satriani - technically good?

Discuss playing styles and techniques, or share your own here.
Locked
shredlord
Member
Member
Posts: 236
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 2:38 pm

i think the fact that satch got lessons from lennie tristano proves that he's got the technical chops to split the red sea...
User avatar
burnt out
Member
Member
Posts: 734
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2003 6:58 pm

I just think that people shouldn't knock any music unless it's really obviously bad to alot of people,or if they've got a valid criticism about some aspect of the musicality of the music,or the message,fashion,trendiness of it,etc.
zreynolds wrote:I value musicianship, and think both Zakk Wylde and Joe Satriani have much to offer (as do many others).
Exactly.

Just like someone else said,"I don't think we should be criticizing anyone who's a legitimate player" given the state of today's music and how superficial and shallow it is and how just downright "bad" the musicianship is nowdays in mainstream music.Whoever it was also mentioned Avril Lavigne.Now I understand you not liking Avril,however atleast she has a band and a guitar in her hands.That's alot more than I can say for some of these pop princesses or DIVAS or whatever they are who just stand their looking like a **** and lip-synching and dirty dancing.So the bottom of the barrel goes a little lower than Avril in my opinion.Do I like Avril? No. :lol:
BajoElSol
Member
Member
Posts: 224
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 4:10 pm

I was just surfing thorugh this forum and thought,

"Oh my god. Is this thread still alive?!?! I thought it was dead and buried when I and TheReaper wrote the following!!!!" :arrow:
TheReaper wrote:
BajoElSol wrote:Satriani technicaly good :shock: Are you kidding!!!!!

Has your friend heard the solo in Ice 9?

Has your friend heard the solo in Crushing Day?

Has your friend heard the solo in The Time Machine?

Has your friend heard the solo in The Forgotton Part II?

I assume he hasn't, cause he wouldn't have said such a thing.

Maybe the difference is that Satch dosn't bother too much about poluting a song up with just technical shit, something I admire in him. He's the type of player who gets the right note at the right time...something which is a lot more diffiuclt to do.

Bajo.
I agree with this. I think you guys are forgetting something very important...

Virtuosity is a tool. Not a style.

To be considered technically good, or a virtuoso do you have to shred a piece of music all the way through from start to finish? OF COURSE NOT!!!!!! But if someone dosn't do this then he's not considered a virtuoso!!!!...I don't see any sense in that.

What Satriani uses is known as speed bursts. Speed burst is, for example, if you look at an entire piece of music then you will notice that the fast parts only last a few measures...but they are technically demanding, or just as technical as playng it for the whole song at warp-speed, as Malmsteen would do (lol)!!!!!!

I consider someone virtuoso if he can play anything which his motor mind demands of him... in other words, his fingers are capable of producing just what he wants to hear. Satriani shows this guys...It's obvious.

TheReaper
mxer
Member
Member
Posts: 213
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:01 pm

Main Entry: vir·tu·o·so
Pronunciation: -'O-(")sO, -(")zO
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -sos or vir·tu·o·si /-(")sE, -(")zE/
Etymology: Italian, from virtuoso, adjective, virtuous, skilled, from Late Latin virtuosus virtuous, from Latin virtus
1 : an experimenter or investigator especially in the arts and sciences : SAVANT
2 : one skilled in or having a taste for the fine arts
3 : one who excels in the technique of an art; especially : a highly skilled musical performer (as on the violin)
4 : a person who has great skill at some endeavor <a computer virtuoso> <a virtuoso at public relations>
- vir·tu·o·sic /-'O-sik, -zik/ adjective
- virtuoso adjective

Virtuoso applies to a broader qaulifying body than you think. It's not a matter of opinion.
markj
Member
Member
Posts: 31
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 5:37 pm

ok lets say theres some kid at a juliard type school playing classical pieces that boggle the mind ,hes a virtuoso ,yes,but if he heard someone like satch playing he might not think much of him ,so its all relative to what you like i mean if your from the deep south and just happens to be black and plays guitar (at the risk of sounding like im steriotyping) hes probably gonna be playing deep blues more often than pagnini ...as for satch lets not forget that he taught kirk hammett a few licks and kirks no punk on his instrument .....but ive never heard satch play anything that sounds like metallica .like someone said before hes not just playing everything hes got to be playing hes playing what the song calls for
markj
Member
Member
Posts: 31
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 5:37 pm

tell one of these speed freaks to write a song like crying and see how it turns out ,sure they can play the notes but with know feel whatsoever
MR4Y
Member
Member
Posts: 423
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 12:58 pm

that type of "discussion" get's me boring

*pissed off mode on*
Both of him(Satch, Zakk, etc...) are pretty good but in your own area. Try to compare a man that play "heavy metal" to a man that play "prog-like" it's ridiculous. You have to analyse with "third person eye" instead of "licking some ass" or something. Some people always use the forum but not ready pretty carefully the martian love secrets. Vai "says" in clearer and loud sound: "You can't judge people like 'my noise is better than your noise'"(I don't remeber exactly the phrase but it's something like this).

The opnion of people is important but it's not when they try to "stab" the tastes of each other. I hope that people don't get offended with something that I writed above :mrgreen:
dweezil 9
Member
Member
Posts: 342
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 2:25 am

zreynoldsp wrote:
I think Billie Joe Armstrong is a technically superior player to Satriani, Zakk, Hendrix, Steve Vai, Yngwie, Petrucci..... :roll: :roll: :roll:

Haha hendrix wasn't technically good at all man. Still a fucking genius though. In no way technical ;).
User avatar
burnt out
Member
Member
Posts: 734
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2003 6:58 pm

Vai "says" in clearer and loud sound: "You can't judge people like 'my noise is better than your noise'"(I don't remeber exactly the phrase but it's something like this).
I'm going to disagree with Mr.Vai on this.Why? Because I CAN! :lol:

I agree that you can't compare yourself to others and say that your noise is better than their noise.No arguments here because if you do that then you are full of yourself.

However,I believe you can as a music fan compare and contrast artists if you are knowledgeable and fair and honest about it and not just being stupid about it.I definately view music like food.Some of it I love and some of it I hate and I have no problem speaking up about that because I don't want to get stuck eating shit.

I don't base everything on speed and technicality or guitar or how hard or heavy something is.I judge the song as a whole on the instrumentation of all of the band members,the lyrical content,the writing and the vocals.From that I try to evaluate the mean average of the quality of the entire song for what it is,with style and genre considerations and while comparing it to similar artists and artistic endevours.Sometimes a negative aspect will stick out too much and become too much of an annoyance or distraction to me for it to be enjoyable.Sometimes the positives outweigh the negatives.A small negative sticking out may not bother me too much as long as there are other positives that are pleasing,as long as that one negative isn't a big nuisance that sticks out like a sore thumb.

I hear people just trash Kurt Cobain all the time.They rag on his voice and his guitar playing and I think to myself,why not say the same things about Neil Young? Huh big man? They're fairly comparable really.But these same people can't see that,lol.The point is that there are worse artists out there than them who you could bag on instead,if you wanted to be more fair an accurate about it.And if you want to be fair then you'll see some similarities between Neil Young and Cobain.And yet I don't hear people bitching and whining about Neil Young,lol. :roll:

~fin
MR4Y
Member
Member
Posts: 423
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 12:58 pm

burnt out wrote:
Vai "says" in clearer and loud sound: "You can't judge people like 'my noise is better than your noise'"(I don't remeber exactly the phrase but it's something like this).
I'm going to disagree with Mr.Vai on this.Why? Because I CAN! :lol:

I agree that you can't compare yourself to others and say that your noise is better than their noise.No arguments here because if you do that then you are full of yourself.

However,I believe you can as a music fan compare and contrast artists if you are knowledgeable and fair and honest about it and not just being stupid about it.I definately view music like food.Some of it I love and some of it I hate and I have no problem speaking up about that because I don't want to get stuck eating shit.

I don't base everything on speed and technicality or guitar or how hard or heavy something is.I judge the song as a whole on the instrumentation of all of the band members,the lyrical content,the writing and the vocals.From that I try to evaluate the mean average of the quality of the entire song for what it is,with style and genre considerations and while comparing it to similar artists and artistic endevours.Sometimes a negative aspect will stick out too much and become too much of an annoyance or distraction to me for it to be enjoyable.Sometimes the positives outweigh the negatives.A small negative sticking out may not bother me too much as long as there are other positives that are pleasing,as long as that one negative isn't a big nuisance that sticks out like a sore thumb.

I hear people just trash Kurt Cobain all the time.They rag on his voice and his guitar playing and I think to myself,why not say the same things about Neil Young? Huh big man? They're fairly comparable really.But these same people can't see that,lol.The point is that there are worse artists out there than them who you could bag on instead,if you wanted to be more fair an accurate about it.And if you want to be fair then you'll see some similarities between Neil Young and Cobain.And yet I don't hear people bitching and whining about Neil Young,lol. :roll:

~fin
Yeah, that's true but the thing that "scrap the botom of the barrel" is to compare two guitarrists that play completely different styles(both is "metal-like" but is different in many ways) and have different musical teaching. These peoiple always make this comparisions in ridiculous way like: "Vai is worst than Wylde because vai is only a 'shredder incomplete project' and Wylde can do slow things like 'Road To Nowhere'" or something. These peope that don't listen "on the both sides" and lick the others @$$ or something. That's is only because they don't undestand the ways of music, how it works, etc... they only lick [put the name of your guitar hero here] @$$. I get pissed with this kind of posting and discussion because they finish in nothing, it's only discussion, etc... that don't change the most part of people minds, etc... And because I assume the most people don't have read the Martian Love Secrets. Its so annoying that people that loves Vai(in music way :mrgreen:) don't knows or read "the filosofy of the man".

But im not defending both sides. There are other kind of people that say stupid things like: "Don't make critics if you can't do better". It's a stupid thinking. As a "learning musician" we learn to judge the things that we don't like in intelligent way(for example: most people I know that are musicians don't like much Malmsteen because he always play the same thing in all of his songs(say Phrygians, Minors, Diminisheds, etc...). Or like a friend of mine says: "If you hear one Malmsteen song, you have heared all Malmsteen songs"). Or resuming(because it was a giant post :mrgreen:): "Compare, but have arguments(like this guy above that contests my opnion :mrgreen:).

See Ya!
User avatar
burnt out
Member
Member
Posts: 734
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2003 6:58 pm

most people I know that are musicians don't like much Malmsteen because he always play the same thing in all of his songs(say Phrygians, Minors, Diminisheds, etc...). Or like a friend of mine says: "If you hear one Malmsteen song, you have heared all Malmsteen songs").
Yeah but I want to slap those people.Malmsteen is speaking a very specific language.He has a very specific sound in mind and that's what he tries to get.That's his thing.He pretty much invented shred or Bach n' Roll.This spawned alot of imitators.Why? Because it's a cool sound.It's a specific sound.And to duplicate it you have to know the "specific" language of it.If you are playing traditional jazz or country then you are not speaking the right language to get that Bach n' Roll sound,lol.The language of what Yngwie is doing is far less repetative than the blues is but you never hear people saying that blues players just play the same few chords,arps and scales EVERYTIME.And if they did say it then I would want to slap them too.

You're friend simply doesn't know what he is talking about.The classical sounds of Malmsteen don't bother me.The excessive shredding of Malmsteen does not bother me.The only thing that really bothers me about Malmsteen is his taste for metal,not in the playing sense,but in the lyrical and vocal sense.His lyrics and his choice of vocalists has always bugged me.That's what really makes every song sound the same to me.His playing is killer.His band's playing is killer.If you listen to it closely enough then you would see that he has some awesome ideas and abilities and is a very good soloist,makes great riffs,and has some cool original technique ideas,has great vibrato,and writes some interesting melodies.I don't think people listen to this guy closely enough.Atleast not those who are willing to just dismiss him immediately.I've heard some very inspiring moments from Malmsteen so I don't know what the hell some of these people who bash him all the time are talking about.
j3
Member
Member
Posts: 314
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 3:43 am

Can't we all just agree to end this insane rant?
The thread started with a guy saying his friend said Zakk has better technique than Satriani. While both players have inspired millions and both players have distinct styles, clearly Zakk does not have superior technique to Joe Satriani.

Read that statement any way you want to.
Last edited by j3 on Sat Oct 01, 2005 7:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
burnt out
Member
Member
Posts: 734
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2003 6:58 pm

I'll end it.Satriani is better than Zakk at guitar,period.THE END.He's better at almost every aspect of music.SO WHAT! That's not to diminish Zakk in any way,it's just stating the truth.Zakk sure doesn't suck so just STFU about it already.
MR4Y
Member
Member
Posts: 423
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 12:58 pm

burnt out wrote:
most people I know that are musicians don't like much Malmsteen because he always play the same thing in all of his songs(say Phrygians, Minors, Diminisheds, etc...). Or like a friend of mine says: "If you hear one Malmsteen song, you have heared all Malmsteen songs").
Yeah but I want to slap those people.Malmsteen is speaking a very specific language.He has a very specific sound in mind and that's what he tries to get.That's his thing.He pretty much invented shred or Bach n' Roll.This spawned alot of imitators.Why? Because it's a cool sound.It's a specific sound.And to duplicate it you have to know the "specific" language of it.If you are playing traditional jazz or country then you are not speaking the right language to get that Bach n' Roll sound,lol.The language of what Yngwie is doing is far less repetative than the blues is but you never hear people saying that blues players just play the same few chords,arps and scales EVERYTIME.And if they did say it then I would want to slap them too.

You're friend simply doesn't know what he is talking about.The classical sounds of Malmsteen don't bother me.The excessive shredding of Malmsteen does not bother me.The only thing that really bothers me about Malmsteen is his taste for metal,not in the playing sense,but in the lyrical and vocal sense.His lyrics and his choice of vocalists has always bugged me.That's what really makes every song sound the same to me.His playing is killer.His band's playing is killer.If you listen to it closely enough then you would see that he has some awesome ideas and abilities and is a very good soloist,makes great riffs,and has some cool original technique ideas,has great vibrato,and writes some interesting melodies.I don't think people listen to this guy closely enough.Atleast not those who are willing to just dismiss him immediately.I've heard some very inspiring moments from Malmsteen so I don't know what the hell some of these people who bash him all the time are talking about.
Yeah, I want to slap some of these people too.:mrgreen: It's because of Malmsteen that I have revisited the classic/baroque music(again) and using this style to make my "baroque" kind of songs.(Or like a friend of mine sayed to me: "If you want to compose like Malmsteen, Is not hearing Malmsteen that you'll do this thing. You have to listen what he listen.")

Changing the subject(and entering into the topic subject). Both of him are technically good in your own area(Don't try to imagine Wylde playing that "Satch Style" progressions and some stuff. It become strange. The inverse situation always do the same thing). That's not mean that one cannot play the other song. Of course, Satch is more technical than Wylde, because if Wylde has the same technique of Satch, he probably will not play hevy metal or joining Ozzy Osbourne:mrgreen:. Wylde is prety good too. The schorching riffs that he play do the feeling of the ozzy songs(specially his ability of doing harmonics in 40% of the song :mrgreen: ). If you gonna compare Satch to Wylde, in the raw way(no specifying the subject), they are the same thing(talented guitar players) that can do more on this instrument than mere mortals like us :mrgreen: .
User avatar
burnt out
Member
Member
Posts: 734
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2003 6:58 pm

Yes exactly.You can't take anything away from Zakk.He's very much a badass at guitar. 8)
Locked