Page 2 of 3
Posted: 09 Jul 2006, 12:52
by &
The Slider wrote:I fucking hate Band of Gypsies with every fibre of my being.
It is lazy, noisy, tuneless, ego-wank noodling.
And you are absolutely right.
Posted: 09 Jul 2006, 13:37
by Prince Of Peace
The Slider wrote:I fucking hate Band of Gypsies with every fibre of my being.
It is lazy, noisy, tuneless, ego-wank noodling.
I wouldn't say it's
all crap, but (in general) you're right John. It was the sound of a man who was flitting from one thing (the Experience) to something else - but he didn't know what it was he wanted. As someone famous once said "It's easy to know what you
aren't for, it's much harder to know what you
do stand for". Jimi was at that stage with the Band Of Gypsies.
Where he would have gone, I know not. What I
do know is that, every once in awhile, I feel the need to explore some of the Experience - and, for that time, I am listening to the most primeval, pure, perfection I know of in music. It really
is that good. Jimi transformed the landscape - he made it so others could follow in his experimental tracks. Put simply, if there
is a musical genius that emerged from rock music - it's Jimi. Pure and simple.
Posted: 09 Jul 2006, 13:40
by Bungo the Mungo
Dark Clark wrote:The Slider wrote:I fucking hate Band of Gypsies with every fibre of my being.
It is lazy, noisy, tuneless, ego-wank noodling.
And you are absolutely right.
Well,
really!
*walks over to armchair furthest away from everybody, sits huffing and puffing, sips tea*
Posted: 09 Jul 2006, 19:08
by Phenomenal Cat
There's two ways of looking at it from my perspective: Either Hendrix rejuvenated pop music by virtually inventing post-1967 rock, or he utterly killed it. Even The Beatles struggled to cope with the emergence of the LP over the single as the dominant form (though it opened entirely new vistas for Harrison). Ironically, I favored Hendrix under the auspices of Chas Chandler, when he really did stick to the 2-1/2 to 3 minute song format.
Album: Axis Bold as Love
Song: Are You Experienced
The man's music makes me so damn happy.
Posted: 09 Jul 2006, 19:15
by bixhenry
Quite simply, the most important musician in my nascent musical life next to The Beatles. I heard Are You Experienced for the first time, in 1976, and it was literally the second rock album I ever heard (I was a young classically-trained pianist who, aside from a smattering of '70s AM pop radio, heard virtually no rock music - at least consciously - then) - the first was The Beatles 1962-1966. Hearing Hendrix after the already-seismic impact of The Beatles completely split my head open, and I pretty much quit piano lessons soon afterwards and became a self-taught guitarist.
It's funny. We all spend so much time qualifying greatness (e.g. "He/She was really great for awhile, and then lost it," or "Their first five albums are great , but their middle period is really shitty!") that we sometimes lose sight of the actual magnitude of the work being produced. And Hendrix, at his best, surely produced work of a staggering magnitude.
Yes, he was a guitarist unlike anyone else, and a great songwriter as well. But his overall presence on the musical landscape was/is almost otherworldly. He had to compete in the rock marketplace with the likes of Iron Butterfly and Blood, Sweat and Tears (who probably sold as many, if not more, records in the '60s than Jimi did), when he was more comparable to Miles Davis or Muddy Waters in terms of artistry.
Album - Are You Experienced
Song - 'Voodoo Chile (Slight Return)'
Posted: 09 Jul 2006, 19:16
by Bungo the Mungo
Phenomenal Cat wrote:There's two ways of looking at it from my perspective: Either Hendrix rejuvenated pop music by virtually inventing post-1967 rock, or he utterly killed it. Even The Beatles struggled to cope with the emergence of the LP over the single as the dominant form (though it opened entirely new vistas for Harrison). Ironically, I favored Hendrix under the auspices of Chas Chandler, when he really did stick to the 2-1/2 to 3 minute song format.
Oh,
hell, yes! Those early singles - and B-sides - were phenomenal!
Posted: 09 Jul 2006, 22:47
by The Slider
They are what made him special. Not turgid 12 minute blues workouts.
Posted: 09 Jul 2006, 22:57
by Prince Of Peace
The Slider wrote:They are what made him special. Not turgid 12 minute blues workouts.
Yes, but no. The experimentation of "Elecric Ladyland" (as an album) was just as important as the first two (essentially pop based) three minute rock songs. Of course,
nothing from his solo career suggests he was making fursther inroards into the music lexicon, so (in that sense) you are right.
Posted: 09 Jul 2006, 23:04
by frimleygreener
has any other other artist made such an impact?
Posted: 09 Jul 2006, 23:38
by My name is Spaulding
The Slider wrote:
I like him best when he isn't overloading the tubes.
Album: Axis
Song: Castles Made of Sand.
I´d happily go along with those choices
Posted: 09 Jul 2006, 23:42
by My name is Spaulding
bixhenry wrote:It's funny. We all spend so much time qualifying greatness (e.g. "He/She was really great for awhile, and then lost it," or "Their first five albums are great , but their middle period is really shitty!") that we sometimes lose sight of the actual magnitude of the work being produced.
Amen to that, even if that behaviour is part of what keeps these boards alive.
Posted: 10 Jul 2006, 00:56
by &
frimleygreener wrote:has any other other artist made such an impact?
Yes. Elvis Presley. The Beatles. Bob Dylan.
Oh, I'm not decrying Hendrix, but I think he was a one-off rather than a part of a lineage. He has more than his share of tremendous achievements, but they aren't the sort that got picked up on and incorporated into rock tradition.
Not in the way that, say, Jimmy Page (clearly the less imaginative of the two) managed to pass on his craft. Jimmy Page riffage is the cornerstone of hard rock, for better or for worse. Hendrix, for all his mindblowage, never got his foot in the door in nearly the same way.
It's much like Moon and Bonham. Moon was
much more strikingly original, but
every drummer these days picks up on Bonzo's playing.
Posted: 10 Jul 2006, 01:27
by Quaco
Incredible, inventive guitarist. Tasty rhythm playing. A
fucking brilliant drumer in the band. Really great singles. A few excellent longer tracks. ... and about my 49
th favorite artist. I honestly like Gary Lewis and the Playboys better!
Album:
Are You Experienced? - which scared the crap out of me when I was young!
Songs: "Are You Experienced?", "Third Stone from the Sun", "1983...", and "Have You Ever Been to Electric Ladyland".
Posted: 10 Jul 2006, 02:45
by Phenomenal Cat
Dark Clark wrote:frimleygreener wrote:.Oh, I'm not decrying Hendrix, but I think he was a one-off rather than a part of a lineage. He has more than his share of tremendous achievements, but they aren't the sort that got picked up on and incorporated into rock tradition.
This is pretty hard to gauge though. Innovation was so fast and furious between 1964-1969, it's those landmarks that pushed everyone else that much further that much faster. Hendrix put everyone on notice almost immediately, and though I take your point that you're a fan, I don't think you're giving Hendrix enough credit, especially on how he influenced his contemporaries. Even if he had only put out "Purple Hze", that one single would have been enough to change the face of rock music permanently. Zeppelin and Sabbath just perfected the model by keeping it stadium-friendly and white. He was a one-off in that he dropped out of the skies and went right back, but he and his band were so fluid they made Cream look oafish and raised the bar to an extent that rock music never went back to sounding like The Hollies.
Posted: 10 Jul 2006, 03:05
by &
On a related note, I think the Experience are
never given enough credit as a band. Mitch Mitchell is almost (if not equally) as big a factor in the records and the gigs sounding so madly fluid. Mitchell was almost the same person as Hendrix if the live recordings are any testament.
The only other band I've heard such one-foot-over-the-edge coordination is in The 'Oo, and even those monsters arguably held on to it for a mere two or three years before losing their way between trying to reproduce '
Quadrophenia' live and trying to hold on to the organised chaos motif.
Phenomenal Cat wrote:... they made Cream look oafish...
I've always thought that Cream jams were a bit oafish to begin with. They're at their best when they're keeping it concise... on long jams, everybody seems to go off on a tangent and it becomes a mess. It's like they never bothered to listen to one another at all.
Posted: 10 Jul 2006, 03:15
by Phenomenal Cat
I don't know where the guy came from, but Mitch Mitchell is the shit.
Posted: 10 Jul 2006, 03:45
by king feeb
While it's true that the
Band Of Gypsies album is a mess, there seems to be a perception that he was artistically finished. But his final recorded album,
First Rays Of A New Rising Sun, shows that he was changing direction to a funkier, harder-edged sound. No sloppy blues jams here, just real strong songs like "Angel", "Isabella", "Freedom", "Ezy Rider", "Room Full Of Mirrors", "Dolly Dagger", and "Earth Blues". Originally, this projected double album was torn apart after Hendix's death, and released posthuminously as
Cry Of Love while other cuts appeared on
War Heroes and the
Rainbow Bridge soundtrack. But now that the double album has been assembled by Eddie Kramer in its intended form, it's one of my favorite Hendrix LPs.
Album:
Electric Ladyland
Song: "Ezy Rider" (Just for the Hell of it!)
Dark Clark wrote:I've always thought that Cream jams were a bit oafish to begin with. They're at their best when they're keeping it concise... on long jams, everybody seems to go off on a tangent and it becomes a mess. It's like they never bothered to listen to one another at all.
Those guys wouldn't even ride to the gig in the same car. I'm fairly sure they hated each other, and that
does show in their long improvs. It's not surprising they don't pull together as a unit very often.
Posted: 10 Jul 2006, 10:13
by The Slider
Prince Of Peace wrote:The Slider wrote:They are what made him special. Not turgid 12 minute blues workouts.
Yes, but no. The experimentation of "Elecric Ladyland" (as an album) was just as important as the first two (essentially pop based) three minute rock songs. Of course,
nothing from his solo career suggests he was making fursther inroards into the music lexicon, so (in that sense) you are right.
Yes but YES.
there is a diference between '1983' and 'Voodoo Chile (
not the slight return)'
They both go on forever, but one of them has a point and the other is aimless, pedestrian noodling.
Posted: 10 Jul 2006, 22:19
by Clippernolan
These threads are making me aware of just how many "greatest hits" records I have!
Album - the one I've got - A Best of
Song - This is a hard one. Maybe "Axis: Bold As Love", with a nod to "Little Wing", "Fire", "Angel", and "Freedom", the last one being a very funky track. I agree that Hendrix was a very compelling vocalist and the thing which draws me in is the interplay between his voice and what the guitar is doing - it's kind of like the guitar is the movie, and his voice is the director's commentary.
Posted: 10 Jul 2006, 22:21
by Matt Wilson
A god.
And it's all great, not just good.
I've got over thirty Hendrix CDs and none of them are boots.
Album: Electric Ladyland
Song: Voodoo Chile (Slight Return) or All Along the Watchtower