The '80s was a hard choice for me. The '60s had Hendrix (the most iconic guitarist of that era regardless of who was better technically, and iconicity was taken into account along with several other factors), and there has hardly ever been a greater combination of man, moment, and music (and really that was what my list was about: who represented the times the best). The '70s was a little harder, but using the same factors that I used to choose Hendrix (skill, iconicity, influence, fame, and other nuances of that sort) pointed to Jimmy Page for me. It seemed like a solid choice, but it is hard to see Jeff Beck, Carlos Santana, Richard Thompson and others of the time ignored (Clapton comes to mind, although by the '70s, he was doing his solo routine, which I find less interesting and appealing than his work with Cream and Derek and the Dominos). The '80s was an even tougher choice. I can pick Hendrix and Page for the '60s and '70s and be cool with it, but the '80s is a vaguer, less clean cut choice for me. You have Mark Knopfler (a solid guitarist, if more traditional and less memorable than some of the people who were working by that time), Kirk Hammett, Angus Young (it’s easy for some people to dismiss him because of his schoolboy outfit, but he’s better than a lot of people like to think), Johnny Ramone (not talented in the way Hendrix and Page were, but undeniably an influence in the music industry), and Slash, who I heavily considered for both the '80s and '90s. Maybe Van Halen is a gimmick (I don’t feel qualified enough to comment), but I thought he summed up the '80s in a way that none of the others did.
I could probably put Slash in for the ‘90s and live with it, although I think Dimebag Darrell is really cool. Slash is arguably more skilled, and undeniably more iconic, influential, and famous, so maybe I ought to have put him there (he did do a lot of good work with Guns N’ Roses in the '90s). I think my reasoning for putting Darrell in there may have been because he developed a kind of iconic status among heavy metal fans (although with that reasoning I could’ve just as easily put Kurt Cobain, who I think is less skilled than Slash or Darrell) after his death, and I know I wanted heavy metal represented somewhere (some would say Van Halen is metal, but I dunno). I feel really good about my choices for the '50s, '60s, '70s, and '80s, but the last two decades I went back and forth on. It might be easier to do a list like this in retrospect, but there’s something to be said for living the moment instead of looking back on the moment.
And I haven’t got a clue if Derek Trucks was the right choice for the 2000s. He’s got as much skill as any modern guitarist, but it may be too early to judge.
I know how to read treble/bass clef notation, though not terribly well. I spent several years in the handbell choir at church, and that’s mostly where I learned it. In my year of playing the guitar (I got my LP a year ago today!), I haven’t really done much that required me to learn how the notes on the clefs relate to the strings of the guitar. It’s something I’d like to learn, eventually.
Mostly, I’ve been learning the guitar via tab, but I’ve been almost exclusively learning rock guitar, so it seems to work so far.
Pork Rind - all good. If you find that Hoover link, that would be cool; I have seen a few other “guitar makers discuss wood” clips; there is usually a fact or two to glean, and I appreciate his approach to guitar making…
As for wanting to like big necks - I hear you; there are certain features that seem to evoke the right attitude or should be able to bring the right feel, but ultimately it has to work for you. As a thumb-over-the-top guy myself, I just find them very comfortable…and I don’t see it as a bad habit at all; just a choice - I was never meant for shredding anyway.
And MwNNrules? Look, you don’t want to be that Dead Poets Society poetry book, do you? The one where Robin Williams has the students read how to calculate the total area of awesomeness of a given poem by rating various factors and producing a quantitative score? Slash is a great, great player on a number of levels, as is EVH - picking one is kinda not the point; have a favorite, sure, but listen to both whenver the mood hits.
…but for what it is worth, in terms of influence, Slash doesn’t hold a candle to Eddie Van Halen. Done. End of story. Slash was part of a huge band and brought attention back to Gibson Les Pauls (even though his was a replica on Appetite - either way, anything that brings attention to Les Pauls is coolness in my book), and he brought attention back to cool, Aerosmithy, bluesy-based lead work and also to great tone; unlike folks like Dimebag, Slash really “gets” classic guitar tones.
However - when EVH came on the scene in ‘78 or so, everything changed - the way that guitars looked, sounded, and were played and manufactured completely changed. The best analogy might be Michael Jordan - when he blew up, and his Air Jordan shoes hit - everything about hip fashion (from tighty shorts to baggy; shaved heads, etc.) shoes (from “neato” to billion-dollar industry and huge endorsement deals, etc.) changed. THAT is what EVH did to guitars - hair metal traces back to Van Halen - heck the entire 80’s. Whereas G n’ R kinda reached back a bit further and reminded people of the first 4 Aerosmith albums…but that is very different from leading a whole new style of lead guitar…again, not even close.
I found it here. No way to link directly, but if you click on “Artisan Videos” toward the right, it will take you to a page that will then link to the Richard Hoover talk. It’s in six parts, so set a bit of time aside. I think you will really like this.
Note: The audio and video are very poorly synchronized.
Too late to edit: The discussion of the problems with mahogany are toward the end of part 2. To me, that’s the most interesting part, as I was not aware of the problems with mahogany availability and production. He says he’s trying to replace his use of it with California Sycamore.
Well I’ve never seen that movie (I’ve heard about it though - will watch it when the opportunity arises), but I get what your saying. It’s not worth overthinking, but I’m just amusing myself.
My line of reasoning for almost picking Slash (twice at that). I take it you prefer Slash to Dimebag Darrell - out of curiosity, is this just a matter of tone preference for you or do you dislike heavy metal, or what?
That’s basically what I figured, although God knows that I would have had to have lived through the '80s to really know.
Sorry, man. I picked up a bit of Ukranian when I was dealing with the Prince-in-exile. Long, long story.
Dude, if you read any of geek-out posts, you know I am alll about amusing myself when it comes guitar. Party on.
I love metal - didn’t I share that post about Walk and also that one about great players with lousy tone? Dimebag is a monster - great Texas Groove playing in a metal context. The biggest issue for me is how his tone his produced - with Slash and the players up through EVH, their tone is much more organic - even though it is electric, it is a combination of wood, a pickup meant to be a microphone to the guitar’s vocals (humor me) and some crackly analog tube circuitry. Dimebag’s tone is based on overwound pickups and a heavily overdriven amp - his guitar functions more as a white-noise manipulator. He’s basically further along a spectrum of how much distortion he saturates his signal with, but since the tone is often created using non-organic-sounding components, he approaches his playing technique differently.
I would describe Dimebag’s tone as interesting and useful, but not organic and as warm sounding. If EVH’s tone is infamously referred to as the “Brown Sound” I would describe Dimebag’s as neon green with black stripes.
There are some high spots, but a lot of EVH wannabees who overplayed like nobody’s business - no different from listening to Aretha and then hearing the new R&B singers who over-warble (over-melisma if you wanna get technical) and leech the feeling out of the song…
Cool - thanks. I will check this out when I can…
How do people play the guitar and not read music?
I played viola back in junior high and high school, and I must have a pretty good memory, because I know the notation pretty well. (I don’t remember which line goes with which note, but I’m not using the alto clef now, so it doesn’t really matter.) And then I took a guitar class with mostly complete beginners. It was really interesting to hear the questions they asked about music. (“If C-sharp and D-flat are different names for the same note, now do you know which name to use?” Stuff like that.) I don’t remember anyone ever explaining to me exactly what a ‘key’ is in music, but once I figured it out it was pretty simple. I think it would help a lot to start those sorts of classes with just a few minutes to explain things that every musician takes for granted, and then the staff and the nomenclature makes a lot more sense. I’ve even though of how I’d go throught it as a teacher.
It was a short class, so the teacher didn’t have a lot of time to get to anything more than some easy chords (although, there are quite a few of them), and some mixed quarter- and eighth-note strums. And since then, the book I’ve been learning from uses the staff (although I’ve looked ahead, and it does have tabs later). I can see the appeal of tabs, but it also seems like it would be kind of limiting.
One thing I had to get over, and that kinda surprised me, is that on the viola the open strings are always on a space within the staff, first finger was always on a line, etc. It was really catching me out the first few weeks on the guitar that the open strings didn’t follow that pattern.
Not sure what you mean - see my post above. I read enough to get the information on chords and some fills, but much of the stuff I need - e.g., the groove, the street smart tricks, the way to dial up the amp, use of effects - none of that stuff is on a treble clef, you know?
So it depends on what you are after, if that makes sense.
I couldn’t tell you how many flats or sharps are in a key - or when you should refer to them as flats vs. sharps for that matter. I know the basic relationship of chords and keys - why sub-dominants and dominants are important in a western scale and what those notes are in most keys - but I couldn’t site read to save my life. And I will look at a chord form and noodle it out, only to stop and realize “oh, that’s that chord I use on X song” but I couldn’t tell you if there’s a flatted ninth or anything unless I worked it out with a pencil.
I can plunk and twang reading the treble clef, am clueless in the bass clef. I don’t do all that well with tab. I’m mostly a ‘by-ear’ player and I prefer words and chords as a memory jogger for songs that I haven’t played for a while, or that I am trying to learn.
So what happens the second time you play a song? I can understand (sort of) going through a song and figuring it out piece-by-piece, but what happens after that when you want to just play it? Do you write notes for yourself as reminders, or does the noodling get the song so firmly in your memory that you don’t have to decipher it again?
Oh yeah - remember: most rock songs are 3 chords and the truth ;). Once I block out the song, it becomes clear which major rock-song Family it is part of - at that point, I just slot it in place (e.g., So Lonely = Goin’ Down = Sam Cooke’s Wonderful World, etc…) and only need to remember the specific tricks, fills and groove. I also have a great memory for lyrics and song structure so by the time I block it out, I can navigate the basic structure. Over the next couple times I play, I repeat it a couple more times - so by that time I have to lead the band through the song, where we beat up my approach, parcel out parts, etc. The act of doing that second pass locks it in for a while…if I don’t keep up with the song or if it doesn’t include some lick I use as a practice lick, it can fade after about a year…
Remember, the technical abilities of forming chords and locking into a groove are second-nature for me after 30 years - so I am past a barrier a lot of players see as a big obstacle…
I can read treble clef well enough to entertain myself with a bit of Bach and other stuff by those old dead guys. Tab - I don’t see there’s anything to learn it’s just a sort of picture showing where to put your fingers innit? Pretty much all the guitar books I have, have both in any case.
An observation on reading dots for the guitar. I spent years playing just by ear and couldn’t translate standard notation to notes to play in anything like real time. It wasn’t until I got a bit more serious and practicing “classical” scales and arpeggios that written music started to make sense. I don’t think standard notation is a good match for rock (or blues). So much of it is modified pentatonics, or modal, or playing in “boxes” that key signatures don’t really represent the notes you expect to play. It’s pretty common for a part to use both the major and minor third (or even something in between), often the home chord has a flattened 7 these things do not happen in classical music.
I think it’s fair to say most rock guitarists* can’t read music, including lots of the famous ones. How do they manage? Most rock music is much much simpler than most classical, there’s a lot more repetition and a great deal more wiggle room. Especially if you’re playing your own stuff, who’s to say you’re doing it wrong?
*more since the 80s probably but for each Steve Vai there’ll be dozens of Johnny Marrs
Watching this now - wonderful. Richard really knows his stuff and is very patient. Great way to learn about acoustics…
Thank you for sharing…
I think if you’re going to be a classical guitar player, reading is absolutely essential. You cannot exist in the classical world without being able to read. End of story. There are no exceptions.
If you want to be a serious jazz player, you should be able to read, although there are no doubt a few jazz greats who couldn’t. But not many, and not lately. If you told me that Joe Pass, or Bucky Pizzarelli, or George Benson or Pat Metheny couldn’t read, I’d be as surprised and incredulous as if you’d told me the sun was going to come up in the West tomorrow.
I very, very much regret letting my reading skills degenerate over the last decade or so (older now, don’t play as much, and not with other people), and I hereby vow to make it a project to get back up to speed in the next year.
Glad you liked it! His perspective on the rarity of rosewood vs. maghogany trees was quite different than the standard line. I wish I knew more.
Agreed - I know a lot about the properties of the woods in a guitar context, but not the nature and business of wood. You might consider reading **Clapton’s Guitar by Allen St. John **- great book about acoustic guitars, their history and sound and desirability - and the woods. I don’t recall rosewood getting put into perspective relative to mahogany like Hoover does, but there was some stuff in there…
Update - I am going to see **Jeff Beck **and **Eric Clapton **tonight at Madison Square Garden. Even as I sit at my desk, I am squealing like a little girl.
I am likely taking tomorrow off since my kids are on Winter Break, but I will file a report when I can…