The thing about great guitar players is...

[wst3]

a deep knowledge of chords, in both a theoretical and practical sense. Coupled with a deep knowledge of the fingerboard and they become something else.

Note I said knowledge of, I suppose one could limp along by simply memorizing the fingerboard and every possible chord. Maybe? But knowing the fingerboard and theory makes the difference.

I could list dozens of guitarists who clearly know both - Eric Johnson, Bryan Sutton, Tony Rice, Lenny Breau, Danny Gatton, and so many others.

What got me thinking about this, other than my never ending, sometimes futile attempt to do the same, was watching Dan Tyminski last night.

One man, one guitar, a bunch of songs, and even more stories, and just an absolute mastery of the guitar.

Makes one want to go back to the woodshed!!!

[Guy Rowland]

Well, ever the contrarian...

My favourite guitar player was The Edge. Born out of the three chord simplicity of punk - and finding they couldn't even play that - he developed an idiosyncratic technique relying heavily on effects - delay in particular - that has often been emulated but never bettered. On the vast majority of songs he filled out the complete sound of the band with no keyboards or 2nd guitar, and his sound is the single most identifiable element that makes U2 sound like U2.

Point being - his playing is very much born from practice, not theory, and he came up with something completely fresh. As the years have rolled by he has diversified - the huge rock chords of Vertigo are a world away from the angular figures of I Will Follow, or his ambient experimentations with Brian Eno. But I've always felt he was someone who was never taught and just experimented.

This is a fantastic documentary - now it seems free to view on YouTube - that puts together three totally different guitarists - The Edge, Jack White and Jimmy Page:

[Jaap]

Thank you so much Guy for that link. I had totally forgotten about that documentary and never watched it and can't wait to wrap up work to watch it.

My two favorite guitar players are really on different sides of the spectrum.

My long hero is Slash, love his emotional and powerful playing. Saw him many times live with Guns and Roses but also with Miles Kennedy. He is just a beast that plays and plays and plays. Even when he has done shows of 2.5 hours with Guns and Roses he can be sometimes found in clubs where he jams with friends who live in the town where he is playing. He is non stop on tour. Maybe not the most technical advanced player, but he has got a really unique sound and playing, which I just love.

The other is Plini. A very advanced player with extreme knowledge of the guitar and the fingerboard. I met him in a masterclass in Mannheim last year during the Guitar Summit and there I got confirmed what I already was thinking, he is more of a composer using a guitar then a guitarist playing his compositions (no idea if that makes sense).

[Lawrence]

Bill,

Dan Tyminski’s vocal on “Man of Constant Sorrow” changed my perspective forever. I wrote a dozen bluegrass inspired songs after seeing “O Brother Where Art Thou”. I love his work.

Eric Johnson does unbelievable stuff on guitar. Very original, amazing chops.

Jaap- I think Slash is pretty darn proficient and a great rock guitarist.

[wst3]

Larry - if you like "O Brother Where Art Thou" (And who didn't <G>) you have to try to catch him - out solo or with his band.

He really is a quadruple threat - singer, songwriter, player (he also plays a mean mandolin), and entertainer. My only gripe is I wish he'd play more plain old bluegrass flatpickin'. He does it brilliantly, but rarely. Even with Union Station he seldom stepped out, but that was how the band worked.

I was kinda surprised that in the most recent tour everyone took their turn in the spotlight. And that's when I realized that they really needed a flatpicker. (No, I won't be auditioning...)

Guy - I appreciate your contrarian perspective. I've long been a fan of the Edge, and his use of simple chords and of course delay. But by his own admission those simple chords did not spring forth from theory. And they weren't Grant Green simple chords... nor were they supposed to be, and I doubt that would have worked.

My thing, I guess, is just imagine what Edge could have done with a little more knowledge about chords and harmony. He has said, many times those chords were the product of what he didn't know. And I think he took that a lot further than pretty much anyone else.

(sorry if I sound like a snob... there are a lot of guitarists who know very little about the underpinnings, and yet create brilliant and beautiful music. I just wonder how much further they could have taken their art.)

[Guy Rowland]

Guy - I appreciate your contrarian perspective. I've long been a fan of the Edge, and his use of simple chords and of course delay. But by his own admission those simple chords did not spring forth from theory. And they weren't Grant Green simple chords... nor were they supposed to be, and I doubt that would have worked.

My thing, I guess, is just imagine what Edge could have done with a little more knowledge about chords and harmony. He has said, many times those chords were the product of what he didn't know. And I think he took that a lot further than pretty much anyone else.

(sorry if I sound like a snob... there are a lot of guitarists who know very little about the underpinnings, and yet create brilliant and beautiful music. I just wonder how much further they could have taken their art.)

I think you've perfectly highlighted why I love The Edge's approach, but I don't agree that theory would have "improved" his work. IMO it would have diluted it, made him less original.

Theory is one way of creating art. Trial and error is another, and that is usually the one that has chimed with me. I get the notion that "you need to understand the rules in order to break them", but I don't think that is always true either.

As one obvious example, punk is an entire genre that is born from not remotely caring what the rules are. I did a thread on it some time ago. I wouldn't expect many or any here to like punk music, but it spoke to people (to use a ghastly modern phrase). And more importantly, the spirit of punk really changed pop music completely. Bands as diverse as U2 and Everything But The Girl were both born from punk and it's "just do it" ethos.

I still love that ethos to this day. "What kind of a noise can I make with this thing?"

[Lawrence]

I love Steely Dan and the Ramones. Music has many niches and I’ve always been grateful for that.

[wst3]

Not sure how to explain myself better, but I believe a knowledge of the underpinnings in any subject, including art in all its forms, only makes it easier to follow your muse. Maybe quicker is the better word?

There is nothing wrong with trial and error, or even just tripping over a good idea, and I love "what kind of noise...", I do that myself, frequently, especially as synthesizers have become increasingly complex. I do that with music too.

A long time ago (in a place far away) I was asked to write music for a production of "The Tempest". Yeah, no problem! Not only is it my favorite of Shakespeare's works, it is incredibly complex, with countless interpretations. Where to even start?

The director wanted a modern feel with at least a hint of Celtic and Americana influences, and he wanted a very small pit band.

To this day I can't explain how I came up with Prospero's theme, I just started noodling around on the guitar in a relatively unfamiliar tuning and it just happened, or rather the basic idea did. It took some time, and some study, to complete the piece. Almost all the rest of the music came from there as well. Maybe it is me, but I could not have completed even the first piece if I did not have some knowledge of how music is constructed.

U2 and Everything But The Girl remain two of my favorite artists, and I know that the spirit of punk had a lot to do with the directions music took some 40 or 50 years ago (can it really be that long?)