critiquing an album almost 20 years after the guy died is the pinnacle of pointless nonsense. Exactly what is constructive about it? The man was evolving like every player does.

If the OP doesn't like it fine. Thats his opinion. However, the post comes across as if the OP is some sort authority on the topic who knows more then SRV did about what sound was appropriate for the album. Clearly none of us are, including you, which is what people are reacting to.


Umm....Firstly, what is wrong with people on here? I think getting your panties in a wad over a friggin' thread topic is the pinnacle of pointless nonsense - IMHO :tapedshut

Second, should we disregard countless books, magazines, websites, etc. that offer historic criticism and observation on popular music, movies and culture? Look at the scads of books on Hendrix, The Beatles, Rolling Stones, etc. Isn't discussion on any given topic how people learn and share information? Perhaps someone will become a SRV fan after reading this thread. Is that okay with you?

Lastly, if you actually READ what I posted you will see I like "In Step." I wasn't trying to come across as an authority on SRV. I'm merely a fan, like many on here. I'm not a fan of hotheaded BS comments that assume to know my motives or attitude on an artist. :nono

If you don't like what I say - that is fine. If you don't agree with me - that is fine as well. But don't attack me and misconstrue my honest thoughts and asking for healthy discussion as anything but that.

:)