Guitar Solos: Clean Vs. Hyper-Accurate
- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Hello kids, adults and whatever else there is out there! I thought I would share my views on some charting styles regarding guitar solos, and possibly spark some debate if we are (un)lucky.
Basically, a human guitarist is probably gonna do mistakes on fast shredding guitar solos no matter how good they are, which creates a bit of a dilemma: should one chart what is actually being played or chart the intention of the part? In my opinion, clean is always better no matter what, and I am here to explain why (and yes this will of course be a bit biased):
First, let’s look at a hyper-accurately charted solo, “Pulse of The Maggots” by Slipknot:
As you can see here, the solo is charted on a 64th grid (if it even is at a grid at all), charting all sorts of minor tempo changes, strums and other such things to make it more accurate to what is being played. Though the question is, from a Rock Band and tab standpoint, is it really accurate? And most importantly, is it fun? Many people have complained about this solo for being frustrating and arguably unplayable, which seems counter productive to get a more accurate experience, as it makes you feel like the game is making you fail rather than your own abilities. Hyper-accurate charting also has the ironic side effect of often not being all that accurate at all, as trying to perfectly place this huge amount of notes on a 64th grid is nearly impossible for the human ear.
Now, let’s look at a clean solo, “The Great Satan” by Ministry:
As you can see here, everything is on a 16th/32th grid, quantized, wrapped nicely and without random strums within the Ho/Po chains, creating a experience that is much more manageable to play for the people with the right skills, while also avoiding fake difficulty via the visual confusion a hyper-accurate charting style brings. You could argue that this solo in particular is wrapped a bit too much, yes, but it’s perfectly possible to keep a clean charting style without overwrapping as well; all you need to look out for is to not have 2 gems be of the same color unless it is completely necessary as part of a actual intentional pattern.
So all in all I am basically asking you to consider a clean and crisp chart over one that tries to be so accurate it ends up un-fun to play.
Guitar is not my main instrument so my point of view is more philosophical than practical. While I think clean is good, it poses a problem: how many variations on a theme can you do on a 5-lane, 32 notes per measure pattern? I think cleaning up compresses the upper tier and makes for less diverse solos. However, is it better to have a more diverse solo or a more fun to play solo?
As always when “Hamonix did it”, I think author should choose what they want to convey.
Guitar is not my main instrument so my point of view is more philosophical than practical. While I think clean is good, it poses a problem: how many variations on a theme can you do on a 5-lane, 32 notes per measure pattern? I think cleaning up compresses the upper tier and makes for less diverse solos. However, is it better to have a more diverse solo or a more fun to play solo?As always when “Hamonix did it”, I think author should choose what they want to convey.
While a good point, I think it is possible to do a lot of patterns without having to resort to random strums and off-grid charting. I mean nothing stops you from experimenting with doing less wrapping than in The Great Satan, and with the right song you can still get pretty unique patterns even if it’s clean and easy to sightread.
While a good point, I think it is possible to do a lot of patterns without having to resort to random strums and off-grid charting.
But that wasn’t the premise.
” src=”/wp-content/uploads/invision_emoticons/default_SA_smile.gif”> You said notes “charted on a 64th grid” and “accurate”. Random strums and mis-aligned notes are another thing altogether.While a good point, I think it is possible to do a lot of patterns without having to resort to random strums and off-grid charting.
But that wasn’t the premise.
” src=”/wp-content/uploads/invision_emoticons/default_SA_smile.gif” /> You said notes “charted on a 64th grid” and “accurate”. Random strums and mis-aligned notes are another thing altogether.Well they would be off of a 16th grid and seem completely off grid when playing them, and as mentioned it would be impossible for a human ear to truly make something on a 64th, 128th or no grid completely accurate when it’s this fast.
With practice, mere mortals should be able to have a shot at someday playing it successfully, or at least be able to hit sections of the solo. So I’d say playability trumps accuracy. What irks me is when (seemingly) random strums are added thus making it harder yet.
I am also in favor of “clean” solos. It was really sad to see metal and rock solos near the end of HMX’s run go for the hyper-accuracy route, and made those songs a lot less fun to play. Where as stuff like the Ygnwie Malmsteen pack could have been done “hyper accurate,” but instead they decided to make it “clean,” and we got something really fun (if really challenging for most folk).
Hmm, I’d say this is a very subjective topic to start with, but in the end, if you ask me, some solos simply can’t be charted clean. Many Metallica solos pose this problem exactly, and I often find myself struggling with them.
I’ve tried to chart a clean version of a solo on several Metallica and Megadeth charts in the past when I was just first starting… its difficult, and to this day, it’s still difficult. Some songs seem to benefit from accuracy, and many songs in the thrash genre in particular are this way. I’ve noticed that Van Halen feels much better clean than accurate, even though he too is shredding most of the time when he plays (especially on solos).
In the end the overall feel of the solo may be lost if you chart it clean depending on what you’re dealing with. I mean, yeah, its hard to play sometimes if hyperaccurate, but at the same time, taking out or changing notes can really cripple a song in terms of its feel, even if its just a single note. I’ve learned this the hard way with solo charting.
I mean, in the end, no one will be right about how to chart a solo. Accuracy is something people strive for, but at the same time, its difficult to be accurate and have a playable song in the case of a song like ‘One’. There are a lot of variables. I’d say a mix of the two finding a common ground would be good. I want accuracy, but not something thats so accurate I can’t play it.
Hmm, I’d say this is a very subjective topic to start with, but in the end, if you ask me, some solos simply can’t be charted clean. Many Metallica solos pose this problem exactly, and I often find myself struggling with them.I’ve tried to chart a clean version of a solo on several Metallica and Megadeth charts in the past when I was just first starting… its difficult, and to this day, it’s still difficult. Some songs seem to benefit from accuracy, and many songs in the thrash genre in particular are this way. I’ve noticed that Van Halen feels much better clean than accurate, even though he too is shredding most of the time when he plays (especially on solos).
In the end the overall feel of the solo may be lost if you chart it clean depending on what you’re dealing with. I mean, yeah, its hard to play sometimes if hyperaccurate, but at the same time, taking out or changing notes can really cripple a song in terms of its feel, even if its just a single note. I’ve learned this the hard way with solo charting.
I mean, in the end, no one will be right about how to chart a solo. Accuracy is something people strive for, but at the same time, its difficult to be accurate and have a playable song in the case of a song like ‘One’. There are a lot of variables. I’d say a mix of the two finding a common ground would be good. I want accuracy, but not something thats so accurate I can’t play it.
I think you are misunderstanding what I mean with a clean solo. I am not saying to simplify the chart, go ahead and chart all the notes that actually are there, but I mean to keep it all on grid, don’t chart unnecessary strums just because the guitarist strums the full solo IRL, and most of all try and make it be fun to play while still feeling accurate enough to not break the rock star fantasy.
When you mentioned One, I went on YouTube to check Guitar Hero: Metallica’s chart for it, and the solo is actually very cleanly charted, with the only part looking off being the O-B-O-Y-O-R ish pattern after the crazy triplets. You can clearly hear the guitarist falling out of time several times during the tapping, but it’s still charted on-grid and is made better and more fun to play for it.
It’s also my personal opinion that doing “Hyper-accurate charting” is a bit of an insult to the artist as well, exposing errors in their playing that may or may not actually be there and making their playing look random and poorly done. As mentioned before, getting something completely on-tempo during shredding with a human ear is impossible, and charting intent over performance generally makes for better charts.
When you mentioned One, I went on YouTube to check Guitar Hero: Metallica’s chart for it, and the solo is actually very cleanly charted, with the only part looking off being the O-B-O-Y-O-R ish pattern after the crazy triplets. You can clearly hear the guitarist falling out of time several times during the tapping, but it’s still charted on-grid and is made better and more fun to play for it.
It’s also my personal opinion that doing “Hyper-accurate charting” is a bit of an insult to the artist as well, exposing errors in their playing that may or may not actually be there and making their playing look random and poorly done. As mentioned before, getting something completely on-tempo during shredding with a human ear is impossible, and charting intent over performance generally makes for better charts.
I think I now get what you were meaning and yes, clean is better, as compared to “a 1/64 later because the guitarist is not perfectly on time”.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.