I'd add RealStrat and it's related products by Music Lab to Joe's list. I had exactly the same requirement as I got fed up with guitar VI's that sounded like harpsicords! They have some excellent videos on their website that demonstrate the range of articulations they support including bends, hammer-on and pull-off. www.musiclab.com Cheers Steve

Hi Joe/All I'm confused about whether to use rack effects in Amplitube for EQ, compression etc or whether to use the usual plug-ins in my DAW (Tracktion Waveform) since they both do the same job. Putting any sound difference to one side for a minute, what would be the typical workflow in a real studio?: 1. Guitarist records tracks with stomp boxes, amp and cab and then producer mixes and adds EQ/Comp/Delay in the DAW or 2. Guitarist records track with stomp boxes, amp, cab and EQ/Comp/Delay rack effects to get the 'perfect' sound they want and then producer mixes with minimal plug-ins, just what's needed to avoid any clash with other tracks/instruments. or 3. A combination of both 1 and 2. I know I can break the 'rules' but it would help me to follow what would normally happen in the studio first and then I've got a starting point for any further tweaking. I'm leaning towards option 2 purely because, what would be the point of having rack effects in Amplitube if everyone used their DAW plug-ins instead! Cheers Steve

Thanks Joe, the fog is starting to clear! I get what you said about stomp boxes especially fuzz/wah etc before the amp and the need for a DI input as an alternative to the hardware effects that the guitarist might bring along to the studio. But I'm still a bit mystified about post-amp rack effects and when they would get used... The virtual rack effects in Amplitube are compressors, EQ, delay etc. and I'm assuming they are modelling what was originally a piece of hardware. Was the original hardware part of a guitarists stage performance kit or was this always part of the recording studio equipment? If it's the first option then maybe the idea is to reproduce the sound the guitarist would have produced on stage? If it's the second maybe it's to reproduce the sound the guitarist would have produced in the studio before recording to tape? In either case, I'm trying to understand the context and history of these rack effects to understand why Amplitube went to the bother of emulating them in their product when they could have relied on producers using their DAW plug-ins instead and just provided the virtual stomp boxes. Another thought that crossed my mind was that maybe they are intended for stand-alone/performance use when Amplitube isn't being used as a DAW plug-in and the performer doesn't have access to other DAW plug-ins? Sorry to labour the point but I don't want to invest a lot of time in learning how to use them and then find I would have been better off using my DAW plug-ins in any case. Cheers Steve

Thanks Joe - much clearer now Steve

I've just completed this course and can't recommend it highly enough. Matt's a talented musician and trainer and the balance of theory, practice and the practical side of how to compose and play keyboard instruments is perfect. Thanks to all involved Steve

Hi Joe Having just completed (and enjoyed) Matt's Advanced Keyboard Techniques course, it struck me that a similar course on guitar technique would be really useful. Although most people are probably using a keyboard MIDI controller, if you are using a half-decent guitar VI like MusicLab RealGuitar, you still need to know how a real guitarist plays, to get realistic results. Many of the courses mention things like pentatonic scales and power chords in passing but a course that covers rhythm and lead guitar techniques for rock, jazz and folk would be really useful. Things like chord shapes, bends, mutes, hammer on and snap off and other articulations... I bought the Guitar for Dummies book which was very useful but seeing it in video rather than the printed page would help to reinforce it. What do you think? Steve

As I'm not a vocalist, my songs tend to be instrumental using the virtual instruments in my DAW. I might be wrong but there doesn't seem to be any standard song forms for instrumentals. Of course, I can use standard verse-chorus forms and just replace the vocal line with an instrument but it feels like I'm missing something, as it seems to just emphasise the lack of a vocal. Is there any song form theory that works for rock/pop instrumentals? Or am I trying to over-complicate things again :-) Thanks

Thanks Joe - Glad to hear that I'm not missing something obvious! I'll follow your advice and stick with the traditional song forms but avoid just creating a melody line. Your ideas of concentrating on texture/voice/effects instead makes sense to me. I was falling into the trap of producing music that sounded like those awful K-Tel albums from the 70's where they covered a well known song and directly replaced the vocal with a guitar/synth. Anything to avoid that! Cheers

Hi Joe I've just completed Greg's jazz courses 201 and 202; both excellent as always. But my specific interest is in jazz fusion (Weather Report, Return to Forever, Snarky Puppy) as I'm more of a rock guy to be honest and listening to these bands it's difficult to relate their songs to the courses. I'm interested to know what elements of jazz fusion are typically rock based and which are jazz based. Rhythm I'm assuming is more straight rock or syncopated funk/latin while harmonies I assume are jazz based (7 chords and modulation). But what about song form? And soloing? Any pointers on what jazz elements to base my fusion songwriting on? And any other resources outside of Ask Video to look at? Maybe this could be a separate section of both of these courses in the future? Thanks Steve

Okay, thanks Joe If you haven't checked them out before, try Snarky Puppy . Some of the best musicians around at the moment in my opinion. Steve