Yeah dude I know you were being tongue in cheek! I didn’t take it any other way, and I don’t think any music school grad or not-grad would. Just wanted to share my experience on the matter.
As for my least favorite Eye Rollers, I don’t have a way to quickly generate tab so I’ll just describe them:
Ascending or descending sixes: playing the 3nps scale, doubling up on each three note shape. Man I hate this one. Love Paul Gilbert, but as far as I know he’s the first so I can give him a pass for inventing it. But I hear it EVERYWHERE. And it’s so arbitrary and determined by the scale too- why would you want to repeat three consecutive notes, but stack them in fourths?! Wouldn’t it make much more sense to have each one start on a chord tone?
Yngwie pattern - 15-12-14-15-14-12. Again, he did it first/started it. But it’s EVERYWHERE now.
Honestly, any standard swept arpeggio pattern, looped many many times. Or just played once up/down or down/up by itself with no musical context. It’s a party trick to me. Blasting through an arpeggio absolutely has uses, since I believe soloing based on chord tones is the way to go. But when you do it over and over again, or just play the sweep pattern once? It’s just super obvious that you learned the technique, and are showing it off.
And last one - playing the same fretting pattern, and repeating it on each string. like tapping 18-15-12 and then going across all six. This will almost always takes you out of the chord, and then out of the key. And it’s clear the player is too lazy to put in the work to adjust the fretting. Going out of the chord/key can be real cool, but again, i think the laziness is evident and unless you just love the sound of doing it in perfect fourths, it’s a party trick. Ugh, even worse when its a pattern like 5-7-8. I think you see this more with beginner players though
Well, since this is cracking the code, look at the pickstrokes.
First string is Down-Up-Down, and then a string change. Let’s say you’re descending - you need to escape on your downstroke to facilitate this string change, DSX. The next string, then, say your high E going to your high B, your picking pattern is now reversed. Up-Down-Up. If you’re a DSX player, you need to change strings after the upstroke, which as a DSX player you’ve buried within the plane of the strings. What to do? Well, why not repeat it? If you play another three notes on the same string without a string change, you’re back to Down-Up-Down, you escape on that last downstroke, and can move easily to the next string.
Basically, if you have a single-directional escape pickstroke, this pattern, ascending OR descending, can be absolutely burnt through at awfully high speeds because all of the string changes occur after upstrokes.
You could economy/sweep it pretty well ascending as an USX player, D-U-D-(sweep into new string with a D)-U-D and either sweep directly iint the next change, or repeat U-D-U and change on the repeat… But as a descending lick there’s no good way to do this unless you start the pattern on an upstroke.
But, the reason you hear it so often, is because it’s an extremely, extremely efficient picking pattern if you play with escaped downstrokes. I tend to vary it up a little more ad on the repeat maybe add in a position shift too so, for example, 5-7-8 on the E, 5-7-8 on the A, and then 7-8-10 on the A followed by 7-9-10 on the D, just because the picking still works perfectly and that gives it a little more movement. But it’s just a great example of a mechanically efficient lick for your picking hand, and as Tom Gilroy’s work here has pointed out, in a lot of cases it’s also an extremely efficient fretting hand run, as well, since a lot of iterations could be done with your 1st, 2nd, and 4th fingers.
I’m not going to run through the pickstrokes, but that Yngwie pattern, the CtC analysis on Yngwie starts with that because that’s a six note motif that starts with a downstroke and ends with an upstroke, which means if you’re an USX player like Yngwie, that’s another little chunk that you can basically move from string to string freely and play as fast as your frettinghand will allow. If you’ve heard it a lot more lately, it could be a direct result of the fact that CtC uses it as a great USX “building block,” if you will, lick.
Yeah I know exactly why it’s played so much, and these other licks in general. I just wish people would choose more creative notes than running through the scale if they’re gonna go with sixes. Personally, if i’m gonna do some runs with even number of notes per string, I’ll change up both the notes AND the number of notes. Like 4-2-4-6-4 something like that. I actually have a lick like this I’m gonna post here for technique critique
I think the main thing with many of these licks is their predictability due to being sequential. Sequences are cool but they are very “etude” sounding when the sequence is never altered. Even having like 3 or 4 different variations on sequences so you can swap them in and out while burning through the patterns would breath some new life into them. Like, if the YJM 6 note pattern was sequence #1 and Gilbert 6’s were sequence #2, you could change between them, moving either up the scale, changing strings etc.
Another thing that could help is choosing a sequence that doesn’t start/end directly on the beats. I feel like that’s a huge reason everything (very subjective I realize) that Eric Johnson plays sounds so fresh. Since he plays so many 5’s and is so loosey-goosey with his timing, it doesn’t just sound like he’s running an exercise up and down the neck.
Another reason, related to the predictability, is the contour of these licks. They either go:
nowhere (i.e. Free Bird, 3-4 note pentatonic patterns that are played like 20 times in row, then moved onto another pattern played 20 times in a row etc.); OR
obviously one direction (i.e. Gilbert ascending/descending 6’s)
Again, the cascading nature of EJ’s phrases buck this system.
Well, yeah, I mean I mentioned I rarely play that basic motif myself exactly lik that, and usually incorporate position changes along with the repeats. I think that’s one of the cooler things about this community and this site, the way that it’s about taking a focus on why something works, and then asking what other doors that observation can open. It’s sort of an interesting approach to creative problem solving.
Something like that Gilbert 6s lick is tough to drop in a solo without it sounding like a nod to Technical Difficulties, but if you look at it as a 6-pitch/9 note motif that you can more around on the neck, it does have some potential. And, if you merely look at it as a “fast scale run” sort of thing where the focus is on the texture of a blizzard of notes on the way up to some big dramatic resolution on a single pitch, then in some ways the actual pitches become secondary to the feel and the sensation of speed, and it’s no more “boring” than just a straight ascending scale run as long as that sensation of speed is swerving a musical purpose.
That said, if you’ve got a couple ideas you’re working on, post up some video! It might prompt some new ideas.
Hey are we still talking about licks we dislike? I saw the freebird lick above.
My go-to-cringer is when someone is playing the minor pentatonic, are in the first “box” position, and they bend that top minor third up to the fourth:
…which is funny because if you make that full bend a quarter step bend and play it over the I, it’s actually pretty damned cool, and probably a lot more indicative of the way SRV would do it in practice. Well, maybe not with the straight scale run up to it.
A lot of these bent licks, it’s just a matter of thinking about why you’re bending that note. @mattc_guitar’s example with the bend on the 1, again, in a minor blues context if you do that as an aggressive bend up a step and a half to the minor 3rd, maybe a hair above, that actually has some mojo to it if you throw some vibrato on top. But if you fall short, it’s going to sound ridiculous.
I spend all this time worrying about speed and technique, and yet I can’t shake the feeling that maybe my playing would be better for it if I just stopped for a couple weeks and worked entirely on bending control.
take those three weeks dude! they’ll be over fast. and there’s tons of great exercises on this exact topic, I can give you some from my lessons with Wes Hauch if you need a place to start.
but yeah three weeks is nothing, and “best time to plant a tree” and all etc.
Well damn fellas, when I finally start gigging again this summer and get ready to rip some licks or solos, the first thing thats going to cross my mind is, “was this lick in the eye-roller licks thread?!” Lmao.
JK, but not really
these are all personal opinions dude! Formed by unique and personal experience. Don’t be swayed from using your favorite material by the thoughts of a few nerds on a forum
Hahaha I know, Im really just kidding. What keeps me grounded is knowing the most popular guitar players made their mark by doing the basics very very well, and maybe adding a twist of their own vibe to it. And im in a cover band, so the amount of guitar players I actually probably play to is very low if I had to guess
I thought I’d add a few more thoughts, as somebody who basically abandoned the entire canon of “shred” vocabulary and came back to it later in life.
There were definitely people playing ascending and descending sixes before Paul Gilbert.
As @Drew mentioned, this particular pattern is essentially a perfect confluence of picking hand and fretting hand efficiency. It’s likely to be among the few things that most guitarists can play quickly, and so when they’re trying to play fast for effect, this pattern is one the few patterns at their disposal. Used sparingly, it can still be effective for that purpose to the average listener.
Also, there is a particular aesthetic that comes from playing faster than fast. Woobledy-bloop nonsense fast. Helicopters blades appearing to spin slowly in the opposite direction fast. The notes don’t really matter at those speeds, the speed is textural.
As for stacking in 4ths, I can see that having uses too. Starting each repetition on a chord tone strengthens places chord tones on strong beats and solidifies the connection between the melody and harmony. That’s great if that’s what you want, but it may not be. Stacking in fourths breaks that connection, making the relationship to the harmony more ambiguous and creates a different aesthetic. Breaking that connection allows you to bring it all together again when a chord changes, which can be very effective.
Obviously, if you do this too much or don’t address the harmony, it can sound like what you’re playing really has nothing at all to do with the rest of the music, but the ambiguity and disconnection is not a bad thing in and of itself.
Fourths are almost ideal for this, just think of how ambiguous quartal harmony is.
Again, this is an interesting example because it’s an example of a pattern which is highly efficient for both the picking hand and fretting hand.
Truth being told I was never the biggest fan of extended sweep arpeggio sections in “shred” music, and I never bothered with sweeping as a teenager. I preferred the Gilbert approach of sequencing arpeggios with string skipping rather than playing the inversions straight up and down with sweeping. I didn’t really begin incorporating any sweeping in my playing until I was in my mid-twenties for more Gambale-esque purposes.
That said, sweeping at higher speeds has a defocusing effect, which can be an interesting aesthetic. In moderation, when done with consideration, it can be an interesting way to present harmonic movement. Rachmaninoff’s concertos absolutely get this aesthetic in parts, as does some of Coltrane’s arpeggio based improvisations.
I feel like some of Jason Becker’s playing really has this effect. Actually, I think the big climax in this tribute to Becker is a good example too:
I like fourths, they have an interesting “angular” sound. I like outside sounds and I like non-functional harmonic movements. So does Frank Gambale and so did Holdsworth.
A fretting pattern can be used to imply a chord and moving that pattern across strings can imply chord movement. There’s definitely ways of doing this and making it interesting. It’s pretty much everywhere in Holdsworth’s playing.
Then again, I’m one of those weirdos that thinks Webern and Berg composed beautiful music…
Repeating sequences and patterns can definitely be fatiguing and predictable. However, patterns can be useful musically, not just mechanically. A repeating structure gives the listener something they can follow. When the relationship between the melody and the harmony or rhythm is not obvious, patterning can be valuable, and that’s not just limited to guitar playing either.
There’s a lot of stuff that sounds good fast and doesn’t sound good slow. There’s a lot of stuff that sounds good slow and doesn’t sound good fast.
It would seem that the great difficulty is in developing enough patterns which will be amenable to being played at speed, and knowing how to transition between them.
Totally agree, rhythmic displacement is super cool.
I think the same applies to a lot of Shawn Lane’s playing too.
This reminds me of a particular pattern Shawn Lane plays on Hey Tee Bone. The entire solo is full of “WTF?” licks, but the lick I’m thinking of starts at about 4:04. You can’t understand what you’re hearing when it hits and while you’re trying to make sense of it it’s already changing.
Entire tune here, worth listening to all the way through if you haven’t heard it before. Brett Garsed’s solo is first (and it’s awesome!), Shawn’s is second.
love your response. definitely made me think differently about some takes, and also made me realize that i did agree with you and could’ve voiced my opinion better. But more importantly the former.
I definitely share your opinion, at least mostly but if not 100%, on each of your breakdowns.
and damn! garsed and lane on the same track. never heard this, quite awesome. Garsed is a player I’ve only recently learned of, phenomenal playing
