batteries and power supply

Check this out, too. He is very diligent in his research. Of particular interest to me was how often the in-studio Strats were earlier models instead of the big peghead later Strats typically more associated with him; makes sense to me because the '64-'65 Strats I've played have sounded more Hendrix-y to me than the late '60s ones (though there was a '67 that kinda nailed it), and definitely more than any '70s Strats, which many casual observers would assume is more suited for the task.

Yeah, it is a great example of the pendulum swinging from decade to decade. This stuff is rarely set in stone. I remember a time when people obsessed over guitar weight and insisted the heavier guitars sounded best.... and they did if you wanted a compressed, sustain-y tone. Light guitars were for wusses with bad backs.

IMO, the reason 11s got so popular is because everyone was listening to SRV and beating the heck out of their guitars. The best string is USUALLY the one that matches how aggressively you play, so a bunch of people probably had an "a ha!" moment if they went from beating the snot out of 9s up to 10s and then feeling very satisfied with themselves with 11s. I run into this with acoustic guys a lot. Many newer guitars are kinda underbuilt and will sound fine with 11s, but then someone wants really light strings to deal with some age (and technique) related hand problems, but they keep beating the snot out of it so it buzzes and sounds flappy and awful. Play with a lighter touch, and they sound nice. Your example Leftee makes me wonder if these are people who were smacking their guitars around ruthlessly 20-30 years ago but have lightened up over the years.

Tonewoods.... tl;dr wood definitely matters, but most people get the how/why part wrong. Electric bodies don't "resonate", they act as filters as the anchors and reflective surfaces for the strings. I see SO MANY people try to make electrics with high end, dense, oily woods that sound like dog carp. This is why lighter woods like (light) ash, alder, pine, and so on work so well for electrics. You want something where you can hit a large plank and get a tone, not something that has to be sawn/planed/sanded down to a back/side set in order to resonate. You won't get the richness of a piece of rosewood if you're just bolting a bridge to an 1 3/4" slab. You may as well be using plywood.

I don’t know the details behind the “string theories.” Sometimes I get the feeling it’s the “play the biggest strings you can handle,” internet drivel.

Well-stated about tonewoods.

The questions I get are always of a relative nature. “Does the Walnut body make this guitar sound brighter?” Or, “does the Walnut body make this a bright sounding guitar?”

Honestly, a guitar sounds like it does because of the alchemy of its parts and setup. So many variables, so little reference available regarding these exact pieces.

Less internet, more playing.

Well, keep looking into it, then.  I'm not presenting this in court, nor am I your personal researcher, nor am I all that personally invested in this discussion.  I'll just say that we're always learning new things, and that is part of the fun of life.

kramer finnaly admitted in a recent interview that jimi used a Fender amp i think a showman on vodoo chilie after years of speculation

From an amp perspective, there is a pretty clear view of the JTM 45/100s he used live. And PRS did a great job of bottling that tone in the HDRX series. I have the least of these - the 20w. But it really does a fine job of emulating those rigs.

any thing live has been put throufh a studio mixing board. people have tried for decades to nail Band of Gypys sound and cant for this vary reason

I am an advocate for exploring gear, but if there is only one case in the world for gear not making a difference and "tone is in the fingers" ruling the day, it is with Hendrix. People who can nail his attack and that funny slightly behind the beat thing he did can nail his tone with a PRS and a Mesa no problem. I see it from time to time online, usually some guitar teacher trying to branch out and do some YouTube lessons.

Dweezil Zappa talked about his dad's technique as "the chicken and the spider"; his left hand was a bit spidery as it sort of lurked around the fingerboard, and his right hand attack sort of pecked at the strings. If you want to nail the Zappa guitar tone, it helps to remember that, and if you watch Dweezil play his dad's stuff, you can tell he morphs a little, and it is like a switch was hit to suddenly get Frank's tone. Everyone stares at Jimi's right hand (fingerboard), but there is some magic going on with his left (picking) hand.

Gear matters a lot of the time. Want the B.B. King sound of the second half of his career? You need that ebony fingerboard for that sharp and boomy attack - you won't get it with a standard 335. Play a Lucille or an ES-355 and you'll know exactly what I mean. Want to get the Byrds jangle? Play with pedals and EQ all you want, you won't get it until you get your hands on a Ric 12. '80s hard rock crunch? A JCM-800 and closed back cab will do something for you that no modeler will accomplish. I can hear the difference between capacitor dielectrics and I can hear one of Alex Lifeson's Les Pauls has the pickups too close on the live show in Rio, likely at "factory spec" which is too high. I can hear the difference in brands of fretwire and between bleached and unbleached bone. These things DO matter, but they all have their place and their own degree of impact on the tone. The more you hear, the more you realize that small adjustments don't matter that much. Get enough of them and stack them up and you have a big deal - this is often why a budget guitar will seem to not have any tone - no single thing is responsible, it is just a bunch of things that on their own won't make a difference, but stack them all together and you get something more. But.... SRV and Jimi are both the classic examples I'd give for it making less of a difference because they used SO much different pieces of gear over the years. Even SRV's #1.... how many recordings did he use it on? 60%? 70%? That leaves a lot where he didn't use it. He used pretty much every amp under the sun over his career. There were slight differences to his sound, but very few listeners will be able to hear much of a change.

So.... yeah. Batteries. Maybe I'll switch to a pignose amp. Maybe a Mini-Twin. Get that stupid AC current out of the picture completely.

i would like to hear and see that

I kinda question why Jimi would be anyone's hero if his primary talent was actually just picking out really good guitars and batteries.

I always run a .052 on the high E for that FAT tone!

Love,

Blues Man Jackhammer Hands

Yea, there's a guy on Youtube (Circle of Tone) who spends a LOT of effort recreating studio tones, right speakers, mics, outboard gear, etc to a point where the AI gives him copyright strikes regularly.

He'll use a similar type of guitar most of the time, but...not chasing things like batteries at ALL.

Yea, I knew a guy who sounded amazing with a Bandit - whether doing straight ahead jazz, rock, or anything in between.  It was all him.

I've never sounded good through a Peavey tone stack, and it's not for lack of trying.

To be fair, he played my stage rig once and handed it back, "It sounds better when you do it", so sometimes it's a case of the player with teh gear not the other way around!