What's more important?

[Silenced Fred]

I ask because my (kinda sorta) friend and I were jamming a while ago, and don't get me wrong, the kid is good at guitar, really good, but then he started knocking me, I told him its not a competition, and to me, song writing skills, and the ability to actually write a song is far more important than being able to learn someone else's song note for note. Think I'm wrong?

[heymisterk]

I HATE players like that who want to turn everything into a competition. I for one have never been one with the patience to learn solos note for note. For better or worse, I am just not built that way. Having said that, I WISH I had continued my classical training and notation skills.

[Silenced Fred]

For a while now, the only covers I have been learning are acoustic type stuff, or arrangements on acoustic, because I plan on starting to do some open mic nights and stuff. I have some of my own stuff down, but I want something other people will know. I only ever learned one solo note for note, and that was The Raconteurs- Many Shades of Black. To me, it takes all of the fun out of playing.

 

But yes, I don't know why anyone ever makes it a competition (well other than like actual competitions). I mean, look at Neil Young, I am a fan, but do I think he's an amazing technical guitarist? No, but he knew how to get out of the song what he wanted. I read a great interview about him, and someone asked about his solos, and he said something along the lines of, "screw it, I go out there and play. If I like it, I keep it, if I don't, then I'll try something else out. I play what sounds good to me."

 

I am a decent guitarist, but nothing amazing. I can write songs though. Oh well, rant (for now) over

[Riverside]

The fundamentals are important...

[EVOL!]

I fully confess to being a whore to the song. To me, a killer song or hooky riff wins every time. I love stretching out as much as the next guitar player and there are a million ways to do that in a song. Look at Sonic Youth or Interpol or Blind Melon.

 

There is a time and a place for flashy shredding, just not in my music.

[Silenced Fred]

I fully confess to being a whore to the song. To me' date=' a killer song or hooky riff wins every time. I love stretching out as much as the next guitar player and there are a million ways to do that in a song. Look at Sonic Youth or Interpol or Blind Melon.

 

There is a time and a place for flashy shredding, just not in my music.[/quote']

 

Exactly! I try to find cool chord progressions, riffs, or just spooky changes or something, I don't go eff it, go I IV V and I'll make a badass solo.

 

A great song is a great song. I fully believe that almost anyone can get great technical ability on guitar, it just takes time. Walk into Guitar Center, look at all of the people who can shred. At least by me, there are tons of people who can shred, but it is rare to find someone who can jam with you, someone who can make up a song.

[FirstMeasure]

Can't answer this question. It presupposes that Technical Skill is only good for learning other peoples songs. Song Writing and Improvisation are skills that lean heavily on Technical Ability. The ability to Pick out another artists tune draws on the same skill as writing and Improv.

 

That said, it's not a competition to see who can learn the most songs. But I believe in the Folk and Blues tradition of Give and Take, but not just with folk and Blues. Pay homage to those that inspired you, and make your own music to keep it alive.

 

It's a balance between New and Old, Give and Take, A respect for what came first and the Confidence to add to it.

 

I can't speak to your situation directly, I wasn't there and the other guy isn't here to defend his position. But I will say, if you're in a project that needs you to learn a Cover note for note, you need to be able to learn that song note for note. If you're in an original project that needs you to write material, then you need to be able to write that material.

[heymisterk]

The fundamentals are important...

 

Agreed. When I was taking lessons, I used to have a bad habit of just rushing through and fudging some of the tougher skills and things I was practicing. Never worked. I had to learn to slow down and practice that part over...and over...and over...until I could do it in my sleep.

 

One great thing about being in a band is your are motivated to really learn your stuff because obviously you don't want to show up and suck at it. That definitely got me kicked out of a band and I learned a lesson.

[Silenced Fred]

The fundamentals are important...

 

Well obviously, but it gets to a certain point...

[Thundergod]

I always play my way, even when playing covers, I do my solos for them, I never cared enough to take on the solo exactly as it is. For some maiden songs I did just because it's my favorite band but usually I don't play them like they were recorded, hell not even they do it when playing live!

[milod]

heymisterk actually hit things pretty much the way I see them - and Jocko nailed it on presentation.

 

And TG pretty well hit it that you don't hear any band sound like their own recordings when they're playing live.

 

m

[DAS44]

Your friend and I wouldn't get along. If he thinks it's a competition, well he's flat out wrong (I'm not going to be reserved here). I think that you can be the most amazing player technically, that I've ever seen but you wont capture my attention like a guy who writes his own stuff and improvises. If you ha a feel for the guitar, if you add your own flourishes randomly, thats what catches my attention, not hitting every single note without fail. Combine the two, and you're right where you want to be .

 

I'm not saying skills arent important, you need them of course but I value the ability to write, and improvise over technical ability.

 

I find that it's harder to get to the point where you can add your own flavor to the song, because (I think) it means you're familiar enough with the structure of the song, that you can play with it. I tend to, on any song I'm playing to first get every note down, just so I can be comfortable with adding my own stuff.

 

I always fiddle around with the song to see how I like it, adding palm muting wherever I feel, add flourishes there, and maybe completley replace a certain bit.

 

They're both important, but I value the latter of the listed the most.

[Tman]

When I was a teenager, it seemed the other guitar player in the band (who was an outstanding singer and keyboardist) and I were always in competition. I figure it was part immaturity and part insecurity. We reunited the band after 32 years this year. It was pure fun and bliss without any competition what so ever.

My goal is to be the type of player that can make the guitar sing with a well placed silence as much as a note and put my own creative mark on the song, even if a cover.

[FirstMeasure]

I have to say it again, and I'm not trying to pick on anyone, but The ability to write and Improvise require Technical Ability. That's not to say you need to fully understand Theory and be able to read music, but a working knowledge of the fretboard and the Techniques it takes to Bend, Voice Chords, Use Vibrato, Hear Root Notes, Decipher Keys, keep it up for hours, give the note their full value, and stay in Time....let me emphasis that.....Stay In Time!!!!!

 

You need this to write more than you do to Cover, that's all there is to it.

[ChanMan]

MiloD- Not exactly so. I am an Evanescence fan because they nailed their song on the Grammy's just like it was recorded on the album. In fact, there are more bands out there that I like simply because they can do on stage what they do in the studio. This doesn't alter your point one wit, but I thought I'd mention that there are some bands that strive for writing songs that can be reproduced live; I think we should give credit where it's due.

 

 

 

Basically, I agree with FM. Technical Skills encompasses songwriting and improvisation. Fred I dare say if your friend can't write or improvise, then his technical skills are lacking.

 

Don't confuse technique with technical skills. .

[milod]

Chanman...

 

Yup, I agree that some artists do by intent try to record what they would do live.

 

OTOH, I think a lotta artists don't want to do things exactly the same every night, every gig. I dunno. I sometimes wonder how many use today's technology to make sure they sound like on the record... and how many don't care...

 

I don't think I can remember exactly how I played some stuff, usually "blues," and some stuff I've done almost exactly the same for over 40 years.

 

The important thing to me is that, whether solo or ensemble, "you" are doing what you wanna do and keep audiences happy at the same time.

 

Life's funny.

 

m

[charlie brown]

I've seen a lot of bands, over the years, "Live!" Very few of them, every played their solo's

exactly like the records. In some cases, not at all, like the record. The record is just that...

a recorded version. Doesn't necessarily mean it's the best treatment. Maybe it WAS, at the

time...but the artists have grown, or experimented, beyond what was recorded.

 

I used to get really hung up, about copying a solo...note for note...at least to the best of MY

ability. After seeing my "hero's"doing it differently, and...more often than not, Better than the

record...I stopped worrying about it, and just try to capture the essence, of the solo, while not

being afraid to experiment a bit on it, myself. A lot of it is audience, expectations...or, more

accurately, what WE think the audience expects to hear. (Most don't know, or care, that much...

as long as they can dance, and at least recognize the song.) If you can solo, to fit the song,

regardless of how accurate it is, to the record, most will appreciate your efforts. Those that don't...

probably, never will. And, as guitar playing, is a lifelong learning experience...solos, even arrangements

may/will change, as you progress. What seemed impossible, to learn, will often be a lot easier, once you

get more technically proficient, and knowledgeable. Competition, as Fred lamented, seems (to me) more

about Ego, than any real quality issue...IMHO. That, will change, once that person gets his "head chopped"

by someone else, down the line. That too, is a part of the learning curve, too....unfortunately.

 

CB

[dem00n]

Both

[Look! Im guitarest!]

I think you feel inferior and brought that up to raise your self esteem. I say both are very important, I'm not going to choose one over the other. Each of those is a big aspect of my playing and I try to practice both plenty every day. Technical ability broadens your range of writing and allows you to play a larger variety of music.

 

You people who complain about guitarists making music a competition are the same people who put technical ability vs song writing and are thus contradicting yourselves. It's the same competitive mentality!

[Guest rogerb]

If you join the band of an artist who has had one or more hit records, He/She will typically want you to play your instrument as close to the record as possible. That is because his/her "fans" want to hear the song just like they would hear it on radio or video. If you are playing in a cover band, which many of us do, it probably isn't as important to copy the recond lick for lick. As for the songwriting question... IT ALL STARTS WITH A SONG!

[HellboundGreaser]

Songwriting, Rhythm and feeling trumps technical Wizardry everytime.

[EVOL!]

MiloD- Not exactly so. I am an Evanescence fan because they nailed their song on the Grammy's just like it was recorded on the album. In fact' date=' there are more bands out there that I like simply because they can do on stage what they do in the studio. This doesn't alter your point one wit, but I thought I'd mention that there are some bands that strive for writing songs that can be reproduced live; I think we should give credit where it's due. [biggrin']

 

Evanescence from the 2004 Grammy? Loved the backing track they played along to. Sorry brother, this is the exact opposite of how I feel. If I go see a band live I want something extra. Having them play the album note for note makes me wonder why I didn't save the ticket price and just listened to record at home. And it doesn't take much for me; an extra little intro, play that keyboard part on guitar if you don't tour with a keyboard player, do a different arrangement or add a breakdown. Being Kiss or Aerosmith and playing to backing tracks so you have those orchestrated synth parts or being the Rolling Stones and playing "start me up" the exact same way you played it fifty years ago ain't going to win me over. Look at Bob Dylan. I don't think that cat ever played a song the same way twice.

[badbluesplayer]

Both

 

 

Ding, Ding, Ding. Fifty points - now to the bonus round.

[TommyK]

You've actually got three things there.

 

I've heard a lot of musicians, vocalists and instrumentalists who had a high level of technical profficiency, but were a chore to listen to.

 

On the other hand I've seen very entertaining musicians whom I'd buy a ticket to see again who weren't quite as proficient. And it seems that technically proficient musicians don't vary from the printed score, i.e. they don't improvise.

 

 

So for me, I'd have to go with improvisation.

 

Writing is a cool attribute, but I don't pay to listen to writers. I pay to listen to performers. Sometimes the twain meet, sometimes not.

[Look! Im guitarest!]

^ You say techincally proficient musicians don't improvise when Buckethead is amazing technically AND improvises.