Richards, Hendrix, Young, Townshend… Slash? Nah. He was in Guns ‘n’ Roses for a start.

hehe, Richards and Townshend figure in someones’ list of great guitarists. i suppose there’s enough variation in taste in the world to prove that anything is possible 🙂

No idea whether he is a great guitarist, but enjoy the tunes which is what counts for me

Must say he isn’t a patch on Blackmore though

Richards, Hendrix, Young, Townshend… Slash? Nah. He was in Guns ‘n’ Roses for a start.
hehe, Richards and Townshend figure in someones’ list of great guitarists. i suppose there’s enough variation in taste in the world to prove that anything is possible

What a snarky comment. I would take Richards and townsend a million times over any number of technically skilled guitarists. With rock electric guitar sound , attitude and ‘the way you play it’ are far more important than technique.

I don’t listen to hard rock anymore really , but I will always regard slash and Angus young as two of the greats

With rock electric guitar sound , attitude and ‘the way you play it’ are far more important than technique

i agree, just cements the likes of richards and townshend in the rather dull, not very creative category as far as i’m concerned. but like i said, taste offers infinite variation of opinion.

Good but sadly generic. Listen to GnR with Slash and them with A Nother guitarist and you’d be hard pushed to tell the difference. Hendrix he ain’t

meh.. he’s ok.. and the work that he and GnR did together was briefly exciting for a six month period back in the 80s..

that’s about the size of it

he is very good indeed,knows how to strum nice melodies naturally,its what comes from inside that counts.

other than playing up and down the scales like its a competition.no musical talent in that.

to the OP – yes he is

Well he’s no Hank Marvin 😕

Definitely not technically great, but an original.

Then again, ust how many ‘great’ musicians actually are? They’re famous, vertainly, but there are probably a million session players out there who would walk all over them.

I’ve seen a pub band (ZU2) who are probably even better than the real thing* and whose guitar playing & overall sound was certainly as impressive as Mr Evans (probably due to to using Vox AC30s and following The Man’s lines very closely). Probably as good a player, but not as good a musician; Edge came up with the trademark sound and continues to work it, the ZU2 guy just copies.

*I know, I know. I just couldn’t resist.

nickf – it sounds like you’re saying technical ability is more a sign of a great player than originality and creativity?? 😕

Dez, I’m saying the complete opposite! A non-great player can definitely be considered ‘a great’ based on the fact that they came up with the music in the first place. The fact that someone can play it faster/louder/totally faultlessly is neither here nor there.

An aside. Many years back, when Dire Straits had just become big, I heard an interview with Mark Knopfler, where he was playing a few segments, just him and a guitar. The interviewer put it to him that his playing wasn’t all that fast. The response “well, I suppose I could play it like this, but it’d sound kind of stupid”, followed by a ridiculously widdly-fast 10 seconds of the Sultans Of Swing solo made the point rather well.

Speed, technical proficiency, the ability to hit a particular note every time…these are as nothing compared to the actual origination of the song.

And I’d rather boil my head than listen to Joe Santriani.

what nickf said ^ numbers of notes per minute has never been a measure of good music.

Well I am just listening to “appetite for destruction” now. Its not the guitar playing that stands out. Its the song writing the singing. The guitar work just seems rather formulaic and dull. Heard it all a million times before.

Dez, I’m saying the complete opposite!
Ah good!

Well I am just listening to “appetite for destruction” now. Its not the guitar playing that stands out. Its the song writing the singing

I know it’s beside the point, but those wailing Robert Plant impersonations do it for you?

And I’d rather boil my head than listen to Joe Santriani.

I suspect that Joe would be indifferent to your opinion*. And this paragraph:

I’ve seen a pub band (ZU2) who are probably even better than the real thing and whose guitar playing & overall sound was certainly as impressive as Mr Evans (probably due to to using Vox AC30s and following The Man’s lines very closely). Probably as good a player, but not as good a musician; Edge came up with the trademark sound and continues to work it, the ZU2 guy just copies.

…demonstrates why you should probably just refrain completely from criticism of any musicians. Do you play anything yourself?

*I should add that Satriani’s music isn’t really my thing; I’m not defending him from a fan’s perspective.

Can’t stand squawking, over indulgent guitar solos – they bore me yet seem to get many people very excited.

Good bass solos, great drumming, flawless production/tightness – that’s where great band excel.

This thread is excellent, never have I read so much concentrated nonsense in one place 😀

Firstly, it proves that no musicians should ever be allowed to comment on others’ music, ever. You’re all far, far too bitter.

‘Standard generic rock riffing’

What’s wrong with a bit of that? Do you only listen to Mongolian throat singing, electronic Zappa covers and Cornelius Cardew’s greatest hits? Get over yourself 🙂

Technical ability has nothing to do with the artistic value or worth of music – value or worth is purely determined by the listener. It cannot be objectively qualified, except perhaps by longevity.

To the those who value ‘speed over feel’. Does this also apply to other elements of your life? Do you keep a stopwatch by the side of the bed.
Do you think that Rolf Harris is a ‘better’ artist that Vermeer, because he could finish a painting quicker?

Oh, and people who value the production over the content – perhaps music isn’t for you? Stamp collecting is nice and you don’t end up deaf.

A musician, yesterday:

I could play “Stairway To Heaven” when I was 12. Jimmy Page didn’t actually write it until he was 22. I think that says quite a lot.

Rusty – music taste is about opinion.

So please let the minions of STW know why you are so much better qualified to comment than anyone else?

Three Fish, this has every danger of turning into a muso’s debate, so I’m going to step out after this one. I don’t play anything these days, and have never played guitar, and I’m not even slightly interested in the subtleties of how the music is played.

It must boil the pee of musicians that the public dare to criticise them, but after all, we’re the paying public. As a listener I’m interested solely in how it sounds rather than how it’s produced. Something with passion, which is new/exciting/different and has a degree of virtuosity is infinitely preferable to me than sterile fret-pounding. Something which is a little crude but which has a lot of energy appeals; I can’t think that anyone holds Smells Like Teen Spirit or Song 2 out as great examples of the guitarist’s craft, but they’re instantly recognisable and utterly memorable guitar sounds.

Whether you like U2 or not (and lots don’t), you’d not deny that there’s a distinctive guitar sound. And it’s fair to say that the guy I saw playing in a pub was playing some of the earlier U2 stuff better than the early records, probably because he’s bringing 20 years of playing to a song that was recorded by a 20 year old, then committed to tape. Didn’t make me think he should be in U2 though.

surf-mat – you just admitted to liking bass solos

you must now cease listening to , and commenting on all music immediately

tim – well after reading your comments…

Rusty – music taste is about opinion.

So please let the minions of STW know why you are so much better qualified to comment than anyone else?

Yes I know. No one’s opinion is any more valid than anyone else’s.
That’s what I’ve just said.

My opinion is that the emotional impact of music is far more important than the way it is produced.
Perhaps we could have a humorous and light hearted discussion about it? 🙂

There are some wonderful albums that would benefit from a better production (The Band, first Clash album, first Smith album etc etc) but good production cannot make up for lack of emotional impact.
And the emotional impact (or value, or artistic merit – it’s all the same) of music has no correlation with the intentions, skill, fashion sense or marketing budget of the people who make it.
It is purely dependant (by defition) on the listener themselves.

What do you think?

And my opinion is that creativity and originality outweigh any musicianship.
If there were no musicians striving to create something new we’d all still have to listen to stuff like er, like U2. Don’t get me wrong I loved U2 many years ago (own Boy & October on vinyl), but new stuff comes out and I lose interest in bands playing the same old stuff.
That’s just me, I don’t think you have to do the same 🙂

G’n’R churned out a version of rock that had been done over and over and far better before, so Slash is of no interest to me.

this has every danger of turning into a muso’s debate

No danger of that happening, and not just because you…

don’t play anything these days, and have never played guitar, and I’m not even slightly interested in the subtleties of how the music is played.

Music is heard on many levels, some people even listen to it, and any given piece can mean as many different things as there are people who listen to it.

It must boil the pee of musicians that the public dare to criticise them, but after all, we’re the paying public.

It depends what you criticise. See, many people have trouble saying simply “I don’t like that” or “I don’t understand that” and then just walking away. They have to stop and point and curl their lip; attempt to justify and/or ‘intellectualise’, usually hilariously, their aversion; or boil their head. Unless they wrote it for YOU, most musicians couldn’t care less if you don’t like THEIR music.