Put together a small board this evening.  5 pedals that I'm already thinking I'm going to swap at least a couple of them out tomorrow.   If for no other reason, I wanted to use my Lovepedal Kalamazoo sorta-copy (my Tone City Durple), but it's got a side mounted power port, and I'm having trouble getting it plugged in.  So I'm probably going to stick a Rat copy on it.  Which isn't even close to the same pedal.  But the power jack is on the top and the input/output jacks are on the side where they should be.

That got me to thinking.  So here are some musings on pedals.  And boards.

• I tend to overthink putting a board together.  It all looks good tonight, but the next morning I know there will be at least one or two that get swapped out.
• I am beginning to hate, loathe, and utterly despise those pedals that have the power plug on the side.
  • Not to pick on them because some of them sound great, but my experience seems to be that it's the more budget friendly pedals that use the side power thing.  There are exceptions to this (looking at you Lovepedal).
• I'm, also, beginning to dislike pedals with their input and output jacks on the top where the power should plug in.  Pedal makers, please quit using top mounted jacks.  If you don't have the right cable, you can't plug the power in.
• Since I saw one for the first time like 5 years ago, I have been working to only use non-velcro attachments to the pedal board whenever possible.  Zip ties generally work, but can fit awkwardly sometimes.  I really like those rail boards, but I can't put anything that doesn't have a square side on them.  I may be about to come full circle and go back to using velcro again.
• I'm always excited to get a new board to try out until I try it out.  That's when I see that the board that was such a good idea has a feature or two that the manufacturer either didn't consider or over which they just threw up their hands, said "screw it," and sold it anyways.
  • The board I got tonight does this.  It came with handles that you can attach if you want, but, if you do, you effectively cannot put anything within a few inches of the left side (or you can't plug your guitar in) or the the right side (or you can't plug anything in to go to your amp).  So I guess I won't be using the handles on it.  Or I have to find first and last pedals on the board that have top mounted jacks.  See my previous comment about top mounted jacks. 
• I still want to try one of those boards (or make one) where the input and output for the board plug into the side of the board and not a pedal.  That strikes me as a good idea.  That way, if you wanted, you could put the first pedal in your chain in the middle.  Or where ever you want because it doesn't have to go on an end somewhere.
• The verdict is still out on manufacturers that no longer have battery compartments.  I totally get it for mini-pedals.  There's no room for  a battery in those.  But I'm still of the mind that a full size pedal should have that option...even if I'm not using it.
• I love my OneSpot.  I've actually got a couple of them.  I just wish I knew what to do with all that extra wire when I'm only powering like 3 pedals with it.

So I mentioned in my Best Gear of 2021 post that my new Epiphone 335 was the best gear I had bought last year.  I still think that.  I still don't see it becoming my main player, but, lately, it's the one that I've grabbed first when I walk into my music room.  It's just a fun guitar to play, and it sounds really nice.

It's a gold top.  Cream colored binding but all the rest of the plastic is black.  Epiphone's Alnico Classic Pro pickups are in it.  If I remember correctly, those are Epi's version of Gibson's 57 Classics, with the Pro signifying that they're 4-wire instead of 2-wire.  Aesthetically, the one thing I wish they would've done would have been to paint the inside edge of the f-holes black instead of body colored (gold).  The Gibson 335 I had for a while had that, and I just always thought it looked better that way.  I haven't measured it, but I think it has the same neck that is on my Standard 50s Les Paul.  It has that same handful of a feel that I've come to really like instead of the really thin necks that a couple of my older Epiphones have.

Sonically, it's not bad.  That's not to say that it's not good.  It is.  But, remembering back to the Gibson, the Epi pickups sound nice, but they're not as articulate as the ones that were in the Gibson.  Granted, that's sitting in the quiet of my practice space.  It's not something I think I would notice if I were playing out somewhere.  It may also be that I'm not remembering the 57 Classics as they really sounded.  After all, it's been over a year since I traded that one off.  I'm in no hurry to upgrade the pickups (they really do sound pretty good), but it is something that I will probably end up doing some day.  Kind of like my Gretsch, one day I'll come across the right pickups for the right price, and I'll know that it's time to go ahead and upgrade them.  Until then, they will definitely serve the purpose.

Playability is just fine.  The action out of the box (out of the store?) was right about what I would've tried to dial in, so, after I got it home, all I did was clean up the guitar-store-funk on it and change the strings.  After playing it for a while, one thing I do need to do to it is get it back on the bench and smooth some of the frets up in the squeaky-zone.  I don't play up there on a real regular basis, but I've been working some stuff that has a bend on the 17th fret, and every time I hit it, I think it scrapes a little bit.

It's turning out to be a great guitar.  It didn't just blow me away like the Standard 50s Les Paul did.  But, in all fairness, it was that Probucker 1 at the neck of the LP that continues to pull me back to that guitar.  I just really like that sound of that pickup in that guitar.  So, didn't blow me away, but it did reach out and grab me at the store, make me take it home, and continues to make me leave it out on the stand and grab it at some point most every day.  

Bang for the buck, dollar to value ratio, whatever you want to call it, Epiphone continues to step up their game.  This new 335 just further convinces me of that.

My pedal board.  Honestly, I have a love/hate relationship with it.  I said earlier today to some online friends that I prefer to go straight to the amp.  I do.  Sort of.  I usually play at the casa, and to get that nice driven amp sound, I've got to make the neighbors mad.  Or use an OD pedal of some sort.  I, also, really like the sound of a univibe.  I've leaned towards that sound ever since I figured out what it was.  So, at the casa where I usually play, I guess I actually like a couple of pedals in front of the amp.

But that doesn't mean that I don't enjoy picking up pedals and playing with them.  It does mean, however, that I have a whole lot of pedals in the closet that I played with a couple of days and then toss them on the shelf knowing that they're there if I ever decide to use them.

Anyways, I had put a a real board together a couple of weeks ago, and yesterday was looking down at it yesterday and realized that, I have a heck of a lot of pedals in the closet that I either never got dialed in real well or that I found a single sound that I liked and never played with beyond that.  So I decided to do something.  I pulled that board apart, put all those same ol' same ol' pedals back in the closet, and pull out some of the ones that I hardly use and see if I could come to like them better.  So here's the chain in order.  We'll see how long it stays out like this.

Boss Tuner:  It's the tuner I always use, and I only have 1 tuner, so it's on whatever board I'm using.

Fulltone Dejavibe:  Did I mention that I like univibes?  I bought this one back in the spring, and it has been out ever since.  It may've been the only pedal on the the floor, but I haven't put it up since I bought it.  At the moment, it's my favorite univibe.

Amazon Basics Compressor:  Bought this one a year ago.  Used it for a few minutes and put it in the closet.  I've never been a huge compression user, but have figured out that there seem to be 2 types of compressors.  I'm not sure how to describe either sound, but I know them when I hear them.  One I really like.  One I really don't.  This is the second type.  I pulled it out just to try to see if I could find a sound I like in it.  If I can't, it's probably going to go to my Reverb shop.

Boss Blues Driver:  Not really going to say anything about this pedal.  I know I like it.  It's got some great sounds in it.  I just don't use it that often because I have other OD pedals that I like better.  I put this one on mostly because I hardly use it.  But I know it's got some nice tones in it, so at least I'll have a pedal on the board that I know I like if I get frustrated with the others.

Boss DynaDrive:  I bought this one a good while back because it seemed to be the pedal du jour for the youtube channels and everyone was talking about how good it was.  So I was curious enough to pick one up.  I was very underwhelmed!  To my ear, it was just kind of an average OD.  Nothing stood out about it.  By my own admission, I really didn't give this one a fair shake.  I only played around with it for maybe an afternoon; it was that underwhelming.  When I did my big gear purge last fall, I'm not really sure why I kept it, but I did.  It's just sat in the closet since then.  If I can't find some nice tones in it this time around, it's another that will probably end up on my Reverb.

EHX Hot Wax.  This one I liked when I got it.  After I got it a few months ago, I dialed in a sound that I liked on both sides, but tossed it into the closet after about a week.  Wasn't because it was a bad pedal.  It was more just because it wasn't one of my usual pedals.  It has some nice sounds in it, just not the ones I would typically use.

EHX B9 Organ:  This is another one that I know I like.  I just don't pull it out often because it is a very niche pedal.  I think it's a LOT of fun though.

Boss Tremolo:  I picked this one up a week ago.  This one is out, not because I never use it, but more because I want to get it dialed in.  Behind a univibe sound, a tremolo is probably my fave no OD pedal.  If my amp had a tremolo, I'd probably have it on all the time.

Danelectro reverb:  I bought this one several years ago.  It has an actual spring in it (that's why it's so big).  It's a one trick pony, spring reverb.  It's fun to play around with, but not a reverb I would really use on the regular or if I was playing out.  It even has that kick pad on it so you can kick it and make the internal spring rattle.  This one does ok, but it's another that I don't think I ever really got dialed in, and, because it only has one sound in it, I've never really looked at it as a really useful pedal.  Seriously, one sound.  You know how even an OD pedal has different levels of gain that make it sound different depending on how it's set?  This one is the exact same sound just in varying volume levels.

Boss looper:  This one is always on the floor too.  I don't count it because all it does is repeat what I put into it.  It doesn't really change the tone at all.  It's a great practice tool as well as one that that's just a lot of fun to riff into and then play over.

I'm guessing this iteration doesn't last more than a couple of weeks.  If for no other reason, I've been on a Rat kick lately, and been buying those type pedals when I see them for a good price.  I didn't put one on this board because I know I like that sound, I just need to dial those pedals in.  

I'm at least a little active on 2 or 3 guitar forums.  The older I get the more I think I might officially be the curmudgeon that T told me I was 15 years ago.  Sometimes folks on the various forums just irritate the heck out of me and make me think that I should step away and stay off the interwebs for a bit.  This was one of those occasions.

We got to talking about capos.  One of the other forum participants either doesn't understand how to effectively use a capo or was just ignoring everything that I was saying.  I finally gave up, and bowed out of the conversation before I said something that was going to get me a warning from the mods.  May the other person wallow in their ignorance (although I know they are far smarter than I and definitely a more skilled player).

There are two primary ways to use a capo.  Notice I did not say that there were only 2 ways to use a capo.  I said there are two primary ways.  These would be the two ways that most people tend to use a capo.  You can change the key that you are playing by slapping it on.  Or you can change the chord shapes that you want to play by slapping it on.  It's on this second point where the individual mentioned and I reached an impasse.

There's the first way.  Change the key in which you're playing.  This one is pretty simple and straightforward.  You're playing in the key of A, but the singer (or you) decide that the key needs to be raised to B, so you slap the capo on the second fret, and you have effectively changed the key of the song to B without having to change the chords that you have learned for the song.  I've learned to play the song in one key, but it's the wrong key for the singer?  No problem.  Bust out the capo, find a place on the fretboard they like, and capo like a champ.  Key changed for them and I don't have to learn new chords for the song.  Yes, you can quickly and easily change the key to a song with a capo.

The second way can be a little more confusing to folks just learning to play.  And, since I know the other forum person is anything but a novice player, I still can't figure out why they couldn't seem to wrap their head around this concept.  Change the chord shapes that you're playing. 

In my bluegrass days, this was something I used to do a LOT.  Back in those days, I played primarily in the keys of G, C, and D.  Not that I couldn't play in A or E or some either "weird" chord, but all the little riffs and lines I played were much easier in one of those three primary keys.  So we're doing a song in A?  Cool!  Capo II and I still get to play with the G chord shape.  Or maybe the song was still in G, but the other guitar player wanted to play cowboy chords, so I'd capo VII and play with a C-chord shape as the I.  But the key we were playing in remained G.

And that's where the person I was interacting with was wrong all day long.  They said that by placing the capo on the guitar, you were changing the key that you were playing in.  Specifically, we were talking about playing in the key of Bm.  They said that, if you did the capo VII thing, you were playing in Em.  I tried several times to make the distinction to them.  No, you were not playing in Em.  You were playing an Em chord shape, but you were still playing in Bm.  They disagreed.  Vehemently. 

They were wrong.  And still are.  Whether you played a barre chord at II to play Bm or you stuck a capo on II and played an Am shape or put a capo on VII and played an Em shape or even stuck a capo higher on the neck and played a Dm shape, you're still playing in Bm.  Yes, your chord shape turns into something else as you move around the neck, but the key remains the same.  Chord shape changes.  Key remains the same.

The one thing I erased several times and didn't tell them out of concern that it would come across as overly snarky is this.  The band is playing in Bm, and you slap a capo on VII.  You don't tell the band that you're switching to Em because the key didn't change.  Your fingering and chord shapes changed.  If you told them to stop playing in Bm and switch to Em, you and the band are going to be playing in different keys.

I still can't figure out how they couldn't wrap their head around that one.

Along a different vein, I only use Shubb capos.  I was given my first one back in 1993.  That's still the one that is in my pocket whenever I'm playing.  No tuning issues.  No bending issues.  It works every time.  I've tried some of the other brands, and always find myself back to the Shubb pretty quickly.  They're the best.

I bought my Epiphone 339 back when they first released them in 2011.  I missed that first run that delivered in the fall of 2011, so the one that I got was made in that second run.  That means that I had to wait 4 or 5 months to get mine.  I ordered it in November, and got it the end of March or first of April.  One change that they made between the first run and the second that I didn't see them announce anywhere was that the original 339s shipped with their Probucker pickups and the second run shipped with their Alnico Classic Pro pickups.  I had actually been looking forward to getting to try the Probuckers out, but the Alnico Classics sound good to my ear, so whatever.

Never gave it a whole lot of thought after that.  Like I said, I wasn't unhappy with the pickups it came with.  I had always heard that the Alnico Classics were Epi's version of Gibson's 57 Classics and the Probuckers were Epi's version of Gibson's Burstbuckers.  I had put a pair of Burstbuckers in an old Les Paul I had, and I really liked them.  Never really bonded with the guitar, but I thought the pickups sounded good.  I had a Gibson 335 for a while that had 57 Classics and I really liked them too. 

In my head, I always said I preferred the 57 Classics.  I'm not really sure why.  Honestly, I think I liked them better because that's what it seemed that most Gibsons I liked were getting when I started paying attention to that brand, and they were advertising them as being "like PAFs."  In the last few years, I've realized that they now seem to be putting Burstbuckers, 490s, MHS, and another pickup or two in guitars as much as they are the 57s.  When I saw that, I realized that several of those are also said to be "like PAFs."  Now, I must confess, I'm not really sure what a PAF sounds like, but being a good gear hound and sometimes cork-sniffer, I know that PAFs are the sound that everyone thinks they should have.  So, if it sounds like a PAF, that's the next best thing to actually having a PAF, right?

Now I'm just confused.  All these PAF-like sounding pickups, and they all seem to sound a little different to my ear.  What's the real PAF sound?  No clue.  At that point, I realized I had been sniffing a cork or two, and figured, I wasn't unhappy with the way that 339 played or sounded.  As well, from a similarity standpoint, I had the real 57 Classics in that 335, and, to my ear, they didn't really sound all that different from those Alnico Classics.  If I really sat and listened to them, I thought Epi version may not have been quite as clear and articulate on the low end, and they may not have been quite as harmonically rich when driven, but they sounded good.  Just playing at church on Sunday or at the local blues jam, and nobody was going to hear a difference in the two.  So there was no reason to change the Epi pickups.

Then last fall, I picked up that Epi LP Standard 50s (or whatever it's called).  I immediately bonded with that guitar.  Loved the neck!  Loved the sound!  And did I mention the neck?  I had been playing that 339 predominately for nearly 18 months when I got that LP, and the 339 suddenly found itself relegated to hanging on the wall.  One of the things I really liked about that LP were the pickups in it.  They seemed super clear and articulate, and sounded good clean or driven.  Maybe it was the guitars.  Maybe it was the pickups.  Maybe it was a bit of both.  Either way, it had the Probuckers in it, so I was once again questioning what the 339 would sound like with Probuckers instead of the Alnico Classics.

So I started looking for a set of them.  You could get them direct from Epiphone, but they were (1) $150 a set, and (2) out of stock.  So Reverb was my option since I don't like eBay.  Someone from Thailand was selling them starting at $50 a set with a wiring harness.  That's a good deal, right?  Seemed super sketch to me, so I passed on them.  I'd see others showing up here and there, but they were running about $50 a piece (or more).  I found a pair that someone pulled out of a new Epiphone where they were asking $70 for the pair.  I messaged them for pics of the back of the pickups, and, when he sent them, it turned out they were actually the Alnico Classics like I already had.  I let him know what he actually had, and that I'd pass since they weren't the ones I wanted.  His ad hasn't changed.  So be careful if you come across that ad; they're not actually Probuckers. 

The next afternoon, I noticed someone had posted a set of Probuckers for a super price.  Looking at the ad, the pics all looked right, so I was convinced they were real.  According to the ad, the seller had just pulled them out of a new Epi LP Modern that they had gotten.  Pics looked right, and the story sounded legit.  Looked at the price again, and three other folks had already made offers on them and someone had them in their cart.  So, since the price was really good without asking for a deal, I pulled the trigger.  I will say that they are the Probucker 2 and 3 pickups where my LP has the Probucker 1 and 2.  

Finally got them swapped out, and the Alnico Classics are now sitting beside me on the desk.  What's the verdict on the 339 now that it has the Probuckers in it?  I like them better!  I think they have a clearer low end.  I'm not sure the difference in the Probucker 1 in the LP neck and the Probucker 2 that is in the LP bridge and the 339 neck, but I still like the Probucker 1 best of all.  To my ear it really sounds good.  Either way, again, to my ear, the Probuckers have a clearer low end and are just a bit more articulate than the Alnico Classics.  They also seem to be a little bit smoother and not quite as harsh when driven.  When turned up, they also don't sound as hot to me.  The Probucker 1 is easily my favorite, but the 2 and 3 I also like better than the Classics.  Granted, in a blindfolded side by side, the only one I think I could pick out of the mix would be the 1.  That is, if I could pick it out of a crowd.  But trying to be objective sitting in my quiet little music room, I believe that I hear a difference in the two types of pickups.

So, I have to say that I think the Probuckers are great pickups.  They're half the price of the Gibson Burstbuckers, and, to my ear, they're not that different.  Granted, I haven't A/Bed them at this point, but from what I remember of that pair I had, they're pretty close.  Given the chance, if I had another Epi with those quick connect ends, if it didn't have the Probuckers in it, I'd see about finding another pair.  I'm not sure that all the hype around the Probuckers isn't at least a little marketing, but, I think, they're well worth the money.  Like I already said, they're not the Gibson (or Duncan or Lollars), but they're close enough that nobody but us gear hounds are going to hear the difference.  Bang for your buck, especially if you get them used, I don't know that you're going to get anything better.

Read today about a company that, at the conclusion of the interview, asks the interviewee to write a haiku about the interview experience.

Now I've heard that some companies will ask you off-the-wall questions to see how you think on your feet.  Or they'll ask you how to do a simple task to see how detail-oriented your thinking process is.  Or they'll ask you a question that seems simple, but want to see if you think outside the box and give the usual, easy answer.  I've even sat through some of these kinds of questions.  And in most cases I thought they were as ridiculous as they are.  Truth is, I think most companies that asked them heard about the famous (or infamous) Google interview process, and they wanted to do something that seemed just as hip and trendy so folks would want to work there.  So they just came across as copy-cats.

There were a couple of technical interviews that I sat through where the weird question was beneficial.  Those two interviews were with different companies and a couple of years apart.  They both asked the same question.  How do you make a PB&J?

The first time, I answered the question, but I kind of stumbled on myself because I hadn't really thought it through.  I gave some details, but realized when I left that I had still been a bit high level in my answer.  I didn't get that job.  I think that was more about me telling them I was trying to cut my commute down and then them telling me the job involved a bit of driving to field offices every day.  But I digress.

The second time I was asked the question, I was ready.  I went into mind-numbing detail.  "Get your bread out of the cabinet, and be sure that it's sandwich bread.  I prefer this brand and this variety for these reasons, but as long as it's sliced, you should be fine.  Gently set the loaf of bread on the counter in a way such that it won't fall off.  Now you can get your utensils out of the drawer.  Go to your silverware drawer and pull out a knife.  Not a sharp one, but one of the full-size table knives like they set next to your plate at suppertime.  Pull that out of the drawer and set it on the counter next to the bread.  Now let's find the jelly.  I actually prefer jam, but that's a matter of personal preference..."  The guy didn't even let me finish.  I was five minutes into my answer and just getting to the point of putting the peanut butter on the bread when he finally stopped me and said, "sounds like you can definitely pay attention to the details when you need to."  I was prepared to go on for another five or more minutes.  Don't clown me with a question like that, because, according to Mrs Enfinger back in 6th grade, I got a PHD in class clown.  That job I got.  Or at least got offered.  They didn't offer enough, and I turned it down after a week of trying to get them to increase the offer.  They did, but just barely.

Anyways, most of the time I think those kinds of interview questions and gimmicks don't really serve a purpose.  When I was on the other side of the table, I refused to ask those kinds of questions.  Instead I'd give an actual example they might encounter, and then I'd ask them how they would respond.  Details?  I could tell in their answer if they knew what they were talking about.  I didn't care if they could bore me with the tedious details on how to make a sandwich.

So I was reading this morning and saw this new take on this whole "who can ask the dumbest, most off the wall thing in an interview, and I think this one wins.  Hands down it wins.  Apparently, some company (they didn't say who) would ask, at the end of the interview, for the applicant to write a haiku describing the interview experience.  I thought about it for a couple of minutes, and here's what I penned.  And those that know me know that I'm just brash enough that this is what I would give them.  I present to you, my interview haiku.

I guess I made a mistake tonight.  There's a piece of gear that caught my eye about a year ago that I decided to research.  I keep telling myself that, if I ever spotted a screamin' deal on this piece of gear I was going to pick it up.  I spotted that deal, but decided to do the research on it first.  By the time I got back to it, someone else had picked it up.  Not pulling the trigger quickly wasn't my mistake.  My mistake was in hitting up some internet forums looking for thoughts and reviews on it.  There was one person's pontificating that particularly chapped my hide.

Someone had written a short, glowing review of this piece of gear.  It's a pedal that's not considered a piece of budget gear, but it uses digital modeling to copy an old analog pedal from way back.  Consequently, the used/new price is usually $70/$100 vs the several hundred that the original costs.  So most of the comments turned into the usual copy vs original vs cheap vs insanely expensive arguments.  Most of that part of the discussion I just skipped, but this one post caught my eye.

I'm not going to copy the post here (although that would probably be easier), but this self-proclaimed authority on the subject spewed their nonsense using what appeared to be a well thought out tome of a post.  However, when you take a look at what they were saying, they're nothing more than a corksniffer saying that more expensive is always better.

They said that folks that give good reviews on budget gear or copies of other, more expensive gear fall into one of a several categories.  They said that they either are a young, broke player that can't afford anything nicer that really just wants to justify their purchase to avoid having buyer's remorse because they know what they got is really not that good.  Or it's someone that doesn't know anything about gear and they're just repeating what they've heard or read somewhere else online.  Or, and this was my favorite, they're not a pro player that has demo-ed vintage, boutique, mid-level, budget, etc gear to see which of it is really better.  They even had the audacity to condescendingly mention that not everyone can afford vintage or high end gear, but "everybody has to start somewhere."

They went on like this for 8 or 9 paragraphs.  Then they continued to argue with other commenters expounding on these opinions.  I think that's part of what just really irritated me.

Yes, budget gear is usually not as good as more expensive gear, but saying (or at least implying) that someone is giving a favorable review of a piece of gear solely because they know it sucks and are trying to feel better about it is, as the British would say, total rubbish.

Let's use my Klon and klones as an example.  At one point, I had my KTR and like 8 klones and did a shoot out with all of them to see which one I liked best.  Honestly, I fully expected to the KTR to come in somewhere in the middle with some of the less expensive klones sounding better.  To the corksniffer's credit, yes, the KTR edged out all the rest of the pedals, and, to my ear, it sounded better and did the Klon thing the best, and the cheapest klone I had at the time ended up at the bottom of the heap.  All the rest of the pedals were basically a crap shoot with pedals that I wanted to do well (and were more expensive) not ending up as high as I would've like.  The #1 pedal (the KTR) was a $300 pedal.  The #2 pedal (the Tone Bakery Creme Brulee) was a $100 pedal.  Was the KTR worth 200% more than the Tone Bakery?  That's a highly subjective thing.  I have both, and even I would say that the KTR sounded better but I'd be hard pressed to say it was worth $200 more.  I'd also say that, since I'm not a pro player, the other pedals sound close enough (and are easy enough to replace) that I'm probably not going to gig out with the KTR.  Heck, my EHX Soul Food came in at the #3 spot, and it was the 3rd cheapest pedal.  I'd write a glowing review on that pedal for none of the reasons that poster mentioned.  I'd do it for the simple fact that it's a good pedal.

They closed their nonsense by saying that folks can drive their budget car if they want, but the Ferrari is always going to be the better car.  To that assertion, I would have to say that it depends on the Ferrari.  A bright red Ferrari is almost always going to win the cool factor, but may not be the better car.  Who wouldn't take a 1962 Ferrari 250 if given the opportunity, but it's not always the better car.  I drive an FJ Cruiser.  It's a very utilitarian ride.  But it has aircon, a radio/cd player, power windows, power locks, can pull a trailer, is a capable off-road ride, and, according the literature, will do 0-60 in 7.8 seconds (although I'd believe that when I see it).  That Ferrari 250 has none of the amenities, and has a 0-60 time at just over 8 seconds.  From a purely objective viewpoint, the modern FJ cruiser is an all around better vehicle than the 60 year old Ferrari.  The Ferrari would be a fun ride for an afternoon or two, but give me power windows and an a/c the rest of the time.

I don't think the modern pedals are that different.  The pedal I am looking at is a fuzz pedal that digitally copies one of those late 60s/early 70s fuzzes.  In the coolness factor, the huge enclosure of the old pedal totally takes it.  In tonal qualities, the old pedal probably wins again.  In the budget arena, the newer pedal can be had on the used market for 1/10th the price of the originals.  From an audience factor, the only ones that are really going to care about the difference in sound are those of us that are "discerning" guitar players; nobody else is going to give a rat's big butt.

In the world of guitar gear reviews, it seems to be truer than ever that half of what you read is just wrong and the the other half you can't believe.  I'll be the first to admit that there's bad gear out there.  But, if you go into it with an open mind, there's a LOT more good gear than you think.  Heck, back during the summer I started looking for a good compressor pedal.  I ended up over the course of the last 6 months buying and playing on about 5 pedals...some budget and some not.  Which one has ended up on my board?  That red Behringer compressor that cost me $25 brand new and shipped to my door.  Definitely considered to be a budget pedal.  Also, a good reminder to put the cork down and breathe in the fresh air.

​And in conclusion, as with all things gear related, your mileage my vary.

The end of 2009 I got laid off from my job.  I had managed to make it through almost that whole recession that we had back then and remain gainfully employed, but that one big client decided not to renew their contract.  I don't think their decision had anything to do with the recession.  Truth is, from what I followed, they decided that they could do what my company had been doing for them on their own.  They spent a year trying to do so, but couldn't get the right people in the right places, made a complete mess of things, and re-hired my by-that-time-previous company about 18 months later.  In fact, I figured they weren't going to get the right people in the right places because they called myself and a couple of other folks on my team and tried to hire us...for half of what we had been making.  We all took our chances to find something better paying.

Neeways, I was fortunate to work my last day in the middle of December 2009 and start a new job the middle of January 2010.  So I decided to spend the month working on my guitar playing.  I hadn't really been playing a whole lot at the time just because of life, but knew that I wanted to try to pick up some skill and, since I had the time, actually work at it.  I wanted to learn some blues, so I started looking around online for some lessons.  Not in person lessons, but a book or dvd (remember those?) or something along those lines that I could do the self-paced thing with.

Luckily, I stumbled across Griff Hamlin's 4 Note Solo.  Now, I have no idea what the search criteria was that I entered, but it popped up, and I watched it.  The concept looked super simple to follow.  I had already taught myself a couple of the minor pentatonic boxes, but had never figured out what to do with them.  Their practical application eluded me.  Watching his video, I also thought that Griff's style of teaching was right up my alley.

So I signed up for his email list, began reading the emails that he was sending, and saw him advertise his Blues Guitar Unleashed course.  During my off month, I worked on the 4 note solo he had, and as soon as my new job started, I ordered his course.  That's easily been one of the better musical decisions I've made.

Griff's style of teaching ended up meshing with my learning style pretty well.  Even with a new job, I managed to discipline myself to sit down and practice every day for a few minutes.  Focusing on what was on the dvd and in the book meant that my playing actually started to move forward in ways that it hadn't since I was a kid sitting in my room for hours a day.

Griff has continued to put out new course material.  He has listened to those who have bought his courses, and works to fill those areas where we're saying we'd like to learn more.  He is still primarily teaching around the blues and the blues form, but has branched out with other courses (theory, CAGED, modes, etc).  His most recent course from just a few months ago is a course on How to Play like BB King.

I've grown to appreciate Griff over the last 10 years, and, even though I've never had an in-person lesson from him (yet), I consider him my guitar teacher.  I've appreciated that I have never seen him be one of those hyped up teachers that says "so this thing and you'll be Eddie Van Halen!"  He has always been honest about the need for practice and lots of hard work if you're planning on getting better.  I've gotten to talk with him over the years via email and a couple of workshops, and he is always encouraging even when you know that what you just played sucked monkey butt.  My unbiased opinion is that Griff is a top notch teacher.  My biased opinion is that he makes all other guitar teachers look like amateurs.

If you've been looking for someone to jump start your guitar playing, especially if that playing revolves around the blues, my belief is that you do yourself a dis-service if you don't give Griff's courses a chance.  Not only is he a great teacher, but his courses are well made (nothing amateur-hour about them), and he offers a money back guarantee.  If you get into it and realize it's not for you, he gives you 90 days to let him know and he'll refund your money.  As well, he has a forum where a lot of his students hang out.  On that forum, you can ask questions about the courses and post audio or video of you working a lesson.  The folks on there are just as encouraging as they can be.  They may give an idea or two to make a lesson work better for you or to let you know that you need to keep working a technique because you don't quite have it down, but they'll still make you feel good about yourself and your playing.  I believe they truly understand that music isn't a competition and that everyone's musical journey is going to be different.  They're just a great bunch of gals and guys.

Later on, I hope to do another post about the BGU course specifically and what it teaches and how it goes about it.  Until then, trust and believe that it's a quality course that can move your playing forward if you work it.

Those that know me know that I laugh at those that are often called cork sniffers.  Whether online or face to face, I'm civil when I'm talking to them, usually.  But there are times that they get on my last nerve.

Now for the uninitiated, let me define what a cork sniffer is.  A cork sniffer is one of those that is so fixated on that specific piece of gear that nothing else is deemed worthy.  Granted, we've all got that piece of guitar, like one of our guitars, that is absolutely the best thing ever and we wouldn't trade for anything.  We've modded the heck out of it, and, despite what others tell us, there is no other guitar in the world that plays as well and sounds as good.  That's not what I'm talking about.  I'm talking about the ones that look down their noses at a Squier or MIM Strat because it's not an MIA Strat.  They're the ones that will crap all over Epiphone because "it'll never be a Gibson."  You get the idea.  They look down their nose at a piece of gear and call it inferior based on its location of manufacture, the brand on the label, or some other seemingly important factor.  That's a cork sniffer, and, in my humble opinion, there are 2 types.

There are those that are just uneducated.  Those are the new players that are basically parroting what they hear others say and have no real basis for their opinion.  They're the ones that say Gibson is the only brand to play because that's what they see their hero talk about and play (although their hero may've played a Tokai until they got their endorsement deal).  I, generally, will give these folks a pass.  Give them some education and experience, and they'll grow out of this stage.  They'll eventually realize that, yes, Gibson is the premium guitar, but bang-for-the-buck there are some Epiphones that may be better than a Gibby.

Then there's the other kind, and they're the ones that really bug me.  I call them "ignernt."  Now, ignernt is a good Texas term.  Around here, if somebody gets called ignernt, the speaker is saying that the speakee is smart enough, they just have chosen to act the fool and be stupid.  They're ignernt.  These are the cork sniffers that I have been known to make fun of sometimes.  They're the ones that are so fixated on a brand (or whatever) that they can't see past the end of their nose.

I was reminded tonight that I used to be one of the second kind  of cork sniffers. Maybe that's why they bug me so much.  And I was reminded of this fact tonight.

Way back when I first started playing, all I knew was acoustic guitars.  The first really nice acoustic that I was exposed to was a Martin.  In fact, through a series of events, after only playing a couple of years, I was blessed to be given my own Martin (a D-35).  Still have that Martin.  It currently needs to have the bridge replaced, but is probably still my fave acoustic.  It's a workhorse of a guitar.  But I digress.

I had a Martin.  All the pro players I knew either played Martin, Taylor, or something really high end like an Olson.  Consequently, outside of Martin and Taylor, I really didn't know anything about guitars.  I had played enough of each of those to know that I knew I liked the traditional Martin sound more than the modern Taylor sound, but they both sounded really nice.

Where I lived, I'd get together and play with a buddy once a week or so (we played in the same band), and we both played Martins.  Another acquaintance at work was given a guitar for Christmas one year by his dad, and asked if my buddy and I would take a look at it and tell him what we thought.  Bless his heart, that was during my days of sniffing corks.

The day that he brought it over to my house, I remember thinking one thing about the guitar and saying something completely different.  In retrospect, I really wish I would have been honest enough with myself to give him an honest review.  All I remember at this point was that it was a jumbo bodied Guild of some sort.  From what I remember about the inlays on it, if it was chosen from their current lineup (although this was 30 years ago now), it would've probably been the equivalent of the F-55.  And that would make sense as, from what I remember he used to say about his parents, they only bought the best.

Anyways, this guitar had a really great sound.  However, it didn't sound anything like a Martin or Taylor.  It was a very full, rich sound.  Very balanced sound.  All around, it was just a really great guitar.  However, because it wasn't a Martin, I don't think I had anything good to say about the guitar that wasn't a backhanded compliment.  "It has a really nice sound for something that's not a Martin."  The other guy that was playing it with me was pretty much like me when it came to guitars.  So he didn't really have anything positive to say about it either.  The guy that had gotten it for Christmas left that evening disappointed that "it'll never sound like a Martin."

I've come a long way since then in both my musical journey and my overall view on life.  I still very much like the sound of a Martin, but I also have a Boulder Creek and a Tacoma, and an Epiphone acoustic.  For electrics, I've got Squiers, MIM and MIA Fenders, as well as Epiphones and Gibsons.  For pedals, I have real live, green Tube Screamers and all kinds of TS clones (including the cheapest, Chinese made ones on Amazon).  I've got a closet full of gear spanning the spectrum of price.

Growing up, my parents tried to teach me to always give people the benefit of the doubt; just because they're different than me doesn't mean they're bad.  Give them the benefit of the doubt until they give me a reason to do otherwise.  As the Disney song says, "if you walk in the footsteps of a stranger, you'll learn things you never knew you never knew."  When it comes to gear, be open minded.  Just because the headstock doesn't say what you think it should doesn't mean it doesn't have a song in it.  Pick it up and play it and see what it says.

And, Joel, if you ever happen upon this to be reading, I really hope you still have that Guild.  Had I not been in the middle of my "Martin or nothing" days, I would have told you that it was a dang skippy nice guitar that had a great, warm sound and anybody should be ecstatic to be able to play.  I'm sure that guitar was full of music if I'd only taken a moment and listened to it.

I discovered John Bohlinger a couple of years ago.  It may've been more like several years ago.  I remember he was doing a gear review for Premier Guitar on youtube, and I thought the guy was awkward and not really that good at it and really needed to quit having his hair colored because it looked...fake.  Fast forward a couple of years, and he had become much more polished, let his hair do its thing so it didn't look bad anymore, and I now find his rundowns and reviews engaging so that I watch most all of them.  I, also, enjoy his backpage of the magazine article every month that's called Last Call.

In his monthly column, he seems to try to give out that fatherly/brotherly advice to other players.  Sometimes it's pretty practical and is something that can be used in very substantive way.  I like these columns because I tend to be a very hands-on, practical person.  Other times he comes across as being contemplative and trying to pass along something profound.  I don't pay quite as much to these columns because I've never really been a theoretical kind of person.  When I realize it's one of those columns, I just kind of scan through it.

I've always been this way.  I realized it in 9th grade Biology class when I got the first C I had ever gotten on a report card.  For the first time in my elementary/middle/junior high career, my name was not listed on the All A's or A/B Honor Roll.  Everyone but me was surprised.  My folks asked me what happened, and my response is that I didn't care about the class.  They asked why, and my response was that it wasn't a fun class, the teacher was a sadistic idiot, and I couldn't see the practical application of what we were learning, so there was no point in learning it.  So no ethereal, theoretical profundities for me.  Start spouting them, and you quickly lose my attention.

Enter the December column.  Mr Bohlinger was riding the line between practical application and trying to be profound.  Then right there in the middle of the column, he said this.  

"Many people (particularly Americans), live their lives doing what they don’t want to do so they can earn enough money to continue doing what they don’t want to do. People struggle like this for a lifetime and then teach their children to do it. If all your job is providing is a paycheck, you have the wrong job."

Now I don't have an issue with his first 2 sentences.  He's spot on.  Too often, we Americans get trapped in that cycle of a job we don't like that we don't leave because we want the stability of paycheck.  After all, it takes money to live, and, when we don't have that money, even the daily grind gets difficult because you still have to put gas in the ride, food in the belly, and a roof over your head.  However, that last sentence.  I just have so many problems with that one.

"If all your job is providing is a paycheck, you have the wrong job."  That's painting with as much of a broad brush as I would be if my response was "no you don't."  More accurately, he should have said that, if all your job is providing is a paycheck you might have the wrong job.

I have a job.  I've been in the workforce for the better part of 30 years.  I've had all kinds of jobs.  Changed careers a couple of times as well.  The one thing I've learned is that, if you're miserable at your job, it's time to move on.  However, just because a job is just a paycheck, doesn't necessarily mean a whole lot.

While I appreciate what I think he's trying to say, I think he's falling too far into that mentality that "if you're not following your passion, you're unfulfilled," and that's an extremely idealistic place to be.  I'll use  myself as the example, and say up front that, if I were to follow my passion, I'd probably be alone, homeless, and living in my car (if I had one) right now.  

In my teens, I told everyone that I was going to fly airplanes.  I got out of high school, got my first real job, and let the president of the company where I worked talk me out of going to flight school.  It wasn't difficult to do.  At the time, I was about as idealistic as I have ever been, working at a non-profit, and felt like I was living the change and making a difference.  Fast forward a few years, I had seen the politics, problems, and blatant hypocrisy in the place I worked, become pretty jaded, and realized it was time to go.  At the first good opportunity, I moved from the big city back to the town where I grew up and took a job, among other things, driving a tractor out in the field all day.  Oddly enough, that job was the job that I look back on these days saying, if I could've made money doing that, I'd still be on that tractor.  Believe it or not, that job was therapeutic, and just what I needed after leaving the situation I had been in.

While I was working on the farm, I had a friend ask me what I would do if I could do anything.  My response was "be a studio guitarist."  He asked me why I wasn't doing that.  Simple.  I wasn't (and am not) good enough.  As recently as a year ago, as I was planning to leave the job I had at the time, I had one of my senior execs ask me that same question.  That's still my answer when asked.  If I could do anything I wanted, I'd be a studio guitarist.

Over the years, music and, especially, guitars has become my passion.  One whole room of  my house is dedicated to music.  When I'm not in there playing or sitting at the computer looking up the latest gear or how to play something, you can bet it's probably what I'm thinking about.  And, yes, I have viewed my job as just a paycheck for years.

You see, I have loved the guitar since I first started playing in high school, but was out and in the workforce before I was good enough at it to make any money with it.  Add to that, I am NOT a good teacher (tried that with a few kids, and not a single one of them kept playing after their parents stopped paying me), and, although I will play in front of folks just to have the opportunity to play with skilled musicians, I'm one of those folks that would really rather not be up on a stage.  And, generally, to have followed my passion of guitar playing, I would either have to teach or play out consistently.

Add to all that I started a career that required me working 80 to 100 hours a week, which left no time whatsoever to really practice and get better.  For quality of life, after 5 years, I changed careers.  Would have loved to have done something music related, but needed to put gas in the car, and my preference was to not live in said car.  So I've always said that, at that point, I accidentally ended up in another industry.  It paid well enough, and, although I would never have said that I really enjoyed it, it was also something that I didn't hate.  It was a paycheck.  Now I'm 20 years down the road, on the 3rd company in that field, and would still never be heard even hinting that it was my calling.  It wasn't.  And it isn't.  And it won't be. 

In fact, at the first company I worked in that field, my supervisor pulled me aside one day and said, "you really need to find your calling, and this isn't it.  I know this because, when I bring a problem to the team, you are the only one in the room whose eyes don't light up thinking about fixing it.  You're as good or better than most of the rest of the team, but I can tell that this is just a paycheck to you and not your passion.  You need to find that calling and pursue it.  As good as you are here, if you were really passionate about what you were doing, you'd be the best in your field."  I told him that I couldn't argue with him.  It was indeed just a paycheck for me, but a good enough paycheck that I wasn't planning on leaving.  It took care of the bills, and gave me enough extra to fuel my real passion, guitars and gear.  When I told him that, he just looked at me like a cow looking at a new gate.

Even though I am now a much better player than I was even 10 years ago, and am discovering that I can usually hold my own when called upon to play, I still don't see how I could be earning even half of what I earn in a music related field.  And I'm still not good enough to be a studio musician.  Truth is, I'm still one of those that's good enough to make the non-musicians think I'm a pretty good player while the real musicians know the awful truth.  Or at least that's how I view my playing.

In fact, how is it any different than someone that likes off-roading and spends all their extra money on their jeep?  There are jobs out there where you can make a living off-roading, but they're few and far between enough that not everybody with a 4-wheel drive can feed their fam or even repair their jeep doing it.  It'd take at least both hands and a foot to count the number of folks that I know in that community that have a day job that has nothing remotely to do with the outdoors, and spend their weekends out on the trail. 

Just because you have to have a paycheck and your passion appears to play 2nd fiddle doesn't mean that it's any less of a passion.  Truth is, most of the folks I work with know that, given the right opportunity, I'd ditch them without a thought to go play guitar somewhere.  Mostly because I've done it in the past and will do it again I'm sure.  I just haven't come across that right long term opportunity (and probably won't), and I like my salary enough that I don't mind the grind 5 days a week so long as I have a guitar in hand when I'm not in the office.

With all respect, good Mr Bohlinger, you're wrong on this one.  Just because it's only a paycheck doesn't mean it's wrong.  Sometimes without the paycheck, the passion has no fuel and would die.  If it's just a paycheck, it might be wrong.  Or it might just be a paycheck.  Like you, I also sell out.  It's just that, with my skill set, the highest bidder means I'm an analyst somewhere during the week.

That said, on a different yet related note, having been there and learned the hard lesson, if you ever find yourself miserable at a job that's just a paycheck, you need to get out as quickly  as you can.  Life's too short for that nonsense.