Is it All about Lead?

[TamingIngrid]

Is it All about Lead?

 

Hey I have an interesting question:

Are all great guitar players only judged by their ability to play lead?

Why dont people ever recognize awesome rhythm jams by guys like Richie Havens? The man rocks yet were always only hearing about guys who can ripp solos at a million notes per second?

In my opinion that isnt music..its a mess....wheres the soul? Wheres the message? It sounds like screaming blabbering mess?

Soloist like Santana and Paige and Buckingham....that style makes sense.....and if most people agree with what Im saying?

Why do you always see guys trying to rip solos everywhere? Is it a test of manilhood or something? And when a GIRL goes to playa solo...and she actually plays well....why do people react in silence instead of wow! Everybody always assumes a Chick Must ONLY play rhythm or acoustic! Its not fair ...........

[Wewus432]

An amazing guitar player who hardly ever plays lead is Pete Townshend. Have you ever watched and heard him on acoustic guitar? Amazing! Another one, Keith Richards, very little lead. I like lead guitar but it can turn into wanking real fast.

[Sylver]

Originally posted by TamingIngrid:

Is it All about Lead?

 

Hey I have an interesting question:

Are all great guitar players only judged by their ability to play lead?

Why dont people ever recognize awesome rhythm jams by guys like Richie Havens? The man rocks yet were always only hearing about guys who can ripp solos at a million notes per second?

In my opinion that isnt music..its a mess....wheres the soul? Wheres the message? It sounds like screaming blabbering mess?

Soloist like Santana and Paige and Buckingham....that style makes sense.....and if most people agree with what Im saying?

Why do you always see guys trying to rip solos everywhere? Is it a test of manilhood or something? And when a GIRL goes to playa solo...and she actually plays well....why do people react in silence instead of wow! Everybody always assumes a Chick Must ONLY play rhythm or acoustic! Its not fair ...........

First off, as far as radio play bands goes, leads are pretty much a no-no if you haven't noticed. Record execs just won't let people record them, it's not what's hot at the moment.

 

I also think there are plenty of guitarists that are respected for thier rhythm playing.

 

Pete Townshend leaps to mind immediately.

 

Paul Simon is an amazing guitarist who is not known for playing leads. His chord progressions and voicings are unreal.

 

When I think of Lindsey Buckingham, it's his rhythm skills that stand out in my mind, though he is very competent as a soloist.

 

Steven Stills, even though he has been known to play a lead or two, is mostly known for his rhythm work.

 

While we are at it, how about Neil Young?

 

For newer stuff, how about Dave Matthews? Great rhythm player.

 

Now that I've made that point, let me make another one. Let's think about the guitar "heros" who are known for thier solos.

 

Start with Jimi. Great lead player, and great at improvising. Did you ever listen to his rhythm work. It's mind blowing. I hear someone playing Hendrix, and I listen to their rhythmic phrasing, not their leads. Jimi is one of the greatest rock rhythm players ever.

 

Stevie Ray Vaughn. See above.

 

Eric Clapton ... very strong lead player, but a much better rhythm player IMO.

 

Jimmy Page ... I personally never cared for his lead playing, but his rhythm playing is great.

 

Starting to see a pattern? All great rhythm players, and these are probably the big 4 in R&R as far as people knowing them. But not just rhythm players, not just lead players, they are just great players plain and simple. Show me a great lead player, and I can almost assure you that they are a better rhythm player(Sorry, BB doesn't really count).

 

And you point about girl guitar players? Well, you got me there. Girls really aren't that good at playing lead, they should stick to rhythm.

 

Ha, ha, got you Lee! Of course I was only kidding. I guess there aren't many lady guitar players because, because, well, hell, I don't know! There are some good ones though, like Bonnie Raitt and Lee Flier, and ... and that chick who did the duet with Ozzy, and Joan Jett, and ... and ... Jennifer Batton(never actually heard her, but I know the name), and ... and ... ok, you make a good point.

 

It must be a penis thing.

[Jedi]

Well said, Wewus.

 

Is it all about lead?

 

No, but my reply is very misleading(I can't help myself from terrible puns)

 

Is it all about looks?

 

No, but c'mon looks are somewhat important.

 

Anyway, another guitarists who is known for his lead, but was a killer rythme guitar player was Jimi Hendrix. His rythme for me is so incredible that I try to steal as much as possible.

 

I don't steal lead chops. I like to leave that as pure as possible.

 

But now with my rambling, I realize that the lead stuff is directly related to the guitar and the guitar player, while the rythme work supports the song.

 

Therefore, a good rthyme guitarist might oftentimes be great songwriters, while a good lead player becomes well a bad ass lead player. In short, a good rythme part brings attention to the song and the songwriter, while a good lead part brings attention to the guitarist.

 

Hope this helps and maybe makes sense to you,

 

Jedi

[Tedly Nightshade]

Chuck Berry doesn't play lead or rhythm, it's all blended together as he plays the whole guitar at once. Keith and Pete and Jimi picked up on that, and so should you!

Chords should be part of the "lead" vocab, and single notes, even screamers, part of the "rhythm". Hell, it's all rhythm, if it makes any sense.

Ted

[Tedster]

Nothing pisses me off more than jamming with someone on a new song and you go to show them the changes and they say "Oh, I'll just fill..you play the changes". NOPE, PAL...Doesn't work that way.

 

Great playing starts with great rhythm chops. Well, let me phrase it this way...in my opinion, you can have a great guitarist who can't play lead, but you can't have a great guitarist who can't play rhythm. (Sorry, Mr. King...you're the exception).

[whitefang]

I've just mentioned Townsend in the "guitar heros" post! All the others mentioned are great examples. Earlier topics brought up debates over speed vs. substance in blues leads. I also said somewhere that one of my favorite CD's (out of MANY) was live's "Throwing Copper", that has some pretty darned nice guitar work, but no real leads!

All that hyper solo work has it's place, alright. But no, it isn't always neccessary.

 

Whitefang

[Mark Zeger]

Other great non-lead guitarists:

 

James Taylor - a brilliant accompanist, one of Pat Metheny's favorites

 

Freddie Green - played with the Count Basie band for over 40 years, solid as a rock

 

Malcolm Young of AC/DC

 

and the founding father of rock rhythm guitarists, Bo Diddley

[The Bear Jew]

I think Ted Nightshade hit on something important. Playing melodies, rhythms and knowing when to stop playing are all key parts of being a musician. These elements make up the language we speak. No ONE element is most important. It's all important.

 

It's not all about lead -- hell, it's not even all about GUITAR. It's all about music.

[strat0124]

I'll go on record (again) to say I hate the term "lead guitar". Alot of those guitarists mentioned are such good musicians that they play lead breaks and they seam together so well in the song you don't realize its a lead. I can tell in short order how much musicianship someone has by their rythym playing, and how they approach it. My band almost always complains that when I write a song theres no apparent leads, and I try to tell them its all in the song! Alot of times a totally recognizable lead break will just ruin a perfectly good song. Not that I don't like to step out in front and let it rip, I just save it for just the right time, and try not to give you everything in ten seconds. But thats me, to each his or her own.

[Wrave]

I don't want to grow up to be a lead guitarist and I don't want to grow up to be a rhythm guitarist. I just wanna grow up to be a guitarist!!! But, even more than that, I wanna grow up to be a musician who plays guitar.

 

For me, it's all about musical taste. Whatever instrument you play, if you play within the structure of the song, technically (refering to technique), rhythmically, musically, co-operatively (if you perform with other musicians) and in synch with the spirit of the piece you are playing, you are a great musician.

 

I have heard solo instruments, instruments considered "simple" because they are folk or primitive or monophonic instruments, played with such feeling and spirit that it affects the soul of the listener. And just like some of the other posts have mentioned, even supporting instruments can catch our attention as we listen when played well.

 

A musical group is just that, a group. It is an ensemble of instruments. It is supposed to sound like a group and when it becomes a lead instrument with background accompanyment, it changes character. When a group has an instrumentalist that has the chops to stand out, that's fine as long as that talented individual remembers that they are a part of an ensemble that, taken as a whole, has it's own sound and that even when a solo part is appropriate, that individual is still a part of the group and must strive to contribute to the sound of the whole group as much as the backup players must strive to be supportive to the soloist.

 

It seems to me like I am kind of dancing around what I want to say. It is no more all about lead than it is all about the vocal or the rhythm. If a person is talented enough to perform solo, then they will often find themselves playing not only the lead but the rhythm and the harmonies as well. While an extremely talented pianist can perform solo and affect the listener, it is still a solo piano. Put that pianist with an orcherstra and the piano becomes part of the orchestra. S/He will be following the conductor's direction as much as any other instrument in the ensemble.

 

Lead guitar, or lead xylophone or lead whatever has it's place and it's time but when in performance with an ensemble it must be part of that ensemble, striving to contribute to the whole sound like all of the other players. If not, I guess the lead instrumentalist can always go off by themselves and become soloists!

[Tedly Nightshade]

"I don't want to grow up to be a lead guitarist and I don't want to grow up to be a rhythm guitarist. I just wanna grow up to be a guitarist!!! But, even more than that, I wanna grow up to be a musician who plays guitar."

 

That rare bird! You can do it, keep your sights set just where they are now.

 

I heartily recommend listening to as much Ellington as possible to get a sense of the possibilities of a soloist who is an ensemble player , and what all kinds of diverse backing is possible, etc.

Ted

[Jedi]

Ted hit it dead on.

 

That's what I love about Hendrix' playing. How, the rythme, lead, riffs are all working together to support a great song. I couldn't quite articulate it in my post. Well said, Mr. Nightshade.

 

Jedi

[whitefang]

Originally posted by dblackjedi:

Ted hit it dead on.

 

That's what I love about Hendrix' playing. How, the rythme, lead, riffs are all working together to support a great song. I couldn't quite articulate it in my post. Well said, Mr. Nightshade.

 

Jedi

Hendrix and B.B. King are good examples of the many more out there that utilize their solos as part of the song. Notice that B.B. never plays rhythm. When he could stand, the guitar went under his arm as he sang. But his solos were never a feverish maelstrom of mosquito-thick notes!(what a vivid image!) It's as if he's just letting his Lucille take her turn singing! Hendrix would play fast, true. But if you noticed, it's only when the energy of the song called for such a flight. ALWAYS give the music what it needs. No more, no less. It's the reason Ringo Starr was one of Buddy Rich's favorite drummers!

 

Overdone solos are a pain in the ass to hear. The solo in "Hit Me With Your Best Shot" is one example. Can someone think of any others?

 

Whitefang

[urbanhiker]

Women who rock: Debbie Davies and Sue Foley, just to name two.

[Sylver]

Originally posted by whitefang:

[QBThe solo in "Hit Me With Your Best Shot" is one example. Can someone think of any others?

 

Whitefang[/QB]

LOL, I really like that solo. Guess I'm just a geek, but I always though Neil G's playing was very musical and melodic.

[nc]

Regarding your original questions, TI, I think sometimes you just have to forget about what other people think, if you think they're wrong.

[Nollykin]

I dunno what it is about girl players. it seems while today is a very "equal" world, and there are PLENTY of women who like do do things men do, there are still a lot who dont. I know lots of girls who are just content to get a business or economics or domestic degree and leave it at that - maybe a penis has a big ambition?

 

NOT being sexis... just generalising... there are ALWAYS exceptions... and lots of em.

 

In my experience, guys have a lot more ideas than girls, but when girls have them, they do them better (Once again, generalisation).

 

Nolly

[Dave da Dude]

I agree with all(most) everyting said. Don't lose sight of the rythm AND the song or ALL is lost (except your ego).

 

[Mark Zeger]

Originally posted by whitefang:

Overdone solos are a pain in the ass to hear. The solo in "Hit Me With Your Best Shot" is one example. Can someone think of any others?

Whitefang

Neil Young "Cinnamon Girl"!

[Lee Flier]

Well! Lessee, I'm a chick that plays guitar... and I can and do play solos... and people do seem to appreciate it, I haven't gotten the "silent treatment" too often.

 

But no, I don't think it's "all about lead" at all. Like others have said, I'm a guitar player... I don't like the whole "lead/rhythm" thing cuz my solos are very chordal and rhythmic and my "rhythm parts" have a lot of passing notes and stuff like that, usually not just standing there strumming chords. I just try to play what fits the song.

 

Bottom line, just play what YOU want to play and don't worry about what anybody else is doing or what they think. When I started playing guitar EVERYBODY else I knew who played was male and was into Eddie Van Halen and Hendrix type leads. The thing is, my favorite stuff of Hendrix and Van Halen is NOT their "solos", they both play great riffs and things that really go with the song. But I always gravitated more toward guitarists like Keith Richards, Pete Townshend, Richard Thompson, Mike Campbell, Jimmy Page, basically guys who weren't showboating but who are songwriters so their guitar playing is tightly integrated with the song. It makes a sonic landscape. That was always my thing and it was definitely against the trend when I was growing up (even more so than now), and I didn't care. You don't have to care, either - just do your thing.

 

--Lee

[spigotsaol.com]

My favorite player of the last 10 years is Dean DeLeo. He's awesome combination of Jimmy Page and

Keith Richards. And the chord changes he comes up with, oy vey.

The really good ones can do both.

But at the risk of sounding like a guitar snob, I like to see/hear a guitarist wail alot. I'm bored to tears by those who don't.

 

Sincerly,

Heywood Jablomi

[Tedster]

Originally posted by mzeger:

Originally posted by whitefang:

Overdone solos are a pain in the ass to hear. The solo in "Hit Me With Your Best Shot" is one example. Can someone think of any others?

Whitefang

Neil Young "Cinnamon Girl"!

HAHAHAHA!!!!

 

Yeah, ol' Neil definitely played too many notes on that one...har har har...actually, that's one of my favorite recorded solos!

 

But, his "Southern Man" solo could qualify...

[Skip_dup1]

A buddy of mine, a drummer in a really interesting band we had for a while (five members, four who wrote and contributed their own pieces), only listens to guys like Alan Holdsworth, Chick Corea, etc. We were talking about it one day and he said, `well those are the best players.` I didn`t disagree with that but I can`t listen to music like that all the time, because usually it`s ONLY great playing. I need to hear great songs, with a great voice over it- at least sometimes.

[whitefang]

Originally posted by Sylver:

Whitefang[/QB]

LOL, I really like that solo. Guess I'm just a geek, but I always though Neil G's playing was very musical and melodic.[/QB]

 

It usually WAS, Sylver. I was just referring to that one solo.

 

Skip, I agree with ya! This is why I usually am unfamiliar with a lot of "who does what", because I never stay put on one radio station of any genre long enough to learn all that information. I can't listen to, and am never always in the mood to, listen to only one type of music ALL the time! Like I tell people, one hour I'll be listening to something like Bobby Darin's "Beyond the Sea", and next I might be cranking up Weezer's "Sweater Song"! Having been in bands, and trying to write songs and get four or five other musicians together enough to sound organized, I've learned to appreciate music for it's quality in construction and execution. This means that you can find gems among the dung in ANY

style of music! And you eventually learn to determine if the solos are overblown, or a perfect fit. Like the solo on "Cinnomon Girl"!

 

I'm STILL trying to figure that one out!

 

Whitefang

[coyote]

Man, this thread is problematic.

 

Charlie Parker, Cannonball Adderly, and about a thousand other great jazz players made a living playing SOLOS that were often chock-full of notes. Were they **wanking**? You bet. No one can tell me that all of Coltrane's wild runs were chosen for their subtle contribution to the song - many of 'em were outright FLASH.

 

I like great songs. I like bands that do that.

I also like great solos! And I have no real objection to music created as a vehicle for a soloist - classical music had an incredible amount of that, as did jazz, as did rock.

 

So NO, it's not all about Lead. But sometimes it is.

[henryrobinett]

The problem, as I see it here, is in genre. In jazz the soloist paints his picture. He has a supporting cast. It's not particularly about the "song". It's about the conversation, where the head master, for his particular length of time, is the soloist. Rock/Pop, R&B, Country, Hip Hop are all different genres. The concept of "solo" is much diminished from the jazz concept and the general concept of "tune" or "song" has a more elevated status. In Rock, for example, everything must serve in the production of the song. If the "wanker" takes too much attention from the song he flunks. If the solo adds to the song thats a great thing and has a structural purpose. In jazz composers/leaders have been criticized for not giving enough room for the soloists because, in jazz, that's what people want to hear. No one in jazz, for example, would dream of accusing Coltrane of flash. Soloists in jazz are always striving to push the envelope or at least they often are encouraged to do so.

 

The concept of "lead guitar" is non-existent in jazz, except perhaps in an arrangement where there are two or more guitars.

 

Doesn't make it right or wrong, just different aims in different genres. You need a different set of ears and a different aesthetic perspective to appreciate different music.

[Lee Flier]

Yeah I totally agree Henry. It sounded like the poster was coming from a rock perspective so that's how I answered. Jazz is a whole other animal of course - I love jazz soloists, although I'm not the biggest fan of jazz guitar, I prefer piano and horn soloists. But that's just me. That's one reason I don't like fusion - it combines two aesthetics that are completely contradictory with each other even though either one is valid on its own. Fusion has the bombast and testosterone of rock without any of its elegant simplicity, while it also seems to have the technical flash of jazz without any of the subtlety and lyricism of jazz. The result is usually not anything I care to listen to.

 

Now I've done it.

 

--Lee

[pauldil]

Originally posted by coyote:

Man, this thread is problematic.

 

Charlie Parker, Cannonball Adderly, and about a thousand other great jazz players made a living playing SOLOS that were often chock-full of notes. Were they **wanking**? You bet. No one can tell me that all of Coltrane's wild runs were chosen for their subtle contribution to the song - many of 'em were outright FLASH.

 

I see your point, and I agree that jazz players also do wank, but all those jazz players you named did not play "lead" vs. "rhythm", especially since they all played sax, which is a single-note instrument. If you think specifically of most jazz guitarists, there is no concept of "lead" and "rhythm". In fact, players such as George Van Epps, Stanley Jordan, Joe Pass, Charlie Hunter, etc. can play both at the same time.

 

Paul

[strat0124]

Lead: The only thing Superman can't see through.