Better then we thought

[Slipdisc]

Your view is skewed. You obviously know your guitargods and I can see where you're comming from... pretty solid reasoning and all...
Although you're correct about bucket being highly regarded in guitarist circles (despite the bucket, not thanks to the bucket), the big difference is Slash touched a much broader audience with his playing, he inspired a whole new batch of young guitar players with his unique yet down-to-earth playingstyle. He broke with the 80's tapping, sweeping, arpeggiating virtuosos and re-introduced back to basics emotional guitar playing. Non guitar geeks liked him whilest it takes a connaiseur to like bucket. 95% of the rock-loving world (and I mean listeners, not musicians) never heard of buckethead before he joined Guns N' Roses.

Slash is on par with Hendrickx, thriving not on his technical proficiency (which is more than adequate) but on the ability to touch people with his playing.

 

Show me some statistics which prove that 95% of the rock-minded people never heard of Buckethead before GNR, otherwise you appear the one having skewed views here. The truth is that Buckethead has been celebrated for years now, as one of the last few truly original exponents of the rock guitar within instrumental music. You can't take your ignorance as representative of other people's interests.

If you need to put Slash on the same level as Hendrix (which is wishful thinking of the highest order), make sure you actually know how to spell the latter's name right. HendriX revolutionized the guitar, he reinvented it. Hendrix achieved to make the instrument as much of an extension of himself only few matched, playing with total freedom. He was one of the first to experiment with stereophonic and phrasing effects. And his fusion approach to rock and jazz resulted in some of the most monumental guitar tunes, in the eyes of fans and fellow musicians.

Slash only re-introduced a kind of playing that had been the soundtrack of the seventies, but almost was forgotten due to loads generic eighties shit. Virtuosos really aren't meant here by me, aswell as countless other virtuosos, but sure some vituosos were putting out absolute shit aswell, as exponents of other genres and styles. Slash never pioneered the guitar in any way. At best he embodied a very successful trip down memory lane, but nothing Page and Hendrix didn?t do before?and did better. Certainly nothing unique when put in proper historic perspective. Slash isn?t on the same level of recognition by fellow musicians as Hendrix is and was. It takes more to become rightfully compared to Hendrix than writing a few classic riffs in your prime, only to never achieve that level never again. Hendrix?s ability to improvise alone should tell you that something really isn?t right about that comparison of yours. Slash is known for many things, but certainly not for his improvisations. Which says a lot about the amount of raw musical talent.

Slash touched a broader audience alright, but you seem to ignore the fact that it happened in a time where the guitar had a way more prominent (but different) place in mainstream music. then it has since the mid-nineties and still has now. You also seem to ignore that when Hendrix exploded onto the scene, the people who would describe his music as ?emotional? (to be able to touch feelings like you put it) and "basic", were in an absolute minority. This should tell you how Slash?s radio-friendly- pentatonic-loved-by-all-tunes, are no base for a comparison. Certainly not a comparison in which you paint a picture like Hendrix was the guitar player of the so called 'emotion'-loving-masses. Buckethead?s approach is often compared to Hendrix and, apart from the technical aspect, is way more founded.

Even Hendrix?s bass player, Billy Cox, thought that Buckethead was one of the few who really took up the glove where Hendrix left it. Buckethead?s unique solo material with a very rich emotional and ambient quality and his pioneering with concepts like octave displacement, tri-tones, (complex, and simple but innovative) harmony and rhythmic ideas and ingenious interval selections make a way more realistic and founded comparison. Especially the ambient quality of Buckethead's offerings, which accomodates the listener with many different levels of listening attention (without letting one have the upperhand), is something Hendrix always strived for aswell.

You seem to imply that virtuoso (and the things that COULD characterize their playing) have lesser emotion in their playing. This says more about your ears then it actually says about the music on topic. Maybe it doesn?t appeal to your notebending- facepulling- definition of emotion, but that doesn?t mean it isn?t there. It's just music that in some cases isn?t as easy digestible, but therefore all the more fulfilling. To me (an absolute GNR fan) and many others (who aren?t necessarily GNR fans, but fans of guitar music in general) the music on albums like Colma and Population Override (by Buckethead) has way more emotional depth then anything Slash ever made. With both very complex multi-layered and very simple yet haunting and beautiful music.

I acknowledge Slash's importance in GNR and I really think he made some magic, but AGAIN, GNR was a band that simply was bigger the the sum of its parts. As seperate part Slash really isn't on Buckethead's level. And speculating on the importance of Buckethead in GNR without CD is clueless. At this point we can only compare common territory (solo stuff) and in that respect Slash has a lot of catching up to do.

-PEACE-

[TheMole]

Don't do that... no need to patronize people...

Show me some statistics which prove that 95% of the rock-minded people never heard of Buckethead before GNR, otherwise you appear the one having skewed views here. The truth is that Buckethead has been celebrated for years now, as one of the last few truly original exponents of the rock guitar within instrumental music. You can't take your ignorance as representative of other people's interests.

I knew bucket behore he joined Guns... don't picture me as ignorant. Besides me knowing buckethead, I also know bucketloads (pun intended) of people who don't know buckethead but do know Slash (and Angus, Page, Hendrix (pardon me for the spelling mistake, sjeesj...), Van Halen, Richards, ...)

If you need to put Sla... <loads of stuff in between> ...s a lot of catching up to do.

Sorry, condensed this part a bit. Just wanted to point out that you are defending your view by quoting how fellow musicians agree, which is ofcourse totally besides the point and the main reason I called your view skewed. The guitarists mentioned above are sometimes far from what we would consider virtuoso or even groundbreaking (cfr Mr Angus Young). But we usually don't learn about the 'top' guitarists until we've picked up a guitar ourselves, you know the Stevie Ray Vaughan's, the Joe Satriani's, the John Petrucci's, Kenny Wayne Shepherd's, etc... I know I didn't...

But when it boils down to it, I'll always have the highest regards for the guys on the first list. If I have to cite influences, I'll cite Slash, Angus, Blackmore, ... That's why they rank above the guys in the second list (and the gazillions I haven't even mentioned (malmsteen, dimebag, wylde, ...)) in my book

[Slipdisc]

Don't do that... no need to patronize people...

Don?t do that, get a freakin? sense of humor, instead of getting all moralistic because of two emoticons?

I knew bucket behore he joined Guns... don't picture me as ignorant. Besides me knowing buckethead, I also know bucketloads (pun intended) of people who don't know buckethead but do know Slash (and Angus, Page, Hendrix (pardon me for the spelling mistake, sjeesj...), Van Halen, Richards, ...)

Yeah, and your point is? How about the statistics that prove me wrong? How about giving those baseless claims some backbone? In a minute you are going to attack me on the fact that I brought other people?s views into this discussion, where it?s you who (from the get go) is reasoning from what other people know and think? very hypocritical.

Sorry, condensed this part a bit.

Yeah condense as much as your lack of argumentation makes you feel like doing? It?s laughable?

Just wanted to point out that you are defending your view by quoting how fellow musicians agree, which is ofcourse totally besides the point and the main reason I called your view skewed.

Is your reasoning always this assbackwards? You called my views skewed based on my FIRST post in this thread. At that point I didn?t use any other musician to reinforce my argumentation, this occurred in the second post. It?s laughable to see how you are twisting and turning your way through this discussion.Furthermore, it isn?t besides the point to show you how respected musicians seem to agree with what I?ve got to add to this discussion.

The guitarists mentioned above are sometimes far from what we would consider virtuoso or even groundbreaking (cfr Mr Angus Young). But we usually don't learn about the 'top' guitarists until we've picked up a guitar ourselves, you know the Stevie Ray Vaughan's, the Joe Satriani's, the John Petrucci's, Kenny Wayne Shepherd's, etc... I know I didn't...

What the hell is your point man? How about replying with something that actually has relevance to my post? I immediately had a good picture of what was happening in the top of the instrumental genre. I really don?t see where you?re coming from and I don?t see how telling us your life story adds anything to this discussion, besides it giving your ignorance a little more depth.

But when it boils down to it, I'll always have the highest regards for the guys on the first list. If I have to cite influences, I'll cite Slash, Angus, Blackmore, ... That's why they rank above the guys in the second list (and the gazillions I haven't even mentioned (malmsteen, dimebag, wylde, ...)) in my book

Wow that?s great, now we all know who influenced you and all?

Yet it do one iota for you in the Hendrix vs Slash comparison or any other point I brought up in my post.

To sum it all up:

Start responding to my posts or find somebody else who likes the concept of people not putting any effort into their posts.

-PEACE-

[TheMole]

I knew bucket behore he joined Guns... don't picture me as ignorant. Besides me knowing buckethead, I also know bucketloads (pun intended) of people who don't know buckethead but do know Slash (and Angus, Page, Hendrix (pardon me for the spelling mistake, sjeesj...), Van Halen, Richards, ...)

Yeah, and your point is? How about the statistics that prove me wrong? How about giving those baseless claims some backbone? In a minute you are going to attack me on the fact that I brought other people?s views into this discussion, where it?s you who (from the get go) is reasoning from what other people know and think? very hypocritical.

No I don't. I attack you (if you really like to call it that) on the fact that you base the relevance of your opinion on the views of 'respected musicians' like you call them, thus propagating a very specialist view as 'truth'. Indeed, we both build our argumentation around some almost mythical peer group, but my point was that your peer group is to specialised to be representative of 'rock culture' as a whole. Now, keep this in mind, it's gonna come back a wee bit later. Ow, by the way: don't ask for statistics when you know they don't exist, I'm pretty damn sure you know what "figure of speech" means so don't act all ignorant all of the sudden.

Just wanted to point out that you are defending your view by quoting how fellow musicians agree, which is ofcourse totally besides the point and the main reason I called your view skewed.

Is your reasoning always this assbackwards? You called my views skewed based on my FIRST post in this thread. At that point I didn?t use any other musician to reinforce my argumentation, this occurred in the second post. It?s laughable to see how you are twisting and turning your way through this discussion.Furthermore, it isn?t besides the point to show you how respected musicians seem to agree with what I?ve got to add to this discussion.

See, there you go bashing me again... Listen, you might not have grasped what I was trying to say in my first post, but that doesn't mean you get to call people names. My appologies if I didn't make myself clear in the first post. Yeah, you didn't use other musicians in your first post, I know, I can read. I can also read between the lines where it's pretty obvious that you're opinion has been formed by hanging around with other musicians, that you have lost the ability to look at things from a different perspective. And you know what, in your follow-up, you proved me right, didn't you?

The guitarists mentioned above are sometimes far from what we would consider virtuoso or even groundbreaking (cfr Mr Angus Young). But we usually don't learn about the 'top' guitarists until we've picked up a guitar ourselves, you know the Stevie Ray Vaughan's, the Joe Satriani's, the John Petrucci's, Kenny Wayne Shepherd's, etc... I know I didn't...

What the hell is your point man? How about replying with something that actually has relevance to my post? I immediately had a good picture of what was happening in the top of the instrumental genre. I really don?t see where you?re coming from and I don?t see how telling us your life story adds anything to this discussion, besides it giving your ignorance a little more depth.

But when it boils down to it, I'll always have the highest regards for the guys on the first list. If I have to cite influences, I'll cite Slash, Angus, Blackmore, ... That's why they rank above the guys in the second list (and the gazillions I haven't even mentioned (malmsteen, dimebag, wylde, ...)) in my book

Wow that?s great, now we all know who influenced you and all?

Yet it do one iota for you in the Hendrix vs Slash comparison or any other point I brought up in my post.

To sum it all up:

Start responding to my posts or find somebody else who likes the concept of people not putting any effort into their posts.

Aww, come on, now you're just being silly... You know I wasn't trying to unfold my life story for you. It would take quite a lot more than 4 lines too, you know.

Listen, I'm just going to try and explain my point of view one more time and then I'm going to let it rest, a'ight... didn't mean to make a big fuss about this to begin with, so I'm kinda embarassed about how it turned out.
The initial reason why I felt the need to reply to your post was this (emphasis mine):

What you need to learn is that Buckethead reached the status of the (almost) untouchable virtuoso by relying on nothing but his own goods. Slash never would have been this big without GNR. Afterall, time has shown what's left of him when it's (almost) just about him (real solo material is almost non existent, it always another band)..... it doesn't even come close to what he was doing a decade and a half ago. Buckethead doesn't need others to show how brilliant he is, people came to that conclusion years ago after the umpteenth brilliant groundbreaking soloalbum.

You obviously know what you're talking about. The thing is, I don't see many 'people' (as you so eloquently put it) agreeing with you. Don't get me wrong, I adore bucket's solo work (well, some of it anyway), so in fact I agree: buckethead is brilliant. But I understand that what buckethead does is something like making indie films: not really meant for the general public, sometimes a little bit out there, not always very accesible, a bit too out of the ordinary for most people, artistic integrity, and so on... What Slash does, on the other hand, can be appreciated by a broader audience, is not very difficult to get at all. All that whilest still getting critical acclaim from people who know something about it (hey, you yourself said Slash did some magical things, right?). Your view is skewed because you look at it from your pedestal. See, I really think you don't honestly believe 'buckethead has reached the status of the (almost) untouchable virtuoso' in everyones book. Not even for the majority. For the select few who are in the know... yes... for the rest of the rock loving world: no. And that is why I called your view skewed.

And don't go giving me the 'Britney Spears' defence either. Slash has critical acclaim as well as commercial credibility, Spears lacks the former.