#1
I'm currently writing out the solo for Invaders, and I think I've got it perfect, it's in GP5 so I'll post the file or a link to it, and I'll upload the text version. That's all I've been working on now.

Am I the only person who learns just by playing songs? I mean I know a good share of music theory, and god help me I want to just sit down and study scales and song form but either I'm too lazy or I just like playing songs by my favorite bands too much. I do, however, like to judge my progressiveness in playing on the songs I can get down, it seems the more technical the song I can accomplish the better I am. I try not to put it as "Oh, I can play Dead Human Collection (I finally got it 100% btw), so I'm a real Pat O'Brien", but at the same time I go "I can play songs of this difficulty, so I must be SOME kind of a good player". Am I alone on this? Are there any practice methods you guys use that help you learn how to write or riff or solo better? I'd liek to hear from you guys since there's not many local people I can share these experiences with
#2
It's a more natural way to learn things, so by all means if you enjoy it, go ahead. Too many guitarists try the fast route by learning the intricacies of the music before (or without) actually learning to make a personal connection and interpretation of the music they enjoy. That is not a musician, too often it becomes something more like a monkey performing a trick. So again, if this is what you enjoy, go for it.
Wise Man Says: The guitar is obviously female, she's got hips, breasts... and a hole.
UG's Flamenco Club
#3
I didn't progress with lead playing much until I started learning others solos. Scales and exercises have their place, but playing solo's seem to help speed it all up.
#4
Hello im a big fan of chemical <a href=
Last edited by Jaenis Ivars at May 22, 2016,
#5
I definitely learned by playing songs. However, for me, that doesn't always means learning every little detail. So I would only learn a guitar solo if it felt like an integral part of the composition, something that ought to be played the same way every time. (My view is that solos should ideally be improvised: different every time. But there's a perfectly valid view that in the case of some rock classics, solos count as part of the composition - as much "written" as the vocal melody or chord sequence.)

There's a few considerations. If the point is simply to perform the piece accurately, then of course, you need to learn all the details - or at least all the details you judge to be important (given that 100% mimicry is probably impossible - listeners are unlikely to mistake your version for the original ).
If the point is to learn about music (in any specific genre, or more generally) - without necessarily wanting to perform the song - then (equally) the more details you can absorb from any piece of music, the better. But again, you might judge that some details matter more than others. If you want to learn how to compose similar songs, you might look at the chord sequence, and/or the vocal melody, how they interact; you might pick up on rhythmic tricks - anything you think you could steal for your own songs. If you want to learn how to improvise, you'd benefit from studying the solo (again checking how it fits the chords).

So detail matters both ways. But there's a difference between learning a song in order to perform it, and learning it in order to expand your creative vocabulary.
Last edited by jongtr at May 22, 2016,