While my guitar gently weeps...

Ghost Rider wrote: What I mean by this long preamble is, non-musicians like me listen with their ears, but especially and chiefly with their heart. This is why we may have a distinct preference for those musicians who can express real emotion through their instruments, and tend to dismiss gratuitous displays of soulless technical proficiency.

I disagree completely, actually. As a musician myself, I generally dismiss displays of soulless technical proficiency because that's all they are - and, as a musician who is at least somewhat technically proficient, I'm not impressed by that at all. On the other hand, I've found that non-musicians (or, at the very least, poor musicians ) tend to be much more easily impressed by somebody playing really fast rather than someone playing a well-crafted, emotional solo. I've also found that a better understanding of music has made me really appreciate such solos much more (moreso in  jazz than anywhere else, but certainly with prog as well).

Philéas wrote: My view on the subject: For a guitarplayer to be truly great, he has to be both technical and emotional. He has to be able to pull off both Page and Petrucci style solos. If you can shred at lightspeed, great, but it's worth nothing if you can't pull off a sweet and slow emotional solo for, say, a power ballad. I know far too many guitarists starting to shred in the middle of a power ballad. And most of them are bad and repeatative shredders aswell. It's horrible to hear. Because another very important key to becoming a great player is to be able to play with variation. If you're not able to vary your playing, it will be uninteresting and repeatative, everything will sound the same. Then we come to speed. Some players use speed as a kind of "excuse" for being repeatative and/or unaccomplished technically, emotionally or melodically. Speed alone does not equal skill, and therefore I feel that players such as Yngwie Malmsteen aren't worthy of being called great. Yngwie is being viewed as a vituoso by many, but in my opinion he doesn't deserve it, because although he is very fast, his playing is repeatative and unemotional, and as a result very boring. I noticed someone mentioning Herman Li of Dragonforce. He's another good example of a fast but otherwise rather unskilled guitarist. Composing is yet another very important aspect. You need to be good at composing riffs and melodies. Being good at soloing is worth very little if you can't write interesting and varied riffs and melodies for your songs. All the music will sound the same and although it can be alright for an album or two, it won't last for more than that. To be a virtuoso on guitar, you have to compose good songs. Being a good lyricist is a bonus, but it has little to do with guitarplaying. And of course there are other very important aspects, such as articulation, phrasing etc. Tone is also important. As for Petrucci, I view him as a virtuoso, because he meets the criteria. He can be mind-blowingly technical, lightning fast, he can almost bring you to tears with his more emotional solos and compositions, and his playing is filled with details, varying from one solo to the other. Last but not least, he's a great composer. His songs can be memorable, interesting, catchy, beautiful, and invoke emotions ranging from hate to bliss. There's simply so much more to John Petrucci than just shredding. After all that Petrucci praising I feel I need to clarify that I also view Jimmy Page as a true guitar genius. One of the things that make Page so great is his ability to adopt many different styles, ranging from heavy rock to beautiful folk. He can also be technical, both in his soloing but especially in his composing, and very emotional . He has great feel in his playing, and he is still one of the most influential guitarists ever, as far as composing goes. There are players that may beat him in terms of being inspirational, making people pick up the guitar, but you can still hear traces of the Page and Led Zeppelin sound in much of today's heavy rock and metal music. I really don't listen much to Deep Purple, but from what I have heard I definitely consider Blackmore to be in the same league as Petrucci (or, if it sounds better to you, Petrucci in the same league as Blackmore). Last but not least; Yes, I am a musician.

nonmusicians need to make more music - the Residents are a prime example (which, by the subject author's criteria, are perhaps the most emotional band of all - early on, they had no idea what they were doing)

Emotion all the way for me!

Warren Haynes happens to be my favourite and with his playing, there's not a single bit of shredding in site.  Marvellous!

His playing is so smooth too, which I really like.  Yes he's primarily a blues based guitarist, but he can play rock, prog and jazz too, he's very accomplished indeed.

One of the most emotional players I've heard is Peter Green actually.  He does a live version of a B.B. King track on the Boston Tea Party CDs and it's so emotional.

Another emotional player for me is Duane Allman.  But the solo for me is the Dickie Betts solo from the Fillmore East version of "Whipping Post".  That solo almost makes me cry.

imoeng wrote: Now if I look back, some people said prog metal fans are stuck in prog metal world and cannot listen to anything or just think prog metal is the number 1.

Thanks for reminding me!

Rather off-topic, but I must state that there are as many classic prog fans who can't listen to anything but classic prog as there are prog metal fans who can't listen to anything but prog metal. In case you're wondering, I'm enjoying both in equal amounts.

Just felt it was worth bringing up.

A lot of people seem to be equating "emotion" (whatever that means) with virtuosity, and others speed with virtuosity. Neither of these make a guitarist a virtuoso. If you don't play guitar and especially if you have no musical experience then honestly I don't see how you feel qualified to say who is good and who is not. That doesn't mean you can't like Page and Gilmour. But just because you really really really like a player doesn't make him good. I really really really like Donovan, but I have no problem admitting he's not a good player. And let me just say I don't know many professional guitarists who list Page or Gilmour in the top ten. Something I find to be very amusing are all the people who claim their solos are so heartfelt. They play blues solos in the minor pentatonic scale! Those two players especially rarely leave those scales. Please note that there is heartfelt emotion in virtuosity, emotion which could only come out of virtuosity. Just because you can't get past how "notey" the piece is doesn't diminish the soulfulness of the music. Any lute suite by Bach is more notey than any Gilmour solo and has depth of soul far surpassing any of them. Once again my humble opinion. (I love having opinions that people surely hate!) 

Edited by Goldenavatar - July 04 2006 at 13:36

OK, I'd recommend you read my initial post to see what I mean. I've got many flaws, but conceit not supported by knowledge and/or experience is not one of them. I said right from the very beginning that I am no musician and that I experience music on a very strong emotional level. Perhaps I shouldn't, but that's the way things are. And I never used the word "good", as I'm not qualified to judge on a technical level. I only spoke about what does something for me on a very personal level.

Forgotten Son wrote: Ghost Rider wrote: As most of you know by now, I'm not a musician. I don't deny that, at some time in my life, I would have liked to learn how to play an instrument. However, I never did, and that of course has influenced the way I listen to music. I've been a music lover for most of my life, but the fact of not having any musical ability or training prevents me from appreciating the finer technical points of a band or musician's performance. While I can understand if someone is singing out of tune or is just bashing away at their instrument instead of actually playing it, I wouldn't be able to recognize, for instance, if a tune is played in 5/4, 7/8 or whatever. What I mean by this long preamble is, non-musicians like me listen with their ears, but especially and chiefly with their heart. This is why we may have a distinct preference for those musicians who can express real emotion through their instruments, and tend to dismiss gratuitous displays of soulless technical proficiency. Although prog is characterised by the fundamental role of keyboards, it is nonetheless an aspect of rock music - and the archetypal rock instrument is the guitar. Guitarists are very often the rock heroes by definition, and rock fans do not like anything better than to argue about the respective merits of their favourite six-stringers. For years I've witnessed a raging debate between the supporters of the shredding school of guitar players and those who instead prefer a bit more feeling with their technique. Since I've been a forum member I've seen quite a number of polls about "emotional guitarists", with people who didn't even know what that "emotional" meant. As for myself, I couldn't care less whether - as I have recently read on a magazine - the younger generation of shredders far outstrips the likes of Page and Blackmore in the technical stakes. To me, listening to Jimmy's solo in "Stairway to Heaven" or to Ritchie's magnificent, crystal-clear sound - or even to Iommi's harsh, monstrous wall-of-sound riffing - gives me much more than an entire album of Petrucci pyrotechnics would ever do. So, what's your take on that, my dearest fellow forum members? I'll say again, slow playing =/= emotional playing. It's a common misconception that if you play fast you're not plaing with emotion. I can catgeorically state that when used well, fast licks are just as emotional as a slow band. To me Yngwie's playing on Rising Force is more emotional than a lot of the slow playing on a lot of Neo-Prog albums I listen to. Before accusations of "you're just another of those shred fans" etc get thrown at me, I must state that my favourite guitarists are Steve Rothery, Steve Hackett, Dave Bainbridge, Nick Barrett and Andy Latimer.

Mr Tiddles does know his guitarists  hahahha

edit - it goes back to my post on page 1 which was ingloriously ignored...  shredding for it's own sake is pointless..   with  a purpose or as means to some end... it has worth and can show emotion.  Your Yngwie example is perfect.


Edited by micky - July 04 2006 at 14:57

With regard to Train of Thought, I mentioned that whatever feel-y guitar solos that ARE there on the album are quite simply overpowered by the rest of it, and on the whole that album is a horrid example for Petrucci's ability to play with feel (as opposed to some of the earlier DT stuff like say Awake)

As for mentioning how he doesn't quite make it up to the mark as Gilmour or Page - that I would agree comes down to personal preference.

Lastly, no doubt there are a lot of prog rockers who can't stand prog metal, or even consider it worthy of its prog prefix, but to each his own. With the exception of Floyd I was always mainly into metal (DT, Opeth, Symphony X, Tool) and its only over the past year or so that my taste has mellowed out, not to say I don't still enjoy an occasional spin of Blackwater Park or The Divine Wings of Tragedy or SFAM.