Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
I really dont think he has any. The work at the beginning of Eminence Front is good but nothing epic. Heck, the most memorable soloing from a stringed instrument in that band is Entwhistle's in "My Generation"

you might be right, but i had a Who song banging through my IPod this past week which had me doing the windmill riffs on my air guitar, which is getting old, but hasn't played a bad note since my teen years.

maybe it's his riffs that i remember. (i'm getting old, too).

 

jw

  • Replies 104
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
you might be right, but i had a Who song banging through my IPod this past week which had me doing the windmill riffs on my air guitar, which is getting old, but hasn't played a bad note since my teen years.

maybe it's his riffs that i remember. (i'm getting old, too).

 

jw

Dont get me wrong. I like him as an entertainer and musician. And The Who is a great band. But that doesn't mean he's s great solo'ist. Heck, plenty of mediocre bands have a memorable solo or two

Posted

As a drummer, I have a love/hate relationship with regards to guitar solos. Raised on jazz, soloing as an art form is in my opinion more pertinent to that genre as a whole. Davis, Coltrane, et al told stories with their solos. Rock guitar soloing is just a totally different animal.

 

That said, I think this conversation begins and ends with Billy Corgan's solo in Hummer.

Posted
As a drummer, I have a love/hate relationship with regards to guitar solos. Raised on jazz, soloing as an art form is in my opinion more pertinent to that genre as a whole. Davis, Coltrane, et al told stories with their solos. Rock guitar soloing is just a totally different animal.

 

That said, I think this conversation begins and ends with Billy Corgan's solo in Hummer.

Rock solos can do the same ... Gilmour on Comfortably Numb is a good example.

Posted
Wasn't that Duane Allman?

 

Certainly sounds more like Allman, come to think of it.

 

I'm not a huge fan of either, though...so I just always kind-of assumed it was Clapton, since he's so well-associated for the song. Doesn't change my point, anyway.

Posted

have to give a mention to Hughie Thomasson of the Outlaws for the rippin solo on "Green Grass and High Tides"

 

also, Martin Barre for the solo for Aqualung. So good, that Jimmy Page tried to distract him from playing it in the studio by banging on the glass while recording...

Posted
have to give a mention to Hughie Thomasson of the Outlaws for the rippin solo on "Green Grass and High Tides"

 

also, Martin Barre for the solo for Aqualung. So good, that Jimmy Page tried to distract him from playing it in the studio by banging on the glass while recording...

Are you serious? I didn't think Page was the jealous type. But I guess drugs and ego will do that to you.

Posted
Certainly sounds more like Allman, come to think of it.

 

I'm not a huge fan of either, though...so I just always kind-of assumed it was Clapton, since he's so well-associated for the song. Doesn't change my point, anyway.

slide guitar gives it away

Posted

Neal Schoen has done a lot of great work and can hold his own with anybody.

 

I think he was pushed out of Santana because he kept blown the old man away.

 

Schoen's work on "Stone in Love" is a good example of lyrical yet blazing work.

Posted
Neal Schoen has done a lot of great work and can hold his own with anybody.

 

I think he was pushed out of Santana because he kept blown the old man away.

 

Schoen's work on "Stone in Love" is a good example of lyrical yet blazing work.

 

There may have been a little tension in Santana that led to Schon leaving to form Journey, but I the idea he was pushed out because he was "too good" is mostly bunk, I think. The real tension at the time, AFAIK, was due more to musical direction and lifestyle than to personal differences or jealousy.

 

Neal could sure play, though. The early days of Journey were very impressive. Schon and Rolie (and the fabulous Anysley Dunbar on drums) carved out a sound that was spacey AND soulful. And Schon demonstrated he had chops combined with sensitivity and imagination. It's hard to believe today that Journey was capable of something like this:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=xhRran...feature=related

 

Unfortunately, Schon's playing changed with the commercialization of Journey's sound. The exploring, beautiful guitar work was replaced with cheap stadium rock anthem riffs.

 

Somewhere in this messy room, I have a Neal Schon solo album. A decent attempt at jazz/rock fusion. It's fine. Nothing special really, but at least it shows he can still play something more intelligent than pap like "Don't Stop Believing". But it also shows he isn't even close to being in Carlos Santana's league, IMO.

Posted

For Schon's sake, I'm glad they went "commercial." Imho, except for the drumming that song's terrible ... kind of like Spinal Tap meets "fusion." Better songs bring out better solo'ing be they commercial or not.

 

And yes Schon felt "the master" Santana was taking the credit for his work. He all but said so when he said he did most of the solo'ing on the album and got no credit.

 

And yes, Schon blows away "the master" too ... who only seems to be the master of bending one note repeatedly.

Posted
For Schon's sake, I'm glad they went "commercial." Imho, except for the drumming that song's terrible ... kind of like Spinal Tap meets "fusion." Better songs bring out better solo'ing be they commercial or not.

 

And yes Schon felt "the master" Santana was taking the credit for his work. He all but said so when he said he did most of the solo'ing on the album and got no credit.

 

And yes, Schon blows away "the master" too ... who only seems to be the master of bending one note repeatedly.

 

I saw Schon play with Santana on more than one occasion. There is no way a Schon solo could be substituted for and/or credited to Carlos. If you saw them play together you would hear the difference in their styles and approaches. What makes that claim even more obviously ridiculous is the fact that Schon didn't join Santana until Santana III. Santana had already had two killer albums (including Abraxas) and absolutely killed at Woodstock.

 

This is an interesting account taken from a Journey-related site:

 

As a testament to Schon's proficiency with his instrument at such an early age, the producer of Santana III, Glen Kolotkin (who also produced Journey's second album), said: "On Santana III there was a song called "Toussaint L'Overture" that became like a contest between Neal and Carlos. Carlos would come in and do a solo. Then Neal would come in the next day and hear it and he'd try to better it. But we only had 16 tracks so he would have to erase over his own solo. It went back and forth like that a bit. I'm convinced to this day that we erased the best solo that Neal ever recorded! He thinks he topped it, but I don't."

 

Neal stayed with Santana briefly before the band disintegrated as Carlos was interested in expanding his sound and lifestyle in a direction that didn't appeal to the rest of the band. Rolie and Schon both left Santana with Schon forming Azteca, a band that would go on to become Graham Central Station, and Rolie opening a restaurant with his father in Seattle.

 

I think Neal might be upset that most people only think of Carlos Santana when they hear "Toussaint L'Overture" and don't know he was trading solos with Carlos. I can understand that. But it's crazy to think he did all/most of the guitar work on a Santana album and Carlos took the credit.

 

As for your preference for the commercial sound, I understand that. Most people find it easier to listen to hooks and a packaged approach to sound. It helps explain why pop music (like Britney Spears and Lady Gaga) is more popular than jazz and classical music.

 

EDIT: Sorry forgot to link the Journey fan site. The article on that page is quite interesting, actually.:

 

http://www.journeydigest.com/Analysis/Greg/jan01.html

 

I don't know what happened to the font after the quote.

Posted

By your reasoning everything labeled "jazz" or "classical" is better than anything on the popular air waves.

 

I call BS on that. Nothing but pretentious nonsense.

 

Plenty of dull, boring, canned examples of jazz and classical pieces.

 

I'll take Schon's soloing on any Journey hit over the derivative dullness of just about any "fusion" music any day.

Posted
By your reasoning everything labeled "jazz" or "classical" is better than anything on the popular air waves.

 

Really? I don't think I said that at all. I think I said it is easier for most people to get/listen to/understand pop music than jazz and classical.

 

I think there is plenty of bad jazz around. Not as much bad classical from the classical era because the stuff that stood the test of time is generally better stuff. But there is plenty of bad newer symphonic music, I think. I'm guessing there was a ton of bad classical music back when it was the popular music of the day. I think only a small % of any genre is excellent. The rest is good, ordinary, bad and downright terrible.

 

But I don't have a lot of respect for musicians (or any artists) who make compromises in what they do primarily to sell records. Especially those artists who demonstrated talent making music/art that was critically acclaimed but may have taken a bit of work for the audience to fully comprehend. It is very rare for something outstanding to be wildly popular...not impossible, but rare. Excellence typically takes a little effort to fully appreciate.

Posted

When you say something like ....

 

"As for your preference for the commercial sound, I understand that. Most people find it easier to listen to hooks and a packaged approach to sound. It helps explain why pop music (like Britney Spears and Lady Gaga) is more popular than jazz and classical music."

 

... you're obviously being dismissive.

 

And I never said I have a general preference for the commercial sound (whatever that is). I said I prefer Schon's later work with Journey to the earlier dullish fusion stuff.

Posted
When you say something like ....

 

"As for your preference for the commercial sound, I understand that. Most people find it easier to listen to hooks and a packaged approach to sound. It helps explain why pop music (like Britney Spears and Lady Gaga) is more popular than jazz and classical music."

 

... you're obviously being dismissive.

 

And I never said I have a general preference for the commercial sound (whatever that is). I said I prefer Schon's later work with Journey to the earlier dullish fusion stuff.

 

My intention was not to be dismissive. I was simply stating what seemed to be an obvious conclusion based on this particular conversation. I wasn't concluding your taste was always commercial, but you like Schon's commercial approach more than his earlier style. And I think while I used a generalization about pop music, I don't think what I said was incorrect.

 

Your characterization of his work in "Of A Lifetime" as 'kind of like Spinal Tap meets "fusion."' is so strange it suggested you were incapable of/or not willing to/or uninterested in doing the work necessary to appreciate a more complex guitar work in that song. Or perhaps you simply don't like "jazz fusion", and there are definitely some minor elements of fusion in that song.

 

Either way, I am not trying to be combative. I'm trying to get to a more substantial conversation about the music.

 

But I am curious, what did you think of that article? And isn't "Frumious Bandersnatch" a classic name for a band from that time?

×
×
  • Create New...