Playing with feeling, wtf is that?

General Music Discussion
#21

There’s certainly a lot of category A when people complain about music, especially very technique-forward music, lacking “feel.” I think Category B is a bit more valid, and I think you’re right that a lot of this is just lacking the vocabulary to express why something fails to connect emotionally, though I suppose in some instances it’s also just a shorthand - “I can exprss why this doesn’t connect with me emotionally, but it’s a pretty long and convoluted point to make and the upshot is the same, just that it doesn’t make me feel much of anything.” Which I guess is fair too, though sometimes the why is pretty helpful.

For me, I think, certainly with technical music but even with less technical stuff like slower sparser blues playing, I think it usually comes down to “does the technique serve the music, or does the music serve the technique?” IT doesn’t have to be blazingly fast for a solo to be very pattern driven and mechancial and even and, well, uneventful, and you certainly CAN do some very fast stuff that, used judiciously, keeps the listener on the edge of his seat.

The tune in the OP probably inst the greatest examnple becase even at full shred MAB isn’t really an egregious offender here, but to @kgk’s point this is pretty clearly a situation where the song was being used as a jumping off point to showcase a very technical solo rather than a solo being something that takes the song to another level - the song was kind of the plain white bread around the solo as the meat of the sandwich, rather than this being a well-crafted sandwich where the solo is just maybe a spicy dressing to take the sandwich up a notch and elevate the whole thing. So, given that from a compositional standpoint this isn’t really a scenario where the solo is trying to add something, it’s also a little hard to go and evaluate it in terms of “feel,” since it’s barely even a composition.

1 Like
#22

I think the key thing about this shorthand is that comparing the statements

  1. “this doesn’t connect with me emotionally”
    and
  2. “this playing lacks feel”

I think the language in #1 acknowledges that there’s the signal (the music) and the receiver (the listener) and the comment is on a lack of connection and there is no blame or judgement. To me, #1 can be just as much something lacking with the listener as there is something lacking with the music.

In #2, all is shifted to the player/music.

Real simple example of this distinction is the difference between

#1. I don’t feel attraction towards you.

#2. You’re unattractive.

Yikes!

1 Like
#23

Excellent point, and an excellent distinction.

Though, I do think there is music that on an absolute basis can lack feel, just as there are people who are on an absolute basis unattractive. It’s just, much like physical attraction, we probably overuse the second when we should be thinking about the first. :laughing:

1 Like
#24

Couldn’t help it… it came in my recommended

6 Likes
#25

Lol no worries! I thought it might have been but clarified myself just in case

1 Like
#26

There is quite a big difference between playing the notes of a song, and actually playing a song.

There is such a thing as playing with feeling, but that’s not something that you can analyze or debate. You can only feel it. In your case, you clearly feel that MAB plays with feeling, in other words, you feel that the type of music MAB plays is emotionally expressive. Others might not share the same sentiment. And that’s fine, not every kind of music appeals to everyone. I can certainly understand why someone wouldn’t find MAB’s type of music emotionally expressive. Sometimes, guitar playing can become a demonstration of technical prowess, instead of music-making. We can become so obsessed with going fast and impressing everyone with our chops we end up forgetting that music goes beyond that.

A good way to know if someone is playing with feeling or not is: if they miss a note, does it sound good? Do you still want to listen to that musician? Do they still touch your soul?

Take Freddie Mercury and Live Aid. He wasn’t actually technically flawless in that concert, but who the hell notices that? Or Jimmy Page. Everyone talks about how he is a sloppy guitarist, but you never hear anyone saying about how he is an uninteresting one.

#27

Didn’t read one response . If you like it, it has feeling. Art is purely subjective. Steve Vai’s opinion is absolutely no more valuable than Eric Cranston’s who lives at 133 General Way

#28

I think it’s the same concept as text or words, you can use a lot but say very little, or use little and say a lot. Or you can use a lot and say a lot. It’s all about the context, and where the reader is personally.

Sometimes I go on a van Halen binge and it really speaks to me, other times I’m on a tears for fears binge and that speaks to me. It’s all about where I am and if I can vibe with the music.

I read about how some people can totally lose interest in music after certain bad illness etc, it’s got to be down to the chemicals in our brain either reacting or not. And our chemistry can change a lot. Thats why if you drink or smoke weed or whatever music can seem so much more powerful.

So in many ways I agree it’s subjective. But I also think there is a definitive aspect of music that is not subjective. For example the whole concept of tension and release. It is a landscape to transfer your message. I think some music is objectively good, and some bad. But just like morals, it can be stretched and warped depending on your personal baseline

#29

eh… you guys got no feel :grin:

1 Like
#30

LMAO him and “Stevie T” Play with a bit toooo much feeling :wink:

1 Like
#31

I’m a fan of both :sweat_smile: I was worried when Stevie T has got hacked recently.

1 Like
#32

imo playing with feeling is spontaneously adapting phrasing or note choice with the use of your intuition

#33

Lol he forgot to do 2 factor authentication… a big DOH he should have XD

1 Like
#34

Musicians and guitarists (and sometimes guitarists are musicians :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:) tend to have this gatekeeper mentality with guitar music. For some reason, it’s ok for ANY other instrumentalist to play fast. Violinists are heralded if they can play a Paganini Caprice or Orange Blossom Special at 300 BPM. Jazz saxophonists are expected at some point to be able to effortlessly blow over rhythm changes or Cherokee north of 275 BPM. Classical pianists can shred. But when you get a guitarist playing fast with crystal clear technique in a rock context, it’s considered wankery. Maybe because the modern guitar is still, compared to pretty much any other instrument, in it’s teenage years. I guess if these snobs had volumes and centuries of composed, written shred music that is featured in the background of an NPR podcast, then maybe it would be accepted.

I took lessons with a legendary jazz pedagogue. And he couldn’t STAND rock/metal or pretty much anything that wasn’t straight ahead jazz. He once remarked that Brian Setzer was a hack lol. He hated the “shredders” like Joe Satriani. His only remark when I told him I was into that kind of music was “oh well yeah those guys are fast”. He tried to make me realize that when you slowed down a great jazz solo, that all the chord changes were being made and it would be a beautiful melody whether it was fast or slow. But this is true of ANY great solo. Apparently people like this have never even taken the time to listen to someone like Joe Satriani play unbelievably beautiful lines, with perfect phrasing, tone, timing and an impeccable sense of melody and direction. Whether they are fast or not. They just lump rock/metal guitarists into the category of shredders. But this guy would readily say that Coltrane shredding on Giant Steps or going off on one of his atonal voyages are breathtaking examples of virtuosity. Which is absolutely true. So why do sax players get the pass to shred, squeak, honk, distort, bend, go completely outside the changes, make noise, etc. But Jimi Hendrix or Steve Vai doing the same thing is somehow not as talented??

I find musicians in general are especially gatekeep-y with Dream Theater. People only see that they play lots of notes. None of these people have ever taken the time (no pun intended) to listen to a gorgeous John Petrucci solo. Now on the other hand, I do find there are lots of shredders that just don’t tick my musical boxes. Some players I do find are just trying to play as fast as they can. Or are just playing fast scale runs, or uninspired rock/blues cliches. There are uninspiring classical works. I’m not a big fan of most technique driven piano showpieces. Like the works of Liszt or Chopin. It’s fine enough. But I much prefer Debussy. It’s just so much more beautiful and expressive to me. But that’s just me. It doesn’t mean that those more complicated, technical pieces aren’t musical.

So maybe it’s because we are guitarists that we can appreciate these more technical players. I can totally see how the average person (especially non musicians) wouldn’t really like or appreciate Racer X, outside of just recognizing the talent. I think normy’s generally are much more impressed with the local guy at the bar that plays acoustic and closes his eyes when he sings slightly off pitch. To the average person, that’s probably perceived as just as talented as John Petrucci. So maybe it’s the same with us guitarists. You or I may not appreciate some solo classical trumpet piece that’s basically meant to be a technical foray. But trumpet players are probably blown away by it.

Anyway that’s enough rambling lol

TL;DR - Flute players shred when they record a movie score. It should be ok when rock guitarists play fast too.

2 Likes
#35

Being an enormous Ozzy fan, and appreciative of all his guitarists, I don’t feel that way at all! I think Gus was exactly what Ozzy might have needed at that time, a slightly more modern guitarist with killer technique but amazing tone and an old-school vibe. Gus also has a fantastic vibrato, and a keen sense of melody. He (almost uniquely among Ozzy’s guitarists) also frequently switches to the neck pickup for his solos, giving them a rounder, glassy sound. I wish Ozzy had kept him on board and released at least a couple more albums with him so we could see how their musical relationship would grow, since I don’t think Gus really was given much room for input on “Scream”. His stuff with Firewind is much more bold and confident.

#36

The ‘feeling’ thing is just one of those topics that will never go away. I’ve been posting on various music forums for around 16-17 years and it basically pops up every time you mention a musician like Vai or Lane. Yngwie is the guy who obviously gets accused of being ‘mechanical’ the most, but whats funny about it is that Yngwie, as we have come to learn, is an incredibly intuitive ‘feel’ based player. It’s apparent in his technical approach but I think its most apparent in the ‘time feel’ of his solos. I was listening to the You Dont Remember, I’ll Never Forget solo and the timing is totally chaotic and loose in an Eddie Van Halen sense. He’s not rigidly playing 16th note runs to the exact beat.

#37

What Is It?

Musically, it’s the only thing that matters.

1 Like