200 greatest guitarists in rock (single, Tool, members, title, quote)

Mojo · 02-21-2009, 08:28 PM

I dont think thats gonna be as unpopular an opinion as you may think on this board.

Personlly I disagree but I'm almost certain theres a lot of Townshend and general Who indifference here.

Elastic Man · 02-22-2009, 07:41 AM

I'm sorry but I have to say it... what a boring, conservative list. Fred Frith and Snakefinger behind Yngwie Malmsteen!? You must be insane! And since when was popularity a criteria for greatness?

Mojo · 02-22-2009, 08:45 AM

...and yet again someone who has not read the thread properly. The criteria for selection is stated in the first post and this is one persons opinion. I dont agree with the accuracy of placings for every single choice on the list but we coud have every member of this forum make a list and all of them would be different. In fact, I wonder how many members would actually be able to compile a list of 215 guitarists that they actually know jack **** about in the first place.

Gah. Rant over.

PS a boring, conservative list would surely have Zakk Wylde, Dimebag Darrell and Satch to name but a few much closer to the top in favour of the likes of Moore and Blackmore for a start.

Elastic Man · 02-22-2009, 11:00 AM

Umm... I realise that this is just one person's opinion but surely that doesn't mean that I'm not entitled to disagree with it? I read the criteria in the first post and questioned why popularity should even be included. I really don't see what's so wrong with that really. True, if Zakk Wylde etc. were highly placed the list would be even worse but I don't think that that really makes the current list any better. Sorry if I offended anyone by the way, I was just offering my own opinion, which is surely as important as anyone elses even if it differs from what most people think.

khfreek · 02-22-2009, 11:57 AM

Popularity is an indicator of how likable their playing is.

Mojo · 02-22-2009, 12:50 PM

No, its not that I was offended. It was admittedly a pretty hotheaded rant but that was a response to a few posts to be fair.

Everyones gonna have a differing opinion about a list like this but I guess I just dont understand how the list is conservative or boring. If anything, I think its very extensive considering its compiled entirely by the one poster.

crash_override · 02-22-2009, 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elastic Man

I'm sorry but I have to say it... what a boring, conservative list. Fred Frith and Snakefinger behind Yngwie Malmsteen!? You must be insane! And since when was popularity a criteria for greatness?

Malmsteen shreds. He deserves to be right up there.

Elastic Man · 02-23-2009, 01:56 PM

Maybe I overreacted. It's certainly not the worst list I've ever seen but, at the same time, it's far from the best. I just get a little frustrated when someone puts so much time and effort into compiling such a list and I feel like I've learnt nothing from reading it. In fact it just seems like repetition of things I've disagreed with before, which can be tedious. Oh well.
As for Malmsteen... I stand by what I said before. His playing is just embarrassing. Technically gifted he may be but this really means very little when it comes down to it. Much as I disagree with Scaruffi on many other matters, I think he is worth quoting on this point because I sincerely agree with the sentiment - "There is a difference, in my opinion, between a juggler and an artist. If the playing is barely passable, but it delivers a lot of emotion, that musician is a genius." Players such as Fred Frith, Jimi Hendrix, John Fahey, Sonny Sharrock, Joe Pass (okay so maybe I'm moving out of the 'rock' sphere a little now...) are what I would deem to be geniuses because they play with passion, creativity etc. whilst also retaining a sufficient degree of technical proficiency in order to express themselves adequately. Malmsteen's playing, on the other hand, is (to me) technical wank of the worst kind. It is utter musical masturbation, which I find not only entirely uninteresting but even quite repulsive.
And I still don't find the popularity of a particular player to be any indication of greatness. A whole host of other factors come in to play to decide whether a particular thing is popular quite apart from its 'likability'.

crash_override · 02-23-2009, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elastic Man

As for Malmsteen... I stand by what I said before. His playing is just embarrassing.

Good one.

No I got you, I know where you're coming from. You just are straying away from the topic. Greatest Rock Guitarists, and you prefer whining and grooving over shredding. Thats cool. I dig both.

Terrible Lizard · 02-23-2009, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elastic Man

John Fahey

Now you're talking.

But Malmsteen has his uses, especially on long drives through the city.

02-21-2009, 08:28 PM	#261 (permalink)
Mojo Melancholia Eternally Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: England Posts: 5,018	I dont think thats gonna be as unpopular an opinion as you may think on this board. Personlly I disagree but I'm almost certain theres a lot of Townshend and general Who indifference here. __________________ Last.FM \| Echoes and Dust

02-22-2009, 07:41 AM	#262 (permalink)
Elastic Man Groupie Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 32	I'm sorry but I have to say it... what a boring, conservative list. Fred Frith and Snakefinger behind Yngwie Malmsteen!? You must be insane! And since when was popularity a criteria for greatness? __________________ http://www.last.fm/user/Wombfruit

02-22-2009, 08:45 AM	#263 (permalink)
Mojo Melancholia Eternally Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: England Posts: 5,018	...and yet again someone who has not read the thread properly. The criteria for selection is stated in the first post and this is one persons opinion. I dont agree with the accuracy of placings for every single choice on the list but we coud have every member of this forum make a list and all of them would be different. In fact, I wonder how many members would actually be able to compile a list of 215 guitarists that they actually know jack **** about in the first place. Gah. Rant over. PS a boring, conservative list would surely have Zakk Wylde, Dimebag Darrell and Satch to name but a few much closer to the top in favour of the likes of Moore and Blackmore for a start. __________________ Last.FM \| Echoes and Dust

02-22-2009, 11:00 AM	#264 (permalink)
Elastic Man Groupie Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 32	Umm... I realise that this is just one person's opinion but surely that doesn't mean that I'm not entitled to disagree with it? I read the criteria in the first post and questioned why popularity should even be included. I really don't see what's so wrong with that really. True, if Zakk Wylde etc. were highly placed the list would be even worse but I don't think that that really makes the current list any better. Sorry if I offended anyone by the way, I was just offering my own opinion, which is surely as important as anyone elses even if it differs from what most people think. __________________ http://www.last.fm/user/Wombfruit

02-22-2009, 11:57 AM	#265 (permalink)
khfreek What a guy Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Brentwood, TN Posts: 2,123	Popularity is an indicator of how likable their playing is. __________________ last.fm

02-22-2009, 12:50 PM	#266 (permalink)
Mojo Melancholia Eternally Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: England Posts: 5,018	No, its not that I was offended. It was admittedly a pretty hotheaded rant but that was a response to a few posts to be fair. Everyones gonna have a differing opinion about a list like this but I guess I just dont understand how the list is conservative or boring. If anything, I think its very extensive considering its compiled entirely by the one poster. __________________ Last.FM \| Echoes and Dust

02-23-2009, 01:56 PM	#268 (permalink)
Elastic Man Groupie Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 32	Maybe I overreacted. It's certainly not the worst list I've ever seen but, at the same time, it's far from the best. I just get a little frustrated when someone puts so much time and effort into compiling such a list and I feel like I've learnt nothing from reading it. In fact it just seems like repetition of things I've disagreed with before, which can be tedious. Oh well. As for Malmsteen... I stand by what I said before. His playing is just embarrassing. Technically gifted he may be but this really means very little when it comes down to it. Much as I disagree with Scaruffi on many other matters, I think he is worth quoting on this point because I sincerely agree with the sentiment - "There is a difference, in my opinion, between a juggler and an artist. If the playing is barely passable, but it delivers a lot of emotion, that musician is a genius." Players such as Fred Frith, Jimi Hendrix, John Fahey, Sonny Sharrock, Joe Pass (okay so maybe I'm moving out of the 'rock' sphere a little now...) are what I would deem to be geniuses because they play with passion, creativity etc. whilst also retaining a sufficient degree of technical proficiency in order to express themselves adequately. Malmsteen's playing, on the other hand, is (to me) technical wank of the worst kind. It is utter musical masturbation, which I find not only entirely uninteresting but even quite repulsive. And I still don't find the popularity of a particular player to be any indication of greatness. A whole host of other factors come in to play to decide whether a particular thing is popular quite apart from its 'likability'. __________________ http://www.last.fm/user/Wombfruit