If you ever want to know about the best cabling for analog data transmission... remember it may be digital data to your router, your computer, and your monitor, but once it's on copper it's an analog signal... ask an amateur radio operator.
Believe me... there is no-one more particular about the characteristics of their analog cabling, than a ham. We use it ... generally multishielded coax these days... for antenna feed lines. The strength of some of the signals we use it to receive, are measured in femotwatts, at frequencies in the multighz ranges. The higher the frequency, the higher the attenuation of the signal per foot of feedline, and the more subject to spurious interference... so low attenuation and spurious signal rejection are kinda important to us.
Whether you're transmitting radio frequency analog transmissions, or internet data, or high resolution high framerate high def video... it's all analog once it's on copper, because the real physical world is analog. It's all high and low voltage values in a sine wave (or at least you hope it's a sine wave), and is subject to all the vagaries of the analog world.
For example, HDMI... 1080p at 60hz SDR color (HDMI-1.1) is a two channel analog signal at about 165mhz, transmitted over 4 shielded twisted pair... 8 signal wires wide effectively, plus clock sync, control channel, power, and ground pins (including one ground pin for each shielded twisted pair), for a total of 19 pins. For 1080p@ 120hz it's about 340mhz, as is 4k@30hz. 4k@120hz HDR color is about 1.2ghz, however as transmitted over HDMI including audio, and various overheads, the actual maximum data rate ends up being appx. 1.485ghz... and 1.485gigabits per second per channel. Again, that's all over HDMI, which is a bonded multi channel serial digital interface (not actually a parallel interface, though the difference between the two is somewhat esoteric at this point)... the total aggregate data rate is between appx. 4gps for HDMI-1.0 (3.96gbps technically the same as DVI by the way), and appx. 48gbps for HDMI-2.1 (actually its 47.52gbps, effectively the same as 12x DVI channels, or 32x 1.485gbit serial data channels bonded together)
The higher the frequency of an analog signal, the higher the signal loss over distance, and the more subject to electromagnetic and radio frequency interference it is... which is why when we make digital interfaces out of analog wires, we tend to limit them to about 1.2-1.5ghz, and when we need more bandwidth, we aggregate or bond more 1.2-1.5ghz channels together.
...Which is why high bandwidth stuff like 4k video, is always transmitted as digital signals if it has to go long distances. It has extremely high signal attenuation, and sensitivity to interference, in analog form (about 6db per 100feet at 1000mhz, over conventional rg6 coax for example... the stuff your cable company uses to get signal to your cable box and cable modem. 30db signal attenuation is generally considered the maximum, so 500 feet would be the maximum at 1ghz. The actual data rate for a 1080p60hz signal as actually transmitted over coax as SDI [serial digital interface] is 1.485ghz x2 channels, for a maximum run of about 140 feet at 30db attenuation, though SDI interface boxes generally extend that out to between 200 and 300 feet through higher power, and some tricks with frequency modulation and error correction. As a purely analog signal, including audio and overhead, it's almost 3ghz if it's a single channel, which would attenuate out at about 90 feet on RG6, which is why we never do that). Breaking it up into high bandwidth IP data is much easier, with much lower losses and greater error tolerance and error correction.
In analog data transmission, using a waveform structure... as most electrical and optical data transmission and cabling standards, and most radio standards do... there's basically two factors which can be used to transmit information. Frequency, and amplitude. We can modulate the frequency at which we transmit... the number of times per second the wave hits a peak... and the amplitude... how strong the signal is, which translates into how high the peak gets.
...(note: theres actually a third, called "phase", and it IS used in many data transmission systems... most of them actually... but it's a much more difficult and complicated thing to decode with precision, or to explain without further background, so I'm MOSTLY ignoring it for most of this explanation)...
The most basic way of doing that is with binary amplitude modulation... off and on, dot and dash. That's the easiest thing to detect.... and consequently those were our earliest forms of optical and electrical communications... the heliograph and the telegraph... and our earliest form of radio communications as well, using spark gap transmitters and cat whisker coherer receivers. We then converted those "off" and "on" states into useful information with thing like Morse code or Baudot code (where we get the word "baud" from).
You'll find that for... ease of explanation let's call it... most examples and illustrations of most communication methods simplify it to this binary representation.
A binary amplitude modulation system, is limited by how fast you can turn the signal off and on... or really, how fast you can precisely and reliably detect it being turned off an on. It can only encode 1 bit of data per time division, because it is always on or off referenced to off.
However, even without frequency modulation, amplitude modulation can be more complicated... and cary more data... than just off and on. In fact, it's actually a lot easier to create more precise signals by NOT using a binary "off" and a binary "on", but instead to use a "high" value, where every signal above a certain "high" amplitude threshold is a 1 and everything below a "low" value is a 0... Every computer logic circuit on the planet does this, but we pretend that "high" and "low" are really "on" and "off" to simplify it for logical explanation purposes.
Further, because we are talking about waveform transitions between high and low states, we can actually have FOUR states represented with basic amplitude modulation... "high", "low", "rising", and "falling" (this is called Quad Amplitude Modulation or QAM, which itself can be detected either by precise time reference, or by phase shifting an amplitude modulated signal wave in reference to a baseline carrier wave... I said I would MOSTLY ignore phase, not entirely).
So, before we even get into frequency modulation, we have the ability to represent 4 states of data. In reference to itself, that can mean 2 or 3 bits (depending on how you encode and how you detect the state), or in reference to a precise clock or a known baseline state such as an unmodulated carrier wave, it can mean 4 bits of data.. a useful increment.
...An important note... 2 different states of data, only in reference to that state change itself... a binary 0 or 1...is only ONE bit of data. 2 different states in reference to something else, like a high or low state in reference to a neutral carrier, or a precise time clock, can be just one bit, OR it can be used to represent TWO bits of data with proper encoding. Four states in reference only to themselves can be 3 bits, but in reference to an outside value can be 4 bits etc... This is because some state must always be null or neutral, representing no data, while all other states can encode data in reference to null or neutral. One can even do this with purely binary data with bitwise time encoding or bytewise sequence encoding, across multiple bits or bytes... Each bit is in reference to a time, or sequence of previous bits, or sequence within a byte, and therefore 0 or 1 are both information states. Without bitwise or bytewise encoding, 0 is the null reference and 1 is the only state with data, with it both states contain or transmit data.... This logical structure is generally ignored when this subject is explained, because it hurts peoples heads.
Now... we have figured out that over most transmission media... be it copper wire, optical fiber, or radio frequency transmissions through a vacuum... we can transmit additional data through two other means.
The first, is by modulating the frequency of a signal wave slightly, compared to either a very precise time clock, or to a reference carrier wave. This again can give us four discernable states of information in any given time division for a wave... any given discrete small frequency band... a peak state, a trough state, a rising state, and a falling state.
The second, is by combining multiple signals in different frequency bands, over the same medium.... Of which there could potentially be infinite divisions in theory... though in practice its difficult to generate and detect a lot of different bands simultaneously with any precision.
However, even before we reach that point, you should be able to see that for any given time division, using a combination of both amplitude modulation, and frequency modulation, we can actually represent.. and transmit and receive... 4 discrete states per frequency, and as many frequency states per time division as we can detect, with 4 states for each as well... 16 total states per discrete division... 16 bits... using purely analog signaling.
In fact, for any given division of time and any given frequency banding, we can use frequency modulation (4 states), amplitude modulation (4 states), and in theory both frequency phase modulation (2, 3, or 4 states, but the 3rd and 4th state are hard to deal with, so really 2 states), and amplitude phase modulation (again theoretically 4 states but really 2) within each discrete frequency band, to represent 64 bits of data.... though using both amplitude phase modulation and frequency phase modulation, is extraordinarily difficult to do with precision, so up until recently generally only one or the other has been used. And of course, it is technically possible to detect and use all four phase states for both amplitude and modulation, meaning you could theoretically represent 256 discrete states, or bits, within one discrete frequency band, in one discrete time division (or you can do it on the rising and falling of a clock cycle.. but it's not practical to do both clock and phase at the same time, because one is detected in reference to the other).
Then, by modulating within a small discrete frequency band, we can multiply those states by the smallest divisions we can discern within that band, times the total number of divisions, or width of that band.
That's where the term bandwidth comes from by the way. It's a measure of the number of discrete bits of data we can discern within a single time division, in a single frequency band, or an aggregate of channelized bands.... and it applies whether were talking about copper hardline, fiber optics, or radio waves.
Right now our highest frequency, and highest bandwidth, commonly used wireless systems are using the 5ghz RF band, and modulating across 80mhz channels within the band. Our highest bandwidth commonly used hardline video systems (HDMI 2.1 or CoaXpress CXP-X standards) use 1.485ghz frequency (anything higher causes severe attenuation of signal over distance... the higher the frequency the higher the attenuation), with HDMI 2.1 using 4 different states per conductor, and 8 conductors, to get 32bits times 1.485ghz, or just under 48 gigabits per second.... a similar standard is also used for our fastest common data networking over copper wire (currently 40gig ethernet), achieving a similar data rate.
The fastest data transmission over copper wire commercially available for mainstream computing applications, is currently 100gigabit ethernet. It uses four pairs of conductors moving 25gigbit each pair, but the frequency is so high that the signal attenuated to un-usability within just a couple meters, so almost all 100gbe is over fiber optics.
When you combine that with heterodyning, or multiplexing of different frequency banded signals over the same media (or as noted near the top, in phase or out of phase signals... the last time I'll mention it in this piece), for channelization within the same larger band, it should be clear that analog data signaling can do a hell of a lot more than just off and on, one and zero.
The most basic means we have used these properties for... for well over a century now... are audio transmissions over the telephone, and audio transmission over the radio.
Audio inherently transmits both frequency and amplitude modulated signals, in 1hz and 1db increments, across about 20khz of frequency spectrum, and 120db of dynamic range... Or at least human audible audio does (ultrasound goes much higher of course). Though to simplify transmission, and to multiply the maximum number of transmissions over a single medium, we have often "narrowbanded" audio to as little as 3khz and as little as 30db dynamic range.
Taditional telephone signals for example, drop everything below 300-400hz or above 3300-3400hz (depending on the region and standards of the particular telephone system) and compand -compress and expand- dynamic range down to 42db or less (+- 18db). We can then take those limited bandwidth "narrowband" signals, and combine them over a single wire, by shifting their frequency up and down in discrete bands, and then shifting them back to their original frequency at the other end... even with basic analog equipment (this is called frequency shifting or tone shifting).
That's how some long distance phone calls and trunk line calls worked for decades, before we switched to digital telephony systems... a process which took decades (and if you still have a land line, your home phone may still be connected directly to the neighborhood switching node over a single analog channel, or even to a local central switching office, depending how overdue your local infrastructure upgrades are... But in the U.S. most landline service is now digital to the neighborhood node, or even digital to the home, and is only analog from that switching box to the analog handset)
It's also how radio stations work. FM stands for "frequency modulation" and AM stands for "amplitude modulation" but in reality both types of radio do both things, its just a question of how each creates and recreates the signal at either end of the transmission. An FM radio station can modulate frequency and amplitude across a small defined band, to transmit appx 15khz and 48db dynamic range worth of audio signal. An AM radio station can do the same but with only a 10khz and 30db range. Thus we can theoretically fit about 200 local FM and about 120 local AM radio stations into a given area, in the FM and AM broadcast bands... But to avoid interference and crosstalk, it's actually more like about 100 fm and 60 am stations.
When we first started sending digital transmissions over analog phone lines, we did it in the simplest way possible... Essentially back to the days of the telegraph, only a little bit faster... We eventually got to about 300 bits per second, before we had to switch from purely binary amplitude modulation, to add the rising and falling signal states, and the frequency banding and heterodyning or multiplexing of signals. Within the limited 3khz and 42db dynamic range allocated to each analog telephone line, we managed to go from pushing just 300 bits per second, up to about 56,000 bits per second.
Now, we're using wideband 5ghz band wireless with QAM, to get bandwidth exceeding a gigabit per second per channel, and bonding multiple channels to get multi gigabit wireless.
...But still... digital data, becomes an analog signal, the second it hits a wire or a radio, and is subject to the capabilities and limitations of its transmission medium. We may live in a digital bubble, but that digital bubble floats on an analog ocean, in an analog universe.
The Random Mumblings of a Disgruntled Muscular Minarchist
Igitur qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum
Showing posts with label Video. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Video. Show all posts
Friday, July 10, 2020
Wednesday, April 18, 2012
The voices in my head - Part 1: Low Quality
"I'd always imagined you as a basso profundo, or a deep, gravelly voice." --A Reader in comments
I do actually, the mic just doesn't pick it up well; and I was feeling a bit sinusy yesterday.
Also, I tend to have a highly variable vocal range depending on the time of day, my energy state, and my stress state.
When I'm very relaxed, very tired, or I just wake up in the morning, my voice is VERY deep and rumbly. During the day, my vocal cords tend to tighten up, particularly as my stress level increases, or I get excited; and my voice gets higher, and tighter.
Also some of my medications can make my voice tighten.
Anyway, here's the low quality, afternoon sample. Tomorrow after I find my decent quality mic/webcam, and before I take my medication, I'll record another and you can get SOME of what my voice actually sounds like; but really, it's never going to come through in a youtube video because of the compression etc...
I do actually, the mic just doesn't pick it up well; and I was feeling a bit sinusy yesterday.
Also, I tend to have a highly variable vocal range depending on the time of day, my energy state, and my stress state.
When I'm very relaxed, very tired, or I just wake up in the morning, my voice is VERY deep and rumbly. During the day, my vocal cords tend to tighten up, particularly as my stress level increases, or I get excited; and my voice gets higher, and tighter.
Also some of my medications can make my voice tighten.
Anyway, here's the low quality, afternoon sample. Tomorrow after I find my decent quality mic/webcam, and before I take my medication, I'll record another and you can get SOME of what my voice actually sounds like; but really, it's never going to come through in a youtube video because of the compression etc...
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Sunday, August 14, 2011
So funny I could cry...
Particularly the Al Franken comment... Funniest, and truest thing, I've heard in weeks.
Sunday, July 24, 2011
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Tim Harford, explaining why authoritarians of any kind are basically always wrong
Of course, he doesn't say so explicitly, but that's exactly what he's pointing out here:
The talk is derived from Harfords recent book "Adapt: Why success always starts with failure", which I reviewed here a few weeks ago.
The talk is derived from Harfords recent book "Adapt: Why success always starts with failure", which I reviewed here a few weeks ago.
Thursday, July 07, 2011
Thursday, June 30, 2011
Monday, May 16, 2011
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Thunderfingers
John Enwistle, one of the best technically, one of the most musical; and certainly given his body of work and it's significance, the greatest bassist in the history of rock (other than perhaps James Jamerson, who basically invented Rock and Roll and soul bass as we know it)... at the time 56 years old (we lost him two years later in 2002), delivering a virtuoso performance on "5:15" (from "the who" album "Quadrophenia"), without breaking a sweat.
Entwistle pioneered many of the techniques now considered standard in hard rock, progressive rock, and heavy metal bass playing, including: bi-amping, the use of high powered 8 speaker bass stacks (necessary to be heard clearly over the high energy drumming of Keith Moon - eventually he used two 200 watt amps, each feeding two 4x10 or 4x12 cabinets, or sometimes four 2x15 cabinets, for a total of 16 driven speakers), the use of feedback, tapping, and harmonics as a musical element for the bass, the use of effects, and the general "lead bass" style.
It is generally thought that his bass solo on "My Generation" is if not the first, certainly one of the first bass solos in recorded rock music (they were not unknown when bands were playing live, but they rarely made it onto records, and almost never onto rock records; as they were considered to be more of a "modern jazz" type thing).
Many of what people think are classic Pete Townshend guitar riffs, and even solos, are in fact Entwistles bass work; especially the intros to many classic who songs.
Entwistle is yet another reason why I believe "The Who" were the BEST (not the greatest, that's clearly "The Beatles") band of their time (not that Paul McCartney isn't a very good -and very innovative- bass player. He is.. and as far as I'm concerned he was the far greater talent than Lennon in the Beatles).
Here's the entire 2-1/2 hour live concert from 2000 (later released as the album "Live at the Royal Albert hall"), that the bass solo from "5:15" above is pulled:
And yes, by then, Townshend had clearly lost too much of "it" to keep on the way he was trying to. I saw them in 1989 for their 25th anniversary of Tommy "The Kids are Alright" tour, and they just utterly blew me away.
In between, somehow, Townshend blew out his voice entirely, and seemed to have lost his ability to either keep time, or play on key.
But, Entwistle, Daltrey, and their drummer (more in a moment) were really on for that tour (Daltrey has since lost too much of "it" to keep going as well).
Oh and the drummer for that concert happens to be Zak Starkey, the son of one Sir Richard Starkey, better known as Ringo Starr.
Starkey has been the drummer for "The Who" since 1996 (much as Jason Bonham has been for the various Jimmy Page projects, including the Led Zeppeling reunion). Appropriate, since it was actually Keith Moon who taught him to play drums (and rather well at that).
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Sunday, June 27, 2010
Tuesday, May 04, 2010
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Friday, February 12, 2010
Can't Stop the Awesome
It's like "Me First and the Gimme Gimmes" as a Hair Band... it's FUCKING AWESOME.
You can hear samples from the album on their website... I will never listen to "Welcome to the Jungle" the same way again.
HT: Scalzi
Labels:
Humor,
Metal,
Music,
Pop Culture,
Video
Thursday, February 11, 2010
My "New Office"
So, I've briefly mentioned before, in a few weeks, we're going to be moving from the house we've been living in the last four years.
More detail on that to follow, but for now I thought I'd inaugurate the video feature of my iPhone 3GS to show y'all my temporary workspace while we're packing.
Normally, I work in an 800sqft office/gunroom/hobby workshop etc... surrounded by a half dozen computers, several monitors, a bunch of guns, reloading equipment, tools and the like.
However, that space would be rather difficult to pack up, clean up, and get ready for moving, were I to keep actually working in it; so we decided to consolidate my workstation into the bare essentials, on the small desk in our bedroom.
Of course, I have a somewhat more expansive definition of the bare essentials than some...
My workstation consists of a ThinkPad W500 (work machine), my brand new as of yesterday (more on that later as well) HP dv8t quad (personal machine), connected to two of the six inputs of a 24" gateway monitor (that I got a SMOKIN deal on two years ago); along with the HP and IBM docking stations, and both HP and MS wireless keyboards and mice.
Unfortunately, my DVI KVM switch fried a few weeks ago or I'd just have one set of keyboard and mouse.
In the other room, and not yet hooked up, is the hackintosh. I may hook it up, I may not; I haven't decided yet.
For comms I've got my blackberry (Tour, my work phone), my iPhone 3GS, my two line landline phone (work and home), and both Skype and Googlevoice (with in and out voip).
Yes, they're all active, every day. At any time someone could be calling me on one... or frequently several... of six lines; for 10-12 hours a day.
Yes, it's a pain in the ass. No, I can't change it. It goes with the job. I work at home, and lead a team spread from Miami, Atlanta, Raleigh, New Jersey and New Hampshire on ones side of the country; and from San Diego to Seattle on the other; with Austin, San Antonio, St. Louis, Minneapolis, and Menomonie Falls Wisconsin in the middle. They all work 8-6, so when necessary I work 6-8.
Anyway... it's an awful lot of (hopefully) productivity packed into a TINY little space (about 36x24").
Wednesday, February 03, 2010
A few VERY different shredders...
Expanding on last nights post, I thought I'd put up a few different videos, of a few different styles and techniques of shredding.
Just for fun, let's look at Darrel Abbot (aka Dimebag Darrel) and his tour through all the major shredding styles "The Art of Shredding"
This sound is, literally, an example of every different kind of shredding there is. Different sections are played in different fingering, picking, and tapping styles.
Then there's the all time canonical example for the shred guitarist, Yngwie Malmsteen; and what is probably the best example of his several different shredding techniques (alternate picking, sweep picking, hybrid picking, hybrid tapping, and two handed tapping) all in one song, "Caprici Diabolo":
Oh and I should note... though I often criticize Yngwie for being all speed and technique, and no soul...and for being a total douchebag (really, he is. Major asshole, and a nasty drunk too)... he can do it almost as well with an acoustic guitar as he can with a strat. Still no soul, but he's not using insane overdrive and extra strings and extended doublecutaways to get his speed :
And I should note, for most of his best, fastest, and most difficult work, Yngwie was stone ass (near falling down) drunk. If I drank as much as he did I wouldnt be able to tie my shoes, never mind play like that.
Oh and he CAN play slowly, and play the blues, and classic rock... he's even good at it... he just likes guitar masturbating a lot more.
There's two guys you have to credit for bringing shredding to mass audiences, and coincidentally both played behind (or in front of) David lee Roth.
The first is of course, Eddie Van Halen, with the song that brought shredding out in public for the first time, "Eruption":
...and for those of you who only know Van halen as mediocre middle aged adult contemporary rockers (you poor misguided fools you), here's an INSANE 11 minute live shredding jam on eruption from the early 80s (where Eddie uses every shredding technique known to man):
Just the look on his face during the whole thing... there's a man in his prime and having the time of his life. He was the absolute king of the world for that 11 minutes.
The other player of course is Steve Vai; who would do more than any other 80s guitarist to popularize shredding with the hard core musical theory crowd (the guys who love metal for the technique and degree of difficulty)... and who in this clip just happens to also being shredding with Tony MacAlpine, Dave Wiener, and Billy Sheehan:
Though I have to say, my favorite Vai tune ever is probably Bad Horsie:
Some may say that role more properly belongs to Satrianai (or even Steve Morse)
... but I disagree. Like Eric Johnson, Satch doesn't really shred... Satch just... IS.
Now... we have to talk a bit about Michael Angelo Batio; who is considered the fastest shredder there is (though Talio DellaVega is the fastest picker according to Guinness).
Frankly, I'm not a fan. He is INSANELY fast... and his technique is incredible... but if there was ever someone who is all technique and no soul or art it's Batio. And I hate to say it, because he's an incredibly versatile and inventive player, and a great teacher of technique (and apparently a very nice guy)... I just don't like his music.
Here he is playing on his signature "double guitar"... not just a double neck, it's actually two guitars joined at the base, that he plays simultaneously with plucking and tapping techniques:
What he can do with a guitar... or two.. or even four (yes, he has a four way version of that thing and he'll play all four at once through harmonics, pedals, sustain effects etc... ) boggles the mind... It's absolutely amazing... but it leaves me cold.
And here's Dragonforce's Herman Li, demonstrating his hybrid tapping/two handed tapping style:
...and what has become their iconic song "Through the Fire and Flames":
Where you can see that Li is one of the fastest two handed, or hybrid tappers ever... Plus it's just a fun song.
Admittedly, Li isnt nearly as musical as some others, but his playing is incredibly fast, and very fun. It's not strained or over-techniqued... it's just he sacrifices quality for speed.
Now, I can't do this sampler without something from John Petrucci, one of my favorite guitarists from one of my favorite bands of all time, Dream Theater. Here's his solo piece "Glasgow Kiss":
Not one of the fastest shredders (though he's damn fast); but definitely among the most musical... Probably as good as Satch, Gilbert etc.. as an artist and band member rather than just a "guitar player".
Ok... I saved this one for last, because... well most people dn't know who he is, other than real guitar geeks... and he's probably the only guitarist I can think of who is both faster, AND more musical than Paul Gilbert... His name is Rusty Cooley; and though he's been around since the early 90s, he's never had much fame... but guitarist know who his is, and stuff like this is why:
and this freestyle jam... just blows me away:
Oh and thinking about it now... Why is it so many of the most amazing guitarists come out of New Jersey? No joke, like 1/3 of these guys are from NJ.
Just for fun, let's look at Darrel Abbot (aka Dimebag Darrel) and his tour through all the major shredding styles "The Art of Shredding"
This sound is, literally, an example of every different kind of shredding there is. Different sections are played in different fingering, picking, and tapping styles.
Then there's the all time canonical example for the shred guitarist, Yngwie Malmsteen; and what is probably the best example of his several different shredding techniques (alternate picking, sweep picking, hybrid picking, hybrid tapping, and two handed tapping) all in one song, "Caprici Diabolo":
Oh and I should note... though I often criticize Yngwie for being all speed and technique, and no soul...and for being a total douchebag (really, he is. Major asshole, and a nasty drunk too)... he can do it almost as well with an acoustic guitar as he can with a strat. Still no soul, but he's not using insane overdrive and extra strings and extended doublecutaways to get his speed :
And I should note, for most of his best, fastest, and most difficult work, Yngwie was stone ass (near falling down) drunk. If I drank as much as he did I wouldnt be able to tie my shoes, never mind play like that.
Oh and he CAN play slowly, and play the blues, and classic rock... he's even good at it... he just likes guitar masturbating a lot more.
There's two guys you have to credit for bringing shredding to mass audiences, and coincidentally both played behind (or in front of) David lee Roth.
The first is of course, Eddie Van Halen, with the song that brought shredding out in public for the first time, "Eruption":
...and for those of you who only know Van halen as mediocre middle aged adult contemporary rockers (you poor misguided fools you), here's an INSANE 11 minute live shredding jam on eruption from the early 80s (where Eddie uses every shredding technique known to man):
Just the look on his face during the whole thing... there's a man in his prime and having the time of his life. He was the absolute king of the world for that 11 minutes.
The other player of course is Steve Vai; who would do more than any other 80s guitarist to popularize shredding with the hard core musical theory crowd (the guys who love metal for the technique and degree of difficulty)... and who in this clip just happens to also being shredding with Tony MacAlpine, Dave Wiener, and Billy Sheehan:
Though I have to say, my favorite Vai tune ever is probably Bad Horsie:
Some may say that role more properly belongs to Satrianai (or even Steve Morse)
... but I disagree. Like Eric Johnson, Satch doesn't really shred... Satch just... IS.
Now... we have to talk a bit about Michael Angelo Batio; who is considered the fastest shredder there is (though Talio DellaVega is the fastest picker according to Guinness).
Frankly, I'm not a fan. He is INSANELY fast... and his technique is incredible... but if there was ever someone who is all technique and no soul or art it's Batio. And I hate to say it, because he's an incredibly versatile and inventive player, and a great teacher of technique (and apparently a very nice guy)... I just don't like his music.
Here he is playing on his signature "double guitar"... not just a double neck, it's actually two guitars joined at the base, that he plays simultaneously with plucking and tapping techniques:
What he can do with a guitar... or two.. or even four (yes, he has a four way version of that thing and he'll play all four at once through harmonics, pedals, sustain effects etc... ) boggles the mind... It's absolutely amazing... but it leaves me cold.
And here's Dragonforce's Herman Li, demonstrating his hybrid tapping/two handed tapping style:
...and what has become their iconic song "Through the Fire and Flames":
Where you can see that Li is one of the fastest two handed, or hybrid tappers ever... Plus it's just a fun song.
Admittedly, Li isnt nearly as musical as some others, but his playing is incredibly fast, and very fun. It's not strained or over-techniqued... it's just he sacrifices quality for speed.
Now, I can't do this sampler without something from John Petrucci, one of my favorite guitarists from one of my favorite bands of all time, Dream Theater. Here's his solo piece "Glasgow Kiss":
Not one of the fastest shredders (though he's damn fast); but definitely among the most musical... Probably as good as Satch, Gilbert etc.. as an artist and band member rather than just a "guitar player".
Ok... I saved this one for last, because... well most people dn't know who he is, other than real guitar geeks... and he's probably the only guitarist I can think of who is both faster, AND more musical than Paul Gilbert... His name is Rusty Cooley; and though he's been around since the early 90s, he's never had much fame... but guitarist know who his is, and stuff like this is why:
and this freestyle jam... just blows me away:
Oh and thinking about it now... Why is it so many of the most amazing guitarists come out of New Jersey? No joke, like 1/3 of these guys are from NJ.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)




