Don't know wht you got - solo

Hi,

I was going through the lesson for that song, and I felt comfortable playing it. But then the solo, is a bit more tricky to me compared to the rest of the song.

Since this song has 2 notes for difficulty, so 2 out of a maximum of 5 I guess it is a advanced beginner difficulty, let's say ... ?? I feel a bit ashamed about struggling with the solo ;) or would you say it is a bit more advanced ?

Hey there! Don't feel ashamed!!! Indeed this solo has some tricky parts! Sometimes our difficulty meter doesn't quite hit the mark, as I would place the solo at least 3 (or even 4) out of 5.

So yes, even though the rhythm is straight forward strumming that's suitable for beginner to intermediate, the solo is definitely a bit more advanced.

Learn and practice the solo one phrase (or lick) at a time. When you encounter some of the trickier licks, it's important to slow way down and practice the licks very slowly at first. Practice them over and over, programming your fingers and burning away any resistance in your muscles. Over time, you should be able to play these licks faster and faster.

Hope this helps, good luck!

Mike

Who rates, or how do the songs get rated for difficuly on Guitar Tricks Mike?

Looking at it from almost 12 months in, I'd rate that solo harder than a 2 too Mike. Factor in the arpeggiation of the second electric and from my expectation perspective of a 2, the only thing ranking the song overall possibly a 3 rather than a 4 -because there's no 3½, is the easiness offered by the relaxed tempo. OTOH, no question the rhythm to me is and easy 2, a doddle at that tempo.

No disrespect -sincerely- intended to Dave C whether the song tutorials are auto ranked or instructor ranked, but he does a lesson of a [u]very[/u] famous song with rhythm and lead adapted to single guitar rated on GT at just 3 guitars ...which clips along at an intense 150BPM and has an (original) signature idiosyncratic structure and so needs to be committed both mentally and muscle memory rote at that speed! o.O

Then I did some research and realised just how incredibly accomplished a guitarist Dave C is which rationalised his (?) assignment of a 3 instead of a 4 or more. WOW! I learnt a lot persevering with that song. Frustrating as it was, my motivation was easily maintained because I loved it so. And still do. If the tempo were even just 120BPM, it'd be so much easier to play. At 150BPM, it's still fun as to play, but definitely a "take no prisoners!" tune at my stage.

Originally Posted by: Mike Olekshy

Hey there! Don't feel ashamed!!! Indeed this solo has some tricky parts! Sometimes our difficulty meter doesn't quite hit the mark, as I would place the solo at least 3 (or even 4) out of 5.

So yes, even though the rhythm is straight forward strumming that's suitable for beginner to intermediate, the solo is definitely a bit more advanced.

Learn and practice the solo one phrase (or lick) at a time. When you encounter some of the trickier licks, it's important to slow way down and practice the licks very slowly at first. Practice them over and over, programming your fingers and burning away any resistance in your muscles. Over time, you should be able to play these licks faster and faster.

Hope this helps, good luck!

Mike

That is good to hear, because I'm considering myself more a level 3 player haha. After another day working on it, it is already much better but the bendings need to be really expressive and mixed with fast hammers and pull offs, so it is really the changes speed that are a bit tricky to nail. At 0.9 speed it is ok but at full speed still tricky.

I bought new Ernie Ball 10-46 strings today, hopefully the bendings will be easier, if not might try 9's ... What do you think?

Went to a shop and tried to play it on different guitars, had no success on Gibsons (sg, lp) but on Ibanez RG and on Jackson JS it felt easier than on my Strat. Since I was thinking to buy a humbucker guitar, this might be an option... Any recommendations on that?

I'm actually unaware of the process for the difficulty ratings - it may well be computer generated. Once we film the lesson, it's out of the instructor's hands.

So, just take them as a general idea of the difficulty, and realize that describing a song using a difficulty benchmark can be a bit subjective, and there may be some inconsistencies along the way.

Glad to hear the speed buttons are useful in this case!! Indeed, guitars such as the Ibanez and Jacksons are a little more built for speed - so would be a great choice for this type of music. That said, as far as advice for picking an instrument goes, you are doing the right thing by going to the shop and trying out a bunch of guitars. Everybody is different, so it's important to try different guitars to see what feels good and natural to you. Of course, you also want to plug in and see if it can give you the tones you're looking for.

Hope this helps!

Mike

Hey

just to let you know I have just realised that each chapter of song lesson has its own difficulty rank.

So there is a global difficulty given to the song, although some parts like in this song might be more difficult than others....

Ah! Good catch - that makes sense. Thanks for sharing!

Mike

Originally Posted by: gilouch0

I have just realised that each chapter of song lesson has its own difficulty rank.

So there is a global difficulty given to the song, although some parts like in this song might be more difficult than others....

If you could excuse me for querying your statement, but it appears you're contradicting yourself here? Either a song has a general or "global" difficulty rating also consistent throughout every segment/part/"chapter" (which I do observe over multiple samples offered below), or each numerically annotated sequential "chapter" of a lesson has an assigned individual rating (which I don't observe).

Unless what you're suggesting is that the general aka global difficulty rating is subsequently meaned to an average rating derived from different individual chapter ratings. Again, I don't observe [u]any[/u] evidence of that.

OTOH what I do see is evidence to the contrary. e.g.

1. "She Loves You" (as taught by Dave Celentano). Difficulty rated 3 guitars - global and every lesson segment. This specifically despite Dave saying within that segment i.e. 7. Song Outro at 5m27s, that paraphrased, "this is probably one of the more challenging sections of the song".

An aside. IME I don't think the Coda is actually the hardest part of learning "She Loves You", although for me there is one undeniably challenging stretch fingering fill suited to Dave's long and slender fingers in that single guitar adaptation exacerbated by it also necessitating a super quick awkward positioning change off the immediately preceding fill. The hardest or challenging aspect of learning that song where one is playing both the lead riff and fills in conjunction with the rhythm is the speed of the changes in some parts as required by the 150BPM tempo.

2. "Revolution" (as taught by Henrik Linde). Difficulty rated 4 guitars - global,and again every lesson segment.

3. Similarly his "Back in the U.S.S.R." Difficulty rated 3 guitars - global and every lesson segment.

4. "I Saw Her Standing There" as taught by Mike Olekshy. Difficulty rated 3 guiitars - again, global and every segment/chapter of the lesson.

Four song examples selected at random by three different instructors varying with multiple guitar parts and/or adaptation to single guitar.

The [u]consistent[/u] logical pattern evidencing itself here that I observe is the application of a single (n) guitars general or mean difficulty rating assigned to a song lesson which is concidentially echoed throughout each of its individual chapters/numerical lesson segments.

But hey, the seemingly erratic or inconsistent assignment of GT's general lesson difficulty rating per individual song is a mystery to me too, hence my earlier question to Mike in the thread.

Regarding the difficulty ratings used on the GT tutorials!

Standards have changed gradually a bit over the years depending on the editors in charge of assembling & labeling the tutorials. And depending on the current catalog of material available at any time.

We did try to label individual lessons at different levels within tutorials years ago. But that got problematic & caused more troubles than it solved. Some students felt it was disorganized & misleading.

With that in mind, the difficulty ratings are always going to have a relative component. Sometimes this is due to the easiest part of the song & sometimes the hardest part. So, it really depends on the context.

I think if the most iconic part of the song is a relatively easy riff it should be listed as beginner or easy.

Even if there are some lead fills that are more intermediate. This is exactly the situation with the Cinderella song mentioned in the OP. The current policy is that if you can play & recognize the song without that fancy lead fill or solo, then the rating should reflect that. However, if the most iconic or notable part of the song is a riff or complex part then the standard should reflect that.

And it's also variable according to the style. Easy in classical or jazz is going to be very different from easy in rock or blues.

Some acoustic songs have "harder" ratings because fingerpicking parts are more difficult to people that enjoy that style. Some rock songs have "easier" ratings because people that enjoy that style are used to those licks & style.

There are sometimes different standards used to label different styles & different songs. Much like different guitar students or players have a different set of skills they personally consider "difficult". In short, it's difficult to assign difficulty ratings objectively across the board for all songs & all players. :)

On the plus side, this forum exists in order to help users find songs or lessons or answer questions! If you need help finding a song that matches your interests or current skill level, please ask!

Hope this helps. Best of success with your guitar learning & playing!

Characteristic pure 'gold' Christopher.

Thank you for your comprehensive reply clarifiying the status quo.