Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 247.9K All Categories
- 22 >> Start Here <<
- 12 New Members
- 8 FAQs
- 88.8K Gear
- 40.4K Guitar
- 3.5K Acoustics
- 1.3K Bass
- 15.1K Amps
- 17.6K FX
- 354 Digital & Modelling
- 784 Other Instruments
- 8.5K Making & Modding
- 429 Gear Reviews
- 107 Guitar Reviews
- 74 Amp Reviews
- 119 FX Reviews
- 88 Other Reviews
- 756 Made in the UK
- 987 Theory
- 1.9K Technique
- 2.2K Live
- 3.2K Studio & Recording
- 2.2K Making Music
- 232 Events
- 15 Guitar Show 2018
- 866 Plug My Stuff
- 108.1K Classifieds
- 42.3K Guitars £
- 2.9K Acoustics £
- 145 LH Guitars £
- 925 Basses £
- 10.9K Parts £
- 18.8K Amps £
- 34.9K FX £
- 2.9K Studio & Rec £
- 6.3K Misc £
- 469 Personnel
- 56.1K Chat
- 37.4K Off Topic
- 1.2K Tributes
- 6.7K Music
In this Discussion
Become a Subscriber!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Johnny Marr - is it just me ?
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
http://www.pastemagazine.com/blogs/lists/2013/02/10-great-johnny-marr-guitar-riffs.html
Mid 80s. Nothing to be impressed about though :-)
[/quote]
You're kidding me! Well I am impressed! You're entitled to your opinion. You're wrong though
[-(
I'm not sure Suffer little children is a very good example, I found more impressive pieces in my search, but it's useful to know that Smiths fans consider this a good example of what's specific to JM, since I think it's one of the weaker ones for guitar - The guitar on Suffer little children is pretty basic and repetitive. I imagine that it was intended as an anti-rock simple bit of rhythm guitar, intentionally avoiding any ornamentation or distraction from the lyrics, it does work if this is the point, the self-restraint would have been refreshing to people sick of Led Zep, I recall the huge hate there was floating around for prog rock and bands like Led Zep at the time. The only other reason than desired style would be that there was no other option apparent to the player on the day.
Personally, I would (in the 80s even) have felt compelled to put more variation into this after the demo track stage. I have no problems with simple, but like some variation
Barbarism Begins At Home was a lot more interesting, nice and busy, it's perfect for a pop song, again I hear some chord fragments that remind me of Nigerian high-life. Anyway, I can find plenty of nice bits of rhythm guitar craft in tracks on the albums I have revisited. I still like what difference does it make.
I'd like to agree on some kind of consensus, which for me would be that he plays good, often interesting jangly rhythm work with some nice textures in it, rather than that there's some secret in there that I am unable to understand because I'm not part of the fan base.
It's a fact that most people like music that's a little more complex than their personal current understanding (since it's a challenge), I've seen documentaries demonstrating this. We can all expect to like a different amount of complexity in what we listen to. Personally I can happily listen to quite a bit of Jazz, African stuff and classical, and stuff like King Crimson, Jah Wobble and Bill Laswell, so basic chord arpeggios sound a bit dull to me. I love Matt Schofield, but when I took my blues fan mate to see him, he didn't like it at all, since he does a few Jazzy things in there, which pushed my mate a bit too far.
Checking my old copy of Guitarist today, it starts Jonny Marr's interview with "Britain's greatest pop guitarist since the 60s", and this is the sort of thing I am talking about. He's a tasteful guitarist, who knows his craft, but no one from the 70s onwards can touch him? Really?
Yeah, but nobody is saying that apart from the dick who wrote the article for Guitarist. He wouldn't be the first sensationalistic journalist to stretch a claim to push the importance of his interview would he? Of course he's not the best pop guitarist since the 60s and I doubt he personally would make that claim.
What a silly cork-sniffing statement which kind of sums up why this irked you in the first place. Only idiots would listen to 'basic chord based arpeggios and intelligent people listen to jazz, classical and African music'? What utter nonsense. It's not a fact it's just some ridiculous interpretation someone made in a documentary which makes people who believe they are 'being challenged' by listening to some uninterpretable art piece feel superior .
Most rock music is made up of simple repetitive riffs. It's widespread appreciation amongst musicians who try to imitate it must be down to the good fortune that most musicians are simple creatures who don't want to be challenged due to their poor understanding.
This is absolute factual proof that you have a greater understanding of music that your mate. Well done.RHC, you are trying to paint a picture of me as some kind of snob who insists on trying to be clever with what he listens to. I rejected that option 30 years ago, and still enjoy lots and lots of simple music as well as complex.
Anyway, I get the message, there's some kind of Emperor's new clothes thing going on, and no one really wants to talk about it, and those who do get insults lobbed at them
I just realised it's helped me, Zep were my favourite band for years, and I simply chuckled reading this
I think I had assumed that musos would all be non-partisan
Supportact said: [my style is] probably more an accumulation of limitations and bad habits than a 'style'.
Amen to that. I would rather chew tin foil than listen to Robert Plant (the rest of them are slightly more bearable).
I mean why on earth would the guitarist from one of the most influential bands of all time end up getting credit? Especially when he has a unique style. Mental, eh?
What insults? Inferring that the bogus fact you stated about people liking music above their understanding hence you would find arpeggiated chords dull suggests that your musical understanding is greater than others, hence giving you the ability to ignore their 'blinded fanboy' responses? To suggest I'm trying to paint you as a music snob is nonsense, your previous post did that.
As I said earlier I do find amusing that despite the reasoned responses (again to the question you posed) you keep making reference to people getting agitated when the only person displaying that is you in your belief that people don't think you are entitled to air your opinions.
You're whole repetitive response is that you don't get it so there must be nothing there. "Emperors new clothes"? So not only those who have commented here, but a large section of the music world, Guitarist magazine, every artist that has worked with Johnny Marr and every band that have tried to imitate The Smiths have all been conned by something that fortunately you were shrewd enough to spot? Again, I'm not inferring that you are a music snob or that you feel your understanding of music is greater than the rest of us, you are.
No-one has said to you 'You must like Johnny Marr.'. No-one has tried to suggest Marr is a virtuoso. They just gave their responses to your original question. More so no-one has done as you do and suggested that a lack of musical understanding may be why you don't. Quite bluntly though and regardless of whether you like or dislike Marr (don't worry we know), if you cannot understand why a large section of people rate him or why he is significant as a guitarist then your understanding of popular British music since 1980 is woeful.
There are some fanatical Smiths fans who worship Marr & Morrissey as gods, I am far, far from one of them. They are not my 'scene' whatsoever but I'm not naïve enough to ignore their importance regardless of personal taste. I am not a fan of Nu-Metal at all yet every time I pick up any Top Guitarist 100 list (which any sane person realises is nonsense) Mick Thompson and Jim Root will feature and I fully appreciate why.
As I asked earlier, would you consider it's right for Pete Townshend to be thought of as a guitar legend? If not then fair enough but it would explain why in you opinion the likes of Johnny Marr or Peter Buck do not deserve recognition as guitarist in their own right.
Earlier you said you thought Johnny Marr's playing was derivative of Jimmy Page's. If Led Zeppelin were your favourite band for years and you genuinely listened to Marr I am curious at how you made this connection? It's just most musical commentators of the time would describe the way Marr approached his playing as as disparate from Page's as you could get within that British rock scene.The thread is becoming quite serious and emotions are high. I'm surprised.
The emperor's new clothes comment made me laugh. Perhaps you're right TC.
Perhaps it's because I love the basics and don't do flash at all. I'm a Tele man afterall!
I've reread my posts before posting in this thread to make sure I am not getting personal. I've received a few insulting responses, which I am a bit disappointed with
I don't dislike Johnny Marr, and I have stated repeatedly that he's a good guitarist. I've asked "am I missing something extra", the response has been people who share my view, assertions that it's just that I "don't get it" (which is why I asked, I know that already), and example tracks that feature nothing unusual to my ears
The Emperor's new clothes reference is because the response to me not seeing something special there, which people say there is, has repeatedly been "there's something wrong with your perception", rather than any kind of rational discussion about technique or style.
Variation of taste with the complexity people are comfortable with in music is not some bogus theory I dreamt up, it was demonstrated by a classical music school on the interesting programme I watched, they showed various individuals to illustrate this. People like different amounts of complexity. Since I've been told several times that some people "don't get it", I'm trying to find a reason why I don't. This does not make me a "cork-sniffer", which is a pretty confrontational term.
To suggest that JM is derivative of Jimmy Page would be nuts, it's very misleading to say that I thought that, I said:
meaning that evening Page, the kind of player Marr is widely known to be so different from, used jangley arpeggios, therefore they were not something new.
I know the "best of" lists are not some league table to be taken too seriously - "my player won/lost", it's the opinions tacked onto these that puzzle me, and occasional conversations, in which sometimes I am expected to nod and agree that Marr has some special powers. Like most big-name musos, he's a competent musician who was the lucky one who hit the big time. Any of us here will know dozens of people with outstanding albums and playing at many levels who never got anywhere. As influential as any big name guitarist is, including all my favourites, they were always in the right place at the right time, and they only as gifted as dozens of their contemporaries who now hold down normal jobs in normal lives, does anyone here truly think otherwise, I know punters do, but musos should know better. I think that uncritical hero worship amongst musos constrains creativity. Players should be able to recognise weaknesses in their own and their heros' playing, how else can we learn and improve anything? would have liked to hear more about his influences and techniques, but this thread has probably gone too far off course now