Song Quantity or Song Quality

[DukeX]

I only play my own stuff. I used to be a quantity guy but found myself frustrated with the quality of my playing. Now I focus on fewer tunes and play them better. And I'm having more fun.

[BallisticSquid]

Originally Posted by jaymarsch

For me it is both but accuracy in playing well technically and bringing the emotion of the song out rather than 100% copying the original artist. I tend to simplify new music that I am learning so I can get the groove down and then add elements as I feel more comfortable with playing expressively. So, it just depends on what you are trying to accomplish with your music and your playing.

Best,
Jayne

This is how I approach it. First I would look to just get the basic chords down and the form of the song. From there I'd look at chord voicings and some chord embellishments that fit. If there is a solo I'll lift some key licks. If it's an iconic solo, I'll try to mimic the original, otherwise I'd improvise.


I came upon this process by accident. My first band experience as an adult was at a local music store that had an adult rock band program. It was me, another guitarist, drummer, bass player, and conga player. The first song we worked on was Van Morrison's Wild Night. There is a lot of guitar going on in there that is not straight forward. No way was I going to learn the original in a week. I was in a bit of a panic. The other guitar player wanted to play the leads and fills, so I tackled the rhythm part. I worked out some interesting chord voicings and I even came up with a way of incorporating the horns into what I was playing. I improvised a solo.

After being in that program, I found myself gigging for over 4 years and in each band I was in we played that song and I played it the way I had come up with. I improvised the solo so much it became a written part I'd play the same each time.

Audiences appreciated that approach rather than parroting the original. Honestly, as long as they recognize the tune and can sing along, they are happy!

[Laughingboy68]

Quantity. It’s going to sound like me either way. Still, I will hone a song over years, if that’s what it takes to make it better. I will always create my own arrangements and try to present any given song in the best spirit that I can. The ultimate driving influence for me is that I think I love songs more than artists (unless we’re talking Louis Armstrong, Jeff Beck, Mark Knopfler, Danny Gatton, Mandy Patinkin or the like - All inimitable artists in any case). The idea that I’d ever want to imitate the specific sound of another musician is foreign to me - inspired by, absolutely, but I don’t want to sound like anybody but me.

The other factor is that learning many, many songs gives me so much data to explore. Chord substitutions, songwriting techniques, rhythmic twists and syncopations, etc., inform the creation of my own songs.

[FrankHudson]

Originally Posted by Logdy

Just wondering but is it better to learn more songs and make more music at 80-90% accuracy for tone/rhythm or learn less and really focus on 90-95% artist matching. For me it’s playing more songs and making more music. I’m not sure what others think or is it just a personal decision?

Both paths work, and few players are purely at one pole or the other (what would that even look like?) and so we're all a mix of the two paths.

[pvfederico]

I find that as my playing improves each year, all the pieces that I play improve. Since I never play a song like the original artist did, my total repertoire is constantly evolving (improving, I hope). Little things that I learn for one song find their way into others, my accuracy improves across the board, etc.

Do others experience the same thing?

[NormanKliman]

I’ve got some things to say but I’m not sure I understand every part of the OP. Just to be clear, I define “artist matching” as trying to play a certain thing the same way as another guitarist. Just a detail or a passage and not basing your everyday playing style on someone else’s.

If you’re aiming to improve your skills as a guitarist, accuracy for tone/rhythm is the ultimate goal IMO, and I think that should also include correct (efficient) playing habits. Everyone starts with bad habits and most of us learn how to play more efficiently as the years go by. I guess this is the “quality” that OP refers to.

I don’t see artist matching as the opposite of that. It’s not an “either or” kind of thing, because copying others is a very important part of the process of perfecting skills. Obviously, if you try to copy someone, you’re going to choose a guitarist who plays better than you do and, with a little luck, you’ll end up acquiring or developing skills. The thing is, to avoid failure and frustration, you have to be careful not to bite off more than you can chew and you should be absolutely sure you’re playing something the same way (or close enough) as the guitarist you’re trying to copy. (In that sense, YouTube videos are like God’s gift to guitarists.) We’ve all discovered ideas from playing things our own way, but far more often we come across the right way years later, and it almost always sounds better and is easier. In this sense, a couple more things to consider are that guitarists with small hands are not going to be able to mimic everything that another with big hands does, and it’s a similar story when you’re trying to play something on a guitar that's different from the one in the recording.

OP also mentions “quantity,” and I think that’s another part of developing skills. You expose yourself to enough different kinds of situations and your hands are going to get stronger.

So, you gotta learn enough new material to have a repertoire that’s big enough to keep you interested and on your toes. You gotta choose your bars carefully, raise ‘em just beyond your reach, and be reasonably sure that you’ll get there before too long.