#1
"People believe that by playing faster and creating new playing techniques you can progress forward, but then they realize that emotionally they don't progress at all. They transmit nothing to the people listening and they stay at where Hendrix was three decades ago. Something like that happened to Vai in the 80s."
-John Frusciante


Just to get minds working this morning, what is the definition of 'Progress' when it comes to playing a guitar, or any instrument? Can emotional progress be coupled with technical progress, or can only one or the other be made? What is the value of traditional guitar/instrumental techniques, what merits are there of "playing faster and creating new' ones? What historic artists have pushed the boundaries of progress? What modern ones?

Let's have a discussion. Please, bring up any related ideas, I hope this goes somewhere.
Quote by skater dan0
...and the bassist comes up to the EQ and moves all the sliders into the typical smiley face pattern and in a really thick Jamaican accent said "you can't have de bass without de smiley face"
#2
Emotional progress sounds like some bull**** term to make elitists think they're better than everyone else.
Originally posted by TestForEcho
Badreligionrock is the man.

Quote by Pinky19
Badreligionrock you have the greatest avatar of all time. Rejected is the best video. Period.
#4
Quote by rush4life
Emotion is objective, so this entire argument is pointless.

I'll have you know my emot-O-meter can measure emotion!
#6
Actually, Frusciante is wrong. New techniques, while not always being "better" at transmitting emotion (which I think is a load of crap anyway, because there is no good or bad way to), give a simply different way of conveying emotion. As a personal example, I adopted a technique where I lightly place my finger on my low B, and hit my palm against the body, giving a dark, moody oscillating sound. I've been told that it is moody and dark, and therefore has been successful in conveying that emotion.
#7
Some people call bands like 'Dragonforce' lifeless because they use more notes than necessary, so to speak, to play a piece. Are they focusing more on 'showing off' or putting more than what is needed out there in order to assert their talent as musicians and promote their own virtuosity while neglecting to focus on providing music?
Quote by skater dan0
...and the bassist comes up to the EQ and moves all the sliders into the typical smiley face pattern and in a really thick Jamaican accent said "you can't have de bass without de smiley face"
#8
Quote by TagRingo
Some people call bands like 'Dragonforce' lifeless because they use more notes than necessary, so to speak, to play a piece. Are they focusing more on 'showing off' or putting more than what is needed out there in order to assert their talent as musicians and promote their own virtuosity while neglecting to focus on providing music?


Evidently they aren't playing more notes than necessary, because if they didn't play all the notes they do, it wouldn't be the song anymore, would it?
#9
Ugh. If playing fast technical stuff makes somebody happy. Then there playing emotionally. It does not have to be the worlds slowest solo to be emotional. The bottom line is your having a good time. What is the reason that people think if its technical there is 0 emotion behind it? How the **** do you know whats going through the musicians head as they play it?


Quote by TagRingo
Some people call bands like 'Dragonforce' lifeless because they use more notes than necessary, so to speak, to play a piece. Are they focusing more on 'showing off' or putting more than what is needed out there in order to assert their talent as musicians and promote their own virtuosity while neglecting to focus on providing music?



Who the **** knows, maybe they just enjoy playing music like that. Crazy idea.
#10
Quote by TagRingo
Some people call bands like 'Dragonforce' lifeless because they use more notes than necessary, so to speak, to play a piece. Are they focusing more on 'showing off' or putting more than what is needed out there in order to assert their talent as musicians and promote their own virtuosity while neglecting to focus on providing music?


Yes, but they're also playing music that some people might find incredibly inspirational, given the virtuosity of it, thus serving a purpose. If people like the music, they like it, and to **** with 'emotion'.
Originally posted by TestForEcho
Badreligionrock is the man.

Quote by Pinky19
Badreligionrock you have the greatest avatar of all time. Rejected is the best video. Period.
#11
When it comes to my own playing and musicianship, progress is damn well whatever I say it is.

Damnit.
My God, it's full of stars!
#12
Quote by Chinfrim
Don't ou mean "Subjective"?

Each person has their own sense of "Emotion"


Whoops, sorry. Yeah, I was three letters off.
#13
i hate people talking about 'emotional' guitar playing, because people seem to think that it is analogous to putting a lot of bends in. its not. you can play guitar however you like and it can still be emotional. there is no such thing as an emotional style, because emotion is something that can be put into any style.

that being said, however, shred still sucks massively.
my name is matt. you can call me that if you like.
#14
Quote by Gurgle!Argh!
i hate people talking about 'emotional' guitar playing, because people seem to think that it is analogous to putting a lot of bends in. its not. you can play guitar however you like and it can still be emotional. there is no such thing as an emotional style, because emotion is something that can be put into any style.

that being said, however, shred still sucks massively.


;-( I can't shred either man....
#15
Quote by Gurgle!Argh!
i hate people talking about 'emotional' guitar playing, because people seem to think that it is analogous to putting a lot of bends in. its not. you can play guitar however you like and it can still be emotional. there is no such thing as an emotional style, because emotion is something that can be put into any style.

that being said, however, shred still sucks massively.


Yeah, they have to be slow bends.
#16
Quote by Badreligionrock
Emotional progress sounds like some bull**** term to make elitists think they're better than everyone else.

Amen.

It's also an excuse idiots use to put down others just because they don't have the same amount of passion for guitar as the technical players. I'm not saying you can't have passion with learning to shred, but to get to a great technical level, you have to really love the instrument.
#17
Quote by rush4life
Yeah, they have to be slow bends.

Can also include vibrato, but only if it's wide.
#18
John is even more close minded in his thinking than I thought.

Vai has a hell of lot of emotion in my ears. Emotion is a totally relative concept.

Guitar should be about having fun. Not arguing over shred versus emotion.
Ibanez s540 with gold Schaller bridge and OMGGOLD hardware

Ibanez RGR320 with Lo-Edge Pro bridge and scalloped fretboard

Lee Jackson XLSC - 500

Roland Microcube

Dunlop Jazz III black
Last edited by PhantomNote at Mar 13, 2008,
#20
I think it depends entirely on what you're looking for. It's far easier to get an emotional "kick" out of slower stuff but that doesn't take anything away from the skill shredders have achieved nor does it make their playing any "worse" than a slower players. It's all really about what you're trying to convey. Personally the only Steve Vai i like to listen to is his Whitesnake stuff (Apart from "For the Love of God"....awesome) and I'd choose Gary Moore over Satch any day. Then again there are people who'll say I'm crazy. Don't get me wrong I think Satch and Vai are incredible virtuosos and I'll never accomplish anything like they have but i connect more with the slower stuff.

I think the greatest illustration of this is the G3 with Satch, Vai and Petrucci... they all get up and do their impressives sets and what not, what do they play when they come out together to entertain the crowd? "Smoke on the Water - Deep Purple" that for me says more about music than any debate over emotional / technical preferences ever could.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ihavnofingrprnt
well there are only three true people alive today who are actually possesed by satan

Dakota Fanning, the kfc general dude, and my neighbor and all of them dont have much musical ability
#21
somebody explain to me how a sound can convey an emotion. Now people can obviously put their emotions into their music. That's called the writing process. And a person can perceive emotions from a sound. But there is nothing in the sound itself that has emotion.

The 2 emotions at either end can be completely different. Add onto that the fact that even boredom is an emotion and you have a simple argument which basically says that frusciante is talking out of his ass.
Rhythm in Jump. Dancing Close to You.

Quote by element4433
Yeah. people, like Lemoninfluence, are hypocrites and should have all their opinions invalidated from here on out.
#22
^you're right, although boredom is no emotion

But progress is mostly based on technical skill I'd say.
I just need about $3.50
(<X.X)O=('.'Q)

I'm the motherflippin'
#23
Quote by Deliriumbassist
And Flanger

And no faster than crotchets at 40bpm


You forgot Wah, the most emotional effect of all, or maybe second behind reverb.
#24
Quote by Lemoninfluence
The 2 emotions at either end can be completely different. Add onto that the fact that even boredom is an emotion and you have a simple argument which basically says that frusciante is talking out of his ass.



Both may feel different emotions but what counts is the player. Emotional in the sense that he is talking about would be "putting yourself into your playing". Not that your song is depressed that day.
#25
Seeing Buckethead play Soothsayer live was probably the most emotional solo that I've ever seen, you don't have to have poor technique to have 'emotion'.
#26
Quote by gsr2k6
Both may feel different emotions but what counts is the player. Emotional in the sense that he is talking about would be "putting yourself into your playing". Not that your song is depressed that day.

I'm saying, you can put yourself into a song completely and it still doesn't mean that someone on the other end is going to feel the same way. It's completely subjective. The whole 'emotion in music' thing is a load of crap. If you get good at making people feel a certain way you're getting good at manipulating people with sound, you're not getting good emotionally because what you associate with anger or happiness may be completely different to what somebody else does.

Plus if you're writing music for others you've gone wrong somewhere.
Rhythm in Jump. Dancing Close to You.

Quote by element4433
Yeah. people, like Lemoninfluence, are hypocrites and should have all their opinions invalidated from here on out.