Yngwie in the 80s.

Hootsmon

octatonic said:

bingefeller said:

octatonic said:

bingefeller said:

thomasross20 said:

It takes a while but I'm well into it. 
Just listening to Live in Leningrad. 
Utterly astounding for live guitar work. 
For me he's probably the best / most natural technical player there ever was. 

I've got two of his tab books. I'm going to make it a mission to try and learn an album all the way through *gulp*

I have found learning his solos very difficult because a lot of his phrasing is so free. You sort of have to get a general sense of the notes he's playing and go from there.  

All you have to do is play as fast as you can- that is what he is doing.
In the solo constructed -> improv continuum you have Petrucci at one end (everything is learned and constructed) and Malmsteen the other (wiggle your fingers... GO!).

I like to try and get it kind of in the same area and not just aimlessly widdle my own improv over the top of his.  

You have to use the right scales and have a general melodic contour that is similar- but Malmsteen really does just play solos as fast as he can play them.
It is why you end up with those weird note groupings- 33 to a bar, 36 to a bar and such.
You can't fake it with minor pentatonic- has to be harmonic minor, phyrigian dominant, some pentatonic, some arpeggios.
Start with the 'I'll See the Light Tonight" solo.
Learn the transcribed solo- memorise the note order but don't worry too much about the playing rhythmically the same as the record.

Have a listen to some of the note groupings after the interlude here:

is that TEFAL on the vocals?

Winny_Pooh

The guy has no interest for me whatsoever. 
Crap genre of music with bland songs and very little musical engagement.

Before Yngwie:

Allan Holdsworth, An extra terrestrial, not influencial to the mainstream like EVH but to all serious guitarists the guy is an oracle, a true improviser and frightening virtuouso.

Al di Meola, well rounded virtuouso that writes some cool music and has technique and musicality.

EVH: Way better music than Yngwie and truly thrilling and energised solos even if not that technical. 

After:
Steve Vai, pushing shred technique to a mind boggling level, a bit indulgent but Blue Powder & For the love of God are the melodoc and technical pinnacle of instrumental guitar rock.

Etc (Johnson, Satriani, Lane)

So in context, why would anyone give a crap about Yngwie unless they are into 80's metal.

bingefeller

octatonic said:

bingefeller said:

octatonic said:

bingefeller said:

thomasross20 said:

It takes a while but I'm well into it. 
Just listening to Live in Leningrad. 
Utterly astounding for live guitar work. 
For me he's probably the best / most natural technical player there ever was. 

I've got two of his tab books. I'm going to make it a mission to try and learn an album all the way through *gulp*

I have found learning his solos very difficult because a lot of his phrasing is so free. You sort of have to get a general sense of the notes he's playing and go from there.  

All you have to do is play as fast as you can- that is what he is doing.
In the solo constructed -> improv continuum you have Petrucci at one end (everything is learned and constructed) and Malmsteen the other (wiggle your fingers... GO!).

I like to try and get it kind of in the same area and not just aimlessly widdle my own improv over the top of his.  

You have to use the right scales and have a general melodic contour that is similar- but Malmsteen really does just play solos as fast as he can play them.
It is why you end up with those weird note groupings- 33 to a bar, 36 to a bar and such.
You can't fake it with minor pentatonic- has to be harmonic minor, phyrigian dominant, some pentatonic, some arpeggios.
Start with the 'I'll See the Light Tonight" solo.
Learn the transcribed solo- memorise the note order but don't worry too much about the playing rhythmically the same as the record.

Have a listen to some of the note groupings after the interlude here:

So, you're saying _don't_ worry about being the same rhythmically?  

octatonic

bingefeller said:

octatonic said:

bingefeller said:

octatonic said:

bingefeller said:

thomasross20 said:

It takes a while but I'm well into it. 
Just listening to Live in Leningrad. 
Utterly astounding for live guitar work. 
For me he's probably the best / most natural technical player there ever was. 

I've got two of his tab books. I'm going to make it a mission to try and learn an album all the way through *gulp*

I have found learning his solos very difficult because a lot of his phrasing is so free. You sort of have to get a general sense of the notes he's playing and go from there.  

All you have to do is play as fast as you can- that is what he is doing.
In the solo constructed -> improv continuum you have Petrucci at one end (everything is learned and constructed) and Malmsteen the other (wiggle your fingers... GO!).

I like to try and get it kind of in the same area and not just aimlessly widdle my own improv over the top of his.  

You have to use the right scales and have a general melodic contour that is similar- but Malmsteen really does just play solos as fast as he can play them.
It is why you end up with those weird note groupings- 33 to a bar, 36 to a bar and such.
You can't fake it with minor pentatonic- has to be harmonic minor, phyrigian dominant, some pentatonic, some arpeggios.
Start with the 'I'll See the Light Tonight" solo.
Learn the transcribed solo- memorise the note order but don't worry too much about the playing rhythmically the same as the record.

Have a listen to some of the note groupings after the interlude here:

So, you're saying _don't_ worry about being the same rhythmically?  

I guess what I'm saying is if you can wiggle your fingers fast enough and choose the right notes (mostly harmonic minor) then it will sound pretty convincing.
You also need to pick it- legato won't really sound right.
That is still quite an ask.

bingefeller

octatonic said:

bingefeller said:

octatonic said:

bingefeller said:

octatonic said:

bingefeller said:

thomasross20 said:

It takes a while but I'm well into it. 
Just listening to Live in Leningrad. 
Utterly astounding for live guitar work. 
For me he's probably the best / most natural technical player there ever was. 

I've got two of his tab books. I'm going to make it a mission to try and learn an album all the way through *gulp*

I have found learning his solos very difficult because a lot of his phrasing is so free. You sort of have to get a general sense of the notes he's playing and go from there.  

All you have to do is play as fast as you can- that is what he is doing.
In the solo constructed -> improv continuum you have Petrucci at one end (everything is learned and constructed) and Malmsteen the other (wiggle your fingers... GO!).

I like to try and get it kind of in the same area and not just aimlessly widdle my own improv over the top of his.  

You have to use the right scales and have a general melodic contour that is similar- but Malmsteen really does just play solos as fast as he can play them.
It is why you end up with those weird note groupings- 33 to a bar, 36 to a bar and such.
You can't fake it with minor pentatonic- has to be harmonic minor, phyrigian dominant, some pentatonic, some arpeggios.
Start with the 'I'll See the Light Tonight" solo.
Learn the transcribed solo- memorise the note order but don't worry too much about the playing rhythmically the same as the record.

Have a listen to some of the note groupings after the interlude here:

So, you're saying _don't_ worry about being the same rhythmically?  

I guess what I'm saying is if you can wiggle your fingers fast enough and choose the right notes (mostly harmonic minor) then it will sound pretty convincing.
You also need to pick it- legato won't really sound right.
That is still quite an ask.

OK I get what you're saying.  I have the scales down no problem, it's the picking that's the problem.  I can only play 16ths at about 137 bpm cleanly and sextuplets at around 110.  Still quite a bit to go before I can fake it (I'm aiming for sextuplets at 130bpm and 16ths at 160bpm and then see where I can go from there).  

Elx

It really isn't all about speed, there are tons of technically better and faster players. It's about tone (on early albums), compositions (until mid 90s), vibrato, phrasing, attitude and a few other things  

Elx

Yngwie appeals to a lot of us non-native speakers of English as we don't realise at first how stupid and cheesy the lyrics are

Emp_Fab

Yeah, but people of all tongues can hear the comical endless scales played at 'ridiculissimo' tempo.  That's not music - that's speed-wanking.

scrumhalf

It's also about impact.

He may not have been the first to do what he did, but he wasn't that far down the queue.

Elx

Emp_Fab said:

Yeah, but people of all tongues can hear the comical endless scales played at 'ridiculissimo' tempo.  That's not music - that's speed-wanking.

If that's how you hear it, I cannot argue with that. But to me it sounds like you're describing Impelliteri, Michael Angelo Batio and a few others, but certainly not Yngwie. 

octatonic

Elx said:

It really isn't all about speed, there are tons of technically better and faster players. It's about tone (on early albums), compositions (until mid 90s), vibrato, phrasing, attitude and a few other things  

Yeah, but if you don't have the speed down as well then it just sounds lame.

I'm not the hugest Malmsteen fan- I kinda think he is the Donald Trump of shred.
I've learned to appreciate it to a degree- I'd rather listen to Steve Morse though.

Emp_Fab

Oh ignore me, I'm pissed off.  I've got stomach ache and raging diarrhoea.  I actually have 'Vengeance' on my car's playlist.

Elx

@Emp_Fab ;
I've been drinking all day, after a long, long time, so you can ignore me too

Elx

2:26-3:35, if you can't be bothered to listen to the whole song, please listen to this and I swear I won't try to change your opinion Listen to it carefully and tell me it's just wanking

bingefeller

He was definitely more tasteful in the 80s.  

Elx

bingefeller said:

He was definitely more tasteful in the 80s.  

Possibly. This was 1992. As a huge fan, I can say, don't bother with anything post 1998, it's horrible. If people judge him by his work in the last 20 years, I can see why they cannot stand him...

octatonic

In the 90's he was a joke.
I remember reading a review for Magnum Opus saying it was the word thing ever created.
Not just music- the worse thing ever.

Elx

octatonic said:

In the 90's he was a joke.
I remember reading a review for Magnum Opus saying it was the word thing ever created.
Not just music- the worse thing ever.

Are you sure you're not talking about War to End All Wars? Because that would make sense...Magnum Opus is very well produced, good songs...

octatonic

Elx said:

octatonic said:

In the 90's he was a joke.
I remember reading a review for Magnum Opus saying it was the word thing ever created.
Not just music- the worse thing ever.

Are you sure you're not talking about War to End All Wars? Because that would make sense...Magnum Opus is very well produced, good songs...

Nope.
It was definitely Magnum Opus.
You have to consider when it was released- this was the height of grunge- Mellon Collie, Nirvana MTV, Jar of Flies, Superunknown.
He was extremely unpopular at that time.

mburekenge

have you seen the footage of yngwie shopping for vintage strats on the tube? 

It really sums up 80s excess in the most fantastic way!

shred isn't my cup of chai tbh, but I don't understand how anyone can hate on him. It's just so overblown and ridiculous it is massively entertaining. 

Like the essence of 80s nonsense bottled. Fair play to the guy.