| ▲ | Jimi Hendrix was a systems engineer(spectrum.ieee.org) |
| 128 points by tintinnabula 2 hours ago | 50 comments |
| |
|
| ▲ | Slow_Hand 27 minutes ago | parent | next [-] |
| Nice article for engineers to understand something that most guitar players will intuitively know. One of the great things about a hi-gain setup like Hendrix's is how the feedback loop will inject an element of controlled chaos into the sound. It allows for emergent fluctuations in timbre that Hendrix can wrangle, but never fully control. It's the squealing, chaotic element in something like his 'Star Spangled Banner'. It's a positive feedback loop that can run away from the player and create all kinds of unexpected elements. The art of Hendrix's playing, then, is partly in how he harnessed that sound and integrated it into his voice. And of course, he's a force of nature when he does so. A great place to hear artful feedback would be the intro to Prince's 'Computer Blue'. It's the squealing "birdsong" at the beginning and ending of the record. You can hear it particularly well if you search for 'Computer Blue - Hallway Speech Version' with the extended intro. |
| |
| ▲ | 9dev 3 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Star Spangled Banner was incredible. The way you can hear the machine guns, choppers, sirens, screaming in agony… that was a masterpiece. |
|
|
| ▲ | solomonb 39 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| 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 11 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | The reverse example of this is musicians who play techno with analog instruments, like Pipe Guy, Basstong, and Meute[0][1][2]. Some people always get extremely defensive whenever I say that techno didn't click for me until I heard them. Well, they get defensive about the part where I think that the reason is also this human expression problem. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0gED3rn2Tc [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mn52b-bWfFM [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYtjttnp1Rs | | | |
| ▲ | pdntspa 25 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > 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. | | |
| ▲ | solomonb 8 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | 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. | |
| ▲ | Nition 16 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | 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). | |
| ▲ | dec0dedab0de 16 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | 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. |
| |
| ▲ | asdfman123 17 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | 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 4 minutes ago | parent [-] | | 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. |
| |
| ▲ | dec0dedab0de 18 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | 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. | |
| ▲ | Nition 32 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | There have 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. | |
| ▲ | gwbas1c 33 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | 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. | |
| ▲ | anthk 23 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | 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. | |
| ▲ | deafpolygon 34 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | 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 34 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I think you misunderstand my comment entirely. I'm not comparing electric to acoustic instruments at all. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | yayitswei an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| This is one of the few articles where I noticed a bunch of LLM-isms and still read to the end because it was interesting. |
| |
| ▲ | purplekohav 35 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Hi! I work at IEEE Spectrum and there's no way an LLM wrote this. We have a pretty strict Generative AI use policy (bottom of this page https://spectrum.ieee.org/about). I'm guessing this is from writers using actual writing techniques that Gen AI stole from... | | |
| ▲ | consumer451 5 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I just wanted to relate a story. I was speaking with my 14 year old nephew via messaging last month. It was about a deep topic, synthetic consciousness. He wrote such an intelligent reply that I asked him: hey, was this from an LLM? He was insulted. I did research with his parents and found out that 99% no, he's just a smart kid. Is there a phrase for this this mode of confusion yet? |
| |
| ▲ | post-it an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It's because there's clearly a near-1:1 ratio of input to output. I also noticed some LLMisms, and I suspect the author may have ran the text (perhaps in the form of a large number of bullet points) through an LLM. But because he's using the LLM to clean instead of multiply, it's still worth reading. | | |
| ▲ | 0x1ch an hour ago | parent [-] | | Probably similar to what I do with my papers and resumes, I write them myself then throw them through LLMs for suggestions and corrections, manually reviewing the output. |
| |
| ▲ | nerdsniper an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | LLM-isms are tolerably bad. LLM's narrative ability is intolerably terrible. As others said, because a human actually wrote the overall narration for this, it was still compelling to read. I think LLM's lack of "theory of mind" leads to them severely underperforming on narration and humor. | |
| ▲ | squeaky-clean 24 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I didn't see any LLM-isms. Emdashes I guess, but I expect those in actual articles, they're only fishy in social media comments. | |
| ▲ | evilos an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | I bailed, it just really kills my desire to keep reading. | | |
| ▲ | gchamonlive 37 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I feel for you, because moving forward more and more interesting and substantious articles will be written with llm-isms, either because LLM was used directly in writing or because the authors absorbed the style. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | jonnypotty 35 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Why is that pic labelled with the wrong names? Pretty sure that isn't Mitch and Noel. |
| |
|
| ▲ | EdPoincare 32 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Crazy example of when everything is AI generated, even the code referenced in git repo (refer to commit 3d733ca), and actually interesting and "new" in a way... |
|
| ▲ | RyanOD an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I've often marveled at the success many guitar players had with experimental electronics - Hendrix, EVH, Les Paul, Brian May, Jack White, and Tom Scholz (special case, of course) are just a few examples. |
| |
| ▲ | nervousvarun 12 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Brian May stands out even among that group (well maybe not w/ Les Paul there) The guy built his own guitar as a teenager and has played it for the rest of his career:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Special | |
| ▲ | tclancy 29 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | The podcast "History of Rock in 500 Songs" (full disclosure: I am a devout, slavering fan) provides these on the regular. I was actually smiling when I heard a fairly new song that attempts a really flat, fuzzed out sound because it made me think, "Buddy Holly invented that by accident with a broken speaker". One of the episodes on The Who goes into the Marshall behind Marshall amps in similar detail. I suppose if I were going to recommend a single episode to Hacker News though, it would be https://500songs.com/podcast/episode-146-good-vibrations-by-... which begins with at least a half hour on the amazing (if not happy) life of the guy who invented the Theremin, Lev Sergeyevich Termen. | | |
|
|
| ▲ | ozim an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| There is art in engineering that we cannot deny. While some try to make it as exact science, it is not, there are things you still cannot put a number on and it works ... |
|
| ▲ | Obscura- 6 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Fascinating |
|
| ▲ | alephnerd an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| This is why I feel the recentish (last 10-15 years) shift in decoupling CS curricula from EE and CE fundamentals (which only 10-15 years ago would have been treated as CS) in the US is doing a massive disservice to newer students entering the industry. DSP, Control Engineering, Circuit Design, understanding pipelining and cacheing, and other fundamentals are important for people to understand higher levels of the abstraction layers (eg. much of deep learning is built on top of Optimization Theory principles which are introduced in a DSP class). The value of Computer Science isn't the ability to whiteboard a Leetcode hard question or glue together PyTorch commands - it's the ability to reason across multiple abstraction layers. And newer grads are significantly deskilled due to these curriculum changes. If I as a VC know more about Nagle's Algorithm (hi Nagle!) than some of the potential technical founders for network security or MLOps companies, we are in trouble. |
| |
| ▲ | jmalicki an hour ago | parent [-] | | I came into a CS and math background without CE or EE, and took two dedicated optimization courses (one happened to be in a EE department, but had no EE prereqs), as well as the optimization introduced in machine learning classes. To be honest a lot of the older school optimization is barely even useful, second-order methods are a bit passe for large scale ML, largely because they don't work, not because people aren't aware (Adam and Muon can be seen as approximations to second-order methods, though, so it is useful to be aware of that structure). Isn't Nagle usually introduced in a networking class typically taken by CS (non-CE/EE) undergrads? Just because EEs are exposed to some mathematical concepts during their training doesn't mean that non-EEs are not exposed through a different path. | | |
| ▲ | esafak 31 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Muon is much more sophisticated than Newton's method. Neural networks have started to borrow techniques from statistical mechanics, and various branches of maths like invariant theory that were previously rarely used in engineering. CS is not dumbing down; its needs and focus are changing. I've never needed or benefited from most of the EE curriculum. There is an opportunity cost in learning things you don't need. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | themafia an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The original title: "Jimi Hendrix's Analog Wizardy Explained." > and the component was the Octavia guitar pedal, created for Hendrix by sound engineer Roger Mayer. So, Roger was the engineer. And, Jimi was the artist. |
| |
| ▲ | btown an hour ago | parent [-] | | Art and engineering are both constrained optimization problems - at their core, both involve transforming a loosely defined aesthetic desire into a repeatable methodology! And if we can call ourselves software engineers, where our day-to-day (mostly) involves less calculus and more creative interpretation of loose ideas, in the context of a corpus of historical texts that we literally call "libraries" - are we not artists and art historians? We're far closer to Jimi than Roger, in many ways. Pots and kettles :) | | |
| ▲ | dajt an hour ago | parent [-] | | We should not call ourselves engineers - it's a massive insult to actual professional engineers. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | weinzierl an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Nice article, but that the signal chain in the top image doesn't match the signal chain described in the text annoys me more than it should. |
| |
| ▲ | threetonesun an hour ago | parent [-] | | It's also a standard right handed strat, which seems like an oversight for a guy famous for playing with a right handed strat flipped upside down. |
|
|
| ▲ | BrokenCogs an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| This is a terrible article. In the first subplot, there is no explanation of what v(b1) and v(c2) are. The -8 on the on y axis (amplitude) looks like an upside down 8. Further down there is a sentence: "First, the Fuzz Face is a two-transistor feedback amplifier that turns a gentle sinusoid signal into an almost binary “fuzzy” output." But the figure does not match this - there is no "gentle sinusoid" wave shown on the first fuzz face plot. |
|
| ▲ | newzino 36 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Hendrix reportedly discovered feedback by walking away from a cranked amp. The guitar just kept sustaining on its own. What followed was years of empirical system identification: learning how body position, pickup selection, and guitar-to-amp distance affected feedback character. No transfer function, just iteration. That's a valid engineering methodology. |
|
| ▲ | downrightmike 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Jimi on the radio is my shorthand for bad economic times. Happened in 2007 and he's playing on the airwaves now |
| |
| ▲ | UncleOxidant 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Interesting economic indicator. But isn't Jimi playing on the radio all the time somewhere? | |
| ▲ | mlhpdx an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | I prefer the Circle Jerks: In a sluggish economy
Inflation, recession
Hits the land of the free
Standing in unemployment lines
Blame the government for hard time
We just get by
However we can
We all gotta duck
When the shit hits the fan
|
|
|
| ▲ | actionfromafar an hour ago | parent | prev [-] |
| And God is a DJ. |
| |