It depends.
Most people love the sound of classical or flamenco guitar. Things like Steve
Vai or Satch or that kind of instrumental stuff most people just hear as one
long guitar solo, which is boring.
Do you play guitar because you like it or because you want other people to like it?
You have to ask yourself who you're writing your music for. If you are writing complex instrumental guitar pieces in order to receive recognition and praise from a wide audience, it would seem you've already found the disappointment that expectation leads to.
Musicians in general have two inherent traits: an ego, and a lack of confidence in their work. The ego may be strong and apparent, to hide the lack of confidence, but the lack of confidence leads to a desperate need of approval to feed the ego. It always goes back to the ego.
So, musicians will rarely care about your long, complicated guitar instrumentals because they tend to be more concerned with their own long, complicated guitar instrumentals. And everyone else who isn't an active musician, doesn't care about your long, complicated guitar instrumentals, because they want to hear lyrics, vocals, a clear and defined melody, a chorus, repetition, and familiarity.
You're working in a very specific area, with a very specific crowd. But I can tell you this: no matter what you write, no matter what you play, someone somewhere is going to be a fan of it.
Also it has taken me a while to come to the realisation that the primary motivator should be that you are doing it for yourself, never expect anything from it. Some people are just difficult for any number of reasons (the critics). Really being a muso is just creating sounds in an organised way that means something to the composer. There is no right or wrong only the limitations of culture. you could write and record something and people now could call it drivel until someone hears it down the line and they call it a work of genius. both are neither rigt or wrong.
I've been a (somewhat) dedicated guitar player for 20 years and even I don't want to listen to 'guitar music' You'll always be able to get guitar players to critique your playing and composition, if you want to appeal to a wider audience you're gonna have to give 'em something more musical, that they can relate to.
Music is mostly about relatability (and I mean, feeling you can relate to the actual music, I'm not talking lyrics here) and most people just can't relate to four minutes of guitar playing, because as far as they're concerned, that's just four minutes of some bloke playing the guitar, it's more likely than not that they can't even relate to the voice of the instrument at all, as it just seems to them to be a singular element.
Many times I've been practicing and different people have basically said "I don't know anything about guitar so I don't know if that's good or not" With stuff like Vai-style guitar music, asking your everyday person to listen to it, is like asking them to watch classical russian drama, and then asking them how they felt about all the sub-context.
Make music you have fun making, that you like to listen to and most importantly makes you think "Hell yeah! I'm awesome" Who cares what other people think, I don't know, but I don't think you picked up a guitar for the first time and got into the hobby for them.
The problem with a lot of instrumental music is that the average listener identifies with the sound of a voice leading the melody. That's a start. The other problem is that most instrumental music at the amateur level is just a reason to wank off over a chord progression, with no regard to melody or structure.
Yeah, this is why no one should try to copy other people's styles. What's the point of listening to your music if it's just a poor man's version of someone else's music/style. You don't even necessarily need to be as good as Satriani or Vai or whatever if your music is interesting in other ways.
Guitar instrumentals in general often seem to be too much about playing leads and everything else is more or less half assed. Even if you happen to be a guitarist, make everything in the song good. Don't just make a backing track and a guitar solo. Put equal effort into the drums, bass, piano, overall song structure, etc
the truth is nobody cares how fast you can sweep, how many fingers you use when you tap, how fast you can play that tricky legato lick. even with the more melodic players in that style of music, its very hard and boring to listen to it with the constant wanking and show off (think of michael angelo batio using a 4 neck guitar).
There's one thing I always noticed before becoming a musician/guitarist myself. Example. Typically, guitar solos in general - especially really fast ones...they sound bland to the average listener, like a cluster of random notes. There's too many notes, too much going on to pick up and too fast to really comprehend the music. You can have some amazing melody in there but what good is it if people can't hear it?
I noticed when starting to transcribe pieces, one of the first ones I did was some 140bpm metal song (which isn't even that fast right). There was this double lead part accompanied by orchestra and synth. The whole part was in 16ths for a good 32 bars and on top of this there was screaming vocals. Not until slowing it down to about 40bpm could I hear how beautiful the melodies were and how everything worked together. I couldn't help but think that the melody was "wasted" by being played too fast.
My point here is that complex instrumentals often times can't be appreciated by non-musicians. You might have been in a situation where you had a friend listen to one of your favorite songs and they just said "This is just noise...even I could play this". Obviously they have no idea what they're talking about but they do have a valid point that to them - it really is just noise - and this is true for a ton of complex compositions. You want to write music that everyone can appreciate, it has to be on an appropriate level.
If there is no distinction in what the melody is or what the "solo" parts are in an instrumental piece, no one will want to listen to it. That's why guys like Satriani, Vai, and Gilbert are well-known and admired. In their instrumental works, they have a distinctive meoldy (think Surfin' With the Alien) as well as a seperate and distinctive guitar solo. Being able to have that seperation allows the casual listener to actually enjoy the song. For example, my one neighbor isn't a musician, and he admires Joe Satriani's guitar work and how he's able to have a melodic line along with a solo.
Shred makes me laugh because a) its not technically virtuosic and b) has little composition interest. In other words it sucks because fails at what its purports to showcase.
I don't recall a shredder with decent technique for a long while. Granted, most can alternate pick and sweep but that's it but they don't usually have anything else to their technique. I doubt 99.9% could fingerpick, do a jazz chord solo, or a flamenco.
I have to admit, rather embarrassingly that I was a "shredder" some years ago. It always made me unhappy because I never was where I wanted to be. However I finally realised I needed to unlearn shred, and its taken me a while to unlearn my shredding, and slowly start afresh. Thankfully I am much happier now playing music.
Honestly when it comes down to it, for any kind of art.. be it music, or anything else... you should be doing what you do for you. Do what you love, and love what you do... and if nobody else gets it... then screw them. That doesn't mean you shouldn't want others to like it.. of course everybody wants to be heard and appreciated by others... but ultimately you're art is an expression of what is inside of you... not necessarily what others want to hear. The people who do like what you do will appreciate it... you can't worry about everybody else.
Do you play guitar because you like it or because you want other people to like it?
You have to ask yourself who you're writing your music for. If you are writing complex instrumental guitar pieces in order to receive recognition and praise from a wide audience, it would seem you've already found the disappointment that expectation leads to.
Musicians in general have two inherent traits: an ego, and a lack of confidence in their work. The ego may be strong and apparent, to hide the lack of confidence, but the lack of confidence leads to a desperate need of approval to feed the ego. It always goes back to the ego.
So, musicians will rarely care about your long, complicated guitar instrumentals because they tend to be more concerned with their own long, complicated guitar instrumentals. And everyone else who isn't an active musician, doesn't care about your long, complicated guitar instrumentals, because they want to hear lyrics, vocals, a clear and defined melody, a chorus, repetition, and familiarity.
You're working in a very specific area, with a very specific crowd. But I can tell you this: no matter what you write, no matter what you play, someone somewhere is going to be a fan of it.
Also it has taken me a while to come to the realisation that the primary motivator should be that you are doing it for yourself, never expect anything from it. Some people are just difficult for any number of reasons (the critics). Really being a muso is just creating sounds in an organised way that means something to the composer. There is no right or wrong only the limitations of culture. you could write and record something and people now could call it drivel until someone hears it down the line and they call it a work of genius. both are neither rigt or wrong.
I've been a (somewhat) dedicated guitar player for 20 years and even I don't want to listen to 'guitar music' You'll always be able to get guitar players to critique your playing and composition, if you want to appeal to a wider audience you're gonna have to give 'em something more musical, that they can relate to.
Music is mostly about relatability (and I mean, feeling you can relate to the actual music, I'm not talking lyrics here) and most people just can't relate to four minutes of guitar playing, because as far as they're concerned, that's just four minutes of some bloke playing the guitar, it's more likely than not that they can't even relate to the voice of the instrument at all, as it just seems to them to be a singular element.
Many times I've been practicing and different people have basically said "I don't know anything about guitar so I don't know if that's good or not" With stuff like Vai-style guitar music, asking your everyday person to listen to it, is like asking them to watch classical russian drama, and then asking them how they felt about all the sub-context.
Make music you have fun making, that you like to listen to and most importantly makes you think "Hell yeah! I'm awesome" Who cares what other people think, I don't know, but I don't think you picked up a guitar for the first time and got into the hobby for them.
The problem with a lot of instrumental music is that the average listener identifies with the sound of a voice leading the melody. That's a start. The other problem is that most instrumental music at the amateur level is just a reason to wank off over a chord progression, with no regard to melody or structure.
Yeah, this is why no one should try to copy other people's styles. What's the point of listening to your music if it's just a poor man's version of someone else's music/style. You don't even necessarily need to be as good as Satriani or Vai or whatever if your music is interesting in other ways.
Guitar instrumentals in general often seem to be too much about playing leads and everything else is more or less half assed. Even if you happen to be a guitarist, make everything in the song good. Don't just make a backing track and a guitar solo. Put equal effort into the drums, bass, piano, overall song structure, etc
the truth is nobody cares how fast you can sweep, how many fingers you use when you tap, how fast you can play that tricky legato lick. even with the more melodic players in that style of music, its very hard and boring to listen to it with the constant wanking and show off (think of michael angelo batio using a 4 neck guitar).
There's one thing I always noticed before becoming a musician/guitarist myself. Example. Typically, guitar solos in general - especially really fast ones...they sound bland to the average listener, like a cluster of random notes. There's too many notes, too much going on to pick up and too fast to really comprehend the music. You can have some amazing melody in there but what good is it if people can't hear it?
I noticed when starting to transcribe pieces, one of the first ones I did was some 140bpm metal song (which isn't even that fast right). There was this double lead part accompanied by orchestra and synth. The whole part was in 16ths for a good 32 bars and on top of this there was screaming vocals. Not until slowing it down to about 40bpm could I hear how beautiful the melodies were and how everything worked together. I couldn't help but think that the melody was "wasted" by being played too fast.
My point here is that complex instrumentals often times can't be appreciated by non-musicians. You might have been in a situation where you had a friend listen to one of your favorite songs and they just said "This is just noise...even I could play this". Obviously they have no idea what they're talking about but they do have a valid point that to them - it really is just noise - and this is true for a ton of complex compositions. You want to write music that everyone can appreciate, it has to be on an appropriate level.
If there is no distinction in what the melody is or what the "solo" parts are in an instrumental piece, no one will want to listen to it. That's why guys like Satriani, Vai, and Gilbert are well-known and admired. In their instrumental works, they have a distinctive meoldy (think Surfin' With the Alien) as well as a seperate and distinctive guitar solo. Being able to have that seperation allows the casual listener to actually enjoy the song. For example, my one neighbor isn't a musician, and he admires Joe Satriani's guitar work and how he's able to have a melodic line along with a solo.
Shred makes me laugh because a) its not technically virtuosic and b) has little composition interest. In other words it sucks because fails at what its purports to showcase.
I don't recall a shredder with decent technique for a long while. Granted, most can alternate pick and sweep but that's it but they don't usually have anything else to their technique. I doubt 99.9% could fingerpick, do a jazz chord solo, or a flamenco.
I have to admit, rather embarrassingly that I was a "shredder" some years ago. It always made me unhappy because I never was where I wanted to be. However I finally realised I needed to unlearn shred, and its taken me a while to unlearn my shredding, and slowly start afresh. Thankfully I am much happier now playing music.
Honestly when it comes down to it, for any kind of art.. be it music, or anything else... you should be doing what you do for you. Do what you love, and love what you do... and if nobody else gets it... then screw them. That doesn't mean you shouldn't want others to like it.. of course everybody wants to be heard and appreciated by others... but ultimately you're art is an expression of what is inside of you... not necessarily what others want to hear. The people who do like what you do will appreciate it... you can't worry about everybody else.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário