CostaFonix wrote:
you make a good point Bob,,, Kiss would be another good example. But I have noticed many artists toning down their lead solo's,,,, I mean who can forget the classic guitar solo in Hotel California, or the intro lead to Boston's - Long Time, or ZZ-Tops indulgent lead in Le Grange,,, I think thats what Deefstes is eluding to,,, yeh we need more of that stuff,,, ?
I think there is some confusion here - between pop music that is heard on pop radio stations and so-called classic rock. The temptation is to conclude that at some legendary time long long ago in a galaxy far far away hits had lots of guitar solos and the guitar solos were significant.
Was that the case? I'm not sure. Some late night FM radio stations with DJs who had to go for a pee or were skinning up, laying out lines etc or actually had some sympathy for the music that they would place above other considerations ( ?)may have played some of those songs from end to end, but I recall a lot of editing going on to make things shorter for various reasons (attention spans, so many songs and then a commercial spot etc). "Sultans of Swing", as played on pop music stations when it was a hit, was edited down, with large chunks being taken out of the second solo in particular. Quite often long solos got faded out. You had to get through 3 or 4 minutes of "Hotel California" before the famous soloing started, and so if that song was a hit (was it?) then I'd assert it wasn't because of the guitar solo because of all the other stuff you had to get through first. If there 3 minutes of stuff that the man in the street hated and THEN the solos the song wouldn't have got anywhere.
We hear those songs being played now on, let's face it, nostalgia shows and we fall into the trap of thinking that "back then" guitar solos made songs hits. I don't think they ever did. Guitar PARTS maybe - but not solos. "Satisfaction" would not have been a hit without that famous riff. "Money For Nothing" was a hit because of a clever video and an insistent guitar hook. Indeed there were a lot of hits with no significant guitar solos (Simon and Garfunkel, many of Paul Simon's solo hits, most Beatles hits, just about everything from Motown).
Most hit songs are a matter of fashion. People wear them like they wear smart clothes - to make themselves attractive to other people. Any intrinsic depth or originality that the song may have is a secondary consideration at most. Unless you're one of those nerdy types who really is intertested in what the guitar player is doing or the bass part, in which case the only fun you are going to have at a party (assuming the music is decent enough to hold any attraction for you) is nerdy, solitary fun. Unless there are two of you, in which case you are likely to be told to STFU if you start talking about the construction of the guitar solos.
Back in the 70s a friend and I organised a party and we made several tapes worth of music - numbered so they'd be played in the right sequence and the mood would flow correctly. The party was a huge hit and we got asked to provide music for other people's parties. This is in the 70s man, the golden age of rock. I learned very quickly that what people wanted to do was shake their booties or have a slow song during which they could get their hands all over the object of their affection/ambitions. Now there's nothing wrong with that at all, BUT actually they didn't care a rat's ass about hearing a brilliant solo by Jeff Beck and they HATED "Stairway to Heaven " because how the hell were you supposed to danced to THAT?
Another factor is the availability of computer controlled noise making devices. The sort of things that Trevor Horn said would free us from "the tyranny of technique". The guitar is one of the instruments that can't be easily replicated with synthesizers and computers.
And I maintain that now, as then, there is plenty of great guitar action to be had - don't just look for it on the pop stations or amongst the pop, mainstream, mass market audience.
To cite the obvious example, Richard Thompson put out his umpteenth album last year. Guitar solos on nearly every song, 3 or 4 of them "big" solos. Set lists from his current tour of the UK suggest that there have been some extended guitar rave ups.
Warren cited the example of John Mayer. I've heard that Buddy Miller and Darrell Scott are really tearing it up behind Robert Plant.
In the boring old world of "folk" I saw Martin Simpson live in concert a few months ago and he was really ripping the frets off of that sucker, especially towards the end of the show.
The guitar solo is very healthy indeed, and nostalgia tends to give false colour to memories of greyer times.
