I was wondering how I could reproduce the tone of Tom Scholz of Boston. You know, like the leads in "More than a Feeling" or any of
their songs for that matter.

quote:

---

Originally posted by FloydianAnimal:
I was wondering how I could reproduce the tone of Tom Scholz of Boston. You know, like the leads in "More than a Feeling" or any of
their songs for that matter.

---

A good starting point: http://www.eet.com/news/98/1004news/scholz.html

didn't he do a lot of doubletracking?

quote:

---

Originally posted by FloydianAnimal:
I was wondering how I could reproduce the tone of Tom Scholz of Boston. You know, like the leads in "More than a Feeling" or any of
their songs for that matter.

---

The 1st album was MXR pedals, Les Paul and Marshalls.....

MXR Distortion+
most importantly an MXR 10 Band EQ

MXR Flanger Chorus

Echoplex


just about the same setup as randy Rhoades, but RR used an extreme EQ setting!

I disagree the first album used a Ampeg amp with Les Paul and MXR.
If you can get a copy of Guitar For the Practicing Musician which has Randy Rhoads on the cover and Tom Scholz interview plus "More than a Feeling" tabbed. I believe it is there tha Tom refers to a specific Model Ampeg amp for the tones on that album.
You also have to remember he finely EQ'd his tone in the studio.
But now you can get a used Rockman.

Craig

check out my site Guitar From The Green goo for my gear and music.

ooops
Tom did doubletrack and a lot of the time he did it at higher octaves and at different increments in the scale.
The solo in "More Than a Feeling" is a perfect example of this.That way Tom made it sound like a tube amp set on meltdown by mimicing the harmonic overtones of a moderatly feeding back note.
Very smart man...a pioneer.
Soldano amps are great at this type of lead tone...matter of fact they are celebrated for it.

Craig

check out my site Guitar From The Green goo for my gear and music.

sorry didn't mean to come off strong...but I guess starting off by saying I disagree could be taken that way.
When I do that I'm simply saying I disagree and not that I think or KNOW I'm right cuz if I thought or new I was right I would say so and back it up with evidence.
I do have the mag here somewhere and I do have a pretty good memory when it comes to matters such as this but I still am not saying I'm right for sure.
Hopefully someone can give the answere with some factual support, or will have that mag issue handy and set the record straight.
On the other hand a friend of mine does own an Ampeg and I recall it being the one Tom mentioned that he used in the studio for his main tone.
One more thing is we are dealing with a very intelligent individual here and more than likely there were a few ingredients that Tom needed to create his hallmark tone.
Please understand that I'm here on this board as a friendly participant and I only want to contribute in a positive way where I can. I've been on boards where people wrongly mislead others or shoot their mouths off trying to sound like they know it all. I'm not hear to do that and I don't want anything I say here to be misunderstood as being negative or malicious.

Kind Regards
Craig

check out my site Guitar From The Green goo for my gear and music.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by CarvinDude:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by khingpynn:
I disagree the first album used a Ampeg amp with Les Paul and MXR.
If you can get a copy of Guitar For the Practicing Musician which has Randy Rhoads on the cover and Tom Scholz interview plus "More than a Feeling" tabbed. I believe it is there tha Tom refers to a specific Model Ampeg amp for the tones on that album.
You also have to remember he finely EQ'd his tone in the studio.
But now you can get a used Rockman.

Touché, I think you’re right. Funny how so many strong and explicit replies are wrong. It’s an Internet thing


Craig

Funny how in a GP interview, Tom listed the gear I mentioned.
If it wasn't used on the first album, it was sure used live before the Rockman stuff. To think the first Boston album is the result of an Ampeg amp is a joke.

Touché, I think you’re right. Funny how so many strong and explicit replies are wrong. It’s an Internet thing


Craig


Funny, how this old GP article echos my original
post:

Probably the most obvious departure in the Boston sound from your run-of-the-mill heavy metal sludge is Scholz' thick, yet clear lead guitar lines, partially accomplished with the aid of a device called a doubler, designed by Scholz and a friend. "That's what we call it," explains Tom, "though doubler is kind of a misnomer. It does more than, say, an Echoplex or a tape delay that just gives you a repeat. We designed it to approximate the same sound as when you dub over a guitar part twice: it adds a pitch change to the time delay. You can build the same type of unit with commercially available devices, but I think that unless you were filthy rich, it wouldn't justify the cost. You would need a regular delay unit, a harmonizer, and an oscillator-nothing very complicated. Since we were broke at the time, and since the technology wasn't very complicated, we built our own. Because the doubler gives Scholz such a rich, heavy sound, Tom is the only one of Boston's three guitarists [the other two are Barry Goudreau on lead and rhythm and singer Bradley Delp on rhythm] to use the device onstage. "Anything more than that would get too messy," Tom explains.



To simulate the sound onstage that he gets on record, Scholz runs the guitar signal and the signal from the doubler in stereo, which duplicates, he says, "the old recording trick of using two rhythm guitars panned to the outside." The device, however, can be used in mono, and Tom describes that result as "sounding sort of flanged."



Aside from the doubler, which Tom states is used judiciously throughout the album, his other techniques are less exotic, though just as effective. "A plain old wah-wah pedal is very effective on certain things," observes the musician. "To some extent you can follow notes on the fretboard. To do it, you find two or three notes next to each other on the fretboard, and then find the position of the pedal that sustains those notes. As you play up the board, press the pedal toward the treble side to sustain the higher notes, or if you're playing bass notes, push back on the pedal to sustain them. It's a great effect, but a little difficult to control."



Tom credits the biggest part of his sound to a Marshall 100-watt Super Lead tube amp cranked full up, though he notes that the tone settings on the amp (which he changes often are critical. "A little adjustment on the head will give you different distortions," he remarks. "Even the same tone settings on two different Marshalls will give you slightly different sounds." Tom uses a preamp that he salvaged from an old hi-fi system to boost his sustain in the studio, though he thinks that most commercial preamps will achieve the same effect.



Onstage, Scholz controls his effects from a pedal board, which, along with individual on/off switches for each effect, also features the "kitchen sink"-a switch that turns everything on ("for those times when they start picking up bottles"). The guitar is first fed into a homemade preamp which has an active high-end boost, to allow Tom to get away with using all his other inline effects without overpowering noise. "Most of those devices are designed to take much larger input signals than even the most powerful guitars put out," Scholz explains. "If you kick up the signal in front by 3 or 4dB, and start boosting the highend at around 2kHz around 6dB per octave, you can get the signal-to-noise ratio down to a usable level.


"After the preamp," he continues, "I have a 6-band MXR Graphic Equalizer that runs on batteries-which in itself is noisier than hell, but sounds all right after it's preamped. I have a wah-wah pedal, but I often use the MXR to simulate the wah-wah sound. After that is a volume pedal, and then a Maestro Echoplex which I modified the hell out of to make it semi-usable."



Modifications to the Echoplex include a foot pedal to control sustain, volume, and head location (the latter by means of a homemade mechanical hookup). Though Tom modified the delay unit over five years ago, it took up until about a year ago to get the unit working to his specifications. "Part of the reason is that the raw materials are of really poor quality," says Scholz. "The electronics, the heads, hell-everything you can name on the thing is really cheesy. Even after having modified it, I still have to tune It up every other week. When I have some time, maybe before we do the next album, I'm going to throw the whole thing out and build a decent one from scratch. I don't think that will be too hard."



Another studio trick that Tom transferred to the stage allows him to get the tone he wants from his Marshalls without blowing himself or the rest of the band off the stage. "With two stacks of Marshalls full out, I don't think there's a guitar made that wouldn't go crazy." Tom believes. He has devised a resistive network that he positions between the head and the speaker bottoms to cut volume without affecting tone. "They're variable: we can tap off however much of the signal as we want," is about as much detail as the Guitarist offers.



The only other piece of modified equipment that Boston uses onstage is a fuzz box run between singer Bradley Delp's Gibson L6-S electric guitar and Ampeg V-4 bass amp head. "I think the thing is called a 'Fresh Fuzz'," says Tom. "It's a cheap little box that I traded for a six-pack a while ago. I put in a few resistors and capacitors to boost the high end and give it a shelf. You get more raunch than fuzz out of it now, which isn't bad at all!"



Scholz feels that both live and in the studio, the manner in which the group's Marshall cabinets are miked greatly alters their sound. "Marshall cabinets in particular are very directional," he notes. "You get a completely different sound quality as you move the mike around. Personally, I put the mike a few feet away from the cabinet so it picks up the reflected signal from the floor, as well as the direct signal from the speakers."

I have no idea what amp he used, although Ampeg doesn't rub me the wrong way. I can tell you this though, serious compression - via the amp, dist box, studio gear and primarily lots of overdubs that are slamming the signal to tape. Not to mention that I'm sure it was "squashed and chopped" even more during mastering. I know that Scholz did alot of that stuff in his basement. I'm sure there was at least one 1176 down there. Somebodys signature says,"is it you or the equiptment". After 4 records(2 of them great)of basically the same sound, I'd say that alot of it has to do with how Tom Scholz plays the guitar.

i here alot of compression and a good distortion if your amp hasnt got it put your distortion after the compressor you could use a light chorus and a delay 250-300 ms regentaration about30% that will get you close now you got to play it!
bluesmann