Shnate McDuanus Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Why do you feel the need to tell us you don't like someone and then get pissy when people don't agree with you? Who cares bro! Music is a great big salad bar. Take what ya like and disregard the rest. I'd give ya my opinion on a lot of guitarist but it won't change how you feel about them. If ya ain't gettin it, ya ain't gettin it. Peace and love. DAMNIT! Now I want salad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Natural Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVOL! Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 I don't think so. If it ain't Hendrix, then who is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WahKeen Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 If it ain't Hendrix, then who is it? You missed my point. I was alluding to your use of such analogy. I found it in poor taste. Although I agree Hendrix was a huge influence even to his not too shabby contemporaries, and of course, his predecessors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvanPC Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 In all honesty, I've never really gotten into any of the so-dubbed virtuosos. In regards to Hendrix, though, you have to take into consideration the era in which he did what he did. This is the reason for his inconic status, and of course, his exceptional playing and musicianship. I'd rather listen to a great player with exceptional musicianship and song writing abilities, than listen to an Yngwie Malmsteen-type any day. Not to say Malmsteen (as an example) doesn't have excellent musicianship, but I don't think he's an amazing song writer by any means. Same goes for the Vai's, Satriani's, etc etc, of the world. Of course these are my opinions, but I think these guys (and a lot of their fans) get hung up on technical skill and prowess, and the potential for great music is lost in the mix - or at least, it no longer becomes the focus of writing a song, but rather a secondary priority. There's something to be said for the simplicity of nursery rhymes... I have great appreciation for what these virtuouso players can do, but in the end it's about music, and I feel like a lot of what they do is showmanship masked in musical notes. Though there's also something to be said about the phrase "To each, their own". If it gets your blood pumping, or gets the synapse in your brain firing, who cares what someone else thinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVOL! Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 You missed my point. I was alluding to your use of such analogy. I found it in poor taste. Although I agree Hendrix was a huge influence even to his not too shabby contemporaries, and of course, his predecessors. Excuse me, are you belittling my religion, the Church of the Sonic Guitar? Just because we don't have 2k yrs does not make us any less spiritual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silenced Fred Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Excuse me, are you belittling my religion, the Church of the Sonic Guitar? Just because we don't have 2k yrs does not make us any less spiritual. It's because you're a cult :) He had some Mind blowing stuff, still is mind blowing. Gotta love that fuzz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dem00n Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Stop picking on my Steve, enough guys. Hes a little bit annoying...who isnt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silenced Fred Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Stop picking on my Steve, enough guys. Hes a little bit annoying...who isnt? Me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 ... Hes a little bit annoying... ... And now, . . . . also . . . . Dem00n is the new master of understatement ! B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hungrycat Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 about a year ago i posted a thread similar to this and got flamed for it , now we have new members on here i thought i'd get there opinion on "my" opinion... jimi hendrix guitar playing does absolutly nothing for me, i don't like it and i have no albums/cd's of his...he's boring imo. i get flamed for saying steve vai and gary moore are two of the greatest guitar playing talents that god ever looked down on...and yet as a guitar player i'm "expected" to worship jimi hendrix because it's the "norm" like a default setting in guitar playing world. maybe if rory gallagher had of died before hendrix then he would be the default "guitar god"?...i swear hendrix is only famous because he's dead. p.s no one played a strat like rory R.I.P. :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dem00n Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 And now, . . . . also . . . . Dem00n is the new master of understatement ! B) Hes a rebel, without them there would be no Star Wars! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damian Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 i don't like hendrix, i started a thread about it, i want peoples opinions, do they or don't they?...lets discuss...no "proof" needed. I do like Hendrix, I'd never start a thread about it, you asked for my opinion, now you have it, and this post is proof................ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mojorule Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 I dig Hendrix! what I never really cared for was Noel Redding and Mitch Mitchell. The jams they go on just turn into Tom rolls and 16th notes. Now when Billy Cox got on the bass things got better, but I don't think he ever played with a drummer that knew where Jimi was going. Gary Moore? He's had the opportunity to play with the best and this is all he's done with it....he's a good guitarist, but nothing truly outstanding beyond his accuracy and speed. I like Hendrix, and I like Noel Redding and Mitch Mitchell. Those tom rolls and 16th notes held the mix together while Hendrix went wandering off, so that the whole thing still sounded like music. I like Cream too, but not as much. I am pretty sure that the classically trained cellist Jack Bruce is more accomplished as a bassist than the former six-string player Redding, and maybe Ginger Baker's solos are more varied than Mitchell's. But when Cream were in full improvisational flight, the fact that they were all virtuosos got in the way of the music for me. When three soloists all decide to push the envelope at exactly the same point and then continue to do so for 48 bars or more, then the result is (a very impressive, but ultimately not very musical) cacophany. Also, the fact that Clapton didn't really do sonic experimentation like Hendrix means that if anybody could have held Cream together in terms of rhythm and harmony, it would have been him. There's something rather wrong when the obvious solo instrument is the only one occasionally playing root notes and holding down the beat, while the rhythm section are doing anything but that. The Experience had that basic principle sussed. I like the Band of Gypsies stuff too, so all power to Billy Cox. But I don't think that Hendrix's songs were quite so tight musically by then, and the fact that they were recorded live affects their structure too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duane v Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Hendrix was the reason I learned how to play lead like the below vid.... If it wasn't for Jimi and EVH, I would still be playing nothing but Beatles songs IMO if you can learn Jimi, it opens the door for learning guys like Gary, Vai, EVH ect..ect.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lz4HHJm_vJw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freak show Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 I think it's extremely uncool to flame a guy for stating his opinion. We're always talking about "who is good", "who is underrated", "who is overrated", etc... The OP thinks Hendrix is overrated. There's no reason to insult him for thinking that. I have never been a huge fan of Hendrix, but he played great, and -- more importantly -- he wrote some very cool songs. What more could a person want? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duane v Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 i swear hendrix is only famous because he's dead. I think it's extremely uncool to flame a guy for stating his opinion. We're always talking about "who is good", "who is underrated", "who is overrated", etc... The OP thinks Hendrix is overrated. There's no reason to insult him for thinking that. Certainly there is no reason to flame anyone, however when one makes a BS comment like in Steve's above quote, I find it difficult in taking that individual seriously from a musician stand-point.... Individuals that have nothing better to do than dance around guitar forums and go coffin kicking, really makes me wonder, and not in a good way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freak show Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Certainly there is no reason to flame anyone, however when one makes a BS comment like in Steve's above quote, I find it difficult in taking that individual seriously from a musician stand-point.... Individuals that have nothing better to do than dance around guitar forums and go coffin kicking, really makes me wonder, and not in a good way That's your opinion, and you're entitled to it. As I wrote in my previous post, I don't agree with the OP either, but that doesn't make his statement a "BS comment" or "coffin kicking". I've heard a lot of people claim that certain stars got a "bonus" for dying young: Kurt Cobain, James Dean, Janis Joplin, etc. In some cases it may be true. I personally think Hendrix was a very talented individual, but I'm not dogmatic enough to call people who think differently "losers", and I wouldn't call their opinions "BS". That's wrong from every "standpoint". And in the end, if everyone were to think the same thing, there would be nothing to discuss. It's just a pity that not everyone can keep things at an objective level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FirstMeasure Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 I like Hendrix, and I like Noel Redding and Mitch Mitchell. Those tom rolls and 16th notes held the mix together while Hendrix went wandering off, so that the whole thing still sounded like music. I like Cream too, but not as much. I am pretty sure that the classically trained cellist Jack Bruce is more accomplished as a bassist than the former six-string player Redding, and maybe Ginger Baker's solos are more varied than Mitchell's. But when Cream were in full improvisational flight, the fact that they were all virtuosos got in the way of the music for me. When three soloists all decide to push the envelope at exactly the same point and then continue to do so for 48 bars or more, then the result is (a very impressive, but ultimately not very musical) cacophany. Also, the fact that Clapton didn't really do sonic experimentation like Hendrix means that if anybody could have held Cream together in terms of rhythm and harmony, it would have been him. There's something rather wrong when the obvious solo instrument is the only one occasionally playing root notes and holding down the beat, while the rhythm section are doing anything but that. The Experience had that basic principle sussed. I like the Band of Gypsies stuff too, so all power to Billy Cox. But I don't think that Hendrix's songs were quite so tight musically by then, and the fact that they were recorded live affects their structure too. It's funny you mention Cream, 'cause I always wonder what Hendrix, Baker, and Bruce would have sounded like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duane v Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 So according to some it's "bonus" points for dying young, and an additional star for achieving fame only because of an untimely death ...... interesting ... Don't see the high level of objectivity in the above Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 ...i swear hendrix is only famous because he's dead. He was famous when he was alive. P. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duane v Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 He was famous when he was alive. P. I think Steve failed to realize the realization of your above statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freak show Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 So according to some it's "bonus" points for dying young, and an additional star for achieving fame only because of an untimely death ...... interesting ... Don't see the high level of objectivity in the above LOL, you're putting two things together, which have nothing to do with one another. My statement that some people claim Kurt Cobain or James Dean became more popular after their death is merely a statement of fact. Some people do claim that. I didn't say these people are right or wrong. I merely stated that some think this. When I said we should be able to discuss things objectively, I meant without personal insults like "loser" and disparaging remarks like "BS". You're the mod, aren't you? Is it really conducive to friendly forum-discussion, when people do things like that? I've seen people banned for less... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freak show Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 He was famous when he was alive. Not only was he famous: I read once that Eric Clapton was in total awe of Hendrix' playing and actually started playing a Strat because of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FirstMeasure Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 So according to some it's "bonus" points for dying young, and an additional star for achieving fame only because of an untimely death ...... interesting ... Don't see the high level of objectivity in the above I've never bought into that line of thinking, there's plenty of guys that die young and never made it to legend status, and there's plenty of guys that live into old age and retain their legend status. Jimmy Page is just as legendary as Randy Rhodes Paul Kossoff is just as underrated as Mick Ralphs Death is just an unfortunate and abrupt end of an artists catalog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.