Some of you may remember an instrumental song i posted a long time ago? Anyway, i remember when i posted it at another forum, a couple people there told me that i should slow down and play more like Mark Knopler (Think that's his name, from Dire Straits (I think :D ) ) and the song i posted didn't have anything that could be classified as shredding in it.

Anyway, one of the other posters said something akin to "Don't bother telling him that, he has a link to a Neo Classical forum in his signature."

Why do people think that Neo Classical Metal is all emotionless wanking, and yet when people hear say... someone shredding some paganini on a violin noone thinks "Man, he needs to slow down and stop wanking that violin." and just because something is fast, why does that mean it can't have feel?

Very good question. I also don't like the stereotype of Neo-Classical be generalized as shredding either. I've shown plenty of classical influenced rock music that isn't shredding. I would say shredding is more happy sounding or neutral sounding than ballads which can be sad, passionate (in love), or very angry sounding. And there are some players that play too fast all the time imo. I think there's a happy medium. Yngwie brings a great intensity to his early playing. I think he got stuck in a rut though when it comes to creativity. Vinnie Moore also had a great deal of emotion. Uli Jon Roth didn't play super fast but with a lot of emotion. MacAlpine the same story. Paganini can play slow. He isn't always playing fast. And his melodies are memorable. That is important to me if you can remember what someone is playing rather than just playing up and down the scales.

Probably because there's not much variety when it comes to neoclassical metal influenced stuff; the problem isn't in the genre, but in the players, as most of them prefer the shred over everything else. And that is quite saddening.

Yeah Yngwie is partially to blame for that. A lot of players followed his lead. They didn't try too be as melodic though as Yngwie. They just love to show off their speed. Not as enjoyable to listen to though. I like some melody and memorable lines.

Too true. Unfortunately most guitarist who play metal feel the need to demonstrate their technical prowess (myself included) in their music - this is particularly true when it comes to instrumental tracks.

Yeah we can thank Yngwie for that. I think some of now guitarist forget what neo-classical music is. They also don't really try to dig into classical music like Jason,Marty Friedman, Yngwie, Vinnie Moore,Tony Macalpine, and some of the other heroes did.
But hopefully my generation will change that.
I dig melodic stuff more than shred. I do like shred when the solo actually meets the song. Like Necrophagist stuff. Muhammed shreds but he adds classical stuff in there and also melodies. So yeah. You guys know what I mean.

I do also like Death Metal guitarists. They seem to actually be doing good at adding melodic solos. I like Chris and Michael Amott.

Honestly I think way too many death metal guitarists who employ classically influenced stuff to their solos and/or songs go the easy way and just shred the crap out of their guitars. Whereas I enjoy Necrophagist's music and respect them for their talent, I wouldn't care for digging into their music as I would with some jazz bands.

And I agree that solos are only necessary when the song screams for them. Many songs these days are ruined because the mandatory guitar solo feels forced.

NeoClassical guitarists have always come in for this criticism. I know piles of guitarists who have not got the technique to play NeoClassical material. When they discover they can't they use the get out clause 'You can't play with feel if you play fast'. That's bollox if you ask me. I seen a thread on Harmony Central Forums a while back asking 'When are you too old to Shred'? Some guys on there really got laid into the NeoClassical guys. Assholes were posting answers like you were too old to shred when you hit 9 years of age. I felt like posting a link to a Jeff Loomis track and inviting guys who thought the technique employed by him to be juvenile to post their own attempts at covering the track. I would not have got any replies, trust me. Flamenco players and guys like DiMeola, John McLaughlin etc have been playing fast stuff for years upon years and you hardly ever hear them coming in for criticism yet go onto youtube and watch a NeoClassical link and just look at the flame war that is going on in the 'Comments' section. I don't pay much attention to the opinions of the average moronic rock fan. Most of those guys have got attitude problems deeply rooted in there persona. At the end of the day if you are playing with as much feel/emotion in your playing as you can muster be it on a fast or slow passage then that's all that matters. You can't please everybody and the debate of speed vs emotion will always rage on regardless. :D

Something that pisses me off is they say that shredders have no feel or emotion. Completely ignoring the fact that what emotion or lack thereof that people feel in music is totally subjective.

That's quite true Steve. When people say Shredders have no feeling, they're wrong because when some shredders they shred to a certain theme like fire or destruction. They also forget that in classical music they play fast sometimes. And no one says anything. It's sad. Maybe we should show thoses people that guys who are great adding emotion to their music and not shred unless they're trying to put a point to it.(courtesy of Steve Vai interview)
Try showing them Marty dragon kiss album and Perpetual Burn also show Air to them.

People will always criticize neoclassical music because it is unique. Listen to Michael Romeo's "The Dark Chapter". Very cool album, and I cannot recall a single wankfest on it. Of course, my friends who hear it in my car feel obligated to tell me how lame they think it is. People fear what they do not understand and cannot do. Those who cannot extract emotion from instrumental tracks (Vinnie Moore - Rain, for example), those who require some explicit lyrics about girlfriends or hard times, and those who are perfectly content with listening to MIDI-sounding computer-generated backing tracks (read: pop music) have no business having an opinion regarding the subject of neoclassical music.

Bottom line: ignore them. Give them the "You are an idiot, so I will just smile at you" smile.

Agreed. I think the NeoClassical genre is destined to remain an underground movement. It's a very esoteric style of music I think. To get the most out of listening to this genre it hepls if you like Baroque Classical music and you are a guitarist/musician.

I agree with you. Its amazing, but many people simply think this:

Playing slowly = Playing with feeling.
Playing fast = Playing without feeling.

An easy and fake way to measure feeling in music.

Anyway, this kind of "civil war" between followers of different music styles happens all the time. For exemple, some jazz musicians try to put down bossa nova; there is people who puts down all that is not classic music; flamenco and new flamenco hate each other; etc...

We may do the same: I can say that I hate commercial pop music and disco pop, but surely there is people who really have its reasons to enjoy it.

I'm not deep about feel. Usually memorable lines equal feel anyways. I'm interested in great songs and not worried if they are tearing up in the song or don't care. It's about what is perceived.

Nice topic Steve,i also want to know answer on that question.
Many people that i met thinks that neo classical is without feeling.
Theres is only few people who likes it.And i hate when someones say "fast playing,no feelings"...Im surrounded with people who listen blues and who thinks that.I have neo classical band,and its very hard to go on the top.People just hate us,when they hear speed they get bored.
Same for progressive here...