QueenZone discussion #1078111

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote: Awesome, a bunch of fake videos. And a bunch of youtubers buying that crap.

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: The good thing is that if you wanna make one of those videos of Jimmy Page, you don't really have to overdub anything. ;)

<font color=666600><b>Music Man wrote: Some people think of the guitar as a game, whereas others think of the guitar as an instrument. It's a shame, because one will never amount to much as a musician until he embraces the latter.

Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: The good thing is that if you wanna make one of those videos of Jimmy Page, you don't really have to overdub anything. ;)

Why must you criticize any guitarist who doesn't play a million notes a minute perfectly cleanly? Maybe it's about time you started growing as a musician and realized that technical ability isn't what it's all about. Chet Atkins is a legend for his technical ability and versatility, but Johnny Cash is a legend too. I'll take Achilles Last Stand over For The Love Of God any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

<font color=666600><b>Music Man wrote: Some people think of the guitar as a game, whereas others think of the guitar as an instrument. It's a shame, because one will never amount to much as a musician until he embraces the latter.

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: I must criticize any guitarist who doesn't play clean at all, Jimmy Page is the personitifation of mediocrity.

Slow of fast is the same, it doesn't matter the speed. The point is playing correctly, and "correctly" and "Jimmy Page" aren't things you put together in a sentence.

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: So, according to you, if crappy musicians can be legengs too and deserve respect for that... then bad musicians don't exist. You can't argue with me because as we're all the same, you can't be right. We'd be ALL wrong.

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: So next time someone says "JOHNNY RAMONE IS A BETTER SINGER THAN IAN GILLIAN" you must say "YES, SIR", for fuckwits can be legens too, so you can't argue.

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: PS: You'll take led zep over Steve Vai just because you're a moron that obviously can't tell holy perfection from CRAP. :)

Jimmy Page: "I'm not a guitarist as far as technician goes." Steve Vai: "I used to practice up to six hours a day." See? Who does really care about being a good guitarist and who is an idiot? Who plays flawlessly and who is lucky when he actually plays something right?

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: I must criticize any guitarist who doesn't play clean at all, Jimmy Page is the personification of mediocrity.

Why?

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: Slow of fast is the same, it doesn't matter the speed. The point is playing correctly, and "correctly" and "Jimmy Page" aren't things you put together in a sentence.

How can YOU tell whether he's playing HIS songs correctly on record or not? And before you come up with all the theory bullshit - how can he be "wrong" yet lots of people still love his work? It may sound bad to YOU, but that's simply your personal opinion. Music isn't a competition to see who's faster or more accurate, music is about putting good sounds together, and Page did that much better than many people who think they just need to learn how to play two-hand tapping at 240bpm.

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: So, according to you, if crappy musicians can be legengs too and deserve respect for that... then bad musicians don't exist. You can't argue with me because as we're all the same, you can't be right. We'd be ALL wrong.

If you think "crappy" means "who doesn't use lots of different technique" and "good" means "very technical", then I think YOU are mediocre.

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: So next time someone says "JOHNNY RAMONE IS A BETTER SINGER THAN IAN GILLIAN" you must say "YES, SIR", for fuckwits can be legens too, so you can't argue.

Johnny Ramone never needed to prove he could sing - he was a guitarist.

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: PS: You'll take led zep over Steve Vai just because you're a moron that obviously can't tell holy perfection from CRAP. :)

Stupidest remark I've heard in ages. You surprise me sometimes.

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote:

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: I must criticize any guitarist who doesn't play clean at all, Jimmy Page is the personification of mediocrity.

Why?

Because I like doing it :-P

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: Slow of fast is the same, it doesn't matter the speed. The point is playing correctly, and "correctly" and "Jimmy Page" aren't things you put together in a sentence.

How can YOU tell whether he's playing HIS songs correctly on record or not? And before you come up with all the theory bullshit - how can he be "wrong" yet lots of people still love his work? It may sound bad to YOU, but that's simply your personal opinion. Music isn't a competition to see who's faster or more accurate, music is about putting good sounds together, and Page did that much better than many people who think they just need to learn how to play two-hand tapping at 240bpm.

Ok, then Page's playing is based on sounding just like crap. He does a hell of a job!

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: So, according to you, if crappy musicians can be legengs too and deserve respect for that... then bad musicians don't exist. You can't argue with me because as we're all the same, you can't be right. We'd be ALL wrong.

If you think "crappy" means "who doesn't use lots of different technique" and "good" means "very technical", then I think YOU are mediocre.

Crappy means "can't even play what he tries to", if you don't use lots of different techniques either, then you're Jimmy Page. Good means "without mistakes". It doesn't mean fast, doesn't mean highly technical. Just "without mistakes". You want to raise the standards of what you think "good" means to me so it's not that Jimmy Page sucks but me being too exigent.

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: So next time someone says "JOHNNY RAMONE IS A BETTER SINGER THAN IAN GILLIAN" you must say "YES, SIR", for fuckwits can be legens too, so you can't argue.

Johnny Ramone never needed to prove he could sing - he was a guitarist.

That's my point. Jimmy Page wasn't a guitar player either, was a talentless performer. So if someone who doesn't even know how to play the guitar is a better guitar player than Jeff Beck (i.e), then Johnny Ramone could be a better singer than Ian Gillian.

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: PS: You'll take led zep over Steve Vai just because you're a moron that obviously can't tell holy perfection from CRAP. :)

Stupidest remark I've heard in ages. You surprise me sometimes.

Howerver, you never surprise me, honestly.

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote:

Jimmy Page: "I'm not a guitarist as far as technician goes." Steve Vai: "I used to practice up to six hours a day." See? Who does really care about being a good guitarist and who is an idiot? Who plays flawlessly and who is lucky when he actually plays something right?

I take back what I said a minute ago. THIS is the stupidest remark. You are underrating music. It takes much more (or "much less", depending on the point of view) than advanced techniques to make good music. You can practice 10 hours a day for 5 years, and you'll end up getting accuracy. Just like any teenager who spends days and nights on MSN ends up becoming a good typer at some point. But creativity to make excellent music and influence several generations of new guitarists DEFINITELY won't come from sitting on your bed and playing "1-3-4" exercises.

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote:

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: I must criticize any guitarist who doesn't play clean at all, Jimmy Page is the personification of mediocrity.

Why?

Because I like doing it :-P

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: Slow of fast is the same, it doesn't matter the speed. The point is playing correctly, and "correctly" and "Jimmy Page" aren't things you put together in a sentence.

How can YOU tell whether he's playing HIS songs correctly on record or not? And before you come up with all the theory bullshit - how can he be "wrong" yet lots of people still love his work? It may sound bad to YOU, but that's simply your personal opinion. Music isn't a competition to see who's faster or more accurate, music is about putting good sounds together, and Page did that much better than many people who think they just need to learn how to play two-hand tapping at 240bpm.

Ok, then Page's playing is based on sounding just like crap. He does a hell of a job!

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: So, according to you, if crappy musicians can be legengs too and deserve respect for that... then bad musicians don't exist. You can't argue with me because as we're all the same, you can't be right. We'd be ALL wrong.

If you think "crappy" means "who doesn't use lots of different technique" and "good" means "very technical", then I think YOU are mediocre.

Crappy means "can't even play what he tries to", if you don't use lots of different techniques either, then you're Jimmy Page. Good means "without mistakes". It doesn't mean fast, doesn't mean highly technical. Just "without mistakes". You want to raise the standards of what you think "good" means to me so it's not that Jimmy Page sucks but me being too exigent.

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: So next time someone says "JOHNNY RAMONE IS A BETTER SINGER THAN IAN GILLIAN" you must say "YES, SIR", for fuckwits can be legens too, so you can't argue.

Johnny Ramone never needed to prove he could sing - he was a guitarist.

That's my point. Jimmy Page wasn't a guitar player either, was a talentless performer. So if someone who doesn't even know how to play the guitar is a better guitar player than Jeff Beck (i.e), then Johnny Ramone could be a better singer than Ian Gillian.

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: PS: You'll take led zep over Steve Vai just because you're a moron that obviously can't tell holy perfection from CRAP. :)

Stupidest remark I've heard in ages. You surprise me sometimes.

Howerver, you never surprise me, honestly.

I rest my case, you make yourself look like a big joke, I don't need to do much. :)

- Horsie Clarkson - wrote:

Raf840 wrote:

- Horsie Clarkson - wrote:

Raf840 wrote:

- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: I must criticize any guitarist who doesn't play clean at all, Jimmy Page is the personification of mediocrity.

Why?

Because I like doing it :-P

Raf840 wrote:

- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: Slow of fast is the same, it doesn't matter the speed. The point is playing correctly, and "correctly" and "Jimmy Page" aren't things you put together in a sentence.

How can YOU tell whether he's playing HIS songs correctly on record or not? And before you come up with all the theory bullshit - how can he be "wrong" yet lots of people still love his work? It may sound bad to YOU, but that's simply your personal opinion. Music isn't a competition to see who's faster or more accurate, music is about putting good sounds together, and Page did that much better than many people who think they just need to learn how to play two-hand tapping at 240bpm.

Ok, then Page's playing is based on sounding just like crap. He does a hell of a job!

Raf840 wrote:

- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: So, according to you, if crappy musicians can be legengs too and deserve respect for that... then bad musicians don't exist. You can't argue with me because as we're all the same, you can't be right. We'd be ALL wrong.

If you think "crappy" means "who doesn't use lots of different technique" and "good" means "very technical", then I think YOU are mediocre.

Crappy means "can't even play what he tries to", if you don't use lots of different techniques either, then you're Jimmy Page. Good means "without mistakes". It doesn't mean fast, doesn't mean highly technical. Just "without mistakes". You want to raise the standards of what you think "good" means to me so it's not that Jimmy Page sucks but me being too exigent.

Raf840 wrote:

- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: So next time someone says "JOHNNY RAMONE IS A BETTER SINGER THAN IAN GILLIAN" you must say "YES, SIR", for fuckwits can be legens too, so you can't argue.

Johnny Ramone never needed to prove he could sing - he was a guitarist.

That's my point. Jimmy Page wasn't a guitar player either, was a talentless performer. So if someone who doesn't even know how to play the guitar is a better guitar player than Jeff Beck (i.e), then Johnny Ramone could be a better singer than Ian Gillian.

Raf840 wrote:

- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: PS: You'll take led zep over Steve Vai just because you're a moron that obviously can't tell holy perfection from CRAP. :)

Stupidest remark I've heard in ages. You surprise me sometimes.

Howerver, you never surprise me, honestly.

I rest my case, you make yourself look like a big joke, I don't need to do much. :)

What's up? Don't know how to answer? ;)

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote:

<font color=666600><b>Music Man wrote: Some people think of the guitar as a game, whereas others think of the guitar as an instrument. It's a shame, because one will never amount to much as a musician until he embraces the latter.

That's true. Jimmy Page: "I'm not a guitarist as far as technician goes." Steve Vai: "I used to practice up to six hours a day." See? Who does really care about being a good guitarist and who is an idiot? Who plays flawlessly and who is lucky when he actually plays something right?

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: So, according to you, if crappy musicians can be legengs... blah blah blah

Don't get philosophical with me, okay?

PS: You'll take led zep over Steve Vai just because you're a moron that obviously can't tell holy perfection from CRAP.

You can practice 10 hours a day for 5 years and you'll end up gettin accuracy. Yes, most likely. Or you could be Jimmy Page, play for more than 30 years and still don't get how to play correctly.

When it's "too advanced" or "too technical" for you, it means you're a poor moron that can't understand it. You better stick with Page's stuff and his basic pentatonic licks, played wrong.

Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: So, according to you, if crappy musicians can be legengs... blah blah blah

You're choosing to label him as a crappy musician because he isn't a technically proficient guitarist. Being a musician consists of the technical, creative, and intuitive sides - and how you apply them. And then there's the influence. Page has influenced tens of millions of musicians. He wasn't just about the music. He had these majestic and mystical sides to him as well which became known through his music and the image he put across. Music isn't just about the notes and the theoretical structures. It's about creating atmosphere, and maximizing the number of people that can get submerged into it. Whether or not you have technical ability is always secondary to that.

Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: Don't get philosophical with me, okay?

I absolutely WILL. That's what music is all about. Every musician and fan of music has their own philosophies about what's important to them, and what creates a good song. There is no book of rules that states which of those thoughts are inherently right and which are inherently wrong. That's what makes art an art. It's not a science that you can dissect to create absolutes.

Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: PS: You'll take led zep over Steve Vai just because you're a moron that obviously can't tell holy perfection from CRAP

Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: You can practice 10 hours a day for 5 years and you'll end up gettin accuracy. Yes, most likely. Or you could be Jimmy Page, play for more than 30 years and still don't get how to play correctly.

Great, as long as you value practicing and accuracy. But not everyone does. I know musicians who are twice your age and have had plenty of success and experience in the business - and they don't have half of your technical knowledge. They don't need it. Having the right attitude and ability to adapt to as many musical situations as possible are what will bring you success in music. Again, the technical side is secondary to that. I was once 18 too, and I thought that the guys who had really technical music were the best. And then one day I listened to Stevie Wonder's stuff from the 70s, and realized that a technically proficient musician could create quality songs that endured for decades. You can't say the same for Vai. He is a musician for musicians. As a musician myself, I appreciate Vai, but I fully understand (and I'm sure he too fully understands) that he's over the heads of pretty much everyone else. And that's ultimately not a good thing. Page could have chosen to practice for six hours a day. But he didn't, because he didn't have to. He had a gift for creating music that most people didn't have. Music is all about connecting with as many people as possible, not being esoteric and over the heads of most. Anyone can learn musical theory and become a technically proficient player, but not everyone can create music that has connected with people for generations. That's why Page is ultimately the better musician, and why he'll be remembered a hundred years from now.

Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: When it's "too advanced" or "too technical" for you, it means you're a poor moron that can't understand it. You better stick with Page's stuff and his basic pentatonic licks, played wrong.

You are in the same field as the select classical and jazz snobs who scowl at people who aren't at their level of technical understanding and/or ability, as if that's the most important thing. You will not get anywhere with that attitude, I assure you. Maybe you should join Treasure Moment. Your two completely different breeds of musical arrogance would surely be an interesting combination.

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: People often choose a solo played wrong like Stairway To Heaven over something amazingly played like Bo Rhap. People know shit about music.

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: "It's your opinion" No, it's not. It's not my opinion when he goes out of tune, it's not my opinion when he can't keep up with the most basic tempo. He plays like fucking crap and it's not my opinion. I do hear all his mistakes, I suffer them. They are fucking there! It's not me trying to sell my opinion as a fact, it's you that don't know shit and obviously don't realize about it.

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: You don't even know what the western scale is or how it works, just shut up.

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: And with just that you think that you already understand music...

<font color=666600><b>Music Man wrote: Music is independent of understanding or knowledge. It's not economics - it's art. Anyone who pretends that there is a base of knowledge necessary to understand art is simply being pretentious, if not completely ignorant. You can try to understand what elicits beauty, and that's fine, although impossible. However, concluding that there are steadfast rules necessary to elicit beauty is utterly senseless.

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: And with just that you think that you already understand music...

Since we first discussed Page, you've been repeating two things a lot: a) It's necessary to have good technical knowledge to make good music b) You're technically better than Page You got to the point of saying some of your compositions are better than Page (some bullshit about using 40 different chords in the same song, while Page would use only a handful...), and since then I've been asking you to show me some of your stuff. By putting items "a" and "b" together, we can conclude your music must be better than Page's. Why don't you prove it? At the moment, I've only heard you strumming easy shit on the guitar while singing joke lyrics, playing with voice delays, and covering other people's songs.

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: I never said my music was better than Page's. I just wonder how, if he is an amazing incredible outstanding composer, a stupid 18 year old fuck like me can write more complex stuff?

My opinion towards my own compositions is that I still don't get where I want to. It's just not there yet and it's hard to realize what's missing. Ask me to write a better song than Walking Back to Waterloo by the Bee Gees and I will say that I wouldn't be able do it in a million years. But damn... a stupid 5/6 chord rock song that barely has arrangements? Fuck, I can do better than that!

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: I never said my music was better than Page's. I just wonder how, if he is an amazing incredible outstanding composer, a stupid 18 year old fuck like me can write more complex stuff?

First, you say good music doesn't need to be very technical. But then, you confess your music isn't better than his, only more difficult. Yet you keep criticising him. *rolls eyes* Will you stop contradicting yourself?

My opinion towards my own compositions is that I still don't get where I want to. It's just not there yet and it's hard to realize what's missing. Ask me to write a better song than Walking Back to Waterloo by the Bee Gees and I will say that I wouldn't be able do it in a million years. But damn... a stupid 5/6 chord rock song that barely has arrangements? Fuck, I can do better than that!

Can you? Why don't you? It's easy to see what's "missing". You think if you study lots of music you can make good songs, which isn't necessarily true. If you study a bit of harmony, you'll be able to put together some chords and notes that will always sound good together. But then, what's special about the songs? Anyone with a bit of patience can spend a couple of hours sitting behind the piano and reading a book. A true genius will have the creativity to make the song sound special, different... Sometimes he'll even ignore a few of those "easy-to-follow" rules from the books, yet his music will be good. You may have more technique than Page - but Page found something you still haven't found, and won't find while you keep acting so narrow minded and so stuck to rules and technical knowledge (which IS important, but not the main thing in music). By the way, lovely song. Very interesting to hear. But still, it doesn't make me very excited to hear more from you, to learn how to play the song, to see a live performance, etc, etc. It's just a good song.

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: PS: If I ever write a song as simple, primitive, repetitive and boring as any of Page's, I FUCKING SWEAR I WON'T WRITE ANOTHER SONG IN MY LIFE.

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: PS: If I ever write a song as simple, primitive, repetitive and boring as any of Page's, I FUCKING SWEAR I WON'T WRITE ANOTHER SONG IN MY LIFE.

If you ever write and play something that sounds like Page, I'm buying your album. :)))))))))))

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: PS: If I ever write a song as simple, primitive, repetitive and boring as any of Page's, I FUCKING SWEAR I WON'T WRITE ANOTHER SONG IN MY LIFE.

If you ever write and play something that sounds like Page, I'm buying your album. :)))))))))))

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote:

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: PS: If I ever write a song as simple, primitive, repetitive and boring as any of Page's, I FUCKING SWEAR I WON'T WRITE ANOTHER SONG IN MY LIFE.

If you ever write and play something that sounds like Page, I'm buying your album. :)))))))))))

It's ok. Keep your money, I don't want people like you listening to my music.

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: I'm not dissing Page for not being technically proficient but for being an utter crap. He never fails to surprise me with his sloppiness (which seems unlimited).

And it is certainly not about maximizing the number of people that can get submerged into it.

Whatever you do with your work after that, it's your business but AT LEAST it should be a competent work played decently.

People that get submerged into something THAT sloppy it's because they can't notice the sloppiness.

It's not that they don't care, how could you "not care" if you actually noticed it?

It makes me wanna cry that people think the term "played correctly" means "TOO TOO TOO DAMN TECHNICAL."

Philosophy would be great when debating about two works correctly played. I do believe that's when it comes into it.

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: Then, you're just saying that success doesn't mean a thing. It just means that people liked it.

People often choose a solo played wrong like Stairway To Heaven over something amazingly played like Bo Rhap. People know shit about music. If they knew, we wouldn't be studying. What for? You study to learn, because you don't know. Most people know shit about music and don't understand anything at all.

I have my own opinion!!

If you really care about music you're not gonna put a technical limit to it. You will find amazing things that are not so technical and you will find incredible technical stuff too.

Whatever average people like or not, I don't give a fuck. It's me who's learning, practicing and studying. Not them. I trust my own point of view.

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: link

Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: I'm not dissing Page for not being technically proficient but for being an utter crap. He never fails to surprise me with his sloppiness (which seems unlimited).

So what if he plays sloppy sometimes? Most of his audience aren't guitarists, so what do they care?

Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: And it is certainly not about maximizing the number of people that can get submerged into it.

Then it's a difference of opinion. I think music should be applicable to and enjoyed by as many people as possible (while not sacrificing your integrity), while you think music should impress other musicians. Let's consider Stevie Wonder's 72-76 material for a moment. Those few records have sold more copies than every record by every virtuoso guitarist combined, and he is just as good a musician as they are. What makes Steve Vai and Eric Johnson better than him?

Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: Whatever you do with your work after that, it's your business but AT LEAST it should be a competent work played decently.

You have chosen to value "competence" over all other aspects of the overall musical picture. And it depends on what you think "decent" is. You label the music you like as "decent" purely from a technical standpoint. Most people don't.

Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: People that get submerged into something THAT sloppy it's because they can't notice the sloppiness.

Who cares... why should they? Why should it matter to them? Page wasn't playing for musicians. He was playing for whoever wanted to listen.

Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: It's not that they don't care, how could you "not care" if you actually noticed it?

Easily. I choose not to see the technical side as the most important side. So what if he hits an open string or a wrong note? The overall picture being presented is what counts, not just the guitar solo in the middle of the song. I don't limit my music listening to musicians who challenge me to get better. I'm not a musician 24/7. I'm a fan of music too. And music that isn't technical is just valid as music that is. Sometimes I want to hear the Dixie Dregs or Joe Pass, but sometimes I want to put on Rubber Soul or London Calling. You're far too busy analzying every little note of every song you hear to the point that you miss what most artists are trying to say overall. You choose to eliminate most artists' credibility and passion because they're not at your level of technical understanding and ability. Most musicians aren't like that, though. Does that make you better than all of them? You know what? Let's all listen to Shawn Lane and boycott everyone who is below him. Vai's skills are novice compared to Lane's.

Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: Then, you're just saying that success doesn't mean a thing. It just means that people liked it.

People liking your music isn't success? What do you define "success" as?

Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: People often choose a solo played wrong like Stairway To Heaven over something amazingly played like Bo Rhap. People know shit about music. If they knew, we wouldn't be studying. What for? You study to learn, because you don't know. Most people know shit about music and don't understand anything at all.

And what's wrong with that? Think about this for a moment: you're not a carpenter, chef, or a travel agent. How would you like it if a carpenter came to your house and said it looked like crap because it didn't have certain embellishments that only a professional carpenter could create or appreciate? How would you like it if a chef told you your taste in food was inferior to his, because you don't like the obscure food he likes, and aren't able to differentiate between a hundred different spices? And how would you like it if a travel agent said you hadn't lived your life fully unless you had travelled to 50 different countries in your lifetime?

Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: If you really care about music you're not gonna put a technical limit to it. You will find amazing things that are not so technical and you will find incredible technical stuff too.

Yes, and you will find incredible stuff that isn't technical at all. You are the one putting the technical limit on music here. You have set a minimum. Nobody here has set a maximum.

Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: Whatever average people like or not, I don't give a fuck. It's me who's learning, practicing and studying. Not them. I trust my own point of view.

Good. Now start respecting theirs. I have no problem with your musical views, as they are what work for you. But just stop being dogmatic about it, insisting that your way of viewing music is the only correct way.

Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: link

Very nice, interesting, and accessible piece of music. So, if you change your attitude towards musicians and common fans of music who think differently than you, then you've got a good future ahead of you. But if you walk into any gig, session, or even casual converation with your current attitude, then few people could care less of what your music sounds like. You're young, talented, and hopefully open to evolving as

<b><font color=gold>SMI<font color=1>TTY wrote: And in the midst of all of this pointless arguing... StSanders's account was suspended on Youtube. I really hope those videos show up again somewhere else.

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote: link

<b>- Horsie Clarkson - wrote: This one guy spending hours, days and weeks of practice... so he can play (i.e) the solo from Killer Queen perfectly, and he does. This other guy comes in and plays the same solo but with lots and lots of mistakes. Do you think it's fair to say one isn't better than the other? Are they equally good?

If that guy had said I LIKE MY HOUSE, IT MAKES ME FEEL COMFORTABLE, that would have been cool. He said it was the best, talking about things he didn't understand and the carpenter proved him wrong.

If you really care about music you're not gonna put a technical limit to it. You will find amazing things that are not so technical and you will find incredible technical stuff too.

Yes, and you will find incredible stuff that isn't technical at all. You are the one putting the technical limit on music here. You have set a minimum. Nobody here has set a maximum.

My minimum just says "NO MISTAKES, PLEASE." Do you think I'm asking too much?

You liked it? I'm very pleased about that.

As Beethoven said "I have never thought of writing for renown and glory. What I have in my heart must out; that is why I write."