Is the Guitar Dead/Dying?
 

So, over the years, the electric guitar has been the platform for new musicians. The combination of price and range has played a key part in this. But what was the last time that the pop charts were set ablaze by a guitar pop song? The real question here is: Is the guitar the starting point for those wishing to play music? Are people even making music with their guitars anymore, or bypassing it altogether to make music on their computers?


Yeah, I know the topic is a strangely worded, but I'm writing a short piece on the topic, and would like to know if anyone would be willing to help me out on this.

Soo... do you live on Mars? Does your spaceship have an internet connection?

Is this for homework, a blog, or a cultural report for commander Zorgon about the habitants of Earth?

A girl named Orianthi wants to meet you.

Yeah, all music today is electronic. What's a guitar, anyway?

Mine are both fucking dead.

Strings have gone on one and the jack lead on t'other.

£45 to fix. Bollocks.

I do kind of think the guitar is falling out of favor, at least as lead instrument. It's not surprising really. I mean look at the trumpet, plenty of people still play it but it's certainly not as popular as it was sixty or seventy years ago. After reaching the apex of its popularity in about the 1970s, I think it's inevitable that the guitar is coming to a point where it will be eclipsed by something else.

This is the most epic example of a pot calling a kettle black that I've ever seen.

Really? I much prefer:

http://yunno.com/data/content/full/2...-kettle-bl.jpg

@ TheStunningCunt

Maybe I should have rephrased the statement.

I feel like today's top musician's (or more like most well known) don't give the guitar the respect it deserves. I mean most people these days try sooo hard to emulate already present well known guitar tones and playing styles instead of trying to find their own way of playing.

I love the guitar, I truly do, whenever I get a significant amount of money I usually spend it on stuff for my setup and any other instruments I might currently be obsessed with. I don't even have a learner's permit (driving) so when I want to play with other people I pack up my gear, walk five miles down the road and boy, do I get **** tons of things yelled at me by passers by. I love playing so much I'm willing to give up driving to pay for my equipment and be rediculed by idiots. All these hardships I encounter are because the guitar has been turned into a douchebag instrument, it's truly, truly a sad thing.

this isn't just spot on, it IS the spot.

I certainly don't think it's "dying" in any capacity but I get what you are saying, definetly. People aren't really mapping out their own styles anymore, everything just falls into grooves and genres/styles of playing.

Got to respect guys like Fred Frith and Tom Morello.

It's almost like you were intentionally trying to describe KoL...

what's wrong with yours?

@TCS that's messed up. if you've ever done any soldering the jack lead shouldn't be too complicated. most of the time it's just two wires.

fair enough. UFO noises are great, there's no such thing as too many pedals hahaha

Hi there,

The guitar in popular music will never fade away completely and even if it's not upfront as the main focus, it's always gonna be there as a key part of the whole overall sound. This is across all the different genres, rock, country, reggae, jazz.

Actually, I disagree with the guy writing the paper, maybe that's unfair...I think he was asking a question and not coming out with a statement.

Just take country music as an example: Brad Paisley, Keith Urban, just two examples of really pretty good guitarists and both topping the country charts on a regular basis. Bon Jovi, still hard at it and featuring some pretty nice guitar.

Then there's me. Hell, I don't copy anyone really and just have my own amazing technique which might catch on, might not but I love it anyway....One man reggae style.
Not that showy but a helluva lot of rhythm and feel in there.Odd-ball is the best way to describe it....

Vive la guitare Gordon.

I'd say yes, skilled lead guitarists are really falling out of favor.

Unfortunately more and more people think a rock band should be one singer/songwriter and a bunch of tools who STFU and do their job without asking questions. I see that philosophy in a lot of contemporary mainstream rock music and also a lot of indie and punk music.

Never say never. You don't hear a heck of a lot of lute or harpsichord in modern music despite the fact that they apparently were both once a very popular instruments.

Hi there,

When the question is asked: "Is the guitar dead/dying" ? We all tend to jump to the solo guitar and start looking for examples of great guitar solos. The guitar is a very versatile instrument and although it might not be upfront and right in your face, it is still present in most types of commercial music.

I don't think computers will see the guitar fading. Loads of guitarists nowadays use their home computers as a way to record their guitars and with all the software available today it is a lot cheaper and less complicated than it was say 20 years ago.

Just look on youtube. There's all levels on there from beginners playing 'House of the Rising Sun' to some really good examples. I think the guitar is as popular as ever, if anything, part of the mystery as been removed and more folks are giving it a go. Picking things up from youtube does encourage the cloning of styles but there will always be the few who can break out from the norm.

Course, nearly everything will die eventually but for me, the guitar is still alive and kicking. Just depends where you look....

Gordon.

That's yet another reason I love prog, implementing the use of classical instruments in rock music.

Many classical composers saw potential in every instrument they could find, it's a shame these sensibilities don't exist anymore, mostly out of fear of some hipster (9001th use of the word so far Urban) crying "PRETENTIOUS WAAAAAAAH".

It's disappointing that of all the wonderful instruments in existance. Only about 5% finds it's way in most contemporary popular music. Guitar, bass, drum, keyboards (including samplers) and turntables.

Wakeman has done some great Harpischord work both solo and with Yes and David Bowie, a lot of prog bands loved the Harpischord. Gentle Giant and Renaissance being good examples.

And Jan Akkerman (Focus) has done a lot of awesome stuff with the Lute.

I might be in the minority here, but I don't think so whatsoever.

As a vehicle for songwriting, the guitar has probably seen better days, but the absence of guitar-oriented rock isn't necessarily an indication of the guitar's demise. Genres change shape and effect different tonal demands from the guitar, but it's been centric to the classic interpretation of a "band" since the late 1950s, and I don't think it's stopping any time soon.

By my estimation there's at least 50 million people in America that play or own a guitar, most under the age of 55 or so (basically encompassing baby boomers onwards). The guitar manufacturing industry itself is enormous and shows no signs of slowing any time soon.

If anything I'd say the guitar is too dominant, too omnipresent. When's the last time you saw someone playing a saxophone or trumpet on a balcony at sunset? It appears to me that there's just too many people that choose the guitar over other antiquated (or even tech-heavy) instruments.

I don't think computer-generated music is a fad or that the guitar will always be around (God knows the mellotron didn't last :(). But suggesting that it's dying sounds absurd to me. The guitar is far too endearing, far too symbolic an instrument for it to simply vanish off the face of modern music.

I have to confess I don't have a whole lot of experience with people playing any instrument on a balcony at sunset.

It's like a fucking mole hill around my apartment complex, the idiots only come out when the cliche is appropriate.

If only you had a giant whack-a-mole mallet thingy.

Personally the meaning of a "band" itself has been bastardized. I'm unappologetically biased towards older rock music in this regard, when rock bands where each member shined equally were much more embraced.

But since punk rock and bands like AC/DC and Aerosmith people now tend to favor rock bands where it's really all about the singer and guitarist, and the bassist and drummer are forced to wear collars that send a painful electronic jolt to their spinal columns if they so much as think about doing something unexpected or adventurous, for the sake of not appearing to be "wankers".

It really makes me mad that most people think of rock bands this way, not as a way for each musician to express themselves in their own way, but a state of dictatorship where the members who play the "unimportant" instruments are expected to keep in line so as not to clash with the leader of the group. I won't deny that I like several bands who fall into this category though. But I don't think it's the only legitimate way to run a rock band.

Actually I won't argue with this. I love the guitar, but there's not as many bold innovators with the instrument like there was in the 60s and 70s, that's not nostalgia bias it's just a fact.

Indeed, there's a lot of idiots who shun the use of other instruments because "IT'S NOT ROCK N ROLL". For god's sake not ALL music should be rock n roll. And it's f*cking bullsh*t that a genre that was all about breaking convention has now become this huge industry with all kinds of ridiculous "rules" being shoved down our throats nonstop by hack writers for magazines like Spin, Blender and Rolling Stone who love to shun things for not being "rock n roll". This magazines always contradict themselves though, don't hate on prog bands use lines like "where's the guitar" and then go on about how f*cking great Radiohead is. A band most music magazines would probably trash nonstop if they didn't have the kind of following they have, lol, after that's exactly what they did at first.

Also I f*cking hate that goddamn Bob Seger song, the one where he pretty much writes off every other genre of music in existance and boasts about how Old Time Rock N Roll is the only music that matters.

Sometimes, Rock N Roll needs to go f*ck itself.

Man, if given the opportunity I would totally trade my guitar for a mellotron.

I agree with your overarching point here but I disagree that it's a development that happened in the 70s. I think it's been that way throughout rock history. Look at the Rolling Stones or the Who for example. Or, hell, just look at the names of groups like Buddy Holly & the Crickets or Bill Haley & His Comets. Truth be told, I'd say this is really something that extends far beyond just rock music.

I'm not quite sure what you're talking about.

What development are you talking about? The development of bands with ensembles of equally expressive musicians? I never said it was developed in the 60s and 70s, I'm just saying that's when such bands were most prominent.

If you're talking about the opposite, then are you saying The Who didn't have a very expressive rhythm section? Because they most certainly did, even in their earlier days. The Who were definitely an "ensemble" band. Either way I'm not saying punk or AC/DC introduced the idea, but it's in the late 70s when there started to be a real backlash against ensemble bands and people started coming up with all these ridiculously strict rules.

How guitarists should never do this, drummers should never do that, bassists should never be audible, stupid bullsh*t like that.

You said "since punk rock and bands like AC/DC and Aerosmith people now tend to favor rock bands where it's really all about the singer and guitarist". I was pointing out that it was like that before "punk rock and bands like AC/DC and Aerosmith" as well.

I never said such music never existed before punk, you should know full well that I of all people am not gonna give punk credit it doesn't deserve, since a lot punk bands (including The Sex Pistols) mostly just ripped off groups like New York Dolls, The Mc5 and The Stooges.

What I'm saying is that thanks in some part to punk rock and other rock bands of the time like KISS, AC/DC and Aerosmith the media started promoting certain ideals of what a rock n roll band "should" be. I hold no grudges against any of these bands in particular and everyone knows I'm a huge AC/DC fan.

I just think it's a very closed minded point of view, there is no "should" in rock n roll, there are no f*cking rules. One thing I detest is people who say rock n roll needs saving, it doesn't f*cking need saving, it needs to f*cking evolve. And music publications send a mixed message when the bands they say are "saving" rock n roll, namely all these garage rock revival bands and groups like The Libertines, are just bands who are making the same generic "Rock N Roll" that was being made over 40 f*cking years ago, ironically that's even more generic and unoriginal than the corporate radio rock that rock n roll aparrently needs saving from.

Prog rock tried to evolve the genre, but all these idiots got scared, said they don't like change and cried about how rock n roll needs to be saved, that it must never f*cking evolve, and that it needs to regress into a primitive state. It's the equilvalent of someone saying cinema is dead because it's no longer in black and white. Besides, even punk evolved and lead to post punk, which isn't any less pretentious than prog ever was.

The very idea of "killing" or "saving" genres is absurd, punk neither saved rock n roll or killed prog, because rock n roll never needed saving and genres don't die just because they fall out of favor with the mainstream. So what if your favorite genre dies out in popularity? That music still exists, it's still in your record collection, enjoy it. You don't have to make a f*cking war out of it.

Yes, boo boo, in my original post I was saying I agree with you on this.

I understand. What I'm saying is those ideals existed long before those bands.

Again I never said they didn't exist before punk, I'm talking about how punk brought about a certain point of view into the mainstream media.

The guitar isn't dead, rock is just not a big thing these days. When is the last time you heard a GOOD rock song on MTV. It's all this Lady Gaga Jusin Bieber crap that really needs to be thrown away. Let's face it, pop culture and rap are taking over, whenever they need guitar in a song they usually just throw something in from a computer or music program. It's not just the guitar, it's music.

Sigh, this is what I'm talking about.

People have to wage genre wars all the time. "Oh noes electronica and rap is more popular than rock, SOMEONE MUST SAVE IT"

Even if rock music were to die right now, it had a great 60 year run, nothing wrong with letting other forms of music take the spotlight. That is by no means the death of music, in fact that is the way of music, trends come and go, they can't last forever.

Besides that, everyone seems to focus on mainstream media. Just because rock music isn't the hottest thing on the charts or MTV doesn't mean there's not 4,053,554,657,899,023,246 doing a great job.

I was just exaggerating, but still it is how music works but it doesn't have to stop. For me, Rock will never fade away. I won't give in to bandwagon, and join the pop culture. Rock is still holding strong, and it will remain as fans remain loyal.

Honestly, by the time rock actually starts to fade away you'll be too old to care.

You're probably right. I'll be dead by then. That makes me glad to hear.

There's nothing wrong with wanting to preserve a genre of music, I believe every genre of music has a right to exist, even the ones I don't particarly like.

I just hate it when fans of a genre have to make a war out of it, and have to blame the dying popularity of a genre on another genre and use that as an excuse to lambast it nonstop.

Just about every kind of music community is guilty of this

Punk and indie fans tend to show endless ignorance towards classic rock and prog and make it out like any band (like say Muse) who attempts to revive interest in these genres is worse than Hitler and Stalin combined.

Prog fans tend to be biased against any kind of music that could be considered "pop" and stupidly think that simply calling something "pop" is a legitimate criticism.

Metal fans tend to show ignorance to just about goddamn everything.

Hehe ^, I can't say it's not true. But that's how it has to be.

And, again, I'm saying that point of view was already present in the mainstream media long before punk came along.