Resolution to the frequent debates about speed

Firstly, I didn't say you were a virtuoso if you could play at 180bpm+, I said you were knocking on virtuosity's door. Virtuosity is not the same as being a full-blown virtuoso.

If you want to take the real definition of virtuoso, there are very few guitar virtuosos---and even Yngwie wouldn't be one, because he cannot read music. A virtuoso is someone with NO musical weakness whatsoever on their chosen instrument.

Virtuosity is having some of the characteristics of a virtuoso--in this case having somewhat the speed of a virtuoso.


Second, with regard to Zakk Wylde--actually if you are talking about real speed, it is important that Zakk Wylde be consistent in his playing. As I said before, he cannot sustain the high speeds without resorting to legato to give the appearance of keeping the same tempo.

In that solo, he starts off pretty fast but then can't keep the steady stream going and so he stops alternate picking---the result is that the line still sounds like it is flowing at the same tempo when in fact his playing becomes MUCH slower overall.

Ask any professional guitar player about how hard it is to alternate pick at 180 versus how hard it is to legato at 180 and they will tell you that the former is harder because it requires both hands to be coordinated.


As to who I regard as virtuosos, there are not many. Going to Berklee you're exposed to a lot of brilliant musical minds on every instrument, and you start to see that it's not just speed or technique--even though its a huge part--that determines this quality. I think John Petrucci is a virtuoso, an all-round talent that has no real weakness. Al Di Meola is in the same vein, even though he refuses to use more practical techniques for some things.

Originally Posted by: elklandercc

Who do you consider virtuosos?

Satriani... Vai... Guys that write whole compositions with complexity AND diversity in their playing styles.... Instead of a whole album of balls to the wall speed... Some guys that play fast ARE virtuoso's they just don't show it enough for me to put them in that category... For me the only two are Satch and Vai...

A virtuoso is "Someone with an outstanding technical ability at singing or playing an instrument." If you think Al Di Meola or Petrucci have no music weakness, you are very worng. I'm sure if you were to ask them in aninterview I have no doubts they would throw a list at you. Don't get me wrong, they are 2 of the best guitarists that will ever live, as well as Satch and Vai. But you have to admit that Zakk fits under that category. A lot of guitarists use Satch, Vai, Di Meola, or Petrucci to rate other guitarists and I think that wrong.

And with the speed thing, again, its speed in general, not strickly picking hand. Sure, everyone knows legato is much easier that alt picking which is why a lot of shredders use it. Listen to some Racer X and hear Gilbert's blazing fast alt. picking and legato. A classic example is Superhero's (Jolly, your the man), in the 2nd he goes from alt. picking to sweep to legato at blazing fast speeds and keeps up his pace. Just because some parts of the solo would be eaier to play than the other (to him, not us hahaha) doesn't mean its not fast playing.

We need to condense all these "speed vs whatever" "who's the best" "who's the fastest" threads into one gigantic trash can forum..... so when someone joins the forum they can just go and post all their "brilliant" opinions...

They don't have any real weakness as compared to the average player. Just listen to them play. Sure they'll say 'I have a harder time with X and Y' but that doesn't mean they do X weakly, as a matter of fact, most of the time they excel at whatever X is.

And again, if you want to go on PURE speed i.e. legato and alt picking whatever--Wylde still does not make the cut. A legato run from Paul Gilbert versus one from Zakk Wylde is a lot faster. The reason why I discounted Zakk Wylde is that he uses legato to keep the flow going, which gives his lines the appearance all being played at an even tempo with the same note durations when they are not. That's all.

And aschleman, no one is forcing you to read or post to this particular thread, why insult it?

Originally Posted by: aschlemanWe need to condense all these "speed vs whatever" "who's the best" "who's the fastest" threads into one gigantic trash can forum..... so when someone joins the forum they can just go and post all their "brilliant" opinions...

You said it, all the threads I've seen never go anywhere.

Just because Zakk can't play as fast as Gilbert, doesn't put him off the list.

Originally Posted by: PlatonicShredWhomever said they were playing 32nds at 140 on a single string---I'd like to hear an audio file. A lot of times people think they are playing faster than they really are, or the tempo is so fast that they confuse different note durations.

This post isn't about 'is speed better than this or that' it's just about the claims people make regarding speed. Giving a realistic view of how fast the fastest guys in town are playing. That's all.

The whole speed debate in terms of taste is for another day.

Yea that was me, sorry I recorded it and slowed it down it wasnt nearly as fast as it should be. At 140 i was only getting 6 notes in each beat and not very well. Its weird how I never thought to slow it down before thanks though now i know where i stand. but i got 9 hours of guitar in today

Originally Posted by: elklandercc
Just because Zakk can't play as fast as Gilbert, doesn't put him off the list.

And why not?

If you research the history on the term virtuoso and what it means, you'll see that, in the modern sense of the word, a virtuoso is someone who's ability inspires 'awe' in those who watch them perform.

Now, I've said that Zakk Wylde is just underneath the radar of virtuosity, which means to say that he's pretty close--but not quite, in terms of the speed a virtuoso possesses.

Not everyone is a virtuoso. Not even everyone who plays fast is a virtuoso. Only a select few are. And remember, I have repeatedly said that speed is just one facet of a virtuoso, which is why I used the term virtuosity.

A virtuoso's speed on guitar would be roughly sixteenths at 200-200 bpm. This includes arpeggios and permutated runs ((not just ascending scales, or pedaled scales))

However, a true virtuoso would also be able to convey emotion, have perfect intonation, have a great vibrato, the tone created by them would also be superb, and they would be able to read music.

Originally Posted by: PlatonicShredAnd why not?

If you research the history on the term virtuoso and what it means, you'll see that, in the modern sense of the word, a virtuoso is someone who's ability inspires 'awe' in those who watch them perform.



However, a true virtuoso would also be able to convey emotion, have perfect intonation, have a great vibrato, the tone created by them would also be superb, and they would be able to read music.

Have you ever been to a BLS show? You'll see some awe during solo's.


I'm not sure about the sheet music but its very probable because he play's piano, but he has all the above, especially vibrato.

I've been to one single Ozzy show with him there, and I can tell you that while the reaction during his solos was headbanging and general cheering on--I didn't see people standing there with their mouths agape in awe, just listening.

Whereas with Yngwie--that's pretty much the entire crowd.

I never have said that Zakk Wylde isn't a great player, or that I don't respect his ability. He just isn't a virtuoso--a ton of great players aren't. It's okay.

Maybe I've been brainwashed by Berklee. Even Satch and Vai being mentioned as virtuoso players around here draws a crooked look or two. But while I think those two are debateable as to whether or not they are virtuosos ((More Vai than Satch)), Wylde is a clearer case.

Originally Posted by: PlatonicShredI've been to one single Ozzy show with him there, and I can tell you that while the reaction during his solos was headbanging and general cheering on--I didn't see people standing there with their mouths agape in awe, just listening.

Becuase if they did stand with their mouths open they'd look pretty funny wouldn't they??

But in your previous post you proved Zakk to be a virtuoso yourself, I just pointed it out.

Cheering on at a Metal show is awe, I saw Rob Zombie not too long ago and John 5 went at it and I was in awe, but I wasn't just standing there, I was letting him know how great he is by cheering him on. If a crowd was dead silent while I was playing a solo, I'd be like WTF?

Originally Posted by: aschlemanBecuase if they did stand with their mouths open they'd look pretty funny wouldn't they??

No need to be sarcastic, but for clarification: No one stopped cheering just to listen to Zakk Wylde play--none that I saw anyway. A lot of people were cheering positive things about Mr. Wylde though. That's not what happened when I saw Yngwie perform. People were much quieter.

And hey, you could argue that it's because the venues Zakk plays at with Ozzy are less intimate than the ones Yngwie plays at instead of just being snide.

I usually equate Zakk Wylde and Steve Howe in terms of ability. Just on the cusp of things, but not quite there. Love both of their playing, I just don't feel they are virtuosos.

Originally Posted by: elklanderccBut in your previous post you proved Zakk to be a virtuoso yourself, I just pointed it out.

Cheering on at a Metal show is awe, I saw Rob Zombie not too long ago and John 5 went at it and I was in awe, but I wasn't just standing there, I was letting him know how great he is by cheering him on. If a crowd was dead silent while I was playing a solo, I'd be like WTF?

No, I didn't. Zakk Wylde's intonation is not perfect, he can't read music, he doesn't possess the technical facility of a virtuoso, and even for emotion he's not that hot.

So, no I didn't prove him to be anything but a good player who's just not a virtuoso.

You seem to want to put him in as a virtuoso, even though you admit that all his fast licks are just a few pet licks---whereas other guys ((even Yngwie)) have a very large amount of licks they can run at warp speed. He does not have the total control over alternate picking or legato that virtuosos have, another fact admitted by you.

At any point a player is limited, or it is apparent that they are limited--they are not a virtuoso. Yngwie could play anything he wanted to right now. You cannot say the same thing about Zakk.

Originally Posted by: PlatonicShred That's not what happened when I saw Yngwie perform. People were much quieter.

They're two different kinds of concerts man... Don't even compare an Ozzy concert to a Malmsteen concert or a Vai concert... That's as unfair of a comparison as any that's been made... Almost as bad as trying to say Hendrix can be compared to EVH... they're two completely different entities to their own.

Originally Posted by: PlatonicShred

And hey, you could argue that it's because the venues Zakk plays at with Ozzy are less intimate than the ones Yngwie plays at instead of just being snide.

I actually predicted what you were going to say already. And you're right, they are two different types of concerts. If you both wish to believe Zakk Wylde is a virtuoso, that's your choice. I have just explained why I, and several others, do not feel that way.

To summarize:
Maximum speed a little under the norm for virtuosos.
Cannot sustain that speed.
Has a limited musical vocabulary at that speed.
Intonation not among the best.
Has not mastered several techniques that the virtuosos have.

Originally Posted by: PlatonicShredNo, I didn't. Zakk Wylde's intonation is not perfect, he can't read music, he doesn't possess the technical facility of a virtuoso, and even for emotion he's not that hot.

So, no I didn't prove him to be anything but a good player who's just not a virtuoso.

You seem to want to put him in as a virtuoso, even though you admit that all his fast licks are just a few pet licks---whereas other guys ((even Yngwie)) have a very large amount of licks they can run at warp speed. He does not have the total control over alternate picking or legato that virtuosos have, another fact admitted by you.

At any point a player is limited, or it is apparent that they are limited--they are not a virtuoso. Yngwie could play anything he wanted to right now. You cannot say the same thing about Zakk.

I didn't say all his fast licks, I was referring to his acoustic playing. So where did you find the information that Zakk can't read sheet music. If he learned to play piano w/o being able to read sheet music, he had one hell of a teacher who happened to dislike sheet music.

This thread is going nowhere even after it was resolved, I think I'm just gonna go to bed.

It's possible to learn piano without knowing how to read sheet music. Maybe he taught himself? I never said whether he could or could not, I just said that just because he plays piano doesn't necessarily mean he can read music. That's all.

The thread is going nowhere because we ended up on a different topic than the original one:

What defines virtuosic speed is around 200-220 bpm. I have never heard anyone play sixteenths at tempos faster than this beyond maybe a 4-8 note burst.

That's all. It was actually intended to dispel some of the myths that fly around about speed. Ha.

It's just funny that I'm being seen as this shred advocate--I'm usually the first person to rally to the defense of people like Angus Young and Jimi Hendrix in my own little circles of friends.

Originally Posted by: PlatonicShredI actually predicted what you were going to say already. And you're right, they are two different types of concerts. If you both wish to believe Zakk Wylde is a virtuoso, that's your choice. I have just explained why I, and several others, do not feel that way.
.

I haven't said that he is... in any way....

I agree that he's probably not. By my standards of virtuosity... I would say that he's not. He's definitely one of the better rock guitarists of all time and he's proved that and in the realm of rock guitar he is a virtuoso... Outside the realm of rock guitar I would say that he's not. He is what he is and that's what he is... a great guitarist... I wouldn't, however, put him in the league of Vai, Satch, Malmsteen, and Petrucci.... I just feel like they're more technically sound and diverse... But that's not Zakk's style. His style is to kick you in the face with a solo... Becuase he only gets at most a minute of a song to show make you feel him... Vai, Satch, Malmsteen get entire songs.... Zakk has a very unrefined way of playing guitar that suits his style and I love that about him... I prefer his Pride and Glory and Book of Shadows stuff to anything that he's ever done... and there's not a lot of his fast stuff on either of those albums... But I do like "Speedball" as well. That's a decent little diddy

On the speed debate... you already know how I feel. Speed does nothing for me... simply put. It makes me yawn to be quite honest... I don't think speed has anything to do with being a good guitarist though... Seeing a kid alt picking as fast as he can just tells me that he probably likes to listen to Dream Theater and he probably thinks either John Petrucci, Yngwie Malmsteen, or Buckethead is the greatest guitar player ever.... and they probably have no jam skills whatsoever... all because someone on a forum somewhere convinced him that being as fast as he can is the way to being a good guitar player... That's all I'm saying... I'm done with this now...

Originally Posted by: aschlemanI haven't said that he is... in any way....

I agree that he's probably not. By my standards of virtuosity... I would say that he's not. He's definitely one of the better rock guitarists of all time and he's proved that and in the realm of rock guitar he is a virtuoso... Outside the realm of rock guitar I would say that he's not. He is what he is and that's what he is... a great guitarist... I wouldn't, however, put him in the league of Vai, Satch, Malmsteen, and Petrucci.... I just feel like they're more technically sound and diverse... But that's not Zakk's style. His style is to kick you in the face with a solo... Becuase he only gets at most a minute of a song to show make you feel him... Vai, Satch, Malmsteen get entire songs.... Zakk has a very unrefined way of playing guitar that suits his style and I love that about him... I prefer his Pride and Glory and Book of Shadows stuff to anything that he's ever done... and there's not a lot of his fast stuff on either of those albums... But I do like "Speedball" as well. That's a decent little diddy

On the speed debate... you already know how I feel. Speed does nothing for me... simply put. It makes me yawn to be quite honest... I don't think speed has anything to do with being a good guitarist though... Seeing a kid alt picking as fast as he can just tells me that he probably likes to listen to Dream Theater and he probably thinks either John Petrucci, Yngwie Malmsteen, or Buckethead is the greatest guitar player ever.... and they probably have no jam skills whatsoever... all because someone on a forum somewhere convinced him that being as fast as he can is the way to being a good guitar player... That's all I'm saying... I'm done with this now...

I can agree with that. Most of it anyway.

With me, there isn't a speed debate. I've been taught to learn every single thing you can on your instrument--be it speed, intonation, etc. In my mind speed is essential to being a good guitarist. Whether or not you have to always USE that speed is a different story--just the option of being able to is what is important. Just so that I can say 'hey, you know, in the middle of these spaced notes, I could put a pretty ascending 32nd note line here for effect'

I think what you're getting at is the 'musicianship' debate--and I agree with you there. People who just play fast for the sake of playing fast are missing the entire point.

A good example of a 'virtuoso' as compared to a normal person would be the guitar work of Lonnie Johnson versus Eddie Lang. I forget the song they recorded together in the late 20's, but they both take solos.

Eddie Lang's solo is good enough, but it's clipped and a little buzzy, whereas Lonnie just masterfully brings the guitar to life, not just with speed, but with a host of other subtle nuances. He has the basic technique mastered, which enables him to add many subtle touches. ((keep in mind with these recordings that virtuoso for a guitar player was different back then in terms of speed--:D))