Does a great guitar player need to have a great technique?

No, mc9mm is right to an extent- There are many "right" ways to play the guitar, and many "wrong" ways to play the guitar. If you play the "wrong" way well enough though, you can make it a "right" way, if that makes sense. For example, tapping used to be "the wrong way", now its a legitimate style.

I've always been an advocate for having good technique, because there are times when you have a lapse of creativity, and I feel that the mind should never get bored with the guitar; The answer to such times is to improve your technique, or to study some theory, or if you are an electronics schematic nut like me, you'll draw up custom guitar wiring diagrams for six hours a day at school (I filled up two 300-page notebooks!) everyday. Basically, keep busy. Before I had a job, I used to read voraciously, eating up (not literally.... :eek: ) books like Finnegan's Wake and War & Peace. There was actually a really long thread on that, about a year ago, can't remember what it was called...

But anyways, this has developed into quite a thread!

~Incidents

Originally Posted by: TheWizard
unless your talking about classical guitar in which there is clearly a right and wrong way to play

Thats where you're wrong.
There's a right way to play classical, and theres a right way to play electric.
The difference is not whether there is a right way to play, the difference
is that in classical guitar, you're expected to play the right way, while in electric
guitar "circles", that is not expected of you.
Imagine a classical guitarplayer flip the guitar behind his back, playing with his
teeth or turn his guitar on fire while playing Etude no. 5.
Would not really work, would it?

So yes, there is a right way to play electric guitar, but the right way, like
Incidents said, can be the wrong way and vice versa. Complicated business..

I recommend we have a new poll with a clearer question. This one is just too damn ambiguous

Originally Posted by: Incidents HappenI know what you mean, I'm just trying to make sure some kid out there doesn't read the post and think to himself that technique doesn't matter, because it does. There is a reason why Steve Vai is respected by musicians but not by the commercial audience, and that's because alot of people think his music brings sensory overload, or its "musical masturbation", or whatnot.

But I do despise the fact that alot of people don't use their pinky finger, alot of people don't like music theory, and alot of people don't spend time with technique. Typically I've found this to be true with blues players, even famous ones (Dave Gilmour, Eric Clapton, Jimi Hendrix). Jimmy Page really could have cleaned up his technique, and I would've been much more of a zep fan.

~Incidents

Yeah, these blues players really could have spent more time on technique.

Although I like Steve Vai and some of his songs, it´s true what you said about why he´s only respected by guitarists. That´s what I tried, try and will try to avoid, but if I succeed, I don´t know.

Originally Posted by: LeedoggI recommend we have a new poll with a clearer question. This one is just too damn ambiguous

Yeah, is true that "great" should have been defined more clearly, but the opinions on great are also very different, so it´s difficult....

But if you have a good idea how a clearer question would look like, post it as poll.

Great Guitar Player is different on how other people see it...if your famous and have people worship u but ur an alright guitarist...maybe...but i think theres definitely sum skill needed to get noticed.....most guitarists that get noticed aren't the ones who follow the rules but break new ground and do it for themselves...so i dont think technique is important.

To me, music is a different lauguage, and to completely understand a language, you must be able to speak it, write it, and read it. Technique comes when you speak it........I think technique is very important to be a great guitarist. If you hear it in your head, but can't get it to come out through your guitar, your technique needs to be worked on...

Originally Posted by: JFRICK If you hear it in your head, but can't get it to come out through your guitar, your technique needs to be worked on...

But for this ability you mainly need a good ear.

OK, I'm gonna weigh in here again....

Originally Posted by: Dictionary.comtech·nique (n):

1. The systematic procedure by which a complex or scientific task is accomplished.
   


2. also tech·nic (tek·nek')
   





1. The way in which the fundamentals, as of an artistic work, are handled.
   


2. Skill or command in handling such fundamentals.

Here's the link

So, the question, as I understood it was not "Should a great guitarist be able to play xxx or xxx (e.g. "32nd notes at 200 bpm", "an F#b32rsqrtyo" or "standing up")". Rather, the question was whether a great guitarist should have great technique, or a great "systematic procedure by which a complex or scientific task is accomplished". That is, a great guitarist should have a great method of accomplishing the act of playing guitar. That is a given, and the obvious answer is "Yes".

A great guitarist will not necessarily play cleanly, fast, theoretically astoundingly, or anything else. A great guitarist is one whose approach to the instrument rises above the approaches taken by all other guitarists, who, again by definition, are "not great".

For example, Jimi Hendrix (or Jimmy Page, or BB King, for that matter) was obviously not the world's fastest or cleanest guitarist, and most likely didn't know much about theory (esp. if compared to, say, Vai). However, he can still be called "great", since his approach to he guitar was unique (in that it is instantly identifiable and was novel), accomplished what he wanted musically, etc.

There's no real argument here about the original question: A great guitarist must, by definition, have great technique. Technique is, again by definition, the means by which they accomplished their goal of playing the guitar.

Now, a side argument that was brought up was whether a great guitarist should be knowledgable theoretically, be able to play at certain speeds, play cleanly, etc. This is nonsense. Start a list of the greatest guitarists and then see how many live up to those criteria.





Boy, I'm giving PonyOne a run for his money as king of long-winded posts!

Originally Posted by: beginnerBut for this ability you mainly need a good ear.

I agree with you having to have a good ear to be able to play what you hear in your head. But, what if your trying to come up with a lead and your hearing finger taps or sweeps in your head? You can't play it unless you know those particular techniques, which are advanced techniques.

Originally Posted by: JFRICKI agree with you having to have a good ear to be able to play what you hear in your head. But, what if your trying to come up with a lead and your hearing finger taps or sweeps in your head? You can't play it unless you know those particular techniques, which are advanced techniques.

Yes of course, in such cases you need to know the technnique. But I think there are also some who can figure out perfectly what notes are played, but that doesn´t really have any big advantages, when they are not able to play it.