• New Sponsor: ShipNerd, Ship Your Gear with Us... for less! Click Here.

Let's Talk Dynamics.

KRosser

Member
Messages
14,301
Look, you're not offending anyone, just simply making an unnecessary stink. The whole point many are making refers to the fact that you state: "the word dynamic... predates electric guitars". Do you not understand that words change meanings all the time? And there are MANY definitions for "dynamic" , not simply "volume". A dynamic orator is someone who speaks eloquently or with passion, a dynamic microphone is different from a condenser mic due to it's diaphragm, a dynamic personality is a strong and outgoing individual, etc., etc....

The fact is that in common parlance, guitarists - electric guitarists in particular - refer to dynamics differently than what has historically been used in music - which comes from an era of strictlly acoustic instruments. So the word has gained a NEW meaning in the electric era, now heading into its 2nd century. We are not wrong, any more than you are wrong. Both meanings are correct. So when we say that dynamics - with regard to an electric guitar plugged into an amplifier - means getting different timbres, distortions, attacks, sustain, subtleties in pick attack, feedback, harmonics, vibrato, etc., we are referring to these things which encompass differences in sound, technique, and expression in addition to volume under one great umbrella. In fact, we will usually call volume simply "volume".

And since that is how people are using the word "dynamics", that MAKES it correct! Unfortunately for those that want to cling to tradition, that is just the way the word has evolved. The important thing is that we understand what it means and can communicate it using that word.

The fact that the electric guitar community has developed a new meaning for "dynamic" that differs from the rest of musicians just means that you're ill-equipped to discuss these issues with other musicians without causing all kinds of unnecessary confusion. See also a discussion of "legato" here earlier.

That is, if I accepted this is now concretely set in the electric guitar community's vocabulary, which I don't. There's no consensus. Clearly - not even on this thread.
 

Ed DeGenaro

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
25,234
The fact that the electric guitar community has developed a new meaning for "dynamic" that differs from the rest of musicians just means that you're ill-equipped to discuss these issues with other musicians without causing all kinds of unnecessary confusion. See also a discussion of "legato" here earlier.

That is, if I accepted this is now concretely set in the electric guitar community's vocabulary, which I don't. There's no consensus. Clearly - not even on this thread.
I always shudder when i hear "the guitar community"....guitarists...the least communal.of all instrumentalists....
 

TP Parter

Member
Messages
1,489
Dynamics is not just volume differences. It's also about difference in tone, frequency content, the amount of distortion etc, nuances, how different touches and techniques translate and change the sound.

A totally dead clean tone is less dynamic than one with some dirt in every aspect except volume, but that difference is heavily mitigated when you play around with the volume control. Dynamics in general are even worse if the highs are heavily rolled off before the amp. That's where all the dynamics and nuances happen on a guitar tone. The attitude, the personality of the player and the "magic" so to speak.

Clipping adds compression, and compression reduces dynamic range. Now, you can set the amp to break up at full volume and roll back for cleans, thus restoring your full dynamic range, but it's called clipping because it does exactly that. It clips off your signal's waveform, or more succinctly its dynamic range.
 

paka

Member
Messages
557
The fact that the electric guitar community has developed a new meaning for "dynamic" that differs from the rest of musicians just means that you're ill-equipped to discuss these issues with other musicians without causing all kinds of unnecessary confusion. See also a discussion of "legato" here earlier.

That is, if I accepted this is now concretely set in the electric guitar community's vocabulary, which I don't. There's no consensus. Clearly - not even on this thread.
Again, there are many definitions for "dynamic". Even before electric guitar rebels conspired to commandeer the traditional definition with regards to music, we have these definitions:

1. marked by usually continuous and productive activity or change
2. of or relating to physical force or energy
3. Relating to forces that produce movement
4. A pattern or process of change, growth, or activity
5. A basic or dynamic force, especially one that motivates, affects development or stability, etc.

So, you can see, even within the standard meanings of the word, it is not incorrect or even necessarily "expanded" to use this in reference to non-amplitude based concepts.

And again, dynamics with reference to electric guitars and amplifiers, can mean a whole lot of different things - refer to my previous post. You are free to not accept the vocabulary used by others. But at this point, it's just a useless debate, because this is common usage, AND is consistent with pre-existing common usage of the word as per several dictionaries quoted above. I suggest employing the use of the words "volume" and better yet "amplitude", as these are far more specific in their meanings.
 

splatt

david torn / splattercell
Platinum Supporting Member
Messages
26,926
Good points.

The guitar is somewhat limited in its dynamic range, all the things you mention help to add to the "illusion" of dynamics.

disagree, there; the electric guitar is capable of remarkable dynamics, since the basic instrument includes both the electric guitar, itself, and (typically) an amplifier.
 

killer blues

Member
Messages
3,635
How often do you guys work on Dynamics?

I would say dynamics and touch are the most important thing when it comes to guitar playing.

What do you guys think?

Oh, here's a video I made about this topic.

Cheers!


always! amps like a two rock depend on it. if you are good at it and have the right amp you dont need pedals or work your volume knob.
 

splatt

david torn / splattercell
Platinum Supporting Member
Messages
26,926
always! amps like a two rock depend on it. if you are good at it and have the right amp you dont need pedals or work your volume knob.

i've found my amps to be capable of much broader dynamic range than any Dumble or Two Rock i've ever played; so much so, that some folks get freaked out by feeling over-exposed to the nuances of their own guitar-playing w/such amps..... especially the purposefully greater headroom of the 120w amp, but the current range of lesser wattage ones, too (50w, & 22w).

that said?
like anything else, those amps are not likely to be attractive everyone. (i tend to play in a lot of extremely dynamic music, myself: true "whisper to roar" always a possibility & a musical need.)

that also said?
volume and tone-control on the guitar is the 2nd key factor in furthering the playing dynamics of electric guitar-playing; same with some uses of pedals, though nothing is more critically #1 than manual touch-control.
 
Last edited:

killer blues

Member
Messages
3,635
i've found my amps to be capable of much broader dynamic range than any Dumble or Two Rock i've ever played; so much so, that some folks get freaked out by feeling over-exposed to the nuances of their own guitar-playing w/such amps..... especially the purposefully greater headroom of the 120w amp, but the current range of lesser wattage ones, too (50w, & 22w).

that said?
like anything else, those amps are not likely to be attractive everyone. (i tend to play in a lot of extremely dynamic music, myself: true "whisper to roar" always a possibility & a musical need.)

that also said?
volume and tone-control on the guitar is the 2nd key factor in furthering the playing dynamics of electric guitar-playing; same with some uses of pedals, though nothing is more critically #1 than manual touch-control.
those were just examples. obviously you have the right amp
 

Aaron Mayo

Member
Messages
2,201
The standard musical definition (look it up in any musical dictionary or ask any musician who plays an instrument other than electric guitar) deals with loud medium and soft and other gradients. It's a "big picture" concept and really important in music.

The other definition is confusing to pretty much everybody (including musicians who aren't electric guitarists).
 

troyguitar

Member
Messages
277
I like a fair amount of compression because it's the only way to get sustain without something like an ebow or loud amp. Basically I should have started on violin or sax.
 

Lopp

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
338
I think a lot of people are confusing true dynamics ie: playing a dynamic amp with a great range of actual volume, like a very high wattage tube amp set to clean 120-200watt+ or a mid wattage+ modren SS amp on a clean very SS like setting. With a colorful type of amplifier that varies that color based on one’s picking dynamics.

The later example is not truly dynamics, that set up actually lacks dynamics, which is why it distorts instead of getting louder and thus provides all that color/timbre, what have you. The picking dynamics are not transfered into actual musical dynamics but are transferred into the different colorful tones your amp produces as it distorts. Again this is not a dynamic sound but one where the dynamics are transformed into tonal changes instead of actual dynamics.

The confusion has started because self appointed guitar gurus(on YouTube) have started referring to amps whose tones can be varied via pick attack, as dynamic amps. And saying things like those amps should be played dynamically and the like. So to an extent this term has begun to take on a bit of a duel meaning.

There seems to be some confusion between people that want to argue nuances.

Dynamics, from random online dictionary definitions in the context of music, are the varying levels of volume of sound in different parts of a musical performance; variation in loudness between notes or phrases; the volume of a sound or note; etc.

In that context an amp itself cannot be dynamic until music is actually played through it. However, in another view, any amp with a volume knob is dynamic because you can vary the level of volume by turning the knob. The amp is both a technical device and a conduit for music. In yet another view, if you talk to an electrical engineer, it can relate to how an amp can go past it RMS power. In other words, its peak power. (I have an electrical engineering degree and work with audio devices, but this is not necessarily my specialty, so I may not be completely accurate, but it is close enough to make the point).

Some peeps seem to be stuck on limiting the definition to how audible volume changes. However, they are limiting the term for the sake of argument. An amp can react to dynamic playing differently. Thus, someone can adjust their playing dynamics, which results in different audible volume coming from the instrument before it reaches the amp, and the amp may not have as wide of a dynamic range due to clipping, etc., yet the player is still playing with dynamics.
 

vintagelove

Member
Messages
2,952
There seems to be some confusion between people that want to argue nuances.

Dynamics, from random online dictionary definitions in the context of music, are the varying levels of volume of sound in different parts of a musical performance; variation in loudness between notes or phrases; the volume of a sound or note; etc.

In that context an amp itself cannot be dynamic until music is actually played through it. However, in another view, any amp with a volume knob is dynamic because you can vary the level of volume by turning the knob. The amp is both a technical device and a conduit for music. In yet another view, if you talk to an electrical engineer, it can relate to how an amp can go past it RMS power. In other words, its peak power. (I have an electrical engineering degree and work with audio devices, but this is not necessarily my specialty, so I may not be completely accurate, but it is close enough to make the point).

Some peeps seem to be stuck on limiting the definition to how audible volume changes. However, they are limiting the term for the sake of argument. An amp can react to dynamic playing differently. Thus, someone can adjust their playing dynamics, which results in different audible volume coming from the instrument before it reaches the amp, and the amp may not have as wide of a dynamic range due to clipping, etc., yet the player is still playing with dynamics.


The thing is, amps can be more or less dynamic, before you ever reach clipping, and is so before "music is played through it". It comes down to the circuit, and the construction quality. Set on 3, nowhere near the onset of distortion, a BF super reverb and a dumble circuit feel very different.

In my experience (which includes a lifetime of being around high quality amps to building and repairing them) the main factor is in the power supply (and perhaps the number of gain stages)


This comes into play with high gain amps as well. A poster earlier mentioned he notices a difference in amps when "chugging". He is right. While the signal might be distorting in the preamp, the power amp is taking that distorted signal and amplifying it. A wimpy power supply is not going to give you the kick in the gut that a robust power supply will (we're also assuming the same quality transformers.


This is especially why it's important to understand, I'm not "arguing about it" to be a stickler on definitions. It's precisely because if you talk to an electrical engineer who builds audio devices, they are going to assume when you talk about dynamics, that's what you're talking about. Even when you're talking about changing your playing dynamics on an electric guitar, what you are really doing is creating more or less voltage for the amp, to amplify.


By the way, there isn't a better or worse in that discussion, it's subjective. Again, if you read my first post, that was the entire point. Most guitar players think they want as dynamic and amp as possible, but they really probably don't. It takes a while to get used to playing that kind of amp. It's like driving a race car. It sounds fun, but driving one in city traffic can get you in a lot of trouble when you gently tap the gas pedal, and rear end the person in front of you.

I am far less concerned about someone reading this thread and coming away with the correct definition, rather I would not want to see them waste money on an amp that wasn't what they really wanted.
 

KRosser

Member
Messages
14,301
Again, there are many definitions for "dynamic". Even before electric guitar rebels conspired to commandeer the traditional definition with regards to music, we have these definitions:

1. marked by usually continuous and productive activity or change
2. of or relating to physical force or energy
3. Relating to forces that produce movement
4. A pattern or process of change, growth, or activity
5. A basic or dynamic force, especially one that motivates, affects development or stability, etc.

So, you can see, even within the standard meanings of the word, it is not incorrect or even necessarily "expanded" to use this in reference to non-amplitude based concepts.

And again, dynamics with reference to electric guitars and amplifiers, can mean a whole lot of different things - refer to my previous post. You are free to not accept the vocabulary used by others. But at this point, it's just a useless debate, because this is common usage, AND is consistent with pre-existing common usage of the word as per several dictionaries quoted above. I suggest employing the use of the words "volume" and better yet "amplitude", as these are far more specific in their meanings.

Do you own a music dictionary, by any chance? We are not discussing the layman's understanding of the word "dynamic", which is determined by common usage and not how musicians use the term.
 

fr8_trane

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
7,170
On guitar, you should control your dynamics in different ways. Especially when there is a vocalist or another soloist. Sometimes I will choose to play dyads instead of full chords. Sometimes I will palm mute. Sometimes I just switch pickups. Or I just pick a lot softer.

It isn't rocket science - it is just something quite a few players don't think about enough.

Although it is not technically "dynamics" - choosing to play less, just a couple hits per bar for example, also takes the volume of a song down and hence is part of the dynamics dynamic.
Agreed. I am also experimenting with the idea of turning my amp up "too loud". I'm finding that it is great way to force myself to be more dynamic. With the amp set loud I know that if i dig in and I am NOT playing a solo the whole band is going to look at me sideways... if not throw something at me. So I will be forced to turn the guitar volume down, pick softer, palm mute, play 2 or 3 note voicings, etc; all to control the volume. Then i can "unleash the fury" on command by diming the guitar or just digging in.
 

Lopp

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
338
Do you own a music dictionary, by any chance? We are not discussing the layman's understanding of the word "dynamic", which is determined by common usage and not how musicians use the term.

In the context of this thread and forum The "Gear" Page, we are not just talking about a narrow definition used by musicians when discussing music theory. Dynamics in relation to amplifiers has different definitions from dynamics in relation to strict music theory and notation. As we discuss gear and amplifiers, the term of dynamics should not be limited to the music theory definition, and instead necessarily includes definitions other than the definition in music theory, and especially includes definitions used for gear, like amplifiers.
 
Last edited:

Lopp

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
338
The thing is, amps can be more or less dynamic, before you ever reach clipping, and is so before "music is played through it". It comes down to the circuit, and the construction quality. Set on 3, nowhere near the onset of distortion, a BF super reverb and a dumble circuit feel very different.

In my experience (which includes a lifetime of being around high quality amps to building and repairing them) the main factor is in the power supply (and perhaps the number of gain stages)


This comes into play with high gain amps as well. A poster earlier mentioned he notices a difference in amps when "chugging". He is right. While the signal might be distorting in the preamp, the power amp is taking that distorted signal and amplifying it. A wimpy power supply is not going to give you the kick in the gut that a robust power supply will (we're also assuming the same quality transformers.


This is especially why it's important to understand, I'm not "arguing about it" to be a stickler on definitions. It's precisely because if you talk to an electrical engineer who builds audio devices, they are going to assume when you talk about dynamics, that's what you're talking about. Even when you're talking about changing your playing dynamics on an electric guitar, what you are really doing is creating more or less voltage for the amp, to amplify.


By the way, there isn't a better or worse in that discussion, it's subjective. Again, if you read my first post, that was the entire point. Most guitar players think they want as dynamic and amp as possible, but they really probably don't. It takes a while to get used to playing that kind of amp. It's like driving a race car. It sounds fun, but driving one in city traffic can get you in a lot of trouble when you gently tap the gas pedal, and rear end the person in front of you.

I am far less concerned about someone reading this thread and coming away with the correct definition, rather I would not want to see them waste money on an amp that wasn't what they really wanted.

Even though you said "the thing is," which seems to imply disagreeing or at least qualifying one of my points, it seems that we are in agreement that the word dynamics involves more than just the music theory definition because we are talking about gear; and "dynamics" with respect to amplifiers has a different definition than with respect to music theory.

That being said, one of my points was about whether calling an amp "dynamic amp" makes sense. According to one definition, pretty much any amp is dynamic because it can output different volume levels, if only depending on the level of the source signal and/or depending on how you set the volume knob. Another definition relates to maximum power output compared to RMS power output. There are even more definitions, which I did not preclude. Thus, I am not sure about the point of your comment about "the thing is" relating to calling an amp a dynamic amp. Maybe the term "dynamic amp" implies an amp is "more dynamic" than another and/or the amp reacts to the input more dynamically or reacts to a more dynamic input in a different manner than another amp. I would enjoy to hear your definition of the term "dynamic amp" so I can better understand where you are coming from.
 
Last edited:

vintagelove

Member
Messages
2,952
Maybe the term "dynamic amp" implies an amp is "more dynamic" than another and/or the amp reacts to the input more dynamically or reacts to a more dynamic input in a different manner than another amp.

Yes, this is the whole point of my posts.

The ability to accurately reproduce the voltage change produced by the instrument, is very different from amp to amp.

Btw, it's important to note here, an amplifier is an electronic device. The fact you play a guitar through it is relatively unimportant. The early amps everything descended from are basically circuit blocks "pasted" together from the rca handbook.

With that out of the way. A good thing to know/be aware of in audio/amps is something called "slew rate"

"In electronics, slew rate is defined as the change of voltage or current, or any other electrical quantity, per unit of time. Expressed in SI units, the unit of measurement is volts/second or amperes/second or the unit being discussed, (but is usually expressed in V/μs).

In amplifiers, limitations in slew rate capability can give rise to non-linear effects."


There is a lot more there, but what's important to know is that amplifiers vary in their ability to reproduce the transients we feed them (the dynamics of your playing).


A forgiving amp, a super reverb, doesn't reproduce the input particularly well. I personally like that. For what I play (fast complex bebop), sometimes you have to dig in a bit, and a non forgiving amp (a small redplate) can blow your freaking ears out because it's so dynamic. A super will have your hardest pick relatively not much louder than your medium pick. The redplate could go from a relative whisper to painfull.

So, when we as players change our playing dynamics (the traditional definition, soft-loud), in an electric guitar, that varies the voltage produced by the pickup. Amplifiers will differ in their ability to reproduce that varying voltage accurately. This is why amps "feel different".


By the way, this is not limited to guitar amps, but any amplifier circuit. The most revealing experience for me was when I was working on modifying an MCI console I had. Long story short, when changing the opamps in the monitoring section, the old ones had capacitors that would limit the slew rate. They were no longer needed with the new chips. When I remove those capacitors, which again allowed a much faster slew rate (reproduction of transients), I could not believe the difference in what I was hearing. It was like listening to every record I had, for the first time. I could hear things I never heard before. Everything was so much faster, and more accurate. It probably took me a whole weekend to get used to the new sound.


This is why IMO using the correct definition is important, because these things are understood on a technical level beyond "guitar player talk", and they really do make a difference. If you tell an engineer you want a dynamic amp, and then you say you want it to go from clean to distortion smoothly, you've just asked for two entirely different things.


Hope that helps understanding my position.


dynamic amp, notice how well it tracks his playing dynamics.





not dynamic amp, notice his clean volume is almost the same as his crunch




check out the sag resistor in tw circuits. It's a contributor to that effect.
 
Last edited:

Lopp

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
338
Yes, this is the whole point of my posts.

The ability to accurately reproduce the voltage change produced by the instrument, is very different from amp to amp.

Btw, it's important to note here, an amplifier is an electronic device. The fact you play a guitar through it is relatively unimportant. The early amps everything descended from are basically circuit blocks "pasted" together from the rca handbook.

With that out of the way. A good thing to know/be aware of in audio/amps is something called "slew rate"

"In electronics, slew rate is defined as the change of voltage or current, or any other electrical quantity, per unit of time. Expressed in SI units, the unit of measurement is volts/second or amperes/second or the unit being discussed, (but is usually expressed in V/μs).

In amplifiers, limitations in slew rate capability can give rise to non-linear effects."


There is a lot more there, but what's important to know is that amplifiers vary in their ability to reproduce the transients we feed them (the dynamics of your playing).


A forgiving amp, a super reverb, doesn't reproduce the input particularly well. I personally like that. For what I play (fast complex bebop), sometimes you have to dig in a bit, and a non forgiving amp (a small redplate) can blow your freaking ears out because it's so dynamic. A super will have your hardest pick relatively not much louder than your medium pick. The redplate could go from a relative whisper to painfull.

So, when we as players change our playing dynamics (the traditional definition, soft-loud), in an electric guitar, that varies the voltage produced by the pickup. Amplifiers will differ in their ability to reproduce that varying voltage accurately. This is why amps "feel different".


By the way, this is not limited to guitar amps, but any amplifier circuit. The most revealing experience for me was when I was working on modifying an MCI console I had. Long story short, when changing the opamps in the monitoring section, the old ones had capacitors that would limit the slew rate. They were no longer needed with the new chips. When I remove those capacitors, which again allowed a much faster slew rate (reproduction of transients), I could not believe the difference in what I was hearing. It was like listening to every record I had, for the first time. I could hear things I never heard before. Everything was so much faster, and more accurate. It probably took me a whole weekend to get used to the new sound.


This is why IMO using the correct definition is important, because these things are understood on a technical level beyond "guitar player talk", and they really do make a difference. If you tell an engineer you want a dynamic amp, and then you say you want it to go from clean to distortion smoothly, you've just asked for two entirely different things.


Hope that helps understanding my position.


dynamic amp, notice how well it tracks his playing dynamics.





not dynamic amp, notice his clean volume is almost the same as his crunch




check out the sag resistor in tw circuits. It's a contributor to that effect.


Fun analysis. Thanks for sharing.

I have a BSEE and thus, could (almost) be one of the engineers that someone would ask to design your hypothetical dynamic amp (albeit, not my specialty). If you told me you wanted a dynamic amp, I would assume you mean an amp with a lot of headroom. Slew rate does affect the headroom, but more accurately is the change in voltage/current over a given time (which you mentioned), such as the amount of time to reach the desired output, which is more related to frequency response than dynamics. For the purposes of our discussion, yes, the slew rate does affect the dynamic response of the amp. Although, for the purposes of this thread, I think discussing slew rate is well beyond what most of our dear readers are interested in.

The big issue peeps are arguing about in this thread is some want to try to limit the definition of "dynamic" to a specific definition, especially those who cite music theory. However, the term dynamic does not only exist in music theory. Sure, we are musicians, but we are musicians who play through amplifiers, where the term "dynamic" takes on a different definition, even multiple different definitions, with most definitions involving a higher variability of something.

I don't know how long the term "dynamic amplifier" has existed with respect to guitar amplifiers, but your definition does work in that I would perceive a dynamic amplifier as being one that more accurately corresponds the output audio level to the input audio level. In one example, this can relate to its headroom or ability to generate more power over its RMS or average rated power for a brief period, which can allow for more dynamic range in the audio reproduced.

Aside from the music theory nerds (and I'm a nerd too), it seems the issue you have is that some players call an amp "dynamic" when it takes on different timbre depending on the dynamics of their playing, such as having less distortion when playing softer and more when playing harder, and I concur. To me, an amp would be dynamic if it produces a louder audio level when you are playing harder. If it starts distorting when you play harder, that means you are clipping the circuit, which results in less dynamic range in the output.
 

vintagelove

Member
Messages
2,952
To me, an amp would be dynamic if it produces a louder audio level when you are playing harder. If it starts distorting when you play harder, that means you are clipping the circuit, which results in less dynamic range in the output.


Agree. Though even on a completely clean amp, the feel can be so different.


An interesting mod to play with (on a SS rectified amp) is a sag resistor in the PSU. Kind of a best of both worlds situation. You can have a real fast response if you want it, or tone it down to your liking by playing with that resistor value.


One more thing about slew rate. It's really not the technically correct term (ironic because I'm fussing over dynamic) when discussing tube amps (Truthfully the details of it are beyond my current understanding), But what happens in tube amps, mimics the effect of slew rate on transients. Slew rate is just a lot easier to understand than some of the definitions. Here's about the simplest I could find on what happens in tube amps. I disagree with their condition of high-volume though. You can still feel the difference even at living room volume.

"Early tube amplifiers had power supplies based on rectifier tubes. The typical anode supply was a rectifier, perhaps half-wave, a choke (inductor) and a filter capacitor. When the tube amplifier was operated at high volume, due to the high impedance of the rectifier tubes, the power supply voltage would dip as the amplifier drew more current (assuming class AB), reducing power output and causing signal modulation. The dipping effect is known as "sag." Sag may be desirable effect for some electric guitarists when compared with hard clipping. As the amplifier load or output increases this voltage drop will increase distortion of the output signal. Sometimes this sag effect is desirable for guitar amplification.'
 

paka

Member
Messages
557
Do you own a music dictionary, by any chance? We are not discussing the layman's understanding of the word "dynamic", which is determined by common usage and not how musicians use the term.
That my friend is incorrect. We are absolutely discussing the use of the word in the informal musical sense. This is my whole point, regardless of what the OP had in mind. Fact is, MOST guitarists are self-taught or have had little musical training, and many cannot read or write music, and know little theory. This is the very reason we are having this discussion. But if you want to call all of those guitarists NON-musicians, then I think your'e going to have an even bigger problem than semantics...
 




Top Bottom