What happened to the Guitar solo??

[csj]

Whoa...Tim,
That gave me flashbacks to Frank Gambale's guitar "Workout" videos.
Writhing women in leotards interspersed with Frank's 2 hour modal wanking.

Somebody put on some Mike Campbell or Johnny Marr, please.

[gez]

That gave me flashbacks to Frank Gambale's guitar "Workout" videos.  Writhing women in leotards interspersed with Frank's 2 hour modal wanking.

Frank-Go-Baldy, the hardest working toupee on the Fuzak scene!

http://www.frankgambale.com/media/HBOWLBig/2.jpeg

[StephenGiles]

Hi Brian Wenz! I lost touch with Sutch's antics for a few years after 65 or so, I saw him at a cinema in Potters Bar with the multi-sax line up, which I think included Ritchie Blackmore, ah - and the Lord Caesar Sutch & the Roman Empire fiasco at the Upper Cut Club in East London somewhere. Then nothing until around 1972. Funny you should have used a 335 in the Savages - it seemed part ot the uniform. Were you still doing Czardas and In the Hall of the Mountain King in the warm up set? I saw Sutch and a Savages line up which had Glen Stoner on guitar around 1978/9 - he was pretty good. Did you get to record with Sutch?

[brian wenz]

Hello StephenGiles--
    Hall of the Mountain King !!!  Crap, I'd forgotten all about that number!!
Yeah, we did it........I actually worked up another version of that stinker in  a band I was in around the early 70's.
We recorded some stuff off-and-on  [pretty hectic schedule with David!].
Come to think of it.....I don't remember ever picking up my money for those recordings!   I think some of the later stuff made it onto the "Heavy Friends" album.
  I always had a feeling that one of the reasons I got the gig after Blackmore was because I had a red 335 like his.  [I'm pretty sure he used a Vox AC30 amp, too.]
Did you ever get a chance to see Mick Green play with Johnny Kidd??  He was a pretty big influence on me and a bunch of other guitarists....
 I've actually got some video of Sutch somewhere  [Mick Green is playing with him in one of 'em!]
 I actually get pretty sad when thinking about that part of my life.... I never had so much fun and got so much valueable experience before or since.  Where's the Fifth Earle of Harrow when we need 'em! ?
Brian.

[downweverything]

What happened to guitar solos you ask?  They were killed by a posse of five horrible and boring notes known as the minor pentatonic scale.  A unique brand of justice.

[runmikeyrun]

the band i've been playing in for 6 years and the one before that for 4 years and even my high school band we never had a guitar solo in  a single song.  Just doesn't fit what we're doing (a genre of metal called math rock).  A solo in that style just causes problems as most of the songs are written in weird time signatures like 9/8 and are very off time and janky... i think putting any kind of solo in there would just make the song fall apart or sound like shit.  

I don't like solos in most styles of music, but in the right tune they are great.  80s metal and Slayer, where would those songs be without the solos?

[Paul Marossy]

A few thoughts come to mind:

1. The "music industry" does impose a very specific format, which I don't like. But, I grew up in the late 60's and in the 70's, so I am used to things sounding much different.

2. Every song does not need a solo. Sometimes a solo doesn't sound right in a song. But, I have heard other songs just begging for a solo, and there never was one.  

3. Most people can't listen to people like Yngwie Malmsteen, Scott Henderson, Frank Gambale or the like because they don't fit into a format that they have been conditioned to hearing or can not/will not appreciate their talent. A lot of people consider the above to be excessive, etc. Sit down sometime and try to figure some of their pieces and you will see that they are a lot more complicated than they sound, not to mention that there are lots of great lines and melodies to be discovered if you are into jazz fusion like I am.

4. This song length business is B.S. If it takes five minutes to say what you really want to say, why should that be forbidden? Oh, that's a big NO-NO because that would cut into the 75% advertising to 25% music ratio. Total crap. The artist has to conform to whatever the label says has to be done. Not for me. I refuse to listen to commercial radio stations. I don't need to hear all of the freakin' "advertisments". I hate that with a passion!

5. If you want to hear guitar solos and music that doesn't have to fit in a box, then you have to listen to independently produced music. Almost everyone I listen to is in this category.

6. It really is a shame that the best guitar players in the world are virtually unknown by the average American, at least. If ask someone if they ever heard of Al Di Meola or Scott Henderson, the ask "Who"?

7. Then there is the instrumental vs. a song. If have never been able to figure out why people can't appreciate instrumental music. There is some incredible music out there that has never been heard because a music station would not play it. The only exception I can think of right now is Eric Johnson's "Cliffs of Dover". What is so horrible about instrumental music?!?

8. The masses have been conditioned as to what is supposed to be music. I'm sorry, but I do not accept this. Especially not today, because it seems that real musical talent is rare. Everything is cut and paste using ProTools. That IS NOT making music. But, I can respect someone going into a studio and laying down tracks without editing it to death.

I don't think guitar solos should be banned. But, there also doesn't have to be one in every song, either.

[MarkB]

I have never been able to figure out why people can't appreciate instrumental music.

Easy... they can't sing along.

Silly as it sounds.. it's true.
"-)

[will]

Hi,

I have never been able to figure out why people can't appreciate instrumental music.

Easy... they can't sing along.

Silly as it sounds.. it's true.
"-)

An oldies station my wife likes to listen to often states. "If you can’t hum them we won't play them".

Kind of boring!

Regards,
Will

[Tim Escobedo]

3. Most people can't listen to people like Yngwie Malmsteen, Scott Henderson, Frank Gambale or the like because they don't fit into a format that they have been conditioned to hearing or can not/will not appreciate their talent. A lot of people consider the above to be excessive, etc. Sit down sometime and try to figure some of their pieces and you will see that they are a lot more complicated than they sound, not to mention that there are lots of great lines and melodies to be discovered if you are into jazz fusion like I am.

Complexity does not equal quality. All the vocabulary in the world is of little use if you have nothing to say.

4. This song length business is B.S. If it takes five minutes to say what you really want to say, why should that be forbidden? Oh, that's a big NO-NO because that would cut into the 75% advertising to 25% music ratio. Total crap. The artist has to conform to whatever the label says has to be done. Not for me. I refuse to listen to commercial radio stations. I don't need to hear all of the freakin' "advertisments". I hate that with a passion!

I have no problem with long tunes. I do have a problem with taking a succinct four minute tune and padding it out to six minutes.

I've sometimes wonder at the stroke of brilliance it was to mercifully keep a tune like "Little Wing" or "Crosstwon Traffic" to managable length. I think had Hendrix been free to indulge any more on those tunes may have diminished the overall effectiveness.

7. Then there is the instrumental vs. a song. If have never been able to figure out why people can't appreciate instrumental music. There is some incredible music out there that has never been heard because a music station would not play it. The only exception I can think of right now is Eric Johnson's "Cliffs of Dover". What is so horrible about instrumental music?!?

Instrumentals face a bigger challenge, no doubt. But when they're good, people like them. When they're not, they drop out of sight faster than last year's fashions. The instrumental is more ambiguous. In some ways, the instrumental has to be even more simplistic than the simplest lyric to be successful, with a good enough "hook" to bend the ear of the listener. After all, Kenny G made a career playing mostly instrumentals.

8. The masses have been conditioned as to what is supposed to be music. I'm sorry, but I do not accept this. Especially not today, because it seems that real musical talent is rare. Everything is cut and paste using ProTools. That IS NOT making music. But, I can respect someone going into a studio and laying down tracks without editing it to death.

I take a pretty broad view of general musical tastes. People like what they like. There really is no why. Cut and paste music isn't new. It's just easier than it used to be. And some of the most creative music I've heard in recent years is just such music. Stuff that would have been impossible twenty years ago. I view the computer as the logical extension to lined staff paper and pencil at the piano keyboard. It's a medium that marries audio and visual feedback more effectively than it's ever been done before. The musical talent is still out there. It just no longer belongs solely to the instrumentalists.

[Paul Marossy]

"Complexity does not equal quality. All the vocabulary in the world is of little use if you have nothing to say."

True. But, quality, too, is very subjective.

"I've sometimes wonder at the stroke of brilliance it was to mercifully keep a tune like "Little Wing" or "Crosstwon Traffic" to managable length. I think had Hendrix been free to indulge any more on those tunes may have diminished the overall effectiveness."

I'll agree that sometimes a very long drawn out song can start to grate on your nerves. But, then you get songs like "Comfortably Numb", which are kind of long, but nobody seems to complain...  :wink:

"Cut and paste music isn't new. It's just easier than it used to be. And some of the most creative music I've heard in recent years is just such music.

I'll agree that things like Stereo Lab does are cool. And it is creative. But, could it be played live? I doubt it. Not without a computer or something. Then it's a computer regurgitating something and playing it. It's music, but anyone can play something, cut and paste it into loops or whatever and then have some kind of medium play it back. I think that too many people use the cut and paste approach as a crutch, or they have to use it because their musical abilities are lacking. Just my opinion.

[DaveB]

For myself, It comes down to one thing: Do I want to be a Guitar player or do I want to be a Musician? Is what I'm playing for the benefit of the SONG?? If not, I need to stop and par down. The older I get, it seems the old saying of less is more becomes more and more relevant.

Now, dont get me wrong, this isn't an anti solo rant. In Fact, on my bands newest album, 75% of the songs have solos. Its all about being tasteful.   Also, wanking is an enjoyable thing. BUT, usually only in my practice room or with the occasional bar gig. I have found it more satisfying to be an integral part of a well oiled machine that produces music. Music is definitly created for the self enjoyment but, if in a band that plays in front of people, its is almost more so created for the listener.
 It seems that nearly 90% of people in these parts dont care for elongated solos and jamming on the same three chords hour half an hour. And to an extent, if your not playing for the enjoyment of the audience, who are you playing to but yourself?? No one, including myself, wants to see that. Get off the stage and go back home. It seems this area where I come from is consumed in guys reliving their childhood in front of everybody playing some skynrd song or a 12 bar blues for an hour straight. Thats probably one of the reasons there is no scene here thats worth a crap. (breathe.....stop ranting.....) Also, there is more to life( for me anyway) than rock 'n' roll. Take some time to explore. Lotsa good stuff out there.

Bottom Line: I wish there were more people interested in being a musician rather than being a guitar player. In the mean time, long live solos..

(p.s. I hope this was relevant....)

[gez]

I'll agree that things like Stereo Lab does are cool. And it is creative. But, could it be played live? I doubt it. Not without a computer or something. Then it's a computer regurgitating something and playing it. It's music, but anyone can play something, cut and paste it into loops or whatever and then have some kind of medium play it back. I think that too many people use the cut and paste approach as a crutch, or they have to use it because their musical abilities are lacking. Just my opinion.

Any instrument, whether it be guitar, sax or computer (yes it an be an instrument!) is only as good as the person playing it.  There ARE musicians taking new technology to the work place and they ARE using this technology live.  You can change/edit/marmalise samples and loops in real time and this CAN be creative.

David Behrman is someone who has been using computers since the year dot and is a classic example of how someone with a LOT of knowhow can create truly amazing music that NOT everyone can write (though his interactive stuff is something that anyone can participate in).

http://www.lovely.com/bios/behrman.html

PS  What's wrong with 'anyone' being creative?

[Paul Marossy]

DaveB,

I hear what you are saying. That's a good point that you make. I guess it boils down to the reasons why you play. If you are playing covers/original tunes for an audience, then noodling should be kept to a minimum if the song doesn't lend itself to soloing. I also am of the mind that most of the time, the less that you say, the better.

But, I also have to say that some people have kept true to their own vision and have not wanted to do anything else (people pleasing). That is what makes them what they are. I can really respect that. Either you like them or you don't. I can also appreciate playing things that people want to hear, if that's your thing.

Myself, I have always liked the experimentalist pushing the envelope more than things that are played on the radio.

[Paul Marossy]

"You can change/edit/marmalise samples and loops in real time and this CAN be creative."

I'm not saying that it is not creative... I just don't consider that to be music, in the classical view. I guess I should have said that to start.  :oops:

Anyhow, can they play it just like the record in a live situation? I think that's what people would expect.

BTW, what the heck is "marmalising"!?

[gez]

BTW, what the heck is "marmalising"!?

I just asked my partner if she'd heard of this word and she thought I'd lost my marbles too!  

Making marmalade out of something, i.e. chopping it all up and mixing it together?  (one of those words you use without thinking too much about the meaning).

[Tim Escobedo]

Marmalising is a perfectly cromulent word.

[Paul Marossy]

Oh yes, of course. Marmalade, marmalising... is that kind of like head cheese?  :lol:

OK, Tim. What does cromulent mean? Never heard of that word before...

[gez]

OK, Tim. What does cromulent mean?

Weren't they the bug-eyed things in Star Trek?

[Tim Escobedo]

Ha!  :lol:

It's from a Simpsons episode.
http://www.diarytown.com/cromulent/archives/000793.html
The scene involves Ms Krabappel wondering out loud about a seemingly made up regional word. When another teacher retorts that "it's a perfectly cromulent word", yet another seemingly made up regional word of dubious validity.

I guess you had to be there.