I'm a troll because I offered my opinion on the subject? Talk about another word that gets thrown around way too freely. Sorry that I don't have some inflated view of Brent Mason just because he was a PRS artist at one point. I deal in reality.
Virtuosos?
- Thread starter eugeneelgr
- Start date
I'm a troll because I offered my opinion on the subject? Talk about another word that gets thrown around way too freely. Sorry that I don't have some inflated view of Brent Mason just because he was a PRS artist at one point. I deal in reality.
dkilpatrick
Makes guitar faces
They’re all just like opinions man
BWV548
Custom Title
- Joined
- May 28, 2017
- Messages
- 570
Ugh. I generally don't like to be negative, but this topic is a bit of a bug for me. I'm not sure we can say any of the people mentioned are virtuosos really. They certainly may be. However, there really is a lack of information to make that determination. Moreover, the designation, even when warranted, is but one, of many, attributes of great musical performances.
A number of things
1) The hyper focus on "virtuosity" is a bit of an odd thing. Indeed breathtaking performances and skills are rewarding, and the extremely hard work that goes into them is very much worthy of respect. However, what often impresses is a set of surface details. This is certainly not to discount the importance of technique, nor the hard work that goes into it. However, "virtuoso" is often exclaimed -particularly in the case of guitar - when people haven't had the opportunity to listen with enough depth and breadth. To be clear, I DO NOT mean that the listener(s) are not able, in the most basic sense of ability, more that the commentary is on one aspect that impresses, without much regard for other aspects of a performer, or how he or she stands relative to peers (in a fairly strict sense). Which brings me to...
2) With a number of the players mentioned (several I'm not familiar with), you have very high calibre musicians, with a very high level of technical proficiency. Indeed, things to respect and learn from. No question. However, because, sadly, the broad level of training on the electric guitar isn't particularly high, those who have trained rigorously will stand out. And again, such hard work and training is worthy of respect and reward. However, if you take the cello, or piano, as examples, you have literally thousands of performers who reach an extremely high level of technical and musical proficiency. There is a long, and evolving, canonical history of training that many choose to pursue. So, you can take pieces like the Bach Cello Suites, or Chopin Etudes, for example, and compare hundreds, if not thousands of performances, all of which will be performed with extremely high levels of skill, training, and musicianship - requiring years of blood, sweat and sacrifice - and without question the majority of the performers would not be called "virtuosos", by any consensual definition of the term (which is of course subjective, to large extent). Indeed, these pieces are extremely difficult - both technically and with regards to challenges of interpretation - and anyone who plays them, has done hard work, worthy of admiration. However, any student who graduates a top conservatory, on one of those instruments will be able to learn, and perform those works with a very high level of skill. To the experienced listener, however, brilliance will be, generally, readily distinguishable from excellence. And to be clear, I'm in NO WAY deriding excellence. Unfortunately, we really don't have a similar culture, and pool of players, on the electric guitar. Moreover, we really don't have an, at least partially, common repertoire with which to help distinguish amongst very high level players. I say unfortunately, however, the the truth is (at least in my opinion), that this fact comes with it's upsides too. Not least of which the sheer number of non-professionals who enthusiastically play, practice, study, perform, share, etc. Though I don't have any data to back it up, it strikes me that the electric guitar distinguishes itself, culturally, in this regard; an my hypothesis, that the lack of centuries of dogma, and more recently, conservatory strain, is one reason for that. So, as with many things, there are trade offs
3) Even in musical arenas where the concept of "virtuoso" is a bit more clear, the focus is all to often (though certainly not always) on a sort of physical impressiveness and ease, in addition to youth. And in some regards, that is fair. However, the acknowledged virtuoso is not always going to be the one giving the performance that stuns people to their cores. The "coloratura" is a good example - and I'm not calling them out to belittle any coloraturas out there. Not every great singer can do with their voices what a coloratura can; regardless of practice effort. Moreover, the music that is composed for them, is designed to take advantage of a specific, relatively rare, skill, and dazzle audiences with it. This often works (though, it can sound often sound, to many (myself included), akin to exacto-blades, being stuffed in one's ears; particularly in the case of sopranos). However, I would be very, very surprised if many people would consider such performances amongst their most deeply powerful musical experiences. I may certainly be wrong, but I'd be surprised.
So... TL/DR - I don't think we can say who, if any, of the players mentioned, or to be mentioned, is a "virtuoso" (not enough information); though some may certainly be. And, frankly, too much focus on that concept misses the point. If you love that person's playing and music, does it really matter whether he or she is in that rarified club?? I, personally, don't think so. Moreover, I'd be very surprised if, say for example, Yo Yo Ma, focuses on and puts laser focus on "virtuosos" when he listens to performers. I don't know the guy, so I could very well be wrong, and he might, but I rather doubt it
A number of things
1) The hyper focus on "virtuosity" is a bit of an odd thing. Indeed breathtaking performances and skills are rewarding, and the extremely hard work that goes into them is very much worthy of respect. However, what often impresses is a set of surface details. This is certainly not to discount the importance of technique, nor the hard work that goes into it. However, "virtuoso" is often exclaimed -particularly in the case of guitar - when people haven't had the opportunity to listen with enough depth and breadth. To be clear, I DO NOT mean that the listener(s) are not able, in the most basic sense of ability, more that the commentary is on one aspect that impresses, without much regard for other aspects of a performer, or how he or she stands relative to peers (in a fairly strict sense). Which brings me to...
2) With a number of the players mentioned (several I'm not familiar with), you have very high calibre musicians, with a very high level of technical proficiency. Indeed, things to respect and learn from. No question. However, because, sadly, the broad level of training on the electric guitar isn't particularly high, those who have trained rigorously will stand out. And again, such hard work and training is worthy of respect and reward. However, if you take the cello, or piano, as examples, you have literally thousands of performers who reach an extremely high level of technical and musical proficiency. There is a long, and evolving, canonical history of training that many choose to pursue. So, you can take pieces like the Bach Cello Suites, or Chopin Etudes, for example, and compare hundreds, if not thousands of performances, all of which will be performed with extremely high levels of skill, training, and musicianship - requiring years of blood, sweat and sacrifice - and without question the majority of the performers would not be called "virtuosos", by any consensual definition of the term (which is of course subjective, to large extent). Indeed, these pieces are extremely difficult - both technically and with regards to challenges of interpretation - and anyone who plays them, has done hard work, worthy of admiration. However, any student who graduates a top conservatory, on one of those instruments will be able to learn, and perform those works with a very high level of skill. To the experienced listener, however, brilliance will be, generally, readily distinguishable from excellence. And to be clear, I'm in NO WAY deriding excellence. Unfortunately, we really don't have a similar culture, and pool of players, on the electric guitar. Moreover, we really don't have an, at least partially, common repertoire with which to help distinguish amongst very high level players. I say unfortunately, however, the the truth is (at least in my opinion), that this fact comes with it's upsides too. Not least of which the sheer number of non-professionals who enthusiastically play, practice, study, perform, share, etc. Though I don't have any data to back it up, it strikes me that the electric guitar distinguishes itself, culturally, in this regard; an my hypothesis, that the lack of centuries of dogma, and more recently, conservatory strain, is one reason for that. So, as with many things, there are trade offs
3) Even in musical arenas where the concept of "virtuoso" is a bit more clear, the focus is all to often (though certainly not always) on a sort of physical impressiveness and ease, in addition to youth. And in some regards, that is fair. However, the acknowledged virtuoso is not always going to be the one giving the performance that stuns people to their cores. The "coloratura" is a good example - and I'm not calling them out to belittle any coloraturas out there. Not every great singer can do with their voices what a coloratura can; regardless of practice effort. Moreover, the music that is composed for them, is designed to take advantage of a specific, relatively rare, skill, and dazzle audiences with it. This often works (though, it can sound often sound, to many (myself included), akin to exacto-blades, being stuffed in one's ears; particularly in the case of sopranos). However, I would be very, very surprised if many people would consider such performances amongst their most deeply powerful musical experiences. I may certainly be wrong, but I'd be surprised.
So... TL/DR - I don't think we can say who, if any, of the players mentioned, or to be mentioned, is a "virtuoso" (not enough information); though some may certainly be. And, frankly, too much focus on that concept misses the point. If you love that person's playing and music, does it really matter whether he or she is in that rarified club?? I, personally, don't think so. Moreover, I'd be very surprised if, say for example, Yo Yo Ma, focuses on and puts laser focus on "virtuosos" when he listens to performers. I don't know the guy, so I could very well be wrong, and he might, but I rather doubt it
11top
Cousin Eddie's cousin
Drew, I’m not trying to make you out to be a troll. After all, it is just opinion. But the point that I’m attempting to make is I believe you are defining virtuoso based upon your bias towards genres of music while excluding others. I can hardly listen to blue grass; it’s just not my thing. However, I’m certainly not going to exclude that genre and all of its players because it’s not my thing.
jxe
babe en der wood
yo-yo ma listens to sting.
And you are making the assumption I am biased, just because I didn't name a player in that genre or agree that one of those players fit the category. It's just that the prog/fusion guys generally have a way better mastery of the instrument on both a theory and technical level. Brent Mason is a great player. But, he's not even in league with a Petrucci type player. Prog/fusion guys also tend to have a grasp on multiple styles versus being a one trick pony.
One thing I don't have in music is narrow mindedness. I grew up with a dad who loved nothing but country, and a mom who was a concert pianist. Talk about diversity!
sergiodeblanc
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2012
- Messages
- 27,383
Yeah, Brent Mason is not my thing, at all! But dude is smart and talented. I think it takes as much or more theory and discipline to chickenpick and double stop over open chords than it is to blow speedy single note solos in harmonic minor over power chords.
None of it matters though as nobody has mentioned Paul Jackson Jr..... who along with Al, is the real god of guitar.
I think we can ALL agree that Al D is the man.
Alnus Rubra
Loving nature’s wonders
Peet
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2017
- Messages
- 88
bodia
Authorities said.....best leave it.....unsolved
Best post on this thread
11top
Cousin Eddie's cousin
He can certainly play, but I can’t listen to him and enjoy it. He is not my thing. Maybe I’m simple, but I have to have some melody. I can’t exactly hum along with his tunes.
Last edited:
I appreciate the talent and dedication it takes to get to the technical level some would label “virtuoso.” But I find most of the resulting “music” absolutely unlistenable.
I suppose that puts me more in Steve’s camp. Give me the melodic legato of David Gilmour over multi-modal technical noodling any day.
Music is supposed to move you. Physically. Mentally. Emotionally.
Everyone gets to pick their own personal nirvana.
So, arguing over who is better or best makes me think some may be missing the point of music.
I suppose that puts me more in Steve’s camp. Give me the melodic legato of David Gilmour over multi-modal technical noodling any day.
Music is supposed to move you. Physically. Mentally. Emotionally.
Everyone gets to pick their own personal nirvana.
So, arguing over who is better or best makes me think some may be missing the point of music.
11top
Cousin Eddie's cousin
I appreciate “technical noodling” and melodic. I can listen to Nuno all day long.
jxe
babe en der wood
based on this one record al dimeola is worse than KISS.
Dirty_Boogie
Still got the ol' tagger on it
dogrocketp
I drank the PRS kool aid, and it was tasty!
There used to be a tv show based in Nashville, run by Mark O'Connor. He is a master of many genres on violin. His guitar player? Brent Mason. Thanks to my Ex, I can't even listen to country music. I used to watch that show, just to hear Brent blow over tunes, and rip through changes. It was very humbling. When Oz Noy went to Nashville a few years ago, Brent Mason sat in with him. I heard it was legendary. Give him his due. He can play damn near anything, and chooses to pay his bills doing what he does.
BWV548
Custom Title
- Joined
- May 28, 2017
- Messages
- 570
This is a great point it highlights a few things
1) the technical difficulty of a music that a musician *chooses* to play, does not necessarily reflect that player’s capabilities. Underestimate a player who chooses to play music, which doesn’t require extreme dexterity at your own peril. That player may have made his or her choices of music based on musical preference alone and may well be able to play intricate and technically challenging music, should they want. We only get to hear a portion of what musicians can do, in so many cases.
2) the technical skill required to play a piece of music does not strongly correlate with the quality, durability, impact, etc of a piece of music. There are technically difficult works that are amazing and others that are pure drivel, in my opinion. Moreover, there are brilliant works, that are relatively easy to perform. And easy works that are deathly dull
Technical brilliance is worthy of respect, but is one, small, part of what can contribute to great music. Moreover, technical brilliance alone, does not make a virtuoso. Extremely rare skill, without deep musical understanding and insight, will not make one the next Schiff, or Perlman, or....
Last edited:
CVS
Not so new member
Glad you mentioned one of my personal favorite guitarists. He is "the real deal". And he is a really nice guy (we met at NAMM in the PRS booth a few years ago) to top it off.
Similar threads
