Pete, has anyone disagreed with you about his approach to playing guitar? Or that it all starts there? I have read no where that anyone has disagreed with you. So with regard to his approach you are absolutely correct, no arguments there. However,
, this thread is not about his approach to playing guitar, but is about the Tone he got from his equipment. This is something you choose to ignore either because you cannot hear it, or do not know what you are talking about. You rather make snide remarks with wink icons in an attempt to demean the subject. Case in point, your slipknot lessons are great examples of his approach to that passage, but the tone of your equipment in regards to his tone is not so great. You either can hear that or choose to ignore it. This is no way an attempt to demean your approach, which is spot on. It is merely an example of the difference between approach and tone. So with all that said, it is obvious that the two entities can be achieved without each other but what happens when they both go together can one make the other better or worse? Point is Jerry's approach affected his tone and his tone affected his playing. If this were not true, then the evolution of Jerry's playing would have went stale, boring and stagnant. All you have to do is listen to songs that span his playing years to hear the growth in his approach and his tone. With your thinking anyone who has his approach nailed also nails his tone. If that were the case i wonder why all the big name jerry players that do have that aspect down all migrate to get that last 1% of his rig tone nailed? Why rewire guitars, buy twin and mac amps or jbl's or try and emulate it digitally? Yourself included? Why the need for the gear if all one has to do is woodshed? It is absolutely the first step, but it is only a part of the equation, a really huge part but nonetheless only a part. For Jerry the two go hand in hand, for us who are not Jerry they are undeniably separate achievable entities.