While I agree with you that he made studying music and taking lessons cool I think that's a very small part of his significance, I also think "revising" the question and "changing" the question is semantics....splitting hairs. In addition, I think that there's a little bit of you being the proverbial Devil's Advocate on this one. Once again, I'm not trying to be rude, but simply trying to follow where you're going with this, debate-wise. I, too, am interested in what Randy's significance is as well, as I'm sure others on the board are.Paul Wolfe wrote: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?CanuckRhoadsFan wrote:Paul, with all due respect, you keep changing the question here because it seems you're not getting the answer you want.
"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.
True, people are in some cases responding with personal opinions, but your own statements are provocative also, and by minimizing his "significance" (with saying he made studying music cool...I think that is a minimalist statement at best) you are, in essence, trying to provoke an emotional response from people. Also, by repeating, "yes, but why was he significant?", it's clear that you are not finding the answer you, personally, seek. And is there a baseline for "significance"? I'm curious that this discussion has been protracted out so long.