Moderator: Andrew
Behshad wrote:Rhiannon wrote:Clapton at #23? SRV at #30? ...Ugh. Helllllll no. But then again, I guess it's whatever style you prefer as to who is better than who.
This list makes more sense, if you're a guitar player yourself, which you're not
StevePerryHair wrote:I was surprised EVH was so high on the list. I expect him towards the top, but was surprised at #2.
Behshad wrote:Im surprised too that Yng is at #3.,.,,, I was expecting #2 actually![]()
And Yngwie isnt ALL about shred and speed.... You wanna talk about soul and feeling check out some of his slower stuff, Prog :
http://youtube.com/watch?v=EDhKv4ZVi5k
http://youtube.com/watch?v=vCwEk6_-vAw
http://youtube.com/watch?v=pyD7sI0dnLM
yulog wrote:I count only 38(and that was being generous) of the 333 bands asked ,to be mainstream bands.The rest are death metal,speed metal,or unknown garbage bands. Seriously, who cares what 90% of these loser bands think on this list...comical to say the least.
yulog wrote:I count only 38(and that was being generous) of the 333 bands asked ,to be mainstream bands.The rest are death metal,speed metal,or unknown garbage bands. Seriously, who cares what 90% of these loser bands think on this list...comical to say the least.
Behshad wrote:Im surprised too that Yng is at #3.,.,,, I was expecting #2 actually![]()
And Yngwie isnt ALL about shred and speed.... You wanna talk about soul and feeling check out some of his slower stuff, Prog :
http://youtube.com/watch?v=EDhKv4ZVi5k
http://youtube.com/watch?v=vCwEk6_-vAw
http://youtube.com/watch?v=pyD7sI0dnLM
Behshad wrote:Rhiannon wrote:Clapton at #23? SRV at #30? ...Ugh. Helllllll no. But then again, I guess it's whatever style you prefer as to who is better than who.
This list makes more sense, if you're a guitar player yourself, which you're not
yulog wrote:I count only 38(and that was being generous) of the 333 bands asked ,to be mainstream bands.The rest are death metal,speed metal,or unknown garbage bands. Seriously, who cares what 90% of these loser bands think on this list...comical to say the least.
Rhiannon wrote:Behshad wrote:Rhiannon wrote:Clapton at #23? SRV at #30? ...Ugh. Helllllll no. But then again, I guess it's whatever style you prefer as to who is better than who.
This list makes more sense, if you're a guitar player yourself, which you're not
Dear Behshad,
Bite my ass.
Signed,
Rhi![]()
Behshad wrote:yulog wrote:I count only 38(and that was being generous) of the 333 bands asked ,to be mainstream bands.The rest are death metal,speed metal,or unknown garbage bands. Seriously, who cares what 90% of these loser bands think on this list...comical to say the least.
As opposed to the 90% of the people who vote here on MR, all important peoplethe other 10% is the Susies, Nancys and Larrys
StevePerryHair wrote:yulog wrote:I count only 38(and that was being generous) of the 333 bands asked ,to be mainstream bands.The rest are death metal,speed metal,or unknown garbage bands. Seriously, who cares what 90% of these loser bands think on this list...comical to say the least.
I don't see it as it mattering whether the bands are loser bands or not. I think they just have a better idea of what talent is when they actually know how to play a guitar.
Behshad wrote:yulog wrote:I count only 38(and that was being generous) of the 333 bands asked ,to be mainstream bands.The rest are death metal,speed metal,or unknown garbage bands. Seriously, who cares what 90% of these loser bands think on this list...comical to say the least.
As opposed to the 90% of the people who vote here on MR, all important peoplethe other 10% is the Susies, Nancys and Larrys
ProgRocker53 wrote:Behshad wrote:Rhiannon wrote:Clapton at #23? SRV at #30? ...Ugh. Helllllll no. But then again, I guess it's whatever style you prefer as to who is better than who.
This list makes more sense, if you're a guitar player yourself, which you're not
I'm a guitar player (well, somewhat) and I think Clapton and SRV should indeed be a little higher. I guess alot of that is because while I do like and enjoy and appreciate the shredders like Vai and Malmsteen, I personally enjoy the guys with a little more "soul." I don't have much finger speed at all, but if I did, I'm sure I'd find it more challenging to make a beautiful emotional solo or craft a legendary riff, than I would arpeggiating through a zillion exotic scales all at once.
Gordon from Edinburgh wrote:ProgRocker53 wrote:Behshad wrote:Rhiannon wrote:Clapton at #23? SRV at #30? ...Ugh. Helllllll no. But then again, I guess it's whatever style you prefer as to who is better than who.
This list makes more sense, if you're a guitar player yourself, which you're not
I'm a guitar player (well, somewhat) and I think Clapton and SRV should indeed be a little higher. I guess alot of that is because while I do like and enjoy and appreciate the shredders like Vai and Malmsteen, I personally enjoy the guys with a little more "soul." I don't have much finger speed at all, but if I did, I'm sure I'd find it more challenging to make a beautiful emotional solo or craft a legendary riff, than I would arpeggiating through a zillion exotic scales all at once.
Which is why i am happy to see Ritchie Blackmore top5 - he did his fast stuff in the 70s - like the live solo on Highway Star from Made In Japan - then played lots of soulful stuff like on Mistreated and Street of Dreams etc - truly great player/writer who should always be above Page.
yulog wrote:Behshad wrote:yulog wrote:I count only 38(and that was being generous) of the 333 bands asked ,to be mainstream bands.The rest are death metal,speed metal,or unknown garbage bands. Seriously, who cares what 90% of these loser bands think on this list...comical to say the least.
As opposed to the 90% of the people who vote here on MR, all important peoplethe other 10% is the Susies, Nancys and Larrys
I will not accept this to be the "be all" list until they put the guitarist from air supply on it!!(man that guy is pure delight)
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 24 guests