[solomonb]

I strongly believe that if you set aside genre preferences the solid body electric guitar coupled to a tube amplifier is objectively the greatest electronic instrument ever created.

All other electronic instruments, with the one exception being the Theramin, have a fundamental problem with human expression. There is an unsolvable disconnect between what the performer's actions and their audience.

See: https://www.scribd.com/document/55134776/48787070-Bob-Ostert...

With an electric guitar you get the physicality and dynamism of an acoustic instrument with the complex timbres and extended technique possibilities of an electric/electronic instrument.

There are complex and musically significant feedback loops occurring across many dimensions that lead to extremely complex transformations of timbre via both traditional music theoretical techniques and the physics of a tube amplifier combined with an inductive load (the guitar pickup).

Its really crazy how much more dynamic and complex this can be then even a highly sophisticated modular synthesizer or whatever. Even the way you over load the power supply in a tube amplifier can be manipulated on the fly to enhance and transform timbre.

Then on top of all that it is so incredibly physical that a performer like Jimi Hendrix can manipulate these systems and have the audience intuitively understand what he is doing. Never in a million years would THAT be possible with any other electronic instrument.

[vanderZwan]

The reverse example of this is musicians who play techno with analog instruments, like Pipe Guy, Basstong, and Meute[0][1][2].

There are always some people who get extremely defensive whenever I say that techno didn't click for me until I heard this kind of "techlow" music. Specifically about the part where I think that the reason is also a human expression problem, because of limitations imposed by the electronic media used.

EDIT: having said that, I don't think I would agree with your premise, because it is colored by a subtle form of survivor bias. None of us remember what it's like to not know electronic guitars or what they sound like, so claiming "the audience intuitively understands what Jimmy Hendrix is doing" is like saying everyone "intuitively understands" their native language. On top of that there's nothing about the workings of an electronic guitar that wouldn't in principle work for something like an electronic violin or whatever.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0gED3rn2Tc

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mn52b-bWfFM

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYtjttnp1Rs

[Fnoord]

Legends Never Die - ‪Leagueoflegends‬ + Ethnic Instruments by Belle Sisoski [1]. And no, I've never played LoL, I probably never will, and I haven't seen that series based on it (Arcana or something?) either.

Also, I haven't checked what Juno Reactor do these days, but their old work is phantastic. My fav show of them is Juno Reactor – Shango Tour 2001 Tokyo [2].

For electric violin, I love Ed Alleyne-Johnson [3]. Never seen him live (I'm not from UK) but I own a couple of his earlier works. It reminds me of that time when my dad was in his final years of his lives, and when he finally passed away. Makes me cry every time.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMIL1YbUQrI

[2] https://www.discogs.com/master/782091-Juno-Reactor-Shango-To...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_Alleyne-Johnson

[bityard]

You might also enjoy Beardyman, if you haven't run across him yet. Does techno and other genres with nothing but his own voice and a shedload of ipads: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYVUlx7BhhI

[raddan]

> There are always some people who get extremely defensive whenever I say that techno didn't click for me until I heard this kind of "techlow" music. Specifically about the part where I think that the reason is also a human expression problem, because of limitations imposed by the electronic media used.

I guess the part people don't like hearing is the implication techno is somehow not expressive. I'm not sure that it lacks expressiveness, but it is certainly more "controlled" than traditional music. When I first heard techno as a teenager in the 90s, my mind was blown. I remember exactly where I was the first time I heard Underworld [1], Photek [2], and Autechre [3]. I think I was attracted to these sounds _because_ they were so different. I think it's hard for electronic music fans like myself to accept the idea that it isn't expressive _because_ it is so different. Isn't it just a different kind of expression?

Still, people like what they like. I'm glad you found a version of dance music that works for you. I've long since moved on being judgmental about people's musical tastes. I think it's just wonderful that music exists at all!

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5GjVvlmg3o [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Xl1xzSRaV0 [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6zT3kVtpHc

[ben7799]

The whole thing about people being defensive is interesting. I love techno, but anyone who has learned other styles of music recognizes the repetitiveness and quirks of a lot of techno and some other electronic genres.

They do a great job with changing their timbre and tones but often ignore a bunch of other factors that make music interesting. Whether that is the rarity of time signatures other than 4/4, the way certain rhythms are locked into certain genres, the choices of keys used, the limited or missing chords, etc.. at some point you start hearing two electronic songs that sound totally different at a superficial level and you realize they're incredibly derivative of each other.

[fsckboy]

>musicians who play techno with analog instruments

just to be clear, Moog synthesizers (and a number of other brands) are electronic yes, but they are analog electronics.

[soulofmischief]

Great recommendations. Throwing Klangphonics in the ring even though they use electronic instruments as well

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bixtQAq2LzE

[hypertexthero]

Hmmm, I disagree, having played electric and acoustic guitars for over two decades and begun learning piano and synths for the first time in 2025.

For one, you can’t easily play two melodies simultaneously across several octaves, using both of your hands, with an electric guitar.

Stringed electronic instruments do have their advantages, but so do the others. Each music making thing has its place in the spectrum.

Two books that have helped me greatly in my musical life, in case people haven’t heard of them, are The Listening Book, and Bridge of Waves, by W.A. Mathieu.

[ben7799]

There are certainly guitarists who can play simultaneous melodies.

If you're limiting to a 6 string guitar the distance between the two melodies would be limited compared to a piano but guitars don't have to be limited to 6 strings.

Classical guitar is full of this kind of thing.

Having taken piano lessons but being more into guitar I think the thing is almost all people who play piano are introduced to this and it is a core concept in far more piano music than guitar music. But it is not impossible on guitar, and many works for piano that get adapted to guitar require the player to do so.

E.x. there are plenty of players who have studied and played the Well Tempered Clavier on guitar.

[xcf_seetan]

You can play with both hands on a Chapman stick, right hand can do the bass, the left the melody/chords or vice-versa (Chapman stick is played tapping the strings with both hands)

[kavalg]

You are completely right about the polyphonic expressivity of piano. What I lack is the intonation (bending) of tone.

[schwartzworld]

> have a fundamental problem with human expression.

How up to date is this opinion of yours? Expression on guitar is pretty intuitive, but modern electronic instrument manufacturers have been working on this problem and created modes of expression that definitely solve this problem.

For example, EWIs allow you to use breath control for expression with many of the same techniques available on actual wind instruments. Also many synths now have features like polyphonic aftertouch, pitch/mod wheels, which allow you to add expression to a note while it is playing. Apps and hardware exist which allow you to use novel methods of capturing motion or other forms of expression. And most modern synths/midi controllers allow you to decide what parameters are affected.

> Then on top of all that it is so incredibly physical

That's an affectation. I can stand on my tiptoes and close my eyes when bending up a note on the synth the same as I can on the guitar. Neither affects the sound, and both are a conscious decision to project an appearance of "I'm really shredding"

> With an electric guitar you get the physicality and dynamism of an acoustic instrument with the complex timbres and extended technique possibilities of an electric/electronic instrument.

That can apply to any instrument once you "electrify" it. What makes a guitar more expressive than a cello or trumpet with a pickup/mic running through effect processing? I play guitar, keys and trumpet, and while I agree that a casio keyboard has limited expression options, your opinion doesn't sound researched.

[nikodotio]

> created modes of expression that definitely solve this problem.

I certainly don’t agree with this as a musician who has tried most of these attempts by electronic music manufacturers.

[solomonb]

> What makes a guitar more expressive than a cello or trumpet with a pickup/mic running through effect

The difference lies in the pickup! On those other instruments you will be using a contact mic (piezo-transducer) wheras the solid body guitar is using an inductive coil.

The contact mic is going to pickup only physical resonance whereas the the coil is measuring an electromagnetic field. Plucking the steel string induces a change in voltage in the coil. This means that the coil can pickup all sorts of interesting electromagnetic interference from the tube amplifier that is all frequency dependent and involve that in whatever feedback loops are occuring.

[xcf_seetan]

> What makes a guitar more expressive than a cello or trumpet with a pickup/mic running through effect

A whammy bar?

[pdntspa]

> There is an unsolvable disconnect between what the performer's actions and their audience

Is that really true though? If I watch a cellist play I can pretty clearly see all the things they are doing and it will correlate neatly to the timbre of the sound.

Secondly I think it's important to note the tube amp and the guitar are seperable, and I don't think that their connection is particularly magical. I can reamp a sound from my synthesizer (or maybe a keytar?) into a guitar chain, and if I manipulate the mic and other controls in the same way I might manipulate the pickup, I can also get all manner of interesting feedback effects. My inputs will have different harmonic characteristics of course, and the tube amp's effects are mostly transformations of harmonics; you'll still get some cool tones and they will be subject to a lot of the same rules as if a guitar was being played.

[Nition]

They're talking about electronic instruments there. The comment is about how electronic instruments don't generally match the physical expressiveness of acoustic instruments (like the Cello).

[solomonb]

I'm talking about electronic instruments how they are deficient in expressiveness compared to your cello example.

> Secondly I think it's important to note the tube amp and the guitar are seperable, and I don't think that their connection is particularly magical. I can reamp a sound from my synthesizer (or maybe a keytar?) into a guitar chain, and if I manipulate the mic and other controls in the same way I might manipulate the pickup, I can also get all manner of interesting feedback effects.

The story is not quite so simple. Your synthesizer is going to have a buffered output so it wont have the complex impedance loading interactions with the amplifier as the guitar pickup.

This is actually critical to how early distortion effects such as the classic Fuzzface work and imo is essential for the kind of complex timbres you can produce with a guitar + tube amp.

In fact you can take an electric guitar, put a buffer pedal in the chain between your fuzz pedal and amp and completely destroy the ability to produce wild feedback and distortion.

[fuzzfactor]

>the tube amp and the guitar are seperable

Eminently separable, but it's good to be aware of the tradeoffs.

Not magic at all, physics.

It's good to understand that high-impedance is not the biggest deal, but one thing about the magnetic pickups that not everybody realizes is the way that plugging directly into a tube (pre)amp basically magnetically couples the strings to the grid of the input tube.

And that grid has no further physical connection to any other components in the circuit, not even within the same tube, except for clouds of electrons and the flow that occurs among the electrodes.

That way your music basically starts out being sprayed through space directly from the strings which create the magnetic signal.

The thing about high-impedance is the way the relatively minuscule resistor values between the amp's input jack and the input grid's tube pin are so insignificant by comparison to the pickup internal impedance, that resistance might as well be zero.

The only reason there is a resistor in between the input jack and the input grid anyway is to accommodate a high-impedance input with better stability under wider conditions than otherwise.

Now you can get a righteous sound with any number of pedals in between the guitar & amp, especially if the battery power is used to boost the signal to more than the guitar puts out magnetically, and it's been the mainstream for so long people almost never consider doing it any other way.

It's just not the same magnetic coupling from the strings to the tube, you can't have both unless it's a tube pedal.

I've designed lots of solid state circuits too and there is plenty of excellence when coupling the same magnetic pickup directly to a silicon or germanium crystal lattice and going from there. Whether it's pedals or a pure solid-state amp. Instead of using any tubes at all.

Also some people prefer having tubes only for the audio output section, coupled to the magnetic speakers through the antique-style audio output transformer the old-fashioned way.

[dec0dedab0de]

they're comparing an electric guitar to electronic instruments, like midi keyboards. An electric cello would be the same thing as an electric guitar in this context.

[jrm4]

Great argument -- but I'd also counter that "the turntable" (i.e. in the hands of experts like Q-Bert, Craze, Rob Swift, Jazzy Jeff and others) fits this quite well -- especially re your "have the audience understand what he is doing argument"

[solomonb]

Haha that is a great highly expressive counter example! However, as far as versatility of sound I still think the guitar+tube amp wins as you have access to all of western music theory and techniques as its still a traditional string instrument.

[Nition]

There have been some interesting keyboard input devices coming out which allow for more expression than normal piano keys, using a sort of hack to the MIDI system called MPE - MIDI Polyphonic Expression. For example the Seaboard Rise or the Osmose. Depending on the instrument it's possible to do per-note pitch bends, change pressure while holding notes, perform vibrato etc. Visually the physical movement is not as interesting as electric guitar though, so yours probably still wins.

[Blackthorn]

> All other electronic instruments, with the one exception being the Theramin, have a fundamental problem with human expression. There is an unsolvable disconnect between what the performer's actions and their audience.

Electric bass? Heck, even in synthesizers, you have the EWI or the Haken Continuum.

Guitar (and bass) are obviously and far and away the most successful, but it does a disservice to a number of wonderful inventions to say they're the only ones. Just look at what the Japanese band T-SQUARE does with the EWI to see people innovating at the edges.

[gnarlouse]

I feel like the synthesizer--CMI Fairlight, Moog anything, Synclavier, PPG Wave, and just the general concept of modular synthesis--are pretty staunch competitors. Yours is certainly a fun and fair take, and arguably the electric guitar+tube amps birthed so many genres (blues, soul, funk, rock, punk, metal, etc) where as synthesizers remained pretty niche with their contribution to experimental music and pop music, mixing in with rock funk and disco, and the titan of EDM that grew out of that.

[sonofhans]

This comment is a love letter to electric guitar. I adore it. Consider reading “Desolation Road” by Ian McDonald. I don’t want to spoil any of it, and perhaps science fiction isn’t your cup of tea, but at one point there is a character on Mars with a 700-year-old strat, and you can tell Ian McDonald loves the guitar as much as you do.

[asdfman123]

You could argue that it's one of the most versatile instruments, sure. "Greatest" is completely subjective.

But is it one of the most versatile instruments? You can do signal transforms with any kind of audio input, although it's done more with the electric guitar than any other instruments.

I would say it in practice, it has the most versatile sonic profile.

[solomonb]

A modular synth is more versatile in terms of enumerated signal transformations. Its the ability to be expressive with those signal transformations that makes the guitar+tube amp what it is.

[anthk]

Ahem, just two words. Yamaha DX-7.

Synth music elevated electric bound tones to anything ever heard.

I remidn you that most of the rock and roll and rock music was about speed and mimicking the sound of a rumbling car engine, as it was a symbol of the freedom in America, being able to run away from your toxic communities to find yourself better anywhere else.

That was the message for the young with rock and roll: a speedy engine for your ears.

Electronic music was like replacing a car with UFO evoking you a space travel.

With the progressive subgenre of techno music you got the same feeling, but with no subtle hints. Heck, one of the most known songs in Spain ever, "Flying Free", literally remixes the sounds of drifting cars between the melodies, making the listener really happy in a very direct way as tons of youngs in the 90's got into the outskirt night clubs... by car. So they felt as driving an infinite highway rave with no end for days.

[bigiain]

The amusing thing (to me at least) is that while the DX7 gave users almost infinite options as to how they could create and shape sounds, if you know what to listen for you'll hear the E PIANO 1 and BASS 1 presets an about half of all mid 80s hits. Turns out when they gave musicians a tool with immense flexibility, many of them still chose to use two of the (admittedly great) preset sounds.

[fsckboy]

The DX-7 FM synthesis opened the door to a pretty narrow but interesting range of sounds, bells and brass, which people loved and it was a ripsnorting success for a time, but it didn't displace subtractive analog synths and people aren't exactly playing FM synthesizers any more, while they are now heavily back into analog subtractive. of course there are also romplers and samplers etc. and those can achieve sounds that FM did, but it's hard to call the DX-7 any type of be-all end-all.

[gwbas1c]

I watched Wayne Coyne of the Flaming Lips do something similar with some kind of "I don't know what" controller, it was some kind of input in his microphone stand. As he moved it around, the sound and projection changed.

I remembered learning about similar MIDI controllers when I was in school.

[bigiain]

Imogen Heap created a set of gloves that transform finger flexing and wrist movement into midi signals you can use in whatever way your performance software allows.

https://mimugloves.com/gloves/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vq52kT6YY-0

[dwd]

Similar to the Theremin is the ondes Martenot. Jonny Greenwood (Radiohead) describes it as a "very accurate Theremin".

You can hear it particularly on "Where I End and You Begin" from Hail to the Thief. Ed O'Brien compliments its sound using an EBow (back before he had the sustainer) in that song.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ondes_Martenot

[jawilson2]

Yes! I always think first of How to Disappear Completely, which I think was the first song he used it on. I remember watching some concert in college from the Kid A days, and he would have like 3 Ondes Martenot players on stage with them, crazy stuff from the band that wrote Creep like 5 years earlier.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvWwMhRsRgo

[FpUser]

>"All other electronic instruments, with the one exception being the Theramin, have a fundamental problem with human expression. There is an unsolvable disconnect between what the performer's actions and their audience."

Look at Roli Seaboard, it has insane amount degrees of freedom / expression

https://youtu.be/2fQbtp2BgY4?si=S52A-22A3GlXPajU

past the middle starts solo

[WalterBright]

No two trumpet players sound the same. I know who is playing just by the tone. Listen to Herb Alpert / Al Hirt / Maurice Andre, all playing the same instrument, but wildly different.

[dec0dedab0de]

I generally reserve the word electronic to mean something with a microcontroller or discreet logic components. Electronic guitars exist, but they're basically differently shaped keyboards.

I often lament the lack of other electric instruments.

[musictubes]

I have come around to the idea of guitars being electronic instruments. Strings are the original oscillators. Once they become electrical signals it isn't clear to me how they differ categorically from any other electric instrument. There are an almost infinite number of pedals, many of which offer things like filters, LFOs, and other synthesis stalwarts. You could even make the guitar a controller for more traditional synthesis work.

[deafpolygon]

I suppose you haven’t heard some really talented sitar players out there. For a traditionally non-electronic instrument, it’s got some crazy sounds.

[solomonb]

I think you misunderstand my comment entirely. I'm not comparing electric to acoustic instruments at all.