Originally posted by Dejan Sajinovic
Think what you want but a solo spot is important in a song. OK if there´s a song our two that don´t include a solo that´s normal but if thre´s 10 songs and no guitarsolo what´s so ever, than it sucks and no matter how good the band is I wouldn´t buy they record. To only hit A/D/G/E/C is boring like death. It means, you have never put time to actually learn guitar and your songs no matter how good they are, are from a musicans point of view bad and boring. And that includes all new bands ´cause they album is made of 5-6 chords wich they play in different order. Use your Illusion guys, and save us from boring rock music wich is killin´ all the goog and impressive rock music we once had.

Noel Gallagher once said that solos are rubbish and that´s because he was never abel to play one. There´s hell more passion in a guitar solo than in some stupid stiff rythm.

C'mon!
You can get just as technical with your rythm work as your lead work. I'm all for a good solo, but [u]only[/u] if it fits the song, and I can think of a lot of songs where the solos just don't fit. I can also think of a lot of songs that desperatly need a solo.

I think what this comes down to is that a rythm part, no matter how tricky doesn't nearly provide the ego boost that sawing away in 32nd notes does, and some of really need that. I'm one of them; I constantly have to fight myself to do what a song needs rather than show off.