Hi, Johnny,Johnny Geudel wrote: ↑Wed Aug 09, 2017 6:32 pmIt is exactly the opposite. Some guitarists hate the tremolo because they have invested an inordinate amount of time in it without result.Rognvald wrote: ↑Wed Aug 09, 2017 4:43 pmP.S. It is my personal belief that many defenders of tremolo do so because of the inordinate amount of time they have devoted to developing this technique with, in my opinion, negligible musical results. However, some like Vodka while others prefer Scotch. It's your choice.
"...There's no doubt about it, the tremolo is one of the most beautiful effects on the guitar. But that's not the only reason we practice it.
We practice it because it is an absolutely honest diagnostic tool. It'll tell you precisely where you are in your level of mastery..." (" The art of virtuosity for guitar", Philip Hii).
In regards to your first statement, if a guitarist has devoted an inordinate amount of time to tremolo and has not achieved results he has either a physical fault in his RH that makes it impossible or he is practicing incorrectly. Everyone can achieve a "respectable" tremolo with proper technique and practice. I have found, as a generalization, that players with the best tremolo have thinner, longer fingers and more delicate hands while those with "sausages" are the ones who tend to struggle. Secondly, the above quote by Hii is his opinion and is not a codified law of Classical Guitarists. Lastly, the term "level of master" is a highly subjective term. There are some guitarists who are famous and considered "masters" that leave me dead as a fish when I hear them play where they have highly evolved technical skills and the musicality of an aardvark. However . . . did I tell you the story about an aardvark that went to see the Mona Lisa??? Playing again . . . Rognvald