Page 1 of 2
#1
By "virtuoso," I mean the players who know an insane amount of theory, can play incredibly fast, can play anything, and such... If you are thinking... "Well, duh.. Isn't that what virtuoso means...?" Right. I just want to make it clear I'm talking about players like Satch and not players like Hendrix.

Anyway, do you guys think that players like Joe Satriani and Steve Vai become limited with their unlimited-ness of virtuoso, shreddy playing? Meaning, think of less skilled players who come up with simple, but badass riffs that make us non-famous, non-virtuoso, nothing players go," Damn... I wish I could make up something like that." Like, with all their complex shredding and such, do they lose the ability to just write a simple song? Do you think they even would want to write a simple song? Or maybe that's because they can't? And no, I'm not trying to say simple songs are best, I'm just saying... Think of all the simple that people just freaking love. They learn to play it, they learn the words... etc... People love simple, but powerful songs. Jack White was talking about there's three things most people want. Rhythm, melody, and a story. And if you listen to the White Stripes their music defines that theory.

For example, think of Pantera. Everyone likes Pantera. There's some "'Shut the **** up about Dime' people..." But, who cares. If you play guitar you at least appreciate it. Think of 'Walk.' It's like a two note riff. People ****ing love that riff. It's badass. And it's two notes. Then, yes of course an insane solo... But, come on. The song is still based around a two-note riff that kicks ass.

Think of Enter Sandman. Metallica... Technical band. Kirk Hammett is monster on that guitar. He knows everything from trash metal to jazz to whatever kind of music Santana plays. =P But, that main riff... It's simple. I bet everyone here can play it. I taught it to my friend who doesn't play guitar.

You can get simpler... Can't Stop by the Chili Peppers. Freaking simple song all the way through... And it... Kicks ass.

Californication... 4 chords. Simple riffs. Kicks ass?

Simpler than that?

Speed Kills by Michael Angelo Batio.


Just kidding.

Bob Dylan's All Along the Watchtower. 3 chords and a voice. (And some annoying harmonica. =P)

Anyway,

Back to my question. Do you think the unlimited-ness of virtuoso, shred playing renders a players ability to just slap a simple riff down and have a badass tune impossible? Oh, and think about it... Mostly only really musical people appreciate that kind of music. Normal people, respectively, think, "Wow, that's crazy." But, they aren't gonna listen to it regularly. Kinda like as you grow as a player, you begin to understand things more... So... it makes it that much more amazing because you know what's going on under the hood... You understand the music, I guess you would say.

Here's a thought...

I heard 'Eruption' on the radio the other day. I thought it was a bit retarded seeing that it's a song showing Eddie's technical skill, not something to tap your foot to... Unless you do... I don't. Heh. I'm just saying it's unlikely you wake up one day wanting to flip on Eruption and just.. Chill.

Heh, I thought of something else... In this video, Steve Vai was talking about how he wrote this song based off of Bulgarian wedding music or something... And he was like, "Anyone can run up and down scales, but on this song I wrote a melody." And he goes to play the melody riff and it's fast, and shreddy. Now granted... It sounded neat. But, it's not likely it would become indefinitely pinned inside my brain.

So, what do you think?
Quote by eggo_boi_15
Arnt the first few things anyone learns on a guitar is

1. Nirvana - smells like teen spirit
2. Prince - Smoke on the water
3. White stripes - seven nation army

^ lol
Last edited by Spaghetti at Jul 14, 2007,
#2
Go listen to Satriani's "Home."
DANNY

Quote by kevinm4435 to some guy
hey d00d i herd u dont like shred u r a genius 4 thinkin dat. all shred is fukin lame wit no soul u no wat im sayin??
#4
Being good at guitar doesn't limit you. Don't ever let anyone on this forum try to tell you that. It is foolishness to think that way.

And just because someone is a virtuoso doesn't mean that everything they play is technical.
#6
personally i think that these virtuosos just use their show of there technical and theory skill while the song dosent realy say that much on an emothional level many others (i.e. me) see music as a way to better comunicate emotion and feelings

also these shredzy (sp) players also kinda have to play alot of fast technical stuff or many ppl would say that they were no longet a virutoso (sp)
#7
Quote by IclaptonisgodI
personally i think that these virtuosos just use their show of there technical and theory skill while the song dosent realy say that much on an emothional level many others (i.e. me) see music as a way to better comunicate emotion and feelings

also these shredzy (sp) players also kinda have to play alot of fast technical stuff or many ppl would say that they were no longet a virutoso (sp)


Hush you.

Mass pwnage of the idea that shredders can only impress with fast music.

Just because someone doesn't play snail paced blues rock doesn't mean they don't put emotion into their writing. Further more, just because someone plays a fast lick doesn't mean he is just trying to show off- alot of times fast phrases are what sound the best and give a certain feel to the song, or build up tension.
Last edited by CowboyUp at Jul 14, 2007,
#8
Quote by IclaptonisgodI
personally i think that these virtuosos just use their show of there technical and theory skill while the song dosent realy say that much on an emothional level many others (i.e. me) see music as a way to better comunicate emotion and feelings

also these shredzy (sp) players also kinda have to play alot of fast technical stuff or many ppl would say that they were no longet a virutoso (sp)


No. Please, watch this and think again.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=HXtc1InfQVA
DANNY

Quote by kevinm4435 to some guy
hey d00d i herd u dont like shred u r a genius 4 thinkin dat. all shred is fukin lame wit no soul u no wat im sayin??
#9
im not hateing on all fast playing or any thing. i think its the right thing to do in some circumstances but IMO its is realy overrated and alot of ppl i know use speed to show off and thats a big part of a being a virtuoso

and also i hate the foods solo the squeels give me a headache

and also again im not talking about all virtuosos or song or ppl just many of them
Last edited by IclaptonisgodI at Jul 14, 2007,
#10
Quote by IclaptonisgodI
im not hateing on all fast playing or any thing. i think its the right thing to do in some circumstances but IMO its is realy overrated and alot of ppl i know use speed to show off and thats a big part of a being a virtuoso


It isn't either of those things.

And the floods solo > the vast majority of guitar solos, ever.
#11
Quote by CowboyUp
It isn't either of those things.


the first thing is just opppinion but how can u argue that speed isint a huge part of virtuoso playing? every virtuoso i can think of is mainly known not for the emotion in ther songs but for their speed
#12
Quote by IclaptonisgodI
the first thing is just opppinion but how can u argue that speed isint a huge part of virtuoso playing? every virtuoso i can think of is mainly known not for the emotion in ther songs but for their speed


Emotion is not contained in music. It is all interpreted by the listener. Not to mention, you cannot possibly know what the writer is thinking while writing the song. For all we know, Far Beyond the Sun is about Yngwie's twin stillborn brother Olaf.

And yes, there are a few show offs, but most are extremely passionate about their music and write great songs.
#13
There are a bunch of shredders like that, but don't group Joe Satriani and Steve Vai in with them. Satriani comes up with better riffs and melodies that 99% of 'normal' guitarists.

Anyway, if you're going to split music into the rather unfair dichotomy of 'shred' and 'non-shred', then you should look at shred thinking "this is what can be done with a guitar, not what should be done with a guitar.' You might think that those players are too much up their own ass with their playing, well, that's the point. The thing with Satriani and Vai and also Eric Johnson, is their songs function as songs. They have structure, dynamics, melody, all the components of well-written compositions. There's nothing they've played that wouldn't work in a vocally-oriented piece. But that's not the point with shred. Shred is about the guitar, if you want riffs, listen to something else.
#14
Quote by bananaboy
There are a bunch of shredders like that, but don't group Joe Satriani and Steve Vai in with them. Satriani comes up with better riffs and melodies that 99% of 'normal' guitarists.

Anyway, if you're going to split music into the rather unfair dichotomy of 'shred' and 'non-shred', then you should look at shred thinking "this is what can be done with a guitar, not what should be done with a guitar.' You might think that those players are too much up their own ass with their playing, well, that's the point. The thing with Satriani and Vai and also Eric Johnson, is their songs function as songs. They have structure, dynamics, melody, all the components of well-written compositions. There's nothing they've played that wouldn't work in a vocally-oriented piece. But that's not the point with shred. Shred is about the guitar, if you want riffs, listen to something else.


Shred isn't a style of music. It is just a term for fast technical playing. Pantera wasn't "shred", but alot of the guitar solos featured shredding sections.
#15
Quote by CowboyUp
Shred isn't a style of music. It is just a term for fast technical playing. Pantera wasn't "shred", but alot of the guitar solos featured shredding sections.

First half of the first sentence in paragraph 2.
#16
Quote by bananaboy
First half of the first sentence in paragraph 2.


You often refer to "shred" as a style that any player other than Satriani, Vai, and Johnson play.
#17
Quote by CowboyUp
You often refer to "shred" as a style that any player other than Satriani, Vai, and Johnson play.

Sorry, I probably could have phrased that a little better. I was referring to what the thread starter was referring to as shred, IE instrumental music with focus on guitar solos. I was calling it that for simplicity's sake.
#18
Quote by bananaboy
Sorry, I probably could have phrased that a little better. I was referring to what the thread starter was referring to as shred, IE instrumental music with focus on guitar solos. I was calling it that for simplicity's sake.


#19
I'd Have to sa that you shouldn't limit yourself to one thing. You shouldn'y say " i'm gonna to come uo with a sweet riff thats 3 notes and that's all I'll do. I'll make hundreds of songs with 3 different notes." Its more like if you make a cool riff fine and if you make up a technical riff cool to. Its good to learn up on your theory so that you can make more then just 3 notes riffs. If you make up 3 note riff its fine as long as its not all you care to learn without trying new things.

Kind of like some one i know who plays punk. He knows powrchords and thats it. He can play them fast and play some easy lead but thats all he limits himself to without trying to go any further.

With Satch I'm not sure if he writes a riff then names it or decide what its supposed to remind you of then right it. My guess is he writes a riff and says, Ooh that reminds me of the beach (just an example) then calls the Beach. Its really hard to say. I mean if you can play fast should you allow your self to play slow to. But then you could be just playing slow just so our not always playing fast and you would be playing slow because you wanted to so

I guess you just gotta do what you want and dont let anyone tell you to go fast or slow yet dont limit yourself to just playing Powerchords
#20
You know Im pretty sure that no ammount of musical thoery or guitar skills can stunt the emotion in what you are playing.

The more you know and the more you think and do, the more emotion you can show in a solo or melody. Sometimes playing ultra-stupiditly fast is the best way to go to play an aggressive melody.

And whoever said satch and vai and malmsteen only do shred. Satch Boogie is an awesome example.

The simpler riffs (enter sandman and so on), might be easy to play, and maybe everyone here could play some solo written by someone or rather, but anyone stop to think HOW he wrote it? With intense skill and theory and emotion.

Also, to the thread starter, i've noticed people who arent muscians generally listen to pop-rock, 'r and b' (thats not rhythym and blues) and rap. People generally get tired of these songs fast anyway. So saying only musicians listen to shred and tecnical music is because they can appreciate it.
And i know a hell load of people who know nothing about music but still like vai and satch and megadeth and other things with shred solos.
#21
TS i think this is a really good thread you made and its going to get debated on a lot
but IMO i think its just what they want to do with music. I know a guy named Scott Gamble which none of you guys probably know. but he is considered the best durmmer in the area that we live in so about 250 000 ppl. and he said one time "i could get with the right people and write songs taht would stand a good chance against all the radio music and i might even be played on there." so my friends dad who plays bass said "then why dont you?" and Scott said " Well whats the point?doesnt matter what other people like if im not having fun with my music it loses its meanning" so going back to your question, i dont think its cause the players are limited by their virtuostic playing but its just what they want to do with their music. I mean look at the chart makers today to most of tehm there music is nothign but a way to make money, its not liek back in the days when people really loved their music. soo yeah the answer to ur quesiton is no i think... as long as what your doing is what your honestly content with i dont think limited is the word to describe it
#22
Quote by jason_lee_91
TS i think this is a really good thread you made and its going to get debated on a lot
but IMO i think its just what they want to do with music. I know a guy named Scott Gamble which none of you guys probably know. but he is considered the best durmmer in the area that we live in so about 250 000 ppl. and he said one time "i could get with the right people and write songs taht would stand a good chance against all the radio music and i might even be played on there." so my friends dad who plays bass said "then why dont you?" and Scott said " Well whats the point?doesnt matter what other people like if im not having fun with my music it loses its meanning" so going back to your question, i dont think its cause the players are limited by their virtuostic playing but its just what they want to do with their music. I mean look at the chart makers today to most of tehm there music is nothign but a way to make money, its not liek back in the days when people really loved their music. soo yeah the answer to ur quesiton is no i think... as long as what your doing is what your honestly content with i dont think limited is the word to describe it


Music to a musician is art. Its a modern day culture and a way of expressing feelings and so on. This is done with theory and musical knowhow.

Music to chart toppers is a business. Its a way of putting food on the table and wine in the glass, albeit if its leeching of the art side of music.

The media over promotes it, people start listening to it and because they know no alternative, they think they like it.
BLAME THE EVIL AMERICANO MEDIA (joke)
#23
Quote by Spaghetti
Do you think the unlimited-ness of virtuoso, shred playing renders a players ability to just slap a simple riff down and have a badass tune impossible?


No, I just think since they have the ability to write complex riffs and solos, they'd rather do that, but that doesn't mean they won't write'simple' riffs.
Quote by paulefty
Dr. No I LOVE YOUR AVATAR!
#24
There's also the fact that if you've got technical control and theoretical knowledge to sink a ship, you're just going to have more fun playing technical stuff.
Quote by marmoseti
Mastering your instrument is being able to play whatever you hear in your head, unhindered by inadequate technique. After that, it's all about what you've got to say, so there would be no "best," just a bunch of people saying exactly what they mean.
#25
Hmm well... after reading your whole post, I kinda forgot what was the question lolll

*scrolls up*

Hah! Hmm, yea I think they still can play simple songs.... most of their songs are probably based on simple progressions, it's only that they like "embellishing" it with speedy/shreddy licks.... But again!


Listen to Starry Night (Joe Satriani)... It's quite simple, not really speedy/shreddy and it's still very good!

So, I DO believe they can do good "simple" music!
Note: Sorry if my grammar and/or vocabulary isn't very good, English is my 2nd language!

Quote by Resiliance
you show me yours and I'll show you mine!


If you're wondering where I've been gone, click here!
#26
Quote by demonofthenight
Music to a musician is art. Its a modern day culture and a way of expressing feelings and so on. This is done with theory and musical knowhow.

Music to chart toppers is a business. Its a way of putting food on the table and wine in the glass, albeit if its leeching of the art side of music.

The media over promotes it, people start listening to it and because they know no alternative, they think they like it.
BLAME THE EVIL AMERICANO MEDIA (joke)


+1
yeah its really a shame how many people take music and just make it a big joke now a days
#27
I think I came up with a good analogy, based off of what demonofthenight said. Music to a musician is art, which is not unlike a painting to a painter being art. Now, ask yourself, if an artist can paint well does it make him not capable of creating a message? Call me crazy, but I think that having 'mastery' of the techniques associated with your art allows you to be more expressive, and convey your emotions and message easier.

Honestly, there have been times where I just wanted to listen to Eruption over and over again. I don't think that playing fast detracts from emotion, I believe it is just a different way of showing emotion. Is sweep picking all that different from a great vibrato? They can both convey a message, its just done in different ways. That's the whole reason why we have different styles of music. If just the blues could carry emotion, there would really only be the blues. If only jazz could carry emotion, there would really only be jazz. No one style of music, fast or slow, loud or quiet, can be used to express more than any other style. I mean, I can't stand country, most rap, a good amount of jazz, and just about all of the poppy music over the years, but I know that those styles of music really speak to some people, just not to me. The the old saying goes,
"Different strokes for different folks."

Listen to some B.B. King, then listen to some Satriani. Then try to tell me that they both are not passionate about their instrument, tell me that they don't have emotion in their playing.
Livin' Easy, Livin' Free
#29
IMO, the emotion, melody and rhythm stuff depend exclusively of how is composed and not the speed or technical skills needed to play it.
Besides being a guitar player, I'm a big fan of the guitar. I love that damn instrument. Steve Vai

Gear:
Kramer Striker FR422SM
Roland Microcube
Digitech Bad Monkey
Dunlop Tortex 1.14mm picks


MY VIDEOS
#30
I love players like Steve Vai, Paul Gilbert, Satch, Govan, etc. I love their phrasing, the melodies they can come up with, the emotion they put into their music, etc.

But I think the threadstarter has a point (which I've seen before). Ofcourse shredders aren't emotionless just because they play fast or hard things (granted, there are quite some exceptions, but I'm talking about the previous mentioned guitarists). But it's true that most of their riffs/licks don't stick in your head like a cool riff would. There's tons of examples of those, walk, juice box, smoke on the water. Riffs or melodies everyone knows, that can stick around in your head for days! Progressions and lyrics often linger around in your for a long time too (stairway to heaven for example). Most virtuose songs don't however.

I once heard people can only really remember 11 notes in a row. Maybe that's why faster things don't really stick around. They can sound beatiful and amazing in a song's context, but I don't think anyone's ever been stuck with a descending run in B locrian in their heads.

Or is that just me?

EDIT: Also, if anyone thinks shred isn't emotion, this will prove you wrong, even more so than that Dime Bag video (the tone hurt my ears a bit through my crappy headphone )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9QL0Jkb_GU There are no words to describe this imo.
Not only would it disrupt the fabric of time and space, but it would totally ruin the surprise!
Last edited by Kailoq at Jul 15, 2007,
#31
I agree alot with Kailog, except for one guitarist for me, Satch. Most of his songs do feature a simple hook, Surfing with Alien, Satch Boogie and Mystical Potato head groove thing to name a few, I think he stands head and shoulders above other guitarists in the way he utilises his abilities, but thats my opinion obviously others won't think the same.
Quote by cakemonster91

*chuckle* A peanut. With a face.



Go to your staff paper and re-write this song a half step down so on the paper it'll be like you have a "C" just move it down to a "B#"




Know your theory, then play like you don't.

#32
in my thought, its about theory, memory and feel (emotion).. first, before you can play what you feel you need to configure what note to use right? after that, it will be keeped on memory (either muscle memory or brain).. then for the improvement, it will use the memory..

its like a baby that have no memory.. He cant say, walk, run, play guitar... but cry? it is the first thing he learn..

Its my thought anyways...
My Gear:

Guitar : Ibanez RG350EX 400 dollar US
Pick : ernie Ball - half a dollar
Amp : borrowing friend
Pedal : behringer metal pedal

------------------------------------------------------------------------

'I trust no talent'
#33
No, I think that music theory and skill on the guitar can show more emotion. I wrote a sweeping riff using a Dsus2, Dmin, Dsus4, and D5 to make a almost "falling into darkness" sound (at least it sounds like to me, and that is all that really matters). I know it isn't that difficult compared to something like Midnight by Joe Satriani or Icarus' Dream Suite by Malmsteen, but it is incredible compared to when I started to learn theory. I can express myself so much more now because I know what certain things will sound like and how to take advantage of the minor/major scales depending on my mood. And also, if used properly, more advanced technique can sound absolutely beautiful and melodic. It isn't always about something to "tap your foot to", because if it was, everything would sound pretty emotionless.
My Equipment
  • Michael Kelly Patriot Custom
  • Vox Valvetronix 2x12
  • Fender 12-string Acoustic
  • Alvarez Nylon String Acoustic
#34
No.

I think if anyone accuses Vai of "emotionless" playing, I'm wondering how they escaped the bloody mental institution.

Some people get wrapped up in fast playing, and some people lap it up. Others use their extraordinary skills when they want to. Besides, if you wanted to express something like the sheer ecstasy of life and fun, surely fast music suits it better? I dislike when people think slow or fast = good. To me, interesting = good, be it funeral or light speed paced.

For others like myself, that Vai piece you described (Freak Show Excess) actually does get stuck in my head, along with stuff by Meshuggah. In fact, I don't like those "simple" pieces you mentioned; entirely uninteresting to me, flat out boring. So is Batio and Malmsteen; I don't think it's fair to lump Satch and Vai in with them.


But it's down to personal taste. Virtuosity is only a barrier if the artist relies on it.
#35
Quote by Dayn
No.

I think if anyone accuses Vai of "emotionless" playing, I'm wondering how they escaped the bloody mental institution.

Some people get wrapped up in fast playing, and some people lap it up. Others use their extraordinary skills when they want to. Besides, if you wanted to express something like the sheer ecstasy of life and fun, surely fast music suits it better? I dislike when people think slow or fast = good. To me, interesting = good, be it funeral or light speed paced.

For others like myself, that Vai piece you described (Freak Show Excess) actually does get stuck in my head, along with stuff by Meshuggah. In fact, I don't like those "simple" pieces you mentioned; entirely uninteresting to me, flat out boring. So is Batio and Malmsteen; I don't think it's fair to lump Satch and Vai in with them.


But it's down to personal taste. Virtuosity is only a barrier if the artist relies on it.

Yeah, Malmsteen isn't all that great most of the time, but I do love Icarus' Dream Suite. Batio is just fun to watch. However, it is just my personal taste, as you said. I absolutely love Satriani's guitar playing though. It is very technical, but it shows alot of personality. Vai's is good too, but I like Joe's more
My Equipment
  • Michael Kelly Patriot Custom
  • Vox Valvetronix 2x12
  • Fender 12-string Acoustic
  • Alvarez Nylon String Acoustic
#36
That was my fear when i realized i've been transfering from blues into shred slowly.
ince my fingers were cut from bending i resorted to more speed and tapping technquies in my playing leaving behind the soul foul bends you hear in blues and started learning mods.

i thought i was throwing my blues playing away.
but as soon as my fingers healed i was able to go pop a good backing tract a solo my heart out agian.

so I think its what you practice, if your gonna be a giganto shredder, you probobly spent quite some time practicing rythm like playing somewhere in your timeline but i dunno.

maybe its just the person.
#37
Quote by FrozenSheep
That was my fear when i realized i've been transfering from blues into shred slowly.
ince my fingers were cut from bending i resorted to more speed and tapping technquies in my playing leaving behind the soul foul bends you hear in blues and started learning mods.

i thought i was throwing my blues playing away.
but as soon as my fingers healed i was able to go pop a good backing tract a solo my heart out agian.

so I think its what you practice, if your gonna be a giganto shredder, you probobly spent quite some time practicing rythm like playing somewhere in your timeline but i dunno.

maybe its just the person.

You can have alot of feeling in tapping and stuff. I personally like tapping with minor scales, which can be both sad sounding or angry (depending on certain aspects). I love blues too, don't get me wrong, but I think if you take time to experiment with tapping, you can get some really cool sounding licks that really show alot of emotion. Oh, and how much did you bend to get your fingers to bleed? I play probably at least 3-5 hours a day (however, that is minimum) and lot of it is blues type soloing/improvising and I never have had my fingers bleed.
My Equipment
  • Michael Kelly Patriot Custom
  • Vox Valvetronix 2x12
  • Fender 12-string Acoustic
  • Alvarez Nylon String Acoustic
#38
Well... I don't listen to much of that kind of music anyway. I guess I should before I ask things like that, eh? But anyway, I wasn't saying they were emotionless or any of those other hackneyed arguments and statements... Just wondering if anyone else thought that since they probably can't play their guitar without thinking about what was going on to make it sound good that they couldn't just let there fingers play something random and off the wall, dissonant, whatever and create some amazing riff that made almost no theoretical sense... Not that those are the best kind of riffs... Ya'll know what I mean, right?

I'll check some stuff out and make another statement.
Quote by eggo_boi_15
Arnt the first few things anyone learns on a guitar is

1. Nirvana - smells like teen spirit
2. Prince - Smoke on the water
3. White stripes - seven nation army

^ lol
Last edited by Spaghetti at Jul 15, 2007,
#39
Quote by Spaghetti
Well, I wasn't saying they were emotionless or any of those other hackneyed arguments and statements, just wondering if anyone thought since they that probably couldn't play guitar without thinking about what was going on to make it sound good... That they couldn't just let there fingers play something random and off the wall, dissonant, whatever... And create some amazing riff that made almost no theoretical sense... But, then again I don't listen to much of that kind of music anyway. I guess I should before I ask **** like that, eh?

It is okay. Today has been a boring day for me anyways. However, I would say that Jimi Hendrix was often guilty of this. It just seems to me that he often just started playing a pretty good blues/r&b/rock song and then goes off on the guitar and it makes no sense (at least how I see it, but then again, I am kind of biased because everyone at my school is obsessed with saying that Jimi is the greatest guitarist, but few are ACTUAL guitarists and even less know who Vai, Satriani, or even Jimi Page and Eric Claptan are (yeah...they aren't that smart) ).
My Equipment
  • Michael Kelly Patriot Custom
  • Vox Valvetronix 2x12
  • Fender 12-string Acoustic
  • Alvarez Nylon String Acoustic
#40
I think the a good analogy for this sort of stuff is to compare it to art(as in painting)

For example, you have a not very detailed painting of a countryside, and then you have one of salvador dali's gigantic paintings with details on every single inch of it. Now, the painting of the countryside might be more popular because it's easier to look at and understand. The Dali painting however might take an artist to fully appreciate all the work and detail that went into it. Can you say that the painter of the countryside is able to express more emotion because more people like his painting? Of course not, you can never say how much emotion went into anything. Hell, even a painting of every single organism on a blade of grass could have had tons of emotion poured into it. Also you can bet salvador dali could also draw that picture of the countryside or something like it. He just wouldn't want to because it wouldn't interest him as much as drawing something epic and complex.
Page 1 of 2