Is great technique wasted on non-musicians?

[Newc]

Re: Is great technique wasted on non-musicians?

Shredding in a slow blues song ruins the mood of the song. It's musical masturbation and posing.
By the same token, throwing a bluesy solo with slow bends into a Speed Metal track is lame beyond all lameness [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

Always ask yoruself "I CAN do it, but SHOULD I do it?"

[RR05xx]

Re: Is great technique wasted on non-musicians?

My roots are metal to the core. When I saw the post for my current band, that is what I was lured in by. Turns out the singer/wongwriter putting it together was actually not into what he claimed, but instead looking for different perspectives on music. He felt his music was to "light" so he wanted someone to add some heaviness. The Bassist is closer to me (he is into Rush we can go off in Metallica, Ozzy or VH for that matter at a drop of a hat). The drummer is more prog rock/punk. Put us all together, and the song is the most important thing.

In sum, the song gets what the song needs. If you feel the need for an vituoso instrumental, then do one (not like that is a new concept!).

[diablomozart]

Re: Is great technique wasted on non-musicians?

technique is merely a tool to express an idea...nothing more...all the technique in the world won't save a song with a bad melody...always...ALWAYS look for the melody in whatever you are playing...d.m.

[paulbag]

Re: Is great technique wasted on non-musicians?

I listen to "feel" music. Doesn't even matter what genre of music. Metal is my preference, but if I can really "feel" something, that's what gets my attention.

[NickCormier]

Re: Is great technique wasted on non-musicians?

It is somewhat true. but thats the culture we are moving into nowadays. The majority of people in north america can't enjoy a good jazz CD, or a nice classical piece like in the old days, so how are they going to enjoy a great technical guitar song? I mean, lyrics obviously dominate the airwaves nowadays, its sad but true =[

[Fragle]

Re: Is great technique wasted on non-musicians?

well, i personally think that average joe can not tell really difficult stuff from just impressive looking things. hell, even non-guitarplayers tend to be like this. when i used to jam cover songs with a buddie of mine who plays drums, he used to be impressed by stuff like the bog standard tapping lick, whereas the craziest sweep would leave him totally unimpressed. same goes for non musicians. play them jason becker's altitudes, or yngwie - blitzkrieg, and then go on and play hendrix - little wing. guess what's impressing them more. people tend to judge things by the way they look. they see the guitar player doing "crazy" stuff like having the right hand all over the fretboard (=tapping) and go crazy, whereas the most precise fast picking might very well leave them totally unimpressed. that's just my personal experience.

as far as songwriting goes....well, i'm way into catchy stuff. i love hooks. i do want to maintain a certain level of technique, i.e. stuff shouldn't be totally dumbed down imho, but as long as it's not just 3 chords played over and over like a lot of todays nu-rock i'm fine with it. the song comes first, imho. i remember an interview with neil kernon in which he says that there's usually one or two killer riffs that are the metal equivalent of a catchy chorus. that's a very good comparison imho. i love stuff like for example nevermore - psalm of lydia. the song can be quite crazy at times, but there's the ultra melodic and catchy chorus riff that keeps it all together.
on the other hand, there's stuff like e.g. hate eternal that does not do anything for me. sure, it's difficult as fuck and all over the place, but there's no melody or real structure. it sounds like a 2:30 assault of high speed playing, without any dynamics or melody. sure, different strokes for different folks, but that's just my .2 anyways.
basically there are only very few technical death metal bands that get me going, cannibal corpse and kataklysm being "best" ones. why? because 99% of the songs have a theme which gives the listener something to recognize.

basically, to get back to the actual topic, the point i'm trying to make is that even the most amazing technique can be wasted if there isn't any musicality and melody. otherwise it's just a big blur of notes.

[Brick]

Re: Is great technique wasted on non-musicians?

you played blitzkrieg and they didn't go nuts that song is amazing!!!!!! haahahahahah

[NickCormier]

Re: Is great technique wasted on non-musicians?

Haha its true.. You could play Serrana and people would be like "no big deal" then do Eruption and they like freak out.. I showed my ex both those videos to see which she found more impressive, and she said Van halen (hopefully it wasnt biased because she already knew who Van Halen was, and didnt know who Becker was other than me always talking about him) but yeah thats how society is..

Of course theres the extreme examples like, Batio and Rusty cooley, who play super super fast with no melody or musicality, but as long as some songs have that "song" feel to them rather than just a pentatonic lick, people should appriciate them moreso than just 3chord singing songs.. unfortunately people only care about the lyrics in songs, thats all they follow and thats all they care about these days. If you want to be famous, just write some good lyrics, possibly hire a hot female singer, and you will get signed in no time, regardless of your guitar talent

[sully]

Re: Is great technique wasted on non-musicians?

well, your very question is loaded with broad generalizations, so it's kinda hard to answer. some would say that you could be a non-musician and have great technique! [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] that's what i thought when i saw this post and immediately thought of batio and the like.

in the broad scheme of things, being able to lay down extreme guitar wankery at will isn't important to anyone other than the niche that enjoys that kinda thing. nothing wrong with it, but there's a reason why guys like batio, etc, will never have the commercial success that others enjoy. nothin wrong with that if they're happy in life though, right?

sully

[Oogadee Boogadee]

Re: Is great technique wasted on non-musicians?

I can't stand it when the more crazy the solo in a lot of metal music, the less interesting the riffing and drumming underneath gets. This isn't all the time, but when i hear it it's a big disappointment.

I think if bands keep the riffing under the leads interesting and clever, with the lead supporting the song instead of the opposite, then you're still maintaining a kick ass song that will interest musicians and non musicians. a quick example is Mustaine's Sweeting Bullet's solo. The riff was freaking cool, and chromatic solo with the sextuplets fit the riff, and it was aggressive but pretty easy. Could you have imagined Poland over that part? IMO, he probably wouldn't have given a shit about the riff underneath it and just would have tech'd the crap out of his guitar. Friedman was right in the middle - interesting and melodic leads you could sing along to, but challenging and unique and aggressive ONLY when they had to be.

rather than worry about not stepping on the solo's toes, i think solos should worry about not stepping on the song's toes. i'm not saying the other instruments should always be playing over the top or whatever, but the part needs to sound interesting w/o the solo.

I think finding the best way to achieve that goal is a hell of a lot more challenging and rewarding than taking the bpms up a notch. I love speed, but once it achieves the desired level of aggression, leave it at that and keep it human.

beyond solos - this should apply to the rest of the parts and instruments. Find a way to work together - and if turns you on to do it at 240 bpm, then so be it, as long as it all fits and you can really pull it off live w/o "help". I think Nevermore is a great band that accomplishes this goal. Everybody is playing their ass off, vocally too, and it comes together in a nice big punch.

[Brick]

Re: Is great technique wasted on non-musicians?

Mustaine and Friedman are such a great a combo, I think the guys and chilldren of bodom are pretty good at keeping the stuff mediodic but still having wicked guitar and i guess key board solos. plus some of the rythm licks are pretty cool. (more with the old rythm guy)

[MBreinin]

Re: Is great technique wasted on non-musicians?

David Gilmour can do more with 3-4 notes than most guys can do pouring on 200. If it TOUCHES you, and you feel that chill go through your spine...then it is communicating. If it just sounds like a swarm of bees, it is shit...no matter how hard it is to produce.

The guitar is a voice, it is SEX. I want to hear notes coaxed into life, twisted...I want to hear that emotion.

Mike

[Oogadee Boogadee]

Re: Is great technique wasted on non-musicians?

sex? i'm sure the the internet has a site or two where you can go listen to sex. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[Dreamland_Rebel]

Re: Is great technique wasted on non-musicians?

ozzy to zakk
"play something that makes a kid want to go out and buy a guitar."

[shredmonster]

Re: Is great technique wasted on non-musicians?

People in general are like this regarding any subject.

Take a guy who is a great race car driver. Personally I couldn't tell one from another. But if you were a race car driver you would be into it.

Unfortunately it takes someone who can understand and appreciate the difficulty os something to appreciate someone else's talent.

All people want from music is to feel its emotion for the most part - the average person and in fact most people I would say.

Bottom line is the people who appreciate extreme music are extreme musicians themselves.