|
Post by sandy on Sept 8, 2020 10:25:36 GMT
Don't know why I hadn't thought much about it before, but came across this, and hadn't realised Tony had taken classical guitar lessons...DOH!!!😂..and that,after listening to the solo on Too Young.... Does anyone know how it worked in the band...did any of them read music, or take lessons? Presumably Bernie must have had piano lessons. Did they just listen to demos then work it out? I'd be interested if anyone knew😊🎶
"Hicks also placed himself in a somewhat conservative light in the same article, separating himself from Keith Richards's comments in the same piece about lessons not being necessary for a would-be guitarist. "Unlike Keith Richard, I do believe in budding guitarists having lessons. I took two years of classical guitar lessons, and I still find them helpful."
|
|
|
Post by Malc on Sept 8, 2020 11:07:51 GMT
To quote Bernie: “I took piano lessons for about four years, from the time I was eight to when I was twelve. Then rock ‘n’ roll took over...
|
|
|
Post by knut on Sept 8, 2020 17:36:51 GMT
Ray Stiles says the guys do not know the chords when they sing in 3 part perfect harmony
|
|
|
Post by cameron on Sept 13, 2020 10:39:35 GMT
What makes the Hollies so great is that they're natural untaught musicians. They have such a raw edge that makes their music so thrilling because they don't necessarily do what's "right", but rather what fits the music. Take Tony's Eastern influenced guitar lines on 'Stop! Stop! Stop!' and 'On A Carousel'; I don't think a classically trained musician would have come up with such inventive and adventurous parts. Bobby too cannot be overlooked for fusing his jazz influenced drumming with pop music. A classically trained musician would baulk at mixing up the styles, because we're taught that they're separate and that's that. The fact that he has an ear for filling a space in a song is what brings Hollies songs to life.
Likewise, their Harmonies, particularly Tony's lower one, don't fit proper chord structures all the time and it gives them an incredible depth because they're not giving us the expected. Like their acapella version of 'Amazing Grace' - both Graham Nash and Terry Sylvester generally sang in a third or fifth note higher or in octave to Allan, which is exactly what you expect (though both singers had superb high voices that were so strong and confident, which is the difference between the Hollies and most other bands), but Tony is all over the place with his lower harmony. His voice isn't giving you the "perfect" chord harmony, which is what makes it so engaging and noticeable but in a good way. To me, the magic really happens on 'Amazing Grace' when Tony joins in on the third verse:
I've always said that the Beatles' greatest asset was not being classically trained or able to read and write music, because it gave them ambition and they'd be able to subconsciously blend styles and influences without falling into the generic chord structures of pop music, which was exactly how the Hollies worked in their heyday as well.
|
|
|
Post by baz on Sept 13, 2020 10:58:52 GMT
I don't think a classically trained musician would have come up with such inventive and adventurous parts. Whilst I may sound like I'm generalising, virtually every musician I've known who were "classically trained" are impeded by their inability to think outside the box. They rigidly stick to the notes written down in front of them. Ask them to improvise, they tend to get flustered and nervous because they feel they lose their safety net of what's written down. One I knew was a multi-instrumentalist and at one live show witnessed her play an impressive blues piano piece. I talked with her afterwards and said it was great and she had a good feel and she sheepishly admitted that every single note had been scored and that if asked, she couldn't play or improvise in that style unless it was all written and notated. It's something that's always baffled me. I've seen and heard them play a variety of music, complex and simple. They truly can play, but put them in a creative situation minus any notation and they melt down and imply you're asking them to do something impossible. Untrained musicians then have no such rigidities and will try anything within the limits of their technical capabilities.
|
|
|
Post by cameron on Sept 13, 2020 15:30:05 GMT
This is exactly right; I remember when I was about 13 or 14 years old and decided that I wanted to take guitar lessons, my guitar teacher asked me if I wanted to take guitar grades or actually play guitar. It baffled me, but I thought the institutionalised grades were really boring, and I just wanted to be able to actually play the songs in the Beatles Guitar Book for Beginners that I'd persuaded my dad to get me along with my first awful nylon stringed guitar! Consequently, much to my parents' disappointment who had no measurable track of my progress as I didn't achieve Grade One, Grade Two etc..., I was taught to have an ear for chord changes and chord pattern. The upshot is, years of practice down the line, I can pick up my guitar and work out most songs to play along with after a couple of listens. And what's more fun - some certificates on your wall or being able to waste two or three hours jamming to your favourite songs at random?
When I was studying music at college (which I failed badly), I was just about the only one who could grasp the music for the annual music showcase and actually perform it. My teacher would berate me for not singing exactly the right phrasing as it was noted (I still can't read music unless I spend hours working it out) or playing the exact right chord phrasing as noted, but I could give an actual performance rather than a staid rigid recital. My teacher also had to admit that it wasn't "wrong", it just wasn't "right" in the eyes of the music syllabus.
To me, this is why older music is generally so enjoyable; it's real, it's different and it's a performance. Since the 1980s, music became metronomically perfect with the advent of digital recording and limitless multi-tracks. There's a feeling that the musicians are under extreme pressure for perfection, and the result is a clinical performance, irrespective of their talents. They'll record a vocal line phrase by phrase if need be, in order to get perfection.
Bringing it back to the Hollies, Bobby recently said that Ron Richards wouldn't let him re-do the drums on 'He Ain't Heavy' because he was rushing to the pub(!), and if you listen at the start of the second verse, he fluffs the first hi-hat transition. It's barely noticeable, but to me his playing is so real and so three-dimensional because of little elements like this that make it human. Ditto on 'Carrie Anne', he plays a slightly different phrasing at the start of Graham's final verse, but again, the performance as a whole is still one of the most exciting records I've ever heard in my life.
|
|
|
Post by Mevrouw Bee on Sept 13, 2020 15:57:19 GMT
I might add that, other than digital recording and multi-tracking, kids nowadays don't teach themselves. Not like they did post-war when they had no money. Now parents get their kids into violin when they're barely able to count, and performing arts schools, and lessons, lessons, lessons. My son even had classical voice lessons that my parents paid for.
The result is what you and Baz say, Cameron, but also that, if you notice, those that get ahead are rarely self-taught on a cheap guitar anymore. It's either the children of the famous or those who came from money. Unless they rap or get on TV talent shows.
|
|
|
Post by The Dude on Sept 14, 2020 17:25:57 GMT
I don't think a classically trained musician would have come up with such inventive and adventurous parts. Whilst I may sound like I'm generalising, virtually every musician I've known who were "classically trained" are impeded by their inability to think outside the box. They rigidly stick to the notes written down in front of them. Ask them to improvise, they tend to get flustered and nervous because they feel they lose their safety net of what's written down. One I knew was a multi-instrumentalist and at one live show witnessed her play an impressive blues piano piece. I talked with her afterwards and said it was great and she had a good feel and she sheepishly admitted that every single note had been scored and that if asked, she couldn't play or improvise in that style unless it was all written and notated. It's something that's always baffled me. I've seen and heard them play a variety of music, complex and simple. They truly can play, but put them in a creative situation minus any notation and they melt down and imply you're asking them to do something impossible. Untrained musicians then have no such rigidities and will try anything within the limits of their technical capabilities. I had a similar experience... About 20 years ago I played guitar, mandolin and tinwhistle in a folk group and one day a friend of our bodhran player wanted to join in. He played violin in the Dutch Radio Philharmonic Orchestra. So we invited him to one of our rehearsals and he came, sat himself down, opened up his violin case, took out his Stradivarius and said "where is the music score?". So we explained that we played all our parts by ear and loved to improvise... He admitted that he, being classically trained, had never learned to improvise and could only play notes from a sheet....
|
|
|
Post by knut on Sept 15, 2020 19:14:54 GMT
I had piano lessons in my young days but it was just boring. I wanted to play Can't buy me love. However I learnt to play from notes. When I was 50 I wanted to learn to play the harmonica intro to He ain't heavy. So I did. Then I went on to play the whole song on harmonica. It took one year but suddenly I could play anything without notes.
|
|
|
Post by rokinrobinoflocksley on Sept 16, 2020 13:09:53 GMT
Same here. I got a classical guitar for my 10th birthday, not knowing the difference. When the nylon strings broke I put steel strings on it, ha. It also came with the books "Guitar Playing Made Easy For Everyone" Vols 1 & 2. They were a great teaching tool to that point, I learned tuning, notes, easy chords, old standard songs. Bought Vols 3, 4, 5 to complete the course, but gave up midway thru Vol 3 when I discovered I could recognize chord patterns of my fave songs. So I know some music theory, and can read it all (slowly), but learning and playing by ear is a whole different thing.
Of course, the best and quickest way to learn is to play songs that you like !!
And I know other players who play by ear, and all they do is improvise. Some won't look at sheet music or chord sheets, will just go from memory. And trained musicians who can't play unless they have sheet music in front of them. Pretty funny...
|
|
|
Post by sandy on Sept 16, 2020 17:13:19 GMT
I had piano lessons in my young days but it was just boring. I wanted to play Can't buy me love. However I learnt to play from notes. When I was 50 I wanted to learn to play the harmonica intro to He ain't heavy. So I did. Then I went on to play the whole song on harmonica. It took one year but suddenly I could play anything without notes. I've had a dabble with the harmonica over the years...in short bursts, because you get serious cheek and lip ache!!! And when I got my first guitar, I spent months, trying to replicate(?!?!) Tony's guitar solo in Too young to be married..... 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣What do they say on Top Gear?? Ambitious, but rubbish🤣🤣🤣 ..and OUCH!!!
|
|