LTS TRN 2 wrote:True, you were comparing the Trower wanking with the Burdon trainwreck
Case closed.
but consider that Burdon once was first rate
No, he wasn't. At his peak, he was never more than a mid level blue eyed soul wannabe. He wasn't even Stevie Winwood, much less Van Morrison...much less Ray Charles.
while Trower has always been a joke, just a one key Hendrix copier.
Goddammit, now wait a minute! Is he an SRV copier, a Hendrix copier or a Gilmour copier?
I'm gonna havta start using a pencil for my scorecard.
And you're missing the point entirely with Beck and Jimi.
How can I be?? You've yet to make one! All you've done is tell me I'm wrong, without offering up
anything in refutation.
You've offered zero specifics, and zero clarifications.
The world of a difference was not only acid (still a huge factor) but that Jimi was an actual, or authentic, r&b player, unlike Beck who while a true convert of Blues was entirely different.
Ultimately, yes. Initially, they were much more similar, at least when it came to
soloing.
In terms of song structure, yes, they were always different. Beck was never an R&B player, not unless you wish to count some of his techno R&B meanderings on something like
Flash, or maybe his "People Get Ready" work with Rod Stewart. (Which was brilliant.)
Hendrix was just plain a better song writer, which lent itself more to the R&B genre. Beck was always more of a guitar instrumentalist, at heart.
Still, Beck
was offered the Rolling Stones gig, which would've forced him to play a buttload of R&B, and while he would've chafed at the constraints of that type of band he could've pulled it off, at least for awhile.
And as far as Jimi's "rhythm" playing, here you reveal that you've not only missed the point, you've missed the train entirely. Rhythm is lead (and vice versa), as Joe Pass demonstrates.
Stanley Jordan demonstrates it even better.
Still, c'mon, no, "rhythm isn't lead, and vice versa," not when there's a lead vocal occupying the "lead" space.
You can't be doing "lead rhythm and lead guitar, or vice versa" in the middle of the vocal section of "Little Wing" or "Hey Joe."
Christ, don't even begin to compare jazz comping and jazz lead playing with rhythm guitar playing in an R&B or rock setting.
Ike would've kicked your ass right off the tour bus.
And your definition of a guitarist in the first place is bogus.
Who cares? It's
my definition. I don't claim it to be official, or universal.
I don't consider myself to be a guitarist, because I'm merely an amatuer...a hobbyist.
If you do, fine. I don't. I realize the literal definition of "guitarist" is merely "one who plays the guitar," but just because someone paints their house or changes the tire on their car I don't consider them to be a painter or a mechanic.
You're actually comparing a professional and an amateur, and neither of these actually denotes whether the player is a "real" guitarist or not.
Of course not. It's just how I categorize guitar players. There are people who play guitar, like myself, and there are people who are guitarists, and those are the pros.
Okay, I'll back off that definition, a little. If a person is a
part time pro, meaning they do get paid to play, I'll still consider them to be a guitarist. They don't have to earn their entire living from it.
That would even include street musicians. If a guy is out there on Fisherman's Wharf, guitar case open, and he's earning himself $50 or whatever by playing for tips, yeah, he's a guitar player.
I've actually done that, only in L.A., and I guess during that period of time I did consider myself to be a guitarist, though it wasn't a full time gig.
Anyway, again, sticking a thermometer in your daughter's mouth and applying a soothing salve to her skinned knee doesn't make you a doctor.
And lay off the muzzies, without them Israel would have to get a job.
:D
