Comments on: Lots of finger-tapping deliciousness

Lots of finger-tapping deliciousness

baphomet — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 15:25:08 -0800

Finger tapping is a very fast guitar technique in which the picking hand is used to "tap" individual notes on the fretboard, while the fretting hand can either remain stationary or be used to do hammer-ons/pull-offs to create even faster playing. Popularized in rock music by Eddie van Halen (YT, great visual example) in the late 1970's, the technique has become almost essential for speed/metal guitar players. Although finger tapping has been dismissed as "wankery" by some, I think that the intense, jazzy stylings of Stanley Jordan prove them wrong. (here is Stanley playing two guitars!) For more tapping madness you can enjoy the furious, virtuous insanity of Dragonforce (full video), and be sure not to miss the speed genius of Mr. Batio. Tapping isn't just for metal though, you can do it on a bass or an acoustic (amazing video).

Want to learn how? This lesson should get you started.

By: doctor_negative

doctor_negative — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 15:28:38 -0800

See also: The Chapman Stick and The Warr Guitar.

By: baphomet

baphomet — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 15:34:21 -0800

How could I forget the Chapman Stick? Thanks, doctor_negative. I don't think finger tapping is the end-all of guitar skill, or even something necessary to be considered a skilled guitarist, but I do think it sounds phenomenal and I am very impressed by the people who can do it well. Also, it's fun as hell, so I thought I'd share it with the MeFi guitar geeks. For a fantastic sample of twin-guitar tapping, check out the audio of the Dragonforce song "Fury of the Storm" starting at 4:20. Guitar geeks should also check out this video of Herman demoing some sound effects from their latest album. Last one- Stanley Jordan reinterpreting Eleanor Rigby. Totally incredible. Enjoy!

By: jcterminal

jcterminal — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 15:49:37 -0800

No mention of the awesome guitar shredding of Steven Colbert? Ugh. For shame.

By: blaneyphoto

blaneyphoto — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 15:50:02 -0800

Personally, I think this Stu Hamm Example is a better illustration of tapping on the bass. You Tube.

By: blaneyphoto

blaneyphoto — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 15:52:34 -0800

Oh, and pretty much everything Les Claypool has recorded too...

By: danb

danb — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 15:52:41 -0800

Victor Wooten's cover of Stevie Wonder's "Overjoyed" has some fantastic (bass) tapping. Kaki King does some interesting stuff as well.

By: Flunkie

Flunkie — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 15:56:01 -0800

Stanley Jordan reinterpreting Eleanor Rigby.

Now those are some serious shoulderpads. What position is he? Looks like a cornerback.

By: the_bone

the_bone — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 15:58:03 -0800

Stanley Jordan playing "Stairway to Heaven

By: the_bone

the_bone — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 16:01:47 -0800

blaneyphoto: Thanks for posting the Stu Hamm link... one of the first concerts I ever went to was Joe Satriani with Hamm as the bass player, and his solo rendition of "Linus and Lucy" blew me away.

By: hoskala

hoskala — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 16:03:54 -0800

Check out Enver Izmaylov. Totally crazy tapping from Ukraine. [video]

By: emelenjr

emelenjr — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 16:04:21 -0800

I know this guy (linked from the page with the Van Halen clip) is only 8, but that is definitely wankery. Ugh. Here's Victor Wooten playing "Norwegian Wood".

By: caddis

caddis — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 16:08:26 -0800

A performance by Stanley is not to be missed. I saw him in 1980 in a small club and was just blown away. He was still developing his style then. When his first album came out a few years later he was in full swing. Nice post.

By: Flunkie

Flunkie — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 16:08:39 -0800

OK, I have concluded: Masturbation.

By: Jimbob

Jimbob — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 16:10:13 -0800

Wankers. What Flunkie said.

By: nickyskye

nickyskye — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 16:12:41 -0800

omg baphomat, your post made my day! I'm in love with Erik Mongrain's music. Sublime! Bliss! I adore acoustic guitar and especially this particular marvelous percussive finger picking/tapping, wow. His site. He's 26, self taught and I can't wait to get his first cd when it comes out. Thanks.

By: alteredcarbon

alteredcarbon — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 16:18:56 -0800

Harvey Mandel was one of the early tappers I think.

By: quin

quin — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 16:22:55 -0800

I did once see Nuno Bettencourt do a quite impressive "drum solo" on his guitar. I don't know what else to call it, because it didn't sound anything like a typical guitar solo, it was totally percussive and sounded not unlike Taiko drums. It was pretty amazing.

By: nickyskye

nickyskye — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 16:23:34 -0800

ooh that Victor Wooten tapping Norwegian Wood. Really nice.

By: alteredcarbon

alteredcarbon — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 16:23:40 -0800

Oh, and great post baphomet.

By: Mister_A

Mister_A — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 16:24:00 -0800

Dragonforce ! ROFLMAO

By: delmoi

delmoi — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 16:31:23 -0800

that wouldn't really work on an acoustic, right? I mean it wouldn't be very loud without pickups.

By: noahpoah

noahpoah — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 16:34:13 -0800

Um, double(ish)?

By: Jimbob

Jimbob — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 16:40:01 -0800

Well, you folks seem to enjoy guitar masturbation, so what the hell, feast your eyes on Yngwie Malmsteen - Concerto Suite in Eb minor For Electric Guitar. I enjoyed the opening with just the orchestra - it occurred to me that Yngwie might have actually produced something of artistic value - but I couldn't watch beyond 2 minutes of Yngwie's mindless onanism. Others might like it. Your favourite shredder sucks.

By: otio

otio — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 16:44:28 -0800

Daft Punk's Aerodynamic is built on tapping. Looking for the video, I found it's inspired a whole bunch of youtubers to give it a try themselves, with varying results.

By: cortex

cortex — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 16:44:40 -0800

I think I'm in love with Herman Li now. that wouldn't really work on an acoustic, right? I mean it wouldn't be very loud without pickups. Well, if you've got strong goddam fingers, it can be (relatively) plenty loud. But, yeah—low action on an electric, with some distortion (or just straight compression) makes it a lot more approachable.

By: malocchio

malocchio — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 16:54:56 -0800

Weedly weedly wee!

By: baphomet

baphomet — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 16:55:00 -0800

Thanks to all who posted videos of awesome bass tapping, mine wasn't great but the thread more than makes up for it. cortex: I saw Dragonforce a few months ago and it was totally unbelievable. Herman Li is just an exceptional musician, and his showmanship was inspiring. The thing that was really at the front of my mind before the show was whether or not he could pull that stuff off live, and I was completely blown away. All of the solos were completely spot on, as were the sound effects he showed off in that video...the divebomb sounds insane live!

By: nickyskye

nickyskye — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 17:04:13 -0800

noahpoah, Thanks for the link to the MeFi post on Erik Mongrain I hadn't seen last October. omg Michael Hedges is some kind of music sculptor with his guitar, constructing amazing pieces of music. ah the cool things I learn here. So nice.

By: Pollomacho

Pollomacho — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 17:13:01 -0800

Totally radical, dude! Most excellent post, Bill.

By: tumult

tumult — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 17:43:00 -0800

youtube: the only place on earth you will see a video of dragonforce followed by someone posting a comment with "unimpressive, i can do that"

By: GalaxieFiveHundred

GalaxieFiveHundred — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 17:58:04 -0800

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 18:03:27 -0800

One hand tapping from Buckethead. This video illustrates basically the hammer on pull of technique that defines two-hand tapping, but withotu the second hand. Note that he doesn't actually pick a string for over two minutes. The button he's pushing is a kill switch that cuts off the pickup. It's equivalent to turning up and down the volumen knob that Eddie is doing in the linked video.

By: unSane

unSane — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 18:05:27 -0800

I'm sorry, Nuno Bettencourt AND Yngwie Malmsteen in the same thread, WITHOUT irony? WTF? I am even ON metafilter any more? BTW tapping sucks. The fucking epitome of pattern playing. It relies entirely on muscle memory. Miles Davis: Think of a note and don't play it Tapping: Play a bunch of notes without even bothering to think

By: unSane

unSane — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 18:06:13 -0800

on preview: Buckethead snuck in too. Je repose mon valise.

By: First Post

First Post — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 18:08:07 -0800

I don't think finger tapping is the end-all of guitar skill, or even something necessary to be considered a skilled guitarist Uh, yeah...to say the least. Finger tapping is by far one of the easiest things to learn how to do on guitar. That's one of the reasons Eddie Van Halen in his early club gig days used to turn his back to the audience during his solos, so they couldn't see how he was doing it. I had a hell of a time trying to learn "Eruption" before I saw how the technique was performed, that's for sure... Good post, in any case. Gah, you had to bring up Micheal Angelo tho didn't ya :P

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 18:11:12 -0800

I'm firmly in the wankery camp. Why is it that guitar virtuosos can't write a song to save their life? One of life's great mysteries IMO. Thanks for turning me onto Stanley Jordan though. Anyone know who the bass player is in that second Jordan link? posted by GalaxieFiveHundred at 8:58 PM EST on December 21 They can. See Steve Vai's For the Love of God, Joe Satriani's Always With Me, Always With You and Summer Song, etc.

By: delmoi

delmoi — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 18:19:25 -0800

If I wanted an electric keyboard, I would buy one.

By: flapjax at midnite

flapjax at midnite — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 18:20:38 -0800

Although finger tapping has been dismissed as "wankery" by some, I think that the intense, jazzy stylings of Stanley Jordan prove them wrong. Are you implying, then, that there's no such thing as "jazz wankery"? I mean, come on... ;-)

By: jonson

jonson — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 18:36:14 -0800

A guy who never gets enough credit in these kinds of threads is Don Ross. His song "Afraid to Dance" is a fantastic example (IMO) of rhythmic, tuneful acoustic guitar, despite the fact that it relies on a ton of hammer on style fretboard tricks. Nicky, if you like Mongrain, I think you'll like Ross as well.

By: psmith

psmith — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 18:37:45 -0800

I am fully cognizant of the fact that Dragonforce is ridiculous -- the lyrics, the technical wankery, the band name, the flowing manes. But god damnit, I love it anyway, and I'm only slightly ashamed to admit it. I had never heard of Herman Li before this post, but that dude has some nimble-ass fingers.

By: Mayor Curley

Mayor Curley — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 18:45:43 -0800

"YOU'RE MY GUITAR HERO!"

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 18:51:31 -0800

on preview: Buckethead snuck in too. Je repose mon valise. posted by unSane at 9:06 PM EST on December 21 And comparing Miles Davis to these particular guitar players, like Buckethead or Satriani (for the former, do not judge until you've heard the album Electric Tears) is that the idiom is completely utterly different. And we need to return to Van Halen's Eruption in the context in which it was released. In 1978, disco dominated the charts. Rock had pretty much exhausted the blues idiom, judging by the output of Clapton, the Who, the Stones, and Led Zeppelin around that time, to name a few. It's not that what they were putting out wasn't good, it's that it was strating to sound like what they had already put out. Instrumentally, jazz was branded "old music" and retired by all bu the hardcore fans from a generation before. Even the aforemention Miles Davis read teh writing on the wall, and by the early seventies had cobbled together an impressive electical jazz band, creating a new genre called fusion, and launchign the careers of many notable musicians inclusing John McLaughlin, Al Di Meola, Chick Corea, and Jan Hammer, all of whom did a tour or two with Davis. The problem was, as Davis had identified, fusion was still too "literate", and I want to be careful with that word. Fusion was by its nature prone to the excursions of jazz (see Return to Forever and Weather Report as great examples of this). Miles himself kept it under control (Bitches Brew is brilliant in its restraint in addition to many other things), but other bands didn't have the benefit of being helmed by a genius. 1978 rolls around, and a teenaged classically and jazz trainedEddie Van Halen puts Eruption to tape, rebooting popular music. See, Eruption was 1978's vision of the future. It offers a future of rock and roll that breaks free of it's blue roots, and allows the musician proficient with his instrument to remain within rock and roll. No more graduating out into jazz or fusion, like Beck did. Eruption's promise was that rock would rely on (rip off) classical music, not the blues. It assures you that if you pull off classical music in the heavily distorted idiom of hard rock, it will still be rock, and people will still love it. It sends Page and Clapton into the setting sun of rock history, slams the door on any hope of fusion escaping the 70's, and ends disco's reign by rendering it music for girls. Eruption probably has more musical in-jokes than any other 1 minute-40 second piece of music. It features among other things baroque counterpoint, a child's violin exercise topped off with a sloppily executed scale. You hear it, and you picture a kid laughing as he plays it. It's fun, it sounds like fun. Technically, what Eruption does to the untrained ear is give it something it can latch onto in the form of fully resolved chords and scale structures - everyone can listen to Beethoven's 9th, not everyone can listen to Giant Steps or Kind of Blue. You hear guitar solos you can remember, unlike the thrashing of something like Led Zeppelin's Heartbreaker. Though the band Van Halen ended up backpedaling on the promise of Eruption, releasing blues-based hits more than classicaly rooted ones, other bands were eager to step in, and Van Halen itself ultimately left its mark with Jump. But the classical influence was on all their albums by 1984, in songs like Cathedral and Little Guitars. Eruption ended guitarists' blind allegiance to the pentatonic on one hand and the wandering-in-the-void modal complexities of jazz on the other. Eruption reached all the way back to the beginning of written music, and said "Let's start all over again, but this time with guitars." That's Eruption.

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 18:54:00 -0800

That fist paragraph should have been "And comparing Miles Davis to these particular guitar players, like Buckethead or Satriani (for the former, do not judge until you've heard the album Electric Tears) is unfair in that the idiom is completely utterly different. To understand that, we need to return to Van Halen's Eruption in the context in which it was released." I don't really know what happened there.

By: Greg Nog

Greg Nog — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 19:00:27 -0800

Man, it's only wankery if there's no one else there to catch the ejaculate. Take heed, middle-aged men at Guitar Center.

By: papakwanz

papakwanz — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 19:03:29 -0800

Your favorite guitar technique sucks.

By: Flunkie

Flunkie — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 19:03:41 -0800

Wow. That "Yngwie and the Orchestra" link... ah... how to put this delicately... lacks all taste.

By: The Straightener

The Straightener — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 19:08:34 -0800

I was a metal kid by the age of 9 and have been playing guitar since I was 11 and I will agree with the non metalheads who see this as masturbatory wankery. Shrapnel Records was as much a part of the initial downfall of metal as hair bands were. I mean, if you seriously like Nitro I don't think we have much common ground. Despite how initially awe inspiring the technique might be, after about two minutes when you see what total lack of imagination and artistic vision or even visceral attack there is driving any of it, it's hard not to roll eyes. It's completely brain dead, for the most part. That said, I will defend the first Yngwie album as a classic of metal, with some solid, thick tube tone that had some ass behind it. That's a fucking ballsy record. And what Stanley Jordan does can hardly be called two hand tapping. It's more like playing the piano on a guitar neck.

By: Jimbob

Jimbob — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 19:08:48 -0800

Eruption's promise was that rock would rely on (rip off) classical music, not the blues. And there lies the fundamental problem with your otherwise excellent essay. We don't need rock to rip of classical music. Classical music is fine on it's own, thankyou. Rock is a natural extension of the blues, but classical music is a complete rape of rock. Your points about jazz, however, as well taken. Jazz and rock can be mixed...carefully... What is more rock? The Sex Pistol's "Anarchy in the UK", or Yngwie Malmsteen's "I Am A Viking"? Chose your sides, fellas.

By: papakwanz

papakwanz — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 19:15:11 -0800

Also, this is the second or third time this week I've seen Miles Davis referenced on MeFi in response to perceived musical wankery. Why does everyone hold up his minimalist aestetic as if it was the law? Don't get me wrong, I love Miles, but, despite his own claims to the contrary, he does not set the rules for all musicianship. He played a certain way. His style was great because it was HIS style, and other people should find THEIR style. Hell, many of the musicians in his group played nothing like him; Coltrane and McLaughlin, to give two examples from different eras, had much more of a maximalist aesthetic in their playing. It can be just as good as any minimalist playing, as Miles well knew. I mean, much of the reason he played the way he played was because he *couldn't* play like Dizzy. And yes, a lot of these players *are* wankers, but tapping can be non-wankery. and fuck the sex pistols

By: caddis

caddis — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 19:27:09 -0800

pastabagel, that was beautiful

By: unSane

unSane — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 19:30:34 -0800

It was the quote I was interested in, more than Miles himself. Pattern playing is the bane of improvised music. and of music which is composed via improvisation (like guitar solos).

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 19:33:26 -0800

We don't need rock to rip of classical music. Classical music is fine on it's own, thankyou. Rock is a natural extension of the blues, but classical music is a complete rape of rock. Well, now we're talking about two different things. You're talking about what should, and I'm talking about what is (in my opinion anyway). Whether we "needed" it or not is sort of irrelevant. Van Halen I was a huge album and the band was immensely popular. That sort of suggests that for the fans at the time, they needed it. Classical music obviously came first, and it is unique from the blues in that it is highly formal and structured (I'm talking here about the baroque/enlightenment era classical that influences heavy metal, not the later more avant garde stuff). The blues is a completely different kind of music - it has tribal and baptist hymnal roots to it. Blues turned into rock by avoiding jazz. Classical turned into heavy metal by avoiding the blue and jazz. Of course what comes later always has some elements of what came before.

By: Flunkie

Flunkie — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 19:33:32 -0800

What is more rock?

This is more rock.

By: papakwanz

papakwanz — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 19:39:23 -0800

Pattern playing is the bane of improvised music. True, but all great soloists start by learning patterns.

By: dydecker

dydecker — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 19:44:19 -0800

this conversation is brought to your by the year 1983.

By: malocchio

malocchio — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 19:47:39 -0800

It's not tapping, but maybe some of you might enjoy some guitar fireworks from Paco de Lucia.

By: papakwanz

papakwanz — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 19:52:42 -0800

After catching up on most of the videos posted in the comments, to my tastes it seems that the acoustic players Mongrain and Ross are MORE wankery than the metalheads. At least the metalheads are honest: "look how fuckin fast I can play? Doesn't this shit sound fucking CRAZY?" These acoustic guys (and similar players, like Kaki King and not related Justin King) get a pass because they are playing acoustic guitars, I guess. Oh, how soulful! He just played a suspended chord! He tapped the guitar body with his knuckles! How deep!

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 19:59:09 -0800

Pattern playing is the bane of improvised music. and of music which is composed via improvisation (like guitar solos). posted by unSane at 10:30 PM EST on December 21 unSane, if you truly believe that you are doing yourself a disservice by not checking out Joe Satriani. Three words - pitch axis theory.

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 20:04:48 -0800

Pattern playing is the bane of improvised music. Also, it occurs to me that jazz, the quintessential improvised music, is based on charts, which have chord progressions, which are themselves a pattern. And those guys are playing in modes that are themselves well-defined. In any case, post-van halen metal wouldn't be improvised anyway, because classical music isn't improvised.

By: pyramid termite

pyramid termite — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 20:06:04 -0800

And we need to return to Van Halen's Eruption in the context in which it was released. and my reaction in 1978? ... wankery ... "yeah, he can play the hell out of that, but it doesn't MEAN anything" ... that was pretty much what i said the first time i heard that that, and eddie flubs a couple of notes See, Eruption was 1978's vision of the future. It offers a future of rock and roll that breaks free of it's blue roots, and allows the musician proficient with his instrument to remain within rock and roll. and goes directly into an old kinks song, which, gee guess what? is pretty blues based ... later on, we have ice cream man ... actually, it was black sabbath who introduced us to the future of metal that didn't have a blues base, although they weren't always consistent in practicing that Eruption's promise was that rock would rely on (rip off) classical music, not the blues. that was what emerson lake and palmer tried to do ... didn't work for them, either ... at least van halen were smart enough to know it wouldn't work Eruption ended guitarists' blind allegiance to the pentatonic on one hand and the wandering-in-the-void modal complexities of jazz on the other while the sex pistols pretty much eliminated the whole concept of lead guitar as redundant ... i don't think of that as a good thing, by the way, but look at a lot of today's bands ... a lot of metal bands, even - where's the lead guitar? by the way stanley jordan actually swings and expresses something, so i won't call him a wanker ...

By: drstein

drstein — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 20:09:29 -0800

Stu Hamm & Billy Sheehan are a few of my favourite bassists ever. Both of them did some nifty stuff with tapping.

By: psmith

psmith — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 20:10:46 -0800

Pastabagel : Three words - pitch axis theory. Daybreak, at the bottom of a lake.

By: Flunkie

Flunkie — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 20:11:04 -0800

that, and eddie flubs a couple of notes

That seems to be a common theme throughout the videos posted here demonstrating the technique.

By: papakwanz

papakwanz — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 20:14:07 -0800

it was black sabbath who introduced us to the future of metal that didn't have a blues base Huh? That's way off, man. Way off.

By: pyramid termite

pyramid termite — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 20:15:05 -0800

It offers a future of rock and roll that breaks free of it's blue roots one more thing - you seem to think this was a good thing ... and although i'll admit that metallica pulled off this kind of non-blues music off very well and it's worthy ... rock's lack of blues roots these days is a lot of what's wrong with it

By: MrMoonPie

MrMoonPie — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 20:19:16 -0800

I first saw Stanely Jordan on Johnny Carson. Carson was blown away, as was most of the audience. Sure, there was some wankery, but there was also, as pyramid termite said, swing. I then saw Jordan in Atlanta, some free concert venue, must have been 15 years ago, and I got up on stage, just behind Jordan, maybe 20 feet off to the left, and saw him up close, saw the facial expressions and the feeling, and that, that was amazing. The audience was into it, the performer was into it, and it was a total jam. Never have I experienced anything like it.

By: lilywing13

lilywing13 — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 20:24:44 -0800

nickyskye, Michael Hedges was a musical sculptor to be sure. I was lucky enough to see the man live 4 (maybe 5) years in a row in a small venue. His performances were gorgeous and I still miss him. His all-to-brief collection of music is worth having.

By: pyramid termite

pyramid termite — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 20:26:58 -0800

Huh? That's way off, man. Way off. album 1, track 1 "black sabbath", 1969 ... whatever the first 4 minutes is, it ain't the blues

By: papakwanz

papakwanz — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 20:33:38 -0800

pyramid: Iommi is playing 3 notes, all in the F#(? not sure my guitar might be out of tune) minor pentatonic. The whole song is based on that. Iommi's solo is based on blues licks. Listen to track 2, the Wizard: completely based on blues riffs. Wicked World. A bit of finger. All the songs on this album are heavily built on blues riffs. Is it a 12-bar blues? No. That's why it is "based" on the blues, not "the blues."

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 20:35:30 -0800

pyramid termite- You'll note that I acknoweldged the sloppy ending to eruption, and the fact taht they stuck to bluesier songs during the Roth-era. Roth wanted to be a cover band, that's why VH did so many covers when he was there and none after he left. And it did work for them. They were hugely popular, and a huge influence. And Van Halen only has the one guitar. The Sex Pistols were punk, and not to put too fine a point on it, never made the musicianship the focus. And Black Sabbath wasn't blues based? Everything is minor pentatonic and first-fifth-octave power chords. ??? You have Van Halen I in 1978. By 1981, a short three years later, Zeppelin, the Who, and the Stones have basically retired.. By the time VH puts out 1984 and "Jump" hits, the "four horsemen", Metallica, Megadeth, Slayer, and Anthrax are formed and selling tens of millions of records. If you want to be in a rock band you have to know how to play the guitar very well. Good, bad, whatever. Things evolve. You may not have lead guitarists now, because both guitarists can lead. Megadeth was the first to do this consistently with any success - their "rhythm" guitarists was Metallica's ex-lead. Look at the sheet music to Megadeth's Hangar 18 (please for the love of god ignore the lyrics). The two guitarists alternate mind bending solos. It may be that rock is now where jazz was in the 70's - adrift. We have/had our flirtations with rap metal the way fusion tried to combine jazz and rock. I guess Dragonforce is the answer to that - screw rap, there's no shame in metal. That sort of thing. Wrapped in all of the current music is the introduction of the new instrument, the sample, and it's virtuoso, the DJ. What the heck is the Crystal Method? Is that rock? Electronica? Maybe both. It's the transitional band that gets us from Metallica to Endtroducing reportedly the first album created entirely from samples. I find it very interesting how electronica, particularly the downtempo chill, variety, is very comfortable openly cribbing jazz standards. It's as if they are saying to the current and up and coming generation that's it's okay to go all the way back to jazz and explore the song a little deeper.

By: LordSludge

LordSludge — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 20:54:18 -0800

John Myung breaks it down pretty well. And if would like to propose a derail to Victor Wooten's thumb thing. All in favor, say "funk".

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 21:11:40 -0800

one more thing - you seem to think this was a good thing posted by pyramid termite Not as such, I'm not making a value judgment, just describing the landscape as I see it. Van Halen was welcome in 1978, because something needed to come along and straighten everybody out. Rock was stagnating and in danger of becoming pretentious - see Yes, ELP, etc. Music has to evolve, adapt, and synthesize everything around it. You can't ignore "Straight Outta Compton" any more than you can ignore "Stairway to Heaven" or "Eruption". It's all a part of the collective unconscious now. Eddie killed disco and ten years later Dr. Dre sampled it and played it under Ice Cube's rants. Eddie made disco uncool. Dre made it cool again, and in the process made Eddie's descendants look pretentious. I'm not going to close my ears to anything. If I like something, I like to play a game and try to figure out why I like it, what are they doing that I like, where'd they get that idea, etc. Hey, this bit sounds like that. For example, the first tapping riff in the solo to Metallica's "One" (at 5:46 in the video) is very similar to (but a lot faster than) the riff in the eruption video at 1:04. For a speed metal anthem, One features a rathe jazzy 6/4 time for the better part of the song. If it's a song I don't like I do the same. Short answer - no, not a bad thing.

By: rfs

rfs — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 21:14:05 -0800

I just went to Amazon to refresh my memory, as I didn't think that the Stones had gone into retirement by 1978, and I was right - Some Girls came out on June 9, 1978, which was one of their more popular albums.

By: First Post

First Post — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 21:19:04 -0800

So basically: Van Halen invented classical/rock fusion ten years after Deep Purple didn't, Joe Satriani invented modes (or at least came up with a snazzy name for the ideas from which modes were extrapolated to begin with), and Sabbath's pentatonically structured riffs actually had no basis whatsoever in the blues. Just reading back the minutes out loud here, heh.

By: pyramid termite

pyramid termite — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 21:23:51 -0800

And Black Sabbath wasn't blues based? Everything is minor pentatonic and first-fifth-octave power chords. ??? no ... that's our old pal, diabolus in musica, there ... and, no, papakwanz, it can't be F# minor pentatonic, which would be F#, A, B, C#, E, because he's playing C, which really doesn't belong ... (iommi tuned his guitar to Eb) ... also the melody ozzy sings isn't pentatonic that's not a blues riff at all ... the rest of that album, they do backslide, but i said they weren't consistent i don't hear much blues in iron man either ... those songs and riffs come from a different and darker place ... (and being pentatonic doesn't make it the blues anymore than it makes chinese music the blues) By the time VH puts out 1984 and "Jump" hits, the "four horsemen", Metallica, Megadeth, Slayer, and Anthrax are formed and selling tens of millions of records. If you want to be in a rock band you have to know how to play the guitar very well. unless you're in the replacements It may be that rock is now where jazz was in the 70's - adrift. rock's been adrift for quite some time ... the innovation factor slowed down right around 1977 or so and now it's just about gone as far as rock and the blues goes ... i think there was a certain standard of musicianship that went with bands trying to cover blues and r&b music, and unfortunately that's gone in a lot of today's rock ... You can't ignore "Straight Outta Compton" any more than you can ignore "Stairway to Heaven" or "Eruption". unconsciously, i think you've put your finger on what's wrong now ... there are no records that we can't ignore and their haven't been for quite some time

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 21:27:54 -0800

I said the Stones basically hung it up after '81, not '78 (Rewind anyone?). They toured the US in '81 and didn't come back again in any significant way until Steel Wheels in 1990.

By: Flunkie

Flunkie — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 22:03:13 -0800

unconsciously, i think you've put your finger on what's wrong now ... there are no records that we can't ignore and their haven't been for quite some time

A lot of people ignored "Straight Outta Compton". And "Stairway to Heaven". And "Eruption". Twenty years from now, there's going to be somebody saying that, unlike those superduper obviously unignorable classics from the mid-aughts, there's nothing we can't ignore now.

By: IronWolve

IronWolve — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 22:11:35 -0800

Good view of tapping on a 11 string chapman stick (I think), guy playing Super Mario, also a cool Acoustic tap video.

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 22:12:08 -0800

Well, like Homer Simpson said, "Everybody knows rock was perfected in 1976".

By: Flunkie

Flunkie — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 22:23:46 -0800

I used to rock and roll all night and party ev-er-y day. Then it was ev-er-y other day.

By: nickyskye

nickyskye — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 22:33:40 -0800

jonson, Don Ross is suhweet. lilywing13 you lucky duck. Good cd tip, thanks.

By: quin

quin — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 22:39:20 -0800

That was an amazing couple of summaries Pastabagel. Well said. pyramid termite : unconsciously, i think you've put your finger on what's wrong now ... there are no records that we can't ignore and their haven't been for quite some time In principle, I agree with you, but I've recently discovered Skindred's Babylon, HED (PE)'s awfully named Back 2 Base X, and even M.I.A.'s oddly interesting Arular. None of them are bleeding-edge new, but all of them fill some part of me that I had forgotten about since my college radio days. There is something raw and simple about these albums that speaks to my central nervous system. None of them are High Art and most will be forgotten in a year, but powerful music does still show up now and again. Your point is valid though, it's been a long time since a Back in Black or ...An Justice for All came out. Something that, despite years of separation, would still speak to me. I assume it's the result of record companies trying to generate the next Big Thing, which will, inevitably be an album with one decent song and eight crap examples of the band's other work.

By: MikeHoegeman

MikeHoegeman — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 23:09:03 -0800

Here are a a couple of chapman stick players there are pretty firmly in the non wankery category... tom griesgraber ... http://www.stick.com/onlinevideos/inastep.html greg howard... http://www.stick.com/onlinevideos/bigbang.html

By: The Deej

The Deej — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 23:14:01 -0800

Someone with more time than me (ok, more ambition) should mash up Dragonforce with Sunn 0))) . Maybe then it would make sense.

By: flapjax at midnite

flapjax at midnite — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 23:28:46 -0800

this conversation is brought to your by the year 1983. Heh, heh. You nailed it there, dydecker. rock's lack of blues roots these days is a lot of what's wrong with it I'd agree with pyramid termite here. I used to rock and roll all night and party ev-er-y day. Then it was ev-er-y other day. And now? It's only in memories... from the corners of your mind... misty watercolor mem- /THWACK! *body falls to floor*

By: wsg

wsg — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 00:06:49 -0800

Thanks for those links, MikeHoegeman. They are definitely not wankery, but they're both the same link.

By: No Mutant Enemy

No Mutant Enemy — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 00:18:03 -0800

album 1, track 1 "black sabbath", 1969 ... whatever the first 4 minutes is, it ain't the blues

And whatever For Your Love by the Yardbirds (1965) is, that also ain't the blues. Clapton left after that single for that very reason.

By: LeLiLo

LeLiLo — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 01:59:13 -0800

Thanks baphomet for the original post and especially to Pastabagel for trying to make some sense of all this beyond “I love this guy / I hate this guy / check out this video.” (That Victor Wooten clip is great, by the way, right up there with the ukulele guy gently weeping.) Obviously tapping is as viable a technique as, say, rapping, and here to stay. I also enjoy Stanley Jordan (in small doses), but fingering two guitars at the same time really does seem — despite his obvious talent — like wankery. He’s literally playing with himself on stage.

By: pyramid termite

pyramid termite — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 04:27:06 -0800

By: Jimbob

Jimbob — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 04:29:50 -0800

Obviously tapping is as viable a technique as, say, rapping, and here to stay. Well, it's the fact that a "technique" has, in these cases, become more important than the music. "Hey look at me play these demisemiquavers, noodling around the Locrian mode at the 21st fret with one hand! Awesome, man!" Nah. That's just being able to move your fingers quickly and accurately. It's the difference between dancing and Dance Dance Revolution. I don't think any real, memorable musical greats have ever been pushing a technique, have they? Mozart didn't write music to show how quickly he could play scales with one hand. As others have said, neither did Miles Davis. Of course tapping can be a viable and useful technique - hello ACDC's Thunderstruck. But as some kind of technical spectacle? It's just a trick.

By: grieserm

grieserm — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 05:06:35 -0800

For more amazing guitar stylings. Please check out my local guitar hero Michael Kelsey. Plus his Myspace. This guy is amazing.

By: mdn

mdn — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 05:33:42 -0800

Twenty years from now, there's going to be somebody saying that, unlike those superduper obviously unignorable classics from the mid-aughts, there's nothing we can't ignore now. I think the difference is there's less of a dominant culture now; at one time there was a tree trunk; in the 80's it started branching a bit more with underground zine cultures, and after the internet it's dozens of little twigs going in their own direction. There is certainly good, innovative, or interesting music being made, but it's less likely to "change the way we do things" because a) a lot of different things are getting done and b) the influence isn't really any stronger from what's played on the radio, because other media are so easy to use, that work from any place or time period is basically just as accessible. Essentially, the zeitgeist is fragmented, as cause and as effect.

By: flapjax at midnite

flapjax at midnite — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 06:05:22 -0800

Obviously tapping is as viable a technique as, say, rapping, and here to stay Tapping is a technique. Rapping is not a technique. Unless you wanna say, for example, singing is a technique. But that would be an incorrect usage of the term "technique".

By: klocwerk

klocwerk — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 06:20:01 -0800

came in to replace the terrible bass video linked, but plenty of people have already comet to the aid of bassists everywhere. That said, here's a link to Jean Baudin playing some Bach on his 9-string bass. And the mario video on the 11-string is actually a bass, not a chapman stick. (Although honestly when you get into ERB (extended range bass) stuff I think it's less a bass and more a new unnamed instrument.) And here's a thread on the talkbass.com forums about his 11-string bass being built. -a bassist who's settled on 5 strings.

By: unSane

unSane — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 06:37:24 -0800

Pastabagel Also, it occurs to me that jazz, the quintessential improvised music, is based on charts, which have chord progressions, which are themselves a pattern. And those guys are playing in modes that are themselves well-defined. I'm sorry, that's a deliberate obfuscation. Pattern playing is playing sequences of notes which have been transferred into muscle memory, as opposed to composing tunes on the fly and playing them. The whole foundation of jazz improvisation is to take a melody ('head') and fuck with it on the fly, as opposed to (say) firing off a bunch of learned blues riffs which your fingers know. The underlying progression, which is what the charts define, is completely irrelevant since it's not what's being improvised. Some jazz players do play patterns but they aren't very interesting ones. In any case, post-van halen metal wouldn't be improvised anyway, because classical music isn't improvised. What? post van-halen metal ≠ classical music (1) a great deal of pre-Romantic and even Romantic period music *was* improvised. Figured bass, cadenzas, impromptus... (2) it drives me nuts when people compare metal with classical, as if learning a few bach/vivaldi inspired runs alternating Im/IV7 made the equation valid.

By: papakwanz

papakwanz — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 06:52:14 -0800

pyramid termite: The C is the flat 5. Yeah, no blues players EVER used the flat five. As I said, Black Sabbath are NOT playing the blues. I said they are BASED on the blues. They are. Every one of Iommi's solos on that first album is based on blues riffs. Do they do a 12 bar I-IV-V progression? No. Does Ozzy sing lines like "Woke up this mornin, and my woman was gone... WEEEELLLL I woke up this mornin, and my woman was gone" No. That's because they only chose certain elements, and took other elements from elsewhere. those songs and riffs come from a different and darker place You must be listening to the wrong blues. The best blues is darker than the blackest sabbath, imo.

By: papakwanz

papakwanz — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 07:01:48 -0800

Some jazz players do play patterns but they aren't very interesting ones. Charlie Parker? Dizzy Gillespie? John Coltrane? Every jazz musician that's not out in the realms of completely free jazz uses "sequences of notes which have been transferred into muscle memory" in their soloing. They learn licks. They learn riffs. Some might be 3 notes, some might be 15 notes. They learn them up and down their instrument, in every key, they learn them in every mode. They go to the woodshed. They learn this stuff and internalize to the point where when they are soloing (over a song they have practiced dozens of times) they can put together this stuff on the fly in whatever way strikes them at the moment. It's not just "fuck[ing] with it on the fly." Yes, they are composing as they play, but it's not just based on random notes they happen to string together that very second. Listen to Coltrane's solo on "Giant Steps." You'll hear a lot of patterns. Then listen to his solo on "Offering" on Stellar Regions, near the end of his career. It's very different, and a lot freer, but you'll still hear a lot of patterns. Hell, listen to Keith Jarrett's Koln Concert, an entirely improvised performance: it's free, it's on the fly, but there's a lot of patterns there as building blocks.

By: saladin

saladin — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 07:22:00 -0800

I don't think any real, memorable musical greats have ever been pushing a technique, have they? Jimbob, you just defined an etude.

By: plinth

plinth — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 07:37:52 -0800

Actually - with regard to pushing technique over musicality, Harry James used to push that would play something with double or triple tonguing, and frankly, he wasn't that good a player. Sometimes a show needs a showman. Obligatory guitar masturbation: Jeff Watson playing an out-in-the-front solo with many taps. It's impressive as long as you don't think about Spinal Tap too much.

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 07:47:17 -0800

unSane- Let's back it up a bit because we're misunderstanding each other, I think. I didn't understand that by pattern playing, you were referring to basic rote memorization of notes, and then playing them that way live over and over. Obviously jazz is not that. However, this reinforces my point. The Van Halen audience in 1991, when that clip was recorded, wanted to hear the same Eruption they heard on the 1978 album. Because, thanks to Eddie, the audience is approaching rock the way a classical audience approaches classical - they want and expect the notes have to be the same live as on the album (or the score) they want to see how you change your expression of them. Satriani comes along and finds a way to make the modality of jazz accessible to the rock audience who by then were trained to hear Van Halen-style structured music. He didn't invent the pitch axis theory, but he uses it to write instrumental music that is accessible and memorable to a non-musician audience expecting to hear major and minor scales. When I say classical, I don't mean that it sounds like a Mozart concerto - this would be Yngwie Malmsteen and the neoclassical players. I am saying that they are using classical composition techniques to write songs and solos where their predecessors would have used jazz or the blues. Two-hand tapping is the easiest way to achieve counterpoint on the electric guitar. That's why it sounds so much like Bach. What happens in the early 80's however, is you do not have bands recording music using jazz compositional techniques, and metal at this point become too complex for blues. Case in point is Dragonforce. That's practically classical symphonic march mixed with too much Pokemon and Dungeons and Dragons. The chord progressions and solos are so obviously unabashedly classical, they may as well be perform them with violins instead of guitars. That's heavy metal completely devoid of the blues or jazz influence (it's a British band I think). Not to upset any sensibilities, but excluding the heavy blues bands of the 70s or the new wave of British metal, most European metal, especially the kind being released now (Norway and Finland I'm looking in your direction), is basically rock music stripped of its black roots - no blues, no jazz, no gospel/soul, no funk, no hip hop. I suspect that's why that kind of music doesn't really do that well here, compared to U.S. contemporaries like Slipknot or Korn in which those roots are still present. I also suspect that 's why U.S. metal doesn't do well over there. Each side lacks the other's context. There's a definite black music/white music tension that pervades American culture that I don't think Europeans get at all, and Brits only slightly get, and I think that's sort of what we're arguing about. (2) it drives me nuts when people compare metal with classical, as if learning a few bach/vivaldi inspired runs alternating Im/IV7 made the equation valid. posted by unSane at 9:37 AM EST on December 22 Here's where you are misunderstanding me. Heavy metal post Van Halen is not classical music. It is classically influenced, the way Led Zeppelin, the Who, and the Stones are blues influenced without actually being the blues. Is it blues influenced also? Sure, a little, but one generation removed so the influence is more subtle. The influences on 80's metal are Clapton and Zeppelin, not the primary sources Willie Dixon or Robert Johnson. Jimmy Page and Eric Clapton listened to Robert Johnson. Eddie didn't. He listened to Page and Clapton, and gets the blues from their lens. Dragonforce, and the metal (=virtuoso rock playing) of today is influenced by 80's and 90s metal, like Metallica, probably Dream Theater, etc.

By: kcds

kcds — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 08:00:23 -0800

Master Batio

By: flapjax at midnite

flapjax at midnite — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 08:20:44 -0800

Jimmy Page and Eric Clapton listened to Robert Johnson. Eddie didn't. He listened to Page and Clapton, and gets the blues from their lens. Yeah. Poor bastard.

By: No Mutant Enemy

No Mutant Enemy — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 08:47:16 -0800

Amazing that we're talking about tapping and no-one's mentionedJimmie Webster yet. He pretty much invented the technique.

By: pyramid termite

pyramid termite — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 08:50:06 -0800

pyramid termite: The C is the flat 5. Yeah, no blues players EVER used the flat five. but they play it as a quarter-tone, in passing from or to a lot of other notes, not slowly, from the tonic as black sabbath did that is different and has nothing to do with the blues (and furthermore, talking about notes that aren't in the minor pentatonic scales simply shows me that the older generation didn't think in terms of scales as much as they did chords and melody) That's because they only chose certain elements, and took other elements from elsewhere. so you admit they use non-blues elements ... and it's a short step from saying that to saying that at times, their music was not based on the blues case in point - the first 4 minutes of black sabbath The best blues is darker than the blackest sabbath, imo. but there's just about always a hint of redemption in the music ... if not in the lyrics, then in the mere fact of performance ... can't say that for sabbath ... (that doesn't mean they're better, of course) re: patterns ... you're right ... although the thing is, they're not consciously thinking about what they're doing much of the time Heavy metal post Van Halen is not classical music. It is classically influenced, the way Led Zeppelin, the Who, and the Stones are blues influenced without actually being the blues. to a certain degree ... but i don't think we should forget that van halen became increasingly pop influenced, too ... He listened to Page and Clapton, and gets the blues from their lens. i don't hear much clapton in his playing at all ... i hear some page, but that's not necessarily a good thing, as mr page is sloppy ...

By: Flunkie

Flunkie — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 09:02:56 -0800

that's a nice thought ... unfortunately, you've neglected to tell us what those unignorable mid-aught classics are

I'm not claiming to be superior to the original poster in that I am able to predict what music of today people of twenty years from now will find "classic". I'm merely willing to admit that whether or not I think a certain contemporary piece -- or any contemporary pieces at all -- will be considered "classic" has little to no bearing on what people twenty years from now will think, whereas the original poster was speaking for people twenty years from now.

By: The Straightener

The Straightener — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 09:23:07 -0800

Dragonforce, and the metal (=virtuoso rock playing) of today is influenced by 80's and 90s metal, like Metallica, probably Dream Theater, etc. Not that it's important or anyone really gives a shit, but Dragonforce's soloists were more likely influenced by Shrapnel Records, as I mentioned earlier. I'm not sure how familiar you are with this record label but it more or less spawned the neo-classical soloist movement in 80s and churned out a mind numbing amount of increasingly generic shred throughout the decade. There has been a tremendous resurgence in interest in shred metal in the last five years, which I have found very interesting considering that this sort of playing became the ultimate taboo in the music underground in the 90s. Whether you were listening to Napalm Death, Ministry, Fugazi or the Cows in 1994, it's likely that the last thing you wanted see was some dude run to the front of the stage with a bunch of wheedly wheedly wheeee. That started changing somewhere around the year 2000, and the new crop of young teen metalheads are whole heartedly embracing it again. I always figured that all these other shred wonk dudes I grew up with who went to Berklee or GIT or some shit were going to have bands eventually and I think that's partially why you're seeing a resurgance of shred. It's like, shit. They spent all those hours learning how to sweep arpeggios and couldn't do anything with it for the next ten years. So now, let's form bands like Dragonforce where ALL WE DO is sweep and tap and blast out all that constipated wank. I played about ten shred albums for a classically trained oboist a long time ago; she had auditioned at and been accepted to Julliard, etc. She busted a gut listening to most of it, being totally baffled by what she saw as the reductionism of small minds that think the only thing to playing classical music is speed and technicality. She almost choked upon hearing Tony Macalpine's version of Chopin's Etude #4 Opus #10, where he is basically blasting through the piece, practically destroying the keys he's pounding them so hard. She did also stand up for the first Malmsteen record, she felt his touch was the only one of any of the players that actually approximated a violinist's. It was her opinion that Malmsteen was the only one who had actually listened to some classical music and "got it." Sorry, I know this is verging on Superman vs. Batman or something by this point.

By: Pecinpah

Pecinpah — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 10:58:25 -0800

Henry Rollins doesn't NEED your fucking guitar! He punches himself in the throat until music comes oozing out (in myxo-Rollins mode)! Fuck! Ah!

By: Enron Hubbard

Enron Hubbard — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 11:28:20 -0800

Thanks, Lordsludge, for the Victor Wooten interview/lesson. There's something for musicians of all stripes in there. Perhaps the comment most pertinent to the current thread was when he said to practice technique but make it musical... a distinction that many technically proficient players never quite "get".

By: interrobang

interrobang — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 13:50:53 -0800

You guys are all old.

By: pyramid termite

pyramid termite — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 14:05:20 -0800

hey, intrerrobang, want some nude pics of your mom?

By: cortex

cortex — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 14:11:48 -0800

You totally screwed that joke up, pt. It's a call-and-response.

By: pyramid termite

pyramid termite — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 14:13:08 -0800

he's too young to remember gospel

By: LeLiLo

LeLiLo — Sat, 23 Dec 2006 21:08:51 -0800

Unless you wanna say, for example, singing is a technique. But that would be an incorrect usage of the term "technique". Not according to the dictionary: tech·nique [tek-neek] 1. the manner and ability with which an artist, writer, dancer, athlete, or the like employs the technical skills of a particular art or field of endeavor. 3. method of performance; way of accomplishing.

By: cortex

cortex — Sun, 24 Dec 2006 07:29:39 -0800

Right. While 'singing' as a gestalt ('making melodic noises with one's throat and mouth' or such) may be more general than technique, in practice singing is technique, though moreso than others. Regina Spektor? Pavoratti? Tom Waites? By the same reasoning, 'playing guitar' isn't a technique, but no one notable for their guitar playing doesn't evidence a whole lot of technique. Tapping is a useful, technical set of skills that is, in its most visible incarnations, summat wanky. That's pretty much it. Hardline positions on either side of the tapping debate are irrational and bordering on extremely silly.

By: cortex

cortex — Sun, 24 Dec 2006 07:30:17 -0800

though moreso than others. moreso for some than for others. Oy.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Sun, 24 Dec 2006 08:10:54 -0800

There is certainly good, innovative, or interesting music being made, but it's less likely to "change the way we do things" because a) a lot of different things are getting done and b) the influence isn't really any stronger from what's played on the radio, because other media are so easy to use, that work from any place or time period is basically just as accessible. Essentially, the zeitgeist is fragmented, as cause and as effect. That's actually a pretty good analysis. The reason it's weird when it ocmes to popular music is that popular music, is by it's very nature, rock especially so. As far as finger-tapping goes: when it's in the hands of a jagoff like Yngwie, yeah it's impressive but dull. Eddie Van Halen technique was more impressive by the fact that of it's setting: with DLR's showmanship and humor and the attention to songwriting, his chops were just one more piece of a puzzle that when put together, often looked great. Jimmy Page and Eric Clapton listened to Robert Johnson. Eddie didn't. He listened to Page and Clapton, and gets the blues from their lens. Yeah. Poor bastard. Not neccessarily. By the late seventies, the Bec/Bloomfirld/Clapton white blues whipping post had been worn down to a toothpick. Something new was needed. I've always said that the dividing line between Zep/Grand Funk/Humble Pie Hard Rock and Purple/Sabbath Heavy Metal was that the former was more blues-based and the latter more classical based. Listen to Blackmore's playing on Machine Head. And to everybody saying that after punk, there's no place for guitar pyrotechnics: come on? Yeah, it did a lot to rein in the self indulgence factor, but proto-punk, punk and post punk has never lacked for guys who could play: Wayne Kramer? Sonic Smith? Ross The Boss Friedman? Robert Quine? Tom Verlaine? Kim Thayil? even Bobby Stinson? All capable of whipping some serious shred on your ass. I love inspired crudity as much as anyone possibly could but it's not an either/or proposition.

By: kingfisher, his musclebound cat

kingfisher, his musclebound cat — Sun, 24 Dec 2006 16:16:14 -0800

For some reason this thread made me find a video of Husker Du, The Minutemen, and The Meat Puppets doing Louie Louie live. No finger tapping, though, sorry.