Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Neil Young is a genius


Silenced Fred

Recommended Posts

Posted

JO: What are your views on people going to college to learn guitar?

 

NY: Paints a pretty doomed picture of the future, doesn't it?[Laughs.] First of all, it doesn't matter if you can play a scale. It doesn't matter if your technique is good. If you have feelings that you want to get out through music, that's what matters. If you have the ability to express yourself and you feel good when you do it, then that's why you do it. The technical side of it is a completely boring drag, as far as I'm concerned. I mean, I can't play fast. I don't even know the scales. A lot of the notes that I go for are notes that I know aren't there. They're just not there, so you can hit any note. I'm just on another level as far as all that goes. I appreciate these guys who play great. I'm impressed by these metal bands with their scale guys. Like I go, "Gee, that's really something." I mean, Satriani and Eddie Van Halen are genious guitar players. They're unbelievable musicians of the highest caliber. But I can't relate to it. One note is enough.

 

Its from an interview, I couldn't have said it better myself. I'm not a technical player, but I play with the emotion from within me.

 

Not really sure why I posted this, just saw it and thought it was great

 

Sorry for taking your bandwidth

Posted

He might just be a genius. I can't argue with the success he's enjoyed.

 

All hail NY.

 

But I won't listen to his recordings - he sounds like cats fu*king to me.

 

No doubt some like it.

 

None for me, thanks.

Posted
Not really sure why I posted this, just saw it and thought it was great

 

Sorry for taking your bandwidth

 

On the contrary, that's absolutely the most 'spot-on' quote I've seen posted for a while.

 

As my Grandfather once said "I agree with every word that man said!"

 

Thanks very much for sharing.

 

P.

Posted

He might just be a genius. I can't argue with the success he's enjoyed.

 

All hail NY.

 

But I won't listen to his recordings - he sounds like cats fu*king to me.

 

No doubt some like it.

 

None for me, thanks.

 

No problem, his sound is really weird.

 

However, I love it. Like he said, Steve Vai, Joe Satriani, Paul Gilbert, those people leave my jaw dropped wondering how they did that, but its not for me. I can't do that. Give me a nice fat Am chord ringing through a slightly distorted amp any day

 

Personally, my favorite music of his is the acoustic stuff, pretty much all of it. That, and Cortez are my favorite songs by him

Posted

nice quote. the important thing to get from this is that the one note needs to be a really good one... you gotta mean it.

 

i was in a band once (as a drummer) with a guy that could play "eruption" note for note. he knew a ton of randy rhoads' stuff too, all note perfect. turns out he learned all of it with those tapes that broke them down phrase by phrase. he had no idea what he was playing or why it worked...

 

no doubt he had skill: he could do all the bends, taps, whammy stuff etc. very impressive.

 

we would jam though, and something as simple as a 12 bar blues would elude him: he simply could not come up with his own stuff. he'd try, but it was awful. his "solo" in our gigs always consisted of chunks of other guys' solos. in a way, he was a human "player piano."

 

i look at it like this: striving to improve is an important part of playing any musical instrument: you want to have the skills to be able to get your point (or your intention) across.

 

but i'd rather see one guy playing his heart out than someone skillfully reproducing someone else's stuff note for note... know what i mean?

 

Don

Posted

CONDENSED BY FRED

 

we would jam though, and something as simple as a 12 bar blues would elude him: he simply could not come up with his own stuff. he'd try, but it was awful. his "solo" in our gigs always consisted of chunks of other guys' solos. in a way, he was a human "player piano."

 

i look at it like this: striving to improve is an important part of playing any musical instrument: you want to have the skills to be able to get your point (or your intention) across.

 

but i'd rather see one guy playing his heart out than someone skillfully reproducing someone else's stuff note for note... know what i mean?

 

Don

 

That's why I stopped doing covers, unless I change them up to be my own.

 

Am I a great player? No, but if and when you see me play, its all on the line.

 

If every note is perfect live, I'm not pushing myself

Posted

If every note is perfect live, I'm not pushing myself

 

I disagree.

 

When playing live, for my money, you have to be spot on. I'm not paying to see you grow.

 

Do the experiments on your own time.

Posted

I respect NY. I love his lyrics and melodies... can't say much for his voice or his guitar playing, but it is his style and it is unique.

Posted

Many, many years ago, I had a good friend in the orchestra tell me that he had no desire to become a professional musician, as he had no desire to be a trained monkey who existed to entertain those who showed up to concerts.

 

I struggled with his statement, as I wanted to become a professional musician.

 

It eventually dawned upon me that he was right - if you don't give the audience what they expect, they won't pay to see it.

 

Just sayin'

 

If you're hoping for a different kind of audience, then more power to you.

Posted

While I don't directly disagree with Neil Young, I do think that having some degree of knowledge and technique will actually help you express what you feel on an instrument. One note and meaning it is all fine and dandy, but it has it's limits, and while saying that theory, knowledge and technique doesn't matter might make you sound oh so very artistic and pure, totally ignoring it will eventually just make that limit all the more obvious to just about anyone who listens.

Posted

I love Neil Young's music, and I'm glad that his approach works for him, but...

 

Who's to say that that approach would work for anyone/everyone? I think that, whatever it is that makes the music that sounds best to the performer (because **** what the audience thinks--there's an audience for any type of music, so it's ultimately the performer who decides what's worth playing, and regardless of what the performer plays he won't please everyone in the audience,) so if Neil Young can play without any theoretical information, then more power to him, but if Chet Atkins needs some knowledge of what it is he's (or was) playing, then that's alright too.

 

I don't think it's fair to criticize one type of performer for another simply for creating the music that they connect to personally. Paul Gilbert wants to shred and play Bach and Mozart piano pieces, that's fine, he's found his audience--I'm here listening to him and buying his albums. Neil Young wants to do his thing, and that's fine too, and he has his audience--I'm here listening to him and buying his albums, too. Some guys need strong theoretical knowledge to make their music and some don't. Same for technique, gear, studio trickery, etc.

Posted

I disagree.

 

When playing live, for my money, you have to be spot on. I'm not paying to see you grow.

 

Do the experiments on your own time.

 

 

but do you differentiate between artistic creativity and note-for-note accuracy? if i wanted to "hear the record" i could stay at home and save a ton of money. (in some extreme cases, you see them live and you DO hear the record...)

 

the performance, warts and all, is what i like. i love jams, reinterpretations of songs, guest artists, the whole works. i really like when an artist covers another: like Hendrix's live version of "Sunshine Of Your Love" for example. very cool.

Posted

I...**** what the audience thinks--there's an audience for any type of music, so it's ultimately the performer who decides what's worth playing, and regardless of what the performer plays he won't please everyone in the audience...

 

I'm not sure that'll work every time... but I have no objection to anyone giving it a go.

Posted

but do you differentiate between artistic creativity and note-for-note accuracy? if i wanted to "hear the record" i could stay at home and save a ton of money. (in some extreme cases, you see them live and you DO hear the record...)

 

the performance, warts and all, is what i like. i love jams, reinterpretations of songs, guest artists, the whole works. i really like when an artist covers another: like Hendrix's live version of "Sunshine Of Your Love" for example. very cool.

 

As above - there will be those who crave the experiment.

 

I'm not one of them.

Posted

I disagree.

 

When playing live, for my money, you have to be spot on. I'm not paying to see you grow.

 

Do the experiments on your own time.

 

I should clarify.

 

Playing a solo live, feeling the music, if I play every single note spot on and with no imperfections, to me, I have failed myself and the audience.

 

But then again, my huge influences are Jack White and Neil Young, so I get dissonance

Posted

I have no quarrel with dissonance. As far as it goes, and when resolved in a satisfactory manner - as I see it.

 

When dissonance is presented as the end-all, I'm not for it. No Schoenberg fan I.

 

I just don't want to live there, especially when (which seems to me to be the case with NY) it is presented as an excuse for ugly-sounding music.

 

For the music that I do like, I don't need to hear what is "on the record" - in fact I love the live experience.

 

I just don't want to hear things that sound bad to my ear.

 

I expect that no one here wants anything different.

 

Where the rubber hits the road is in the experience of the listener.

 

And I respect that.

 

Like what you like.

Posted
... First of all, it doesn't matter if you can play a scale. It doesn't matter if your technique is good. If you have feelings that you want to get out through music, that's what matters. If you have the ability to express yourself and you feel good when you do it, then that's why you do it. ...

 

Neil is cool . . . . . BUT -

 

What a load of crap. Sounds like a bad lecture to a bunch of lesson #1 guitar students.

 

Unless you're playing in a room by yourself, if your technique is crappy - people aren't stupid - they'll know you're crappy.

 

Wait . . . . . you're crappy, but a least you're expressing yourself and you feel good doing it.

 

Oh brother. :rolleyes:

Posted

Neil is cool . . . . . BUT -

 

What a load of crap. Sounds like a bad lecture to a bunch of lesson #1 guitar students.

 

Unless you're playing in a room by yourself, if your technique is crappy - people aren't stupid - they'll know you're crappy.

 

Wait . . . . . you're crappy, but a least you're expressing yourself and you feel good doing it.

 

Oh brother. :rolleyes:

 

The key thing that you're missing or ignoring is that "you can be a not-great player IF your expression is understood and appreciated by the audience." He's not saying you can be crappy, he's saying you can sound good without conventional training. You can pull it off if people get it.

 

I think Young's point is that the goal should not be technique, but rather self-expression. Guitar geeks recognize technique but charisma is attracts a following. EVH had Roth, Slash had Rose -- and they got famous. Gilbert, Malmsteen, etc have all the chops in the world but chops doesn't bring a following, it's the charisma of self-expression.

 

In other words, take someone who's not a technically good player. If he or she can express theirself well and present something that people can enjoy , that can trump a shredfest hands down. Precision can be a beautiful art in itself, but beautiful art is very often imprecise.

Posted

I wasn't fishing for people to go "wow, Neil Young is a genius and you are too Fred!"

 

His music isn't for everyone. My parents hate him. He has embraced who he is, and that made him successful and I feel I can relate. To me, music is expression. A solo is a true expression of the artist at that moment. If they are frustrated, it might be more staccato and clumsy. if they are happier, they might have a more fluid motion. Its a window into the musician's soul.

 

i don't expect everyone to get it, or even think they should or that I have any idea what I'm talking about. We are all different people.

 

To me, he is a huge influence, not just in guitar but also in life because he keeps playing what he wants, and either people like it or they don't (as is shown through this thread here)

 

To me, when I watch Le Noise and I see the grimace on his face, or I watch Jack White on stage take off with a crazy solo completely lost in the music stumbling around, crashing into the mic almost falling off stage, THAT speaks to me. Not every note is perfect, he hits some weird ones but it fits with what is going on to me and I understand what is going on through his mind, nothing else matters.

Posted
... He's not saying you can be crappy... ... I think Young's point is that the goal should not be technique, but rather self-expression. ...

 

Come on. I understand the point. My opinion is different than his or yours. There's certainly value in the ability to communicate feeling in the expression of an art form. Self-expression is part of that process.

 

But in my opinion, in the performance of musical art with an instrument, the ability to play (technique, knowledge, etc) also certainly does matter to performers, patrons and audiences.

Posted

My wife and I have this argument from time to time. She was a music major in college until carpal tunnel cut her piano playing short. She hates anything that isn't pitch perfect. When I put a NY song on, she cringes, I say it's great. "He cant sing" she says. I say , but he's getting his point across, he's creating a mood, a feeling. ......and that takes talent, which he has.....in spades.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...