Guitarists you just don't understand

[Goat]

Slash is one of my favorite players but I can see why people don't get him or his playing.

With Slash, people have to put him in context with what was going on at the time and it makes things more clear. By 87', every player was looking more and more like a woman and things were starting to get really "sugary" and overprocessed, etc. Slash came out and there was this raw energy and just a "plug and play" mentality with his gear. That is a big reason he got so big, so fast.

And by 1989, many players were laying down tracks using a Rockman X-100 and/or Rockman Sustainor. The Rockman compression was so prolific, that when G&R released AFD, it sounded fresh! Don't get me wrong, the Rockman stereo chorus / stereo echo are world-class effects. It's the Rockman compressor circuit that I loath.

I like Slash, I guess? I viewed him as a Joe Perry wanna-be, so I never took him seriously. As I recall, there were several 80's era bands doing the Aerosmith thing... RATT, Cinderella, G&R, Faster Pussycat, Motley Crue, Keel... I love Slash's guitar tone on Civil War.

 

[skoora]

Slash is one of my favorite players but I can see why people don't get him or his playing.

With Slash, people have to put him in context with what was going on at the time and it makes things more clear. By 87', every player was looking more and more like a woman and things were starting to get really "sugary" and overprocessed, etc. Slash came out and there was this raw energy and just a "plug and play" mentality with his gear. That is a big reason he got so big, so fast.

People always talk about Nirvana killing pop metal but Appetite For Destruction was a huge shot across the bow of all that shit. It brought a lot of people back to denim and leather and raw rock songs about the darker sides of humanity, rather than chanting she’s my Cherry Pie. Gun’s popularity never waned through the early 90’s. I would say it steadily grew. I guarantee all the grunge kids had that album. Really tasty user of wah unlike another we all know...lol

 

[petee]

Who ever told Neil Young he could play an electric guitar should be beaten to death with it, along with Neil. Acoustic guitar, I'm in, I like his playing.

 

[Gitfiddler]

I have never listened to Periphery, but i always thought Bulb was a forumite that one day got a Jackson model guitar. Is he a good guitar player or an internet hero (both?)? And, yes, i can look for him playing on youtube, but haven’t. Since i dont understand, i thought this would be a good thread to ask. Is anyone into periphery? Am i missing out by not following Bulb?

I guess i understand why Vito Bratta disappeared, but i wish he didnt. Chris DeGarmo too

I don’t understand why Brett Garsed and Michael Lee Firkins aren’t more popular

 

[paulyc]

Slash is one of my favorite players but I can see why people don't get him or his playing.

With Slash, people have to put him in context with what was going on at the time and it makes things more clear. By 87', every player was looking more and more like a woman and things were starting to get really "sugary" and overprocessed, etc. Slash came out and there was this raw energy and just a "plug and play" mentality with his gear. That is a big reason he got so big, so fast.

People always talk about Nirvana killing pop metal but Appetite For Destruction was a huge shot across the bow of all that shit. It brought a lot of people back to denim and leather and raw rock songs about the darker sides of humanity, rather than chanting she’s my Cherry Pie. Gun’s popularity never waned through the early 90’s. I would say it steadily grew. I guarantee all the grunge kids had that album. Really tasty user of wah unlike another we all know...lol

That and thrash metal, Metallica in particular.

 

[romanianreaper]

And by 1989, many players were laying down tracks using a Rockman X-100 and/or Rockman Sustainor. The Rockman compression was so prolific, that when G&R released AFD, it sounded fresh! Don't get me wrong, the Rockman stereo chorus / stereo echo are world-class effects. It's the Rockman compressor circuit that I loath.

I like Slash, I guess? I viewed him as a Joe Perry wanna-be, so I never took him seriously. As I recall, there were several 80's era bands doing the Aerosmith thing... RATT, Cinderella, G&R, Faster Pussycat, Motley Crue, Keel... I love Slash's guitar tone on Civil War.

Yep, exactly! Let me tell you something though, Cinderella live just killed it. I saw them open for AC/DC in 88' or 89' and the tones were just amazing!

 

[Goat]

And by 1989, many players were laying down tracks using a Rockman X-100 and/or Rockman Sustainor. The Rockman compression was so prolific, that when G&R released AFD, it sounded fresh! Don't get me wrong, the Rockman stereo chorus / stereo echo are world-class effects. It's the Rockman compressor circuit that I loath.

I like Slash, I guess? I viewed him as a Joe Perry wanna-be, so I never took him seriously. As I recall, there were several 80's era bands doing the Aerosmith thing... RATT, Cinderella, G&R, Faster Pussycat, Motley Crue, Keel... I love Slash's guitar tone on Civil War.

Yep, exactly! Let me tell you something though, Cinderella live just killed it. I saw them open for AC/DC in 88' or 89' and the tones were just amazing!

DIO (w/VC) and Cinderella rocked! I never got to see Cinderella, but their studio tones were huge.

 

[Speeddemon]

Who ever told Neil Young he could play an electric guitar should be beaten to death with it, along with Neil. Acoustic guitar, I'm in, I like his playing.

Hear hear!
Listen to this from 1m34s onward:

soooo cringe-inducing.
That's how I played leads after 4 guitar lessons as a kid! Not as a multi-million dollar selling artist.

 

[Thunkful]

This thread really proves that how much tastes differ between people when it comes to music.

While someone said here that they're not into Shawn Lane, i can't even remember how many times i've listened the Powers of Ten album through and that's ok!

Same with Dokken, Winger and other hair metal bands which again is my go to music style.

Really tho, it just makes me feel so fucking good that there's something in music for everyone, no one gets left out of the bunch just because they would like to listen something different. That kind of universal availability and openness is not found on every aspect in this life, for example in soccer that i used to do for over 10 years.

Seriously, thank god for the music and especially for the variety of it!

 

[Thunkful]

And by 1989, many players were laying down tracks using a Rockman X-100 and/or Rockman Sustainor. The Rockman compression was so prolific, that when G&R released AFD, it sounded fresh! Don't get me wrong, the Rockman stereo chorus / stereo echo are world-class effects. It's the Rockman compressor circuit that I loath.

I'm not too fond of the Rockman sound either. Prefer the real amp myself as well!

 

[rstites]

Slash is one of my favorite players but I can see why people don't get him or his playing.

With Slash, people have to put him in context with what was going on at the time and it makes things more clear. By 87', every player was looking more and more like a woman and things were starting to get really "sugary" and overprocessed, etc. Slash came out and there was this raw energy and just a "plug and play" mentality with his gear. That is a big reason he got so big, so fast.

People always talk about Nirvana killing pop metal but Appetite For Destruction was a huge shot across the bow of all that shit. It brought a lot of people back to denim and leather and raw rock songs about the darker sides of humanity, rather than chanting she’s my Cherry Pie. Gun’s popularity never waned through the early 90’s. I would say it steadily grew. I guarantee all the grunge kids had that album. Really tasty user of wah unlike another we all know...lol

That and thrash metal, Metallica in particular.

Definitely. AFD was 1987 and was played right along with Hysteria as the two biggest rock albums on radio for the next couple of years. They gave two alternatives and I say the more syrupy glam stuff did just fine during that time. However, there was definitely a resurgence of more of a straightforward hard rock with Guns at the top, but bands like Cinderella and Tesla were both over there too and I enjoyed them.

In 1991, Metallica and thrash crested and really helped shove the poppy end of glam down. Nirvana came out that year, but really didn't get into the mainstream until a bit later. They were big, but their influence gets vastly overrated due to the suicide of Cobaine while they were still popular IMO. (I don't hate them or anything. I just think they get vastly overrated on their influence.)

 

[Purpleibby]

The problem with that is ALL metal took a hit(this change was only 4years anyway), even Dio, Priest and Maiden. Metallica went away from their thrashy sound. Thrash took the same hit, really all heavy music did.....it wasn't limited to the glam bands. Even bands like Dokken weren't glamming it up at the height of the metal years(by back for the attack they weren't fashioning like glam anymore)....IMO it had less to do with tastes and was a corporate decision. Pretty much ALL music went down the crapper. So I don't buy it. By the late 90's and early 2000's the good stuff was going strong again but by that time people were pirating music and the music scene hasn't been the same since. The stint of shitty music and shitty "dare to suck" attitude was short lived and metal music lived on again.

 

[Goat]

Who ever told Neil Young he could play an electric guitar should be beaten to death with it, along with Neil. Acoustic guitar, I'm in, I like his playing.

Hear hear!
Listen to this from 1m34s onward:

soooo cringe-inducing.
That's how I played leads after 4 guitar lessons as a kid! Not as a multi-million dollar selling artist.

You're confused, because (hence, the title) you don't get Neil Young. Maybe you do, but don't realize it?

Listen this song by Living Color:

Forget about how good or bad you think the soloing is... In your opinion, does the soloing fit the narrative of the song?

 

[rstites]

The problem with that is ALL metal took a hit(this change was only 4years anyway), even Dio, Priest and Maiden. Metallica went away from their thrashy sound. Thrash took the same hit, really all heavy music did.....it wasn't limited to the glam bands. Even bands like Dokken weren't glamming it up at the height of the metal years(by back for the attack they weren't fashioning like glam anymore)....IMO it had less to do with tastes and was a corporate decision. Pretty much ALL music went down the crapper. So I don't buy it. By the late 90's and early 2000's the good stuff was going strong again but by that time people were pirating music and the music scene hasn't been the same since. The stint of shitty music and shitty "dare to suck" attitude was short lived and metal music lived on again.

Thrash was huge at the time, but really it'd just peaked. It's simply too heavy to sustain that level of popularity. There was no way it was ever going to maintain that interest. Grunge filled the vacuum left behind, but it had a run of about half what glam metal had. There were a number of really good hard rocking bands in that era. Even some of the so-called grunge bands fit right in there. STP, Alice in Chains, etc. were excellent hard rocking bands IMO.

I feel that a lot of the glam bands had just run their course. Most bands only have 2-3 good albums in them to begin with. It may have been a corporate decision, but it was one based on what the corporate heads thought would sell. Quite Riot opened the sunset strip to lots of signing and then when Nirvana got radio play, they all went off to Seattle for a bit. I actually kind of think of Quiet Riot and Nirvana in the same way in that regard.

I have a lot of really good metal albums from the 90's. It just returned to where it had generally been - more of a niche underground thing, which I'm fine with. I never set out to be one of the popular kids.

 

[romanianreaper]

Thrash was huge at the time, but really it'd just peaked. It's simply too heavy to sustain that level of popularity. There was no way it was ever going to maintain that interest. Grunge filled the vacuum left behind, but it had a run of about half what glam metal had. There were a number of really good hard rocking bands in that era. Even some of the so-called grunge bands fit right in there. STP, Alice in Chains, etc. were excellent hard rocking bands IMO.

I feel that a lot of the glam bands had just run their course. Most bands only have 2-3 good albums in them to begin with. It may have been a corporate decision, but it was one based on what the corporate heads thought would sell. Quite Riot opened the sunset strip to lots of signing and then when Nirvana got radio play, they all went off to Seattle for a bit. I actually kind of think of Quiet Riot and Nirvana in the same way in that regard.

I have a lot of really good metal albums from the 90's. It just returned to where it had generally been - more of a niche underground thing, which I'm fine with. I never set out to be one of the popular kids.

I've said this many times here on the forum but I think it is healthy when a particular genre "dies". Over time, things get diluted. You see it every single time a certain type of music comes out and a particular band leads the pack. Mostly this happens when a record company ruins things. They either brought in bands that sort of sounded like the trend or they take a good band and ruin them. Def Leppard is one example. NWOBHM band that now, barely has a guitar sounds in their "hits".

Nirvana is not overrated in my opinion. It was refreshing to hear riffs and sounds that were that raw.

 

[Purpleibby]

The problem with that is ALL metal took a hit(this change was only 4years anyway), even Dio, Priest and Maiden. Metallica went away from their thrashy sound. Thrash took the same hit, really all heavy music did.....it wasn't limited to the glam bands. Even bands like Dokken weren't glamming it up at the height of the metal years(by back for the attack they weren't fashioning like glam anymore)....IMO it had less to do with tastes and was a corporate decision. Pretty much ALL music went down the crapper. So I don't buy it. By the late 90's and early 2000's the good stuff was going strong again but by that time people were pirating music and the music scene hasn't been the same since. The stint of shitty music and shitty "dare to suck" attitude was short lived and metal music lived on again.

Thrash was huge at the time, but really it'd just peaked. It's simply too heavy to sustain that level of popularity. There was no way it was ever going to maintain that interest. Grunge filled the vacuum left behind, but it had a run of about half what glam metal had. There were a number of really good hard rocking bands in that era. Even some of the so-called grunge bands fit right in there. STP, Alice in Chains, etc. were excellent hard rocking bands IMO.

I feel that a lot of the glam bands had just run their course. Most bands only have 2-3 good albums in them to begin with. It may have been a corporate decision, but it was one based on what the corporate heads thought would sell. Quite Riot opened the sunset strip to lots of signing and then when Nirvana got radio play, they all went off to Seattle for a bit. I actually kind of think of Quiet Riot and Nirvana in the same way in that regard.

I have a lot of really good metal albums from the 90's. It just returned to where it had generally been - more of a niche underground thing, which I'm fine with. I never set out to be one of the popular kids.

Yeah I don't really consider AIC to be part of it, at least at first. AIC was crossover...but even they softened up compared to their earlier material, I stopped listening after Dirt......The market wasn't softening up, Pantera dominated during the time because they said "fuck you" didn't follow the trends and kept putting out great material...the problem was a lot of the thrash bands broke up, or changed their sound when they didn't have to.....as we can see now, the great bands that are still out there doing their thing are having no problems. You had greats like Dio playing clubs, hardly could be called thrash....Grunge didn't do shit really, it died quickly and the movement when to a pop version of itself(you got Bush and Hole, they should have formed a fucking band) .....they did the same shit. I remember it well, I was "fuck you" to all of it. Most folks I know where clammoring for more real metal at the time.

I've said this many times here on the forum but I think it is healthy when a particular genre "dies".

But metal never did die....IMO it was an evolution(meaning growth and advancement) over time and still going strong. It's not going anywhere. IMO, none of the earlier indicators of what a market is matters like it used to with the advent of piracy and how people get their music now compared to the old days.

 

[Speeddemon]

Who ever told Neil Young he could play an electric guitar should be beaten to death with it, along with Neil. Acoustic guitar, I'm in, I like his playing.

Hear hear!
Listen to this from 1m34s onward:

soooo cringe-inducing.
That's how I played leads after 4 guitar lessons as a kid! Not as a multi-million dollar selling artist.

You're confused, because (hence, the title) you don't get Neil Young. Maybe you do, but don't realize it?

Please re-read the part about Neil Young that I agreed with; I *get* him and like some of his acoustic stuff, just don't let him play leads on an electric. The fact that some people, Neil himself included thought it was a good idea, THAT I don't *get*.

With Vernon Reid, I'm on the fence...he seems to veer into that Vai area, where being quirky for quirky's sake is seen as talent in itself.
Don't get me wrong, the guys can play, have actual talent, but I don't like the over-the-top look at me doing crazy wobbly, screechy weird shit-type players that are seemingly selling off that weirdness as 'additional talent' that's so avant-garde, if you don't like it, it de facto means you're too simple to comprehend... .
Generally;
Randy Rhoads, yes. Vinnie Vincent, no.
Andy Timmons, yes. MAB, no.
Slash, yes. Buckethead, no.

Oh well, maybe I'm just too simple.

The fact (to me) that MAB's coolest note in the "Freight Train" solo is the one where he lingers on more than 0.0004s and uses good vibrato and a slow bend, shows (to me at least) that the rest of that solo is pure wankery 'look at me being shit-stupid fast, under/over arpeggio's on a 4-neck guitar'. Is it a tasteful solo that enhances the song and tells a well written, well formulated story in itself (e.g. the leads in Comfortably Numb, or heck, even the twin-lead in Tesla's "Cumin' Atcha Live")? No.
YMMV.

 

[herewegoagain]

The thing about Clapton is that you have to consider the times he grew out of. The Beno album with John Mayall and the Blues Breakers in 1966 was a big deal because nobody heard a guitar tone like that before. It was distorted and overdriven and he played Blues licks he learned from importing records of black blues players from the states.

This is exactly the correct answer to the question of this thread. I read posts on forums everywhere about how Clapton is the 'most overrated' player of all times... in humble honesty, there is stuff that I can play that sounds every bit as good as anything EC ever recorded... the difference is though, he did it before anyone else even knew what was happening.

I am amazed at the quantity of great music that was produced by the Beatles and Stones in the '60s, and equally by Led Zep, Skynard and many others 10 years or so later.
The trail blazers often get unjustifiably disrespected.

 

[Goat]

Please re-read the part about Neil Young that I agreed with; I *get* him and like some of his acoustic stuff, just don't let him play leads on an electric. The fact that some people, Neil himself included thought it was a good idea, THAT I don't *get*.

With Vernon Reid, I'm on the fence...he seems to veer into that Vai area, where being quirky for quirky's sake is seen as talent in itself.
Don't get me wrong, the guys can play, have actual talent, but I don't like the over-the-top look at me doing crazy wobbly, screechy weird shit-type players that are seemingly selling off that weirdness as 'additional talent' that's so avant-garde, if you don't like it, it de facto means you're too simple to comprehend...

Oh well, maybe I'm just too simple.

Understood.

I don't judge the quality of a particular piece by its execution, but by its ability to translate against the narrative of the song...if ya know what I mean? My originals start out as instrumentals, influenced by whatever idea I have in my head at the time. My point is, that some authors play what is appropriate for the song while others use the song as a platform for fulfilling a narcissistic need for attention. Playing a fierce solo break does not make one a lead guitarist. I don't think Neil Young considers himself as one, nor has he ever billed himself as such. Not that I know of anyway? He plays what he feels is congruent to the compostion.

 

[petee]

Who ever told Neil Young he could play an electric guitar should be beaten to death with it, along with Neil. Acoustic guitar, I'm in, I like his playing.

Hear hear!
Listen to this from 1m34s onward:

soooo cringe-inducing.
That's how I played leads after 4 guitar lessons as a kid! Not as a multi-million dollar selling artist.

You're confused, because (hence, the title) you don't get Neil Young. Maybe you do, but don't realize it?

Listen this song by Living Color:

Forget about how good or bad you think the soloing is... In your opinion, does the soloing fit the narrative of the song?

Southern man and Rockin in the free world are perfect examples of the horror.

I also never cared for the solo in Cult of Personality or Reids tone.