Page 3 of 4 <1234>
Topic Options
#43154 - 09/22/10 05:55 AM Re: Guitar Heroes! [Re: Clicks]
ta2zz Offline
veteran member


Registered: 08/28/07
Posts: 1552
Loc: Connecticut

 Originally Posted By: TV is God
Don't forget Michael Angelo Batio.

The man is nothing without his custom guitar he relies too heavily on a gimmick. Iím betting only guitarists here know his name and only because of that guitar.

Why has no one mentioned Vernon Reid?

Love rears its ugly head
This ones all well produced.

Elvis is dead
This one is a little rougher and I know the sound sucks but you can hear him mimicking the sax if you listen. That and his performance is just awesome from playing a crack head to strumming a dead guitar.

I am not a fan of older live music that gets played at a quicker tempo. Pink Floyds old songs sounded pretty spot on to the studio recordings, even without Roger Waters. I saw the Momentary Lapse of reason tour I think it was the late 80ís.

I havenít seen that many musicians on the stage since Elvis.

The future is the master keyboardist and amazing midi controllers.

Enjoy

~T~
_________________________
We are the music makers, And we are the dreamers of dreams. ~Arthur William Edgar O'Shaughnessy

Top
#43165 - 09/23/10 10:58 PM Re: Guitar Heroes! [Re: ta2zz]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



I am watching a Jimi hendrix DVD bootleg I bought a week ago. The bootleg runs for five hours and is filled with all these rare Hendrix performances. The picture quality is pretty crap at times, but the guitar playing is just great stuff.

I have also bought a DVD of a Cream reunion concert from 2005 at Royal Albert Hall. This is fantastic as well. All three of them look comfortable and enjoyed playing together. Clapton was controlled, yet brilliant.

I like music DVDs and bootlegs. I got a Led Zeppelin one from a 1977 Seattle show, but the picture quality was too poor to really enjoy.

Other good guitarists:

Robbie Robertson of The Band - great player

Bruce Springsteen

Steve Jones of The Sex Pistols - the man couldn't really play that well but who gives a fuck. Great stuff.

Duane Allman

Top
#43167 - 09/24/10 09:07 AM Re: Guitar Heroes! [Re: ta2zz]
Nyte Offline
member


Registered: 10/19/09
Posts: 380
Loc: Ohio
 Originally Posted By: ta2zz

 Originally Posted By: TV is God
Don't forget Michael Angelo Batio.

The man is nothing without his custom guitar he relies too heavily on a gimmick. Iím betting only guitarists here know his name and only because of that guitar.

Why has no one mentioned Vernon Reid?

Love rears its ugly head
This ones all well produced.

Elvis is dead
This one is a little rougher and I know the sound sucks but you can hear him mimicking the sax if you listen. That and his performance is just awesome from playing a crack head to strumming a dead guitar.

I am not a fan of older live music that gets played at a quicker tempo. Pink Floyds old songs sounded pretty spot on to the studio recordings, even without Roger Waters. I saw the Momentary Lapse of reason tour I think it was the late 80ís.

I havenít seen that many musicians on the stage since Elvis.

The future is the master keyboardist and amazing midi controllers.

Enjoy

~T~


LOL Ta2zz, I hate the sound of just about anything done in midi format. I'm not sure if it's because it just doesn't sound like the real thing to me, or what. I know a lot of the industrial/grunge music is reproduced sounds (in studio and "pieced in" electronically) but for some reason when it's put in the midi format, it changes the way it sounds to me. It might just be my hearing, since I have exceptional hearing, that I can tell the difference. Shit, my family calls me "dog ears" because I can hear sounds that they can't. In a room with a computer on, a TV on with the x-box running and a fan running, I found a hamster that got loose because she walked across a piece of card board behind a dresser. I CAN hear a difference in sounds and sounds made into midis sound "off" to me. Oh well. Someone may enjoy that kind of replication. I'd rather hear the "real" sound cut and pasted into something digitally, or dubbed in.
_________________________
If only just for today.....

Top
#43174 - 09/24/10 02:18 PM Re: Guitar Heroes! [Re: Clicks]
Draculesti Offline
Impaler
member


Registered: 09/18/07
Posts: 325
Loc: Rockville, Maryland
Okay, I don't have a lot of time here, so this is a basic general reply to the thread overall. I'd like to take the time, mostly, to dispell a few myths and correct some inaccuracies.

 Quote:
I've learned that I value passion and emotion in the music more than technicality or being able to make weird sounds.


Firstly, regarding technique. There are SO many misconceptions about technique, that it's not even funny. "Technical" is a misnomer in that many use that word as an adjective to describe a "type" of music, as if to say that there is technical music, and then all the other, more "soulful" stuff. Total bullshit. Technique is NOT a style, a type, but a musical TOOL, a means to a musical end. From the simplest melody, from Pete Townsend's one note to Andres Segovia's hundreds, technique is present. Technique is not the musical devil that so many seem to think it is. True, there are many guitarists who are all technique and no soul, but all soul and no technique is no better. They ["soul" and technique] must exist in tandem, otherwise what you have is a one dimensional player.

That is all for now. More later when I have the time.
_________________________
The Holy Trinity: Me, Myself, and I.

Homo Homini Lupus

Top
#43176 - 09/24/10 05:40 PM Re: Guitar Heroes! [Re: Nyte]
ta2zz Offline
veteran member


Registered: 08/28/07
Posts: 1552
Loc: Connecticut

Did you listen to the musician and what he does at that link, I think not? I also think you are confusing what I am speaking about with a .mid format song on your computer. Example .mid

All this talk of exceptional hearing makes me think, a compact disk is different from a record in the fact that the sound now takes steps digitally instead of gentle curves. This is the difference between digital and analog. Do you hate all digital music? What about mp3ís?

 Originally Posted By: Nyte
Oh well. Someone may enjoy that kind of replication. I'd rather hear the "real" sound cut and pasted into something digitally, or dubbed in.

Sampled music can be inserted into a live performance using a ďmidiĒ controller. MIDI being the Music Instrument Digital Interface and all.

The midi controller can be used to trigger samples of actual recorded instruments. This controller often takes the shape of a keyboard but others exist that benefit the guitarist.

Midi Guitar controler Not as elaborate as the keyboardist in my previous link.

Different controllers handle samples differently as well as different musicians.

Peace

~T~
_________________________
We are the music makers, And we are the dreamers of dreams. ~Arthur William Edgar O'Shaughnessy

Top
#43177 - 09/24/10 06:22 PM Re: Guitar Heroes! [Re: Draculesti]
TV is God Moderator Offline
Moderator
member


Registered: 08/11/08
Posts: 273
Loc: The Cornhole
 Originally Posted By: Draculesti
"Technical" is a misnomer in that many use that word as an adjective to describe a "type" of music, as if to say that there is technical music, and then all the other, more "soulful" stuff. Total bullshit. Technique is NOT a style, a type, but a musical TOOL, a means to a musical end.

Couldn't agree more. To me being a more technical musician is synonymous with being a better musician and what it means to be a better musician is the ability to do with your hands what you have in your head. Whether that be "I need to do this pattern this fast" or more abstract like "I need to make this feeling" the quality of the technique is measured in how quickly and easily he can accomplish what he wants. That is assuming his standards of what is wanted aren't soul written around what he's done.
Just like Jimi Hendrix knowing the perfect note to hit, how to hit it, and whether to let it ring, bend it up or down, when to kill it. These things are all another form of technique, one that transcends just the type of instrument and the physical act of how one manipulates the strings, keys, or whatever.

Top
#43179 - 09/24/10 11:24 PM Re: Guitar Heroes! [Re: TV is God]
Oxus Offline
member


Registered: 04/15/10
Posts: 509
Agreed also. During my study with Robert Fripp we spent some time discussing the importance of 'practice'. Which meant the development of expert technique in order to facilitate comfortably, whatever is being demanded of at the moment.

Yo can have a Coltrane vocabulary but it does you no good if you have Keith Richards' hands (I love Keith by the way, but you get my point!)

This 'development' also extended to our 'inner' awareness and our ability to Become a honed vessel through which the music can flow (trying to not sound all religious and spiritual).

I think a great example of a guitarist that has some chops but is certainly not an Alan Holdsworth, and has become such a vessel through which the Muses move through, is Carlos Santana.

Beautiful tone, awesome feeling. When you watch him play it is magickal, when he speaks you can sense something deeper going on than with most ordinary guitarists.


 Originally Posted By: TV is God
 Originally Posted By: Draculesti
"Technical" is a misnomer in that many use that word as an adjective to describe a "type" of music, as if to say that there is technical music, and then all the other, more "soulful" stuff. Total bullshit. Technique is NOT a style, a type, but a musical TOOL, a means to a musical end.

Couldn't agree more. To me being a more technical musician is synonymous with being a better musician and what it means to be a better musician is the ability to do with your hands what you have in your head. Whether that be "I need to do this pattern this fast" or more abstract like "I need to make this feeling" the quality of the technique is measured in how quickly and easily he can accomplish what he wants. That is assuming his standards of what is wanted aren't soul written around what he's done.
Just like Jimi Hendrix knowing the perfect note to hit, how to hit it, and whether to let it ring, bend it up or down, when to kill it. These things are all another form of technique, one that transcends just the type of instrument and the physical act of how one manipulates the strings, keys, or whatever.

Top
#43186 - 09/25/10 09:04 AM Re: Guitar Heroes! [Re: ta2zz]
Nyte Offline
member


Registered: 10/19/09
Posts: 380
Loc: Ohio
 Originally Posted By: ta2zz

Did you listen to the musician and what he does at that link, I think not? I also think you are confusing what I am speaking about with a .mid format song on your computer. Example .mid

All this talk of exceptional hearing makes me think, a compact disk is different from a record in the fact that the sound now takes steps digitally instead of gentle curves. This is the difference between digital and analog. Do you hate all digital music? What about mp3ís?

 Originally Posted By: Nyte
Oh well. Someone may enjoy that kind of replication. I'd rather hear the "real" sound cut and pasted into something digitally, or dubbed in.

Sampled music can be inserted into a live performance using a ďmidiĒ controller. MIDI being the Music Instrument Digital Interface and all.

The midi controller can be used to trigger samples of actual recorded instruments. This controller often takes the shape of a keyboard but others exist that benefit the guitarist.

Midi Guitar controler Not as elaborate as the keyboardist in my previous link.

Different controllers handle samples differently as well as different musicians.

Peace

~T~


Ta2zz, I don't know how to explain what I can hear when he's playing that organ with all the controls. It's an unnatural hum that continues between notes. I listened to the video, without watching it, to figure out what it was that "bugs" me so much about what's being played and that's the first thing that stands out when I listen to it.

I did say that I like grunge type music, which you and I both know most of is digitally created any more. There is a huge difference between vinyl and CD and the sounds you get from both. Listen to a vinyl and then play the same song from a CD. The CD will sound clean and filtered, even though the song is the same. That's simply because the programs that are used to create CD's are set up to filter out "noise". Similar types of programs are used to set up MIDI controls for things like this organ but don't take into account the noise the organ itself makes while producing the "added" music/sound. The problem is, that instead of hearing natural "background" noise from the music actually being played, you're now hearing the actual instrument sound that the MIDI is being "played through" (the hum of the organ itself).

CD's and MP3's are a music source themselves but are not insturments. You can "record" a live version of a song on a CD, put it into the MP3 format and still end up with it sounding like it did from the original source (depending on how you set up your programing for the recording and MP3) because it's not being played "through" or being produced by another instrument.

And obviously I don't hate all digital music. I just don't like the "plastic humming" that I can hear from something like this organ using the MIDI for other instruments/sounds. The guitar one sounds closer for me to what it was being used to achieve (probably because most of what it changed the sound to were string instruments anyways), but it still sounds "off". Especially the horn, organ and drum. They both have their uses, just not something I'd listen to on a regular basis by themselves. It has an irritating, "unnatural" sound to me.

BTW, I went and listened to several of the other youtube videos of the other MIDI guitars that are out there. I even watched a couple pertaining to the Roland Guitar. It's interesting how far they have come with MIDI sounds.
_________________________
If only just for today.....

Top
#43328 - 09/29/10 03:32 PM Re: Guitar Heroes! [Re: Oxus]
Draculesti Offline
Impaler
member


Registered: 09/18/07
Posts: 325
Loc: Rockville, Maryland
TV, Oxus, I'm glad to see there are people who get it.

 Quote:
During my study with Robert Fripp we spent some time discussing the importance of 'practice'. Which meant the development of expert technique in order to facilitate comfortably, whatever is being demanded of at the moment.


Exactly. Technique is simply the muscular development of the playing mechanism to allow for maximum ease and comfort. Unnecessary tension can be a career killer, and so the development of technique is about reducing that tension to the absolute minimum needed for the execution of a musical passage or piece. It's also about developing reach and allowing for the fingers to work independently of one another.

 Quote:
Yo can have a Coltrane vocabulary but it does you no good if you have Keith Richards' hands .


That should be framed and hung on the wall for all to see.

There is another misconception about practice and technique, as though guys who never practice or have never studied formally (i.e. lessons of any kind) are somehow more amazing than those guitarists/musicians who have. Firstly, many of those guys who swear they don't practice or work to develop the playing style they have, are plainly and simply lying. As Yngwie Malmsteen would have everyone believe, he was apparently shat out of his mother's womb with his Stratocaster in his pudgy little baby hand and could play "Flight of the Bumblebee" within hours of birth, much like a colt that is running and frolicking within hours of being born. It just plain doesn't happen that way. Even those who are deemed prodigies must develop muscular strength, dexterity, and coordination. Prodigies have an innate musical sense and ear, but their bodies must play catch up. This is where the development of technique comes in.

Furthermore, this adulation and worship of those who "don't work for it" is a slap in the face of those who do, who live, breathe, eat, sleep, and fuck music. It's an insult to denigrate a musician who did go to music school and poured as much (if not more) blood, sweat and tears into studying music. I've heard such insults hurled at bands like Rush, who are no less amazing for having formally studied music. It's not untrue that a music education can paint you in a box, but only if you let it.
_________________________
The Holy Trinity: Me, Myself, and I.

Homo Homini Lupus

Top
#44777 - 12/09/10 07:31 AM Re: Guitar Heroes! [Re: ]
John Dark Offline
stranger


Registered: 09/20/10
Posts: 6
Vernon Reid, Brian Setzer, Buddy Miller, Uli Jon Roth, and Ritchie Blackmore.
No one-liners, please. Either post something of value, or don't post. An example of a one-liner is "Yes, indeed!", which you posted immediately after this. Kindly read the FAQ, and bear in mind that one-liners will be removed.


Edited by SkaffenAmtiskaw (12/09/10 07:38 AM)

Top
#44806 - 12/10/10 12:22 AM Re: Guitar Heroes! [Re: John Dark]
Fist Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 08/31/07
Posts: 1453
Loc: B'mo Cautious MF
Growing up, my dad, who was a Korean War vet, had a lot of friends who were Viet Nam vets. One of them was pretty much a washed up bum but he played fantastic classical 12 string Spanish guitar. He tried to teach me to play but I really don't think that part of my brain was receptive to the training.

Now, at 40, I think would like to revisit the 'ol git box. Any suggestions for picking up the craft at this stage of the game?
_________________________
I am the Devil and I am here to do the Devil's work.

Top
#44808 - 12/10/10 02:18 AM Re: Guitar Heroes! [Re: Fist]
Draculesti Offline
Impaler
member


Registered: 09/18/07
Posts: 325
Loc: Rockville, Maryland
While it's true that learning an instrument as an adult can be much more difficult than as a child (much like language), an astute (and patient) student, as well as an attentive and knowledgeable teacher can get some surprisingly good results. In some ways, it's actually easier to teach adults, because it is easier to explain what are already abstract musical concepts in language that is free of cumbersome metaphors and and not overly simplified, unlike with children.

I would start with thinking about what style(s) specifically you would like to learn. While basic technique is more or less universal for all styles, pinning down a specific style or styles can actually help clarify and define what direction your studies will take. I will say, however, that it is acknowledged that classical is the best and fastest way to build a solid technique.

The next step would be to seek out a good teacher. Don't be afraid to go with a teacher who is freelance, especially if his/her credentials are good. Music stores that give lessons can be good, but always ask for credentials; community music schools are generally best, but sometimes the quality of teaching can be pretty wide-ranged, from super shitty to top of the class.

Third, is to buy a decent guitar. I can't stress this point enough: you must strike a balance between quality of construction and price (if money is an object and you don't want to make too much of an investment in case it doesn't work out). Especially with classical guitars, price is, generally, directly related to quality. In other words, shitty guitars are cheap, but don't sound as good and are harder to play; good guitars are more expensive, but sound better, and are easier to play, which in my opinion makes learning the instrument easier. There are some great classicals that are of great quality for student budget prices; I recommend This Guy (specifically check out the Cremona model; it's $1,250, but it is of amazing quality and sounds better than some concert models four times its price range). I realize that's a lot of cash, so here is another great alternative: Aria Guitars. The problem is, the good high-end models are going to cost every bit as much as the LoPrinzi, although you may find some deals on ebay. You can also try finding a used vintage model. They made an AC-20 model that would be excellent for a beginning guitar, but they only made those from 1977-81. I have one that I might be willing to part with.

Finally, as far as learning material is concerned, a teacher will more than likely recommend his or her own preferences for methods. Myself, I would recommend the following materials (if classical is your choice of direction):

Either of these two methods are good:

Solo Guitar Playing, 4th Ed. by Fredrick Noad (Amsco publications) Con: a little disjointed, introducing certain concepts a bit too early, in my opinion, and certain concepts I don't agree with at all.

Learning the Classic Guitar, Vols. 1-3 by Aaron Shearer (Mel Bay publications) Con: very slow-paced with, in my opinion, some overly-simplistic material.

ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL:
Pumping Nylon by Scott Tennant (Amsco publications). It's not a method, it's a technique manual, but it is the most concise, yet complete, technique manual around.

The Art and Technique of Practice by Richard Provost (Guitar Solo publications). Also not a method, this is a book that I consider required reading. It introduces a practice methodology, a step-by-step text on how to practice (a topic that is sorely lacking coverage in a large percent of the pedagogical/didactic literature). It's only one approach, but it gets good results. It will help you clarify what your goals are in learning guitar (from the long-term down to short-term goals), and it covers topics such as scheduling, and various stages of practice, such as note-learning, interpretative practice (making the piece more musical), and problem solving (ways to identify, isolate, break down, and conquer troublesome spots).


I hope I have been able to provide some good information here. It's a lot, I know, but it should greatly help you in your decision making process.
_________________________
The Holy Trinity: Me, Myself, and I.

Homo Homini Lupus

Top
#44810 - 12/10/10 04:34 AM Re: Guitar Heroes! [Re: Draculesti]
John Dark Offline
stranger


Registered: 09/20/10
Posts: 6
Draculesti, you've made excellent points here. I was in the musical instrument business for a LONG time, doing everything from retail to product development & artist relations. You hit the nail right on the head.
Top
#44812 - 12/10/10 05:58 AM Re: Guitar Heroes! [Re: John Dark]
Dutch Satanist Offline
pledge


Registered: 10/19/10
Posts: 69
Loc: Delft, The Netherlands
I'm still missing a few.

Darrel Dimebag of Pantera,
Adrian Smith, Steve Harris and Dave Murray of Iron Maiden,
Yngwie Malmsteen (say what you like, but the guy has an incredible technique),
Jeff Waters of Annihilator,
Piggy from Voivod,
... and probably some more I could mention.

I think this list will grow quite big, since there is so much talent out there.
_________________________
ďThere is a beast in man that needs to be excersised, not exorcised.Ē

Top
#44839 - 12/11/10 11:31 AM Re: Guitar Heroes! [Re: Draculesti]
Fist Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 08/31/07
Posts: 1453
Loc: B'mo Cautious MF
Thanks Drac. By the way, perhaps you are being modest but I think you should mention to the committee that you are a Master in Music. AU I belive?

I have very broad musical tastes. While I would love to shred an axe in the style of the best talent of Metallica or Megadeth, that might be a long time coming. I wouldn't mind learning to do some acoustic stuff on a small guitar that is easy to take on a deployment. Yeah, I can see me now, 6' 230lbs doing "Over the Rainbow" on a ukulele in the West African bush.

But seriously, for starters I would probably look at doing some classic American Folk, Blues, and Country - perhaps some Mexican six string.
_________________________
I am the Devil and I am here to do the Devil's work.

Top
Page 3 of 4 <1234>


Moderator:  Woland, TV is God, fakepropht, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.03 seconds of which 0.002 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.