HoneyboyHart

I know all three are important... but what is the most important. Maybe a better question would be what is the relative importance of each. Now I'm not talking jazz but something a like blues.

__________________
Rick Honeyboy Hart

"It's about tone, taste, and technique. Technique is last for a reason."

http://www.bluesguitarinsider.com

http://www.rickhoneyboyhart.com

mdc

In blues? Taste. Tone is literally 1 nano millimeter behind. Technique is about 3 micro nano millimeters behind.

__________________
Sweet

mark.bark

technique is last? You can play a guitar through a shit amp, but theres no point in having a £2k stack if you cant play....


All 3 are unique to each person

except taste.... it nearly always tastes like wood

EpiExplorer

Technique first.. for pretty much anything. Taste, then tone. Plenty of musicians can write and play great music with shit tones, and a lot of others write and play shit music with great tones.

__________________

Geldin

You can't compare the subjective to the objective. The question is unanswerable.

Technique is purely objective. If you have bad technique, there's no ifs, ands, or buts. You're doing it wrong.

Tone can be kind of grey. Some sounds are simply unpleasant to the human ear, but within the acceptable range, there's a lot of variation in what people like to hear.

Taste is purely subjective.

__________________
My solo progressive metal project,
The Sleeping Fury ,
has a just released its debut album.

The new album is streaming here

I've got a blog! It's a metal blog. About metal.

iduno871

tone all the way, then taste and then technique. Most musicians won't see it this way. But fans will whether they know it or not.

Zaphod_Beeblebr

All three are entirely inextricable from one another.

__________________

jthm_guitarist

I would put taste way out front. If someone is technically good and has good tone but is playing really boring or crappy music then what's the point?

__________________

Zaphod_Beeblebr

If someone is playing good music but you can't hear them because their tone is drowned out in the mix what's the point?

If someone is writing good music and has a decent, well EQ'd set up but lacks the physical facility to play any of it what's the point?


Now, all of these things are relative, many people will never need Guthrie Govan's technique to play the music they hear in their heads, but you must have some level of all three to be playing anything of worth.

__________________

HoneyboyHart

Maybe I should put this in the context of the goal...

To move the audience!

So... put tone, taste and technique into the context of which is most important to move your listener?

__________________
Rick Honeyboy Hart

"It's about tone, taste, and technique. Technique is last for a reason."

http://www.bluesguitarinsider.com

http://www.rickhoneyboyhart.com

Zaphod_Beeblebr

Then tone and taste are equal. The audience, unless you're playing to a room full of guitarists, will never notice your good technique.

__________________

cip 123

i'd still say technique is first you cant move someone if you cant play?

mdc

Don't forget that this is with regard to blues.


BB King had great technique

__________________
Sweet

Zaphod_Beeblebr

Joe Bonamassa is also a blues player

__________________

Elderer

All three. Just look at good pianists-E.Kissin,that Georgian chick(forgot last name...something-vadze)-they have crazy technique that sets them free as far as 2 hand pieces go. The rest came later I guess-phrasing/articulation,tone.They have all three.

I mean Im a blues fanatic myself(altho I play hard rock-Zepp,TCV,Graveyard etc) and I can understand where that mentality comes from...its hard for me to catch that FEEL when/if Im distracted by bad pull-offs/hammer-ons/slides. Ive confronted a lot blues guitarists about it and the common answer is - its all about da feeeeeeel duud,you havent got it yet...to me its a rather poor excuse for shameless sloppy ripping of blues scale.


B.B. King is a fine example.
Bonamassa is too clean,polished for my liking.
Page...different story but I still forgive him slopyness in live bootlegs.He compensated it with songs.

Mephaphil

All 3 are equally important.

However, Tone and Taste are the most important. But technique has to be very close.

Like Zaph said, if you have great tone, and pick the right licks but you might catch the string above slightly when you bend, like I might do (like most of us) from time to time no one is ever gonna notice because it's so minor.

But if you aim to bend the E and bend out of pitch and the B, D and G ring out, well no tone is gonna help you.

__________________

wafflesyrup

The majority of the audience has little interest in music. Don't pander to them. Make 'em work for it.

Dayn

Ugh, blues. In that case, I value taste above technique or tone. I would say taste, technique, then tone. It must be interesting for me to listen to foremost, then there must also be the technique to back it up.

Tone is easy and entirely gear-dependent. If someone says tone is in the fingers, they're talking purely about technique. It's still just a bit of metal vibrating against metal.

__________________
Ibanez RG2228 w/ EMG808Xs | Line 6 POD HD500 | Mackie HD1221

macashmack

For an audience, taste, then tone, then technique. The classic rock guys were sloppy as hell and everyone loved 'em. Might not be the same now though.

__________________


Modes and scales are intelligent and useful. Start learning them. Seriously.