G3 - When heroes fail

Osensei

New member
So many these days practice technique as a religion. I keep reading posts where guys have gotten bored and are stuck in a rut. They wanna push beyond the boundaries of their current state of the art playing into new frontiers.

You'll be surprised to discover than many of the God-like guitar heroes that so many have come to admire have the same human weaknesses as the rest of us mere mortals. Yes, I'm speaking of the venerable Joe Satriani and Steve Vai. I purposely failed to mention Johnson cause IMO he's like a guitar non-entity! LOL! I know how disrespectful that sounds but I'm entitled to my opinon. I respect his spirit and effort but to me he's the G3's weakest link.

What can I say? When Vai and Satriani do their own thing they are in total and complete command of their element. However, as with all musicians the moment of truth arrives sooner or later. Keep in mind as I speak that these two gentlemen are head-cutter supremicists. So this is no DIS!

The moment of truth came in the final set of the first G3 concert when all three guitar players took the stage and decided to take on some electric blues. It was painfully obvious IMO that all three came up lacking when faced with the standard blues repetoire. The emotion and fire of true blues playing was never approached by either party. This just goes to show that it takes more than mastery of what Frank Zappa refered to as "Stunt Guitar" to make a complete guitarist.

Like I said, this is not a DIS! I would just like to point out the fact that even the untouchables of the industries have their weaknesses. Keeping in mind that the sum of their weaknesses is often greater than many of our own strenghts, let me venture on to say this point is offered as a point of encouragement for those who are stuck in that rut. The point illustrates that even the greatest among us also struggle to improve. It also illustrates and hopefully inspires those who practice to seek that intangable "something" that is beyond mere technique and theory to arrive at that human/emotional place that makes the guitar the greatest spiritual instrument.
 
Re: G3 - When heroes fail

I know what you mean, I am slowing down bigtime these days, the single notes and how I play them are really getting more attention from my side.
No matter the amount of output, you still need to have something to say.
How many really have something that they really want to say?
Just how many knows when to keep quiet and let the space talk?
I like quirky stuff, and I do not mind fast players, but I do not get players with nothing but right notes and no story!
It is just noise then with no purpose or direction, we like that as persons!
Dunno maybe I am wrong here?
Interesting thread!
Niels
 
Re: G3 - When heroes fail

I've never been a fast player, I've tried to do it and just couldn't get the speed thing down, and basically I've worked on other things like vibrato and bending as my "tricks" so to speak. I don't want to sound like I'm gloating, but I've had more people come up to me after I've played at places like jam sessions to praise what I did, or ask to see my guitars and ask me how I did certain things, more so than the guy could can do the speed picking and shred type stuff. I find it funny what impresses people sometimes...
 
Re: G3 - When heroes fail

It absolutely is a "DIS". Who elected you to define the terms taste, fire, emotion, musicality etc? John Coltrane defined speed and chops long before guitar shredding was even thought about. Is he also some sort of second class player because he doesn't fit your definitions?
 
Re: G3 - When heroes fail

Speed is good if you have the phrasing to match, but alsoy ou can have speed and no melodic sense. Slow cn be good if the melodies and feeling are ther. I do think however that being fast does not mean lack of emoition or feeling. I do ahve to say that I aleays thought Eric Johnson was awesome, but definatly of a differrent style than Vai or Satch, yet he is fast too. If hes not your pick thats ok. I would say though, none of those guys are really straight blues players they are more blues influeneced players, at least Satch and Johnson are.
 
Re: G3 - When heroes fail

You stated your preferences well, and I respect that.

That being said, they are nothing more than preferences. It's always dicey when commenting authoritatively on subjective topics. I, in moments of weakness, do it, too, but I try to avoid it.

I get your point, though. As great as any player may be, he's not as great as many would like to think that he is. All players have weaknesses, areas where they are uncomfortable, things that they can't do, etc.
 
Re: G3 - When heroes fail

Coltrane? Let me tell you 'bout some Coltrane, some Miles, and some everybody else in Jazz! None of them could measure up to the standard set by Charlie Parker. All the rest after Parker were just interesting to listen to. Parker was a player who could craft the perfect real-time improvised melody. I never heard Parker get lost in the changes like I've heard so many jazzmasters do that came after him.

Now you can either let the former statement tick you off, or you can try to resonate some understanding. What you have to appreciate about the musicians that followed Parker was that they finally threw off the constraint of having to follow Parker. They rightly set out to pioneer thier own sound. To thier credit, they were intelligent enough to realize what was truly important. Each of them came to thier own conclusion that what was needed from them was to make thier own unique contribution. From thier efforts sprang new styles of Jazz that were just as monumental as what parker had done in the bebop era.

Cool, Freejazz, Hard Bop and Fusion all sprang from Musical Natural Selection in its purist form. I say Natural Selection because Parker was so dominant that he forced the neccessity for change on the part of those who would follow him if they were to ever develop further. This is just the natural way of things.

Yes, both Miles and Coltrane started out as decent bebopists but they finally realized, "Man we ain't gonna never top Charlie! So lets forge ahead"! Onward and upward as they say. And so they accepted the necessity to abandon "Parkerism". Miles later fathered several distinct jazz idioms on his own and became the "Father of Fusion". Coltrane went on to play what he refered to as the "Black Classical Music". And when they died they died playing thier own creations utilizing thier own voices and not Parker's!

So when I encourage young people today to break out of thier Vai-ism and Satriani-ism, Tribal Techism or Whoeverism. I'm not Dissing anybody as Architect seems to think! I'm just encouraging them not to end up at 50. At home playin alone. Constantly, playing the same old tired rehashed shredder crap in the year 2030 and having to listen to your kids say, "Dad, can't you play anything else?!"
 
Last edited:
Re: G3 - When heroes fail

So many miss the point! I love and appreciate the music of these artists. The purpose is to encourage others to strive ahead by illustrating how even monsters of a particular style still have weakness and barriers to overcome.
 
Re: G3 - When heroes fail

I get what you're trying to say, but your user name doesn't help. You're no sensei to me, you're just another dude with an opinion on the internet.

Someone get this saved... We're about to throw down in "Tips and Clips"...lol
 
Re: G3 - When heroes fail

I study Karate. And I chose my name to honor the memory of Morihei Ueshiba, the father of Aikido and practitioner of Omotokyo.
 
Re: G3 - When heroes fail

And jazz, apparently.

Look... I appreciate what you're saying and I agree, but...

I learned that music appreciation can't be forced in an internet forum.

The best that you can hope for is to make suggestions and hope that they resonate with some and that it opens their eyes (ears) to something that they didn't see before.
 
Re: G3 - When heroes fail

And so we arrive full circle. From the art of music to the art of debate and back again.

The only problem I see with this being on the internet is that we can't all share beer and pretzels! LOL!
 
Last edited:
Re: G3 - When heroes fail

:) I mst say i like the idea of forgingh ahead and not getting caught up in satch-ism or vai-ism as you put it. I don"t know most of those jazz artits you mentioned but what your saying does click with me. I am currently studying satch and will likely study vai soon too. I howevwer want to aquire thier tools they have and use them in my own way. For me as a player technique is important. I love shredding but i also realize that the players i admire are doing good enough at being themselves and whats the use of trying to be them. I also want the freedom to play something slower if i feel that in a song and i also don't want to feel like every song has to have a guitar solo. yeah our favorite players all have weaknesses as do we all. Creativity before speed. For me i want it with speed , at least when speed is appropriate.:)
 
Re: G3 - When heroes fail

Did someone say beer?

I understand and agree with your point. I've seen it in my own playing. I started playing guitar soon after Yngwie hit and I was obsessed with speed and technique. As I've grown ( both in age and musically), I have come to view technique purely as the vehicle for expressing the emotion that I feel when I'm playing. There's just as much technique involved in a bend or slur as there is in a six string arppegio. The most importand thing is to know when to do what.

Since my fretting hand pinky has been out of commission for a little while, I've realized how many areas I haven't explored technique-wise. It's been a great learning experience.
 
Re: G3 - When heroes fail

My two quick cents.

We learn from what other people can and can not do. How they play and don't play. In the end, hopefully you have created something of your own.
 
Re: G3 - When heroes fail

Finally more ppl that get it! I'm not a proponant of fast or slow. That would be too closed minded a position for an artist to take. A user in another forum made this statement once, "There is no valid reason to imitate art!". Wrong! There are valid reasons to imitate art! That fellow was obviously not an artist.

Reason #1 - To preserve the art for future generations
Reason #2 - To study an art form or learn by doing

It's true! Very few people can just pick up an axe and spontaneously create thier own style or movement from day one. Before we can lead we must follow. Total freedom dictates that its just as valid to follow Vai and Satriani as it is Miles, Coltrane or anyone else. It's a question of personal choice and it's all good! But at some point an artist needs to free themselves from the influences of others and become an innovator in their own right. However few people have the gift to start out as thier own musician. For most following thier contemporaries or those who came before is the best way.

The danger however, is in becoming so conformed to our idols the we rob ourselves of our own ability to change and grow. That's how ruts get started. The same can be said of theory and technique. Yes, both are excellent tools to have. However, I've seen more than a couple students in my lifetime give up music forever simply because someone taught them theory! How can that happen you might ask? It's simple! Some people become so obsessed with one aspect of an art such as theory, thinking that it is "the answer". They lose the ability to play a single note unless they can think of a valid theoretical reason for doing so. The result is that they lose thier "intuitive" ability to create. The resulting frustration makes them give up.

In the end music, as most arts, is greater than the some of all its component parts save one - it's creator!
 
Last edited:
Re: G3 - When heroes fail

Musical theory is a useful tool, a guideline to understanding music, and a language for describing ideas to other musicians. It is not a law dictating how music should be composed, as many shred players (myself included) seem to believe. The limitations of this idea lead to burn out, or a creative slump, at least for me. My best musical ideas were not mapped out with a theoretical approach, they were happened upon by accident. A rare occasion to think outside the limits of musical theory as I understood it at the time. This has lead to growth musically, because I needed to figure out how my accidental inspiration was accounted for in the theory.

Then, I heard Carlos Santana. Musically quite simple, but extremely difficult to play, much more difficult for me to play than Satriani. (never liked vai). So lately I study much less theory, and much more phrasing and tone. More growth I guess.
 
Back
Top