-
My standard answer is, "Yes."
Anyone else have some good comebacks?
And then there's guys who play, "Lead Rhythm Guitar," but I don't play with them anymore!
-
04-13-2020 12:15 PM
-
Originally Posted by Tom Karol
I.e. they are used to bands with 2 guitar players.
-
I tell them "whatever the situation calls for."
-
As a teenager, one year or so into playing guitar, I was asked that question. I considered it briefly and quickly decided that to be a lead guitar was better. I practiced on that trajectory until playing with others revealed some sorely missing elements of my skill sets. Moving forward from that false start stupidity, I would say that I endeavor to make a meaningful contribution to the collective efforts of whatever assemblage of musicians I have the opportunity to interact with.
-
Is there a difference?
-
Originally Posted by TOMMO
Well my friend made it clear HE was the lead guitar player. The band already had a set of songs and I was given my rhythm guitar parts and told very clearly to stick to them. I learned these parts but it was so boring. I played classical music on the violin in grade school until jr. high and I found being in this rock cover band was just as structured as being 7th chair in an orchestra. I did have a fling with his sister but as soon as that ended I left the band. Again, just way to structured and boring.
I still play often with this guy. But how we play acoustic guitars and thus rhythm for each others' solos. (and I even taught him to play a few songs like Sweet Georgia Brown,,,, songs with mostly Dom7 chords, and minor blues like Equinox).
-
Pretty standard question and come up often. Surprised at some of the answers I'm reading here? Lead guitar is notes, and solos, rhythm guitar is chords mostly. The lead player take the solos. Sometimes in Rock you have two lead players like Thin Lizzy where they harmonize their solos. Most players start out playing rhythm and work their way up to lead guitar...
-
Originally Posted by jameslovestal
-
Well, itsnot just a rock thing...theres very much "rhythm guitar" in jazz...ask Freddie.
-
Originally Posted by TOMMO
-
No matter how many notes I'm fretting, I'm playing rhythm.
-
Shouldn't the question be rhythm vs treble?
;-)
-
Originally Posted by Tom Karol
I've always felt that the distinction between "lead" and "rhythm" was a false dichotomy anyway, because when you're playing lead, you'd damned well own the groove or else you will sound like crap; and when you play rhythms, there are times when stepping out and supplying a melodic line in the top voice can really take a song someplace.
-
Originally Posted by bako
Originally Posted by MacGringo
Yep, the division of responsibility is a rock-band approach to things, most of the time. You see it in country and blues as well, though.
My favorite two-guitar bands always featured communication and conversation between the two guitarists -- i.e., the division was much blurrier -- the Allman Bros and Television are the two examples from rock that I love most.
Most of my experiences in rock bands, I've been the only guitarist; sometimes keys, sometimes a power-trio. I've never cared for a gig that regulated my playing into one bin or the other. As a result, I value both approaches, and probably favor rhythm. And as @"TOMMO" mentions, in the context of being the only guitarist in a band, everything you play must be infused with rhythm -- and that means even solos have to groove. That's why I said in my previous post that I think in the end it's an artificial divide, to my thinking.
A clear division obviously worked for many rock bands -- AC/DC, anyone? -- and that's cool too. Whatever system the two guitarists work out, if it serves the music it's cool by me.
-
I tell them I do both - at the same time. And that usually shuts them up.
Or I just tell them I play jazz. And their response is: "Wow, that's hard". And I say, "Yes, it's always a work in progress "
-
Mostly rhythm ....
Is the Bud 6 Really That Good?
Today, 02:33 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos