Originally Posted by whodini
It's definitely real. Greenwood wrote a computer patch that sampled the sound from his guitar at random intervals and with random looping. The result was a bridge between analog and digital which to me was nothing short of genius since it came as such an unexpected twist in a relatively subdued rock song.
I appreciate the classic rock gods but do become bored with their rather forumulaic approach to tackling a solo. Greenwood is the one musician I look up to the most as he is consistently reliable for a shot in the arm and a kick in the pants, musically speaking. Could he play that outro like the standard bluesman? As a classically-trained musician, sure. But would he be happy with applying the bare minimum? Never.
In the end I suppose it's just a matter of you enjoy your music inside or outside the box.
I agree that classic rock guitar solos get boring and repetitive, esp the blues based ones, but there are many ways of breaking out of this idiom, many ways of not playing blues. For me, music should be purpose driven; randomness and atonality do not get it done to my ear. My favorite music, harmonically and melodically (excluding for a moment rhythm, dynamics, etc.), typically falls well within 'tonal' boundaries but outside of, though perhaps including, what we'd call blues. Ick, what a sentence.
Anyway, anyone from Jim Hall to Pat Metheny to Kurt Rosenwinkel are decidedly not playing SRV-type 'blues', but they're going from V to I just like anyone else. The difference between these guys and Greenwood is that they're expanding and hopefully improving an existing vocabulary, while JG is throwing all that history out the window. Two ways to skin the cat, I suppose, but I tend to prefer the former.