Has the solo had it's day ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter grimtraveller
  • Start date Start date
I'm speaking primarily of guitar solos, but I think the days of the over-the-top whack-off solo are pretty much behind us, mostly because at this point everyone's heard it all before. Half an hour on YouTube and mindless speed-shredding just won't seem nearly as impressive (if ever indeed it did). That said, used as a properly-placed melodic component to heighten the emotional impact of an excellent chord progression, it can work as an extension of the vocal melody (or as a replacement for one, in the case of metal bands that don't have melodic vocals) and really take you places the vocals alone couldn't go.
 
That's an interesting point ~ so often, when the word 'solo' is mentioned, it's hard not to think of 'guitar solo'. And the shredder {in the 90s over here, it was called 'widdling'} has in some ways been counterproductive to many peoples' perceptions of a solo. As Lt Bob alluded to, there are many types of instrumental solos. To me they're just a part of the musical landscape that may or may not appear.
 
I never really thought they were relevant. Melodies are relevant, and can show off your skilly playing if they are intricate enough and tastefully fit in (like the typical conversation between singy part, and guitar bit for punctuation for instance between lines).. but dedicating some kind of formulaic 8 or 16 bars to "show off" kind of thing just seems silly, doesn't serve the song, the groove, whatever.. its just some dude showing off. I look at "sweet child of mine" by guns n roses as a great example. Yeah its not a super terrible difficult guitar part with the signiature riff, but it is skilly, and appropriate, and creates the mood of the song... the "breaks" with the solos coming in and out between verses and stuff are just kind of filling up space, and it all gets back to rocking once they get back to that melody. Hey, radio wanted 3.5 mintes or whatever. I like melodic playing, but think it is most powerful when it is part of the song canvas or whatever you would call it, intertwining with other stuff instead of being on top of it saying "CHECK ME OUT I'M AWESOME! (with some fast fingers and no particular reason what it adds to the musical composition other than being in the same key)". Guitarists will say "NO! I have feeling and stuff..." about it but really its just some hammer ons, scale runs, taps, whatever... like you are just trying to show off "yeah i know how to play" though instead of serving the song. There are exceptions (and taste is individual so appologies in advance for my picks but the Hendrix or Gilmore or Eddie solos often were as intrinsic to the song as the vocals, where that was the highlight, not the filler. When they become filler, its like "yay... another person knows how to sweep pick a scale" kinda distraction.
 
Interesting......when you view the post before Captain Ego's.
Let me ask you Cap'n, do you feel that way about violinists, pianists, flautists, trumpeters, organists, saxophonists, cellists, mandolinists, trombonists, harmonica players, marimba and vibes players, harpists etc, etc ?
I think your point has some aspects of truth to it. But it's rather too general for me.
 
INtricate is not a part of the plus bag for me.
One of my all time fav pop/rock solos is in Everyday by Slade. It wasn't Dave Hill in this instance - Jim Lea played it - from the sounds of it he picked it out on the piano & transferred it to guitar. It's simple, gives reference to the melody & builds. LOVELY
Shredding certainly did a lot to redefine the solo from being a relatively short show piece that complimented the song to an extended show off fest tat had its own life - in fact the guitar solo became, for a time, much the same as a drum solo: something to be endured.
 
rayc said:
INtricate is not a part of the plus bag for me.
Click to expand...
I quite like intricate lead playing through the melody, be it notes or the notes of the chords but it's really much later in the day {often years, maybe even decades !} that I notice it. It's effectiveness is in it's overall effect. I guess there's the distinction between lead playing and actual soloing which I didn't always appreciate.
rayc said:
Everyday by Slade
Click to expand...
What a gorgeous song. I remember around the time it came out because my Mum had just bought me a little radio that had an alarm on it and it was the continuation of the point where I began to independently check out what music I liked. Up to that point, Slade had been untouchable in England. It seemed like every song they released hit No.1 but this was the first to break the run. They never hit the top slot again. But they continued to knock out songs that were IMO of much higher quality than their No.1s. This was one of them.
rayc said:
Shredding certainly did a lot to redefine the solo from being a relatively short show piece that complimented the song to an extended show off fest that had its own life - in fact the guitar solo became, for a time, much the same as a drum solo: something to be endured.
Click to expand...
That's where I agree with the Cap'n and it wasn't only in pop/rock that that happened. Solos felt obligatory in alot of jazz based stuff {even if, in reality, they turned out not to be} after the 60s and to me this was never more demonstrated than in the bass solo and the drum solo, both of which so very rarely made sense. If anything sat apart from so many of the pieces they were part of, it was these ! Interestingly, solos didn't feel necessary in alot of reggae and soul.
 
Grim,
You're right. Solos in the earlier Wailers music were pretty much add ons in the ODs done in England. Mind you those clavinet etc lines that bridged or intro'd were attention grabbing pieces in their own right.
Slade - I have a few of their post #1 albums. The Flame movie & soundtrack contained some absolute gems.have you heard James Whild Lea's 2008/9 solo album Therapy? More of that classist approach to melody and some lovely arrangements plus a BIG nod to Pet Sounds on 1 track.
 
Last edited:
The music machine no longer focuses on the soloist. Luckily we still have some catchy pop tunes out there to keep my attention.
 
I mostly agree with Captain Ego. I feel there is a certain point where a solo is just showing off and I lose my vocus from what emotional state the song was conveying. I much more prefer break downs, a chorus with a key change, a last chorus with 3 different vocal tracks with different lyrics and melodies layered over each other, a verse with a switched up beat you wouldnt expect, or a piano playing back the songs melody for 1 stanza.

That being said, a solo DOES still have its place in some music when used tastefully. Example of my favorite would be "Open Your Eyes" by Alter Bridge. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3UjH2GD0iY The solo in this song is LITTLE long and complex but I feel it really builds upon the existing lead guitar part throughout the song, compliments the unerdlying intruments and keeps my emotional interest. ALL ART, be it painting, statues, photography, or music was created by someone who wanted to show someone else how they felt at a certain point of time using the best way they knew how. In my opinion if a song doesn't make me feel what the artist was feeling when they wrote it then I don't consider it art and I wont listen to it... Following that point, if the solo doesn't follow the emotional state of the song it doesnt belong.
Just my .02
 
Mr. F. said:
In my opinion if a song doesn't make me feel what the artist was feeling when they wrote it then I don't consider it art and I wont listen to it
Click to expand...
Most of the time I haven't got a clue what the artist was feeling when they wrote the song. And even when I do, I feel no obligation to feel the same way. I may dig the song "I want you ~ she's so heavy" but I have never had any great desire to bed Yoko Ono ! :D
 
Last edited:
I like simple, more riffy kind of solos - ala Johnny Thunders. Sloppy and dangerous. I don't like finger melting play-as-many-notes-as-possible shred stuff. Slash or Angus style is about as technical as I can stomach. Anything more than that is gay wankery. Their kind of solos fit into the song instead of on top of it. I can dig that to a small degree. I incorporate moronic junk solos into most of my stuff simply because I can and sometimes I like it. I've never in my life though listened to any band or song just because of a guitar solo. Virtuosity means exactly nothing to me.

And the only thing worse than an ugly excessive solo is when the player makes ugly excessive solo faces while doing it. The lead face is the worst trend in rock music.
 
With me there's a mood, time & place for jammy soloing. I don't often get in the mood for it but it's usually a feeling that embraces Prog & Pysch at the same time. Mind you that almost always means a meandering solo rather than a shred session.
Flurries of notes rarely do it for me.
I can't say I try to get in the same place as the writer/performer. If it connects it connects & if it doesn't you won't find me listening.
Solo face - it's a perennial isn't it. From Muddy to Frampton to the newer players. I'd enjoy seeing someone who doesn't have solo face.
 
Greg_L said:
I like simple, more riffy kind of solos - ala Johnny Thunders. Sloppy and dangerous. .
Click to expand...
I like sloppy usually. Often sloppy means you're playing right at the edge and I like that.

Although my mission in life is to achieve virtuosity on my instruments; when I'm playing I like to be pushing my own boundaries (not speed but note selection and reach) and when you're pushing your limits it's usually sloppy.
I like it in other peoples' playing too.

And that whole 'New Orleans' thing , which is where I learned my craft, is all about sloppy. The second line 'feel' is always really loose.
And I don't make faces .... at least I've never been told I do and that's something you get told about if you do it.
I imagine I probably look pretty much intent and focused on what I'm doing.
 
The wretched excess of 80s hair bands sort of killed guitar solos for me. All those over-the-top scale runs that didn't really match the song. Solos should be short and sweet and be derived from the main motif of the song in some way.
 
In my mind, there are essentially two types of solos:

#1 - An intentional compositional element, providing rhythmic and/or melodic counterpoint to the vocal melodies and/or elements of the piece itself, either adding to or providing relief from tension.

#2 - "Fuck Yeah! Fuck Me! Fuck You! Let's Fuck! Check this shit out!"


Both have their place, and some of the better ones are part #1 and part #2.
 
Greg_L said:
Virtuosity means exactly nothing to me.
Click to expand...
For me, virtuosity is merely coincidental. I don't even really know what qualifies as virtuoso playing. Are improvizers by the very nature of what they're doing virtuoso ? The ability to make stuff up on the fly ? But then, alot of jazz and Indian players still bore me to death on some pieces. As do some that just play minimalist punk/metal/hard rock/poppy solos, whatever the instrument. And those same players will thrill me to bits on other songs. Whether it's a thousand notes per breath or seven.
The bottom line for me is that I either like the solo or I don't. There are zillions of great songs with very average solos that don't particularly stand out for me. But I couldn't tell you why. I don't really notice whether it's expertly or sloppilly executed. I don't honestly care. It gets me or it doesn't. The player of the solo has absolutely no control over it. Whether I like it, am indifferent to it or am irritated by it or hardly notice it.
 
Yeah going on virtuosity, the solo definitely hasn't had its day, in that type of music. I remember there was a big "no solos" trend in the early 2000s, but did it ever really lift? I thought it did for a time, but looking back it looks like it didn't.
 
Virtuosity is often about execution, what matters in a solo, as in songwriting, is composition.
 
Solos/leads are still alive and well, they're just not in the mainstream music any more....you can thank Nirvana for that one since they essentially killed the "guitar solo age" by pushing Metal back into Europe's mainstream. There are several bands that still have solos/leads, some are even dual & harmonized like Avenged Sevenfold (don't like them, but they have shred). A popular trend in Metal these days is Progressive Metal (on the heels of 70s Prog giants like Yes, Rush, Dixie Dregs as well as 80s Prog & Shred like Queensryche & Malmsteen). I still write songs w/ lead breaks in them. Just there are a lot more bass, keyboard, and drum solos mixed in now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top