Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Jimi Vs. Clapton


Boston004681

Recommended Posts

I've been looking for something to make you guys think.

 

Alright! Here we go. The Ultimate challenge. Who is better? Or, do you think they break even?

 

...What I Think...

 

---------------------------------

Clapton CREAMS(get it?) Hendrix far as the solo performances go.

 

But Cream, Derek & The Dominos, And The Jimi Hendrix Experience, Break totally even.

 

---------------------------------

In other words, they were both better before they went solo...

 

=D> Ok. What do you think? =D>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really stopped caring about "who is better" a couple of years ago... now I don't mind... I have a Mac in the studio... a portable PC for home... A Fender for clean stuff, a Gibson for everything else... I listen to all of them and never wonder who is better... no one and nothing is better, everything is different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought both were over rated.

Clapton is God?? If that is true then Jeff Beck is God + 10

 

Hendrix was clever in the studio' date=' live he sucked.

 

I admire them both, but I think they have been lofted up higher then they deserve.[/quote']

 

I don't know where you heard Jimi but when I saw him in concert he was great. May of '70.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neither...

 

 

<--------------------------------

 

 

The thing with Hendrix is, I love the songs he wrote (I'm assuming he wrote them)... but I love them a whole lot more when played by other people. Voodoo Chile (Slight Return) for example. Brilliant song IMHO, but I liked the way SRV played it better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clapton took Freddie King licks and sensibility into rock and roll. He made it louder, arena rock. Then he reduced his talents to lame MOR pop pabulum. He was/is a fine guitar player, but no innovator.

 

Hendrix blew the doors off conventional rock and took into a new direction. It's hard to remember now just how spectacular he was at Monterey and over his three studio albums. He revolutionized rock guitar, and his lyrics ain't bad either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really stopped caring about "who is better" a couple of years ago... now I don't mind... I have a Mac in the studio... a portable PC for home... A Fender for clean stuff' date=' a Gibson for everything else... I listen to all of them and never wonder who is better... no one and nothing is better, everything is different.[/quote']

 

Okay, ha ha ha how politically correct to say "no one and nothing is better, everything is different". Ha, ha, ha. Sounds so wonderful, yet is so inaccurate. Proof: you yourself are implying that your statement is better than the opposite statement. --Or is your opinion simply meaningless, since it is no better or worse than anyone else's?

 

Of course there are better guitarists. What DIFFERS is what people consider 'better'. But just because people don't agree on what 'better' is doesn't mean that there isn't such a thing as actually 'better'. In most arenas, there are universal standards for what is "better". And guitar playing is one of those.

 

Man, I gotta say, that while liberal thinking is right on in so many cases, it is just truly ignorant in the area of "everything is relative, no one is 'better at guitar or crocheting, they're just different". (I'm an independent, in politics and in thinking)

 

Clapton vs. Hendrix has been on my mind for a long time. When Hendrix is great, which is about 35% of the time (when he's not TOO out there) he's better than Clapton or anyone else. The other 65% of the time, Clapton is better.

 

In my opinion (or possibly in fact), Clapton is good because his good character enables his practicing to develop a coherent, exact, musical style. Astounding, almost.

 

Hendrix is good because his incredible lack of inhibitions enables him to touch his guitar in a way that produces music which is not only remarkably different but is interpreted by the human psyche as expressing a feeling that the psyche is not used to getting from music.

 

There has been NO one like Jimi Hendrix, and I firmly believe that his accomplishment is based on the degree to which he is TRULY, I say TRULY improvising. Sure, most lead players are "makin' it up", but they are doing it to different degrees. In his great 35% of the time, Hendrix's degree of how much he was NOT PLANNING what to do next was higher than basically anyone else's has ever been.

 

Jimi's best: Voodoo Chile (short one), Machine Gun (live on New Year's Eve), Midnight.

 

P.S. I saw Jimi play live. =D> Though I gotta tell you, at the same concert I saw Johnny Winter play guitar, and he was almost as impressive as Hendrix. ha ha wow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clapton took Freddie King licks and sensibility into rock and roll. He made it louder' date=' arena rock. Then he reduced his talents to lame MOR pop pabulum. He was/is a fine guitar player, but no innovator.

 

Hendrix blew the doors off conventional rock and took into a new direction. It's hard to remember now just how spectacular he was at Monterey and over his three studio albums. He revolutionized rock guitar, and his lyrics ain't bad either. [/quote']

 

Very well said m8. Jimi's out of this world, I honestly don't know how people can compare him to Clapton...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's like comparing apples and oranges.

Like all of you, I've listened to both my entire life.

I've even seen Clapton twice.

I chose Hendrix because the musicians he surrounded himself with fit well with his style. No one can deny the contribution of Mitch Mitchell when it comes to Jimi. The people who worked with him in the studio were also good.

Love Clapton, and he's been a survivor. He's endured.

Still, I picked JMH.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate these.

 

You can't say one guitarist is "better." It belittles their skills and they ground that they broke.

 

 

They both played fantastically and are like the Adam and Eve of rock guitar, but they both played so differently while still being in the same genre.

 

While Jimi was raw and unpredictable, Clapton was smooth and perfect.

 

 

It's all about taste, and the whole "better" thing takes away from the art they made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...