Prog Polls - Hackett or Petrucci?

Print Page | Close Window

Hackett or Petrucci?

Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Polls
Forum Description: Create polls on topics related to progressive music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=33390
Printed Date: July 18 2025 at 20:11
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com

Topic: Hackett or Petrucci?

Posted By: White Shadow
Subject: Hackett or Petrucci?
Date Posted: January 18 2007 at 21:38

My friend of lesser looks and musical tastes and I quarrel a lot. Who, is the better guitarist, musician, and who had the better band? Also, who makes the btter music? Hackett hands down for me. Just my opinion.

-------------
[signature]

Replies:

Posted By: Lota
Date Posted: January 18 2007 at 21:41

Steve Hackett

-------------
And In The End, The Love You Take, Is Equal To The Love You Make

Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: January 18 2007 at 21:42

Oh man. First of all, a warning to future posters: Please don't make make outlandish statements against Petrucci. I've seen enough of these to know the future!

As to the question at hand, I think Hackett is definitely the better songwriter, and Petrucci probably the bestter musician, but technical skill only means something is you can write engaging songs.

-------------
http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want!

Posted By: OpethGuitarist
Date Posted: January 18 2007 at 21:45

both are poor songwriters (yes it's my opinion, thats obvious, so i dont need an IMO...)

so the edge has to go to Petrucci in mere ability

-------------
back from the dead, i will begin posting reviews again and musing through the forums

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: January 18 2007 at 21:46

Hackett, more trascendental, skilled, complete and versatile.

IMO no contest.

Iván

-------------

Posted By: video vertigo
Date Posted: January 18 2007 at 21:49

Hackett is one of the best guitarists, Petrucci is..... Petrucci
the two should never be mentioned in the same context

-------------
"The rock and roll business is pretty absurd, but the world of serious music is much worse." - Zappa

Posted By: OpethGuitarist
Date Posted: January 18 2007 at 21:50

^^^

why?

nostalgia ruling here once again

-------------
back from the dead, i will begin posting reviews again and musing through the forums

Posted By: MajesterX
Date Posted: January 18 2007 at 21:53

I don't get what you're trying to accomplish here.

You know that Hackett is better in your opinion and that Dream Theater and the "unemotional w**kery" of Petrucci is hated here, so I don't think this thread really accomplishes anything.

Just my opinion, and I don't think you can compare the two.

-------------

Posted By: JayDee
Date Posted: January 18 2007 at 21:54

video vertigo wrote:

Hackett is one of the best guitarists, Petrucci is..... Petrucci
the two should never be mentioned in the same context

Right on.

But if I had to choose between the 2, It's Petrucci, coz he plays metal. Simple.

-------------

Posted By: OpethGuitarist
Date Posted: January 18 2007 at 21:54

MajesterX wrote:

I don't get what you're trying to accomplish here.

You know that Hackett is better in your opinion and that Dream Theater and the "unemotional w**kery" of Petrucci is hated here, so I don't think this thread really accomplishes anything.

Just my opinion, and I don't think you can compare the two.

sure you can

of course, getting a mature discussion about it is what's difficult

i find both to be poor songwriters and terribly overrated in their respective fields, though I think Petrucci is extremely technically proficient

-------------
back from the dead, i will begin posting reviews again and musing through the forums

Posted By: srbruno
Date Posted: January 18 2007 at 21:57

Hackett defintly had a very strong influence on guitarists that cxame after him...but in the case of mere skill and overall talent i think Petrucci takes it away. He has all the skill Hackett has and more.. i think hackett may write a little bit better than Petrucci but again skill wise Petrucci wins in my eyes..

Posted By: willy
Date Posted: January 18 2007 at 22:36

i'm a drummer, and cant speak very well on the grounds of who the better technician is. But hackett is more tasteful and charismatic for sure, alot easier to listen to.

-------------

Posted By: polyrythmic
Date Posted: January 18 2007 at 22:42

Technically Petrucci is better, but hands down Hackett is miles ahead of Petrucci for me! Hackett knows how to make meaningful music, that you feel.

Posted By: SolariS
Date Posted: January 18 2007 at 23:47

i don't get why people always say you can't compare two things.... you can compare anything on some level!

the fact that both of these guys play guitar is enough to make some kind of comparison, so don't try to kill the conversation by saying you CANT compare them.

-------------

Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 19 2007 at 00:01

When Petrucci reaches HAckett's age and years of playing, then we can compare. For now, I'd have to go with Hackett even though the best solos and best moments for me are by Petrucci, but just the experience makes Hackett probably more versatile.

Of course, it would be good if everybody takes a lookn at Petrucci playing with Rudess acoustic...then call him what you want.

I'm being a complete farce. As much as I want to say Hackett is better, I really can't. They're on the same level.

-------------

Posted By: bhikkhu
Date Posted: January 19 2007 at 00:20

Hackett for sheer versatility alone. Maybe Petrucci could reach that level after some more years, but I think Hackett had him beat back in the '70s. If you knew all of his work, you would see how obvious this is.

-------------
a.k.a. H.T.

http://riekels.wordpress.com" rel="nofollow - http://riekels.wordpress.com

Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: January 19 2007 at 00:30

I'll begin this post by saying that DT is not among my listening list, although I have heard some of their stuff (mostly Images & Words & A Change Of Seasons. Fine guitar player, Mikey is; but once more it comes down to feel, to talent & not just technique. Hackett was an "ensemble " player. And so he doesn't "stand" out as much. But his contribution (as regularly noted on these pages) was important to the Genesis sound. Another consideration is the level of technique among guitar players in his time. As some have noted, Steve Vai can outplay Jimmy Page, but poll your average music fan & Page's "memorable" tunes outnumber Vai's by a wide margin. I usually use Yingwie Malmsteen as an example, as he is generally considered technically better than his hero Blackmore, but you don't a have folks crying out for any of his compositions compared to Ritchie's songbook (Smoke on the Water, Burn, Child IN Time etc ...). And the final nail in the argument's coffin - folklore has it that Hackett "invented" tapping. Yes, big revelation, it was not Eddie Van Halen, but Mr Steve that was the first to do it, on record anyway, you can check out Supper's Ready for the proof ....

Posted By: iguana
Date Posted: January 19 2007 at 04:16

once again, another episode of our favourite
progarchives-telenovela "APPLES VS. ORANGES"

me: hackett. music isn't sports.

-------------
progressive rock and rural tranquility don't match. true or false?

Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: January 19 2007 at 05:31

It's not a question of who is better - after all no-one can say one way or the other - it's all opinion. Unless you get the two to take some sort of test !
The things is...........why on earth would you want to?
What does it matter? If you like them both then enjoy them both. If you only like one then it becomes a mud slinging process against the other.

Posted By: iguana
Date Posted: January 19 2007 at 06:26

Glueman wrote:

The things is...........why on earth would you want to?
What does it matter? If you like them both then enjoy them both. If you only like one then it becomes a mud slinging process against the other.

well said, glueman.

-------------
progressive rock and rural tranquility don't match. true or false?

Posted By: akin
Date Posted: January 19 2007 at 06:46

Hackett in Genesis was not that good mainly because he didn't have many spots as the band was keyboard driven. But man, check his solo stuff. The classical songs are fantastic.

Petrucci is all about speed. When he comes to do something different, he does weak arrangements for the DT ballads. Ok, he is quite good in the album with Rudess, but he is not near doing something that is really "kick ass".

So Hackett wins by a mile.

Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: January 19 2007 at 08:33

I would like to add to my earlier comments. If it were just about technique then my favourite guitarists would be Vai, Petrucci, Satriani etc. That's not, however, what music is to me. Where I can admire spectacular artistry, it often leaves me cold. What I want from a guitarist is passion and something which moves me - you know, the shiver up the spine moment. I'm still not taking sides though!

Posted By: Mr. Sanchez
Date Posted: January 19 2007 at 09:04

Hahaha... I love these polls..

Petrucci is just a Guitarist, Hackett is a musician.

Personal preference is the winner here.

-------------
It's Calling Me Back To My Home.

Posted By: Abstrakt
Date Posted: January 19 2007 at 09:08

It's like comparing Light to dark, sun to moon, apple to banana....

Posted By: markosherrera
Date Posted: January 19 2007 at 09:12

Hackett,I listen all his work in Genesis,GTR ,and like solist ,he is better than Petrucci

Posted By: Machinemessiah
Date Posted: January 19 2007 at 10:22

Mr. Sanchez wrote:

Hahaha... I love these polls..

Petrucci is just a Guitarist, Hackett is a musician.

Personal preference is the winner here.

Totally agreed, and my personal taste whispers me........

HACKETT!

Posted By: MadcapLaughs84
Date Posted: January 19 2007 at 13:40

I think their styles are totally different, John Petrucci in fact is far more technical than Hackett, but in compositions, Petrucci has also more elements to come with. Still, Stevie is a great guitar player.

-------------

Posted By: chessman
Date Posted: January 19 2007 at 18:03

Of course, the two are chalk and cheese, and Petrucci can play a million notes a nanosecond.

But Hackett is a musician, through and through, a master songwriter, and plays the guitar the way he wants to, without feeling the need to throw in as many notes as possible.

He is my favourite guitarist,

Petrucci is just another talented player.

Posted By: progadicto
Date Posted: January 19 2007 at 19:22

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Hackett, more trascendental, skilled, complete and versatile.

IMO no contest.

Iván

Totally agree... the perfect description...

Petrucci is good in his own stuff. Nothing against him. But I really think Hackett is one of the most trascendental musicians of the last decades. Inffluential when he was on Genesis and very inffluential in his solo career...

-------------
... E N E L B U N K E R...

Posted By: Floydian42
Date Posted: January 19 2007 at 20:08

Hackett of course

Posted By: KoS
Date Posted: January 19 2007 at 20:10

Hackett, duh!

Posted By: Dr. Occulator
Date Posted: January 19 2007 at 20:11

Did you actually think Petrucci had a chance in a poll like this?

-------------
My Doc Told Me I Have Doggie Head.

Posted By: 1800iareyay
Date Posted: January 19 2007 at 20:21

Hackett is the better musician, though Petrucci is much better technically

Posted By: Forgotten Son
Date Posted: January 20 2007 at 06:31

Hackett. He's the better composer on both electric and acoustic guitar, he's more versatile and, though Petrucci destroys him on the electric when it comes to pure technical skill, Hackett is more skilled on acoustic guitar. I'd say Hackett has much better phrasing that Petrucci on both instruments, also.

Posted By: TheLamb
Date Posted: January 20 2007 at 08:21

Both are top of the scale musicians.
Completly different though. Let's just say... I don't like comparing... But when I do, my moto is "Only compare two musicians that would try out for the same band (if it was making auditions for an empty position or something) if they were interested".

No need to compare between Petrucci and Hackett

-------------

Posted By: Cygnus
Date Posted: January 20 2007 at 08:23

srbruno wrote:

Hackett defintly had a very strong influence on guitarists that cxame after him...but in the case of mere skill and overall talent i think Petrucci takes it away. He has all the skill Hackett has and more.. i think hackett may write a little bit better than Petrucci but again skill wise Petrucci wins in my eyes..

Such as???Petrucci by far...

Posted By: el böthy
Date Posted: January 20 2007 at 13:24

Fripp pwns them all with one hand, while he takes his tea with the other one

-------------
"You want me to play what, Robert?"

Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 20 2007 at 14:26

The odd thing is, if Petrucci and Hackett met, I'm sure they would praise each other, and Petrucci would revere H as a master, but not one of them would consider himself above the other. Just Petrucci would see H as one of his mentors, of the examples he followed. Like when you see DT with Yes in some video and pictures, you can almost TELL the admiration this man has for Howe. And you can tell the respect Howe has for this young (well, not so young anymore) wizard.

A better poll would be: Hackett vs Billy Joe Amstrong
or Myung vs Sid Vicious or Portnoy vs MickPointer or Collins vs Agalloch's drummer

-------------

Posted By: Moatilliatta
Date Posted: January 20 2007 at 14:40

I really don't why people only view Petrucci's stuff as "all about speed" or how he just plays fast techincal stuff and that's it. I think his solo's and riffs and all that always are powerful/emotional/meaningful/melodic. He doesn't just play fast to show that he is fast. The notes are all carefully chosen and played at the certain speed for some reason.

However, as a sole composer he is quite poor. Dream Theater is made possible by the collaboration of all the players, who are all musical genious/virtuosos. Petrucci's solo stuff is rather weak. It only boasts some cool riffs and amazing solos, but there really is no sentimental value to it. Rudess' however is virtuosic, creative, diverse, and memorable. He is probably more responsible for the quality of their duet album.

However, both are great guitarists. Hackett as a solo composer is better than Petrucci, but strictly as a guitarist I think Petrucci could slaughter anyone in a contest. I love both.

Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 20 2007 at 14:41

Moatilliatta wrote:

I really don't why people only view Petrucci's stuff as "all about speed" or how he just plays fast techincal stuff and that's it. I think his solo's and riffs and all that always are powerful/emotional/meaningful/melodic. He doesn't just play fast to show that he is fast. The notes are all carefully chosen and played at the certain speed for some reason.

However, as a sole composer he is quite poor. Dream Theater is made possible by the collaboration of all the players, who are all musical genious/virtuosos. Petrucci's solo stuff is rather weak. It only boasts some cool riffs and amazing solos, but there really is no sentimental value to it. Rudess' however is virtuosic, creative, diverse, and memorable. He is probably more responsible for the quality of their duet album.

However, both are great guitarists. Hackett as a solo composer is better than Petrucci, but strictly as a guitarist I think Petrucci could slaughter anyone in a contest. I love both.

-------------

Posted By: Trickster F.
Date Posted: January 20 2007 at 14:44

Hackett can hack it, so him.

-------------
sig

Posted By: MajesterX
Date Posted: January 21 2007 at 14:15

Mr. Sanchez wrote:

Hahaha... I love these polls..

Petrucci is just a Guitarist, Hackett is a musician.

Personal preference is the winner here.

I'd like to see your definition of a musician please.

-------------

Posted By: Forgotten Son
Date Posted: January 21 2007 at 14:54

Cygnus wrote:

Such as???Petrucci by far...

Francis Dunnery, Brian May, Yngwie Malmsteen, Roine Stolt, Alex Lifeson etc all cite him as being an influence on their playing to some degree.

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: January 21 2007 at 15:11

akin wrote:

Hackett in Genesis was not that good mainly because he didn't have many spots as the band was keyboard driven. But man, check his solo stuff. The classical songs are fantastic.

Hackett was not good in Genesis, HACKETT WAS PERFECT FOR GENESIS.

Genesis music required a person able to create atmospheres, he was the support of the band along with Banks, many of the sounds that most people believe are keyboards are in fact created by Hackett with his unique style before the MIDI guitar was invented.

Remember Hackett's performance in The Return of the Giant Hogweed is historical, nobody ever before dared to bring the tapping technique to Rock, he was the predecessor.

The prove of how good he was in Genesis is that when he left, the band lost everything, not even Gabriel's departure caused so much damage to Genesis musically.

I heard a Gabriel interview about Hackett's audition and he said that while all the other guitar players were doing speed masturbation and trying to be the new Hendrix or Santana (there is only one Hendrix and Santana), Hackett started working on atmospheres and they decided for him inmediately.

Hackett in the other hand says that he noticed that Genesis music required more depth and atmosphere, it was easy for him to make an amazing solo to impress the band (Most bands would had hired a flashy guitar player more easily) but he heard Genesis music, knew what was missing there and added it, took the risk and was hired, that's what a real musician does.

IMO Hackett is more responsible of the Genesis trademark sound than Banks, Banks is the composer but Steve added what the band was lacking of.

So Hackett wins by a mile.

There we agree.

Iván

-------------

Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: January 21 2007 at 15:11

Neither is my favourite guitarist, though I'd take Hackett over Petrucci any day. JP may be superior in a technical sense, but Hackett's playing has much more feeling to these ears. Sorry, DT fans - this is not gratuitous bashing, but just a question of personal taste, as all art is.

Posted By: Cygnus
Date Posted: January 21 2007 at 15:29

Forgotten Son wrote:

Cygnus wrote:

Such as???Petrucci by far...

Francis Dunnery, Brian May, Yngwie Malmsteen, Roine Stolt, Alex Lifeson etc all cite him as being an influence on their playing to some degree.

Because i have read May's influences..Steve Hackett isn't one of them..

Posted By: Chus
Date Posted: January 21 2007 at 15:30

I prefer Hackett but I wouldn't go as far as saying that Hackett has more skill than Petrucci (technically), nor the other way around. In fact we should only rely on subjective criterias when comparing the two; it's more accurate

-------------
Jesus Gabriel

Posted By: Forgotten Son
Date Posted: January 21 2007 at 15:36

Cygnus wrote:

Because i have read May's influences..Steve Hackett isn't one of them..

"He [Brian May] said to me, he was aware of the early GENESIS material, in particular, "Musical Box", which was on the album "Nursery Cryme". And I played there a harmony guitar solo on the end of that, and he said to me that I had influenced him. I was completely out of way with this because I always thought that his harmony guitar style was something which he really came up with and pioneered it. But I used to do a thing like that from time to time."

http://www.dmme.net/interviews/hackett.html

Posted By: Sasquamo
Date Posted: January 21 2007 at 21:55

"Hackett because he was in Genesis, one of the classic prog bands, and Petrucci is in Dream Theater (need I comment)"

Seriously, that's what it comes down to. I choose Petrucci.

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: January 21 2007 at 22:50

Sasquamo wrote:

"Hackett because he was in Genesis, one of the classic prog bands, and Petrucci is in Dream Theater (need I comment)"

Seriously, that's what it comes down to. I choose Petrucci.

It's your option to choose Petrucci, but don't be unfair, many members have given solid arguments to justify Steve Hackett being better according to their opinion.

Hackett's contribution as a soloist is as important as his contribution to Genesis if this is possible, but again it's a matter of taste.

Iván

-------------

Posted By: Chus
Date Posted: January 21 2007 at 23:01

saying "Hackett by a mile" is pretty much exaggerated. I'll give you that Hackett was FAR more influential than Petrucci; but Petrucci's TECHNICAL skill is obvious. Still I prefer Hackett, but that doesn't make him better than Petrucci TECHNICALLY-WISE (put it in capitals so there's no confusion)

-------------
Jesus Gabriel

Posted By: bluetailfly
Date Posted: January 21 2007 at 23:14

Chus wrote:

saying "Hackett by a mile" is pretty much exaggerated. I'll give you that Hackett was FAR more influential than Petrucci; but Petrucci's TECHNICAL skill is obvious. Still I prefer Hackett, but that doesn't make him better than Petrucci TECHNICALLY-WISE (put it in capitals so there's no confusion)

Being technically skillful is nothing unless you have an aesthetic gift. Without the ability to move some one musically, technical skill is worth nothing...nothing.

There are tens of thousands of guitarists who are technically skillful, who can play rings around a lot of talented guitarists, but they will go nowhere because they don't have a musical gift.

My point is, if you're going to argue that Petrucci's got it over Hackett, I think you'd better emphasize his musical talent, e.g., chord phrasing, melodic soloing, intensity of voicing or something, not just his technical ability, because that's not impressive to those who are knowledgeable of the guitar and the music it can make.

-------------
"The red polygon's only desire / is to get to the blue triangle."

Posted By: Chus
Date Posted: January 21 2007 at 23:22

^^ I'm not saying otherwise.. and I'm not talking about just shredding.. it's the way Petrucci shreds (and the way he chooses his notes and scales, also the way he does arpeggios, legato, etc.).. I know he does mainly guitar masturbation but noone could say that Petrucci lacked skill... However I'm more than sure technical skill is not the only attribute, but it's one which should be credited alongside the ability to convey the message (in which IMO Hackett wins; most of the people listening to Petrucci's solo just wants a badarse solo, whilst we want Hackett to speak through his guitar).

BTW I've already made it clear I prefer Hackett

-------------
Jesus Gabriel

Posted By: bluetailfly
Date Posted: January 21 2007 at 23:27

Sorry, I should have written "...if one is going to argue..." I didn't mean to direct it at you.

-------------
"The red polygon's only desire / is to get to the blue triangle."

Posted By: Chus
Date Posted: January 21 2007 at 23:29

^^ don't worry, didn't take it directly

-------------
Jesus Gabriel

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: January 22 2007 at 01:43

I understand that somebody likes Petrucci more if you like Metal or Prog Metal, but being skilled is much more than just being fast, lets see.

Being skilled among other atributes requires:

I.- Versatility: Being able to play different styles and genres, Steve Hackett has performed and composed:

Symphonic
Avant
Fusion
Jazz
Classical Guitar
Acustic non Classical guitar
POP
Rock
Ambient/Atmospheric

Petrucci only Metal or Prog Metal

II.- Adaptability: Being able to play music from different authors (With your own arrangements) and do it well, Steve Hackett has performed and arranged for one concert music from:

Genesis
King Crimson
Asia
Own stuff

Never seen Petrucci do that, maybe but not sure.

III.- Being Innovative: Hackett will be remembered as the master of atmospheres and for being the first guitar player ever to adapt the tapping technique not only to Prog Rock but to Rock in general, Petrucci hasn't done anything that Vai, Satriani or Malmsteen haven't done before him.

IV.- Being able to play with first level musicians: Hackett has played with:

Peter Gabriel
Mike Rutherford
Tony Banks
Phil Collins
Chester Thompson
John Hackett
Brian May
Sally Oldfield
Percy Jones (Eno, Brand X,)
Johny Gustavson (Brian Ferry, Roxy Music, Kevin Ayers)
Phil Ehart
Steve Walsh
Tom Fowler (Zappa, Mothers of Invention, Jean Luc Ponty)
Richie Havens
Graham Smmith
Nick Magnus (Renaissance)
Colin Blunstone
Steve Howe
Bill Bruford
Paul Carrack
Tony Levin
Ian Mc'Donald
Pïno Paladino
Peter Banks
Jan Akkerman
John Wetton
Julian Colbeck

Among endless others and done it well always, he changes lineups and more important, this first class musicians are willing to accept his invitations and play with him, I don't believe it's the case of Petrucci.

V.- Just a quote:

Alex Lifeson (1984 Guitar magazine): "Yes, Steve Hackett is so articulate and melodic, precise and flowing. I think our Caress of Steel period is when I was most influenced by him. There's even a solo on that album which is almost a steal from his style of playing. It's one of my favorites, called 'No One at the Bridge'."

When Petrucci gets that Curriculum vitae, then compare him with Hackett, you can like Petrucci more, but he's still various steps behind IMHO.

Iván

-------------

Posted By: Lystmaler
Date Posted: January 22 2007 at 02:50

I think Petrucci is an amazing guitarist. He's able to blend a lot of styles in his play and he's great live.

"Petrucci only Metal or Prog Metal"
That statement is incorect. He has played "Classical Guitar" and "Acustic non Classical guitar" as you put it.

"Never seen Petrucci do that, maybe but not sure."

He play's a nice variety of styles in the official bootlegs where Dream Theater cover full albums with his own gear and equipment. The most recent one was a cover of Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon.

Posted By: Sasquamo
Date Posted: January 22 2007 at 09:22

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

I understand that somebody likes Petrucci more if you like Metal or Prog Metal, but being skilled is much more than just being fast, lets see.

Being skilled among other atributes requires:

I.- Versatility: Being able to play different styles and genres, Steve Hackett has performed and composed:

Symphonic
Avant
Fusion
Jazz
Classical Guitar
Acustic non Classical guitar
POP
Rock
Ambient/Atmospheric

Petrucci only Metal or Prog Metal

It doesn't matter if Hackett has played in those genres, it's a matter of whether he plays them well. I have my doubts with his abilities in jazz and fusion. Also, just because you've never heard Petrucci play different doesn't mean he hasn't. I have a feeling he could pull off many different styles very well, it's something that comes from being very, very good.

II.- Adaptability: Being able to play music from different authors (With your own arrangements) and do it well, Steve Hackett has performed and arranged for one concert music from:

Genesis
King Crimson
Asia
Own stuff

Never seen Petrucci do that, maybe but not sure.

I fail to see how making music for other bands makes you better.

Being an innovator doesn't always make you good at your innovation. And besides, since when do you have to make up a new way of playing to gain credibility. Maybe Petrucci doesn't use innovative techniques, but he plays innovative music, that's enough for me.

IV.- Being able to play with first level musicians: Hackett has played with:

Peter Gabriel
Mike Rutherford
Tony Banks
Phil Collins
Chester Thompson
John Hackett
Brian May
Sally Oldfield
Percy Jones (Eno, Brand X,)
Johny Gustavson (Brian Ferry, Roxy Music, Kevin Ayers)
Phil Ehart
Steve Walsh
Tom Fowler (Zappa, Mothers of Invention, Jean Luc Ponty)
Richie Havens
Graham Smmith
Nick Magnus (Renaissance)
Colin Blunstone
Steve Howe
Bill Bruford
Paul Carrack
Tony Levin
Ian Mc'Donald
Pïno Paladino
Peter Banks
Jan Akkerman
John Wetton
Julian Colbeck

Come on, you're really not being fair here. Ever thought that maybe Petrucci doesn't want to play with anyone else? Another flaw with your list is that it's made up of what seems to be entirely musicians from 30 years ago who were around when Hackett was in his prime. Now if Petrucci were to play with modern musicians in his generation, would you call them first-level musicians. Not to mention that playing with famous people doesn't mean you're good, it just means you're very well-known and popular.

V.- Just a quote:

Alex Lifeson (1984 Guitar magazine): "Yes, Steve Hackett is so articulate and melodic, precise and flowing. I think our Caress of Steel period is when I was most influenced by him. There's even a solo on that album which is almost a steal from his style of playing. It's one of my favorites, called 'No One at the Bridge'."

When Petrucci gets that Curriculum vitae, then compare him with Hackett, you can like Petrucci more, but he's still various steps behind IMHO.

Iván

Well, the biggest problem I have with this is all the evidence you put forward to support an argument that comes simply down to playing tastes. Seems to me like you act as if choosing the better guitarist is like a scientific endeavor, finding lots of information and evidence to help form an opinion. I find it easier to just decide who I like better.

Posted By: Visitor13
Date Posted: January 22 2007 at 09:40

bluetailfly wrote:

Being technically skillful is nothing unless you have an aesthetic gift. Without the ability to move some one musically, technical skill is worth nothing...nothing.

There are tens of thousands of guitarists who are technically skillful, who can play rings around a lot of talented guitarists, but they will go nowhere because they don't have a musical gift.

All of which are completely subjective.

My answer is - Hackett for acoustic, Petrucci for electric, though Hackett is more original and most likely the better guitarist overall.

Posted By: Chus
Date Posted: January 22 2007 at 10:01

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

I understand that somebody likes Petrucci more if you like Metal or Prog Metal, but being skilled is much more than just being fast, lets see.

Being skilled among other atributes requires:

I.- Versatility: Being able to play different styles and genres, Steve Hackett has performed and composed:

Symphonic
Avant
Fusion
Jazz
Classical Guitar
Acustic non Classical guitar
POP
Rock
Ambient/Atmospheric

Petrucci only Metal or Prog Metal

II.- Adaptability: Being able to play music from different authors (With your own arrangements) and do it well, Steve Hackett has performed and arranged for one concert music from:

Genesis
King Crimson
Asia
Own stuff

Never seen Petrucci do that, maybe but not sure.

IV.- Being able to play with first level musicians: Hackett has played with:

Peter Gabriel
Mike Rutherford
Tony Banks
Phil Collins
Chester Thompson
John Hackett
Brian May
Sally Oldfield
Percy Jones (Eno, Brand X,)
Johny Gustavson (Brian Ferry, Roxy Music, Kevin Ayers)
Phil Ehart
Steve Walsh
Tom Fowler (Zappa, Mothers of Invention, Jean Luc Ponty)
Richie Havens
Graham Smmith
Nick Magnus (Renaissance)
Colin Blunstone
Steve Howe
Bill Bruford
Paul Carrack
Tony Levin
Ian Mc'Donald
Pïno Paladino
Peter Banks
Jan Akkerman
John Wetton
Julian Colbeck

V.- Just a quote:

Alex Lifeson (1984 Guitar magazine): "Yes, Steve Hackett is so articulate and melodic, precise and flowing. I think our Caress of Steel period is when I was most influenced by him. There's even a solo on that album which is almost a steal from his style of playing. It's one of my favorites, called 'No One at the Bridge'."

When Petrucci gets that Curriculum vitae, then compare him with Hackett, you can like Petrucci more, but he's still various steps behind IMHO.

Iván

Petrucci is not just about speed (that's what Yngwie Malmsteen is for

) He also happens to be a great improviser; knowing it's very difficult to do so (in fact there are about 142 books dedicated to improvising methods, which shows that improvising is not just throwing random notes in the air); now I don't know that much about improvising but Petrucci, who has studied in Berklee, surely has been exposed to this (and he seems to dominate that area a bit). Now as for Hackett, he doesn't seem like an improviser kind of guy to me, so I doubt about his abilities to play jazz.. then again I haven't heard his jazz playing (if you could recommend me something like that from him please do

)... of course it doesn't mean that Petrucci is better because he can improvise, but I neither think Hackett is "better by miles".

And another thing... my father (a jazz-and-everything-else musician who hardly makes an unasked opinion) happened to wander in my room one time as I was watching Petrucci playing some of his solo songs.. my father said at once "that guy is good"... and trust me he doesn't say that much, especially about metal musicians... I could also say that about him even if you might know me as a metal-basher

.

But taste wins for me in the end

-------------
Jesus Gabriel

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: January 22 2007 at 11:58

I fail to see a convincing argument against most of my statements, but I may be wrong ads anybody.

Lystmaler wrote:

Petrucci only Metal or Prog Metal"
That statement is incorect. He has played "Classical Guitar" and "Acustic non Classical guitar" as you put it.

"Never seen Petrucci do that, maybe but not sure."

He play's a nice variety of styles in the official bootlegs where Dream Theater cover full albums with his own gear and equipment. The most recent one was a cover of Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon.

But where is that wonderful material, how abundant it is, how many officiakl abums has he written and composed? Playing one or two tracks is nothing, I'm talking about real official albums, and I'm not talking about one or two songs in bootlegs, Hackett has done excellent albums and DVD's.

Sasquamo wrote:

The reality is that all Hackett albums except maybe one (POP material) are good, he has consistently released solid albums, so he does it well, that's one part.

His jazz material in his Archives is outstanding, his solo material with his brother in Jazz and Fusion is outstanding (Can't remember the name of his DVD).

And please everyboy talks about having a feeling of Petrucci being able to do different things, if he was able he would had do it, maybe he can, maybe not, but he has not proved being remotely a versatile musician.

Sasquamo wrote:

I fail to see how making music for other bands makes you better.

No, Hackett was not making music for other bands, he joined members of Asia, King Crimson, Genesis /Well himself and Chester), took masterpieces from all this bands made new arrangements and played music by this bands and his oewn material (Played by this great musicians) for his own album called Tokyo Tapes, which is credited to him, not to the other guys.

Sasquamo wrote:

Yes it makes you good, it makes you be the man everybody will follow (not the follower), you need to have a special skill to adapt a technique from one genre to another, that's what Chuck Berry did adapting Jazz and Blues techniques and practilly co-creating Rock, that's what Hackett did and made him so special, so different, everybody being able to play Rock using tapping technique owes it to Hackett.

Hackett used the tapping technique for first time in an aclaimed performance done in The Return to the Giant Hogweed and used it successfully during all his career, inspired musicians as Brian May, Alex Lifeson and according to some places even the same Petrucci.

Sasquamo wrote:

Alone maybe not, but added too vairous elements it makes you:

1.- Able to adapt your style to any musician, and I'm not talking about second class session musicians that will follow you for the money, I'm talking of making the arrangements for the style of musicians as famous as you, you don't go to Steve Walsh, Ian Mc'Donald or Tony Levin and tell them how to play, you need to adapt your style to them as much as they need to adapt their style to you.

You won't go with Sally Oldfield like Pink Floyd with Claire Torry (Great work by Floyd BTW) and tell her "do what you want and follow us improvising", Sally won't risk her name, she needs to see something solid and clear in black and white plus consifder it worth to risk her name.

The same with Brian May, Phil Ehart, Paul Carrack, Tom Fowler, John Wetton, Richie Havens, etc. They will ask you hey pal, what do you have to offer us and we'll see....and if your stuff is not good doesn't matter how Mr. nice guy you are, they won't join you.

2.- It makes you respected not popular, this guys are famous musicians with a name that won't join you because you're the cool musician or the popular pal, they won't join a nobody puting their careers in risk unless they know you're good enough to boost their own careers.

3.- It makes you confident enough in your skills not to be afraid to play with musicians who may take the glory for you, it's easy to play with unknown musicians and take the glory, it's hard to play with famous musicians and still take the glory.

In other words it doesn't make you worst not playing with them, but makes you more skilled, confident and repected by your peers to call them and receive an inmediate answer or being called by them as in the case of Peter Banks, being accepted by a band with a name like Genesis without being known and replace a capable guitar player like Anthony Phillips.

Sasquamo wrote:

No that's not true, being skilled is not a scientific endeavor but:

1.- Boosting a band when you join them and the band loosing their quality when you leave.

2.- Being probably the most versatile musician in Prog scenario with own succesful compositionss and arrangements.

3.- Being confident to recruit skilled and famous musicians for your albums

4.- Being accepted by the elite of the musicians.

5.- Being innovative.

6.- Having a prolific career with lets say 90% of your albums good or great

7.- Being invited by other musicians to join them.

8.- Dare to form a band with the best musicians in your own instrument like his works with Brian May or GTR with Steve Howe his closest rival.

Are all signs of how good you are.

Art is not a scoience, but you don't achieve everything Hackett has achieved in a competitive and non popular genre withoiut being only a good or even a great and popular musician, it makes you be siomebody very special.

BTW: I'm not talking about improvising despite he does excellent improvisations playing Genesis tracks in acustic versions alone in Tokyo Tapes, Somewhere in South America plus each and every DVD he has,

He plays strong Jazz Fusion material in MOMENTUM (Specially "A Bed, A Chair And A Guitar") , also with his briother (Again I can't remember the name of the DVD) and in his 70's, 80's and 90's Archives also did a tour playing jazz variations on his themes in Barcelona and Madrid during 2005 with his brother John and Roger King on the keyboards.

Hackett hardly will improvise, not because he's unable, he has proved to be absolutely able, but because he's a musician who studies the pieces, rarely enters in a competition trying to prove how better he is, he passed from being the obscure guy sitted in a corner but leading the band to the center of the attention, always playing what is necesary for the band or the album without requiring of many solos.

It's easy to notuice the guy making wonderful solos, that's the intention with the solos being noticed, but doing them rarely and still being noticed is harder because you're sacrificing your own bright for the music and still can't avoid being noticed.

There are Universities that claim Mr Hackett is part of their curriculum , he doesn't write books but is studied and gave lectures at Brunel University, Jazz East, Basstech, Drumtech and the Powerhouse Group of Music Schools, that also means something.

Iván

-------------

Posted By: Sasquamo
Date Posted: January 22 2007 at 13:00

You realize that jazz with "hardly any improvising" isn't really jazz, or at least not good jazz, right? Anyone can make jazzy songs by using a bunch of 7 chords, but you cannot say they are good at jazz unless they can improvise well.

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: January 22 2007 at 13:04

Ok Sasquamo, forge Jazz, but ewhat about the other 8 genres and sub-genres? Despite I believe his jazz work is very solid, listen his improvisations ibn all his live albums, he doesn't improvise in studio, but as a soloist he does.

BTW: Jazz is not only improvisation, listen Jean Luc Ponty, a very structured form of Jazz, not all Jazz is free Jazz.

Does one less genre makes him less prolific or versatile?

I'm not saying Petrucci is bad, but I believe he's hardly in the level of Hackett, very few are.

Iván

-------------

Posted By: bluetailfly
Date Posted: January 22 2007 at 15:30

Visitor13 wrote:

All of which are completely subjective.

My answer is - Hackett for acoustic, Petrucci for electric, though Hackett is more original and most likely the better guitarist overall.

Thanks for your response, but you're point is really irrelevant to the point I am making. Of course it's subjective, I'm not arguing otherwise. My point is, if you prefer Petrucci, discuss his musical sesibility: what is it about his work that moves you, how does his playing turn you on, what aesthetic choices is he making that work for you? Simply pointing out technical prowess sidesteps this necessary condition.

-------------
"The red polygon's only desire / is to get to the blue triangle."

Posted By: CorporalClegg68
Date Posted: January 22 2007 at 15:41

Ok, so I listen to both Dream Theater and Genesis rather extensively and I think I can safely say that I enjoy Hackett's music better. Petrucci is no doubt amazing, but his stuff particularly his solo stuff gets pretty boring after the first couple of songs. Hackett also has a very distinct sound and it isnt overly obnoxious.

Posted By: raindance
Date Posted: January 22 2007 at 18:04

If the poll is asking who is the most technically proficient player then Petrucci is the obvious answer without a shadow of a doubt. If the question is who do you prefer, well that just a matter of oppinion!

Posted By: Forgotten Son
Date Posted: January 22 2007 at 19:03

Chus wrote:

Petrucci is not just about speed (that's what Yngwie Malmsteen is for

)

I hope that winking emoticon was used to denote a joke. Yngwie is less about speed than Petrucci, has better phrasing than Petrucci and has one of the best vibratos in rock...period.

Posted By: Chus
Date Posted: January 22 2007 at 19:29

^^ I wouldn't say better phrasing but agree that he has a powerful vibrato.. though quite frankly I can't stand most of his licks (sounds a bit samey to me)

-------------
Jesus Gabriel

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: January 22 2007 at 21:26

raindance wrote:

If the poll is asking who is the most technically proficient player then Petrucci is the obvious answer without a shadow of a doubt. If the question is who do you prefer, well that just a matter of oppinion!

Please support why it's so obvious, you are just expresssing an opinion without an argument, much less than what most of us have done.

Iván

-------------

Posted By: Sasquamo
Date Posted: January 22 2007 at 21:47

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Please support why it's so obvious, you are just expresssing an opinion without an argument, much less than what most of us have done.

Iván

Uhhhh, because by no means could Hackett play the stuff Petrucci does.

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: January 22 2007 at 23:17

Sasquamo wrote:

Uhhhh, because by no means could Hackett play the stuff Petrucci does.

Ehm, I don't see any except incredibly high speed, Hackett can do almost anything and as a fact has done it.

Iván

-------------

Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 22 2007 at 23:31

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Sasquamo wrote:

Uhhhh, because by no means could Hackett play the stuff Petrucci does.

Ehm, I don't see any except incredibly high speed, Hackett can do almost anything and as a fact has done it.

Iván

In terms of "fingering" and speed, I think both would be quite matched, maybe Petrucci has an edge just because the music he plays demands it. I would say Petrucci has yet to prove himself as a composer, because a fantastic guitarist, JUST GUITARIST, he is. MAybe he's a lesser MUSICIAN altogether, but not GUITARIST. (believe me, there are lot of guitarist that are no musicians and, of course, the other way around). Maybe that is caused because Petrucci works in a band of all-virtuoso performers, whereas Hackett left Genesis early to write his own music. I say the question has no answer (No OBJECTIVE answer anyway), nor DOES IT NEED IT (I'm sure both will be remembered by their fans as masters of the axe. No matter what we choose).

-------------

Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: January 22 2007 at 23:47

The question is:

White Shadow wrote:

My friend of lesser looks and musical tastes and I quarrel a lot. Who, is the better guitarist, musician, and who had the better band? Also, who makes the btter music? Hackett hands down for me. Just my opinion.

It seems hard at first because though Petrucci is far less refined and wide-ranging than Hackett, Petrucci would probably win a competition on chops only. But the question says 'better guitarist, musician, and who had the better band'-- Well, the better all-around guitarist is Hackett, the more versatile and knowledgable musician is Hackett, and for better band Hackett wins again. Hmm...could the winner be Steve Hackett?

Posted By: Visitor13
Date Posted: January 23 2007 at 03:19

I'd love to get a classical guitarist's opinion of Hackett's classical stuff and a jazz guitarist's of his jazz stuff.

Then again, the fact that Hackett can play classical on a (at the very least) decent level already speaks volumes about his ability and talent. I haven't heard his jazz stuff, but I'm more skeptical here, as I don't think you can really dabble in jazz (neither can you dabble in classical, but I think Hackett does more than merely to dabble there) You can play jazzy-sounding licks, but little more than that, IMO... but I'm certainly not writing Hackett's jazz abilities off here.

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: January 23 2007 at 09:50

Visitor13 wrote:

I'd love to get a classical guitarist's opinion of Hackett's classical stuff and a jazz guitarist's of his jazz stuff.

Then again, the fact that Hackett can play classical on a (at the very least) decent level already speaks volumes about his ability and talent. I haven't heard his jazz stuff, but I'm more skeptical here, as I don't think you can really dabble in jazz (neither can you dabble in classical, but I think Hackett does more than merely to dabble there) You can play jazzy-sounding licks, but little more than that, IMO... but I'm certainly not writing Hackett's jazz abilities off here.

Well Visitor, Steve's Hackett's Midsummer's Night Dream with thew Royal Philharmonic Orchestra was considered one of the top 10 Classical albums of 1997 by the demanding Classical critc.

That means something.

If you want a Classical expert opinion, it's only necassary to say that Yehudi Menuhim was so impressed with Hackett's performance of the Four Seasons by Vivaldi that used Steve's music as the theme to his television documentary From Kew To The Findhorn Foundation and he was even more demanding than the Classical critic and an expert..

Iván

-------------

Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 23 2007 at 15:11

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Visitor13 wrote:

I'd love to get a classical guitarist's opinion of Hackett's classical stuff and a jazz guitarist's of his jazz stuff. Then again, the fact that Hackett can play classical on a (at the very least) decent level already speaks volumes about his ability and talent. I haven't heard his jazz stuff, but I'm more skeptical here, as I don't think you can really dabble in jazz (neither can you dabble in classical, but I think Hackett does more than merely to dabble there) You can play jazzy-sounding licks, but little more than that, IMO... but I'm certainly not writing Hackett's jazz abilities off here.

Well Visitor, Steve's Hackett's Midsummer's Night Dream with thew Royal Philharmonic Orchestra was considered one of the top 10 Classical albums of 1997 by the demanding Classical critc.

That means something.

If you want a Classical expert opinion, it's only necassary to say that Yehudi Menuhim was so impressed with Hackett's performance of the Four Seasons by Vivaldi that used Steve's music as the theme to his television documentary From Kew To The Findhorn Foundation and he was even more demanding than the Classical critic and an expert..

Iván

Now, and only NOW, I may start to accept the possibility of HAckett "winning" this useless poll (well, which poll isn't, specially mine

).... If you said Menuhin said so, I'll shut the hell up.

-------------

Posted By: Sasquamo
Date Posted: January 23 2007 at 17:14

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Sasquamo wrote:

Uhhhh, because by no means could Hackett play the stuff Petrucci does.

Ehm, I don't see any except incredibly high speed, Hackett can do almost anything and as a fact has done it.

Iván

Take a Petrucci lick and hand it to Hackett, and he would be immediately lost. Hand a Hackett like to Petrucci and he would play it perfectly, but you would say he wasn't playing it with the same emotion or he played it "too perfectly" or something like that.

Posted By: Chus
Date Posted: January 23 2007 at 19:05

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Visitor13 wrote:

I'd love to get a classical guitarist's opinion of Hackett's classical stuff and a jazz guitarist's of his jazz stuff. Then again, the fact that Hackett can play classical on a (at the very least) decent level already speaks volumes about his ability and talent. I haven't heard his jazz stuff, but I'm more skeptical here, as I don't think you can really dabble in jazz (neither can you dabble in classical, but I think Hackett does more than merely to dabble there) You can play jazzy-sounding licks, but little more than that, IMO... but I'm certainly not writing Hackett's jazz abilities off here.

That means something.

Iván

I heard some of those pieces of AMND and they sounded quite easy to play, as opposed to pieces like "Sevilla" by Albeniz or "Estudio Remembranza" by Segovia. now those are tough mothers. I'm not going to jump into the conclusion that Hackett lacks technical skill because I haven't heard him trying to play pieces quite like them (as yet).

-------------
Jesus Gabriel

Posted By: White Shadow
Date Posted: January 23 2007 at 22:09

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Remember Hackett's performance in The Return of the Giant Hogweed is historical, nobody ever before dared to bring the tapping technique to Rock, he was the predecessor.

The prove of how good he was in Genesis is that when he left, the band lost everything, not even Gabriel's departure caused so much damage to Genesis musically.

IMO Hackett is more responsible of the Genesis trademark sound than Banks, Banks is the composer but Steve added what the band was lacking of.

So Hackett wins by a mile.

There we agree.

Iván

I like this guy

-------------
[signature]

Posted By: White Shadow
Date Posted: January 23 2007 at 22:15

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

I fail to see a convincing argument against most of my statements, but I may be wrong ads anybody.

Lystmaler wrote:

Sasquamo wrote:

The reality is that all Hackett albums except maybe one (POP material) are good, he has consistently released solid albums, so he does it well, that's one part.

His jazz material in his Archives is outstanding, his solo material with his brother in Jazz and Fusion is outstanding (Can't remember the name of his DVD).

Sasquamo wrote:

I fail to see how making music for other bands makes you better.

Sasquamo wrote:

Alone maybe not, but added too vairous elements it makes you:

Sasquamo wrote:

No that's not true, being skilled is not a scientific endeavor but:

1.- Boosting a band when you join them and the band loosing their quality when you leave.

2.- Being probably the most versatile musician in Prog scenario with own succesful compositionss and arrangements.

3.- Being confident to recruit skilled and famous musicians for your albums

4.- Being accepted by the elite of the musicians.

5.- Being innovative.

6.- Having a prolific career with lets say 90% of your albums good or great

7.- Being invited by other musicians to join them.

8.- Dare to form a band with the best musicians in your own instrument like his works with Brian May or GTR with Steve Howe his closest rival.

Are all signs of how good you are.

Iván

Impressive

-------------
[signature]

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: January 23 2007 at 23:08

Chus wrote:

I heard some of those pieces of AMND and they sounded quite easy to play, as opposed to pieces like "Sevilla" by Albeniz or "Estudio Remembranza" by Segovia. now those are tough mothers. I'm not going to jump into the conclusion that Hackett lacks technical skill because I haven't heard him trying to play pieces quite like them (as yet).

Try:

1.- Steve Hackett Live Archive 05 CD England; United Kingdom. Track Listing Intro, Japonica, Andante In C, Tribute To Segovia,

2.- Read the ctitics about Hackett playing Segovia material in Barcelona....if there's people obsessed and demanding with Segovia's music, those are the Sapanish http://www.dlsi.ua.es/~inesta/LCDM/Conciertos/stevehackett_abr05.html - http://www.dlsi.ua.es/~inesta/LCDM/Conciertos/stevehackett_abr05.html

3.- Steve Hackett - http://www.freakemporium.com/site/release/STOT050/releasepage.html - Live Archive 05 . Dble CD, £9.50 ( http://www.freakemporium.com/site/list_label.cgi?label=Camino - Camino - CAMCD36)

Double disc set recorded at the Queen Elizabeth Hall in South London in 2005, featuring Hackett in his acoustic mode accompanied by his flute-playing brother John and keyboardist Roger King. Material stems from the works of classical composers such as Ravel and Segovia, as well as three tracks from Genesis days, 'After The Ordeal', 'Horizons' and 'Firth Of Fifth', his first excursion into classical music 'Bay Of Kings' from 1984, from his 2004 release 'Metamorpheus' and of course the by now mandatory 'Hands Of The Priestess' from the seminal 'Voyage Of The Acolyte' opus. Not to mention plenty of storyteling and raconteuring from the man himself- good enough reason to shell out your hard-earned, wethinks.

5.- A rare acoustic performance at the Teatro Metropolitan in Palermo, Sicily. Hackett, accompanied only by keyboardist Julian Colbeck, presents material from his two highly acclaimed acoustic albums together with some Genesis favourites and a selection of previously unheard material. Includes pieces unavailable elsewhere such as such as Steve's interpretations of "Cinema Paradiso" and Vivaldi's "Concerto in D"

Check it he has not only played Segovia but also Ravel, Bach, Vivaldi, etc etc etc-

BTW: It's probably not hard to say that Midsummer's Night Dream is easy after Hackett, wrote it, played it and recorded it with the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra alone as a soloist, but he did it before and believe me, the Classical critics are not benevolent with Rock stars playing their holy music, by the contrary they are very hard, and despite this fact he was acclaimed by that hard critic.

However Steve's greatest musical flowering was to come with the 1997 release on EMI Classics of " http://www.stevehackett.com/albums/midsummer.html - A Midsummer Night's Dream " - a series of original compositions for classical guitar and orchestra inspired by the play. The album fulfilled another of Steve's ambitions - to record with The Royal Philharmonic Orchestra - and put him in the UK's classical Top 10!

http://www.stevehackett.com/bio/brief.html - http://www.stevehackett.com/bio/brief.html

BTW II: Hackett didn't hired the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra, he was invited by EMI Classical division.

This is an album which was recorded in 1997 as Steve was invited to do a show with the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra. The music was all composed by Steve Hackett.

The album was originally released by EMI Classical, but sold out rapidly. It has been unavailable for years.

That's a bit harder.

Sasquamo wrote:

Take a Petrucci lick and hand it to Hackett, and he would be immediately lost. Hand a Hackett like to Petrucci and he would play it perfectly, but you would say he wasn't playing it with the same emotion or he played it "too perfectly" or something like that.

Sasquamo, guitar players as Hackett, Howe, Mc'Laughlin, Di Meola, etc won't get lost with anything.

In my case I'm talking about music and achievements Hackett has reached, Yehudi Menuhin doesn't choose Hackett's music because he's a nice guy, Menuhim was probably the most iconic classical Director and violin player of the XXth Century, and guys like him don't take risks.

In your case you're guessing that Hackett would get lost and that his music would be easilly played by Petrucci, I could also say that Petrucci wouldn't work an atmosphere remotely as Hackett, but that would be guessing.

I try to talk about facts and achievements that are documented.

I know I'm a fan of Hackett's work, but it is about time, he was the most ignored guitar virtuoso of the big 5 bands until he left Genesis and people discovered how really great he is, well I believe he must be credited.

Iván

-------------

Posted By: Chus
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 13:25

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Try:

1.- Steve Hackett Live Archive 05 CD England; United Kingdom. Track Listing Intro, Japonica, Andante In C, Tribute To Segovia,

3.- <A>Steve Hackett</A> - http://www.freakemporium.com/site/release/STOT050/releasepage.html - Live Archive 05 . Dble CD, £9.50 ( http://www.freakemporium.com/site/list_label.cgi?label=Camino - Camino - CAMCD36) Double disc set recorded at the Queen Elizabeth Hall in South London in 2005, featuring Hackett in his acoustic mode accompanied by his flute-playing brother John and keyboardist Roger King. Material stems from the works of classical composers such as Ravel and Segovia, as well as three tracks from Genesis days, 'After The Ordeal', 'Horizons' and 'Firth Of Fifth', his first excursion into classical music 'Bay Of Kings' from 1984, from his 2004 release 'Metamorpheus' and of course the by now mandatory 'Hands Of The Priestess' from the seminal 'Voyage Of The Acolyte' opus. Not to mention plenty of storyteling and raconteuring from the man himself- good enough reason to shell out your hard-earned, wethinks.

Check it he has not only played Segovia but also Ravel, Bach, Vivaldi, etc etc etc-

I'll check 'em out when I get the chance, thanks

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

BTW: It's probably not hard to say that Midsummer's Night Dream is easy after Hackett, wrote it, played it and recorded it with the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra alone as a soloist, but he did it before and believe me, the Classical critics are not benevolent with Rock stars playing their holy music, by the contrary they are very hard, and despite this fact he was acclaimed by that hard critic.

Not denying his composing skills (which is really a hard part); I just won't say he's a great guitarist for what I'd heard him play so far... yet again perhaps I need to listen more of his classical work and the suggested material above. I'll do it as soon as money comes around plenty

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

However Steve's greatest musical flowering was to come with the 1997 release on EMI Classics of " http://www.stevehackett.com/albums/midsummer.html - A Midsummer Night's Dream " - a series of original compositions for classical guitar and orchestra inspired by the play. The album fulfilled another of Steve's ambitions - to record with The Royal Philharmonic Orchestra - and put him in the UK's classical Top 10!

http://www.stevehackett.com/bio/brief.html - http://www.stevehackett.com/bio/brief.html

BTW II: Hackett didn't hired the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra, he was invited by EMI Classical division. [IMG]height=17 alt=LOL src="smileys/smiley36.gif" width=17 align=absMiddle>

This is an album which was recorded in 1997 as Steve was invited to do a show with the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra. The music was all composed by Steve Hackett.

The album was originally released by EMI Classical, but sold out rapidly. It has been unavailable for years.

That's a bit harder. [IMG]height=17 alt=Wink src="smileys/smiley2.gif" width=17 align=absMiddle>

Sasquamo, guitar players as Hackett, Howe, Mc'Laughlin, Di Meola, etc won't get lost with anything.

I try to talk about facts and achievements that are documented.

Iván

I doubt Petrucci would play classical guitar as perfect as classically-trained guitarists. Then again, haven't heard him so I won't judge that quickly, but he himself was trained differently.

-------------
Jesus Gabriel

Posted By: MajesterX
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 16:37

I have an idea, everyone just shut the hell up!!

The reason I hate this place is because people just bash Dream Theater all day long and praise the classic prog bands which I don't find to be that great.

Ivan- WE GET IT! You don't need to continue fighting!

We know you wish Petrucci was dead and in the ground in an unmarked grave while you reign as prime minister and play with the wizards in Peter Gabriel's lyrics in the magical utopia of Hackett-land where any non-atmospheric feelings are illegal as people burn Iron Maiden records while wearing capes. You've proven your point!

You said " I doubt Petrucci would play classical guitar as perfect as classically-trained guitarists".
I doubt Hackett would play metal guitar as perfectly as guitarists who play demanding heavy metal.

You have not mentioned that Hackett has not touched Metal playing.

Sorry for the rant, but this sounds more like Policy Debate than a stupid poll on a progressive rock forum.

-------------

Posted By: progismylife
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 16:41

MajesterX wrote:

I have an idea, everyone just shut the hell up!!

The reason I hate this place is because people just bash Dream Theater all day long and praise the classic prog bands which I don't find to be that great.

Ivan- WE GET IT! You don't need to continue fighting!

We know you wish Petrucci was dead and in the ground in an unmarked grave while you reign as prime minister and play with the wizards in Peter Gabriel's lyrics in the magical utopia of Hackett-land where any non-atmospheric feelings are illegal as people burn Iron Maiden records while wearing capes. You've proven your point!

You said " I doubt Petrucci would play classical guitar as perfect as classically-trained guitarists".
I doubt Hackett would play metal guitar as perfectly as guitarists who play demanding heavy metal.

You have not mentioned that Hackett has not touched Metal playing.

Sorry for the rant, but this sounds more like Policy Debate than a stupid poll on a progressive rock forum.

That rant was a bit uncalled for. First you say you hate this place ( Cry

), second you start saying some things about Ivan which are untrue and unnecessary to prove your point ( Ouch

) and third you call polls stupid ( Angry

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 18:02

MajesterX wrote:

I have an idea, everyone just shut the hell up!!

If you don't like the the thread, you can avoid it, it's your choice, but nobody has to shut a debate simply because you don't like it, specially when nobody has been insulting or offensive.

The reason I hate this place is because people just bash Dream Theater all day long and praise the classic prog bands which I don't find to be that great.

Nobody is bashing Dream Theater here, nobody has said Petrucci is a bad guitar player, it's a simple conversation and argumented opinions about degrees of skills...NOTHING ELSE.

If you want to listen people saying how much they love Dream Theater and how they believe it's the best band of the world, there are plenty of fan clubs, people gives their opinion, like it or not.

But why are you so angry about a place you hate so much in your own words?

Ivan- WE GET IT! You don't need to continue fighting!

I'm not fighting or haven't fought a single time, just gave arguments.
I didn't started this thread and if people reply politely as has happened until now, I won't shut up.
I have said several times I can understand people believing Petrucci is better but neither I agree, neither I have offended anybody.

We know you wish Petrucci was dead and in the ground in an unmarked grave while you reign as prime minister and play with the wizards in Peter Gabriel's lyrics in the magical utopia of Hackett-land where any non-atmospheric feelings are illegal as people burn Iron Maiden records while wearing capes. You've proven your point!

First, I have nothing against Petrucci, saying I don't believe he's in the level of versatility and acomplishments is only expressing my opinions as I wouldn't feel offended when people compares Hackett, Howe or anybody with most surely technically superior players as Segoivia or Paco de Lucía in the acustic, Flamenco and classical fields.

It would be completely stupid to hate a person who I haven't talked with in my life.

For your information, I'm one of the members who has insisted more in the addition of Iron Maiden and supported it from the start when people was harrasing Raf, not only because I believe they are pioneers of Prog Metal but also a superb band, so it's very unlikely I would burn an album of one of my favorite bands (You may ask Ghost Rider about this or simply read my posts).

That I don't like Dream Theater.. it's true I have never hidden it, but I don't like a lot of King Crimson, VDGG and never been able to fully understand Gentle Giant, what's wrong with that, I knoew what I like and I say it publicly despite the sub-genre, era or approach, I also asked for the inclusion of bands like Fantomas, Miranda Sex Garden, OSIBISA, Elmer Gantry's Velvet Opera (As a fact I have included all them except Fantomas) and none is remotely Symphonic or Classic Prog.

You said " I doubt Petrucci would play classical guitar as perfect as classically-trained guitarists".
I doubt Hackett would play metal guitar as perfectly as guitarists who play demanding heavy metal.

Yes you're right, Hackett is not a metal guitar player, but again, the poll was made about this two musicians, I didn't placed the rules neither asked the question.

I'm talking specificly about general skills, versatility, recognition and a couple issues more, and I have given arguments plus quotes for each one.

You have not mentioned that Hackett has not touched Metal playing.

You're right, because HE DOESN'T PLAY METAL, I would be lying if I said he did, despite I believe somngs like Musical Box or The Knife (Not written but performed by him) have already some metalic elements and aggressive guitar playing.

Sorry for the rant, but this sounds more like Policy Debate than a stupid poll on a progressive rock forum.

If it's so stupid...Why are you wasting your time and showing your anger in it when you have at least 100 other open threads to give your opinion in?

Iván

-------------

Posted By: bluetailfly
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 18:15

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

MajesterX wrote:

I have an idea, everyone just shut the hell up!!

If you don't like the the thread, you can avoid it, it's your choice, but nobody has to shut a debate simply bexcause you don't like it, specially when nobody has been insulting or offensive.

The reason I hate this place is because people just bash Dream Theater all day long and praise the classic prog bands which I don't find to be that great.

Nobody is bashing Dream Theater here, nobody has said Petrucci is a bad guitar player, it's a simple conversation and argumented opinions abiut degrees of skills...NOTHING ELSE.

But why are you so angry aboput a place you hate so much in your own words?

Ivan- WE GET IT! You don't need to continue fighting!

I'm not fighting or haven't fought a single time, just gave arguments.
I didn't started this thread and if people reply politely as has happened until now, I won't shut up.
I have said several times I can understand people believing Petrucci is better but neither I agree neither I have offended anybody.

For your information, I'm one of the obnes who insisted more in the addition of Iron Maiden because I believe they are puioneers of P¨rog Metal and a superb band, so it's very unlikely I would burn an album of one of my favorite bands (You may ask Ghost Rider about this or simply read my posts).

Haven't said or implied that a single time, haven't even mention Petrucci lacks of skills a single time, something that has been said several times about Hackett, but believe me, neither I work for Hackett neither I receive a dime, I just give my opinions and that you won't stop them.

You said " I doubt Petrucci would play classical guitar as perfect as classically-trained guitarists".
I doubt Hackett would play metal guitar as perfectly as guitarists who play demanding heavy metal.

Yes you're right, Hackett is not a metal guitar player, but again, the poll was made about this two musicians, I didn't placed the rules neither asked the question.

I'm talking aspecificly about general skills, versatility, recognition and a couple issues more, and I have given arguments and quotes for each one.

You have not mentioned that Hackett has not touched Metal playing.

You're right, because HE DOESN'T PLAY METAL, I would be lying if I said.

Sorry for the rant, but this sounds more like Policy Debate than a stupid poll on a progressive rock forum.

If it's so stupid...Why are you wasting your time and showing your anger in it when you have at least 100 other open threads to give your opinion in?

Iván

This is hilarious...

I wish I could see this acted out on a stage...

-------------
"The red polygon's only desire / is to get to the blue triangle."

Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 19:44

You are all wrong since you didn't include Green Day's guitar player and mastermind in the poll.....

-------------

Posted By: MajesterX
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 20:06

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

[QUOTE=MajesterX]I have an idea, everyone just shut the hell up!!

If you don't like the the thread, you can avoid it, it's your choice, but nobody has to shut a debate simply because blah blah blah blah.......

Honesty, did you think I was serious in that post?? LOL

You really need to get a sense of humour my friend in this place, with all respects.

I guess I'm just the type of person that likes to make silly over-dramatic rants because they are annoyed. Wink

Just PLEASE never dissect my ever words like they're a poor dead pigeon in a school biology class, it's more formal to quote me and THEN talk about what I said and how it's wrong than to pick and my every syllable.

In all seriousness, I see them both as equals, Hackett is better at emotional more classical based playing while Petrucci better at more technical more metal based playing. Personally I like a combination between technicality and emotion. I think players like Daniel Gildenlow, Mikael Akerfeldt, Alex Lifeson and Steve Howe bring that to the table in their own unique way.

Cheers! Smile

-------------

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 20:13

Honestly you did sounded very serious, at least for Progismylife (Who I never talked with) and me,but if it all was a joke, no harm has been done (Well, even if it's serious, no harm has been done anyway).

Iván

-------------

Posted By: Chus
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 20:22

MajesterX wrote:

I have an idea, everyone just shut the hell up!! The reason I hate this place is because people just bash Dream Theater all day long and praise the classic prog bands which I don't find to be that great. Ivan- WE GET IT! You don't need to continue fighting! We know you wish Petrucci was dead and in the ground in an unmarked grave while you reign as prime minister and play with the wizards in Peter Gabriel's lyrics in the magical utopia of Hackett-land where any non-atmospheric feelings are illegal as people burn Iron Maiden records while wearing capes. You've proven your point! You said " I doubt Petrucci would play classical guitar as perfect as classically-trained guitarists". I doubt Hackett would play metal guitar as perfectly as guitarists who play demanding heavy metal. You have not mentioned that Hackett has not touched Metal playing. Sorry for the rant, but this sounds more like Policy Debate than a stupid poll on a progressive rock forum.

You just love deforming one's idea. I said he couldn't play as perfect classical guitar BECAUSE HE HAS A MORE EMPHASIS ON ELECTRIC GUITAR. You think we get paid for bashing DT and this is all a conspiracy? We try to write as objectively as possible about DT, and the fact that they're all superb players, but is it bad that we just don't like it?

-------------
Jesus Gabriel

Posted By: Chus
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 20:30

MajesterX wrote:

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

[QUOTE=MajesterX]I have an idea, everyone just shut the hell up!!

If you don't like the the thread, you can avoid it, it's your choice, but nobody has to shut a debate simply because blah blah blah blah.......

Honesty, did you think I was serious in that post??

You really need to get a sense of humour my friend in this place, with all respects. I guess I'm just the type of person that likes to make silly over-dramatic rants because they are annoyed.

Just PLEASE never dissect my ever words like they're a poor dead pigeon in a school biology class, it's more formal to quote me and THEN talk about what I said and how it's wrong than to pick and my every syllable. In all seriousness, I see them both as equals, Hackett is better at emotional more classical based playing while Petrucci better at more technical more metal based playing. Personally I like a combination between technicality and emotion. I think players like Daniel Gildenlow, Mikael Akerfeldt, Alex Lifeson and Steve Howe bring that to the table in their own unique way. Cheers!

Sorry didn't read that

.. but you have to be careful, perhaps you could raise another DT war or ELP war for rants like these

Gotta go get my paycheck for DT bashin'

-------------
Jesus Gabriel

Posted By: Visitor13
Date Posted: January 25 2007 at 17:29

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Well Visitor, Steve's Hackett's Midsummer's Night Dream with thew Royal Philharmonic Orchestra was considered one of the top 10 Classical albums of 1997 by the demanding Classical critc.

That means something.

Iván

Haha, that is just awesome.