Groo
-
Content Count
439 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Groo
-
-
This solo has always looked easy to play to me, but has always sounded great. It looks easy, but there's a lot of subtle stuff going on, I recommend listening closely. He never seems to play the same solo twice, but they're all similar. This is a transcription of the performance from the I Am Trying to Break Your Heart DVD, because the mix is nice and loud, and the solo sounds good to me. Here's a YouTube link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAchM1rqiOg
b = half step bend
v = vibrato
~ = hold
br = bend and return
e--------3------3-------3--------3-------3----------------------------------------
B---------------3----------------3-------3---6s5-3--6s5-3----------------3--------
G--5b~~-----5b------5b-----5b-------0----3---6s5-3--6s5-3----------------3--------
D--------------------------------------0-------------------5v---5s17s10--5--------
A---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First 5b~ and later rapid 5bs is kind of cut off with palm muting at the top of the bend
e------3-------3------3------3-----3-----3------3-----3-----3------3~~---s14-15--
B--------------3-----------------------------------------------------------------
G--5b~----5~b-----5b~~----5b----5b----5b-----5b----5b----5b----5br---------------
D--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
I don't believe anyone ever stated you were wrong regarding Blu-Ray's technological superiority.
Sorry for the late reply, but I know a little bit more about this subject now, and can better explain what I was saying.
Overall, the reason for using Blu Ray is pretty simple. Blu Ray lets you have higher resolution video than DVD. With DVD, the best you're going to see is 480p. With Blu Ray, you can easily have 1080p, and soon 4K.
I Am Trying to Break Your Heart was filmed on B&W 16mm. If you can it in digitally, that's about 2K resolution. Of course, the more documentary nature of the film means you won't get quite as much clarity as you would something that's deliberately filmed for it. Let's say, minimal, they get a good 720p digital scan out of it. That's HD, that's still a lot better than the 480p of DVD. You're just going to get a much cleaner and clearer picture than the DVD, hands down, there's just more pixels. Here's a good visual breakdown:
But that's just pixels. Blu Ray also has a better compression algorithm. DVD uses MPEG 2 compression, which is notoriously bad for grainy sources like IATTBYH. Blu Ray uses the much superior H.264 (aka MPEG-4). Just using this compression algorithm alone would mean a better picture.
Back in 2008 I think they still may have used MPEG-2 for Blu Ray, it may not have made as much sense, but I definitely think it's time for a Blu Ray transfer of this movie. Plexifilm has said that when they initially made the DVD they scanned it in at more than just 480p, so tossing it on a Blu Ray wouldn't require that much work. Ideally at this point they could do a fancy Deluxe Edition Blu Ray with additional special features, etc.
You can keep the stereo soundtrack, but if you wanted to get real fancy, you can have the band come in and help mix a fancy 7.1 soundtrack, but that's not really necessary.
-
are you done yet? How about you provide this elusive data and research i apparently so desperately need to know about instead of continuing to ever so politely telling me I have no clue? it would save me 6 months worth of time and effort and it would also give you the opportunity to respond to me again so you can get the last word in...although you did say there is no need to speak any further on this...hmmmm...
thank you rwilson580 and speedracer. I'm glad I'm not the only one that interpreted what is at issue the way I did.
back to the color correction on digital images i was working on.
I was a bit of a jackass, I apologize.
But I still think I'm right
. -
Again...you guys are missing the point I'm trying to make. The point I'm trying to make is not whether Wilco SHOULD release it on Blu Ray. Whether or not it makes fiscal sense is entirely up to the band/management/record company. They're probably using some formula like $X put into transferring to HD - (number of predicted copies sold x profit per copy) that will determine whether or not they actually release it. But, it seems like someone made thought this was a good idea, because there was, at some point, an effort to release it on Blu Ray. Personally, I don't care whether it comes out or not. The political issues with the band speaking out against the Blu Ray release are another wrinkle that I'm ignoring here. What bothers me is the belief that a Blu Ray release would not provide any audio/video benefits.
When I was talking about super expensive involved transfers, I was referring to older movies, where the print may have degraded, or there are other technical issues. Something like Star Wars, It's a Wonderful Life, or Wizard of Oz. Those are the kinds of movies where a transfer would cost a lot of money. To do a transfer of a movie like that, each frame of the movie has to be gone over and touched up. But, the results are usually amazing, with old movies looking like they did when they came out in the theatre.
They not not have to go into this kind of detail for IATTBYH. I have no idea how much a decent HD transfer would cost for IAATBYH. However, it is a more recent movie, and it does not need the kind of restoration work something like Star Wars, Wizard of Oz or It's a Wonderful Life may need. When they did the initial transfer of the film to digital for DVD, they may even have done an HD transfer and scaled it down for DVD. If they already have an HD copy of the film from the original film transfer, it would make it even easier to do a Blu Ray release. They would have to fuck things up royally to do a bad transfer. But, it seems from other comments that I've read that whoever is doing the Blu Ray transfer cares, and wants to do a good job.
From a viewer's perspective, the video would be improved by being in a higher resolution, and less compression - it would be the closest thing to watching it in a theatre. There may be artistic issues (grain, cameras being out of focus, etc.) that may be more clear in a Blu Ray release, but I can't really speak on those. Sound would also be improved - they could use audio that's less compressed, and even mix it into multi-channel audio if they chose to do so (although I believe they're leaving it in stereo).
As a whole, the band wants to put out a quality product, I can see that, that's one of the reasons I like them. While they dabble in many areas, at the core, the band is musicians, and maybe don't have a complete technical understanding of what a Blu Ray transfer would entail. It seems like they are assuming that just because the movie is grainy black and white and stereo that a Blu Ray transfer is pointless. I took the quote to mean that they may not understand the benefit of a Blu Ray release for IATTBYH. However, they are not video technicians - there is not technical reason as to why a Blu Ray transfer would not look/sound better. There are technical people that have posted in this thread and in others that show, quite clearly, that a Blu Ray release would be beneficial. The people who are actually handling the Blu Ray release say it looks better. What more do you need?
It seems like there are other issues blocking the Blu Ray release than purely technical ones - issues as to who owns the rights, whether the band wants it released, the issue of the band not being aware of a Blu Ray release, the price, etc. Those issues are irrelevant to the point I'm trying to make.
Obviously, you won't see the kind of benefit as to DVD vs Blu Ray that you would with a more modern, technically advanced film like Watchmen or the Dark Knight. You will also need an HDTV to even begin to understand the benefits. A proper sound system would also help. It may not be for everyone, but that's not what got me involved in this thread in the first place - the point is that it would look/sound better on Blu Ray (if handled properly). If the band doesn't want to release it, that's fine, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't look/sound better.
I'm pretty happy with my DVD copy of IATTBYH. Even if I watch it on an upscaling DVD player on an HDTV, it still looks pretty good, and I don't feel the need for a Blu Ray release. The DVD copy had a pretty good transfer, and it still holds up. I wouldn't be buying the IATTBYH Blu Ray. But, I can see why someone would want a Blu Ray copy, and the benefits from a proper Blu Ray transfer are undeniable.
-
I think I've been pretty clear about it. Older movies can be transferred, if done properly will look fine, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are going to look or sound any better or phenomenal. just because you could doesn't mean you should. the band deemed no benefit from this transfer, so the artist has spoken. and i by chance agree with the artist in this matter.
this is also about opinions, so ummm, thanks for letting me know i am 100% wrong and 100% false.
time to go watch my analog tv with basic cable attached to it.
Obviously, you are (by your own admission in earlier threads) missing some of the basic knowledge required to understand the kind of benefits a Blu Ray transfer could bring. Just because there have been shitty Blu Ray transfers in the past does not mean that IATTBYH would have a shitty transfer. Also, Wilco is a group of musicians, not movie makers, they don't necessarily understand the benefits of Blu Ray either. Either way, they were speaking out about the PRICE of the disc and not the quality of the transfer (even though they did make the "grainy black and white comment," there is some misunderstanding here). There is no need to speak any further on this - there's obviously some sort of failure for you on a basic level as to understanding the benefits of Blu Ray (and technology), I recommend you do some research, and come back to this topic in about 6 months.
-
I would rather unreleased vinyl see the light of day (which they did) and ensure that they keep providing goodies and freebies and all sorts of things that make Wilco awesome than dumping a bunch of money into an "awesome" transfer of a video that's already fine to me. If I want awesome Wilco in high-def, I go to a show. I trust them to know their market for goods enough to know that this wasn't a justifiable cost at that time.
That's fine...but that's not the point. The point is that the movie WOULD benefit from a Blu Ray transfer.
-
Basically Jones poorly framed and setup the shots. His handheld moves are really bad news. The focus is off for quite a bit of the film too. He also was shooting in low light situations and almost the entire film is slightly underexposed, which is why it is so grainy. Generally you would slightly overexpose if possible to alleviate some of the grain. The framing in the interviews in the film is also horrible. Just watch Jeff explaining being dropped in the hotel room. It is really important what he is saying but there is Jones unable to frame him well and checking focus the whole time and always reframing the shot. Drawing attention to the camera instead of the subject is a big no no in documentary for obvious reasons.
Jones is actually a very famous still photographer in his own right long before making the doc. I know it was his first film but notice it was also his last released? If you don't count the unreleased Vic Show. I know he has gone back to still photography and a friend told me he did all the period photography for the George Clooney movie Leatherheads so he is still working high profile photo gigs. I thought it was generally known here too that critique of the Wilco documentary, which is all Jones not the band.
I much prefer the Burn To Shine guys DVDs for Wilco. Just watch a performance from Sunken Treasure and then watch one from IATTBYH and you will see the difference. Those guys know how to shoot handheld. Jones unfortunately should have used a tripod. Jones just did not understand cinematography at all. Still photography is much easier than motion picture. I like his photos for YHF and love the poster for IATTBYH just think the actual film is shot bad but am still glad it was made and will buy the Blu Ray, even with Wilco's warning. And all this is my opinion, but it has been the major critique of the film since the beginning.
*Also the camera Jones used was great. In fact it was much higher quality than the Burn to Shine guys who shoot on video. But even with less expensive cameras their work looks much better.
I apologize for digging up an old topic, but I just wanted to toss in my two cents.
I'm not a cinema geek, but I do have an eye for art. I much prefer Sam Jone's work on IATTBYH to anything I've seen the Burn to Shine guys do. In fact, I'd venture to say that the whole look of IATTBYH is one of my favorite ones (for any other project, it would likely be completely unsuitable, but it fits perfectly here).
I'm sure that the BTS stuff is shot a lot more cleanly and properly, but the vibe of IATTBYH is just through the roof. It might be a combination of the music, the story, etc., but IATTBYH does it for me much more than Sunken Treasure, Ashes, etc. (although they are different types of movies). In fact, Sunken Treasure and Ashes leave me kind of flat - the cinematography is boring to me compared to IATTBYH.
Anyways, not trying to incite riots, just tossing out a different viewpoint...
-
you don't get it. enjoy your new technology and all the glory it will clearly provide for everything.
Apparently, I must not. What exactly is your opposition to a Blu Ray transfer of older movies? It sounds like you're saying that movies shot on film will see little or no benefit from a transfer to Blu Ray (which is 100% false).
I'm not some sort of Sony hired Blu Ray shill - I don't even own a Blu Ray player. But it's completely 100% wrong to think that older movies cannot benefit from a Blu Ray release.
One thing I forgot to mention earlier: aside from a higher resolution transfer, HD video on Blu Ray can also be much less compressed than DVD, so less chance of seeing compression artifacts.
EDIT: This post does a lot better job explaining it than I can:
I usually never post just lurk but had to get involved with this discussion since I am a video editor and in case anyone from the Wilco camp reads this thread. Let me just say that film be it 16mm or 35mm is superior to HD still to this day. There are now some HD cameras available that give almost as good of image quality as 35mm but those cameras are made by Panavision and are for very high budget movies. Watch Zodiac for an example of that camera.
16mm has a resolution of about 2k lines of resolution and 35mm has about 4k lines of resolution so even at 1080P the highest standard for video now, you are still only getting half the resolution compared to the theater and a screening from an actual release print. So releasing IATTBYH on Blu Ray would make sense. It's too bad it is such a poorly shot documentary to begin with and is actually notorious for that in filmmaking circles. I sometimes think Tweedy must have heard that which is why he shelved the VIC show Jones shot a couple years back. The clips on the website made sense why they did not choose to release that. Jones is one great photographer but not cinematographer.So I would think in fact that you most likely would just see a lot more grain and more out of focus shots than you probably noticed on DVD.
Now the other advantage of Blu Ray is uncompressed audio and the band is right it was recorded only in stereo but was still compressed to Dolby Digital 2.0 for the DVD, which is like turning a WAV file into a MP3 so to have uncompressed audio would actually be the biggest upgrade and advantage which the band should care about. I am totally with Wilco on the cost of Blu Rays being a complete rip off because it is. Sony charges so much for the technology which is why the discs are so high but in fact it is just as easy to make a Blu Ray disc as a DVD just different encoding techniques. So if Plexi Film really wants people to purchase this title twice they should price it the same as the 2 disc DVD just like Criterion is doing for their Blu Ray releases.
So I applaud Wilco for looking out for it's fans which is why this has been my favorite band since 96. The price should be the same especially for this release because Wilco is right and other than uncompressed audio the differences will be small. A lot of super 16mm looks great. Watch 28 Weeks Later to see good super 16. Sam Jones just shot this documentary very badly so nothing can be done about that. I just think a Blu Ray priced the same would be a release Wilco could get behind and it would be nice if Plexi Film did not try to gauge Wilco fans. No reason for this disc to be higher priced since I seriously doubt Criterion is taking a loss releasing their Blu Ray discs at the same price as the DVD. Sorry for the long post. I would like to see this released just not get ripped off on the Blu Ray. Hope my explanation clears the situation up a bit.
The technical merits of a Blu Ray transfer are unquestionable. There have been some shitty Blu-Ray versions of older movies released, but that's just due to laziness/unwillingness to spend money.
-
oh good grief, here we go again. film has grain, light passes through it, when transferred to a digital format, you see the grain, the flaws in the grain, the film, scratches, dust, you name it. digital is made up of 1s and 0s. digital will always be clear and pristine, but if you go from grain and dust flecks to 1s and 0s, the flaws show up that you wouldn't have seen in an earlier format. watch Caddyshack on DVD and get back to me on how much anything from film would benefit from a transfer to Blu ray.
This is what I mean by quality of transfer - the film grain itself is part of the nature of the film and pretty much inevitable. However, dust, scratches, etc. (other physical defects) can either be physically cleaned off the print, or removed via software. Really high quality transfers involve going over each frame. A movie like Caddyshack probably has a really poor transfer (most comedies are not known for their visual splendor), but I can guarantee you that more visually stunning movies have much higher quality transfers (couldn't tell you off hand which ones, but I'm sure there are various review sites that could tell you).
If the studio really wanted it, they could have technicians produce a super high quality HD transfer of Caddyshack that would absolutely blow your socks off. However, they mat not feel that putting in the time and money into the transfer of a movie like Caddyshack is not worth it.
-
Have you watched any movies that have been transferred from a previous medium over to DVD needless to say Blu-Ray? Just because Blu-ray is the top of the line media format that doesn't mean something made prior to that format is going to look fantastic on the new magical medium.
it's probably just me though...and i'm a prude these days.
i'm also pretty sure rwilson580 is correct in his memory.
DVD and even Blu Ray are a long ways off from film. The resolution, even in 1080p HD, isn't nearly as high as that of film. I don't remember offhand the exact numbers, but it's significant. I'm not sure what you have been watching, but just about any movie would benefit from a transfer to Blu Ray. There have been some bad Blu Ray transfers, of course, and not every movie gets a careful transfer. But, the potential is definitely there.
That being said, I'm not sure how IATTBYH was shot, but it looks like it was on film and (despite being in grainy black and white), it should still benefit from a Blu Ray transfer (if for nothing else than for improved sound).
-
This has been covered - use the search function.
That's very rude. What's wrong with starting new topics instead of digging up old ones? This is a discussion board, not an archive. If it annoys you, don't reply to the topic.
-
The Flaming Lips. Transmissions from the Satellite Heart, Zaireeka, Clouds Taste Metallic, Hit to Death in the Future Head and THE SOFT BULLETIN. Nothing else even comes close to a run like that.
Uncle Tupelo's best stuff was from the 80s, and Wilco's best stuff is 2000+.
-
but are the "songs" mindblowing ? Dunno. Ordered a copy today.
I can say for certainty that the songs on The Soft Bulletin are definitely that.
It's nothing like the Soft Bulletin, Clouds Taste Metallic, Transmissions, At War With the Mystics, or Yoshimi. If you are only a fan of those albums, you will likely not "get it." The songs are not structured at all like the songs on those albums. There is very little similarity in arrangement, feel, etc. The Flaming Lips have, once again, reinvented themselves, and some people are not going to like it, some are going to think it's trash, and that's OK, because I fucking love what they've done.
The songs here are much more organic, spacey, and jam based. What it reminds me most of is earlier Pink Floyd (Ummagumma-ish era) or early Mercury Rev. Weird, trippy, jammy stuff that captures a certain feel. It's not based around lyrics or song-writing or carefully crafted chord progressions (which is a departure from previous albums, and seeing that this is a Wilco board, it's a departure from the usual Wilco style as well) AND THAT'S OK. I am not surprised that certain people don't get it, but for those that do, it's a treat.
-
just listened to this album for the first time last night. first off, i'd have to say that i'm a casual lips fan, never really thought yoshimi and soft bulletin warranted the praise they received although i dug both albums. anyway, i got really stoned last night and threw this album on in the dark, and just listened to it straight through. it absolutely blew me away. i've only heard about 4 or 5 lips albums, but this is on another level than anything i've heard from this band. usually experimental stuff like this takes a few listens to sink in for me, but this one just hit me immediately. i'd have to say this is already one of my two favorites of the year along with middle cyclone. i have nothing much to say about individual songs, or favorite moments, just listen to this one straight through, that's the way it's supposed to be heard.
I think the best way to put it is that this album is a return to the dark/weird Flaming Lips stuff of yester-year. If you dig this album, check out some of their older stuff (Hit to Death in the Future Head, In a Priest Driven Ambulance, etc.).
-
This album is amazing, no bones about it. If you don't like it, that's fine, probably not your thing.
Sagittarius Silver Announcement alone is worth the price of admission. Evil, If, and I Can be a Frog are the only tracks I'm not in love with.
-
Finally found this one at a local Borders. Great articles, great photographs, and something no one else has mentioned yet - the magazine smells great too!
The Wilco article was very cool, makes me want to buy even more guitars
. -
it seems to me that Jeff's tome is more defined by the pedals than Nels' tone. "Hell is Chrome" solo could be nothing but the Prunes n' Custard, for example. With Nels' it's more about his hands: the flourish of notes and the (excessive?) use use of the ole' whammy bar.
While I agree with you about Nels' hands being the center of his tone, what I was meaning is that there's a lot of talk about the pedals that Nels, Jeff, etc. use (and Nels contributes to that sort of talk: http://www.nelscline.com/tech.html). A lot of the stuff Nels does on stage is "enhanced" by pedals and other tools he likes to use, and a lot of the sounds he gets are very specific to the pedals he uses, and he likes to use very specific, boutique pedals. With Jay, all you really need is a cranked tube amp and a few standard pedals to imitate his tone. A Tube Screamer, Tremolo Pedal, a nice axe, and a cranked Fender amp are pretty much all you need.
-
I'm listening to the stream, loving it. If anyone could point me towards an MP3 capture of the stream, it would be highly appreciated...
-
I as well love Jay Bennett's tone/playing. However, judging from the article (and my own eyes and ears from the videos I've watched), it doesn't seem that Jay Bennett is defined by his pedals (at least, not to the level that someone like Nels Cline uses pedals). His tone is fantastic, especially in that video that you linked to. However, all it takes to get the kind of sound like you see in the video is a nice clean Fender amp and a Telecaster (or other similar, chimey bright guitar). I think most of Jay Bennett's skill was in his fingers, and amp/guitar choice (which explains why I like him so much). Toss your favorite compressor and overdrive pedal in front of a nice Fender amp, and you'll probably be able to get pretty close to Bennett's tone (as long as you can cop some of his licks).
-
J-45s vary wildly from guitar to guitar. I would recommend playing as many as you can get your hands on before you make a decision. For what it's worth, I really like a lot of the newer ones Gibson's been making (really light resonant bodies with thick necks), but you'll have to form your own opinion.
-
-
If anyone could help me track down a copy of this song, it would be highly appreciated...
-
Here's my take on the solo (arranged for guitar in standard tuning). Sounds like it's originally played on a lap steel, probably tuned to some sort of 6 chord, but I didn't realize that until I was halfway into it, so I figured, might as well finish it off. I am writing from memory, so it might be a little off (will check when I get home), corrections welcome.
Split into chunks for easier consumption:
(v = vibrato, lots of it here)
E---------------------------------
B---------------------------------
G---------------------------------
D--7b8-5-7b9b7-5---s5---s12---s15v
A---------------------------------
E---------------------------------
E---------------------------------
B---------------------------------
G--15v----15s17s15----------------
D-------------------s19----s19s12-
A---------------------------------
E---------------------------------
E---------------------------------
B-----6-6----s6-6--s6-s7---s12v---
G---------------------------------
D---6-----6--s6-6--s6-s7---s12v---
A---------------------------------
E---------------------------------
E---------------------------------
B--s12v---12s14s12----7s----------
G---------------------------------
D--s12v---12s14s12----7s----------
A---------------------------------
E---------------------------------
(on the last slide, slide down towards the nut)
-
Hey Gin -
Just got a quick chance to look over your Box Full of Letters tab. I think you're right on with Riff 4. Riffs 5 & 6, we're basically playing the same notes, just different version
.
At Least That's What You Said guitar solo
in Lyrics and Tabs
Posted
Inspired by this great video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvwJSiyPG1s
I set out to try to meticulously tab out everything that's going on in this song. Needless to say, it's quite difficult to pick everything out, but I think I have a pretty good stab at it. There's a few "key" licks to learn, and then you interweave them with improvisational riffs. Jeff doesn't really play the song the same way twice from what I can see from live videos. Learning the licks below should give you a good basis to somewhat imitate what he's doing. Mainly from what I can see it's a lot of very cool variations on hammer ons and pull offs.
I use this software to help slow the recording down and pick out the notes: https://www.seventhstring.com/xscribe/overview.html
I'd recommend using something similar to help play along. However it's tough to be 100% accurate with all the stuff going on and the distortion.
For his effects, Jeff is using some sort of quick delay and what sounds like a Crowther Prunes and Custard pedal, probably through a Vox amp.
The tuning from what I can tell is drop D capo 5, but it's very rarely relevant, only one note in the initial lick leading into the solo is for sure a note that you can only get by being in drop D with a capo.
Anyway, here is the drop D, capo 5 version, corrections very much welcome:
Lead in riff
Em D
E-------------------------------------------------2--2----------------------------------
B-----------0-------------------------------------3--3----------------------------------
G--0--------0--------0----------0-----------------2--2----------------------------------
D--0h2---x--0h2-x----0h2-x-----x---0h2---0-0h2----0--4--2--4--4--2--4--4-5-5s7----------
A---------x--------2---------x---------x-------------0--0--0--0--0--0--0-0-0------------
D----------------------------------------------0-----0--------0--------0----------------
Chord you’re hammering on before solo:
E----
B--7-
G----
D----
A--7-
D----
Then this with very minor variations
E-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B------7--------5-------3-2--0------------------------------------------------------
G------------------------------0--------7-----6--------4-----2p0----0---------------
D--------------------------------0-----------------------0--------4-----------------
A--s7-------7-------5---------------8s9----7-----7s--5-----0------------------------
D-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then this thing
E---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G-0h2p0------------0h2p0-----0------------------------2--0-0-------------------------
D--------0h4--0-4---------4------2p0------0h2-4-4-4p---------4p----------0------
A------------------------------------4p2--------------------------0h2h2h0----------
D----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then this again
D
E----2--2------------------------------------
B----3--3------------------------------------
G----2--2------------------------------------
D----0--4--2--4--4--2--4--4-5-5s7------------
A-------0--0--0--0--0--0--0-0-0--------------
D-0-----0--------0--------0------------------
E----------------------------------------------------------------------2---------------
B----------------------------------------------------------------------3---------------
G------------------------0----0----0----0------------------------------2---------------
D--2--0--2--0--2p0-------0h2--2s4--4s2--0---2h4p2h4p2p0----------------0---------------
A------------------2-------------------------------------2h4p2h4p2-----0---------------
D----------------------------------------------------------------------0---------------
E--2--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B--3--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G--2---0h4p0------------------------------------------------------------------------
D--0---------4~p0--2h4-0h2p0-------0h4---4-5s7-5------------------------------------
A--0-------------------------0h2p0--------------------------------------------------
D--0--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B---7~7~7~7~--7s5--5s3--3s2--2------3----2---2-----------------------------------
G-----0-------0----------------0-------------------------4------2p0----0---------
D--------------------------------s4----4---4----0-----------0-------4------------
A---------------------------------------------------3s5-------0------------------
D--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G-(0h2)--------------0h4h5p4-4p2----------------------------------------------------
D------4h5p4-2-2p0----------------0-0h4-5v~--0-0h2s4p0------------------------------
A-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G---------0h4p0-------------------------0h2p0-0--0h2p0------------------------------
D--0---0---------0h4h5p4--2h4p2--------------------------0h2p0----------------------
A--0---0-------------------------5p2p0----------------------------------------------
D--0---0----------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G-------------------------------------------------------------------------
D--2~~~---0h2p0-----0-0-2--2s4--0------0-----0--0-0-2s4-4-0-------------------------
A----------------2------------------2-----2-----------------------------------------
D-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E---2----2-----2----2-----2----2---2---2--------------------------------------------
B---3----3-----3----3-----3----3---3---3--------------------------------------------
G---2----2-----2----2-----2----2---2---2--------------------------------------------
D---0----0-----0----0-----0----0---0---0--------------------------------------------
A---0----0-----0----0-----0----0---0---0--------------------------------------------
D---0----0-----0----0-----0----0---0---0--------------------------------------------
E--------------------------------------------------------------------------
B----7~~~~~~~~~~~~~5~~~~~3~~~~~2~~~~~~-------------------------------------
G-------------------------------------7~~~~6~~~~~4~~~~~2~~~~~~-------------
D--------------------------------------------------------------------------
A--------------------------------------------------------------------------
D--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lots of vibrato here
(it’s either 2 or 0 on the b string not sure he changes it up)
E-------------------------------------------(0)----------------------------------------
B---0----xx--0-0-0---0-0-0-0-0---------------5-----------------------------------------
G---4b~--xx--4-2-4---4-4-2-4-2-----7b~~-7-7----7------------------4p2---0--4-2-4s7-----
D-------------------------------------------------4h5p4--2-0-2--------2----------------
A--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hold out that first note with vibrato
E------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B---------------------------------------------------------10~~10~~10~~10~~10b--
G---9~~~~~9~~~~9~~~~9--7-9-0--2h4----------------------------------------------
D----------------------------------5p4p0h4--0h2-2p0-----0----------------------
A---------------------------------------------------2p0------------------------
D------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then this lick, played with lots of vibrato (4 measure of 12)
E-----7-9b--9b--7-10-7--7-9-7-10--7-9-7-10--7-9---12-12-12-12--12-12-12-12--12-12-14-14--
B--10------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B--7--7~----------------------------------------------------------------------------
G--7--7~------7----7---7---7---7---7-7----7---7--7---7--7------7-----7---7---7-7-7---
D--7--9~---9-----9--9----9----9-9---9---9---9------9------9-9----9-9---9---9-------9
A-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E------------------------------------------------------------------------
B--------7~~~~~~~~~~~~~5~~~~~3~~~~~2~~~~~~-------------------------------
G------------------------------------------7~~~~6~~~~~4~~~~~2~~~~~~------
D------------------------------------------------------------------------
A--7---------------------------------------------------------------------
D------------------------------------------------------------------------
Song ends on
E-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D-----4s5s4s5s4s5s4s5s4s5s4s5s4s5s4s5s4s5-------------------------------------------
A-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------