QueenZone discussion #976802

*azzadude* wrote:

Penetration_Guru wrote: Could you be more succinct?

Could you be more of a fuk wit?

Knute wrote: Joe Pass Andres Segovia Frank Gambale The troubleclef dude on youtube is amazing. Just to name a few. In fact youtube has some amazing players on it like this dude: link

*azzadude* wrote:

Penetration_Guru wrote: Could you be more succinct?

Could you be more of a fuk wit?

Zebonka12 wrote: Don't believe me? Don't bother arguing. His fists are the ultimate bargaining chip.

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote: Steve Vai Eric Johnson Jason Becker Paul Gilbert Yngwie Malmsteen Buckethead Shawn Lane Richie Kotzen The rest of the world sucks.

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote: Kiko Loureiro

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote:

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote: Kiko Loureiro

I don't know much about him and I have barely heard anything about him, but the Guitar Player Magazine (brazilian edition, of course)mentions him all the time. He's not very well known among brazilian people in general, but among brazilian musicians he's probably the most admired guitarist.

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote: Steve Vai Eric Johnson Jason Becker Paul Gilbert Yngwie Malmsteen Buckethead Shawn Lane Richie Kotzen The rest of the world sucks.

<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote:

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote: Steve Vai Eric Johnson Jason Becker Paul Gilbert Yngwie Malmsteen Buckethead Shawn Lane Richie Kotzen The rest of the world sucks.

Only if you're deaf. You named some fine players, and missed lots of fine players. To name but a few: Gary Moore Ritchie Blackmore Jimmy Page Carlos Santana (so it's just major scales...he's good at it!) John McLaughlin

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: Oy, gosh. There is a lot of hate against Page these days. I don't think people understand how incredibly creative the man was. Perhaps he wasn't the cleanest, fastest, or most consistent. In fact, technically, he did kind of suck - but so did the Beatles. It's funny how as time goes on, the achievements of pioneers are slowly outphased from people's minds. Finally, it's actually pretty damn hard to play as well as Page did with his guitar slung at his knees. While perpetually high on cocain. But image is, was, and always will be a part of rock and roll. Drugs, too.

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote:

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: Oy, gosh. There is a lot of hate against Page these days. I don't think people understand how incredibly creative the man was. Perhaps he wasn't the cleanest, fastest, or most consistent. In fact, technically, he did kind of suck - but so did the Beatles. It's funny how as time goes on, the achievements of pioneers are slowly outphased from people's minds. Finally, it's actually pretty damn hard to play as well as Page did with his guitar slung at his knees. While perpetually high on cocain. But image is, was, and always will be a part of rock and roll. Drugs, too.

I don't find him incredibly creative either. He sucked technically... and technique is the only thing that makes you a good or a bad instrumentist. There's a difference between being kinda limitated and sucking big time. The Beatles were technically limitated, that's why they never tried anything they couldn' handle. At least they always played things that they could actually play... and played them fine! They may be sloppy sometimes, but hey! the guys did everything, and Paul is one fucking hell of a singer. Shitty Page, on the other hand, always tried to play things that he could NOT possibly play... and he still does. 30 years playing the same things and he still can't get them right, what a sucker!!

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: Well, I'd also like to think that the musical significance of Jimmy Page more or less ended when Led Zeppelin did.

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote:

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote:

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: Oy, gosh. There is a lot of hate against Page these days. I don't think people understand how incredibly creative the man was. Perhaps he wasn't the cleanest, fastest, or most consistent. In fact, technically, he did kind of suck - but so did the Beatles. It's funny how as time goes on, the achievements of pioneers are slowly outphased from people's minds. Finally, it's actually pretty damn hard to play as well as Page did with his guitar slung at his knees. While perpetually high on cocain. But image is, was, and always will be a part of rock and roll. Drugs, too.

I don't find him incredibly creative either. He sucked technically... and technique is the only thing that makes you a good or a bad instrumentist. There's a difference between being kinda limitated and sucking big time. The Beatles were technically limitated, that's why they never tried anything they couldn' handle. At least they always played things that they could actually play... and played them fine! They may be sloppy sometimes, but hey! the guys did everything, and Paul is one fucking hell of a singer. Shitty Page, on the other hand, always tried to play things that he could NOT possibly play... and he still does. 30 years playing the same things and he still can't get them right, what a sucker!!

First of all, you're making something up called "instrumentalism," whose only criteria is technical ability. 1) Saying "I don't find Jimmy Page to be creative" is pretty much the same as saying, "Penn can't juggle, and Teller isn't good at sleight of hand." It's pretty ridiculous to even suggest that. 2) When I say he "sucked" technically, I am comparing him to technical geniuses of the modern era, such as Paul Gilbert. However, you're making it seem like he couldn't play a note to save his life. He played rather well, especially at a time where lightning-paced licks were not common, nor were they a mainstay. Perhaps in live performances he was somewhat inconsistent. But like I said, maybe that had something to do with all the cocaine running through his body, as well as his guitar being slung at his feet. Even then, just because he didn't hit every single note perfectly, that doesn't mean he didn't perform very well. 3) Limitated is not a word. No idea what you're trying to say. Actually, I don't quite get your argument after the word "instrumentalist," so it would be cool if you could elaborate.

Zebonka12 wrote: If you're going to suck - do it loudly, and proudly!

<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote:

Zebonka12 wrote: If you're going to suck - do it loudly, and proudly!

I wonder if you've ever said that to your girlfriend...

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote:

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote:

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote:

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: Oy, gosh. There is a lot of hate against Page these days. I don't think people understand how incredibly creative the man was. Perhaps he wasn't the cleanest, fastest, or most consistent. In fact, technically, he did kind of suck - but so did the Beatles. It's funny how as time goes on, the achievements of pioneers are slowly outphased from people's minds. Finally, it's actually pretty damn hard to play as well as Page did with his guitar slung at his knees. While perpetually high on cocain. But image is, was, and always will be a part of rock and roll. Drugs, too.

I don't find him incredibly creative either. He sucked technically... and technique is the only thing that makes you a good or a bad instrumentist. There's a difference between being kinda limitated and sucking big time. The Beatles were technically limitated, that's why they never tried anything they couldn' handle. At least they always played things that they could actually play... and played them fine! They may be sloppy sometimes, but hey! the guys did everything, and Paul is one fucking hell of a singer. Shitty Page, on the other hand, always tried to play things that he could NOT possibly play... and he still does. 30 years playing the same things and he still can't get them right, what a sucker!!

First of all, you're making something up called "instrumentalism," whose only criteria is technical ability. 1) Saying "I don't find Jimmy Page to be creative" is pretty much the same as saying, "Penn can't juggle, and Teller isn't good at sleight of hand." It's pretty ridiculous to even suggest that. 2) When I say he "sucked" technically, I am comparing him to technical geniuses of the modern era, such as Paul Gilbert. However, you're making it seem like he couldn't play a note to save his life. He played rather well, especially at a time where lightning-paced licks were not common, nor were they a mainstay. Perhaps in live performances he was somewhat inconsistent. But like I said, maybe that had something to do with all the cocaine running through his body, as well as his guitar being slung at his feet. Even then, just because he didn't hit every single note perfectly, that doesn't mean he didn't perform very well. 3) Limitated is not a word. No idea what you're trying to say. Actually, I don't quite get your argument after the word "instrumentalist," so it would be cool if you could elaborate.

I meant LIMITED, not limitated. Sorry. As for instrumentist, I meant performer. I recall reading somewhere that word, and since "instrumentista" is actually a word in spanish and its meaning is exactly what I tried to say, I just wrote that. But I was pretty sure that I had read that and that it was actually a word, otherwise I would have looked up my dictionary :)
And I repeat, I don't find him creative. I find Hendrix creative, though he's so fucking sloppy. I find Steve Howe creative, Blackmore too.
Anyway, being creative does not make you a good guitar player. The only thing that makes you a good performer is doing well the only thing you have to do: PLAY.
I don't care whether Page created scales or whatever. He's sloppy as hell, therefore he sucks. If you're a good composer, you're a good composer. If you're a good arranger, you're a good arranger.
It doesn't make any sense that if you're a good arranger, you're a good guitar player.
A good guitar player must play well, otherwise he's not a good guitar player. No matter how great his songs may be, how cool his solos may be or whatever.
And it's not just a few notes not played perfectly but ho

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: One more thing, who do you think is one of Paul Gilbert's favorite, most respected guitarists whom he was most influenced by? It was Jimmy Page. Any real Paul Gilbert fan knows this. VSS, are you just some sort of poseur listing guitarists that you know can play fast as your favorites?

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote:

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: One more thing, who do you think is one of Paul Gilbert's favorite, most respected guitarists whom he was most influenced by? It was Jimmy Page. Any real Paul Gilbert fan knows this. VSS, are you just some sort of poseur listing guitarists that you know can play fast as your favorites?

Have you ever heard Paul Gilbert? Because he sounds nothing like Page. He sounds A LOT like EVH, actually. No use in arguing with an idiot that thinks Jimmy Page is a great guitar player and says a lot of incoherent bullshit to try to prove his point. I won't waste my time.

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote: Alrite, can you play Superheroes by Racer X? Now you're pissing me off. What the fuck can you play? What the fuck do you know about playing and who fucking sounds like who? Show me that you play better than me, and I'll stop. If you don't then there is no fucking possible way that you can realize who fucking sounds like who. It's not about reading who Paul likes, because you are a fucking idiot, but about who he actually sounds like. Saying that he sounds nothing like Eddie, only proves that you're talking nonsense and that you're a very stupid person. And deaf, of course. So, show me anything played by you, and you better play amazingly. Because you don't realize who plays better than who just by reading some shit, like you do but by playing that kind of stuff. You moron. OH OH JON ANDERSON DOESN'T GO OUT OF TUNE. You fucking deaf idiot.

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote: PLAY AND SHOW YOU'RE BETTER THAN ME

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote:

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote: PLAY AND SHOW YOU'RE BETTER THAN ME

Which would prove what? Hold on, let me go record in the studio in the bathroom of my dorm.

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote:

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote:

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote: PLAY AND SHOW YOU'RE BETTER THAN ME

Which would prove what? Hold on, let me go record in the studio in the bathroom of my dorm.

is that a "I'M A WUSS" sign? I think so

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote:

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote:

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote:

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote: PLAY AND SHOW YOU'RE BETTER THAN ME

Which would prove what? Hold on, let me go record in the studio in the bathroom of my dorm.

is that a "I'M A WUSS" sign? I think so

Is that an "I'm a dumbass" sign? I am quite certain. I wasn't kidding, I do have a recording studio in my bathroom. However, where do I see your guitar skills? Oh, never mind. I didn't know you were on youtube: link I also find it incredibly laughable that you think that "I think it's possible that I might be able to play guitar better than you" is a rational argument for why "Jimmy Page sucks." Fuckin' idiot.

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote:

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote:

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote:

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote:

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote: PLAY AND SHOW YOU'RE BETTER THAN ME

Which would prove what? Hold on, let me go record in the studio in the bathroom of my dorm.

is that a "I'M A WUSS" sign? I think so

Is that an "I'm a dumbass" sign? I am quite certain. I wasn't kidding, I do have a recording studio in my bathroom. However, where do I see your guitar skills? Oh, never mind. I didn't know you were on youtube: link I also find it incredibly laughable that you think that "I think it's possible that I might be able to play guitar better than you" is a rational argument for why "Jimmy Page sucks." Fuckin' idiot.

It's a rational argument for why you can't realize that Page sucks, and that Paul sounds nothing like him. Stupid ignorant prick. I still wait for your version of Scarified or B.R.O

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote:

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote:

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote:

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote:

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote:

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote: PLAY AND SHOW YOU'RE BETTER THAN ME

Which would prove what? Hold on, let me go record in the studio in the bathroom of my dorm.

is that a "I'M A WUSS" sign? I think so

Is that an "I'm a dumbass" sign? I am quite certain. I wasn't kidding, I do have a recording studio in my bathroom. However, where do I see your guitar skills? Oh, never mind. I didn't know you were on youtube: link I also find it incredibly laughable that you think that "I think it's possible that I might be able to play guitar better than you" is a rational argument for why "Jimmy Page sucks." Fuckin' idiot.

It's a rational argument for why you can't realize that Page sucks, and that Paul sounds nothing like him. Stupid ignorant prick. I still wait for your version of Scarified or B.R.O

And where are your versions? You have made 0 rational arguments thus far, so I suppose I only continue this discussion to further humiliate you. I never said that Paul Gilbert sounded like Jimmy Page, now, did I? I merely said that the entire world, even Paul Gilbert and whomever else you idolize, agrees with me and not you (of course). You are so utterly ignorant when it comes to music and the guitar. The average person who has never even picked up an instrument demonstrates more sense than you do. Let me correct myself, the below-average person who has never even picked up an instrument demonstrates a more sound understanding of music and the guitar than you ever will. These are not jokes, nor are they meant to make fun of you. They are cold, hard facts.

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: Oy, gosh. There is a lot of hate against Page these days. I don't think people understand how incredibly creative the man was. Perhaps he wasn't the cleanest, fastest, or most consistent. In fact, technically, he did kind of suck - but so did the Beatles. It's funny how as time goes on, the achievements of pioneers are slowly outphased from people's minds. Finally, it's actually pretty damn hard to play as well as Page did with his guitar slung at his knees. While perpetually high on cocain. But image is, was, and always will be a part of rock and roll. Drugs, too.

Mr.Jingles wrote:

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: Oy, gosh. There is a lot of hate against Page these days. I don't think people understand how incredibly creative the man was. Perhaps he wasn't the cleanest, fastest, or most consistent. In fact, technically, he did kind of suck - but so did the Beatles. It's funny how as time goes on, the achievements of pioneers are slowly outphased from people's minds. Finally, it's actually pretty damn hard to play as well as Page did with his guitar slung at his knees. While perpetually high on cocain. But image is, was, and always will be a part of rock and roll. Drugs, too.

I've hated Page ever since he sold his soul to "Satan". No, I'm not talking about Beelzebub, the Lord Of Darkness. I'm talking about "Satan" in the music world, and that man is P.Diddy, Puffy, or whatever you want to call that fuckin' scumbag. Page sold his "music" soul when he allowed "Satan" to masacre 'Kashmir' by making a hip-hop version of one of the best songs ever.

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: I thought I made it incredibly clear and obvious that I am at a college dormitory. You clearly can't keep up with my clever replies, and that much is true. And I adamantly stand for the skin flute being a legitimate musical instrument. I asked you to record something, and I haven't seen anything yet. As for me, I'M AT COLLEGE. You have to be incredibly retarded to not have grasped that concept yet. I bet you can't even play the guitar. Knowing poseurs like yourself, you probably just own a few guitars so that you can show people and pretend you can play. But when they ask you to show them something, you make up an excuse, like, "There's a tornado warning in the area. I think we'd best be off to the basement." Idiot. I thought by now you'd realize the ignorance you're spewing forth and just quit. But as long as you continue, I shall further make a fool of you! Edit: I have an idea. How about you record something, show everyone how good you are, and then I'll admit that I was wrong, and that you're better at shredding than me, thus invalidating all my posts.

Zebonka12 wrote: And I gotta add.... you've both got every opportunity to show each other your playing. Why hasn't Matias linked to this yet?? link

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote: awwwww guitar duels are cool =) Used to do that with a friend of mine, we played as fast as we could trying to beat each other and harmonizing the sweeps and tappings BEST JAMS EVER Gotta do that again, some day =(

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote: As simple as saying that Jimmy Page didn't suck. You say he MIGHT HAVE POSSIBLY BEEN SOMEWHAT SLOPPY. I say he sucks, and he always sucked and always will. You almost say that being sloppy can't keep you from being a great guitar player... then Johnny Ramone would be better than Shawn Lane, because he is more important.

RETROLOVE<h6>The Black Queen wrote: Robert Johnson

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote:

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote: As simple as saying that Jimmy Page didn't suck. You say he MIGHT HAVE POSSIBLY BEEN SOMEWHAT SLOPPY. I say he sucks, and he always sucked and always will. You almost say that being sloppy can't keep you from being a great guitar player... then Johnny Ramone would be better than Shawn Lane, because he is more important.

Better technically? Of course not. But that is only one characteristic of MANY (which you completely ignore and pretend don't exist) that a guitar player has and should have. Greater? Most definitely.

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote:

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote:

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote: As simple as saying that Jimmy Page didn't suck. You say he MIGHT HAVE POSSIBLY BEEN SOMEWHAT SLOPPY. I say he sucks, and he always sucked and always will. You almost say that being sloppy can't keep you from being a great guitar player... then Johnny Ramone would be better than Shawn Lane, because he is more important.

Better technically? Of course not. But that is only one characteristic of MANY (which you completely ignore and pretend don't exist) that a guitar player has and should have. Greater? Most definitely.

I knew you'd say that. I pity you, really.

<font color=blue>Rick wrote: Steve Lukather. I'm the only who mentioned him, so he IS really underrated. His feel and technical ability is stunning. *waits to be credited as "a fag who doesn't know a fuck about music"* :-)

koopa wrote: VSS, you're matiasmay? Dude, you rock! Why did you take down your Queen videos though? And how about recording yourself playing "Addicted to That Rush"? =)

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote:

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote:

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote:

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote: As simple as saying that Jimmy Page didn't suck. You say he MIGHT HAVE POSSIBLY BEEN SOMEWHAT SLOPPY. I say he sucks, and he always sucked and always will. You almost say that being sloppy can't keep you from being a great guitar player... then Johnny Ramone would be better than Shawn Lane, because he is more important.

Better technically? Of course not. But that is only one characteristic of MANY (which you completely ignore and pretend don't exist) that a guitar player has and should have. Greater? Most definitely.

I knew you'd say that. I pity you, really.

Do you pity my reason? Or my wisdom? I suppose ignorance IS bliss, but I'd gladly sacrifice bliss if ignorance is the price.

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote:

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote:

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote:

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote:

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote: As simple as saying that Jimmy Page didn't suck. You say he MIGHT HAVE POSSIBLY BEEN SOMEWHAT SLOPPY. I say he sucks, and he always sucked and always will. You almost say that being sloppy can't keep you from being a great guitar player... then Johnny Ramone would be better than Shawn Lane, because he is more important.

Better technically? Of course not. But that is only one characteristic of MANY (which you completely ignore and pretend don't exist) that a guitar player has and should have. Greater? Most definitely.

I knew you'd say that. I pity you, really.

Do you pity my reason? Or my wisdom? I suppose ignorance IS bliss, but I'd gladly sacrifice bliss if ignorance is the price.

I pity your soul, you're really stupid.

Valensian Sky Surveillance wrote: "OOH OOH I AM AT COLLEGE, I'M A FUCKING DIPSHIT I DON'T HAVE A GUITAR, CUZ I LOST THE LAST ONE WHEN I STUCK IT UP MY ASS" Music Fag, 2007

Zebonka12 wrote: I am so lost. Pass the popcorn!

<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: Oh.