Go Back   UG Community @ Ultimate-Guitar.Com > Music > Musician Talk
User Name  
Password
Search:

Reply
Old 05-26-2014, 09:52 PM   #61
bassalloverthe
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlasco
Most guitar players I know do not read lead sheets and could not if you asked them to. It's not something most of them would have any interest in doing either.


Do you think they are better off as players for it? Are there outlets of knowledge unavailable to them because of the skill they dont have?

My answers are no, and yes, respectively. I would, personally, focus my pedagogy around those two questions.
bassalloverthe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2014, 09:54 PM   #62
Sean0913
Music Theory Renegade
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlasco
Naw, they just tend to handle more topics in smaller doses better than fewer topics in large doses. Everything comes up together and nothing falls behind just as nothing ever seems to pull a clear lead.


That's interesting.

The first thing that comes to mind when I read this, is "learning styles" Do you already have an assessment of the primary learning strengths for each student?

One thing when bringing the Academy online, back in 2009, was I made sure that I had something to account for every learning style, from visual to audible to hands on and so forth, in each lecture. That was a deliberate, planned out part of it. The other was, how to make it relevant for all cultures, without tending towards careless idioms that another country would have no clue about.

That was the biggest unknown. I was actually surprised when no one ever needed help, regardless of what country - Thailand, Croatia, Sweden, Canada (eh), even all my ones from the UK. You'd think that after a lecture SOMEONE says, "I didnt get that...what did you mean by that?".

Right? When do you see that no one EVER asks questions in a class lecture?

That to me is stunning. I can only figure that it was an approach that I somehow refined having taught it to hundreds in the years before it went online.

Best,

Sean
__________________
Guitar Teacher/Mentor

An Online, Theory Based Guitar School

Stuck? I Mentor Guitar Players for Free.

If you are interested in the Academy, I offer a free Skype-based Demo. Just contact me on my profile, and we can work out the times.
Sean0913 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2014, 10:00 PM   #63
Vlasco
Turn of the century man!
 
Vlasco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hatfield, PA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean0913
That's interesting.

The first thing that comes to mind when I read this, is "learning styles" Do you already have an assessment of the primary learning strengths for each student?

One thing when bringing the Academy online, back in 2009, was I made sure that I had something to account for every learning style, from visual to audible to hands on and so forth, in each lecture. That was a deliberate, planned out part of it. The other was, how to make it relevant for all cultures, without tending towards careless idioms that another country would have no clue about.

That was the biggest unknown. I was actually surprised when no one ever needed help, regardless of what country - Thailand, Croatia, Sweden, Canada (eh), even all my ones from the UK. You'd think that after a lecture SOMEONE says, "I didnt get that...what did you mean by that?".

Right? When do you see that no one EVER asks questions in a class lecture?

That to me is stunning. I can only figure that it was an approach that I somehow refined having taught it to hundreds in the years before it went online.

Best,

Sean



Sure, if I give out traditional materials to a student then I believe it to be the most helpful method for them as a learner. No doubt the type of learner who learns best from those materials tends more towards a different style of study.
Vlasco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2014, 10:06 PM   #64
Vlasco
Turn of the century man!
 
Vlasco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hatfield, PA
Quote:
Originally Posted by bassalloverthe
Do you think they are better off as players for it? Are there outlets of knowledge unavailable to them because of the skill they dont have?

My answers are no, and yes, respectively. I would, personally, focus my pedagogy around those two questions.



Sure, but it wouldn't be a great idea to take someone who has expressed interest in just rocking out in their free time as a hobby and telling them they have to learn how to read jazz charts or classical pieces. It's a waste of their time and it kills their passion. It's much more efficient to give them the information that is useful to their goals and leave it open to expansion later when they decide to delve deeper.
Vlasco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2014, 10:07 PM   #65
Sean0913
Music Theory Renegade
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by cjohnson122989
Yeah, I can see how that would be hard for a total beginner. This, as a first lesson, is probably unhelpful to an absolute beginner because it's emphasizing the ability to read sheet music - a skill that many successful guitarists don't even bother with. This would assume right away that you know the letter name of every note on the fretboard.

I think what piqued my interest on this thread was how I can relate to the frustration of spending years trying to make sense of certain concepts, only to look back and realize that it was not very difficult to understand at all. I probably learned via traditional method as I am primarily self taught (my first and only guitar lesson came after 8 years of going it alone). Lately, I've been trying to make sense of everything in a root/interval way, but I first learned guitar by reading tab and looking up basic chords.


And that's something, I definitely can relate to my friend. I spent 12 years of my life in L.A. trying to understand this all. I was accepted to GIT when it was still GIT, BIT and PIT, before it was consolidated to MI, if that tells you anything. Back then it was much more a Howard Roberts centered teaching; I studied with Dick Grove, if you remember him. I was really close with John Tapetta, I cut my teeth on Troy Stetina. I was the self taught guy, reading Wolf Marshall, trying to understand Satriani, and going crazy.

Wolf Marshall was my number one reason for wanting to know theory. That guy could play and he knew everything (at least in my world at the time he did). A few years ago at Winter NAMM, I ran into him, and I was shocked that no one seemed to recognize him or know who he was. I expressed a great deal of thanks for all he had done to inspire me, but it was a bittersweet meeting. The poor guy had just lost his father the night before, and he was gracious but clearly hurting; I didn't even have the heart to ask to take a picture with him. I felt so bad for him.

Anyways 12 years or so after trying to understand it, some things clicked, and I stepped back and said, "If someone would have just explained that this this and this...I'd have had it in 3 months, not 12 years. The question became its own answer: If people would have known this they would have taught it that way. So, there was a reason, that no ones teaching it, its because they didn't see it. I did. I can't tell you why I saw it, but there you have it.

I have a question for you, how come you say that once you understood it, "it was not difficult at all", yet, you describe your first attempts to learning as "frustrating". How would something not difficult at all, also be frustrating? Wouldn't it stand to reason that if it were not difficult at all you would have gotten it right then? If this isn't the case, what do you credit as the reason for being frustrated.

And kudos and all respect for such a reasoned, real rational response.

You nailed it, that it would be hard for a total beginner. I think you understand better at least a sense of why I feel the way I do, so far as to say it sucks.

Best,

Sean
__________________
Guitar Teacher/Mentor

An Online, Theory Based Guitar School

Stuck? I Mentor Guitar Players for Free.

If you are interested in the Academy, I offer a free Skype-based Demo. Just contact me on my profile, and we can work out the times.

Last edited by Sean0913 : 05-26-2014 at 10:12 PM.
Sean0913 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2014, 10:48 PM   #66
Venice King
UG Monkey
 
Venice King's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: In some oblate spheroid...
I'm actually impressed at how quick I learnt guitar, I put in a lot more hours than I do now. Wouldn't change my approach if I somehow could
__________________
Blog Of Awesome UGers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OddOneOut
I seem to attract girls.
Which is annoying, cos I'm a girl and I like cock.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISH_PUNK13
Being an idiot should be illegal too.
Venice King is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2014, 12:33 AM   #67
cjohnson122989
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean0913
I have a question for you, how come you say that once you understood it, "it was not difficult at all", yet, you describe your first attempts to learning as "frustrating". How would something not difficult at all, also be frustrating? Wouldn't it stand to reason that if it were not difficult at all you would have gotten it right then? If this isn't the case, what do you credit as the reason for being frustrated.



Thanks

I think I was referring to my old approach and the speed of my own personal understanding. It was frustrating that something so simple took so long to finally click. I started learning by reading tab, so in my earlier days I relied solely on patterns I recognized across other songs I learned. I tried to make sense of theory and diatonic intervals a few times, but never all at once. So... memorizing fret numbers...

I've made some moderate progress in learning about rhythm, time signatures, and composition by using notation software during this time period... and I did record myself often to clean up my technique, so I suppose it wasn't a total waste of time.




But since you asked:

The theory approach only became "not difficult" after I put in the time of doing some work on paper and running through different permutations of the major scale (is it ok to call them modes? or maybe agree to disagree and just call them major scale fragments?) as a guitar drill to aid in muscle memory, but mainly as a personal challenge to myself. When I began to recognize these same exact runs in tabs I've been struggling with, I decided to delve deeper into this approach. I just printed several sheets with blank fretboards and practiced filling out note names in various orders to search for something that made sense (ex: all the natural notes, modes of the major scale in 3 octaves, modes of the major scale in 2 octaves beginning on different notes and different strings, etc.) over and over again; and the repetition happened to build some big-picture understanding in my case. I do not rely on these sheets at all because scale construction makes sense to me now. I do not have to stop an think about it because I just plain know where intervals are in relation to a root note as a result of this practice - on paper as well as on guitar.

Trying to make sense of this all at once was difficult and frustrating, but now I would say that the concept itself is not nearly as difficult as it seemed. Knowing a basic major / minor or pentatonic scale is fine, but it isn't often that the entire scale would be used in a song, or even in a single musical phrase. These runs don't always start on the root either. Simply knowing a major scale as a shape isn't the same as understanding intervals. I truly wish that I had made sense of this sooner in my playing career. Fully understanding intervals in relation to the root through a comparison to the major scale was a huge step for me in filling the gaps that came with knowing a "shape" or a pattern. And I had to figure most of this out with no teacher. It all just seems so much simpler in hindsight when I try to explain it this way, and that is frustrating when I think of how easy it is vs. all the time I used to spend on rote memorization.

I take a lot of crap for it in these forums, but practicing the seven modes of the major scale (using the same root! and not some scale starting on a different note...) was very useful for being able to hear every interval used at least once in the context of the major scale's cycle of intervals. At the conclusion of the above exercise, the way I see it is: if chords can have inversions with notes, scales can have modes with intervals. Phrygian dominant would be a mode of the harmonic minor scale in that respect. And as long as UG keeps featuring articles and lessons with phrygian dominant in the title and Yngwie's picture on it's home page (like today), people will keep talking about modes. I don't care if other people see the use of this exercise, but I did, so I'm sticking with it.

I guess I wasn't far off in identifying my next step as understanding chord construction, based on your other post. I have already been taking some basic chords that I already know and breaking them down into using that same root/interval perspective I mentioned - even though it's been mainly root-third-fifth. That's one example of what I meant before about applying this approach to everything (and maybe even applied to roman numeral chord progressions too). But I'm confident that I could begin to try calculating inversions and other non-standard chords on my own through my understanding of diatonic intervals.
cjohnson122989 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2014, 04:02 AM   #68
Elintasokas
Registered Wild Boar
 
Elintasokas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Finland
Quote:
Originally Posted by cjohnson122989
Fully understanding intervals in relation to the root through a comparison to the major scale was a huge step for me in filling the gaps that came with knowing a "shape" or a pattern. And I had to figure most of this out with no teacher. It all just seems so much simpler in hindsight when I try to explain it this way, and that is frustrating when I think of how easy it is vs. all the time I used to spend on rote memorization.

How is that not rote memorization? It's just a different way of thinking. Instead of memorizing box shapes you still have to memorize every interval of every scale related to any given root. I'd argue it needs WAY more memorization than box shapes ever do.

I mean you need to be able to play any interval without thinking a second. That involves a ridiculous amount of memorization before you can recall them all in real time.

It's a really useful skill, though and one I've been working on a long time. I pretty much remember all the intervals for all major scales.
__________________
The most annoying thing in music: Sight reading! UPDATE: It's getting slightly less annoying
SoundCloud
Last.fm profile
Software that has helped me tremendously:
Practica Musica
Counterpointer

Last edited by Elintasokas : 05-27-2014 at 05:36 AM.
Elintasokas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2014, 05:40 AM   #69
c0baltshad0w9
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
I have been playing for ten years. By that I mean I bought my first guitar and started learning ten years ago. However until I was fourteen, I only practised maybve half an hour a week. When I was fourteen I took it more seriously, and began practising half an hour a day. Had I done that from the start... wow.

For my first seven years, I taught myself, and because of that I learnt bad technique. When I had lessons, I imporved much faster. Had I had lessons from the start I would be ten times the guitarist I am now.
c0baltshad0w9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2014, 11:15 AM   #70
MaggaraMarine
Slapping the bass.
 
MaggaraMarine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Finland
@ Sean:

I agree that you can learn theory a lot faster. But you still need to practice your technique. You just can't become great at technique in a short period of time. It requires a lot of muscle memory. Of course I could be a lot better at technique but I find technical exercises boring. And I'm not saying people couldn't get better at shorter period time. But it still takes a lot of time to become really good.

How many great sounding guitarists have you seen that have been playing for a year or less?

Most of the time their bends and vibrato sound horrible and their playing sounds really sloppy. That's because they haven't spent enough time with the instrument. Of course they could be learned faster. But techique comes over time. You need a good sense of rhythm and a good ear. And they are skills that need some time to develop. Same with speed. It comes over time. Developing skills like this aren't (all) about understanding. I'm sure they could also be learned faster, but again, they still need time to develop properly.

I also see no need to hurry. Of course it's great if you can find ways to learn things faster. But on the other hand, as somebody said, many people see guitar as a competition (even though they may not even notice it). They ask questions about how good they should be in 3 years. Or are they good guitarists because they can play [insert whatever] and they have been playing for x years. That's seeing guitar as a competition.

I don't think it's that important to become a great guitarist at a really short period of time. You need time to become a musician. And being a good musician is differnet than being good at playing the guitar. You need the "vocabulary". You also need your own ideas and your own view of things. Learning to understand music takes time - you need to listen to it a lot.

But yeah, I think this is enough rambling, the thread was about getting better at guitar.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlanHB
Just remember that there are no boring scales, just boring players.

Gear

Charvel So Cal
Ibanez Blazer
Digitech RP355
MXR Micro Chorus
Laney VC30
Tokai TB48
Hartke HyDrive 210c
MaggaraMarine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2014, 11:47 AM   #71
Victorgeiger
Registered User
 
Victorgeiger's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
I started playing guitar not by any method, my parents gave me an acoustic guitar and left me to it with the internet. Ahh, then internet. What a wonderful place.

I didn't bother with any theory, I was 16 and there were people around me in bands that I wanted to be a part of and wanted to be a part of now, nothing else was acceptable to me so I practised almost every single day and night until I was good enough.

With the help of the internet, Guitar Pro and proper motivation I managed to teach myself enough guitar technique and physical skill in 6 months to be able to audition for one of the local metal groups that one of my school friends was a part of. They let me join!

I was told my guitar playing was at a level that some people only achieved after 2 years and this made me feel great. I achieved my goal. Remember I was young, in high-school, didn't care much about school work and didn't have a girl friend.

I had a lot of time.

But this is what is possible. After i turned 18 and finished high school life started getting in the way of getting better although I did always still play in bands an practice when I could. I still improved more and still didn't know any theory.

2 more years passed and life started really getting in the way, I almost stopped playing all together but occationally practiced or wrote songs and retained my overall skill for the most part.

Now, finally I have more time available to me and I have been using this time to pick up my guitar again. My new approach now also includes the learning of music theory when the opportunity presents itself and so far it has been going well. I have learned many of the popular chords and scale notes and shapes as well as the circle of 5ths.

This really helps with song writing but having the playing skills in place really helps learn his theory. I remember when I couldnt even play the guitar properly how hard it was to understand theory but now that I have experience with the instrument and I am older I can understand the theory much more easily.

I would recommend this approach if you are young and figuring out the guitar for the first time. Music playing is about expression and feeling. theory can give you good guidelines to making good music but no amount of theory will make you create good music. That is up to you.
__________________

News, reviews, guitar lessons and


Last edited by Victorgeiger : 05-27-2014 at 12:12 PM.
Victorgeiger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2014, 05:19 PM   #72
cjohnson122989
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elintasokas
How is that not rote memorization? It's just a different way of thinking. Instead of memorizing box shapes you still have to memorize every interval of every scale related to any given root. I'd argue it needs WAY more memorization than box shapes ever do.


I agree that it is mainly a different way of thinking, but I would say that having a "full understanding" of something is not really the same as rote memorization. There is admittedly some rote memorization involved in the learning process of course, but I think once someone understands a guitar concept, it's no longer rote memorization in the same sense as memorizing every note of a guitar solo one at a time. Scales are a good aid in that.

And I honestly don't find myself memorizing the intervals of every scale. Just being aware of notes that aren't typical of some form of the major/minor scale is good enough for me. When I learned that the harmonic minor scale is the natural minor scale but with a major 7th instead of a minor 7th, that's all I needed to know to understand it.
cjohnson122989 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2014, 05:26 PM   #73
radiantmoon
UGs king kong slayer
 
radiantmoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: newzealand
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlasco
For most guitarists the skill is relatively useless and the subtitle states that this would be where to ask about sight reading though it isn't endorsing it as an important skill.


In what way is sight reading a useless skill? It is a lot more proficient than having to work out what the note is before you play it which is more time consuming. Imagine reading a book and having to work out each word before you understood the sentence, sight reading is like reading a book, you understand as you play. To say it is a useless skill is ridiculous, why would you want to have to spend all that time working out the music if you could just play and understand it automatically?
__________________
radiantmoon is the toughest person I know. He inflects a sense of impending doom upon any who look upon his stone-chiseled face. The children run out of fear, while the men run for they know that the stories are true.
radiantmoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2014, 05:43 PM   #74
Elintasokas
Registered Wild Boar
 
Elintasokas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Finland
Quote:
Originally Posted by cjohnson122989
I agree that it is mainly a different way of thinking, but I would say that having a "full understanding" of something is not really the same as rote memorization. There is admittedly some rote memorization involved in the learning process of course, but I think once someone understands a guitar concept, it's no longer rote memorization in the same sense as memorizing every note of a guitar solo one at a time. Scales are a good aid in that.

And I honestly don't find myself memorizing the intervals of every scale. Just being aware of notes that aren't typical of some form of the major/minor scale is good enough for me. When I learned that the harmonic minor scale is the natural minor scale but with a major 7th instead of a minor 7th, that's all I needed to know to understand it.

You're right. Apparently I didn't quite know what rote learning means

But yeah, I find knowing all the intervals useful because you can think like "okay, this note becomes a sus4 suspension of the next chord, which I can then resolve nicely to the third etc". Also it makes playing ANY kind of arpeggio with any number of extensions possible more easily because you can basically build chords in real time.
__________________
The most annoying thing in music: Sight reading! UPDATE: It's getting slightly less annoying
SoundCloud
Last.fm profile
Software that has helped me tremendously:
Practica Musica
Counterpointer
Elintasokas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2014, 09:59 PM   #75
Vlasco
Turn of the century man!
 
Vlasco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hatfield, PA
Quote:
Originally Posted by radiantmoon
In what way is sight reading a useless skill? It is a lot more proficient than having to work out what the note is before you play it which is more time consuming. Imagine reading a book and having to work out each word before you understood the sentence, sight reading is like reading a book, you understand as you play. To say it is a useless skill is ridiculous, why would you want to have to spend all that time working out the music if you could just play and understand it automatically?


Because most guitarists are memorizing short pieces with repeating riffs or progressions with little to no availability of notation. For many it isn't time efficient to go the notation route especially if the will is adamantly against it and the chance to use it isn't even all that common within their genre.
Vlasco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2014, 10:08 PM   #76
crazysam23_Atax
Burning away
 
crazysam23_Atax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cal-eye-forn-ia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlasco
Because most guitarists are memorizing short pieces with repeating riffs or progressions with little to no availability of notation. For many it isn't time efficient to go the notation route especially if the will is adamantly against it and the chance to use it isn't even all that common within their genre.



So, I guess we should all just skip sight reading. You know, because why should guitar players learn how to play any song by sight? I mean, hell...most players can sight read tabs; why shouldn't they learn how to sight read sheet music?


Because...laziness? What a bad excuse.
__________________
Tunes?

Bandcamp

Now working on my upcoming EP "Discarnate". See the expected track list on my bandcamp.



Terry Prachett is funnier than you! Discworld

Last edited by crazysam23_Atax : 05-27-2014 at 10:19 PM.
crazysam23_Atax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2014, 11:33 PM   #77
Vlasco
Turn of the century man!
 
Vlasco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hatfield, PA
Quote:

So, I guess we should all just skip sight reading. You know, because why should guitar players learn how to play any song by sight? I mean, hell...most players can sight read tabs; why shouldn't they learn how to sight read sheet music?


Because...laziness? What a bad excuse.


Yes, because that's exactly what I was saying.
Vlasco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2014, 12:44 AM   #78
crazysam23_Atax
Burning away
 
crazysam23_Atax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cal-eye-forn-ia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlasco
Yes, because that's exactly what I was saying.

No, you're saying, "Why learn it if they never use it in their genre?" Which is a bullshit excuse that ultimately translates to:

"I PLAY METAL/PUNK/ROCK/BLUES! WHY SHOULD I LEARN TO SIGHT READ?"
Well, maybe because you're supposed to be a musician, as in someone who studies music?


Let's be real here. As guitar players, we can learn and have access to (via the internet) just about any style/genre. This makes us better players overall. If I learn a lot of Jazz, I can then take that and apply it to Metal or Rock or Blues. If I learn classical guitar, same thing. And so on and so forth.

Just because you "don't use it in your genre" doesn't mean it isn't going to make you a better musician. Learn how to sight read sheet music, regardless of whether your metal band uses tabs or sheet music. Sight reading is simply another tool in a musician's arsenal, that can be used to good effect. It will make you a better musician to actually learn how to use sight reading (aka study enough to properly learn it).




The only real point your argument boils down to is laziness. And that's an utter bullshit reason.
__________________
Tunes?

Bandcamp

Now working on my upcoming EP "Discarnate". See the expected track list on my bandcamp.



Terry Prachett is funnier than you! Discworld

Last edited by crazysam23_Atax : 05-28-2014 at 12:52 AM.
crazysam23_Atax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2014, 12:52 AM   #79
Vlasco
Turn of the century man!
 
Vlasco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hatfield, PA
Some people just play guitar to have some fun.
Vlasco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2014, 12:56 AM   #80
crazysam23_Atax
Burning away
 
crazysam23_Atax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cal-eye-forn-ia
That's great, and they might have more fun if they were able to use more "tools" (to continue the metaphor from earlier).

How cool is it, to be able to do the following:
Your buddy tells you, "Hey, learn this song. Here's the sheet music. We should play it sometime". Then, you look at it, turn on a metronome/drum machine, and play the basic parts (I could see not playing solos or such) without batting an eye. Just by sight reading it!

HOW COOL IS THAT?! Of course, that takes more than 2 weeks of practicing sight reading, but you get my point.
__________________
Tunes?

Bandcamp

Now working on my upcoming EP "Discarnate". See the expected track list on my bandcamp.



Terry Prachett is funnier than you! Discworld

Last edited by crazysam23_Atax : 05-28-2014 at 12:58 AM.
crazysam23_Atax is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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 07:14 AM.

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.