DreamTheaterForums.org Dream Theater Fan Site
Dream Theater => Dream Theater => Topic started by: Zydar on December 01, 2014, 08:20:14 AM
-
https://www.ultimate-guitar.com/news/ug_news/ug_showdown_round_1_brian_may_vs_john_petrucci.html (https://www.ultimate-guitar.com/news/ug_news/ug_showdown_round_1_brian_may_vs_john_petrucci.html)
Ultimate-Guitar has a showdown where we can vote for our favourite guitarists, tournament style. This round it's Brian May against John Petrucci.
-
Sorry nope
Can't vote. Aside from the fact that one is a childhood hero and the other is on another planet...........its a stupid comparison! It's like arguing who's better - Steve Vai or Eric Clapton!
I are frustrate. :tdwn
-
I made the SV and EC comparison before I'd had a look at al lthe other matches in the poll
:facepalm:
-
Voted Petrucci but it kind of breaks my heart as both are among my absolute favourite guitarists.
-
Sorry nope
Can't vote. Aside from the fact that one is a childhood hero and the other is on another planet...........its a stupid comparison!
Can't vote either. Brian May is just too good to not get a vote, but so is JP.
Brian can also do the most unreal backing vocals.
-
In my opinion, the sooner we start boycotting this type of bullshit, the better. The first time we did it (when DT beat Metallica in the finals) was kinda neat for exposure and showing off how big this community is (not to mention we even got a thank you video), but it's insulting to give so many clicks (and revenue) to these lame sites. This sheep was skinned way too many times.
-
Buckethead beating Ritchie Blackmore... :facepalm:
The world just went full retard.
Blackmore - Gilmour - May: The Holy Trinity.
-
In my opinion, the sooner we start boycotting this type of bullshit, the better. The first time we did it (when DT beat Metallica in the finals) was kinda neat for exposure and showing off how big this community is (not to mention we even got a thank you video), but it's insulting to give so many clicks (and revenue) to these lame sites. This sheep was skinned way too many times.
I already do that on a regular basis to these sites, so I might as well chip in and vote. I'll vote for JP anyway. Won't argue if Brian May wins though.
-
Brian May has some major chops, and there are aspects of JP's playing that were inspired by May's style, for sure. It is almost unfortunate how keyboard and piano oriented a lot of Queen's music was, because it really does make people forget just how great of a guitar player Brian May is. That being said, JP is a god, and can play anything Brian May ever wrote, and then some. In terms of proficiency, JP has it, easily.
-
It is almost unfortunate how keyboard and piano oriented a lot of Queen's music was, because it really does make people forget just how great of a guitar player Brian May is.
(https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v410/rumborak/what_zps3b78e108.jpg)
-
It is almost unfortunate how keyboard and piano oriented a lot of Queen's music was, because it really does make people forget just how great of a guitar player Brian May is.
(https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v410/rumborak/what_zps3b78e108.jpg)
Whenever the conversation of great rock guitarists comes up, I never, ever see/hear Brian May's name come up, until I mention it. And when I do, oftentimes people are like, "Really?" and I'm like, "Think about it. He can really play, and has some great guitar parts in Queen songs," at which point people do think about it and go, "Oh yeah, you're right."
At least that's my experience.
-
Maybe it's because I'm an old fogie, but in my circle of friends, the people who care about this type of music will very quickly talk about Brian May.
-
Brian invented the layering of guitars in the recording studio. Nobody did "that" many overdubs. It sounded regal.
-
Maybe it's because I'm an old fogie, but in my circle of friends, the people who care about this type of music will very quickly talk about Brian May.
Lucky you. Most of my friends are more into the heavier stuff though, so Queen doesn't get mentioned too much unfortunately.
Brian invented the layering of guitars in the recording studio. Nobody did "that" many overdubs. It sounded regal.
For a second I read, "It sounded illegal."
-
I literally just came on to the forums to post this bracket.
-
Buckethead beating Ritchie Blackmore... :facepalm:
The world just went full retard.
Blackmore - Gilmour - May: The Holy Trinity.
I know Buckethead kinda has a silly rep for being gimmicky and appealing to the guitar hero kids, but it's a bit unfair to be condescending like that just because those guitarists you mentioned have a more influential history. I mean really, as we all know all of these polls are silly as it's unfair to even compare these guitarists because they've got completely different styles, still both undeniably skilled. Although that's the case with comparing most of the considered 'legendary' guitarists of music, they're different. It pretty much turns into a popularity contest, and who's name is more regognisable.
Anyway, regarding the JP poll, I'm surprised how close it is atm, JP on 49% right now.
-
Brian invented the layering of guitars in the recording studio. Nobody did "that" many overdubs. It sounded regal.
For a second I read, "It sounded illegal."
That too.
-
Buckethead beating Ritchie Blackmore... :facepalm:
The world just went full retard.
Blackmore - Gilmour - May: The Holy Trinity.
I know Buckethead kinda has a silly rep for being gimmicky and appealing to the guitar hero kids, but it's a bit unfair to be condescending like that just because those guitarists you mentioned have a more influential history. I mean really, as we all know all of these polls are silly as it's unfair to even compare these guitarists because they've got completely different styles, still both undeniably skilled. Although that's the case with comparing most of the considered 'legendary' guitarists of music, they're different. It pretty much turns into a popularity contest, and who's name is more regognisable.
Anyway, regarding the JP poll, I'm surprised how close it is atm, JP on 49% right now.
Yeah, I know, but... C'mon!
-
FFS!! :censored
JP and May don't play the same style of music anyway!! :justjen :tdwn :yeahright
-
Well, they kinda do just in different positions.
Like they play the same sport but in different positions. Still, I do agree the comparison is pretty dumb.
I can't vote for JP as Brian May is a hero and a living legend. I can't vote for Brian May though as much as I love Queen, I just can't say that Brian May is better.
-
Brian invented the layering of guitars in the recording studio. Nobody did "that" many overdubs. It sounded regal.
Well, he didn't invent it but he sure took it to another level. Overdubbing was around before Queen was.
-
I can't vote for JP as Brian May is a hero and a living legend. I can't vote for Brian May though as much as I love Queen, I just can't say that Brian May is better.
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.
-
Brian invented the layering of guitars in the recording studio. Nobody did "that" many overdubs. It sounded regal.
Well, he didn't invent it but he sure took it to another level. Overdubbing was around before Queen was.
But what Brian did with it was a whole new ballgame. Referring to Brian's work as "overdubbing" is like referring to space flight as "throwing things upwards".
-
Poll is closed, and I have to say, Brian rightfully won. While JP is an excellent guitar player and all, he just doesn't have the lasting impact or influence that Brian had.
And in fact, that judgment actually extend to all DT members I think. They are all masters of their instruments, but in terms of a long-term view of of the "craft" of their instrument, none of them made a lasting mark.
-
Poll is closed, and I have to say, Brian rightfully won. While JP is an excellent guitar player and all, he just doesn't have the lasting impact or influence that Brian had.
And in fact, that judgment actually extend to all DT members I think. They are all masters of their instruments, but in terms of a long-term view of of the "craft" of their instrument, none of them made a lasting mark.
Yet they can still outplay those who did make that mark, even when those guys were in their prime.
Personally, I'm all about who perfected the craft, not who pioneered certain aspects of it, and made more of a cultural impact. So with all due respect to Brian May, as far as I'm concerned, JP should've won.
-
Don't get me wrong, the flawless execution of their skill was one of the major appeals for me with DT, at least back in the day.
The problem is, there are thousands of guitar players who are equally as good, or better than JP. MP even said it himself once, that whatever was "the shit" back in the day is now considered standard by many drummers.
So, what musicians stand the test of time? It's the ones that are unique, the ones that have character. And in that regard, Brian is in a different league from JP.
-
Sure, there may be a bunch of guys now who have surpassed JP in terms of dexterity, but it's not as if Brian May is among them. If you're judging by cultural impact, okay, Queen has surpassed generations, but what about the test of time in terms of longevity and being prolific? Brian May has barely made any new music since Freddie passed away, meanwhile JP is leading a band for 30 years, and still going very strong. That's a whole different kind of a test of time.
Either way, like I said, to me it's not about cultural impact, it's about who's the better musician, and I would say that's JP hands down.
-
Nah, Brian May is the better musician. JP is better in being a technical virtuoso, but May is a better creator of music, with more memorable guitar moments and creating signature sounds and licks that are instantly recognizable as Brian May. I can not really say that there is a signature JP sound, where you will recognize that he's the one playing when you hear a song that is new to you.
Bringing out the longevity card to prop JP against May is...like apples and oranges? Queen started in 1970, more than a decade ahead of DT.
-
Nah, Brian May is the better musician. JP is better in being a technical virtuoso, but May is a better creator of music, with more memorable guitar moments and creating signature sounds and licks that are instantly recognizable as Brian May. I can not really say that there is a signature JP sound, where you will recognize that he's the one playing when you hear a song that is new to you.
Yes, Brian May has his very specific signature style to his sounds and licks, but JP can do those, and more. He's a much more versatile musician, able to play anything from mile a minute shredding, to thick, chunky riffs, to weeping, soulful solos, to mellow acoustic stuff. I really don't understand how that makes him a worse musician. Obviously you're well within your rights to like one over the other as you see fit. But I judge musicians on their skill level, not what most people think, or how much of a cultural impact they had. I mean, The Beatles are the highest selling band in history, last time I checked, and they had so much more of an impact than DT, so I guess Ringo Star was a better drummer than Mike Portnoy, right? ::)
-
rumby, stop scrooging DT side. :lol
-
Brian May has some major chops, and there are aspects of JP's playing that were inspired by May's style, for sure. It is almost unfortunate how keyboard and piano oriented a lot of Queen's music was, because it really does make people forget just how great of a guitar player Brian May is. That being said, JP is a god, and can play anything Brian May ever wrote, and then some. In terms of proficiency, JP has it, easily.
Irrelevant.
That aside, these are two of my favorites, and anyone who thinks that Brian May is not one of the best ever needs to get a clue. Not saying that is anybody here, but his playing is a large reason why Queen is one of the biggest and best bands ever.
-
Irrelevant.
Okay... But we're talking about who's the better guitar player, and if one guy can play everything the other guy can and more, I'd say that makes him the better player. I mean, you can disagree, but if every argument I make is "Irrelevant because Queen," then it's quite a productive one-sided conversation we're having, isn't it?
-
Better player does not automatically equal better guitarist.
There are probably hundreds of guitarists who can "play" circles around David Gilmour when it comes to chops and technique, but who cares? Music is not all about chops.
-
Nah, Brian May is the better musician. JP is better in being a technical virtuoso, but May is a better creator of music, with more memorable guitar moments and creating signature sounds and licks that are instantly recognizable as Brian May. I can not really say that there is a signature JP sound, where you will recognize that he's the one playing when you hear a song that is new to you.
Yes, Brian May has his very specific signature style to his sounds and licks, but JP can do those, and more. He's a much more versatile musician, able to play anything from mile a minute shredding, to thick, chunky riffs, to weeping, soulful solos, to mellow acoustic stuff. I really don't understand how that makes him a worse musician. Obviously you're well within your rights to like one over the other as you see fit. But I judge musicians on their skill level, not what most people think, or how much of a cultural impact they had. I mean, The Beatles are the highest selling band in history, last time I checked, and they had so much more of an impact than DT, so I guess Ringo Star was a better drummer than Mike Portnoy, right? ::)
What? I am not even arguing for cultural impact. So that Ringo Starr and Mike Portnoy stuff is not even close to what I am arguing.
The only thing that JP I think really has a distinct advantage over May is the shredding but that was never his preffered arsenal anyway. Let's see some of the amazing May examples in the other departments that you mentioned:
Amazing riffs - Ogre Battle, Tie Your Mother Down, Hammer to Fall, The Hitman, Now I'm Here, One Vision, Bohemian Rhapsody, Tear It Up, Keep Yourself Alive, Sheer Heart Attack (simple, but sweet), Fat Bottomed Girls, Let Me Entertain You, More of that Jazz, Death on Two Legs, Innuendo, Tenement Funster
Weeping, soulful solos - Bohemian Rhapsody (just this one already settles the matter. :p ), Save Me, Somebody to Love. I Can't Live Without You. And the ultimate weeping solo, The Last Horizon, where astrophysicist Dr. Brian May was on full guitar god mode. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frube9ra07Y (not a complete version, the best vid of a live performance has been taken down)
Other solos - just about everything really. I especially love Hammer to Fall and We Will Rock You :hefdaddy And the amazing sound effects in Get Down Make Love that was so ahead of its time, people actually thought they were using synthesizers.
Mellow acoustic stuff - Too Much Love Will Kill You. The concert version of Love of My Life.
You know, musical composition is part of musicality too, and May, I honestly believe, beats JP in that department. He composes guitar parts better.
-
Better player does not automatically equal better guitarist.
There are probably hundreds of guitarists who can "play" circles around David Gilmour when it comes to chops and technique, but who cares? Music is not all about chops.
No, but when you say, "Which guitarist is better?" you could judge them differently by a whole slew of factors. But it really seems sometimes like saying, "Well, just because he's got more chops doesn't mean he's a better guitarist," okay, but it doesn't mean he's worse either. Having chops is not a detriment, last time I checked. And it's not like JP is only good for chops. If he wasn't able of writing and playing great music, we wouldn't be here having this discussion.
You know, musical composition is part of musicality too, and May, I honestly believe, beats JP in that department. He composes guitar parts better.
Okay, that's cool. That's your opinion, and you're completely entitled to it. Personally, even in terms of composing, I don't think Brian May even comes close to JP. The brilliance of queen came from all four of them and half of Queen's best songs aren't even guitar driven, they have a lot of great songs which are largely drum or synth oriented, and their composing was just as much a contribution from May as it was from the other members. Same could be said for DT too, but personally, when listing all the great riffs and solos by May, he has some truly iconic ones, but I'd say JP has way more that are just as good.
But regardless of what the case may be, yes, songwriting is a factor, but just like chops, it's not the only factor. So like I said, "Which one is better" can be judged by many different factors, and it really depends on the person which specific factors they choose to judge.
-
When I say musical composition skills, it's not really about songwriting. I am talking about composing guitar parts of a song. JP is excellent in this. But May is even better. His guitar work for example in Seven Seas of Rhye is sublime. And Bohemian Rhapsody is just perfect. It's like the perfect example of how to compose a moving solo, a kickass riff, and an amazing outro in one song. As muc as I love JP, i can not yet place any of his work near that. Or the emotional depths of Last Horizon.
-
When I say musical composition skills, it's not really about songwriting. I am talking about composing guitar parts of a song. JP is excellent in this. But May is even better. His guitar work for example in Seven Seas of Rhye is sublime. And Bohemian Rhapsody is just perfect. It's like the perfect example of how to compose a moving solo, a kickass riff, and an amazing outro in one song. As muc as I love JP, i can not yet place any of his work near that. Or the emotional depths of Last Horizon.
But again, that's up to personal tastes. I think JP has written plenty of riffs and solos that I think are just as good as May's best work. Bohemian Rhapsody is perfect, and it captures all of that in a single song, which is amazing, but it's not like every Queen song is like that. And as much as I enjoy songs like One Vision, or Headlong, for example, their riffs are good for being simple and catchy, and on an average day, JP can blow them out of the water, if you ask me. But again, that's just personal tastes.
-
I would say that in terms of riffs they are about even. DT is more riff-driven so maybe JP has an edge, but May's is really catchy. JP also has an edge in shredding. But in solos, May is definitely better for me. That man composes his solos like a song and they are beautiful. When I first heard Too Much Love Will Kill You's acoustic solo, I was speechless.
-
But there's more to a solo than being heartfelt and soulful. Which, I mean, JP is very good at too, just listen to The Spirit Carries On or The Best of Times. But there are also shredding solos like in Voices or As I Am, or just really intricate solos like Under A Glass Moon.
Sure, maybe JP's more melodic solos aren't quite as heartfelt and tear jerking as Brian May's best, but that doesn't mean that the shredding and the intricacy of his technical solos shouldn't be counted at all. JP's strength is that he's extremely well rounded and he's really good at playing every style he's ever tried to play, and that's a long and varied list.
-
^What you said about John Petrucci being well rounded is exactly why I felt that not only should he have beaten Brian May, but he should have won the whole showdown. I truly feel that there has never been a single guitarist who can do everything as well as JP can. He has mastered every style of playing that he has attempted. He is an amazing musician and songwriter along with having virtuoso level chops. Regardless of what criteria someone chooses to judge a guitarist on, John passes with flying colors. The only thing holding him back is recognition, but this bracket is asking for most popular. It's asking for best, and in terms of skill, John Petrucci should have won.
-
Your argument is invalid because Queen.
-
rumby, stop scrooging DT side. :lol
But it's so goddamn entertaining! :lol
Seriously though, I think if people made the argument "JP is the most versatile", I could see that. In a sense, he is the perfect studio musician, who can be put in front of just about any musical style and do a good job at it.
It's just that, most people associate the term "best" with "best at a particular discipline", not " doing a good job at the most disciplines ".
-
Seriously though, I think if people made the argument "JP is the most versatile", I could see that. In a sense, he is the perfect studio musician, who can be put in front of just about any musical style and do a good job at it.
It's just that, most people associate the term " best " with "best at a particular discipline", not " doing a good job at the most disciplines ".
But what if you took like, four guys who each is best at a completely different discipline? And asked which one was the best, how could that even be decided, then?
-
Music isn't an athletic competition where you can say "A jumped higher than B". Clearly people try to take the multitude of factors into account, and I think uniqueness, character and lasting influence are very important. In all three of them Brian clearly outdoes JP.
Regarding your comment that one can't compare yet JP and Brian in terms of lasting influence, when Queen stopped existing in '91, Brian had already been in the upper echelon of guitarists for more than a decade.
-
Exactly, music is subjective. To say that one is clearly better than the other is impossible. If you value those particular qualities where May outdoes JP, that's fine. But other people might not. Personally, I couldn't care less about lasting influence because how a culture is shaped has nothing to do with how good a musician is. I mean, again, going back to my example of The Beatles, their lasting influence is immense, but I wouldn't call any one of them the best at their respective instruments.
Uniqueness and character are also subjective. I'm not sure how May CLEARLY outdoes JP in those departments. If by uniqueness you mean he had his own very signature sound, yes, he did, but with any artist that has a unique sound, as iconic as it may be, part of it comes from personal limitations. Look at David Draiman. He has one of the most unique singing voices in Metal, and you instantly know when it's him, but that pretty much nails him down into one particular style, and he'd have a hard time doing justice to certain other genres, because his voice is more suitable for Metal.
With Queen, yes, they were a very, very diverse band, but I would say that's mostly attributed to the fact that their songs were often led by different instruments. Between songs that were driven by drums, piano, or other types of keyboard sounds, if anything, I'd say there werent enough guitar driven Queen songs. Anyway, my point is, Queen's diverse sound didn't come because of May, but in spite of him, and even though he's a terrific guitar player, I'd be a lot more impressed if he had more diversity than that he has a recognizable signature style.
Again, clearly, this is a matter of what a person values the most, and yes, of course most people will pick Queen's guitar player over DT's guitar player because Queen has made more of a cultural impact and became the more popular band. But for my money, JP is a vastly superior guitar player to Brian May. To me, chops and versatility hold a lot more importance than uniqueness or character, neither of which JP is lacking either.
-
To say that JPNis more rounded than Brian May is obviously ignorant of Brian May's output. Just like saying that half of Queen's output is synth oriented, given that Queen took pride in putting a no synth label in their albums, with May doing wonders in the guitar that people actually thought they were using synths.
-
To say that JPNis more rounded than Brian May is obviously ignorant of Brian May's output. Just like saying that half of Queen's output is synth oriented, given that Queen took pride in putting a no synth label in their albums, with May doing wonders in the guitar that people actually thought they were using synths.
Well, I don't know what they were using. But I know that's not guitar I'm hearing leading songs like Radio Gaga, I Want To Break Free, The Show Must Go On and I'm Going Slightly Mad. To name a few.
-
What ??
They absolutely used synths in Queen. Maybe not in the early days but they definitely did.
-
IIRC, The Game is where Queen starting using synths.
-
Let me clarify. The statement I contested is the claim that half of Queen's output is synth oriented. Their entire 1970s discography does not have any synth whatsoever. All the synth-like sounds from Queen to Jazz are from the genius of Brian May's imagination of what a guitar can do. They started uaing synths in The Game, and even then, a lot of aongs in that album are not synth heavy, like Another One Bites the Dust and Crazy Little Thing Called Love. They became synth heavy starting in Hot Space, but they had lots of songs that are guitar heavy like Hammer to Fall. They cut down on the synths in Innuendo.
-
They started uaing synths in The Game, and even then, a lot of aongs in that album are not synth heavy, like Another One Bites the Dust and Crazy Little Thing Called Love.
Yeah, but even those songs don't have anything special going on guitar wise.
And yeah, before The Game, they didn't use Synths, but instead, a lot of the songs were very piano driven instead. Heck, half of the awesomeness of Bohemian Rhapsody comes from the piano work on that song.
-
You know what, I would stop arguing because you seems to be so unfamiliar with Queen's work with tour generalizations it's pointless. I personally do not comment on the body of work of musicians that I have not heard substantially all the work so that I can give an informed opinion about it. So in the case of guitarists, I only give opinions on May, JP, Vai , Page, Nuno and Hendrix. I personally do not see how anybody can say objectively say that JP is more versatile than a guy who played all sorts of styles from rockabilly to proto-trash to some prog to some classical to blues and country and several other styles.
-
I personally do not see how anybody can say objectively say that JP is more versatile than a guy who played all sorts of styles from rockabilly to proto-trash to some prog to some classical to blues and country and several other styles.
Because JP hasn't played that many different styles? Between all of DT's discography and all the covers that DT has done, I think JP has more than proven that he can pretty much play any style Brian May can, and more. Just because he hasn't dabbled in rockabilly (that I know of) doesn't mean he wouldn't easily be able to do it if he wanted to. It's not exactly more complex than stuff he'd already done.
Of course, same goes for Brian May, for all we know he can shred faster than JP, and just hasn't shown it. But somehow I doubt that.
-
That doesn't make sense. Queen was a far more diverse band than Dream Theater could ever dream of being, and while Petrucci is a beast, assuming he can just play any style he hasn't yet at a high level is silly; less complex doesn't always mean easier to play for every musician. Considering that you yourself admitted to preferring chops over uniqueness and character, I am really happy I don't have your ears. :lol :biggrin:
-
See, you made the argument on versatility, but you can not even tell me concretely what musical style JP did that May did not dabble into other than shred. (and May did shred, you just have to be familiar with his work to point out which songs he made shredding solos.)
-
That doesn't make sense. Queen was a far more diverse band than Dream Theater could ever dream of being,
Yes, but we're not talking about the whole band, we're talking about one musician. Queen was in large part an effort of all four members, Freddie Mercury being one of the main composers of the band. And like I said, a lot of their songs weren't guitar oriented. Being a more versatile guitar player doesn't necessarily mean having a more diverse band. But like I said, with all the covers DT had done, they've JP has had the opportunity to play far more styles than DT's discography in particular expresses.
and while Petrucci is a beast, assuming he can just play any style he hasn't yet at a high level is silly; less complex doesn't always mean easier to play for every musician.
Not for every musician. But "JP has chops, therefore he can't play anything slow and mellow" is not exactly an accurate statement. He has proven that he can just as easily handle playing slower, more melodic passages as fast and intricate stuff.
See, you made the argument on versatility, but you can not even tell me concretely what musical style JP did that May did not dabble into other than shred. (and May did shred, you just have to be familiar with his work to point out which songs he made shredding solos.)
Well, how about Metal? I mean, yes, Queen dabbled in what can techincally be considered Metal, but they really weren't a very heavy band. Nothing at the level of Metallica, or heavier, the way DT has done, with Pantera inspired songs like The Glass Prison, or faster thrashier stuff like Honor Thy Father. JP dabbled in pretty much every subgenre of Metal short of Extreme Metal genres. And Metal in itself has a lot of very diverse sounds, which I'm pretty sure Brian May has never been interested in.
But nothing I can say will convince you, and frankly, I'm not trying to convince you. I think JP is more versatile, I think JP is a better guitar player, if you don't agree that's fine, but don't be saying that my opinion is invalid, dude.
-
Go listen to Stone Cold Crazy and then realize that that song came out in 1974. It may not be Pantera- or Metallica-heavy, but for 1974, that was pretty damn heavy and fast.
"JP has chops, therefore he can't play anything slow and mellow" - I never said that.
-
Go listen to Stone Cold Crazy and then realize that that song came out in 1974.
Revolutionary, different, awesome, yes. Way ahead of its time... Your point?
"JP has chops, therefore he can't play anything slow and mellow" - I never said that.
Right, so I think JP has proven that he's capable of playing slower more melodic stuff. So I'm fairly sure that if he ever wanted to play rockabilly, he wouldn't have too much difficulty with it.
-
Go listen to Stone Cold Crazy and then realize that that song came out in 1974.
Revolutionary, different, awesome, yes. Way ahead of its time... Your point?
Uh, that May could play metal, which you cleverly tried to dispute.
Right, so I think JP has proven that he's capable of playing slower more melodic stuff. So I'm fairly sure that if he ever wanted to play rockabilly, he wouldn't have too much difficulty with it.
But you don't know that. But hey, if we are giving credit to guys for stuff we've never seen them actually play, I'll say that I'm fairly sure that Brian May could play any kind of extreme metal if he wanted to. See, I can play that game, too. :)
-
Uh, that May could play metal, which you cleverly tried to dispute.
I wouldn't call that song Metal, but okay "early metal" maybe. It's not speed metal, it's not thrash metal, it's not power metal, it's not symphonic metal. And again, I'm not saying that May couldn't learn to play those styles if he wanted to, but he certainly hasn't dabbled in them.
But you don't know that. But hey, if we are giving credit to guys for stuff we've never seen them actually play, I'll say that I'm fairly sure that Brian May could play any kind of extreme metal if he wanted to. See, I can play that game, too. :)
Maybe... But I haven't heard him ever play that fast, and I'm pretty sure he can't. But hey, chops don't count, right?
-
Again, something I never said. You're really reaching now, since you keep trying put words in my mouth. Enjoy your chops and leave the good stuff to those of us who can appreciate uniqueness and character. :biggrin:
-
That song in that era was metal. Come on TGP.
-
Enjoy your chops and leave the good stuff to those of us who can appreciate uniqueness and character. :biggrin:
Okay, now you're just baiting me. You're basically implying that JP doesn't play "good stuff" or that he doesn't have uniqueness and character at all. But of course, that's just me putting words in your mouth. ::)
That song in that era was metal. Come on TGP.
It was heavy for its era, but the heaviest music of any given era isn't automatically classified as Metal. But I mean, there are people out there who say that Led Zeppelin was the first Metal band and that AC/DC is Metal too, so, it's up to the individual definition, I guess. But I wouldn't call it Metal.
-
]I wouldn't call that song Metal, but okay "early metal" maybe. It's not speed metal, it's not thrash metal, it's not power metal, it's not symphonic metal. And again, I'm not saying that May couldn't learn to play those styles if he wanted to, but he certainly hasn't dabbled in them.
But those genres weren't even invented at that point, and further, they were built upon the foundation that Queen and many others laid.
-
Yes, but being built on their foundation doesn't retroactively turn those bands into that genre. I man, Rock'n'Roll was built on the foundations of Blues artists, but that doesn't mean that those Blues artists should be classified as Rock'n'Roll as a result.
-
You're basically implying that JP doesn't play "good stuff" or that he doesn't have uniqueness and character at all.
Uh, no. You are really reaching now. I already said in this thread that:
a) Petrucci is one of my favorites.
b) Music is not all about chops.
So for you to think I am implying that Petrucci doesn't have uniqueness or character makes zero sense. Of course I think JP has uniqueness and character (unlike many modern day shredders), otherwise how could be a favorite of mine?
-
You're basically implying that JP doesn't play "good stuff" or that he doesn't have uniqueness and character at all.
Uh, no. You are really reaching now. I already said in this thread that:
a) Petrucci is one of my favorites.
b) Music is not all about chops.
So for you to think I am implying that Petrucci doesn't have uniqueness or character makes zero sense. Of course I think JP has uniqueness and character (unlike many modern day shredders), otherwise how could be a favorite of mine?
I'm not reaching. All I'm saying is that I think Petrucci is the better guitar player, and chops have a lot to do with it. And you said, "Well, enjoy your chops, I'm gonna go enjoy the good stuff."
Music is not all about chops, I know that. But just because I really enjoy something simple and catchy like Twisted Sister, doesn't mean that I'm going to claim that JJ French is an amazing guitar player. He's not. He gets the job done, and I have total respect for him. And I'd listen to bands like Twisted Sister and Disturbed over, say, Yngwie Malmsteen or Dragonforce any day, because yes, it is about style over chops, when it comes to what one listens to. But just because I prefer the former two bands, doesn't mean I can't recognize that the latter two have superior guitar players.
Just the same, saying JP is a better guitar player than May doesn't automatically equate to, "therefore Dream Theater is a better band than Queen." Being a superior musician doesn't mean you have the superior band, but this discussion isn't about who's the better or more diverse band, this discussion is purely about these two individuals and their ability to play their instruments. And I think JP is superior in that particular area.
-
On a separate topic, it's also worth pointing out that JP is slowly "winding down" in terms of skill. Many of his chromatic runs are done "let's make it to the end on time" vs the solid reproduction of the album material back in the day.
Again, this is all said in comparison to Brian May. I think it's pretty safe to judge JP's impact on the world of guitar playing at this point, since he's slowly winding down. And when you compare the corpus of both players by the time they wound down, Brian clearly was way ahead.
And to put it really succinctly, Brian May is a legend. John Petrucci, as good as he is, is not.
-
To be fair, the 60's and 70's were the ideal time to claim legend status. Since the 90's and onwards, the rock music market had become so fragmented (this is a good thing) that there are simply no more legends of the instrument/vocal, everything has been done and invented before. Coming from someone who's favorite guitarist is Brian May, I think technical skill is way underrated nowadays because appreciating it gives you the reputation of the anti-musical nerd who jerks off to Yngwie Malmsteen, while the truth is way simpler - higher technical skill gives you more leeway and allows you to compose and play out anything you could possibly imagine. When combined with excellent songwriting, it gives you magnificent pieces of work such as... well, Images and Words? :)
For what it's worth, I don't think you could claim Brian May or David Gilmore are less technically skilled than JP? There is no god-given talent to make a prodigy play like David Gilmore plays, there is no way you can just pick up a guitar and translate emotion into sound. A lot of cold calculation and nerding off with the guitar must be done before you're capable of writing music history like the guitarists of the 70's did. A lot of the stuff they did then was cutting edge.
-
Someone saying Stone Cold Crazy isn't a metal song.
Oh good lord. :rollin
-
I mostly consider metal songs to come from metal bands which were classed as metal even back then (I'm not into calling Blue Cheer or In A Gadda Da Vidda metal if you catch my drift), and Queen really wasn't a metal band. But yeah, that song, in terms of structure and heaviness it's shoulder to shoulder with most of what Black Sabbath was doing at the time.
-
For what it's worth, i will definitely concede that it's a lot easier to become a legend in your field when the field is nascent. But, Steve Vai, Tom Morello, Slash, Eddie Van Halen and others would disagree.
-
Queen did not delve into metal. Half of Queen's songs are synth-oriented. Most of Queen's songs in the 1970s are piano-driven. Brian May did not play fast.
TGP, I am not convincing you to like Brian May over JP. I have had enough experience in this forum that you never change your mind on anythying. What I would like to suggest, though, is for you to not comment on things you do not know much about because you are entitled to your opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts. Based on your representations of Queen and Brian May's music in this thread, my impression is that you have not even heard 75% of Queen's output. Do not speak as if you can authoritatively comment on Brian May's playing if you are just basing it on two Greatest hits albums.
-
Again, something I never said. You're really reaching now, since you keep trying put words in my mouth. Enjoy your chops and leave the good stuff to those of us who can appreciate uniqueness and character. :biggrin:
No offence or anything, but no one needs to put words in your mouth to interpret an implication, which is mostly what I see happening. Your comments might imply something, then you deny that you said that version of the interpretation. I'm not saying that happened every time, but it did sound like you made an implication about JP, at least by comparison with the way you worded that statement.
On a separate topic, it's also worth pointing out that JP is slowly "winding down" in terms of skill. Many of his chromatic runs are done "let's make it to the end on time" vs the solid reproduction of the album material back in the day.
Again, this is all said in comparison to Brian May. I think it's pretty safe to judge JP's impact on the world of guitar playing at this point, since he's slowly winding down. And when you compare the corpus of both players by the time they wound down, Brian clearly was way ahead.
And to put it really succinctly, Brian May is a legend. John Petrucci, as good as he is, is not.
Jumping the gun a bit? What could possibly make you determine that JP is 'winding down'? I'm not suggesting this will be the case, but I wouldn't assume so much as they're nearly done. For all we know DT hasn't hit their prime and are only half way through their careers. Besides, what does that even mean, winding down? Chances are an experienced guitarist is more likely to be able to integrate more of the styles they've played over the years to demonstrate even more versatility.
To be fair, the 60's and 70's were the ideal time to claim legend status. Since the 90's and onwards, the rock music market had become so fragmented (this is a good thing) that there are simply no more legends of the instrument/vocal, everything has been done and invented before. Coming from someone who's favorite guitarist is Brian May, I think technical skill is way underrated nowadays because appreciating it gives you the reputation of the anti-musical nerd who jerks off to Yngwie Malmsteen, while the truth is way simpler - higher technical skill gives you more leeway and allows you to compose and play out anything you could possibly imagine. When combined with excellent songwriting, it gives you magnificent pieces of work such as... well, Images and Words? :)
For what it's worth, I don't think you could claim Brian May or David Gilmore are less technically skilled than JP? There is no god-given talent to make a prodigy play like David Gilmore plays, there is no way you can just pick up a guitar and translate emotion into sound. A lot of cold calculation and nerding off with the guitar must be done before you're capable of writing music history like the guitarists of the 70's did. A lot of the stuff they did then was cutting edge.
Yeah, I agree with a lot of what you've said here but I'll also use your comment as an outlet to make a few points. :lol
So if something is cutting edge, it's going to be more renown and memorable. So, what happens when someone emulates one of these 'legendary' styles in a similar way but also somehow objectively; improves upon it technically (perhaps by having more variation, less repetition). The new creation inspired by the legendary creation could have all the criteria that could make it debatably superior to the original. But it was written today and doesn't get as much recognition. It won't have as much of an impact, and due to the paradoxical nature of it's composition requiring the aforementioned influence, can never have a comparable impact because it's not cutting edge. So what determines that someone gets legendary status? That they pioneered, or founded a certain style? That's one way for sure, but how does one become a legend today? My living up to the preconceived status of these former legends? My trying to emulate them as closely as possible until they get recognition? Or do they have to come up with something completely unique and obscure so they can be regognised as innovative instead of being traditionally contemporary.
I guess my point is, it's always gonna be subjective so unless we can come up with some kind of guitar player versatility test with various excersises to assess the players, based on: ability (skill/style), creative potential and improvisational ability, understanding of musical structures and patterns (theory), performance ability/technique (by sight, ear or memory). And no matter what test there is, it'd still be as useless as any other "objective analayse" because of subjective interpretation and the inability to accurately measure abstract attributes. This is just my point of view as a music teacher, I would never bother making these comparisons with any sort of certainty. And for what it's worth, I prefer JPs style because I appreciate less predictable musical patterns favoured by prog in general (not that May doesn't have some of these qualities). But I can't determine who is a better player because there's a point that a musician reaches where the measurement of their skill transcends the simple conception of what generally makes a good player. Obviously a learner is still developing their identity, which can take years. But clearly May and Petrucci are not beginners, they have developed and cemented their styles over many years, and have a firm grip on how to play their instrument in a variety of ways. They could probably both express whatever comes into their head on their instrument which will result in different appeal of different material due to different influences. Not one of us can assume the other can't play a certain style, because they probably could if they wanted to. I think Queen's body of work is kind of beyond what Dream Theater has achieved popularity wise, but hardly any of that recognition is because of the guitar player. It's in spite of him for sure, but I think you'll find most people that casually appreciate Queen don't even know who Brian May is. So I wouldn't use Queen's popularity to determine the skill of the guitarist and then relatively compare that to the success of another band to measure skill.
-
Jumping the gun a bit? What could possibly make you determine that JP is 'winding down'? I'm not suggesting this will be the case, but I wouldn't assume so much as they're nearly done. For all we know DT hasn't hit their prime and are only half way through their careers.
Err, yeah. Its of course your choice to believe so, but I think most people see DT in the last third of their career.
Regarding JP, I say it from the viewpoint of being a guitarist myself. JP's playing just doesn't have the fluidity and ease it used to have. I rewatched the old videos a while ago, and those were the grand days of JP's playing. He's holding up impressively well these days, but in terms of his overall impact, I think we've seen all there is.
-
I follow you, there was something about the young JP that seemed innovative and full of potential, just watching old stuff like Live in Tokyo gives this impression. But I still don't believe that being in the last third of your career (or however you want to separate the timespan) correlates to the guitarist winding down. It's an understandable concept that a player might just chill and ride the wave a bit more casually towards the 'end', but I don't necessarily believe this 'winding down' factor should imply any kind of expectation and I couldn't say that about JP yet. Can you?
-
I'm all saying this in the thread's argument of "greater life work", which I think most people voting in that poll are considering. While I agree that JP won't put down his guitar anytime soon, do you really expect JP to start an important new chapter that would make people revise their assessment of him? He has not changed his playing style since ToT, and that's 11 years ago.
-
He's gotten comfortable with his style since ToT probably. I still reckon that he's remained quite versatile, always experimenting with his tones and technique, each album still has a unique difference in sound to some varying degrees. At the very least, I believe JP is still quite capable of surprising us, and I couldn't confidently believe that about too many players. Although I don't quite know what more we're expecting him to do, he's already achieved more than many musicians could hope for. If anything we're more likely to see more original/experimental material from a solo album than in DT. Anyway, I suppose it's an honor in and of itself just for JP to go up against Brian May as far as recognition goes. :biggrin:
-
For what it's worth, i will definitely concede that it's a lot easier to become a legend in your field when the field is nascent. But, Steve Vai, Tom Morello, Slash, Eddie Van Halen and others would disagree.
They still played in this unfragmented chunk of rock music that's appealing to everyone (and Van Halen had some techniques left to pioneer), and most of them made their name at the tail end of the 80's, beginning of the 90's. Except Morello, but I've heard more people who consider Petrucci a rock legend than Morello.
So what determines that someone gets legendary status? That they pioneered, or founded a certain style? That's one way for sure, but how does one become a legend today? My living up to the preconceived status of these former legends? My trying to emulate them as closely as possible until they get recognition? Or do they have to come up with something completely unique and obscure so they can be regognised as innovative instead of being traditionally contemporary.
Tbh I think that we as a civilization are not really ready to admit legendary status to anything or anyone that's relatively contemporary and fresh. Only when 20+ years pass and the style isn't played by anyone anymore/the band has broken up/the person in question has died (we were pretty fast to declare Kurt Cobain and Jeff Buckley legends), then we're talkin'. But not a lot before that.
I have a lot of my late dad's issues of the famous Yugoslavian rock magazine Jukebox (from '75 and onwards), and basically they were all about the 60's, Cream this and Cream that, why did the Beatles fall apart, what is the future of rock'n'roll (most people thought it was winding down) when prog, Black Sabbath, Rainbow, Queen were happening right in front of their noses. In the era there were some fans and journalists that were discerning and wanted to make new legends and recognize them, and that was usually what happened, but a lot of people who were fawning over Queen when Freddie died were the same people who thought of them as a "meh" band even after A Night At The Opera. Not that they are a representative sample of that, but my mom and dad thought Queen actually couldn't really play and that they used studio magic for everything until I showed them a DVD when I was like 13 or something.
-
Again, something I never said. You're really reaching now, since you keep trying put words in my mouth. Enjoy your chops and leave the good stuff to those of us who can appreciate uniqueness and character. :biggrin:
No offence or anything, but no one needs to put words in your mouth to interpret an implication, which is mostly what I see happening. Your comments might imply something, then you deny that you said that version of the interpretation. I'm not saying that happened every time, but it did sound like you made an implication about JP, at least by comparison with the way you worded that statement.
Well, I can't help it if someone wrongly assumes I meant something, when things I have actually said in this thread indicate otherwise. :)
-
Queen did not delve into metal. Half of Queen's songs are synth-oriented. Most of Queen's songs in the 1970s are piano-driven. Brian May did not play fast.
TGP, I am not convincing you to like Brian May over JP. I have had enough experience in this forum that you never change your mind on anythying. What I would like to suggest, though, is for you to not comment on things you do not know much about because you are entitled to your opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts. Based on your representations of Queen and Brian May's music in this thread, my impression is that you have not even heard 75% of Queen's output. Do not speak as if you can authoritatively comment on Brian May's playing if you are just basing it on two Greatest hits albums.
Not sure how someone who keeps saying Brian May didn't play fast or half of Queen's output was synth based is able to authoritatively speak on Brian May's playing myself, actually. If anyone sounds like they're basing Queen on Greatest Hits Albums here it's you.
-
Agreed, Jaq. Saying half of Queen's material is synth-based makes no sense, considering the first seven albums have ZERO synths, and while they used synths quite a bit in the 80s, there are still plenty of songs that had zero or little synth, and even many that did used them for color, not to base a song around them.
-
Queen did not delve into metal. Half of Queen's songs are synth-oriented. Most of Queen's songs in the 1970s are piano-driven. Brian May did not play fast.
TGP, I am not convincing you to like Brian May over JP. I have had enough experience in this forum that you never change your mind on anythying. What I would like to suggest, though, is for you to not comment on things you do not know much about because you are entitled to your opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts. Based on your representations of Queen and Brian May's music in this thread, my impression is that you have not even heard 75% of Queen's output. Do not speak as if you can authoritatively comment on Brian May's playing if you are just basing it on two Greatest hits albums.
Not sure how someone who keeps saying Brian May didn't play fast or half of Queen's output was synth based is able to authoritatively speak on Brian May's playing myself, actually. If anyone sounds like they're basing Queen on Greatest Hits Albums here it's you.
I was sarcastically repeating TGP's statements! I am the one who is saying that Queeen's songs are not synth oriented, that they delved into metal, and that Brian May played fast, contrary to what TGP was saying. Should I have used the sarcasm font?
-
I don't know what makes some of you guys the authority on Queen, but you're clearly nitpicking details in an attempt to completely disregard some otherwise valid points. They didn't delve into metal, they just played in a style that would practically become a staple for metal. But Stone Cold Crazy wasn't metal at the time, it can be said in retrospect that it's a type of metal, but they didn't set out to play metal or deliberately have a go at 'delving into some metal', they simply demonstrated a type of expression of their own style and unintentionally pioneered a genre to various extents, similar to what the Beetles did with Helter Skelter for example.
Half the stuff that popularised the band in the latter part of their career is full of synths and is all over the greatest hits album(s). Synth also being a predominant feature that a majority of casual Queen fans stereotypically associate with Queen (studio effects and synth). And when it's not synth, it's piano. So I wouldn't necessarily take a statement regarding 'half of Queen's songs being synth', or that 'half of the songs in the first part of their career were piano based instead', too literally. I think the point was more a generalisation to the effect that; if it's not a guitar tune, it's a piano centered tune. You don't have to divide it in half for that to be a fair statement. And that point was related to the composition of the music not always being dependent on the guitarist and therefore not a very relevant comparison when comparing bands and guitar players. Especially if one is a primary composer, and one is only sometimes filling that role. Finally, I appreciate the wider range of Queen's music, but I know people that are much bigger fans of Queen than myself, and they still only listen to the greatest hits albums and only know the hits, fact is Queen is mostly associated with those songs. Of course, this is DTF so I'm not surprised that you're nitpicking. And that I'm bothering to nitpick your nitpick. :P
Whatever, I just thought some people are missing the point of the original discussion.
-
The context of the discussion actually is that there was a claim that JP is better than Brian May because JP supposedly is more versatile than May. I engaged in the discussion because it is an interesting claim, and I have listened to full discographies of Queen and DT. But apparently, the one making the claim has not listened to enough Queen while having listened to the whole DT discography. How can the versatility of May be judged contrasted to JP if only a handful of songs have been listened to? I mean, if you would discuss versatility of somebody's guitar playing, at least listen to his body of work substantially.
i was actually expecting a healthy discussion, until these questionable generalizations about Queen's music was put forward.
-
The trouble with the comparison between Queen and DT could be be underpinned by the fanbase.
DT has a fanbase where the majority of the listeners know or are getting to know the back catalogue as a whole. This is because DT don't really have hits that you can hang your hat on. Basically, no one track or album (as is testified here by frequent debates) stands out high above the rest.
Quee non the other hand have a majority fanbase of casual listeners. Essentially, everybody has an opinion on Queen. The problem is that, the majority opinion is wrong (that can happen). Queen were often called Glam rock in the 70's. That was pigeon holing as most of their output was more prog in that they went anywhere and everywhere they could. They did evolve into a much straighter outfit into the 80's but they did still experiment. The fanbase generally views them as a pop band. Yet, metal heads, rock fans and Queen geeks (which I am) know that Queen were always so much more than anything anyone could pin on them. They really were a band where the whole was greater than the sum of its parts.
Anybody saying that Queen were just this or just that and basing that on their greatest hits is just as absurd as doing the same with DT based on songs like I walk beside you or Another Day. That's just one facet of DT just as Queens hits were generally only representative of one facet of Queens style. Fact is, Queen rarely is ever had any real discernible style which probably has given their music the longevity it has.
Remember, this is the same band that played heavy rock/metal (Stone Cold Crazy), thrash punk (Sheer Heart Attack), funk (another one bites the dust), dixie land jazz (good company), ragtime (bring back that leroy brown), prog rock (prohets song), Baroque (procession), pop (a kind of magic) and so on. Even that is a very small selection.
None of it seems out of place looked on as a whole, but it's so difficult to name any other group of musician that did all of that as convincingly as Queen did. Could DT do it? Yes of course they could. But it would be ridiculous to hear DT do a Charleston parody on the next album. Somehow, Queen managed to slip in and out of these genres with natural ease. That's the difference. It all just seemed to work.
Dismissing Queen as a pop rock band is a bit short sighted and means you're missing out on one of the great back catalogues. I wouldn't really want anyone dismissing DT as just a prog metal band for the same reason.
-
Remember, this is the same band that played heavy rock/metal (Stone Cold Crazy), thrash punk (Sheer Heart Attack), funk (another one bites the dust), dixie land jazz (good company), ragtime (bring back that leroy brown), prog rock (prohets song), Baroque (procession), pop (a kind of magic) and so on. Even that is a very small selection.
None of it seems out of place looked on as a whole, but it's so difficult to name any other group of musician that did all of that as convincingly as Queen did. Could DT do it? Yes of course they could. But it would be ridiculous to hear DT do a Charleston parody on the next album. Somehow, Queen managed to slip in and out of these genres with natural ease. That's the difference. It all just seemed to work.
That's the amazing part about Queen, yeah. Maybe it's because they started doing it right from the get-go.
-
i was actually expecting a healthy discussion, until these questionable generalizations about Queen's music was put forward.
Oh it's still interesting, doesn't mean it's a healthy discussion though. :P In all fairness, these generalisations about Queen are relevant and also valid from different perspectives. An opinion can't be wrong, it's just a point of view. Now it can be an incomplete point of view, but it can still develop an impression and come to it's own conclusions. Which is what my point was regarding the Queen fanbase (which I'm also generalising), that most of them don't even know who Brian May is (I asked a few people yesterday at work after seeing the discussion in this thread and I wasn't surprised that people that are into Queen, still don't know who he is). They've got a very different fanbase (but also similarly diverse) that's more about experiencing the music than picking it apart for analysis. I don't know how fair this assumption would be, but most DT fans I know also know the names of all the band members and seem more aware of those details. Don't know what that's supposed to say about that particular scenario but there you go. :lol
-
It seems you are using the term "into Queen" very loosely here. Almost by definition, not knowing the guitarist of a band puts an upper limit to how much that person is "into" the band.
-
I am inclined to agree because that's a fair statement, but I think you overestimate the casual listener's interest in those sort of details. Perhaps a dedicated fan would surely know, but I'm not using it all too loosely because I'm talking about friends who are really "into" the band, they would even say Queen is one of their favourite bands, but they'd be lumped in with a lot of other bands whom they also don't know the lineup. It's just the bands and the music those bands play that's of any interest. I think it's another level of fandom when you start digging deeper like we do, but I wouldn't say by definition that they have to know these details even if they're very much into the band, ya know?
-
Then the casual listener should not really judge Brian May as less versatile than JP, would you say? Hehehe
Anyway, to get back into topic, how indeed would you compare JP to May as a guitarist? What aspects of guitar musicianship do you think favor one player over the other?
In my own assessment, JP is better in shredding. They are just about equal in composing riffs, they just have different genres. I find May a better soloist, knowing how to elicit more emotion on a fewer notes. I also find May more imaginative, which I think made him find a signature sound while also managing to cross musical styles with ease.
-
Then the casual listener should not really judge Brian May as less versatile than JP, would you say? Hehehe
Correct. But in the same regard it also means the band's popularity is irrelevant as well if we were to consider it in the equation.
Anyway, as far as considering aspects of guitar musicianship. It's a bit hard for me to determine because I'm actually a pianist and only play a bit of guitar. But I would say (and mentioned something to similar effect earlier) there's a point where the whole comparison is pointless because both players have practically transcended the boundaries of what can measure a great player. They're both legends if you ask me and after that, it comes down to matters of taste because what is left to measure when they both have enough skill to play the same content if they wanted to, just in their own style. I'm a JP fanboy and he's one of my all time favourite guitarists so that speaks for itself. But Brian May is still a phenomenal guitarist and constantly impresses me. He can certainly surprise me with his solos, and some of the effects and harmonies are really unique to his style and just sound divine. I still feel JP tends to integrate more styles into his playing at once, but such is the nature of progressive music. BM has still demonstrated huge variety in his playing too, but more on an individual song basis stylistically. :biggrin:
-
Well said. So maybe it's time to put this discussion to rest? :rollin
Anyway, time for some sexy Queen + Adam Lambert shit. :p
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFAFXSeW4KQ
-
I just looked at the setlist of the current tour with Adam Lambert. You know, I probably wouldn't mind seeing the Queen, but the ticket prices, combined with the really generic setlist, just doesn't make it worth it.