Go Back   UG Community @ Ultimate-Guitar.Com > Instruments > Guitar Techniques
User Name  
Password
Search:

Closed Thread
Old 03-16-2008, 09:34 PM   #121
RockDJ
Banned
 
RockDJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by bangoodcharlote
Efficiency is generally used to talk about speed, pal.

Don't make me laugh.

Efficiency refers to the lack of excess (ie. excess time and resources).


Just don't.
RockDJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2008, 09:42 PM   #122
TheShred201
Back From The Dead
 
TheShred201's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Which when applied to guitar playing pertains to excess motion of the hands/tension in the arms, creating more efficient motion and higher speed.

There's no such thing as efficiency in music. Then by your definition, punk would be your perfect music, but you have an A Perfect Circle avatar. Their music by your definition of efficient, is not efficient, as it took a good deal of time and resources to practice, create, record and produce, and features excess elements such as the occasional odd time signature. But you don't like inefficient music. Also, why would you come into someone's thread asking about guitar speed solely to bash speed in music. I happen to know someone who posted above me who has a bit of "excess time" which means that they aren't very "efficient".

To sum it all up. "Just don't." Your argument is useless. Your point is pretty much in-correct, seeing as the terms don't make sense, you fail to come up with examples and evidence to support your non-point, and the only thing you've achieved is to annoy some people. Don't start an argument that you can't win.
TheShred201 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2008, 09:43 PM   #123
ouchies
UG's OG
 
ouchies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: USA, Central New Jersey
Quote:
Originally Posted by RockDJ
Call it whatever you want, but I prefer efficiency in my music.


LOL that makes no sense hahaha
__________________
Tearitup
ouchies is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2008, 09:48 PM   #124
RockDJ
Banned
 
RockDJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheShred201
Which when applied to guitar playing pertains to excess motion of the hands/tension in the arms, creating more efficient motion and higher speed.

There's no such thing as efficiency in music. Then by your definition, punk would be your perfect music, but you have an A Perfect Circle avatar. Their music by your definition of efficient, is not efficient, as it took a good deal of time and resources to practice, create, record and produce, and features excess elements such as the occasional odd time signature. But you don't like inefficient music. Also, why would you come into someone's thread asking about guitar speed solely to bash speed in music. I happen to know someone who posted above me who has a bit of "excess time" which means that they aren't very "efficient".

To sum it all up. "Just don't." Your argument is useless. Your point is pretty much in-correct, seeing as the terms don't make sense, you fail to come up with examples and evidence to support your non-point, and the only thing you've achieved is to annoy some people. Don't start an argument that you can't win.

Don't tell me what I mean.

This is what I meant, you wasted all the time and energy to look cool by creating that wall of text instead of just simply stating your point.

This is the same idea with shredding... how about instead of you spending the time and energy it takes to compose wank, you focus on making better music.

If music is used to convey emotion, and you can convey that same emotion in less notes, then guess what is more efficient.




*sigh*



DO NOT even try to argue with me. I am not here to toss your ego off.
RockDJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2008, 09:51 PM   #125
Metallica rulz
going back to school
 
Metallica rulz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Illinois
Quote:
Originally Posted by RockDJ
Don't tell me what I mean.

This is what I meant, you wasted all the time and energy to look cool by creating that wall of text instead of just simply stating your point.

This is the same idea with shredding... how about instead of you spending the time and energy it takes to compose wank, you focus on making better music.

If music is used to convey emotion, and you can convey that same emotion in less notes, then guess what is more efficient.




*sigh*



DO NOT even try to argue with me. I am not here to toss your ego off.

By that logic.... Why work hard to get a hot girl when you still can blow a load on an ugly girl. I mean its all the same right?
__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AHmmY3r2zg&feature =channel_page ADTR cover
Metallica rulz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2008, 09:52 PM   #126
RockDJ
Banned
 
RockDJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metallica rulz
By that logic.... Why work hard to get a hot girl when you still can blow a load on an ugly girl. I mean its all the same right?

*asciii headache guy*

Seeing who I am dealing with, I give up.



Wolfmother sucks.


Goodnight.
RockDJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2008, 09:54 PM   #127
Metallica rulz
going back to school
 
Metallica rulz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Illinois
What^?

.... Yes they do suck lol.
__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AHmmY3r2zg&feature =channel_page ADTR cover
Metallica rulz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2008, 10:03 PM   #128
TheShred201
Back From The Dead
 
TheShred201's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
First, if you want to see a wall of text let me know. That was pretty short. I in no way tried to make it longer to "look cool", and I see little extra information if you actually take the time to read it.

Now, the problem is that your second post doesn't give the same definition of efficiency, though I thank you for provide examples and more information, as now I understand your arguement better. I still have issues though. First; who are you to say what music is better or worse--opinion here, not fact. Next; emotion in music is percieved by the listener. Generally, no two pieces will invoke the same emotional response, so no piece can do it in less notes than another. Finally, again, WHY did you come into this thread to bash speed in music.
TheShred201 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2008, 12:10 AM   #129
Zaphod_Beeblebr
Shallow and pedantic.
 
Zaphod_Beeblebr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Behind a desk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RockDJ
If music is used to convey emotion, and you can convey that same emotion in less notes, then guess what is more efficient.


You make no sense...I would ask you this: if you can create the same musical statement with less notes every time, which is what you seem to be saying, you re-write For the Love of God without those awesome sweeps or that beautiful alternate picked run near the end and still have it mean the same thing, go away and re-write "Why?" by Satriani so it has the same meaning to me but without the awesome bluesy shred in the solo section. You can't, ergo: shred does have a purpose sometimes.

Also I'm fed up of this "Music is for conveying emotion" thing everyone seems to be in at the minute; I, and just about every other musician on this planet (barring pop and advert writers), write music for myself, for my own purposes not to make you feel anything, if someone wants to shred for hours then you have no right to tell them that it sucks; just go away and make a point of not listening to it.

I'm just as averse to complete wank as most people but I don't waste other people's time by walking into their threads (or conversations) and saying "that sucks" and then going away again because it's a waste of my time and their time and I'm not going to change anybody's mind.
__________________


Quote:
Originally Posted by steven seagull
Zaphod wins...flawless victory.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freepower
Another flawless victory for Zaph!



Zaphod_Beeblebr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2008, 12:20 AM   #130
z4twenny
UG's resident Psychopath
 
z4twenny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: there ain't no doubt in my mind, i'm gonna stomp all over your test of time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bangoodcharlote
^Watch out! Some people think that!
.


i like nirvana

was he the most soulful and emotive of all guitarists? naw, but he definately poured all of himself into his music and you really can't ask more than that of a musician.
__________________
41 songs in my profile, click "view all mp3's" all sorts of variety
Check out my new Industrial side project Penis Christ
http://artists.ultimate-guitar.com/penischrist/
Cover of the NIN classic Head like a hole.
z4twenny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2008, 12:27 AM   #131
TheShred201
Back From The Dead
 
TheShred201's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
^^+ a lot
TheShred201 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2008, 01:27 AM   #132
Archeo Avis
UG Nerd
 
Archeo Avis's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Quote:
If music is used to convey emotion, and you can convey that same emotion in less notes, then guess what is more efficient.


...and if you can't? You didn't criticize pointless guitar masturbation, you criticized "playing fast" as if it's somehow incompatible with good music. What exactly is the cutoff point? At which nps does the music cease to be good?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac72187
Someones knowledge of guitar companies spelling determines what amps you can own. Really smart people can own things like Framus because they sound like they might be spelled with a "y" but they aren't.

Last edited by Archeo Avis : 03-17-2008 at 08:18 PM.
Archeo Avis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2008, 12:11 PM   #133
bangoodcharlote
Fractal
 
bangoodcharlote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by z4twenny
i like nirvana
As do I.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by demonofthenight
Sue, you amaze, gross, educate wonder, inspire and turn me on so much


"Melodic Control" by Marty Friedman: A video on soloing
A Great Theory Lesson

A Harmonizing Lesson
The Correct Way To Play The Gallop

~Sue
bangoodcharlote is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2008, 10:22 PM   #134
Gordita Supreme
Banned
 
Gordita Supreme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spamwise
this isn't the pit. serious replies please or don't post.

I was thinking something like 10-12 nps would be where shred would start.. like I said, I don't know though.


It depends. I could hit 10-12 nps easily, but if it was just a series of 3 notes repeated ala tremolo picking, I wouldn't consider that shred.

I can alternate pick series of notes and scalar runs anywhere from 150 - 200 bpm 16ths depending on the patterns and type of solo. But in reality, in my band I almost never 'shred' in that manner. I guess the fastest I go is doing 160 sweeps.

I guess the question is what do you consider shred? What solos make you think "man that guy can ****ing shred!"? Whatever solos do that, well, thats the speed you're aiming for.
Gordita Supreme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2008, 12:34 AM   #135
Blind In 1 Ear
Git-Man
 
Blind In 1 Ear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archeo Avis
...and if you can't? You didn't criticize pointless guitar masturbation, you criticized "playing fast" as if it's somehow incompatible with good music. What exactly is the cutoff point? At which nps does the music cease to be good?

i used to think in that "less is more" kinda way. but ive realized how stupid that statement is. its really just a matter of personal taste. for me, im not a huge fan of shred. but i dont say its unemotional or anything like that. some of it i feel for sure. other stuff though i cant really relate to because to me it sounds like computer noises. its not appealing to me. but it is to others and i have no doubt that it conveys emotions for them.

and you ask a good question. at what point does it become un-emotional? when is it too fast to be good? thats really just opinion. personal taste. for me, i dont really like anything faster than eric johnson because i find its hard to understand. but that doesnt make it wrong to go faster. thats just what i like. and people forget that playing fast has been around forever. piano players play fast all the time and no one really says anything. well, some said mozart had too many notes in his songs to which he said "and which ones would you like me to take out?" and hes got a point. the composer is making their music that way for a reason. the speed is there for a reason too.

that being said, i think if you play fast just for the sake of playing fast, that seems a little silly to me. and unfortunatly ive seen a lot of guitarists who do that. playing fast is fine. it can build or release tension in a solo for instance. but if you do it all the time, it loses effect. it gets boring. just as someone playing slow all the time is boring. guitarists need to be more dynamic with their playing. more variety. for instance vai's tender surrender is pretty dynamic. different volumes and tones and speeds. when you change your playing through out a solo and not just do one thing, people have more interest in it. if you just play fast all the time and play at the same volume and tone, it gets boring.

but then again, some people really like that and i guess the people playing these solos are doing it for the people who really like that stuff. so i guess my point is, we all need to stop bashing other peoples ideas of music and saying our view is better or right. music is just organized noise. who are you to say how to organize it?
__________________
http://www.youtube.com/user/timmy47?feature=mhee

check out my youtube page for some songs.
Blind In 1 Ear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2013, 01:40 PM   #136
_K.
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Well I'm new to guitar, and I've found this thread informative so I'm adding a final thought. nps is just a measure of proficiency, as many others have noted. Proficiency alone is not music, but it matters greatly in creating music. As a beginner, I'm currently more interested in proficiency than composition. I'd rather practice on RR solos than scales in which case I do have bpm/time signature, but if it's just scales outside of a musical context then nps is useful. And make no mistake, shredding isn't limited to guitarists. Piano virtuosos also pay close attention to nps, and their numbers are similar, 12 nps and up.
_K. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2013, 02:18 PM   #137
Dreamdancer11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Shred is a bullshit term by definition.Its not a genre of anykind or a valid music term,Shred was just the complexic attempt ignorant people used to describe something that is beyond their abilities physically and musically and mostly when occurs in rock music.Through time somehow it stuck cause it usually makes folks feel good about their inabilities(ex watch mainly blues ,first position only, pentatonic stock lick noodlers).

So to answer the question something is shred when its faster than YOUR ability to play it...in the same fashion that a chick is a ***** when she sleeps with everyone EXCEPT you(if she sleeps with you too she is just....easy ).
Dreamdancer11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Closed Thread


Thread Tools Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:18 PM.

Forum Archives / About / Terms of Use / Advertise / Contact / Ultimate-Guitar.Com © 2014
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.