Becoming a Good Lead Player--Best Approach?

Don't forget about the importance of good gear also. Having a smooth playing guitar and a nice gain with good sustain counts for a lot in my opinion. I believe 90% of the tone will come from the player's hands, but the gear will make it easier.

....that's not advice for Matt though.. we know he's got nice gear and nice chops... that's just a general opinion for everyone.
 
Hopkins-WitchfinderGeneral said:
I can't express how dissapointed I am that you didn't say "make lots of videos of yourself playing opeth songs!" :cool:

bwahah, cheapshot fucker :lol:. Although I do have to say that playing the Opeth stuff did get me a very long way in terms of playing.

I'm thinking Matt is way beyond that level of playing though.
 
Matt Smith said:
Sometimes I'll see some guy who's been playing for like 3 years and he can solo circles around me (pretty embarassing since I've been playing a lot longer), so there's got to be a way to improve my skills exponentially and quickly, especially since I'm already so familiar with the instrument and have a quick left hand just from riffing.

I personally like better the guitarist with interesting solos and melody lines, regardless of the speed. Speed is waaaay overrated IMO. I've seen that 8 yr old shredding incredibly, but I'm really interested whether he'd put out some music or just go working in some guitar circus as an acrobat...
Michael Romeo started practising seriously at age of 18, so it's never too late.

But I always prefer a guy like Andy LaRocque :worship: :worship: :worship: who has great technique, but one of the most original and instantly recognizable styles I've ever heard. Same goes for James Murphy. :headbang:
On the other hand, I adore Dave Gilmour's playing (that reminds me, Akerfeldt did a very good job with his Gilmouresque solos on Damnation, amazing player) as well and speed is non-existant in his solos. I would rather play like him than any Angelo type player any time...
When such guitarists play, I enjoy the melodies and harmonies, I don't judge them by how fast or complicated some lick of theirs is. If something sends shivers down my spine, I have a deep respect for that player and that's it.
 
One of the reasons why our friend James Murphy here is one of my favorites is because he mixes awesome melody and composition with killer shred techniques. He along with Marty Friedman, Alex Skolnick, Jeff Loomis, and of course the mighty DIMEBAG are probably my biggest inspirations because of the sense of balance in their styles.
 
Moonlapse said:
bwahah, cheapshot fucker :lol:. Although I do have to say that playing the Opeth stuff did get me a very long way in terms of playing.

I'm thinking Matt is way beyond that level of playing though.

For an intermediate player i'd say opeth solos are good to learn, becayse they mix up stuff and have a lot of melodic motifs, which imo is a very important thing to learn about soloing. Make regonisable melodies.
 
Mulder said:
Sing(hum) your solo's while playing them. Worked for me.

Combing your "ear" with what your fingers do is essential, the eventual result is you can play any melody in your head right out on the fretboard.

A fun exercise is to play random notes on the guitar and attempt to sing them at the same time, try doing atonal stuff, it can get very amusing!
 
SickBoy said:
I personally like better the guitarist with interesting solos and melody lines, regardless of the speed. Speed is waaaay overrated IMO. I've seen that 8 yr old shredding incredibly, but I'm really interested whether he'd put out some music or just go working in some guitar circus as an acrobat...
Michael Romeo started practising seriously at age of 18, so it's never too late.

But I always prefer a guy like Andy LaRocque :worship: :worship: :worship: who has great technique, but one of the most original and instantly recognizable styles I've ever heard. Same goes for James Murphy. :headbang:
On the other hand, I adore Dave Gilmour's playing (that reminds me, Akerfeldt did a very good job with his Gilmouresque solos on Damnation, amazing player) as well and speed is non-existant in his solos. I would rather play like him than any Angelo type player any time...
When such guitarists play, I enjoy the melodies and harmonies, I don't judge them by how fast or complicated some lick of theirs is. If something sends shivers down my spine, I have a deep respect for that player and that's it.


I second this! it seems that some of you are only focusing on great technique and speed, all the players you guys mention are phenomenal players ,but some of them have only little emotion and plays like it's a competetion.I have alot of those videos myself and some are great(John Petrucci,Paul gilbert and George lynch to name a few)and some are in my opinion terrible to learn from(Yngwie,Michael Angelo)Sure all these guys have something to offer,but i would rather learn from melodic players than speedfreaks.Alot of these players are insane leadplayers,but only some of them are good rythm players and only a few of them are good songwritters. :headbang: (atleast in my book)
 
I generally view technical ability and artistic expression on guitar as two entirely seperate things, which is why I suggested the Michael Angelo track. If you can disconnect your 'songwriting muse' whilst learning patterns provided by Yngwie, Michael stuff, and actually getting your hands working at those speeds, being able to technically pull off difficult things on the guitar, then it's only so much better for you when you actually write your own emotive solos, because they'll be a complete synch to play.

When it comes to trying to better oneself as a songwriter, then I would heartily suggest the emotive lead players, and wouldn't hesitate to suggest Opeth. Michael (Akerfeldt) has a phenomenal way of writing great solos that aren't overly technical, don't seem linear and just sound great to the ear.
 
I think of solos like this:
if a certain solo adds to a song in any way, I'd leave it in there. If it doesn't, I'd try to change it or change its rhythm part. If all fails, I can always ditch the solo, it DOESN'T have to be there after all. Instead of solo a harmonized melody could work, for example... It's all about what feels right, slow, fast, with lotsa whammy bar work, harmony, no harmony - it doesn't matter in the end.
 
One a scale of 1-10, how hard are the leads on megadeth's "hangar 18"? Mike's guitar god friend asked me to learn every other solo on that song so we could switch off but after like three hours of sitting there trying to work through the first solo I'm about ready to give up ever trying to play fast again. The biggest problem has been the string changes, it's killing me! Also, I remember how much I hate TAB now.
 
Awesome that you mentioned Queensryche, because those are my favorite solos ever--they all served a purpose and added to the songs. It's ALL about the melody for me. I probably should have worded my initial post differently, because I really don't care about super-fast guitar acrobatics. If I could rip out Queensryche-style solos at the drop of a hat, I would be a happy guy. That's all I really want to achieve with this. To actually learn the rest of the fretboard and have a clue what I'm doing. If you played a riff or chord progression and asked me to improv a solo over it, it would sound like a little kid picking up a guitar for the first time (OK maybe not quite THAT bad, but you get the picture). Now I can write solos note by note and learn them, but I want to be able to just come up with stuff easier and quicker by actually knowing what I'm doing.

Thanks for all the great advice, as always.