Greatest Guitar Player Tournament (1 Viewer)

[Bernhard]

I'll go with Mark Knopfler... Just listen to the Dire Straits' 'On the Night' album... great stuff.

 

[Bruce Hedtke]

Technical proficiency does not make a good guitar player. The school of playing that Vai, Satriani, Petrucci, and Malmsteen subscribe to is wholly uninteresting. It sounds like someone who has mastered the guitar out of a school textbook, and we get to listen to a technical demo of how good they are. I'll take sloppy and passionate better than cold and technical every day.

Amen. On that note, Les Paul is way, way up there.

And, I just have this soft spot in my heart for Slash. Always have and always will.

Bruce

 

[JohnRice]

Geez, broaden your spectrum just a bit there, guys. At least Django Reinhardt and Andres Segovia were both mentioned once. Lets toss in Julian Bream and Howard Alden for starters.

Ryan,
with all due respect, If Jimi was original "in the day" then he was just plain original period. Don't diminish his contribution because half of the guitarists who came along after him are copying him in some way.

 

[Zen Butler]

My soft spot is for Eddie Van Halen , not just for his technique. The guy was/is able to emulate so many styles see the very Hawaiin Could this be Magic? or the flamenco Spanish Fly or his straight ragtime type chords on Big Bad Bill. These emulations had a very unprocessed legitamacy to them. His guitar work on the very overlookedPush Comes to Shove still holds up today, with a solo that is incredible.
Yes there are many technically equal players now, but many of them admit VH's influence on them, and you can hear it everywhere. He has lost his edge now but his library should be held up just as others before him. Like Hendrix, when he came, no one was like him.
some other overlooked:
Andy Summers (chord work)
Robin Guthrie(chords,textures)
George Lynch(nice tone and emotion)
Jake E. Lee(very original), very wasted talent, although his solo album A Fine Pink Mist was quite good.

 

[Mike Broadman]

The school of playing that Vai, Satriani, Petrucci, and Malmsteen subscribe to is wholly uninteresting.

They certainly have their place. They are not the beginning and end of all guitar playing, but who is? Not even Hendrix. There are way too many approaches to hold any "school" above another. Is Jimi Hendrix really a better guitar player than Wes Montgomery?

Vai- He actually can and does write great music. Not consistently, which is his weakness, but it's not any less valid than other rock music.

Satriani- a complete musician, with "hooks" and choruses every bit as infectious as any pop song. If only guitar shredders liked his stuff, he wouldn't be as popular as he is.

Petrucci- it's the right playing for Dreamtheater, who collectively are great songwriters.


This is why these "greatest of all time" debates are utterly pointless. People are angry the Malmsteen doesn't play simple pop songs. Well, that's not what he's trying to do! It would be like criticising the Beatles for being poor symphonic composers.

 

[Mike Broadman]

The above post was preaching. Now for some of that "broadening your horizons thing:"

Robert Fripp- living proof of how technical proficiency is used to enhance the music

Frank Zappa- living proof of how to get around lack of technical proficiency to improvise

Grant Green- the taste and mindset of a cool bop sax player on a guitar

John McLaughlin- this guy can do everything.

Mark Knopfler- extremely high technique that isn't about speed

Buddy Guy- a walking blues encyclopedia with a sense of humour

 

[Brian Perry]

My favs:

Jimmy Page
John Petrucci
Carlos Santana

I think a lot of the subjectivity with respect to songwriting ability has to do with the genre of the music itself. Personally, while I can appreciate the genius of Hendrix, I can't stand to listen to his songs. It's just not my cup of tea. Likewise, I know the main reason I'm a Petrucci fan is because I like Dream Theater's music.

I guess what I'm saying is that it depends on one's overall musical taste. Bach's music could be considered "technical" compared to Mozart, yet most historians consider them both on the top tier of composers.

 

[Rob Tomlin]

Im very glad to see several others here who admire David Gilmour's work! I was a little worried that I would be the only one who thought he was even worth mentioning in this thread.

I also agree that Mark Knopfler is a great guitarist.

 

[MartinTeller]

Frank Zappa- living proof of how to get around lack of technical proficiency to improvise

Ummm.... not quite "living" these days.

 

[Craig S]

The 2 guitarists I never get tired of listening to are Mark Knopfler & Carlos Santana. I love the fluidity & melodicism of their playing.

The late Michael Hedges could do some amazing things with his axe.

And what about Neil Young?? OK, not much in the technique department, but his solos for tunes like "Cortez The Killer" & "Like A Hurricane" are just bursting with emotion.

 

[Rich Malloy]

Man, everyone always forgets the great Pat Martino. He's even got a website! http://www.patmartino.com/
And Django, Django, Django... fortunately no one forgets Django! That Mosaic boxset may well be the greatest repository of unbelievable guitar playing ever issued.

 

[JohnRice]

I agree, Rich.
Link Removed
Just because I disagree with some things you say, doesn't mean I think I have to disagree with everything you say.
Just to point out to the unfamiliar. Notice the last two fingers on his left hand. They were left essentially unusable from a fire in his youth. This guy only had two usable fingers on his left hand!

 

[Reginald Trent]

George Benson is no slouch either. Check out his DVD entitled "George Benson Absolutely Live" DTS version

 

[Marshall Alsup]

For me it would be a three way tie between:
SRV
Page
Gilmour

And if I had to choose I'd probably choose Gilmore, but ask on a different day and it may be one of the others. Know what I mean?

-Marshall

 

[Artur Meinild]

Technical proficiency does not make a good guitar player.

I disagree. What does make a good guitar player then?

A high charisma doesn't make you better at playing. Good songwriting abilites doesn't make you better at playing either.

The only thing that really matters when we are talking about BEST guitarist is their technique on the instrument.

Of course a personal style and passionate feeling is as important as the ability to play fast, but all of these are different aspects of the technical proficiency.

I think the keywords are actually: Speed, Feeling, Style.
It's then just a matter of taste what you prefer.

 

[Rich Malloy]

The only thing that really matters when we are talking about BEST guitarist is their echnique on the instrument.

The old "music as gymnastics" approach. Ugh. That's a very superficial criterion.

I remember Miles Davis once said, I think specifically regarding Mike Stern (a fantastic player, to be sure but of course nowhere near Miles in the improv dept), 'this cat needs to attend "Notes Anonymous".'

Technique is only the starting point. Once you've figured out how to wriggle your fingers they way you want them to wriggle, you've still gotta come up with the notes. Unfortunately, too many musicians end their development with part one, leading to extraordinarily fast, cleanly-picked tedium. Might as well turn on the metronome and practice scales at 200bpm - it's certainly no more interesting.

The key is finding that one perfect note... and then the next one... and the next one... if you're not concentrating at this level, you're just playing on auto-pilot. A recitation only. Not art.

 

[JohnRice]

Rich, don't forget I said this. YOU ARE SO RIGHT.
I see "Technical Proficiency" and "Technique" being used interchangeably, but they aren't the same thing. I'm sorry, as far as I am concerned, technical proficiency alone does not make a great musician. I also agree with Artur that songwriting has absolutely nothing to do with being a great musician.
Django Reinhardt and Count Basie are both widely recognized as two of the greatest musicians of all time, but neither of them played fast or a lot of notes. They both, in fact, were rather minimalist in their playing. All this reminds me of an amusing scene in The Man Who Wasn't There, where the piano coach says Birdy seems "like a very nice girl. She plays like a very nice girl. When it says B flat, she plays a B flat...... She should make a very good typist."

 

[Jan H]

While we're quoting films, how about "Amadeus", when the King of Austria scoffs at Mozart for playing "too many notes." The fact is that the better the technique, the better the player. This whole thread largely seems to be a discussion of composition rather than guitar-playing ability. If you liked the solos that Hendrix composed better than the solos that John Petrucci composed, than you naturally think that Hendrix is the better guitar player. Subjectivity is a beautiful thing

 

[Artur Meinild]

The key is finding that one perfect note... and then the next one... and the next one... if you're not concentrating at this level, you're just playing on auto-pilot. A recitation only. Not art.

I'm a musician myself (keyboard), so I know what you mean. This does, however, go under my keyword "style".
When you can play the right note at the right time so people can still hear it's *you* playing, you've got a style.
Mark Knofler is a great example of a guitarist with a lot of style and feeling.
And I disagree very much with those who say that improvisation is a defacto criteria for being a good musician - it's not!
It's handy to be able to improvise, but it's not necessary - you can play an equally good solo (in my opinion maybe even better) that you have rehearsed for years than one that's improvised. It all depends on what kind of music you play, and whether it leaves room for improvisation or not.
I can improvise, but rarely do so because my kind of music (fast melodic metal) requires to be played very tight to sound good, so you don't really have "time" to improvise a lot. We're still some of the best metal musicians in the country though...

 

[JohnRice]

I think that may be one of the most important points made so far. While I haven't talked about improvisation myself, I do think the ability to do so is vitally important to being the best possible musician. Yes, a musician who can play fast and cleanly has that in the toolbox over one who can't, even if they only do this during rehearsals and warmup. The problem I see, as some others have mentioned, is that it is all too often that is the point where it stops. I'll take a Louis Prima who, technically, was slow and sloppy but had style and feeling, over an Al DiMeola any day.


And yes, I agree that Mark Knopfler is an excellent example of a "popular" guitarist who actually does have tremendous style. He is a genuine artist.