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.
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?
Why then try to rip off my style of mock-ular jabbing? Are you that fresh out of ideas?
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
Last edited by Gideon on Dec 16th, 2008 at 03:18 AM
First off, Satriani, Slash etc do not "worship" Schon.
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.
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!"
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?
You don't get to decide my points. You've misintepreted since day one.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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!"
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.
Last edited by Gideon on Dec 16th, 2008 at 06:16 AM
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.
I'm not deciding, fact and history is.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.".
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.
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.
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.
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.