Tako wrote:
> OK, let's set taste aside. I still maintain Malmsteen only seems
> accomplished because he infuses his music deliberately with seemingly
> difficult passages.
So what? It pleases tastes different from yours, and probably his own.
>Summers can do all that and more,
Supposing you're right, that doesn't mean Malmsteen lovers will like
Summers, or the opposite ( as is your case ). We're talking taste again!
>and you'll never
> convince me Clapton couldn't learn Malmsteen's scales and arpeggios if he
> put his mind to it.
and you'll never convince me you have the ability to know all the alternate
realities we might live in! Clapton may have a pre-disposition for
tendinitis, what would ruin your assumption!
>MOST wannabe rock guitarists can play Malmsteen!
C'mon, Tako. You know it's not true! BTW, not many wannabe rock guitarists
care about Malmsteen ( mostly in the US ).
>
> There is also some objectivity to the idea of originality, at least in the
> tech department. There is NOTHING Malmsteen does that Eddie Van Halen
> didn't do years earlier.
I've just talked to that guitarist friend of mine. He said: "is he nuts?!
Malmsteen is OBVIOUSLY more complex." He asked you to be more specific about
WHERE Van Halen played like Malmsteen ( in private, if you and the list
will ).
Bye,
Caio Rossi
|
