What is Randy's "Historical Significance"??

Talk about Randy Rhoads here.

Moderators: Randy Perry, The Flying Dutchman, Stiltzkin, skezza, Trigger

User avatar
GUITARIDOL5682
Mass Poster
Posts: 4756
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: What is Randy's "Historical Significance"??

Post by GUITARIDOL5682 »

I do encores ...but only at the weekend..
Paul Wolfe
Mass Poster
Posts: 5272
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 10:19 am

Re: What is Randy's "Historical Significance"??

Post by Paul Wolfe »

I think a lot of you misunderstood my question. I get that Randy was into classical music & was phenomenal at playing & was more detailed in creating his parts rather than off-the-cuff... those are all good observations.

What I was getting at, though, is why was Randy important? If I'm 13 and starting to play guitar, other than being the guy who created Crazy Train (along with Bob), why would I want to learn more about Randy Rhoads. What did he contribute?

Clapton melded the blues into rock beautifully and play many styles. Page created music from many different angles. Jimi turned everything upside down and showed that there are no limits to what can be done. Ed brought tapping & warp speed riffing to the masses. Paul Gilbert showed us how you can be a technical genius and still rock...

But what did Randy bring to the table? Others had done the classical thing, others had done pretty much everything Randy did, he just was better at the execution than most...

In 2048, whe a kid is looking back on music, why would Randy's name be in the conversation?
Stiltzkin
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2079
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 11:29 am
Location: Sweden

Re: What is Randy's "Historical Significance"??

Post by Stiltzkin »

Paul Wolfe wrote:In 2048, whe a kid is looking back on music, why would Randy's name be in the conversation?
oh, but it won't be :!:
just as Clapton and Page won't be mentioned today.
Honestly, I think the only guy that will be spoken of in 2048 is Slash :)
CanuckRhoadsFan
Madman
Posts: 486
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 5:21 pm

Re: What is Randy's "Historical Significance"??

Post by CanuckRhoadsFan »

Paul Wolfe wrote:I think a lot of you misunderstood my question. I get that Randy was into classical music & was phenomenal at playing & was more detailed in creating his parts rather than off-the-cuff... those are all good observations.

What I was getting at, though, is why was Randy important? If I'm 13 and starting to play guitar, other than being the guy who created Crazy Train (along with Bob), why would I want to learn more about Randy Rhoads. What did he contribute?

Clapton melded the blues into rock beautifully and play many styles. Page created music from many different angles. Jimi turned everything upside down and showed that there are no limits to what can be done. Ed brought tapping & warp speed riffing to the masses. Paul Gilbert showed us how you can be a technical genius and still rock...

But what did Randy bring to the table? Others had done the classical thing, others had done pretty much everything Randy did, he just was better at the execution than most...

In 2048, whe a kid is looking back on music, why would Randy's name be in the conversation?
Randy's name would be in the conversation because of his work with Ozzy, plain and simple. End of story.

We all know how talented Randy was and can wax poetic endlessly about it, but at the end of the day, he was there are the beginning of Ozzy's solo career, and that's what he'll be remembered for, for better or worse.

Now, once people start actually looking into and exploring his body of work, they'll learn more about Randy the person and his playing.

Other than that, to people at large, he's "that guy that played guitar for Ozzy at first".
User avatar
orion_damage
Mass Poster
Posts: 648
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 4:11 pm
Location: Your Mom's

Re: What is Randy's "Historical Significance"??

Post by orion_damage »

CanuckRhoadsFan wrote:
Paul Wolfe wrote:I think a lot of you misunderstood my question. I get that Randy was into classical music & was phenomenal at playing & was more detailed in creating his parts rather than off-the-cuff... those are all good observations.

What I was getting at, though, is why was Randy important? If I'm 13 and starting to play guitar, other than being the guy who created Crazy Train (along with Bob), why would I want to learn more about Randy Rhoads. What did he contribute?

Clapton melded the blues into rock beautifully and play many styles. Page created music from many different angles. Jimi turned everything upside down and showed that there are no limits to what can be done. Ed brought tapping & warp speed riffing to the masses. Paul Gilbert showed us how you can be a technical genius and still rock...

But what did Randy bring to the table? Others had done the classical thing, others had done pretty much everything Randy did, he just was better at the execution than most...

In 2048, whe a kid is looking back on music, why would Randy's name be in the conversation?
Randy's name would be in the conversation because of his work with Ozzy, plain and simple. End of story.

We all know how talented Randy was and can wax poetic endlessly about it, but at the end of the day, he was there are the beginning of Ozzy's solo career, and that's what he'll be remembered for, for better or worse.

Now, once people start actually looking into and exploring his body of work, they'll learn more about Randy the person and his playing.

Other than that, to people at large, he's "that guy that played guitar for Ozzy at first".

Yeah I'd have to agree here. I mean the question is pretty vague and really opinion based. What pops in my head as important may not for others.

Randy will be remembered as Ozzy's first guitarist and the guy that wrote Crazy Train. Considering the amount of time he was in the spotlight I think it's a huge blessing for his name and body of work. Crazy Train is a legendary riff that kids want to learn to play along with Iron Man and Smoke on the Water to name a couple. It's great because that'll always create an opportunity for the listener to venture into Blizzard and Diary thus keeping Randy as an important guitarist.
nuclear1
Junior Member
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 2:16 am

Re: What is Randy's "Historical Significance"??

Post by nuclear1 »

orion_damage wrote:
CanuckRhoadsFan wrote:
Paul Wolfe wrote:I think a lot of you misunderstood my question. I get that Randy was into classical music & was phenomenal at playing & was more detailed in creating his parts rather than off-the-cuff... those are all good observations.

What I was getting at, though, is why was Randy important? If I'm 13 and starting to play guitar, other than being the guy who created Crazy Train (along with Bob), why would I want to learn more about Randy Rhoads. What did he contribute?

Clapton melded the blues into rock beautifully and play many styles. Page created music from many different angles. Jimi turned everything upside down and showed that there are no limits to what can be done. Ed brought tapping & warp speed riffing to the masses. Paul Gilbert showed us how you can be a technical genius and still rock...

But what did Randy bring to the table? Others had done the classical thing, others had done pretty much everything Randy did, he just was better at the execution than most...


But here's another side....
Randy was the FIRST of all Ozzy's guitar players to put HIS stamp on the Sabbath tunes......and while he admittedly played em loose...He KILLED em!
In 2048, whe a kid is looking back on music, why would Randy's name be in the conversation?
Randy's name would be in the conversation because of his work with Ozzy, plain and simple. End of story.

We all know how talented Randy was and can wax poetic endlessly about it, but at the end of the day, he was there are the beginning of Ozzy's solo career, and that's what he'll be remembered for, for better or worse.

Now, once people start actually looking into and exploring his body of work, they'll learn more about Randy the person and his playing.

Other than that, to people at large, he's "that guy that played guitar for Ozzy at first".

Yeah I'd have to agree here. I mean the question is pretty vague and really opinion based. What pops in my head as important may not for others.

Randy will be remembered as Ozzy's first guitarist and the guy that wrote Crazy Train. Considering the amount of time he was in the spotlight I think it's a huge blessing for his name and body of work. Crazy Train is a legendary riff that kids want to learn to play along with Iron Man and Smoke on the Water to name a couple. It's great because that'll always create an opportunity for the listener to venture into Blizzard and Diary thus keeping Randy as an important guitarist.
sytharnia
Mass Poster
Posts: 688
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2010 5:00 am

Re: What is Randy's "Historical Significance"??

Post by sytharnia »

randy will be remember exactly the same is he is today, 10 yrs ago etc ....... as will all the guys like jimi and jimmy and eddie. The ozzy music from the first 2 albums falls into the "classic" league now so kids will always hear it in some form.

But there will be degrees of separation in the same way that players I like...say warren demartini...will say they love jeff beck, so I listen to jeff beck to try and hear what they do (but I can't get into beck really)
I mean my nephews are 15 odd yrs younger than me and are into zep/sabbath etc ..... I played them badlands and they loved it so know who jake e lee is, not that they can get into his stuff with ozzy


anyway I guess I went off on a bit of a tangent there :D ....... but I think randy will not really be remember as some sort of pioneer by most, but a few will dig a little deeper and "get it"
User avatar
GUITARIDOL5682
Mass Poster
Posts: 4756
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: What is Randy's "Historical Significance"??

Post by GUITARIDOL5682 »

In the UK and Europe HM Rock fans are getting more into the old school music. The New Wave of British Heavy Metal (NWOBHM) has had a huge revival in the last 10 years. Some guys in their late teens and early 20's are listening to bands i grew up listening to. They are playing bands who came from the same scene who never got a look in back in the 80's. Releasing one single or at best one album and then splitting up. This trend in old school has been picked up in a large way, with fans that took a liking for the Gothic image and music they have now taking off the eye liner and are wearing cut off denim jackets with patches from the old school bands. They know who Randy Rhoads is and they respect the guy, the music of the younger generation has took a turn for the best. Because the music you hear on the radio these days is X Factor generated shite. Luckily some kids have grown into something that would of only been talked about by their parents when they complained about the rubbish on the radio..
Donnie
Cool Member
Posts: 118
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 10:18 pm

Re: What is Randy's "Historical Significance"??

Post by Donnie »

I think Randy's still in a good position to be remembered forever while we will not be..? ;p
1756 Mozart~1956 Rhoads~2156 ??????
Paul Wolfe
Mass Poster
Posts: 5272
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 10:19 am

Re: What is Randy's "Historical Significance"??

Post by Paul Wolfe »

Recently Kanye West did a duet with Paul McCartney and there was a social media uproar because Kanye West fans didn't know who Paul McCartney is.

Call it blasphemy, but Paul McCartney has a tad bit more historical significance than Randy Rhoads (or Ozzy for that matter), yet there is an entire generation who has no idea who he is.

I asked my 13-year-old if he knew who Paul McCartney is and he said, "I recognize the name, but I don't know why." When I said he was in the Beatles, my son admitted he had heard of the Beatles but wouldn't know a song by them if he heard it. He knew they were "big" back before the world transitioned from black & white to color (or while dinosaurs still roamed the earth), but that's about all he knew. Hell, the Beatles broke up 31 years before he was born, John Lennon was killed 21 years before he was born & George Harrison died when my son was only 9 months and 6 days old, so why should he know who they were?

Personally, I know quite a few guitar players who don't understand the significance of Edward Van Halen (some are members of this board). Since today's guitar players can play Eruption note-for-note with their eyes closed, kids today don't understand just how phenomenal Van Halen was in 1978. Then again, they also don't understand how Jimi "changed the world" of guitar playing...

It's from this perspective that I asked my "vague" question.

So let me put it another way: If Randy never moved beyond the Strip (if Quiet Riot disbanded in 1979), what would be different in the world of guitar and metal?

Same question for Ed and for Jimi, if they hadn't ever recorded a note for the masses to hear, where would guitar playing be today?
sytharnia
Mass Poster
Posts: 688
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2010 5:00 am

Re: What is Randy's "Historical Significance"??

Post by sytharnia »

I think you are over complicating it. I mean if my mum and dad hadn't got together then I wouldn't be here to know who randy rhoads is :mrgreen:

As long as they keep doing things like books about the history of guitars then there is a good chance randy will be at least a little known....if only for his link to JACKSON guitars
User avatar
GUITARIDOL5682
Mass Poster
Posts: 4756
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: What is Randy's "Historical Significance"??

Post by GUITARIDOL5682 »

Well Paul it's a no brainer really you'll only know who these guys are if your interested in the music or that particular player etc. I couldn't name a single baseball player.. No Shit... Because i've never been into base ball. So for every fan of base ball i do apologise. It's up to the individual to be able to dig into the past and know the history of guitar players to find out who Page VH Hendrix are. I know a guy who is 19 and he is living in 'the 60's' he loves all the old woodstock bands and even dresses like a 60's hippie.
CanuckRhoadsFan
Madman
Posts: 486
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 5:21 pm

Re: What is Randy's "Historical Significance"??

Post by CanuckRhoadsFan »

Paul Wolfe wrote:Recently Kanye West did a duet with Paul McCartney and there was a social media uproar because Kanye West fans didn't know who Paul McCartney is.

Call it blasphemy, but Paul McCartney has a tad bit more historical significance than Randy Rhoads (or Ozzy for that matter), yet there is an entire generation who has no idea who he is.

I asked my 13-year-old if he knew who Paul McCartney is and he said, "I recognize the name, but I don't know why." When I said he was in the Beatles, my son admitted he had heard of the Beatles but wouldn't know a song by them if he heard it. He knew they were "big" back before the world transitioned from black & white to color (or while dinosaurs still roamed the earth), but that's about all he knew. Hell, the Beatles broke up 31 years before he was born, John Lennon was killed 21 years before he was born & George Harrison died when my son was only 9 months and 6 days old, so why should he know who they were?

Personally, I know quite a few guitar players who don't understand the significance of Edward Van Halen (some are members of this board). Since today's guitar players can play Eruption note-for-note with their eyes closed, kids today don't understand just how phenomenal Van Halen was in 1978. Then again, they also don't understand how Jimi "changed the world" of guitar playing...

It's from this perspective that I asked my "vague" question.

So let me put it another way: If Randy never moved beyond the Strip (if Quiet Riot disbanded in 1979), what would be different in the world of guitar and metal?

Same question for Ed and for Jimi, if they hadn't ever recorded a note for the masses to hear, where would guitar playing be today?
Paul, with all due respect, you keep changing the question here because it seems you're not getting the answer you want. I'm unsure as to why this is? I understand what you're getting at, but really, it's muddied the issue immensely - and I mean this in the nicest way. If you're just trying to keep the conversation going here (and it's a good one, btw) just say so! Again, I'm just coming at this question trying to reason it through, not to antagonize.

I personally think that had Randy not gotten famous, someone else would have stepped into the fray, maybe not in Ozzy's band, but in general, and done something equally as good. Randy's (and the band's) work, as great as it is, is just one possibility of what could have been, in the whole scheme of things. Like everything else, there are endless possibilities of what could be and what is. We were fortunate enough to see what became of this particular grouping of people, plain and simple.

Now, in terms of the Paul McCartney situation, you have a mixture of people trolling others on social media just to piss others off (and rest assured, many of them DO know who PM is), and a small amount of people who actually took to social media to say something about it. As great as The Beatles were, it's completely understandable that many people from later generations have no idea who they are, especially listeners from the last decade or so. Why would they, really? The Beatles were long before their time and have little relevance on the music they listen to or enjoy. I think people are confusing and complicating meaningfulness and relevance to today's listeners of an artist and their legacy.

Some groups or artists transcend their time and genre, and The Beatles are one of them...but past a reference and a tip of the hat to them, sadly, pop music as it stands today offers the listening public little reason to go back and listen them actively.
Paul Wolfe
Mass Poster
Posts: 5272
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 10:19 am

Re: What is Randy's "Historical Significance"??

Post by Paul Wolfe »

CanuckRhoadsFan wrote:Paul, with all due respect, you keep changing the question here because it seems you're not getting the answer you want.
No, most of the answers are "Randy was great." Which has nothing to do with historical significance. So I've revised the wording to make it more clear. I initially asked what the historical importance of Randy is, that means when looking back at the history of metal, why would Randy Rhoads be important?

"Because he's great" is not relevant, "Because he had awesome solos," is not relevant. "I like Randy because," is not relevant.

Jimi is historically important because he made soloing a central focus of a song, he did things no one else ever thought of doing with a guitar and because he shifted the focus from songs to individual musician talent.

EVH is important because he took technical ability to a phenomenal level never before imagined & he brought the idea of tapping to the table which was subsequently copied by everyone after him.

So, again, why is Randy significant historically? Classical modes were already in use, Randy listened to Purple and Scorpions and was inspired by them. Composed soloing was already present in rock, Randy listened to and was inspired by Michael Schenker. What is unique about Randy to make him significant?

As I said before the only thing I can see is that he made it cool to take lessons and talk about studying music. That is huge by the way. Randy made it cool - in my opinion - to study and practice. Prior to that nobody talked about taking lessons and nobody talked about modes. Randy was a teacher, so his significance being that he made it cool to study music is a fitting legacy.
User avatar
TAB
Madman
Posts: 456
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 9:04 pm

Re: What is Randy's "Historical Significance"??

Post by TAB »

For instance maybe this guy below should have historical value because he was tapping and way more amazing than Eddie's trills way before in 1965 but no one noticed because it wasn't rock. Just like Hendrix got his ideas from others that weren't noticed on the big concert stage.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7M8L1rAUsI
Post Reply