So was Randy a genius, or a creative genius?

[Cpt Matt Sparrow]

Following on from the pro footage talk I thought I would start a new topic.

From my title I have made a distinction between being a genius, and a creative genius. Mozart wrote his first pieces as a toddler, dictated music 'from his head' with no effort, and by the tme he was a teenager had toured extensively, written symphonies, concertos and operas. Of course Mozart was very rare, and a genius, in the true sense of the word.

I think Randy was the later type of genius, a creative genius. In my opinion this is because he developed his virtuosity in his mid late teens, and by all accounts while he was intelligent, he wasn't 'super intelligent' ie Oxford, Harvard intelligent. He began playing at 6, and while he progressed very rapidly, there are many cases of people who made much faster progress.

So what is special about Randy? Craig (Paste) often points out there were 'better' (a can of worms right there in an accurate definition of better!) guitarists. I wrote to Paste and said I agreed, but Randy had very, very special spark that made him very different and more stylish than any other electric player in my opinion. And that includes players before and since!

It is that specialness and flair in the package of him, as a guitarist/composer, that to me is where his creative genius lies.

Any thoughts on this?

Cheers

Matt

[Trigger]

I think Randy is a creative genius and his worth is so great that it is impossible to judge at the present time, when he is looked back on by generations to come they will be able to reference his work and judge the standards of all his peers.
I believe at that point he will be discovered and understood, we also look at his music as contempory but in the future it will fit within a classical (old) style and at that point his solos and riffs will be viewed as individual small movements, as will much of todays music, long gone are the days of single peices lasting an hour or more.

Modern musical genius is hard to determine I can see that the late Beatles music was stunning and genius!, so is much of the work Bowie has given to the world, and I think Randy the rounded person we lost in 1982 did produce some genius work, I also think that what adds to his genius is that we can see his work go from strengh to strengh in a few short years.

Oddly though I feel that we will have to forget about Randy to give his musical legacy a chance to be understood fully.

[Ritchie]

I personally think the term geniusgets used too freely . I believe W.A Mozart was the true essence of what a genius is . Steve Vai is on the same page and also perhaps Buckethead and guys like Zappa too .

I believe Randy happened to be in the right place at the right time and had above average skills as a musician and was allowed to display those skills in the enviroment he needed to show them off .

Just my thoughts .. don't take them personally

[Paul Wolfe]

I think Randy was the later type of genius, a creative genius. In my opinion this is because he developed his virtuosity in his mid late teens, and by all accounts while he was intelligent, he wasn't 'super intelligent' ie Oxford, Harvard intelligent. He began playing at 6, and while he progressed very rapidly, there are many cases of people who made much faster progress.

This is why I asked the question that I did of Lee Kerslake and Bob Daisley.

Randy's playing had improved from his Quiet Riot days to his Blizzard of Ozz days, but that was due to constant teaching and practicing. I'm certain that Randy was working on his classically flavored stuff before he left for Ozzy's place in England, but couldn't incorporate it into Quiet Riot's glam/pop/metal.

------------------------------------------
Q12

Hi Mr. Kerslake, thank you for taking the time to converse with us.
I wonder about the Blizzard and Diary sessions and how much Mr. Daisley and yourself helped with arranging the pieces?
------------------------------------------
A HELL OF A LOT .MOST OF THEM IN FACT! WITH RANDY!
------------------------------------------

Randy's songwriting apparently wasn't what so many give him credit for. Sure he came up with the parts - or most of them - but apparently Lee and Bob helped arrange those pieces into the masterpiece songs we all know.

Ultimately, I don't think Randy was a genius at all. I think he was a talented musician who worked hard at his craft and loved his instrument.

[rice_pudding]

Randy's songwriting apparently wasn't what so many give him credit for. Sure he came up with the parts - or most of them - but apparently Lee and Bob helped arrange those pieces into the masterpiece songs we all know.

Ultimately, I don't think Randy was a genius at all. I think he was a talented musician who worked hard at his craft and loved his instrument.

Hey Paul,

Better batton down the hatches someones bound to call you out on that!

I agree up to a point, i've always rated Bob highly as a musician. He's done a lot with ozzy and all of it is gold IMO. And i know from expierience that writing songs is a heck of a lot easier with a good drummer.

Ultimately i feel the end result was a moment of magic, some unions just work out really well, better than they probably should even. Led Zep and Guns 'n' Roses may be similar examples, split them up and what do you get?

I still feel Randy was the special part of the mix though. Working with expierienced guys would have helped him come out of his glam rock shell, where he had been limited to writing catchy mainstream tunes. Bob is the point by which you can really measure randys talent. Bob has wrote for ozzy alongside Jake and Zakk, all the results were special IMO but not quite as special as the work with randy.

Rob

[The Flying Dutchman]

Bob is the point by which you can really measure randys talent. Bob has wrote for ozzy alongside Jake and Zakk, all the results were special IMO but not quite as special as the work with randy.

+1
Though Bob had to do it without Lee Kerslake also, he missed Randy and Lee. Lee was also a writer, Tommy wasn't.....
(not sure about Randy C. )

[estang74]

Great Topic

I think for his time, Randy was one of the best for sure. The problem is he only had a couple of albums and didn't get the chance to expand his sound/technique.

Another interesting question would be: How much of Randy's look accounted for his popularity.

What I mean by this is imagine if Randy was bald, fat and had no stage presence would we talk about him the same. The first answer would be he wouldn't have gotten the gig, but honestly, how much does image play? I know when I started playing guitar I thought Randy and Eddie were the coolest looking rock stars and they could play their asses off. I know that had a big part of why I started playing metal.

thoughts?

[Mozart82]

When you talk about average musicians, to me, I don't think of a player with an awesome feel and expression in there live playing style packaged with being pretty well rounded and original. I think of someone that is more of a working musician that can get a job done but doesn't really stand out. If I had to choose between the genius catagory and creative genius, I would say creative, but I think trying to compare peoples talent in completely different styles of music and time periods, along with different backgrounds is kind of strange. Being distracted with wanting to be a rock star guitarist is probably not going to help someone reinvent the wheel. As far as song writing I'm sure Randy might have asked his mother a lot of theory questions that were also an influence on constructing parts and Ozzy did have melodies and ideas. I think to throw around things like" it was all Randys song writing" or "It was all Bob and Lee's input on structure." The "Genius" Behind Blizzard and Diary as far as material, is that it was just like what Bob and Lee have said over the years. It was a real band that happen to come together at a perfect time. It was four people coming together that had something to offer basically. Randy did work hard to be on top of his playing as a rock guitarist so I think he could have followed through and been a classical player. As far as where Randy was headed I think the reality might have been more of what his mother has said, that he wanted to put classical and rock together. I'm sure he would have been one of the leading players on what that would have started. That probably again being rock related could have distracted him from being a top classical player, but who knows...

Yes theres Yngwie with his classical influenced style rock, but there was also other players that helped shape or inspire that direction like Michael Schenker, and even Blackmore... I think Passion talent and a lot of playing time is key with players in great rock bands. Van Halen is another great example of four band members working together where guitar is the fuel for the fire.

Sorry I'm rambling on my first post here but me being a Randy fan, and a guitarist, to pick things apart or make a judgment call or trying to measure the talent of Randy as a musician is a little funny. Just listen to the the Mr. Crowley EP after the studio albums and then the Cleveland 81 show. That is passion and talent that moves a lot of people. I think trying to decide how talented someone is, or was, that moved you to become a huge fan is funny because it's like trying to measure your own musical taste or IQ even against other peoples opinions. Regardless of how high on the measuring table Randy was as a musician we all bought the albums. Good Artist and Great artist inspire people and to me thats a big part of what its all about. People definately throw the word "Genius" around too much when talking about Musicians. I think one thing that made Randy "special" besides coming from a good family was he was beginning to lead the pack of Lead Guitarist in the "rock" realm. Yeah that's obvious but there you go. Also, maybe he is like a cinderella story. He was also after a dream and was reaching it. Some people have more passion than others and know what they are doing... but its not a sport I guess.

I'm Looking forward to the new Documentary and footage. Something new and exciting to ad to the ole Randy cowection!! heh heh
Thanks for reading my random thought.

[Stiltzkin]

Mozart wrote his first pieces as a toddler, dictated music 'from his head' with no effort, and by the tme he was a teenager had toured extensively, written symphonies, concertos and operas. Of course Mozart was very rare, and a genius, in the true sense of the word.

you know ... I'm not so sure that what Mozart wrote at age 5(or 6?)
was very listenable.

[Paul Wolfe]

Hey Paul,

Better batton down the hatches someones bound to call you out on that!

Hey Rob, I'm sure someone will point out that being a right-wing Christian, neo-Nazi, stupid asshole of a person has blinded to Randy's genius!

But ultimately, I do believe Randy was very talented, but if he was genius, I've yet to here it. He was on the cutting edge, but others were close enough behind that it's hard to believe that he was the only one onto the classical/metal/modes thing...

Led Zeppelin is a perfect example of the 'magic'. Page never hit those heights again without the others... Plant had some hits, but nowhere near the same.

[The Flying Dutchman]

Good Artist and Great artist inspire people and to me thats a big part of what its all about.

+1
Great first post!

[Cpt Matt Sparrow]

Mozart wrote his first pieces as a toddler, dictated music 'from his head' with no effort, and by the tme he was a teenager had toured extensively, written symphonies, concertos and operas. Of course Mozart was very rare, and a genius, in the true sense of the word.

you know ... I'm not so sure that what Mozart wrote at age 5(or 6?)
was very listenable.

The mighty Wilkapedia says he was 8 anyway...
I think you are right to an extent, his great works didn't come to much later. His childhood works are very listenable though.

I personally think the term genius gets used too freely . I believe W.A Mozart was the true essence of what a genius is . Steve Vai is on the same page and also perhaps Buckethead and guys like Zappa too.

Interestingly in an interview in Guitarist in 1986 the interviewer says to Vai is he a genius? Steve replied that the only person he met who was a genius was Zappa, because he could 'command genius' and that he couldn't do that.

Out of all the guitarists mentioned I only think Zappa was a real genius.

I completely agree though, the term is bandied about too freely. I don't think even many famous composers were genius'. Does that mean that the composers works who are genius' are more enjoyable, more emotional more inspiring??

Well put it this way my favourite composers; Brouwer, Walton, Britten, Vaughan Williams and Leo Brouwer weren't genius' (creative genius' yes though), but their work moves and connects with me more than Mozart's ever could.

Matt

[Cpt Matt Sparrow]

Mozart82,

lovely to meet you! I thoroughly enjoyed your read. I think too that qualities such as determination, passion, enthusiasm are all too often over looked. There are two great quotes that come to mind.
Thomas Edison said "Genius is 10 percent inspiration and 90 percent perspiration." (thankyou google)
My favourite though is when someone said to Bach they wished they had his ability, he famously replied that if they worked as hard as him, they could have!

Matt

[Trigger]

That is demonstrated by RR's jump in talent from 1978 to 1981, to me it is almost like RR was two different people.

[RR-ElectricAngel]

Several years ago I wrote a physics book called The Theory of Everything. It took me 5 years to write it. There are ideas in that book that would completely transform physics. Does that make it genius? NO! Genius is a term that is coined by others who have a connection with the artist/author on some emotional level. It is an emotional reaction not a logical one. Einstein defined genius as someone who who could find a simple solution to a complex problem. If no one ever believes in your work you are considered a passionate fool but if the world perceives your work as important enough to transform mankind then you are considered a genius.

My brother always tells me "Hendrix was a genius." For me he was he was lucky enough to be on the cutting edge of technology and talented enough to use it to affect a lot of people in a musical way. Genius in this sense could just be someone able to do something first. They utilized things in a certain way and were able to change the way everyone thought of doing something. Every musician I know tells me "Hendrix made sounds no one else could make." In the last 30 years I've heard guitarists create sounds that Hendrix would of thought were genius. I have guitar students that don't even know who Hendrix was for that matter. Does that mean he becomes less significant? NO! It is the collective consciousness of everyone that makes him significant.

When this documentary comes out on Randy a whole new collective consciousness will be awakened and his work will be better appreciated and his "genius" will be talked about and analyzed for future generations. This documentary is proof that Randy matters on a grand scale. Right now his work is really only appreciated by his apostles (i.e, us). We are the ones that will eventually say "Ohh I always knew Randy was a genius." I am just grateful Randy was a decent person and not a prick. We admire too many celebrities which are shallow and offer nothng to mankind except as fodder for our amusement.

P.S. There are songs by Randy that I think are not terrific. But the last track Diary of a Madman is genius in my opinion. That song defines excellence. And if you haven't heard his private lessons on audio you should at least once. Why? He talks to YOU. That makes him more real to me than Hendrix who I've only seen through the eyes of the media. Love this topic Matt...