Killer arguments for no longer watching a YouTuber's content (EVH content)?

mrkb

Philly_Q said:

Tyler/Music is Win is usually pretty even-handed with his comments on other music so I think there's some kind of in-joke going on here.  And no, he didn't nearly die but that's a nasty cut and it must have been a very disturbing experience.

I’ve made a nasty cut - buy my album…..

OilCityPickups

Okay this is - I believe - Eddie's original solo isolated from the track. 

https://youtu.be/Aplfy9YZcZs?si=b76zSM6Efasxgy5i

And this is the Tom Shreds version. 

https://youtu.be/pDbLwCfnfZM?si=I-Z3FCknOaJEFoX5


Now I would confess myself as not an EVH fan, but I do consider the Beat it solo one of the greatest guitar solos in popular music history, along with Danny Cedrone's Rock Around the Clock solo, and a very few others.

'Tom Shreds' gets every note bang on ... great work .... but yep it's totally had the balls removed. Sterile is an accurate description. 

Listen to the two versions ... streets apart. 

stickyfiddle

I have a bunch of feelings on this. Beat It is iconic and EVH was a legend, even though I don't love that much of his music if I'm honest.

I'm intimately aware of this one having learned it for the band last year and there is a bounce in there that noone can ever quite match but most YouTubers don't even try. And my god I'm not suggesting I get it right - I don't even play all the notes, but I do try and get the right overall feel. There is definitely a lack of bounce in the mentioned video - he makes it look easy but it also sounds a little dull and just playing the notes without any real personal expression.

That said "sterile" is often an accusation thrown at shredders, and hence it's entirely possible this was intended as an in-joke by MIW. 

In any case I've always found the MIW guy intensely irritating, so I don't really care. Either it's a poorly-landed joke or just plain mean. 

Philly_Q

I don't think there's any point comparing, at least not from this "sterility" perspective.  

The original's a piece of music being created on the spot - by a genius, although that's almost irrelevant - with total abandon and all the player's idiosyncrasies.  He's just playing, he can't get it wrong because it didn't exist until that moment.

The cover is a totally different exercise, with a totally different intent.  It's someone trying to exactly copy an existing piece that everyone has heard a thousand times.  He's trying to replicate another player's quirks and make it sound off-the-cuff, which is next to impossible.  And he can't win.  If he nearly succeeds, it's "sterile", if he injects any of his own personality or style, "he's messed up that bit".

OilCityPickups

Philly_Q said:

I don't think there's any point comparing, at least not from this "sterility" perspective.  

The original's a piece of music being created on the spot - by a genius, although that's almost irrelevant - with total abandon and all the player's idiosyncrasies.  He's just playing, he can't get it wrong because it didn't exist until that moment.

The cover is a totally different exercise, with a totally different intent.  It's someone trying to exactly copy an existing piece that everyone has heard a thousand times.  He's trying to replicate another player's quirks and make it sound off-the-cuff, which is next to impossible.  And he can't win.  If he nearly succeeds, it's "sterile", if he injects any of his own personality or style, "he's messed up that bit".

Hummm not sure I agree on that. I've heard other folks copy that solo note for note and still keep that feeling of urgency and danger of the original. 
As @stickyfiddle says, that Tom Shreds version lacked 'bounce', forward drive or anything other than note for note accuracy. 

Philly_Q

You may be right, I can't claim to have spent hours watching and listening to different Beat It covers, but in those I've seen there are things they get right and things they get wrong, but the ones which work best are the ones which "feel" right even if some of the notes are wrong.  I don't think I've seen any which exactly reproduced both the notes and the feel.  As Sticky himself said (my emphasis in bold):

stickyfiddle said:

I'm intimately aware of this one having learned it for the band last year and there is a bounce in there that noone can ever quite match but most YouTubers don't even try. And my god I'm not suggesting I get it right - I don't even play all the notes, but I do try and get the right overall feel. There is definitely a lack of bounce in the mentioned video - he makes it look easy but it also sounds a little dull and just playing the notes without any real personal expression.

It also makes a big difference if you're seeing and hearing it live, or watching a YouTube video on repeat.  Live, it's 30 seconds and if it feels exciting and impressive, it's done the job.  If you heard it back, there might be a dozen mistakes but that doesn't matter.

(I'm talking as a listener not a player, by the way.  For avoidance of any doubt, It goes almost without saying I can't play it.)

guitarjack66

I understand that the assailant was pretty wound up by the use of grammar on his youtube channel. I have some sympathy on that score.