My perso favs
Jeff Beck, Joe Walsh, John Frusciante, Brian May, Mike Campbell, Jimmy Page, David Gilmour, Eric Clapton, Jack White, Keith Richards.
they all speak through the guitar. It is a unique gift to be able to make a guitar speak. There are many others. Conveying feeling requires subtlety. These musicians also play for the song.
Wanabees
Santana, Eddie van Halen and Hendrix - they all try too hard. Impressive tone and skill but in the outrageous showmanship quest they often ignore important aspects of rhythm, respecting the other musicians and playing to give feeling to the song. |
Stewart, my musings on this subject are once again not understood. My point is not that technique is not a factor (or even requirement) in being a superior musician, but rather that technique is often the sole (or at least main) criteria with which musical talent is judged. Should it be? Let me make a broad statement: All the technique that a musician needs is that which allows him to play with his body what he hears in his head. There are some musicians greatly admired for their talent and/or skill whose music I don’t care for, and I wouldn’t be surprised if that isn’t true for just about everyone. Here’s a very good example of how I look at the subject: Steve Smith was the drummer in Journey during the height of their popularity. He is a very accomplished player, now playing Jazz, what he was doing before joining Journey. Richard Manuel was the pianist/singer in The Band (one of Eric Clapton’s favorite singers, and a musician Clapton recently called a genius), but also played drums on quite a few Band songs (primarily on their 2nd, s/t "brown" album). Smith’s drumming in Journey was largely what I consider pedestrian---very unimaginative, stock "Rock" drumming. But he played it flawlessly, thanks to his advanced chops. Manuel’s drumming is very unique and unusual, his parts very imaginative and interesting (and sometimes intentionally humorous, rare amongst drummers). They are also very musical, his parts always in service to the song. But Richard was pretty limited in technique, and a little awkward on the drum set. So, on the one hand you have a technically advanced drummer playing forgettable, routine stock parts in songs that are nothing to write home about (does anyone consider the guys in Journey good songwriters?!). On the other, a pianist playing drums as a second instrument, whose drum parts are fantastic---very creative, unique, interesting, and above all musical. And they are played in the context of some of the best songs ever played by a Rock ’n’ Roll Band. So, who’s the "better" drummer? |
You can be a great musician without being a great instrumentalist and you can even be a great instrumentalist without being a great musician. I would argue that the former is far more common than the latter situation. But being a great instrumentalist and even a great musician doesn't guarantee that you will produce great music. It just ain't that easy.
ESPN recently came up with a list of the most dominate athletes in their specific sports. They crunched the statistics and determined that Peyton Manning was #3 and Tom Brady was #20 across all sports. I can understand someone arguing that Manning is "better" than Brady, but it is nonsensical to say there is a 17 place difference between them. Similarly, I don't think many people are arguing that Neil Young is not a great musician and a capable guitarist, but there's no way on earth that he is #17 on a list of greatest guitarist.
It may be subjective, but some people can just flat out play better than others.
|
The drumming by the lady of Little Hurricane duo is interesting. A good example of musicality. I don’t think she has much chops but her style is refreshing. |
THANK YOU, 'astewart8944' ! 'BDP24' might notice that every player I mentioned is (or was) a great artist, who plays with creativity, passion and taste. There's not a 'shredder' in the group. (And, yes, I agree that there are a zillion rock guitarists with good technique, but zero soul.) And any one of them would explain that great artistic expression requires great technical skill on their chosen instrument. Charlie Parker once said that he wanted to be able to play whatever he felt... and to do that, he needed to practice 4 hours a day. Music doesn't simply spring from the heart. It also 'springs' from many lonely hours developing your chops. |
@bdp24 Thanks for your further explanation. I respect your point of view. I would answer your question by saying that, in your illustration, Steve Smith is a vastly better drummer than Richard Manuel. Steve Smith has the technical chops to play different genres at a high professional level. That he chose to play RNR with Journey doesn't make him a pedestrian drummer, it makes him a gainfully employed drummer. And his drumming with Journey isn't pedestrian. Steve Smith was inducted into the Modern Drummer Hall of Fame in 2002. Richard Manuel will never be considered for that honor because he wasn't a serious drummer--he was a singer/piano player that sometimes drummed and when he did it, he did so admirably. Peace Al |
I have found that many musician’s who have highly developed technique are often prone to play in a manner as to make sure that fact is obvious to all. Guitarist’s parts are arrived at with a few factors involved, the balance between those factors being what determines the "kind" of player they are perceived as being. And different styles of music require different kinds of skills, thought the same basics are needed for all music’s, of course. Music theory is indiscriminate. Albert Lee has been a big favorite of mine since the 1970’s. For those who know of him, I need say nothing more. For those who don’t, he is a Telecaster player who plays rather fast runs, in a basically Country style. He has played with Emmylou Harris, and was with The Everly Brothers for years. Dave Edmunds, another favorite guitarist of mine (and the best Chuck Berry-style guitarist of which I am aware. Keith Richards WISHES he could play like Dave), absolutely loves Albert’s playing. I didn’t learn of Danny Gatton until the 1990’s, but fell hard once I did. Talk about technique! He was (R.I.P.) also a Telecaster player, and worked with Joe Barden creating those great Tele pickups. He was a guitarist’s guitarist, with highly developed chops, but also very musical sensibilities. Vince Gill nicknamed Danny "The Humbler". I also love Richard Thompson, a Strat player. he has a very unique, immediately-identifiable style, like no one else. Also on a Strat is Marshall Crenshaw, thought of more a songwriter and singer, but also a fantastic, musical guitarist. He is also a really fine drummer. And then there is Ry Cooder. His playing just makes time stand still. His middle break (okay, solo) in John Hiatt’s "Lipstick Sunset" is the most lyrical, beautiful music making I have ever heard from a guitarist. And for a perfect-for-the-song, musical guitar break, give a fresh listen to George Harrison’s playing in the middle of "Nowhere Man". His tone is absolutely electrifying! Compressed to the nth degree, but to great musical effect. I love the approach musicians take on their non-main instrument. Rather than thinking in terms of the instrument itself---patterns of thought relating to the playing of the instrument in isolation, learned in the need to become proficient on the instrument---the musician approaches the playing of the instrument in terms of what is called for MUSICALLY. Stevie Wonder is a good drummer in that way, as was Andrew Gold (Ronstadt’s guitarist in the 70’s), Emitt Rhodes, and Todd Rundgren. And, yes, Richard Manuel. Levon Helm said when that when he got up to Big Pink to rejoin The Hawks, Richard, who had been playing drums during Levon’s absence, quickly became his favorite drummer. He was a FANTASTIC drummer, MUCH better in purely musical terms than Steve Smith. Richard was inducted into The Rock ’n Roll Hall Of Fame too, ya know! If a guitar (or other instrument) part is perfect for the music in which it is played, if it works well musically, or even just sonically, what difference does it make how "hard" the part was to play, how much technique is required to play it? Why is technique for it’s own sake elevated to such a lofty position? I’ll tell you what I think: The evaluation of playing on purely technical terms is an objective one---just like sports stats. That's easy. The evaluation of playing musically or artistically is subjective, a much different endeavor. |
What you say in your last paragraph is absolutely true. However, I think it’s also important to not be biased against technique. Sure, some players need to always show how much technique they have, sometimes at the expense of musicianship; and that goes to what Onhwy61 says about having a lot of chops and still not be a good musician. But, having a lot of chops opens a lot of possibilities. Having a lot of technique doesn’t assume that the player will use it gratuitously. For a great player it can actually enhance his concept when playing very simply and with restraint. A player who has limited technique might be always on the cusp of maxing out chops-wise which can give the playing a sloppy feeling. A player with a lot of chops who is also a good musician can play very simply and musically while being well inside his “chops comfort zone” which potentially gives the playing a lot of clarity. Coltrane was a perfect example; had as much chops as anyone (possibly ever) and yet could play a very simple and incredibly expressive solo when he wanted to. Other times he had so much to say and his chops allowed it. On the other hand a player like Wayne Shorter who can be heard to have tremendous technique early in his career made a point of playing fewer and fewer notes as his career progressed and could still say just as much or more. The proof is in the pudding.
|
very good post by bdp24--i personally don't respond to guitarists like clapton or eddie van halen who are more about technique than "musicality," the mind-boggling richard thompson being the exception. as for neil young, i believe he's got better chops than he's being given credit for, though he often seems to purposely dumb it down and to avoid flash. that said, he's capable of very fluid, lyrical playing, esp. on acoustic.
|
haha all pop brats are around rolling stone so nothing indeeeed special. |
I am apparently incapable of making myself understood. No matter how many times I plead my case against technique being viewed as the NUMBER ONE or MAIN criteria by which a musician’s playing is judged, I still am perceived as being anti-technique. Why is that? No one would accuse me of that if they had heard the playing of Danny Gatton, as I said, one of my all-time favorite guitarists. You can’t play like Albert Lee without having technique to spare. Everytime I go to an Albert Lee live appearance, the place is crawling with guitarists, their eyes glued on his hands. Of course technique is a required element, and a major one, in playing any instrument. Everybody knows that. But I hear a lot of guitarists and drummers who make it an end unto itself, rather than a means to an end. They sacrifice musicality at the alter of technique, using the music as a platform for expressing themselves purely through their instrument, rather than playing that instrument in service to the music. For those who don’t hear it, or aren’t bothered by it, consider yourself lucky. Jim Keltner was asked for advice on rudiments and other technical matters, and his response was: learn them, then forget about them. In other words, don’t intentionally go out of your way to use them just for the sake of using them, but have them at your disposal when the music calls upon you to use them. That’s called musical wisdom, and it is a rare commodity. Another old axiom, attributed to both Duke Ellington and Count Basie: The notes you don’t play are as important as those you do. Jim also said his favorite drummer, who he wished he played more like, is Roger Hawkins, one of my three favorite drummers of all time. Talk about musicality! He also played a press roll as well as Buddy Rich. Do Rock music listeners agree with Jim? Do they even know who Roger Hawkins is? Do you, dear reader? He is never mentioned here when people talk about the great drummers. That's what happens when you don't play the obvious, gratuitous fills I hear so much of in Rock music. Roger Hawkins could play rings around John Bonham, but he has too much class to play that way. |
@bdp24
I totally get where you are coming from. Although I shake my head in awe listening to Vinnie Caliuta or Danny Carey - as these guys are insane. I prefer a more musical passionate and approachable style that fits tightly with the band and the song.
Of course I know the muscle shoals drummer. This was one place the Rolling Stones has to go to pay tribute to what may be the best rhythm section ever in pop blues and soul. There is a great documentary movie about Muscle Shoals - I highly recommend it if you can find it on Netflix. |
@bdp24 Nice post. Thanks for the further input. I think you have great taste in guitarists. Peace Al |
|
Douchiest---love it! All those hair/metal band musician’s are like "Don’t look over there, look over here. Ain’t I great?!" The singer, the guitarist, and the drummer, all trying to steal the spotlight from each other. Embarrassing. Drummers have all heard the stories about the sheet music Frank Zappa put in front of drummers for their auditions. Few could play it, Vinnie Colaiuta being one who could. He works with Jeff Beck now, and is scary good. Another musically great drummer with insane chops is Steve Gadd, one of the handful of the best drummers in the world. It is assumed, and is largely true, that a technical guitar player wants a likewise technical drummer. One exception was Danny Gatton, who had this exchange with his new drummer during the break between sets in their first show together: Gatton: "You know all that fancy sh*t you’re playing?" Drummer: "Yeah." Gatton: "Don’t." |
A key element of rock is excess. It's the "too much ain't enough" ethos. It's an element that is easily made fun of as in "my amp goes to 11", but it shouldn't be outright dismissed. Good taste and restraint are usually admirable traits, but there are times when just go crazy is acceptable. Throughout its history rock 'n' roll is one of those areas. For instance, Steve Vai is an insanely good guitarist. He's also a good musician. But truth be told, it's not like I would want to listen to him very often, yet that doesn't take anything away from him being totally over the top amazing. If you got it, flaunt it. And don't think Gatton or Thompson aren't equally flashy, they just do it differently.
|
Terry Kath of Chicago may be the most underrated guitarist of all time. He very well may be the best Rock Guitarist of all time next to Jimmy. |
Agreed with Terry Kath. Excellent underrated guitarist. |
Doesn't the quote from Jimi, confirm the last two posts? |
Agree about Gatton and Thompson, onhwy61. The difference between them and Vai is a question of taste, which is of course highly subjective. I find Danny and Richard's playing to be cool, Vai's corny. But that's just me. |
bdp24 aalenik's post begs the important question: Is technical ability what distinguishes one as a superior guitarist---or singer, or drummer, or whatever? Or is it something some elusive, more abstract, more, dare I say it, artistic? The answer is "yes". If you're not technically accomplished, you can't be fully creative or artistic. Technique is a toolbox. The more tools you have, the more stuff you can create. But just because you have a lot of tools doesn't mean you will use them to create art. That can be done with fewer tools. But your art will be limited. B.B. King was an artist with a very limited toolbox. Steve Vai is an artist with a massive toolbox and knows how to use it. I don't think there's any doubt 95 out of 100 guitarists would rather have Steve Vai's skills even if they don't play his type of music. Therefore, Vai is the better "guitarist". Vai could duplicate what B.B. King or Neil Young play. B.B. King and Neil Young cannot duplicate what Vai plays. You might be surprised to learn (or not, after all it does consist of people) that the guitar world is as rife with myth as the audio world. Such as "tone is in the fingers". No, it isn't. Tone is in the technique and the equipment. There's no magic to it. You learn the technique, you learn the tone. Even intermediate players can learn Neil Young's tone. In the end, ranking players is subjective by how much you value technique versus your (subjective) view of art, and therefore pretty much meaningless. For me, that ratio comes out at Buckethead, who is a stunning technician and a prolific artist. But when I'm in the mood to change that ratio to make art my primary listening experience I might switch to SRV. |
This is awesome! I appreciate all the comments. Is Neil the most technical guitarist....heck no, but he certainly knows how to coax emotion from a guitar. As the father of a wonderful daughter who is quite musical btw, one of my favorites has always been "I am a child". I saw Neil live during his left turn with the Shocking Pinks. During that show I sat front row. Neil did a short set of his older tunes just he and his guitar. As he moved to stage left he looked right at me and we held that gaze for a few brief moments. It was one of the best concert experiences I ever had. Someone mentioned Mark Knopfler as the greatest guitarist alive today. Hard to argue with that and I tend to agree. Someone also mentioned Mr. Steve Howe who has always been one of my favorites. Howe is technically and musically gifted and certainly willing to pass along his skills to other musicians.
|