" beauty is in the eye of the beholder" or listener in this case...............

think we all appreciate or see different aspects of music as important.... and yeah a simple solo can be musically perfect.... i remember back in the day when i worked the hotel scene we used to play walking on sunshine.... a no1 hit with a solo that was almost nothing but the same note played in a rhythmic fashion but it so suited the song......... and yeah i never got why people got off on the gary moore holding that note in parisiene walkways...... but many applauded when it got to that part .... so yeah i think we like what we like...... and to some keith richards is their favourite guitarist to some it's steve vai or many rate kurt cobain as a fabulous guitarist .... so yeah afraid your question is like asking
"how long is a piece of string"

not so much a question as a discussion, obviously some may seem inclined other ways and it might be benificial to here so.

MIKA the better one wrote: I find that bands/players like Artic monkeys (not technical a all) are far more of a musician than any of those speed players. I find more interest watching Queens of the stoneage play one chord a whole song pretty much than Satriani play a ascending G harmonic minor scale in 6ths in 6/8 time
guitarist.
thoughts???????? O n this matter???????

Erm dude... no , you are missing the point completely.

If you want to talk Macho Speed guitarists , I could direct you to players like Michael Angelo Batio and Francesco Ferrari.

Satriani & Vai & Petrucci & Govan & Friedman and many more are players that are blooming with creativity and have many more
options than the Arctic Monkeys due to their centuries of hard work, love for the instrument and music itself.

They understand music on a much higher level than the Arctic Monkeys and thus reap the benefits.

Who would feel more gratified, rewarded after a show? The arctic monkeys who have played a mixture of drunken dissonance

or a mastermind like Satriani who has crafted the perfect melody , executed flawless legato passages, dwelved into new sonic territory
and perfected every detail of his playing style.


Yes you are right... There are people that worship these players and go overboard and it becomes a Competition about speed/ knowledge.
And there is no room for the beauty of simplicity and melody.

But the G3 crew???.... Can't touch em

for the discussions sake then ?

It also depends on who it appeals to. Guys like Vai and Satriani appeal to guitarists more than average joe. I don't particularly aspire to play like them, but i have tried one or two of the songs as a technical lesson.

I used to like Nirvana but it stopped appealing to me the more I learned about music, hence I grew out of that target bracket.

I think since they stopped teaching music in schools appreciation for music has become a lot simpler, mainly because the average listener doesn't understand what is going on unless it goes doef doef and has 3 notes and 4 words, one of which is bleeped out.

andrewjbryson wrote: Who would feel more gratified, rewarded after a show? The arctic monkeys who have played a mixture of drunken dissonance

thats a redundant question.... Both are setting out to play their own music so there would be no difference.

If you had an audience expecting to see the arctic monkeys and Satriani came out or vice versa that would be disappointing..

DonovanB wrote: I think since they stopped teaching music in schools appreciation for music has become a lot simpler, mainly because the average listener doesn't understand what is going on unless it goes doef doef and has 3 notes and 4 words, one of which is bleeped out.

Donovan, if you're ever in Jozi or I'm ever in Durban (which has been known to happen when the planets are in a certain alignment) I will buy you a drink!

I have to agree with AJB...

You can't say their "music" is any less... Just because you don't listen to them, doesn't mean it's not music?

I dont listen to the likes of Vai, Satriani, etc etc (that often) but I own the G3 DVD's and I can appreciate them for what they do. The entertainment, pure bliss and proficiency of their skills are of another level. And yes you do have to understand music AND love guitar to enjoy their music...

I can't stand Opera and Metal... Does that make me say it's not music?

No... It IS still music...

DonovanB wrote: I think since they stopped teaching music in schools appreciation for music has become a lot simpler, mainly because the average listener doesn't understand what is going on unless it goes doef doef and has 3 notes and 4 words, one of which is bleeped out.

+1 Now that's just cr@p

There's certainly nothing wrong with technique. Technique is vocabulary.

Back in the 70s there was a backlash against prog rock, a genre which was seen as increasingly pointless and unrelated to anything except bizarre lyrics, light shows and demonstrations of technical proficiency.

The backlash, of course, was Punk.

Now we might say that the prog rockers were guys with lots of technique but nothing to say.

But Punk didn't last, though it's influence was huge and lasting, because if it had anything to say it's vocabulary was so limited that it couldn't say it.

DonovanB wrote: I think since they stopped teaching music in schools appreciation for music has become a lot simpler, mainly because the average listener doesn't understand what is going on unless it goes doef doef and has 3 notes and 4 words, one of which is bleeped out.

Couldn't agree more. I think its got a lot to do with people lacking patience. If something doesn't grab them in he first 10 seconds, then it gets passed over.

+1 with Andrew, however, it's different strokes for different folks.
I get my kicks from listening to and watching guys like Petrucci, Vai, Satriani etc.

Arjun Menon wrote:

DonovanB wrote: I think since they stopped teaching music in schools appreciation for music has become a lot simpler, mainly because the average listener doesn't understand what is going on unless it goes doef doef and has 3 notes and 4 words, one of which is bleeped out.

Couldn't agree more. I think its got a lot to do with people lacking patience. If something doesn't grab them in he first 10 seconds, then it gets passed over.

I think it's because a lot of people don't appreciate music for it's own sake. They see it as a fashion.

+1 with Donovan and Bob

I was busy working out a slightly different fingering for "Message in a Bottle", (I love the riff) and my 8 year old son was kind of loitering around and the opening was there to give him a music appreciation lesson, I was shocked at how easy he grasped it.

I had done this with my 11 year old daughter previously (But she was always musical, so it was easier to understand her getting it) and she even appreciates Rodrigo y Gabriela because I explained to her the talent in the whole percussion rhythm thing that Gabby does.

But getting back to the subject, I would still prefer a solitary David Gilmour bend, than 25 technical notes played over that same piece of music.
Heart/Soul will always win over sheer technicality for me, but in saying that , Technicality with heart and soul, that's just another level... ?

I guesse its diferent for different guys, I personally just find artic monkeys for example are for more musicians as they write songs that sort of avoid that cliche. I have always felt Satriani and co sorta can use there technical abiltiy to play a typical sad song, happy song, etc. Look at some gutarists here in SA ( I have encountered a few) a guy who can play every DREAM THEATRE song a bit of Satriani, and even clapton and hendrix, but ask him to play an original song and its pretty underwhelming smae as all the tricks he has learnt like a monkey.
At the moment I am listening to John Frusciantes solo stuff, he is a great player (dont try argue that) And my goodness he can write amazingly, there is more feeling in his songs I fing than the for more technical songs by Satriani and co. Bands like Artic mnkeys, nirvana (once you get past the fact that TEEN SPIRIT was raped and should no longer be in there catalogue) these bands pull off more interesting emotion and interest (in myself at least) in two cleverly placed notes than, anothers whole masterpeice grand peice.
I have listened to a more technical music eg The Mars Volta, very technical, very cool, but first and foremost there are musicians and can play a whole song simple as ever but if they feel it may be benificial to the song they will do a more complex thing, as long as it provides to the song.
Punk was one of the best things that could have happened for music, it showed people you could suck but be a musician and actual emotionally make a connection. (that was a very gay line but decided to leave it)
PLEASE check this video out these guys are technical but so so simple and write an amazing song in the process

Mika, how old are you bud?

random question... .21 (i feel old)

I gave up on avoiding cliche's when Lenny Kravitz and Slash wrote a song called always on the run. Has a killer riff but the lyrics are all about " My Mama said.."

As with everything there needs to be a balance.

10 thumbs up for MIKA! INTERESTING topic, i like the threads you create...always thought provoking (spelling??) these are the kinda threads a forum needs...interesting stuff ?


I think music is SO universal and subjective,i dont believe any guitarist/musician can say i "am better than you"

True some can have more knowledge/skill/scales under his belt, i dont beleive that makes him better..sometimes a simple riff of 2 chords can outshine that knowledge/1000 scale riff and connect with alot more people. SO my opinion EVERY guitarist is equal ? ? how is that for controversial ?

I know a guy that has studied music and can play any scale/complex riff but he plays with NO FEELING and so i dont really relate to him, i find him abit stale (for lack of a better word). I also pay close attention to SRV and Walter Trout who play a load of scales etc and i really enjoy them. I think you gotta keep progressing but have a healthy balance between knowledge and feeling ? and no matter how long you play you will always be equal to every other guitarist ? LOL

thank you , I enjoy all the feedback, and talk. Ey in a sense from the second you pick up and instrument you kinda cant be told you are better or worse its just kinda your thing, consider the new smashing pumpkins drummer...... only played drums for 4 years, but billy corgan liked him and saw something. However we gotta be carefull to recognise that there are certain things/ players/ bands that we as a individual with certain tastes will not like, in some cases alot. There are a few guitarsists/ musos who if and when i have seen them I have come close to implosion. In london once my cousin and myself saw chad kroger from nickelback in a little pub drunk of his head with two girls under his arms, after a bit of banter we called it a night.
Another funny story same cousin decided to annoy ....... Bush singer Gavin Rossdale, he asked him "why is your band called BUSH?"
Gavin answered "Its a cool name"
Fair enough
But yeh lets not get sidetracked

Don't know how true it is... but someone told me the guitarist from Arctic monkeys only played guitar for 8 months or so before
they released their first album/ single.

True or not....

Must be quite a exciting feeling going from Zero to Hero

heard that two, dont know how possible it is, I do know that they were just very clever in their marketing in getting noticed and signed.

What appeals to the masses (is what seems to) rule........!!!