Saturday morning thoughts about skill level

[catt]

Originally Posted by mcduffnw

Why not just play simple pleasant stuff for folks if you are around and the moment seems right?

Do you find something wrong with just making folks happy with simple music?

This is exemplary of my rough equation (art vs "simple" music). When folks aren't into what I'm playing, I pick up something that engages them. As interested as I am in "art" I am also interested in conveying musicality. Victor Wooten asked, "Does the world really need another hot player?" (Paraphr). I tend to agree that, what is needed just as much, is to convene musically. My solution was to find effective performance material that doesnt bore me . I'm easily bored.

[nolegsfngrpickn]

Originally Posted by lowrider

Even Leo Kottke, one of the greatest acoustic players of a generation realized that if he wanted anyone to listen, he had to sing.

I may get slammed for this, but I saw Leo in concert last year. I was bored after 30 minutes. The performance felt unbelievably repetitive.

[Deliberate1]

Whenever someone says to me, "you're good," always in the context of my jazz woodwinds work since I do not play guitar out of the house yet, what I really hear them saying is "you're good - for me." I get what that means. It is not a commentary on skill level, but of the impact of the music I made, and that is what I appreciate.
David

[GeneralDreedle]

Originally Posted by tbeltrans

I'm not so sure about the patronization. I can only speak for my posts, but my point was simply that folks want to hear vocals over instrumental fingerstyle regardless of complexity. I have seen that often enough to be fairly sure it is more common than not. I do think it is also commonly true, at least in informal music situations, that people prefer to hear the songs they know and enjoy.

Tony

That's a good point, and I apologize if I misinterpreted what people were saying. I remember recently our friends were over and we were having an in home art day and while they were drawing I was playing guitar but I was only playing Mississippi John Hurt songs, without vocals, the husband knew the songs and liked them but his wife said "play some actual songs!". It was actually amusing

[Martin_F]

I have always found that people react quite well to some good Travis picking in the style of Paul Simon, Kansas, or a ton of the 60's stuff during the folk revival. If you can keep a good beat and sing a basic melody, it's pretty easy to make songs sound pleasing. For myself, I like to play Paul Simon and some Doc Watson, but more people would gravitate to the Simon over anything Watson (maybe with the exception of House of the Rising Sun as done by Watson).

Martin

[tbeltrans]

Originally Posted by GeneralDreedle

That's a good point, and I apologize if I misinterpreted what people were saying. I remember recently our friends were over and we were having an in home art day and while they were drawing I was playing guitar but I was only playing Mississippi John Hurt songs, without vocals, the husband knew the songs and liked them but his wife said "play some actual songs!". It was actually amusing

Yes, that is a phrase heard rather often by instrumental players. Another way to put it that I have also heard is "Why doesn't s/he sing?". There are times when one or two relatively short instrumental guitar pieces will work. That is usually between other non-related activities where there is a captive audience (think - church service).

Tony

[WordMan]

Originally Posted by jgottsman11

Thank you all. This was quite informative. I guess I will just stick to playing for myself since I could care less about playing songs with vocals.

Ahem. Could *not* care less.

Totally fine. I would suggest that, again, Performance is a different craft-set vs. Guitar Playing. It is possible to play instrumental guitar and sell the song and entertain an audience - but you really have to pay attention to what a audience is going to be entertained by.

[seannx]

Originally Posted by tbeltrans

Yes, that is a phrase heard rather often by instrumental players. Another way to put it that I have also heard is "Why doesn't s/he sing?". There are times when one or two relatively short instrumental guitar pieces will work. That is usually between other non-related activities where there is a captive audience (think - church service).

Tony

It’s a little like the rock vs jazz guitarist joke. Complex finger and Travis picking instrumental songs are not as accessible to the average listener. Years ago (1972) I went to a Sun Ra concert. There were 4 or so musicians. I was able to follow the groove as the first, then second, and third started playing, but when the fourth came in, I was totally lost. Couldn’t get what was going on musically. Sometimes jazz is the same for me. This thread is very helpful for putting technical skill and complexity into a larger perspective.

[Joe Beamish]

Originally Posted by jgottsman11

Good morning everyone and happy Saturday!

I was just sitting here with my breakfast and got to thinking about what non-guitar players think when I play guitar for them.

Usually if someone asks me to play a song for them, I choose one of my more complex fingerstyle pieces as they are appealing to my ear and a challenge to play, and assumably appealing to them.

However, I have found that I could play a simple G, D, Am, C for example in a nice slow melodic pace and get a better reaction out of people. Why is that? Does anyone have a similar experience?

I too have wondered about questions like these.

I think most people like to hear music and songs more than "complex pieces." Most Beatles tunes, for example, are variations on simple musical ideas with the types of chords you're mentioning.

Also, people don't like the sound of effort. Not just the groundlings -- the little people who don't understand art -- but most everybody. Most of us respond to heart and feeling. Maybe the complex pieces need to be practiced so they're smoother, come off more simply, and deliver more emotion.

I'm often surprised when I start learning a cover song I like, only to discover how stupid simple the song really is. Without my thinking about it, it seemed more sophisticated before I unpacked it. Why? Maybe it was the cadence of the melody -- just a little different, coming in at unusual moment, the phrasing, giving the tune a something-something that lifts it out of banality.

[tbeltrans]

Originally Posted by Joe Beamish

I too have wondered about questions like these.

I think most people like to hear music and songs more than "complex pieces." Most Beatles tunes, for example, are variations on simple musical ideas with the types of chords you're mentioning.

Also, people don't like the sound of [U]effort.[/U] Not just the groundlings -- the little people who don't understand art -- but most everybody. Most of us respond to heart and feeling. Maybe the complex pieces need to be practiced so they're smoother, come off more simply, and deliver more emotion.

I'm often surprised when I start learning a cover song I like, only to discover how stupid simple the song really is. Without my thinking about it, it seemed more sophisticated before I unpacked it. Why? Maybe it was the cadence of the melody -- just a little different, coming in at unusual moment, the phrasing, giving the tune a something-something that lifts it out of banality.

This is a very good point. I think it was Joe Pass who said that if you have to work hard to play it, the audience has to work hard to hear it.

I notice that the steel string players who play solo complex ragtime pieces in which they try to capture all that a piano would do, are difficult for me to listen to because they seem to be struggling to get all the notes in.

There is one classical guitarist who did his own transcriptions of Scott Joplin so that the pieces really flow as they should, and he is a joy to listen to. A book of all the transcriptions is available from Mel Bay, and they are manageable by the average fingerpicker such as myself, so it isn't so much that the guy has tremendous classical technique (though he does), but that he arranged these to be playable.

Also, he plays them in the slower, stately pace that they were meant to be played according to Joplin himself. I enjoy listening to these more than I do piano renditions because it seems that the piano players seem to treat them as a race to the finish line.

By the way, the guitarist is Giovanni de Chiaro, and his recorded music is available from amazon.com.

Another guy who does really nice, relaxing arrangements of standards and pop tunes for classical guitar is Lex Von Sumayo. I think people would respond to this type of playing because the melody is so clearly stated all the way through, the arrangement has the feel of the original tune and is therefore very familiar, and it can be played very smoothly. He does a lot of tunes from that era that everybody knows well and recognizes immediately.



Tony

[Joe Beamish]

^ Agree, I often prefer Joplin's (and others') rag pieces when they're played on guitar.

Mr. De Chiaro here describes adapting piano rag to guitar -- like fitting it into a smaller shoe, leaving out notes. And he plays a Joplin piece beginning just after the 2:00 mark.

GAS warning: Also, wow I like nylon string guitars.

[tbeltrans]

Originally Posted by Joe Beamish

^ Agree, I often prefer Joplin's (and others') rag pieces when they're played on guitar.

Mr. De Chiaro here describes adapting piano rag to guitar -- like fitting it into a smaller shoe, leaving out notes. And he plays a Joplin piece beginning just after the 2:00 mark.

GAS warning: Also, wow I like nylon string guitars.

Thanks for posting that video, Joe. I have long admired de Chiaro's work.

Tony

[jwayne]

Originally Posted by lowrider

Even Leo Kottke, one of the greatest acoustic players of a generation realized that if he wanted anyone to listen, he had to sing.

(snip)

Even though his voice sounds like "geese farts on a muggy day".

[Pitar]

Snappy, catchy, whistlable, toe-tapping, genre-familiar, all of the foregoing, complexity loses to. Two minutes of accomplished playing of an instrumental is 120 seconds some people can't get back. I love to play instrumentals and would exclusively if justified by an audience. But, even I get 5 minutes in with the best instrumentalists and begin drifting off. Tommy Emmanuel, et al, I'm shifting cheeks in my seat a few minutes in. Switch to song listening and I'm much more engaged.

We have our lead guitar heroes but if we had to listen to their riffage alone I think we'd be less inclined to want them playing outside the context of a band, meaning we need a break from them.

[Robin, Wales]

Originally Posted by jgottsman11

Good morning everyone and happy Saturday!

I was just sitting here with my breakfast and got to thinking about what non-guitar players think when I play guitar for them.

Usually if someone asks me to play a song for them, I choose one of my more complex fingerstyle pieces as they are appealing to my ear and a challenge to play, and assumably appealing to them.

However, I have found that I could play a simple G, D, Am, C for example in a nice slow melodic pace and get a better reaction out of people. Why is that? Does anyone have a similar experience?

I'm working up a set of songs accompanied by guitar for this very reason. So at parties, camping trips etc when someone says 'play something' (but actually mean 'sing something') I have a good set of tunes to bring out.

It really isn't easy if you are not a natural 'front man'. I spend as much of my guitar practice time working on how I'm going to perform those pieces and in singing practice as I do playing guitar. Every time I pick up guitar I force myself to sing - and, consequently, I'm getting better at it. Also, my guitar playing is changing over time so that the instrument more and more is becoming support for the voice rather than the focus. This sounds like my playing is becoming less complex, but, in fact it is more complex. I'm being forced to play in keys that I wouldn't have otherwise used and transpose tunes to different root chord shapes - I'm playing one thing and singing something else often at cross rhythms. I'm having to listen to my voice and the guitar as a whole package - and that takes practice in itself.

I don't have a powerful voice so I'm muting a lot playing alt bass and doing runs and fills between sung phrases and being far sparser with strumming. All in all, by singing songs I've had to learn to play guitar anew. Every day I'll play and sing a tune slightly differently to the day before - and that's moving me forward all the time. My goal is to get my guitar playing to a point where the audience doesn't 'notice' it because it is so natural - in the same way that people don't notice the great band that's playing behind a good singer.