WTF Loudwire. Satriani vs Hanneman? Come on...

Fat Freddy wrote:

This is why we should've kept arguing over the whole Cheese vs. Aardvarks thing.

Too true, I've changed my stance on this now because I had pasta for dinner, tried it with aadvark, yuk!! But with cheese it was really nice.

Cheese now gets my vote!  (I am amazed to be the first person to use this emoticon this on this thread!)

S.D. wrote:

Being born to a prior generation does NOT make you a pioneer.  Starting something, inventing something, influencing future generations...that is what makes you a pioneer.  Plenty of people have lived and died and never contributed a damn thing to the world, so they obviously aren't pioneers.  

The Beatles weren't pioneers because they did stuff 45+ years ago....they were pioneers because they changed music forever and people are still working within the framework they laid out.

Exactly.
Hendrix, EVH and RR changed the world according to the guitar. Like them or not, they made a big difference and changed the game.

Hendrix was to the guitar like the Beatles were to Rock n' Roll. Enough said.

EVH turned the guitar world upside down and in a short couple of years caused players and manufactures to rethink the 6 string. How many guitarists out there can claim to have influenced the guitar in almost every aspect, not only in the way it's played, but also, the way it's constructed.

RR inspired a generation to move past the 12 bars and on to the modes. Gave Gibson a shot in the economic arm, and Jackson a name. All this in two years and two albums.

These guys didn't just put out music, they were movers and shakers. There are lots of really good and talented musicians who have influenced and inspired so many, but there are very few who really shake things up. Most guitar polls and showdowns are conversation starters to get people really talking about the thing they love most, music.

Aardvark pizza. Just sayin'.  

We've got a cheese smiley, we need an aardvark smiley!

S.D. wrote:

Being born to a prior generation does NOT make you a pioneer.  Starting something, inventing something, influencing future generations...that is what makes you a pioneer.  Plenty of people have lived and died and never contributed a damn thing to the world, so they obviously aren't pioneers.  

The Beatles weren't pioneers because they did stuff 45+ years ago....they were pioneers because they changed music forever and people are still working within the framework they laid out.

The Beatles? Eeek!!! Slayer started something, bcuz they had the chance to being that no one else at that time did what they do. That goes for the first of everything, is all Im saying. You can't do that nowadays. There is too many bands. SOAD IMO sound different bcuz of the vocal style. Musically it was modern rock/metal.

If you invent something you are an innovator, YES!! But how can you invent something when it's already been invented? That was my point.. Who rly cares anyway hahah!!! But i do like disagreeing just to disagree hahah!!

 

I've been ignoring this thread because the title didn't interest me. But tonight I got bored...

I've just read the last page or so and I see I've been missing something.  I shall return after I've taken about a week to read the rest of this thread.

tohostudios wrote:

I've been ignoring this thread because the title didn't interest me. But tonight I got bored...

I've just read the last page or so and I see I've been missing something.  I shall return after I've taken about a week to read the rest of this thread.

 

tohostudios wrote:

I've been ignoring this thread because the title didn't interest me. But tonight I got bored...

I've just read the last page or so and I see I've been missing something.  I shall return after I've taken about a week to read the rest of this thread.

I think the basic summary of this thread is:

We're arguing whether cheese is more influential than aardvarks.  

corplhicks wrote:

Who in the blue hell is Synyster Gates?

Lari wrote:

corplhicks wrote:

Who in the blue hell is Synyster Gates?

Ah, I can answer that one!

Guitarist for Avenged Sevenfold. A band who basically sucked until their singer blew out his vocal chords with that growling crap and actually started singing on the album "City Of Evil". Since then, I've found the band to be interesting.

But since I don't listen to Slayer I can't comment on the guitar prowess comparison.

journeyman wrote:

S.D. wrote:

Being born to a prior generation does NOT make you a pioneer.  Starting something, inventing something, influencing future generations...that is what makes you a pioneer.  Plenty of people have lived and died and never contributed a damn thing to the world, so they obviously aren't pioneers.  

The Beatles weren't pioneers because they did stuff 45+ years ago....they were pioneers because they changed music forever and people are still working within the framework they laid out.

Exactly.
Hendrix, EVH and RR changed the world according to the guitar. Like them or not, they made a big difference and changed the game.

Hendrix was to the guitar like the Beatles were to Rock n' Roll. Enough said.

EVH turned the guitar world upside down and in a short couple of years caused players and manufactures to rethink the 6 string. How many guitarists out there can claim to have influenced the guitar in almost every aspect, not only in the way it's played, but also, the way it's constructed.

RR inspired a generation to move past the 12 bars and on to the modes. Gave Gibson a shot in the economic arm, and Jackson a name. All this in two years and two albums.

These guys didn't just put out music, they were movers and shakers. There are lots of really good and talented musicians who have influenced and inspired so many, but there are very few who really shake things up. Most guitar polls and showdowns are conversation starters to get people really talking about the thing they love most, music.

Well said.

Is there a difference between discovering and inventing? For example, "tapping" already existed in a more simple variation, but EVH is credited with turning it into a musical art form. There was a time people actually thought he invented it.

Troublezone wrote:

Is there a difference between discovering and inventing? For example, "tapping" already existed in a more simple variation, but EVH is credited with turning it into a musical art form. There was a time people actually thought he invented it.

I think EVH took it to the top and made it COOL... Just like there were bands doing what Slayer was doing before them, but they did it better (I guess).

I think bands who started or perfected a certain genre or way of music get way too much credit. Being an innovator is important cuz it opens the door for many other artists, but it doesn't mean you are better than someone that's doing the same thing, only in the present.

MetalRob331 wrote:

Troublezone wrote:

Is there a difference between discovering and inventing? For example, "tapping" already existed in a more simple variation, but EVH is credited with turning it into a musical art form. There was a time people actually thought he invented it.

I think EVH took it to the top and made it COOL... Just like there were bands doing what Slayer was doing before them, but they did it better (I guess).  

I think bands who started or perfected a certain genre or way of music get way too much credit.  Being an innovator is important cuz it opens the door for many other artists, but it doesn't mean you are better than someone that's doing the same thing, only in the present.

Quite true. None of the guitarist who came before another is better just because they came before them. They are considered "better" because they were innovative. For someone to go down as a "great" they need to earn it. Les Paul was very innovative, yet maybe only a few knew his music. Could you truly call him innovative since the electric guitar was already invented. My answer is yes. Les brought together many components already in existence into a complete package and realized what so many others hadn't. SRV came along and many praised and others hated him. Was he innovative, I think yes, he combined traditional and southern blues, yet he wasn't the first. Satriani opened the door for instrumental albums, which again wasn't a first by any means, but yet how many have walked through that door lately. All those guitarist in the past are recognized for their accomplishments and yes the bar is set rather high, but that doesn't mean there isn't any more innovating to be had and it's all been done before so why bother. The new kids coming up and logging some serious woodshed time will, I'm sure, be just as innovative. It isn't about "no guitarist left behind", but rather "Whacha got!"

I actually had good conversation with a buddy over this and I was schooled. I never even heard of Synyster Gates and through the miracle of modern technology he culled together what he thought was some good stuff from Gates. I listened and walked away with a better understanding of why some really like the guy. At least now I am slightly more informed, but not enough to offer an opinion.

The guy has def chops and a killer ear for melodicness. Guitarists are a preference.. I prefer players like Jorn Lofstad. Nils Norberg, Jeff Loomis, Mark Tremonti, Rich Ward, Dimebag, Neal Schon, Michael Romeo, John Petrucci, and a whole lot of others...

I agree with everything you said

On a side note.. DImebag is up against Zakk Wylde!!!

MetalRob331 wrote:

The guy has def chops and a killer ear for melodicness.  Guitarists are a preference.. I prefer players like Jorn Lofstad. Nils Norberg, Jeff Loomis, Mark Tremonti, Rich Ward, Dimebag, Neal Schon, Michael Romeo, John Petrucci, and a whole lot of others...  

I agree with everything you said  

On a side note.. DImebag is up against Zakk Wylde!!!  

Neal Schon was the guy who got Floyd Rose serial #2 from a batch of 5 total. His guitar originally built by Jackson was bada$$, wish I never got rid of it.

MetalRob331 wrote:

and a killer ear for melodicness.  

 

Dimebag v Zakk makes a hell of a lot more sense. And Dimebag would win.

MetalRob331 wrote:

The guy has def chops and a killer ear for melodicness

LOL, you mean melody?

mc666 wrote:

MetalRob331 wrote:

The guy has def chops and a killer ear for melodicness

LOL, you mean melody?

 

I've glanced through a thread and aside from several wtf moments, I've prepared a question. If we are taking into consideration that Synyster Gates won over Iommi, and that A7X is a HUGE band right now, doesn't that indicate he is more influental for this present generation of guitar players (established and begginners, in other words, he is being more of an inspiration than an icon) than Jeff (I think it was Slayer as a whole band, their sound, rather than individual guitarists who were pioneering force - tbh all I've heard from them doesn't sound that much different than what other "extreme" acts were doing at the time)? The arguing seems useless made just for fun (obviously) for me until we have a strict, not subjective criteria of "greatest", but if it goes as the most influental and inspiring as usual - in the end it comes down to how many human beings like given guitarist, - the statistics of this poll show that Synyster is the one who made a bunch of people to take their first guitar lesson - lets put it like that - not Jeff. I must mention I neither listen to (or like, as the terms are interchangeable) Slayer, A7X, Pantera, Satch (I do have a double album of his) and cheese in general, nor have any musical education to compare their technical skills. Post was created simply out of curiosity.

Troublezone wrote:

mc666 wrote:

MetalRob331 wrote:

The guy has def chops and a killer ear for melodicness

LOL, you mean melody?

 

I don't think that we have any right to have a preference for words, all words are as good as each other, even words that don't actually exist. In fact made up words are probably better because, you know, someone had to invent (or discover) that word.  Soo.......



You decide!!!!  

mc666 wrote:

MetalRob331 wrote:

The guy has def chops and a killer ear for melodicness

LOL, you mean melody?

Nope, I meant melodicness.. Like Epicness!! Melody and Melodicness are def different especially when writing on the guitar, compared to singing? When I think of melody, I think of a hook in a song. I don't think of the guitar. When I think of melodicness, I just think of amazeballs...

MetalRob331 wrote:

mc666 wrote:

MetalRob331 wrote:

The guy has def chops and a killer ear for melodicness

LOL, you mean melody?

 

Nope, I meant melodicness.. Like Epicness!!  Melody and Melodicness are def different especially when writing on the guitar, compared to singing?  When I think of melody, I think of a hook in a song.  I don't think of the guitar.  When I think of melodicness, I just think of amazeballs...

  You think of what? Amazeballs!?  

Melodicness is not a word, neither is epicness.  Unless you chronically suffer from stupidedness.