i can absolutely see how chuck berry could be #2..... HOWEVER... that would not simply mean raising him from the #7 to #2, but it would signify a fundamental shift in our approach to the list, and the rest of the it would have to be restructured accordingly, i.e., give way more merit to things like popularity and iconic status....

my problem with that is the following - there are hundreds, nay - thousands - of such lists online and in books..... anybody who can type and listens to music and has opinions can make a list, and a lot of them do, and unconsciously (in 99.9999% of the cases) they go by iconic status and popularity as the two heaviest criteria... those are the lists with chuck berry at #2, slash at #7, kurt cobain at #15, bruce springsteen at #35, etc. (and often random people like bb king, robert johnson, and wes montgomery somewhere in the 40s or 50s)

the idea of our list is that it is different from the rest... it takes effort and guts to keep resisting succumbing to constant calls to count popularity and iconic status, and make this list like all the rest.... as far as i'm concerned, that's not going to happen any time soon...

(such an alternative list could be made, counting popularity and iconic status as the main criteria, for what it's worth, and echoes seems to be working on some compromise between the two sides in his own thread; however, such lists don't interest me personally...)

I see what you're saying. That's what made me interested In the sight in the first place, it was actually written by smart people. Either that, or seeing a guitar list (The all genre list) without Hendrix at the top.

In some ways, perhaps, but by the criteria I feel they have a pretty justified placement. Roth and Schenker I feel are worthy of a higher placement than Rhoads, but that has more to do with my personal preference than anything else.

Yes, but he could be interpreting the criteria differently from the way me and George interpret it. Like George notes, Berry could be #2, but only if we were to view influence and overall reputation as quite a bit more important than it currently is. Moving Berry higher would also mean having to make massive changes to the rest of the list, and a lot of important names would be placed considerably lower on the list. There are consequences to all such actions, and that is why I won't take these kinds of suggestions seriously as long as the criteria is the way it is. "Sampson says" is not a criterion.

If I'm not mistaken influence and impact are key...and I've never known Satch nor Vai to be regarded as players who are as important/influential as the other two...yet they are leagues above them on this list. Feel free to correct me. Of course we all know that Roth and Schenker score pretty damn high in all the criteria, not just influence/impact.

Here are some guys Uli has influenced:
Marty Friedman, Yngwie Malmsteen, Kirk Hammett, Joe Stump, Gus G, Andy DiGelsomina, Michael Romeo,James Byrd,Wolf Hoffman, Alex Masi, Michael Amott, Chris Amott, Dave Mustaine, Joe Satriani, Steve Vai, Chris Impellitteri, Eddie Van Halen, Jason Becker, Michael Denner and Hank Shermann of Mercyful Fate.

Schenker has influenced:
Kirk Hammett and James Hetfield, Dave Mustaine , Adrian Smith , Randy Rhoads, Michael Amott , Chris Caffery , Gus G , Vinny Burns, George Lynch , Doug Aldrich, Warren DeMartini , Frank Hannon, Slash, Michael Wilton, Paul Gilbert , Roland Grapow, Aaron Aedy, Alex Skolnick and Eric Peterson, Andy LaRocque , Gary Holt, Grant Estes, Arjen Lucassen, Andy DiGelsomina, Hans Ziller , Jim Matheos, Michael Denner and Hank Shermann , Tak Matsumoto , Marty Friedman ,Dec James

I dont mean to detract from research done by people into influence, but most of these lists of who influenced who arent really worth a jot.

Domino lists Steve Vai as been influenced by Uli. But where does that fit in with him being influenced by Beck, Zappa, May, Satch, Hendrix, Holdsworth etc. All far more obvious and documented influences. I have seen dozens of Vai interviews and I cant't remember him ever mentioning Uli.

Most of these lists are made up by journalists or are exaggerated from quotes or articles. Its easy to see how this happens: -

A german interviewer says to Paul Gilbert on tour, 'What do you think of Michael Schenker?'. Gilbert says, 'Yeah Great Player' (what else would he say?). Interview gets printed and so the influence is now created.

Genuine direct influence is much harder to find !!

Did I ever say Schenker and Roth should be in the top 15? No, I just said they could be higher.
Fair enough on Vai and Gilbert but Slash, Kirk Hammett, Doug Aldrich, Gary Holt, Mustaine, Becker and Friedman have all mentioned those guys directly bub.

absolutely agreed seeker. influence is getting way overrated here, why does it have to be worth than any other criterion? berry greater than jeff beck.. give me a break

Here's Jason Beckers own words on his own forum (no mention of Uli or Schenker):-

http://jasonbeckerguitar.com/board/read.php?22,339



I'm not trying to score points. I'm simply saying that REAL influence is difficult to find. Even from Jason's post, does it really count as influence that he mentions all these guys. Probably not.

Always thought of influence as being, in the simpliest of ways, twofold .... I was influenced by "X" to play a guitar ... I was influenced by "X" in how I play a guitar ... Take care

Oh I certainly wasn't using what Sampson said to help raise Berry. I just threw in his name because George qas talking about Echoes wanting to move him higher. I don't want to get into a discussion about Berry but I understand what you and George are talking about.

I agree with Yngtchie here. Influence is certainly an integral part of greatness, but not everything. Berry is possibly the most influential rock guitarist ever, but simply doesnt dominate in ALL of the criteria in the same way as Beck, Blackmore, etc.

Exactly my friend !!

I love listening to Guthrie Govan speak. He often talks about early Clapton and learning all the Bluesbreaker/Cream licks as a kid. He says that he wasnt massively influenced by Jimi, but he did learn from him the important lesson that Rhythm and Lead playing are not mutually exclusive and can be mixed together. He was largely influenced by Yngwie because in the early days, he played fast but with great musicality, as did Shawn Lane. He describes in detail what he took from these players and they were real influences.

Okay...shit.lol This is semantics Seeker. We both know that Roth and Schenker were influential. That's all I'm saying. That they are influential enough to be raised a couple spots. If you want to be semantic, Becker had indirect influence from Uli because Becker's biggest influence later was openly Friedman, whose biggest lead influence was Roth. I wish you'd try and focus on my main argument as opposed to the specific players I may be wrong about. It doesn't mean they weren't influential, as we both know they are.

Yes, that is what I am trying to do! I though nobody have realized that.