...a storm is comin...

You are correct but there are some electric players with similar skills and even an average country/banjo player will likely be technically better than most rock players.


As always in music, its not what you sound like, or what your music says or how good you are. If you LOOK cooler than <whomever> you win. i.e. by that logic, Slash is better than ANY classical player, hands down. (one example).

Tommy Emmanuel is the best..... kla
He isn't even on there, I bet..



Monte Montgomery a close second..............

PbZepplin wrote: but classical guitarists are the most technically skilled,

PbZepplin wrote: classical guitarists are the most technically skilled

Most skilled?
eeeek
I agree they are skilled.... to a point..

Somehow I dont think the finest classical players will rip up, for instance, Monte Montgomerys version of Sultans of Swing, Little Wing or a few other things.
But I do believe that Monte could play those complex classical pieces that require all the dexterity and skills on earth... I think....

Some players are just exceptionally amazing... and I dont think there are 10 people on earth, in my opinion who can drop a jaw like Monte Montgomery time and time again...


@Chad :roflmao:

Haha, this is an interesting post...a bit "trolly", but hey.

First thing: I'll agree that typical lists of "great guitarists" often overlook guitarists outside of the broad genre of electric guitar. What about guys like Django Reinhart, Paco de Lucia, Andres Segovia, John Williams, Tommy Emmanuel, Monty Montgomery etc. etc. Usually, once (ho hum) Hendrix, Clapton, Page, King et al have occupied the first eight spots, someone decides to try and be "creative" with the final two ? That's why these lists are so funny, but they're great conversation starters. Then again, Rolling Stone is not a magazine aimed at classical music lovers...

As for classical guitarists being the most technically skilled, I can't see how you can make that sort of claim with any really strong justification.

There are many technical players (primarily electric players) who employ the same concepts you're describing. John Petrucci's "Rock Discipline" (thanks guys!) is full of technique advice for limiting excess movement and developing fluidity and speed, enabling him to play impossibly fast while still remaining clean and clear. There are plenty of players with that sort of technical facility, though at the moment you've be hard pressed to beat Guthrie Govan and Mattias Eklundh in terms of technical achievement on the electric guitar. The discipline and technique required to play the music that they play is just as demanding and requires just as much practice as anything you'll find in the classical realm.

Then there are players like Monty Montgomery or Tommy Emmanuel who are absolute geniuses on the steel-string acoustic, employing techniques that Classical guitarists would thumb their noses at (particularly the use of the thumb, various percussive techniques etc.). These guys produce an incredible array of sounds from an instrument that at first appears quite limited.

Then, you get players who can shred up a classical guitar as well as an electric, ah la Chris Broderick. Many neo-classical styles are influenced by classical theory and techniques as well.

What about fusion players, who not only require a complete technical mastery but depend just as much on their grasp of theory, all happening at lightning-speed during improvised performances (no sheet music here folks!)?

TL;DR: mastery of the guitar in any genre, be it metal or classical, acoustic or electric, takes years of practice and dedication to that particular genre's technical demands (and sometimes the technical demands of multiple genres). To propose that any single area requires a player to be the "most technically skilled" (or the "most anything", really) is a little ignorant IMO.

Can someone post a video of some exceptional classical guitar work?

Like Keira?, you should know some of the finest classical players on earth... ?

I know none sadly :-[

PbZepplin wrote: I spotted an article recently. Rolling Stone has compiled a list of who they consider the top 100 guitarists of all time.
I was rather pissed off about it. My reasons:

By guitarists, one must assume this includes guitarists of all genres and guitar types:
electric, acoustic, base and classical (& any others that I may have left out). First of all, all their 'experts' who compiled the
list are knowledgeable on Rock music, and not necessarily on other Genres. I think Rolling Stone should define what they mean as
'top guitarists' as being primarily rock guitarists. I would argue that classical guitarists are the most technically correct and skilled guitarists. My reasons:

With which I shall take issue, though that doesn't imply disrespect of the classical guitar or classical players.

1. The history behind formal classical guitar technique is hundreds of years old.

Well... sort of. Probably not as many hundreds as you may think. All current forms of guitar have evolved from earlier instruments like the ud and the lute (the lute having evolved from the ud) and the current form and number of strings is comparatively recent. If you're ever in Oxford (UK) then go the Ashmolean museum and have a look at some of the "guitars" they have there. One in particular - made by Stradivarii and nothing like a modern guitar - smaller bodied, shorter scale, gut strings, gut frets, 5 courses of paired strings....

Last year Richard Thompson teamed up with some musicians from the globe theatre in London to do a short tour in which they played renaissance songs. He played with a guitar pattened on surviving guitars from that era. Here it is....

Tuned differently than a modern guitar (and the whole ensemble tuned to a different pitch, the reference "A" note was pitched at 392 Hz, about a tone below the current 440 Hz)

Also a lot of the technique and theory of the 6 string guitar would apply across styles of guitar and styles of music.

Though there's no one universal set. Segovia didn't know much about playing in DADGAD, two-handed hammers and pulls, hybrid picking or whammy bars.

2. Classical guitar technique has evolved to be the most efficient use of movement for guitar, both on the right hand (for plucking the strings) and the left hand (which works the fret board).

Some truth in that, but see above.... there are things that classical guitarists never have to do.

Classical guitar technique limits extraneous movement of either hand. The left hand forms a claw, with fingers spaced to be over individual frets, which then act to 'hammer on' to the frets. The technique for the right hand emphasises that each finger is reserved for a particular string, fingers are thrown back, and the thumb does not buckle. Classical guitarists also learn to 'prepare' on the right hand, with fingers being placed on the strings before being played in anticipation. These techniques emphasise an absolute minimum of extraneous movement, which results in experienced classical guitarists being able to play very fast, confidently, and with the minimum of mistakes.

Well who says jazz or rock or bluegrass or flamenco or whatever players can't play like that?

Think of the techniques that have evolved around the plectrum (another thing classical players don't have to bother themselves with).

There are many players outside of the classical world who have taken classical lessons, or who seek to make their movements economical in order that they may play fast and accurately.

Heard of Martin Simpson? Not a classical player. Brent and I have both seen him playing live, and he's a fantastically accurate and exact player.

Look, it's an argument worth having, but it's not one that anybody is going to emphatically win. For every technique of Segovia's you can point at I can propose something from other genres. I could show you the famous video of Jerry Donahue demonstrating his array of string-bending techniques, including behind-the-nut bends and another technique he has where he simultaneously bends one string a tone and another a tone-and-a-half.

It seems to me that it's better to take in as much as you can of the world of guitar techniques and absorb all of those that will help you fulfill your musical vision.

There are plenty of great Classical Players

Google Narsisco Yepes, he even plays more strings than CAB , he helped design the 10 string nylon guitar.

Warren wrote: TL;DR: mastery of the guitar in any genre, be it metal or classical, acoustic or electric, takes years of practice and dedication to that particular genre's technical demands (and sometimes the technical demands of multiple genres). To propose that any single area requires a player to be the "most technically skilled" (or the "most anything", really) is a little ignorant IMO.

This! +1

Brentcgp wrote: Can someone post a video of some exceptional classical guitar work?

=

=

=

Squonk wrote: There are plenty of great Classical Players

Google Narsisco Yepes, he even plays more strings than CAB , he helped design the 10 string nylon guitar.

Thanks Squonk.
Actually very cool..
right hand brilliant...
but yeah, not my cuppa tea ?

=

I would hazard a guess that anyone in the Rolling Stone top 10 has sold more albums than all the classical guys put together. Does that mean the Rock guys are better/worse technically? Who knows, but it would explain why Rolling Stone knows about them.

Considering the magazine is loosely named after an extremely popular rock band I'm not surprised.

besides, a magazine named "Charlie Byrd" wouldn't sell as well, even with half naked women on the cover.

Wow, you guys took the troll bait well ?

This thread is retarded. Best classical guitarists vs best electric guitarists, Guthrie and friends are king.

PbZepplin wrote: I spotted an article recently. Rolling Stone has compiled a list of who they consider the top 100 guitarists of all time.
I was rather pissed off about it. My reasons:

By guitarists, one must assume this includes guitarists of all genres and guitar types:
electric, acoustic, base and classical (& any others that I may have left out). First of all, all their 'experts' who compiled the
list are knowledgeable on Rock music, and not necessarily on other Genres. I think Rolling Stone should define what they mean as
'top guitarists' as being primarily rock guitarists. I would argue that classical guitarists are the most technically correct and skilled guitarists. My reasons:
1. The history behind formal classical guitar technique is hundreds of years old.
2. Classical guitar technique has evolved to be the most efficient use of movement for guitar, both on the right hand (for plucking the strings) and the left hand (which works the fret board).
Classical guitar technique limits extraneous movement of either hand. The left hand forms a claw, with fingers spaced to be over individual frets, which then act to 'hammer on' to the frets. The technique for the right hand emphasises that each finger is reserved for a particular string, fingers are thrown back, and the thumb does not buckle. Classical guitarists also learn to 'prepare' on the right hand, with fingers being placed on the strings before being played in anticipation. These techniques emphasise an absolute minimum of extraneous movement, which results in experienced classical guitarists being able to play very fast, confidently, and with the minimum of mistakes.
Rock guitarists may be the most popular in mainstream culture, but classical guitarists are the most technically skilled, and Rolling Stone's list should acknowledge this.

Those "who is best" lists are best compared to the funny pages...you look at it and smile...sort of...it really means nothing. ?
While classical players are technically veeeery good, my question is: Can they SING while playing at the same time ? ?

Donovan Banks wrote: Considering the magazine is loosely named after an extremely popular rock band I'm not surprised.

Bollocks it is! It's named after a song by Dr Hook and The Medicine show.

OK granted this post was rather 'trolly' and as a newby I have over-stepped my mark ?
Yeah all the arguments here are good ones. I suppose many guitarists start off learning classical and then progress
to other genres anyway, so those technical points are carried through. Looking forward to posting on this forum. It looks like a cool community :-[

At least you have a cool nick ? Great not so classical band ?

Figured I may as well post this ? Not great quality, but thought this was pretty cool...