#1
What works for me, atleast:

1) Make up a rhythm over a progression, as simple or complex as you want it.

2) Play notes and patterns of notes (in key, hopefully) over that rhythm. If it sounds good, keep it. If it doesn't, try something different.

3) If you don't know how/where to start/end, look at what notes are being played in the rhythm.
My Gear:
Paul Reed Smith SE Paul Allender
Laney GH100L Head
Behringer Cab
Damage Control Demonizer Distortion/Preamp
#5
Or how about training your ear to know what sounds good over what.
If you play guitar, please don't waste your time in The Pit, and please instead educate yourself in the Musician Talk forum, where you can be missing out on valuable info.
Quote by DiminishedFifth
It's like you read my mind!

I got meself a self-approving sig. Kick. Ass.
#6
I wasn't trying to be new. I was just trying to give a simple guideline that works for me to those who need it and feel overwhelmed or confused on where to begin. If it's helpful to you, awesome. If it's not (and for a LOT of people it won't be), then is there any reason to be negative?

How about you post your own methods then? I'm not trying to be competitive, but you make it sound like you have a lot of useful info to add.
My Gear:
Paul Reed Smith SE Paul Allender
Laney GH100L Head
Behringer Cab
Damage Control Demonizer Distortion/Preamp
#7
There's already tons of lessons on this kind of thing, and what you said hardly explains anything at all. If the person doesn't have any knowledge of keys, he'll be fiddling with his guitar all night. If he does know about keys, he already knows everything you've said.

Not trying to be a dick or anything... hopefully I'm not.
#8
No its okay your not... I definitely understand the need to make sure people aren't getting bad or irrelevant information on the forums.

I know my method is very basic... but it solves my problem and that's the only reason I posted it. My problem was that once I knew theory, all I did was "over apply" it until everything I made sounded formulaic. Fiddling around, basically, is what helped me fix that I guess.

Check out my music on my page and I hope no one will think my solos are just random notes in key.

I guess posting this under something like, "Feel like knowing theory has made your solos too formulaic?" would have been much more appropriate and helpful, and only attracted those to whom it would have appealed.
My Gear:
Paul Reed Smith SE Paul Allender
Laney GH100L Head
Behringer Cab
Damage Control Demonizer Distortion/Preamp
#9
WOW! what an incredibly useless thread...
*reported*... twice in one reply!


OH NOES!!! Theowy is scawY!!!
#11
I prefer to play a bunch of notes that are not in key.

Actually, I like to hum ridiculous phrases out loud and then try to recreate them on the guitar. That works for me.
#12
I had a jazz teacher that taught me a method he called "still melody". You simply play notes from the underlying chords, holding the note as long as the chord is playing, and when the chord changes, move your melody note to the closest note inside the next chord. You'd be amazed how well this can inspire ideas.
Quote by Zaphod_Beeblebr
Theory is descriptive, not prescriptive.


Quote by MiKe Hendryckz
theory states 1+1=2 sometimes in music 1+1=3.
#13
Mel-o-dy.

Case in point: the Slash solo for G n' R's November Rain. Beautiful!!

Most intermediate-level kids in 6th grade could learn it and play it well. So?

It's a kick ass solo because it has a hook.

I have heard plenty of solos from far better players than Slash, but 99.9% of them have no hook. There is no theme and so as a listener I don't give a crap.

People rip on Slayer because they are "sloppy" or whatever.

Their solos are built around movement. Sloppy or not, they often go somewhere.

Better to do that then spray gallons of guitar semen all over your audience, accomplishing nothing but causing them to get sleepy and head to the restroom, or worse, home.
"Virtually no one who is taught Relativity continues to read the Bible."

#14
If these guitarists can't make a better solo than Slash, how could you consider them better than slash. The point of a solo is to make music, that's it. If it is good music, nothing else matters. All these terms we discuss are useful, but in making music, at no point should they overshadow the quality of the music.
Quote by Zaphod_Beeblebr
Theory is descriptive, not prescriptive.


Quote by MiKe Hendryckz
theory states 1+1=2 sometimes in music 1+1=3.
#15
Quote by The_Sophist
If these guitarists can't make a better solo than Slash, how could you consider them better than slash. The point of a solo is to make music, that's it. If it is good music, nothing else matters. All these terms we discuss are useful, but in making music, at no point should they overshadow the quality of the music.



Ur missing 1 little point, and that's taste.

If I like apples and you like pears, does that means ur fruit is better?

Music isn't good or bad. There's only popular or less popular.

I like Slash, but I also Like Petrucci.

Why must there always be this debate. Just don't say 1 music is better then another. 1 Solo isn't better then another.

You can only say if 1 has better technique then another, by which slash isn't even that bad, he has got good dynamics and timing, and he always plays bends in tune.

He just isn't super versatile, but this doesn't making his technique bad. Good technique is that what you can play, you can play well. And he can do that.

Rather have a 5 note solo in tune, then a sweep which has all string noise.

The "Re-incarnation of Plato" Award 2009
(most intelligent)
The "Good Samaritan" Award 2009 (most helpful)

[font="Palatino Linotype
Who's Andy Timmons??
Last edited by xxdarrenxx at Feb 5, 2009,
#16
Quote by xxdarrenxx

You can only say if 1 has better technique then another, by which slash isn't even that bad, he has got good dynamics and timing, and he always plays bends in tune.



His bends live are utter crap. On albums I think he does such a good job, though maybe the dvd I watched it was his off night and Axl was on form... who knows. His song he did with Michael Jackson was awesome though. Other than that, we're off the TS's topic. I agree with the TS, go with what suits you, share what u can... u always gonna get tossers who think its a waste of time. But for those that you helped, well done man.
#17
I was talking specific to the person I was responding to, of course musical taste varies, I listen to prog, all my freinds listen to metal. I'm just wondering how can someone make better music (in ones opinion) and still be worse than someone who makes inferior music (again, in ones opinion).
Quote by Zaphod_Beeblebr
Theory is descriptive, not prescriptive.


Quote by MiKe Hendryckz
theory states 1+1=2 sometimes in music 1+1=3.
#18
Quote by The_Sophist
I was talking specific to the person I was responding to, of course musical taste varies, I listen to prog, all my freinds listen to metal. I'm just wondering how can someone make better music (in ones opinion) and still be worse than someone who makes inferior music (again, in ones opinion).


Objectively you can't.

Technique is the only thing you can measure to some extent, and even that is in a lot of times ambiguous.

The "Re-incarnation of Plato" Award 2009
(most intelligent)
The "Good Samaritan" Award 2009 (most helpful)

[font="Palatino Linotype
Who's Andy Timmons??
#19
Quote by The_Sophist
I had a jazz teacher that taught me a method he called "still melody". You simply play notes from the underlying chords, holding the note as long as the chord is playing, and when the chord changes, move your melody note to the closest note inside the next chord. You'd be amazed how well this can inspire ideas.


That's quite good advice. This is basically what the book "Connecting Chords with Linear Harmony" is about. Despite the name, it's about solos and melody, not harmony (i.e. LINEAR harmony = melody which is maybe what your teacher meant by "still melody").