turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
The problem with post-Nirvana "grunge", or whatever you want to call it, is that most of those cats missed the point just as bad as the shredder types did. Kurt made good music DESPITE his limitations as a guitarist, NOT BECAUSE of them. A lot of guys thought that just because Kurt made worthwhile music without being a technical wizard, they could too...But the "musicianship", good or bad, was never the point of that stuff...it was the end result and the impact it had.
A lot of shitty bands used Kurt as a crutch and an excuse to play badly and never get better. Truth of the matter is, Kurt WAS getting better before his death. Guys that purposefully play badly are just as bad as guys who think it's all about playing technically well.
They both make the mistake of thinking that rock and roll is about how good (or bad) the guitarist is, which is a pretty narrow-minded way of looking at music.
Far as someone complaining that the Donnas' guitarist plays pentatonic licks at the 5th fret a lot....hey, so did Chuck Berry. It's about the attitude behind it.
Hell, truth of the matter is, that Tremonti cat is probably a technically better guitarist than Kurt (or Chuck, for that matter).Not that he's great or anything, but I digress... That doesn't mean his music's as good though.
The Bush/Creed/insert other crappy bands here that followed the success of Nirvana had the chops of Kurt mixed with the creativity of Winger. Worst of both worlds style corporate rock.
The Donnas, on the other hand, have something of value to offer, and the guitarist is plenty proficient, for what they're doing. She's probably not going to get hired to play for King Crimson or anything...then again, Robert Fripp wouldn't be the best match for the Ramones either. It's all about playing appropriately in the context..something cats like Chuck, Keef, Randy Rhoads, Fripp, Kurt, and the chick from the Donnas always have done. I don't put them all in the same category ability-wise, just in terms of fitting what they were/are doing.
There's room for everything. People that take the worst qualities of their influences rather than the best ones inevitably make bad music. The post-Kurt scene, in that sense, has been the way the post-Eddie scene was in the late 80's. All the chops, none of the inspiration. Corporate rock's always been that way...it just so happens that now we've got guys with Kurt-chops playing bad music, rather than the late 80's, when it was guys with Eddie chops playing bad music. It's still bad music either way...
Steve
p.s. The Donnas RAWK.
A lot of shitty bands used Kurt as a crutch and an excuse to play badly and never get better. Truth of the matter is, Kurt WAS getting better before his death. Guys that purposefully play badly are just as bad as guys who think it's all about playing technically well.
They both make the mistake of thinking that rock and roll is about how good (or bad) the guitarist is, which is a pretty narrow-minded way of looking at music.
Far as someone complaining that the Donnas' guitarist plays pentatonic licks at the 5th fret a lot....hey, so did Chuck Berry. It's about the attitude behind it.
Hell, truth of the matter is, that Tremonti cat is probably a technically better guitarist than Kurt (or Chuck, for that matter).Not that he's great or anything, but I digress... That doesn't mean his music's as good though.
The Bush/Creed/insert other crappy bands here that followed the success of Nirvana had the chops of Kurt mixed with the creativity of Winger. Worst of both worlds style corporate rock.
The Donnas, on the other hand, have something of value to offer, and the guitarist is plenty proficient, for what they're doing. She's probably not going to get hired to play for King Crimson or anything...then again, Robert Fripp wouldn't be the best match for the Ramones either. It's all about playing appropriately in the context..something cats like Chuck, Keef, Randy Rhoads, Fripp, Kurt, and the chick from the Donnas always have done. I don't put them all in the same category ability-wise, just in terms of fitting what they were/are doing.
There's room for everything. People that take the worst qualities of their influences rather than the best ones inevitably make bad music. The post-Kurt scene, in that sense, has been the way the post-Eddie scene was in the late 80's. All the chops, none of the inspiration. Corporate rock's always been that way...it just so happens that now we've got guys with Kurt-chops playing bad music, rather than the late 80's, when it was guys with Eddie chops playing bad music. It's still bad music either way...
Steve
p.s. The Donnas RAWK.
Originally Posted by mdog114
Originally posted by Dick Long
I'm optimistic, but I've seen only scant evidence of it happening. Perhaps the next crop of teens will relegate grunge to its rightful place in the trash bin of nearly forgotten music.
I do hope that it's never forgotten completely. I would suggest a special section (in a dank basement, of course) of the RRHOF devoted to grunge where visitors for many years can see/hear evidence of a generation who turned its back on the spirit of R&R and elevated anti-heroes to icon status. I think it is important for people to see this, lest they forget about it and possibly repeat it. As you would walk up the creaky stairs from grunge section, they should have a brightly lit wing with 20' statues of Guitar Gods: Hendrix, RR, SRV, Clapton, VH, YJM,.......etc. The visual and sonic impact of such a display would contrast so dramatically and would speak for itself.
Your list of Guitar Gods makes sense, with the exception of Yngwie, who is probably the most technically skilled of the lot. The "spirit of rock and roll" has never been about how good the guitarist is. Jimi, Randy, Stevie, Clapton, and Eddie all played in great bands with great tunes, and great music. Yngwie's always been more about the "guitar hero" status than the music, but he is a great player, don't get me wrong.
When you think about it, all these guys, with the exception of Yngwie, at some point made a move toward more song-oriented playing and less flash at some point.
Post-Cream Clapton, BOG-era Jimi (he got tired of the pyrotechnic flashy stuff and just wanted to stand and play toward the end)..Stevie did Family Style with Jimmy, who he ALWAYS said was a better player than he was, because of Jimmy's substance-over-flash mentality, which Stevie admittedly envied to some degree...Randy wanted to go in a more pure classical (read, LESS hero status) direction and was probably going to leave Ozzy's band anyway, reportedly. Eddie, for better or worse, tamed down the pyrotechnics when Sammy joined too.
Those guys all matured and saw the big picture. Music is what matters. Yngwie has never really seemed to get that. Flash is impressive for a while, but good music is what sustains a career.
Steve
Originally posted by Wes_Powell
All girl pop punk group. They ain't that bad for what they are.
That'd explain why I'd never heard of them!
Hey, I'm working with Take Two but I'm having a bit of a problem with G1 and G2's measures not matching up on the opposite pages.
But I still dig it.
-wp
They should at least have the same number of measures per page (in total), even if they don't line up perfectly line by line. (kinda tough when one part is doing quarters while the other is doing 16ths, etc).
If it gets to be too much of a problem, number all the measures manually. 
Originally posted by Wes_Powell
Not at all. I thought it was a great post.
-wp
Don't misunderstand me man (well, apparently you're not, but just in case someone else does...).
My post was in NO WAY meant as a reaction or a flame toward Wes. For that matter, I'm not sure that HelpI'maRock was pigeonholing Wes into a "camp" on this one either.
I was just commenting on corporate rock from ALL eras and abilities, not any particular genre.
Steve
I've also decided, from this point forward, to never again mention Yngwie. He's a tired example, and he's been demonized for his tastelessness as much as Kurt's been demonized for his lack of skill. Both examples are usually greatly exaggerrated.
Granted, I used Yngwie as an example in the last post (well...I was responding to someone that put him in what looked to me like a "one of these things is not like the other" list), but I'm going to try and refrain from even doing that anymore.
Hell, Yngwie's got more soul than Michael Angelo and that Petrelli (I think? maybe I'm thinking of someone else...) guy put together, for sure. Either of them would make a more worthwhile symbol and scapegoat.
Steve
Granted, I used Yngwie as an example in the last post (well...I was responding to someone that put him in what looked to me like a "one of these things is not like the other" list), but I'm going to try and refrain from even doing that anymore.
Hell, Yngwie's got more soul than Michael Angelo and that Petrelli (I think? maybe I'm thinking of someone else...) guy put together, for sure. Either of them would make a more worthwhile symbol and scapegoat.
Steve
Help Desk