Forum Home Forum Home > Other music related lounges > General Music Discussions
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - David Gilmour > Jimi Hendrix
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedDavid Gilmour > Jimi Hendrix

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 6>
Author
Message
Petrovsk Mizinski View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: December 24 2007
Location: Ukraine
Status: Offline
Points: 25210
Direct Link To This Post Topic: David Gilmour > Jimi Hendrix
    Posted: March 19 2009 at 19:30
In fact, by a long shot IMO.






Discuss.


Edited by HughesJB4 - March 19 2009 at 19:30
Back to Top
OzzProg View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 02 2008
Location: Quebec
Status: Offline
Points: 533
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 19 2009 at 19:59
Two distinct styles.

I'm sure if Hendrix was around during the 70's, he would have innovated some new things, and came up with a new sound.

The same goes for Gilmour, if he was not held back by Waters (as many claim he was, I included), he could have exploded into the best guitarist our world has yet to see.

Its like comparing RIO to Symphonic prog, hard to do.

However, at the end of the day, I prefer Gilmour's style over Hendrix's.
~Some of my Muzak~


<a href="Last.fm" rel="nofoll
Back to Top
The Pessimist View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: June 13 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 3797
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 19 2009 at 20:24
I've never really liked Hendrix (very overrated IMO), but I love Gilmour.
"Market value is irrelevant to intrinsic value."

Arnold Schoenberg
Back to Top
Petrovsk Mizinski View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: December 24 2007
Location: Ukraine
Status: Offline
Points: 25210
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 19 2009 at 21:01
Originally posted by OzzProg OzzProg wrote:

Two distinct styles.

I'm sure if Hendrix was around during the 70's, he would have innovated some new things, and came up with a new sound.

The same goes for Gilmour, if he was not held back by Waters (as many claim he was, I included), he could have exploded into the best guitarist our world has yet to see.

Its like comparing RIO to Symphonic prog, hard to do.

However, at the end of the day, I prefer Gilmour's style over Hendrix's.


Two distinct styles, but it's hardly a stretch like trying to compare a classical guitarist to a funk guitarist, which mind you, can still be done.

Back to Top
jammun View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 14 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3442
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 19 2009 at 21:17
I have all due respect for Gilmour, but please...
Back to Top
Logan View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Forum Moderator

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Utopia
Status: Offline
Points: 12188
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 19 2009 at 22:07
It's not so much about who is the better guitarist, or vocalist for that matter, for me, it's about whose music engages me more.  I like both, but I much prefer Hendrix.  I find him to be musically more vibrant and/or immediate in a way.  Gilmour is sometimes too polished to really connect with me; whereas, Hendrix has this grittier and more grounded (no matter how high he was) or real feel (even when "out' there), and "beautiful" stuff.  I was listening to "Castles Made of Sand" earlier today; love that track.
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15428
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 19 2009 at 22:12
Honestly if not for popular media's portrayal of Jimi Hendrix I never would have associated him with being a great guitar player or even a good composer. I don't find his playing all that interesting and I rarely listen to anything he's done. I just don't particularly enjoy him aside from a few listens here and there.

Gilmour on the other hand just had a way of making it feel like his guitar lines were speaking directly to you independent of any intentions of the man playing them. His playing is a very intimate experience for the listener and that is truly amazing.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Petrovsk Mizinski View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: December 24 2007
Location: Ukraine
Status: Offline
Points: 25210
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2009 at 04:41
Originally posted by jammun jammun wrote:

I have all due respect for Gilmour, but please...


But please........?
I'd love to actually know why you feel the way you do.
That short statement doesn't tell me a whole lot if I must be honest.
Back to Top
Chris S View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: June 09 2004
Location: Front Range
Status: Offline
Points: 6802
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2009 at 04:58
Well I am not sure you can compare the two. Two totally different styles, One died in his 20's, the other pushing 65 and still improvising and searching new limits.
 
Another poster claims Waters held Gilmour back......no way on earth could anyone hold Gilmour back. As for Jimi, he was like a bullet train just passing through
 
Boths gifts to the world of BIG music
Music - The Sound Librarian
...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...
Back to Top
Petrovsk Mizinski View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: December 24 2007
Location: Ukraine
Status: Offline
Points: 25210
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2009 at 05:35
Originally posted by Chris S Chris S wrote:

Well I am not sure you can compare the two. Two totally different styles, One died in his 20's, the other pushing 65 and still improvising and searching new limits.
 
Another poster claims Waters held Gilmour back......no way on earth could anyone hold Gilmour back. As for Jimi, he was like a bullet train just passing through
 
Boths gifts to the world of BIG music


Of course you can compare the two.
And no, they don't have totally different styles.
I would interpret "totally different styles' as meaning perhaps as one guitarist plays funk and the other technical death metal music perhaps.
But both are firmly rooted in the style of blues rock, both dabbled (to some extent or another) in psychadelic experimentation with their playing.
Maybe Gilmour was held back.
It's evident from watching various DVDs of Gilmour's playing and the fact that he teaches at the Academy of Contempory Music that he could probably play well beyond what he usually shows us, whereas I believe Hendrix was basically at his limit, in terms of pure technical skill on the guitar.

The big question/s:
Who do you prefer?
Why do you prefer the one you choose as your first preference?


Back to Top
Chris S View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: June 09 2004
Location: Front Range
Status: Offline
Points: 6802
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2009 at 06:10
^ I prefer neither and like each equally ,IMO, their very different styles, blues influences aside. You can compare them, I can't do that...sorry.Smile
Music - The Sound Librarian
...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...
Back to Top
harmonium.ro View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: August 18 2008
Location: Anna Calvi
Status: Offline
Points: 22979
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2009 at 06:29
Originally posted by HughesJB4 HughesJB4 wrote:

Originally posted by Chris S Chris S wrote:

Well I am not sure you can compare the two. Two totally different styles, One died in his 20's, the other pushing 65 and still improvising and searching new limits.
 
Another poster claims Waters held Gilmour back......no way on earth could anyone hold Gilmour back. As for Jimi, he was like a bullet train just passing through
 
Boths gifts to the world of BIG music


Of course you can compare the two.
And no, they don't have totally different styles.
I would interpret "totally different styles' as meaning perhaps as one guitarist plays funk and the other technical death metal music perhaps.
But both are firmly rooted in the style of blues rock, both dabbled (to some extent or another) in psychadelic experimentation with their playing.
Maybe Gilmour was held back.
It's evident from watching various DVDs of Gilmour's playing and the fact that he teaches at the Academy of Contempory Music that he could probably play well beyond what he usually shows us, whereas I believe Hendrix was basically at his limit, in terms of pure technical skill on the guitar.

The big question/s:
Who do you prefer?
Why do you prefer the one you choose as your first preference?




Well, you can never know that, can you? Maybe Jimi would have lived to play with Miles or ELP and to develop his technical & songwriting skills beyond anyone else's, maybe not... We can't know. Smile Still I appreciate your words about Gilmour, which is usually not very highly regarded here on PA.
Back to Top
AlbertMond View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 27 2008
Location: Namibia
Status: Offline
Points: 139
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2009 at 07:32
I prefer Gilmour, personally. However, I think Hendrix was probably a better guitarist.
Promotion so blatant that it's sad:
Back to Top
angelmk View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Post/Math Rock Team

Joined: November 22 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1954
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2009 at 09:18
Gilmour for me, i like Pink Floyd too much Heart
Back to Top
Alberto Muņoz View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 26 2006
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 3565
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2009 at 10:53

Strange comparison... cronological Hendrix was at his peak, when Gilmour is almost starting.

When Gilmour have his peak Hendrix was very death.
 
do not understand what is the real reason to compare those...
 
 


Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Albion
Status: Offline
Points: 33272
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2009 at 10:56
Originally posted by HughesJB4 HughesJB4 wrote:

Originally posted by Chris S Chris S wrote:

Well I am not sure you can compare the two. Two totally different styles, One died in his 20's, the other pushing 65 and still improvising and searching new limits.
 
Another poster claims Waters held Gilmour back......no way on earth could anyone hold Gilmour back. As for Jimi, he was like a bullet train just passing through
 
Boths gifts to the world of BIG music


Of course you can compare the two.
And no, they don't have totally different styles.
I would interpret "totally different styles' as meaning perhaps as one guitarist plays funk and the other technical death metal music perhaps.
But both are firmly rooted in the style of blues rock, both dabbled (to some extent or another) in psychadelic experimentation with their playing.
Maybe Gilmour was held back.
It's evident from watching various DVDs of Gilmour's playing and the fact that he teaches at the Academy of Contempory Music that he could probably play well beyond what he usually shows us, whereas I believe Hendrix was basically at his limit, in terms of pure technical skill on the guitar.

The big question/s:
Who do you prefer?
Why do you prefer the one you choose as your first preference?


I prefer Gilmour because I prefer the music he plays. I prefer Gilmour's technique and style because I prefer that kind of controlled playing. I recognise that Hendrix was a great innivotive guitarist, he just didn't record very music much that I liked.
 
To me this is one of those questions that has no definitive answer - we cannot speculate on how Hendrix would have developed as a guitarist - he could have gone so many ways - he could have just as easily become dull and repetitive or he could have gone on to the next level but he could have also burned out like Peter Green.
 
All the guitarists in the (UK) psychedelic scene in the late 60s fed off each other, they all influenced each other, and to some extent tried to out-do each other - Hendrix was a (reluctant) showman, Gilmour was never a showman - both pushed at the limits of what a guitar could do and what you could do with it, both on stage and, more importantly, in the studio  - both saw the studio as an extension of the instrument rather than just a means of recording it. Both were influenced by Syd Barrett (Barrett is often not recognised as a guitarist because he was never a great guitarist, but listening to him play there is a level of control in his use of slide, feedback and wah-peddle that shows a degree of finesse he is not usually associated with) - I would go as far as to say that Hendrix's use of the wah-peddle to control feedback is something he pick-up from watching Barrett play the UFO club in 66/67 rather than the other way around. Gilmour had to "copy" Barrett's techniques to be able to play Barrett's music, but he soon improved and developed those techniques beyond anything that Barrett (or Hendrix) had done - "Saucerful of Secrets" and "Echoes" are Gilmour taking the guitar to almost avant garde levels - whereas Hendrix never strayed too far from his blues roots, even at his most "progressive" Hendrix would never have recorded anything as ground-breaking as those where at the time. After Hendrix's death all comparisons are moot - Gilmour settled into his signature style with is preferred effects (Electric Mistress, stacked Leslie Speakers etc), and honed them to his preferred level of perfection - and the Hendrix Estate muddied the Hendrix-waters by releasing sub-par cash-in recordings that Hendrix would have never released himself.


Edited by Dean - March 20 2009 at 11:00


If you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would - Neil Gaiman
Back to Top
WalterDigsTunes View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: September 11 2007
Location: SanDiegoTijuana
Status: Offline
Points: 4373
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2009 at 11:04
Gilmour would play one note every thirty seconds or so, while Hendrix cared enough to actually play his instrument Wink
Back to Top
crimhead View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: October 10 2006
Location: Missouri
Status: Offline
Points: 19159
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2009 at 11:12
Apples and Oranges like others have said. Hendrix could play the blues as well and do it quite well. Both have their style and both have their place in music history. We will never know how much further Jimi could have taken it.
Back to Top
Mr ProgFreak View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 5082
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2009 at 12:17
I think that Hendrix was far more innovative and groundbreaking than Gilmour, and surely equally inspired.

Edited by Mr ProgFreak - March 20 2009 at 13:46
Back to Top
tszirmay View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Crossover Team

Joined: August 17 2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 4244
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2009 at 12:23
Well, they were both innovators, Jimi undeniably brought in a visceral style that simply did not yet exist at the time. Gilmour has a catalog of slick, elegant playing that is perhaps at the polar opposite of Hendrix' rage and fury. In terms of choosing one over the other, there can be little argument other than personal preference.
Both are icons.
"The more I analyze the human race, the more I love my dog" Mme de Stael
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 6>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.