Renata Tarragó's recording of that was the first by a female guitarist and it's still one of the best; and I would say that if Dave here listened to that out of the blue he wouldn't be able to tell she was playing without nails. If she felt that it was "limiting" her I'm sure she could've let her nails grow.Michael.N. wrote: ↑Tue May 09, 2017 9:33 pmYes and she has a recent recording of Concierto de Aranjuez with the London symph. That too would seem impossible to play without nails. . . . but I guess the people at the London symph. weren't too bothered! I think the point is that nail players do outnumber no nail players by an enormous amount. If it was more evenly split you'd probably find that there would be a lot more no nail players figuring in the top ten charts. Luque has probably played without nails ever since she picked up a guitar, that must be part of the secret. It's obviously never hindered her. I still think she sounds closer to a nail player though. I prefer Rob's tone. There ya go.
I'm just wondering if you knew, twistedblues, what metaphorical bomb you were throwing into the Delcamp forum?
Is your nail file sapphire, crystal or diamond?Smudger5150 wrote: ↑Tue May 09, 2017 10:40 pmI'm just wondering if you knew, twistedblues, what metaphorical bomb you were throwing into the Delcamp forum?
I wonder what other topics like this can potentially divide opinion. And (newer?) people come along and innocently(?) stir things up again.
And after all that, I'm standing here with nail scissors in one hand and a nail file in the other and I'm not sure which one to use
The reason why nail players outnumber non nail players by an enormous amount is because it's a much better playing technique, that results in much better playing, tone color, and response. I too can play pretty good without nails. But why when it's not that hard to learn to use nails and then play much better. And the reason why you don't find hardly any non nail players in the "top ten", is because they don't play as well as guitarists who use their nails.
You bring some good points to the table here: 1. Luque sounds different that Rob who sounds different than Tarrago. Just like nail players, not all flesh players sound the same. 2. It takes time to develop the sound. Pujol even said you can't just whack your nails off and expect that beautiful fleshy sound immediately. You have to work at crafting the sound
Well we aren't going to agree entirely on the nails thing, but I watched some of your videos and really enjoyed your playing Respect and best wishes.davekear wrote: ↑Tue May 09, 2017 11:12 pmThe reason why nail players outnumber non nail players by an enormous amount is because it's a much better playing technique, that results in much better playing, tone color, and response. I too can play pretty good without nails. But why when it's not that hard to learn to use nails and then play much better. And the reason why you don't find hardly any non nail players in the "top ten", is because they don't play as well as guitarists who use their nails.
And those who understand this, which is most classical guitarists, would be fools to play without nails. And obviously they realize this.
Of course there can be more than one "right way" to do something. But there is also better ways of doing things. I've played without nails before, and I play pretty well, but I can tell you, having a choice between the two, I'll take playing with nails any day. Why? Much wider diversity of tone. Clarity of tone. Much better dynamics. Brightness. (And by the way, I can get just as mellow of a "dolce" with nails as anyone without). Speed of scales is much easier and quicker with nails. Timbre is much better and with nails you have a full color palette. Without nails it really is quite a muffled sound. I'm not saying that there aren't those who can use no nails and play pretty music. But they really are limiting their potential. Fingernails are a great tool to have. Again, this is why almost all of the great guitarists out there today use their nails. And as a teacher, I will always extol the benefits of using fingernails.tateharmann wrote: ↑Wed May 10, 2017 12:33 amJust curious do you really think the "top 10" are there because they're the best?
Could you measure in some kind of talent 'unit' that Elliot Fisk is better than, say, Renata Tarrago? Or is it purely subjective?
I can agree to disagree ..I do actually love hearing nail playing (I did it for double digit years)...but I love flesh playing too. Can't we agree that there's more than one right way to do something!?
Probably not. Lol
That sounds beautiful, in many ways harp-like here and there. And if a virtuoso plays the same piece with nails it would be beautiful too, but only in a different way. It's playing as individuals. Neither way is intrinsically "better" if the playing is with skill and a knowledge of the music.tateharmann wrote: ↑Wed May 10, 2017 2:01 am
However, it's quite another thing to claim that it's the BEST or even BETTER way to play. You say flesh playing is "muffled"...is that what you get out of Luque's recordings? Dynamics, brightness, scale speed, you-name-it-here can all be achieved without nails. Have a listen here:
Something that sounds "muffled" to one person may sound "smooth", "silky", "soft", "delicate", "gentle" and so on to another person. It's totally a matter of personal taste. There is a difference between objective quialities and subjective quialities.
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 8 guests