| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Tony R 
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: July 16 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 11979
|
 Posted: April 12 2009 at 11:44 |
 Petrovsk Mizinski wrote:
Tony R wrote:
I love these stories about Hendrix playing out of tune as if he was some hack who just messed about, got some interesting sounds and was very lucky. The guy earned a living as a session musician for many years and was certainly in demand in the mid 60's. If he couldnt really play then he wouldnt have lasted 5 minutes! Then there's the stories about all the top guitarists standing open-mouthed in awe when they saw him in concert, including Eric Clapton, they would hardly give props to someone who played out of tune. Hendrix was the Picasso of the electric guitar and his style transcended blues or pop or even psychedelia. He is unique and if he'd survived I'm damn sure he'd have been a giant of the jazz-fusion scene, as some have mentioned.Gilmour? Wonderful guitarist and the right man for Pink Floyd when they needed to move to the next level, but better than Hendrix? He'd be the first to laugh at this I reckon.
|
Really, I don't think anyone is accusing Hendrix of ALWAYS having poor intonation and/or being sloppy with other areas of guitar technique, because he wasn't always obviously.The point is more, in order to have what is considered good technique, you need to be consistent all the time.Consistency of good technique is what makes people like Allan Holdsworth or Chopin the viruosos they were/are. For someone like Holdsworth, a bad playing day would be a few minor mistakes and even then you almost wouldn't notice the mistakes anyway unless you were a guitarist like myself.Hendrix was lacking in consistency.He had great nights from what I hear, where he was on the ball and played tight, but other times he wasn't quite on the boat and his playing was all over the placeDavid Gilmour, on the other hand, has a reputation for his precise, controlled playing. |
Regarding his "off- nights," you do know he was a heavy drug-user don't you?
|
 |
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46828
|
Posted: April 12 2009 at 11:49 |
|
also was forced to perform several hundred shows a year.... by the people holding his leash....
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 64569
|
Posted: April 12 2009 at 18:50 |
Petrovsk Mizinski wrote:
Atavachron wrote:
actually Hendrix was a stickler for being in tune (no small trick with the way he played, BTW), much of his stuff would've sounded completely wrong had he been out
|
Again, no one is accusing him of always being out of tune, but come on, there are enough live performances of him that are proof enough he was off as a result of his playing or because his guitar couldn't keep.
Fact is, he didn't have the high quality locking tremolo systems that we have been taking for granted since the 80s that ensure guys like Satch of Vai never go out of tune from their intense whammy bar usage, or even locking tuners and stuff like that.
As a reference point, I had a 2 point non locking system on my recent 6 string I used to play, and this was a high end guitar mind you. Top of the line American made locking tuners, 2 point knife edge tremolo, very very well made and also the design of the headstock and tuners eliminated string trees which further aid tuning stability, and no matter how much set up time I put into the thing, no matter how much pencil graphite I put into the saddles, within about half an hour of serious whammy bar abuse I would have to retune at least one of the strings.
Now imagine you have a vintage 6 screw trem like the one Hendrix, (which is inherently less stable than a 2 point knife edge modern tremolo like the one I have) with no locking tuners. There is only so much it can take before every string is going to to bind in the nut and/or bridge saddles. Hendrix had more than his fair share of tuning stability problems because of the inherent weaknesses in the tremolo design.
Spend as much time setting up and maintaining a 6 screw trem as you like, but it's not fail proof and there is a point where it just doesn't hold in tune anymore.
EVH himself used 6 screw trems before he went to locking systems, and even then, he had to spend ages working on getting the set up as absolutely perfect as possible to make sure it stayed in tune, because you have to remember at the time the Van Halen debut was released, there was no such thing as being able to buy a Floyd Rose and putting it into your guitar. In the end, he switched to Floyd Rose systems because 6 screws vintage designs couldn't keep up with the abuse he gave it.
Of course, Gilmour uses the same trem (since there was only one opion available at the time, unlike today where Fender offer 6 screw, 2 point knife edge and Floyd Rose locking systems), but it seems clear to me he abused the tremolo a lot less and hence, didn't run into the same tuning stability problems Hendrix did.
|
sure but there's more going on to keeping in relatively good tune than one's gear-- Eddie said he had to "tweak" his bar after use (to re-tension the strings) among other things.. Hendrix can often be seen tuning in mid-song with either hand and would do other things to maintain intonation and knew immediately when he was out, drug-induced haze or not.
Edited by Atavachron - April 12 2009 at 18:52
|
|
JLocke
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
|
Posted: April 12 2009 at 19:49 |
Atavachron wrote:
"he played sloppy" is like saying Charles Bukowski had a rough writing style..it misses the point, doesn't it? Besides, Hendrix didn't play sloppy, at least no more than Keith Emerson flubbed notes left and right and Robert Plant's voice failed on a regular basis |
I don't see your point. I never said those tother guys were any better than Jimi . . . 
Besides, I love his music, so why do tyou feel like you have to defend him? I'm not attacking him, even. I'm just saying that he wasn't a very 'neat' player. To say otherwise makes me feel like you're simply trying to argue, when as far as myself (and plenty of others here) are concerned, it's pretty obvious that Hendrix was all over the place when he played.
I'm not saying he sucked as a musician or a songwriter, nor am I saying I think his playing style was a bad thing, all I'm saying is that he played sloppy. Everyone has their own style, and that's okay. It reflects absolutely nothing about their character or their capability musically. And I am sorry if you felt like I was somehow saying Hendrix was 'less than' anyone else; I certanly was not.
Edited by p0mt3 - April 12 2009 at 19:49
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 64569
|
Posted: April 12 2009 at 19:52 |
|
of course I'm just trying to argue, and your clarification is appreciated
|
|
ghost_of_morphy
Prog Reviewer
Joined: March 08 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2755
|
Posted: April 12 2009 at 20:49 |
Anybody who suggests that the moderately talented Gilmour is even equivalent to the sublime and groundbreaking Hendrix should be shot.
Not to disparage Gilmour, mind you. The guy plays well and is also innovative in a moderate way. But Hendrix was (and still would be, if he weren't so incessently copied) a giant.
|
|
|
|
AlbertMond
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 27 2008
Location: Namibia
Status: Offline
Points: 139
|
Posted: April 12 2009 at 21:12 |
ghost_of_morphy wrote:
the moderately talented Gilmour |
Lolwut?
|
Promotion so blatant that it's sad: 
|
|
crimson87
Prog Reviewer
Joined: January 03 2008
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 1818
|
Posted: April 12 2009 at 21:23 |
p0mt3 wrote:
crimhead wrote:
Easy Money wrote:
^ I'm no Chuck Berry fan, but nobody plays his songs right except that ugly guy in the Stones. Berry actually uses real nice inventive sparse RnB chords, while your typical local bar band tramples all over that. |
We all know that Chuck stole that sound from Marty McFly when he went back in time to play at his mom and dad's prom to get them together. Doesn't anybody remember Back to the Future?
|
"Hey, Chuck? Chuck! It's Marvin. You're cousin, Marvin Berry?! Y'know that new sound you're lookin' for? Well listen to this!!!" |
Actually Marty Mc Fly invented sweep picking way back in 1955 , talk about a guitar god.
|
|
Statutory-Mike
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 15 2008
Location: Long Island
Status: Offline
Points: 3737
|
Posted: April 12 2009 at 21:48 |
|
I'm going to agree with Harry 100%, David Gilmour by a long shot. I honestly don't see what anyone see's in Hendrix.
|
|
|
|
AlbertMond
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 27 2008
Location: Namibia
Status: Offline
Points: 139
|
Posted: April 12 2009 at 22:25 |
crimson87 wrote:
p0mt3 wrote:
crimhead wrote:
Easy Money wrote:
^ I'm no Chuck Berry fan, but nobody plays his songs right except that ugly guy in the Stones. Berry actually uses real nice inventive sparse RnB chords, while your typical local bar band tramples all over that. |
We all know that Chuck stole that sound from Marty McFly when he went back in time to play at his mom and dad's prom to get them together. Doesn't anybody remember Back to the Future?
|
"Hey, Chuck? Chuck! It's Marvin. You're cousin, Marvin Berry?! Y'know that new sound you're lookin' for? Well listen to this!!!" |
Actually Marty Mc Fly invented sweep picking way back in 1955 , talk about a guitar god. |
Not to mention tapping. The guy was waaaaay ahead of his time.
|
Promotion so blatant that it's sad:
|
|
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195
|
Posted: April 13 2009 at 02:19 |
MisterProg2112 wrote:
I'm going to agree with Harry 100%, David Gilmour by a long shot. I honestly don't see what anyone see's in Hendrix. |
Maybe you should ask David Gilmour. He used to cover Hendrix songs before he joined Pink Floyd ... BTW: If you don't get what's special about Hendrix ... take a look at the time line. Hendrix really changed the way the electric guitar was used in a band context. He influenced virtually every other guitarist of his time and beyond, including Gilmour.
|
|
JLocke
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
|
Posted: April 13 2009 at 02:22 |
Atavachron wrote:
of course I'm just trying to argue, and your clarification is appreciated
|
No problem. 
And, aren't we all? 
|
|
Visitor13
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: February 02 2005
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Points: 4702
|
Posted: April 13 2009 at 10:01 |
Tony R wrote:
I love these stories about Hendrix playing out of tune as if he was some hack who just messed about, got some interesting sounds and was very lucky. The guy earned a living as a session musician for many years and was certainly in demand in the mid 60's. If he couldnt really play then he wouldnt have lasted 5 minutes! Then there's the stories about all the top guitarists standing open-mouthed in awe when they saw him in concert, including Eric Clapton, they would hardly give props to someone who played out of tune.
Hendrix was the Picasso of the electric guitar and his style transcended blues or pop or even psychedelia. He is unique and if he'd survived I'm damn sure he'd have been a giant of the jazz-fusion scene, as some have mentioned.
Gilmour? Wonderful guitarist and the right man for Pink Floyd when they needed to move to the next level, but better than Hendrix? He'd be the first to laugh at this I reckon.
|
Yes, exactly. And that whole 'good' vs 'bad' technique argument is moot anyway. If you play good music, you have good technique, simple as that. It's like when Certified says Gentle Giant were much better technicians than Dream Theater, I completely agree with him.
FWIW, Hendrix was one of the first, if not the first guitarist to wow Miles Davis. They never got a chance to record together due to Hendrix's death, but Davis went on to include the guitar as a permanent feature in his bands since then.
I'm yet to hear any musician of Davis's stature lavish praise on Gilmour.
|
|
Petrovsk Mizinski
Prog Reviewer
Joined: December 24 2007
Location: Ukraine
Status: Offline
Points: 25210
|
Posted: April 13 2009 at 10:30 |
Tony R wrote:
Petrovsk Mizinski wrote:
Tony R wrote:
I love these stories about Hendrix playing out of tune as if he was some hack who just messed about, got some interesting sounds and was very lucky. The guy earned a living as a session musician for many years and was certainly in demand in the mid 60's. If he couldnt really play then he wouldnt have lasted 5 minutes! Then there's the stories about all the top guitarists standing open-mouthed in awe when they saw him in concert, including Eric Clapton, they would hardly give props to someone who played out of tune. Hendrix was the Picasso of the electric guitar and his style transcended blues or pop or even psychedelia. He is unique and if he'd survived I'm damn sure he'd have been a giant of the jazz-fusion scene, as some have mentioned.Gilmour? Wonderful guitarist and the right man for Pink Floyd when they needed to move to the next level, but better than Hendrix? He'd be the first to laugh at this I reckon.
|
Really, I don't think anyone is accusing Hendrix of ALWAYS having poor intonation and/or being sloppy with other areas of guitar technique, because he wasn't always obviously.The point is more, in order to have what is considered good technique, you need to be consistent all the time.Consistency of good technique is what makes people like Allan Holdsworth or Chopin the viruosos they were/are. For someone like Holdsworth, a bad playing day would be a few minor mistakes and even then you almost wouldn't notice the mistakes anyway unless you were a guitarist like myself.Hendrix was lacking in consistency.He had great nights from what I hear, where he was on the ball and played tight, but other times he wasn't quite on the boat and his playing was all over the placeDavid Gilmour, on the other hand, has a reputation for his precise, controlled playing. |
Regarding his "off- nights," you do know he was a heavy drug-user don't you?
|
No, of course, as someone who has been listening to him for a few years, I wouldn't know that *sarcasm* So what if he was a drug user? You think that excuses someone from a bad performance? I really wouldn't want to pay to go to a gig, only to have the artist sound like turd because he is off his nut on drugs/alcohol/has been awake for 72 hours straight or whatever. Why is it any more acceptable for Hendrix to have turned up on stage totally fried, yet if Steve Wilson were to come on stage totally hammered, forget half the lyrics, play out of key for half the time, people would positively pissed off their spent that money on a crap performance? Sorry, but being drunk/on drugs is not an excuse for a bad performance. A good excuse might be because of equipment malfunction beyond the artist's control or something pretty reasonable like that. It is within someone's control as to whether they get on stage blazed or not, so there is no excuse. And no, addiction is not an excuse either, go to rehab and get yourself sorted out before you continue gigging. You wanna stay on top of your game? Practice and retain a reasonable level of self control in regards to drug or alcohol use. Jimi wasn't always on top of his game unfortunately.
|
|
|
|
Negoba
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5208
|
Posted: April 13 2009 at 10:44 |
Both played in a pentatonic-based style, used lots of bends, fused blues with psychedelia, it's not an unreasonable comparison.
Both had incredible touch, both could be expressive and truly seem like they were channelling something deep or otherworldly.
"All along the Watchtower" is psychedelic rock guitar at its apex. Considering how many imitators have failed to match that work (Page came closest) I rank Hendrix up among the inciendary stars of rock. The guy invented rock guitar as we know it.
Having a guitar teacher who basically used those guys solos as my textbook, I would say that Gilmour's are much easier to understand, though reproducing his touch is remarkably elusive. Of course, he spent years developing it, and claims that much of his early Floyd work was just mucking around.
I actually prefer listening to Gilmour now, as the compositions are more complete and I just connect more with the music.
Finally, neither of those guys were looking to be the "Best guitarist," but were trying to create transformative music. They both succeeded. Django Reinhart could kick both of them technically decades before. Chet Atkins could kick both of them technically at the time of their performances and he was an old coot. Who cares? I'd rather listen to Pink Floyd because that's just where my tastes lie.
|
|
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
|
|
Petrovsk Mizinski
Prog Reviewer
Joined: December 24 2007
Location: Ukraine
Status: Offline
Points: 25210
|
Posted: April 13 2009 at 11:08 |
Visitor13 wrote:
Tony R wrote:
I love these stories about Hendrix playing out of tune as if he was some hack who just messed about, got some interesting sounds and was very lucky. The guy earned a living as a session musician for many years and was certainly in demand in the mid 60's. If he couldnt really play then he wouldnt have lasted 5 minutes! Then there's the stories about all the top guitarists standing open-mouthed in awe when they saw him in concert, including Eric Clapton, they would hardly give props to someone who played out of tune.
Hendrix was the Picasso of the electric guitar and his style transcended blues or pop or even psychedelia. He is unique and if he'd survived I'm damn sure he'd have been a giant of the jazz-fusion scene, as some have mentioned.
Gilmour? Wonderful guitarist and the right man for Pink Floyd when they needed to move to the next level, but better than Hendrix? He'd be the first to laugh at this I reckon.
|
Yes, exactly. And that whole 'good' vs 'bad' technique argument is moot anyway. If you play good music, you have good technique, simple as that. It's like when Certified says Gentle Giant were much better technicians than Dream Theater, I completely agree with him.
FWIW, Hendrix was one of the first, if not the first guitarist to wow Miles Davis. They never got a chance to record together due to Hendrix's death, but Davis went on to include the guitar as a permanent feature in his bands since then.
I'm yet to hear any musician of Davis's stature lavish praise on Gilmour. |
"If you play good music, you have good technique, simple as that" That is ridiculous, sorry. I think the Clash made good music, but good technique they did not have. I love the old Metallica records, yet Kirk Hammett is one of the sloppiest guitarists of any guitarist who came from the 80s thrash metal scene. My sister likes the Sex Pistols, to her it's good music, but the fact is they couldn't play for sh*t.
|
|
|
|
Tony R
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: July 16 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 11979
|
Posted: April 13 2009 at 11:15 |
Petrovsk Mizinski wrote:
Tony R wrote:
Petrovsk Mizinski wrote:
Tony R wrote:
I love these stories about Hendrix playing out of tune as if he was some hack who just messed about, got some interesting sounds and was very lucky. The guy earned a living as a session musician for many years and was certainly in demand in the mid 60's. If he couldnt really play then he wouldnt have lasted 5 minutes! Then there's the stories about all the top guitarists standing open-mouthed in awe when they saw him in concert, including Eric Clapton, they would hardly give props to someone who played out of tune. Hendrix was the Picasso of the electric guitar and his style transcended blues or pop or even psychedelia. He is unique and if he'd survived I'm damn sure he'd have been a giant of the jazz-fusion scene, as some have mentioned.Gilmour? Wonderful guitarist and the right man for Pink Floyd when they needed to move to the next level, but better than Hendrix? He'd be the first to laugh at this I reckon.
|
Really, I don't think anyone is accusing Hendrix of ALWAYS having poor intonation and/or being sloppy with other areas of guitar technique, because he wasn't always obviously.The point is more, in order to have what is considered good technique, you need to be consistent all the time.Consistency of good technique is what makes people like Allan Holdsworth or Chopin the viruosos they were/are. For someone like Holdsworth, a bad playing day would be a few minor mistakes and even then you almost wouldn't notice the mistakes anyway unless you were a guitarist like myself.Hendrix was lacking in consistency.He had great nights from what I hear, where he was on the ball and played tight, but other times he wasn't quite on the boat and his playing was all over the placeDavid Gilmour, on the other hand, has a reputation for his precise, controlled playing. |
Regarding his "off- nights," you do know he was a heavy drug-user don't you?
|
No, of course, as someone who has been listening to him for a few years, I wouldn't know that *sarcasm*
So what if he was a drug user? You think that excuses someone from a bad performance?
I really wouldn't want to pay to go to a gig, only to have the artist sound like turd because he is off his nut on drugs/alcohol/has been awake for 72 hours straight or whatever.
Why is it any more acceptable for Hendrix to have turned up on stage totally fried, yet if Steve Wilson were to come on stage totally hammered, forget half the lyrics, play out of key for half the time, people would positively pissed off their spent that money on a crap performance?
Sorry, but being drunk/on drugs is not an excuse for a bad performance. A good excuse might be because of equipment malfunction beyond the artist's control or something pretty reasonable like that.
It is within someone's control as to whether they get on stage blazed or not, so there is no excuse. And no, addiction is not an excuse either, go to rehab and get yourself sorted out before you continue gigging.
You wanna stay on top of your game? Practice and retain a reasonable level of self control in regards to drug or alcohol use. Jimi wasn't always on top of his game unfortunately.
|
It's only rock 'n' roll...many, many artists have and continue to go on stage whilst heavily under the influence. The morality of it is incidental to that fact. These were different times and most of the audience were in similar states of chemically-induced mental dysfunction.
|
|
Alberto Muņoz
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 26 2006
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 3577
|
Posted: April 13 2009 at 11:21 |
Petrovsk Mizinski wrote:
Visitor13 wrote:
Tony R wrote:
I love these stories about Hendrix playing out of tune as if he was some hack who just messed about, got some interesting sounds and was very lucky. The guy earned a living as a session musician for many years and was certainly in demand in the mid 60's. If he couldnt really play then he wouldnt have lasted 5 minutes! Then there's the stories about all the top guitarists standing open-mouthed in awe when they saw him in concert, including Eric Clapton, they would hardly give props to someone who played out of tune.
Hendrix was the Picasso of the electric guitar and his style transcended blues or pop or even psychedelia. He is unique and if he'd survived I'm damn sure he'd have been a giant of the jazz-fusion scene, as some have mentioned.
Gilmour? Wonderful guitarist and the right man for Pink Floyd when they needed to move to the next level, but better than Hendrix? He'd be the first to laugh at this I reckon.
|
Yes, exactly. And that whole 'good' vs 'bad' technique argument is moot anyway. If you play good music, you have good technique, simple as that. It's like when Certified says Gentle Giant were much better technicians than Dream Theater, I completely agree with him.
FWIW, Hendrix was one of the first, if not the first guitarist to wow Miles Davis. They never got a chance to record together due to Hendrix's death, but Davis went on to include the guitar as a permanent feature in his bands since then.
I'm yet to hear any musician of Davis's stature lavish praise on Gilmour. |
"If you play good music, you have good technique, simple as that"
That is ridiculous, sorry.
I think the Clash made good music, but good technique they did not have.
I love the old Metallica records, yet Kirk Hammett is one of the sloppiest guitarists of any guitarist who came from the 80s thrash metal scene.
My sister likes the Sex Pistols, to her it's good music, but the fact is they couldn't play for sh*t.
|
"If you play bad music, you have a bad tecnique, simple as that"
"If you play good music, you have a bad technique, simple as that"
"If you play bad music, you have a good technique, simple as that"
Well the prisoner's dillema applies to this and also the whole sentences are a fallacy
|
|
|
|
Lost Follower
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 12 2008
Location: Londres
Status: Offline
Points: 130
|
Posted: April 13 2009 at 11:41 |
Petrovsk Mizinski wrote:
My sister likes the Sex Pistols, to her it's good music, but the fact is they couldn't play for sh*t.
|
Oh dear. Taxi for PM. 
|
|
~Jump you f**ker jump~
|
|
Visitor13
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: February 02 2005
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Points: 4702
|
Posted: April 13 2009 at 11:55 |
Petrovsk Mizinski wrote:
My sister likes the Sex Pistols, to her it's good music, but the fact is they couldn't play for sh*t.
|
It may be good music to your sister, but is it good music in the first place?
Anyway, if you make good music, that means you've got good technique, I stand by it. If your house can withstand an earthquake, it's well built, even if it is built of something most people would never use for one reason or another, or built using weird technologies.
BTW, Nick Cave can't sing for sh*t either.... sing Tuvan throat singing, that is. But who cares. |
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
David Gilmour > Jimi Hendrix
