GuitarBizarre debates virtuosity

ixtlan22 · 03-12-2009, 05:43 PM

I guess it's all about content for me. If there are a lot of notes then they damn well better be saying something. John Coltrane is a good example of one of the only true masters of playing lots and lots of notes, most of which sound like they have a real point to me (I'm mostly referring to the middle part of his career where the free thing and the form started to mix together). I guess what happens to a lot of musicians is that the things they can play very very fast/ cleanly are things that are ingrained in their muscle memory and therefore aren't necessarily anything that they really thought out, just something they've practiced a lot. Usually when a musician gets to a higher tempo or a smaller subdivision, they have to resort to the things they know rather than really developing their ideas to their full potential. To me this is not really the definition of virtuosity but a lot of listeners will mistake someone who is super technically proficient for a virtuoso. As far as I'm concerned, more often than not, someone playing A LOT really sounds like they are playing nothing to me. Content. That's what it's all about in my mind.

As an afterthought, I think a virtuoso is someone that can make one note more impressive than a thousand and then as soon as you're used to that, they can melt your face with a blistering run, bursting with inspiration.

jackhammer · 03-13-2009, 09:42 AM

I personally wouldn't say that virtuosity is any less valid but the majority of people just don't like it. There has to be a line when music is played for the sake of it that crosses my own criteria for listening. This can be any musical genre whether it's Jazz, Rock or vocal operatic virtuosity. They may well be technically brilliant but it's not what I want to hear. Maybe if I was a musician they I may look at it differently but I have held this stance since first hearing Malmsteem in 1986 and being a rock fan too. Sometimes I can barely tolerate EVH's soloing because it's sonically far too busy. I think for the same as say Mastodon's music, the drum tracks are far too busy and I consider them superfluous and they detract from the music.

03-12-2009, 05:43 PM	#11 (permalink)
ixtlan22 Loves Jan Terri Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 184	I guess it's all about content for me. If there are a lot of notes then they damn well better be saying something. John Coltrane is a good example of one of the only true masters of playing lots and lots of notes, most of which sound like they have a real point to me (I'm mostly referring to the middle part of his career where the free thing and the form started to mix together). I guess what happens to a lot of musicians is that the things they can play very very fast/ cleanly are things that are ingrained in their muscle memory and therefore aren't necessarily anything that they really thought out, just something they've practiced a lot. Usually when a musician gets to a higher tempo or a smaller subdivision, they have to resort to the things they know rather than really developing their ideas to their full potential. To me this is not really the definition of virtuosity but a lot of listeners will mistake someone who is super technically proficient for a virtuoso. As far as I'm concerned, more often than not, someone playing A LOT really sounds like they are playing nothing to me. Content. That's what it's all about in my mind. As an afterthought, I think a virtuoso is someone that can make one note more impressive than a thousand and then as soon as you're used to that, they can melt your face with a blistering run, bursting with inspiration. __________________ "Peculiar travel suggestions are dancing lessons from God." -Bockonon-

03-13-2009, 09:42 AM	#12 (permalink)
jackhammer Ba and Be. Join Date: May 2007 Location: This Is England Posts: 17,331	I personally wouldn't say that virtuosity is any less valid but the majority of people just don't like it. There has to be a line when music is played for the sake of it that crosses my own criteria for listening. This can be any musical genre whether it's Jazz, Rock or vocal operatic virtuosity. They may well be technically brilliant but it's not what I want to hear. Maybe if I was a musician they I may look at it differently but I have held this stance since first hearing Malmsteem in 1986 and being a rock fan too. Sometimes I can barely tolerate EVH's soloing because it's sonically far too busy. I think for the same as say Mastodon's music, the drum tracks are far too busy and I consider them superfluous and they detract from the music. __________________ It be my music and film collection. “A cynic by experience, a romantic by inclination and now a hero by necessity.”