duccichucka said:

Elmer, now you are cutting your nose off to spite your face; you are trying to defend an opinion that you know is impossible to defend for assuaging that same opinion.

You just said:

"No amount of exposition will suffice to make it (pleasant sounds) objective fact."

If this is true, then how can you make it (soul) an objective fact as well?; or, something to point out and claim that s/he has or does not have? How can you say "what I like is subjective" but "this dude has no soul"?

You can qualify your assertions about what you like. You can say: "I like Malmsteen because of his technique, compositional skills, precision, etc." Then you can go about explaining what exactly is it about Malmsteen's use of the Lydian mode, etc. Hell, most of music theory is just that - a theory. Music is not a law.

But you cannot qualify whether or not a musician has soul or not. You, or any of the other ding dongs in this thread who suppose they can, can not either. Because there is no such thing as 'soul' (i.e. immaterial) - you believe that the immaterial exists. Otherwise, it's material and belief is not required.

So I say again - what you and everybody in this thread has done is to simply list artists whose musicianship is aurally pleasing. But to claim 'so and so' has soul or doesn't, is bullshit and you don't know what you are talking about. You cannot back up your claim because you cannot prove, point out or indicate what soul is, who has it, who doesn't have it, etc.

All of y'all need to get off of your high horse and stop acting like you are an authority on what musician has soul - say what you really mean to say (I like Coltrane!) and keep it moving.

Look moron, can you read? or am I to qualify statements I never made because you didn't have the basest knowledge of language to make sense of an evaluative adjective in the first place.

Soul, "whatever that is", has nothing to do with reality because language has nothing to do with reality. Even the word reality is just a word. Love is as analogous to soul as any other I'm afraid, and it doesn't begin to emphasise arbitrariness. -If that was your point. I mean, that's if you weren't just trying to seem superficially clever on your voyage to nowhere.

And don't bother with the non-sequiturs. Toodle pip.

I have this funny Alan Holdsworth story I have to tell you. I'll PM you about it.

theAudience said:

Pretty much in agreement, especially with the player you used as an example at the very end.

However, there are those where the solos are built around well crafted compositions.

With respect to modern guitarists, probably the grand-daddy of it all, Allan Holdsworth truly understands this.

Or, if you are more open minded, there's always Fred Frith:

manthevan said:

Holdsworth is one of my absolute favorite guitarists. He has originality, amazing fluid legato techinque that no one has been able to duplicate, he's got a lot of good compositions and he improvises like a God. He never plays the same phrase twice in his solos. He's just incredible!

And he's got a lot of feeling!

^ Not long before that performance at Yoshi's, I attended the show they did here in L.A. I sat right in front of Holdsworth and his rig.

One of the things that impressed me was the fact that he got that incredible lead sound without being oppressively loud.

My old review of the show: http://prince.org/msg/8/203407

Music for adventurous listeners



tA

Tribal Records

2freaky4church1 said:

Or, if you are more open minded, there's always Fred Frith:

I'm willing to guess Thurston Moore picked up some things from him.

Music for adventurous listeners

tA

Tribal Records

elmer said:

Stevie Ray Vaughan - As souless as a rapist mannequin.

Brian May - As souless as a faulty dishwasher.

Eric Clapton - As souless as the most odious, ever-lingering, cancer bud.

elmer said:

duccichucka said:

Elmer, now you are cutting your nose off to spite your face; you are trying to defend an opinion that you know is impossible to defend for assuaging that same opinion.

You just said:

"No amount of exposition will suffice to make it (pleasant sounds) objective fact."

If this is true, then how can you make it (soul) an objective fact as well?; or, something to point out and claim that s/he has or does not have? How can you say "what I like is subjective" but "this dude has no soul"?

You can qualify your assertions about what you like. You can say: "I like Malmsteen because of his technique, compositional skills, precision, etc." Then you can go about explaining what exactly is it about Malmsteen's use of the Lydian mode, etc. Hell, most of music theory is just that - a theory. Music is not a law.

But you cannot qualify whether or not a musician has soul or not. You, or any of the other ding dongs in this thread who suppose they can, can not either. Because there is no such thing as 'soul' (i.e. immaterial) - you believe that the immaterial exists. Otherwise, it's material and belief is not required.

So I say again - what you and everybody in this thread has done is to simply list artists whose musicianship is aurally pleasing. But to claim 'so and so' has soul or doesn't, is bullshit and you don't know what you are talking about. You cannot back up your claim because you cannot prove, point out or indicate what soul is, who has it, who doesn't have it, etc.

All of y'all need to get off of your high horse and stop acting like you are an authority on what musician has soul - say what you really mean to say (I like Coltrane!) and keep it moving.

Look moron, can you read? or am I to qualify statements I never made because you didn't have the basest knowledge of language to make sense of an evaluative adjective in the first place.

Soul, "whatever that is", has nothing to do with reality because language has nothing to do with reality. Even the word reality is just a word. Love is as analogous to soul as any other I'm afraid, and it doesn't begin to emphasise arbitrariness. -If that was your point. I mean, that's if you weren't just trying to seem superficially clever on your voyage to nowhere.

And don't bother with the non-sequiturs. Toodle pip.

Um, I'm sorry, but you just said:

"...because language has nothing to do with reality. Even the world reality is just a word."

Isn't that 'language'? Heheh!!

All 'words' are just sounds/words that we attach meaning to. And you are missing my point, luv: the word 'soul' isn't able to be qualified. It's a word that is an abstract idea - you can't speak of anything having 'soul' or not because it doesn't exist!

Calm your jets - take your beating and chill out captain! See ya around!

And sadly, this thread has turned into a "Let's post videos of obscure musicians of which we cannot prove why they are actually virtuosos to be heralded to show how knowledgeable we are about music!" thread.

Have at it boys!

I wouldn't be too quick to say that Buckethead has no soul. His funk rock chops on "Hideous Mutant Freaks", "Zillatron" and "Col. Claypool" is slammin'. His soothing acoustic solo CD "Colma" is AMAZING.

I love Yngwie's early stuff (Rising Force/Alcatrazz)..had a lot of fire and passion back in those days. And as the other poster mentioned he can play the blues and Jimi stuff when he wants to.

And Greg Howe is the man! Nice guy and a helluva player. When his Varney CD came out back in the late 80's I wore it out. He was the only dude back then who wasn't just about playing 1000 miles and hour.

Brian May, no soul?..Listen to his work on side 1 of the "The Game". SRV?..Overrated but cool. Clapton? Like coffee, better with Cream.

The only 2 guitarists that come to my mind with no feel or soul at all is CC Deville and Kirk Hammett. Quick noodling, bad tone, bad vibrato, etc. Hetfield wipes the floor with Kirk.

Aud..Thanks for the Holdsworth clips. Underrated dude but brilliant. Even EVH thinks so.

Yngwie's used to have plenty of soul, the way he played before the accident in 1987 (which damaged his right hand) was incredible not only in terms of technique. Now days he overplays a lot, his sound is not what it used to be and his technique is a mere shadow of what it used to be when it comes to accuracy. I'll listen to his pre Alcatrazz stuff from Sweden, his album with Alcatrazz and his 3 first solo records any day though. The tone, the bending and the accuracy is what made old school Yngwie so great. And one other thing, contrary to most rock guitarists he can actually improvise on a high level. His solos are normally not thought out in advance. He is more like a fusion or jazz musician in that sense although his selection of notes, melody and harmony are mostly rock with some classical influences.

This acoustic piece called "Crying" from his third album Trilogy shows Yngwie is more than just speed. There's also an improvised electric guitar solo that begins at 2.45 where Yngwie has captured some of Richie Blackmore's sound and added his own touch without overdoing it.

The title track from Yngwies second solo album Marching Out always gives me chills. If you don't like the prelude go directly to his improvised solo that begins at 0.35. Yngwie plays most of this solo in dorian mode (as appose to the harmonic minor and aeolian, and phrygian modes he often plays in and has been criticized for). And he does it so well. The mix of slow blues bends, his unique vibrato, fast dorian mode runs is superb. And he even utilizes the 9th and the whammy bar in a way that almost reminds of the way Allan Holdsworth did on some of his 70th records. I just love this! One of my Yngwie favorites.

People who disregard Yngwie as just a boring shredder should take a closer listen. Although I'm not fond of most of the things Yngwie does now days he used to have such amazing clean tone back in the days and his bending and vibrato on his pre 1987 records is actually what I like most with Yngwie. Listen to the amazing accuracy in his bending and his unique tone on this solo recorded in 1983. It starts at 2.50. The song is called "Suffer Me" and the album is No parole from Rock & Roll.

And if anyone would like to listen to the tasteful shredding by Yngwie that more or less turned the guitar world upside down in the early and mid 80's you should listen to this. This is the song Kree Nakoorie from the Alcatrazz record Yngwie did in 1983. Listen to the solo that begins at 2.45. Listen especially from 3.40-4.30 where Yngwie plays without distortion. Just amazing display of technique and emotion. This SHOULD NOT be mixed up with the boring and sometime inaccurate blurry shredding Yngwie does these days.

[Edited 7/11/11 6:21am]