Basically playing musically and with nice phrasing is more important than having tons of speed/chops. I agree. Dave Gilmour solos were for me, in the first few years of learning the guitar, a great way to get used to playing slow solos and to focus on that whole blues-based phrasing kind of thing. However, then I started listening to some Eric Johnson records, found his solos incredibly beautiful but noticed very quickly that I couldn’t play them. So, this started my journey of becoming more technically proficient and trying to play at least some of his stuff, as well as solos from other ‚musical shredders‘ (as opposed to soulless speed-players), and also my own solos and musical compositions. I have to say that although I am with very high probability still not at Eric Johnson level of technical proficiency, this journey has been incredibly rewarding. There is something incredibly satisfying about pulling off stuff on the guitar that 3 months or maybe half a year before, you couldn‘t do. Still, in principle you are right. And also: learning music theory and as much as one can about chord-scale relationships on the guitar fretboard is in my opinion more beneficial and rewarding than just practicing technique. Thus, everyone who wishes to improve their soloing should probably go into Jazz or Jazz-related music as soon as they have reached a certain level of technical proficiency. This will then boost soloing- (or improvising-) capabilities to the next level …
Nailed it for many of us, even old farts like me. I no longer care that much that I can play this song or that song after 50 years of playing. I now create music and much of it comes from simple chords, simple runs, exploration and smiles. Needed video, thanks!
I think it's significant that technical ability is not just speed and tricks. Having good timing, being able to control dynamics, string noise, and play in tune (which is what's hard about that bend) are absoltely critical technical abilities that will further you as a musician. However, these are all just tools that should serve the ultimate goal, which is to make music, just like you are saying. The most powerful instrument you have as a musician is a recording device.
I completely agree. I used to hold technical ability above all others. While I still greatly admire very technical players, I have also learnt to appreciate more subtle (in the service of the song) style guitarists too.
As an early intermediate guitarist this video helps answer many questions I had in my mind. So, thank you! And yes, David Gilmour can save many guitarists from quitting due to frustrations over speed and technical prowess.
I agree with you and most of the commenters. I do believe that practice is important if only to keep my hands in shape enough to play the sounds that speak to me. My top three favorite guitarist are George Benson, Carlos Santana and Ernie Isley. All are/were proficient musicians but by today's standard not very technical and that's okay.
Any technique can be helpful but it's not the be all and end all by any means. As a kid it was Beatles for me, then in my teens Peter Green, Dave Gilmour and Jimmy Page . . . then all sorts, but a lot of time Harrison & PG played melodies (and counter melodies to the vocals) you could sing. When the big hair bands and million miles an hour stuff came along I pretty much ignored all that - all flash, no feel most of it. Play what works for you and the song, I guess 😅
You are like a guru iv been playing for 20 years and I can sit down and play beautiful melodic stuff but am so hung up on trying to play fast I spend my time trying trem picking an sounding like bs instead of nice tasteful melodic 70 to 80 bpm tunes that are nice to hear
I'm impressed with fast players (Vai, Satriani, Colin, Hell Stevie T, and Jared Dines). I'm not inclined to emulate them. That's their lane, and I enjoy what they are doing there. Likewise, I don't want to ape Emmanuel, Cook, or Segovia. That leaves finding my voice out there. Fripp and Al DeMeola did it. Jeff Beck did it. I'll find it somewhere.
good perspective, utkarsh. when i was young, i thought technique was the be all and end all of guitar playing. as i've grown older and a little wiser, i've learned that playing songs whether original or new and doing it with passion is more important. i am still trying to learn how to improvise and solo over music for my technical skill however, it isn't with the goal of being the best technical player. the goal is to express myself and create.
I dunno, technical proficiency is just a means to a musical end. If you have the interest and commitment that high level players have, go ahead and take it to a high level. If you don't, don't.
You don't have to be going at 400 BPM to be a great guitarist. Sometimes you don't need to that fast. Sometimes less is more. Better technically is not a great idea either.
@@marLamaDeo The quality of music is subjective. However if we are trying to apply some metric, I would say great music has achieved some level of "long term" popularity. That's independent of whether I personally like said music or not. If we are talking about Guthrie Govan, while he's technically top notch, I am unaware of anything he's done that really entered the public consciousness. Now Woody Guthrie is in a totally different league. If you want to ignore popularity, then what's your metric? Notes per second?
@@G_Demolished You can like or dislike whoever you want and so can I. But anyone making a claim that some music is objectively good at minimum needs a metric. If you think mine is bad, what's yours? People who claim popularity is a bad metric generally fumble around when asked for a better one.
I've never understood the guitar world/industry's obsession with SOUNDING JUST LIKE ..... somebody else. That's usually a guarantee that you will not stand out. How many blues players sound like Stevie Ray now? It's already been done, nobody else can touch him. If you really want to be a "technique" guitar star, be ready to match chops with guys like Steve Vai, or forget it. Otherwise, go for something UNIQUE that matches your abilities. Some famous amazing guitar solos and parts are SO SIMPLE! As they say, IT's ALL IN the HANDS (and the EARS). Great content, thanks!😋
![Chris Langan - The Interview THEY Didn't Want You To See - CTMU [Full Version; Timestamps]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/9miVG2xT5jY/mqdefault.jpg)
Basically playing musically and with nice phrasing is more important than having tons of speed/chops. I agree.
Dave Gilmour solos were for me, in the first few years of learning the guitar, a great way to get used to playing
slow solos and to focus on that whole blues-based phrasing kind of thing.
However, then I started listening to some Eric Johnson records, found his solos incredibly beautiful but noticed very
quickly that I couldn’t play them. So, this started my journey of becoming more technically proficient and trying to
play at least some of his stuff, as well as solos from other ‚musical shredders‘ (as opposed to soulless speed-players),
and also my own solos and musical compositions. I have to say that although I am with very high probability still not
at Eric Johnson level of technical proficiency, this journey has been incredibly rewarding. There is something incredibly
satisfying about pulling off stuff on the guitar that 3 months or maybe half a year before, you couldn‘t do.
Still, in principle you are right. And also: learning music theory and as much as one can about chord-scale relationships
on the guitar fretboard is in my opinion more beneficial and rewarding than just practicing technique. Thus, everyone who wishes
to improve their soloing should probably go into Jazz or Jazz-related music as soon as they have reached a certain level of technical proficiency.
This will then boost soloing- (or improvising-) capabilities to the next level …
Musicality is more important than advanced technique. Take BB King
One of the best examples
Nailed it for many of us, even old farts like me. I no longer care that much that I can play this song or that song after 50 years of playing. I now create music and much of it comes from simple chords, simple runs, exploration and smiles. Needed video, thanks!
Thanks
Great point of view. I absolutely agree. Success on guitar is the joy of playing
I think it's significant that technical ability is not just speed and tricks. Having good timing, being able to control dynamics, string noise, and play in tune (which is what's hard about that bend) are absoltely critical technical abilities that will further you as a musician.
However, these are all just tools that should serve the ultimate goal, which is to make music, just like you are saying.
The most powerful instrument you have as a musician is a recording device.
Agree. And the seemingly overlooked bits like the one you mention are often more difficult to master than playing fast
I completely agree. I used to hold technical ability above all others. While I still greatly admire very technical players, I have also learnt to appreciate more subtle (in the service of the song) style guitarists too.
As an early intermediate guitarist this video helps answer many questions I had in my mind. So, thank you! And yes, David Gilmour can save many guitarists from quitting due to frustrations over speed and technical prowess.
Haha though he adds an additional layer for frustration that one can never sound as good as him
I don't play super fast, but I absolutely rock 😎
I agree with you and most of the commenters. I do believe that practice is important if only to keep my hands in shape enough to play the sounds that speak to me. My top three favorite guitarist are George Benson, Carlos Santana and Ernie Isley. All are/were proficient musicians but by today's standard not very technical and that's okay.
Excellent perspective sir, and man that PRS is so Lovely Utkarsh 👍
Any technique can be helpful but it's not the be all and end all by any means. As a kid it was Beatles for me, then in my teens Peter Green, Dave Gilmour and Jimmy Page . . . then all sorts, but a lot of time Harrison & PG played melodies (and counter melodies to the vocals) you could sing. When the big hair bands and million miles an hour stuff came along I pretty much ignored all that - all flash, no feel most of it. Play what works for you and the song, I guess 😅
You are like a guru iv been playing for 20 years and I can sit down and play beautiful melodic stuff but am so hung up on trying to play fast I spend my time trying trem picking an sounding like bs instead of nice tasteful melodic 70 to 80 bpm tunes that are nice to hear
I'm impressed with fast players (Vai, Satriani, Colin, Hell Stevie T, and Jared Dines).
I'm not inclined to emulate them. That's their lane, and I enjoy what they are doing there.
Likewise, I don't want to ape Emmanuel, Cook, or Segovia.
That leaves finding my voice out there. Fripp and Al DeMeola did it. Jeff Beck did it. I'll find it somewhere.
For sure
good perspective, utkarsh. when i was young, i thought technique was the be all and end all of guitar playing. as i've grown older and a little wiser, i've learned that playing songs whether original or new and doing it with passion is more important. i am still trying to learn how to improvise and solo over music for my technical skill however, it isn't with the goal of being the best technical player. the goal is to express myself and create.
it's easy to forget that it's about the music...
Number 1 Myth - you have to practice!
thank you U! .. ! what mic are you using? can you share your setup?
Johnny Ramone did greatness with bare basics
For sure
Barre chords
What was the name of the song again? Where you mentioned David Gilmour doing that bend?
Between two points
Hello sir, nice guitar in your hand
Thanks
Electric guitar tone wood it’s up there 😁
I dunno, technical proficiency is just a means to a musical end. If you have the interest and commitment that high level players have, go ahead and take it to a high level. If you don't, don't.
You don't have to be going at 400 BPM to be a great guitarist. Sometimes you don't need to that fast. Sometimes less is more. Better technically is not a great idea either.
You seriously think that is the No 1 myth?
Your touch and feel for the musicality is only enhanced with more technical proficiency
Guthrie has it all, not onley speeeeeeeed! Thanx for posting. 😊
Really? Which famous piece of music has he written?
@@zemlidrakona2915fame is your barometer of the worth of a piece of music?
@@marLamaDeo The quality of music is subjective. However if we are trying to apply some metric, I would say great music has achieved some level of "long term" popularity. That's independent of whether I personally like said music or not. If we are talking about Guthrie Govan, while he's technically top notch, I am unaware of anything he's done that really entered the public consciousness. Now Woody Guthrie is in a totally different league. If you want to ignore popularity, then what's your metric? Notes per second?
@@zemlidrakona2915Britney Spears has long term popularity. You need a new metric.
@@G_Demolished You can like or dislike whoever you want and so can I. But anyone making a claim that some music is objectively good at minimum needs a metric. If you think mine is bad, what's yours? People who claim popularity is a bad metric generally fumble around when asked for a better one.
It’s pronounced ad•Vanced with a V, not ad•Wanced with a W. It’s not that hard.
Dingbat comment.
I've never understood the guitar world/industry's obsession with SOUNDING JUST LIKE ..... somebody else.
That's usually a guarantee that you will not stand out. How many blues players sound like Stevie Ray now?
It's already been done, nobody else can touch him. If you really want to be a "technique" guitar star, be ready to match chops with guys like Steve Vai, or forget it. Otherwise, go for something UNIQUE that matches your abilities. Some famous amazing guitar solos and parts are SO SIMPLE! As they say, IT's ALL IN the HANDS (and the EARS). Great content, thanks!😋