Members DaveAronow Posted April 19, 2013 Members Share Posted April 19, 2013 Would you rather play something so completely musically awesome that it would cause agles to weep if it werent for the fact that it also tonally sounds like gas escaping from bloated roadkill after being "popped" with a sharpened stick, Or would you rather play something so ridiculously infintile, unimaginative and non musical that it causes birds in flight to freeze in midair as they stop and stare in disbelief, BUT that also happens to be the sweetest tone ever heard by human ears? Which is more important to you? Tone, or content? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jkater Posted April 19, 2013 Members Share Posted April 19, 2013 Great question! and well formulated. lolWell, I'd rather deliver content over tone. And once I'd achieved that and the condition about being allowed only one is over, I would run with a middle size big wallet to the store and buy decent gear so I have both! Good gear cost a few bucks, good content costs a lifetime of practice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members kayd_mon Posted April 19, 2013 Members Share Posted April 19, 2013 Tough question... I'll take content. It would be like listening to a great song on a {censored}ty radio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members GreatDane Posted April 19, 2013 Members Share Posted April 19, 2013 For me its always about the content. No one will remember that it sounded weak or sub par tone wise and honestly 99% (non-scientific; meant directionally to underscore a point) of listeners are going to be oblivious to the tonal quality or in a situation where quality is inherently compromised (live show, iPod, laptop speakers, {censored}ty car stereo...). And here's another thing: the people who can create beautiful content generally have enough control over their instrument that it makes the OP a false contrast. Tell the story as beautifully as you can musically and I am sure that's all you'll ever need. Its why I believe guitarists should play instruments that inspire them to play (at any price point). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BydoEmpire Posted April 19, 2013 Members Share Posted April 19, 2013 I don't think you can really separate the two completely, but given the choice I'd rather play great music with bad sound than bad music any day of the week. Content. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members genesis3 Posted April 19, 2013 Members Share Posted April 19, 2013 sounds like you could only ask that question as a listener, which sorta makes it unanswerable....not too many doods setting out to deliberately play or sound like {censored} lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members GilmourD Posted April 19, 2013 Members Share Posted April 19, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Fiveway Posted April 19, 2013 Members Share Posted April 19, 2013 ...a hundred duck-sized horses, for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members soundcreation Posted April 20, 2013 Members Share Posted April 20, 2013 I'd just quit. Basically I refuse to take part in this "hypothetical". Both would {censored}ing suck. I'm not interested in hearing an "amazing piece" that hurts my ears cause the tone is so {censored}ing terrible.Like this for example... As usual Joe's playing is fantastic but the {censored}ing absolute {censored} sqweeeelly sound of that guitar and amp are an embarrasement to that song. I can't sit through more than 5 seconds of that. At the same time I'm also not interested in the least in listening to or playing something, that in my opinion, is melodically {censored}, but sounds amazing. It's just as destructive to my ears. So yeah....I'd rather just go watch a great movie or do something more constructive with my time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members photon9 Posted April 20, 2013 Members Share Posted April 20, 2013 Content. Good content trumps bad tone. See Zappa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members WoodenDuckMaker Posted April 20, 2013 Members Share Posted April 20, 2013 Writing great guitar parts trumps all. This is why guitarists like Kurt Cobain and Jack White will be remembered in a hundred years from now, and guitarists like Steve Vai and Yngwie Malmsteem will be little more than a footnote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members beach bum Posted April 20, 2013 Members Share Posted April 20, 2013 For me it's all about the content i've allways been able to get something pleasing from even the most {censored}ty guitars and amps. The key is to exploit the tone if you give me a {censored}ty cheap piece of plywood with nasty pickups and a crappy no name practice amp I'll play single note riffs on the low strings. And maybe go for middle eastern sounding scales and exploit that nasty buzzy sound rather than try to play creamy pentatonic blues rock licks that will sound {censored} with that tone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Alecto Posted April 20, 2013 Members Share Posted April 20, 2013 Content. You can always buy gear; you can't buy talent.Besides, if you're good enough, more knowledgeable people will take you in-hand, much like how Cesar Diaz dealt with Stevie Ray Vaughan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members The Burninator Posted April 20, 2013 Members Share Posted April 20, 2013 DaveAronow wrote: Would you rather play something so completely musically awesome that it would cause agles to weep if it werent for the fact that it also tonally sounds like gas escaping from bloated roadkill after being "popped" with a sharpened stick, Or would you rather play something so ridiculously infintile, unimaginative and non musical that it causes birds in flight to freeze in midair as they stop and stare in disbelief, BUT that also happens to be the sweetest tone ever heard by human ears? Which is more important to you? Tone, or content? "sounds like gas escaping from bloated roadkill after being "popped" with a sharpened stick" - that's not necessarily a bad thing."play something so ridiculously infintile" - also not necessarily a bad thing. I guess going too far either way will suck.I personaly don't think the guitar sound on Blizzard of Ozz is all that, but Randy Rhoads sounds GREAT there because he was an awsome guitarist playing awsome riffs and solos in awsome songs.Dime's sound on Cowboys from Hell - I guess it grew on me, but the guitar sound is not what I'd describe as my dream tone. That said - I'd play with a half-assed version of that sound if I could play as awsome as that album is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BeanoBoy Posted April 21, 2013 Members Share Posted April 21, 2013 It's impossible for me to make any musical statement if my tone sounds bad to me. It's got to inspire me, then I can try to create. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DaveAronow Posted April 21, 2013 Author Members Share Posted April 21, 2013 Me? I like sweet tones as much ad the next guy. Problem with me, is I think ALL tones are sweet in the hands of a master that can manipulate them in an artistic, creative and musical way. I see tones as colors on an artists pallate There may be more appropriate colors for a specific painting an artist has planned to paint than others, so he is going to choose colors appropriate in order to artistically express what it is he is trying to express. Obviously there will be colors that wouldnt really work and could even ruin the picture if they were used in that specific painting. So are these "{censored}" colors, to be avoided at all costs? Hell no! They can be aeesome colors used in a different context that are more appropriate for them. That same artist might take the very colors he avoided from the painting in the first example, but now tell him he has to paint a second painting using only the rejected colors from the first, but also tell him he can use them to paint any picture he can imagine. Well, a good artist is going to take those "{censored}" colors and blow your mind with them. That's what he does. That is why he is called an artist and not a painter. The same thing can be said for musical tones. Some might . More appropriate for specific situations, but in the hands of a master, all tones or sounds on Earth become potentially great if they fall in the hands of someone that knows how to set them in the right context. As an example, give a really great guitarist a crappy guitar andcs {censored}ty amp, and he will soon figure out a musical context in which to make those tools sound good. He is an artist. He is "playing" the tools given him. The tools aren't playing him, or controlling him, which is what happenscto so many people that get locked in to a rigid tunnel vision ed way of thinking. So with this attitude, and in the right context, ALL tones are fair game. But for me, personally, music will always be more about content. Tones are just tge tools, or the "paint". Music and musical content are the "art" that is created with those tools. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gardo Posted April 21, 2013 Members Share Posted April 21, 2013 To some standards I do play like shat. So what I'm having fun with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members PrawnHeed Posted April 21, 2013 Members Share Posted April 21, 2013 False dichotomy. I can do both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.