#1
I know a man who is a guitar seller and he playing guitar since 1960. I ask him to play fast, he said he can't, playing fast is for youngster. Then I say that Black Sabbath are not young they are older than you then he laugh.
I ask him who is your favorite foreign band and he told me The Beatles and non of the band are better than them.
I wonder why metal not into most of old people? I also start with the beatles and going upward to Queen and hard rock GnR and finally Metallica and other Metal band.
#2
Difference in style. Guys like Alvin Lee were certainly fast players but most that grew up in the 60s have a fondness for theme and melody that is often lost in Metal music. Fretboard pyrotechnics is simply not interesting to them.
"Your sound is in your hands as much as anything. It's the way you pick, and the way you hold the guitar, more than it is the amp or the guitar you use." -- Stevie Ray Vaughan

"Anybody can play. The note is only 20 percent. The attitude of the motherfucker who plays it is 80 percent." -- Miles Davis

Guthrie on tone: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmohdG9lLqY
#3
People are partial to the music they grew up with and shred in rock just hadn't been developed back then. Though obviously you did have fast guys in other genres. Jimmy Bryant comes to mind.

http://youtu.be/XuUWM9r7Irc

Some other country and jazz guys, like Django, John McLaughlin, Joe Maphis, etc were all burning it up in the 60s or prior to that in many cases such as Jimmy and Django. But a lot of old rock guys don't listen to that kind of music either.
There's no such thing; there never was. Where I am going you cannot follow me now.
#5
Quote by sosxradar
So it like people these day listenign to Pop and rap? eww it bleeding my ear.


"Your sound is in your hands as much as anything. It's the way you pick, and the way you hold the guitar, more than it is the amp or the guitar you use." -- Stevie Ray Vaughan

"Anybody can play. The note is only 20 percent. The attitude of the motherfucker who plays it is 80 percent." -- Miles Davis

Guthrie on tone: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmohdG9lLqY
#7
Quote by sosxradar
I know a man who is a guitar seller and he playing guitar since 1960. I ask him to play fast, he said he can't, playing fast is for youngster. Then I say that Black Sabbath are not young they are older than you then he laugh.
I ask him who is your favorite foreign band and he told me The Beatles and non of the band are better than them.
I wonder why metal not into most of old people? I also start with the beatles and going upward to Queen and hard rock GnR and finally Metallica and other Metal band.


LOL. You are completely wrong about a lot of things. But, thanks for the laugh.
#8
Paco Delucia was playing faster and more intensely than almost anyone even by today's standards back in the 60's, and he was playing fingerstyle! Classical players had the speed long before blues, rock and even jazz. Technical metal is very late in the game and is basically applying virtuoso classical ( i.e. Paganini etc.) concepts to rock music. Don't be fooled into thinking modern players invented speed, they are very late to that party - Paganini could probably crush anyone around on guitar or violin if he was still here.
#9
Less that 60s-era rock guitarists couldn't play fast than that the type of people with those skill sets didn't generally go into rock (many jazz and classical types were virtuosic speed-wise), and those who did were (a) influenced by blues where speed was the opposite of the goal (Clapton, Richards and many others), (b) interested in noise before technique (garage rock, Kinks and Who-esque rock, even Jimi) or (c) where in bands that leaned more pop (emphazed integrated, catchy songs over volume and rhythm) and played to suit the song and melody (Beatles being prime example). probably a combination of technology (can't be a coincidence that increases in signal volume and amplifying power went hand in hand with more aggressive and faster playing) and the mainstreaming of rock guitar that allowed a sort of arms-race of speed and technique in metal. on average maybe...the solo in rock around the clock is jazzily technical and Brian May is a fine example of someone with undeniable technical skill AND a seamless fit-the-song sense of melody.
#11
Quote by reverb66
PPaganini could probably crush anyone around on guitar or violin if he was still here.


I highly doubt that.

But even before Western music as we know it, dudes were shredding up traditional lute type instruments, particularly among the peoples of East Asia and the Turkic peoples of Central and Western Asia.
There's no such thing; there never was. Where I am going you cannot follow me now.
#12
Quote by sosxradar
I know why some of people hate the beatles I nkow why I know why.

Good to have you aboard. I look forward to your future contributions to the debate.
Last edited by jongtr at Sep 17, 2015,
#14
Or, the old man could have been annoyed by you, and told you something just to get you to go away LOL. Or he doesn't play fast songs so never learned to play fast and doesn't shred scales. And he said that, thinking you would just give him that since he's older and probably assumed you wouldn't try calling him out on his logic.
#15
I'd say that some people, regardless of age are just less interested in speed. Guitar playing is multifaceted in the way some folks enjoy playing blues, others enjoy shred guitar, some enjoy classical and so on, so forth. For a guitar player who's played for so long, I don't think speed is the thing they would evaluate their playing on. He's probably more about melody, harmony etc like a lot of the guitar players of his generation were. I'm not a particularly speedy player - in fact I'm pretty slow compared to most but I wouldn't evaluate my playing on my speed alone. If someone asked me to play as fast as i can, I'd just reply, "why!?"
Gibson Les Paul Studio
Gibson SG 67 Reissue
PRS 24SE 30th Anniversary
Ibanez Iceman IC507
Schecter Damien Solo Elite

Laney Ironheart IRT60
Orange Micro Terror
Pedals
POD HD500x
#16
I guess people in the 60s just weren't that interested in speed. If you don't practice speed, you won't be able to play fast. It's really that simple. If the music you play doesn't require extreme speeds, there's no point in practicing speed.

And I'm sure there were fast guitarists in the 60s. That's just not what rock'n'roll was about back then. Speed was more of an 80s thing. Well, 70s also had prog rock which emphasized technique - not necessarily speed, though.

But yeah, if you don't like shred music, why would you want to be able to shred? Maybe the guy you talked to had only focused on things he liked.
Quote by AlanHB
Just remember that there are no boring scales, just boring players.

Gear

Bach Stradivarius 37G
Charvel So Cal
Fender Dimension Bass
Hartke HyDrive 210c
Ibanez BL70
Laney VC30
Tokai TB48
Yamaha FG720S-12
Yamaha P115
#17
to be fair, you don't need to play fast to make a song sound great. Really Hendrix's solos at the end of the 60s were the fastest you were gonna get because Black Sabbath didn't pioneer metal until... 1970!!!! And even that was slow! If you're looking for fast, look at something like 'Miserlou' by Dick Dale and similar surf rock songs. The picking is rapid!!!
#18
There is no correlation between speed and how old you are and how long ago you played. None what so ever!

I'll give some examples of great guitarists you may want to listen to (there are literally thousands more):

John McLaughlin
Doc Watson
Wes Montgomery (amazing!)
Paco De Luca
Frank Zappa
Dimebag Darrel
Eddie Van Halen
.......
.....
...
..
.

oh my! Those are just a few I can think of in different genres before my head explodes! Then there's all the thousands you never even heard of...
#19
Who66 makes a good point. It's not that older players didn't have the chops to do it but speed was just not integral to the songs of the time. Rock was still a very young genre of music in the 60's. The songs were more dependent on melody, lyrics and vocal harmony. Players didn't think of speed as a particularly desired technique. The idea of playing fast just to be fast didn't seem like a goal anyone cared about. The 50's gave us the birth of rock and the first rock bands and vocal groups. In most cases the bands didn't have multi layered harmony vocals and the vocal bands rarely played their own instruments relying on a backup bands. In the 60's a lot of the harmony influenced vocals were still very prominent but the players started to learn how to sing and the vocalists bought guitars, basses and drums becoming completely self contained groups that both played and sang. Then around 1966-67 we got Cream and Hendrix who emphasized playing guitar over everything else. A year or so later we got Black Sabbath and Led Zeppelin and the changes came fast after that and guitar solos became the center piece of songs. It was a building process over 20-25 years. It wasn't that the players from the 50-60's era couldn't play fast, it didn't fit the music of the time and had not been developed as a technique yet.

Personally I don't care to shred and am no longer impressed by it. I'd turn it around and ask a similar question about why so many of todays band don't create good three and four part vocal harmony. The answer probably is that there isn't a big enough audience for it at the moment. It's currently not in style.

I agree with Who66 about Frannie Beechers lead in "Rock Around The Clock". Try to play it as clean and fast as he did it in 1954. It ain't that easy.
Yes I am guitarded also, nice to meet you.
Last edited by Rickholly74 at Sep 17, 2015,
#20
Quote by channellsguitar
to be fair, you don't need to play fast to make a song sound great. Really Hendrix's solos at the end of the 60s were the fastest you were gonna get because Black Sabbath didn't pioneer metal until... 1970!!!! And even that was slow! If you're looking for fast, look at something like 'Miserlou' by Dick Dale and similar surf rock songs. The picking is rapid!!!
The picking is, but not the quantity of different notes per second. Shred is about the fret hand, surely, more than the pick hand!

IMO, there are two things going on here.
1. how an individual's tastes change as he/she gets older (IF they do, and in what way)
2. how cultural preferences change over time, dependent (in this case) on things like technology and media.

I think it's true that young people - especially teenage boys! - value speed (and high energy) more than older people (and females of any age).
When I was young (yes it was in the 60s) I was blown away by "fast" guitar players - at least by "fast" as it was then. Stuff like Blind Blake for fingerstyle, or Cliff Gallup for rockabilly guitar, or Jerry Reed for country, or Alvin Lee for rock. ("Rock" was a new genre then, just being invented.)
Hendrix wasn't mind-blowing because of his speed, but because of the range of sounds he got, his fluidity, imagination and showmanship. He was technicolor 3D, while the other guitar heroes of the day (Eric etc) were monochrome one-dimensional.
If I'd been into jazz at that point, it might have been Art Tatum on piano, or Django Reinhardt on guitar (Django came later for me, after I'd grown out of the speed thing).

To be honest, I never much liked Alvin Lee. By the time I heard him, I was 20, and that kind of playing was already a bit "meh" to me (to use a word that didn't exist then, but should have). "Fast" was already getting a little boring, as I'd been playing guitar for 4 years by then, and was getting into more subtle, deeper stuff.

I did get excited again by punk in the late 70s, but that was down to its energy and (sometimes) the songwriting, not the guitar techniques. (It was "fast", but in terms of tempo, not notes per second.)

Shredding was a craze that totally passed me by (until I stumbled on it on the internet). It seems like a narrow subgenre within rock. As rock developed, its basic concepts didn't evolve - nothing really new came along after the early 70s - so it expanded by splitting into different subgenres, and the smaller the subgenre, the more enthusiastic and fanatic its followers seem to be. Even if some shredders began as good musicians, speed soon became the whole point of it - that's all the fans wanted - with competitions for the most notes per second. (Yeah I've seen those.)
And high gain of course, which began to stand in for the sheer power of volume which was one of rock's founding principles. The body-shaking sound of a Marshall tube stack gave way to the wasp-in-a-jar of digital distortion from FX boxes.

Bah. Nurse! time for my medication! Yeah, that grape skunk will do nicely.....
Last edited by jongtr at Sep 17, 2015,
#21
Quote by jongtr
Not sure if this counts as "fast", but it is from 1927.


Not really fast at all.

Quote by edg
There is no correlation between speed and how old you are and how long ago you played. None what so ever!


Sure there is. Some people might have played fast back then, but as time has passed, more guitarists are playing fast. And not only fast, but faster, employing a wider range of techniques, playing more accurately, etc.
There's no such thing; there never was. Where I am going you cannot follow me now.
#22
Quote by theogonia777

Sure there is. Some people might have played fast back then, but as time has passed, more guitarists are playing fast. And not only fast, but faster, employing a wider range of techniques, playing more accurately, etc.



Lol. I'd really like to see you back that statement up. My mind is boggled. Also, what fast even means in terms of a musical definition is totally up for grabs.
#25
early les paul was playing beyond fast for the day..the effects he invented helped..as they do with todays speed demons..they don't sound as fast when they play clean..need that rapid delay sound as 2 notes very close together..speed for speeds sake..not very musical..but very obsessive
play well

wolf
#26
after seeing that paco video I shouldve continued with the classical lessons, what a fool. No, I wanted to be a rock star!!!! HA HA HA HA HA!!!
#27
paco was phenomenal! I might just have to get back to the classical...... thinking thats what I really want
#28
The way I see it, it's like this.

Ever since the sort of renaissance period there were fast players on all instruments. In the more sort of modern era, there was still that classical thing, on guitar that would be things like paco, but there was also jazz where there were fast players, and highly skilled players.

They were sort of popular, but not really mainstream popular with the kids. Not like rock and roll.

A lot of guys from the 60s were into more sort of mellow 60s music. The popular music of the time wasn't difficult to play really. Most people didn't therefore care to learn to play fast. It was sort of the invention of pop, where musicians didn't need to be highly skilled instrumentalists, but just good songwriters, or singers.

Then right around Jimi Hendrix, the electric guitar started to become a spotlight showcase instrument where guys would learn to play the bigger and better solo. The guitar and distortion and stuff lent itself well to all sorts of flashy and dazzling techniques, and people got really into that.

The older people just saw it as a lot of fluff. Dazzling, and loud, but not musically pleasing to listen to really.

Even today, if what you want to do is learn popular songs, the guitar is usually really easy. One would only really learn to play real fast if they really wanted to be an instrumentalist, or happened to be into metal or that sort of general genre that uses blazing guitar skills.

Fast is a lot of work, and a lot of cool music can be made without fast.

A lot of guitarists play just as a hobby. They just play the songs they know and like. Fast guitar music is only really liked by certain demographics.

Joe Pass was fast back then.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nznXSc2VkOk

Most guys learning guitar in that era were not really listening to Joe Pass that much though I don't think.
#29
An example of one of the greatest old shredders is Glenn Tipton of Judas Priest.
Born 1947

Close to the ages of
-Jimmy Page
Born 1944

-Jeff Beck
Born 1944

-Jimi Hendrix
Born 1942

-Alvin Lee
Born 1944

Being able to shred, is most definitely in one's taste in music. There are some shredders today who aren't really that fast, but can play with fast music.
Last edited by TwoPlusTwo at Sep 17, 2015,
#30
Quote by edg
Lol. I'd really like to see you back that statement up. My mind is boggled. Also, what fast even means in terms of a musical definition is totally up for grabs.

you mentioned dimebag so there's really no convincing you that there's good music in the world

i think every musician should learn to produce so they realize that being able to play fast is just as easy or hard as playing slow when you have a tempo control. maybe that'll make it easier for cocky SOBs to see that nobody cares how showy your playing might be if it doesn't sound good

and it probably doesn't sound good
Quote by Kevätuhri
Hail isn't too edgy for posts, posts are not edgy enough for Hail.


Quote by UseYourThumb
You win. I'm done here.
Last edited by Hail at Sep 17, 2015,
#31
Quote by Hail
you mentioned dimebag so there's really no convincing you that there's good music in the world

i think every musician should learn to produce so they realize that being able to play fast is just as easy or hard as playing slow when you have a tempo control. maybe that'll make it easier for cocky SOBs to see that nobody cares how showy your playing might be if it doesn't sound good

and it probably doesn't sound good



Very interesting. Maybe you can elaborate.
#32
Quote by edg
Lol. I'd really like to see you back that statement up. My mind is boggled. Also, what fast even means in terms of a musical definition is totally up for grabs.


Look at all the post-80s guys, Shawn Lane, Mattias Eklund, Guthrie Govan, Marco Sfogli, Buckethead, Jeff Loomis, Rusty Cooley, Shane Gibson, John5, etc that can play circles around any of the pre-80s guys.

As far as everyone playing faster, check out the thousands of kids on YouTube doing covers of Racer X and Malmsteen. Everyone shreds these days.

Faster also isn't some subjective thing either. X shred technique played at Y notes per second. It's really not "up for grabs" as you put it.

Quote by Dynamight
"Fast" is relative.


Fast is relative, but can be objectively and quantifiably measured.
There's no such thing; there never was. Where I am going you cannot follow me now.
#33
Quote by theogonia777
It's really not "up for grabs" as you put it.


Yeah, it really is. Technically I can play a sweep that gets so fast that is it is basically just a blurr of sound. Not really a distinguishable nanosecond between one note and the next. It approaches 1/0. Black hole. Event horizon. But, so what? I can use it if I want, or not. It just ends up boiling down to some stupid measurement. Do you want to measure things, or play music?
#34
Quote by edg
Do you want to measure things, or play music?


Measuring speed usually involves measuring things.
There's no such thing; there never was. Where I am going you cannot follow me now.
#35
Quote by theogonia777
Measuring speed usually involves measuring things.


I'm not really even sure what your point is at this juncture.

I can scrape my pick across 6 guitar strings and produce digitally distinguishable notes in tempo and show it visually on a computer waveform. Pretty much anyone can do that. At some point its not even music and all you're doing is just taking measurements.
#36
Quote by theogonia777
Not really fast at all.
I guess not. The technique is still impressive though, IMO. Technique is about a lot more than just being fast, right?
Quote by theogonia777

Sure there is. Some people might have played fast back then, but as time has passed, more guitarists are playing fast. And not only fast, but faster, employing a wider range of techniques, playing more accurately, etc.
I agree. There are many many more guitarists around these days, and consequently many more technically accomplished ones. At the peak of technical accomplishment, they are doing things I suspect no 60s guitarist (at least not in rock, or maybe even in jazz) could have done.
The issue, of course, is whether we worship that accomplishment in itself, if it doesn't go hand in hand with equally advanced musical content.

Then again, if a sizeable audience appreciates speed for its own sake, who are we to say they're wrong? Lots of people like to go to circuses, or watch magicians, or even athletics. There's clearly a market for seeing human beings push their physical capabilities to the limit.
"Art" is something else entirely....
#38
The way I see it, a lot of the 60s guys didn't play fast either because they didn't need to or didn't practice such playing. B.B. King was considered one of the greatest blues guitarists ever (if only because he died this year) and he admitted at least once that he can't play fast. When you're vibrato is as good as B.B. King and your guitar playing is that emotional, you don't need speed. Same with guys like Clapton, Buddy Guy, and Muddy Waters. Guys like Keith Richards and George Harrison were good enough songwriters and played tastefully enough for their playing to work.

Paco De Lucia is a member of a style known as Flamenco. It's a Spanish style where guitarists will often play enough sweeps and tremolos to put Yngwie Malmsteen and his kind to shame (they might be more melodic as well). Flamenco can get technical enough to rival Classical Music and Extreme Metal. Paco is a beast even among these monsters. I confess I don't know that much about Flamenco but that' just my limited opinion.

This is just my insight on the matters.
"I don't know what you're trying to suggest. There's no shame in taking what you need to hold your position!"

Super Buu (DBZ) on assimilation (it could also apply to blues guitar and guitar soloing in general).