Conference napalm::guitar

    I think Les Pauls, sans the Pro Deluxe, have very fat tones to them!
    The strats that sound thin are the ones with cheesy light bodies and
    lousy pickups.  I played a friends mid 70s strat...the thing was heavy!
    and it had a big fat tone to it.  The single coil pickups sounded
    really nice...similar to a Dimarzio HS-3.

    I can't define what is "thin" and what is "FAT" (and I know Webster's
    surely has it ALL wrong  :^), but this is my idea of what I consider
    to be thin/FAT:
    
    Thin = Jeff Healy, most C/W, Jimmy Page's telecaster on solo to STH,
           Hendrix' high strings
    
    FAT = Tom Sholz' Les Paul, Hendrix' low strings, Eddie Van Halen, etc.
    
    Of course, there's a scientific explaination for this stuff, but then
    again, I ain't no scientist.  :^)
    
    Mike

	I can get a nice fat jazzy tone out of the single coils on my
	Rick w/out getting the bulldozer effect common the Gibsons. In
	this case body weight and .10 strings appear to be the major
	factors. I've spent quite a bit of time with a new American
	Standard Stratocaster that a buddy of mine bought. I can get some
	warm fat tones out of that too but there's a component to every
	tone I've tried in that guitar that screams "Strat". Nice guitar
	if you can live with that.

    I think what it has to do with is harmonic content.  The "fat" tones
    tend to be more low-midrangy, where the "thin" tones tend to accentuate
    the high end.  I think that lots of low end guitars sound thin because
    they put cheap low output pickups in them.
    
    I have a Strat that's ANYTHING but thin, but it's extremely heavy and
    has EMG pickups in it.  I played a Les Paul "Recording" model that I
    thought was nasty thin (not to mention an utter piece of crap, but
    that happens to used guitars sometimes).
    
    Greg

    	yeah, I agreed with Greg, my definition would be high freqs=thin
    mid and low=fat, kind of.. there's another dimension that I can't
    explain.. I've compared a bunch of cheaper Strats and Teles with
    plywood bodies and really low impedance pickups and they all sound thin
    as compared to my solid wood strat with Fender sensors or my Tele with
    the Duncan humbucker in the bridge position.  SRV, and Robert Cray
    always get a fat sound (at least the stuff I've heard.. ) and they use
    huge strings in conjunction with ash bodied Strats.  I dunno, I'm still
    pretty much working at developing some chops, but I know I could drive
    myself nuts (more nuts??) striving for the right tone.  Thing like the
    way the bridge lays on the body, string guage, the neck the neck
    attaches to the body (no kidding, I bolted my strat neck on five or six
    times til it sounded right), the angle over the bridge of the strings..
    etc. etc. etc.  all seem to have an effect on tone..  The beach boys
    play strats (right?) and they've always had a kind of thin sound...
    
    Hmmm,  maybe thin=then and fat=happenin'
    
    
    Regards,
    Steve

    Hmmmm, this is very enlightening.  At least two previuosly mentioned
    examples are totally opposite to what I would say.  To me, Jeff
    Healy's tone is very "fat" and Robert Cray's is very "thin".
    I'm not saying you're wrong, only that it's interesting that your
    perceptions are so different from mine,

    Strat through a clean amp always sounds thin to me

    Anything through a cranked Marshall sounds fat

    Don't forget the effect of "fingers" on the tone of yer axe as well.  A
    blues nut friend of mine sat in with our band a few weeks ago and had
    my Les Paul sounding kind of "thinish" just by the way he plucks the
    strings. Mac McCloud sounds like Mac McCloud no matter what he's
    pickin'....
    
    Steve D.
    

I guess whats buggin' me is an LP player will tell me how fat their 
sound is in comparison to my Charvel, when I think the LP sounds thin
and wimpy compared to my tone...  and it doesn't seem to be the Charvel, 
because they tend to say the same about Fender...

Now Pat Blair has a american Strat thats new, and to me is the EPITOME
of FAAAATTTT... (BTW - Who ever said they thought  Jeff Healy  had a fat tone ?
I agree...).  I guess it's just a different definition of Fat, Thin, Wimpy, 
Ballzy...  But I wish someone would do some standard settings...  :)

jc

I don't think its the guitar as much as the pickups, effects, and amps.
Take, for example, a Strat. You can get a nice clean "thin" sound like Mark 
Knofler does. But Strats are also used by Kirk Hammett of Metallica, and that 
sound is hardly "thin" by any stretch of the imagination. Clapton's tone seems 
to be somewhere in the middle.

I think the same goes for any guitar - you can make it what you want it to be, 
with the proper accessories.

Alan S.

    To me, "fat" and "thin" more describe the midrange content than
    anything else.  When I want a fat sound, I crank up the middle, when I
    want a thin sound, I take it out.  For example, on my Boogie, playing
    my Strat, I can do this:
    
    For a fat rock sound, use the bridge pickup and set the Boogie to:
    
    Volume 1 (this is the channel volume): 8.5, Pulled for bright (I like
    everything bright, with brand new strings, what can I say?)
    Treble: 7.5, pulled to boost the midrange.
    Bass: 3.5
    Middle: 3-4
    Master 1: 1.5 - 2 (nice practice level for in the house)
    Lead Drive: 4.5 - 5, pulled for lead channel (Nice and crunchy with 
                          my Strat's single coils)
    Lead Master: 5 - 6
    
    To get it fatter, either turn up Middle, Pull out Master 1, or pull out
    Bass.  All of them will add lower harmonics, I just don't like it THAT
    damned full most of time.
    
    I can switch to a full (in the BASS, not middle register) jazz sound by doing this
    starting with the above.  This is a much thinner sound (to me):
    
    Switch to the fret board pickup, Take middle down to 0, Pull out Bass
    (to bring in a jazzy low end), Push in the Treble, Push in Lead Drive,
    Turn Volume 1 down to 5, Bring up Master 1 to compensate for the
    decrease in volume and now the sound is much thinner for soloing, but
    deep for rhythm on jazz.
    
    If I want to go to extremes, I also throw in the EQ.  To get extra fat
    the EQ looks like this:
    
    |  |  *  |  |
    |  *  |  *  |
    |  |  |  |  |
    *  |  |  |  *
    
    For thin, I use something like this (just the opposite):
    
    *  |  |  |  *
    |  |  |  |  |
    |  *  |  *  |
    |  |  *  |  |
    
    Does this help at all?  It's just my perception on fat and thin like
    the other replies.
    
    Will
    
    

    Coop,
    
    If you think Les Pauls are "thin and wimpy", you'll never understand
    the defenition of a nice warm fat tone....give it up.  I presume that
    since my Les Paul is wimpy, you'll stop complaining that I play too
    loud? (I guess I should ignore all the axe slingers that compliment my    
    guitars' beautiful tone...sheesh)
    
    ;^)
    
    Bulldawg 

    I used to have a Gibson "SG", it was certainly fat!
    Wish I'd never sold it now.
    
    Robin.

    
    	Steve, Coop is asking people what they think means thin and what
    means fat.  Saying he'll never understand the meaning is not really 
    answering the question.  Also, his ears are different than yours...

    Ash and maple are alot harder than mahogany. My baretta is heavy,
    and growls thick. But there's always a cut to the sound, an edge, an
    hardness that dosen't come from a guitar with soft wood.
    
    Maybe that's it, a soft or hard sound. Maybe it's just another 
    can-o-worms. 

    Obviously several of my buddies misunderstood my reply to Coop.  I
    publicly apologize if any offense was taken, NONE was intended!!!!
    Gee, can't ya bust yer friends in this conference any more?  Please note
    smiley faces  ;^)  8)  |)
    
    Steve....

No problem dude...

:)

    Doesn't p-p wacking hurt....I suppose it depends on several variables
    |)
    
    Steve D.

    
    RE; .10
    
    I own a Mesa Boogie as well, and the the settings you described for the 
    EQ seems little confusing to me.  
    | | | | |
    * | | | *
    | * | * |
    | | * | |
    | | | | |
    This is the setting I'll normally use for rhythm playing and I'd
    describe it as being "crunchy".  For solo playing, I use the EQ on/off
    pedal and turn the EQ off.  That's what I'd describe as being "punchy".
    As far as thin sound, that would be more like;
    | | | | |
    | | | | *
    | | | * |
    * * * | |
    | | | | |
    | | | | |
    
    Also, something else to consider;  Les Pauls have shorter neck (less 
    string tension) and Strats have longer neck (more string tension).
    It seemed like no one really touched this subject?????  It seems that 
    my Les Paul have throatier ka-chunka :*) than my Ibanez which has 
    tighter ka-chunka.  I usually play my Ibanez with bridge humbucker on,
    and tone at around 5 whereas my Les Paul also with bridge humbucker on
    and tone wide open.  My preference?  Give me the name of the song
    first, then I'll answer...  
    
    My $0.02...
    
    J.

    re -1
    
    Yeah, I'll buy that for being a little chunky.  Just not "fat" to me,
    anyway.  I never use the EQ with lead mode, always in rhythm.  I just
    gave that setting because it's a setting I use sometimes.  Usually on
    jazz stuff, when I want the sparkle of the treble, but the smooth depth
    of the base.  To my ear, when that's the sound I'm looking for, the
    mid-range sort of muddies up everything, so I take it out.
    
    Will

    Ya know?
    
    Tone can be affected different ways, too!
    
    I was reading about Steve Stevens and his views on tone.  He says what
    a lot of people say...you can't get a good tone with just a preamp.  ie
    - tone, real tone, comes from overdriving your output tubes in your
    amp...preamp gain will just give you a buzzy, fuzzy distortion, but
    tone comes from the output stage getting a workout.  I tested this out
    on my 100wt tube amp last night, and yes, while it was loud, there was
    a big round tone happening as well.  I found this worked well for rock,
    jazz, and funk idioms as my drummer and I jammed away for a few hours.

    
    
    
    	I'm fat and Tom Petty is thin!!!
    
    
    Steve
    
    

    RE -2
    
    on my 100 valve marshall I usually run the preamp all up.
    Then i turn the MV just a little bit, you can definately hear a
    new type of distortion kick in . You need a feather-touch, after
    it kicks in it just gets louder and louder.
    
    As if this has anything to do with it...
    
    tOe

	Yup. That's why I have a 10wt champ as a practice amp. I
	turn the clean volume to 10 and it distorts just right. Gotta
	swap out the crap speaker on that bugger soon cuz I know it
	can sound even better.

	When I was out amp shopping a coupla months ago, I was looking
	for an amp that I could open up far enough to get that windy
	power amp tone without levelling downtown Nashua.

	I think the logic behind the lower powered amps (AC30s, Bassmans,
	JTM45s, Super60s ;-) ) is the ability to get that crank from the
	power stage without loosing yer hearing.