https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2XW-dOA8Ws
I agree with all he said there.
Anyway to my own ears and feelings, these modern professor-like players who shreddedyshred and put everything too fast and perfect are just B O R I N G
Printable View
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2XW-dOA8Ws
I agree with all he said there.
Anyway to my own ears and feelings, these modern professor-like players who shreddedyshred and put everything too fast and perfect are just B O R I N G
I agree too but I appreciate how good Satrianna is. Yet I just can’t get into those players. After a song or two, it gets on my nerves. The exceptions to that are Eric Johnson and Joe Bonamassa because they know that without a good song, it’s just jerking off.
I don't include Bonamassa in that cathegory, he's a bluesman before anything else.Quote:
Originally Posted by ch willie
I've heard Blackmore's comments and Joe Satriani's reply to them. Blackmore has a case of Lead Guitarist Disease and suffers from Me, Me, Me and time and music has truly passed him by. Joe Satriani doesn't play that fast on his music. His instrument takes the place of lyrics and constructs melody in his songs that often contain both a solo and a coda and written with intent. At Blackmore's age of 73, I find it in poor taste that he has to comment like that particularly because he's never written anything you could compare to Joe Satriani's body of work. On the other hand Joe Satriani has played and written in a band with a singer on the side project Chickenfoot, playing both parts of rhythm and lead guitarist on their 2009 and 2011 albums. Still the band's over all sound is much more standard Sammy Hagar with only a touch of Joe Satriani and not hey look at me Joe Satriani Lead Guitarist in Chickenfoot.
I disagree here: "particularly because he's never written anything you could compare to Joe Satriani's body of work".
Man, Purple is really a band that built a lot of what Rock n Roll is today.
What an ass.
"Anybody who isn't me 45 years ago sucks."
"Jimi was great because he missed and played the wrong note all the time." Apparently he forgot to also mention that Jimi played out of tune a lot too.
I've never heard anybody defend being less than a virtuoso and being a lazy player with such conviction.
No wonder live music is dying off due to hack blues players who "play from the heart", "searching for notes" instead of understanding what the hell it is that they're doing.
Steve Morse can play rings around Blackmore and Satch is the definition of virtuoso.
I guess this guy wouldn't like Paganini, Ravel or Mussorgsky either.
Not to mention here's a guy who's been coming out and playing the same solos note-for-note for over 40 years.
Look, if anyone wants to become great player you need to understand something: You need to go out, play live, put it out there - and suck - for a while. "playing form the heart" will get you into your first band, but if you want to be a go-to player in your local market you need to do learn to "play from the head". Lot's of aspiring guitarists don't want to study an artist and learn their stuff note-for-note, but you have to. It's part of the dues, and that's how you build your foundations. Get in a player's head and hands. Then take what you learned and move one.
Then you start to have breakthroughs. You hear SRV and go - "Wow, that's strangely familiar. All he's doing is copping Albert King note-for-note and then putting the Jimi hammer-on in the turn."
Blackmore's playing is good enough on it's own he shouldn't feel the need to disrespect other players. Morse's fusion style of playing in the Dixie Dregs ( a freaking AWESOME band!) laid a lot of foundation for a lot of other players that followed. Satch is the cleanest performer I've ever heard.
Hey, maybe I'm just an old player now but I can name all the truly innovative guitar players of the last 50 years on one hand with a finger or two left over.
Jeff Beck - 'nuff said.
Sonny Landreth
Carlos Santana
Eddie VanHalen
These are the guys I listen to and hear true innovation. They approach the instrument in a fundamentally new way rather than building off of derivation.
YMMV.
Chuck
What an ass.
"Anybody who isn't me 45 years ago sucks."
"Jimi was great because he missed and played the wrong note all the time." Apparently he forgot to also mention that Jimi played out of tune a lot too.
I've never heard anybody defend being less than a virtuoso and being a lazy player with such conviction.
No wonder live music is dying off due to hack blues players who "play from the heart", "searching for notes" instead of understanding what the hell it is that they're doing.
Steve Morse can play rings around Blackmore, and Satch is the definition of virtuoso.
I guess this guy wouldn't like Paganini, Ravel or Mussorgsky either.
Not to mention here's a guy who's been coming out and playing the same solos note-for-note for over 40 years.
Look, if anyone wants to become great player you need to understand something: You need to go out, play live, put it out there - and suck - for a while. "playing form the heart" will get you into your first band, but if you want to be a go-to player in your local market you need to do learn to "play from the head". Lot's of aspiring guitarists don't want to study an artist and learn their stuff note-for-note, but you have to. It's part of the dues, and that's how you build your foundations. Get in a player's head and hands. Then take what you learned and move one.
Then you start to have breakthroughs. You hear SRV and go - "Wow, that's strangely familiar. All he's doing is copping Albert King note-for-note and then putting the Jimi hammer-on in the turn."
Blackmore's playing is good enough on it's own he shouldn't feel the need to disrespect other players. Morse's fusion style of playing in the Dixie Dregs ( a freaking AWESOME band!) laid a lot of foundation for a lot of other players that followed. Satch is the cleanest performer I've ever heard.
Hey, maybe I'm just an old player now but I can name all the truly innovative guitar players of the last 50 years on one hand with a finger or two left over.
Jeff Beck - 'nuff said.
Sonny Landreth ( Using your finger as a bow while you play slide?)
Carlos Santana (I'm not playing, I weaving with love. Lysergic & Diethylamine put on vinyl)
Eddie VanHalen ( The solo on Michael Jacksons' Beat It pretty much says it all. )
These are the guys I listen to and hear true innovation. They approach the instrument in a fundamentally new way rather than building off of derivation.
YMMV.
Chuck
Oh, come on, Chuck! I know you have pretty strong opinions but now we're gonna box a little :laughing:
All right, we agree here. He behaved like a douchebag.Quote:
Originally Posted by Offshore Angler
Quote:
Originally Posted by Offshore Angler
Man, that's such a mistake. Live music dying off because of intuitive/not-too-technical players? Back in the 60s that was most everything there was. If I had to name a reason why guitar-related music is dying, I'd say the opposite: there are very few players left who can actually put real feeling to the songs and be heroes on stage.
Honestly, when was the last time you saw a concert with the glory, grace and heart of an 80's Queen show? What do we have today? Mostly robots.
We wouldn't be, on May, 2018, talking about Jimi, Keith, Mick Taylor, Page, SRV and so many other "hack blues players who "play from the heart", "searching for notes", if that wasn't the heart of music, now would we? :hmm By the way, nowadays there are many guys who do play the blues with a lot of soul and great technique out there... I wonder why you say this, considering you are a gigging player and probably go out a lot at night.
There is a HUGE conceptual difference between being a virtuoso and being a genius, an artist. You don't have to be a virtuoso to be a hell of an artist and compose something people will love. Theory and technique are the map, not the mountain.
It's no use to master an instrument, to be able to play fast, precise and sparkly solos that make people yawn. And like it or not, many people do yawn to these perfect robots, just as many music scholars have compared the opening riff in Smoke on the Water to Beethoven's 5th Symphony's first movement intro, regarding many aspects.
Fact is, you pick 100 rock-listening kids out of different high schools and ask them who's greater, Blackmore or Satriani... You probably won't like the replies.
But music is about creating and making sounds that please people, and some players do it with a *small* bunch of powerchords and downstrokes, I mean Johnny Ramone... And look what the public and the press said about him for about 30 years.
I don't mean to say that playing well and being a virtuoso doesn't mean anything, but like it or not, it ain't the main goal in music. Music is all about making the audience like you.
Now, reading both posts, Chuck's and mine, I can't help but to comment: ain't it cool how forums are a great way of making friends and discussing music and sharing our different opinions just as if we were in our favorite bar, talking over some beers? :salud:
Chuck, I agree that all those guys took the guitar to a new place. But as a listener, I just don't get pleasure out of Satriana. I recognize the genius behind his playing and others' like him. But then again, even with someone like Hendrix, I have a hard time listening to an album all the way through. Same thing with SRV.
I do think Blackmore should have kept his mouth shut. It's not cool to put down other musicians like that, and Blackmore was an ass to do so. I understand the logic behind what he's saying and might even agree with it to a degree. But he didn't have to be a dick.
I'll say this for Ritchie, he hasn't changed in the last 40 plus years. He's always been a dick. I remember reading my first interview by him in GP years ago and going "Wow. Really? And I was worshipping this guy?"
Indeed, he was a total douche there.
I'm puking over here about how the master narrative has changed over time.
Jimi, before he became "Jimi", was as technical a player as there was. You had to be to be part of the bands he played in. He also had military discipline.
Keith Richards - he's super anal about "getting it right", he's the only person I ever saw chew out Chuck Berry to quit taking the easy road and get the solo note-for-note. KR was also classically trained an that foundation is where playing comes from. Listen, you can hear it.
Johnny Ramone, often didn't play on the albums. Session cats did. Live they just played fast and loud. The punk version of meedly meedly.
Having studied music as a minor (no chicks in engineering!) a take exception that someone separates virtuosity from interpretation. Virtuosity is where where perfect technique and perfect interpretation meet. As in Pablo, Satchmo, Heifetz, Buddy Rich, and EVH. These are the kind of musicians you should study and learn to listen to what they say.
Then, and only then, go play the blues and you'll be amazed how much differently yo approach them.
THE WORST SIN A GUITAR PLAYER CAN MAKE - is trying to play every solo they ever play in the pentatonic. Learn why a C Ionian scale works perfectly over a G7 chord and then lights and bells start going off. This C over G7 example is at the heart of rock and roll solos.
Look, I get it that some people's goals are to be in a band with friends, play at the local watering hole an have a few beers - and that's perfectly fine. But others may strive for more. To be known as accomplished and in-demand players in their area. If that's what someone's goals are then this attitude of "I'll just play from my heart" has to go. I know that some people think I'm a dick when I throw the cold water of reality on their flames of musical passion, but I've been doing this stuff a long time. Hard work, dedication and being able to handle a boatload of rejection and criticism are what makes a musician. And when you finally bust into the "in crowd" of players, it's dog-eat-dog trying to keep the best gigs.
In other words, it't not all fun and a Monkees video fantasy.
Chuck
I think you get on a high horse about it sometimes, but I don’t disagree with what you say, Chuck. I like a guitarist who knows his theory but who also plays by the feeling that a song requires. I agree with you that often when guitarists say they play from the heart that they’re just masking over their limitations. But as much as Keith Richards might be trained, we both know he could never do what Satriana does, not do I think Satriana could capture the feel that Keef gets. Not every player wants to be Satriana, Vai, or Van Halen—not because they couldn’t learn to play like that but because they don’t want to. I don’t always play in the pentatonic because I like to explore other modes, but I’m just not interested in the kind of playing that Satriana etc plays. It doesn’t make me happy. That doesn’t mean I don’t want to learn new things. It means I’d rather spend my time learning and playing other things.
And by the way, there’s a famous video of Chuck Berry chewing out Keef for not getting the groove. Makes me uncomfortable to watch it.
He he,
Q: What do you call two great musicians arguing vehmently?
A: A good band.
:)
Ha ha. Good one!
Quote:
Originally Posted by ch willie
Yet some guys can squeeze so much out of a pentatonic... Those are artists...
Anyway, well said, Willie.
Funny thing is, I myself come from classical music and I know my thoery too. I was trained at the University as a classical guitar player... And the way I felt, it made me an earless zombie. I couldn't improvise a phrase to bless my soul with, though I could play Bach, Albéniz, Scarlatti, Rodrigo and all those guys...Quote:
Originally Posted by Offshore Angler
I began to feel free the moment I first held a plugged in electric guitar and realised I didn't have a clue about how to speak though it.
In a sum I think there's room for everyone... There's people who like technical, fast and flawless players and there's people who like to see someone cry and laugh through their instruments. To each his own.
You really should read a bit about Johnny Ramone, Chuck. Especially his autobio. He's an example of how you don't need to know a rat's paw about music to be a musician and please yourself and the crowd.
Not that you're "wrong" in anything you think and wrote, it's just that like I said, there's room for every kind of musician... Including those who search for notes and play out of tune, but create something cool and unique.
Peace, brother!:salud:
Explain that to Roy Buchanan. Oh wait...Quote:
Originally Posted by Offshore Angler
Or Danny Gatton.Quote:
Originally Posted by renderit
BAM!
This is pretty awesome
https://youtu.be/bw_VY5wiFbY
aw, man, all sorts of examples and no visuals. talk about a freaking tease of a link.
I watched most of AXS's premiere of "The Ritchie Blackmore Story" last night, as I switched away from the World Series (heresy!). Sorry, neither of the teams do I care a whit about. But I digress.
Blackmore does come across as a bit of a self-absorbed dick. On the other hand, he was advancing the guitar in contemporary music in ways that few others were. Deep Purple's "Concerto for Group and Orchestra" (1969) preceded Procol Harum's live concert with the Edmonton Symphony Orchestra by two years (although I guess one could argue that Jon Lord listed as composer was the driving force behind it).
Re-reading the posts above, I find it somewhat humorous that Steve Morse's name pops up, since he's the current guitarist with Deep Purple.
https://youtu.be/IIJRWpmqqQs
I found a picture of the OP in the paper
https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/...44/247/297.png
Seriously tho OP every time Ive seen you post recently it's been complaining about something, it feels like.
OA's take may have incendiary but I largely agree. If you can't find someone making great music today in ANY style, and that includes shred, the problem is YOU.
Just to be clear, I'm OS. OP of this thread was Sérgio. OA is Offshore Angler, There may be others who are referred to a "Ox." To whom are you referring?Quote:
Originally Posted by redisburning
precisely who I indicated...Quote:
Originally Posted by OldStrummer
Me, complain? Not at all.
I really don't know what could give you that idea, Red. I have fun discussing all things music here, and I enjoy sharing different points of view, including my own.
And me preferring the old stuff to most of what I see today is not a problem, it's my personal taste. I respect whoever thinks otherwise, though I fancy the eventual debate.
If there's something I ain't, it’s a whiner :laughing: Most of the folks here will probably tell you so :hmm
Peace and love.
:yah:
FWIW, I didn't think Sérgio was complaining. Of course, I share his opinion that supershreddyshredders quicky become boring. Even Richie Blackmore, who I think could shred with the best of them, was better known for his iconic Smoke On The Water riff that you hear nearly every pimple-faced kid cranking out way too loud in every guitar shop everywhere.
Speaking of me not liking anything new (which ain't entirely true) and too much shredding, I just took the time to listen carefully to Greta van Fleet's album, on Apple Music. I bet you'd like it too, OS, unless you're not into Led Zeppelin. they're quite a bit alike in vocals, drumming and the guitar phrases are structurally similar to Pagey's but it's definitely original music.
I liked them a lot. They sound quite good and their drummer has a sledgehammer beat. It's on my personal playlist now. :salud:
I would say the fact that you do it constantly gave me that idea but that's just me :thinking:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sérgio
Aight in this thread someone just called Greta van Fleet (an actual ripoff band) original and said people with actual skill soulless.
Im out boys.
I'm not into anything that has been played to death. I own Zeppelin albums and I never go near them. Why should I? I can hear Zep while walking through the grocery store! If I never hear Stairway To Heaven again it will be too soon. Same thing with the Rolling Stones (except perhaps, for 2120 South Michigan Avenue, to my knowledge, the only instrumental piece they ever recorded. It was used by a local DJ as his intro music). I sometimes make exceptions for Beatles tunes but even then, I go deep into their catalog.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sérgio
I think one of the reasons I have favorite bands is because they haven't been played to death, and thus, in my head, have retained some of their artistic "integrity," whatever that means.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldStrummer
For some reason, I never tire of the Eagles, even with as much airplay as they get.
I have never been a rabid Eagles fan, but I agree with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Offshore Angler
OS I agree 100% with the thoughts they play the same songs from the same bands every day. I grew up listening to those groups who we all know have talent but God Dam give that shit a rest enough already! I can turn on the radio hear the same tired songs I grew up on every fuckin day...
Speaking of the Fab four they where the first boy band why grown men fawn over them is a misery to me. I know they wrote some great songs had great harmony's did shit in the studio that was ground breaking. But for Christ sake they where not God's! If I hear another oh John was great statement I'm gonna puke!:bonk
Quote:
Originally Posted by redisburning
I guess I just found the real whiner in this thread :speechles
I’m stating my own taste. You got yours and it’s different. That’s ok.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldStrummer
Understood. Me, I’m a Zep fanatic, and I often wish there was more of their work to listen to. That makes me enjoy pretty much anything that resembles their style. That’s why I liked GvF.