DMusic.com | for indie musicians and fans | Free MP3 music downloads

Electric guitars, Classical guitars, Guitar amps and more.

zZounds.com offers recording equipment for starting and experienced musicians. Find the best prices on electric guitars, acoustic guitars, classical guitars and more.

Forums > Music: Guitar

shredding???

sparkotronic	Date: November 25, 2005 @ 9:52 AM I cant really get into it. I used to love Vai as a lad, but it sounds like they put technique before the music. Shurely the music must come first? Take guitarist's like Dave Gilmore and Steve Rothery, They can express so much in one note. To me it's music in a mathamatical sense but not auraly! What do you all think?
EvilPicnic	Date: November 25, 2005 @ 10:26 AM Yes, they put the technique first. But that doesn't mean that the music's not going to be good also. I agree, it's the wrong way around to do it, but putting technique first isn't new - Paganini was world-famous not for his musicality, but his speed. Speed is impressive. The world shouldn't be like that, but it is, so we have to live with it. And Steve Vai can be extremely lyrical when he wants to be, btw, he's an extraordinarily talented guitarist, even if he does tend to overplay.
Bhairava	Date: November 25, 2005 @ 11:54 AM Yeah most shredders tend to be too technical first over musical. But yeah Vai and Satch are exceptions to this. I'd say Eric Johnson is a guy who is as much musical as technical if you're looking for someone like that with a good balance. I think his musical to technical ratio is higher then Vai but Vai's done some great stuff like Tender Surrender. I just watched an Eric Johnson Video and he was talking about how he practices and he says he basically writes songs in practice and works on them so thats probably why. Hey this would be quite interesting lets start a musical to Technical ratio disussion on shredders. First comes musical aspects of their music and then technical sides of it. Right here goes Eric Johnson 55:45 Joe Satriani 45:55 Steve Vai 35:65 Malmsteen 15:85 Ok Compare it to song writers: Nick Drake 90:10 The Beatles 95:5 Niel Young 85:15 John Martin 80:20 Having a higher ratio value only applies to the individual persons emphasis on a certain thing and not on how good they are in comparison to another. For instance Malmsteens 85 ratio for technique doesn't mean he is better then Vai's 65 on technique just the emphasis put on it. Have you're own ideas post them! Sorry for hijacking the thread .
GreatGooglyM...	Date: November 25, 2005 @ 11:57 AM No, no, no, no, no... They put the music first. At least most of them do. Guys like Vai, Satriani, Gilbert... They all play very "melodical" (I hate that adjective!) songs, but they spice them up with some shreddy licks. For people who doesn't listen a lot of shred, it often sounds more like a wank fest than real music. Shred is a pretty hard style to get into and I understand why most of the people say that it's mostly technique. I used to say that too. Of course, they all can play slow too. Listen to For The Love Of God and then say that Vai can't express himself with little amount of notes. Speed itself isn't that impressive. It's true that some licks sound better when played fast, but there are a lot them that don't. I once went to a guitar shop and played chromatic licks very fast and everyone looked me like a madman. They were definately not impressed. Then, I played some slower, more bluesy stuff and I saw some impressed looks. Speed = Not impressive
GreatGooglyM...	Date: November 25, 2005 @ 12:01 PM Bhairava... I think those "musical-technical ratios" aren't very good idea. It's very much about opinions. I could already say that those your ratios are very biased.
Traf	Date: November 25, 2005 @ 12:21 PM If people want to call themselves shredders, then that's ok... Doesn't mean they're good players.. My own opinion, for what it's worth, is that I think it's far harder to play in a controlled fashion, with good tecniques such as vibrato, than fly about all over the place.. Shredding can be fun and may impress other wanna be shredders, but there's so much more to music, and I feel some people get carried away with it and actually use it to hide thier lack of control.. I think the only good speed merchants are the ones who know when to slow down... So there ya go..
GeneHilbert	Date: November 25, 2005 @ 12:22 PM As for myself... I see art as art. The song will dictate direction, and if you are receptive to this you will go with the flow. If you force it - it will sound forced. As well - people with superior technique will tend to perform and write in that direction. Right, wrong or indifferent, their music is their music. Art has always been a personal experience presented to the public, for review, debate, praise or reticule. It is in the end the expression of ones soul, dedication, vision, interpretation. It is simply ……….. Art.........
Bhairava	Date: November 25, 2005 @ 12:51 PM Yeah its only for opinion don't take it seriously be as biased as you like just for fun. Man don't treat it seriously I'm just messing around I'm in a playful mood. Hehe... Little trouble maker in disguise. Actually I personally think they should get rid of the term shredding and just make it music it is all musical in some form.
GreatGooglyM...	Date: November 25, 2005 @ 12:55 PM That's exactly what they're doing. I've never heard a shredder call himself a shredder.
Bhairava	Date: November 25, 2005 @ 6:13 PM Hehe yeah thats true. In my music class we were talking about this and it seems that people get kind of branded together after they've played as being one thing or another but really they were just doing whatever at the time. Its kind of dumb really. So from now on, if you remind me to stick to this cause I'm a tad forgetful, I'll just treat it as music no matter what the style. What an enlightening moment .
Alecs	Date: November 25, 2005 @ 10:34 PM There aren't very many shredders who simply go out with the idea of playing fast and doing nothing else. The closest to doing that I think would be Yngwie, though he definitely has some emotional playing. Listen to Satriani and tell me he's just goin out and tryin to play fast.
GreatGooglyM...	Date: November 26, 2005 @ 7:02 AM ^Oh no... Please not the "emotional and unemotial" conversation again... :tearhear:
BlackMage	Date: November 26, 2005 @ 8:03 AM "There aren't very many shredders who simply go out with the idea of playing fast and doing nothing else." Oh, you have no idea... But, seriously. Who cares? Let people do what they want to do. I think they know best what they want to do and people outside of it can just shut the hell up and stop caring. Just listen to the god damn music and stop thinking how it comes out since you wouldn't understand it anyway. Music is very personal and trying to "analyze one's musicality" is far more unforgivable wankery than any fast tremolo picking or "shredding" or jamming your dick up the damn input hole. Well... maybe not the last one...
GreatGooglyM...	Date: November 26, 2005 @ 8:19 AM Yeah, I agree with Luni. Musicality is very personal, and can't be judged. This thread should die...
hueseph	Date: November 27, 2005 @ 5:23 AM Well I have to say, I prefer the shredded chicken fried rice over the steamed.
sparkotronic	Date: November 27, 2005 @ 5:58 AM I didn't want to look at the emmotional vrs technical side or judge anyones musicality!. what I meant was when you hear something do think that sounds sweet or how the hell did they do that! When I heard Paul Gilbert doing ELP's karn evil 9, it blew me away! It never occured to me that someone could play emmersons chops on a guitar and I tip my hat at the man for doing it. But the first thought was how on earth can he play like that! When I hear Vai, Satch ect, my first thought is usually oh my god, how can a guitar do that. When I hear the more sedate players, it's usually thats sweet. It's good to hear the instuments boundaries being pushed, but sometimes it just sounds forced, well to me anyway.
BlackMage	Date: November 27, 2005 @ 6:35 AM "well to me anyway." Exactly. You will never know what it will be like to them. It may sound forced to you, but they might be playing with their hearts completely out to it.
GreatGooglyM...	Date: November 27, 2005 @ 9:36 AM "It may sound forced to you, but they might be playing with their hearts completely out to it." Once again, Lunitari is right. Music is such thing that you can't do it forced. No one would practice technique for years, if they wouldn't want to. Shred is not forced, it's just way some people like to play guitar. I'm getting sick and tired of these posts saying that "speed has no emotion", "speed is forced", "shredding has no soul". If you got nothing else to do than these ignorant posts, go practice some chromatics.
Bhairava	Date: November 27, 2005 @ 4:50 PM Yeah. I was thinking a bit more on it. I think speed has no emotion is wrong. I think perhaps its more accurate that its difficult to be as lyrical in playing fast however if you listen to good musicians they use both and vary them when needed.
GeneHilbert	Date: November 28, 2005 @ 1:14 AM That's what phrasing is all about........
sparkotronic	Date: November 28, 2005 @ 8:10 AM I've never said that speed has no emotion! gees, you lot are touchy! I was only wondering what your first impression of a song was. If you have an understanding of how people percieve music, then you can incorperate that in to your own. Mabey I worded it wrong, but I thought a newbie would have a chance before the throat jumping stuff happend!
GreatGooglyM...	Date: November 28, 2005 @ 9:07 AM If you read through some threads, you'll find a lot of discussion about it already.
Beckerfan101	Date: November 28, 2005 @ 2:17 PM It's all preference. I love (almost ) every kind of music. But I can understand that people cant stand shred. But on another note.... Why do people always have these arguments about shred ? and not about grunge for an example. I don't really get all this negativ attention around the shred scene
GreatGooglyM...	Date: November 28, 2005 @ 2:26 PM yeah, that's a good question. somehow shred is just labeled as tasteless wanking to most musicians and music listeners...
EtherEclectic	Date: November 28, 2005 @ 3:42 PM and sometimes, just sometimes the person is just jealous... hell im man enough to admit that i get ticked off at john petrucci when i listen to dream theater... because I CANT PLAY LIKE THAT! dont need to but still
Bhairava	Date: November 28, 2005 @ 7:19 PM I guess its because its not a style people naturally like in the same way Jazz, Classical or just generally obscure music. The thing is though they kind of lean back on a certain aura about them particularly Classical. Thing with shred is it doesn't have this as such, people assume its about the individual more its not like oh there is a classical muscian or jazz man. So they don't know how to approach it unless they either play guitar and lean towards shred music or someone tries to guide them through it. I mean some of the sounds shredders come out with are actually pretty wild and not normal for people to take. For any new style you need to break into it slowly but because shred hasn't found its space like with jazz and classical people find it more difficult to accept. Maybe when its got a little bit more history to it it'll change.
Beckerfan101	Date: November 29, 2005 @ 10:07 AM Classical can be really fast as well. And I don't hear anyone complaining about that. Mainly because the ones who hate shred don't know/listen to classical musicians so they dont hate em.
GreatGooglyM...	Date: November 29, 2005 @ 10:23 AM yeah, but if you think about it, most of the classical composers weren't that respected when they were alive.
Bhairava	Date: November 29, 2005 @ 12:23 PM Yeah it seems a lot of people that deserve credit don't get it until they are dead . You see with Classical being fast sometimes I don't think people would care as much with Classical being fast as Shred being fast. I still think its a lot to do with the image things have and how ingrained they are in our culture.
GreatGooglyM...	Date: November 29, 2005 @ 12:41 PM "You see with Classical being fast sometimes I don't think people would care as much with Classical being fast as Shred being fast." What...?
Bhairava	Date: November 29, 2005 @ 5:24 PM Oh should've made my self more clear. Ok. I notice that speed in classical music (by ignorant people) is accepted more then speed in shred. There are plenty of virtuoso violinists that anyone says wow at. Unfair really.
sparkotronic	Date: November 29, 2005 @ 5:35 PM I think that it's more likely to be the metal influence that is frowned upon. No one really respects metal, other than those that love it.
Beckerfan101	Date: November 30, 2005 @ 2:19 AM You see with Classical being fast sometimes I don't think people would care as much with Classical being fast as Shred being fast. I still think its a lot to do with the image things have and how ingrained they are in our culture. That was basically what I said So I agree
Bhairava	Date: November 30, 2005 @ 3:56 AM I'm not sure about people not liking Metal influence. I haven't really heard many people against classic metal like Maiden. They are kind of a steriotype of metal that everybody has heard of and their music is easy to get into and very catchy which is generally what someone new to a style would pick up and enjoy straight away. I don't even think that the metal image is particularly looked at as bad either to be honest. Its kind of a novelty now really with films like Bill and Teds excellent adventures and Beaves and Buthead. I mean metal is kind of a subdivision of rock and rock is regarded as acceptable amongst most people. If you watched Rock School based on School of Rock everyone over here seemed to watch that and enjoy it.
sparkotronic	Date: November 30, 2005 @ 4:02 AM Ah, but most shredding metal is instumental, so you can't sing along. Maiden are easy listening compared to some others. Lets face it, most shredding isn't easy listening!
GreatGooglyM...	Date: November 30, 2005 @ 6:33 AM Shredding isn't supposed to be easy listening! Luckily!
Beckerfan101	Date: November 30, 2005 @ 1:39 PM Ah, but most shredding metal is instumental, so you can't sing along. Yeah, my dad complains about that as well haha I'm not sure about people not liking Metal influence. I haven't really heard many people against classic metal like Maiden. They are kind of a steriotype of metal that everybody has heard of and their music is easy to get into and very catchy which is generally what someone new to a style would pick up and enjoy straight away. Thats just because of a thing called opinion, the metal scene is really big, so is the classic rock scene, classic rock was for the old times, metal is now, there are barely none new classic rock bands (succesfull) now.
sparkotronic	Date: November 30, 2005 @ 2:14 PM what I was meaning was that people who like classical dont like shred because it's metal!
T-Boi	Date: November 30, 2005 @ 2:29 PM feeling - it is. i want to type more but i don't know where do i begin
GreatGooglyM...	Date: November 30, 2005 @ 3:32 PM "what I was meaning was that people who like classical dont like shred because it's metal!" Yeah, it's personal preference. So what?
EtherEclectic	Date: December 3, 2005 @ 10:15 PM sorry to quote that guy like everyone else but here it goes: Classical can be really fast as well. And I don't hear anyone complaining about that. Mainly because the ones who hate shred don't know/listen to classical musicians so they dont hate em. quite the opposite, alot of people who mainly like classical dont like rock/metal music in the first place so naturally they wouldnt like shred. for me i love classical brahms, vivaldi,lisa gerrard, neo-classical, new age "kitaro" while i listen to alot of metal, i just cant get into shred. but once again just personal preference
hueseph	Date: December 4, 2005 @ 2:58 AM Why is it emotionless when Yngwie does it but art when George Benson does it? Why wanking when Vai does it but soulful when Jeff Beck does it? Skillful when it's Bach but senseless when Michaelangelo does it? People complained that Pagannini was a showoff and an emotionless player. Others suggested he sold his soul. Did no one consider that he paid his dues? That what he plays was art? Not til hundreds of years later.
GeneHilbert	Date: December 4, 2005 @ 3:06 AM Touché - people just need a topic to bitch about.....
BlackMage	Date: December 4, 2005 @ 5:55 AM I thought it was art when Yngwie does it... And Gene; right you are.
GreatGooglyM...	Date: December 4, 2005 @ 7:51 AM I beg to differ. Yngwie is a horrible shredder, but his stage precence is hilarious.
EtherEclectic	Date: December 4, 2005 @ 10:03 AM ya know who is the bomb as far as shredding goes? OfficeMax! their shredders kick holy rollin fuckin ass!
celtaidd	Date: December 4, 2005 @ 11:46 AM IMO, Its hard to put emotion into shred because you have to rely more on note choice than you can on bends or vabrato etc. But its brilliant in small doses
EtherEclectic	Date: December 4, 2005 @ 11:56 AM just a personal thing really, some can find that emotion in the quickness some cant. take classical for instance, i am a sucker for violin solos of a nocturine nature "interview with the vampire soundtrack" its done really fast with strong vibrato, but then again sometimes i hear something classical that is really quick and i cant enjoy it.
celtaidd	Date: December 4, 2005 @ 12:23 PM especially shred with a classical slant
GreatGooglyM...	Date: December 4, 2005 @ 12:43 PM So, bends and vibrato have more emotion than fast licks? Interesting...
EtherEclectic	Date: December 4, 2005 @ 1:12 PM bends and vibrato could very well have more emotion according to his opinion and preference, that is the right of an opinion. i too would rather hear soulful bends and vibrato instead of blistering fast leads constantly. but that doesnt mean that someone cant find emotion in the fast leads, just that he doesnt, just that i dont, just that alot dont. while alot do. its impossible for anyone prove either style has more emotion over the other. because its all a matter of what they want to hear and not what they are supose to hear.
Bhairava	Date: December 4, 2005 @ 1:16 PM Yeah I'd say the more time you can spend on a note the more passion you can put into it. Playing fast is more suggesting at sounds though. They kind of blur together so you kind of look at it differently.
EtherEclectic	Date: December 4, 2005 @ 1:21 PM its like coffee, some like it black and some like it sugared and full of creamer.
BlackMage	Date: December 4, 2005 @ 1:31 PM "Yngwie is a horrible shredder" That doesn't really matter on the side of Yngwie's music (or any other music for that matter) being art, or does it?
GreatGooglyM...	Date: December 4, 2005 @ 2:06 PM It does actually. IMO most of Malmsteen's music is horrible, no matter how artistic it would it be.
Alecs	Date: December 4, 2005 @ 2:19 PM ^yngwie artistic? you gotta be kiddin me! It's speed, that's it, not to mention he's an asshole. Yngwie is a disgrace to the shredder image.
GreatGooglyM...	Date: December 4, 2005 @ 2:55 PM Exactly. Besides, you forgot that he steals from classical composers. I almost cried when I heard the raping of Albinoni's Adagio. He stole the theme from there and named it "Icarus' Dream Suite"!
GreatGooglyM...	Date: December 4, 2005 @ 2:56 PM ...and if I want to listen neo-classical I prefer Jason Becker, Tony MacAlpine or Vinnie Moore over Yngwie.
celtaidd	Date: December 4, 2005 @ 3:15 PM it isnt that I dont see emotion in shred, just that its harder to put emotion in, because imo you have to concentrate more so as to include relevent and emotional passing notes and slurs. Its a harder syle to pull off (obviously) If I put anyones nose out of joint then I apologise no offence was intended
GreatGooglyM...	Date: December 4, 2005 @ 3:20 PM Yes, I understand what you mean. I'm getting bored to the whole "shred/emotion" conversation...
EtherEclectic	Date: December 4, 2005 @ 4:30 PM soo lets put this thread to bed: jack likes fast guitar solos, difficult sweep picking, creative runs that defy the laws of physics! jane likes vibrato while on the neck pickup, and some crying bends and releases. both can find emotion and power in what they like to listen to. they are all after the same thing, music they love! take a lesson from jack and jane!
celtaidd	Date: December 4, 2005 @ 4:42 PM I to your wisdom
EtherEclectic	Date: December 4, 2005 @ 4:54 PM no bowing to me! i am 3inches tall so instead of looking like bowing it looks like attacking! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!! ITS A MONSTER RUN AWAY RUN AWAY! yep, 3pots of coffee so far today and now im having an expresso! imagine if i played shred! i'd die of a heartattack!
BlackMage	Date: December 10, 2005 @ 8:51 AM "It does actually." How? You're basically saying here that because he's a horrible shredder, his music isn't art. So, if you're horrible at something, it's not art? Music is not music?
GreatGooglyM...	Date: December 10, 2005 @ 9:20 AM Basically anything is art or music, if you want to think it that way. However, somethings are just horrible, no matter how artistic they would be. You can draw a line into a paper and say: "Hey, this is art!", but it's highly likely that people will not consider it as artistic as - for example Mona Lisa. Same goes with Yngwie. He can wank that harmonic minor scale and sweep those 3 string diminshed arpeggios and call it art, but there are people out there, who can sweep 7 string arpeggios, sweep tap, string skip and actually compose, not steal from others. In my opinion, that latter group is art, not Yngwie.
BlackMage	Date: December 10, 2005 @ 10:33 AM What he is doing is his own expression. If you do it yourself (be it compose, play or both) then it's your art. Surely a lot of people can say what they want and not like it, but can they actually say that what someone is doing, is not art? Every piece of sound an individual will do, will be individual since nothing can replicate the sound the one individual made. When the sound is produced by a conscience, it will remain art. When it becomes the work of a machine operated by calculations and whatnot, it loses itself. It becomes a mere technicality. For example a factory can make a guitar body and thousands of other guitar bodies exactly like the first one. That's just production since all of the bodies are made with the same programming. When an actual sentient being does it, it becomes the work of the individual and it will be pretty much impossible to do exactly the same thing by anyone (including the person who made it) If the being tries it again, it will most probably fail since the "programming has been redone" so to say. That is, because the being and it's thoughts/skills etc. are not the same, it can not make an exact replica of the former body it made. It's not the same creator anymore, therefore it can not create the same thing anymore. That's my interpretation of art. Every piece of art is individual. Machines cannot make individual pieces of anything. Now... Yngwie is a human being, therefore being sentient. He makes a rendition (note, I'm not calling it stealing) therefore making it a piece of his own. I don't call it stealing since he didn't take the original piece and play it to other people claiming it's his own. That would be stealing. There's been hundreds of cases of people doing their own versions of anything and not saying whose original performance it's based on. I don't think it's makes a whole lot of difference as long as at least a number of people are aware that they are the different thing. "He can wank that harmonic minor scale and sweep those 3 string diminshed arpeggios and call it art, but there are people out there, who can sweep 7 string arpeggios, sweep tap, string skip and actually compose, not steal from others." So basically what you're saying is that the people who have better or more complex techniques make art than the people who have simpler or worse techniques.
GreatGooglyM...	Date: December 10, 2005 @ 11:29 AM "So basically what you're saying is that the people who have better or more complex techniques make art than the people who have simpler or worse techniques." Yeah, basically. You don't have to be fast to sound good though. The point is, if you're trying to play fast, then do it well. If you can't play fast, then don't try do it. I was maybe a bit too hasty saying that Yngwie isn't an artist. What I meant is that he's an artist, but a horrible one.
celtaidd	Date: December 10, 2005 @ 1:02 PM I think what Strat "meant" to say is that yngwe is an artist, but not his taste (unless he means horrible as in not a nice person
BlackMage	Date: December 10, 2005 @ 4:52 PM "Yeah, basically. You don't have to be fast to sound good though. The point is, if you're trying to play fast, then do it well. If you can't play fast, then don't try do it." Understood. Dunno about that horrible one since it's all subjective, but opinion noted. As simple as he is, I like to think that he brought rock to classical. I like a lot of his songs, but most of them tend to get boring if listening the studio versions. I just love his stage presence. He just does what he does best and I like to respect that. As finns say "Mihinkä tiikeri raidoistansa pääsee", Strat. But yeah, that's just opinions and no one cares.