Guthrie Govan is so good.......

[Anonymous]

I was thinking more along the lines of the Beatles (in terms of great song longevity). I think that is the level of talent he has in his playing, I wish it was matched by his writing.

I think his guitar playing is matched by his songwriting (at least Erotic Cakes), personally and his songs are more interesting to me than any Beatles music. He is not in the genre of pop music, so to me, comparing his compositions to Beatles songs doesn't make any sense. Song "longevity" is not relevant in his genre of music as, really, there is a very limited audience for what he does. There isn't enough of a mass of people to care... The Beatles have song longevity because they are great songwriters (to many anyway) in the genre of pop rock-n-roll music, which appeals to the masses...

Steve

No worries... We are allowed to like him or not for differing reasons. If you are hung up on my concept because I used a pop reference, how about Miles Davis then? I have a feeling that won't matter either... but that's okay too. I'm a Guthrie fan, just likely not for (all) the same reasons you are.

Listen, I'm not arguing with you at all, just giving my thoughts in the interest of conversation, which I'm sure you'd agree is what we're here for. I'm not trying to convince you of anything with regards to Guthrie and It's fine with me that you dig him for different reasons then me. Liking someone's music is completely subjective, why would I be offended if you don't dig his tunes or try to convince you otherwise?

However, the song longevity concept you bring up is meaningless. It's entirely based on what the masses dig - doesn't make Guthrie's songwriting any better or worse than the Beatles or Miles Davis.

It's funny you bring up Miles Davis. 99% of people you walk up to on the street could not name a Miles Davis song or even tell you what instrument he played - not much song longevity there because the masses don't give a rat's ass about Miles Davis. More people could name a Poison song. The Beatles - 99% of people could tell you a song, name every member and tell you what instrument they played because they appeal to the mass audience. Big difference.

If you want to compare song longevity between Miles Davis and Guthrie Govan, the difference is nearly negligible. 99% of people couldn't name or hum a song by either one of them.

If you dig Miles Davis' compositions more than Guthrie's, that is your subjective opinion, to which you are entitled.

Steve

Wow, that's over the top regarding Miles Davis. There is a HUGE market for jazz and Miles Davis is a superstar, a master and a Legend. To compare the two is ridiculous man. You couldn't be more wrong. You lost me BIG TIME there.

I'm not wrong about anything I said. You are inferring something in your own mind.

What are you debating with me? All I said is that 99% of the average, general public if you walked up and asked couldn't hum a Miles Davis song for you. Are you denying that? I am only comparing Guthrie and Miles Davis in that context - the general public couldn't hum a song either of them wrote.

Hope that clears things up for you. I wasn't comparing the relative merits of Miles Davis music or legend status with Guthrie's at all...

Steve

 

[supersonic]

When God sits down to play guitar he wishes he could play like Guthrie.

I cannot criticize a note this man plays. Music just flows out of him and he never, ever sounds cliche. I honestly cannot understand how a musician never runs out of things to say and never repeats himself.

The only thing I cannot stand about Guthrie is that he makes it look so easy. Sometimes I watch youtube videos and he almost makes me believe I can pull off some of what he is doing. The inspiration sets in and I feel overwhelmed with musical power........and then I pick up a guitar and reality smacks me in the face that I will never be a hair on this mans ass.

But he looks like such a nerd and has skinny girlie arms!

 

[Zachman]

When God sits down to play guitar he wishes he could play like Guthrie.

I cannot criticize a note this man plays. Music just flows out of him and he never, ever sounds cliche. I honestly cannot understand how a musician never runs out of things to say and never repeats himself.

The only thing I cannot stand about Guthrie is that he makes it look so easy. Sometimes I watch youtube videos and he almost makes me believe I can pull off some of what he is doing. The inspiration sets in and I feel overwhelmed with musical power........and then I pick up a guitar and reality smacks me in the face that I will never be a hair on this mans ass.

But he looks like such a nerd and has skinny girlie arms!

I've always found that listening to music w/ your ears, as opposed to your eyes is more useful.

 

[IndyWS6]

When God sits down to play guitar he wishes he could play like Guthrie.

I cannot criticize a note this man plays. Music just flows out of him and he never, ever sounds cliche. I honestly cannot understand how a musician never runs out of things to say and never repeats himself.

The only thing I cannot stand about Guthrie is that he makes it look so easy. Sometimes I watch youtube videos and he almost makes me believe I can pull off some of what he is doing. The inspiration sets in and I feel overwhelmed with musical power........and then I pick up a guitar and reality smacks me in the face that I will never be a hair on this mans ass.

But he looks like such a nerd and has skinny girlie arms!

I've always found that listening to music w/ your ears, as opposed to your eyes is more useful.

 

[electrophonic.tonic]

Very stiff, very controlled, lacks a lot of soul. No fire and definitely super sterile.
Give me something that ROCKS man.
All this clinical playing is just boring.

Although he shreds and I Love that he is super good, he never throws down, it's always this super controlled kind of thing. Gets boring...

Agreed. Does nothing for me either. Although I can appreciate the technique, and he's 1000 times the shredder I'll ever be, it's just not my cup of tea.
For soloing, I'm definitely from the blues side a la Albert King and the Hendrix school...I don't mind hearing clams or out of tune strings. I just want to hear someone DESTROY their guitar.
Next to Jimi, Guthrie sounds like elevator music.

 

[thiswaythatway]

Very stiff, very controlled, lacks a lot of soul. No fire and definitely super sterile.
Give me something that ROCKS man.
All this clinical playing is just boring.

Although he shreds and I Love that he is super good, he never throws down, it's always this super controlled kind of thing. Gets boring...

I find an incredible amount of passion and soul in his playing on things like "Fives" off Erotic Cakes. If the solos on that tune are not "throwing down", I don't know what is. Of course, this is just my subjective opinion and you've stated yours. That's the great thing about music. There is something for everyone and at times we'll agree and at times we won't...

Steve

If only Guthrie could "throw down" like Kirk Hammet.

 

[thiswaythatway]

Very stiff, very controlled, lacks a lot of soul. No fire and definitely super sterile.
Give me something that ROCKS man.
All this clinical playing is just boring.

Although he shreds and I Love that he is super good, he never throws down, it's always this super controlled kind of thing. Gets boring...

Agreed. Does nothing for me either. Although I can appreciate the technique, and he's 1000 times the shredder I'll ever be, it's just not my cup of tea.
For soloing, I'm definitely from the blues side a la Albert King and the Hendrix school...I don't mind hearing clams or out of tune strings. I just want to hear someone DESTROY their guitar.
Next to Jimi, Guthrie sounds like elevator music.

Next to Jimi, Guthrie sounds like he tuned his guitar and he's sober.

 

[mesa50w]

Very stiff, very controlled, lacks a lot of soul. No fire and definitely super sterile.
Give me something that ROCKS man.
All this clinical playing is just boring.

Although he shreds and I Love that he is super good, he never throws down, it's always this super controlled kind of thing. Gets boring...

Agreed. Does nothing for me either. Although I can appreciate the technique, and he's 1000 times the shredder I'll ever be, it's just not my cup of tea.
For soloing, I'm definitely from the blues side a la Albert King and the Hendrix school...I don't mind hearing clams or out of tune strings. I just want to hear someone DESTROY their guitar.
Next to Jimi, Guthrie sounds like elevator music.

agreed

 

[ejecta]

Now we are comparing Guthrie to Hendrix and giving Guthrie the nod. I bet even Guthrie would laugh his ass off it that.

 

[thiswaythatway]

Now we are comparing Guthrie to Hendrix and giving Guthrie the nod. I bet even Guthrie would laugh his ass off it that.

So what, I'll listen to what I like and I don't listen to Hendrix or Beck on a regular basis, a lot of their stuff either bores me or I've been burnt out on it. Just lookup some video of Hendrix after he either dropped some heroine or coke and tell me if you'd want to sit through that noise if you could go back in time. I don't care how much of a legend someone is, if it sounded like shit I'd walk out.

Show me a video of Guthrie playing like shit. I won't hold my breath.

 

[ejecta]

Now we are comparing Guthrie to Hendrix and giving Guthrie the nod. I bet even Guthrie would laugh his ass off it that.

So what, I'll listen to what I like and I don't listen to Hendrix or Beck on a regular basis, a lot of their stuff either bores me or I've been burnt out on it. Just lookup some video of Hendrix after he either dropped some heroine or coke and tell me if you'd want to sit through that noise if you could go back in time. I don't care how much of a legend someone is, if it sounded like shit I'd walk out.

Show me a video of Guthrie playing like shit. I won't hold my breath.

Sure.... listen to whatever you like. But like I said I have absolutely no doubt Guthrie would have a good laugh at that.

 

[Anonymous]

Now we are comparing Guthrie to Hendrix and giving Guthrie the nod. I bet even Guthrie would laugh his ass off it that.

It's all subjective, man. One thing that is not disputable or a matter of personal taste is that Guthrie is far better than Hendrix from a pure technical standpoint as a guitar player.

Steve

 

['63-Strat]

I was thinking more along the lines of the Beatles (in terms of great song longevity). I think that is the level of talent he has in his playing, I wish it was matched by his writing.

I think his guitar playing is matched by his songwriting (at least Erotic Cakes), personally and his songs are more interesting to me than any Beatles music. He is not in the genre of pop music, so to me, comparing his compositions to Beatles songs doesn't make any sense. Song "longevity" is not relevant in his genre of music as, really, there is a very limited audience for what he does. There isn't enough of a mass of people to care... The Beatles have song longevity because they are great songwriters (to many anyway) in the genre of pop rock-n-roll music, which appeals to the masses...

Steve

No worries... We are allowed to like him or not for differing reasons. If you are hung up on my concept because I used a pop reference, how about Miles Davis then? I have a feeling that won't matter either... but that's okay too. I'm a Guthrie fan, just likely not for (all) the same reasons you are.

Listen, I'm not arguing with you at all, just giving my thoughts in the interest of conversation, which I'm sure you'd agree is what we're here for. I'm not trying to convince you of anything with regards to Guthrie and It's fine with me that you dig him for different reasons then me. Liking someone's music is completely subjective, why would I be offended if you don't dig his tunes or try to convince you otherwise?

However, the song longevity concept you bring up is meaningless. It's entirely based on what the masses dig - doesn't make Guthrie's songwriting any better or worse than the Beatles or Miles Davis.

It's funny you bring up Miles Davis. 99% of people you walk up to on the street could not name a Miles Davis song or even tell you what instrument he played - not much song longevity there because the masses don't give a rat's ass about Miles Davis. More people could name a Poison song. The Beatles - 99% of people could tell you a song, name every member and tell you what instrument they played because they appeal to the mass audience. Big difference.

If you want to compare song longevity between Miles Davis and Guthrie Govan, the difference is nearly negligible. 99% of people couldn't name or hum a song by either one of them.

If you dig Miles Davis' compositions more than Guthrie's, that is your subjective opinion, to which you are entitled.

Steve

Wow, that's over the top regarding Miles Davis. There is a HUGE market for jazz and Miles Davis is a superstar, a master and a Legend. To compare the two is ridiculous man. You couldn't be more wrong. You lost me BIG TIME there.

I'm not wrong about anything I said. You are inferring something in your own mind.

What are you debating with me? All I said is that 99% of the average, general public if you walked up and asked couldn't hum a Miles Davis song for you. Are you denying that? I am only comparing Guthrie and Miles Davis in that context - the general public couldn't hum a song either of them wrote.

Hope that clears things up for you. I wasn't comparing the relative merits of Miles Davis music or legend status with Guthrie's at all...

Steve

Even within the jazz community Guthrie is by no means a household name, he's only really known in guitar circles. Unlike instrumental guitar music, whose fan base is typically only other guitar players, there are lots of serious jazz fans that don't play. Miles Davis is a superstar. So no, can't agree with you on that one. And I'd think many non-musicians had to sit through some version of music history and could hum you "So What." Don't get me wrong I love Guthrie and Erotic Cakes and have seen him live multiple times and with the Aristocrats too. Guy is a complete badass for sure, but he's not even close to the notoriety of someone like Scofield or Mike Stern in jazz let alone someone like Miles Davis. At the same time I grew up listening to Miles Davis and my brother was named after him so I admit I've listened to more than most.

That said the "general public" is mostly a slovenly mass of mouth-breathers, so sure, I get what you're saying. But still, Miles Davis is known within the GLOBAL music consciousness, and always will be. Guthrie just isn't. You really can't compare the two, Miles was a complete innovator and shaped the whole genre.

 

[ejecta]

Now we are comparing Guthrie to Hendrix and giving Guthrie the nod. I bet even Guthrie would laugh his ass off it that.

It's all subjective, man. One thing that is not disputable or a matter of personal taste is that Guthrie is far better than Hendrix from a pure technical standpoint as a guitar player.

Steve

Maybe he is but technical prowess, while a nice talent to have, it's definitely not the litmus test for being a good musician.

 

[Rogue]

Maybe he is but technical prowess, while a nice talent to have, it's definitely not the litmus test for being a good musician.

I think this forum is more a weedly weedly forum.

 

[ejecta]

Maybe he is but technical prowess, while a nice talent to have, it's definitely not the litmus test for being a good musician.

I think this forum is more a weedly weedly forum.

 

[Anonymous]

I was thinking more along the lines of the Beatles (in terms of great song longevity). I think that is the level of talent he has in his playing, I wish it was matched by his writing.

I think his guitar playing is matched by his songwriting (at least Erotic Cakes), personally and his songs are more interesting to me than any Beatles music. He is not in the genre of pop music, so to me, comparing his compositions to Beatles songs doesn't make any sense. Song "longevity" is not relevant in his genre of music as, really, there is a very limited audience for what he does. There isn't enough of a mass of people to care... The Beatles have song longevity because they are great songwriters (to many anyway) in the genre of pop rock-n-roll music, which appeals to the masses...

Steve

No worries... We are allowed to like him or not for differing reasons. If you are hung up on my concept because I used a pop reference, how about Miles Davis then? I have a feeling that won't matter either... but that's okay too. I'm a Guthrie fan, just likely not for (all) the same reasons you are.

Listen, I'm not arguing with you at all, just giving my thoughts in the interest of conversation, which I'm sure you'd agree is what we're here for. I'm not trying to convince you of anything with regards to Guthrie and It's fine with me that you dig him for different reasons then me. Liking someone's music is completely subjective, why would I be offended if you don't dig his tunes or try to convince you otherwise?

However, the song longevity concept you bring up is meaningless. It's entirely based on what the masses dig - doesn't make Guthrie's songwriting any better or worse than the Beatles or Miles Davis.

It's funny you bring up Miles Davis. 99% of people you walk up to on the street could not name a Miles Davis song or even tell you what instrument he played - not much song longevity there because the masses don't give a rat's ass about Miles Davis. More people could name a Poison song. The Beatles - 99% of people could tell you a song, name every member and tell you what instrument they played because they appeal to the mass audience. Big difference.

If you want to compare song longevity between Miles Davis and Guthrie Govan, the difference is nearly negligible. 99% of people couldn't name or hum a song by either one of them.

If you dig Miles Davis' compositions more than Guthrie's, that is your subjective opinion, to which you are entitled.

Steve

Wow, that's over the top regarding Miles Davis. There is a HUGE market for jazz and Miles Davis is a superstar, a master and a Legend. To compare the two is ridiculous man. You couldn't be more wrong. You lost me BIG TIME there.

I'm not wrong about anything I said. You are inferring something in your own mind.

What are you debating with me? All I said is that 99% of the average, general public if you walked up and asked couldn't hum a Miles Davis song for you. Are you denying that? I am only comparing Guthrie and Miles Davis in that context - the general public couldn't hum a song either of them wrote.

Hope that clears things up for you. I wasn't comparing the relative merits of Miles Davis music or legend status with Guthrie's at all...

Steve

Even within the jazz community Guthrie is by no means a household name, he's only really known in guitar circles. Unlike instrumental guitar music, whose fan base is typically only other guitar players, there are lots of serious jazz fans that don't play. Miles Davis is a superstar. So no, can't agree with you on that one. And I'd think many non-musicians had to sit through some version of music history and could hum you "So What." Don't get me wrong I love Guthrie and Erotic Cakes and have seen him live multiple times and with the Aristocrats too. Guy is a complete badass for sure, but he's not even close to the notoriety of someone like Scofield or Mike Stern in jazz let alone someone like Miles Davis. At the same time I grew up listening to Miles Davis and my brother was named after him so I admit I've listened to more than most.

That said the "general public" is mostly a slovenly mass of mouth-breathers, so sure, I get what you're saying. But still, Miles Davis is known within the GLOBAL music consciousness, and always will be. Guthrie just isn't. You really can't compare the two, Miles was a complete innovator and shaped the whole genre.

But... my only comment was on the general public. I recognize that Miles Davis is far more well known than Guthrie Govan, of course. I'm sure far more people would recognize his name if you randomly asked people. What I'm saying is that if you walked up to 20 people randomly in Times Square and asked them to name or hum a Miles Davis or Guthrie Govan song, not one of them would be able to do it. Ask the same 20 people to name or hum a Beatles song and the majority could do it. My comments were made in the context of "song longevity" that Zach brought up. My only point is that the masses decide what has this longevity and the masses know pop music, not jazz or guitar instrumental music. I recognize there is a large jazz community - once again - the random 20 people you asked in Times Square - I doubt you'd get one jazz fan out of the bunch that is deep enough to name and hum a Miles Davis song. I think you are WAY overestimating the music history class effect, bro...

More people will remember and be able to hum "Gangnam Style" in 20 years than anything Miles Davis ever wrote - this measure, to me, is not relevant as to whether someone writes great songs or not as it is all subjective. Just because masses of people like something better, doesn't make it better. I love Guthrie's songs, some think they suck - all subjective...

Of course, I could be wrong.

Steve

 

[Anonymous]

Now we are comparing Guthrie to Hendrix and giving Guthrie the nod. I bet even Guthrie would laugh his ass off it that.

It's all subjective, man. One thing that is not disputable or a matter of personal taste is that Guthrie is far better than Hendrix from a pure technical standpoint as a guitar player.

Steve

Maybe he is but technical prowess, while a nice talent to have, it's definitely not the litmus test for being a good musician.

Never said it was. However, once you move into the "good musician" argument, subjectivity starts to creep in... Which is fine. You like what you like and I like what I like and a variety of musicians get to make a living. Sometimes we'll agree and sometimes we won't. All good...

Steve

 

[Anonymous]

Maybe he is but technical prowess, while a nice talent to have, it's definitely not the litmus test for being a good musician.

I think this forum is more a weedly weedly forum.

Hey, that Randy Rhodes tribute thing he did was pretty cool!

Steve

 

[Anonymous]

Maybe he is but technical prowess, while a nice talent to have, it's definitely not the litmus test for being a good musician.

I think this forum is more a weedly weedly forum.

I love all kinds of music, not just technical guitar playing. My favorite music of all time is probably the set of albums the Stones released from '68 through '72. No blistering 80s style guitar solos there, although I love plenty of that as well... I think you'd be surprised at what people like here...

Steve