Local Commentary About Rock Guitar

[ToneMerc]

Interesting local commentary about the current state of rock guitar.


http://hamptonroads.com/2014/04/poptotu ... od-no-more

TM

[vibratoking]

Interesting article. Different is what makes any musician interesting. We have all heard so many different musicians that it is hard to actually be different these days.

That article mentioned Jack White. I don't like or get the Jack White thing. Masturbation is done best alone...

BTW, the music industry is killing music. I have a hard time even turning on the radio anymore. Full of useless, predictable efforts to generate revenue instigated by some douchebag of the music industry. One good thing about being a typical teenager, they have no memory that the shit they are listening to has been done a million times before. Ignorance is bliss, but I feel sorry for kids in this generation...the role models are Miley Cyrus, Taylor Swift and Justin Bieber. God, that made me sick just saying it.

[NickC]

First off, Jack White and Derek Trucks should never be mentioned in the same paragraph (or same planet). It just ain't right. In fact, if everyone eschews any mention of Jack White ever again, that'll be about right.

Secondly, I wholeheartedly disagree with Mr. Clay Barbour's basic premise in this line "Lost in modern music is a little of that dedication to the craft that - along with drug addiction - defined many of the greats during the salad days of rock."

Drug addiction never helped any artist, in any way-manner-shape-or-form. Full stop. Drug addiction never "defined many of the greats." Yes, many of them were addicted to drugs. They'd have been even greater without the debilitating effects, certainly NOT BECAUSE of them. That's just irresponsible from a "journalist" pontificating on the subject like it's a fashion statement, rather than the horror it was.

Heroin didn't "make" Chet Baker. Alcohol didn't "make" Roy Buchanan. Both suffered through those coping mechanisms, which eventually destroyed them.

[TNblueshawk]

First off, Jack White and Derek Trucks should never be mentioned in the same paragraph (or same planet).

Good God I'll second that.

Nick, the way I read that drug paragraph was different. I could be wrong of course but it seems all he said with that was he was pointing out that some of the greats were addicts. I didn't read into it that he felt because of this addiction they were great? Whatcha think?

About a year or so ago on another forum this guitar God thing came up. I guess the criteria for the article is popular rock bands and there are no guitar God's? If so yeah for sure. However, as an avid blues lover or blues rock if one prefers I disagree strongly that there are no guitar Gods. Unless the defition of such is that little Joey and Susie must know their names and it has to be straight up rock (whatever that is) I'll put Robben Ford and Matt Schofield, just off the cuff, up against anyone. I could go down the line with others but I'm just trying to make a point.

Maybe I read this whole article wrong which is certainly possible with me.

[M Fowler]

My rock god hero's were not commercial artists but were/or are local players that influenced me and unheard of.

I don't listen to music anymore unless I stumble upon a youtube video or someone posts a link. My record buying, tape buying, CD buying and downloading stopped years ago.

A concert here and there and a visit to the local watering hole once in a while.

[bradicusmaximus]

Interesting local commentary about the current state of rock guitar.


http://hamptonroads.com/2014/04/poptotu ... od-no-more

TM

I think it's short-sighted and ignorant to proclaim the death of whatever. All it takes is one person to emerge on the scene and change everything. For example, I remember when I was in high school, we began my senior year celebrating speed metal, neoclassical shredding, and generally all things Mike Varney and Shrapnel records, but by October Nirvana hit and hit hard. Things changed almost over night and love them or hate them, they defined the tone of my generation's formative years.

So, today we have bands and groups and mashed up watered-down corporate pop. Who knows what's waiting in the wings? The next guitar slinger is probably out there now putting the finishing touches on the sound that will inspire millions of kids to pick up their Squire or Epiphone or First Act or whatever and try to be that guy (or girl). It will be the perfect storm of sonic ambrosia and we won't realize it happened until we look back fondly at it.

In context, I'm also old enough to vaguely remember when they proclaimed Disco was dead as well. We all know what happened there - it just came back like a zombie to eat musical brains.

[NickC]

First off, Jack White and Derek Trucks should never be mentioned in the same paragraph (or same planet).

Good God I'll second that.

Nick, the way I read that drug paragraph was different. I could be wrong of course but it seems all he said with that was he was pointing out that some of the greats were addicts. I didn't read into it that he felt because of this addiction they were great? Whatcha think?
...........................

You're right. I'm occasionally going off like an exposed nerve on this topic.

Back in the day there was a LOT of prattle (by muso's and rock critics and certainly Hunter S. Thompson) to the effect that drugs was a viable way towards expanding ones consciousness. To that effect, many were "tuning in, turning on, and dropping out." I lost too many friends, and the world lost too many fantastic artists, as a consequence. Whatever benefit drugs ever contributed to the creative process, has been eclipsed by the damage they've done.

You know the saying about the sixties: "If you remember the sixties, you weren't really there."

I've forgotten more about the sixties than I'll ever remember (it gets funnier the more you think about it).

[lord preset]

About a year or so ago on another forum this guitar God thing came up. I guess the criteria for the article is popular rock bands and there are no guitar God's? If so yeah for sure. However, as an avid blues lover or blues rock if one prefers I disagree strongly that there are no guitar Gods. Unless the defition of such is that little Joey and Susie must know their names and it has to be straight up rock (whatever that is) I'll put Robben Ford and Matt Schofield, just off the cuff, up against anyone. I could go down the line with others but I'm just trying to make a point.

Maybe I read this whole article wrong which is certainly possible with me.

There are probably as many if not more amazing guitarists around as there ever were. The point is that lead guitar simply does not have the status it once did in popular music culture - and that is absolutely the case. But you could say that of instrumentalists of all types. It's not like the masses have turned their fickle affections away from guitarists in favor of keyboard players or drummers etc.. Musical virtuosity of all types mostly fails to draw much attention beyond niche markets of aficionados. This is the age of the producer - who typically remains in the shadows - and the distracted listener, for whom music is for background ambience while they are doing other things. I think the only reason singers remain famous at all is that you need a face for the music for marketing purposes.

[TNblueshawk]

First off, Jack White and Derek Trucks should never be mentioned in the same paragraph (or same planet).

Good God I'll second that.

Nick, the way I read that drug paragraph was different. I could be wrong of course but it seems all he said with that was he was pointing out that some of the greats were addicts. I didn't read into it that he felt because of this addiction they were great? Whatcha think?
...........................

You're right. I'm occasionally going off like an exposed nerve on this topic.

Back in the day there was a LOT of prattle (by muso's and rock critics and certainly Hunter S. Thompson) to the effect that drugs was a viable way towards expanding ones consciousness. To that effect, many were "tuning in, turning on, and dropping out." I lost too many friends, and the world lost too many fantastic artists, as a consequence. Whatever benefit drugs ever contributed to the creative process, has been eclipsed by the damage they've done.

You know the saying about the sixties: "If you remember the sixties, you weren't really there."

I've forgotten more about the sixties than I'll ever remember (it gets funnier the more you think about it).

No doubt. I grew up in the mid/late 70's and then when old enough got turned onto the late 60's music and it stuck with me all these years. I'm familiar with the thought that LSD etc.. expanded the mind allowing one to explore one's musical mind etc.... I've no comment on that. However, I always wondered if the drugs, depending on one's choice, somehow contributed to the better playing ability of some. By that I mean if the drug of choice kept you awake and "up" if you will and did this allow some to practice/play 12-16 hours or whatever a day therebay allowing one to become better? I'm bascially backing into the drug thing here. Obviously this would only work in the short term until the drug becomse more important than the guitar.

It's just something I've thought about from time to time but don't have any proof on the theory. Not sure how you do that. All I know is I've been so damn tired and wanted to pick up the guitar but didn't due to work, life or whatever. I keep hoping some fresh air will give me the buzz I need to wake up and want to practice.

[TNblueshawk]

About a year or so ago on another forum this guitar God thing came up. I guess the criteria for the article is popular rock bands and there are no guitar God's? If so yeah for sure. However, as an avid blues lover or blues rock if one prefers I disagree strongly that there are no guitar Gods. Unless the defition of such is that little Joey and Susie must know their names and it has to be straight up rock (whatever that is) I'll put Robben Ford and Matt Schofield, just off the cuff, up against anyone. I could go down the line with others but I'm just trying to make a point.

Maybe I read this whole article wrong which is certainly possible with me.

There are probably as many if not more amazing guitarists around as there ever were. The point is that lead guitar simply does not have the status it once did in popular music culture - and that is absolutely the case. But you could say that of instrumentalists of all types. It's not like the masses have turned their fickle affections away from guitarists in favor of keyboard players or drummers etc.. Musical virtuosity of all types mostly fails to draw much attention beyond niche markets of aficionados. This is the age of the producer - who typically remains in the shadows - and the distracted listener, for whom music is for background ambience while they are doing other things. I think the only reason singers remain famous at all is that you need a face for the music for marketing purposes.

Agreed. I also noticed that somewhere along the way 'ugly' people apparently can't play popular music either. Some weird anomaly occured in the last 10 years in particular where only good looking people deserve a chance to "make it". Weird

[talbany]

This is definitely a culture shift mostly due to shows like The Voice,American Idol, X-Factor etc, has swung the attention to the singer..Guitar hero has not helped much in the way of cultivating any real talent..The other thing is Woman in general would much rather hear a crooner sing love ballads and run around than someone whail-ing away on a guitar..Ever been to a Joe Bonnamassa show?..It's all dudes..Hopefully guy's like Derek and Joe and Warren can help get things going but from here it looks well rather Bleak!!

BTW..There were a few out there that could play well high.. When I saw GNR at the Bayou in DC Slash literally fell off the bus drunk and hit the stage and played amazing..SRV in his drinking drug days also played like a Monster and I don't know how Bird played the way he did being on heroine all those years!!..Some can do it others suck at it..

Tony

[Jana]

Kinda like yodeling with an auto tuner--that's my analysis of most of the music these days. There are some young people out there with real talent but, unfortunately, their talent falls on deaf ears.

[ampmike]

Interesting article. Different is what makes any musician interesting. We have all heard so many different musicians that it is hard to actually be different these days.

That article mentioned Jack White. I don't like or get the Jack White thing. Masturbation is done best alone...

BTW, the music industry is killing music. I have a hard time even turning on the radio anymore. Full of useless, predictable efforts to generate revenue instigated by some douchebag of the music industry. One good thing about being a typical teenager, they have no memory that the shit they are listening to has been done a million times before. Ignorance is bliss, but I feel sorry for kids in this generation...the role models are Miley Cyrus, Taylor Swift and Justin Bieber. God, that made me sick just saying it.

WELL SAID,I could not have said that any better!!!!!!Mikey

[boots]

I think the problem with today's music is that the listeners (not the musicians) are all on the wrong drugs! Just kidding....

The psychedelic music of the 60's and 70's was great because the audiences were in tune with what the bands were playing. It wouldn't have been the same if the musicians were the only ones who were "experienced".

Not that I'm promoting drug abuse. I'll be the first to admit that my playing has improved greatly since I quit getting high. But I also must say that just one "experience" can have a huge impact on one's appreciation of sounds and music.

[ToobNoob]

Sorry, double post.