Experience

hey everyone

i was just wondering....how long did it take some of you to get really good at playing guitar? i asked because i have a little bit of experience in my opinion(about 1 1/2 years), but i already can do hard techniques like sweep picking, economy picking, string skipping and other things like that. some people told me that i should not have jumped to advanced stuff and other people told me i am way ahead of where i should be( i listen to them more :) ). i know a lot of scales and chords, mainly because of this site, and a lot of licks in different genres of music and its been fun learning about it.

I wouldn't say you should'nt learn advanced techniques if you can. If you have that kind of natural ability, use it. However, pay attention to the quality of those advanced techniques. Maybe you can do those things but can you do them well is the question.

I was able to do a lot of things well right away and some things took years. I've been playing since I'm 13 and I'm now 47. I'm told by some that because I had to work so hard to get where I am now that it shows in my playing. "Feeling" is what you get when you have to strugle to learn certain techniques.

Do you play with a lot of feeling or do you just shred? But most importantly, are you happy with your playing?

I would say i was the same way. It was very easy for me to learn these techniques, and yes, I do play them well and with feeling. Even though i havent been playing that long, i can at least say that in my first 3 months of playing i always thought SHRED SHRED SHRED, and my idea of "shred" was to play scales fast and only ascending(because i wasnt good at descending yet). around 8 months i had mastered the scales that i knew and was just getting into those techniques i mentioned....i became more technical and melodic. Now, to me, shred is a very ugly word and i hate to hear people say it just because someone can play fast. i lesten to whats "under" all the speed and distortion.

I agree with what Mac said about performing the techniques well. I have played with a lot of players who make the same claims that cannot hold up when they start to play. There is a big difference between playing well, and playing cleanly. The latter is the more difficult one as it takes many years to get most of the mistakes out of your playing. Learning difficult techniques early on is fine if you know not to expect amazing results for some time(though it will definitely pay off in the long run).
I have only been jamming for about 8 years and really only serious with it for the last 4 of those years, but I've become quite a formidable player in the last 2 years when everything(technique and knowledge wise) started to click.
Just depends on the person and when they break over those horrible "plateaus" in playing.

I believe that everyone learns at their own pace, don't compare yourself to others. Do whatever you want on guitar because to get good you have to enjoy it rather than trying to be the best guitar player.

agreed matt. but i never practice with the intention of being better than others. As long as there are many different genres of music and different playing styles then there cant be a "best" guitarist. And case, "well" to me is being able to play something with enough fluency for it to be heard clearly, not to be played perfectly. I practice those techniques primarily everyday for the longest which is why i made the claim to be able to play them well. as for sweep picking, i will say that i can do that with excellence because that is the my most used and favorite technique and i practice that more than anything. i dont know every arpeggio there is to know, but at the same time, they cant all be swept. O yeah....are there any tappers on here?

I listened to alot of Jazz, Rock, Metal, Blues, Country, And anything else with guitar in it. Then took bits of each technique and style for my playing.

So when I feel like some jazz, I can play it.
If I feel like metal, I can play it.

However in soloing, I now take a John Frusciante type approach; Minimal notes, maximum feeling.
(I used to take a Kirk Hammet type before; Tapping, wah-ing, Whammying)

Take Jimmy Page for example. While technically his writing skills and playing are obviously legendary, his playing is sometimes kinda sloppy. But that's ok. That's who he is and I love it. And he plays with the utmost of feeling. Michael Angelo Batio is technically fantastic and has mad skills and speed in almost every area and does NOT make mistakes. To me, he doesn’t play with a whole lot of feeling. Also, some people find him boring. I for one appreciate both.

In general,

about 1-3 years to get used to your instrument be conformable with it.

then about 8 years of theoretical study

then 2 years (and the continued life time after) to bring it all together while hopefully constantly evolving and learning.

Now this depends on natural talent (Coltrane was said to have devoured a book that takes 8 years in 4!!) and of course the level you want to take things too. This is obviously the general time scale for serious classical/Jazz study not for simple three chord rock which would be in about 5 mins ;).


As for extended techniques there is no value in learning them so soon. In the end their really not that hard and when you get your scales and chord fully down you end up doing it away (just in case you didn't know all those techniques aren't knew at all). Personally, I can't stand people who can do all this crap yet if I ask them to playing anything they haven't a clue what to do or even how to implement what they can do (not saying that this is you). In the end, their not advance because there hard there advanced because you should know about 3 years worth of carp before you should be doing them.

but I digress, its all really about what you wish to accomplish musically that should be your guide. Not what some bored idiot on the inter web thinks.



normally I wont to this but, Page is a hack it really kills me that people put him on this pedestal, when he is going to hell for the things he put people through. I mean people hate Elvis when he never lied about who he was and actually credited every composer, yet they worship they ground that fake walks on. It's true that I listen to led zeppelin its a good band but you will never hear me talk about that phony in any good terms.

O_o Elaborate on why Page is a phony? I've never heard anything like that.

Really this is a question of talent or skill. I had talent (not trying to be c-o-c-k-y [they might censor it]). I had people telling me I was really good after a year of playing. but that was mainly blues and metal stuff. Now (when it comes to guitar style) I play a mix of Zappa (he is his own genre), Jazz, and Blues. Now I've been playing for almost 4 years, and I feel that my taste in music and playing style has expanded and changed considerably.

Its amazing you much thievery of riffs and songs led zep has done,And never giving credit to all the old bluesmen.

RA, my father tells me the same exact things that you said about knowing techniques but not being able to implement them in soloing haha. i actually have that problem SOMETIMES. but people who play jazz and fusion(im actually studying both right now) are the most technical, melodic, and skilled people out there to me. i personally am more of a neoclassical person, you can tell if anyone has ever seen the licks i put up, but i know there is much more to music than just that. so i try to incorporate all the styles i like into either a song or a solo.

and i dont know too much about jimmy page except he played a guitar with a violin bow 1 time :)

hmmm i don't necessarily agree with this. for the most part i am self-taught. i taught myself mosly using this site and others for the first 1-2 years of my guitar playing. just picked up a guitar and went to town. i studied things that were very useful. i studied things that were over my head at the time and probably too "advanced" for where my general ability was.

there are some things that i learned that were "ahead of my time" BUT i wouldn't say that that time was wasted. because once i got to a point where my teacher (who i've been going to for the past few months) introduced these concepts to me, i already had a leg-up on them. some examples:

modes -- i knew all my modes up and down. i didn't know a thing about them, other than the scale patterns. i didn't know how to use them, or even how to describe them. i just knew the pattern for each mode. they were just different scales to learn as far as i was concerned. now that i have a guitar teacher, when he brings up the concept of modes, well, i already have all the patterns memorized. and when he teaches me to link the modes together longitudinally along the fretboard, i can see it much easier without having to first learn all the patterns.

triads -- i learned the top 3 string triads on my own by learning to play ska guitar on my own from tabs online. i wasn't at a point where i could move the triads up and down along the fretboad, but i knew the top 3 string major and minor triads. i knew they had uses in music. when my teacher started me on learning the triad i was already familiar with them. i was familiar with the concept, and with their purpose. that was a stepping stone to learn the triads down the strings and in other positions...

SO i don't think that it's a "waste" to learn string skipping too early. sure there might be a better curriculum to follow but the thing about guitar is that... how to explain this. it's not all about learning, it's also about enjoying the experience. one of the first songs i learned was "maps" by yeah yeah yeahs. there is a wicked string skipping riff in the bridge (8th notes skipping from D to e, then G to e, then low E to e). and i picked it! i wasn't very good at guitar in general when i learned it, but i did.

and now that i'm much better at guitar, i'm also pretty good at string skipping thanks to that song.

oh yeah i'm terrible at making mistakes, too...

Venon: Congratulations on playing well after a short amount of time.

----------

It's fun for people to try to tear down heroes: RA

Jimmy Page admits to stealing and borrowing, like all blues guys (and Jazz and everyone else). Nothing to see here.

^^^I have never heard him admit it....

@gx1327....my story is similar to yours haha.

the only thing is i am "self taught" from this website, youtube, wikipedia(theory), and anything i get my hands on. with the modes, i knew what they were, just not how to play them or link them(until about 3 months ago). i dont want to sound c-o-c-k-y either, but before i even attempted to pick up a guitar, i knew what all of the things i can play now sounded like(sclaes, arpeggios, ect.), and i knew what notes went with eachother, i just didnt know what they were.

for example, i used to make songs on guitar hero 5 before i could play a real guitar. looking back at it, i used to say things like "fac", "ceg", and "ace" because those were combinations of notes i used to use when i made a solo or something. now i know those are arpeggios. so when i learned/played it on a real guitar i was like oooooooooo:) because then i knew what it really was. i would say i had a natural feel for music

and @tiny, thanks

@Gx1327--I think you have misinterpreted what I meant by EXTENDED techniques. Modes and triads are not extended at all there the basics and want I meant by three years worth of crap (the part you edited out). sweep picking is an extended techniques and people waste years endless practicing them and due to not knowing the modes and triads end up thinking that they have to memorizes arpeggios.

and though the disclaimer was kind of vague it was trying to say do what your heart wants. By no means I'm I saying to play Mary had A Little lamb because the songs you like are to hard. by all means try to play the hardest songs you want, my point was to not waste time endless practicing EXTENDED techniques when once you got your modes and triads down (something I have always stressed on here if you read anything i say) they almost come about naturally anyway.




Right, at lest not by court action or being back into a wall anyway. There is taking things musically (which every one does), then there is malicious stealing and claiming you wrote things you obviously didn't. And it is not just old blues musicians it's people who thought he was their friend. I was going to post things but whats the point it ain't hard to find it after all. When all it is said and done I like led zeppelin, but Page shouldn't be a hero to anyone I'm sorry if it offends but I got to stick up for the real musicians who fit the claim, "While technically his writing skills and playing are obviously legendary" (tinyskateboard).


for the hell of it as I'll get flamed anyway but here's ONE!!! time he screwed bert jansch (who if you don't know I love)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkX7Q2J7k48

Anne Briggs (one of the best check her out, a must!!) with the traditional way of playing it (not really as it should be a harp, but you should get it)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxOouYO5tY4&feature=related


the list is endless look it up

I'm not offended; I have no love for Jimmy Page. He didn't hide where he stole his stuff from. I'm totally unclear where he was supposed to have acknowledged Jansch or Briggs.

Take for example Johnny Cash stealing Hurt from Trent Reznor. He stole the song...he totally killed it...and surpassed NIN in every way. But it was eminently fair, because he did it better. Bob Dylan owned some songs that were not his...but he doesn't have to go around professing that he's not the originator. Is it the lack of formal acknowledgments that make you (RA) prickle?

Misquote: "While technically his writing skills and playing are obviously legendary" (tinyskateboard). " Uhh, I didn't say that (maybe i was thinking it).

@tinyskateboard personally I think Trent did it better but aside from that that was a cover not stealing.

If you cover a song you have to pay royalties to the original artist it being their song. If you steal you get out of paying them their due cut of it and that is wrong.

That being said I like led zep

taurus - Am A/G# A/G D/F# F Dm
Stairway - Am A/G# D/F# Fmaj7 G Am

read>>> http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081012092626AAA4kyL

ok,RA,heres some info to build up you case(note*these are all.proven articles)
you read that right Here is a list of songs that the classic band Led Zeppelin lifted from other artists – without credit.  In some cases, they got sued for stealing other people’s music n some cases, in the less litigious days of the Sixties, they just got away with it.  It’s hard to magine that some of these songs that have been a staple of popular culture have been credited to a band who didn’t even write them.  Read on to find out the details.

moby *** This instrumental tune off of Zeppelin’s 1969 album, Led Zeppelin II was known by a couple of other names during the band’s career – namely “Pat’s Delight” and “Over The Top”.  The credits go to John Bonham, John Paul Jones, and Jimmy Page.  However, what they forget to mention is that it was originally written under the name of “The Girl I Love” by Sleepy John Estes (1899-1977).  It was later covered by musician, Bobby Parker (who gave credit to Estes).  The song would later be re-recorded on Zeppelin’s 1997 album The BBC Sessions.  This time they gave credit where credit was due and used Estes‘ name and song title.  Properly annotated, this song should have been arranged by Zeppelin, not giving them full creditNobody’s Fault But Mine This Led Zep song appeared on their 1976 Presence album.  On the album, it is credited to the real person who composed this song – Blind Willie Johnson – was mentioned.  He isn’t stated on th Led Zeppelin version.  Johnson’s version was recorded between 1927-1930, but was never registered and is considered public domain.  Johnson, himself, most likely took this song from a negro spiritual because the title appears in a 1924 songbook.  Once again, the song was arranged by Led Zeppelin, not written by them.

ok,RA,heres some info to build up you case(note*these are all.proven articles)
you read that right Here is a list of songs that the classic band Led Zeppelin lifted from other artists – without credit.  In some cases, they got sued for stealing other people’s music n some cases, in the less litigious days of the Sixties, they just got away with it.  It’s hard to magine that some of these songs that have been a staple of popular culture have been credited to a band who didn’t even write them.  Read on to find out the details.

moby ** This instrumental tune off of Zeppelin’s 1969 album, Led Zeppelin II was known by a couple of other names during the band’s career – namely “Pat’s Delight” and “Over The Top”.  The credits go to John Bonham, John Paul Jones, and Jimmy Page.  However, what they forget to mention is that it was originally written under the name of “The Girl I Love” by Sleepy John Estes (1899-1977).  It was later covered by musician, Bobby Parker (who gave credit to Estes).  The song would later be re-recorded on Zeppelin’s 1997 album The BBC Sessions.  This time they gave credit where credit was due and used Estes‘ name and song title.  Properly annotated, this song should have been arranged by Zeppelin, not giving them full creditNobody’s Fault But Mine This Led Zep song appeared on their 1976 Presence album.  On the album, it is credited to the real person who composed this song – Blind Willie Johnson – was mentioned.  He isn’t stated on th Led Zeppelin version.  Johnson’s version was recorded between 1927-1930, but was never registered and is considered public domain.  Johnson, himself, most likely took this song from a negro spiritual because the title appears in a 1924 songbook.  Once again, the song was arranged by Led Zeppelin, not written by them.

There's a whole industry devoted to this topic.

Like I said, people love to complain.

And if you play a certain Beatles song backwards, it's clear they are necrophiliacs...

And that Taurus song is pretty lame.

Goodnight.

Whole Lotta Love The original title of this song was a blues number called “You Need Love” by Grammy-Award winner Willie Dixon (1915-1992), who was a founder of the Chicago Blues sound.  Dixon is also a member of the Rock n’ Roll Hall of Fame (1994).  When Led Zeppelin released their song “Whole Lotta Love” on Led Zeppelin II (1969), they credited the music to themselves.  However, in 1985, Willie Dixon’s son, sued Led Zeppelin for plagiarizing the song from a 1962 recording that was written by his father and sung by Muddy Waters on Chess Records. The opening verse of Led Zeppelin’s “Whole Lotta Love”: You need coolin’, baby, I’m not foolin’ I’m gonna send ya back to schoolin’ Way down inside, honey, you need it I’m gonna give you my love (2x) Compared to the opening verse of Willie Dixon’s “You Need Love”: I ain’t foolin’ you need schoolin’ Baby you know you need coolin’ Baby, way down inside, woman you need love When the lawsuit was filed, Led Zeppelin’s attorney stated that it was strange that someone would wait that long to file a suit.  The case was settled out of court, but Dixon’s name was added to the credits – adding credibility to the claim.  As a side note, at the end of the song, Plant quotes a Howlin’ Wolf song,“Back Door Man” with the lyrics, “Shake for me girl/Wanna be your back door man.” – which was also written for Howlin’ Wolf by Willie Dixon!

Dazed and Confused How can this great, classic tune have been lifted without anyone taking notice?  The song, originally played by a folk singer named Jake Holmes, on his debut album, The Above Ground Sound.  In 1967, Holmes got a break by opening for the Yardbirds, who, if you recall, had a guitarist by the name of Jimmy Page.  The Yardbirds continued to play the song after Holmes was no longer opening for them and when Led Zeppelin came out with their debut album in 1969. Unlike the other lifted songs that Led Zeppelin used, they at least didn’t take any credit for this song.  The song was attributed to no one on the album notes.  Holmes didn’t say anything, but later sent a letter to Jimmy Page asking to be acknowledged on the song and compensated for his music.  By compensation, Holmes asked Page if he could spare him a little gas money.  There was no response to the letter..

http://myfivebest.com/led-zeppelin-a-cover-band-5-songs-stolen-by-led-zep/

@tsb,I would complain if someone stole my music,and didnt pay me. people love to live in denial,as much as people.love to complain.The difference between your denial and my complaining is that I have facts,and you dont want to beleive them.

\M/(*-+)

gs2112

Like I said, there was tons of stuff borrowed.

Quote me this fact; which songs did Zep lose the copywright suit on?

Plant kept singing other peoples lyrics, and I think they lost a couple of royalty cases on that.

Edit: It's not denial if I don't deny it! :)

Yeah. This post is not about whether Page/Zep stole songs or not. It's about your own personal experience with the guitar and how long it took you to progress. I made the Page MAB comparison to show how guitarists are different in their styles and that they are both regarded as top guitarists. One plays with a lot of soul and feel and the other plays very clean but can be boring.

Maybe Page did steal, borrow, not give credit or whatever but I don't personally care about his business or ethic practices. It does'nt effect me one bit. I do however think he is still a genius. What was it 10, 20, 30 songs? He wrote and produced over 100 songs and they are all great.

If you don't like Page and you think he's a theif, start a post about it.

..

They settled out of court,becuase they knew they couldnt win amd they stole the song,nd they still.put his name on the credits cuz it was his song.Stealing and borrowing without permission are the same thing.Oh i guess your no in denial ftw.

You are amusingly competetive! FTL :(

Haha,what can i say,I didnt get an A in debate for and conflict resolution.for.nothing xp

I agree. Music sucks. Their heroes are nothing, but a thiefs. No one do their own stuff, why... because they cant, everything is done (twice atleast)... and in desperate way, they try something new!! it doesnt work, so they got inspiration from some older songs!!! cool... lets do a song (million people loves it) BUT!!!! NO **!!! its stealed, borrowed!!!! everything crumbles down.. no crowns, no jesters!!! everything is lost to madness... yes the business... Oh man I hate that angel! with her **, the money... desire of fame, OWNER... owner of the riff!... something on my bored mind tell me to stop, but I cant...NOW hit the green post thing...

^^ im not sure i follow?

Following there, where I have been... is dangerous.

and yes, I know you dont mean that. LOL

HAHA! how wise...

GS: once you do any (actual) debating I'll let you know if you get a passing grade! ;)

well yea i agree with Empirism...theres not a single lick in todays music world that is original or isnt inspired by some older persons lick, no matter howl known/unknown that old person was. I believe that in those two songs that GS2112 showed, they both just happened to use the same chord progression and somewhat similar patterns.

this is kind of close-minded thinking, and i most definitely do not go by this logic, but there are really only 12 notes in music, theres only so much we can do with them.

and for all we know, maybe the 1st guy in the video got that same thing from somebody else who we might not know

I can't comment on the main topic because even though I've played the guitar for four years, I still am lousy, and I really only have figured out how to play ok a year ago. Once I got the confidence to play in front of people, my skills grew exponentially.

^^^actually venom,that progression is used.in while my guitar gently weeps also,I agree that there is only so much we can do.with 12 notes,but it seems alot of famous people dont need to copy anyone,like tom morrelo,or david gilmour,there original.with there 12 notes,Using someones style as inspiration is one thing,but blantly playing someone elses chords exactlse same in a similar pattern without tthe permission or citing the source is plagirism.
You say that the 12 notes can only.produce so.many.licks,riffs chords etc,but listen.to.flamenco,the metal,the reggae,how bout jazz theey all.use those same 12 tones,do.they sound similar?no they all have there own original ideas and rhythms,progression etc.Though alot of.people do "borrow"things like cowboy chord.progression and pentatonic licks for everthing,they have sorta become.public domain ,and are acceptable to be ripped off,because they have no specific orogin of who created it.On the other hand an exact copy of a progression.that actually has a copyrighted source is not acceptable,because it has been claimed as an.original creation.
^^so.that being said,If your gonna borrow,you got to wuote the original creator.If i plagirised a paper for school and.changed two words,id get failed and sent to.the.principals.office.for cheating.Even though anyones free to use any words they please,iff I used my words in that order,im f****d
(hands hurt now...)
@Tsb Fine!

\M/(*-+)
gs2112