Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

lead guitar - phrasing


saturn

Recommended Posts

I thought that might get a reaction. Sorry to hijack the thread. As I meant to say, most musicians don't get famous without being talented performing artists. But much of pop music today is formulated and choreographed and overproduced- crafted.

 

I was playing a CD of mixed Blues artists while my 22 year old (at the time) daughter and a friend of hers were around. They commented that they couldn't get into the Blues because to them it all sounded the same. Can you imagine? [cool]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply

very tasteful and nice tone. I probably would have something similar but maybe with a bit of a dirtier tone. not super saturated, but on the verge where if I dug in hard the guitar screamed and if I gently plucked the strings it was nice and clean... maybe done some jazzy octave stuff too.

 

Well originally this was posted to showcase my new Sienna burst Strat direct to my Blues Jr. I wasn't really looking to dirty it up on this vid.

 

 

Reading the post I thought it was a good example for me as far as patience and phrasing as less can be more.

 

I will work on the jazzy octave thingy though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest farnsbarns

I've always looked at it like this...

 

A few weeks ago I did a thread about negative space in art and design. I feel the same about soloing. I've heard it said that it's about the notes you don't play. To me it is slightly different, it's about the negative space between the underlying rhythm section and the solo. When I hear a strait major scale over a straight major chord (whether that chord is being played on another guitar or piano or if it is being played collectively by the base a sax, a trumpet and a trombone, like in the New Orleans jazz I was brought up on) I hear no negative space, it all tesselates to closely. I suppose that's why I like the genres where a melodic scale that produces difference notes over the backing because some of the notes are a semitone from the notes in the chords.

 

I also have a tenancy towards call and responce (question and answer) type phrasing.

 

I like how BB king, and Freddie King do that sing the call and play the response thing. Wish I could sing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to comment on the art sub-thread here.

 

Sure I may not like all of it, but then I'm not really fond of a lot of 'fine art' in the visual realm (Jackson Pollock is an example of an artist I just don't get at all).

 

Many pop songs sound simple, but IMHO are deceptive. Try to write a novel in 3 minutes yourself in meter and rhyme and you will see how difficult it is. And some pop songs are pretty complex. Of course, some are can be classified as kitsch but art vs. kitsch is definitely in the 'ear' of the beholder.

 

And of course pop music is also a craft and formulaic. But then so is a symphony or a rondo or a sonata.

 

Still, the art of music is turning the empty notes into something that moves the listener. You can teach a person technique (how to mechanically play the notes), you can teach most people how to listen to music (to hear the nuances and development) but you cannot teach talent. However, if you teach the person with the inborn talent the mechanics of playing his/her instrument, how to listen to the music properly, and how to recreate the nuances and development of music, you will end up with a great musician. If you do the same with a person of lesser talent, you can only end up with a great technician at best.

 

At least that's the way I see it.

 

Notes ♫

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In many threads in this forum, we have danced around the philosophical subject of the meaning of the word "art" and what is "good art"? It would be a good thread on its own to address that question.

 

Anyone can play an instrument. Anyone can paint a picture. What distinguishes that from art; what makes it good art? What distinguishes that from craft?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest farnsbarns

In many threads in this forum, we have danced around the philosophical subject of the meaning of the word "art" and what is "good art"? It would be a good thread on its own to address that question.

 

Anyone can play an instrument. Anyone can paint a picture. What distinguishes that from art; what makes it good art? What distinguishes that from craft?

 

Are you hoping to find the answers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, art for a person is something that they are appreciating and interacting with. In the case of music that means you have to either pay or consciously make some sort of effort to experience and interact with it. That could mean anything from making a free download to paying for drinks in a bar so you can experience some live music to directly buying your concert ticket or album. However if you just put it on for something to have on in the background (as I was talking about earlier) then, for that person, that music is not being treated as art (IMO). Of course, you can appreciate something that is playing in the background if you start to interact with it by talking about it, singing along, swaying a hip or even headbanging to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay... art vs craft, "good" versus "not so good" art?

 

In a sense the quality of art is in the eye of the beholder. It's that simple to me. It has little to do with the specific degree of craftsmanship involved, but rather the connection with the watcher, listener, reader or viewer.

 

We must recognize too how art in ways connects best within a given era of time in a given culture. E.g., in music we have no real idea how music might have sounded to the ancient Greeks, but we do know that Orpheus, whether a reality or complete myth, was championed as a musician whose efforts charmed listeners. Would we care for whatever he did thousands of years ago? I really don't know.

 

OTOH, when one discusses art vs. craft I think we have the beginning of difficulty in that an exceptional craftsman may or may not craft good "art." But since "art" is in the eye of the beholder, we have always that question: Art or Craft?

 

Poet T.S. Eliot, for example, referred to Ezra Pound as the superior craftsman in poetry. I really question that myself, largely because I find "more" in Eliot's work.

 

As a guitarist and in other endeavors I frankly consider myself one whose only ability in life has been to develop decent degrees of skill as a craftsman, but one lacking talent to make that skill take the leap into "art." Others would suggest that merely the effort to create this or that with a good degree of craftsmanship and "heart" took those efforts into the realm of "art" beyond skill.

 

Again, that takes one into the realm of subjective analysis.

 

That's why I have a tendency to describe most of what I do as "industrial art," where craftsmanship is given a degree of primacy - and let the one who perceives such work make his or her own determination whether it is art, either "good" or "bad," in addition to their determination of the craftsmanship itself.

 

E.g., we might all agree that there is high craftsmanship in "shredding," but our argument then is whether it is "art" and, if art, whether it's "good" or "poor" art.

 

Frankly I think the question never truly will be answered on a given "piece" except within our own perception, conscious and subconscious analysis.

 

m

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's kinda why I brought it up in the first place. There are many on this board that often say that I think such and such an artist sucks. Well it's fine to say I think this guy sucks but it's not fine to say this guy sucks without a legitimate reason. The fact is, nobody really cares what you think, personally. Your personal opinion has no legitimacy, and if you're gonna say this guy sucks, you need to have a legitimate reason. I'm just trying to explain why an artist would legitimately suck or not. A lot of people couldn't appreciate Charlie Parker, thought that he sucked. History says that he is one of the greatest sax players that ever lived.

 

If you say this guy's phrasing sucks, that is a legitimate reason why this guy really does suck, since phrasing is a relevant interest in determining whether he truly sucks or not.

 

In the end, whether or not you buy the guy's art is up to you. As my mother in law says, "It's good if you like it."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I try to take a cue from my first band director, Robert C. Monroe. He didn't like Country & Western music, but would never say anything negative about it. Instead he would say, "I don't understand it."

 

I hope I will never say an artist sucks as long as his/her craftmanship is good. If the singer can't carry a tune (poor intonation) I will admit she/he is a poor singer. But if his/her craft is good and I hate the music, I hope I am good enough to say, "I don't understand it."

 

A lot of shredders and bebop players are good, but I only like a few, the rest are still good, I just don't understand them. I am one of the few sax players I know that does not like John Coltrane. Oh I can appreciate the genius that went into his work, and he definitely had full command of his instrument, but the music he played just doesn't speak to me personally - I don't understand it on an emotional level.

 

You can put Garth Brooks, Buck Owens, Aaron Copeland, WA Mozart, JS Bach, and scores of other artists and craftspeople in the same boat. I can analyze what they do/did, I can see the worth, but they just don't speak to me personally. On the other hand, two of my favorite 'classical' composers, Shostakovitch and Prokofiev speak to me but there are a lot of classical music listeners who hate them but love Mozart and Bach. And it's not just complicated music that appeals or not to me. I love Muddy Waters and don't care much for Howlin' Wolf. It's a personal thing that I can't explain. Either I like it or I don't and it doesn't matter if it is great art or kitsch, if it speaks to me on an emotional level, I like it.

 

It's easy to recognize a bad craftsperson, a singer with poor intonation, a musician with poor command of his/her instrument, and so on, but it's not so easy to recognize a bad artist -- that goes into personal territory.

 

I put more comments on the "What is art" thread.

 

Insights and incites by Notes ♫

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something musically always speaks to me, no matter the level of where it comes from.

 

My trumpet teacher Claude Gordon was very quick to cut me off when I started to criticize other players....

 

"When you become that kind of musician, your ability to improve diminishes."

 

So it was at that point (11 years old) I would always be a good listener to other musicians, regardless of the skill level.... I was taught to be gracious of others performances....

 

So now it's natural to appreciate that folks have the courage to throw their performances out there..... And I find that most are really trying to do their best [thumbup]

 

IMO the "art" of being a gracious listener and a good person is not always the rule on internet forums. [confused]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me Santana as much as Im not a huge fan Phrases perfectly. I know a lot of people shot him down But Slash in songs like November rain and Dont cry basically Mimics Axl the whole time making the guitar sing to me he is one of the most talented guitarists ever, On a side not Im not a huge fan of GNR, Even though I have 1 album on my Iphone its never really played.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...