Oomph! |
05-10-2008 11:38 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by boo boo
(Post 478759)
McCartney dosen't do bass solos. That dosen't have anything to do with technical abillity. Its about taste. Bass solos don't suit his music so no bass solos.
And judging how good a f*cking bass player is by weither or not he does solos is just laughable. Do you even f*cking know what a bassist is supposed to do?
Many of the most technically skilled bass gods rarely or never solo. Because soloing doesn't make a great bass player, its about rhythm, balance, solid and creative basslines, complimenting the other instruments and adapting to different styles. Paul had all that covered. Just because someone can do a sloppy ass Victor Wooten impersonation dosen't make him better.
|
I'm not saying it's *because* he did a solo, in that video he demonstrated that he has more skill tha Paul, that's all.
Also, Godsmack's bass player, Robbie Merrill, has rythm, balance and can play at least a couple of different styles, just that I'm aware of (Heavy Metal, hard rock, slap bass)
What can Paul play that Robbie cannot? inb4 wise ass remark like 'good' or whatever little unoriginal, unfunny BS you will probably reply with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy jack fire drill
(Post 478763)
Godsmack sucks and the Beatles don't.
|
You latch to that notion blindly but you're wrong. You can childishly repeat that over and over again but it won't magically become true, you're in denial that you like lame pop bands that wouldn't impress a 10 year old and I listen to music that actually invokes emotion and pasison. You have no counter-argument, the Beatles suck, They are both lame and have less talent, I have to go to get up for work in about 4 hours so I'll talk to you guys tomorrow sometime (you'll be here right? You never aren't it seems)
|