Jack Weber Posted February 11, 2011 Report Posted February 11, 2011 Oh, my. The stakes are high indeed. But I'm in, I'll see your Vaughn and Kath and raise you: 1. Chet Atkins 2. Jim Heath (the Right Reverend Horton Heat) And raise you: 1.James Burton 2.Mick Taylor Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
wyly Posted February 11, 2011 Report Posted February 11, 2011 (edited) You're taking some things i'm saying out of context. I was originally responding to this quote of yours: What you implied is that because this girl is so amazing and technically proficient at age 5 (which she is), that she will very likely be better than Jimi Hendrix when she's an adult (btw Hendrix only got his 1st guitar at age 15). What i'm arguing is that her technical skills will almost certainly be better than Hendrix's when she's his age if she keeps playing, but that won't necessarily mean she'll be a better guitarist than him. My argument is/was that being technically proficient at the guitar is only part of a what makes a great guitarist, and that creativity and being able to write excellent original compositions is also a huge part of being a great guitarist. What made Hendrix so great wasn't just his technical proficiency, but his off-the-charts creativity/imagination he put into his playing (beyond anything i've personally heard before or since). There are a ton of great technical guitarists. But like i said before, many of them can play at the speed of light with perfect form and play scales up and down the neck like crazy, but many also cannot write their own original compositions to save their live. Example, here's a youtube guitar star Matt Rach. Did some of these videos at 15 years old: As you see, he can play both electric and classical guitar with incredible technical talent. His classical form is almost perfect. I was very excited when i saw these videos and watched a whole bunch more of his & followed him over the years (he's probably about 20-21 years old now). However, both of the above videos are cover songs (though he reworked the "canon rock" piece brilliantly into his own from JerryC's original "canon rock"). But when i check out his original songs, pretty much all of them are mediocre or lame, nothing as good as his cover stuff. He just doesn't have a lot of talent seemingly for writing original creative compositions. There are so many other guitarists/musicians like this. My point is that being technically amazing doesn't always translate into being creatively talented too, meaning the logic of you thinking the 5 y/o girl will likely be better than Hendrix simply because she started a lot earlier doesn't jive. fair enough but now you mixing technical guitar skills with an entirely different skill set, composing...and then adding something really subjective cultural popularity...I already like the 5yr old better than hendrix, the only relationship I ever had with hendrix music was to turn off the radio...so no I don't think he was talented, which is my opinion, subjective and irrelevant not having multiple skill sets does not make an artist inferior, they need to be judged on separately each skill...a musician can spend a lifetime performing other peoples music it doesn't lesson their talent... I agree with both things you just said. However, I stand by the robot/trained-monkey comparisons. The kid obviously has natural talent, but to be that good at that age she also obviously has been pushed incredibly hard by her (North Korean) parents and has put in hundreds if not thousands of hours of practice into her playing as anyone would have to do in order to get that good. But for a 5 year old, you can't really get any better and no i don't expect a 5 y/o to write their own original songs that complex. I would hope not but neither of us know that one way or the other...there are gifted people among us who are born with remarkable natural talents and do it with an ease that rest of us can't imagine...at 5 yrs of age I would guess this is one of them, thousands of hrs of practice isn't plausible at 5... Edited February 11, 2011 by wyly Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
Jack Weber Posted February 12, 2011 Report Posted February 12, 2011 Here's a what if proposition to ponder... Many people,including me,feel that Buddy Holly was as influetnial on modern Rock music as Chuck Berry.The reason is that Holly was one of the original architects of the modern 4 piece Rock band. There are many example of variations of this,including The Beattles,The Kinks,Pink Floyd,Led Zeppelin,The Who,Kiss...etc...Obviously there are variations of this with The Who and Led Zeppelin,but they are essentially 4 piece bands... The question is this... What if Buddy Holly had lived??? Huge questions... Would he have continued on the Rock path or go back towards the Country model? Would the influence of The Beattles have been as profound with Holly alive? What would have been the influence on the Southern Rock genre,(Lynard Skynard,The Allman Bros.,The Outlaws,The Marshall Tucker Band etc)? Think about that one,folks... Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
wyly Posted February 12, 2011 Report Posted February 12, 2011 Here's a what if proposition to ponder... Many people,including me,feel that Buddy Holly was as influetnial on modern Rock music as Chuck Berry.The reason is that Holly was one of the original architects of the modern 4 piece Rock band. There are many example of variations of this,including The Beattles,The Kinks,Pink Floyd,Led Zeppelin,The Who,Kiss...etc...Obviously there are variations of this with The Who and Led Zeppelin,but they are essentially 4 piece bands... The question is this... What if Buddy Holly had lived??? Huge questions... Would he have continued on the Rock path or go back towards the Country model? Would the influence of The Beattles have been as profound with Holly alive? What would have been the influence on the Southern Rock genre,(Lynard Skynard,The Allman Bros.,The Outlaws,The Marshall Tucker Band etc)? Think about that one,folks... I've thought about many times, very talented and very young when he died...hard to say where music would've gone had he lived his brand was very different, more rock than country IMO... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
WIP Posted February 12, 2011 Report Posted February 12, 2011 If we're going to have a special section for great guitar solos, here's my nomination: Steve Hackett of Genesis; this must have been from when he went solo in the late 70's. The band here features John Wetton on bass - who played in many prog rock bands from King Crimson to Asia, and Genesis's touring drummer - Chester Thompson....don't know who the other guys are....doesn't matter! This vid is taken from Hackett's guitar solo in the middle of Firth Of Fifth: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xW_7YyKawbw&feature=related Quote Anybody who believers exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist. -- Kenneth Boulding, 1973
Shwa Posted February 12, 2011 Report Posted February 12, 2011 (edited) And raise you: 1.James Burton 2.Mick Taylor See you and call. Edited February 12, 2011 by Shwa Quote
jbg Posted February 13, 2011 Report Posted February 13, 2011 (edited) People who curse when they post must feel very strongly about their views. But people who use texting abbreviations must feel less strongly. I know I'm quoting from another thread, but the Grateful Dead must have felt really strongly when they sang, in Uncle John's Band, "G-d d@mn well I declare, have you seen the like, there was a breed of cannonball it's motto is 'don't tread on me'...". Edited February 13, 2011 by jbg Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
kimmy Posted February 13, 2011 Author Report Posted February 13, 2011 Being a great technician and being a great artist are two different things. Joe Satriani could play rings around Neil Young (and a lot of other icons) if you're grading on technical ability... but would anybody here actually choose to listen to Joe Satriani over Neil Young? I remember reading that when Metallica was auditioning for a bass player to replace Cliff Burton, Les Claypool (now of Primus) showed up. He showed off all the amazing things he can do with his bass, and they were basically blown away, and told him "that was awesome, but sorry, you're way too good for this band." They ended up choosing Jason Newsted, a guy with (like Burton) a very basic and straightforward style that fit their sound perfectly. As for Claypool, he's regarded as one of the best bassists of our time, but in spite of that, I think most people would rather listen to toddlers banging on pots with spoons than listen to a Primus CD. -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
Moonlight Graham Posted February 15, 2011 Report Posted February 15, 2011 Being a great technician and being a great artist are two different things. Joe Satriani could play rings around Neil Young (and a lot of other icons) if you're grading on technical ability... but would anybody here actually choose to listen to Joe Satriani over Neil Young? I remember reading that when Metallica was auditioning for a bass player to replace Cliff Burton, Les Claypool (now of Primus) showed up. He showed off all the amazing things he can do with his bass, and they were basically blown away, and told him "that was awesome, but sorry, you're way too good for this band." They ended up choosing Jason Newsted, a guy with (like Burton) a very basic and straightforward style that fit their sound perfectly. As for Claypool, he's regarded as one of the best bassists of our time, but in spite of that, I think most people would rather listen to toddlers banging on pots with spoons than listen to a Primus CD. Great post. I believe Claypool also auditioned when Newsted left Metallica and they were looking for another new bassist. Kirk Hammett and Les Claypool are childhood friends. Ya Claypool is so talented, but his style is just so different from Metallica...though i've seen video of him playing 'Master of Puppets' solo live. The guitar virtuosos like Satriani, Vai, Malmsteen etc. while i respect their technical talent/skill, i just get into their music most of the time. Often it comes across as musical masturbation or "look what i can do". Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
Jack Weber Posted February 15, 2011 Report Posted February 15, 2011 Great post. I believe Claypool also auditioned when Newsted left Metallica and they were looking for another new bassist. Kirk Hammett and Les Claypool are childhood friends. Ya Claypool is so talented, but his style is just so different from Metallica...though i've seen video of him playing 'Master of Puppets' solo live. The guitar virtuosos like Satriani, Vai, Malmsteen etc. while i respect their technical talent/skill, i just get into their music most of the time. Often it comes across as musical masturbation or "look what i can do". Kinda like Yes.... Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
wyly Posted February 15, 2011 Report Posted February 15, 2011 (edited) Being a great technician and being a great artist are two different things. Joe Satriani could play rings around Neil Young (and a lot of other icons) if you're grading on technical ability...but would anybody here actually choose to listen to Joe Satriani over Neil Young? define great artist... stage performance? choose Joe satriani over neil young...I would because I think neil young is boring crap(and I don't even know who satriani is)...it always comes down to personal likes and dislikes... Edited February 15, 2011 by wyly Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
DogOnPorch Posted February 15, 2011 Report Posted February 15, 2011 (edited) I wonder what city gets this CSI theme... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMGq_HRH7A8 Edited February 15, 2011 by DogOnPorch Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
guyser Posted February 16, 2011 Report Posted February 16, 2011 (edited) The question is this... What if Buddy Holly had lived??? Huge questions... Would he have continued on the Rock path or go back towards the Country model? Would the influence of The Beattles have been as profound with Holly alive? What would have been the influence on the Southern Rock genre,(Lynard Skynard,The Allman Bros.,The Outlaws,The Marshall Tucker Band etc)? Think about that one,folks... Ok...let me see... Well for one, I suspect Buddy wonuld not have become as famous as he is had he not died (whats that say about the Big Bopper?). Same as Curt Cobain , Shannon Hoon ,Jimi Hendrix and Janis. (ok I threw one in there for obscurity) He would have had to stand the test of time and produced continually to be considered influential, although I understand that as time marches one can look back at the influential aspects and see them clearer. He probably would have hit the 1970's and gone off the charts as far as relevance goes, but I wont rule out a comeback later on.There always seems to be a 10 yr lag whereby one cant be seen, then all of a sudden there is a cool factor. Cue Vanilla Ice...... The Beatles, and of course Im not that old, were a phenomenon unto themselves, fueled in part by style, nationality and the burgeoning availability of records and record playing. Southern Rock genre....???....I havent the slightest f'ing clue about that . Rarely if ever did I listen to that, and almost never bought anything of theirs. Oh wait, I may have a 45 in the basement of Lynyrd. Edited February 16, 2011 by guyser Quote
WIP Posted February 16, 2011 Report Posted February 16, 2011 define great artist... stage performance? choose Joe satriani over neil young...I would because I think neil young is boring crap(and I don't even know who satriani is)...it always comes down to personal likes and dislikes... I like Neil Young, but as a guitarist, he should have checked his ego at the door and backed off those fumbled, clumsy solos. His guitar playing is a mess when he tries to go too fast or play hard-to-reach chords. The overall point is valid -- some guitarists are technically good, but play with no emotion. Since I mentioned Steve Hackett earlier as a personal favourite, I'm recalling watching the last Genesis live concert video, and how their touring guitarist - Darrell Stuermer played totally bland when they do a medley of their 70's prog rock classics. Stuermer can play the same chords I guess, but it's totally soulless. Quote Anybody who believers exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist. -- Kenneth Boulding, 1973
Moonlight Graham Posted February 17, 2011 Report Posted February 17, 2011 (edited) I like Neil Young, but as a guitarist, he should have checked his ego at the door and backed off those fumbled, clumsy solos. His guitar playing is a mess when he tries to go too fast or play hard-to-reach chords. The man is a god on the electric guitar. Nobody, and i mean nobody, puts more of their entire being into their live playing, especially his solos, not even Hendrix. I love when he goes ape-shit on solos and tugs that whammy bar up and down like a raging motherf'er. Edited February 17, 2011 by Moonlight Graham Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
wyly Posted February 17, 2011 Report Posted February 17, 2011 I like Neil Young, but as a guitarist, he should have checked his ego at the door and backed off those fumbled, clumsy solos. His guitar playing is a mess when he tries to go too fast or play hard-to-reach chords.I'll take your word for it, I can't past his voice long enough to get to his ability on a guitar...The overall point is valid -- some guitarists are technically good, but play with no emotion. Since I mentioned Steve Hackett earlier as a personal favourite, I'm recalling watching the last Genesis live concert video, and how their touring guitarist - Darrell Stuermer played totally bland when they do a medley of their 70's prog rock classics. Stuermer can play the same chords I guess, but it's totally soulless.so we're talking about stage presence, performance/entertainment value...I would agree there are many performers even mega stars who aren't especially good but they put on a great show...a guitar playing friend of mine a real technical purist likes to refer to them as manufactured Schlock...I freely admit to enjoying a bit of schlock now and then unless a the artist works in a studio exclusively public performance is important...I recall a documentary on the early beatle years when they dumped a member who had no stage presence, I don't know accurate that was george harrison never had much of a stage presence either so I can't imagine how poor the other guy would have been ... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
ToadBrother Posted February 18, 2011 Report Posted February 18, 2011 I recall a documentary on the early beatle years when they dumped a member who had no stage presence, I don't know accurate that was george harrison never had much of a stage presence either so I can't imagine how poor the other guy would have been ... That doesn't sound like the Beatles history I know. If you're referring to Pete Best, he was dumped because George Martin didn't think he was a very good drummer and told Brian Epstein that the Beatles were free to use him as a drummer, but that he would provide the drummer for recording sessions. The other three didn't want that arrangement, fired Best and hired Ringo Starr (who initially didn't impress Martin either, who rerecorded Love Me Do with a session drummer). Quote
ToadBrother Posted February 18, 2011 Report Posted February 18, 2011 (edited) The question is this... What if Buddy Holly had lived??? Huge questions... Would he have continued on the Rock path or go back towards the Country model? Would the influence of The Beattles have been as profound with Holly alive? What would have been the influence on the Southern Rock genre,(Lynard Skynard,The Allman Bros.,The Outlaws,The Marshall Tucker Band etc)? Think about that one,folks... Holly was turning away from rock and roll in his last recordings. I suspect he would have likely have either turned his hand more fully to being a producer (which is where his real talent lay) and perhaps towards "crooner" stylings. He had already made two major innovations in cementing the guitarist-bass player-drummer lineup as the core of a rock band and for his early studio experiments with overdubbing which moved a technique more often used for spoken word and comedy records into the musical mainstream, paving the way for bands like The Beatles and The Kinks who would rely heavily on such recording techniques by the mid 60s. There is another thing to credit Holly with, and it was his major talent as a songwriter, and that was creating musical and lyrical "hooks". Even early innovators like Ike Turner and Chuck Berry still largely relied on the basic blues progressions and song structures, but Holly was a damned bright guy who merged the earlier rock and roll sound with the musical concepts borrowed from the post-war pop music vocabulary, and ultimately from swing and other wartime and prewartime traditions. Of course, the largest influence of Holly on the British Invasion in particular was the fact that his songs were pretty damned easy to play. Chuck Berry, for instance, was a pretty sophisticated rock guitarist for his time, and for a lot of those English lads with their cheap guitars, it was damned hard to do those songs. Throw on a Buddy Holly record, and you had a song that used pretty basic chords and an uncomplicated yet very effective style of play. More than one music historian has pointed out that while Elvis, Chuck Berry, Little Richard and the other major mid 50s acts certainly were the big inspirations for the bands that would later form the British Invasion, it was Buddy Holly that basically created both the band and musical structures. Even the name the "Beatles" was Lennon's way of trying to imitate the name of Holly's band The Crickets, so in another way Holly heavily influenced the later history of rock music by inspiring the name of the biggest of his musical descendants. Edited February 18, 2011 by ToadBrother Quote
wyly Posted February 18, 2011 Report Posted February 18, 2011 That doesn't sound like the Beatles history I know. If you're referring to Pete Best, he was dumped because George Martin didn't think he was a very good drummer and told Brian Epstein that the Beatles were free to use him as a drummer, but that he would provide the drummer for recording sessions. The other three didn't want that arrangement, fired Best and hired Ringo Starr (who initially didn't impress Martin either, who rerecorded Love Me Do with a session drummer). Stuart Sutcliffe-mid 1960 to mid 1961... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
ToadBrother Posted February 18, 2011 Report Posted February 18, 2011 Stuart Sutcliffe-mid 1960 to mid 1961... By every account I've heard, Sutcliffe left the band of his own free will to pursue his artistic aspirations, and in no small part because he intended to marry Astrid Kirchherr. Paul, George and Pete Best were certainly not Stuart's biggest fans (he was a crappy bass player, and in fact never had really wanted to join the Beatles, but John had insisted). I doubt that Paul and George were all that upset that he left, but so far as I know they never pushed the matter much because John was very loyal to Stuart and would get quite angry when folks spoke against him. Accusations of crappy stage presence were made against Pete Best, but there are other accounts that report that he was, particularly in the Cavern Club days, the most popular member of the band. There were certainly interpersonal issues, he never gelled with the core three members. In the end, I think the other three just wanted an excuse to toss Best, and probably had had their eye on trying to get Ringo in for some time. Quote
DogOnPorch Posted February 18, 2011 Report Posted February 18, 2011 By every account I've heard, Sutcliffe left the band of his own free will to pursue his artistic aspirations, and in no small part because he intended to marry Astrid Kirchherr. Paul, George and Pete Best were certainly not Stuart's biggest fans (he was a crappy bass player, and in fact never had really wanted to join the Beatles, but John had insisted). I doubt that Paul and George were all that upset that he left, but so far as I know they never pushed the matter much because John was very loyal to Stuart and would get quite angry when folks spoke against him. Accusations of crappy stage presence were made against Pete Best, but there are other accounts that report that he was, particularly in the Cavern Club days, the most popular member of the band. There were certainly interpersonal issues, he never gelled with the core three members. In the end, I think the other three just wanted an excuse to toss Best, and probably had had their eye on trying to get Ringo in for some time. Agreement. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
wyly Posted February 18, 2011 Report Posted February 18, 2011 (edited) By every account I've heard, Sutcliffe left the band of his own free will to pursue his artistic aspirations, and in no small part because he intended to marry Astrid Kirchherr. Paul, George and Pete Best were certainly not Stuart's biggest fans (he was a crappy bass player, and in fact never had really wanted to join the Beatles, but John had insisted). I doubt that Paul and George were all that upset that he left, but so far as I know they never pushed the matter much because John was very loyal to Stuart and would get quite angry when folks spoke against him.I've heard multiple versions of his leaving...he was made to feel not welcome, he was pushed out, he quit or a combination of the three...after all these decades we're not going to find the real answer...his reputation was that he wasn't very good and he was "wooden" on stage... Edited February 18, 2011 by wyly Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
kimmy Posted February 19, 2011 Author Report Posted February 19, 2011 so we're talking about stage presence, performance/entertainment value...I would agree there are many performers even mega stars who aren't especially good but they put on a great show...a guitar playing friend of mine a real technical purist likes to refer to them as manufactured Schlock...I freely admit to enjoying a bit of schlock now and then unless a the artist works in a studio exclusively public performance is important... No, not stage presence or doing big cheesy rock-star moves in tight pants. I just had "Brothers In Arms", by Dire Straits, on my stereo, and it's a great example of what I was thinking of. I haven't looked at a tab for it, but it sounds like it should be dead simple to play correctly. Even I could probably learn it, and I'm literally the worst guitar player on the entire planet. Give the Korean toddler, and Joe Satriani, and me, the sheet music for that, and we could all probably learn to play the notes correctly... and each performance would sound different (and probably much inferior) to how it would sound when Mark Knopfler plays it. -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
bloodyminded Posted February 19, 2011 Report Posted February 19, 2011 (edited) No, not stage presence or doing big cheesy rock-star moves in tight pants. I just had "Brothers In Arms", by Dire Straits, on my stereo, and it's a great example of what I was thinking of. I haven't looked at a tab for it, but it sounds like it should be dead simple to play correctly. Even I could probably learn it, and I'm literally the worst guitar player on the entire planet. Give the Korean toddler, and Joe Satriani, and me, the sheet music for that, and we could all probably learn to play the notes correctly... and each performance would sound different (and probably much inferior) to how it would sound when Mark Knopfler plays it. -k True, Knopfler's style is unique enough that he's instantly recognizeable. And I love "Sultans of Swing," no matter what anybody says about it. And don't try to steal my position as worst guitar player. Feminism works both ways. My "Smoke on the Water" doesn't even sound right. Edited February 19, 2011 by bloodyminded Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
kimmy Posted February 19, 2011 Author Report Posted February 19, 2011 True, Knopfler's style is unique enough that he's instantly recognizeable. And I love "Sultans of Swing," no matter what anybody says about it. People say bad things about Sultans of Swing? And don't try to steal my position as worst guitar player. Feminism works both ways. I dunno, I'm pretty terrible... My "Smoke on the Water" doesn't even sound right. ...in that case, I may have to concede. -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.