Great Kat or "Great Crap" ?

[Bejeeber]

Originally posted by lloben@earthlink.net:

.....There are so many players who out there who blow her far, far away, it's not even funny.....

Yep. The weirdest part to me is how GP claims she can "outplay just about every guitarist on the planet", and that "her fretboard speed is awesome".

 

So much bulls**t about her technique, which is actually missing in action. Fretboard speed??!! You gotta be kidding. Tremelo picking speed - the easiest speed technique there is - is the only speed she's got.

 

The thing is that technical ability is not that subjective compared to actual musical content, and guitarists with first hand experience with advanced guitar technique aren't going to be fooled by TGK's crap.

 

I do enjoy Editor Boy's writing style, so my suggestion to GP would be to start having someone on staff who has a background that enables them to accurately assess the level of a player's technique review stories like these for accuracy before going to press.

[Kramer Ferrington III.]

Originally posted by lloben@earthlink.net:

Herein lies one of the major problems with Guitar Player these days, and with Michael Molenda in particular.

To be fair, it's not just Michael Molenda... heaps of people have written similar stuff, judging by the articles on her site.

 

There's also that Guitar One article where she was included among the ten fastest shredders of all time.

 

http://www.greatkat.com/59/index59.html

 

Not saying she's up to her own hype, just saying it's not just Molenda that has taken her seriously.

[llobenearthlink.net]

Fair enough. It may not be just Molenda, but there seems to be a correlation with his being the Editor and their growing evolution towards increasing amounts of bullshit. The Great Kat is but one example, but a pretty glaring one. As for the others who've sung her praises, I would say the same: that they are being bought and sold readily because of the T+A factor, and it's really pathetic. And it's not even honest, for g_d's sake. Gosh, if you really want T+A, simply buy whatever porn rag you like and be done with it. It will be real T+A and you won't likely confuse it with shred guitar playing. I recall Jennifer Batten, who, incidentally, can play circles around The Great Kat any day of the week, commenting a while back about the absurdity of women having to play the sex factor in order to have their playing 'heard'. She compared it to something as absurd as demanding that Paul Gilbert be seen in a jock strap to finally appreciate his prowess. And we don't need that, right? Right. In the meantime, if The Great Kat is going to touted as THE shredder of the decade, she ought to have something to back it up, but she really doesn't. Her playing sucks, and so, for Guitar Player to say something so above-board laudatory about her just seems a little too stupid for my taste.

[doc taz]

Originally posted by lloben@earthlink.net:

Fair enough. It may not be just Molenda, but there seems to be a correlation with his being the Editor and their growing evolution towards increasing amounts of bullshit. The Great Kat is but one example, but a pretty glaring one. As for the others who've sung her praises, I would say the same: that they are being bought and sold readily because of the T+A factor, and it's really pathetic. And it's not even honest, for g_d's sake. Gosh, if you really want T+A, simply buy whatever porn rag you like and be done with it. It will be real T+A and you won't likely confuse it with shred guitar playing. I recall Jennifer Batten, who, incidentally, can play circles around The Great Kat any day of the week, commenting a while back about the absurdity of women having to play the sex factor in order to have their playing 'heard'. She compared it to something as absurd as demanding that Paul Gilbert be seen in a jock strap to finally appreciate his prowess. And we don't need that, right? Right. In the meantime, if The Great Kat is going to touted as THE shredder of the decade, she ought to have something to back it up, but she really doesn't. Her playing sucks, and so, for Guitar Player to say something so above-board laudatory about her just seems a little too stupid for my taste.

Good comment, but for the record, I never did once say that she's the absolute best. I knew most people weren't going to like her angle. Thanks for patronizing the rest of us, by the way.

 

I don't expect guys to come out in jockstraps, either. Unless you're talking about a P-Funk concert that goes on during New Year's, that is.

 

Yes, Batten is great, indeed. I can't disagree with that. So is Rory Block. So is Susan Tedeschi. So is Sharon Isbin...

 

People that know me best can recall that I have used several fine women guitarists as avatars. Not once did I ever use Kat. I probably wouldn't, anyway, because I knew from the beginning that a lot of folks would be repulsed with it. I'm not that inconsiderate of other folks. (well, maybe in a metal forum...)

 

Now, I think I have some Diamanda Galas in here somewheres... that ought to 'kill' the Kat lady.

[Darklava]

I think shes the greatest of all time no one comes

close.

[llobenearthlink.net]

Diamanda Galas! Yes, not a guitarist, it's true, but what an amazing artist. Hey, she doesn't happend to wear a bustier, does she? Just wondering . . .

[Gifthorse]

Her technique is dismal. It is pretty weak that Guitar Player is endorsing her and saying she is so good and can play circles around other players with her 'incredible technique'. That makes Guitar Player look ignorant to people who can play guitar and know what represents difficulty and technique on guitar. Ok isn't it about time to let this topic die (as I post AGAIN!!)

[Dr. Ellwood]

This thread cannot die untill we get apologies and cash compensation plus a free trip to Dollywood from GP!!!!

[Kramer Ferrington III.]

Originally posted by lloben@earthlink.net:

I would say the same: that they are being bought and sold readily because of the T+A factor, and it's really pathetic.

D'you think so..? I mean, she's not exactly a goddess, is she?

 

The bit I found disappointing was that MM could have done the interview in a more tongue-in-cheek fashion. He could have raised an occasional eyebrow, at the very least. After all, he's supposed to be an "aging punk iconoclast" and all

 

 

And yeah... where's our apology and our cash?

[Bejeeber]

Should we consider negotiating for vintage guitars as compensation in lieu of the cash?

 

The trip to Dollywood is NOT negotiable though.

[Editor Boy]

Hi guys...

 

Thanks for all the comments, as always. Every opinion was well considered.

 

I would like to say just a couple of things, however:

 

[1] Vince mentioned that I could have been more tonque-in-cheek. Well, if you read into all the CAPS, and the over-wrought introduction, then I think you'll see evidence of that very "raised eyebrow."

 

[2] It's true that some people totally dig TGK and some think she's B.S. -- the reader mail and forum traffic has been very interesting. And that interesting split of opinion is why I thought it would be fun to start this thread. It has been very entertaining and educational. Again, thanks to all for the comments.

 

[3] I DO get a tad sad when people bash GP for less-than-groovy content. I mean, you can rage about the TGK article if you so desire (please do), but that same "lame" issue also included a lengthy cover story on Eric Johnson and features on Jim Hall, Kinski, Coltrane for guitar, Zemaitis guitars, and so on.

 

GP has ALWAYS been an extremely stylistically diverse guitar magazine -- so where is all the "crap" foisted on the public by some "punk iconoclast" editor or wayward staff? What percentage of "good" artists vs "new" artists would you like to see? Which guitarists ARE we missing? Would you prefer to read solely about icons and classic rock, jazz, and metal players? Let me know. As I've said many times, I always invite the readership to help us ensure we're not failing to cover important players. I've gotten a fair amount of cool tips -- and excellent stories -- from that back-and-forth. Obviously, reading your content desires is harder to do if people simply state that we could cover more deserving players but don't give us any options, or mention players that we've already covered recently (which always triggers my fear that some of those foisting venom haven't actually read the magazine in a long while).

 

[4] Despite some of the hurtful, worthy comments here, GP is doing amazingly well, both in business and overall reader support. Although that's a tribute to GP's fine and talented staff (its editorial, sales, production, administrative, and executive departments), we don't really get all wrapped up in self-congrats. We are extremely aware that our evolution and growth is very much due to a passionate community of readers who constantly throw us feedback (both good, bad, and painful).

 

Truly -- how many other mags consistently publish very critical letters in their letters sections? How many editorial staffs actively search newsgroups, forums, and reader snail-/e-mail to check the pulse of their community? This staff does all of that and more, and if you take the time to scrutinize GP over just the past two years, you'll see that a significant amount of reader concerns/desires have been addressed. We DO try hard to listen and learn, and I totally dig the fact that so many guitar zealots take the time to read us the riot act. You HAVE changed us. You guys should celebrate that fact -- this is a very decent marriage!

 

But those are MY thoughts -- let me know if we or I continue to be off base.

 

All the Best,

Mike

[Gifthorse]

I liked the issue with KAT. The Coltrane giant steps on guitar was sweet, and I enjoyed the article on Eric Johnson.

 

I want to see Brett Garsed on the cover. He is incredible and not well known in the US.

 

One of the coolest rock fusion players, up there with Wayne Krantz and Holdsworth.

 

Doyle Dykes is a god at fingerpickin. Leo Kottke, Junior Brown, Ty Tabor.

 

Those would be immediate. I am sure you guys have probably done features on all of them at some point, but they are all notable players that deserve respect.

[Bejeeber]

Personally I think the diversity of guitarists covered by GP is really nice. I don't even mind TGK being covered - it's just the way GP appears to be touting TGK's supposed technical abilities that seems wrong.

 

I for one sure would appreciate more in depth info about the artists covered BTW. The new and not very famous ones seem to be given more photo space than text, so I'm hoping that'll be sorted out and we'll be reading some more detailed coverage of these guitarists in the future.

[Kramer Ferrington III.]

Originally posted by Editor Boy:

Hi guys...

 

[1] Vince mentioned that I could have been more tonque-in-cheek. Well, if you read into all the CAPS, and the over-wrought introduction, then I think you'll see evidence of that very "raised eyebrow."

Geewhillikers..! Maybe I'm not as subtle as I thought I was.

 

Originally posted by Editor Boy:

Would you prefer to read solely about icons and classic rock, jazz, and metal players?

Oh, God no.

 

I avoided GP like a plague for years on end because it seemed so stodgy and obsessed with "icons and classic rock, jazz, and metal players". I thought it snobby and living in a little ivory tower, completely oblivious to the punk siege massing up downstairs.

 

I like GP much, much better these days.

 

 

Originally posted by Editor Boy:

Truly -- how many other mags consistently publish very critical letters in their letters sections?

Now, that's a bit disingenous or however it's spelt. With all due respect, the "you're-all-a-bunch-of-tonedeaf-cretins-because-you-don't-put--on-the-front-cover-every-single issue!!!!!!" type letter is a hallowed tradition in rock mags all across the world.

[Kramer Ferrington III.]

** double post.** post. )

[Mike Gug]

What percentage of "good" artists vs "new" artists would you like to see? Which guitarists ARE we missing?

By "new", I assume you're talking about undiscovered, of course.

 

We read magazines for the freshness of the latest gear, updates, etc. It's why the medium exists. It hs a shelf life greater than the newspaper medium, but less than that of the book medium.

 

So, I'd say Eric Johnson, a player who is still alive, "returning" or doing something new is worthy of the medium. A major article on Hendrix, a dead guy (as important as he is), is due less often than actual news from the world of guitar. I think GP has a handle on that concept.

 

I, personally, enjoy the concept of discovery I get from magazines. From GP and this forum, I found the Mooney Suzuki, the Black Keys, Jellyfish and a few others currently on my iPod. Phil Keaggy is being ordered as soon as I get off this thread.

 

So, here's how I would like to see "new" artists presented. Offer a small write up in the magazine, and refer the reader to the GP website for an easy download of a tasty sample of the player's fretboard prowess. Dig? "Mike Varney's Spotlight" and "Buzz" are VERY cool, but don't send me to someone else's website for a listen. I'd feel safer with a download standardization GP can offer.

 

And finally, to specifically answer your question: what artists ARE you missing? I'd say, Christian to start. I don't want to keep harping on it, but I know of a lot of Christian bands that have guitarists. I don't see them in your mag. Maybe we suck as guitarists(?). (Well, I do at least)

[Guitarzan]

i could design the new GP so i loved every inch. but who else would want it?

i learn something from everything i read in GP. even in articles about artists i dislike.

sometimes the mag is awesome from cover to cover and sometimes i skip some things at first, only to read them eventually.

i find value in most of what i read. i don't always agree with everything i read or hear but i find learn from all that is positive or negative.

[GeorgeVW]

There's a single reason why I dismiss Kat, and it's typified by one of her responses in the interview:

 

" Listen, people are stupid and they want the easiest formula for their slow-thinking braiins. If you give them one ounce of Beethoven, they will throw up. People would rather listen to Madonna's crap than Mozart. Now if they were intelligent, they would say, 'I need to hear the music of geniuses to make me more intelligent - not crap music that makes me stupid."

 

Aside from the fact that, as the interviewer, MM should have challenged her on that statement (hey, Lester Bangs would've), this single excerpt reveals that she believes that she knows what all the rest of us need, and that if she doesn't like something, it's not deserving of being called music. This shows me that she doesn't understand what music is.

[Guitarzan]

i don't think she is as serious as she sounds. a comment like that is probably based on how she views artists like Britney Spears doing compared to other music. we all get pissed from time to time and say things that sound like that.

i can see what she means, it sounds like she has been frustrated at some time.

i would rather hear her speak than read some poop about J-lo or some other artist i am supposed to care about.

i must admit she needs a image makeover.

[Kramer Ferrington III.]

Originally posted by GeorgeVW:

it's typified by one of her responses in the interview:

 

"...Now if they were intelligent, they would say, 'I need to hear the music of geniuses to make me more intelligent - not crap music that makes me stupid."

Which leads to another question: why DO we listen to music?

 

I listen to it because of the pleasure it gives me, not because I want it to make me intelligent.

 

She reminds me of those people that add all these supplements to their food... you know, riboflavin, niacin, beethoven...

 

She also insists that classical music is dead. Well, is it?

[skipclone 1]

A note for the 'players I'd like to see covered' file-

I've read GP only occasionally of late-it's expensive in Japan-but if you haven't done it already it would be good to profile Tak Matsumoto, of the Japanese duo B'z. He's a really fine player and has a signature Les Paul that I think the readers would find interesting too.

in fact Japan has a number of excellent artists who deserve an introduction.

[llobenearthlink.net]

Or how about Guthrie Govan? An absolute monster. Truly.

[Guitarzan]

i agree with Skipclone1. there has been and still is loads of great players from the east that we get little to no coverage.

[Billster]

Originally posted by GeorgeVW:

There's a single reason why I dismiss Kat, and it's typified by one of her responses in the interview:

 

" Listen, people are stupid and they want the easiest formula for their slow-thinking braiins. If you give them one ounce of Beethoven, they will throw up. People would rather listen to Madonna's crap than Mozart. Now if they were intelligent, they would say, 'I need to hear the music of geniuses to make me more intelligent - not crap music that makes me stupid."

 

Aside from the fact that, as the interviewer, MM should have challenged her on that statement (hey, Lester Bangs would've), this single excerpt reveals that she believes that she knows what all the rest of us need, and that if she doesn't like something, it's not deserving of being called music. This shows me that she doesn't understand what music is.

I'll chime in here, and note that she first claimed everything since Bach has sucked the life out of the music, and then later praised the likes of Wagner, Beethoven, Pagannini and others, all of whom came after Bach.

 

Total schtick. Krap.

[Cleef van Lee]

Before reading the GP article The Great Kat never got my attention. But I read the interview with interest, visited her website, listened to her clips, read through all the posts in this thread, re-read the interview twice, and revisited greatkat.com.

 

IMHO, Kat's costume is relatively timeless since it belongs to the fetish world which has a much slower stylistic evolution than the always mercurial fads of youth/musical culture. As far as I know, the costume she wears in the interview photos is appropriate for a modern dominatrix.

 

Besides, she has a lovely body, great hair, and a beautiful face. If I was so inclined, I'd probably be happy to be her slave. I'd like to see what she looks like with her mouth closed, too. But she looks pretty ferocious with it gaping open.

 

I couldn't say why she chooses to perform in a dominatrix persona. Pity that GP didn't ask her. But I suspect the persona is something she feels. Given her practice schedule, she probably has precious little time to act out that role non-musically.

 

Is it shtick? Of course, but musical performers always have some sort of shtick. Even "non-shtick" requires cultivation -- making it just another kind of shtick.

 

Her name sounds like an obvious inversion of "Catherine the Great," the Russian empress.

 

Can she shred? Of course. Is she the greatest living shredder? Supposing that it is a valid question, any answer is mere opinion, since there is no objective standard for what constitutes greatness.

 

I find her interview to be entirely truthful, albeit confrontational. I can't find any fault in any of her pronouncements. The first of these is that the guitar hero notion is a male sexuality construct. Obviously. And that women are prohibited from recognition as great guitarists; because they are not male, they can't be guitar heros. Who can argue with that? (She doesn't say it, but this has been true of all musicians from time immemorial. The famous players of every era, on any instrument, have also been regarded as studs.) It is a bone fide chauvinistic closed shop.

 

Some people are dismissive of the sexuality of her act as T&A. It looks to me like Kat is asserting that she is both a great guitarist and the sexual equal of any male guitar hero. She _would_ be a guitar hero if women weren't prohibited from that role. She is attempting to rub the noses of her oppressors in their own injustice. Does it make you squirm? There is a lot of squirming in this thread.

 

Here comes the truly obvious: Do male guitarists flaunt their sexuality on stage? You betcha. Can they also be regarded as great guitarists? Of course. Why then should a woman's act be dismissed as T&A? Why should her guitar playing be dismissed regardless of any sexual content in her stage persona? "Damned if you do and damned if you don't" is a hallmark of oppressive injustice.

 

Is Kat's act exploitive of feminist anger? Who cares. She's nice to look at, she's emotionally evocative, and she plays better than most. What reason for complaint could there be? None, unless, of course, you really are worried that your dick is too small, are so caught up in guitar hero mythos that you're entirely taken in by it, and are trying to live it without understanding it.

 

As to her musical prejudice for classical. I really believe that music is the one area of life where irrational prejudice is okay. It could hardly be otherwise. Kat's training predisposes her to certain things. From her perspective it isn't prejudice. And she is right about stupid. We are freaking stupid most of the time. I've long believed that in any field of human endeavor 95 percent of our efforts are mediocre garbage. That's why some stuff stands out as genius. You just have to accept stupidity and sift through the muck to find the gems. Kat's merely trying to promote the gems she's found.

[Darklava]

You kiddin me?someone gets it.Good read

[Dr. Ellwood]

"You just have to accept stupidity and sift through the muck to find the gems. Kat's merely trying to promote the gems she's found."

 

Except in this case there are no gems to find. Promotion of someting yes, more garbage. There is not one original thought, observaton or even anything of entertainment value there.

[Bejeeber]

Originally posted by Cleef van Lee:

Can she shred? Of course. Is she the greatest living shredder? Supposing that it is a valid question, any answer is mere opinion, since there is no objective standard for what constitutes greatness.

Well since the term "shred" refers to advanced speed playing techniques on the guitar, there are certain basic elements of shred that can be easily identified by those who have studied advanced guitar techniques.

 

They aren't really a matter of opinion amongst knowledgable players, only to those who aren't able to discern what techniques are being used, or those have no experience with those techniques.

 

You see techniques are technical and are quantifiable, unlike artistry, etc.

 

Judging by those web clips, can she shred? Not at all.

 

She might qualify for '80's parody intermediate level.

 

If she starts practicing more.

[Billster]

Originally posted by Cleef van Lee:

Here comes the truly obvious: Do male guitarists flaunt their sexuality on stage? You betcha. Can they also be regarded as great guitarists? Of course. Why then should a woman's act be dismissed as T&A? Why should her guitar playing be dismissed regardless of any sexual content in her stage persona? "Damned if you do and damned if you don't" is a hallmark of oppressive injustice.

I think that most of the male musicians who build their whole act on their appearance don't garner a lot of respect as musicians in the eyes of other musicians. Peter Frampton already had established himself as an artist when "Framptom Comes Alive" turned him into a sex symbol, and it still took years for him to recover from the factor.

 

 

Originally posted by Cleef van Lee:

Is Kat's act exploitive of feminist anger? Who cares. She's nice to look at, she's emotionally evocative, and she plays better than most. What reason for complaint could there be?

She's trying to have it both ways - "You can't accept me/look at my tits!"

 

What about Jennifer Batten , who toured with Michael Jackson and Jeff Beck (at different times!) while dressing like a somewhat normal human?

[Darklava]

http://www.batten.com/Images/mj+jb.jpg

Looks like the Kat but with no tits.

Shes just having fun yankin cranks