Some might say that the musical efforts put forth by these two finger-melting men are void, a kind of aural masturbation falsely appreciated and lauded by fanboys; a form of expression that is simple dexterity without engaging content, and at least looks really silly. But an earnest attempt at music-making that most people are unable to experience from a serious perspective should have no correlation with impacting life in an entirely negative way. Well, there is an egregious conflict worth bringing to the table. Unconsciously producing the silliest disruptions known to the aural plane is not a crime, unless it is done while wearing a frown of Viking disgust. Yngwie Malmsteen proves this. He has emboldened all that threatens to harm the human appreciation of sound; he is a negative force. And so you ask, what is the difference, what about Vikta? Quite simply, his expression threatens none. One shreds to numb the senses and terrorize the mind, while the other thumps to make your feet tap and keep the good times flowing. But they both play really really fast.

Herein lies the great moral dichotomy of our times, the yin and yang of sound’s cheez whiz underbelly.

bennett & ricky collab.

7 Responses to “YNGWIE vs. THE WOOT”

  1. jeff says:

    implicit question: double happiness….positive force? vikta or yngwie?

  2. bennett says:

    Riley the floor is open to you.

  3. Riley says:

    No informed consumer of shred music could honestly make a case that Yngwie Malmsteen is a positive force in the world. The man who brought the world such neo-Baroque shred metal classics as “I Am A Viking” and “You Don’t Remember, I’ll Never Forget” is a world renowned asshole, possessor of a surly, arrogant demeanor and impossibly tight leather pants to accompany his incendiary technical abilities. His misogynistic, twinkie devouring ways have erupted on such occasions as his infamous, obscenity laden airplane tirade (available for your listening DEEP DEEP pleasure @ http://www.blabbermouth.net/yngwie_tokyo_flight.mp3) and as the time he took his girlfriend hostage with a shotgun in an LA hotel (although the charges were later dropped).

    Yet just because the mighty Swede is, well, an absolutely terrible guy, we should not be so quick to anoint other, more well tempered wankers as positive forces. When stacking the two up against one another, the WOOT understandably comes off as the Luke Skywalker to YJM’s Darth Vader. His “funky good timez” major chord-arpegio style is immediately more palatable than the Viking’s demonic harmonic minor-riffing, and the buoyant, beaming smile that rests on his face as he plucks and plops away certainly does seem to suggest that he is one fresh, feel good kinda dude. Furthermore, his comparably clean criminal record understandably reinforces the notion that the Man with the Bass Guitar is looking out for us all.

    Unfortunately, such an appraisal of the situation is highly cosmetic. By suggesting the notion that one of these villains may be a better force for the world than the other, one immediately undermines the very essence of what it means to be a shredder. Simply put, the reason anyone starts shredding is simply to enhance the perception of one’s penis size; one who shreds in front of thousands of screaming (probably Japanese) fans differs from one who shreds alone only in that the former is attempting to dupe many people into overestimating your penis size, while the latter is simply trying to fool himself (After blazing through sweep arpeggios for hours during high school, I would go to the bathroom and actually expect my member to be larger than it was before. Often times, I think it was.)

    The number of notes that one can play is directly and absolutely proportional to perceptions of their genital size; the reasons for this are as of yet unclear, and I feel warily certain that I will spend the rest of my life trying to get to the bottom of this mystery. Yet the sad fact remains that unless you have waded through the seedy, testosterone filled waters of the shred underworld, this truth is not immediately apparent. (though there are clues everywhere)

    It is under this filthy, juvenile light that we must compare the Mighty Swede and the Woot. Perhaps, owing to his status as a fairly large black male, Mr. Wooten already feels sufficiently satisfied in the perceptions of his member; the more petite and European Mr. Malmsteen may feel a need to compensate for more unflattering genital expectations with flashy stage moves, tight (likely stuffed) leather pants, lots of obscenities, and the occasional shotgun. But basing conclusions on such cosmetic differences obscures the heart of the matter and leaves us in a world where shredders are appreciated for their gestures and personality rather than their face melting chops. This is a fate either of the subjects discussed would hate to see happen; they have built respectable careers by climbing to the top of a very stupid, silly mountain, a mountain built on the backs of dorky, misinformed weiners who have somehow been tricked into thinking that there is actually a reason for someone to play that fast. Drawing attention away from these mens’ appendages and onto their stage moves and extra-curricular activities is reckless and dangerous. As such, the proper question to ask in this situation:

    Who is faster, Malmsteen or Wooten?

  4. bennett says:

    I think the silence that has come to rest over this post is being held in place by the weight of its sheer scholastic density

  5. borna says:


  6. Carter says:

    the woot never had a show like this

  7. borna says:

    carter, the youtube embed didn’t work. just post up a link to the video and i’ll fix it for you.

BY bennett. Leave a Reply