who's are the worst guitarists that "made it"?

[thorny]

I bet if any of us sat down with any of these guys just to jam a little we would change our tune. All of the guys mentioned here have their strengths. I could really never put anybody down that writes their own tunes or anything like that. I can only listen to a guy like Paul Gilbert for awhile and then it gets a little old. But a guy who could write a song like Powderfinger to me is genius. Try learning Captain Kennedy next time your feeling like Neil has no technical ability. I used to be into the whole blazing chops deal back then but now I just want to play my acoustic guitar and sing and play my harmonica.

[donkey kong]

im really surprised at the defense of the guys in matchbox20. obviously blazing solos would not fit in their tunes, and thats not even the point. my point regarding them, and the other wimpy players from the 90s, is that they really did nothing to make the tunes interesting. solos are not always where its at, but creating good guitar parts is really the trick. layering and creating melodies, harmonies, and sub-harmonies is something that great players do. they make music interesting to the listener. i saw counting crows on tv one time and they had 3 guys on guitar......all.....doing.......the........very... ..same........thing. *blah* ... *spit* .... *hack* .... *collapse*

[utah]

Originally Posted by sam.I.am

neil young on acoustic is great. on electric hes laughable, at best. that stupid one note solo on cinnamon girl is a perfect example. *spits*

yeah, matchbox 20 are great players. they can strum 3 chords on their $3k PRS guitars in a slightly different pattern at the same time as to not step on each other. wow. new ground is broken.

You know, respectfully.....I understand that you're not a fan of Matchbox 20. That's cool, that's music. We don't all dig the same things. But don't insult my intelligence just because you think you're smarter than me, when it comes to evaluating guitar players.

I always get a kick out of guys with chips on their shoulders, who feel the need to run down other musicians, who clearly enjoy the success that their critics are unlikely to ever achieve.

[utah]

Originally Posted by sam.I.am

im really surprised at the defense of the guys in matchbox20. obviously blazing solos would not fit in their tunes, and thats not even the point. my point regarding them, and the other wimpy players from the 90s, is that they really did nothing to make the tunes interesting. solos are not always where its at, but creating good guitar parts is really the trick. layering and creating melodies, harmonies, and sub-harmonies is something that great players do. they make music interesting to the listener. i saw counting crows on tv one time and they had 3 guys on guitar......all.....doing.......the........very... ..same........thing. *blah* ... *spit* .... *hack* .... *collapse*

Wow....you saw Counting Crows on TV.

Well, there you go. I guess that does make you an expert on their music. Presumably, you've seen Matchbox 20 on TV as well. I bet you've even heard some of their songs on the radio as well.

My apologies for previously suggesting that you're just a frustrated critic. Clearly, I am in the company of a musical expert. :-)

[reags]

Originally Posted by utah

You know, respectfully.....I understand that you're not a fan of Matchbox 20. That's cool, that's music. We don't all dig the same things. But don't insult my intelligence just because you think you're smarter than me, when it comes to evaluating guitar players.

I always get a kick out of guys with chips on their shoulders, who feel the need to run down other musicians, who clearly enjoy the success that their critics are unlikely to ever achieve.

I'll second that.

I myself for one, am not that good - I can play chords and I get by content because I can play what I want and what I need to, so to read something with grade 5 bashing is quite sad. Utah's right, different styles of music for different people - that's the beauty of music - variety. You like some, others you may not. Let's just leave it at that.

[HereIGoAgain]

Before we get into a snob/anti-snob dynamic here, some things need to be known.

There was a time when, in order to succeed in the music business, you needed a) the equipment, b) talent, and c) dedication. Well, those days are long gone.

Today, those who succeed in the music business, by and large, do so because the major labels feel they are marketable. For example, I know a guy who's so good that Steve Vai would be "just another guitar player" to him. He's in 2 different bands, and he's played in bands for a long time. He'll never get a major record label because (and he's actually been told this) he's not marketable. He'll never be on MTV. Instead, we've got a crap load of whiney pop-princesses, gangsta rappers whose "street cred" is long gone, and a host of others purely because the record labels want us to buy those kinds of records.

Is that to say that those succeeding today lack talent? Not necessarily. But, with all due respect, if you want to talk about chips on shoulders and success, understand how the business works first. Talent is wonderful, but if some suit doesn't think you'll sell, you might as well pack it in and get a day job. (Or produce your own record and slug it out like many AGF'ers are doing.)

[hellbechrome]

Dylan? Neil?
They're all great in comparison to the punk rockers, Johnny Ramone and the guy from the sex pistols... his name eludes me at the moment. David Bowie isn't a very good guitar player at all either, great artist, not so great guitarist. Wayne Coyne from the flaming lips, he's a pretty awful guitarist as well.

[Bern]

Originally Posted by HereIGoAgain

There was a time when, in order to succeed in the music business, you needed a) the equipment, b) talent, and c) dedication. Well, those days are long gone.

I think a) was replaced by good looks.

What does 'the worst guitarist' really mean ? For myself, it means nothing and I don't think about it.
Looking at most responses, I'll predict that in the next 100 years every guitarist that 'made it' will get some honorable mentioning as being the worst guitarist.

[Mattie]

Originally Posted by Bern

Looking at most responses, I'll predict that in the next 100 years every guitarist that 'made it' will get some honorable mentioning as being the worst guitarist.

Exactly... every guitarist who makes it will be declared "unworthy" by someone harboring some kind of professional jealously against their success. And I like Matchbox 20 too!

[Bob Womack]

Originally Posted by sam.I.am

you lost me there, bubba

Ole Nige got a solo in the movie which was, erm, original.

Bob

[Bob Womack]

Originally Posted by beach bob

At the risk of of formenting negativity, I'll submit the name Gary Richrath (REO Speedwagon)...

Preemptive apologies to friends / fans / relatives of Gary's. You know what they say about opinions...

Gary's cousin is a member of the AGF, so that's twice for him. I forgot who the cousin is, but, again, my apologies for my round.

Bob

[banjar]

Ted Nugent

[DaveWilsonUK]

I really have to take issue with this thread and some of it's content. I had to give up reading some of it because it's so negative.

Define the question more fully before slagging off a lot of guys who are a lot more successful than you or I will ever be. What do mean by "worst"? Do you mean "technically worst"? "Worst songwriters?" "Worst dressed"?

Most of the discussion has focussed on technique. Let me point out that that technique is no definer of who is "good" or "bad" in music (or any art). If someone can play an instrument and get someone to listen then they are successful - these guys have played to a lot more people and sold a lot more music than you or I, or most people (everyone?) on this forum. They have inspired people to play. Just because they don't play a lot of notes or have great timing or know a lot of scales or inversions doesn't mean they are "bad".

I'm a big fan of Clapton, but is he a technically perfect guitarist? No! If he was he would lose a lot of the emotion in his playing. His timing is not perfect and sometimes he plays things that "shouldn't" work. Would I rather listen to Clapton than some technically perfect shred-meister? Yes!

Neil Young has been named, but Neil Young on electric puts a lot of emotion into his playing - more than most other guitar players. Sure he doesn't play complex stuff and he doesn't play zillions of notes but would he want to? His approach is not about technique, it's about expressing emotion. If he achieves what he wants then, that must mean he can't be described as "the worst"?

Lack of chops? What about a lot of the blues guys? Dylan? U2? They produce feeling more than technique. Are they worthy of a listen or should we dismiss them because of poor technique?

Without some of these guys, guitar playing would not move forward. We need alternative approaches and we need experimentation or we'll all go round in circles.

Sorry if I spent too long on my soapbox, but I think it's short-sighted to disrespect art because it doesn't follow certain "rules".

How about discussing who sounds great without great technique? Or who is pushing boundaries due to their unconventional approach?

[Jedd]

Originally Posted by thorny

I bet if any of us sat down with any of these guys just to jam a little we would change our tune. All of the guys mentioned here have their strengths. I could really never put anybody down that writes their own tunes or anything like that. I can only listen to a guy like Paul Gilbert for awhile and then it gets a little old. But a guy who could write a song like Powderfinger to me is genius. Try learning Captain Kennedy next time your feeling like Neil has no technical ability. I used to be into the whole blazing chops deal back then but now I just want to play my acoustic guitar and sing and play my harmonica.

Again, I am one of Neil's biggest fans. But when I think of Neil Young, I don't think in terms of 'Neil Young - great guitarist' But when I think of Steven Stills I do. When I think of Joe Walsh, it's Joe Walsh - great guitarist. Bob Dylan- great songwriter etc.

Let's don't confuse how much we love the songs with their reputations as great guitar virtuosos.

(and just for the record, Neil's grandson's stuffed monkey could play better than me. lol.)

[Jedd]

And yes, If I were to read just the title of this thread and then see some of the names that are being thrown around here, I might take issue as well.