Greatest Rock Guitarist of All Time Tourney

[SteVo+ 3,702]

When it gets to it, I'll ask you guys for suggestions for videos/songs about guitarists I'm not that familiar with.

[Krawnka 282]

Is it too late to throw Mattias Eklundh on the list?

 

 

"White Trash Hyper Blues"

Edited April 27, 2011 by Krawnka

[Silentway 20]

I vote for option B. The lower half of the list has no chance anyway, so why bother with all of those guys? Jerry Garcia? Really? Great band, but anyone with any experience with a guitar could play his stuff.

 

Disagree, sure he's not a technical wizard like snore-fest players like Vai & Satriani, but he's an improv wizard and had some really nasty and influential licks when they were a psychedelic band and not a country-fused jam band.

[Silentway 20]

Nomination results:

 

 

 

Al Di Meola 1

John McLaughlin 1

Michael Bloomfield 1

Neil Young 1

Peter Green 1

Robbie Robertson 1

Robert Johnson 1

Son House 1

Steve Hackett 1

Steve Howe 1

 

These guys with one vote are all "Greater," that the guitarists with the top 4 votes, (unless you really value the influence of Hendrix which far outweighs his sloppy garbage play) so it's obvious this tournament is completely irrelevant. Not trying to be a dick, but it just is the way it is.

[seanbrock 1,684]

Love all the Zappa love. Glad people realize how fucking much that man shreds.

[Sarge+ 3,436]

I suppose I shouldn't be too surprised, but there is some of this going on in this thread...

 

Music Snob - A person who believes s/he has a more refined taste in music and has much more knowledge in the field of music in general. Every song and genre is unacceptable unless the snob happens to like it, then it is absolute perfection. Music snobs feel obligated to enlighten everyone with unwelcome critiques and irrelivant musical trivia.

 

An especially irritating breed of tool, the music snob is a self described authority on what is or is not "good" music. The genre is irrelavant, as music snobs somehow confuse their subjective opinions with objective concrete facts across all genres of music. The music snob is quick to write off your taste in music, and often spout proudly a large number of "better" unknown and/or less "commercial" bands that if you had as good of taste as they did, you would already know about and love. The music snob can be found at low budget local record stores, probably arguing with a clerk about how no good bands cds are for sale. The music snob often prides themselves on their, again, self described "non-conformist" interests, and everyone else is merely a braindead product of MTV.

 

A specimen that is prone to be of high levels of irritance to the normal person. In general, they hold the belief that their musical taste and their musical taste alone is relevant while anyone who has opposing or different opinions on music is considered stupid and won't hesitate to spew snotty remarks at you. These people are often pretentious poseurs who always make an ass out of themselves as they claim to be "non-conformist" for listening to indie bands with quirky names who have song titles that are at least ten words in length. The funny thing is, is that they don't realize that they are actually the biggest conformers out there for listening to, or claiming to listen to certain bands or genres in order to fit into a certain scene or gain some cred.

 

Generalizations aside, they are the Adolf Hitlers of music and if you don't like the exact same music they do, they will cut you down in ridiculous ways for having a different opinion and it often leads to broken friendships. If you find that you are friends with a music snob, do yourselves a favor and just cut them loose right away. It'll save your fist from being hit by their face when they find out you listen to mainstream. There are some who will even criticize others for not being as pedantic about music or a band as they are or even simple things as to why you are interested in the artists you like.

 

Music Snob: Oh my god, is that (insert band here), they suck, they are totally (insert bizzare music sub-genre) not real (insert music genre). If you werent such a sheep youd listen to (insert 1, to an indefinate number of obscure/unpopular bands). All the bands I listen to are known by fewer than 100 people and you can't find their albums in stores, so that totally means I have a better taste in music than everyone! I'm so HxC!

[RANGA+ 1,210]

I suppose I shouldn't be too surprised, but there is some of this going on in this thread...

 

Music Snob - A person who believes s/he has a more refined taste in music and has much more knowledge in the field of music in general. Every song and genre is unacceptable unless the snob happens to like it, then it is absolute perfection. Music snobs feel obligated to enlighten everyone with unwelcome critiques and irrelivant musical trivia.

 

An especially irritating breed of tool, the music snob is a self described authority on what is or is not "good" music. The genre is irrelavant, as music snobs somehow confuse their subjective opinions with objective concrete facts across all genres of music. The music snob is quick to write off your taste in music, and often spout proudly a large number of "better" unknown and/or less "commercial" bands that if you had as good of taste as they did, you would already know about and love. The music snob can be found at low budget local record stores, probably arguing with a clerk about how no good bands cds are for sale. The music snob often prides themselves on their, again, self described "non-conformist" interests, and everyone else is merely a braindead product of MTV.

 

A specimen that is prone to be of high levels of irritance to the normal person. In general, they hold the belief that their musical taste and their musical taste alone is relevant while anyone who has opposing or different opinions on music is considered stupid and won't hesitate to spew snotty remarks at you. These people are often pretentious poseurs who always make an ass out of themselves as they claim to be "non-conformist" for listening to indie bands with quirky names who have song titles that are at least ten words in length. The funny thing is, is that they don't realize that they are actually the biggest conformers out there for listening to, or claiming to listen to certain bands or genres in order to fit into a certain scene or gain some cred.

 

Generalizations aside, they are the Adolf Hitlers of music and if you don't like the exact same music they do, they will cut you down in ridiculous ways for having a different opinion and it often leads to broken friendships. If you find that you are friends with a music snob, do yourselves a favor and just cut them loose right away. It'll save your fist from being hit by their face when they find out you listen to mainstream. There are some who will even criticize others for not being as pedantic about music or a band as they are or even simple things as to why you are interested in the artists you like.

 

Music Snob: Oh my god, is that (insert band here), they suck, they are totally (insert bizzare music sub-genre) not real (insert music genre). If you werent such a sheep youd listen to (insert 1, to an indefinate number of obscure/unpopular bands). All the bands I listen to are known by fewer than 100 people and you can't find their albums in stores, so that totally means I have a better taste in music than everyone! I'm so HxC!

 

Urban Dictionary FTW

[Sarge+ 3,436]

I thought it was too fitting for some of the posts in this thread.

[RANGA+ 1,210]

It is incredibly fitting...it annoys me when people state their opinion like it's cold hard fact. Everybody else is suddenly wrong, and nothing can change their mind.

 

[BwareDWare94 723]

I don't listen to Indie bands, and most of my artists are somewhat well-known.

 

Then again, I don't think you were aiming that directly at me. There's a MUCH more arrogant music snob who has now made an appearance in the thread.

[Silentway 20]

Once again we've confused the term "Greatest," with "Favorite." And everyone's an elitist if there's someone less informed than you are, but thanks guys. <333

Edited April 28, 2011 by Silentway

[BwareDWare94 723]

Once again we've confused the term "Greatest," with "Favorite." And everyone's an elitist if there's someone less informed than you are, but thanks guys. <333

 

I don't know, dude. If we were to hand the award to the most technically skilled guitarist, we'd be giving it to some neoclassical asshat who just plays fast. The guitarists I'm standing up for, such as Loomis and Petrucci, are fucking talented and creative. No way in Hell this should go to Batio or Yngwie.

[Krawnka 282]

I don't know how you can call someone who taught himself to play ambidextrous, two guitars at once, with different notes, and invented the over/under picking to do such tasks, as not talented or at least creative.

[BwareDWare94 723]

I don't know how you can call someone who taught himself to play ambidextrous, two guitars at once, with different notes, and invented the over/under picking to do such tasks, as not talented or at least creative.

 

I never denied his talent. I just don't find speed creative. How he does it doesn't matter if it's not that great of a sound, which it isn't. Petrucci and Loomis have solos that blow most of anything I've ever head Batio play out of the water.

[Krawnka 282]

I think that goes back to musical style preference, rather than talent or creativity. I prefer Loomis's style of music over Batio, but I can't say he's more talented or creative based upon that.

 

Batio's solo work has some horrible background guitars vs Loomis having more of a heavy guitar style going on behind his solos.

 

Batio's style is more 80s glam, which may turn off most, even me for some, but his ability is still apparent. Loomis has a more modern style, it's "harder" which is my own personal preference.

 

Petrucci is more of a 90's style, again which is a better sound than 80s glam in my opinion.

 

If I were to choose one I'd like to sit down and listen to, out of the three, I'd pick Loomis. But that doesn't mean he's the most talented, nor creative, just the one that plays the style of music that I prefer.

 

All three classify as "Rock" but they're all 3 different styles of "Rock".

[Vin+ 3,121]

Is it too late to throw Mattias Eklundh on the list?

 

 

"White Trash Hyper Blues"

Just listened to a couple of his songs. Bravo, good sir.

[BwareDWare94 723]

I think that goes back to musical style preference, rather than talent or creativity. I prefer Loomis's style of music over Batio, but I can't say he's more talented or creative based upon that.

 

Batio's solo work has some horrible background guitars vs Loomis having more of a heavy guitar style going on behind his solos.

 

Batio's style is more 80s glam, which may turn off most, even me for some, but his ability is still apparent. Loomis has a more modern style, it's "harder" which is my own personal preference.

 

Petrucci is more of a 90's style, again which is a better sound than 80s glam in my opinion.

 

If I were to choose one I'd like to sit down and listen to, out of the three, I'd pick Loomis. But that doesn't mean he's the most talented, nor creative, just the one that plays the style of music that I prefer.

 

All three classify as "Rock" but they're all 3 different styles of "Rock".

 

At the same time, who's best between these three isn't what we're worried about. We just don't want to see fucking Synester Gates, Kirk Hammett, or Angus Young beating out any of these three in the tournament, though lack of exposure will undoubtedly make that happen.

 

Is there ANY kind of legitimate argument for putting Synester Gates ahead of Jeff Loomis?

 

Didn't think so.

[Vin+ 3,121]

At the same time, who's best between these three isn't what we're worried about. We just don't want to see fucking Synester Gates, Kirk Hammett, or Angus Young beating out any of these three in the tournament, though lack of exposure will undoubtedly make that happen.

 

Is there ANY kind of legitimate argument for putting Synester Gates ahead of Jeff Loomis?

 

Didn't think so.

 

We all know that Hendrix is going to win this thing anyway, so the point is moot.

[Silentway 20]

I don't know, dude. If we were to hand the award to the most technically skilled guitarist, we'd be giving it to some neoclassical asshat who just plays fast. The guitarists I'm standing up for, such as Loomis and Petrucci, are fucking talented and creative. No way in Hell this should go to Batio or Yngwie.

 

I didn't say the most technically skilled, there are a ton of factors that go into what makes a guitarist great and raw technical skill is just one part of that. Look at Stevie Ray Vaughn, he didn't even know what the fuck he was doing really when compared to snorefest "guitar geniuses" like Eric Johnson but he's one of the best guitarists of all time. You have to look at things such as their influence over future music, body of work, credits as a composer, skill as we said before, and I think the opinion of other musician's are really important. For example Eric Clapton is his biggest detractor as a guitarist, I've read his book and he doesn't even like leading the band because he doesn't even know what to do and you can tell in his solo stuff that all he is as a lead composer is a pop musician. Sure he's done great work with Mayall and Cream and stuff, but he's not a lead composer and Duane Allman's guitar work overshadowed his quite obviously in the Derek & The Dominoes album. But Eric Clapton and Jimi Hendrix is popular, and this isn't a music forum so this is going to be 1/4 legitimate and 3/4 popularity contest.

 

And I'll agree John Petrucci is head and shoulders among his peers. Not a big dream theater fan at all, but he's better than almost any modern guitar players I can think of.

[SteVo+ 3,702]

Alright guys, I am making an executive decision and going with B on the grounds that it will be much easier and that this is the shortest field, which I think is appropriate. I don't want a lot of votes coming down to guitarists voters haven't heard of, which would likely happen if we extended the field.

 

Speaking of the field, it currently consists of 41 guitarists. Through a brief preliminary round we will narrow that down to 32. From there it will be single elimination until we get down to one final duel between two guitarists.

 

The prelinary round is as follows. Of the 12 guitarists who received 3 votes, thus putting them on the bubble, they were randomly placed into three groups of four. We will vote on each group, meaning three winners will take the final three spots in the tournament of 32.

 

For the actual bracket, I did two 16-part brackets on each side of an Excel document. For coolness factor I shall name them the Western and Eastern Brackets, respectively. When it came to ties, I tried to place guitarists so that the more classic guitarists would be in the West, and the modern guys in the East. Consequentially, the Western Bracket is mostly classic rock, and the Eastern Bracket is more modern.

 

I shall be putting preliminary polls up soon. Before I do, however, I need suggestions on songs for the following guitarists (for the voting, a music sample will be posted for each guitarist):

 

Jeff Loomis

John Sykes

Mick Ronson

Michael Schenker

Joe Satriani

Dave Murray

[Bay 2,003]

Dave Murray -

 

 

 

 

[RANGA+ 1,210]

For Joe Satriani it's gotta be:

 

[seanbrock 1,684]

Music isn't PURELY subjective though. I would say that Motzart was a hell of a lot more talented than Lil Wayne wouldn't you? I would say the the music Motzart created took a lot more ability and hard work than the last Drake album. There are certain things that are measurable in music. It's not just something where everyone's opinion is right and all music is good because SOMEBODY out there enjoys it. No, some music sucks. Some musicians are overrated and there are levels of talent amongst musicians.

 

While I agree that nobody can tell you what music to listen to. I know that it's unlikely that somebody would change your mind about a band or musician that you like, but the bottom line is if you listen to Raffi and you're a grown ass man there's something wrong with you.

[BwareDWare94 723]

Jeff Loomis:

 

 

Synester Gates can't play that solo...

[FSUViking 184]

Jeff Loomis:

 

 

Synester Gates can't play that solo...

 

OK. We'll just pretend that they're two different bands that play different types of music and two guitarists that play different styles. None of that is important or relevant.

 

The important thing is you haven't obviously spent two and half weeks dwelling on this issue.

Edited May 8, 2011 by FSUViking