|
HardRadio HardBoard The Heavy Metal Supersite
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
The Dorf
Joined: 11 Feb 2001 Posts: 1165 Location: Baltimore, MD
|
Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 8:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'll go with RR too. I agree with Rockangel about Eddie (no disrespect to Eddie), but Randy had his whole career ahead of him, and he was always saying in interviews how he wanted to better himself as a guitarist. I can only imagine how far his career would have gone if he hadn't left us so soon. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
hoffmoon
Joined: 08 Sep 2006 Posts: 1 Location: I am a Zonie
|
Posted: Fri Sep 08, 2006 12:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Randy Rhoads!!! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mack
Joined: 28 Nov 1998 Posts: 138 Location: Clear Lake, MN
|
Posted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 9:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, I guess I'll be in the minority on this one. While Randy was indeed a phenomenal guitarist with a bright future, I think Eddie's style was far more innovative and influential.
Considering Eddie Van Halen was born in 1955 and Randy Rhoads was born in 1956, both artists released their debut albums at roughly the same age (Van Halen's eponymous album was released in 1978; Quiet Riot I was released in 1977). Production quality aside, there is no comparison between the two albums. To lift a quote from allmusic.com's review of Randy's playing on QR1:
[quote]His playing here is uniformly dull and uninventive, so collectors and blind worshipers should beware.[/quote]
Now, contrast this with AMG's review of VH1:
[quote]Few other guitarists have had such an instant impact on a generation of up-and-coming players who copied his unorthodox, kamikaze style — especially his trademark tapping technique showcased on the album's legendary solo, "Eruption."[/quote]
Granted, Allmusic's reviews aren't always dead-on and should be taken with a grain of salt, but few people would dispute the main points made in both reviews.
Fast-forward to 1981: Van Halen releases 'Fair Warning', and Ozzy releases 'Diary Of A Madman' (Randy's final studio release). Both are the 4th album released by each guitarist. In my opinion, both albums are equally kck-ass, and I cannot choose one over the other.
To suggest that Randy would have only gotten better & better had he not died so soon is pure speculation, just as many have speculated that Metallica never would have sold-out had Cliff not died.
Sure, Randy said in many interviews that he wanted to become a better guitarist -- but show me a guitarist who ever said in an interview, "Yeah, this is about as good as I'm ever going to get. It's all downhill from here".
Some will point out that Randy was better than Eddie because of Randy's classical guitar background, but to me it's meaningless because Eddie's songwriting was geared toward the party crowd and he had no desire to delve into the classical realm. If he had, I am sure he would have excelled as well (but now it's ME who's doing the speculating, so never mind that last remark).
Bottom line: Eddie vs. Randy is apples & oranges; each had his own distinct style and both were masters of their craft. I just think Eddie came out of the chute blowing everyone away, while it took a few albums before Randy started showing his true colors. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
metalcelt
Joined: 23 Aug 2006 Posts: 5 Location: Pittsburgh
|
Posted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 9:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Me I would go with Randy
Eddie is a very good guitar player
Randy however is a different type more of a neo classical/metal player Eddie is more of a straight on Rock N Roll kinda guy
Nothing wrong with the Rock N Roll style. I remember reading an interview with Ozzy saying the stuff Randy was playing on tour buses in between shows was just sick.
Diary of a Madman is a Magnum Opus for Randy. Awesome song... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Rockangel
Joined: 28 May 2000 Posts: 1367 Location: A step away from crazy
|
Posted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 11:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="metalcelt"]Some will point out that Randy was better than Eddie because of Randy's classical guitar background, but to me it's meaningless because Eddie's songwriting was geared toward the party crowd and he had no desire to delve into the classical realm.[/quote]
I think that alone is the point I was trying to make. I think Randy was open to trying anything no matter what his background. Which you also made clear in your post (which was very good btw). I think you are right that Eddie could have done it, but didn't want to. Thats just another way of saying "this is as good as I want to be and this is how I will always be."
Randy, I believe would have done what he always did. Which was grow and try new things, move in new directions and broaden his horizons. Growing and evolving. It's not speculation if he was already showing a pattern of just that. An educated guess maybe. But I think it is a good bet.
Eddie was and is good at what he does. But he stopped being innovative long ago. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Jake
Joined: 02 Mar 1999 Posts: 4963
|
Posted: Sun Sep 10, 2006 5:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You guys realize that Randy was probably Ozzy's least talented guitarist right? He was hardly a virtuoso. You don't grow into becoming a virtuoso- some people are some aren't. Usually the virtuosos are those guys you've already heard of when they're 16- they might improve, but that doesn't mean that a guy like Randy could ever play on their level. Van Halen, Vai, Malmsteen, Satriani, Friedman, Vinnie Moore- guys like that were/are way more technically gifted than Rhoads.
Despite Randy's innovation and good songwriting, Zakk Wylde and Jake E Lee would play circles around him. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Rockangel
Joined: 28 May 2000 Posts: 1367 Location: A step away from crazy
|
Posted: Sun Sep 10, 2006 10:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
True Jake... but we were not asked to compare Randy with anyone but Eddie. And I stand by my statement.
Also being technically gifted is not all it takes to be a great... anything. Just because a person can play something flawlessly doesn't mean they have the imagination to grow.
You also left yourself an out and at least subconsciously conceded the fact that a person can become a virtuoso later through hard work simply by using the words " Usually the virtuosos are those guys you've already heard of when they're 16- they might improve"
And I think you are confusing the term prodigy with virtuoso. Which is someone with an innate talent they are born with and it blooms early. Hard work, understanding and appreciation can make a person a virtuoso at any time in their lives.
I totally agree with you on Zakk, Satriani and Vai. And also keep in mind I am not a guitarist just an artist. So maybe my opinion on this topic is pointless. But I’ll stand by my original statement. Maybe I just never much liked Eddies style and it colors my opinion. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Jim McCormick
Joined: 09 Oct 2003 Posts: 467 Location: Cedar Rapids, IA
|
Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 12:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Jake"]You guys realize that Randy was probably Ozzy's least talented guitarist right? He was hardly a virtuoso. You don't grow into becoming a virtuoso- some people are some aren't. Usually the virtuosos are those guys you've already heard of when they're 16- they might improve, but that doesn't mean that a guy like Randy could ever play on their level. Van Halen, Vai, Malmsteen, Satriani, Friedman, Vinnie Moore- guys like that were/are way more technically gifted than Rhoads.
Despite Randy's innovation and good songwriting, Zakk Wylde and Jake E Lee would play circles around him.[/quote]
I agree that Jake E. Lee was the man!
EVH by miles over Randy. Whether you like him or not, EVH is the most inflluential guitarist since Hendrix, & you know what? He deserves it.
I remember buying VH "I" when it came out in 1978. I was just bowled over. For those who are old enough to remember, you know what I'm talking about. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
prisoner666
Joined: 19 Oct 2007 Posts: 3 Location: chicago,il.
|
Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2007 3:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
eddie.... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|