Anyone subscribe? $70/year. "Worth" it (worth being a relative term)?

http://www.tonequest.com/

I subscribed for a year - if you're plugged into the forum scene and have the time/patience to surf the web, I don't think TQ is all that necessary. The nice thing about it though is that it has lots of nice info collected in one place for you so there's no thinking about it.

That's was kind of my guess - thanks for the info davei.

thanks for the link. the interview with Ken Parker was a good one!
blues

I subscribed this year. Agree with you davei, there's not all that much you wouldn't have heard about on these forums, but the interviews are interesting and the mag is very well done in general, and I do like having the info easily accessible. I just ordered a Seymour Duncan Pickup Booster on the basis of their positive writeup from this month's issue, it's the first thing I bought on their say so - I'll see how that works out.

The interview with Caesar Diaz was fantastic. They had PDFs posted on the site for free a while back along with Dickson (Eric Clapton's tech) and Analog Man. They currently have four entire issues online for nothing! I'm not a guitar tech so thats plenty for me.
--
http://www.tonequest.com/sample.htm

quote:

---

Originally posted by guysmy:
The interview with Caesar Diaz was fantastic.

---

Funny, that interview was one reason I STOPPED subscribing - there was no real info in there that hadn't been printed somewhere else before, and Diaz's incredibly self-serving tone (as if SRV would have sounded bad without him) was nauseating.

i, too, subscribed for a year. as much as i liked reading a magazine free from advertising, the issues seemed pretty slim to warrant the price. as much as i like roots & blues stuff, it seemed to be their sole focus, so they kinda lost me there. add to that, imho, the interviews w/ diaz & parker left them looking like megalomaniacs. i also got a sense from a review of delay pedals that they regarded pedals as crutches for players to hide their inadequacies.

just my 70 bucks a year

quote:

---

Originally posted by davei:

quote:

---

Originally posted by guysmy:
The interview with Caesar Diaz was fantastic.

---

Funny, that interview was one reason I STOPPED subscribing - there was no real info in there that hadn't been printed somewhere else before, and Diaz's incredibly self-serving tone (as if SRV would have sounded bad without him) was nauseating.

---

Caesar is a real character and yes he has an ego, but I found him to be a great storyteller. I didn't know much about him before I read the article so it was fresh to me.

I also didn't know much about Cesar Diaz and found the article interesting. Plus there have been a few past articles showing various guy's pedalboards, Joe Bonamassa, Peter Stroud, etc. along with interviews. Not the most insightful reporting in the world, but a lot of the stuff they talk about is right up my alley.

The interview with Cesar WAS Cesar.

He was a real character and spoke his mind and didnt sugar coat anything.

Before he passed, we emailed quite a lot and he offered some really sound advice to me (as well as sending along a lot of really cool pics). He was up front, to the point and a no BS kind of guy.

There was no slant to that interview, what you guys read was how he was.

Don't get me wrong guys, there's no doubt in my mind that that was the real, no holds barred Cesar Diaz (RIP). His attitude (as read in print) just rubbed me the wrong way. I can't say anything bad about the guy in general though (since I didn't know him) - just that article. It sticks in my mind because that particular article was just so galling. He contradicted himself in the same paragraph (something about matching tubes - talking about how he helped SRV by matching this or that, then going on to say how it wasn't that important). And how it was "his" tone (I think "my tone" were his exact words) that he passed on to SRV! True or not we can debate forever, but when I read that article it just sounded like he himself (and only him) was responsible for "the tone". I think there was an interview with Dr. Z in the same issue, I remember thinking the contrast between the two could not have been any greater. From a historical standpoint Diaz's interview was more interesting but Dr. Z had more technical info.

I too got the feeling after reading a year's worth of issues (plus many more - a buddy of mine has subscribed continuously from the beginning) that FX are a "crutch". I don't know, for me tone tweakers tend to fall into 3 categories: FX heads, component swappers (tubes/speakers/pickups/etc.), and all of the above. TQ seems to be biased towards components, which is fine if that's your thing, but it didn't do anything for me.

I also had issues with the timeliness of their information and quality of writing. As I mentioned before, if you're plugged into the forum scene (if you're reading this you must be) you always know the latest and greatest when it comes out, or the latest trend. TQ seemed to be a step or two behind - which is not always a bad thing, since it gives some perspective.

I'll give TQ credit though, I usually liked their interviews with more obscure artists. Other publications like Guitar Player or Guitar World always seem to focus on mundane details like recording techniques or lydian scales that make my brain fall asleep (yeah, I know other people love that stuff

quote:

---

Originally posted by davei:
Don't get me wrong guys, there's no doubt in my mind that that was the real, no holds barred Cesar Diaz (RIP). His attitude (as read in print) just rubbed me the wrong way.

---

I hate to say it, but I have to aggree. If he was so great, why did he have to keep braging on himslef? He lost it for me with one story of growing up in Cuba (or was it Puerto Rico?) and some old man down the street showing him some guitar chords. He then goes on to say the man was Segovia. Segovia was Spanish.

I get Diaz and Torres mixed up. I remember a few years back in Guitar Player one of them was interviewed and commented on how he fixed Claptons Tweed Twin (the amp had been blowing up he said in the article). The next month Claptons guitar tech writes in and say the amp blew up AFTER Diaz (or was it Torres?) worked on it.

I've had a subscription for 2+ years, and bought almost all the back issues from somebody on ebay.

Almost every issue there's SOMETHING worthwhile, although there's plenty of stuff that I'm just not into. But when they get into a topic you're digging (or may be into later), it is cool. I've seen very good features on HIWATT, Vox, lots of boutique pickup guys, etc.

Bottom line, I keep subscribing because I know that some time in the next year there'll be SOME article on something that will make it worth while for me...

-- GM

i've subscribed since issue #4,than back-ordered
the first 3.i think it is a great mag,full of
usefull material,especially about amps.in all
the issues there was maybe 2 features that i
didn't get something out of,1 was about martin guitars(i'm not a big acoustic fan).& i am staying a subscriber.i mean,it is a mag about gear!

lol! i thought it was funny when diaz told stevie he sounded like s-h-i-t hehehe but found it hard to believe that stevie used 32 amps at one time in the studio. what for?

Does anyone else feel that TQR is a bit of a "Good ol' boy's club"? You give me a good review and I'll give you a good review?

I've learned some incredibly valuable stuff in TQR over the past few years, mostly about amps and tube technology but also about speakers & pickups (interviews with Chris Kinman, Scott Peterson of Harmonic Design, etc.) Yeah these guys are primarily blues and roots players/fans and therefore are not too interested in pedals....TQR is based in Atlanta/Decatur and so I've been lucky enough to get a bunch of free issues from local stores....I don't think it's a good ol' boy thing, I think it's a low budget, limited audience gearhead rag that relies alot on loaner gear for reviews. Alot of the stuff they've reviewed has come from local stores here in Atl. I don't know that they would print a bad review of someone they've worked with though, so in that sense it may be biased. But I honestly think they just only write about stuff they like and don't bother writing bad reviews of stuff they're not into. Just my $.02