What a joke! Eddie Van Halen above Alex Lifeson?

[goose]

QUOTE (danielmclark @ Nov 24 2011, 10:35 AM)

QUOTE (ReRushed @ Nov 24 2011, 07:51 AM) The past 15 years or so aside, Eddie Van Halen is a great composer and arranger. He's so much more than his technique. The man is responsible for so many memorable licks and riffs and solos. The tone. And let's not forget, the songs are good. It's too bad Eddie Van Halen's personality flaws and lifestyle are denigrating his legacy. He's an all-time great, but he makes it very hard to acknowledge that fact. 1978-1996... 18 years. 1996-2011... 15 years.   We're getting close to the point where one can honestly say "the first half of his career was brilliant, the second half was pathetic and sad."   And that's if you count the years between 1986 and 1996 as part of the brilliance, which a lot of people don't. Length of career isn't a good measure of greatness. Hendrix proves that. Innovation and influence are.   I wonder how he would have aged musically?   As for Alex, he's an amazing player, but strikes me as more influenced by other players than an influence on them   (Certainly what he borrows he makes his own.)

Edited November 24, 2011 by goose

[ReRushed]

QUOTE (danielmclark @ Nov 24 2011, 10:35 AM)

QUOTE (ReRushed @ Nov 24 2011, 07:51 AM) The past 15 years or so aside, Eddie Van Halen is a great composer and arranger. He's so much more than his technique. The man is responsible for so many memorable licks and riffs and solos. The tone. And let's not forget, the songs are good. It's too bad Eddie Van Halen's personality flaws and lifestyle are denigrating his legacy. He's an all-time great, but he makes it very hard to acknowledge that fact. 1978-1996... 18 years. 1996-2011... 15 years.   We're getting close to the point where one can honestly say "the first half of his career was brilliant, the second half was pathetic and sad."   And that's if you count the years between 1986 and 1996 as part of the brilliance, which a lot of people don't. Fair enough and I pretty much agree. But most influential rock musicians made their mark or had their influence or made their innovation in a short time frame. Very few musicians truly re-invent themselves throughout their careers. It's the nature of the beast.

[goose]

QUOTE (ReRushed @ Nov 24 2011, 10:41 AM)

QUOTE (danielmclark @ Nov 24 2011, 10:35 AM) QUOTE (ReRushed @ Nov 24 2011, 07:51 AM) The past 15 years or so aside, Eddie Van Halen is a great composer and arranger. He's so much more than his technique. The man is responsible for so many memorable licks and riffs and solos. The tone. And let's not forget, the songs are good. It's too bad Eddie Van Halen's personality flaws and lifestyle are denigrating his legacy. He's an all-time great, but he makes it very hard to acknowledge that fact. 1978-1996... 18 years. 1996-2011... 15 years.   We're getting close to the point where one can honestly say "the first half of his career was brilliant, the second half was pathetic and sad."   And that's if you count the years between 1986 and 1996 as part of the brilliance, which a lot of people don't. Fair enough and I pretty much agree. But most influential rock musicians made their mark or had their influence or made their innovation in a short time frame. Very few musicians truly re-invent themselves throughout their careers. It's the nature of the beast. Which is perhaps why Alex remains a great player. He continues to adapt his playing style.

[rushgoober]

QUOTE (goose @ Nov 24 2011, 08:39 AM)

QUOTE (danielmclark @ Nov 24 2011, 10:35 AM) QUOTE (ReRushed @ Nov 24 2011, 07:51 AM) The past 15 years or so aside, Eddie Van Halen is a great composer and arranger. He's so much more than his technique. The man is responsible for so many memorable licks and riffs and solos. The tone. And let's not forget, the songs are good. It's too bad Eddie Van Halen's personality flaws and lifestyle are denigrating his legacy. He's an all-time great, but he makes it very hard to acknowledge that fact. 1978-1996... 18 years. 1996-2011... 15 years.   We're getting close to the point where one can honestly say "the first half of his career was brilliant, the second half was pathetic and sad."   And that's if you count the years between 1986 and 1996 as part of the brilliance, which a lot of people don't. Length of career isn't a good measure of greatness. Hendrix proves that. Innovation and influence are.   I wonder how he would have aged musically?   As for Alex, he's an amazing player, but strikes me as more influenced by other players than an influence on them   (Certainly what he borrows he makes his own.) An excellent point.   I love the direction he was going on with the First Rays of The New Rising Sun material. He was moving away from psychedelic and branching out to blues, soul, R&B and other influences, while still maintaining a definitive rock sound and some psychedelia. He wasn't letting himself be defined by a genre, and of course his songwriting and playing were so amazing that it didn't really matter what he was playing. It all worked IMHO.   I have no doubt, however, that if Hendrix was around today, he would have a string of mediocre or bad albums behind him as well. Almost no one can keep up the same level of brilliance for more than a decade or two at the very, very most.

[Principled Man]

"Greatest guitarist" lists are ultimately self-defeating, because they too often use irrelevant criteria.

 

For example, the "influence" criterion. Has Angus Young influenced more young, aspiring guitar players than Joe Satriani? Probably, but what does that tell us? Not much...... AC/DC has sold a gazillion albums and garage bands are playing far more AC/DC songs than Joe Satriani songs. Young guitarists are playing like Angus Young far more than they're playing like Joe Satriani.

 

I also question the "dead guitar god" effect. It's similar to the "dead artist" effect. The guitarist becomes more celebrated and hyped after he dies....and as the years go by, he can be elevated to near mythic levels of godhood. Jimi Hendrix was undoubtedly a great guitar player, but is he really the "greatest ever"....who is never to be demoted to #2 or #3....?

 

It's all biased, subjective opinion. That's why no one should ever take these lists seriously.

 

 

[Xanadoood]

[ReRushed]

QUOTE (goose @ Nov 24 2011, 10:43 AM)

QUOTE (ReRushed @ Nov 24 2011, 10:41 AM) QUOTE (danielmclark @ Nov 24 2011, 10:35 AM) QUOTE (ReRushed @ Nov 24 2011, 07:51 AM) The past 15 years or so aside, Eddie Van Halen is a great composer and arranger. He's so much more than his technique. The man is responsible for so many memorable licks and riffs and solos. The tone. And let's not forget, the songs are good. It's too bad Eddie Van Halen's personality flaws and lifestyle are denigrating his legacy. He's an all-time great, but he makes it very hard to acknowledge that fact. 1978-1996... 18 years. 1996-2011... 15 years.   We're getting close to the point where one can honestly say "the first half of his career was brilliant, the second half was pathetic and sad."   And that's if you count the years between 1986 and 1996 as part of the brilliance, which a lot of people don't. Fair enough and I pretty much agree. But most influential rock musicians made their mark or had their influence or made their innovation in a short time frame. Very few musicians truly re-invent themselves throughout their careers. It's the nature of the beast. Which is perhaps why Alex remains a great player. He continues to adapt his playing style. I'm not denying Alex Lifeson is great. He is. But, he's not in the ranks of an Eddie Van Halen. Everything was different after Eddie Van Halen. You can attribute that to only a few musicians. And Alex Lifeson is not one of them. With all this said, Alex Lifeson is among my personal favorite guitarists. And that's all that matters to me.

[rushgoober]

QUOTE (goose @ Nov 24 2011, 08:43 AM)

QUOTE (ReRushed @ Nov 24 2011, 10:41 AM) QUOTE (danielmclark @ Nov 24 2011, 10:35 AM) QUOTE (ReRushed @ Nov 24 2011, 07:51 AM) The past 15 years or so aside, Eddie Van Halen is a great composer and arranger. He's so much more than his technique. The man is responsible for so many memorable licks and riffs and solos. The tone. And let's not forget, the songs are good. It's too bad Eddie Van Halen's personality flaws and lifestyle are denigrating his legacy. He's an all-time great, but he makes it very hard to acknowledge that fact. 1978-1996... 18 years. 1996-2011... 15 years.   We're getting close to the point where one can honestly say "the first half of his career was brilliant, the second half was pathetic and sad."   And that's if you count the years between 1986 and 1996 as part of the brilliance, which a lot of people don't. Fair enough and I pretty much agree. But most influential rock musicians made their mark or had their influence or made their innovation in a short time frame. Very few musicians truly re-invent themselves throughout their careers. It's the nature of the beast. Which is perhaps why Alex remains a great player. He continues to adapt his playing style. I don't know how great he really still is. I mean, he can still play their classic tunes with gusto and precision, but I can't remember the last time I was truly blown away by a recent guitar solo of his. Even S&A, in which I loved a few of the songs, didn't contain super memorable guitar solos for me, except maybe in Hope, which was very atypical. You really have to go back to Counterparts for me to really have the guitar stand out, but that's maybe because the two albums in between did so little for me that when I don't like the lyrics in a song, the music becomes somewhat moot to me.

[Xanadoood]

QUOTE (ReRushed @ Nov 24 2011, 10:46 AM)

QUOTE (goose @ Nov 24 2011, 10:43 AM) QUOTE (ReRushed @ Nov 24 2011, 10:41 AM) QUOTE (danielmclark @ Nov 24 2011, 10:35 AM) QUOTE (ReRushed @ Nov 24 2011, 07:51 AM) The past 15 years or so aside, Eddie Van Halen is a great composer and arranger. He's so much more than his technique. The man is responsible for so many memorable licks and riffs and solos. The tone. And let's not forget, the songs are good. It's too bad Eddie Van Halen's personality flaws and lifestyle are denigrating his legacy. He's an all-time great, but he makes it very hard to acknowledge that fact. 1978-1996... 18 years. 1996-2011... 15 years.   We're getting close to the point where one can honestly say "the first half of his career was brilliant, the second half was pathetic and sad."   And that's if you count the years between 1986 and 1996 as part of the brilliance, which a lot of people don't. Fair enough and I pretty much agree. But most influential rock musicians made their mark or had their influence or made their innovation in a short time frame. Very few musicians truly re-invent themselves throughout their careers. It's the nature of the beast. Which is perhaps why Alex remains a great player. He continues to adapt his playing style. I'm not denying Alex Lifeson is great. He is. But, he's not in the ranks of an Eddie Van Halen. Everything was different after Eddie Van Halen. You can attribute that to only a few musicians. And Alex Lifeson is not one of them. With all this said, Alex Lifeson is among my personal favorite guitarists. And that's all that matters to me. Everything was different for about 10 years....then the 90s rolled around, and guys started mentioning iommi and page again

[ReRushed]

QUOTE (Xanadoood @ Nov 24 2011, 10:54 AM)

QUOTE (ReRushed @ Nov 24 2011, 10:46 AM) QUOTE (goose @ Nov 24 2011, 10:43 AM) QUOTE (ReRushed @ Nov 24 2011, 10:41 AM) QUOTE (danielmclark @ Nov 24 2011, 10:35 AM) QUOTE (ReRushed @ Nov 24 2011, 07:51 AM) The past 15 years or so aside, Eddie Van Halen is a great composer and arranger. He's so much more than his technique. The man is responsible for so many memorable licks and riffs and solos. The tone. And let's not forget, the songs are good. It's too bad Eddie Van Halen's personality flaws and lifestyle are denigrating his legacy. He's an all-time great, but he makes it very hard to acknowledge that fact. 1978-1996... 18 years. 1996-2011... 15 years.   We're getting close to the point where one can honestly say "the first half of his career was brilliant, the second half was pathetic and sad."   And that's if you count the years between 1986 and 1996 as part of the brilliance, which a lot of people don't. Fair enough and I pretty much agree. But most influential rock musicians made their mark or had their influence or made their innovation in a short time frame. Very few musicians truly re-invent themselves throughout their careers. It's the nature of the beast. Which is perhaps why Alex remains a great player. He continues to adapt his playing style. I'm not denying Alex Lifeson is great. He is. But, he's not in the ranks of an Eddie Van Halen. Everything was different after Eddie Van Halen. You can attribute that to only a few musicians. And Alex Lifeson is not one of them. With all this said, Alex Lifeson is among my personal favorite guitarists. And that's all that matters to me. Everything was different for about 10 years....then the 90s rolled around, and guys started mentioning iommi and page again I don't buy the argument that Eddie Van Halen's influence has diminished or has become irrelevant. If the argument is who had a bigger or more prominent influence, I can see your point.

[circumstantial tree]

I don't think it matters. Just two different guitarists, that's all.

[Tom Sawyer]

I'm so glad everyone agrees with me on this one.

 

[Alvy Singer]

These lists are all bullshit. Clapton, Richards? Do me a favour, Clapton is the most overrated guitarist in history.

 

The greatest rock guitarist who has ever lived (IMO) is Michael Schenker. Alex is my second fave after mad Mickey. EVH is much more influential though than either.

[patjnev]

In some ways Eddie is better then Alex . but who would you rather fly with? . Edward has been doing great lately and I hope he accomplishes all he endeavors.Unfortunately he always seems to do good for a while and then self destruct again. Supposedly now he is sober and completed a new CD with Dave , but the tour will be the new test. If he can stay sober through the tour he will make it . Yes Edward is more proficient technically then Alex but when I think of memorable licks and riffs , solos and songs in general I purely love Alex wins hands down.

[Something4Nothing]

This argument is pointless considering it is completely subjective.

 

Each person will have their own opinion on who is the "Best" guitarist of all time.

 

 

[Good,bad,andrush]

Call me crazy but I actually think Alex is more technically proficient even if it's just by a little bit. That said, duh EVH is more influential.

 

 

[Silas Lang]

It still blows my mind at this stage of the game how many can objectively claim that Eddie is so superior to Mr Lifeson. Never understood the fascination with fast and flashy guitar solos. Obviously, Eddie was much more influential and had killer chops but other than popularizing the basis of modern guitar wanking - tapping - he had little to add. The thing with EVH is that too many of the solos seem flown in, almost arbitrarily, adding little to the music except sheer technique. Fun but meaningless. There's nothing wrong with that, of course. Van Halen (with DLR) were a great, fun rock n roll band but in terms of real artistry there isn't much going on. EVH is amazing at what he does, but that is all he does. He's pretty much remained a one trick pony over the course of his career, becoming stagnant and unproductive.

 

Lifeson on the other hand has always played with a lot more grace, style and feeling with beautiful fluid rhythms, scorching solos, blues and melodic sense. Alex has continued to develop and grow as a musician over the years and as a result has turned out to be all-around much more diverse, well-rounded and multidimensional than Eddie. It seems logical to say that the more musical styles one can play well would make them the better musician.

 

If it was called the top ten most influential guitarists the list would make sense. But ten best, not even.

[Presto-a RUSH fan!]

Eddie Van Halen is more well known, and polls like this are basically popularity contests, especially one in The Rolling Stone. Is he technically better? Since I am not a guitarist, I can only judge by what I hear. EVH in his PRIME was probably technically better, faster and Eruption is one of the best solos of all time. Right now, I think Alex would blow EVH out of the water, as from what I've heard he can barely play now.

 

All that said, Alex is a different kind of guitarist. Since he is in a band with arguably the best bassist of all time and the best drummer of all time, he is asked to do different things than what EVH did. While I will agree that EVH was more influential and probably technically better, I don't think there are many guitarists in the world who can play so many different styles with so many different little nuances that go overlooked.

 

Alex also has 19 studio albums (I am counting his solo and taking out Feedback) and he is able to come up with amazingly different sounds and riffs that are legendary. They may not be the most difficult to play, but he created them in a sea of other rock music and they stand out to this day. (see Spirit of Radio, Limelight, Fly By Night, Working Man, Red Barchetta, Closer To The Heart, Freewill, etc, etc, etc) and those are just the popular songs. The battling guitars in Bytor and The Snowdog are down right freaking amazing.

 

I think a proper best of all-time list would be done by professional guitarists. They know how difficult it is to come up with a riff that stands the test of time regardless of how easy it is to play or technically difficult to play. I bet if they did poll professional Rock guitarists, this list would look ALOT different and Alex would be much, much higher.

 

I think if you put EVH in RUSH, he wouldn't be able to do what Alex does creatively.

 

So that is my 10 cents on the issue.

 

To me, of course, is one of the best of all time!

[Tony R]

QUOTE (Presto_a RUSH fan_06-08-90 @ Nov 25 2011, 07:49 AM)

Eddie Van Halen is more well known, and polls like this are basically popularity contests, especially one in The Rolling Stone. Is he technically better? Since I am not a guitarist, I can only judge by what I hear. EVH in his PRIME was probably technically better, faster and Eruption is one of the best solos of all time. Right now, I think Alex would blow EVH out of the water, as from what I've heard he can barely play now. All that said, Alex is a different kind of guitarist. Since he is in a band with arguably the best bassist of all time and the best drummer of all time, he is asked to do different things than what EVH did. While I will agree that EVH was more influential and probably technically better, I don't think there are many guitarists in the world who can play so many different styles with so many different little nuances that go overlooked. Alex also has 19 studio albums (I am counting his solo and taking out Feedback) and he is able to come up with amazingly different sounds and riffs that are legendary. They may not be the most difficult to play, but he created them in a sea of other rock music and they stand out to this day. (see Spirit of Radio, Limelight, Fly By Night, Working Man, Red Barchetta, Closer To The Heart, Freewill, etc, etc, etc) and those are just the popular songs. The battling guitars in Bytor and The Snowdog are down right freaking amazing. I think a proper best of all-time list would be done by professional guitarists. They know how difficult it is to come up with a riff that stands the test of time regardless of how easy it is to play or technically difficult to play. I bet if they did poll professional Rock guitarists, this list would look ALOT different and Alex would be much, much higher. I think if you put EVH in RUSH, he wouldn't be able to do what Alex does creatively. So that is my 10 cents on the issue. To me, of course, is one of the best of all time!

The list was voted for by professional guitarists, including Lifeson himself.

[Presto-a RUSH fan!]

QUOTE (Tony R @ Nov 25 2011, 04:47 AM)

QUOTE (Presto_a RUSH fan_06-08-90 @ Nov 25 2011, 07:49 AM) Eddie Van Halen is more well known, and polls like this are basically popularity contests, especially one in The Rolling Stone.  Is he technically better?  Since I am not a guitarist, I can only judge by what I hear.  EVH in his PRIME was probably technically better, faster and Eruption is one of the best solos of all time.  Right now, I think Alex would blow EVH out of the water, as from what I've heard he can barely play now. All that said, Alex is a different kind of guitarist.  Since he is in a band with arguably the best bassist of all time and the best drummer of all time, he is asked to do different things than what EVH did.  While I will agree that EVH was more influential and probably technically better, I don't think there are many guitarists in the world who can play so many different styles with so many different little nuances that go overlooked.  Alex also has 19 studio albums (I am counting his solo and taking out Feedback) and he is able to come up with amazingly different sounds and riffs that are legendary.  They may not be the most difficult to play, but he created them in a sea of other rock music and they stand out to this day.  (see Spirit of Radio, Limelight, Fly By Night, Working Man, Red Barchetta, Closer To The Heart, Freewill, etc, etc, etc) and those are just the popular songs.  The battling guitars in Bytor and The Snowdog are down right freaking amazing. I think a proper best of all-time list would be done by professional guitarists.  They know how difficult it is to come up with a riff that stands the test of time regardless of how easy it is to play or technically difficult to play.  I bet if they did poll professional Rock guitarists, this list would look ALOT different and Alex would be much, much higher. I think if you put EVH in RUSH, he wouldn't be able to do what Alex does creatively. So that is my 10 cents on the issue.    To me, of course, is one of the best of all time! The list was voted for by professional guitarists, including Lifeson himself. You got me. I thought I read it was a fan vote. So Alex must suck.   I stand corrected.

[Weakly Criminal]

QUOTE (Workaholic Man @ Nov 24 2011, 09:45 AM)

"Greatest guitarist" lists are ultimately self-defeating, because they too often use irrelevant criteria. For example, the "influence" criterion. Has Angus Young influenced more young, aspiring guitar players than Joe Satriani? Probably, but what does that tell us? Not much...... AC/DC has sold a gazillion albums and garage bands are playing far more AC/DC songs than Joe Satriani songs. Young guitarists are playing like Angus Young far more than they're playing like Joe Satriani. I also question the "dead guitar god" effect. It's similar to the "dead artist" effect. The guitarist becomes more celebrated and hyped after he dies....and as the years go by, he can be elevated to near mythic levels of godhood. Jimi Hendrix was undoubtedly a great guitar player, but is he really the "greatest ever"....who is never to be demoted to #2 or #3....? It's all biased, subjective opinion. That's why no one should ever take these lists seriously.

This.

[metaldad]

QUOTE (Something4Nothing @ Nov 25 2011, 01:35 AM)

This argument is pointless considering it is completely subjective. Each person will have their own opinion on who is the "Best" guitarist of all time.

Lists like this are a joke. You like who you like . These threads have been done to death . Some of these posts are funny and down right clueless. Carry on

[trenken]

QUOTE (presto123 @ Nov 24 2011, 12:59 AM)

QUOTE (goose @ Nov 24 2011, 12:17 AM) How many artists do you hear and say, "He was completely influenced by Alex"?  On the other hand, there are endless guitarists using Eddie's style. Not that Alex isn't great.  He just doesn't stand out as one with a singular distinctive, signature style or sound.  That's why he'll never top this kind of list. What? Alex signature style and sound is probably his greatest strength. As soon as you hear him play on anything you immediately know who it is. There are not too many guitar players you can say that about. His greatest strength is his ability to fill in a sound in a band where the drummer and bassist stand out, and doing what's right for the song.   This has kept him from really shining in the eyes of the music world. Noone said he isnt a great guitarist, he is, but he doesnt do anything particularly difficult usually, and also has not really been a massive influence. He's an influence to Rush fans, Eddie is an influence to people that dont even listen to Van Halen.   Now had Alex been in a band where the rest of the guys were just average, like VH, then he would probably he more recognition than he does, but right now him being listed lower than Eddie is the right thing.   A lot of people think Eddie just does all that tapping bullshit, but he is an extremely skilled guitarist outside of that, plus the fact that he really does have a signature style, and I cant really say that Alex does.

[WCFIELDS]

QUOTE (trenken @ Nov 23 2011, 09:01 PM)

You're insane. People usually vote for who is technically better, or more influential and Eddie does things far more difficult than anything Alex has ever played, and has been FAR more influential to other guitarists. Just because Alex is in a band you like more doesnt mean the entire world should think he should be ranked over a guitarist significantly more legendary.

Exactly......I can't even believe anyone thinks Al is a better guitarist than EVH. No chance.

[Xanadoood]

QUOTE (WCFIELDS @ Nov 25 2011, 10:06 AM)

QUOTE (trenken @ Nov 23 2011, 09:01 PM) You're insane. People usually vote for who is technically better, or more influential and Eddie does things far more difficult than anything Alex has ever played, and has been FAR more influential to other guitarists. Just because Alex is in a band you like more doesnt mean the entire world should think he should be ranked over a guitarist significantly more legendary. Exactly......I can't even believe anyone thinks Al is a better guitarist than EVH. No chance. Smoke and mirrors...that's how Randy rhoads described Eddie.