yeah, this is how i feel about frusciante. but you know, i don't think it's bad to care about technique. like, being interested in the guitar as an instrument doesn't in any way preclude being interested in the music. i LIKE that he's a really technical player and that no one else really plays like him in a lot of ways if you count his original stuff and not when he is just doing hendrixish solos, and that he comes up with really interesting songs if you just look at how they're played and not how they sound. i still prefer him as a musician but yeah, i care about that stuff because i care about the guitar as an instrument, and i'm sure if you asked him, he probably would too! i don't really see why you're making it sound like it is somehow the INFERIOR CHOICE to care about technical shit like playstyle or REVERSE POLARITY PICKUPS or tube amp engineering or any of the other really non-musical aspects of guitar. that shit's perfectly legitimate and i'm sure a lot of musicians you like care about it a lot and use that kind of knowledge to actually get the sound they do. like i said, it doesn't in any way preclude their being musicians.
well that's not really what i meant. i was talking about the guys who when talking about their favourite music the first thing they bring up is how fast a musician plays, or how they switch time signatures 20 times in one song or whatever. i'm sure a lot of musicians do care about the technical stuff, because it's what they've decided to do with their life so of course that's going to be part of it all, and for fans who are also interested in music or doing it as a career, learning about that stuff is inevitable and there's some fun in playing around with the toys you can use to make things sound different and stuff like that. it's all technical though, it's only interesting if you are truly trying to learn why music sounds the way it does. most people, if not all, who i know have spent months doing nothing but learning solos and letting me hear their favourite virtuoso moments, are just interested in the spectacle of some "rock god" playing fast as fuck and basically getting a big hard on for what seems to me to be the musicial equivalent to a die hard movie or something.
it's like, a very specific kind of stupidity all my friends in high school had about music. maybe i'm being too harsh, but it just seems boneheaded and boring to me. technique though is definitely not just playing fast and doing wacky tricks on stage though, that's just showmanship and it's not for me.
the kind of actual technique and skill involved in making good music, while it's important for a musician to have, isn't really so interesting to me. i guess i could compare it to filmmakers - the size of the lense, the arcane details of set lighting and so on - aren't what attract me in the end. they all help, but it's background. there have to be good intentions to start with, the execution comes after that. i'm more interested in the first part i guess, but that's just because i am kind of impatient with small details.
so i didn't mean to say heh, technique? for mere philistines. reading about that stuff bores me, but i can see why it might be important and it would probably let me become better at making the sounds i want to if i knew about it. i suppose what i'm talking about is theory and not technique. but even as i type this i'm realising this isn't really that relevant now because i'm out of high school and i don't actually have to talk to people who are like this anymore so this is mostly leftover crap that i just never talked about.