Hi
Is the metal a progression of blues guitar. I have heard people say this,however is it true. If it is true how else do genres intertwine. Is learning blues a good way to help with learning metal?
anyway thanks for any relpys, I find this interesting.
IMO, learning blues is good experience in any case. Rock developed from blues. Some metal has gotten pretty far from rock's blues roots, while other stuff has more recognizable blues influence. Guess which I think sounds better? :lol:
Besides, I think you'll find that it helps to keep your creativity up if you play different kinds of music that you enjoy. You don't have to stay in the same genre all the time.
"A cheerful heart is good medicine."
I'd suggest learning jazz stuff, I think that'd be much more helpful for metal guitar.
I'd suggest learning jazz stuff, I think that'd be much more helpful for metal guitar.
*nod* most modern medal is really about either putting some major distortion to some old Bach, or to some old Coltrane.
Seriously!
And since a lot of those jazz guys where actually very much influenced by classical,
"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side." -- HST
Definetly jazz will help you play more modern metal. I believe a lot of the early metal bands like Sabbath were into the blues and jazz. I read some where that Iommi and Blackmore were huge fans of Django Reinhardt.
Yea, I'd also say that metal is more like jazz...or "gypsy guitar". It's fast like that is, but with a ton of loud distortion. But at the same time it has a ton of power chords for the chorus.
I would say, develop a liking to listen LOUD music at harsh clipped solid state distortions. (= mud for me)
Also pounding drums with cymbals crashing every 2 seconds. (That goes for death metal)
Great advice given by others as regards learning Jazz. But I think that a person who is playing metal or a metal wannabe won't like to put hours of practice in learning jazz.
So imo they should be good at playing anything that can provide pain to the ears of a normal person.
(I wonder how blood metal will sound ? :oops:)
Well metal is a vast style of music. Gotta figure out what kind of metal you want to play. Give me some metal bands you like cause there's a lot of genres which each have their own subgenres. Like deathjazz or deathgrind or funeral black metal. I wouldn't say blues really connects to metal too much. Classical more than anything connects to things like technical death metal or black metal.
And btw, first wave black metal and thrash were very much influenced by punk. Power/speed metal were influenced by classical a lot of the time.
And btw, first wave black metal and thrash were very much influenced by punk. Power/speed metal were influenced by classical a lot of the time.
Well metal is a vast style of music. Gotta figure out what kind of metal you want to play. Give me some metal bands you like cause there's a lot of genres which each have their own subgenres. Like deathjazz or deathgrind or funeral black metal. I wouldn't say blues really connects to metal too much. Classical more than anything connects to things like technical death metal or black metal.
I've heard that stated as fact so many times, I do believe it's time to bust the myth.
The metal/shred styles do not draw from classical music.
I've often noted that trained musicians often look down on guitarists as musically ignorant; most guitarists can't read music, and know very little music theory. Saying there are "classical" elements of metal don't help the cause. In fact, it adds an ignorance of music history to the list of reasons many other musicians look down on guitarists...
The problem is the name "classical". What the layman thinks of as "classical music" is really orchestral music - music composed for the instruments of the orchestra. To the classically trained musician, it means something much more specific. Calling it all "classical music" is like calling everything performed on an electric guitar "rock"... even if it's played by Merle Haggard or Chet Atkins.
Orchestral music is made up of four broad periods: baroque, classical, romatic, and modern (often called "20th century"). The classical music period covered compositions from roughly 1750 to 1820. Metal does not draw from this period in music.
To make matters worse, the modern period of orchestral music has a sub-category called "neo-classical": music composed to emulate the style of classical period composers. Metal doesn't draw from this period either, even though they appropriate the label.
There are significant differences in style between periods in orchestral music - far larger than the differences between genres of metal. The baroque period is characterized by polyphony, the moving of independent melodic voices to create a harmonic structure. The classical period developed homophony, having a single central melody line placed over a chord structure. The romantic period extended the concept of tonality, modulating more frequently (and farther) than classical did, and the modern period is made up of dozens of sub-styles that either complicate or simplify the structure of romantic period music.
When people say metal comes from "classical", they really mean it appropriates melody lines from baroque composers like Bach or Paganini. Since the favored instrument of the period was the harpsichord (which does not sustain notes), baroque melodies tend to have a lot of notes. Baroque music also contains a great deal of "ornamentation" - simple turns around a central note, such as trills or mordents. These sound flashy and difficult... but are very easy to play on the guitar.
But it's important to note that shred does not really stem from baroque; it only 'borrows' single melodies. The baroque style is best expressed as one with multiple inter-twining melodies, which metal lacks. Perhaps that's why Paganini is such a favorite of shredders; he's considered a very minor baroque composer because of his great emphasis on a single line - like Yngwie's orchestral stuff, it's to show off one instrument rather than a composition's structure.
If anything, metal is "baroque light". Melodically, metal artists quote a lot of baroque material; harmonically, they're never emulating the more elaborate works, but stick to the basso ostinato techniques of early baroque composers like Purcell.
Another source of the misconception that metal is "classically based" is the fact that a couple of the early figures in the development of the metal style were originally trained as classical guitarists: Ritchie Blackmore and Randy Rhoads. But classical guitar ain't classical music... because the classical guitar didn't even exist in the beginning of the classical period! Earlier music, like Vivaldi's guitar concertos, were actually composed for other instruments - the lute or vihuela. So when Rhoads lifted Brouwer's Estudios Sencillos for Diary of a Madman, he wasn't using "classical" music - he was using 20th century pieces by a Julliard-educated classical guitar composer.
Anyway, early metal did come largely from punk, which came from early 3 chord rock, which came from blues. But there's not much of a blues influence left in today's metal. "Speed metal" came down a different path, from the violin compositions designed to develop or showcase technique, like the Paganini Caprices. If you want to take that route, you'll be better off studying the same stuff that concert violinists do: the Kreutzer etudes, John Cage's Freeman etudes, etc.
Guitar teacher offering lessons in Plainfield IL
Folks...you aren't going to get a better explanation than the one NoteBoat gave.
"A child of five could understand this...send someone to fetch a child of five !"--Groucho Marx
Folks...you aren't going to get a better explanation than the one NoteBoat gave.
Yep - the man's a veritable walking musical encyclopaedia. Once again I'm impressed by the depth and range of his musical knowledge. We are not worthy!
:D :D :D
Vic
"Sometimes the beauty of music can help us all find strength to deal with all the curves life can throw us." (D. Hodge.)
When people say metal comes from "classical", they really mean it appropriates melody lines from baroque composers like Bach or Paganini.
IMHO Paganini is considered as a romantic composer not baroque. To me his music is nearer to Listz or Brahms than Bach or Vivaldi. But I didn't study his work deeply, only as a listener.
Yes - Great stuff from NoteBoat.
Just to clarify a little on the use of the word 'classical music', in case anyone has the mistaken impression that the wider and more commonly understood meaning of the term is wrong...
Although, in its strictest sense, 'classical music' refers to the period outlined by NoteBoat, the separate, wider meaning of the word is also completely legitimate and recognised by musical authorities, not only laymen. A classically trained musician, for example, depending on their chosen area of specialist study may be as familiar with the Baroque works of JS Bach, the Romantic works of Tchaikovsky, or even the atonal works of Schoenberg, (ALL of which are considered 'classical music' in the wider sense) as with the true 'classical' works of Mozart, Haydn and their contemporaries.
This convenient umbrella term covers orchestral music (but not usually commissioned film scores, although some such as Sinfonia Antarctica by Vaughan Williams composed for the film "Scott of the Antarctic" are definitely considered 'classical' in the wider sense).
The term isn't restricted to orchestral music but also includes solo instrument 'art music' such as that composed for lute, classical guitar (not 'metal'), harpsichord, etc. as well as the art music of non Western traditions such as Middle Eastern, Indian, etc. (Ravi Shankar is a classical musician)
At the moment I'm doing some exchange lessons with a setar teacher of Iranian classical music. Often, I'm struggling to grasp what they have in common with 'our' classical music. :?
