The Gilmour Effect

General Music Discussion
#1

Saw this video and it caused me to wonder what the thoughts of the forum are on the Gilmour Effect? When the topic of shredders being boring comes up, David Gilmour seems to ALWAYS be mentioned as the exemplar of good playing. Why is this? Why is Gilmour’s slower, bendy, lyrical (often pentatonic) playing so beloved and faster players solos so unloved in comparison? The stats on youtube views are irrefutable.

Does fast playing destroy the chances of your solo being enjoyed by a broad audience? Eruption is often near the top of best solo lists, but often second to Comfortably Numb. Has it got to do with song popularity? Would we expect to see Malmsteen’s “Suffer Me” solo recognised in lists if the song (or album) was an international mega-hit?

Is it tone? Gilmour employs a cleaner sound than a lot of shredders - is this part of it?

Love to know people’s thoughts on what makes Gilmour’s solos so popular. What is the “X” factor that causes the Gilmour effect?

#2

I think that’s basically it. Most “shred” solos are found in faster / more “intense” songs, which tend to not be as popular. Some that come to mind would be the small runs in “Don’t Stop Believin’”, “Paradise City”, “Hot For Teacher”… Even those 3 examples are considered dated and tied to a particular era, whereas I’ve heard people refer to Pink Floyd as “timeless”.

I think more modern playing can definitely be popular while technically difficult (Polyphia), but that’s an entirely different skill set that is beyond me.

2 Likes
#3

I don’t know the various cultures around other instruments, but it seems to me the guitar world is peculiar for being unhealthily obsessed with speed, either in the “speed=good” or “speed = bad” way.

Not sure why this happened. Maybe because playing fast on a guitar is so mechanically challenging?

E.g. on piano I don’t hear people complaining about the 3rd movement of moonlight sonata, which is basically piano shredding. Or people obsessing that the 1st movement has fewer notes but more “feel”.

I’d love for us to evolve past this and just worry about whether we like the music or not, independently of note count :slight_smile:

2 Likes
#4

I just think that Gilmour is the total opposite of shredding so its just an easy comparison for people to understand yet most guitar players can appreciate Gilmour’s playing.

4 Likes
#5

I think that’s part of it. The cynic in me likes to the think that a lot of the complainers know how much work it takes to play fast and clean, so minimizing it makes themselves feel better about not having put in the time themselves.

I was wondering if it’s an exposure by genre thing too? For example, there is plenty virtuosity in jazz and classical music. People tend to accept it as part of the genre. Compared to rock though (at least in the US), those genres just aren’t as popular. Guitar just may be the only instrument your standard rock fan has heard played at a virtuoso level. I can’t off the top of my head think of anything on the radio that has a saxophone part with Coltrane level chops. I can’t think of a piano part in radio rock music that’s got Rachmaninoff level chops. Thanks to the 80’s though, almost everyone has heard electric guitar shredding. That’s a round about way of saying, maybe the complainers just don’t like ‘fast’ and if they heard the equivalent on another instrument, within the rock genre, they wouldn’t like it either.

Also, we all look for different experiences and listen to music for different reasons. A lot of people listen to music to take their mind off other things and they just want something accessible that they can immediately identify with. It can be challenging for someone that hasn’t had a lot of exposure or education (formal or not) to listen to something that requires they also put some effort into analyzing it. They may just want to hum along. You can do that with the Comfortably Numb solo…it’s difficult doing that to Rusty Cooley solo. The tongue and lips wear out quickly :slight_smile:

For me, most of the virtuoso stuff I listen to, I enjoy because the whole time I’m appreciating how much work went into that level of playing. I find myself gently shaking my head side to side in moderate disbelief thinking ‘wow!’ There’s also an emotion of excitement it tends to bring out. I’m old now though, I don’t always want to be excited. Sometimes I just want to drink my metamucil and relax to some classic Pink Floyd. When I do this, I find myself closing my eyes, gently nodding my head up and down and thinking ‘ahhh’ :slight_smile:

In summary, there are plenty different types of ‘good’. I’ll be glad too when people stop dogging the thing that isn’t what they like.

2 Likes
#6

Just realizing my last post got off track and into old man yelling at clouds territory. Back on track!

I think people can identify with it. I’ve read countless Guitar World interviews where many different players of different levels saying the mark of a good solo is if you can sing along with it. Obviously that’s just one definition of a good solo and not being able to sing along doesn’t automatically make it bad, but DG delivers on that. Also, he has an amazing gift of using ‘space’ and that creates excitement/anticipation in its own way. Just about every solo of his I’d consider ‘perfect’. And usually that’s in the context of ‘on its own’ as well as taking the song to a new level.

I think so. Many people find it flat out cacophonous.

I know it’s subjective and I really don’t intend to start a flame war, but he’s got what I consider the optimal lead tone. It’s not just a question of saturation (though I am a firm believer that too much gain kills tone), it’s the frequency response overall. I wish I had a solo track to run through a frequency analyzer to see exactly what’s in there that I like so much. Back to people identifying with it, there’s something very human and vocal-like about his tone. Aware or not, I think people pick up on this.

Overall though, I think he’s just a melodic master. He seasons to taste with a great vibrato and thoughtful choice of “when to bend” among other nuances. I’m as a big a shred fan as they come, but DG is one of my absolute faves. Again, it doesn’t need to be “better or worse” or “this guy or that guy”. Why can’t we just like all for various reasons? :slight_smile:

3 Likes
#7

Funny thing…I had to pick out DG’s end solo on Comfortably Numb for a student of mine.
I found it well played but boring. But that’s my personal taste I’m not saying that some one who likes it is wrong.
I find the “play with feeling” discussion pointless since that is totally subjective.

2 Likes
#8

Yeah even though above I said all his solos are perfect I don’t like the outro solo of Comfortably Numb as well as the first solo. I probably should have said my ‘favorite’ solos of his are perfect haha and yeah that is also subjective. People that aren’t into his playing have valid opinions :slight_smile:

2 Likes
#9

Best Gilmour solo (s): Dogs from Animals.

I have always been a big shred fan but as I get older find myself liking certain shred less and less, as sometimes it seems like it’s fast for the sake of being fast rather than for the texture and impact.
I find melodies and harmonies much more interesting now, but the best of both worlds is when shred is applied to be melodic and inventive.

Maybe that’s why I’ve always loved Vai and Satch and RR and EVH. They seem to have a great talent for balancing space, shred, texture and melody.

1 Like
#10

Of course other shredders are great but someone like PG, for example, seemed to go over the top and shred for the sake of it on a lot of his 80s stuff.
Being a guitarist, of course I appreciate and revel in what he’s playing, but the test is if a non-guitarist appreciates and enjoys it as well, and the fact is non-guitarists would get bored quickly and probably not get as much out of it as us.

But someone like Vai or Satch can create music that is enjoyed and loved by everyone, that’s true for Gilmour too.

Vai’s Tender Surrender is a great example of this I think, very well textured, ebbs and flows, with space and sections of fast trills which could be called shredding, although he hardly picks a note in the fastest section. Also some great phrasing that is not necessarily fast but timed to create some magical emotive lines.

2 Likes
#11

The albums that he released were often exquisite, and his solos are very musical and seamlessly integrated. Most shred is excessive and inappropriately jammed into a song that doesn’t really need it; just because someone can play fast doesn’t mean that they should. I say this as somebody that drowns his hamburgers in habanero sauce, thinking that “nothing satisfies like excess.“

#12

Yes, the song comes first and their playing is appropriate.

1 Like
#13

I guess I don’t see why these things always have to be set up in opposition to each other.

Gilmour didn’t wink out of existence because of the Glass Prison arpeggios.

By all means don’t play fast if you don’t want to, but make sure it’s really because you don’t want to and not because you can’t*.

*This thought shamelessly stolen from Miles Davis but I can’t find the source/quote.

2 Likes
#14

“My dad’s better than your dad” … the argument will never go away :slight_smile:
None of it should matter. In my opinion, the best musicians are those that contribute the right amount to the song and the genre, nothing else - speed should be irrelevant.

I think the ‘speed = bad’ argument does have some merit on occasion in some genres because it can get a bit overdone as guitarists improve their technical ability - but this is probably more in the live shows. Speed gets a lot more applause which is a shame really, albeit a reality.

I used to listen to quite a lot of bluegrass and gypsy jazz. These are examples of genres where, again in my opinion, speed has become a bit too much into focus. The right amount keeps it exciting and interesting. Too much and it starts to detract from the melody. In small doses it’s brilliant - overdone it becomes tiring to listen to.

In other genres I guess the opposite could be true.

1 Like
#15

Great point! Certainly in the classical world there seems to be no issue with speed - it is expected in many situations and performances.

@Pepepicks66 I agree the song is hugely important part of this. When the Gilmour effect is discussed it almost always centers around the song Comfortably Numb.

I have been trying to think if there are any similar players to Gilmour that are similarly popular and I can’t think of anyone. He seems to actually be incredibly unique. I guess Pink Floyd is too as a band. The slow, epic huge songs - who else is like them?

Perhaps a band of that ilk would be Dire Straits - though obviously stylistically different - also had a guitar player in Mark Knopfler that is hugely loved as well.

The song “Brothers in Arms” is similarly slow and epic like Comfortably numb is and contains beautiful, emotional, slower soloing. Yet, Knopfler is not referred to in the shred discussions as much as Gilmour is. Gilmour seems to be the example that is constantly used.

I agree with this. Maybe it has something to do with the sound of solo electric guitar as well? Do people find the sound of high speed violin/ piano etc. a problem I wonder?

Great replies everyone :slight_smile:

#16

Maybe Clapton and Santana? Not in terms of genre obviously but surely in popularity and the layperson’s typical “great guitar player”.

I know it’s loaded because Pink Floyd is SUCH a huge band. Maybe it helps (if popularity is a big part of the equation) to think of bands that have achieved similar success as Pink Floyd, then think how their guitarists are thought of by the general public.

I’d say most of the players in theses bands regularly churn out solos/riffs that you can easily sing along with. The only “lots of notes” guitarist in the list is Metallica’s Kirk Hammett. Ironically, he tends to be a favorite whipping boy among guitar fans that gravitate towards more “virtuoso” playing. (And speaking of “whipping boys”, his solo in The Unforgiven is very melodic and takes the song to a new level, IMO :slight_smile: )

But I think to step back and see who’s sold the most records, it stands to reason that most people have listened to songs from these artists more than other artists. Aware or not, the average listener is conditioned that the solos in songs by these bands are the standard. Most of these solos are short, not flashy and pretty melodic. Solos that sound drastically different than these could be considered culture shock and they’ll want what’s familiar to them.

Now, if we narrow the focus to US sales, something interesting happens:

We get an undisputed virtuoso in EVH. Plenty of hits where he shreds, lot of people have heard it. We also get a virtuoso that most people probably don’t realize in Neal Schon…who mostly plays lots of very slow, lyrical solos that people can sing along with, that are on very popular songs :slight_smile: Think Don’t Stop Believin or Faithfully. Both feature him playing a song hook as a solo, nothing flashy. Still, the general public has heard him shred in Separate Ways and Any Way You Want It. He whips out Eric Johnson level chops in both of those.
(EDIT: I realized that the US list is a top 15 whereas the worldwide was a top 10. Even so, on the US list, the 2 virtuoso players are not in the top 10)

On the whole though, what’s popular in rock is very tame from a musicianship standpoint. I have no problem with this :slight_smile: Just sayin, I see where the Gilmour Effect comes from. You can train a dog to salivate when it hears a bell. It doesn’t seem unreasonable to me that something wildly different from what people are used to is initially off-putting.

2 Likes
#17

Speed picking is a technical device. When it is used in the service of communicating a story or emotion, it is interesting for me. When it is just used merely as a display of technical virtuosity, it captures my attention for a few seconds, and then bores the heck out of me.

2 Likes
#18

Yes EVH absolutely a virtuoso and gets massive deserved respect… He had the rare talent of shred, melody and musicality. Amazing.

Love Schon too! Learnt a lot of his solos when I was learning how to play melodically.

I think with the Gilmour effect we are getting some great input here into what is contributing to it:
tone, Comfortably Numb, Pink Floyd, lyrical playing etc.

great point - and should be used in my view in combination with slower lyrical playing for contrast, musicality etc.

#19

There is and (almost) always has been a place for virtuoso technique in music and that applies even more strongly to the styles involving the electric guitar which is very young by historical standards.

I think the issue actually BECOMES an issue when technique becomes the point of a song or composition instead of just one facet of it. That doesn’t make for the most interesting listening experience regardless of style or instrument and to be fair it almost universally turns off the average non-musician listener as they have no frame of reference to gauge the difficulty of what they are hearing.

There is an idea in composition of “contrast and continuity” or put simply - things that are different vs things that are the same. Too much of things are that are the same and the music is very bland (like elevator music for example) and too much of things that are different and the music is chaotic (like free jazz in the 60s and 70s). Each listener has a preference but the overall result is a bell curve where very few people like monotonous music and very few people like chaotic music and most are in the middle.

One other consideration is that most non-musicians simply don’t resonate with music that doesn’t have vocals. Instrumental music (all combined) makes up a fairly small fraction (less than 10%) of all sales and streams.

So all that being said shred guitar music (in general) does not contain a lot of contrast and either does not contain vocals or contains vocals that are similarly virtuosic to the guitars (which is also challenging to the average listener)…and the lyrics are often not sales oriented. Also, playing very fast and extended lines often results in either scales or arpeggios played with very little melodic shape (a lack of contrast) and the sounds that are most often used to facilitate the technique (gained up midrange add delay) are also not varied.

One great example of having contrast and continuity is “Don’t Stop Believing” by Journey. The infamous fill after the first verse is fast and repetitious. Only four notes and very fast. If the solo was like that fill it would be boring. But the solo isn’t like that…it is instead a melody that fits the chords of the tune with a flurry of notes to set it off and ending with intensity built out of a high bend instead of fast picking. You can sing the notes of that solo…and indeed many non-musicians DO sing the solo while air guitaring. Being singable is a very good measure of a solo in my opinion.

As far as guitarists as “popular” as Gilmour there are many. If we set the criteria as “guitarists obsess about his tone (gear), note choice, and technique” then Eddie Van Halen, Robben Ford, Larry Carlton, Michael Landau, Jimi Hendrix, Stevie Ray Vaughan, Mark Knopfler, and John Mayer all qualify (as do many others). Each of these players have numerous articles, videos, web pages, and manufacturers talking about and trying to imitate them…and it’s notable that none of them are considered “shredders” although EVH certainly had his moments.

#20

Haven’t listened to the video in the OP, nor do I want to as I don’t want it coloring by Youtube algorithm, lol. But I did scan the thread - couple great posts in here.

I agree with the consensus I’m seeing - I think words like “playing with feeling” get tossed around too lightly, but Gilmour at his best is an extremely vocal, lyrical, and melodic lead player with a great sense of space and… texture, maybe, to his playing. Worth mentioning in passing is a lot of the very “composed” feeling of his playing was no accident as he was a proponent of heavily comping together solos in the studio, but neither here nor there- he’s a textbook example of a player who both 1) adds something new to a song with a solo, but 2) plays melody lines you could sing. I also think the guys pointing out his use of relatively clean tones are onto someting - fairly unsaturated playing offers you a lot of dunamic control, both in “loudness” sense, but also allowing you to push the guitar in and out of saturation for effect, and I think the fact his playing is often fairly dynamic is something that people also latch onto. And “textbook” above is unfair here since I’m struggling to think of too many names I’d also want to put on that same page.

But, I don’t think that HAS to be the antithesis of “shred,” and I think shred, done well, can incorporate the same sort of melodic, “singable” elements, into the context of a faster, more technical solo.

Two of my favorite lead breaks:

The main solo to Joe Satriani’s "until we say goodbye,"starting around 1:37 or so:

Geoerge Lynch’s first lead break on Tony MAcalpine’s “Tears of Sahara,” around 1:57 or so

Some common elements - those big soaring bends, strong sense of melody, very “vocal” lead breaks… but with technique used as an emphasis and an accent, and not as the poiny of the solo. Both of these are very “singable” leads, at least in places, if you gloss over the fast parts.

My two cents, anyway. I don’t think there’s any reason you can’t take a Gilmour-influenced lead break but, if you’re thoughtful, also add some very fast runs into it as well.

2 Likes