So hows does one classify your ability????

flatfourfan · 2012-01-04T10:11:01+00:00

Beginner, novice, intermediate, professional/ expert? I was asked by a friend yesterday to state that my ability was. I see myself as a beginner, however others say that I'm higher up. I'm pretty happy with beginner status as this isn't a p*ssing contest lol. But I was curious, how do you judge each level, with regards to ability, certain things learnt etc? input?

BluJu

I AM THE BEST!

I AM THE GUITAR KING!

DO NOT COME ANY CLOSER OR PREPARE TO HAVE YOUR FACE MELTED.

This was the last person to challenge my epic skill.
Please note how their face is melted.

Keira-WitherKay

Chad Adam Browne wrote
Eugene with an Axe wrote Most guitarists I've seen and spoken to, novice or not, think the sun rises everytime they get up off their butts.
Actually the sun rises about 20 minutes after I get up cause it knows I don't like glare first thing in the morning ?

JK ?

It rises when I tell it to...

? and rightly so...............

afraid being too humble as a guitarist may be polite.........but if you are at the point of getting onto a stage to perform , i must say the humble attitude is NOT the right way ........... i've always said if i get the choice ....... i'd rather be in a band working with musicians who "believe" they have something to say musically and back their talents to perform a stunning entertaining show.......... ego for an artist is a good thing , if you doubt your skills then how can you expect anyone else to want to enjoy your show...........

and a little secret ........ in the music industry many fairly below average musicians , when rated to the virtuosa's are in bands that are hugely popular and making big money in music.........

music is art .........

and in any art the trick is finding something to say "artistically" that touch or intruige other people(your fans) , and many times that does not need to be said with virtuosity , if you can say it in a basic way .......

so skill in art ..can help but is not the measuring stick........where having something "artistically ' to say is more important .........

think about nirvana ....... no great virtuosity .......... and they are just one band of a long list .........
BUT Nirvana had an awesome package as a band .....and had huge attitude and had a message that touched a whole generation of fans ,t
they are a supergroup of the 90's and got there on passion/great songs /personality / in touch with their audience but did it all with quite average (and i'm being kind) guitar technique ........... and the list goes on ........

so yes technique is always good to learn ....but i do recommend if you have something you can offer "musically" that can touch the audience , don't let your lack of technique hold you back....... ? not all music genres requires a virtuosa guitarist .........

and on that note let me end by saying i don't believe in the rating system band i always recon if you can entertain people with your art , you doing fine........ don't let others tell you what your art should be............ this of course applies to original music ......... just be creative with what you have ........ and you will see as you grow over time as a musician your genres and needs will change and you will accumilate that theory/technique ..... but that can take years .......

so in the mean time get on stage and be fabulous with what you have........... and have attitude........ it can make up for a lot of the missing technique till you learn it ...and in the mean time you will learn valuable performance/entertaining skills from being on a stage with an audience ..which is very different than in your bedroom

note ; please be clear i'm not saying technique and theory are NOT important , i am a music tutor and i believe one never stops learning about music even at a pro level it's a life long pursuit ........... BUT i am saying don't wait to have all those skills before being "creative" with your music ....

domhatch

flatfourfan wrote b*llshit..............

shouldn't that read "bullish*t"? don't want to seem pedantic or anything. or lead us astray of the topic.

anyhoo. i like 7th's read of the situation - about having fun. it may not appear to have a direct bearing on ability, but i believe it does when you consider that most people will stop improving when they stop having fun. i'm no great shakes as a player: i don't practice enough, i don't apply myself to the instrument, all that stuff, but man do i have fun. hmm. i've just realized that i've contradicted myself. ok, so i have fun, but i suck. time to rectify the situation. anyone recommend a good teacher in the northern suburbs?

:-[

deefstes

domhatch wrote
flatfourfan wrote b*llshit..............
shouldn't that read "bullish*t"? don't want to seem pedantic or anything. or lead us astray of the topic.

:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:

singemonkey

So here's a thought:

Beginner: Struggling to learn basic guitar techniques like changing chords, basic alternate picking, playing scales cleanly and in time at slow tempo, hammer-ons, pull-offs, etc. Not yet able to play in time with other musicians.

Intermediate: A vast area of development, but characterised by striving to achieve confidence in your chosen areas of guitar playing.

Advanced: Able to confidently play as you wish to.

By this logic, both Eric Clapton and Yngwie Malmstein are advanced. Why? Both can confidently express themselves in their respective areas of music. They can play what they want to play in a decisive, convincing manner, irrespective of Malmstein's much greater technical skills.

Also, it follows - as most of us feel intuitively - that some people on this forum calling themselves beginners is absolute BS. It's vaguely insulting in fact, both to people struggling to form an open D chord, and those who are trying to play more convincingly, to have superb players, with thousands of hours of intense practise and huge chops, classifying themselves as "just starting out."

A handful of players on this forum would be beginners. Almost all the rest would be intermediate. Advanced players would also be a tiny handful who feel that they are performing what they wish to be able to perform with great confidence (maybe none of us).

Wizard

I like Singe's definition best so far.

But.
A scoring system is only important if someone is judging.

The alternative is to just play music.

AlanRatcliffe

The problem I find is that the more I learn, the more I realise there is to learn. Keeps you humble that... I'm also very aware of the gaping holes in my knowledge... the stuff I should have been learning instead of taking my guitar apart for the 1000th time. :-[

I've no problem filling the "hero" role for the audience - that's part of the stage show. Problem is, some guys start buying into their own hype and believing it, which starts translating into an attitude.

Wizard wrote The alternative is to just play music.

"Shut up and play yer guitar", huh? Obviously I agree...

Squonk

Pinch wrote For me a good guitar player is someone who can play in any situation something that makes the song or composition better than it was without it. This can be 1 note or 3000 at the speed of lightning. Although this is also highly subjective I believe that you don't need to be the best technically to do this, but you need to be a good alround musician that understands the intracies of arrangement and composition and how to use your guitar to enhance what is already there or to create something new. Technical ability for me is only important insofar it can assist me to understand what I need to do on the fretboard to play what I hear in my head. So if you can play something really simple that moves me I will rate you as a good player just as I will rate you as good when you can play Passion and Warefare note for note.

Guitar Playing isn't something you can have a set of criteria to determine beginner, Intermediate, Advanced, SuperGod etc.

There are so many different aspects to guitar playing like timing, tone, touch etc that need to be in the pot as well.

I think "Guitarist" use these terms mainly to assist you in your playing level in the lessons section.
Let's take "Another Brick in the Wall" as an example -
Intermediate for the chord section as there are barre chords as well as some triads that possibly beginners would struggle with.
The Solo would include a couple of other skills like bending, tone, touch, a sense of the drama, no point in playing Gilmour machine like. So maybe a they would suggest Intermediate to Advanced...

But dont put yourself in a box!

singemonkey

I feel safe in my box. ☹

Squonk

singemonkey wrote I feel safe in my box. ☹

Singe, what you say on these threads doesn't add up to being in box. I think you help a lot of people out of the box.

evolucian

singemonkey wrote Also, it follows - as most of us feel intuitively - that some people on this forum calling themselves beginners is absolute BS. It's vaguely insulting in fact, both to people struggling to form an open D chord, and those who are trying to play more convincingly, to have superb players, with thousands of hours of intense practise and huge chops, classifying themselves as "just starting out."

Fine. Advanced. I also tell the sun when to shine on Chad and if it can. Better?

***edit****

Now in all fairness with regards to me initially saying that I am a beginner is my call to make. I gave a reason for myself too. The further you get, the more you realise how little you actually know. But I guess it all goes into what you plan on studying for yourself. If you are only going to stick to rock - then you'll be intermediate in no time and super advanced in a year or three down the line. That is of course, by just sticking to one genre - not allowing any other influences to barge their way in. Buuuut.... once you do let another influence come in, you are, in effect, back at square one. And to whomever else declared themselves a beginner (who may or may not be)... I'm pretty sure they have their reasons for saying so... and it's not to get a sympathy vote but a personal realisation.

It is, after all, just a personal preference to see myself as a beginner. Albeit I can get around the neck a little better, in the grand scheme of things.... I am just a fly on a mountain of poop... insignificant.

kayDUB

singemonkey wrote I feel safe in my box. ☹

I knew it would just be a matter of time until someone brought up pentatonics ? ?

singemonkey

I hear what you're saying, Evo, and I certainly wasn't accusing you or anyone of intentionally putting down beginners. When it comes to classical, or metal, or whatever, I'm a beginner too.

But I reckon there's a difference between branching out and starting from scratch, you know? Even though I'm rubbish at classical, the hand coordination helps quite a bit. And even though I'm no good at metal, I already know a little bit of alternative picking and tremolo picking which puts me ahead of even real metalheads who've only just picked up the guitar two weeks ago.

« Previous Page