Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

There are a bunch of Guitarists that I like. I like so many, it would probably be hard for me to name my 5 best. I want to know who are the best guitarists ever to you.

Buckethead
Mikael Akerfeldt
Johnny Marr
John Frusciante
Kristoffer G. Rygg

You mean favourites, so on that note:

Hendrix, Adam Jones, Prince, Frank Zappa, Mikael Akerfeldt.

-C

Angus Young
Michael Schenker
Ace Freeley
Daron Malakian
Buckethead

my favourites

Hendrix
John Mayer
Slash
S.R.V

there's too many others would want a place in my top 5 so i'm just going to name 4

but yeah...i like blues based stuff...as you can tell

Nothing is wrong with blues based stuff dude. Blues based stuff is kinda cool actually, it just isn't something I would listen to all the time.

I got another 5:

Slash
K.K. Downing
Glen Tipton
Phil Campbell
Ulrich Roth

Dimebag Darrell.

Five, can you count?

-AC

There are many great ones so 5 best would be hard to say. Here are 5 personal favorites though.

Carlos Santana
Steven Vai
Joe Satriani
Slash
George Harrison

Hendrix
Johnny Greenwood (Radiohead)
Frank Zappa
Adam Jones (Tool)
Eric Clapton

John Petrucci too.

That's two, go on, now the rest. Three...four...five.

-AC

Eric Clapton
Jimi Hendrix
Dimebag Darrell
Duane Allman
Adam Jones

Jimi Hendrix
Eric Johnson
Adrian Smith
Mathias Jabs
Ted Nugent

B.B. King

Why say five if the criteria is going to be thrown out?

-AC

I have already have said:

Angus Young
Michael Schenker
Ace Freeley
Daron Malakian
Buckethead
Slash
K.K. Downing
Glen Tipton
Phil Campbell
Ulrich Roth
Jimi Hendrix
Eric Johnson
Adrian Smith
Mathias Jabs
Ted Nugent
and B.B. King

It's not like you need to post 5 for every single post, unless you haven't said any, you can keep posting more if you think of someone else, so shut it.

Then just say "Top Guitarists Ever", you silly child.

-AC

Ace Frehley
Van Halen
Dimebag Darrell
Randy Rhodes
Burton Gans

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Then just say "Top Guitarists Ever", you silly child.

-AC

It isn't like I need to consistantly need to name 5 all the time, noob.

Precisely, so why specify five?

-AC

Because it is hard to name just 1 best guitarist, so I rather put 5 then 1, and as you go down the list, there are less upon less guitarists that you can think of, so you can start putting less, it doesn't need to be 5 all the time.

Here's my 3 worst drummers, of...a while.

The guy from Linkin Park.

Since we aren't restricted to 5, here are my favorite guitarists:

Carlos Santana
Jimi Hendrix
Stevie Ray Vaughn
Eric Clapton
B.B. King
Steve Vai
Frank Zappa

Originally posted by celestialdemon
Since we aren't restricted to 5, here are my favorite guitarists:

Yeah, you are not restricted to 5. It isn't a rule. It isn't like I said "Only 5, or elso your's doesn't count" but I didn't say that. If you of only 5, great, if you think of more, even better. If you posted your favorites and think of another guy, post him/her then, like this:

Eddie Van Halen
Richie Blackmore

Angus Young
Jimi Hendrix
Tommy Iommi
Jimmy Page
Carlos Santana

Carlos Santana

"Name your top five ever, then keep naming more.".

Stupid.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
"Name your top five ever, then keep naming more.".

Stupid.

-AC

You're stupid. No one has a problem with it except for you.

Vernon Reid is a good guitarist.

Originally posted by Wil Deidara
You're stupid. No one has a problem with it except for you. Still stupid though. Should have just called it "Favourite Guitarists", and alieviated any misunderstandings.

I realized it in the beginning that I should have switched the name to that. It was my bad, but AC doesn't understand.

Here, the new name for the guitarists thread. Happy AC.

Now, list your favorite guitarists.

1.Hendrix
2.Satriani
3.Malmsteen
4.Jimmy Lee
5.Bob Dylan shockhappy_wave

Me...i'm an official guitarist...i'll even go as far as to say i'm and official AND a guitarist

Dave Murray

1.) Neal Schon.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYg0rrCiIRg

^ Enough said. The man can emote with the singing guitar like none other and then lay down some serious shredding. There's a reason why the likes of Brian May and Joe Satriani worship him and why Carlos Santana and Eric Clapton were wrestling with one another to recruit him for their bands when he was 15.

2.) Steve Lukather.
3.) Eddie Van Halen.
4.) Carlos Santana.
5.) Steve Vai.

Do you honestly ever think "I wonder if I can say Schon's name without descending into a saliva-drenched praise-jerk."?

Genuine question.

-AC

Eddie Van Halen

1. Alex Lifeson
2. Steve Howe
3. Robert Fripp
4. Matt Bellamy
5. Jimmy Page

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Do you honestly ever think "I wonder if I can say Schon's name without descending into a saliva-drenched praise-jerk."?

Genuine question.

-AC

No.

Do you honestly ever think "Does my House impersonation ever get old?"

Genuine question.

(it does)

Kirk Hammett

Originally posted by Gideon
No.

Do you honestly ever think "Does my House impersonation ever get old?"

Genuine question.

(it does)

Easy, Wil. Any minute now, AC will read your contribution, consult his House dvds (he might pop one in for good measure), grab his cane, wobble on over to his computer, and spend half an hour trying to cobble together some witty, sarcastic remark where he'll remind you that the title of this thread says "top five best guitarists" and point out that you have four more to go.

He's that predictable.

Five favs, in no particular order...

Steve Vai
Jimmy Hendrix
Les Claypool
Slash
Jani Liimatainen

Originally posted by Gideon
Easy, Wil. Any minute now, AC will read your contribution, consult his House dvds (he might pop one in for good measure), grab his cane, wobble on over to his computer, and spend half an hour trying to cobble together some witty, sarcastic remark where he'll remind you that the title of this thread says "top five best guitarists" and point out that you have four more to go.

He's that predictable.

1) If you were as sharp as your wit clearly is, you'd see I've already said that. So clearly I'm not predictable, I'm ahead.

2) I've never watched an episode of House in my life, actually.

However, if the best thing you can come up with is comparing me to a rather decent English actor, then I'll take that.

I'll take that gladly over you not being able to say Neal Schon's name in a thread without lubing him up and pounding away, as if you have to continually prove you like him. Seriously, you post his name, post a video, then say "Enough said.". It's not enough said, because you then feel you have to give us his biography...every time.

However, you've answered my question: no, you don't ever ask yourself if you can do that.

You should try. Say it, say "Neal Schon", and let that be that.

-AC

Originally posted by Gideon
Easy, Wil. Any minute now, AC will read your contribution, consult his House dvds (he might pop one in for good measure), grab his cane, wobble on over to his computer, and spend half an hour trying to cobble together some witty, sarcastic remark where he'll remind you that the title of this thread says "top five best guitarists" and point out that you have four more to go.

He's that predictable.

, I know, he is pretty damn predictable. Including the part about saying I have 4 more guitarists to go.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri


2) I've never watched an episode of House in my life, actually.



you should...

Neal Schon

He is good Gideon, but he isn't the best that I have seen. Still pretty good.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
1) If you were as sharp as your wit clearly is, you'd see I've already said that. So clearly I'm not predictable, I'm ahead.

A sharp wit suggests that the person who wields it is sharp himself. According to your profile, you're in your twenties. At your age, there's no excuse for such stupidity. I mean, this isn't exactly quantum physics. Given that you spend twenty four hours of your life hacking away at your keyboard with some genuinely intelligent people, one would think that you could at least pick up a few tricks.

Are you used to being House-lite without a response from someone? I'm glad to have opened your eyes.



Right. Like any of us believe that.



House isn't an actor, actually. He's a fictional doctor. Hugh Laurie would be the actor. Seriously, AC, are you sleep deprived? I haven't read such shit from you since that one time you proposed that Geddy Lee was as good or even better as a singer than Steve Perry.



Someone has to pay the man his due. Might as well be me.



That's right.

Unlike you, AC, I don't generally say stupid things. I know full well what I typed.



His name is enough to summon the most degenerate and unkempt of sexual desires.

Before you come back for more (and you will), raise your game or kindly step off the court.

@ Wil,

It seems as though everyone is listing their favorites, not those whom they regard as best. How do you define best? What are the parameters? Technical skill? Reputation? Both? It's a vague description. As far as Schon goes, his technical skill is phemomenal. This is a man who was considered a world-class guitarist by two of the world's greatest when he was a teenager (he had only picked up a guitar five years prior). The likes of Joe Satriani, Slash, Sammy Hagar, Phil Collen, Vivian Campbell have given Schon countless accolades. Reportedly, for the Hear N' Aid (the rock version of We Are the World), Yngwie Malmsteen was impressed with Schon's performance.

Is he the greatest? Hell no. But the idea that if you're not a household name you have no talent is rather dumb.

Of course, AC tried that one against me, too...

Originally posted by Gideon
A sharp wit suggests that the person who wields it is sharp himself. According to your profile, you're in your twenties. At your age, there's no excuse for such stupidity. I mean, this isn't exactly quantum physics. Given that you spend twenty four hours of your life hacking away at your keyboard with some genuinely intelligent people, one would think that you could at least pick up a few tricks.

Are you used to being House-lite without a response from someone? I'm glad to have opened your eyes.

The only cliche is the cliche itself. You play the cool, "I'm not impressed." guy who inevitably comes along and tries to show the old, perceived tough guy how it's done, then gets a big cheer from all the dullards who have been on the receiving end of a whooping stick for the past...however long.

It's ok, I get it. This would be really thrilling if I was who or what you claim I am. Unfortunately, your claim falls on its face considering that to be a wannabe, I'd have to be aware of the character's traits. You should have picked a more relevant show. Regardless, this isn't a thread for discussing House, so I'll take your compliment and let that be the last I say on the matter. I wish to keep this on topic.

By the way, I am curious. What stupidity? Me calling you out on your perpetual Neal Schon fellation? Because I can see why you'd be considering that stupid. It's ok, you're offended, it happens.

All I'm saying is, maybe just chill a little. Nobody is trying to rob you of a right to love or like Neal Schon, just suggesting that you don't need to be his publicist every time you post his name.

Originally posted by Gideon
Right. Like any of us believe that.

Any of us? So I was right, you do perceive yourself as the voice of a number of folks. Sad, really.

Honestly, though. I haven't. I know of the show, never seen it though. I don't watch, or listen to, shit. Hence why you have shown up to inform me greater on House and Journey.

Originally posted by Gideon
House isn't an actor, actually. He's a fictional doctor. Hugh Laurie would be the actor. Seriously, AC, are you sleep deprived? I haven't read such shit from you since that one time you proposed that Geddy Lee was as good or even better as a singer than Steve Perry.

Exactly, House is a character played by Hugh Laurie, I know that much about the show. So, thanks for mentioning me in the same breath as an act that has won critical acclaim. Appreciate it, sir.

Still on that? I obviously hit a nerve. It must be genuinely so tough splitting your time between Perry and Schon. Do any of them get jealous? Were you secretly the woman in the Separate Ways video?

Originally posted by Gideon
Someone has to pay the man his due. Might as well be me.

What due? He's a highly regarded guitarist, as you are aware and as we're all aware, mostly. He's not being robbed of any due. I've never denied the man's accolades, either. I'm simply saying that you don't actually need to assume you're going around educating us on Neal Schon. We're aware, and if people aren't aware, it's probably because they don't give a shit, and your post wasn't going to change that.

So again, we're back at the start of this whole fiasco, aren't we? Me being puzzled by your unexplainable passion for salivating over Neal Schon every time you say his name.

Originally posted by Gideon
That's right.

Unlike you, AC, I don't generally say stupid things. I know full well what I typed.

Haha, how would you "generally" know what I say? You poke your head out of whatever minor subforum you dwell in once in a blue moon, post something about Neal Schon, then recede like a hairline

That said, your constant and almost nauseating promotion of Schon is generally stupid, in my opinion.

Originally posted by Gideon
His name is enough to summon the most degenerate and unkempt of sexual desires.

Before you come back for more (and you will), raise your game or kindly step off the court.

Wouldn't anyone have to step off the court to come back, regardless of good or bad performance? Didn't entirely think that through, did you? Try it.

I get it though, and you know better. We both know better. You cockily praise yourself by telling me to raise my game etc, we go back and forth. I get it Gideon, there have been many of your kind on this site. It's like Tony Montana and his banker, "You go high, I go low, I get it.". I do, Gideon. My only point was (Or question):

Why do you continually feel you have to promote Schon? What are you getting out of it? People who know him know that he's good. You, admittedly, are a fanboy. If memory serves correct, you've admitted you're a fanboy. Fanboys by general nature, over-appreciate. I'm not taking anything away from Schon, I'm just not boning the man, and nobody besides you mentions him because...aware or not, champ, we just...don't care about him. You continually repeat shit you've said on this forum, about Schon, time and time again.

You have never been able to, and will never be able to, accept this.

Proof:

Originally posted by Gideon
It seems as though everyone is listing their favorites, not those whom they regard as best. How do you define best? What are the parameters? Technical skill? Reputation? Both? It's a vague description. As far as Schon goes, his technical skill is phemomenal. This is a man who was considered a world-class guitarist by two of the world's greatest when he was a teenager (he had only picked up a guitar five years prior). The likes of Joe Satriani, Slash, Sammy Hagar, Phil Collen, Vivian Campbell have given Schon countless accolades. Reportedly, for the Hear N' Aid (the rock version of We Are the World), Yngwie Malmsteen was impressed with Schon's performance.

Is he the greatest? Hell no. But the idea that if you're not a household name you have no talent is rather dumb.

Of course, AC tried that one against me, too...

If you were sharp enough, you'd realise that it has changed from "Best" to favourites.

Your biggest argument for Schon was always how good he was as a kid, and you struggled with the idea that you are not always a prodigy. He was outstanding for his age, in the truest sense of the word, but as he got older his ability did not increase enough to warrant the praise you give him for how good he WAS, in relation to his youth.

That's what you've always failed to grasp. "He was this good when he was a teenager.". So? So what? He's not anymore. He was surpassed by guitarists who came after, Van Halen for one. Then you tried saying "Sammy Hagar says Schon is better.". So? Sammy Hagar isn't as good as either Schon nor Van Halen, and better guitarists than Hagar rate many guitarists above Schon, including Van Halen.

This continually baffled you, and still does, I bet.

Furthermore, "Is he the greatest? Hell no.", well then if you're going to talk about "Best", why say he doesn't get due? He doesn't deserve due if due is "Best", does he? Cos he's not. If it's favourite, then you can name him all you like. You contradict yourself.

"Everyone's naming their favs, not who is best." (Then you named Schon). "I'm giving Schon his due, somebody has to.", "Is he the greatest? Hell no.".

What? Then why name him?

Secondly, I've never, ever said that if you're not a household name, you're not talented. When did I ever try to use that argument?

-AC

I'm impressed with the diatribe and how many mistakes were in it.

a.) AC, you're a 20-something-year-old guy who spends an unheathy amount of time posting on forums and debating pop culture. The idea that you're unaware of House is rather dumb to imply; you know the actor's name and it's one of the most popular television series currently running. You know about House, don't bother playing stupid. No one here believes that you're mystically ignorant about it.

b.) House is the character, Laurie is the actor. I compared you to the character, not the actor. "LOL THX FOR COMPRING ME TO HEW LARRIE" was extraordinarily lame. You can do better.

c.) Geddy Lee vs. Steve Perry. You made the claim, but I'm glad you don't deny it. Your logic tends to involve how many accolades person X gets from famed musician Y. Lee is not a regarded singer; Perry is. Perry wins, you lose.

d.) I never claimed that this was a list of "best" guitarists. I read the thread prior to posting, I'm aware that it was intended to be a list of favorite guitarists. I didn't preface my list with the statement that it was one of the most accomplished ax-men nor did I make a subsequent claim thereof. As I posted below, Schon isn't the greatest nor do I even believe he's the most skilled; I have never made either contention. That I list him as number one would, in my opinion, inspire any intelligent person to conclude that I was clearly giving a list of my personal favorite guitarists.

e.) Prove Eddie Van Halen is better than Neal Schon. And then prove that many guitarists consider him better.

f.) Regarding "nobody giving a shit about Neal Schon," Joe Satriani, Slash, Sammy Hagar, Yngwie Malmsteen, Vivian Campbell, ect. are some of those who do. Clearly somebody does. Or is it your contention that because you don't, no one else does? Who's pretending to speak for others now, AC?

Besides, we all know you obviously do give a shit. You've spent a lot of time arguing about him. And more than once. True apathy would likely manifest in a lack of attention to this discussion. You care and your constant protests that you don't are embarrassing because you contradict yourself by discussing this at all.

I know this will continue before one of us gets bored and goes off to do something else. Honestly, though, I don't think you're an idiot. I just think you're so quick to be antagonistic that you say things that are provably false.

Originally posted by Gideon
@ Wil,

It seems as though everyone is listing their favorites, not those whom they regard as best. How do you define best? What are the parameters? Technical skill? Reputation? Both? It's a vague description. As far as Schon goes, his technical skill is phemomenal. This is a man who was considered a world-class guitarist by two of the world's greatest when he was a teenager (he had only picked up a guitar five years prior). The likes of Joe Satriani, Slash, Sammy Hagar, Phil Collen, Vivian Campbell have given Schon countless accolades. Reportedly, for the Hear N' Aid (the rock version of We Are the World), Yngwie Malmsteen was impressed with Schon's performance.

Is he the greatest? Hell no. But the idea that if you're not a household name you have no talent is rather dumb.

Of course, AC tried that one against me, too...

I am not asking who the best is, I just want your favorites. How do I define best? Shredding ability, guitar solos, how good they are, reputation doesn't matter. They need a rep, but a rep doesn't make them good. Schon is good, but I wouldn't say he is my favorite, or one of them, although if there was a top 10, he would be on it probably. Well tons of guitarists think Schon is great, but Schon isn't the only one they like. EX. Ozzy was impressed by Buckethead, and actually wanted to have him play with him. By the way Buckethead didn't because Ozzy wouldn't let him. He wouldn't take the bucket off .

He isn't the greatest, but he kicks ass.

Well unlike me, AC is stupidstupid.

Wil, you genuinely don't know anything, but well done for proving my point. It was almost prophetic;

"You play the cool guy who inevitably comes along and tries to show the old, perceived tough guy how it's done, then gets a big cheer from all the dullards who have been on the receiving end of a whooping stick for the past...however long.".

It applies to you.

Gideon, I've sent the irrelevant part of your reply to your PM box.

I'll say one thing though.

Originally posted by Gideon
I'm impressed with the diatribe and how many mistakes were in it.

a.) AC, you're a 20-something-year-old guy who spends an unheathy amount of time posting on forums and debating pop culture.

Shocking. A 20 something year old male who spends time on a forum debating things to do with culture, popular or not; relevant mostly.

You spend time on KMC discussing and filling your profile with over-analytical Star Wars nonsense. I'd say you're coming up on the worse end of the "Pathetic" scale.

Originally posted by Gideon
d.) I never claimed that this was a list of "best" guitarists. I read the thread prior to posting, I'm aware that it was intended to be a list of favorite guitarists. I didn't preface my list with the statement that it was one of the most accomplished ax-men nor did I make a subsequent claim thereof. As I posted below, Schon isn't the greatest nor do I even believe he's the most skilled; I have never made either contention. That I list him as number one would, in my opinion, inspire any intelligent person to conclude that I was clearly giving a list of my personal favorite guitarists.

Originally posted by Gideon
e.) Prove Eddie Van Halen is better than Neal Schon. And then prove that many guitarists consider him better.

Show me anything Schon has created with the technical skill, musicality or subsequent influence of Eruption. Created, not "He can play Eruption.", created.

Show me anything Schon has done that rivals the solo to Beat It.

Van Halen has pioneered, patented and created not only playing styles, but actual guitar parts. He has innovated the guitar itself.

Van Halen has/had the ability to write anything Schon has ever created. Schon doesn't have the ability, nor has he ever, to write something on the level of Eruption. How do I know this? He was around for ages before, as were many, many others of equal or superior skill. Van Halen wrote Eruption and it changed guitar playing, Schon hasn't ever done that. He's just a guitarist highly regarded for his skill, deservedly so. Not for incorporating that skill into writing and creating things that nobody else could have.

Schon is not often listed in the area of influential or innovative guitarists, just peoples' favourites. Just like when you're talking about drummers, Bonham isn't listed as massively innovative because he wasn't. He's just a favourite of many better drummers than himself, why? Because they like his music.

They like Schon's music and he, like Bonham, is very skilled. Just not near the best, and that's all I'm saying.

Van Halen is, to everyone aware of music, regarded as one of the most skilled guitarists there is. You should know this. Schon isn't, is he? No.

Originally posted by Gideon
f.) Regarding "nobody giving a shit about Neal Schon," Joe Satriani, Slash, Sammy Hagar, Yngwie Malmsteen, Vivian Campbell, ect. are some of those who do. Clearly somebody does. Or is it your contention that because you don't, no one else does? Who's pretending to speak for others now, AC?

Did you read my post? I'll re-quote it because, well, you ignored it:

"Why do you continually feel you have to promote Schon? What are you getting out of it? People who know him know that he's good. You, admittedly, are a fanboy. If memory serves correct, you've admitted you're a fanboy. Fanboys by general nature, over-appreciate. I'm not taking anything away from Schon, I'm just not boning the man, and nobody besides you mentions him because...aware or not, champ, we just...don't care about him. You continually repeat shit you've said on this forum, about Schon, time and time again.".

I simply said that those of us HERE who are aware of Schon obviously do not care enough to mention him, and those who do not know him still obviously do not care enough.

I never once said "Nobody gives a shit about Neal Schon.", did I? Silly, silly boy.

Originally posted by Gideon
Besides, we all know you obviously do give a shit. You've spent a lot of time arguing about him. And more than once. True apathy would likely manifest in a lack of attention to this discussion. You care and your constant protests that you don't are embarrassing because you contradict yourself by discussing this at all.

I have spent time debating guitarists with you, of which he is one. That does not mean I care about Neal Schon. Wait...didn't you just say I fail at logic? "You talk about him, so you care.". What?

Originally posted by Gideon
I know this will continue before one of us gets bored and goes off to do something else. Honestly, though, I don't think you're an idiot. I just think you're so quick to be antagonistic that you say things that are provably false.

Whew, thankfully you don't think I'm an idiot...really.

In all seriousness, what's provably false? My original claim was that you over-promote Neal Schon with such fanboyistic glee that I find it peculiar and nauseating. You haven't proven it false, you've proven it correct, if anything.

You know I just realized something. You shoudn't really say 20 something year old male when your gender says Unspecified. Kinda stupid.

People here know I'm a male, I don't need to advertise it in my sidebar.

Gideon knows anyway, so I don't need it to be specified.

Stop being silly.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
People here know I'm a male, I don't need to advertise it in my sidebar.

Gideon knows anyway, so I don't need it to be specified.

Stop being silly.

-AC

Well, it is kinda stupid, that's it.

You said much more than one thing. I'll PM you the rest, but as for the Eddie Van Halen vs. Neal Schon scenario, you cannot prove that EVH is technically superior.

He's an innovator. So what? Thomas Edison was an innovator. Guess his lights bulbs are better than everyone else's. Except that that isn't the case. Innovation is a sign of greatness and creativity; that doesn't mean that EVH is faster or more technically accomplished.

When you get me proof that EVH can play things Schon can't, but not vice versa, we'll talk.

I want word for word proof from a credible source. All you've said thus far is "EVH > Schon 'cause I say so."

Joking and barbs aside, AC, your word isn't good enough. I want proof. Until I get it, you have not made your point.

Originally posted by Gideon
You said much more than one thing. I'll PM you the rest, but as for the Eddie Van Halen vs. Neal Schon scenario, you cannot prove that EVH is technically superior.

He's an innovator. So what? Thomas Edison was an innovator. Guess his lights bulbs are better than everyone else's. Except that that isn't the case. Innovation is a sign of greatness and creativity; that doesn't mean that EVH is faster or more technically accomplished.

When you get me proof that EVH can play things Schon can't, but not vice versa, we'll talk.

I want word for word proof from a credible source. All you've said thus far is "EVH > Schon 'cause I say so."

Joking and barbs aside, AC, your word isn't good enough. I want proof. Until I get it, you have not made your point.

It is just a matter of opinion. Like my opinion is that Angus Young is better than both, IMO though.

If I had to choose between EVH, or Schon, it is a tough choice, but I would choose Schon, not by much. Both kick ass though.

Originally posted by Gideon
You said much more than one thing. I'll PM you the rest, but as for the Eddie Van Halen vs. Neal Schon scenario, you cannot prove that EVH is technically superior.

He's an innovator. So what? Thomas Edison was an innovator. Guess his lights bulbs are better than everyone else's. Except that that isn't the case. Innovation is a sign of greatness and creativity; that doesn't mean that EVH is faster or more technically accomplished.

Like I said, Schon hasn't ever done anything as technically superior as Eruption. If he had, guitarists would know about it and would rank him above Van Halen. You look at any knowledgeable, critical poll and Schon isn't often ranked anywhere near the best, or near Van Halen.

I have seen a fair few of them in my time, and I'm sure you have too. Have you ever seen critics or guitarists actually rate Schon higher than Van Halen? Not "I like Schon, he's brilliant.".

Edison will always be regarded as a better genius than someone who invents a different version of the light bulb, because they're working with something existing. He created the thing.

Originally posted by Gideon
When you get me proof that EVH can play things Schon can't, but not vice versa, we'll talk.

I want word for word proof from a credible source. All you've said thus far is "EVH > Schon 'cause I say so."

Joking and barbs aside, AC, your word isn't good enough. I want proof. Until I get it, you have not made your point.

By extension, you need to prove he is. Cos implication seems to be that you feel Schon is technically better.

I've given you proof. It's not just about playing ability, it's about creation. Van Halen is technically advanced enough to create Eruption, Schon isn't, and we both know this for reasons stated previously.

Originally posted by Wil Deidara
It is just a matter of opinion. Like my opinion is that Angus Young is better than both, IMO though.

Better in what way, skill? Angus Young? He's actually nowhere near. That's a genuinely laughable claim. Proving that you don't know what you're on about, and Gideon will tell you the same, as will anyone.

Originally posted by Wil Deidara
If I had to choose between EVH, or Schon, it is a tough choice, but I would choose Schon, not by much. Both kick ass though.

Just PM him and say "Can I pleasure you?". It's more to the point and probably more dignified than this veiled asskissing.

-AC

AC, I'm going to drop the pretense of insults or jabs, because I think there is an actual discussion to be made of this. Let me finish Heroes and I'll get right back to you.

your argument = epic fail

I genuinely do wish I had spotted that first, because that's truly hilarious.

Not as sharp as I used to be.

-AC

someone overrated once wrote "we get by with a little help from our friends"

Originally posted by Wil Deidara
reputation doesn't matter. They need a rep,

I wouldn't say he is my favorite, or one of them, although if there was a top 10, he would be on it probably.

Ozzy was impressed by Buckethead, and actually wanted to have him play with him. Buckethead didn't because Ozzy wouldn't let him.



do you actually read this shit back to yourself before you post it?

i'd didn't think it was even possible to contradict every single point you make in a single post

even Parker manages not to do that in the conspiracy thread and he's about as useless a poster as it's possible to be...but you take it to a whole new level of stupidity

You prattle on and on how Wil's making not-so-veiled attempts to pleasure me, yet here comes your resident cheerleader. Single standards, AC; I don't play by the rules of a hypocrite.



I see that you're not a fan of capitalization or punctuation. Takes that pesky nanosecond to find the period and type it in, right? Or that damn shift button, too far away to press, especially when your right hand is currently touching yourself to AC's avatar and your left is reaching for the bag of chips.

Allow me to explain what I did in my "epic failure" of an argument. I identified AC's particular brand of logic -- endorsements from celebrity musicians -- and I used it against him, citing the names of famous and accomplished guitarists who are all fans of Schon's work. Meaning no matter what kind of route he goes, I've got him nailed.

This little argument is between AC and I. If you want to jump in, feel free. But clearly, you don't know what the hell you're talking about. Does everyone around here jump in the middle of a debate with the Barry Badass routine?

It gets old.



Again with the lack of capitalization and punctuation. Are you some kind of grammar bigot?

Ten minutes, AC. I expect one or two quotes that specifically cite EVH as a more skilled guitarist than Neal Schon.

Originally posted by Gideon
You prattle on and on how Wil's making not-so-veiled attempts to pleasure me, yet here comes your resident cheerleader. Single standards, AC; I don't play by the rules of a hypocrite.

Resident cheerleader? You actually don't come out of the Star Wars forum often do you?

Jaden and I had what amounted to about a four week debate on this forum over the NME once. For the longest time, he was one of the members I couldn't stand, and likewise.

He's cool and everything, but I fail to see how he's cheerleading. Wil didn't know who Schon was, and now he's saying he's better than Van Halen because he wants to side with you and not me.

Jaden came in here and pointed out a massive hypocritical point, I found it funny and so I said so.

How are the two even comparable?

Originally posted by Gideon
I see that you're not a fan of capitalization or punctuation. Takes that pesky nanosecond to find the period and type it in, right? Or that damn shift button, too far away to press, especially when your right hand is currently touching yourself to AC's avatar and your left is reaching for the bag of chips.

Why then try to rip off my style of mock-ular jabbing? Are you that fresh out of ideas?

Originally posted by Gideon
Allow me to explain what I did in my "epic failure" of an argument. I identified AC's particular brand of logic -- endorsements from celebrity musicians -- and I used it against him, citing the names of famous and accomplished guitarists who are all fans of Schon's work. Meaning no matter what kind of route he goes, I've got him nailed.

You haven't got me nailed, though, have you?

You suggest that because a singer like Sammy Hagar says "Neal Schon is better.", that carries any weight. I asked you a question:

How many times is Schon's name dropped by the best guitarists when the discussion of best guitarist comes up, when compared with Van Halen? Who receives more praise from peers of relevance? Van Halen. Exactly, we all know the truth.

Schon is a very able guitarist, but he has not done, nor will he ever do, what Van Halen has done for the guitar and guitar playing. If you have a counter-argument, proof etc, present it.

What has Schon done on the level of patenting guitar parts, or writing a piece of technical and creative seminal wonderment like Eruption? Seriously? You tell me.

Originally posted by Gideon
This little argument is between AC and I. If you want to jump in, feel free. But clearly, you don't know what the hell you're talking about. Does everyone around here jump in the middle of a debate with the Barry Badass routine?

It gets old.

You know what gets old? You popping up once in a millenia, coming here and saying "Mmm, Neal Schon." and getting the glass-up-ass because I say "Why do that?". All you do is say "Neal Schon, was a mad guitarist as a teen, joined Santana." or something like that.

That gets old, it gets old incredibly fast, because that's all you post in this forum.

Originally posted by Gideon
Ten minutes, AC. I expect one or two quotes that specifically cite EVH as a more skilled guitarist than Neal Schon.

Why quotes from others? I have musical proof, as I've said.

Eruption. Name a piece Schon has created that's more technically advanced, influential or praised as that.

-AC

Originally posted by Gideon
You prattle on and on how Wil's making not-so-veiled attempts to pleasure me, yet here comes your resident cheerleader. Single standards, AC; I don't play by the rules of a hypocrite.

I see that you're not a fan of capitalization or punctuation. Takes that pesky nanosecond to find the period and type it in, right? Or that damn shift button, too far away to press, especially when your right hand is currently touching yourself to AC's avatar and your left is reaching for the bag of chips.

Allow me to explain what I did in my "epic failure" of an argument. I identified AC's particular brand of logic -- endorsements from celebrity musicians -- and I used it against him, citing the names of famous and accomplished guitarists who are all fans of Schon's work. Meaning no matter what kind of route he goes, I've got him nailed.

This little argument is between AC and I. If you want to jump in, feel free. But clearly, you don't know what the hell you're talking about. Does everyone around here jump in the middle of a debate with the Barry Badass routine?

It gets old.


Again with the lack of capitalization and punctuation. Are you some kind of grammar bigot?

Ten minutes, AC. I expect one or two quotes that specifically cite EVH as a more skilled guitarist than Neal Schon.

ah yes...attack the grammer when actual debate fails...a crux for the weak

and no...you didn't use AC's argument against him...you used your argument against him...and then you used your argument against yourself by being a complete idiot. perhaps you thought it'd slip past unnoticed...but it didn't

as for me being AC's cheerleader...nice try...but i've had alot more arguments with him over the last 5 years than most.

last i checked i only had two hands...so if one's touching myself to AC's avatar and the other is reaching for the bag of chips...then which ones are typing the words that are making you look like the complete idiot that you are?

oh...and as it happens...i'd stake my life on me knowing infinitely more about music than you ever will.

Merely pointing out a tremendous problem. But, damn, you're thirty. You should have rectified the grammar issues at this stage in your life, buddy.

Next time, don't jump in the middle of an argument, try to point out one error, and declare the entire thing an "epic failure." The 'error' in question not even being an error at all.



You haven't been paying attention. AC brings up quite often how EVH is worshipped by musicians. I bring up those who feel the same to Schon. I used his own logic against him; it was the purpose of the whole statement.

But I love how the guy too lazy or too incompetent to press two extra buttons is giving me lectures on debating.

You might want to stay out of this one.



'Alot' isn't a word. The phrase is 'a lot.' Again, you're not exactly a role model for debates or linguistics. You're not fooling anyone. Make an argument or stay out of it.



Didn't know that you touch yourself and eat chips all the time.



How can you stake in a bet what you clearly don't have? You're 30. Hell, at least AC's witty and can punctuate. You can't even do that. Maybe it's senility.

As far as you knowing more about music, I'm sure you do. You've practically lived for a great deal of it. That said, I'm not critiquing your knowledge of music, Jaden. I'm bringing you to task for fancying yourself as a decent debater. I committed no fallacies nor did I make a logical mistake; I used AC's logic against him as a way to cover my own ass.

If I want your musical expertise, I'll ask for it. In the meantime, leave the debating to those who can do it, okay?

AC:

I'm not discussing innovation, as it was never my contention. I'm discussing technical ability. Prove that Schon is worse than Van Halen. Statements, please, from credible sources.



I would suggest brushing up on my posting, AC. I'm sarcastic by nature. I just tend to try not to be an ass out of the blue, though. Unlike Jaden here, I'm secure enough to not throw out a one liner of "epic fail!" and then run off.

Originally posted by Gideon
You haven't been paying attention. AC brings up quite often how EVH is worshipped by musicians. I bring up those who feel the same to Schon. I used his own logic against him; it was the purpose of the whole statement.

What you aren't concentrating on is why.

First off, Satriani, Slash etc do not "worship" Schon.

Originally posted by Gideon
I'm not discussing innovation, as it was never my contention. I'm discussing technical ability. Prove that Schon is worse than Van Halen. Statements, please, from credible sources.

Like I said, focus on why each is praised, that's your proof.

Schon is praised for being a very capable technical player, right? Yes.

Van Halen is praised for that too, as we both know. So the question is, who is better? You asked for proof in terms of personal quotes, but they're all throughout history.

Who has ever praised anything by Schon to the degree that Eruption is praised by guitarists? Like, why are you so adamant about rejecting this proof?

Eruption is an outstandingly technical piece of music that was CREATED by Van Halen. It pushed boundaries of guitar playing that nobody at that time could, that's why it's so acclaimed. Schon was a guitarist at that time.

Do you not see where I'm going?

-AC

I'm not rejecting the fact that Eddie Van Halen is a praised innovator. I'm rejecting the idea that Schon is incapable of playing it or that God or genetics somehow imbued Eddie Van Halen and Eddie Van Halen alone with the ability to tap.

Your whole premise is "EVH can do anything, Neal can't!"

It's completely baseless.

Originally posted by Gideon
I'm not rejecting the fact that Eddie Van Halen is a praised innovator. I'm rejecting the idea that Schon is incapable of playing it or that God or genetics somehow imbued Eddie Van Halen and Eddie Van Halen alone with the ability to tap.

Your whole premise is "EVH can do anything, Neal can't!"

It's completely baseless.

You don't actually pay any attention.

1) It's not about innovation per se.

2) I never said he couldn't play it. Ever.

The point is, look:

Why was it innovative? Because it pushed boundaries, technically, that no guitarist at that time could do. Schon was a guitarist at that time.

It's not a hard premise. Schon has not got the ability, technically, to do things that have been praised for being advanced, and THUS, innovative. He is just another gifted guitarist.

-AC

I do, actually.



You do realize that this was the singular criterion that you've been complaining about since day one, right?





You've been deducting points from Schon because he's not an innovator. That's absolutely stupid. I'm not contending that Schon is as great or as well known or as reputable.



AC, even in our first round about Schon (a year ago?), it was your contention that Schon couldn't play EVH's catalogue; that only a select tier of musicians could do so, citing how Slash couldn't play the solo to "Beat It."



First, you say it's not about innovation. And then you go on to cite innovation as a reason to think EVH > Schon. This is getting ridiculous.

Second, the idea that no one could tap prior to EVH is just retarded. He possessed a certain chromosome or ability that allowed him to tap? And, by watching him, thousands of guitarists across the damn globe could somehow access previously unused parts of their brain or nervous system to develope the talent? That's a bullshit contention number one.



Right, Schon is a gifted guitarist fellated by his peers, but he doesn't have the ability to perform anything advanced. Give me your standards for "gifted" and "prodigious." Those accolades aren't typically given out to any Joe Blow who can play "Smoke on the Water."

This is what I'm talking about. Your argument makes zero ****ing sense. How can you be gifted and prodigious and lack the ability to play things that are advanced? How is EVH the only person who could have created tapping? And how do you know Schon can't do this shit?

Bullshit contention numbers two, three, and four.

Originally posted by Gideon
You do realize that this was the singular criterion that you've been complaining about since day one, right?

You don't get to decide my points. You've misintepreted since day one.

Originally posted by Gideon
You've been deducting points from Schon because he's not an innovator. That's absolutely stupid. I'm not contending that Schon is as great or as well known or as reputable.

What are you talking about? It's not because he hasn't innovated, it's because when compared with WHY and HOW Van Halen was, he cannot and has never been able to.

Van Halen's Eruption was technically innovative, TECHNICALLY advanced. Schon was around at the time, and if he has superior ability, why didn't he do something like it? Why has he never done anything as a guitarist, innovative or not, that everyone sees as legendarily technical?

If you don't see him as great or reputable, why not think about reasons for that?

Originally posted by Gideon
AC, even in our first round about Schon (a year ago?), it was your contention that Schon couldn't play EVH's catalogue; that only a select tier of musicians could do so, citing how Slash couldn't play the solo to "Beat It."

Couldn't create it, maybe. Not play. I doubt I said play, considering I've heard other guitarists play Eruption.

Slash factually cannot play it properly, watch any video of him performing with Michael Jackson, he bails out of most of the solo.

Originally posted by Gideon
First, you say it's not about innovation. And then you go on to cite innovation as a reason to think EVH > Schon. This is getting ridiculous.

READ what I am saying, because this IS getting ridiculous.

It's not the base fact that one did something innovative and one didn't, it's REASONS WHY. WHY has Schon NEVER had a piece of music that people consider legendarily technical? Because he doesn't have one. Van Halen does.

Originally posted by Gideon
Second, the idea that no one could tap prior to EVH is just retarded. He possessed a certain chromosome or ability that allowed him to tap? And, by watching him, thousands of guitarists across the damn globe could somehow access previously unused parts of their brain or nervous system to develope the talent? That's a bullshit contention number one.

What the shitting Hell? What are you on about? Who said Van Halen was the first to ever tap?

I'm actually surprised you've got room to hide all this up your ass, between Schon having rented that space and you stuffing your head in there to kiss the man and also to be ignorant.

Originally posted by Gideon
Right, Schon is a gifted guitarist fellated by his peers, but he doesn't have the ability to perform anything advanced. Give me your standards for "gifted" and "prodigious." Those accolades aren't typically given out to any Joe Blow who can play "Smoke on the Water."

Find where I said he doesn't have the ability to perform anything advanced. It's not about what he can play, because he's regarded highly due to his ability to play certain things. What he isn't regarded as, by his peers, is legendary to the level of Van Halen. Why is that?

Originally posted by Gideon
This is what I'm talking about. Your argument makes zero ****ing sense. How can you be gifted and prodigious and lack the ability to play things that are advanced? How is EVH the only person who could have created tapping? And how do you know Schon can't do this shit?

If you honestly do not stop insisting I said things I haven't said, and I've said the opposite in this very thread, I'll stop replying to you.

WHO is talking about being the first to tap? Stop getting so emotionally distraught.

Originally posted by Gideon
Bullshit contention numbers two, three, and four.

Now you have to prove where I said them all.

-AC

I'm simply going by what you have said.



That's one of your (many) problems. You assume that you have the means to dictate who is capable and who is not capable of innovation and composing technically advanced material. Where is your proof that Schon hasn't? Are you familiar with the entirety of his catalogue? That it hasn't reached critical acclaim is an indication that he is incapable?

I don't get to decide your points and you don't get to decide who has such talented capability. When you demonstrate world-class musicianship, we'll talk further on that particular subject.



Schon's pre-Perry Journey days were about progressive rock similar to Rush and other bands. Then along came Steve Perry and rock history was made; Schon is an unabashed capitalist who sold his soul to the commercial devil in order to gain popularity. Van Halen, from day one, has been about the guitar antics of Eddie Van Halen. Sammy Hagar and David Lee Roth have just been essentially hired help. That doesn't mean that in solo works Schon hasn't demonstrated enormous technical ability.



Because greatness doesn't necessarily translate to skill. Contrary to the mythology that Jimi Hendrix is pinnacle of guitar playing, he's not. Eric Clapton is regarded as "greater" than the likes of Steve Vai, but the man's nickname is Slowhand -- he's not as technically accomplished as some other, lesser-known and lesser-regarded musicians.

Tom Hanks and Tom Cruise are regarded as the pinnacle of acting. Does that mean that they are more accomplished and talented actors than those whom they are more famous? No.



There. "Maybe." That's a lot better than your indulgences in absolutism: "NO SCHON CANNOT DO THIS!"



You did.



Yeah, but Slash isn't Neal Schon, which annoyed me when you'd bring it up. Hell, there you go. Slash is as well regarded and as well known as the likes of Steve Vai or Joe Satriani. So is Brian May. That doesn't mean shit when you compare their abilities as guitarists.



And where is your proof that Schon lacks such capacity?



I was throwing out a specific example of the so-called technical talent that EVH and EVH alone supposedly possesses.



You'd be surprised. I'm pretty good with managing space and tight fits.





This is well past ridiculous, now. Do you have selective memory, AC? You **** up and then your psyche can't reconcile such an enormous mistake, so you voluntarily forget about it?


Edit: I'm heading to bed. For the love of God, don't respond until you've had some sleep yourself. I'm sorry, but you've basically given diatribes ad infinitum that Neal Schon is inferior simply because you say so. If you give me some credible proof and cease saying things like "he can't play advanced stuff" and then "show me where I said he can't play advanced stuff" and I'll happily concede the point.

But all I see is misdirection, a selective memory, and double standards. Give me something else and I'll drop it. Hell, I'm just tickled pink that I finally got you to admit that Schon's a gifted guitarist. Definitely a heel turn from the drivel you posted the last time we went a couple of rounds like this.

Originally posted by Gideon
That's one of your (many) problems. You assume that you have the means to dictate who is capable and who is not capable of innovation and composing technically advanced material. Where is your proof that Schon hasn't? Are you familiar with the entirety of his catalogue? That it hasn't reached critical acclaim is an indication that he is incapable?

So show me then.

Show me a piece Schon has created or played that, technically, has been legendarily praised by his peers for being very, very advanced beyond the ability of most other guitarists, one of whom was Schon.

We know Van Halen has one.

Originally posted by Gideon
I don't get to decide your points and you don't get to decide who has such talented capability. When you demonstrate world-class musicianship, we'll talk further on that particular subject.

I'm not deciding, fact and history is.

Originally posted by Gideon
Schon's pre-Perry Journey days were about progressive rock similar to Rush and other bands. Then along came Steve Perry and rock history was made; Schon is an unabashed capitalist who sold his soul to the commercial devil in order to gain popularity. Van Halen, from day one, has been about the guitar antics of Eddie Van Halen. Sammy Hagar and David Lee Roth have just been essentially hired help. That doesn't mean that in solo works Schon hasn't demonstrated enormous technical ability.

1) Schon's work with Journey made "rock history" (If you can even call it that) in the sense of fame and hit songs. Not ability.

2) I never said he hasn't demonstrated technical ability, I'm saying, as I always have:

"Show me a piece Schon has created or played that, technically, has been legendarily praised by his peers for being very, very advanced beyond the ability of most other guitarists.

We know Van Halen has one.".

If he hasn't, then look at why.

Originally posted by Gideon
Because greatness doesn't necessarily translate to skill. Contrary to the mythology that Jimi Hendrix is pinnacle of guitar playing, he's not. Eric Clapton is regarded as "greater" than the likes of Steve Vai, but the man's nickname is Slowhand -- he's not as technically accomplished as some other, lesser-known and lesser-regarded musicians.

Yes, and what's your point? I've never said technical ability surpasses creative ability. Sometimes your creative ability is so great because of what you're working with. Some guitarists make great music with average guitar ability, but if they are massively ambitious, their ability does not match their ambition, and such, creativity can be stumped. Eddie Van Halen has never suffered that, because he has always had the technical ability to create whatever he wanted on the guitar.

Originally posted by Gideon
Tom Hanks and Tom Cruise are regarded as the pinnacle of acting. Does that mean that they are more accomplished and talented actors than those whom they are more famous? No.

1) No they're not, what are you talking about? Regarded by who? Idiots? Tom Hanks I can see has had some massively praised roles, but never are they said, by any credible source, to be a pinnacle of acting. That always falls to the De Niro and Pacino level actors of this world.

2) You are making a point that I agree with, but is irrelevant here. Whilst it's true that fame doesn't equate with talent, there is also a reason that the argument fails.

Whilst there may be a lot of talented musicians out there, there's a reason that most of them will die not having played outside their garages. Let's not be blind about it. Fame, sure, it's not an indicator of definite talent, or how much more talented you are than a lesser known guy. That's not what we're dealing with here, though.

It's not like I'm saying "Dave Grohl is a better technical singer than Steve Perry because he's more famous.". Van Halen is more known and regarded than Schon BECAUSE of his ability. His advanced technical skill is what separated him from the rest and made him famous, he didn't get famous then get praised. It was his skills that got them signed, got them an album deal and, essentially, got them a career.

Schon wasn't even regarded as the most talented in Journey.

Originally posted by Gideon
There. "Maybe." That's a lot better than your indulgences in absolutism: "NO SCHON CANNOT DO THIS!"

No, you twisted what I said. You told me I said "Schon couldn't play Eruption.", and I said "Couldn't create it, maybe.", in the sense that it may be what I said. Not "He might be able to.", because he couldn't, in my opinion. You feel he could have.

One man did.

Originally posted by Gideon
You did.

Proof? I'm genuinely not remembering that. If I did, I was wrong. He may very well be able to play it, it doesn't make him a better guitarist. I still do not believe I said it, and it will require proof.

Originally posted by Gideon
Yeah, but Slash isn't Neal Schon, which annoyed me when you'd bring it up. Hell, there you go. Slash is as well regarded and as well known as the likes of Steve Vai or Joe Satriani. So is Brian May. That doesn't mean shit when you compare their abilities as guitarists.

Exactly, so compare them.

What's Schon ever done that is on par with, or superior to, Eruption? You're the Schon scholar, enlighten us all.

Originally posted by Gideon
And where is your proof that Schon lacks such capacity?

The capacity to create Eruption, or something as legendarily technical and boundary-pushing for the guitar, as Eruption?

Well, I don't know. I'm gonna go with:

1) He didn't create it.

2) Nothing he has done since, before or during that time has ever been praised by guitarists to the degree of Eruption.

I'm gonna assume Satch, Vai, May etc, these people have heard as much or more of Schon than you or I. They know more about guitar than you or I. So if Eruption is considered more legendary and boundary pushing than anything Schon has done...by guitarists, then what's the assumption to be reached? That Schon obviously isn't as good.

I'm still waiting for a Schon example that's equal or superior to Eruption in terms of skill and peer-praise. Can you provide that?

Originally posted by Gideon
I was throwing out a specific example of the so-called technical talent that EVH and EVH alone supposedly possesses.

I gave you an example; Eruption.

It's not about any one skill. It's about combining a slew of technical skills to create one technically superior and advanced piece of music. Schon obviously wasn't skilled enough to be the man to do it.

Originally posted by Gideon
This is well past ridiculous, now. Do you have selective memory, AC? You **** up and then your psyche can't reconcile such an enormous mistake, so you voluntarily forget about it?

I'm waiting on proof. Then I can forget about it and move on.

"What's Schon ever done that is on par with, or superior to, Eruption? You're the Schon scholar, enlighten us all.".

Originally posted by Gideon
I'm heading to bed. For the love of God, don't respond until you've had some sleep yourself. I'm sorry, but you've basically given diatribes ad infinitum that Neal Schon is inferior simply because you say so. If you give me some credible proof and cease saying things like "he can't play advanced stuff" and then "show me where I said he can't play advanced stuff" and I'll happily concede the point.

But all I see is misdirection, a selective memory, and double standards. Give me something else and I'll drop it. Hell, I'm just tickled pink that I finally got you to admit that Schon's a gifted guitarist. Definitely a heel turn from the drivel you posted the last time we went a couple of rounds like this.

I'm genuinely curious as to why you keep insisting I ever said "He can't play advanced stuff.", and "He's inferior because I say so.". You can't, as factually proven by you not providing me with examples I said this. I asked you to, and you haven't, but I see where you're going wrong and I will point it out:

You are confusing me saying; "He doesn't have the ability to create or play something that is PRAISED AND LEGENDARY for being technical and advanced.", with "He can't play anything that's advanced.".

See, the two are different.

You can't show me anything Schon has done that has been praised by peers as much as Eruption has, for technique. Nothing Schon has done is as legendary for it.

If I'm wrong, prove it, but for the love of the thread, please stop saying I said things I didn't. I'm giving you an avenue with which to silence me and you're not taking it. "Prove to me Schon is inferior.", and my proof is in Eruption's reception and praise, not due to the fame, but WHY it's famous and what it's praised FOR.

Technique is praised, in Schon's case, but he is praised in the sense that there's a good chance he could play a lot of what you ask him to. YOUR main flaw is separating innovation from technical ability, because in Van Halen's case, they're the same. What was innovative about him was his OVERALL technical ability. Not the fact that he tapped, his OVERALL technical skill, and how he used it, e.g; Eruption.

Schon hasn't ever done that, has he? Proof.

Eruption is one of the most influential rock music instrumentals ever, because it changed the way millions and millions of people played the guitar, or thought about playing it. When has Schon ever done that? Learning it, or being able to play it, doesn't make you as skilled.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri


Better in what way, skill? Angus Young? He's actually nowhere near. That's a genuinely laughable claim. Proving that you don't know what you're on about, and Gideon will tell you the same, as will anyone.



Just PM him and say "Can I pleasure you?". It's more to the point and probably more dignified than this veiled asskissing.

-AC

Who cares. It's my opinion, not yours. Can't you get that through your thick head? Oh, wait, I'm sorry, blind people can't see. No wonder you didn't see me put IMO THOUGH.

But fine, if you want me to choose someone better than them, Jimi Hendrix probably, and neither Schon, or Van Halen are at his skill. As Rolling Stone has shown who is the best guitarist of all time, http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/5937559

As far as opinions go, everyone's welcome to theirs. But while I can't speak for AC, I've always been the type of person that, if you offer an opinion, be prepared to justify it.

Angus Young is a well known guitarist with a penchant for creating catchy guitar riffs; my problem with him and AC/DC is that the riffs and solos are contrived, repeating. Nothing new or original. There is no truly stellar musicianship within AC/DC. Brian Johnson isn't anything approaching an accomplished singer and Angus Young is not as technically gifted as people would have him believe. I get it that they come up with catchy rhythms, but given the level of hype they receive, you'd think there'd be more to their constitution.

For the record, Black Ice was terrible. And as far as Rolling Stone goes, that magazine is a joke. A complete and utter joke. In their recent pole of the greatest and most gifted singers, Bob Dylan was in the top ten. Mercury, Perry, Gillan, some of the vocal greats weren't. It's a broken instrument that appeals to the ignorant and foolish.

I'm not bashing you or anything, just disagreeing.

@ AC:

Neither of us is going to give ground, here. I see no merit in the argument that Eddie Van Halen's innovation somehow means that he is more technically gifted than Neal Schon. None whatsoever. Does it mean he's more creative? Possibly. More famous? Of course. Greater, in the sense of accomplishment? Absolutely. Does that mean, however, that there is a certain tier of musical notes or songs or devices reserved only for Eddie Van Halen and that Neal Schon cannot reach? No.

You look to "facts and history" to make your argument, yet that premise assumes that "facts and history" always give credit due where it is deserved. That isn't the case. Especially when their circumstances were completely different: EVH formed a band based solely around his guitar skills. The likes of Sammy Hagar and David Lee Roth could never eclipse him. Meanwhile, Schon's talent took a backseat to power ballads where he could not unleash his creative talent. You want Schon-greatness? Try "Beyond the Thunder," "Soul SirkUS," or "HSAS." Fact of the matter is that Neal and Eddie have reached a level where they can play all of the other's material.

Originally posted by Gideon
Merely pointing out a tremendous problem. But, damn, you're thirty. You should have rectified the grammar issues at this stage in your life, buddy.

Next time, don't jump in the middle of an argument, try to point out one error, and declare the entire thing an "epic failure." The 'error' in question not even being an error at all.

29 actually....might want to sort out your mental arithmetic...besides...i think i'm allowed to be lax on my grammer...what with having PhD after my name i think i've earned it.





nah..i think you might want to trot back to the starwars forums and play with the other 11 year olds.





i don't have to make an argument when you're doing such a great job of detroying your own...and all the back tracking in the world isn't going to change that...and neither's trying to make points about grammar. it just proves how utterly devoid of merit your argument actually is.





again...i'm 29...you might want to work on that a bit more. nice try though.



wow...attacking age and grammar...as for you knowing if i'm a good debator...if you'd come out of the star wars forum more often and discuss the more mature subjects that occasionally pop up on the board you might learn something. i'm guessing you're simply not capable of it so i'll leave you to discuss darth vader with coolmovies.




that certainly wouldn't be you then because from where i'm sitting, you're not only getting spanked by AC...you're spanking yourself as well.

way to go Sherlock.

As for the debate? I'm not going to discuss much in the way of Schon vs EVH because, while i appreciate their standard of play, I don't really listen to much by either.

I came in simply to point out the contradiction in your argument and like a petulant child you lost the plot.

If i hadn't struck a nerve you would've skipped over it and merely said "that's not what i meant" but the fact is, it is what you meant.

Again, nice try.

Originally posted by Gideon
You look to "facts and history" to make your argument, yet that premise assumes that "facts and history" always give credit due where it is deserved. That isn't the case. Especially when their circumstances were completely different: EVH formed a band based solely around his guitar skills. The likes of Sammy Hagar and David Lee Roth could never eclipse him. Meanwhile, Schon's talent took a backseat to power ballads where he could not unleash his creative talent. You want Schon-greatness? Try "Beyond the Thunder," "Soul SirkUS," or "HSAS." Fact of the matter is that Neal and Eddie have reached a level where they can play all of the other's material.

Those songs aren't technically lauded and considered legendary by guitarist peers to the degree Eruption is.

-AC

I see that you spent the past 24 hours boning up on basic grammar and punctuation. Not bad for someone with a PhD. Do most individuals with such highly regarded college degrees spend their time trolling on internet forums, ignoring the foundations of basic linguistics, and interrupting discussions and debates with useless, inarticulate drivel? Funny. I always had the impression that most of them actually amount to something.

PhD. That's cute.



Proving, once again, that our standards of education can always be higher.



Ironic, since you've been posting there yourself. Hell, you've been posting there in the past 24 hours.

"your argument = epic fail."



Yeah, it's plain to see that you simply lack the capability to engage in an actual debate.



You understand what rounding is, don't you? I'm not referring to your physique, but in math.

Or are you a body builder, too?



Say, weren't you just in the middle of a Star Trek vs. Star Wars debate, lecturing others on the powers of Q? LOL.

"your argument = epic fail"



Sitting?

Now there's something I'm sure you do quite well. Is that where your PhD comes from?

And I appreciate the fact that you believe you can read my thoughts and intent across the web. But you can't.

"your argument = epic fail"

Now you have a Star Trek vs. Star Wars argument to get back to. Why don't you go do that?

AC, PM me when you have the proof, okay? I appreciate it. Thanks for the debate.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Those songs aren't technically lauded and considered legendary by guitarist peers to the degree Eruption is.

-AC
Beyond the Thunder is an album and HSAS and Soul SirkUS are bands. At least do your research if you insist on comparing Schon to Van Halen...

Just to reiterate: I'm not making a bullshit claim that Neal Schon is as great, as innovative, or even as creative as EVH. But I think that he's technically prodigious enough to play anything EVH can and vice versa without difficulty.

Slay, are you a big guitar nut?

I'm not arguing that Schon couldn't play it.

I'm asking you again; give me a lists of pieces Schon has played, singular pieces, that have been as technically advanced/influential and critically (By peers) acclaimed in music, and for the guitar, as Eruption.

Go.

Originally posted by Slay
Beyond the Thunder is an album and HSAS and Soul SirkUS are bands. At least do your research if you insist on comparing Schon to Van Halen...

Oh! You got me! The thing is, I asked for songs, pieces had had done that came close to Eruption's legacy for technique and peer praise, precisely because I am not as well-versed in Schon's music outside of Journey. He hasn't given me that, he has given me other things that still don't match it.

-AC

That's such bullshit. Give me a band that has been more critically acclaimed or innovative than the Beatles. Guess that means the likes of Rush, Led Zeppelin, or others are subpar in comparison. You're asking me to provide proof that Schon is as innovative or as great as Eddie Van Halen, which was never my contention.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Oh! You got me! The thing is, I asked for songs, pieces had had done that came close to Eruption's legacy for technique and peer praise, precisely because I am not as well-versed in Schon's music outside of Journey. He hasn't given me that, he has given me other things that still don't match it.

-AC
What I'm saying is, if you actually had studied Schon's work to the point where you could honestly say ''I think EvH is technically better than Neil Schon'', you would've known that. But you don't.

No offense, and I'm not taking sides, but you've been using an amount of guesswork in saying that Van Halen is technically better.

Originally posted by Gideon
That's such bullshit. Give me a band that has been more critically acclaimed or innovative than the Beatles. Guess that means the likes of Rush, Led Zeppelin, or others are subpar in comparison. You're asking me to provide proof that Schon is as innovative or as great as Eddie Van Halen, which was never my contention.

The Beatles are critically acclaimed for making good music, and anyone claiming they were innovative can be swiftly proven wrong.

We're dealing with acclaim and praise by people who are his peers, not because they think Eruption is a nice piece of music, but because it's one of the most influential instrumentals in rock music history, precisely because of the advanced technical skill involved, and how far ahead it was of others at the time. Schon was around at the time.

So please, name some singular pieces Schon has done, skill wise, that have come close to advancing guitar playing or guitar perception, peer-orientated, like Eruption did. I'm waiting.

Originally posted by Slay
What I'm saying is, if you actually had studied Schon's work to the point where you could honestly say ''I think EvH is technically better than Neil Schon'', you would've known that. But you don't.

No offense, and I'm not taking sides, but you've been using an amount of guesswork in saying that Van Halen is technically better.

Then where is my proof otherwise, from the man who could probably tell you Schon's shoe size?

He has no trouble crawling out from the Star Wars forum to tell us Schon's bio, but when I ask for examples to counter my own, he clams up, as he will do again in his reply.

-AC

You made the contention that EVH is better. It's your burden to prove. Asking me for pieces of innovation that is critically acclaimed is blatant misdirection.

Originally posted by Gideon
You made the contention that EVH is better. It's your burden to prove. Asking me for pieces of innovation that is critically acclaimed is blatant misdirection.

I have proven how he is better, with a certain piece of music and the reasons for its acclaim, its influence on the instrument and its subsequent legendary status in the eyes of peers as a result.

You are not understanding why this is proof, because you generally have problems understanding arguments. I have to explain, then repeat things to you.

Now you refuse to give proof, so I'll take that as you conceding your argument and leave you to your replies.

-AC

Your proof goes to the extent of "lol evh is better 'cuz i say so." That's not proof. As Slay has pointed out, you don't know what the hell you're talking about, and your unfamiliarity with Schon's work doesn't lend you the credibility required to rule that Eddie Van Halen is better.

Next time you go toe-to-toe with someone, familiarize yourself with the burden of proof. You made the claim, it's your job to prove. Not mine. When you give me conclusive evidence of Eddie Van Halen's technical superiority, we'll talk.

Until then, I appreciate the (backhanded) concession. It reveals a surprising progression in your maturity.

Precisely, and you know more of Schon than I, and you can't provide anything that counters the proof I've provided, despite my request. Whether you like the proof I've given, I've given it. Yours stands at zero.

As such, your post is a statement of admission. Thanks for playing, it was fun and that. See you in a year, when someone creates another guitarist thread and you once again appear to buff Schon's pylon. Maybe then you'll have honed your skills, probably not, but don't stop believing.

-AC

More to say after all?

And here I thought you were going to leave me to my replies. Do you typically contradict yourself? Or is this case special: this is what? The third time you've had your ass kicked on the same subject?

Maybe you can't handle the stress at your age.

Originally posted by Gideon
More to say after all?

And here I thought you were going to leave me to my replies. Do you typically contradict yourself? Or is this case special: this is what? The third time you've had your ass kicked on the same subject?

Maybe you can't handle the stress at your age.

1) Leave you to your replies in the sense of topic, because you've lost that fight.

2) Ass kicked? All you do is ignore what I'm saying and argue against things I've never said, but hey, you're the one protesting too much for someone who's supposedly "right". I'm not the one crying and getting genuinely emotionally agitated by you. You are.

Although, you should be thanking me. You've had a longer conversation about Neal Schon over the past couple of days than you probably have had in what, a year? Just be thankful I consider you worthy of the time, honestly. If I were not dwelling in this music forum, you'd have no reason to come here.

That said, I'm curious just how much more you can deviate from the topic and onto me personally, as a way of saving your disgraced self before you scuttle back to the Star Wars forum. I command you to reply and entertain me, now. Do as you are told, or we may as well go our separate ways.

-AC

Nonsense. You quite plainly said that you'd leave me to my replies; you gave it no qualification. That you're replying is testimony to both your hypocrisy and my unhealthy level of control over you. It induces a macabre sense of flattering. On the one hand, it makes me proud of my irresistibility. On the other, it is sort of uneasy having the clear sexual, obsessive attention of a twenty-something House-lite.



The only tears that have been shed from me are the ones that are the result of too much laughter. Come on, Alpha! Consult your House DVDs! He can do better. If you're worthy of being one of his many e-disciples, surely you can do the same. Or, better yet, why not actually take your overabundant time to provide some evidence of Van Halen's technical superiority.



I have, quite often. You provide an interesting sort of entertainment. It is fascinating to debate with those who delude themselves into thinking that they're actually good at it.



Nonsense. Neal Schon is the gravity which binds my universe. Try a week.



Clearly I'm worthy of your time. You're seemingly obsessed with me, yearning for my attention. That's why (after repeated statements) you have refused to let this go. You crave my interaction with you.



You personally? There's not much to discuss other than the attention you devote to me. It's not far removed from stalking.

Originally posted by Gideon
Nonsense. You quite plainly said that you'd leave me to my replies; you gave it no qualification. That you're replying is testimony to both your hypocrisy and my unhealthy level of control over you. It induces a macabre sense of flattering. On the one hand, it makes me proud of my irresistibility. On the other, it is sort of uneasy having the clear sexual, obsessive attention of a twenty-something House-lite.

And then I gave it qualification.

Is that what you do now, just say what I would say back to me? Imitation isn't flattery, influence is.

Glad to see you know your role, though. I tell you to jump, you say "How high?". I say "Post.", you say "Schon". Proving you can't do it without saying his name.

Originally posted by Gideon
The only tears that have been shed from me are the ones that are the result of too much laughter. Come on, Alpha! Consult your House DVDs! He can do better. If you're worthy of being one of his many e-disciples, surely you can do the same. Or, better yet, why not actually take your overabundant time to provide some evidence of Van Halen's technical superiority.

Well then, I'm just supremely proud I could make you cry tears of joy and sorrow together, then. I didn't intend to upset you, make your blood boil and once again hold a mirror up to the fact that you over-appreciate a guitarist that isn't as good as you would like him to be, but I guess that's just what happens, part o' life.

Just for the record, while we're playing this game, you do realise that repeating "You've given me no proof.", doesn't mean I haven't, right? Ok, good. You realise you are just saying it, right? Excellent.

Because I enjoy your comedy, I'll indulge you:

"You are confusing me saying; 'He doesn't have the ability to create or play something that is PRAISED AND LEGENDARY for being technical and advanced.', with 'He can't play anything that's advanced.'.

See, the two are different.

You can't show me anything Schon has done that has been praised by peers as much as Eruption has, for technique. Nothing Schon has done is as legendary for it.

If I'm wrong, prove it, but for the love of the thread, please stop saying I said things I didn't. I'm giving you an avenue with which to silence me and you're not taking it. "Prove to me Schon is inferior.", and my proof is in Eruption's reception and praise, not due to the fame, but WHY it's famous and what it's praised FOR.

Technique is praised, in Schon's case, but he is praised in the sense that there's a good chance he could play a lot of what you ask him to. YOUR main flaw is separating innovation from technical ability, because in Van Halen's case, they're the same. What was innovative about him was his OVERALL technical ability. Not the fact that he tapped, his OVERALL technical skill, and how he used it, e.g; Eruption.

Schon hasn't ever done that, has he? Proof.

Eruption is one of the most influential rock music instrumentals ever, because it changed the way millions and millions of people played the guitar, or thought about playing it. When has Schon ever done that? Learning it, or being able to play it, doesn't make you as skilled.".

If you can't get around your head exactly why that is proof, then I really feel you are a lost cause. Weirdly, I don't feel different to a doctor right now, I'm fighting to save a patient but try as I might, he's just laying there in a Schon-induced impact coma, unresponsive to sense and reason.

Originally posted by Gideon
I have, quite often. You provide an interesting sort of entertainment. It is fascinating to debate with those who delude themselves into thinking that they're actually good at it.

Nonsense. Neal Schon is the gravity which binds my universe. Try a week.

Clearly I'm worthy of your time. You're seemingly obsessed with me, yearning for my attention. That's why (after repeated statements) you have refused to let this go. You crave my interaction with you.

So what is it this time? An ironic attempt at trying to use the way I "am" against me, or are you genuinely not capable of keeping up with me, so you have to attach yourself to my underbelly by replying mockingly as I would/have?

Is this another one of those "No, Jaden, actually. I wasn't being a hypocrite. I was just acting as he does.". Despite that obviously and factually not being the case?

Good though.

Originally posted by Gideon
You personally? There's not much to discuss other than the attention you devote to me. It's not far removed from stalking.

I'm not in the Star Wars forum debating with you. You only show up here because you know I'm the only person who will indulge your desire to speak of Neal Schon.

And maybe that makes me the bigger fool, but I suppose we're not all perfect. I indulge you too often, you like Journey and Neal Schon. All of us are inherently flawed, somehow.

Let's test. You can think what you want of my debate, I will know what I know of yours, and we can leave this as it is. If you truly desire to continue this with me, if it's what you need, you'll reply (Then if I reply, you'll say "Oh look, you can't stop replying.", been there and done that). If you genuinely don't need to reply to me, you and I can both just walk away and no longer reply to one another, can't we?

Either way, this is my last off topic reply in the thread. The rest is coming to your inbox.

-AC

I love it. This is truly the never ending story. We know you'll be back, Alpha. The same predictability you credit to me is made manifest in you. This is what you call a stalemate (unlike the argument, which was a decisive Gideon victory).

You haven't the means to prove that Eddie Van Halen is a superior and more technically gifted guitarist. All you've proven is that Neal Schon is not as innovative, well known, or "great." I never made that contention.



You'll be back for more. You have an infatuation with me that surpasses an emo girl's love for Stephanie Meyer books. I'm your brand of heroin, indeed.

Originally posted by Gideon
As far as opinions go, everyone's welcome to theirs. But while I can't speak for AC, I've always been the type of person that, if you offer an opinion, be prepared to justify it.

Angus Young is a well known guitarist with a penchant for creating catchy guitar riffs; my problem with him and AC/DC is that the riffs and solos are contrived, repeating. Nothing new or original. There is no truly stellar musicianship within AC/DC. Brian Johnson isn't anything approaching an accomplished singer and Angus Young is not as technically gifted as people would have him believe. I get it that they come up with catchy rhythms, but given the level of hype they receive, you'd think there'd be more to their constitution.

For the record, Black Ice was terrible. And as far as Rolling Stone goes, that magazine is a joke. A complete and utter joke. In their recent pole of the greatest and most gifted singers, Bob Dylan was in the top ten. Mercury, Perry, Gillan, some of the vocal greats weren't. It's a broken instrument that appeals to the ignorant and foolish.

I'm not bashing you or anything, just disagreeing.

You want me to justify it, he does guitar solos, and can shred while running around, and can do guitar solos and shred while laying on the floor whil spinning around in circles.

Angus Young is a well known guitarist, and a great guitarist. His riffs are great, and I know it may not seem like he can make something new, but I have heard different riffs. Don't bring Bryan Johnson into this conversation. He is an accomplished AC/DC singer, just like Bon Scott. Who cares if he isn't as gifted as others, but he kicks fvcking ass.

I know Rolling Stone is a joke. Angus Young diserves to be in the top 10, or even the top 5. But still, Jimi Hendrix is still the greatest to most people out there.

Angus Young isn't actually that skilled, though.

If he's your favourite, fine. He's the favourite of many.

-AC

You've accurately detailed the habits and mannerisms of most accomplished frontmen. That's not a sign of technical prowess or high level playing skills; that's a sign of an entertaining stage figure. Mick Jagger is an enormously gifted and charismatic stage persona who captures and enthralls the hordes of Rolling Stones lunatic-fans. But that doesn't mitigate the fact that he's a dreadful singer without exception.



He's definitely well known.



You misunderstand, I was exaggerating. AC/DC songs feature different riffs, but generally by only a couple of notes. They seem carbon copied and contrived, offering little substance to the song itself. They're good fun, but there's nothing there. A truly great composition may have both, but it will have substance. Meat. Or (as in Alpha's case), at least a great deal of fat.



"An accomplished AC/DC singer" doesn't mean a lot. Johnson's voice is unique (I always think of a jagged shard of glass) and it has survived the test of time. But he isn't some vocal virtuoso capable of extreme range, remarkable power, or peerless control. Those are the hallmarks of a great vocalist. Johnson isn't.



Young is as well known as any guitarist and famous for his antics. That said, while he is obviously a talented musician, no one I know (other than you) considers him to be a truly great well of musicianship.

Originally posted by Gideon
You've accurately detailed the habits and mannerisms of most accomplished frontmen. That's not a sign of technical prowess or high level playing skills; that's a sign of an entertaining stage figure. Mick Jagger is an enormously gifted and charismatic stage persona who captures and enthralls the hordes of Rolling Stones lunatic-fans. But that doesn't mitigate the fact that he's a dreadful singer without exception.



He's definitely well known.



You misunderstand, I was exaggerating. AC/DC songs feature different riffs, but generally by only a couple of notes. They seem carbon copied and contrived, offering little substance to the song itself. They're good fun, but there's nothing there. A truly great composition may have both, but it will have substance. Meat. Or (as in Alpha's case), at least a great deal of fat.



"An accomplished AC/DC singer" doesn't mean a lot. Johnson's voice is unique (I always think of a jagged shard of glass) and it has survived the test of time. But he isn't some vocal virtuoso capable of extreme range, remarkable power, or peerless control. Those are the hallmarks of a great vocalist. Johnson isn't.



Young is as well known as any guitarist and famous for his antics. That said, while he is obviously a talented musician, no one I know (other than you) considers him to be a truly great well of musicianship.

He RUNS AS FAST AS HE CAN across the stage, JUMPS IN THE AIR, and JUMPS DOWN ON THE GROUND AND SPINS IN CIRCLES, and shreds while doing all of this, and can shred awesome, and you are saying that that isn't impressive.

He's well known, and is great, easily.

Generally by a couple notes. Something is wrong with you. All of there songs have different notes, and shit. I don't know what you are talking about. You are just trying to make them sound worse than they really are.

Well neither Bryan or Bon are accomplished singers around the world, but Angus Young is known everywhere around the world. That is why people by AC/DC records, to hear AY's guitar solos.

Know one you know, you must not know many people, because I know lots of people who say Angus Young is one of the greatest of all time.

No, it isn't. Not enough to warrant the idea that he's somehow in the top ten most skilled ever. It's visually pleasing and entertaining, but the purpose of shredding isn't to hit specific notes in some sort of melody.



He's just not as musically accomplished as some other guitarists. Not top ten, no.



You caught me. I'm on some sort of musical Jihad against AC/DC where I post meaningless and baseless detractions about their relative ability.

Come on now, that's absurd. I'm simply telling you a simple truth: AC/DC's catalogue consists of contrived compositions that sound remarkably similar to their previous work. Even "Thunderstruck," which starts out with a truly memorable guitar riff, fades into the same rhythm and riff section that Young and company vaccuum seal in the freezer, to pull out on their next album.



I admire the level of appreciation you have for Angus Young, but you don't speak for the majority of AC/DC fans around the world. While I don't necessarily disagree with you, his popularity isn't necessarily a hallmark of world-class talent.



And where is the justification for that? And, if you please, don't rehash the same argument you've just provided.

Originally posted by Gideon
No, it isn't. Not enough to warrant the idea that he's somehow in the top ten most skilled ever. It's visually pleasing and entertaining, but the purpose of shredding isn't to hit specific notes in some sort of melody.



He's just not as musically accomplished as some other guitarists. Not top ten, no.



You caught me. I'm on some sort of musical Jihad against AC/DC where I post meaningless and baseless detractions about their relative ability.

Come on now, that's absurd. I'm simply telling you a simple truth: AC/DC's catalogue consists of contrived compositions that sound remarkably similar to their previous work. Even "Thunderstruck," which starts out with a truly memorable guitar riff, fades into the same rhythm and riff section that Young and company vaccuum seal in the freezer, to pull out on their next album.



I admire the level of appreciation you have for Angus Young, but you don't speak for the majority of AC/DC fans around the world. While I don't necessarily disagree with you, his popularity isn't necessarily a hallmark of world-class talent.



And where is the justification for that? And, if you please, don't rehash the same argument you've just provided.

You know what, you are just a waste of my time. Life is short, and you are wasting mine. Something is wrong with your head, you might need to get it checked. In conclusion, Angus Young is a great guitarist, no question, is he the best, no, Jimi Hendrix is probably, but seriously, you should get your head checked if you don't think all of the things that Angus Young does is impressive.

Originally posted by Wil Deidara
You know what, you are just a waste of my time. Life is short, and you are wasting mine. Something is wrong with your head, you might need to get it checked. In conclusion, Angus Young is a great guitarist, no question, is he the best, no, Jimi Hendrix is probably, but seriously, you should get your head checked if you don't think all of the things that Angus Young does is impressive.

Yeah, look, I'm all for keeping this civil. But if you're going to be an ass, at least take lessons from someone who can do it in a clever way.

Otherwise, spare me the "lol u r just a waste of my time" dismissal that has become as contrived as any of AC/DC's riffs.

So because I disagree with you, something's wrong with my head? Because, by your own words, "I don't think all of the things Angus Young does is impressive," I'm insane or retarded? That's enough to warrant a couple of eye rolls.

Stop taking this personal. No one's being mean to you. I'm just pointing out that you've not been very persuasive as to why I should be in awe of Angus Young.

i'd have to agree with this...the hype surrounding the new album is a bit ridiculous. even more so given that it sounds exactly like any other AC/DC album.

it does bring up another aspect of the debate though. why are riff makers ever really considered up there with the best lead guitarists. obviously not in terms of technical ability but in terms of emotive ability and writing ability.

for example is James Hetfield better than Kirk Hammet? again, not on technical skill but on what their respective playing gives to the audience. i chose Metallica as an example as they're known, predominantly, for their great riffs.

Don't even get me started on how much Black Ice blows. And all of this media attention on Britney Spears' new album.

History is a cruel master; there are those who truly deserve the attention based on merit and will never get it because of the world's stupidity.

ah **** it...edit...cant be arsed with the hassle

we're all here to speak about music

Originally posted by Gideon
Don't even get me started on how much Black Ice blows. And all of this media attention on Britney Spears' new album.

History is a cruel master; there are those who truly deserve the attention based on merit and will never get it because of the world's stupidity.

unfortunately...the world's stupidity in relation to music is something we all have to suffer through.

the UK x-factor's murder of "hallelujah" sums it up perfectly.

It extends to television, too, but that's an entirely different discussion for an entirely different forum.

The only reason that Black Ice sold what it did is because it's AC/DC. I bet half of the people didn't actually listen to the whole album before popping in Back In Black.

strangely enough...while up at a friends house last weekend, he put on the new album...and half way through he put on the older stuff.

same with the new GnR album (although i prefer Chinese democracy over Black Ice)

Yeah, Guns N Roses is another touchy subject. I'm not a fan. Axl Rose's range is impressive, but he comes off as so incredibly whiney. I'm all for high tenors or countertenors in rock, but they have to apply their range appropriately to the song.

Not to mention that his antics are absurd. Slash's opening riff to "Sweet Child O' Mine" is notoriously catchy, though.

Originally posted by Gideon
Yeah, Guns N Roses is another touchy subject. I'm not a fan. Axl Rose's range is impressive, but he comes off as so incredibly whiney. I'm all for high tenors or countertenors in rock, but they have to apply their range appropriately to the song.

Not to mention that his antics are absurd. Slash's opening riff to "Sweet Child O' Mine" is notoriously catchy, though.

yeah his vocals do tend to be a love it or hate it type of thing.

the only other criticism i have of the new stuff is that it's over produced and the guitars seem as if they've all been written with the thought "how would Slash make it sound" in mind.

Does he sound decent on the new material?

pretty much as he always did...i thought his voice would've taken a beating over the last few years but it doesn't seem that way...he can still reach the high notes.

like i say...it does sound over produced though...like they've packed in as much as possible.

If he sounds better as far as mannerism, I might go buy it.

most of the songs are available to listen to on youtube...give them a listen there 1st is probably the best advice i can give.

one thing i will say is that i don't think it's up to the standard that 14 years of writing and recording should make it.

then again. my liking for GnR and music in general has changed a lot in that time so maybe it's just me.

Hard to pick just five...
My favorites are:
(In no particular order)

Jimi Hendrix
John Lee Hooker
Brian May
Marc Ford
Elmore James
Robert Johnson
Dimebag Darrell
Marc Knopfler
Trey Spruance
Dave Gilmour
Jim Martin
Jimmy Page
Both guitarists in the band "The Hoax"
James Hetfield
Slash

If I had to pick favorites 5 Definitively, the picks being players who combined would be the ultimate in all situations:




Hendrix (For imagination, groove and the killer soulful leads, not to mention showmanship, for occasions where that matters)

Dime (For all that, plus ultimate vicious brutality in tone and technique)

Slash (For the killer melodies, and neck-position-pick-up string bending wailing)

Hooker (while not exactly being virtuso had such flavour and his hypnotic rhythm playing is something else. I could drown in an ocean of that... You could just loop "Boom boom" for me forever and I'd be listening or playing all the way.)

Spruance (for those unfamilar with he, is there for real character and feel being in his playing whether he is playing death metal, chicken pickin', augmented or diminished jazz chords, smooth Steve-Cropper-like soul licks.... His rhythm skills are killer and his lead abilities to scream, sing, quirk, warble, wail the blues or wield smoothness like a chilled Wes Montgomery seals the deal for this virtuoso.)






Damn hard choices.

There are like fifty that I could name that have all captured my ear and attention over the years and most that have had some kind of influence on me over the years too. Those five definitely the most.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Hard to pick just five...
My favorites are:
(In no particular order)

Jimi Hendrix
John Lee Hooker
Brian May
Marc Ford
Elmore James
Robert Johnson
Dimebag Darrell
Marc Knopfler
Trey Spruance
Dave Gilmour
Jim Martin
Jimmy Page
Both guitarists in the band "The Hoax"
James Hetfield
Slash

If I had to pick favorites 5 Definitively, the picks being players who combined would be the ultimate in all situations:




Hendrix (For imagination, groove and the killer soulful leads, not to mention showmanship, for occasions where that matters)

Dime (For all that, plus ultimate vicious brutality in tone and technique)

Slash (For the killer melodies, and neck-position-pick-up string bending wailing)

Hooker (while not exactly being virtuso had such flavour and his hypnotic rhythm playing is something else. I could drown in an ocean of that... You could just loop "Boom boom" for me forever and I'd be listening or playing all the way.)

Spruance (for those unfamilar with he, is there for real character and feel being in his playing whether he is playing death metal, chicken pickin', augmented or diminished jazz chords, smooth Steve-Cropper-like soul licks.... His rhythm skills are killer and his lead abilities to scream, sing, quirk, warble, wail the blues or wield smoothness like a chilled Wes Montgomery seals the deal for this virtuoso.)






Damn hard choices.

There are like fifty that I could name that have all captured my ear and attention over the years and most that have had some kind of influence on me over the years too. Those five definitely the most.

Not one mention of Duane Allman. *tsk* *tsk*

I acknowledge that he and Clapton should be there along with Peter Green, Dick Dale, Hank Marvin and Albert Lee. Too late to edit now I guess. But Marc Ford represents Allman pretty well.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
"Name your top five ever, then keep naming more.".

Stupid.

-AC

All I got out of that list was a giggle at the use of "Hooker" and "flavor" in the same sentence. Yes, it's juvenile. Oh, well.

Originally posted by Kris Blaze


I got your 'too many guitarists' right here. *Grabs crotch*

His crotch or your crotch? One's a crime. Hell, in some states, both of them are.

LOLz



Mine.

I think the State of Great Britain may have a differing law.

Ritchie Blackmore
Steve Morse

Ted Nugent

Jimi Hendrix
Eddie Van Halen
Duane Allman
Slash
Buckethead

Steve Vai
Jimmy Hendrix
Stevie Ray Vaughn
Les Claypool
Jani Liimatainen


I put down Slash as one of my five in my last post, totally forgetting about Vaughn and Vaughn is easily one of my favorites. I don't know how I could've forgotten about him.

Originally posted by geshien
Steve Vai
Jimmy Hendrix
Stevie Ray Vaughn
Les Claypool
Jani Liimatainen




Les Claypool?...he's a bass player is he not?

Originally posted by jaden101
Les Claypool?...he's a bass player is he not?

A bass is a guitar is it not?

Originally posted by geshien
A bass is a guitar is it not? Indeed. It'd be interesting to see people's Top 5 bass guitarists, as well.

Les Claypool is definitely in my top 5 bassists.

John Entwhistle
Mike Dirnt
Kim Deal
Paul McCartney

Victor Wooten
Trevor Dunn
Martin Mendez
Justin Chancellor
Prince

Originally posted by geshien
A bass is a guitar is it not?

Depends if its a big Upright bass or not.
Those big old things seen in old jazz videos aren't.

The smaller ones worn over the shoulder with a strap that have guitar shaped bodies are.

Sadako's Top Five bassists:

Bill Gould
Stuart Zender
Bootsy Collins
Cliff Burton
John Paul Jones

Originally posted by geshien
A bass is a guitar is it not?

no...it's a bass

it's like saying name your favourite piano player and naming an organist ...just cause they look similar doesn't mean they're the same.

Jaden, Bass Guitar is the electric bass everybody employs in rock pop etc. (Examples: The Fender precision, the Fender jazz and Flea's Ernie ball, you name) it if its worn on the player by usage of a strap and has the small solid body and pickups, and it aint one of those big old upright double basses, its a bass guitar.

Aint nothing wrong with just calling it 'bass' anyhow, but just for accuracy...

Originally posted by jaden101
no...it's a bass

it's like saying name your favourite piano player and naming an organist ...just cause they look similar doesn't mean they're the same.

No, a bass is considered in the guitar family.

My top bassist is Gene Simmons

Hahahahaha, Gene Simmons and Angus Young.

Well, to each their own.

-AC

Angus Young on bass...?

That'd make a cool change... but how would he get round that neck with such small hands...?

He'd probably have to use a short scale Tanglewood or something lest the bass be bigger than he is.lolz

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Hahahahaha, Gene Simmons and Angus Young.

Well, to each their own.

-AC

Well since Gene Simmons is one of the only bassist's I actually think is good, and remember I said if someone is better than Angus, it's Jimi Hendrix, and he probably is the best guitarist of all time.

Skill wise?

There are people sitting in their bedrooms better than Angus Young. He isn't very skilled.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Skill wise?

There are people sitting in their bedrooms better than Angus Young. He isn't very skilled.

-AC

Heck, Angus is way better than you, .

Are you reading my posts. Jimi Hendrix, better than Van Halen, and Schon, and everyone knows it.

Originally posted by Wil Deidara
No, a bass is considered in the guitar family.

my mum's in my family...she's still not me though

But both you and you mum would be classified under the same surname/as part of the family unit though.

But still. Bass guitar it is.

It has more in common with guitar than an old upright bass.



Its even played the same as a guitar as it is a guitar with thicker strings that are tuned like a guitar only an octave lower.
It has frets like a guitar.

You dont get those with the upright double bass.

You could take em of a bass' neck and fill the gaps, and it'd sound like a fretless, but it'd be a fretless bass guitar...

Here just in case the word of someone who has taught guitar and bass guitar for almost 15 years isn't enough, heres some wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bass_guitar

Originally posted by jaden101
my mum's in my family...she's still not me though

You're not making any sense.

By that example, there are no other exceptions.

A bass is a guitar. Had the author of the thread been more specific and said something along the lines of "no bass guitars" then you'd have an argument but, seeing as how their is no said basis, you've none.

Originally posted by geshien

A bass is a guitar.

Not always. But mostly.

Some types are an upright or double bass and arent even remotely guitar like.

A Bass guitar is a Bass guitar however.....

*Head explodes after having said "Bass Guitar" 15 times too many*

Originally posted by geshien
You're not making any sense.

By that example, there are no other exceptions.

A bass is a guitar. Had the author of the thread been more specific and said something along the lines of "no bass guitars" then you'd have an argument but, seeing as how their is no said basis, you've none.

a guitar is just called a guitar...if the thread starter wanted bass guitarists then i'm sure they would've said best guitarists and bassists

regardless...Les Claypool is a damn good bassist...

Originally posted by Wil Deidara
Heck, Angus is way better than you, .

Are you reading my posts. Jimi Hendrix, better than Van Halen, and Schon, and everyone knows it.

It doesn't matter who he is better than, he's not a skilled guitarists in a way that would make him the best.

-AC

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Not always. But mostly.

Some types are an upright or double bass and arent even remotely guitar like.

A Bass guitar is a Bass guitar however.....

*Head explodes after having said "Bass Guitar" 15 times too many*

That is what I mean. I simply wasn't being specific because I didn't think anyone would be confused on which instrument I was referring to.

Originally posted by jaden101
a guitar is just called a guitar...if the thread starter wanted bass guitarists then i'm sure they would've said best guitarists and bassists

regardless...Les Claypool is a damn good bassist...

Yet every guitar can be categorized. Guitars are not simply guitars. I.E. you wouldn't confuse a (prime) acoustic with an electric guitar like an Ibanez Universe but, you'd recognize them both as a part of the guitar family. Be mindful that their are a variety of differences that separate specific guitars. The bass guitar is not an exception. It's still a guitar, my friend.

And yes, Les Claypool is a beast.

Originally posted by geshien
That is what I mean. I simply wasn't being specific because I didn't think anyone would be confused on which instrument I was referring to.





Well, that's what jaden is saying, isn't it.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It doesn't matter who he is better than, he's not a skilled guitarists in a way that would make him the best.

-AC


sleep1