quote:
Originally posted by bofatron sofasaurus:
And take a guy like Vai. I think we could all agee to rank him as one of the best guitarists alive.
And then who is to decide what is and is not valid music and skill? Neil Young can't shred but there is something to his style that is wonderful and more human than a buch of arps and scales up and down the fretboard. Who is going to be the final judge to decide what is and is not good music, who is a musician?
Exactly. I think people often forget about this, and focus more on technical ability than on the music. I think it's because you can measure speed, but you can't say objectively "this is good music" or "this is bad music." So people go for the stuff that they can touch when they want to define greatness, and that ends up being irrelevent stuff like speed.
For the reason you mentioned above, I wouldn't even rank Vai that high. To me, he's a guy who knows scales, sweep patterns, and sound effects, and doesn't have much in the way of musical sensitivity. Well he sometimes does, but he usually chooses to opt for musical masturbation instead (I like stuff like sisters, but he usually goes for the sound effects/noodling shred instead.)
I'm not ragging on anybody who likes Vai, I'm just saying that's not the kind of stuff I like. I like some of the guys in that genere, mostly satriani, but I listen more often to jazz and classical. People will often say that jazz is too technical, that it's all of the things I was just denouncing above, and to that I reply that there is some jazz like that, and that's not the stuff I listen to. I prefer guys like chet baker, miles davis, and wes montgomery, guys who could say a lot when they improvised, even if they can't blaze up and down the scales like clifford brown, dizzie gillespie, and jimmy bruno (all three of whom I also like, but not as much.)
