It seems after your response I may have AC stuck in a contradiction form a previous thread. I know he means well, he's just wound a tad tighter than the rest of us.
Just giving him a dose of his own special medicine.
AC, after going through this thread I've realized... you haven't even posted your choice as greatest guitarist! All you've done is shoot down other people opinions because they aren't the same as yours... how about you grace all of us with (what you seem to think is...) the best guitarist... and then we'll see who gets shot down!
Last edited by VoodooChile89 on Dec 9th, 2005 at 03:17 PM
Nobody has me stuck in a contradiction. It's not a matter of oldies. If Synyster Gates was genuinely one of the best ever (which is what this thread is about, not really good guitarists, just ones that are candidates for best ever) then I would give him his dues. He's not though is he? Step out of the bubble in which you really like him. Look at the kind of people who are the best ever:
Vai, Satch, Petrucci, Paul Gilbert, Jeff Beck, Hendrix etc.
He's nowhere near as good as Tom Morello, Dimebag or such is he? And they're not the best ever.
That's all very well and good, but you're missing the point here.
YOU love Synyster Gates, right? I have no "beef" with the man but this thread is about greatest guitarists ever. EVER. Not "Post a guitarists you really like." The same thing is happening in the drummer thread.
My favourite guitarist ever is Tom Morello, possibly Adam Jones. Hardly oldies since they came to fruition in the 90s. So that puts away your little theory of catching me in a contradiction. I haven't named them though, why? Because I don't think they're the best ever.
Regardless of being an oldie, Jimi Hendrix is the best ever. Unless we are discussing purely technical playing, in which case Joe Satriani or Steve Vai.
People need to set criteria for these threads. What are we judging on? Technical skill or is it a personal preference thread? You'll never ever find the best for personal preference, it's stupid to try.
Synyster Gates might not seem that good now... but just like Hendrix, in 10, 20 or 30 years... he might be viewed as a legend... and you're right... they should put critieria on these threads...
p.s. in my Guitar World magazine Steve Vai told them in an interview that Yngwie and Dimebag were better shredders... just some info.
you don't have to be afraid to stand up for Tom... he's on my list! I would've respected it if you put his name straight up! and you have to admit... my choices aren't as NEAR as bad as some other people on this thread, right?
Last edited by VoodooChile89 on Dec 9th, 2005 at 04:19 PM
Yngwie is a great technical player when it comes to speed, beyond that he's not much.
Second, I'm not afraid to stand up for Tom. I don't believe he's the best ever though, so me liking him is irrelevant here. Hence the base of my argument.
You love Synyster, I have no beef with him. I have no beef with the guys in Avenged, they aren't on my musician hate list. I just don't like their music. It's not diabolically shit, it's just not overly good, to me at least.
The point is, this is about the best ever. Synyster isn't one of those. Nor is he close to being. You've admitted this, so I don't see why you need to name him just because you like him.
I guess all that I'm trying to say is... Avenged Sevenfold is a breath of fresh air within the newer hard rock or metal bands that are coming out... and especially with their new sound, they've really impressed me... I'm just going by personal preference, you're right... I'm just trying to get A7X respected by people other than emos who just like them 'cause of their look or whatever lol
I don't think you'll find the best for technical skill either. Either way it's just people naming guitarists.. nothing gets proved or solved... so that would just make it another opinion based thread. No different from one based on personal preference.
I understand, but even technical ability has no clear cut way to judge who's the "best" at it, because if it did and was an undeniable fact backed up by proof, then there would be one universal answer to the question "who's the greatest guitarist ever?" There obviously isn't.
It's just like sports.. players may have factual statistics and may out perform other players in specific areas, but there's no way to proove who the best quarterback was even through statistics.
Basically as long as you're using the word "best" it's going to be opinion based about 99% of the time.
"Universally accepted by anyone that matters" is just an elitist rewording of it being partially accepted.
Of course, if Jimi Hendrix really was factually the best guitarist in terms of technical ability, you could always post some factual proof in favor of this argument. Otherwise, this thread remains as subjective as a personal preference thread. It's just people throwing out names. There's nothing factual or objective about it.
The only reason you'll never find a best is because it'd be a bit hard to round up everyone in the world.
If this was possible, the best could be proven on technical ability. Because is one can do things better, as well as things that other guitarists can't do, then they would obviously be the best. Not finding the best has nothing to do with it being subjective.
Technique isn't subjective. Tom Morello is technically better than Adam Levine from Maroon 5 isn't he? No amount of "Well opinions..." is changing this fact.
I'm not arguing that technique is subjective, only that it works on many levels and who's to say which "area" of technical ability is the most important? I think it's possible to prove one guitarist better than another if you set a specific criteria. Could be speed, timing, accuracy.. whatever. Just as long as you set a criteria and limit the options (like in the case between Adam Levine and Tom Morello). However just saying the "greatest guitarist ever," even if only going by technique, leaves an endless amount of options for potential guitarists and also makes the question subjective cause different guitarists excel in different areas in technique, and different types of technical playing are not always directly comparable.
Which is why on topics like these, unless they're super specific, it's always going to be left to opinion. If it wasn't, it wouldn't be much of a discussion.
There is possibly a best overall technical guitarist, in terms of who is better at the most criteria. This is obviously not gonna happen on KMC.
Your post just emphasised my entire point being that these threads should be titled favourite, not best. Because people are naming guitarists irrelevant to the thread.
There's no point discussing actual best, because whilst there is one, we won't be finding it will we?
KMC Community Forums
Dec 9th, 2005 02:50 PM
