What famous guitar player do most guitarists love to hate??????????????

[Fadedepi]

Just a comment about Neil Youngs lead playing ability. Listen to a couple of tracks from the Buffalo Sprigfield "Again" album. Namely Mr. Soul and Rock & Roll Woman, where Neil's lead playing provides the drive for these songs. Then remember this was 1966 and no other groups, getting air play, were playing licks like those. For that time period he was awesome.

 

Faded....

[layboomo]

Just a comment about Neil Youngs lead playing ability. Listen to a couple of tracks from the Buffalo Sprigfield "Again" album. Namely Mr. Soul and Rock & Roll Woman' date=' where Neil's lead playing provides the drive for these songs. Then remember this was 1966 and no other groups, getting air play, were playing licks like those. For that time period he was awesome.

 

Faded....[/quote']

 

I don't know which came first Mr.Soul or Satisfaction by the Stones but somebody sure ripped of the other ones lick!

[tulsaslim]

 

I don't know which came first Mr.Soul or Satisfaction by the Stones but somebody sure ripped of the other ones lick!

 

As a matter of fact that's why Mr. Soul was never released as a single. Buffalo Springfield's record company said the same thing.

 

Stephan Stills was a much more accomplished player yet it is a lot easier for me to play his licks than Neil's. And some of Neil's hooks (Rockin' in the Free World, Hey Hey My My, etc.) are incredibly simple yet extremely slick. Every time I hear them I think 'Why didn't I think of that?'.

 

By the way, my brother is a big Neil fan but fondly refers to him as the 'missing link'-i.e. if you could train a gorilla to play guitar he would have basically the same moves Neil does. I think he's got a point.

 

And does anybody else think that as Paul Gilbert gets older he starts to look more & more like Neil Young?

[Lerxst1281733995]

OR "Lennon & McCartney" if the truth be told! Both were good guitarist...probably better than most realize.

In fact' date=' Lennon was a damn good "rhythmer" (his term)...IMHO! And "Macca" is no slouch, either. Just not

commonly thought of as "Guitar Gods!" (Editorial Statement)...I always hated that WAY overused term, anyway!

 

CB[/quote']

 

+1 on that... Lennon's rhythm work can be incredibly tricky... There are so many songs I've tried to learn where I'm amazed that he could sing while playing those rhythms... More often than not, I end up just fudging it... ("Close enough for Gov't work) And a lot of his chord choices were just inspired..

 

McCartney has always been underrated as a lead player as well... People forget that he put in a lot of "hard time" as a guitarist in the Hamburg days..

[bluesstringer]

Lennon, Mcartney, and Harrison were all gifted players IMHO. There is so much going on in alot of their songs that I still pick up things now that I haven't noticed in all these decades of listening to them. All the rhythmic leads, all the little trills here and there - not the obvious stuff - but the things you kind of hear and then realize what you heard and you're like - Where did that come from ? Very tasteful, interplay constantly going on in the background. The little simple lead to mini chord riffs like in Get Back in the chorus. Who else thinks like that ? Can you imagine having a blank slate and writing/creating all the music, hundreds of songs that these guys did, from somwhere in their collective consciousness ? It boggles the mind - or at least my mind.................Never again in History IMO !

[charlie brown]

Lennon' date=' Mcartney, and Harrison were all gifted players IMHO. There is so much going on in alot of their songs that I still pick up things now that I haven't noticed in all these decades of listening to them. All the rhythmic leads, all the little trills here and there - not the obvious stuff - but the things you kind of hear and then realize what you heard and you're like - Where did that come from ? Very tasteful, interplay constantly going on in the background. The little simple lead to mini chord riffs like in Get Back in the chorus. Who else thinks like that ? Can you imagine having a blank slate and writing/creating all the music, hundreds of songs that these guys did, from somwhere in their collective consciousness ? It boggles the mind - or at least my mind.................Never again in History IMO ![/quote']

 

Right ****ing ON! " Never again," you got that right!!

 

CB

[layboomo]

".....Very tasteful, interplay constantly going on in the background......"

 

Thankyou George Martin......lets not forget his role in many of those great recordings....although he wasn't playing he had an awful lot to do with that. ...and Billy Preston laying down a keyboard groove doesn't hurt either!!

[Notes_Norton]

I think it's great that the thread got shifted to how great the Beatles were :-)

 

I didn't like them much when they first came out. Oh, they were OK, but I was young and really into R&B and jazz at the time. Probably due to the influence of my school band-mates. Our rock band covered many of the songs, but I always preferred playing the Motown songs.

 

Their guitar chops at first couldn't have been that good, as our guitar player covered them quite well (we were still in high school). George Harrison was dissed by the guitarists of the day and could have been a candidate for this thread. But the Beatles' chops improved and eventually they grew into something spectacular.

 

The first LP I liked was Help, and then I really started really getting into them when Rubber Soul came out. They became my favorite group.

 

I heard an interview once and it displayed the transformation of one of my favorites "I Am The Walrus" from the time John (I think) played the simplistic song to George Martin and then the final arrangement done mostly by Martin with input from the band members. I think that without the input of George Martin, they wouldn't have been nearly as great

 

So as laboomo indicated, the Beatles were really a sextet, not a quartet. John, Paul, and George H had some very wonderful songwriting skills, George M was a genius at arranging, and of course Billy P was one heck of a pianist.

 

One example is the "Let It Be" LP produced by Phil Spector (another great producer in his own right) did not (IMHO) show the spark and originality of any of the Help and later George Martin produced albums.

 

There were also many examples of other non-Beatle musicians performing on their albums, Bernard Purdie, Chet Atkins and others. How many and which cuts? We will probably never know. Not that it matters all that much. The output was marvelous. When they broke up it was a sad day for music.

 

They were the biggest thing since Elvis Presley (who was the biggest thing since Frank Sinatra) and nobody since has captured what either Frank, Elvis or the Beatles did. They all defined their generation.

 

But in those days, we had fewer classifications of music to divide the market. In my youth we had Rock, C&W, Jazz and R&B, so every kid listened to the rock stations. The rock stations played everything from C&W tinged rock (rock-a-billy) to R&B rock to everything in between. Even Frank Sinatra, Andy Williams and other artists from the "swing generation" style of music got on the early Rock and Roll charts and played on Top40 stations, simply because there was no place else for them.

 

Now we have so many genres, Rock, Alternative, Rap, Dance, Techno, Country, Jazz, Smooth Jazz, and so on. As long as the market is so divided, there will probably never again be a person or group that defines a generation.

 

Insights and incites by Notes

[bluesstringer]

Believe me guys, I am not dissing Martin, Preston (one of my favs), the host of contributing musicians through the years, or the times in which they were active as a group, merely stating my opinion of the unique blend of musicianship, and what I still believe to be very unrerrated chops and style!

[layboomo]

Believe me guys' date=' I am not dissing Martin, Preston (one of my favs), the host of contributing musicians through the years, or the times in which they were active as a group, merely stating my opinion of the unique blend of musicianship, and what I still believe to be very unrerrated chops and style![/quote']

 

Absolutely without the musicianship...the producer has nothing to work with.....it was a magic combination ,that Notes so eloquently stated, will probably never be seen again given the current state of the industry. I was never a huge fan of the early Beatles stuff to be completely honest.....but the later stuff was absolutely brilliant and completely fresh without the limitations and restrictions all of the current "genres" seem to have.

[hybrid77]

This wanker.....

 

[charlie brown]

 

Absolutely without the musicianship...the producer has nothing to work with.....it was a magic combination ' date='that Notes so eloquently stated, will probably never be seen again given the current state of the industry. I was never a huge fan of the early Beatles stuff to be completely honest.....but the later stuff was absolutely brilliant and completely fresh without the limitations and restrictions all of the current "genres" seem to have.[/quote']

 

 

Agreed! I DO like the early stuff, because it was the stuff that got me going/hooked, into music!

It sounded so "fresh" then, even though it was based on their hero's styles, but adapted to

theirs. Simple...sure, and catchy, too! "More 'Pop' than Rock?" Maybe, but that's open for

debate/dicussion. If it was/is "Pop," it was/is of the best kind! The later stuff, Rubber Soul...on,

was unbelievable, especially at the time, and with the primitve (by today's standards) "technology" that existed.

There will never be another "Beatles," IMHO...for a variety of reasons...Timing, Talent, Chemistry,

a "blessing from the gods,"...whatever!

 

CB

[Lerxst1281733995]

Another element of the Beatles is that they were always evolving.. Always pushing forward.. "A Hard Day's Night" doesn't sound like "Please Please Me" or "With the Beatles" and "Rubber Soul" doesn't sound like "A Hard Day's Night"... Then when "Revolver" came along, all hell broke loose! They didn't just churn out the same, formulaic, pablum, album after album..

 

Also, bear in mind that they released 13 albums in a span of 7 years! And don't forget all the singles... They were not only innovative and ground-breaking, but prolific... And they almost single-handedly invented the album format as we know it today.. Before they came along, it was all about the 45s.. "Albums" were just a compilation of hit singles cobbled together on a long-playing record designed to squeeze a little more milk out of the cash-cow.. The Beatles brought it to an art form..

[charlie brown]

 

Another element of the Beatles is that they were always evolving.. Always pushing forward.. "A Hard Day's Night" doesn't sound like "Please Please Me" or "With the Beatles" and "Rubber Soul" doesn't sound like "A Hard Day's Night"... Then when "Revolver" came along' date=' all hell broke loose! They didn't just churn out the same, formulaic, pablum, album after album..

 

Also, bear in mind that they released 13 albums in a span of 7 years! And don't forget all the singles... They were not only innovative and ground-breaking, but prolific... And they almost single-handedly invented the album format as we know it today.. Before they came along, it was all about the 45s.. "Albums" were just a compilation of hit singles cobbled together on a long-playing record designed to squeeze a little more milk out of the cash-cow.. The Beatles brought it to an art form..

 

[/quote']

 

Agreed!!

 

CB

[nemorino]

The Beatles were what got me into playing guitar (that and wanting to get the better of my big sister, whose guitar it was). Still love them today and can't imagine why it took me so long to join Club Casino (still digging my new baby - quoting Lerxst from an earlier thread - to a point where it's not....natural).

 

Back on topic: Angus Young.

 

 

(stands WELL back....)

 

[layboomo]

Back on topic: Angus Young.

 

 

(stands WELL back....)

 

As you should......I disagree with that one... he has one of the best rock vibrato shakes in the business IMO and his hooks are killer....sure some are pretty simple, but for testosterone fueled, marshall powered, in your face guitar....Angus is the man. I sound like an AC/DC freak and I'm not ,but I do think he is one of the better hard rock guitarists out there....certainly one of the most entertaining to watch.

[nemorino]

Thanks Laybooma - maybe I need to re-evaluate Angus from a more objective musical point of view: I've been seriously scarred by the AC/DC heads I shared a house with for a year at college - hell, it was!

[layboomo]

Thanks Laybooma - maybe I need to re-evaluate Angus from a more objective musical point of view: I've been seriously scarred by the AC/DC heads I shared a house with for a year at college - hell' date=' it was![/quote']

 

I can totally identify with that...too much of anything will do that to you....for me it was Rugby players, Jack Daniels and Warren Zevon on 11 at 4AM.....Ahhhh college To this day I still can't stand Warren Zevon....I made the mistake of trying to object once....once! Sh!tfaced rugby players are not to be taken lightly!

[5er driver]

This wanker.....

 

 

 

Definitely. I forgot to add him to my Mansteam post.