Conference napalm::guitar

    
    	Jaco, for sure...
    

Pastoria(SP?)?

    Hmm, at first sight, I'd say there are a few jazz players who are rather
    conspicuous in their absence.
    
    And although Bo Diddley made some great records, I don't think he was
    terribly innovative/important as a guitarist, except maybe in terms of
    the shape of his guitars ;-)
    
    As regards the rest, I guess you can probably make out some sort of
    case for all of them...plus a whole load more besides.
    
    Dom
                                

    More from a bassist's point of view...
    
    If we're talking innovation, then clearly Larry Graham belongs on the
    list.  The man invented slap style, and still probably does it better
    than anyone else.  Also James Jamerson.  These two are *glaring*
    omissions imo.  Along with Jaco of course.
    
    Chris Squire and Jack Casady are two additional names that might have
    been considered; both developed unique, innovative styles that were
    quite influential, but they would be more borderline choices.
    
    /rick
    

    There's a good reason why there's not too many bass players
    listed among "innovators"; most of them know their place  
    (below the fifth fret) and they stay there :-)
    
    I would add jazz guys too; particularly Herb Ellis, Barney Kessel,
    Joe Pass, and Pat Martino.
                            

    While it may claim to be otherwise, it is nothing more than a 
    "list of our favorites".
    
    And if you wanna talk about bass innovators you should be talking
    about Victor Wooten of the Flecktones.   He is the god and king
    of innovative bass players.   All others are mortals at his feet.
    That includes Sheehan, Myung, Clarke, Hamm, Squire, Laboriel, etc.
    
    	db

    Well, I can think of several "favorites" of mine for instance
    that aren't on that list.  And some that are there that I don't
    particularly care for, but agree should be there.
    
    And then of course there's Bo :-)
    

    
    
    		I don't think B.B. is much of an innovator...
    
    		Now on the other hand Stanley Jordan....

It looks as though people are having a tough time with Bo Diddley as
an innovator.  The reason Guitar Handbbook included him is becasue
of his "thumping/shuffling" style, which stands out in the songs "Bo Diddley,"
"Brown Eyed Handsome Man," and a couple of others.

-Steve

    It's a lame list.  Lately I've been checking
    out alot of blues, and realizing how
    essential T-Bone Walker was.  For those
    interested I'll try to remember to post the 
    title of a cool book I just found on blues guitar.
    I've been reading it to my 3 week old daughter (named
    Jessica, after the guitar solo of course!)
    
    Dave
    

    
    	Poor kid.
    
    	Stunts like that can be considered child abuse in some states.
    
    	8^)
    

    I can't believe .0 omits Les Paul. That guy WAS pretty damn innovative.
    
    As fer my picks... Carlos Santana and Al DiMiola

    
    No such list is complete without Hank Marvin. Every British guitarist
    to come out of the 60's cites Hank as THE person that inspired them to
    pick up a guitar. The only exception to that is Eric Clapton but even
    he acknowledges the vital role Hank played in the development of
    British pop/rock.
    
    Richard
    Reading, UK

    
    Andres Segovia.
    
    His complete devotion elevated the guitar to that of a solo
    performance instrument that was at last, rightfully acclaimed
    by the musical media of the late 1920's, 30's, right up to the 
    present where the classical guitar is a science in the finest
    of music colleges, schools, and related professional groups
    of today.
    
    Sure, there were virtuosi of the past (Sor, Guiliani, Tarrega [whom
    Segovia himself considered nothing less than a Saint], Ponce, etc.).
    But it was Segovia whose relentless quest for the instrument 
    made it all stick, as prior to his work on this planet, the guitar
    would surface and decend in terms of popularity in timely intervals
    spanning hundreds of years.
    
    This man's true love for the guitar fueled transcriptions which
    greatly expanded the repertoire into much of what it is today.
    
    A true apostle of the guitar.  I would have given anything to meet 
    him.
    
    Kev --
                                                                 

    ...and what about Django Rheinhardt?(sp)
    
    
    						ian

RE: Last - That list implied innovators rock guitar.  The influence
of blues and jazz are integral to that evolution.  Segovia's is strictly
classical guitar work.  I doubt anyone would argue against the skills and
talent of Andres Segovia. But there's an anecdote in Django Rheinhart's profile
where Django played at a private party that Segovia was attending.  Segovia
insisted on having the sheet music to what Django was playing.  He was shocked
when he found out that Rheinhart had been improvising. 

A couple from the Guitar Handbook that I forgot are:

- Freddy King
- Andy Sommers(SP?)

I'd add Merle Travis and Chet Atkins and second the vote for Les Paul.   

    re .10
    
    I named my daughter Jessica after the same solo :-)

    Brian May was also in the list if my memory serves me right.
    
    re. a few back
    Chuck Berry did "Brown-Eyed Handsome Man"...not Bo Diddley!
    
    Have to agree with Rick about Larry Graham and James Jamerson (I'd
    rather overlooked bass-players initially). Graham would have to be
    considered one of the most innovative (and influential) musicians of
    all time - just listen to practically *any* early Sly & the Family Stone
    track (but I'd particularly recommend "Ride The Rhythm" from Dance To
    The Music). As for Jamerson, you couldn't even *hear* the bass before
    the early Motown records.
    
    Can't believe there's any real need for B.B. King AND Freddie King AND
    Eric Clapton (who I'm sure would be astonished to be included in the
    list!) in a list of innovators. Aaaanyway....
    
    Dom 

    What, no HOLDSWORTH??
    
    Tom

Jimmy Page

	
	I agree with Pat Martino. but more inovative compositionally
	I've never heard Herb Ellis be innovative,Kessel did some harmonic's
	type stuff early on which might be considered innovative,
	I wouldn't add Di Meola,but the guy who played in Chick's band before
	him who's name escapes me,Bill Connor's?
	Steve Vai's playing has always been interesting/innovative to me along 
	with Beck
	Pete Townsend? What? for the rock opera Tommy? BB King? a no vote here
	for both... Jimmy Page....I dunno...
	How about Wes Mongomery? Yes
	Les Paul and Chet definately
	Howard Roberts
	Bo who? Clapton innovative in Cream days...Duane Eddy I've never heard,
	that I know of... Robert Fripp yes,Steve Howe. 
	Leo Kotkee,Tuck Andress..... Stanley J.
	How about Carlos Santana? maybe Mcglaughlin (sp)
	Innovative is hard to find these days in guitar..... I can come up with
	alot of favorites but not innovative.

	I couldn't include Pat Metheny,John Schofield,Jan Akermann,Bill Frisell
	Mick Goodrick and Randy Roos or a host of others.
	

    Eddie Cochran - Put the "Rock" in Rock-a-billy.
    
    Buddy Holly - Established the 4-piece rock quartet as the std. 
    Innovative song writing style. 
    
    Robert Johnson - By the time most of us heard his songs, he had already
    been dead 40 years. His songs are a permanent part of Americana and his
    bottleneck-slide playing influenced an entire generation of Blues
    Guitarists. 
    
    Professor Longhair (Invented New Orleans style Piano) Listen to any
    Little-feat or Dr. John tune. The piano style came from the ole Profesor. 
    
    Muddy Waters - "Discovered Electricity"
    
    
    	Mark

>    Buddy Holly - Established the 4-piece rock quartet as the std. 
>   Innovative song writing style. 

I second that vote. Buddy was also the first rocker to use a solid
body guitar. He was the first lead singer to play rhythm *and* lead guitar,
as well. I love the old blues men, but to go into that, you'd have to
include so many: Howlin Wolf, John Lee Hooker, Mississippi John Hurt...

-Sb

    ... well, at least he's different ...

    My list:
    
    Luthiers/Builders:
    
    	Torres			More or less invented the classical guitar
    	CF Martin Co.		X-bracing, the Dreadnaught, etc.
    	Orville Gibson		Archtop guitar, electric guitars
    	Gibson Co/L. Loar	Made the archtop useful
    	D'Angelico		Perfected the archtop
    	Leo Fender		Solid body electric
    
    	There are others, but 90+% of all guitars built today pay heritage
    	to one of the above.
    
    
    Guitarists (in no particular order):
    
    	Segovia			Rescued the classical guitar from oblivion
    
    	Charlie Christian	Guitar like a horn
    
    	Django Reinhardt	Like no one before him
    	
    	Robert Johnson		Blues master
    
    	Chuck Berry		OK, so he stole most of his licks from his
    				piano player, rock&roll would be totally
    				different without him.
    
    	Eric Clapton		For better or for worse, the first major
    				rock "Guitar Hero"  
    
    	Clarence White		Revolutionized bluegrass guitar
    

    I can't believe that someone "diss'd" the 3 KING's...Where do you think 
    Jimi and SRV (not mentioned yet, i don't think) and Clapton and may be
    a few more got their biggest inspirations,the building blocks of their
    own styles ?

There was still one I missed in that original list:

Frank Zappa.

RE: .28 - I started reading through those profiles again, and you're
absolutely right on at least one count: Eric Clapton said that Freddie King 
was his biggiest early influence.

    >I can't believe that someone "diss'd" the 3 KING's...Where do you think 
    >Jimi and SRV (not mentioned yet, i don't think) and Clapton and may be
    >a few more got their biggest inspirations,the building blocks of their
    >own styles ?
    
    If you're referring to me (in 3130.18), then I suppose the explanation
    lies in my interpretation of the word "innovative". Sure, the "Three
    Kings" were *influential* (just ask messrs. Clapton, Green, Beck,
    Taylor, Page, Bloomfield et al). They are/were also masters of their
    craft. 
    
    However, I personally don't consider them great *innovators* in that I
    think they largely build on the foundations layed by Charlie Christian,
    T-Bone Walker, Big Bill Broonzy, etc. By the same token, I don't
    consider Clapton or SRV to be great innovators.
    
    Dom

    Actually I offer this as the ultimate proof that the list is
    ridiculous and not even worthy of discussion:
    
    The list given in .0 does NOT have Eddie Van Halen.   Whether or not
    you like him (and I suspect the authors of the list don't) he is
    has (in the words of Frank Zappa) "re-invented guitar playing".
    
    He has added so many new techniques and styles to the guitar that
    although he's far from my favorite guitar player, it's hard to think
    of any other single guitar player whom I think is even comparable
    in terms of "innovation".
    
    It's why these kinds of things are just a waste of time.
    
    	db

    I was wondering about that too; seems like a rather obvious ommission.
    It appears the author(s) more or less drew the line at the shred era.
    
    Someone earlier mentioned Hank Marvin.  I confess I've never heard a
    note from the guy, but practically every British rocker (of my
    generation anyway) mentions him as the major dude.  Did he actually
    do something new, or was he more just a role model?
    
    /rick
    

    Just out of curiosity, does anybody know if Eddie Van Halen has ever
    mentioned being influenced by Emmett Chapman?
    
    Paul

    > It appears the author(s) more or less drew the line at the shred era.
    
    Yep.  My conclusion was that whoever did this list is basically
    an anti-shred type.
    
    Which is fine as long as you don't make any claims as to being 
    "objective".   Basically, its a list of "his" (or "their") favorites.
    
    What marks this list as "not objective" is not so much "who is there" but
    "who isn't" - particularly such an overwhelmingly obvious no-brainer 
    choice like Edward Van Halen.
    
    	db

    
    	I was going to add EVH here, but I wanted to say something more
    	and didn't know how to word it, so I changed my mind.
    
    	I think I was ready to say something like "introduced blazing
    	speed to guitar playing", but didn't know if that was correct
    	or not.
    

    Re .32
    
    Hank Marvin, lead guitar with UK group The Shadows. Renowned for
    'Apache' (before Ventures version) in about 1959 but The Shadows had a
    string of monster hits in the early mid 60s'.
    
    Innovator? Well, he brought ultra smooth, reverbed STrat sound to most
    of EUrope for the first time and this influenced most people in the UK
    to try the guitar at some point (even if they only mimed witha tennis
    racket!). If you listen to a selection of Shadows stuff now and
    consider how the sound must have 'electrified' radio listeners back
    then then you start to realise why he had the impact he did.
    
    These days he still tours but undersells himself by playing covers of
    current pop melodies.
    
    Cites main influence as the Buddy Holly strat sound.
    
    If you liked the lead guitar in Chris Isaacs 'Wicked Game' that's what
    Hank is about (but it wasn't him).
    
    Richard

>   It's why these kinds of things are just a waste of time.

Then why are you wasting your time responding?

Van Halen is mentioned in the book several times.  The book states
up front that the list of who to include took longer to compile than
the whole rest of the book.

Personally, as a guitar music-lover since I first heard Apache as a 5
year-old kid, Van Halen does nothing for me.  Never has.  

My favorite all around is Chet Atkins, who of course is mentioned
throughout the book, but is not on the list.

From a technical standpoint, I think Atkins could play with his feet
as well as anyone of Van Halen's ilk.  But more importantly, Atkins
plays versions of songs such as Wildwood Flower and David's song
that raise the hair on the back of my neck every time I hear them.

But all this is just my opinion.

Van Halen gives me a headache.  And if he's an innovator, so is 
Alvin Lee.


-S

    actually db, we may be getting a bit off the track here.  While I don't
    have the book in front of me, I don't think the authors claim this list
    to be complete.
    
    re Hank Marvin, come to think of it I have heard something; the entry
    he contributed to the first "Guitar Speak" project record.  As I recall
    it was one of the better tracks on the album.
    
    I balked at first at Pete Townshends inclusion on the list, but the
    more I thought about it the more I had to agree.
    
    /rick
    

    
    	RE: Steve
    
    	But you don't have to be good to be an innovator.  You just have
    	to be different, or introduce a different style to the world.
    
    	I have never considered Hendrix to be a very good player, but I
    	would have to add him to the "innovators" list, just as I would
    	have to add EVH.  The only difference is that I love EVH's play-
    	ing.  Hendrix is just OK.
    

>    actually db, we may be getting a bit off the track here.  While I don't
>    have the book in front of me, I don't think the authors claim this list
>    to be complete.
    
    Do they claim to be even remotely "objective".
    
    I don't think the omission of Eddie Van Halen can be dismissed as
    just being an "incomplete" list.  
    
    You do not have to "like" his stuff to appreciate the impact he's had
    on guitar playing.  You only need to walk into Daddy's Junky Music
    store and note how almost all the guitars have locking trembars, or
    listen to the half dozen Eddie Wanna-Be's all copping "Eddie Tricks".
    
    As guitarists, I'm sure you ALL know that the "No Stairway to Heaven"
    sign in "Wayne's World" would really have more likely been "No
    Eruption" if it weren't for the fact that "Eruption" isn't nearly
    as well known to non-guitar playing, movie-going public.  I've
    heard "Eruption" 30 times for every time I've heard "Stairway to
    Heaven".
    
    And lest you think I'm some Eddie fan miffed at his omission, I like
    his stuff but he's probably ranked about 30 on the list of guitar
    players I listen to.  But I do recognize that he has clearly
    "innovated" more than the first 29 folks I might listen to on a given day. 
    
    So why do I focus on him?  I think the omission of such an obvious
    choice demonstrates that no only isn't the list very "objective"
    but it proves there was no attempt to try and be "objective".
    
    It's a list of someone's favorites - not an objectively constructed
    list of "innovators".   Eddie Van Halen would be on any objective
    list whether you like him or not.  And it's probably someone who
    has no appreciation for shred.
    
    	db

> I have never considered Hendrix to be a very good player

Whoah, I'm sorry, I just don't understand that comment.  

Once, after being cornered repeatedly in a profile-type show,
Les Paul finally named his favorite guitarist - Jimi Hendrix.

I really don't think it is opinion, I think it is a fact that Hendrix
was an extremely good guitarist.  He's not my favorite, and I appreciate
his work more than I actually enjoy it. 

And db, now I understand what you mean, and I agree with you about
VH.  I bought my Tele at Daddy's and sorta frequent the place.  In the
late 60s, early 70s, Clapton was god, now it's Van Halen to countless 
kids.

-S

    
    	If you were to poll 1000 people as to their favorite, or most
    	memorable Hendrix tune, there's a very good chance that the
    	most popular answer would be "The Star Spangled Banner".
    
    	Play a few notes.
    	Move the guitar close to the amp to produce feedback.
    	Play a few more notes, maybe even some of the same ones from
    	the original song.
    	More feedback.
    	Lick the strings.
    
    	Heck, I could do that, except for the part about playing some
    	of the right notes.  8^)
    

    Methinks we've been down this path before in guitarnotes; but since
    when is that ever a deterrent :-)
    
    Given what Hendrix played, and the way he played it, and where
    and when he played it, the SSB at Woodstock is clearly a landmark 
    moment in the history of electric guitar.  That said, few Hendrix
    fans would tell you this Jimi at his best; just maybe at his most
    profound.
    

    
    Maybe we're getting confused between innovators and influencers.
    
    I innovate at home. I learnt on a 12 string and thus have a very
    chordal approach to playing with a heavy emphasis on open chords even
    on my strat. But have I influenced anyone? Nope.
    
    Clapton, is a good guitarist but did he REALLY innovate? My suggestion
    is that he was an enormous influence. Listen to the guitar part in the
    Carpenter's 'Goodbye to Love' (I think). Would anyone have dared to put
    that on a middle of the road record like that without the influence of
    Clapton and CReam lurking there? I suspect not.
    
    The title of this note is 'Innovators'. But do Innovators actually
    matter?
    
    Richard

> I have never considered Hendrix to be a very good player
>>Whoah, I'm sorry, I just don't understand that comment.  
    
    Probably another case of "lack of objectivity"...IMO, far more serious
    than leaving out Van Halen from a list of innovators.
    
    I might be wrong...but I doubt it.
    
    Dom 

    	>If you were to poll 1000 people as to their favorite, or most
    	>memorable Hendrix tune, there's a very good chance that the
    	>most popular answer would be "The Star Spangled Banner".
    
    Ye gods! I doubt if that would be true even if you were to poll 1000
    people who were present at the Woodstock festival. 
    
    Dom                 

	re: Hendrix's SSB - when I read Shawn's note, I just couldn't
	believe it.  He has to be pulling our legs!  The only people
	who would include SSB in any best-of-Hendrix would be the
	ones who've heard virtually nothing by him!

	Thanks, Rick, for once again writing a great reply.

	It's so unfortunate that so many people judge Jimi by Purple
	Haze and the Star Spangled Banner.

	Oh well...

	re: db and how it has to be somebody's favorite list - well,
	you certainly have a point about EVH, but there are several
	on there who qualify as innovators.  Missing one guitarist,
	albeit one of the most important innovators, doesn't make
	the whole list bogus.

	Tom

RE: .42 and the discussion generated by Hendrix' Star Spangled Banner.

I'd been listening to Hendrix for about a year when the Woodstock
album was released, and though I was only 16, I thought "This [SSB] is 
stupid, Jimi must have been on ludes (methaqualone).  Everyone thinks
this is the genius of Jimi Hendrix? Whoah!"  All I'd listened to
were "Are You Experienced" and "Axis Bold As Love," before that.
I hadn't even bought "Electric Ladyland."  But the clincher for me 
with Hendrix was when I heard a very well mixed bootleg of his "Isle of
Wight Jams," circa 1970, not long before he died. I heard them in 1979.

I think those sessions were once available commercially.  The "Isle of
Wight Sessions" and songs like "The Wind Cried Mary" are much, much more
than enough to make anyone realize that Jimi's SSB was nothing more than
noodling around at high decibles.  Except for one thing, I never met anyone 
who could make straight feedback sound like projectile missles.

-S

>>> I have never considered Hendrix to be a very good player
>>Whoah, I'm sorry, I just don't understand that comment.  
    
>    Probably another case of "lack of objectivity"...IMO, far more serious
>    than leaving out Van Halen from a list of innovators.
    
    I think this merely reflects two different and classic views of
    "very good guitar player".
    
    By today's standards, I believe it would be very hard to take any
    argument that Hendrix was a "very good" player in the "technical"
    sense.   Although by the standards of the time in which he played
    you could argue that.
    
    Actually Eddie Van Halen, who I think of as the "father of shred",
    isn't even a "very good" technical player by todays standards!
    
    However, I think anyone who argues that Hendrix wasn't a very good
    guitar player period is likely to be focusing on the technical side
    and not on other aspects.   
    
    Hendrix's playing had this incredible power in it.   I also suspect
    that anyone who really doesn't appreciate Hendrix's playing should
    compare people trying to imitate him.   Frank Marino can play Hendrix's
    stuff note-for-note and sound totally wimp.  On the other hand, listen
    to Stevie Ray Vaughan (or surprisingly Eric Johnson) cover Hendrix
    cause I think THOSE guys really are the best at capturing that "power"
    although they play Hendrix with the polish of today's technical
    standards.
    
    FWIW, I also think it's almost undeniable that Hendrix, like Eddie
    Van Halen, was and SHOULD be at the forefront of any "innovator"
    list (which is different from "very good player").
    
    re: Tom DR
    
>	re: db and how it has to be somebody's favorite list - well,
>	you certainly have a point about EVH, but there are several
>	on there who qualify as innovators.  Missing one guitarist,
>	albeit one of the most important innovators, doesn't make
>	the whole list bogus.

    I disagree.  It may not mean that anyone else who IS on the list
    is undeserving, but it does make the "list" itself bogus.   EVH
    is just WAY too significant (even "obvious") an omission.  IMHO of course.
    
	db

    I also wanted to add that I think Hendrix's music really has to be
    heard live.   I can't claim to have seen him in person, and seeing
    him live on film definitely isn't the same as being there.  But you
    can see the "fire" in playing in the live stuff that I, frankly,
    don't think the studio recordings capture.
    
    Actually saying that Hendrix played with a kind of "fire" seems to
    describe it much better than "power".
    
    I have to admit though that it's seeing Eric Johnson and Stevie Ray
    Vaughan do Hendrix covers that got me to appreciate Hendrix himself.
    They exposed the "fire" in his music.
    
    	db

    Re: Inovators vs. Influencers
    I guess in my book, someone who does something new without influencing
    anyone is probably not inovative in any positive sense.  
    
    Re: omission of EVH 
    Gee, I left EVH off of *my* list, so I guess that makes me anti-shred
    and means I made no attempt to be objective.
    
    FWIW, (outside of possibly Segovia), none of the guitarists on my
    list qualify as my favorites (or anyone I listen to with any
    great frequency).  
    
    So I guess I have to disagree that any list like .0 that leaves off 
    EVH is simply a list of favorites put together without any attempt
    at objectivity.
    
    EVH is a great guitarist.  I left him off my list because, while he
    may have popularized a number of techniques, and "raised the bar"
    for rock lead guitar, I see him as more of an evolution of the
    guitar hero rock lead guitarist of Clapton/Page mold (boy that should
    draw some sarcasm) than something new.  I listed Clapton as the 
    inovator for this genre, because before Clapton, instrumental-focused
    rock was much different (more combo-oriented than lead oriented: e.g.,
    the Ventures).  So while Clapton may have borrowed from a number of
    sources, he presented the material in a new manner and in a new
    format (the power trio).
    
    All that asided, given the scope of the list referenced in .0, 
    I guess I would agree that EVH should be included.  I would not,
    however, accuse the authors of blatant favoritism without any
    attempt of objectivity without hearing their reasons for exclusion
    (if in fact he was excluded-- the author of .0 did not claim that
    he presented the full list).
    
    Jim      

    
    	re: Don't waste your time with the studio stuff
    
    	Man, talk about a bridge of sighs... 
    
    	db, we'd have to be a Larry Carlton cover band if we ever
    	played together.  We don't agree on much else...  ;^)
    
    	Good thing there's enough music for everybody!
    

>>    Re: Inovators vs. Influencers
>>    I guess in my book, someone who does something new without influencing
>>    anyone is probably not inovative in any positive sense.  
    
    Yeah, you've nailed it.  There are plenty of instrumentalists who do or
    did something unique, and in the strictest sense I guess they are
    innovators,  but the category as used here seems to imply that their
    contributions had far reaching effects.
    
>>    Hendrix's playing had this incredible power in it.   I also suspect
>>    that anyone who really doesn't appreciate Hendrix's playing should
>>    compare people trying to imitate him.   Frank Marino can play Hendrix's
    
    That's an excellent way to put it.  On the surface they may appear to be
    the same; side-by-side, you get a true sense of Jimi's greatness.
    
    re the studio stuff, Paul Cummings recently turned me onto some of
    the post-mortem releases, in particular "Cry of Love".  For some reason
    I always avoided these, but I'm finding there's amazing stuff here.
    
    /rick
    

    >By today's standards, I believe it would be very hard to take any
    >argument that Hendrix was a "very good" player in the "technical"
    >sense. Although by the standards of the time in which he played
    >you could argue that.
    
    I was just about to launch into violent disagreement here (and believe
    me, I'm certainly not the world's greatest Hendrix fan)...but I
    suppose you've got a point! Apparently, Hendrix was starting to develop
    the jazzier side of his playing at the time of his death, but we'll
    never know what might have come out of it. In fact, I don't think you'd
    necessarily consider Hendrix a phenomenal "technician" even by the
    standards of his time; people like Larry Coryell and Wes Montgomery had
    modal/octave playing well-nailed by then.
                
    All of which just underlines that technical playing is just one part of
    the whole cake. Even so, Hendrix's vibrato on things like "Red House"
    runs rings around practically anyone *I've* heard that's around today.
    His phrasing and the overwhelming power of his playing have few equals
    too. To say that he was not a good technical player is a bit like
    saying that Billie Holliday was not a good technical singer; true, but
    almost irrelevant. 
    
    As regards innovation (and FWIW, I'd place Hendrix at the very top of
    the list), I remember reading a very apt quote from Hendrix himself.
    It's well-known that he spent most of his time after gigs jamming and
    going to see other bands, and in answer to the question "What do you 
    look for when you go to see a new band?", Hendrix said: "First of all,
    feeling. Then, togetherness and the ability to communicate something to
    the audience. Originality comes way down the list.". Amazing how many
    acts today seem to see things the other way round ;-) 
    
    Dom
    
    P.S. Personally, I'd place Robin Trower above SRV as a Hendrix-imitator
    (I haven't heard Eric Johnson). Especially his early records, where he
    was frequently accused of being a mere copier.      
                             

    
    
    Don't forget Alvin Lee, although in my opinion now, he is not a great 
    player, but back when the first Ten Years After album came out, there 
    was no songs that had a long lead, (longer than a few seconds) and 
    no one was playing as fast (well in the rock sceen not jazz). 
    
    As a side note, when Hendrix first became popular in England I was 
    frequenting the club scene in London, he and many others used to hang
    out at this club called the SpeakEasy. There was this three peice band
    that Hendrix was trying to promote, called the New Nadir. As a
    promotion everytime this band played at the speak easy, Hendrix will do 
    a session with them on Bass (he was a knock out on the bass!) I
    remember one night everyone kept requesting for him to play lead. 
    He got the guys right handed guitar and did a version of Red House 
    that blew us off our seats. Back then poeple like Peter Green and 
    Calpton ruled the lead guitar scene, what Hendrix did was by far the 
    best lead I ever heard live at that time, I think it was 1968 or 69.
    
    Shaw
    
    
    
    

    Dick Dale - Sold Arabic melodies with a backbeat to surfers.
    
    James Ulmer - Did to the guitar what Ornette Coleman did to the sax.
    
    Edd COte

    Speaking of Hendrix on bass, I have a photo of him on bass backing up
    Leslie West, at a club in New York
    

    How about..
    
    Adrian Belew
    David Torn
    
    ...I don't know about influence, but these two are definately
    innovative.
    

    
    re: Hendrix
    
    Well, I actually did have the opportunity to see him live in '68.
    Matter of fact, I shook his hand after the concert and managed to
    cop the jack-plate from his smashed-to-bits strat.
    
    My impression of his live performance:  less than outstanding.
    Loud?  Yes.  Powerful?  Yes. (it helps having a wall of 100 watt
    Marshall stacks behind you - too bad he wrecked them all at the
    end of the show).
    
    But I also had the opportunity to see live many other 'influential'
    guitarists from the same epoch:
    
    	Mick Taylor with John Mayall's Bluesbreakers
    	Eric Clapton with Cream
    	Johnny Winter
    	Jeff Beck Group
    	Mike Bloomfield with the Butterfield Blues Band
    	even Jim McCarty (of Detroit Wheels fame) with the Buddy Miles Express
    
    Sorry to have to report that all of the aforementioned players put on
    much more impressive shows than Hendrix, and I consider them all to have
    been better players.  And they all, of course, had more 'influence' on
    me and my playing.
    
    Hendrix was good.  But I've never understood why he eclipsed so many
    other 'better' players of his day,  any more than some other noters
    in here can't understand why the 'Clapton is God' phenomenon occured.
    
    /Steve

    
    Steve it is a matter of personal taste and your opinion only. 
    I saw John mayall and the blues breakers many times as I went to 
    school in Birminghan England, his home town and Mike Taylor was not
    the *best* guitar player that Mayall had. However, if you think 
    Clapton is god, I can see why you would make a comment on Taylor 
    (which does/did nothing that hadn't been done before) being better 
    player than Hendrix ;-) I remember well, when Taylor was Mayall's new
    guitar player picked out of a bunch of guys answering his newspaper
    add looking for a guitarist. They appeared at this club called Le Metro
    in Birmingham and Taylor did not have the confidence or the fluency
    that say Peter Green offered. But hey if we all had the same taste
    there would be only one kind of music. 
    All I know is I could pickup any bluesbreaker album then and learn/copy
    the leads and play with the songs withing the same day. With Hendrix
    it took me quite a bit longer to imitate him, sorta ;-)
    
    Shaw
    

    >>Placing more weight on "presenting things in a new manner/format" as
    >>being more of an innovation than changing the very way you play the
    >>guitar (tapping), the sounds you can get out of it, pushing the
    >>envelope of technique, innovating in the very design of the
    >>instrument of itself seems non-objective to me.
    
    Well, that's your subjective analysis of my objectivity...  ;^)
    
    For any objective list to be compiled, it will have to be based on
    some set of critiera.  The selection of the critieria is inherently 
    subjective (or at best, a consensus of subjective opinions).  
    
    Van Halen wasn't the first to use tapping (although he most likely
    independently invented the technique, and certainly did the most
    to popularize it).  He certainly pushed the envelope of technique
    (in rock), but I guess I see this as more evolution than innovation.
    Even Eddie has said something like "Some day I'll hear some kid 
    playing back *my licks* at twice the speed..."  He built ihis own 
    guitar from parts, but exactly how did he have any impact on the 
    design of the instrument?  I guess the prevalence of heavy-duty
    whammy bars on strat-style guitars for metal, but I don't see that
    as a huge contribution (Maybe my ignorance is showing on this point).
    
    >>I also point out that there were lots of (mostly British) players
    >>doing what you attribute to Clapton at the time Clapton came out.   
    >>In fact, I find it arbitrary that you assign that innovation to Clapton.
    
    I agree that other people were doing what Clapton was doing at
    a similiar time frame.  Bloomberg, Page, or Beck are some of the
    other possible choices.  I wanted to only pick one (to not overly
    represent the genre), and decided that Clapton had the widest
    impact.  Maybe Clapton/Page/Beck as a single entry would have been
    a better choice.
    
    I'm not tring to argue that EVH does not belong on the list in .0.
    He probably does.  db may even be right on the reasons for his
    exclusion.  It probably is a list of favorites, but I don't necessarily
    believe that the authors are anti-shred (though certainly not 
    pro-shred).  It's just not *inconceivable* to me that the authors 
    had objectively applied whatever their criteria for selection was 
    in excluding EVH (unlikely perhaps, but far from impossible). 
    
    I didn't but any of my very favorite players on the list either
    (Knopfler, Parkening, Atkins, Rice, Isbin, Jerry Douglas), so, 
    I'm obviously objective, too ;^)
    
    Jim
    

>    Gee, I left EVH off of *my* list, so I guess that makes me anti-shred
>    and means I made no attempt to be objective.
    
    I don't agree that it makes you anti-shred, but yes, I do believe it
    would suggests you aren't objective.
    
    However..
    
    >EVH is a great guitarist.  I left him off my list because, while he
    >may have popularized a number of techniques, and "raised the bar"
    >for rock lead guitar, I see him as more of an evolution of the
    >guitar hero rock lead guitarist of Clapton/Page mold (boy that should
    >draw some sarcasm) than something new.  I listed Clapton as the  
    >inovator for this genre, 
    
    THIS makes you anti-shred and non-objective. ;-)
    
    > because before Clapton, instrumental-focused  rock was much different
    > (more combo-oriented than lead oriented:  e.g., the Ventures).  So
    > while Clapton may have borrowed from a  number of sources, he presented
    > the material in a new manner and  in a new format (the power trio).
    
    Placing more weight on "presenting things in a new manner/format" as
    being more of an innovation than changing the very way you play the
    guitar (tapping), the sounds you can get out of it, pushing the
    envelope of technique, innovating in the very design of the instrument
    of itself seems non-objective to me.
    
    I also point out that there were lots of (mostly British) players doing
    what you attribute to Clapton at the time Clapton came out.   In fact,
    I find it arbitrary that you assign that innovation to Clapton.
    
    There was NO ONE who sounded remotely comparable to Van Halen when
    he came out.  In fact, I remember when that first album came out,
    no one even knew HOW he did most of what he did. 
    
    In fact, not only didn't he sound like "any other" guitarist, hell...
    he often didn't even sound like "a" guitarist:  I remember folks
    not even being sure it was a guitar!!!!
    
    Now, it's not a goal of mine to convince you that EVH was more
    innovative than Clapton.  My goal is mainly to convince you that
    EVH is just WAY TOO MUCH of an OBVIOUS choice for the list.  
    
    You mentioned that .0 may not have included the full list but I think
    Steve mentioned that EVH was NOT on the list.
    
    Assuming EVH is not on the list there's only two things I could offer
    to explain his absence:
    
    	o Lack of objectivity
    
    		or
    
    	o Mind-boggling "head-in-the-sand" ignorance or more politely,
    	  "incredibly poor research"
    
    BTW, I'm not really sure that I would put any of my very favorite guys
    (Morse, Carlton, Satriani, Johnson, Petrucci, Howe, Stevie Ray Vaughan)
    on that list.
    
    I think that suggests at least a certain level of objectivity.
    
    Now of course, my subjective opinion is that Clapton has no business
    being on that list of all but trying to be objective I come to the
    conclusion that since I've never understand why people make such a big
    deal over him anyway, perhaps I should just chaulk it up as a "lack of
    appreciation" for whatever it is he innovated.
    
    If I were writing such a book, I think I'd feel COMPELLED to put him
    on the list using the same logic that I fault the writers of this
    book for not using to put EVH there:  half the world world of guitar
    players site him as one of the most influential innovators around.
    
    	db

    Only in notes... .61 is actually a reply to .62!!!!!
    
    No, we haven't time travelled... I wanted to add some text to the
    original .60 and Jim started writing a reply to it before I deleted
    it.
    
    The text I added was that not only didn't EVH sound like "any other"
    guitarist, he often didn't even sound like "a" guitarist!!!!

    re. Hendrix
    
    Like note .59 I had the opportunity to see Hendrix live (Clark
    University, March '68). He was preceded by Soft Machine ( all I can
    remeber of them is the psychadelic blob visual background effects).
    Hendrix was late, and did not start playing until well after midnight.
    They could not get his microphone to work so we were left with his
    guitar playing only ;)  What a show! Innovative...hell yes.
    He is not one of my favorites by any stretch, in fact it wasn't until
    the all blues cd came out that I've listened to him in years.
    EVH doesn't do it for me either but I could not leave him off a list of
    innovators.
    
    I'll add some fuel to the fire. How about George VanEpps, Wes
    Montgomery, Roy Buchanan?
    
    My favorite live performance to date? SRV at the Opera House in the
    Combat Zone (Boston) about nine years ago.
    
    Rich

>    For any objective list to be compiled, it will have to be based on
>    some set of critiera.  The selection of the critieria is inherently 
>    subjective (or at best, a consensus of subjective opinions).  
    
    It's hard to imagine any reasonable "consensus" of opinion that
    would omit Van Halen.
    
    If I had to guess, probably the consensus of opinion he had was to ask
    a bunch of people who haven't listened to any guitar player past the
    1970!  Look at the list.
    
    Guess what?  A lot has happened since then.
    
>    Van Halen wasn't the first to use tapping (although he most likely
>    independently invented the technique, and certainly did the most
>    to popularize it).  
    
    He may not have invented it, but he found a "voice" with it that
    made people want to listen to it and... changed the way about a
    few zillion guitar players played because of it.
    
    He changed the way people played guitar!   Merely influencing a lot
    of people isn't necessarily "innovating" but changing their whole
    approach even to the extent of their equipment and what hands they
    use on what part of the instrument!!!!
    
    How could anyone argue that someone who changed guitar (or as Zappa 
    put it: "re-invented the guitar") isn't a MAJOR MAJOR innovator?
    
>    Even Eddie has said something like "Some day I'll hear some kid 
>    playing back *my licks* at twice the speed..."  
    
    It's already happened.   I've seen dozens of players who can play
    twice as fast.
    
    > He built ihis own  guitar from parts, but exactly how did he have any
    > impact on the  design of the instrument?  I guess the prevalence of
    > heavy-duty whammy bars on strat-style guitars for metal, but I don't
    > see that as a huge contribution (Maybe my ignorance is showing on this
    > point).
    
    You're ignorance IS showing.   Listen to the radio.  Go into a guitar
    store.  Go into a club.
    
>    I agree that other people were doing what Clapton was doing at
>    a similiar time frame.  Bloomberg, Page, or Beck are some of the
>    other possible choices.  I wanted to only pick one (to not overly
>    represent the genre), and decided that Clapton had the widest
>    impact.  Maybe Clapton/Page/Beck as a single entry would have been
>    a better choice.
    
    Actually, I get the impression that it's NONE of those guys who 
    brought that about.  It's other people that they listened to but
    aren't as famous.
    
    In any case, perhaps we should agree that there was a major innovation
    there, but attributing it to Clapton is just ridiculous and unfair.
    
    > I don't necessarily believe that the authors are anti-shred (though
    > certainly not  pro-shred).  It's just not *inconceivable* to me that
    > the authors  had objectively applied whatever their criteria for
    > selection was  in excluding EVH (unlikely perhaps, but far from
    > impossible). 
    
    There is a total non-appreciation in the list of anything having to
    do with the kind of guitar playing that has been dominant for the last
    15 years or so.   And this is despite the existance of what anyone
    who hasn't had their head in the sand for the last 15 years would
    tell you is a clear choice:  Edward Van Halen.
    
    Like I said, there's only two explanations for that I can think of:
    they are thumbing their noses at modern guitar style (dismissing it as
    not a significant "innovation") or as I've said, they have just haven't
    made a very good effort (actually a "deplorable effort") at researching
    what's going on today and where the innovation was.
    
    If you can provide me with an alternative explanation... well... like
    Ross Perot says... "I'm all ears".   ;-)
    
    Van Halen is just WAY WAY too obvious an omission. 
    
    Walk into any music store on a Saturday afternoon and shout out
    "Hey... dudes... who was the most innovative guitar player of the
    modern guitar era" and you're likely to get a chorus of people
    to stop playing "Eruption" put down their guitars and respond
    with "Eddie Van Halen!".
    
    That's as much research as it takes to know to put EVH on that list.
    
    	db - who doesn't even have many VH records on CD right now
    	     and whose (vinyl) record player hasn't worked for years.

>    	db, we'd have to be a Larry Carlton cover band if we ever
>    	played together.  We don't agree on much else...  ;^)
    
    Hey... we HAVE played together!  Two nights in Saugus at some
    pork palace!
    
    I remember them like they were yesterday.  I had a lot of fun those
    nights.  The way I remember it, you did too.
    
    And we didn't do any Carlton.
    
    But Tom, the SECOND you decide you want to do a Carlton tribute
    for a DECjam you CALL ME!   I won't even ask to play much guitar.
    I could be quite happy playing keyboards all night - LC writes
    incredibly cool chord charts.  
    
    All I ask is for in terms of me playing the guitar is just one
    solo.... OK, it's not just any solo.  And you probably know
    which one it is too.
    
    	Kid db

    I don't think the list in .0 is a very good one.  I just don't agree
    that any list that does not include EVH is totally lacking in
    objectivity and obviously developed by someone who has their "head
    in the sand."
    
    >> It's hard to imagine any reasonable "consensus" of opinion that
    >> would omit Van Halen.
    How about "name the top 12 innovators who have made a lasting
    impact on the guitar has a lead instrument."  One could argue that
    EVH would be excluded because its too early to determine how
    long lasting his impact will be.  I'm sure a lot of jazz players
    in 1920 would never have guessed that the guitar would totally
    supplant the plectrum banjo in the jazz rhythm section in less
    than 15 years.
    
    
    OK, I've listened to the radio, I been to guitar stores, I've been
    to clubs.  Please explain EVH's contribution to the equipment
    used in playing guitar.   (Marshall stack, lots of gain, a strat with
    a whammy?  Sounds like Jimi...)  Educate me, *please*.

    Clapton and Page were primarily influenced by Elmore James, T-bone 
    Walker and Kings.  I decided to confine my list to one bluesman,
    Robert Johnson.  If I were to add an electic bluesman, I'd pick T-bone.  
    
    If the list in .0 is open to the guitar in general, I'd say 
    the omissions of Andres Segovia and Clarence White in .0 
    are just as glaring (if not more so) as the omission of EVH. 
    
    I suspect that db and I hang out at different music stores.  Of 
    course it's hard to judge a good acoustic while 10 pimply young 
    EVH-wannabees are trying to play "Eruption." ;^)
    
    Jim

    EVH was one of my major influences... Yep, I'm a youngin'.
    
    No EVH was not the first to use tapping, but the tapping combined with
    the delay, maybe some compression, and 'grease', (ooops flange,
    almost forgot the early EVH flanging) made such huge, complex sounding
    music...all from one dude! I also appreciate that most of the early
    recording work was pretty basic, with few overdubs, very little 'production'
    
    Add in his other tricks such as Major-league whammy dives and pulls,
    whammying while tapping or hammer-on/pull-off,
    excessive use of artificial harmonics (some styles of which I do
    believe he created) sometimes with whammy.
    ...and all this with a Sh/t-eating grin.
    
    ...and then he bagged Valerie...talk about a hero for the people.
    
    Larry (Who still wants to be like Eddie)
    

re: .60, Shaw,
    
>    Steve it is a matter of personal taste and your opinion only. 

	A truer statement couldn't be made!


>    Mike Taylor was not the *best* guitar player that Mayall had.

	I don't recall anyone saying he was, and it's Mick BTW.


>    However, if you think Clapton is god,

	I don't.


>    Taylor did not have the confidence or the fluency that say
>    Peter Green offered. 

	I agree.  Green was probably (IMO) the *best* guitar player
	that Mayall had.


>    All I know is I could pickup any bluesbreaker album then and
>    learn/copy the leads and play with the songs withing the same day.

	Well, my hat's off to you... you certainly must be a better
	player than I.  I'd be happy if I could play half as well as
	Mick Taylor did on 'Bare Wires' or 'Blues from Laurel Canyon'.


>    With Hendrix it took me quite a bit longer to imitate him, sorta ;-)

	Of course, that presupposes that one would _want_ to play like
	Hendrix...  I still can't figure out why anyone would. ;-)
    
/Steve

    
    	db - of course I remember!!  Yep, it was great!
    
    	Leave it to you to pick LC's all time best solo that's also
    	the only one I also know!  Sorry... ;^)
    

    db, your assessment of the Saturday music store culture is an accurate
    observation... for 10 years ago.  What I hear most often these days is
    some beginner banging out the riff to "Smells Like Teen Spirit" (and
    badly, no less) or one of the (seemingly) interchangeable Stone Temple
    Pilots tunes, etc.  The kids who played Eruption have all grown up and
    gotten real jobs.
    
    Locking whammys are becoming a vanishing species as well; the majority
    of new axes I see hanging on the wall nowadays are hardtails or some
    variation on the traditional Strat setup.
    
>>    If I had to guess, probably the consensus of opinion he had was to ask
>>    a bunch of people who haven't listened to any guitar player past the
>>    1970!  Look at the list.
    
    I thought of this as well, but note that Andy Summers was mentioned on
    the list (in a later note).
    
    /rick
    

Debating the skills, innovative techniques, and influence of Hendrix and 
Van Halen has proven to be an exercise in head-butting.

There are so many truly innovative and influential players who have been 
integral to the evolution  of guitar playing.  Guitar music is diverse.  
None of these guys were on the list of innovators:

Mississippi John Hurt - Very early Delta blues with great influence over a whole  
(Delta/Acoustic Blues)	generation of acoustic blues players, from John Fahey 	
			and John Hammond to Leo Kottke and George Gritzbach.

Merle Travis -		Invented that thump/pick technique for playing root 	
(mentioned earlier)	notes.  Even Chet Atkins emulates this technique. 

John Fahey - 		He took John Hurt's Delta Blues and elaborated, playing 
			everything from waltzes to straight accoustic blues.

Leo Kottke - 		He took Fahey's and Hurt's styles and elaborated.

Clarence White - 	He showed the world of Bluegrass that
(mentioned earlier)	the guitar can take the lead.

Tony Rice - 		Took Bluegrass up a couple of notches and played a 	
			very big role in the development of Jazzgrass.

Duanne Allman - 	One of the earliest electric slide guitarists, who
			mixed jazz, blues, and country with rock as no one 	
			before him.

Doc Watson - 		He doesn't really flatpick and he doesn't really
			fingerpick.  He uses his thumb and his index finger
			to create a unique style with which he adapts fiddle 
			jigs and reels to the guitar.  


And if bass players can be counted in, what about pedal steel and National
guitar (dobro) players?  Buddy Emmons and Bobby Black in the former, and
Mike Auldridge and Jerry Douglas in the latter category.
		
-Steve

    What about Michael Hedges?

    In the light of .72 (and one or two previous notes), I'd be inclined to
    agree that the total absence of country/folk/bluegrass players from the
    list in .0 is the real glaring omission. Clarence White, to name but
    one, has all the necessary credentials (IMO) to be considered a great
    innovator, including influence on technological developments in the
    guitar industry.
    
    And there's probably a whole bunch of ethnic musicians not represented
    (African guitarists?). So the "lack of objectivity" would appear to
    extend far beyond shred ;-)
    
    Dom

>    How about "name the top 12 innovators who have made a lasting
>    impact on the guitar has a lead instrument."  One could argue that
>    EVH would be excluded because its too early to determine how
>    long lasting his impact will be.  
    
    Then why is Robert Fripp on the list?  What was his "lasting impact"
    and can you name 10 other guitar players doing what he does to
    demonstrate that he has "lasted".
    
    >Please explain EVH's contribution to the equipment used in playing
    >guitar.   (Marshall stack, lots of gain, a strat with a whammy?  
    
    Not just "a whammy" but a combination of Van Halen himself and the
    style he created spawned a plethora of designs for locking whammys,
    trans trem, etc.
    
>    I suspect that db and I hang out at different music stores.  
    
    Which is fine.  You aren't claiming to produce a list of "innovators"
    while trying to subdue your own subjective preferences.
    
    My point was that while he's not even close to being my favorite,
    it doesn't take much "research" or "awareness" to see that he was
    a) wildly different than anyone else when he came out (again,
    the Frank Zappa quote of Van Halen "re-inventing the guitar" comes
    to mind) and b) his influence has had a PROFOUND influence on
    guitar players and c) that influence has "lasted" as long as he's
    been around, which is a pretty long time now.
    
    A couple of questions for you Jim:
    
    1) Do you agree that when he came out, his guitar playing was 
       profoundly different from anyone else at the time?
    
    2) Can you say that about EVERYONE else on that list?   Clapton
       for example?
    
    3) Do you agree that influence is still clearly prevalent today?
    
    4) Do you agree that he's "lasted" at least in that he has survived
       a very long time, still has a profound influence on many of today's
       players, and is still selling out arenas, making platinum albums,
       etc.
    
    And if the answer to the above is yes, do you agree that he is a 
    "no brainer" choice for such a list?
    
    	db
    
    p.s. I'm not really all that interested in convincing anyone as to
         WHY he was left off the list (anti-shred, head-in-the-sand, etc.)
    	 I'm only interested in demonstrating that the list can't be
         respected for that omission.
    
    	 To me, it's like leaving the Celtics off a list of "All-time great
         basketball teams".   It may be because the writer was a Lakers
    	 fan, or because the writer didn't know squat about basketball,
    	 but regardless of the reason it undermines the value of the
         list.

    BTW, although I "recognize" and "value" innovation, ironically I don't
    get anything out of merely that when I listen.
    
    Lots of times the copiers "improve upon" the innovators.
    
    Someone said that Eddie said "10 years from now, people will be
    playing my licks twice as fast as I do".   Well, it's now almost
    20 years later and I'd say we're up to about 4x speed.
    
    I think of folks like Steve Vai as "Van Halen on steroids".  I probably
    listen to Vai much more than VH these days.   And ironically what I
    do listen for in VH these days is not so much the "tricks" and
    "technical flair" because people have taken that MUCH further now.
    
    What I hear in Van Halen that still gets my juices going is his
    incredible and often underlooked rhythm playing, which IMHO was also
    highly innovative. 
    
    While all the other guys were playing chords - mostly five (power) 
    chords - Van Halen was doing rhythmic things, single notes, and
    chords you never heard in those kind of contexts.
    
    	db
    

    >2) Can you say that about EVERYONE else on that list?   Clapton
    >   for example?
    
    I'm afraid the answer there, Dave, is a big YES.
    
    When Clapton first started playing at the Crawdaddy with the Yardbirds
    in '64, people immediately began making the trip over from the other
    side of London to see "this hot new guitarist". By the end of the year,
    they were coming over from Australia.
    
    It's not a question of making comparisons with Beck, Page, Green, 
    Taylor et al (or Hendrix, Bloomfield and Winter across the Atlantic),
    it's a straight question of chronological order. Clapton did the power
    blues thing *before* any of them. The only reason *I* didn't nominate
    him for the list is because I place more importance on the roots of his
    playing (rather than his sound)...and I think it's undeniable that he
    based his style on many black blues players who came before him. 
    
    In much the same way, EVH would be guilty of bare-faced cheek if he
    were to deny the influence of people like Clapton or Hendrix (and in
    fact, I happen to know that he doesn't deny it ;-)).
    
    Dom     
              

    > What about Michael Hedges?
    
    No kidding!  Talk about a unique acoustic style!

    Just to make one thing clear, I think EVH belongs on the list in
    .0 (which seems to be pretty rock oriented), I just don't believe
    that his omission from a list is the "ultimate proof" that the list
    is "ridiculous and not even worthy of discussion" and that the
    creators of the list are totally unaware of everything that has
    happened in the guitar world for the last 15 years.  I found this
    claim to be somewhat amusing since my own list (earlier in this)
    string omitted EVH, and I don't consider myself anti-shred, nor
    totally ignorant.  So I decided to play devil's advocate (besides,
    arguing with db can be fun).
    
    Why is Fripp on the list?   Good question.  I don't know what
    selection critieria was used by the authors of the list. I only
    suggested a possible criteria that objectively could be used
    to omit EVH.
    
    To answer db's questions:
      
    1) Do you agree that when he came out, his guitar playing was 
        profoundly different from anyone else at the time?
    
    	Different? Yes. "Profoundly" different?"  That's a little
    	tougher.  I was in high school when VH came out with their
        first album, playing guitar in a rock band.  Maybe I don't
        value the whammy and tapping gimmicks as much as you do...
        The thing I like best about EVH is his killer rhythm playing--
        the guy can really nail a riff.  He has great imagination.
    	Lots of other non-rock guys used artificial harmonics, though.
        Lots of jazz guys played with equal or better technique.  
    	
    2) Can you say that about EVERYONE else on that list?   Clapton
       for example?
    
    	No.  I would have omitted Bo Diddley, Jeff Beck (even though
        he's a great player), and Duane Eddy (though I love twang).
    
        Clapton-- sure.  Clapton and Cream were the first to make
        popular and commercially viable rock with an extended format,
        with extended solos.  The rock guitarist as a virtuoso (of
        sorts).  db probably will cringe at the mention of Clapton
        as a vituoso, but that's what we was considered to be in
    	'67.  Cream was the archetype for the rock power trio.  
    	Without the success of Cream, would Led Zeppelin ever
        been in position to achieve the widespread success and 
        popularity they achieved?  I don't think so.  And without
    	Cream and Led Zep, we may never have heard of VH.
    
    3) Do you agree that influence is still clearly prevalent today?
    
    	In the world of shred, sure.  The whole alternative/grunge/
    	anti-guitar-hero movement is a reaction *against* the
        legions of followers he spawned, however.  And there are
    	a lot of interesting things going on in the world of guitar
        that have nothing to do with EVH at all.
    
    4) Do you agree that he's "lasted" at least in that he has survived
       a very long time, still has a profound influence on many of today's
       players, and is still selling out arenas, making platinum albums,
       etc.
    
    	He's definitely not a flash in the pan.  I don't know what his
    	long-term impact will be.  Maybe in twenty years, the whole
    	shred thing will be viewed as an interesting aberation (not that
    	I think it will, but pop music can be pretty wierd).
    
    	He *is* still selling out arenas, making platinum albums, etc.,
    	but so does Clapton... so what does that prove?
    
    
    >>And if the answer to the above is yes, do you agree that he is a
    >>"no brainer" choice for such a list?
          
    I certainly agree that any *comprehensive* list of major contributors
    to the rock guitar as it exists today, should include EVH.  I would
    be interested in hearing why the authors of the list in question
    omitted him.  
    
    Jim

>    >2) Can you say that about EVERYONE else on that list?   Clapton
>    >   for example?
    
>    I'm afraid the answer there, Dave, is a big YES.
    
>    It's not a question of making comparisons with Beck, Page, Green, 
>    Taylor et al (or Hendrix, Bloomfield and Winter across the Atlantic),
>    it's a straight question of chronological order. Clapton did the power
>    blues thing *before* any of them. 
    
    Gee... I think you could argue that the 50's guys on the list list
    (Bo Diddley and Chuck Berry) were "power blues".
    
    I think you could also argue that several other folks on the list
    are "power blues" players (Clapton, Hendrix, Townsend and I'd even say Beck
    if it weren't for the fact that Beck moved onto the fusion thing).
    
    However, the point isn't whether Clapton or anyone else was "the first", 
    but rather "why are they ALL there?" and "especially considering so
    many other genres are totally absent".
    
    In fact, in reading that list, the list strikes me as "most innovative
    within power blues" rather than most innovative.   I think only 2 or
    3 of the folks on that list are not CLEARLY on the same line of
    descent in the history of guitar.
    
    Almost no representation from jazz for example.
    
    The list seems rather obviously (I'd say "undeniably") centered on
    blues rock.
    
    Can we at least agree that it's a very crummy list and that even a
    group of folks like us could come up with something far more diverse
    relevant, and objective?
    
    	db

    
    	Maybe the author[s] of the list is/are of the opinion that all
    	music is derived from the blues, and therefore blues guitarists
    	must have been the innovators/influences to all the new stuff?
    

    Maybe you're right.  EVH himself says he learned guitar by copying
    Clapton solos from the live "Wheels of Fire" tracks.  It's a direct
    link.
    
    Oh no, I feel dat ole kozmic blooze note pulling us into it's orbit again :-)
    

    I certainly agree that it isn't a very good list, and is 
    rather blues-rock-centric.
    
    I thought the inclusion of Christian and Rheinhart were pretty good
    jazz choices, though (I made the same choices from jazz on my list).  
    Both were very influential outside of jazz, too.  Wes Montgomery would
    be the next name I'd add from jazz.
    
    The folk&bluegrass and classical fields aren't covered at all in .0.
    No country, either.
    
    jim

    Why is it every time Clapton's name is mentined it's good for a 100
    note debate string?

    
    Hey, I know! Ask how to use a compressor... :-)
    
    -b

    Geeze
    
    	I'm gonna miss this........8^).
    
    
    
    P.K.

    	Albert Lee, for bringing country "chicken picking" to 
    	the commercial ears of everyone who wanted to listen to 
    	everything and beyond.
    
        Hey, he even played on a Steve Morse album and EVERYTHING!
    
    
      Fred (who feels too much time has already been spent on this note)

    >       <<< Note 3130.86 by MPGS::MARKEY "Fluffy nutter" >>>>
    >
    >    Hey, I know! Ask how to use a compressor... :-)
    >
    >    -b
    
    
    	HEY! Take it easy, some of us noters use compressors thank you! 
    
    	It could improve even YOUR tone!     Many MANY  8-) 's
    
    
    			Fred

    >	HEY! Take it easy, some of us noters use compressors thank you! 
    
    >	It could improve even YOUR tone!     Many MANY  8-) 's
    
    I'll have you know that my trust Trace Elliot GP12SMX
    has two, yes that's two, compressors built in! :-) :-)
    
    And, as I sit here typing, I look to my left at a rack
    with a bunch o' compressors. Let's see, there's the dbx 160X,
    the dbx 166, the old dbx 160, two Drawmers, a Tubetech...
    I have _nothing_ against compressors!! :-) :-)
    
    Some of my best friends are compressors! :-)
    
    -b

    Hi All
    Browsing thro the Notes I came across this particular note
    Well, most of the well known artists of yesteryear are noted..
    late '60's - '70's..
    
    There are two guitarist and composers from India that I would like to
    mention... also thro the same period.. and versitile in the music
    of rock - jazz - classical - fusion - you name it!
    
    "Gussy" Mahajit Rikh , teaching guitar at the Jawaharlal Nerhu
    University in Delhi, India, who was called the cross between Alvin of
    10 yrs after and Jimi H! in his early days.. oh Page & Clapton are
    included for the styles ... not to miss out BST , Chicago's Terry..
    to Salgovia on the acoustic.. and it goes on..   Gussy played in many
    bands like the Devil Beats, The Void, SKY, .. he also playes at one of
    the top 5-Star hotels in Delhi on nights.
    
    The other person lives in New York, Suresh Shottam who played in a
    group called "Human Bondage", who started as a classical violinist,
    thro the sitar, doing a lot of ragas with the eastern scale and western
    mix... an excellent scholar of Trinity College ..  his early days was
    with the Spartans.. (two brothers + two brothers).. Suresh's brother
    Ramesh plays drums for a group called Embryo from Germany. I have lost
    track of Suresh, but seems that he may not be playing music due to
    personal reasons..
    
    for the Notes, Ron
    

    Hi
    There seems to be quite a debate on Clapton/Hendrix and a few other
    older names..
    a food for thought...
    
    The styles of British Performers or Innovators changed the American
    style of the blues and jazz...
    
    One would say that British Music innovated ? or influenced American?
    Any takers?...
    
    Afterall the early 60's was all Ventures and Beach Boys...
    where as the small island brought out the noise of the Shadows, Stones,
    Beatles, Cream, Yardbirds... and the list goes on...
    
    I feel that there was quite a lot of resistance to foreign groups or
    performers, and guitarists would definately be compared to others style
    since there was no other way to say this or that person had his own
    technique...is that innovation?...  influencing may not be innovation,
    but interperation could also fall under the same category.
    
    I have played bass for Tramp, Void, Axis way back in the '70's, but
    have kept in touch mentally with the changes.. when its classical then
    one talks of Sagovia (sp)? jazz .. that gets me out of people, blues ..
    King... etc...
    there was a bass player that really got me listening, he would change
    riffs in the same piece.. I think the group was Jefferson Airplane..
    very effective on After Bathing at Baxters, and one of the Chicago's
    original bass players.. both these players added to the number by
    listening to the lead play and it was kinda talk-tune each other,
    ofcourse this was my style of playing.. now would you call that
    innovation.. or does it have to be only Big names... even little people
    do count..
    ron
    
    
    

    RE. .39,
    
    I may be a little late here but regarding Hendrix being "just ok", me
    thinks you should give your head a shake. Have a listen to Radio One
    (Drivin South in particular).
    
    Re .59, why he was so good should be summed up here there a well.The
    guy is 24 yrs old, it's 1967...this is not your average player.
    
    -kev                        

>>    Dom (btw, I swear to God that I've never knowingly heard
>>    "Eruption"...anyone like to hum me a few bars ?;-))    
    
    1) get out your LP of "Machine Head"
    
    2) plunk down the needle in the middle of the solo to "Highway Star"
    
    3) turn up your turntable to 45 rpm
    
    You're there dude!
    
    :-)
    

    
    	Ok, I'll come outta the closet too.  I've never heard
    	Eruption either...
    
    	There.  I said it.  Whew...
    

    
    	Oh, come now ... everyone's heard "Eruption"!!  It's usually
    	played [and possibly wrongly known] as the intro to their
    	cover of "You Really Got Me".
    
    	If Tom's going to the upcoming jam, someone please bring a
    	tape for him to listen to.
    
    	And Dave, "1984" was DLR's last Van Halen album, not "Diver
    	Down".
    

    Yo Ronald, this is off the track but your mention of Indian guitarists
    was a good lead in for something I wanted mention.
    
    Seen in yesterday's Arts listing, Hindustani slide guitarist(!)
    Debashish Bhattacharya is playing at Passim in Harvard Square tomorrow
    afternoon at 2:30.  The photo shows him holding this remarkable looking
    instrument, like an L5 with added necks and drone strings.  
    
    I've never heard of slide guitar being used in Hindustani music, sounds
    fascinating.  Anyone heard of this guy?
    
    /rick
    

    
    	A tape of Eruption??  Come on - with a roomful of shredders?
    
    	I say that everyone who can play it gets up and does it
    	together...
    

Willie Nelson said in his auto-biography that his only advice to aspiring
songwriters and musicians is to remember that the world is full of
critics... as long as you're honest with yourself when you write, it doesn't
matter what anyone says... time will treat you well if you stick to your
convictions, that kind of message.  Speaking of guitars and innovation, how
about Willie's "classical" axe?  Willie's a good picker.

I don't think the authors of the Guitar Handbook felt that strongly about their
list of innovators. I think they did a pretty good job, though.  And I'd be
willing to bet, though I don't know, that Chet Atkins and Les Paul were
technical advisors for this project, and that Chet and Les asked to be
left off the list.  Atkins could open a museum to show off the awards he's
won in his life.  Having read about him, I'd say Chet probably thought
that for the sake of brevity, he'd do more for the list by being left off.
You can't tell the world everything you know in one book.  Half the people in
the world wouldn't read it, the other half wouldn't believe it.  If that list
wasn't so short, there'd be a lot less entries in this note.

It's great that guitarists get so fired up over this topic and
that opinions are so strongly articulated.  

But maybe some people get a little carried away in defense..."methinks the lady
doth protest too much,"or however that quote goes. 

-SB

    >>I say that everyone who can play it gets up and does it
    >>together...
    
    	Impossible...
    
    	The only way to get two shredders to play anything in
        perfect unison is to shoot one of them.   ;^) ;^) ;^) ;^) ;^)
    
    
    Jim  (whose favorite part of "Eruption" is the Jack Benny violin
          take-off...)
    

    > Oh, come now ... everyone's heard "Eruption"!! 
    
    Shawn, I looked up the term "blueser" in my dictionary and found
    the following intriguing definition:
    
    	Blueser:  Someone who has never heard "Eruption".
    
    ;-)
    
    	db

>I don't think the authors of the Guitar Handbook felt that strongly about their
>list of innovators. 
    
    Let's hope not.
    
    > I think they did a pretty good job, though.  
    
    Have you heard "Eruption"?   ;-)
    
    > You can't tell the world everything you know in one book.  Half the
    >people in the world wouldn't read it, the other half wouldn't believe
    >it.  If that list wasn't so short, there'd be a lot less entries in
    >this note.
    
    Once again (and again and again), the objection isn't the "shortness"
    of the list, but the omission of an obvious choice.  A choice who isn't
    even one of my favorites.
    
    > It's great that guitarists get so fired up over this topic and that
    > opinions are so strongly articulated.   But maybe some people  get a
    > little carried away in defense..."methinks the lady doth protest too
    > much,"or however that quote goes. 
    
    Nonsense.  
    
    We just enjoy a good debate.  No need for you to be so defensive.

    	db

Since everyone's confessing ignorance, why did everyone start talking
about Fawn Hall?

>Charlie Christian
>B.B. King
>Django Rheinhart(SP?)
>Chuck Berry
>Bo Diddley
>Pete Townsend
>Jimi Hendrix
>Jeff Beck
>Eric Clapton
>Duanne Eddy
>Robert Fripp
>Stanley Clark - the only bass player
    
    I think Les Paul, Leo Fender, and Jim Marshall should all be on the
    list.
    
    I don't know when the Handbook was published, but a modern-day list
    would have to include Leo Kottke, Michael Hedges, Eddie Van Halen, 
    and Joe Satriani.  
    
    Kottke and Hedges have redefined acoustic guitar styles.  Likewise for
    EVH in rock guitar.  Satch has elevated the guitar like nobody else in
    rock and made it a focal instrument, serving it up on a silver platter.
    
    Mike

   >> little carried away in defense..."methinks the lady doth protest too
   >> much,"or however that quote goes.

>     Nonsense.  

It makes SOME sense, really, think about it.
    
>    We just enjoy a good debate.  No need for you to be so defensive.


Touchy, touchy.  It wasn't me who keyed in 10K words about any spicific
guitarist.

You say EVH is a giant in the realm of innovation, he must be.  

All I want to know from a node named Dregs is if the album "Full Circle(?)"
is any good.  I went looking for DD tapes and ended up ordering that one
because the store had nothing in stock.

-SB

    >Shawn, I looked up the term "blueser" in my dictionary and found
    >the following intriguing definition:
    >
    >	Blueser:  Someone who has never heard "Eruption".
    
    Funny - mine has exactly the same definition for the term
    "non-shredder" ;-)
    
    I thought it had been proved time and time again in this conference
    that Bluesers are those guys who like Chet Atkins, Wes Montgomery,
    Clarence White, Jerry Garcia, Segovia and Paco de Lucia ;-)
    
    Dom
    
    P.S. The curiosity for hearing "Eruption" s nearly killing me!

    Jeff Beck made the list and Roy Buchanan didn't??? Something is wrong
    with that picture. And thing JB can do...Roy did it first.

    
    	Dom, pick up Van Halen's self-titled album and listen to it
    	right through.
    
    	Even though you're not a "shred" fan, I think you'll be able
    	to appreciate it.  And if/when you do listen to it, remember
    	that this album is almost 20 years old now, and before that
    	you really heard nothing like it.
    
    	"I'm the One" really rips ... probably one of the best on
    	there.  Covered by "4 Non Blondes" on the "Airheads" sound-
    	track, but NOTHING like the original.
    

    	>Dom, pick up Van Halen's self-titled album and listen to it
    	>right through.
    
    I swear I'll make a point of doing that, Shawn - although I can't
    offhand think of anyone I know who's got it (I was a member of a
    CD-lending library until last year, so it wouldn't have been a problem
    then).
    
    My knowledge of Van Halen is mainly limited to "Jump" and a couple of
    TV concerts I've seen which didn't particularly bowl me over. But I'm
    always ready to be converted.
    
    Dom

    > It wasn't me who keyed in 10K words about any spicific guitarist.
    
    You have confused "volume" with "being fired up".  
    
    But don't worry, lots of people don't see the distinction.  One thing
    you should know about me: I'm an unusually fast typist.  Probably a
    by-product of playing too many notes on musical instruments (I play
    keyboards and guitar).

>All I want to know from a node named Dregs is if the album "Full Circle(?)"
>is any good. 

    You're asking the wrong person.   There isn't one single Dregs album
    out there that I would describe as being not "any good".  ;-)
    
    I think that album is a good starting point to listen to the Dregs.
    Although my recommendation for "first Dregs album" is "Dregs of the
    Earth".   
    
    But the Dregs are very consistent and about the only album I'd
    "discourage" as a "first album" would be "Night of the Living Dregs".

>>    P.S. The curiosity for hearing "Eruption" s nearly killing me!
    
>    	Dom, pick up Van Halen's self-titled album and listen to it
>    	right through.
    
>    	Even though you're not a "shred" fan, I think you'll be able
>    	to appreciate it.  
    
    Well, I disagree. 
    
    I don't think folks not into "shred" will like it.  They'll probably
    say "I've heard it before" not realizing that "Eruption" itself is
    the first and not even necessarily the best.
    
    However, if you can ignore all the pyrotechnic stuff that is trademark
    VH and focus on the rhythm playing, I DO think you'd really appreciate
    that.  For that, I'd be more inclined to recommend the "Van Halen II"
    album.
    
    If you want to know what "Eruption" is like, then listen to "Spanish
    Fly" on VH II - it's like an acoustic "Eruption".
    
    	db
    
    p.s.  Perhaps in addition to "jams" we should also have "listening"
          sessions.   Everybody brings some recordings they want to share
          with other folks.   I'd even volunteer my home for that.

    As I pointed out to db at lunch, in my 1982 edition of The Guitar
    Handbook, the intro page to the Guitar Innovators sections says,
    
    		A whole book could have been written on guitar 
    		innovators.  Selecting which players to include
    		and which would have to be omitted has been a
    		difficult task.  The final list should not be
    		considered in any way complete - more as a 
    		personal choice.
    
    So, to some degree db is right.  Then again, I just read the profiles
    again (because of this notes thread) and the authors do try to justify
    their choices and I think a lot of what they say makes sense.  Not all
    of it, but then that's *my* opinion.
    
    							John

    RE: "Spanish Fly" being an acoustic "Eruption"
    
    I'd call it more "Eddie imitates a classical/flamenco tremolo." 
    I never thought of the two as similar, until you mentioned it.
    I can see your point, but someone familiar with the classical
    tremolo technique (and not Eruption) might miss the connection.
    Instead of the "normal" technique, EVH uses a pick for the tremolo,
    and plays the bass notes with hammer-ons.

    
    	Dave, I did say:
    
             to appreciate it.  And if/when you do listen to it, remember
            that this album is almost 20 years old now, and before that
            you really heard nothing like it.
    

>    So, to some degree db is right.  Then again, I just read the profiles
>    again (because of this notes thread) and the authors do try to justify
>    their choices and I think a lot of what they say makes sense.  Not all
>    of it, but then that's *my* opinion.
    
    John,
    
    I have no problem "justifying their choices". 
    
    I have stated repeatedly that I can not justify ONE of their
    "non-choices".  And that I also can't explain his omission by
    any means other than ignorance or bias.
    
    And towards that end...
    
    John also mentioned to me that Andy Summers was among the "others"
    not typed into .0.
    
    Accordng to John, Andy Summers "met" Stewart Copeland" in 1977.   
    Well... Van Halen I came OUT in 1978 and the band had been together
    for years. 
    
    So... I'm hoping that that has laid to rest the contention that Van
    Halen's omission was due to an exclusion of players more recent
    than a certain time because there IS a player on the list who came
    out AFTER Van Halen was already incredibly famous - unlike many bands
    (like the Police) Van Halen became super-band on the release of their
    first album!   Van Halen was a mega-band before anyone ever heard of
    Andy Summers.
    
    So hopefully, we all accept that his omission is not due to him
    not having lasted long enough yet because someone who came out later,
    AND is in "nowhere land" right now *IS* on the list.
    
    OK?   Thank you.  ;-)
    
    	db

>     You have confused "volume" with "being fired up".  

>    But don't worry, lots of people don't see the distinction.  

Good, now I don't feel like a DREG anymore.  What happens when you get fired up?


Full Circle is a good starter?

-S

    Dave,
    
    Regarding when Andy Summers joined the Police, it's according to The
    Guitar Handbook, not me.  I was never a huge Police fan.
    
    
    							John

    > Good, now I don't feel like a DREG anymore.  What happens when 
    > you get fired up?
    
    People get mad at each other and stop respecting each other for the
    only reason that they disagree.  Always seemed stupid to me that
    people could get angry at someone for disagreeing but most people do.
    
    This is all in good fun.
    
> Full Circle is a good starter?
    
    Yep, in that if you don't like it I won't say "well you shoulda
    listened to...".
    
    The Dregs are one of the few bands I can say that about.  They are
    very consistent at least with regard to "quality".  Of course, they
    are INCREDIBLY "inconsistent" in style.  But that's what I like about
    them.  The most common adjective used to describe them seems to be
    "eclectic" and I certainly can live with that term.

    	db

    As the "opposition" for the majority of the previous debate,
    I concur that it was all in good fun.
    
    db and I often disagree, but I now know we have at least three
    things we can agree on:
    
    	1) We both think EVH is a great rhythm player (something
           I picked up from this string)
    
        2) We both like Bela Fleck and the Flecktones 
    
        3) We both like the piano outro to "Layla" (something I
    	   learned in out in the Clapton "Unplugged", uh, *discussion*)
    
    Oh, and were both fond of Steinways (so that makes four things).
    And it appears we both like a good debate...  
    
    I still don't believe that EVH's omission from the list in .0 is
    a deliberate snub to shred, nor do I believe it to be total ignorance
    on the part of the authors.  It seems more likely (to me) that 
    none of the authors were shredders, and no one thought to include
    include EVH.  If someone had suggested him, the others might have
    concurred.  I guess that it could be considered shoddy research,
    but since they didn't claim their list to be definitive, I think
    it is fine. 
    
    Jim

>    I still don't believe that EVH's omission from the list in .0 is
>    a deliberate snub to shred, nor do I believe it to be total ignorance
>    on the part of the authors.  It seems more likely (to me) that 
>    none of the authors were shredders, and no one thought to include
>    include EVH.  If someone had suggested him, the others might have
>    concurred.  I guess that it could be considered shoddy research,
>    but since they didn't claim their list to be definitive, I think
>    it is fine. 
    
    I really think this goes beyond "shoddy".   I really think you have to
    have stuck your head DEEP in the sand to not be aware of  the innovation,
    influence and impact Eddie Van Halen had on guitar  playing.
    
    I can't excuse that no matter how many disclaimers as to how limited
    their research was or how big their bias was.
    
    Ask yourself if you could excuse leaving the Celtics off a "greatest
    basketball teams list", or JFK off a "most loved presidents" list.
    I think it's firmly in that category of goof.  There doesn't even
    seem to be much disagreement (at least among those of us who HAVE heard
    Eruption) as to whether or not he clearly should've been on the list.
    
    	db

    >                 <<< Note 3130.109 by POLAR::KFICZERE >>>
    >                              -< Innovators... >-
    >
    >   Jeff Beck made the list and Roy Buchanan didn't??? Something is
    >	wrong with that picture. And thing JB can do...Roy did it first.
    >
    
    	Beck = More progressive
    	Roy  = Blues (innovative to the core IMO also)
    
    
    	Blues just gets looked over...   ya know that "easy/nobrainer/
        boring/emotion-filled_ya_right/childsplay/anyone-can-do-it/I-can 
    	play-better-than-that-bluser...  yeah_right/I-IV-V_crap".
    
    
    	;^)'s
    	
    	Fred (who's into making trouble today)
    
    
    	P.S. I think Roy was GREAT!)

    No arguement here. I think you summed the two up quite well. Although i
    found RB to be quite progressive as well. Not so much in his structure
    of material,but his guitar playing itself.Wonder what he'd be doing
    now?
    
    -k

    As regards Andy Summers, I think it should be said that he'd been
    around a long time before the Police were formed. Since the
    late-sixties, he'd played rock & roll/R&B with Zoot Money (under his
    real name of Andy Somers), psychadaelic rock with the second
    incarnation of Eric Burdon's Animals, progressive rock with Soft
    Machine/Kevin Ayers/Kevin Coyne et al, and numerous sessions. So he was
    reasonably well-known at least on this side of the Atlantic well before
    1977, although I'm sure he made the list because of the records he made 
    with the Police. 
    
    But, far more important...
    
    
    I too have a copy of The Guitar Handbook, but it's in Italian (I live
    and work in Italy). I can only assume it's an updated version of the 
    one that generated the list in .0 (although Steve did mention that he 
    hadn't listed ALL the names), because the list in my copy also includes
    Steve Cropper, Jaco Pastorius, Frank Zappa, Syd Barrett, Brian May, Pat
    Metheny, Steve Vai and.....
    
    Edward Van Halen ;-)
    
    > I think the authors are bozos
    
    You took the words right out of my mouth ;-) ;-)
    
    Dom 

    re: .126
    
    Undoubtedly because a bunch of non-bluesers wrote in about EVH and
    told the authors to find a good proctologist and request a "cranial
    extraction".
    
    ;-)

    Re: Andy Sommers
    
    > I'm sure he made the list because of the records he made 
    > with the Police. 
    
    I'm sure he made the list because he's somebody's favorite.
    
    	db

>Undoubtedly because a bunch of non-bluesers wrote in about EVH and
>   told the authors to find a good proctologist and request a "cranial
>    extraction".

What?

    
>Undoubtedly because a bunch of non-bluesers wrote in about EVH and
>told the authors to find a good proctologist and request a "cranial
>extraction".
    
...or better still, a bunch of EVH fans wrote in and did the same.    
    
    For the benefit of those who are new to this conference, "non-bluesers"
    are also known as "shredders" ;-) 
    
    And a glance at the list in .0 will tell you that Stanley Clarke and
    Robert Fripp are the two newest members of that ever-increasing family
    "the bluesers". Syd Barrett and Jaco Pastorious are currently having
    their applications examined ;-) 
    
    Dom

>    For the benefit of those who are new to this conference, "non-bluesers"
>    are also known as "shredders" ;-) 
    
>    And a glance at the list in .0 will tell you that Stanley Clarke and
>    Robert Fripp are the two newest members of that ever-increasing family
>    "the bluesers". Syd Barrett and Jaco Pastorious are currently having
>    their applications examined ;-) 
    
    Well, I think you've led our new readers slightly astray Dom.
    
    It's not true that "non-bluesers" are "shredders".  In fact, that's the
    classic blueser mistake - to paint the world as being only black and
    white (or in extreme cases, paint the world using only blues).
    
    "Blueser" refers to a stereotypical blues fanatic and it would be more
    accurate to say that a "blueser" is an "anti-shredder".
    
    It's not out-of-character for a blueser to appreciate folks like
    Clarke, Fripp, Barrett and Pastorious.
    
    However, your classic died-in-the-70's blueser would rather lose his
    soul to the devil at the crossroads than ADMIT that they've even
    heard "Eruption".
    
    ;-)  ;-)  ;-)  ;-)  ;-)  ;-)  ;-)
    
    	db
    
    p.s. And a blueser also seriously contends that Ralph Macchio 
    	 legitimately beat Steve Vai.

    
    	Yeah, the duel in "Crossroads" should be certified as the ONE
    	LEGITIMATE test when classifying a guitarist as a "blueser" or
    	a "shredder".
    
    	A "blueser" would say that Ralph won.  A "shredder", or anyone
    	with a brain, would say that Vai won.
    
    	8^)
    

    
    I think Pat Morita won. Oh sorry. Wrong Ralph Macchio movie...
    
    -b

>    I think Pat Morita won. Oh sorry. Wrong Ralph Macchio movie...
    
    Hammer on,  pull off,  hammer on,  pull off...

>    	Yeah, the duel in "Crossroads" should be certified as the ONE
>    	LEGITIMATE test when classifying a guitarist as a "blueser" or
>    	a "shredder".
    
>    	A "blueser" would say that Ralph won.  A "shredder", or anyone
>    	with a brain, would say that Vai won.
    
    Imagine, Vai loses because he could not IMITATE Macchio playing an
    uninspired version of a non-original piece.
    
    I mean THAT scene says it all doesn't it?
    
    ;-)  ;-)  ;-)  
    
    	db

    >It's not true that "non-bluesers" are "shredders".  In fact, that's the
    >classic blueser mistake - to paint the world as being only black and
    >white (or in extreme cases, paint the world using only blues).
    >
    >"Blueser" refers to a stereotypical blues fanatic and it would be more
    >accurate to say that a "blueser" is an "anti-shredder".
    
    Point I was making (or trying to) is that most "shredders" seem so
    ill-at-ease (this may sound harsh, but I haven't got time to put it more
    diplomatically;-)) with any other genre that they tend to lump
    practically anyone who isn't a shredder in the blues camp.
    
    Enough to make Blind Lemon Pastorious turn in his grave, eh?;-)
    
    >It's not out-of-character for a blueser to appreciate folks like
    >Clarke, Fripp, Barrett and Pastorious.
    
    Phew! Seeing as I've got records by all of them, I can still consider 
    myself a "blueser" then ;-)
    
    >However, your classic died-in-the-70's blueser would rather lose his
    >soul to the devil at the crossroads than ADMIT that they've even
    >heard "Eruption".
    
    All this in a world where your average born-in-the-90s shredder thinks
    Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club is a dating agency ;-)
    
    Dom
    
    P.S. I honestly wasn't joking when I said I hadn't *knowingly* heard 
    "Eruption"! If you think that's amusing, what do you make of the
    American kids who accosted Ray Davies at practically every stage of his
    U.S. tour to tell him how much they loved his version of Van Halen's
    "You Really Got Me"? ;-) 
                           

    
Funkin' Wagnels says:

	shredder : a guitarist who specializes in playing the maximum
			number of notes per second.

	blueser  : a guitarist who specializes in imparting the maximum
			amount of emotional content to each note played.

;-)
    

    
    Gee, my copy sez:
    
    Blueser:  A guitarist who can't get out of clapton-cover-mode, spending
    all his/her time trying to wring emotion out of a note thats STILL just
    a note.
    
    Shredder: A guitarist who can't stop picking on the above in public
    forums.
    :-)
    :-)

    Incidentally, the inclusion of Syd Barrett miffed me a bit. I mean,
    I've got practically everything the guy's ever recorded, but he doesn't
    strike me as being a fundamental name in the field of guitar
    innovation.
    
    Then again, he certainly used a few "alternative tunings" ;-)
    
    Dom

>    Point I was making (or trying to) is that most "shredders" seem so
>    ill-at-ease (this may sound harsh, but I haven't got time to put it more
>    diplomatically;-)) with any other genre that they tend to lump
>    practically anyone who isn't a shredder in the blues camp.
    
    My distinct impression is that it is the BLUESERS that lump everyone
    who isn't a shredder into the "blueser" catagory, NOT the shredders.
    
>    All this in a world where your average born-in-the-90s shredder thinks
>    Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club is a dating agency ;-)
    
    And where Claptomaniacs are not altogether sure whether "Spanish Fly"
    refers to a  variety of marijuana or a sexually transmitted disease. ;-)
    
    > What do you make of the American kids who accosted Ray Davies at
    > practically every stage of his U.S. tour to tell him how much they
    > loved his version of Van Halen's "You Really Got Me"?
    
    What do I make of it?  They're high on acid!!!!
    
    The Van Halen version puts the original Kinks version to shame!
    
	db

    >> The Van Halen version puts the original Kinks version to shame!
    
    Yeah, just like all those Yngwie-wannabees playing "Eruption" in
    double-time put Eddie to shame...
    
    
    
    RE: Bosendorfers
    
    People who play Bosendorfers often play too many notes...  Steinways
    are *much* better if you want to play with emotion...
    

    
    
    One guitar player that blew my mind way back when I was in college
    in the S.F/ Berkley area was the late John Cipolina (sp?) of the 
    Quick Silver Messanger, espcially without the band. I remeber 
    hearing him yearly at concert by the Fishermans' warf in S.F 
    he definately was very good and different for his time. 
    Anyone else ever heard him play live?
    
    Shaw

    >One guitar player that blew my mind way back when I was in college
    >in the S.F/ Berkley area was the late John Cipolina (sp?) of the 
    >Quick Silver Messanger, espcially without the band. I remeber 
    >hearing him yearly at concert by the Fishermans' warf in S.F 
    >he definately was very good and different for his time. 
    >Anyone else ever heard him play live?
     
    I cam within 10 minutes (!) of hearing him play live in London in
    1981...but he hadn't come on stage by 1.30 a.m. and I had no means of
    getting back home (poverty-stricken student days), other than the last
    night bus ;-)
    
    Interesting player, although I have to admit I can't alway distinguish
    between Cipollina and Gary Duncan (?) in their guitar duals on the live
    QMS album. "Maiden of the Cancer Moon" (or whatever it's called!)
    particularly sticks out.
    
    Dom      

I'd choose Duanne Allman.  Great range of styles and he had a big reputation of 
pushing other people to play their best.  

Jim

    
    Hi All
    The sound produced by the band "White Trash" lead by Edgar Winters
    brother of Johnny Winters was very innovative, however they were never
    given their due, understand that they had two lead guitarists? one 
    better than the other... who was better Johnny or Edgar?
    
    Has anyone thought of "Mountain" as a group that could also fall
    in the "List".. what became of them?
    ron
    
    
    

    
    	Edgar plays keys and sax.  He's now playing in David Lee Roth's
    	Vegas band.  Johnny Winter is the guitarist.  Check out his note
    	in here - there are tons of Johnny fans.
    
    	Yeah, he was the first POPULAR / SUCCESSFUL blues guitarist and
    	he influenced many guitarists to play the blues.  He was, by far,
    	my biggest influence.
    
    	Leslie West and Mountain are recording a new CD.  He was recently
    	given a bunch of Peavey 5150 gear by Eddie Van Halen.  One thing
    	about EVH, he seems to care about the guitarists who came before
    	him or those not as successful (Allan Holdsworth).
    
    	Tom
    

    
    	re: "Johnny Winter is the guitarist".  By that I mean, he's the
    	guitar playing Winter - not DLR's guitarist.
    
    	As far as the 2 guitarists with Winter, I'd guess you're thinking
    	of Rick Derringer (Rock 'n' Roll Hoothie Koo).
    
    	Tom
    

RE: 142

    I saw Quick Silver Messanger in either 1971 or 1972 at a woodstock wannabe
    concert in Pittsburgh PA.  (Some of the others I remember being there were
    Taj Mahal and Billy Preston.)  Overall, a nice concert, but I don't
    remember much of it anymore....and I was straight then...it has just been
    too many years with too much happening in between :-) :-)

- Mark

    Thanks Tom
    ... sure has been a long time ...
    ... yea, over 20 years... or should I say "Twenty Years ago today,..."
    .. Good ole SPLCHB!!
    ron

    Don't know if these dudes aren't already in here,....
    
    	Pete Cosey, John McLaughlin, John Scofield
    
    /pc
    

    Here's list of Guitarists selected for "Inside the Blues: 1942
    - 1982 - Four Decades of the Greatist Electric Guitarists"
    by Dave Rubin, published by Hal Leonard: 
    
    1942-1952: T-Bone Walker, Clarence "Gatemouth" Brown, Johnny Moore, 
    Carl Hogan and Bill Jennings, John Lee Hooker, Muddy Waters, 
    Elmore James
    
    1952-1962: Howlin' Wolf, Willie Johnson and Hubert Sumlin 
    (one entry for the previous three), Guitar Slim, B.B. King, 
    Muddy Waters - Chicago Blues Rhythm Guitar, Otis Rush
    
    1962-1972: Freddie King, Albert King, Magic Sam, Buddy Guy, 
    Lonnie Mack and Michael Bloomfield (Rockin' the Blues), 
    Kenny Burrell (Jazzin' the Blues), Jimi Hendrix (Blues
    Guitarist)
    
    1972-1982: Johnny Winter, Albert Collins, Son Seals, 
    Fenton Robinson, Stevie Ray Vaughan. 
    
    The book has a little page or too about each artist as 
    listed above, including licks.  Its a very respectful
    treatment and as a blueser I love it.  It does not 
    go into depth on individual artists however, like 
    say a whole book on Jimi Hendrix might. 
    
    Dave
    

    Did Howlin Wolf play guitar?
    

    
    The "chapter" is titled "Howlin' Wolf, Willie Johnson and 
    Hubert Sumlin".  The Wolf studied guitar with 
    Charlie Patton, and obtained a "rudimentary but totally 
    effective and authentic grounding in first generation 
    Delta blues guitar".  
    
    His sidemen Willie Johnson and later Hubert Sumlin are
    specifically discussed and the example licks are of the
    sidemen, not Howlin'.  The Wolf apparently played rhythm 
    and slide guitar as well as blow harp and sing. 
    
    Dave 
    
    
    

>    Did Howlin Wolf play guitar?

The Howlin' Wolf London Sessions - still in print on CD/Tape - includes
a dialog of Wolf, Clapton, and I think Mick Taylor, where Wolf gives a lesson
on slide technique.  Circa 1971.

-S

    RE: last
    
    Yes, it's on the collection called "The Blues", a magazine/CD that
    comes out twice a month (in the UK).  I gave up after about 50 mags.  I
    couldn't believe there were that many unknown blues players, (well
    unknown to me :-)   It was interesting to hear where more recent music
    comes from and I'll never have the same respect for Led Zeppelin again.
    
    One thing that amazed me about the 'lesson' was that Howlin' sounded
    exactly the same when he was singing as when he was talking.
    
    tmp

    just browsing thru...curious, over 150 replies and not one mention of
    either Lowell George or Jerry Garcia.  Pity.  These are two of the most
    uniquely gifted guitar players that ever lived...IMHO.  
    
    To me, too much technique overkills the music, as too many notes is
    only so much noise. 
    
    These guys got more out of one note than all the shredders in the world
    combined, again IMHO.
    
    j-c
    
    

    	Clapton sucks!!

    	Oops, wrong note.  8^)


    	Maybe 1 Garcia note says more than 1000 Steve Vai notes, but
    	it'd be nice if Garcia played a different note once in awhile.

    	8^)

    	    >Maybe 1 Garcia note says more than 1000 Steve Vai notes, but
            >it'd be nice if Garcia played a different note once in awhile.
    
    	He does, or did.  It may have taken a few hours but eventually he'd 
    	hit most of the notes in a scale.
    
    	Lowell, on the other hand could play a note for days.
    
    	j-c
    

    >		"These guys got more out of one note than all the
    >		 shredders in the world combined"
    
    Gee, I've never heard that said before.   
    
    You have marvelous insight into music new friend.
    
    Tell us more.
    
    	db

	>>>  -< The Blueser battle cry >-
    
    		Curious... neither Lowell George nor Jerry Garcia
    		are examples of what I'd term "bluesers".
    
    	/Steve

    >You have marvelous insight into music new friend
    
    Marvelous insight???  HAH !  And if you look again, you might recognize
    the name...if not, does the name Gary Lopez ring a bell?  You brought
    your DX (i beleive) over for an ensamblage in my basement studio
    several years ago.
    
    anyway, I wont be dragged into debate about why the Dead were not the 
    worst band that ever existed. It seems a bit retarded that you have
    to be a Deadhead to appreciate their music.  But such is the case, I
    guess...
    
    >Tell us more.
    
    What do you want to know?
    
    jeff

>    		Curious... neither Lowell George nor Jerry Garcia
>    		are examples of what I'd term "bluesers".
    
    I'm just observing that the "get more out of one note than all
    shredders" is something that we've heard a few thousand times,
    MOSTLY from blues afficionados.
    
    For the record, I think Eric Johnson, Steve Morse and Joe Satriani
    get "more emotion out of" their guitars than non-fans of shred will
    ever be able (or "inclined" or "willing") to understand.
    
    These "more out of one note" and similar statements ultimately boils 
    down to these things:
    
    	1) I have no appreciation for where "expression" comes from
    	   in shred
    
    	2) I have no willingness to accept that expression does exist
    	   within those styles, albeit in different ways/forms than
    	   styles I do appreciate.
    
    	3) All music styles are subject to the evaluation of the
    	   metrics of the styles I like
    
    I recognize Jerry Garcia and Lowell George if only because they
    touched so many people. 
    
    But the same can be said of Morse, Satriani and Johnson.
    
    	db

>    anyway, I wont be dragged into debate about why the Dead were not the 
>    worst band that ever existed. It seems a bit retarded that you have
>    to be a Deadhead to appreciate their music.  But such is the case, I
>    guess...
    
    I don't think we want to debate that, nor whether or not Jerry Garcia
    puts more into his playing than all the shredders combined.
    
    To some of us, both claims seems equally sophomoric.
    
    I only wanted to point that out, not restart any debates.  It seems
    a bit retarded that you have to be a shredhead to appreciate that
    music.   But such is the case I guess...
    
    	db

>    For the record, I think Eric Johnson, Steve Morse and Joe Satriani
>    get "more emotion out of" their guitars than non-fans of shred will
>    ever be able (or "inclined" or "willing") to understand.
    
>    But the same can be said of Morse, Satriani and Johnson.
    
    	db, 2 outta 3 ain't bad!

    

    I happen to like both Garcia and Lowell George immensely, however
    "innovative" is not really the word that comes to mind when I think
    of them. Lowell was perhaps more of an innovator than Gerry from
    the point of view that he took slide guitar to a new level during
    his peak period (from 1973 to the time of his death). 
    
    The amazing thing about Gerry and the Dead is that they survived
    over 3 decades together as a band and they continuously tried new
    things (in many cases new toys) to keep it interesting. There were
    many times that the band drifted apart, people went off and did 
    differant things to broaden their horizens and then when the band
    would reunite it would be better than ever. The (unavaoidable) 
    changes in personel also helped to keep it fresh although each
    time it was due to a death in the band. 
    
    I believe I initiated both a Grateful Dead note and a Little
    Feat (Lowell George) note at one time in this conference. I'll
    post pointers when I have time.
    
    Later....Mark

>>    For the record, I think Eric Johnson, Steve Morse and Joe Satriani
>>    get "more emotion out of" their guitars than non-fans of shred will
>>    ever be able (or "inclined" or "willing") to understand.
    
>>    But the same can be said of Morse, Satriani and Johnson.
    
>    	db, 2 outta 3 ain't bad!
    
    Gee... he used to LIKE Satriani.

    	>I don't think we want to debate that, nor whether or not Jerry Garcia
        >puts more into his playing than all the shredders combined.
    
    I didnt say that.  I said "more into one note".  There's a difference.
    
    
    	>To some of us, both claims seems equally sophomoric.
    
    Why, because they differs from yours?     
    
    
    	> I only wanted to point that out, not restart any debates.  It seems
        >a bit retarded that you have to be a shredhead to appreciate that
        >music.   But such is the case I guess.
    
    Good.  That I appreciate Johnson, Morse and Satriani as incredible
    musicians and you appreciate George and Garcia "if only because they 
    touched so many people" leaves little room for discussion, now doesnt
    it?
    
    jeff
    

    	>I happen to like both Garcia and Lowell George immensely, however
        >"innovative" is not really the word that comes to mind when I think
        >of them. Lowell was perhaps more of an innovator than Gerry from
        >the point of view that he took slide guitar to a new level during
        >his peak period (from 1973 to the time of his death).
    
    
    To me innovative means, something new, be it approach to style or 
    technique, whatever.  Lowell was among the greatest slide players ever 
    (IMHO). Little Feat was one of a kind.  And even though he was only one
    of six, he was such the innovator that when Feats tried to replicate
    Lowell's contribution they were miserably unsuccessful (again, MO).  
      
    With Jerry, same.  It was not only how he played the strings, but his note
    placement that was innovative...This is why I feel he is one of the most
    innovative musicians of his time...When you hear him, from the first
    note you know its Jerry.  Nobody's guitar sounds like his.  Nobody
    plays like him...to me thats innovation.
    
    	>I believe I initiated both a Grateful Dead note and a Little
        >Feat (Lowell George) note at one time in this conference. I'll
        >post pointers when I have time.
    
    That would be great.  Thanks...          
    
    jeff
    

    	>I don't think we want to debate that, nor whether or not Jerry Garcia
        >puts more into his playing than all the shredders combined.
    
>    I didnt say that.  I said "more into one note".  There's a difference.
    
    We don't want to debate whether or not they put "more into one note"
    either.
    
    Those of us who appreciate shred, do NOT agree with the "one note"
    claim either.   It's based on a limited view of shred.
    
    OK?

    	>Those of us who appreciate shred, do NOT agree with the "one note"
        >claim either.   It's based on a limited view of shred.
    
    I dont care if you agree.  Your views are loud and clear.  And now,
    mine are too...
    
    jeff
    

    Hmm - I just gotta say that I like "shred" music (the likes of which
    are plastered all over this file...).
    
    However, I used to be a MAJOR deadhead...Saw Jerry play zillions of 
    times with The Dead, The NewRiders, Jerry Garcia Band, etc...
    
    I stopped listening to the dead when I learned to play guitar (or
    started learning) cuz I felt that Jerry was a mind-less meanderer...  
    While I used to get a charge out of it, the man made up his own 
    scales.  Outta wack ones...
    
    Emotion?? Nhaaa...  Acid/Smack/Coke induced meandering.
    
    Now, The Dead WAS in fact revolutionary in the PA/Recording
    department...  MAN they had some BITCHIN' stuff packed in their
    racks...!!
    

    >However, I used to be a MAJOR deadhead...
    
    If you suddenly started hating their music, you were never a deadhead.
    You might have called yourself one cuz maybe you thought it was cool to
    be one or whatever, but...
    
    	>I stopped listening to the dead when I learned to play guitar (or
        >started learning) cuz I felt that Jerry was a mind-less
    	>meanderer...
    
    Meanderer, ok. he does meander.  mindless, though?  how smart are you?
    
    	>While I used to get a charge out of it, the man made up his own 
        >scales.  Outta wack ones...
    
    Very innovative.
    
    	>Emotion?? Nhaaa...  Acid/Smack/Coke induced meandering
    
    All the best musicians in history do/did drugs.  
    
    
    
    

        >However, I used to be a MAJOR deadhead...
    
    As the joke goes, "What did the Deadhead say when he sobered up?"
    
    "Man! This music sucks!"
    
    >    All the best musicians in history do/did drugs.  
    
    Hardly.  Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Chopin, Liszt, Segovia, Django
    Rheinhardt, etc. all did drugs?!
    
    You'd be more accurate in saying:
    
    "A lot of the best musicians in modern history, especially since the 
    1960's, have done drugs."
    
    Mike

    Unfortunately, this notes thread contains a lot of discussion of what's
    "innovative" without providing many examples (names of actual tunes or 
    riffs). 
    
    Here's one. Dig out a copy of the Grateful Dead's "Europe '72" live
    album and listen to the song "China Cat Sunflower". To my ears that's an
    innovative melody with some very innovative guitar playing by Jerry
    Garcia.  Yea or nay?
    
    Allen  
    

    
    But no one would call Satriani and offer up
    the now vacant guitar chair for the 
    Dreadfull, I mean Gratefull Dead, would
    they?  
    
    I don't think he could cut it.
    
    (no smiles, maybe its funny, you decide)
    
    Dave
    

    Jeez, it must be what, 6 months since the last time we
    had this discussion?

    
    
    Yup, must be the heat in New England or something.
    
    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
    

    I've never been a Greatful Dead fan, or a particular fan of Jerry
    Garcia.  I will admit that my exposure to the Dead is limited to the
    three or four songs that they recorded that get airplay.
    
    But David Grisman (the world's greatest mandolin player, IMO)
    respected Jerry's talents (he recorded a couple of albums with him, and
    dedicated a song to his memory on Tone Poems II).  This is reason
    enough for me to give him the benefit of a doubt.   

    
    
    
       No, it's the freakin humidity.
    

    
    	I don't think Satriani would play for The Grateful Dead even if
    	they did call him and ask him to.  Why should he?  That's not
    	his style of music.
    
    	And that's also very probably the main reason they wouldn't call
    	him in the 1st place.
    

    
    
    
       I swear some of you guys just  L O V E  to argue. 
    
    
       I was messing with the Extreamist last night and 
    I have a question that shouldn't cause any fighting.
    
       Just what the heck is the purpose of "Drop D" tuning? 
    Did Satch just want to make it easier to bend?  Is it 
    just that simple and if so,  why?  I mean, a half step 
    doesn't buy you _THAT_ much. 
    
    
      -Rick. 
    
     

>>    Here's one. Dig out a copy of the Grateful Dead's "Europe '72" live
>>    album and listen to the song "China Cat Sunflower". To my ears that's an
>>    innovative melody with some very innovative guitar playing by Jerry
>>    Garcia.  Yea or nay?
    
    	I vote yea.
    
>>    But no one would call Satriani and offer up
>>    the now vacant guitar chair for the 
>>    Dreadfull, I mean Gratefull Dead, would
>>    they?  
    
    Maybe not as far-fetched as it sounds.  Satch is a San Francisco boy
    ain't he?  I'd wager he's boogied to Jerry himself on occasion.  And I
    seriously doubt he'd speak ill of the Dead.
    
    re coop = deadhead, who woulda thunk it???
    

    Here's the pointers I promised:
    
    	Grateful Guitars		note 344
    	Little Feat/Lowell George       note 2623
    
    Enjoy!
    
    	I don't want to rat-hole this topic so I will avoid debating
    the merits of these guys playing. I happen to like some of the new
    material that Feat put out in recent years. The "Let it Roll" album
    for example was brilliant. There's not a bad tune on the album. 
    "Mambo" was more forgettable but it also had it's moments. The
    album "Shake Me up" kicked butt however I don't think anyone ever
    noticed it. I found copies of Shake Me Up  in the discount rack
    within weeks of release. The latest album "Aint had Enuff Fun" has
    taken a while to sink in but it is clearly a great album. The use
    of a female lead vocalist is such a departure for Little Feat that
    you have to view them as a completely differant band than they were
    before.
    
    One of the things that used to amaze me about Lowell was his incredible
    playing style and the fact that he could sing simultaneously while
    playing brilliant lead lines. Clearly the new Little Feat does not
    have anyone this multi-talented and as a result they had to bring in
    "specialists" to try and fill Lowell's shoes. I guess these guys
    could have decided that since they could not fill Lowell's shoes, they
    should hang it up and never attempt a LF reunion. If they had done so
    we would have missed out on some very good music and people like
    Paul Barerre's talents would be sorely missed.
    
    The same could be said about the Dead. The Dead could have broken up
    after Pig Pen died since he had such an integral part in the band
    and could not be replaced. It would have been a shame if they had
    done so!
    
	You can never go back to the way things were in the past. This is
    no reason to stop trying IMHO.
    
    	Mark
    

    Some reference points to innovative slide guitar by Lowell George...
    
    Day or Night and All That You Dream off the Last Record Album and/or
    Waiting For Columbus live album are examples of Lowell's guitar work. 
    Lowell liked to hang on a note and wait for something to happen in the
    music and then break into a phrase to add some rythmic or textural color 
    to it.  Very interactive.  Very innovative (IMO)
    
    Other favs are Two Trains and Rock n Roll Doctor off of Sailing Shoes
    (I think).
    
    jeff
    
    
    ps..Ill try to refrain from making references/comparisons to other
    styles/musicians.  It was a mistake to and Im sorry if I offended other 
    noters by my opinions.

    >>   Just what the heck is the purpose of "Drop D" tuning?
    
    In "Drop D" tuning you lower the low-E string a full step to D.
    All other strings are left in standard tuning.  It is a common tuning 
    for solo and fingerstyle (including classical guitar) pieces in the 
    key of D, since it gives you the low open D as a bass note (although
    its use is not restricted to the key of D).
    
    How it relates to Mr. Satriani is outside my realm of expertise.

    I entered the last reply before reading all of the previous replies
    so here is some more thoughts.
    
    Europe 72 is my favorite Dead Album ever and the medley that
    includes "China Cat Sunflower" into "I know you rider" is 
    amazing. If you think back to 1972 and recall popular music
    at that time, no one even came close to what the Dead were
    doing live. They flowed effortlessly from one tune to the
    next.
    
    Not to criticize Gerry but I believe his playing suffered as
    he got older. Gerry was my main influence for years. I used to
    try to copy his guitar solos note for note for many of the tunes
    on American Beauty, Workingman's Dead, Europe 72, etc. His 
    playing was flawless on those albums and I saw him as a major
    role model for guitarists at that time. As he got older there
    seemed to be a lot more (dare I say) *sour notes* in his playing
    and other lines that seems unplanned/unintentional or othewise
    did not make good musical sense. The thing to keep in mind is
    that when you love someone, you have to accept their flaws (warts
    and all) and as Gerry got older, I become more forgiving. I 
    used to remind myself at every Dead concert that I could be seeing
    Gerry for the last time. 
    
    It will be interesting to see if our present guitar *heros* can
    stand the test of time the way that Gerry and Lowell did.
    
    Mark

I typically like to avoid these discussions because they
tend to be way too emtional and opinionated.  (I'm one
of the guys who made the mistake of saying in too loud
of a voice once, that I though the Stones sucked.  Imagine
my surprise when someone actually wanted to "Step out side
and settle it.."  huh ?????  hey, drink decaff....

But I guess I need to kick my 2 cents in...

Personally, I put the Dead, (and maybe coincidently) in the
same catagory I put the Stones in (And I'm just using the Stones 
and the Dead as an  example, cuz they are two bands that I
really haven't got an ear for, but I know that millions of
people do....)

So,, yea, I appreciate the contributions that they were able
to make to music,, and lets face it, the Dead put
out some tunes that EVERYONE knows, just like the Stones.

however, being exposed to the Dead by what I consider
one of the premier dead heads of my time, (a guy named Mark,
who is among other things, a Catholic Priest, who NEVER missed
a dead show he could get to..) I usually
came out of a 'Dead listening experience' with with Mark, 
always with the same conclusion...  (which I whispered only to 
myself..)

	".. Gee.  I just don't get it..."

He'd be just so into the tunes, I mean  REALLY into them...  Tappin
the feet, snappin the fingers,, singing the choruses... and I'd just 
sit there with this blank stare,, trying too eek something positive out of
the music,,,  try as I might, I could find nothing to comment on.

(It's like our Moms always said, if you can't find anything nice to say
about a person....  so,, out this was born a new saying..  
"If you can't find anything nice to say about a band,, your talking about 
 the Dead..."  but .... I digress..)

so,, Jerry Garcia a Guitar-God-innovator-what-ever ??? 
Well, maybe,, I really don't know... A better question what makes 
an innovator an innovator ??? Style ? Sound ? combination of both... 
I know it's not NPM, (notes per measure)...  maybe it's different
for everyone..

wouldn't it really be creativity.  Are they doing something that 
nobody has done yet, (wouldn't Henrix still be one of the greates
innovators...)  But follow that train of thought, can you put
Garcia in that catagory..  Again, if it *IS* different for everyone,
than why not..  Admittedly he's not on my list..

So to me, this is a pure emotion discussion.
I can never appreciate Jerry G. like some of you can, I
just wasn't there...  again,,, excuse me but 

 	... Gee...  I just don't get it..

    I like Let it Roll and Shake me up.  Agreed on Mambo...to quick to
    release probably.  I had trouble not comparing the new members with 
    Lowell mainly because they tried so hard to duplicate the sound of a
    man who has no equal.  Outside of that context, its great stuff.
    
    And Paul Barrere, who plays some mean slide as well, is a fantastic
    guitar player.  I see them whenever I can, if only to witness Barrere
    Payne and co...
    
    jeff
    

    > But no one would call Satriani and offer up the now vacant guitar chair 
    > for the Dreadfull, I mean Gratefull Dead, would they?  
    
    And they wouldn't have called Andres Segovia either.
    
    What this tells us about Jerry Garcia, Andres Segovia and Joe Satriani
    is not apparent to anyone not running around in tie-dye T-shirts
    and a perhaps overly-tight headband.
    
    ;-)
    
    	db

    re: .187
    
    Mark's reaction to the GDead is the same as mine.
    
    I only end up scratching my head wondering what it is that everyone
    else is hearing that I'm not.  
    
    But, you look around you at a G-Dead concert and any reasonable person
    would have to conclude that somehow, someway, the Grateful Dead and
    their music is greatly appreciated by a lot of people.
    
    I'll probably never stop TRYING to appreciate the Grateful Dead but
    I gotta tell, I don't hold much hope.
    
    Maybe some Deadhead in here should make a "Grateful Dead/Jerry Garcia
    Appreciation 101" tape and pass it around.
    
    	db
    
    p.s. The only concert I have EVER walked out of was "Bobby and the
         Midnites".   The only reason I was there in the first place was
         because the warmup-band was Steve Morse.

    
    	Dave, I think you're actually agreeing with Ray in .188
    
    	8^)
    

    	>role model for guitarists at that time. As he got older there
        >seemed to be a lot more (dare I say) *sour notes* in his playing
        >and other lines that seems unplanned/unintentional or othewise
        >did not make good musical sense. The thing to keep in mind is
        >that when you love someone, you have to accept their flaws (warts
        >and all) and as Gerry got older, I become more forgiving. I 
        >used to remind myself at every Dead concert that I could be seeing
        >Gerry for the last time
    
    I first saw the Dead in '77.  Nearly two decades later I was seeing an
    old man struggling to maintain.  In recent years, the peaks were few
    and far between.  Remembering all words to songs he'd sung for 30 years
    seemed impossible for him.  So even as we had to become more forgiving
    and often were dissappointed still, those increasingly rare moments of
    magic became more important.  The sound he made was sweet as ever. 
    And those moments he'd lose his way, as he always did, even in his prime, 
    the suspense of the playout was always exciting.    
    
    And true, for ten years, every show I saw, I worried Jerry'd drop dead on 
    stage.  
    
    Jeff
      
    
    

    	>p.s. The only concert I have EVER walked out of was "Bobby and the
        >     Midnites".   The only reason I was there in the first place
    	>     was because the warmup-band was Steve Morse.
    
    
    	One way not to measure Garcia or the Dead is by taking in a Bobby
    	show.  The Dead are an aquired taste for many.  Bobby's Midnights
    	and Ratdog are an aquired tast for Deadheads.

    RE: Corey
    
    Seems to me that for a person to grow out of a particular
    genre of music (specifically, The Dead) doesn't necessarily
    mean that one was "never a dead head"...  
    
    Mikes little joke about the dead head who sobered up sort've
    makes my point...
    
    After seeing them live in excess of 24 times, knowing their music
    inside and out (I *still* know the chops the Sugar Magnolia - I can't
    SHAKE it!!), and basically living the whole experience for 10 years
    should qualify me...  :-)
    
    ...Then my girlfriend at the time bought me an MXR Distortion+,
    and my whole outlook on music changed...  :-) 
    
    

    	>Seems to me that for a person to grow out of a particular
        >genre of music (specifically, The Dead) doesn't necessarily
        >mean that one was "never a dead head".
    
    I agree.  I just thought it strange... to wake up one day and decide
    that you suddenly hate the Band you've followed for 10 years.  Its
    not like, "yeah I used to like Sean Cassidy, the Partridge Family
    and the Dead when I was a kid but I grew out of it".  Now some bands
    I hated as a kid and then grew into liking them.  But all the bands
    I've really liked in my life I still like.  My point being that some
    dedheds are in it because they love the music and some are in it
    because of the scene. 
    
    	>Mikes little joke about the dead head who sobered up sort've
        >makes my point.
    
    Not all deadheads are drug freaks...Most shows Ive been to have been
    "sober shows" (well maybe a beer here or there) and I listen to taped
    shows all the time, completely straight. 
    
    	>After seeing them live in excess of 24 times, knowing their music
        >inside and out (I *still* know the chops the Sugar Magnolia - I
    	>can't SHAKE it!!), and basically living the whole experience for 
    	>10 years should qualify me...  :-)
    
    Yeah that qualifies.
    
        >Then my girlfriend at the time bought me an MXR Distortion+,
        >and my whole outlook on music changed...  :-)
    
    So, if she bought you an envelope filter instead, you'd still be
    a deadhead??
    
    jeff
    

>       Just what the heck is the purpose of "Drop D" tuning? 
>    Did Satch just want to make it easier to bend?  Is it 
>    just that simple and if so,  why?  I mean, a half step 
>    doesn't buy you _THAT_ much. 
    
    I think it's for bottom end and it should be a whole step.  Ty Tabor
    uses it religiously and gets a really fat sound.
    
    Mike

>    	One way not to measure Garcia or the Dead is by taking in a Bobby
>    	show.  The Dead are an aquired taste for many.  Bobby's Midnights
>    	and Ratdog are an aquired tast for Deadheads.
    
    Yes, that's what lots of deadheads have told me.
    
    Actually, most of them love the dead (obviously) but hate Bobby & the
    Midnites.
    
    I'm also amazed that so many people who think so highly of the Dead
    ALSO will tell you that they hardly own ANY of the Dead's album. 
    To me, that tells me that these people are less into the music and
    more into the scene.
    
    That at least "half explains" why "I don't get it" cause I'm not into
    the "scene".   The one Dead concert I was at was ANYTHING but a
    "sober" concert.   I even wondered if the United States Government
    had momentarily declared the stadium to have some sort of "diplomatic
    immunity" from our normal laws about possession and use of illegal
    substances.
    
    	db - who HAS inhaled but doesn't any longer

    Perhaps you misunderstood those Deadheads who told you they don't own
    any of the albums.  The major label releases, with a few notable
    exceptions, are not generally held in very high regard.  But trading of
    live tapes is rampant.  I don't know any Deadheads who don't own and
    enjoy at least some recorded music; it's just that most or all of it
    is live tapes.  Live is of course where the true Dead experience is at.
    
    These days, there are an abundance of commercially available riches for
    those who want to sample good, live Dead; the kind of stuff previously
    only available on bootleg tapes.  5 volumes of "Dick's Picks", each
    containing most or all of a particularly good show, hand picked and
    mastered by someone at the heart of the Dead organization.  And also the
    three "From the Vault" releases, again clean live recordings of superior
    shows.
    
    /rick
    

    Hundred Year Haul is also excellent and can be had at your local
    Strawberry's.  Its one of the shows from Europe '72
    
    jeff
    

    I think "Hundred Year Hall" is the third release in the "From the Vault"
    series; it just commonly goes by that name.
    
    For me, the peak of what these folks achieved happened in the live shows
    of '72 and '73.  By 1974, I already hear it starting to slip away a bit.
    But then again, that's just me.
    

    RE:  <<< Note 3130.196 by MKOTS3::JCOREY "Lazy Lightning" >>>

>    I agree.  I just thought it strange... to wake up one day and decide
>    that you suddenly hate the Band you've followed for 10 years.  Its
>    not like, "yeah I used to like Sean Cassidy, the Partridge Family
>    and the Dead when I was a kid but I grew out of it".  Now some bands
>    I hated as a kid and then grew into liking them.  But all the bands
>    I've really liked in my life I still like.  My point being that some
>    dedheds are in it because they love the music and some are in it
>    because of the scene. 
 
    I never said I hated The Dead.  Used to be that I owned all their
    albums, carried roses around, had a "Steal Your Face" on my car
    etc...  I think I replaced Europe '72, Skeletons and Roses, Aoxomoxoa,
    Mars Hotel and American Beauty on a weekly basis.  (I still love that
    tune "Unbroken Chain" offa Mars Hotel...    
    
    Now the ony time I listen to them is between Dream Theater CD changes
    when my wife leaves the oldies station on.  :-)  Man, what memories...
    
    oh, but I DID like The Partridge Family too :-)
    
>   Not all deadheads are drug freaks...Most shows Ive been to have been
>   "sober shows" (well maybe a beer here or there) and I listen to taped
>   shows all the time, completely straight. 
    
    Hmm - things have DEFINATELY changed.  Used to be that if you were
    straight, you were a sever minority.  I remember seeing 'em in 
    Lewiston and someone gave me a gallon jug of water...It was hot and
    I was drinking away, when I noticed this purple cellophane (sp?)
    floating around the bottom of the bottle...  I didn't come down for
    three days.  :-)  I also remember Roy Buchanon at that show.  Wow.
    
>    Yeah that qualifies.
    
    <in my best Sister Mary Elephant voice>
    
    Thank you.
    
        >Then my girlfriend at the time bought me an MXR Distortion+,
        >and my whole outlook on music changed...  :-)
    
>    So, if she bought you an envelope filter instead, you'd still be
>    a deadhead??

    Hmmm - not likely.  A band called Dokken had this guy George Lynch
    who had this sound....  ;-) 

    
    
    
        Mike,
    
        I checked "friends" last night and in the end just shook my head. 
    
        Nashville/Drop D tuned.  (Huh?)  Tune to Nashville and then
        drop each string a half step.  Oh well, if you say so.  
    
        Great fun considering I am the absolute king of being a beginner 
        for the   l o n g e s t   time ever. 
    
        
        In direct regards to this note string, the first name that comes
        to mind is, Eddie Van Halen.  He's not of this planet.  IMO
    
    

    Nashville and Drop D aren't exactly the same.  As someone said earlier
    in here, the standard Drop D is where you just lower the bass string
    from E to D.  The standard Nashville tuning is where the strings have
    standard tuning, but strings 3-6 are tuned an octave *higher*.  
    
    If you combine them, you're doing something completely different than
    what we referred to earlier (just a standard Drop D tuning).  
    
    Mike

    
       Yup.   I was brain cramped, but didn't feel like being anymore
       the idiot I already was.  I had confused the notes for guitars
       1, 2 and 3.  Memory just isn't what it use to be. 
    
       I was tuned to drop d for guitar one on friends.  (An acoustic
       just doesn't seem to cut it.) 
    
    

    Talk about Dropped tuning, check out just about anything from the
    Seattle Area in the past few years....
    
    :-)
    
    

>        In direct regards to this note string, the first name that comes
>        to mind is, Eddie Van Halen.
    
    Eddie Van Halen comes to the mind of nearly anyone who didn't stop
    listening to new guitarists around 1980.
    
    Look at the list.   There's not a single player on it past around 1978.
    
    	db