Saturday morning thoughts about skill level

[Glennwillow]

I have no idea what music other people like to hear played live. If I knew, I would play it and make them happy for a little while. But other people's taste in music is a complete mystery to me.

I only know what I like. I am not particularly into complex songs, but to some people, playing a Travis pick is complex.

I'm glad I don't play for money anymore. Trying to anticipate other people's tastes just wore me out.

But I do think it's pretty common that people think you or I are good only when we play something they like.

- Glenn

[BluesKing777]

Look at the Billboard top 100 chart for today. (April, 2020).

Do you know them? Any?

Do they have any guitar in them?

Can you play/sing them with guitar?



BluesKing777.

[rick-slo]

Personally I prefer well crafted instrumentals. My early years were spent listening to the master classical composers. Never was into listening to much rock and roll and other pop music.

Of course some songs are very well done by having good melodies and lyrics. If the vocals are spot on also then you have a winner.

[PetesaHut]

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 think its key to play something that is melodic and has rhythm and harmony.

[s2y]

I'm at my level. I'm better than when I was a beginner. Not quite as good when I was in 2 bands and didn't have kids. I changed to an overnight position, which allows me to work less days, less total hours, and less traffic. I'm improving once again.

[SprintBob]

I can't sing and don't have the motivation or desire to learn so either I accompany or play solo fingerstyle on guitar. My teacher stressed to me the value of learning and keeping popular songs in my fingerstyle repertoire so that I would have something listeners would like and/or could relate to. That seems to be the case with my wife. She seems to get much more engaged with my playing if she hears me playing a song she knows the lyrics to. Funny, I took her to one Tommy Emmanuel concert and she was blown away. Have not been able to get her to another one because her attitude with him now is "been there, done that".

[thomasn]

From my limited experience, agreeing with pretty much everyone here.

Instrumentals works rarely as a stage act. Maybe if you can keep a steady drive and weave a memorable melody on top, then yes. That would pretty much limit you to carter or travis-picking, and those simple backbeats can get pretty repetitive. Acoustic guitar is just a poor lyrical instrument. It lacks the sustain or core volume to carry a melody with conviction. Great rhythm instrument, but then you'd still need a melody on top somehow.

Solo instrumental guitar music works best in a chamber music setting imho, that's where it's most likely to find a receptive audience.

[WordMan]

Playing Guitar is Playing Guitar.

Performing Guitar is the equivalent of Standup Comedy, a Poetry Slam, a guy open mic’ing by singing Broadway songs over iTunes accompaniment tracks (a regular at my open mics, who kills), etc.

Playing live is like Public Speaking - a person has to cross that boundary and find a way to be comfortable.

So: you are trying to judge your Playing as Performance. You should just judge your Performance and note where you can improve. Your Playing is merely one factor of MANY in your Performance.

[M19]

This all rings true. I was doing a reasonable amount of "open-micing" a few year back, and my fingerstyle stuff got tepid appreciation at best, but my passable singing and very simple take on "Hanging by a Thread" by Nickel Creek got my most enthusiastic responses.

[rllink]

When I first started on my musical journey I met a fellow who played the guitar and sang at festivals around the area. He was not particularly good at either, but he had a huge following. When I asked people what they liked about him almost all said it was the feeling that he put into it. I've always tried to keep feeling at the top in any of my musical endeavors.

[BigSky]

Very interesting thread. My experience with bar and background noise type gigs (where folks are doing something other than actively listening) is a well executed and unique cover of a popular song often grabs the audience. If you play an original, they can appreciate that you wrote something but they have no connection to the song. I am always surprised that the simplest song done in an interesting arrangement gets the biggest applause.

Open-mics often are attended by a high percentage of musicians who are actively listening to your chops & vocals. A popular instrumental is not always a deal killer in that milieu. Still a three chord song with lots of stage presence and audience connection will rule the day.

[gibpicker]

Originally Posted by KevinH

Yes, for the general public, vocalists generally seem to win out over good instrumentalists, which has always been my bane, since my voice sounds something like a cat being sucked into a vacuum cleaner. This also partly explains why purely instrumental players like, say, John Fahey, never had as big of an audience as someone who also sings. I really appreciated Steve Goodman, who could mix his superb playing in with nicely crafted lyrics.

The cat being sucked into a vacuum cleaner thing is still making me LOL.

[ChuckS]

Originally Posted by thomasn

From my limited experience, agreeing with pretty much everyone here.

Instrumentals works rarely as a stage act. Maybe if you can keep a steady drive and weave a memorable melody on top, then yes. That would pretty much limit you to carter or travis-picking, and those simple backbeats can get pretty repetitive. Acoustic guitar is just a poor lyrical instrument. It lacks the sustain or core volume to carry a melody with conviction. Great rhythm instrument, but then you'd still need a melody on top somehow.

Solo instrumental guitar music works best in a chamber music setting imho, that's where it's most likely to find a receptive audience.

I think it's not the instrument, but the player, that imposes the limitations you referred to (I.e. Instrumentals work rarely as a stage act. Acoustic guitar is a poor lyrical instrument. Solo instrumental guitar music works best in a chamber music setting...)

I suggest you listen to some of the solo instrumental arrangement of players that have won the National Fingerpicking Championship, such as Pat Donohue, Tim Sparks, Phil Heywood, Eric Lugosch, etc. You might think differently afterward.

[thomasn]

I think we're agreeing, just saying different things (?)

Originally Posted by ChuckS

I suggest you listen to some of the solo instrumental arrangement of players that have won the National Fingerpicking Championship, such as Pat Donohue, Tim Sparks, Phil Heywood, Eric Lugosch, etc. You might think differently afterward.

I think this is exactly the sort of music OP is referring too: delicate and intricate fingerstyle that won't impress an average joe. Most people would react with something like, oh this guy really knows guitar, and then start talking again until somebody sings Landslide. Some of those names you mentioned (and I only knew Pat D and Tim S) are travis pickers, which as far as fingerstyle goes is a more muggle-friendly because it puts a consistent pulse underneath the melody.

Really not taking away from those players, but I think their audience is mostly guitar nerds and their spouses, which is kind of what this thread is about. Their audience comes specifically for them, and partly appreciates their music on.a technical level.

As for my comment that an acoustic guitar is not a good melodic instrument, I mean that when playing a melody the brittle sound of a solo fingerpicked guitar just cannot cut through the ether on its own. That's why an average singer/strummer will grab an audience quicker than the most virtuoso solo guitar instrumentalist 9/10 times. Even aggressively flatpicked lead lines sound plingy and thin all by themselves without some backing. It's not a knock on the instrument, it's just more of an example of how important a catchy and forcefully projected melody is to a listener.

[Robin, Wales]

Originally Posted by thomasn

...Even aggressively flatpicked lead lines sound plingy and thin all by themselves without some backing. It's not a knock on the instrument, it's just more of an example of how important a catchy and forcefully projected melody is to a listener.

I would agree with that. When I played dorbo in a bluegrass band our front man guitarist was a very good flatpicker - could bang out fiddle tunes all day long if you let him. But we played acoustically around a single mic' so during songs he would always call in the fiddle, banjo, mandolin, dobro or bass to take breaks, and rarely play them on guitar - just provide solid backing for the rest of us. The guitar just didn't really cut it as a lead instrument in that setting.

When I play songs solo on guitar and take an instrumental break I tend to play the melody, or close to it, on the bass strings with my fingers still basically in the chord shape so I can add in strums to back myself and fill the sound out (Carter style?) - that seems to work OK and doesn't sound out of place compared to the sung verses.