Rock musicians vs. classically trained musicians

[stormin1155]

I just returned from the symphony. A friend of mine (who is also a pretty good guitar player) plays violin and invited us. Afterward I asked him his opinion of rock musicians vs. classically trained musicians. Are rock musicians as good of musicians as those who are classically trained?

 

Yes I know it's apples/oranges, but here is his answer. Classical music is a whole different discipline. Most successful classical musicians study and take lessons for years (he played and took lessons for 15 years before taking up electric guitar). Rock is more improvisational: classical is more confined. When you are talking about the top professional rock guitarists (Clapton, Ford, Carlton, etc), yes, they are very accomplished musicians. But most rock players aren't in the same league as classical musicians.

 

So what do you think? Truth or is he just being a snob?

 

(replys from people who have never seriously listened to classical music don't count)

[EADGBE]

I think both are talented. I also think it takes years to be a good rock guitarist. Classical musicians can't just pick up an electric guitar and play anything they want. They will have to learn just like anyone else. Although their training and discipline will probably give them an edge as far as learning how to play. And learning good technique. But sometimes when I'm listening to classical music I'll think to myself I want to listen to some music. And then I'll realize I'm already listening to music. Classical music just doesn't move me the same way as rock. In some ways rock music is more pure. It has drums. It has rhythm. It sometimes has screaming guitars. I admire classical musician's ability to read music. But rock musicians can learn to read music too. A lot of classical musicians have a hard time improvising. But for a lot of rock musicians this comes naturally.

[stewiesguitar]

i think that classical musicians have better technique but that is one of the main fundamentals in classical style.

 

rock does have the edge on improvisation but most of the time they lack in technique.

 

its very hard to compare the two style because of them being so different.

 

i would say compare jazz to classical and get a better face off.

[Brian May]

two opposite ends of the spectrum...but yeah rock are more improvisational and creative. But mostly we cant read a note (i'm generalising here!!) Classical musicians read well, understand music theory and can play well whats on the score. But they play old old cheesy music mostly.

[pewing33ny]

there is plenty of improvisation in classical music, i have no idea why you think there isn't.

[roners5]

well this is tough to compare not only because of the nature of the music, but also the fact that "classically trained" violinists etc which are of the caliber to be playing in the symphony are generally masters of their instrument. Most rock guitarists are not; however, as mentioned, if you make a more fair comparison with accomplished jazz guitarists, I think they are on par with the classical guys.

 

Songwriting ability is also a completely different element that makes a big difference, depending upon what your definition of a "musician" is.

[stormin1155]

 

i think that classical musicians have better technique but that is one of the main fundamentals in classical style.

 

 

 

Yes, that's one thing I really noticed.... there were what?...15 or 20 violins? They were moving their bows up and down and vibratoing (is that a word?)PRECISELY in unison. Classical music is so precise.... by comparison rock is quite messy. But perhaps the rawness of it is part of it's appeal.

[Kind of Blued]

Most "rock musicians" aren't musicians at all, in my opinion.

[stormin1155]

 

there is plenty of improvisation in classical music, i have no idea why you think there isn't.

 

 

True, particularly when featuring a soloist. At today's concert, however, if there was any improvisation, I didn't detect it. They were all reading off their sheets and each violinist was playing exactly what the one next to him/her was. On a whole I think it's safe to say that there is far more improvisation in rock (or jazz) than there is in classical.

[sfarfsky]

Generally speaking if he can't improvise he sucks and if he doesn't know basic theory he sucks. Most guitarists I come across have chops, ears, and technique.

 

I would not be surprised if the average guitarist knows little compared to other instrumentalists since its the new fad. Vocalists are probably the worst as far as versatility and theory though

 

This is all speculation though

[gasolinefight]

I'll give classical musician's all the props in the world for doing what they do. and yes, as some have said here, their technique is impeccable.

 

BUT.............................

 

Some of the greatest rock songs ever written wouldn't be the same with fantastic technique, each style is unique. Would sleazy southern blues played just a touch behind the beat even exist?

 

A friend of mine went to school for jazz improv drumming, and he is a fantastic drummer, but we can't talk about music because as soon as I say that I'm going to tune my guitar to open G for some slide tunes, he retorts with "down tuning or playing anything that's not in standard tuning is just cheating and the sign of a lazy musician." (hence I really don't talk with him anymore)

 

All styles are different, the one beautiful thing about music is that it's free and open to interpretation. If Neil Young feels that one note constitutes a solo, then one note constitutes a solo. If EVH wants to tap from here to kalamazoo, then so be it. There are no rules in music, only suggestions.

[PunkKitty]

I studied classical guitar for about 5 years. It's a totally different instrument. It's very disciplined. And it really doesn't translate to blues, jazz or rock well. Yes, it does translate to some forms of rock and metal well, but not the stuff that I like to play. It's just different. It really polished my technique but it stifled my improvisation skills. 20+ years later, I still don't improvise well. But my finger picking is down to a science. And I still have very clean technique. I cringe at the thought of using my thumb on the low E for example. But I have a solid knowledge of theory.

[ihavenofish]

my brothers ex gf was a concert pianist. one day i was at their house and i asked her to play something. she read the music and played. asked her if she could play a certain song, and she said she could only play what was on the pages.

 

my take is that classical players for the most part are robots. they are technically proficient and working an instrument and have absolutely no musical skills. they rely on someone else to create music and simple play it back exactly how the composer expects.

 

good rock (and other genre) musicians are likely to have little to no technical skill and 1000 times the musical ability.

 

theres exceptions on both sides of course, with rock robots and gifted classical musicians. these are the ones that dont usually last in their respective genres though. every once in a while you get someone who defies all this, but its a rare occurence.

[prolog]

Apples and oranges.

 

When I started on electric, I couldn't improvise, couldn't pick out pieces by ear, and do all the stuff that good rock musicians take for granted.

 

However, years of classical training have taught me to read music well, sight-read difficult music, and have instilled really excellent practice habits. It's easy for classical musicians to write off rock musicians as power-chord-slamming neanderthals, and vice-versa as elitist, uncreative snobs who simply read notes on a page. But to do so is to really ignore the essence of both styles of music.

[SteinbergerHack]

my take is that classical players for the most part are robots. they are technically proficient and working an instrument and have absolutely no musical skills.

 

 

Not the best of them. Who do you think writes the stuff that they play? Not all "classical" groups are cover-only.....

[ihavenofish]

Not the best of them. Who do you think writes the stuff that they play? Not all "classical" groups are cover-only.....

 

even the ones that arent cover only tend to be populated mostly by robots.

 

its a sweeping generalisation of course - which is the point.

[prolog]

I cringe at the thought of using my thumb on the low E for example.

 

I used to, but I do it all the time for muting, or playing notes. When I switch back and play classical, the thumb goes back under the neck.

[KoaFreak]

From a technical standpoint, most classical players can make most rock players look foolish.

 

But then again, most classical players follow their sheet music strictly and create little if anything, not to mention no improv. That makes them robots, not artists.

[bdegrande]

I played keyboard for many years before taking up guitar, including a lot of classical music, I can sight read, know theory, etc.

 

I am by no means a very good guitarist yet, but the more I played music the more I became convinced that I would rather punch a clock than play somebody else's music note for note.

[The Beatles27]

it's too apples to oranges, jazz and classical are closer because both take extensive music theory knowledge (yes there are a few exceptions like Wes Montgomery) however jazz requires improv skills that classical musicians can't always do

[EADGBE]

Most "rock musicians" aren't musicians at all, in my opinion.

In your opinion what are they?

[prolog]

From a technical standpoint, most classical players can make most rock players look foolish. But then again, most classical players follow their sheet music strictly and create little if anything, not to mention no improv. That makes them robots, not artists.

 

No. Unless interpretation counts for nothing.

[EllenGtrGrl]

IMO, as was mentioned earlier, this is an apples and oranges thing. I'm saying this from personal experience. I've been playing guitar (mainly rock, with tho occasional jazz thing here and there) for the past 31 years. I also played classical music for about 10 years (I played euphonium in symphonic bands, up through my sophomore year of college [i even played in the college symphony band]). There are pluses and minuses to both. Here's what I mean:

 

1. Music theory - most rock guitarists don't have much formal music training. Classically trained musicians have it by the boatload. I think to this day, that my classical training helped me immensely with regards to note placement on the fretboard, ear training, and melodic playing. But, there is a proviso to the above - most classically trained musicians have very little exposure or trraining in music that doesn't employ major (and to a lesser extent minor) scales, such as the pentatonic, or modal scale based stuff (Dorian. Phrygian, etc.) that's often used in rock music.

 

2. Talent - IMO this is sort of a draw. I knew more than a few formally trained classical musicians who were basically just hacks. While they knew what notes had to be played, they couldn't play some parts, in spite of years of formal training. As a result, they were never first chair material. While there are plenty of rock guitarists who are hacks, there are also some who are immensely talented, in spite of never having any formal training. Two of them that immediately come to mind are Jimi Hendrix, and Billy Gibbons. BUT, as I mentioned above, formal training, like classical musicians get, can help you to tap into what talent you have on guitar, at a faster pace, than if you're self-taught, or "learning it off of the street."

 

3. Creativity - IMO rock guitarists usually win this race.

 

a. Improvisation - classical music very seldom has any parts in it that call for improvisation. In general, improvisation is frowned upon in classical music. You are EXPECTED to stick to the written music that's on the stand in front of you. The most deviation you are allowed, is how you "interpret" it (basically your phrasing - volume choice, and the way you accent the notes you are playing). Even then, your performance needs to sound the way, the classical music movers and shakers say, is acceptable for the piece to sound. So all of you wannabe classical musicians, who hope you can do a cover of a song, and make it deviate as wildly from the original piece as say, Van Halen's version of the Linda Ronstadt song, "Baby You're No Good", The Who's version of "Young Man Blues", or Blue Cheer's version of "Summertime Blues", can forget about doing so. It's just plain not allowed in classical music. As it is, some classically trained musicians, just can't seem to improvise. The trumpet playing husband of a friend of mine comes to mind. The guy plays in numerous civic bands, but can't improvise a solo, or short lead part to save his life. If it isn't on sheet music, he has no idea what to play.

 

b. Composing songs - "real" classical musicians of any note don't write music. It takes time and energy away from honing their skills as performers and interpreters of music. Can you find any instance of when somebody like Yo Yo Ma, or Itzak Perlman played a piece they wrote? No. This also holds true, for most classical guitarists (10-string classical guitarists occasionally write their own tunes, since there seems to be a scarcity of solo pieces that work on 10-string classical guitar). Andres Segovia, never wrote a song in his life. As a matter of fact, he was at a party in the 30s, where he saw Django Reinhardt ripping it up on guitar. Andres thought the music sounded so cool, that he wanted to play it, and asked Django, what the name of the song was, and where he could get the music for it. Django laughed and told him that basically he couldn't get the music for what had just been played, because he (Django) had just improvised it! In general, if a dyed-in-the-wool classical musician wants a new song to play, if it isn't already available in print, he or she is out of luck, or they have to commission someone to write it for them.

 

By contrast, while there are many rock guitarists who are caught up in just playing the same old classic rock songs, or "white boy does the blues(rock)" rut, many of them write their own tunes, or try to play something in a markedly different way, than it was originally written.

 

In a nutshell, both classical and rock music have their good and bad points.

[Grazzhoppa]

im taking classical guitar at indiana university right now. my instructor is getting his doctorate in guitar and he is classically trained. and yeah the only person that can play better than him that ive actually seen live is his teacher. seriously they are wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy better than any rock guitarists. and not only can they play classical but also rock, blues, and pop...whatever they want to basically. honestly you can tell playing a rock song is like a joke to him, hes just that good.

[Grazzhoppa]

and i really dont know why you guys think classical music doesnt have improvisation....