Shawn Lane Really Does Suck
Nobody
Jack A. Zucker
Are you trolling or serious about this?
Shawn Lane is one of the best guitarists I've ever heard. He's one of the
few cats who could hang with Holdsworth, Vai and Gambale in terms of
musicality, technique, etc.
His playing is so good it's mind-boggling. What have you heard of him? Have
you heard any of the recordings he's done with Hellborg or the earlier, self
produced CD where he plays all the instruments?!?
Seriously, the dude could probably sit in with anyone, playing any genre and
come away with respect.
Jaz
"Nobody" <NobodyU...@DELETEaol.com> wrote in message
news:01c38044$a9cfb880$79c4...@715162529worldnet.att.net...
NJD
@news2.news.adelphia.net>, j...@jackzucker.com says...
> Jason,
>
> Are you trolling or serious about this? <snip>
He was kidding, Jack.
--
Nick
"There are not more than five musical notes, yet the
combinations of these five give rise to more melodies
than can ever be heard." -- Sun Tzu
http://www.ironia.net My last band
Nobody
NJD <n...@NIXSPAAMcultv.com> wrote in article <MPG.19d8bd9ef...@news.optonline.net>...
> In article <qdBbb.1359$qK1.1473011
> @news2.news.adelphia.net>, j...@jackzucker.com says...
> > Jason,
> >
> > Are you trolling or serious about this? <snip>
>
> He was kidding, Jack.
Aye.
Nobody
Atlas <c1su...@hotmail.comNOSPAM> wrote in article <rqvtmvs1607ukhnq3...@4ax.com>...
>Yep, he's trolling. Polfus
Ooops...there you go again doing that thing you do.
Jack A. Zucker
news:MPG.19d8bd9ef...@news.optonline.net...
> In article <qdBbb.1359$qK1.1473011
> @news2.news.adelphia.net>, j...@jackzucker.com says...
> > Jason,
> >
> > Are you trolling or serious about this? <snip>
>
> He was kidding, Jack.
Regardless,
He should realize that Shawn Lane may read this post or someone may tell him
about it. Something like that is hurtful to a cat who's put so much of his
life into woodshedding.
I made a negative comment about a certain guitarist a few years back and
when the guy came to town, he asked folks if they knew me and that he was
"lookin' for me! My comment wasn't anything like this one, either...
Be careful what you say about guys in these groups! :-)
Jaz
NJD
@news2.news.adelphia.net>, j...@jackzucker.com says...
> Be careful what you say about guys in these groups! :-)
Well I certainly agree with that. In fact, I don't
think it's wise to ever criticize other musicians unless
they're doing something really unethical.
Believe it or not, but I think Jason was actually paying
Lane a compliment by picking him as representative of
someone whose playing he perceives to be unassailable.
I think that was his tongue-in-cheek point anyway.
Could be wrong.
Don't forget to bring a TOWEL!
> Believe it or not, but I think Jason was actually paying
> Lane a compliment by picking him as representative of
> someone whose playing he perceives to be unassailable.
> I think that was his tongue-in-cheek point anyway.
I thought he was just lonely, again. "How's your
rash, RMMG?"
> Could be wrong.
Me too! BYE!
--
Toucan, four can
Hey man jam / the Tou-Wang Clan
Reply to me @ tou...@mailblocks.com
www.usaidit.org or www.YouSaidit.org
Nobody
Jack A. Zucker <j...@jackzucker.com> wrote in article <_WIbb.1452$qK1.1...@news2.news.adelphia.net>...
Noted....pardon moi.
Nobody
NJD <n...@NIXSPAAMcultv.com> wrote in article <MPG.19d92d5ed...@news.optonline.net>...
> In article <_WIbb.1452$qK1.1574543
> @news2.news.adelphia.net>, j...@jackzucker.com says...
> > Be careful what you say about guys in these groups! :-)
>
> Well I certainly agree with that. In fact, I don't
> think it's wise to ever criticize other musicians unless
> they're doing something really unethical.
>
> Believe it or not, but I think Jason was actually paying
> Lane a compliment by picking him as representative of
> someone whose playing he perceives to be unassailable.
> I think that was his tongue-in-cheek point anyway.
>
> Could be wrong.
>
> --
> Nick
It is absurd that I could even believe Shawn Lane would be terrible!
John Verkuilen
>Wow...thought he was good, but not really...what's the big deal, eh?
My killfilter ain't picking up the troll no more again. Go back under your
bridge and eat shit.
Jay
Robert Barker
news:h1Ybb.3342$u96....@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu...
Keeping in mind that the comment from 'Nobody' (and I couldn't have picked a
better name for him if I'd tried...) comes from somebody who can't play
worth a shit, helps to put it all in perspective...If Mr. 'Nobody' put all
the time he spends here looking for imaginary 'insults', in inane gear
'discussions', or 'defending' his (mediocre) guitar 'heroes', into focused
'practice' he might be rather good, in a few more years...but, I don't see
that happening...He's basically an attention-seeking jerk-off who happens to
own a guitar...bottom line. ;+)
NJD
rwba...@spambegonecox.net says...
1) Jimmy Page was NOT a mediocre player.
2) He was kidding. It was sarcasm.
Lighten up guys.
Robert Barker
> In article <Y8Zbb.5098$KJ4....@news1.central.cox.net>,
> rwba...@spambegonecox.net says...
> > "John Verkuilen" <ja...@s.psych.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
> > news:h1Ybb.3342$u96....@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu...
> > > "Nobody" <NobodyU...@DELETEaol.com> writes:
> > >
> > > >Wow...thought he was good, but not really...what's the big deal, eh?
> > >
> > > My killfilter ain't picking up the troll no more again. Go back under
> > your
> > > bridge and eat shit.
> > >
> > > Jay
> >
> > Keeping in mind that the comment from 'Nobody' (and I couldn't have
picked a
> > better name for him if I'd tried...) comes from somebody who can't play
> > worth a shit, helps to put it all in perspective...If Mr. 'Nobody' put
all
> > the time he spends here looking for imaginary 'insults', in inane gear
> > 'discussions', or 'defending' his (mediocre) guitar 'heroes', into
focused
> > 'practice' he might be rather good, in a few more years...but, I don't
see
> > that happening...He's basically an attention-seeking jerk-off who
happens to
> > own a guitar...bottom line. ;+)
>
> 1) Jimmy Page was NOT a mediocre player.
I think he was / is. So, obviously, we disagree on that point. So it goes.
>
> 2) He was kidding. It was sarcasm.
>
> Lighten up guys.
Give Polfus a break, huh? Like he gives other people? No thanks. He doesn't
deserve one.
Jack A. Zucker
news:Y8Zbb.5098$KJ4....@news1.central.cox.net...
> that happening...He's basically an attention-seeking jerk-off who happens
to
> own a guitar...bottom line. ;+)
How's that any different from anyone else on here? :-)
NJD
rwba...@spambegonecox.net says...
> > 1) Jimmy Page was NOT a mediocre player.
>
> I think he was / is. So, obviously, we disagree on that point. So it goes.
Saying that Page was a mediocre player is beyond
ridiculous. It's insane and just plain wrong. He was
an awesome musician and artist -- one of the most
influential guitarists ever.
Anyone who seriously thinks he was mediocre is missing
something very big.
I can understand that though. For about 25 years, I
thought the Rolling Stones were just awful. I now
realize I was sadly mistaken and had, in fact, lost the
forest for the trees in my assessment.
I'm still not a Stones fan. However, I do now recognize
that they were an incredible band and that Richards was
a great and important musician.
> >
> > 2) He was kidding. It was sarcasm.
> >
> > Lighten up guys.
>
> Give Polfus a break, huh? Like he gives other people? No thanks. He doesn't
> deserve one.
Apparently there's a history of animosity here of which
I was previously unaware.
I understood his sarcasm immediately and agree that
saying Page was mediocre is as ridiculous as saying
Shawn Lane isn't any good. I mean come on.
Robert Barker
"howldog" <howldogAINT...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:6ns0nv4cdris4j5ua...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 15:25:40 GMT, NJD <n...@NIXSPAAMcultv.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >2) He was kidding. It was sarcasm.
> >
> >Lighten up guys.
>
>
>
>
Heh. You nailed it. ;+)
NJD
howldogAINT...@yahoo.com says...
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 15:25:40 GMT, NJD <n...@NIXSPAAMcultv.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >
> >Lighten up guys.
>
>
>
I'm unaware of the history. I'm pretty selective in the
threads I read. I kill threads as soon as the flaming
starts usually.
Robert Barker
> In article <13_bb.5109$KJ4...@news1.central.cox.net>,
> rwba...@spambegonecox.net says...
> > > 1) Jimmy Page was NOT a mediocre player.
> >
> > I think he was / is. So, obviously, we disagree on that point. So it
goes.
>
> Saying that Page was a mediocre player is beyond
> ridiculous. It's insane and just plain wrong. He was
> an awesome musician and artist -- one of the most
> influential guitarists ever.
Nick, I certainly don't wamt to fight with you. But, I didn't label *your*
opnion as *insane*, now did I? Note that IMO, 'influential and artistic' !=
technical ability / proficiency. Neither does /////TONE\\\\\, or in some
peoples eyes, Billy Gibbons would be King of the World. I think Page was /
is a good player, so perhaps I should have stated it that way. Be that as
it may, I don't think he's a monster guitarist, in any sense of the word,
regardless of how 'influential' he was. We could argue this until the cows
come home, but, you're not likely to change your mind, and neither am I. So,
let's drop it, shall we?
>
> Anyone who seriously thinks he was mediocre is missing
> something very big.
>
> I can understand that though. For about 25 years, I
> thought the Rolling Stones were just awful. I now
> realize I was sadly mistaken and had, in fact, lost the
> forest for the trees in my assessment.
A good example of what I meant, actually. The Stones are a classic case,
IMO, of the *band* being greater than the sum of it's parts.
>
> I'm still not a Stones fan. However, I do now recognize
> that they were an incredible band and that Richards was
> a great and important musician.
In the context of the *band*, I would agree with that.
>
> > >
> > > 2) He was kidding. It was sarcasm.
> > >
> > > Lighten up guys.
> >
> > Give Polfus a break, huh? Like he gives other people? No thanks. He
doesn't
> > deserve one.
>
> Apparently there's a history of animosity here of which
> I was previously unaware.
Yeah. There is. I'd be lying if I denied it. For the record, I can't stand
the MF'er. But, it's not limited to just me, Nick.
>
> I understood his sarcasm immediately and agree that
> saying Page was mediocre is as ridiculous as saying
> Shawn Lane isn't any good. I mean come on.
Ok, he's a good guitarist, if that makes you happy. Technically speaking,
and 'artistic influence' aside, though, I stand by my comment.
Nobody
John Verkuilen <ja...@s.psych.uiuc.edu> wrote in article <h1Ybb.3342$u96....@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>...
> My
Go fuck yourself, Jay...and then shut up with your bitching.
--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs
Nobody
NJD <n...@NIXSPAAMcultv.com> wrote in article <MPG.19da3002f...@news.optonline.net>...
> 1) Jimmy Page was NOT a mediocre player.
>
> 2) He was kidding. It was sarcasm.
>
> Lighten up guys.
>
> --
> Nick
They can't, Nick.
Nobody
Jack A. Zucker <j...@jackzucker.com> wrote in article <SI_bb.1618$qK1.1...@news2.news.adelphia.net>...
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Nobody
NJD <n...@NIXSPAAMcultv.com> wrote in article <MPG.19da440ef...@news.optonline.net>...
Excellent post.
Nobody
Robert Barker <rwba...@spambegonecox.net> wrote in article <B4%bb.5186$KJ4....@news1.central.cox.net>...
> Yeah. There is. I'd be lying if I denied it. For the record, I can't stand
> the MF'er. But, it's not limited to just me, Nick.
People that hate me are usually assholes, and I always fight against scum like you.
Don Evans
"Jack A. Zucker" <j...@jackzucker.com> wrote in message
news:SI_bb.1618$qK1.1...@news2.news.adelphia.net...
Some of us are information-seeking jerk-offs. :-)
Don
Robert Barker
sucking Jacks dick? How? Whatever, Polly.....
Jack A. Zucker
news:9O%bb.5290$KJ4....@news1.central.cox.net...
> How, exactly? By changing your screen name every couple months? LOL!! By
> sucking Jacks dick? How? Whatever, Polly.....
OK Mr. Kettle...
Nobody
Robert Barker <rwba...@spambegonecox.net> wrote in article <9O%bb.5290$KJ4....@news1.central.cox.net>...
> People that hate me are usually assholes, and I always fight against scum like you.
> >
> > --
> > Jason
> > http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs
> >
> How, exactly? By changing your screen name every couple months? LOL!! By
> sucking Jacks dick? How? Whatever, Polly.....
Thank you for proving my point.
--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs
NJD
rwba...@spambegonecox.net says...
> Ok, he's a good guitarist, if that makes you happy. Technically speaking,
> and 'artistic influence' aside, though, I stand by my comment.
I took lessons from a guy for a while who, from a
strictly technical point of view, had some of the most
incredible chops I have ever heard. He was inhumanly
fast -- like Lane.
He was a jazz player, but also kicked ass playing blues.
Anyway, he had an enormous influence on me. What amazed
me was that he really didn't think much of most of the
shredder players out there and you certainly couldn't
accuse him of sour grapes because he was about as fast
and clean as they come.
Let's put it this way: He could have gone on stage with
Shawn Lane and not have had to worry about being smoked.
The guy had some friggin' chops and could have held his
own with anyone on the planet.
Anyway, I asked once whom he thought the greatest
guitarists of all time were and his answer really
surprised me because his list included Chuck Berry and
Keith Richards.
Taken aback, I asked him about some of the more jaw-
dropping shredders (I'd rather not name them here). And
he said, "let me tell you something, most of those guys
are really pretty crappy players."
He then said, "it all depends on what you mean by
'great.'"
That all made me realize that technique is part of the
means, not the end. It's just a tool. Some people have
piles of technique and never achieve greatness as a
player IMHO. Others have much less facility, but get
there anyway.
It's not about technique IMHO.
My teacher, BTW, thought Page was a really great player.
I asked him.
Dan Stanley
"Robert Barker" <rwba...@spambegonecox.net> wrote in message
news:Y8Zbb.5098$KJ4....@news1.central.cox.net...
"Nobody"s least favorite person du jour ( du millennia, probably), Atlas,
happens to like Shawn Lane a whole lot.
So, "Nobody" ( if that is his real name) ( it's not) ( my people call him
'Polfus'), just as part of doing that thing he does, just *hadda* write that
new header, "Shawn Lane Really Does Suck". And he ( Polfus, I mean) really
meant it.
BUT, then JAZ said he liked Shawn Lane. That puts Polfus ( which is not his
real name, but it is who he is) in an awkward spot, because he ( Polfus, I
mean) feels some sort of pathological need to agree with JAZ ( which to him
[ "him" being, of course, Polfus] is the same thing as getting JAZ to agree
with him, which is a very weird aspect of that thing Polfus does).
So then, Polfus ( which, we've established, is who he is) has to do this
awkward sort of backpedaling thing, saying he was obviously joking, tongue
in cheek and all. Although we all know that that sort of thing ( tongue in
cheek type humor, I mean) isn't the sort of thing Polfus is capable of.
So, to sum up, Polfus REALLY didn't like Shawn Lane, whether or not he ever
heard him, simply because Atlas DOES, but then, because JAZ DOES, Polfus
DOES too, and will probably crow in a few months about "turning JAZ on to
Shawn Lane" is this kinda fashion:
"HAHAHA! Good one! And I'm glad to see you took my advice indeed about Shawn
Lane! Damn, son, he can play that guitar! How's your neck!"
It's tough being Polfus. I'm glad I'm not.
Dan
Dan Stanley
"Jack A. Zucker" <j...@jackzucker.com> wrote in message
news:SI_bb.1618$qK1.1...@news2.news.adelphia.net...
Most of aren't wearing pants.
Dan
Dan Stanley
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 17:40:32 GMT, "Nobody"
> <NobodyU...@DELETEaol.com> wrote:
>
>
> >People that hate me are usually assholes,
>
>
>
>
> >and I always fight against scum like you.
>
>
> HEAL!
You guys might be laughing, but I've *seen* Howldog's awesome cosmic power.
He can hold back the mighty waters! I've SEEN it, ma-an!
Dan
Dan Stanley
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 15:25:40 GMT, NJD <n...@NIXSPAAMcultv.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >
> >Lighten up guys.
>
>
>
>
HAHAHA! GOod one! Shit, son, that is some damn funny stuff, indeed!
How's your neck?
Dan
Don't forget to bring a TOWEL!
> My teacher, BTW, thought Page was a really great player.
> I asked him.
And then you shitcanned him...?
--
Toucan
Be heard. Spread the word.
www.usaidit.org or www.YouSaidit.org
NJD
tousc...@com-diddley-castaway.net says...
> "NJD" <n...@NIXSPAAMcultv.com> wrote
>
> > My teacher, BTW, thought Page was a really great player.
> > I asked him.
>
> And then you shitcanned him...?
Shitcan the best all around player I've ever heard? I
don't think so.
I listened and thought, "yes master."
NJD
c1su...@hotmail.comNOSPAM says...
> Shawn Lane has some of the baddest chops of anyone in the
> world. But it's the insane amount of musical depth that goes behind
> the chops which is what impresses me. The guy's got knowledge that
> easily rivals or exceeds that of a Ph.D musicologist.
Lane was one of the few shredders my teacher liked.
>
> >My teacher, BTW, thought Page was a really great player.
> >I asked him.
>
> Good for your teacher.
Page was a great player. Anyone who doesn't think so is
seriously confused. That's *my* opinion.
Dan Stanley
"Atlas" <c1su...@hotmail.comNOSPAM> wrote in message
news:3jc1nvopjgec1osdr...@4ax.com...
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 19:26:47 GMT, "Dan Stanley" <vze2...@verizon.net>
> wrote:
>
> >You guys might be laughing, but I've *seen* Howldog's awesome cosmic
power.
> >He can hold back the mighty waters! I've SEEN it, ma-an!
>
> seal?
>
Not only that, he drink it without barking like a seal.
Dan
Dan Stanley
"Atlas" <c1su...@hotmail.comNOSPAM> wrote in message
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 19:26:47 GMT, "Dan Stanley" <vze2...@verizon.net>
> wrote:
>
> >How's your neck?
>
We could put you on damn wheels and roll you around! Thanks for taking my
advice! Email me right back, so I know you read this email!
Dan
Richard
> The one and only, all-seeing and all-knowing, Danley "Dan" Stanley
Nice "Eye of Mordor" content.
--
Clark '04.
Dan Stanley
"Richard" <rh...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.19da80d19...@news.verizon.net...
> toneg...@see-sig.invalid wrote...
> > The one and only, all-seeing and all-knowing, Danley "Dan" Stanley
>
> Nice "Eye of Mordor" content.
I'm not TOTALLY evil. In fact, I'm really quite a nice fellow, once you get
to know me.
Here, have this palantir, and a lovely ring. I give them to all my friends.
I'll be in touch.
Dan
NJD
c1su...@hotmail.comNOSPAM says...
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 20:01:37 GMT, NJD <n...@NIXSPAAMcultv.com> wrote:
>
> >Lane was one of the few shredders my teacher liked.
>
Well, one might conceivably object to his choice of
material. But hey! He earned those chops. He can play
whatever the hell he wants as far as I'm concerned,
whether it's a waste of his talent or not.
> >Page was a great player. Anyone who doesn't think so is
> >seriously confused. That's *my* opinion.
>
> Hey I like Page. If you've noticed, I'm not the one bashing
> him.
I never can remember who I'm supposed to be mad at.
J...@no.komm
Atlas <c1su...@hotmail.comNOSPAM> wrote:
>Technique isn't everything. But it's a VERY large component.
What is technique? Where does it come from? Where do the standards
come from?
>And anybody who thinks they don't need any facility either plays very
>simple music, or is deluding themself.
There are few, if any people who think you need no facility at all to
play an instrument. What most people who are seemingly "anti-technique"
are on about is obsession with technique, and/or the idea that you have
to learn a set list of existing, approved techniques to express
yourself.
--
<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <J...@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
Nobody
NJD <n...@NIXSPAAMcultv.com> wrote in article <MPG.19da70b3f...@news.optonline.net>...
> In article <dqb1nvcj5orfk04ai...@4ax.com>,
> c1su...@hotmail.comNOSPAM says...
> >
> > >My teacher, BTW, thought Page was a really great player.
> > >I asked him.
> >
> > Good for your teacher.
>
> Page was a great player. Anyone who doesn't think so is
> seriously confused. That's *my* opinion.
>
> --
> Nick
Seriously...dazed and confused.
Dan Stanley
"Atlas" <c1su...@hotmail.comNOSPAM> wrote in message
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 20:01:37 GMT, NJD <n...@NIXSPAAMcultv.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >seriously confused. That's *my* opinion.
>
> him.
Shit, son, that's why it's so good to see you agree with the advice I gave
you a damn month ago! How's your neck!
Dan
Dan Stanley
"NJD" <n...@NIXSPAAMcultv.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.19da84e32...@news.optonline.net...
> In article <rlh1nv072kcsarjts...@4ax.com>,
> c1su...@hotmail.comNOSPAM says...
> > x-no-archive: yes
> >
> > On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 20:01:37 GMT, NJD <n...@NIXSPAAMcultv.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Lane was one of the few shredders my teacher liked.
> >
> > It's kind of hard to not like him.
>
> Well, one might conceivably object to his choice of
> material. But hey! He earned those chops. He can play
> whatever the hell he wants as far as I'm concerned,
> whether it's a waste of his talent or not.
That's pretty much how I look at any player who seems to be playing what he
wants when he wants the way he wants to, most of the time. Shawn Lane,
Johnny Ramone...it's all good. Now, I'm not saying that they are equally
skilled, just that they both get to do what they want, and good for them.
> > >Page was a great player. Anyone who doesn't think so is
> > >seriously confused. That's *my* opinion.
> >
> > Hey I like Page. If you've noticed, I'm not the one bashing
> > him.
>
> I never can remember who I'm supposed to be mad at.
"Them Damn Fat Cats in Warshington" always works for me.
Dan
Nobody
J...@no.komm wrote in article <d9e1nv4n582khh9dq...@4ax.com>...
Excellent post...well said as always.
ryanm
news:rlh1nv072kcsarjts...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
notes that make me want to cry than a bazillion notes that are perfectly
placed and fit perfectly within whatever scale or whatever.
ryanm
ryanm
news:oH1cb.16825$Uv2....@nwrdny02.gnilink.net...
survived that long. : )
ryanm
Jack A. Zucker
news:vn1ig62...@corp.supernews.com...
Well, Slash does nothing for me so we're even. I'd rather hear someone who'd
dedicated to the art of music (Lane) as opposed to someone dedicated to the
art of partying (Slash) :-)
Jaz
Nobody
Atlas <c1su...@hotmail.comNOSPAM> wrote in article <ds52nvou427g98gqd...@4ax.com>...
> >Where does it come from?
>
> Practicing.
When do you stop "practicing", and start making music?
Does it matter how many scales you know or how much theory you know if you can't use it or make music with others?
>For jazz guitar - featuring octave solos...played with a thumb, it would have to be Wes Montgomery.
Wes didn't know much theory, taught himself to play guitar, and never ever took a lesson from anyone.
So it really all depends on the guitar player, doesn't it?
Robert Barker
news:rlh1nv072kcsarjts...@4ax.com...
>
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 20:01:37 GMT, NJD <n...@NIXSPAAMcultv.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >seriously confused. That's *my* opinion.
>
> him.
>
>
>
> --
> "I don't do drugs, I am drugs" - Salvador Dali
I'm not exactly bashing him, either. That wasn't really the point. If he (or
anyone else, for that matter) is someones 'hero', that's dandy with me. But
I say it's a stretch to call him a 'great guitar player', on the basis of
his Zep / Power Station, et al. output. I just don't hear it. Comes from
being 'seriously confused', I expect. ;+)
Robert Barker
nice!) way.....Heh. ;+)
Robert Barker
Nick, I know what you're saying. Believe me. And, yes. Your teacher had it
exactly right. 'It all depends on what you mean by "great".' FWIW, I think
Keef is the nuts, *in* the Stones. It's a perfect fit. They wouldn't be what
they are without him. Heh. Now, can we just agree to disagree on 'great',
finally? ;+)
Robert Barker
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 19:26:47 GMT, "Dan Stanley" <vze2...@verizon.net>
> wrote:
>
power.
> >He can hold back the mighty waters! I've SEEN it, ma-an!
>
> seal?
Nah...He meant Howl can drink a 12 pack, then do two sets before he has to
stop and take a whiz...Hence, 'holding back the mighty waters'! HTH!! ;+)
Robert Barker
looked it up...not even close!! Heh. I *must* be seriously confused!! ;+)
Robert Barker
news:Fr8cb.6131$KJ4....@news1.central.cox.net...
Station'...Please excuse me....I guess sometimes these things slip my mind,
after 19 years... I do like the name 'Power Station' better, though....;+)
Robert Barker
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 17:06:41 GMT, "Robert Barker"
> <rwba...@spambegonecox.net> wrote:
>
> >Nick, I certainly don't wamt to fight with you. But, I didn't label
*your*
> >opnion as *insane*, now did I? Note that IMO, 'influential and artistic'
!=
> >technical ability / proficiency. Neither does /////TONE\\\\\, or in some
> >peoples eyes, Billy Gibbons would be King of the World. I think Page was
/
> >is a good player, so perhaps I should have stated it that way. Be that
as
> >it may, I don't think he's a monster guitarist, in any sense of the word,
> >regardless of how 'influential' he was. We could argue this until the
cows
> >come home, but, you're not likely to change your mind, and neither am I.
So,
> >let's drop it, shall we?
>
> You'll have to do better than that, Robert.
>
> >A good example of what I meant, actually. The Stones are a classic case,
> >IMO, of the *band* being greater than the sum of it's parts.
>
> That's sweet...really.
>
> >In the context of the *band*, I would agree with that.
>
> Always with the *insulting* insults, my man.
>
> >Yeah. There is. I'd be lying if I denied it. For the record, I can't
stand
> >the MF'er. But, it's not limited to just me, Nick.
>
> Thanks for keeping it real.
>
> >Ok, he's a good guitarist, if that makes you happy. Technically speaking,
> >and 'artistic influence' aside, though, I stand by my comment.
>
>
>
> Piece,
>
>
> Atlasfus
>
> --
> "I don't do drugs, I am drugs" - Salvador Dali
Is that a mexican poncho, or a *Sears* poncho?
Not A Speck Of Cereal
[] >
[] > Hey I like Page. If you've noticed, I'm not the one bashing
[] > him.
[]
[] Shit, son, that's why it's so good to see you agree with the advice I gave
[] you a damn month ago! How's your neck!
The thing that is interesting to me is that while you constantly
repeat what I say, nothing you post is worth repeating.
SpeckFus
----
"...there would have been no Holdsworth or
Hendrix without the genius of Boxcar Willie"
-- Mark Garvin
Remove X's from my email address above to reply
[These opinions are personal views only and only my personal views]
Not A Speck Of Cereal
[] John Verkuilen <ja...@s.psych.uiuc.edu> wrote in article <h1Ybb.3342$u96....@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>...
[]
[] > My
[]
[] Go fuck yourself, Jay...and then shut up with your bitching.
Wait... I just have to clear this up. If he shuts up with his bitching
first, does he still have to fuck himself?
Don Evans
well, month, anyway.
"Dan Stanley" <vze2...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:W71cb.16798$Uv2....@nwrdny02.gnilink.net...
>
> "Robert Barker" <rwba...@spambegonecox.net> wrote in message
> news:Y8Zbb.5098$KJ4....@news1.central.cox.net...
> > "John Verkuilen" <ja...@s.psych.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
> > news:h1Ybb.3342$u96....@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu...
> > > "Nobody" <NobodyU...@DELETEaol.com> writes:
> > >
> > > >Wow...thought he was good, but not really...what's the big deal, eh?
> > >
> > > My killfilter ain't picking up the troll no more again. Go back under
> > your
> > > bridge and eat shit.
> > >
> > > Jay
> >
> > Keeping in mind that the comment from 'Nobody' (and I couldn't have
picked
> a
> > better name for him if I'd tried...) comes from somebody who can't play
> > worth a shit, helps to put it all in perspective...If Mr. 'Nobody' put
all
> > the time he spends here looking for imaginary 'insults', in inane gear
> > 'discussions', or 'defending' his (mediocre) guitar 'heroes', into
focused
> > 'practice' he might be rather good, in a few more years...but, I don't
see
> > that happening...He's basically an attention-seeking jerk-off who
happens
> to
> > own a guitar...bottom line. ;+)
>
> "Nobody"s least favorite person du jour ( du millennia, probably), Atlas,
> happens to like Shawn Lane a whole lot.
> So, "Nobody" ( if that is his real name) ( it's not) ( my people call him
> 'Polfus'), just as part of doing that thing he does, just *hadda* write
that
> new header, "Shawn Lane Really Does Suck". And he ( Polfus, I mean) really
> meant it.
>
> BUT, then JAZ said he liked Shawn Lane. That puts Polfus ( which is not
his
> real name, but it is who he is) in an awkward spot, because he ( Polfus, I
> mean) feels some sort of pathological need to agree with JAZ ( which to
him
> [ "him" being, of course, Polfus] is the same thing as getting JAZ to
agree
> with him, which is a very weird aspect of that thing Polfus does).
>
> So then, Polfus ( which, we've established, is who he is) has to do this
> awkward sort of backpedaling thing, saying he was obviously joking, tongue
> in cheek and all. Although we all know that that sort of thing ( tongue in
> cheek type humor, I mean) isn't the sort of thing Polfus is capable of.
>
> So, to sum up, Polfus REALLY didn't like Shawn Lane, whether or not he
ever
> heard him, simply because Atlas DOES, but then, because JAZ DOES, Polfus
> DOES too, and will probably crow in a few months about "turning JAZ on to
> Shawn Lane" is this kinda fashion:
>
> "HAHAHA! Good one! And I'm glad to see you took my advice indeed about
Shawn
> Lane! Damn, son, he can play that guitar! How's your neck!"
>
> It's tough being Polfus. I'm glad I'm not.
>
> Dan
>
>
>
Robert Barker
I suppose you're thinking, at this point, 'Maybe he didn't get *all* of
it??!' Maybe not, but I (I, meaning myself, of course) think so. ;+)
So, anyway,
I think I'm
going to
start
posting like
this
from now
on. ;+)
Ron Thompson
> Well, Slash does nothing for me so we're even. I'd rather hear someone
who'd
> dedicated to the art of music (Lane) as opposed to someone dedicated to
the
> art of partying (Slash) :-)
That art of partying used to be part of the art of the music.
--
rct
The opinions above are mine and mine alone.
Ron Thompson
> Wes practiced all day long - teaching himself Charlie Christian solos off
of records. So in that respect, his teacher was
> Charlie Christian. And while he didn't formally study theory, he listened
to enough jazz - and had a very intuitive mind to the point
> to where he absorbed the concepts, and was able to play very harmonically
advanced ideas. His grasp of chords, substitutions,
> etc...was awesome.
All true. The only problem I have with this kind of thinking is that it is
almost exclusively the thinking of jazzbos. Since Wes learned from
Christian, and as you say, "...he listened to enough jazz...", his seat of
the pants education is somehow legitimate. I would suggest that yer average
jazzbo would NEVER extend the same courtesy to...oh, Slash maybe, or some
other Rock Legend that simply listened to enough stuff to do the very same
thing as above, only not jazz.
Learn theory enough to understand WHY you do what you do instead of just
doing it because, and know enough of it to be dangerous. Don't leave things
to chance and at the same time don't stand up there sweating over the
harmonic qualities of the flatted 13th vs. the natural 11th in this next
diminished passage I am about to play. Either way will get you absolutely
nowhere, the path is in the middle somewhere.
Boom
I get a kick out of people who want to be good but don't really want
to learn. To them I always say, "What if you want to play something
but can't because you're in over your head?"
> "Will having knowledge of scales and theory help you to make
>music with others?" - The answeer to that is, yes. (IMO) Once again,
Of course it will. Nobody wants to hear you run scales and modes, but
if you know scales and modes, it can certainly prevent you from being
one-dimensional and average.
>>Wes didn't know much theory, taught himself to play guitar, and never ever took a lesson from anyone.
This is the argument I always love...the one flaw people forget when
they say things like this is YOU ARE NOT WES MONTGOMERY!
>>So it really all depends on the guitar player, doesn't it?
Hey, you want to play Sum 41 songs, you can learn enough to do that in
3 months. You want to play like Wes or Charlie Hunter, maybe you
should think about hitting the woodshed. On the other hand, you're
clearing a path for employment for guys who do practice, so maybe you
shouldn't practice and just get out of the way.
NJD
c1su...@hotmail.comNOSPAM says...
> >>What most people who are seemingly "anti-technique"
> >> are on about is obsession with technique, and/or the idea that you have
> >> to learn a set list of existing, approved techniques to express
> >> yourself.
>
> Most who are anti-technique are largely that way because they
> themselves can't play, and compensate for it via sour grapes.
Maybe most, but *NOT* all.
My technique is pretty good for an amateur and I don't
think it's important at all. My last teacher could blow
away almost anyone and he didn't think it was very
important. When he played, you'd have to listen for
quite a while before you realized he was a speed
monster. Most of his solos were smooth and melodic.
Few required great speed. Of course when the moment
called for speed, it was quite exciting. That's the
ultimate IMHO: a guy who can play as beautifully either
slow or fast. Very, very few players can do that.
Some of the worst players around have incredible
technique. Don't ask me to mention names, because I
don't believe in criticizing other musicians publicly,
no matter how dreadfully boring they are.
Technique matters very little. Creativity and passion
are SO much more important that technique hardly even
enters the picture.
It's only one tool among many and of all the tools
available, it's one of the least important IMO. You
need a minimal amount of facility to express yourself.
Anything beyond that is usually just gravy. When
technique becomes an end in itself, your music will
definitely suck despite the fact that many musicians who
don't understand music at all will appreciate the chops.
NJD
rwba...@spambegonecox.net says...
> Nick, I know what you're saying. Believe me. And, yes. Your teacher had it
> exactly right. 'It all depends on what you mean by "great".' FWIW, I think
> Keef is the nuts, *in* the Stones. It's a perfect fit. They wouldn't be what
> they are without him. Heh. Now, can we just agree to disagree on 'great',
> finally? ;+)
Okay, but I think my definition is more important and
meaningful in the context of what music is and how it
functions in human culture. As my good friend Bobby
Melpignano always says, "it's the feel, man. It's all
about the feel."
Unfortunately, Bobby often feels rather frenetic. Check
out a 1991 recording of his at
http://cultv.com/music/bands/psychologic/dreamexpress.ht
m if you've got a minute. Ah, youthful angst! ;-)
Anyway, it is all too easy for musicians to lose the
forest for the trees and many do IMHO.
Nobody
Atlas <c1su...@hotmail.comNOSPAM> wrote in article <c643nvgqsl8rfdd2u...@4ax.com>...
> >When do you stop "practicing", and start making music?
>
> That's a very interesting question. There could be a number
> of ways to answer it.
>
> 1. You could view "practicing" and "making music" as one in the same.
>
> 2. You could view "practicing" and "making music" as two separate
> entities.
>
> And if #2 is your choice, then I would say it makes sense to
> work on both. "Making music" could imply working on songs, riffs,
> arrangements, etc.. (All of which are very good, very important
> things). However, you need facility on your instrument in order to
> execute the ideas you hear in your head. That's why practicing is
> beneficial.
>
> Additionally, you could be playing in a cover band - where
> you're playing other people's music. So you need to have your chops
> up to the point to where you're able to handle the original player's
> ideas.
>
> No matter how you look at it, practicing will make you a
> better player AND better enable you to "make music".
But you still failed to answer the qustion:
When do you stop "practicing", and start making music?
>Does it matter how many scales you know or how much theory you know if you can't use it or make music with others?
> If you phrase it in such a leading manner - than the answer is no.
Exactly.
>On the other hand, if you phrase it in a more intelligent way, such as:
>
> "Does it matter how many scales you know or how much theory
> you know"? - The answer to that is, yes. (IMO) The reason being,
> because knowledge will only open doors for you. You will gain
> absolutely nothing by being blind and ignorant.
>
> And the second part of the question:
>
> "Will having knowledge of scales and theory help you to make
> music with others?" - The answeer to that is, yes. (IMO) Once again,
> it can help you with soloing, comping, and understanding which notes
> work and which ones don't (which help you - and the band to sound
> better).
You missed the point: it doesn't matter if you can't make MUSIC with it.
>What I'm curious about is why you would spend so much energy fighting me with this issue.
I'm not fighting with you...I'm wondering when you make music, and when is enough "practice"?
>Wes didn't know much theory, taught himself to play guitar, and never ever took a lesson from anyone.
> Wes practiced all day long - teaching himself Charlie
> Christian solos off of records. So in that respect, his teacher was
> Charlie Christian. And while he didn't formally study theory, he
> listened to enough jazz - and had a very intuitive mind to the point
> to where he absorbed the concepts, and was able to play very
> harmonically advanced ideas. His grasp of chords, substitutions,
> etc...was awesome.
And the point is that he did it HIMSELF.
No lessons, teachers, books, etc..
So there are always exceptions to your rules.
>But the main point of this - and one which you're (yet again)
> missing - is that he got to where he got through practicing. And the
> end result of that was that he developed a STANDARD of technique.
Listen, you need to get a clue, Kevin...I play all the time, and I don't callit "practicing", even though that's what it is.
I PLAY, use all I have learned, and try to make it all fit somehow.
A person can teach themselves, and it will NEVER depend on school, lessons, etc.
>So it really all depends on the guitar player, doesn't it?
>
> For what? Practicing? No.
No, for what they are able to accomplish on their own.
>Everybody will benefit from practicing. Everybody can benefit
> from learning theory & harmony - and then learning how to apply it
> onto their respected instruments.
And again..when do you stop "practicing", and start making music?
> You can feel free to thumb your nose at practicing, at developing chops, and at aquiring theory/harmony knowledge.
Kevin, I have never done that...you are confused if you think that.
>But don't bitch and moan when you come to the realization that you absolutely suck on guitar.
>Hope that helped, princess.
>NEXT!!!!!
About as much as a quack chiro back cracking.
Later,
Jason
John Verkuilen
>x-no-archive: yes
>On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 17:33:14 GMT, "Nobody"
><NobodyU...@DELETEaol.com> wrote:
>>Go fuck yourself, Jay...and then shut up with your bitching.
>Sad.
What's sad is that asshole won't keep fucked off. I really WANT to
ignore him. A lot of people really want to ignore him but constant
name changes indicate he really wants us to get his bile and shit.
Of course with a name like "Nobody Upstairs" I think there really
isn't more to say. :)
My Usenet access will go away due to university computer changes. While
there are a lot of people I will miss, Pollfie is NOT one of them.
Jay
John Verkuilen
>Wait... I just have to clear this up. If he shuts up with his bitching
>first, does he still have to fuck himself?
Only if Pollfie loans me his 14" rubber cock!
Jay
Robert Barker
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 04:49:38 GMT, "Robert Barker"
> <rwba...@spambegonecox.net> wrote:
>
> >> In other words, he can drink a 12 pack without breaking the
> >> seal?
> >
> >Nah...He meant Howl can drink a 12 pack, then do two sets before he has
to
> >stop and take a whiz...Hence, 'holding back the mighty waters'! HTH!! ;+)
>
> the seal on your bladder). :)
>
>
>
> Atlas
> --
> "I don't do drugs, I am drugs" - Salvador Dali
Oh. Shit. Well, you learn something new every day!! I'd never heard that
before....Thanks! I think.....Heh. ;+)
Robert Barker
> In article <PK8cb.6165$KJ4....@news1.central.cox.net>,
> rwba...@spambegonecox.net says...
> > Nick, I know what you're saying. Believe me. And, yes. Your teacher had
it
> > exactly right. 'It all depends on what you mean by "great".' FWIW, I
think
> > Keef is the nuts, *in* the Stones. It's a perfect fit. They wouldn't be
what
> > they are without him. Heh. Now, can we just agree to disagree on
'great',
> > finally? ;+)
>
> Okay, but I think my definition is more important and
> meaningful in the context of what music is and how it
> functions in human culture. As my good friend Bobby
> Melpignano always says, "it's the feel, man. It's all
> about the feel."
And I agree with the 'feel' sentiment....what it is for me I guess, is, that
as my tastes have changed, I find myself listening to Humble Pie, Led Z,
early Beck, etc. more from a nostalgic perspective than anything...They
don't really 'wow' me, like they did back then, or at least not as often...I
still enjoy them, when I do listen, though, and they bring back some great
memories...so, I guess it's all good, eh? ;+)
>
> Unfortunately, Bobby often feels rather frenetic. Check
> out a 1991 recording of his at
http://cultv.com/music/bands/psychologic/dreamexpress.ht
> m if you've got a minute. Ah, youthful angst! ;-)
I did....I would have arranged it a little differently, is the first thing
that occurred to me....Heh...But, frenetic is certainly an apt
description...;+)
>
> Anyway, it is all too easy for musicians to lose the
> forest for the trees and many do IMHO.
Or, perhaps they move to a different part of the 'forest'...;+)
NJD
rwba...@spambegonecox.net says...
> > Unfortunately, Bobby often feels rather frenetic. Check
> > out a 1991 recording of his at
> http://cultv.com/music/bands/psychologic/dreamexpress.ht
> > m if you've got a minute. Ah, youthful angst! ;-)
>
> I did....I would have arranged it a little differently, is the first thing
> that occurred to me....Heh...But, frenetic is certainly an apt
> description...;+)
Well just so I don't get in trouble, I should point out
that Bobby has matured a lot as a musician since then.
He's a full time guitar teacher up in Boston these days.
We keep talking about trying to get together to put out
a CD. He has even written all the material already.
But he's got kids, I've got kids, and, well, it's tough
to get anything arranged let alone done. Don't know if
it'll ever happen.
But I'm not selling my studio equipment just yet.
Hope reigns eternal. ;-)
Robert Barker
> In article <Ovicb.9477$KJ4...@news1.central.cox.net>,
> rwba...@spambegonecox.net says...
> > > Unfortunately, Bobby often feels rather frenetic. Check
> > > out a 1991 recording of his at
> > http://cultv.com/music/bands/psychologic/dreamexpress.ht
> > > m if you've got a minute. Ah, youthful angst! ;-)
> >
> > I did....I would have arranged it a little differently, is the first
thing
> > that occurred to me....Heh...But, frenetic is certainly an apt
> > description...;+)
>
> Well just so I don't get in trouble, I should point out
> that Bobby has matured a lot as a musician since then.
> He's a full time guitar teacher up in Boston these days.
That's great! I do envy guys who can do what they love for a living...I
enjoy my job, actually, but if I could play full time, and still make a
decent living, well, that'd be the cats whiskers, IMO.
>
> We keep talking about trying to get together to put out
> a CD. He has even written all the material already.
> But he's got kids, I've got kids, and, well, it's tough
> to get anything arranged let alone done. Don't know if
> it'll ever happen.
If it does happen, I'd like to be one of the first customers...
>
> But I'm not selling my studio equipment just yet.
Hopefully, never, unless it's for upgrades...
>
> Hope reigns eternal. ;-)
Ain't it the troof.....;+)
Robert Barker
news:99d3nv4lf53v2tghl...@4ax.com...
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 13:58:48 GMT, NJD <n...@NIXSPAAMcultv.com> wrote:
>
<snip>
> >My last teacher could blow
> >away almost anyone and he didn't think it was very
> >important.
Yeah, kinda like the multi-millonaire who doesn't worry about money all that
much. Sure.
>
> I've met those types. And just between you and me, they're
> bullshitting you when they say that. It matters a great deal to them.
> Because how else do you account for their extraordinarily developed
> chops?
You can't. Bottom line.
>
> You don't pop out of the womb having that kind of facility.
> It takes YEARS of intense work, and dedication in order to play like
> that. And in order to do that kind of work, you've got to have a
> burning desire to play that way.
So, you're saying us part-time hobbyists ain't *never* gonna shred like
Yngwie?? <sniff>
>
> Sorry, but I don't buy your teacher's "technique doesn't
> matter" bullshit...while he's blasting out 128th notes up and down the
> board.
I have a teensy-weensie problem with that, too....Heh. ;+)
>
> >When he played, you'd have to listen for
> >quite a while before you realized he was a speed
> >monster. Most of his solos were smooth and melodic.
> >Few required great speed. Of course when the moment
> >called for speed, it was quite exciting. That's the
> >ultimate IMHO: a guy who can play as beautifully either
> >slow or fast. Very, very few players can do that.
>
> What you're describing there is somebody who's developed great
> technique, and learned to keep them on a very short leash.
>
> There's actually quite a lot of players who can do that. In
> my own town (Pittsburgh), can can think of at least a dozen...and
> without even trying very hard. Every town's got 'em. Yours too.
>
> Nationally, Brent Mason immediately comes to mind. Same thing
> with Carl Verheyen. Steve Lukather too. Tommy Tedesco too.
>
> Maybe we ought to just round up all the studio guys...and make
> 'em spill the beans. <G>
Ok...who never worked on their playing? Raise your...Oh, nevermind. I
already know the answer....;+)
>
> >Some of the worst players around have incredible
> >technique. Don't ask me to mention names, because I
> >don't believe in criticizing other musicians publicly,
> >no matter how dreadfully boring they are.
>
> I won't ask you to name names, because I don't believe a
> single word of that.
Oh, I do. But that's subjective, after all. ;+)
>
> >Technique matters very little. Creativity and passion
> >are SO much more important that technique hardly even
> >enters the picture.
>
> Technique matters very much - because it's a tool that allows
> you to express your creativity & passion.
Exactly. That's like saying a blind person needn't learn braille, because
they can hear. Developing technique opens up whole new worlds to a player.
>
> Trying to play guitar without any technique is like trying to
> build a table without a saw and hammer. Technique is a tool. And
> like any other tool, it can be used properly - and to great benefit.
>
> >It's only one tool among many and of all the tools
> >available,
>
> Agreed...I'm with you...
>
> >it's one of the least important IMO.
>
> I don't know if I'd agree to that. How do you know? How can
> you be so sure - which one comes first, second, third, etc...?
I don't agree. At all. Technique is what you *start* with. How you develop
it (or not) is up to you.
>
> Wouldn't a much more intelligent thing to do would be to say
> technique - along with creativity, passion all combine to help the
> musician do what he's attempting to do?
>
> >You need a minimal amount of facility to express yourself.
If you find that you can express yourself to your satisfaction, with minimal
facility, then that's true.
>
> Depends on what you're trying to express. What if I'm trying
> to play a Steve Morse'ish solo?
>
> >Anything beyond that is usually just gravy. When
> >technique becomes an end in itself, your music will
> >definitely suck despite the fact that many musicians who
> >don't understand music at all will appreciate the chops.
>
I don't know of any guitar player where 'technique' was an end in itself.
You develop technique, minimal or not, to express yourself. The amount of
technique you develop depends. Largely on *what* you're trying to say, and
the manner in which you choose to say it.
>
>
>
>
> Atlas
> --
> http://www.geocities.com/cbpdoc/DiscHerniation_Main.html
Sorry for jumping in. Again. ;+)
NJD
c1su...@hotmail.comXXXSPAM says...
> >My technique is pretty good for an amateur and I don't
> >think it's important at all.
>
> that separates you vs. somebody like your teacher? You know - the guy
> with the fabulous chops...who you adore, and worship and call
> "master"?
Well that was tongue in cheek. I do not worship him nor
anybody for that matter. I'm human. He's human. We're
all just human as far as I know.
I think my brother is an artistic genius, but that
doesn't make him a god -- not by a very long shot.
We've all got our plusses and minuses, which tend to
balance things out.
I will say that part of what my teacher could do had a
genetic component. There's no way I could ever be that
fast. I could practice 12 hours a day for the rest of
my life and it wouldn't matter. I just don't have
whatever is necessary for my fingers to move that fast
and I've practiced enough to know this with certainty.
When I'm on top of my game, I am actually pretty fast --
but not like that. That's a whole other league that
I'll never join because this body just doesn't have the
capacity.
That doesn't mean I couldn't be as good a musician
though if I put in the work. I just couldn't be that
fast.
> >My last teacher could blow
> >away almost anyone and he didn't think it was very
> >important.
>
> I've met those types. And just between you and me, they're
> bullshitting you when they say that. It matters a great deal to them.
> Because how else do you account for their extraordinarily developed
> chops?
I think it's largely because he loves playing guitar
more than anything else, so he does it all the time and
has all his life. He was playing in a professional jazz
group when he was still in high school. He also had a
natural ability in terms of dexterity that very few of
us share.
>
> You don't pop out of the womb having that kind of facility.
> It takes YEARS of intense work, and dedication in order to play like
> that. And in order to do that kind of work, you've got to have a
> burning desire to play that way.
Or you just love to play and play all the time. And
there is definitely an aptitude that matters a lot.
> Sorry, but I don't buy your teacher's "technique doesn't
> matter" bullshit...while he's blasting out 128th notes up and down the
> board.
He doesn't do that all the time. He even played in a
hard-core NYC punk band for a while. There was no
shredding in that gig, which he said was a blast BTW.
Believe it or not, he really dug punk music.
> >When he played, you'd have to listen for
> >quite a while before you realized he was a speed
> >monster. Most of his solos were smooth and melodic.
> >Few required great speed. Of course when the moment
> >called for speed, it was quite exciting. That's the
> >ultimate IMHO: a guy who can play as beautifully either
> >slow or fast. Very, very few players can do that.
>
> What you're describing there is somebody who's developed great
> technique, and learned to keep them on a very short leash.
>
> There's actually quite a lot of players who can do that. In
> my own town (Pittsburgh), can can think of at least a dozen...and
> without even trying very hard. Every town's got 'em. Yours too.
Not like this guy.
(I've been, like, you know, around.)
> Nationally, Brent Mason immediately comes to mind. Same thing
> with Carl Verheyen. Steve Lukather too. Tommy Tedesco too.
>
> Maybe we ought to just round up all the studio guys...and make
> 'em spill the beans. <G>
I wouldn't call those guys shredders. That doesn't mean
they're not great players. They are. Much better than
most shredders in fact.
Most shredders suck.
> >Some of the worst players around have incredible
> >technique. Don't ask me to mention names, because I
> >don't believe in criticizing other musicians publicly,
> >no matter how dreadfully boring they are.
>
> I won't ask you to name names, because I don't believe a
> single word of that.
I believe you're mistaken.
> >Technique matters very little. Creativity and passion
> >are SO much more important that technique hardly even
> >enters the picture.
>
> Technique matters very much
No it doesn't matter much at all IMHO.
> - because it's a tool that allows
> you to express your creativity & passion.
Yes. It's great for that, but some guys manage to do it
with relatively little time spent in the wood shed.
> Trying to play guitar without any technique is like trying to
> build a table without a saw and hammer.
Well of course you have to be able to play. I'm not
talking about people who can't play.
> Technique is a tool. And
> like any other tool, it can be used properly - and to great benefit.
>
> >It's only one tool among many and of all the tools
> >available,
>
> Agreed...I'm with you...
>
> >it's one of the least important IMO.
>
> I don't know if I'd agree to that. How do you know?
I'm good at pretending I know.
> How can
> you be so sure - which one comes first, second, third, etc...?
Saying it aloud makes it so in my little mind!
> Wouldn't a much more intelligent thing to do would be to say
> technique - along with creativity, passion all combine to help the
> musician do what he's attempting to do?
By George, I think you've got it! :-)
> >You need a minimal amount of facility to express yourself.
>
> Depends on what you're trying to express. What if I'm trying
> to play a Steve Morse'ish solo?
Well then you need a lot of facility if that's your
goal.
I've heard some old blues players who didn't do anything
fancy, but still managed to send chills up my spine.
I also once had a roommate attending Berklee. He was a
very good young Italian guitarist with good technique,
but he was also incredibly creative. He could and would
play anything at any moment. And I do mean anything.
He'd pick up any old things lying around, start banging
something on them or whatever was necessary to coax out
a pleasant sound, and somehow, it always was great. He
was a *musician* who really didn't need an instrument to
play well. He could make good music at any time any
where.
Boy, did I envy him for that.
Don't know what happened to him. He went back to Italy
and that's the last I knew. His name was Antonio.
Don't remember the last name.
> >Anything beyond that is usually just gravy. When
> >technique becomes an end in itself, your music will
> >definitely suck despite the fact that many musicians who
> >don't understand music at all will appreciate the chops.
>
> When, when, when. Nice leading sentence structure. Have you
> met Polfus?
I haven't met any of you. He seems okay to me in my
limited experience. Everyone seems pretty okay these
days. A while back, this place was unbearable.
I kind of like it now. Then again, I'm rather bored and
somewhat lonely these days. Unemployment definitely
blows.
NJD
rwba...@spambegonecox.net says...
> I don't know of any guitar player where 'technique' was an end in itself.
> You develop technique, minimal or not, to express yourself. The amount of
> technique you develop depends. Largely on *what* you're trying to say, and
> the manner in which you choose to say it.
Oh come on! You've got to be kidding me. They're
everywhere.
Jack A. Zucker
> Atlas wrote:
>
> > Wes practiced all day long - teaching himself Charlie Christian solos off
> of records. So in that respect, his teacher was
> > Charlie Christian. And while he didn't formally study theory, he listened
> to enough jazz - and had a very intuitive mind to the point
> > to where he absorbed the concepts, and was able to play very harmonically
> advanced ideas. His grasp of chords, substitutions,
> > etc...was awesome.
>
> All true. The only problem I have with this kind of thinking is that it is
> almost exclusively the thinking of jazzbos. Since Wes learned from
> Christian, and as you say, "...he listened to enough jazz...", his seat of
> the pants education is somehow legitimate. I would suggest that yer average
> jazzbo would NEVER extend the same courtesy to...oh, Slash maybe, or some
> other Rock Legend that simply listened to enough stuff to do the very same
> thing as above, only not jazz
Jazz is pop music as much as GnR is. The only difference is that jazz
is further along in it's evolution. Slash was schooled in the same way
as wes was but the language he was schooled in is more in it's infancy
in terms of harmonic richness.
I think you have to look at the bigger picture of guitarists as
musicians. Wes could have sat in with Albert King and sounded great,
as could Slash. However, neither Albert, nor Slash could have "hung"
with Coltrane like Wes did.
I leave it to you to draw conclusions. I'm not taking anything away
from the blues/rock thing because I think it's got it's own set of
parameters.
Jaz
Jack A. Zucker
> >>Does it matter how many scales you know or how much theory you know if you can't use it or make music with others?
>
> I get a kick out of people who want to be good but don't really want
> to learn. To them I always say, "What if you want to play something
> but can't because you're in over your head?"
I agree with that and I've been saying that for years. I remember
teaching a student who was into ozzy and Rhodes Rhodes. This student
couldn't play any harmonic material other than blues riffs. I tried to
enlighten him to major scales but he said they didn't sound "tuff"
enough. I tried to show him how to incorporate diatonic blues-scale
4ths and 5ths and they didn't sound "tuff" enough either.
Folks that have a preconceived notion of what they're willing to learn
rarely get to that higher place that they aspire to. Look at all the
great players from Hendrix to Van Halen to Vai to SRV. They may play
"rock" music, but they all studied and listened to material that was
much broader than that. Jimi listened to Miles and Wes, Eddie listened
to Jimi and Mozart, etc...
If knowledge is so bad, why aren't the best artists 10 year old
kids?!? (I guess some folks think they are...)
Nobody
NJD <n...@NIXSPAAMcultv.com> wrote in article <MPG.19dba232c...@news.optonline.net>...
> I've heard some old blues players who didn't do anything fancy, but still managed to send chills up my spine.
And that brings us back to my point, Nick:
Whats the difference if someone plays speed licks or slow licks if they can't be musical when doing so?
As your quote says clearly:
"There are not more than five musical notes, yet the combinations of these five give rise to more melodies than can ever be heard."
-- Sun Tzu
Not sure what those specific 5 are, but I do know the point is what one does with them.
One of my fave "solos" of all time is from Andy Summers from The Police's "Bring On The Night".
All it really is ONE NOTE ( changes a little toward the end of the "solo" )...and its all feedback.
No shredding ( and he *can* do that ), no cerebral bullshit...just feel and tone.
Okay..and another thing:
I have practiced speed picking and have it down to what I want to do with it. I love speed stuff, as it rips and I love trying to
do that.
But WHEN to use it is a whole other story, and is what makes one a *musician* or a trained monkey.
Limit Steve Vai and Jimmy Page to only two chords and two key notes for a solo.
What happens?
It all comes back to what one does with them, not how fast one can play them.
--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs
ryanm
news:2f33c43f.03092...@posting.google.com...
>
> Jazz is pop music as much as GnR is. The only difference is that jazz
> is further along in it's evolution. Slash was schooled in the same way
> as wes was but the language he was schooled in is more in it's infancy
> in terms of harmonic richness.
>
advanced language than Spanish because we put the verb befor the noun, and
all them European's speak a more infantile language because they put the
noun before the verb." Your qualifier is subjective, so saying one is more
or less "evolved" than the other is innapropriate. Maybe rock/blues is
*more* advanced because it has reduced the number of acceptable scales and
modes to a more efficient subset than all those jazz players, who are still
fooling around with all those extra, useless scales and modes, and they just
can't see, in their less advanced state, that they're wasting their time?
More complex != better. Think about it....
ryanm
NJD
@posting.google.com>, j...@jackzucker.com says...
> Jazz is pop music as much as GnR is. The only difference is that jazz
> is further along in it's evolution. Slash was schooled in the same way
> as wes was but the language he was schooled in is more in it's infancy
> in terms of harmonic richness.
It's a lot harder to make tensions work playing chords
when the sound is heavily overdriven. Distortion
produces louder more perceptible overtones on the basic
notes played. So richly harmonic chords that sound
great clean start to sound very dissonant dirty.
Harmonic richness almost has to come by way of
horizontal content as in the tensions that are brought
in during a melody or solo typically played over basic
triads or power chords, if you want that heavy
overdriven sound. Otherwise it all just turns to sonic
mud.
--
Nick
"There are not more than five musical notes, yet the
combinations of these five give rise to more melodies
than can ever be heard." -- Sun Tzu
ryanm
>
> I don't know of any guitar player where 'technique' was an end in itself.
>
soul, to me.
ryanm
NJD
715162529worldnet.att.net>, NobodyU...@DELETEaol.com
says...
> As your quote says clearly:
>
> "There are not more than five musical notes, yet the combinations of these five give rise to more melodies than can ever be heard."
> -- Sun Tzu
>
Oh sorry. They are:
C, C#, D, D# and F#
--
Nick
"There are not more than five musical notes, yet the
combinations of these five give rise to more melodies
than can ever be heard." -- Sun Tzu
Gamelan
> Imagine how all of our playing would be had none of us ever
> discovered the usenet?
>
Shut up, you bastard! ;-)
Gamelan
> and that's the last I knew. His name was Antonio.
> Don't remember the last name.
>
You've just ruled it down to 1 in 18 million. ;-P
Gamelan
"Atlas" <c1su...@hotmail.comXXXSPAM> wrote in message
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 17:24:39 -0400, "Gamelan"
> <bobafet...@rcn.com> wrote:
>
> >Shut up, you bastard! ;-)
>
Step 1) Obtain Italian grandmother
Step 2) Don't visit her too much
Step 3) Take a trip back home. She'll be glad to fix you whatever you want.
Nobody
NJD <n...@NIXSPAAMcultv.com> wrote in article <MPG.19dbb42bd...@news.optonline.net>...
> > "There are not more than five musical notes, yet the combinations of these five give rise to more melodies than can ever be
heard."
> > -- Sun Tzu
> >
> > Not sure what those specific 5 are, <snip>
>
> Oh sorry. They are:
>
> C, C#, D, D# and F#
What does it all mean?
Nobody
NJD <n...@NIXSPAAMcultv.com> wrote in article <MPG.19dbae862...@news.optonline.net>...
> In article <2f33c43f.0309240951.498360e1
> @posting.google.com>, j...@jackzucker.com says...
> > Jazz is pop music as much as GnR is. The only difference is that jazz
> > is further along in it's evolution. Slash was schooled in the same way
> > as wes was but the language he was schooled in is more in it's infancy
> > in terms of harmonic richness.
>
> It's a lot harder to make tensions work playing chords
> when the sound is heavily overdriven. Distortion
> produces louder more perceptible overtones on the basic
> notes played. So richly harmonic chords that sound
> great clean start to sound very dissonant dirty.
>
> Harmonic richness almost has to come by way of
> horizontal content as in the tensions that are brought
> in during a melody or solo typically played over basic
> triads or power chords, if you want that heavy
> overdriven sound. Otherwise it all just turns to sonic
> mud.
>
> --
> Nick
Excellent post.
I do just wanna say that if one has a harmonically rich amp, that makes the tension easier to produce ( with sus chords, etc ).
I have an amp that is able to do that, so I love it. Most every other amp does what you said though.
--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs
Nobody
Atlas <c1su...@hotmail.comXXXSPAM> wrote in article <s804nvgkoiik2b3rb...@4ax.com>...
>
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 14:38:10 GMT, "Nobody"
> <NobodyU...@DELETEaol.com> wrote:
>
> >But you still failed to answer the qustion:
>
> My name is Elmer J. Fudd, Millionaire. I own a mansion and a
> yaught.
>
> >When do you stop "practicing", and start making music?
>
> Yes.
>
> >Exactly.
>
> So in other words, you're now admitting that you were asking a
> leading question in order to solicit a specific response that may or
> may not be related to the truth? Is that what you're finally
> admitting, "Nobody Upstairs" - if that is even your "real" name
> indeed!
>
> >You missed the point: it doesn't matter if you can't make MUSIC with it.
>
> My name is Elmer J. Fudd, Millionaire. I own a mansion and a
> yaught.
>
> >I'm not fighting with you...I'm wondering when you make music, and when is enough "practice"?
>
> Yes.
>
> >And the point is that he did it HIMSELF.
> >
> >No lessons, teachers, books, etc..
> >
> >So there are always exceptions to your rules.
>
> Uh, Polfus...buddy. You're doing that thing that you do.
>
> You aren't Wes Montgomery. He was a musical genius.
>
> You aren't.
>
> Thus comparing him to yourself is not only moot, it's also
> highly narcissistic on your end.
>
> >Listen, you need to get a clue, Kevin...I play all the time, and I don't callit "practicing", even though that's what it is.
> >
> >I PLAY, use all I have learned, and try to make it all fit somehow.
> >
> >A person can teach themselves, and it will NEVER depend on school, lessons, etc.
>
> You de-tune that log of yours down to C...belt out the jamz,
> and then obsess over picks and strings minutia.
>
> That's neither practicing, nor is it making music. It's
> jerking off.
>
> >And again..when do you stop "practicing", and start making music?
>
> Yes.
>
> >Kevin, I have never done that...you are confused if you think that.
>
> My name is Elmer J. Fudd, Millionaire. I own a mansion and a
> yaught.
>
> >About as much as a quack chiro back cracking.
>
> LOL!
>
>
>
> Atlas
Looks like the questions got a little tough for you, Kevin.
David and/or Rena Covell
"Dan Stanley" <vze2...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:oH1cb.16824$Uv2....@nwrdny02.gnilink.net...
>
> "Atlas" <c1su...@hotmail.comNOSPAM> wrote in message
> > x-no-archive: yes
> >
> > On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 19:26:47 GMT, "Dan Stanley"
<vze2...@verizon.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >You guys might be laughing, but I've *seen* Howldog's
awesome cosmic
> power.
> > >He can hold back the mighty waters! I've SEEN it, ma-an!
> >
> > In other words, he can drink a 12 pack without breaking the
> > seal?
> >
>
But what I want to know is whether he can drink it without
*barfing* like a seal. There's nothing smellier than anchovies
and sour beer. Uggh.
Gamelan
"Atlas" <c1su...@hotmail.comNOSPAM> wrote in message
> x-no-archive: yes
>
>
> > You know what. I'm too impatient for the rest of the series.
> >I'm going out for gnocchi tonight.
>
> Followup:
>
> Had the gnocchi. It was alright...although a bit too "dense".
> I feel like I just ate some lead.
>
> The tiramisu was outstanding, tho'. ;)
>
Followup:
Mon Sep 22, 2003
Doctors believe that Shawn will have to remain on medical oxygen for the
remainder of his life. Shawn is very troubled by this report yet determined to
overcome the situation. He will be released from the hospital sometime next
week.
News
9/18/03
Shawn remains in the hospital in moderate to severe pain. He is still under
oxygen. He is undergoing treatments that will gradually improve his breathing.
Tests revealed that smoking and other factors have contributed to Shawn's
problems. This will be a long drawn out recovery period. Shawn is going to make
it through this situation. I don't think it's necessary to make daily posts but
will update everyone if anything significant happens. Shawn wants me to thank
everyone again for your emails and notes of concern. I'm sure he will personally
thank you when he is able.
Thu Sep 11, 2003
Shawn has now been in hospital for over three weeks. He has been under oxygen
the entire time, and had a biopsy performed on his lungs on Sep 9. This was a
very serious procedure and now he is back in IC. The results should deterime the
source of his problem.
Jack A. Zucker
> In article <2f33c43f.0309240951.498360e1
> @posting.google.com>, j...@jackzucker.com says...
> > Jazz is pop music as much as GnR is. The only difference is that jazz
> > is further along in it's evolution. Slash was schooled in the same way
> > as wes was but the language he was schooled in is more in it's infancy
> > in terms of harmonic richness.
>
> It's a lot harder to make tensions work playing chords
> when the sound is heavily overdriven.
I don' t agree. Holdsworth, Gambale, Henderson, and even Mclaughlin all do
it effortless. I find it easier to make tensions work when playing with
heavily overdriven tones.
Jack A. Zucker
news:vn3p15s...@corp.supernews.com...
> "Jack A. Zucker" <j...@jackzucker.com> wrote in message
> news:2f33c43f.03092...@posting.google.com...
> >
> > Jazz is pop music as much as GnR is. The only difference is that jazz
> > is further along in it's evolution. Slash was schooled in the same way
> > as wes was but the language he was schooled in is more in it's infancy
> > in terms of harmonic richness.
> >
> Now, I find that offensive. That's like saying "English is a more
> advanced language than Spanish because we put the verb befor the noun, and
> all them European's speak a more infantile language because they put the
> noun before the verb."
Offensive or not, it's true.
> Your qualifier is subjective, so saying one is more
> or less "evolved" than the other is innapropriate.
No it's not and you can't back up your position with any evidence because
it's indefensible.
> Maybe rock/blues is
> *more* advanced because it has reduced the number of acceptable scales and
> modes to a more efficient subset than all those jazz players, who are
still
> fooling around with all those extra, useless scales and modes, and they
just
> can't see, in their less advanced state, that they're wasting their time?
> More complex != better. Think about it....
Yawn...
Jack A. Zucker
And Slash is God...Excuse me whilst I throw up.
Slar
>
> And Slash is God...Excuse me whilst I throw up.
FS: JAZ Vomit, 3 hours old in original plastic grocery bag. $200 plus
shipping before it goes to Ebay. Possible trade for contents of kitchen
trash can.
WTB: JAZ Vomit. Preferably in original plastic grocery bag. Looking for
boutique barf action in a discount package, as close to original as possible
with tremolo mod and shoddy construction.
Nobody
Atlas <c1su...@hotmail.comNOSPAM> wrote in article <l3j4nvchd24dl3g3v...@4ax.com>...
> How's your neck?
>
>
>
>
> Atlas
As a alleged "chiropractor", why would you make fun of someone's injury, i.e. Jack's?
Nobody
Atlas <c1su...@hotmail.comNOSPAM> wrote in article <s0u4nv8l9sh3ijchj...@4ax.com>...
"Yep, he's trolling. Polfus knows that I really dig Shawn's music...so he's simply trying to push a button. Sad, innit?"
Well I'm sure everyone reading your posts has appreciated your input:
> Jazz is to Rock what Einstein Theory of Relativity is to Polfus' Slingshot TheoryHow would you know? You didn't understand a
single word of it.1. BWAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!! 2. Uh, Polfus....... buddy? Tensions
aren't created by your guitar gear. They're a concept in harmony (where you create dissonance,followed by resolution to
consonance). But you knew that, right? Oh my God, this is just too priceless.In all honesty, I have never in my life encountered
somebody who was this dense and braindead as Polfus.How's your neck? You know what. I'm too impatient for the rest of the series.
I'm going out for gnocchi tonight. Followup:Had the gnocchi. It was alright...although a bit too "dense". I feel like I just ate
some lead.The tiramisu was outstanding, tho'. ;)I dunno about that. There was a kid at my daughter's daycare who was on soy
formula. Anyway, she barfed...and it was THE most vile smelling shit I've ever encountered. It could've knocked a buzzard off a
shitwagon from 100 paces. No, it's a guitar GEAR website. And a really shitty one at that. There's no actual music contentanywhere
in it. Glad that helped. I don't have to do anything. No fuck off.Oh the irony! Have you ever once wondered why people use the
phrase "Polfusian Logic"? Ever wondered who they were referring to when using that? Well if your meds are taken in just the right
dosage, and at the right time, I'm sure nothing will surprise you.I ran out of part 1. Can I borrow yours? You know what. I'm too
impatient for the rest of the series. I'm going out for gnocchi tonight. So there. Heh. I'll shut up if you share your recipe for
gnocchi. My name is Elmer J. Fudd, Millionaire. I own a mansion and a yaught.So in other words, you're now admitting that you were
asking a leading question in order to solicit a specific response that may or may not be related to the truth? Is that what you're
finally admitting, "Nobody Upstairs" - if that is even your "real" name indeed!My name is Elmer J. Fudd, Millionaire. I own a
mansion and a yaught. Uh, Polfus...buddy. You're doing that thing that you do.You aren't Wes Montgomery. He was a musical genius.
You aren't. Thus comparing him to yourself is not only moot, it's also highly narcissistic on your end. You de-tune that log of
yours down to C... belt out the jamz, and then obsess over picks and strings minutia. That's neither practicing, nor is it making
music. It's jerking off. My name is Elmer J. Fudd, Millionaire. I own a mansion and a yaught. When, when, when. Nice leading
sentence structure. Have you met Polfus? Ha! Hot damn, son - that's some fine logic you've used to corner Polfus. He's a gonner
now. How's your neck? You can feel free to thumb your nose at practicing, at developing chops, and at aquiring theory/harmony
knowledge. But don't bitch and moan when you come to the realization that you absolutely suck on guitar. Hope that helped,
princess. NEXT!!!!! This is nothing new. Sheehy disagrees with me. Polfus then sticks his tongue up Sheehy's ass. (Which pretty
much solidifies that I'm right about the technique thing). ;) He's got to get it back from his mom first.What, and miss all this
comedy? I think he was attempting to do some self-deprecating humor. Unfortunately, it backfired on him - because it was too
accurate to actually be funny. That sucks. I'm sure there's always a way around it. If I know anything, it's that people will
always find a way to get around doing their work, and looking for fun distractions. <G> Please have mercy! I beg of you. I have
only one lung left...and you're slowly excising the upper lobe. After 12 beers, not only do I bark like a seal, but I also swim
through hoops, and balance beach balls on my nose. I hereby nominate this post for the "Big Gay Wood" of the year award. Some of us
actually PLAY the guitar too. (That's probably the most glaring difference between Polfus and the rest of us).You'll have to do
better than that, Jason.Sad.Sad.Sad.You'll have to do better than that, Robert. That's sweet...really.Always with the *insulting*
insults, my man.Thanks for keeping it real.You're beautiful. LOL! No, Polfus. That's called projection. Do the world a favor,
and go stick your head in a microwave.Taking a pic, scanning it, and posting it on a website is not really a big deal. BUT what is
a big deal is that you're ENTIRE fucking website is focused on one thing and one thing only - and that's guitar gear. You cannot
discuss anything beyond gear, quite simply because you're not a musician. You're just a douchebag who happens to own aguitar. Not
half as funny as your posts. Trust me on this, Polfus -you're giving the rest of us some spectacular comedy. And you're completely
unaware of it. I don't have to do anything, Jason.The only valid question is why your mother didn't go through with the
abortion.HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Oh-my-god...I can't breathe.Flatlining.Going.GoingGone.Atlas1968-2003Your weighing the
guitar in the first place - and then writing about it in dozens upon dozens of threads - and then making such ahoooge deal of the
guitar's weight on your website is the funny part.The weight of the guitar is so irrelevent, it's not even worth bringing up during
day to day conversation. And yet, it's what you focus on, instead of more important things (such as practicing, developing chops,
learning other people's songs & solos, etc...).If you would learn to not major in minor things, perhaps you'd get better as a
player. LOL!!!!!Which one of us has their guitar's weight featured on his respected website? Thanks for keeping it real. You're
going to have to do better than that, Jason.Always with the insulting *iNSuLTs*, little lady.It's right up there with the "silent
sound". LOL!ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!! You're not a pharmacist (or even a doctor). So you're really not in a position to "educate" anybody
on drugs. You're a nurse - and that's it. You're an entry level healthcare grunt - who's job it is to wipe ass, and hand out
pills. Humpty Dumpty.It's the one thing you don't think about.And then again, not really. What "Polfus" does is to serve as a very
effective punching bag.Which instructional video was that? "How to weigh your guitar on a postal scale in 10 easy
steps?"Blistering melodic. Heh. I hear there's a soothing ointment that can help with that.If you thought his fingers were fluid,
you should've heard his toes! It was like fluffy clouds flying away in a midsummers daydream.It's way over your head - because he
talks about music.Save your money, Polfus. It'd be better spent on Fischer Price toys.What questions? You lost the argument,
Polfus. Now go away. Far away.It means you're a moron.Hope that helped.AtlasNo, Polfus, it doesn't. Saying that "growth rings give
rise to figure" is like saying that,"Baking bread gives rise to a good roast beef sandwich, with just a little mustard."- Dan
Stanley>
Piece,
Atlasfus>
Jack A. Zucker
ass and takes no prisoners. Frankly, jazz could do well to look back at it's
roots and get some of that machismo back. Unfortunately, the some rock bores
me with it's juvenile attitude.
I don't know why Ryanm gets so offended. Personally, I love Van Halen, Slash
and others. However, to say they're in the same universe with Shawn Lane,
Allen Holdsworth, Scott Henderson or Frank Gambale is total insanity. It's
like the high school kids doing their simple fingerpicking compared to the
classical guitarist, John Williams...
"Atlas" <c1su...@hotmail.comNOSPAM> wrote in message
news:s0u4nv8l9sh3ijchj...@4ax.com...
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 02:50:05 GMT, "Jack A. Zucker"
> <j...@jackzucker.com> wrote:
>
> >> Now, I find that offensive. That's like saying "English is a more
> >> advanced language than Spanish because we put the verb befor the noun,
and
> >> all them European's speak a more infantile language because they put
the
> >> noun before the verb."
> >
> >Offensive or not, it's true.
>
> I don't think it's a fair analogy to say Jazz is to Rock
> what English is to Spanish. IMO, that's completely wrong.
>
> It's more like this:
>
> Jazz is to Rock
> what
> William Shakesphere is to Hustler
>
> OR
>
> Jazz is to Rock
> what
> A brand new top of the line, PC is to the Commodore 64
>
> OR
>
> Jazz is to Rock
> what
> Einstein Theory of Relativity is to Polfus' Slingshot Theory
>
>
>
>
> Atlas
> --
Ron Thompson
> It's more like this:
> Jazz is to Rock what William Shakesphere is to Hustler
> OR
> Jazz is to Rock what A brand new top of the line, PC is to the Commodore
64
OR
Jazz is to Rock what unemployment is to a decent paying health/life
insurance providing job that has room for promotion.
--
rct
The opinions above are mine and mine alone.
Robert Barker
hearing, apparently, and I suspect they would deny that there was no 'soul'
in their playing. Maybe all that wheedly-deedly stuff expresses something
for them...it does for their fans, obviously, because they're still selling
records..To each their own...;+)