At band rehearsal, and...

That's what I thought, I was worried a book wouldn't be in depth enough for teaching technique. An instructor might be needed, but they usually charge a lot. Hmmm. Wait, didn't Yngwie Malmsteen teach himself to play? ... Better get an instructor then. :P

Anyway, sorry for hijacking your thread. :)
 
haha, there's nothing to hijack... its just about a video, take it or leave it :P. I was sort of hoping it'd turn into more guitar discussion :).

And by the way, yeah instructors do generally charge a bit ($24 AUD an hour here), but you'd only need them for about 5 or 6 lessons. It's well worth it though.
 
I've been playing guitar for about 1,5 years now, and I can do some solos, and I know some scales n stuff. The solos I know by Opeth are the one in Face of Melinda and the one in Patterns in the ivy 2... none of them are really advanced tho. Do you still reckon I should get lessons? 'cause I've been considering to, even though I'm not sure it's really a necessity..
 
and what should those lessons include? I assume that the technique and such can be self-taught. are you referring to the theory-part or am I wrong about people learning the technique-part themselves?
 
Well, Opeth are professionals and in my understanding none of them took lessons. Or maybe Mike did, but only for a few years. Lessons can really be risky. It's hard to learn theory and the like without losing your ability to "think outside the box", so to speak. If you're taught a certain way, you may never be able to write the way you did before, or whatever.
 
KennonKun said:
Well, Opeth are professionals and in my understanding none of them took lessons. Or maybe Mike did, but only for a few years. Lessons can really be risky. It's hard to learn theory and the like without losing your ability to "think outside the box", so to speak. If you're taught a certain way, you may never be able to write the way you did before, or whatever.

I cant speak for all, but Ive been taking lessons for about 6 months now and the progress ive made would simply not be possible without them. Of course much of your experience depends on your instructor; I am taking a music major class through my university and have been very happy, although a little overwhelmed (only been playing guitar for 1.5 years). It is, in my opinion, absolutely necessary to have some basic understanding of what you are doing on the instrument, ie Theory. With my class (which is simply a one on one session) we talk about everything from temperments and composition, to the more specific guitar techniques.
Contrary to what you say about it being "limiting", the goal of all the scales and progressions is to create a comprehensive feel and understanding of the instrument, as well as the theory behind it. This greatly expands your "library" of ideas and possiblities. A true education would not be limited to one way of teaching; you would learn more than just Western tradition.
From understanding intervals, to chord structure, to simply exploring sonic properties, i cannot overestimate the importance of formal instruction. It is where the hobby corsses over to the "art"
Alright, sales pitch over...
 
Justin speaks the truth. Now to get practical, if what he said seems daunting and is making you cringe when you think about learning the instrument, then forget you ever read it.

The love and drive for the instrument comes from within. You cannot compensate for lack of drive with any amount of theory knowledge and professional tutoring. If you just want to get yourself started, take the initiative to learn some basic technique, and from there on the world is your oyster. You only need to consider all the things mentioned if you're considering being a serious session formal-style musician... alot of that stuff is completely unecessary for the metal we all know and love. If you are truly devoted, and a naturally good musician, you don't need someone to 'teach' you how to have a good ear. Alot of teaching compromises an individual's musical identity. Art cannot be taught.. it's a form of self-expression.
 
Ok maybe I can do solos after all. I tried learning the Forest of October solo and I got through about 4/9 of it and it doesn't sound that bad at all. I've never really tried learning a solo without going "Fuck it" after trying for a few minutes , so maybe that's it.
 
One more question, Moonlapse, which direction do you pick each string exactly?

Like this: (^ = up; v = down)

__v___v_v_^_^_v___v_v_^_^ etc.
--9h6-------6-9h6-------6-10h7-------7-10h7-------7-|
------7---7-------7---7--------8---8--------8---8---|
--------6-----------6------------7------------7-----|
----------------------------------------------------|
----------------------------------------------------|
----------------------------------------------------|


Or like this?

__v___v_^_^_^_v___v_^_^_^ etc.
--9h6-------6-9h6-------6-10h7-------7-10h7-------7-|
------7---7-------7---7--------8---8--------8---8---|
--------6-----------6------------7------------7-----|
----------------------------------------------------|
----------------------------------------------------|
----------------------------------------------------|
 
T3hLep4rAffinity said:
Ok maybe I can do solos after all. I tried learning the Forest of October solo and I got through about 4/9 of it and it doesn't sound that bad at all. I've never really tried learning a solo without going "Fuck it" after trying for a few minutes , so maybe that's it.

that's my problem with solos too, i don't really stick with them. i just try em a couple times, and go ah fuck it, i'll stick with rhythm.
 
Code:
__v___^_^_v_v_^___^_^_v_v etc.
--9h6-------6-9h6-------6-10h7-------7-10h7-------7-|
------7---7-------7---7--------8---8--------8---8---|
--------6-----------6------------7------------7-----|
----------------------------------------------------|
----------------------------------------------------|
----------------------------------------------------|
 
Moonstruck said:
One more question, Moonlapse, which direction do you pick each string exactly?

Like this: (^ = up; v = down)

__v___v_v_^_^_v___v_v_^_^ etc.
--9h6-------6-9h6-------6-10h7-------7-10h7-------7-|
------7---7-------7---7--------8---8--------8---8---|
--------6-----------6------------7------------7-----|
----------------------------------------------------|
----------------------------------------------------|
----------------------------------------------------|


Or like this?

__v___v_^_^_^_v___v_^_^_^ etc.
--9h6-------6-9h6-------6-10h7-------7-10h7-------7-|
------7---7-------7---7--------8---8--------8---8---|
--------6-----------6------------7------------7-----|
----------------------------------------------------|
----------------------------------------------------|
----------------------------------------------------|

i play it like


__v___^_v_^_v_____^
--9p6-------6h9p6-------6h10p7-------7h10p7-------7-|
------7---7-------7---7--------8---8--------8---8---|
--------6-----------6------------7------------7-----|
----------------------------------------------------|
----------------------------------------------------|
----------------------------------------------------|
 
I forgot to say in the first message: Great job Moonlapse. I love that solo, and you played it very well, especially so for just busting out at a rehearsal.

In my previous post, i certainly wasnt trying to intimidate, or scare people away from lessons and or playing an instrument! Most of the "jargon" is just that; new terminology just like any other field. While i absolutely agree with Moonlapse in that Theory/technique alone does not make good music (Michael Angelo anyone?), its basically impossible to make unique, creative, and inspired music without having the ability to express yourself through whichever medium you choose. Having passion is one thing; turning it into something worthwhile is where the "skill" and knowledge elements come into play. Even for guys like Opeth, who dont have "much" formal training (by the way, a fews years (is that even accurate for Mike?) is quite a bit!) , they still claim that musicianship is very central and important to producing quality stuff. Much like anything in life, its about balancing emotion and the more "cerebral". Moonlapse quotes Plato so Im sure he knows exactly what I mean. :)
That aside, I strongly disagree with Moonlapse's statement about more advanced theory only being necessary for "professional" musicians. Even though I am taking Major music study, i have zero intention to perform in a band, studio, or play music for a career. I simply love education, and am fascinated by how things work. I started off not caring too much about the theoretical; after about a year of having no idea of the history or reason why i was playing what i was (questions like: what are progressions, and why do we naturally like certain ones, or associate them with moods? Why is a guitar tuned the way it is? What is temperance, and what effect has it had on the development of sound and composition? etc.) i decided to seriously persue it.
I tend to think any inquisitive mind would want to know what the hell they where doing, rather than simply copying other players because you like the way it sounds... Understanding what that sound is, and why you like it can only make you a better player, and listener. Not to be long winded (too late i know) but education is never a bad thing; its only leads to higher understanding and appreciation.
Moonlapse is absolutely correct when he stated that one cannot teach artistry. But to achieve art, and to express ones passion's, the method must be understood.
 
Ah of course, I forgot about scholars. Yes, you always find some people who like to learn disciplines or theory simply for the educational gratification. Got to admire that. I was actually quite interested in becoming versed in music theory until none of my tutors were adequately schooled enough to really teach me anything.

But isn't the way tonal intervals affect human emotion more of a psychological study than a musical one? I wasn't aware such things were taught under classic disciplines.