I love listening to songs to hear all the subtle nuances of how the instruments come together. I love listening for the music. It's funny because my wife likes to listen for the singer. I guess it makes sense, me being into the guitar and my wife being a singing type. Just about the only common ground we have in music is the Queensryche and Evanesence. I wouldn't say that either band has guitar gods, but they both put all the instrument voices together very well. I can just sit there and just about trip out on the song writing and composition. It's one of the great things about music that most people just miss out on, both recording artists and listeners.
One of my favorite CD's is the G3 live album with Vai, Satch, and Johnson. I've never owned a Vai album before this, but I love listening to Satch and Johnson. I never got into the Vai stuff, but then I saw the DVD of the album and Vai blew me away. I think Satch and Johnson write better songs, some not very virtuoso-like, but Vai was insanely entertaining to watch play his stuff.
Vai is truly a technical god. I remember reading an article about how he practiced in the early days to get where he's at today. He had I think three one hour blocks that were devoted to scales, modes, and I can't remember the third. He went through the three hours and then repeated twice. He had three hours of each per day and then finished off with an hour of, if memory serves, just jamming and playing along with music. You put 10 hours a day into something with that kind of structure, you are going to have mad skills. I just wish I had ten hours a day I could practice my playing, or any number of other things I've gotten interested in over the years.
I think that the point is that the guitarists that get air time are hacks. You and all your sibling posts mentioned guitarists that are almost universally unknown, except to other guitarists/guitar fans. Many times you may never hear about a great guitarist unless by word of mouth. The radio stations around here will maybe play a SRV song once in a while. I never hear anything like Petrucci, Satriani, Vai, Eric Johnson, or a dozen other guitar gods. Most radio stations seem to think that something like Green Day or Nirvana is a tour de force of guitar virtuosity.
Yeah he can sing about as good as most of the other hacks with music contracts these days. Maybe that's why they call them recording contracts. Hmmm...
The slides would even be trickier to work out if you want both finger slides (almost everybody does these) and slide slides (like George Thorogood)The slides with glass or metal slides WOULD be tricky, the finger slides would be a nightmare. That has a finger for every string/fret combo. It would have to take a fixed finger and work out some way of moving along the neck and then return to its point of origin. Either that or have a "floating finger" that can go to every string/fret coordinate and slide like the glass/metal slide.
what makes master of puppets so powerful? is it the notes or hetfield/hammet?
I don't think it's that powerful, just loud. I think that has to do with how much studio processing was done. The Master of Puppets album was one of their massively studio processed albums. If I had to pick any one element that made the album great it would be Cliff Burton.
Funny thing there is that pianos can't bend strings, so a player piano can do anything a human can do and then some. Even basic guitar has string bends. Then there are bar dives, harmonics, pinch harmonics, tapping...
If you really want to nit pick on the thing, all you really have to do is complain about how it looks like the strings are plucked up and down perpendicular to the guitar body. The strings are going to be a lot more likely to buzz on the frets.
All I can say is that if it can play like Yngwie Malmsteen, without being a dick, then I'm sold. That being said, I'd like to see how well it can improvise. I don't think it will be able to improvise and compose. Duplicating playing is a whole different animal.
IMHO this is just the reinvention of the internet appliance. It would be cool to have one, but I'd probably only get one if I had WAY TOO MUCH discretionary income.
I think it might be an old video clip (SNL?) about Bill Gates buying the US, Canada, and Mexico to avoid the anti-trust suits. I think that if you have seen that video clip and laughed at it/liked it, it's probably just a natural reaction. Of course it's also a few years removed.
Spam is the reason I stopped using hotmail in the first place. I got an account and let maybe 5-6 people know the address when I was in school. In the first week or so I started getting spam.
This was a quite a few years ago, so it might not be the case. But then again it is Microsoft here. Introducing bugs while fixing bugs is the modus operandi.
I get to see a crappy streaming video of a company party. w00t! Can I see it really good on my dial-up? Will I even hear it on my dial-up? Maybe I shouldn't buy anything on amazon and pay for broadband instead? I get it amazon, I shouldn't do any shopping there anymore. Now do the other poor saps that might even be excited to see and hear Dylan and Jones get screwed because they don't have a fast enough connection? Amazon is clearly run by really smart people.
Microsoft is just doing this at the request of the RIAA and MPAA so they can exploit and track use. They don't really want to make a better product. Of course I don't know what I'm talking about and just airing the thoughts that a conspiracy nut might think.
Maybe I'm just not hip with current scientific thinking, but I understood space as being infinitely large. Even without infinity in the equation, with the number of galaxies that have been observed, and the number of stars per galaxy the probability of life occurring is still there.
Ultimately, there is no "proving" anything with any methods available to us now. All we have to go on are a couple hundred years worth of observations (a couple decades of really good observations), and a whole lot of counting on our knowledge of things as absolutes. I imagine that a number of things we term constants could be wrong, because we aren't able to observe things like radioactive decay being constant over milenia. That being the case, the term life as we know it is really turning on the tunnel vision. Microbiologists are finding all kinds of wild microbes these days. That in a small sense is challenging the concept of life as we know it.
I'm not sure what I'm really getting at here. I guess I just think that the probablity is high, and that we don't know a whole heck of a lot about the size and nature of space and even life. I think, however, that if we do end up finding life out there, it will end up being pretty boring. I don't think it will be a lot like sci-fi with the wild out of this world (no pun intended) life forms and environments. However when I saw Fantasia 2000 recently, I was visualizing massive space-faring whales when there was the bit with whales flying above the surface of the water.
Statistically proving ET life is easy. You just use the logic laid out in the H2G2 about the population of the universe. I don't have my book handy right now, and it has been a while since I read it. Following the logic, you have a probability of finding life in any star system. Given space is infinitely large...You get the picture.
Slashdot Mirror
I love listening to songs to hear all the subtle nuances of how the instruments come together. I love listening for the music. It's funny because my wife likes to listen for the singer. I guess it makes sense, me being into the guitar and my wife being a singing type. Just about the only common ground we have in music is the Queensryche and Evanesence. I wouldn't say that either band has guitar gods, but they both put all the instrument voices together very well. I can just sit there and just about trip out on the song writing and composition. It's one of the great things about music that most people just miss out on, both recording artists and listeners.
One of my favorite CD's is the G3 live album with Vai, Satch, and Johnson. I've never owned a Vai album before this, but I love listening to Satch and Johnson. I never got into the Vai stuff, but then I saw the DVD of the album and Vai blew me away. I think Satch and Johnson write better songs, some not very virtuoso-like, but Vai was insanely entertaining to watch play his stuff.
Vai is truly a technical god. I remember reading an article about how he practiced in the early days to get where he's at today. He had I think three one hour blocks that were devoted to scales, modes, and I can't remember the third. He went through the three hours and then repeated twice. He had three hours of each per day and then finished off with an hour of, if memory serves, just jamming and playing along with music. You put 10 hours a day into something with that kind of structure, you are going to have mad skills. I just wish I had ten hours a day I could practice my playing, or any number of other things I've gotten interested in over the years.
I think that the point is that the guitarists that get air time are hacks. You and all your sibling posts mentioned guitarists that are almost universally unknown, except to other guitarists/guitar fans. Many times you may never hear about a great guitarist unless by word of mouth. The radio stations around here will maybe play a SRV song once in a while. I never hear anything like Petrucci, Satriani, Vai, Eric Johnson, or a dozen other guitar gods. Most radio stations seem to think that something like Green Day or Nirvana is a tour de force of guitar virtuosity.
I feel your pain. I feel your pain.
Yeah he can sing about as good as most of the other hacks with music contracts these days. Maybe that's why they call them recording contracts. Hmmm...
The slides would even be trickier to work out if you want both finger slides (almost everybody does these) and slide slides (like George Thorogood)The slides with glass or metal slides WOULD be tricky, the finger slides would be a nightmare. That has a finger for every string/fret combo. It would have to take a fixed finger and work out some way of moving along the neck and then return to its point of origin. Either that or have a "floating finger" that can go to every string/fret coordinate and slide like the glass/metal slide.
I don't think it's that powerful, just loud. I think that has to do with how much studio processing was done. The Master of Puppets album was one of their massively studio processed albums. If I had to pick any one element that made the album great it would be Cliff Burton.
Funny thing there is that pianos can't bend strings, so a player piano can do anything a human can do and then some. Even basic guitar has string bends. Then there are bar dives, harmonics, pinch harmonics, tapping...
If you really want to nit pick on the thing, all you really have to do is complain about how it looks like the strings are plucked up and down perpendicular to the guitar body. The strings are going to be a lot more likely to buzz on the frets.
All I can say is that if it can play like Yngwie Malmsteen, without being a dick, then I'm sold. That being said, I'd like to see how well it can improvise. I don't think it will be able to improvise and compose. Duplicating playing is a whole different animal.
IMHO this is just the reinvention of the internet appliance. It would be cool to have one, but I'd probably only get one if I had WAY TOO MUCH discretionary income.
I think it might be an old video clip (SNL?) about Bill Gates buying the US, Canada, and Mexico to avoid the anti-trust suits. I think that if you have seen that video clip and laughed at it/liked it, it's probably just a natural reaction. Of course it's also a few years removed.
Wow I said the same thing and because I didn't read any posts I get moderated as redundant. Go figure.
Microsoft in talks to buy China. Then again, wasn't gator spyware? Hmmm...it's all getting clear now.
Spam is the reason I stopped using hotmail in the first place. I got an account and let maybe 5-6 people know the address when I was in school. In the first week or so I started getting spam.
This was a quite a few years ago, so it might not be the case. But then again it is Microsoft here. Introducing bugs while fixing bugs is the modus operandi.
Thanks for taking the heat off of us for a while.
Either that or: at least our's fail after they get somewhere.
Try this: Read the parent and then reread my post. Think about it for a while, and I'll wonder how your post has a score of 2.
Yeah, I'd remember the short cryptic names better, so the short names are absolutely better. Deal with it.
I get to see a crappy streaming video of a company party. w00t! Can I see it really good on my dial-up? Will I even hear it on my dial-up? Maybe I shouldn't buy anything on amazon and pay for broadband instead? I get it amazon, I shouldn't do any shopping there anymore. Now do the other poor saps that might even be excited to see and hear Dylan and Jones get screwed because they don't have a fast enough connection? Amazon is clearly run by really smart people.
I didn't know it was blue either. I always thought of blue associated with IBM. Maybe we will get to see another SCO type lawsuit against IBM?
Microsoft is just doing this at the request of the RIAA and MPAA so they can exploit and track use. They don't really want to make a better product. Of course I don't know what I'm talking about and just airing the thoughts that a conspiracy nut might think.
Is that like Blue Hat of Death?
Ultimately, there is no "proving" anything with any methods available to us now. All we have to go on are a couple hundred years worth of observations (a couple decades of really good observations), and a whole lot of counting on our knowledge of things as absolutes. I imagine that a number of things we term constants could be wrong, because we aren't able to observe things like radioactive decay being constant over milenia. That being the case, the term life as we know it is really turning on the tunnel vision. Microbiologists are finding all kinds of wild microbes these days. That in a small sense is challenging the concept of life as we know it.
I'm not sure what I'm really getting at here. I guess I just think that the probablity is high, and that we don't know a whole heck of a lot about the size and nature of space and even life. I think, however, that if we do end up finding life out there, it will end up being pretty boring. I don't think it will be a lot like sci-fi with the wild out of this world (no pun intended) life forms and environments. However when I saw Fantasia 2000 recently, I was visualizing massive space-faring whales when there was the bit with whales flying above the surface of the water.
Statistically proving ET life is easy. You just use the logic laid out in the H2G2 about the population of the universe. I don't have my book handy right now, and it has been a while since I read it. Following the logic, you have a probability of finding life in any star system. Given space is infinitely large...You get the picture.
I'd say that 5% is pretty generous. But then again seeing how 5 and % reside on the same key, I'll cut you some slack.
Just dawned on me. Nice sig man!