SRV beasts Hendrix 100x over!!!

isaac · Unread post by **isaac** » Mon Sep 08, 2003 10:19 pm

yep...i'm glad people like buckley and dave were doing the stuff they were doing around that time.

hopelessposeur · Unread post by **hopelessposeur** » Tue Sep 09, 2003 8:07 pm

alright, Im not gonna call you all ignorant, I swear. And if not for the fact that you (poster) used the phrase 'youngsters', Id guess you to be about 17, but Ill skip that, too (because god knows theres nothing wrong with being 17 , it just sounded like a very 17-year-old thing to say). I love SRV and have for years, and I still listen to him more than hendrix. But I will say this:
Hendrix isnt famous for being very fast, and hes not famous for writing incredibly complex, hard-to-play songs. Most of them are fairly easy, in fact, after youve picked up a little bit of coordination. What makes him so damn great is that he did it first. Screaming solos, wah wahs, backwards solos, feedback, and hell, just the harmonies (bold as love) that the guy put together made him damn near a man from another planet. You say SRV put together a better Little Wing, but thered have been no little wing to improve on without jimi; very likely SRV wouldnt have much at all for you to listen to without jimi's influence; he definitely would have had more of an albert-king-style blues instead of the roaring, soaring sweetness that is 'telephone song' or 'couldnt stand the weather'. Go listen to 'one rainy wish' and ask yourself if 'Lenny' would have been written without it. Listen to 'power of soul' and see if you dont hear the blueprint for SRV's entire sound put down in one song.
I swear (sigh). Stevie would spank your ass for blasphemy if he were still alive today
Anybody with talent can play what hendrix played, but no amount of talent can match that level of creativity.

skilly · Unread post by **skilly** » Tue Sep 09, 2003 8:31 pm

well said

fatjack · Unread post by **fatjack** » Tue Sep 09, 2003 9:45 pm

hopelessposeur wrote:alright, Im not gonna call you all ignorant, I swear. And if not for the fact that you (poster) used the phrase 'youngsters', Id guess you to be about 17, but Ill skip that, too (because god knows theres nothing wrong with being 17 , it just sounded like a very 17-year-old thing to say). I love SRV and have for years, and I still listen to him more than hendrix. But I will say this:
Hendrix isnt famous for being very fast, and hes not famous for writing incredibly complex, hard-to-play songs. Most of them are fairly easy, in fact, after youve picked up a little bit of coordination. What makes him so damn great is that he did it first. Screaming solos, wah wahs, backwards solos, feedback, and hell, just the harmonies (bold as love) that the guy put together made him damn near a man from another planet. You say SRV put together a better Little Wing, but thered have been no little wing to improve on without jimi; very likely SRV wouldnt have much at all for you to listen to without jimi's influence; he definitely would have had more of an albert-king-style blues instead of the roaring, soaring sweetness that is 'telephone song' or 'couldnt stand the weather'. Go listen to 'one rainy wish' and ask yourself if 'Lenny' would have been written without it. Listen to 'power of soul' and see if you dont hear the blueprint for SRV's entire sound put down in one song.
I swear (sigh). Stevie would spank your ass for blasphemy if he were still alive today
Anybody with talent can play what hendrix played, but no amount of talent can match that level of creativity.

I never questioned Hendrix's ingenuity. He, of course, was probably the most creative musician that ever lived. But in terms of technical ability, SRV was slightly better. The choice is difficult, but I give SRV the advantage just because of his pure strength. SRV wouldn't be what he was if it wasn't for Hendrix, but he is better because of Jimi's influence.

And thanks for assuming we know nothing because were seventeen; obviously I have know idea what I'm talking about because I'm just a stupid teenager who doesn't know anything about music. Apparently, I must have never been allowed to listen to their music. And the fact the you said you aren't gonna call us ignorant most likely means that you do think were ignorant.

So we all appreciate your age-ist remarks...

douchebag

QuattroDore · Unread post by **QuattroDore** » Tue Sep 09, 2003 9:54 pm

"So we all appreciate your age-ist remarks..."

Hendrix was better because he was older, and therefore clearly knew more about music.

Matty Boom · Unread post by **Matty Boom** » Wed Sep 10, 2003 2:23 am

Just a comment, when I listen to Voodoo Chile from both Jimi and SRV, I admit, Stevie rips it up, but when Jimi belts it out, I really do believe he is a voodoo child. Make any sense?

Matty Boom · Unread post by **Matty Boom** » Wed Sep 10, 2003 2:32 am

I shouldn't have said that because I love them both. They both rock and they both did it, it's just too damn bad they didn't get the chance to get together and rip it up. I don't think they would have spent their time arguing who's better at what, I think they would have just put out some great music. But I don't know, this might not be very well thought out.

Dancing Ants · Unread post by **Dancing Ants** » Wed Sep 10, 2003 3:00 am

I'm gonna go with Clapton.

hopelessposeur · Unread post by **hopelessposeur** » Wed Sep 10, 2003 1:00 pm

fatjack wrote:So we all appreciate your age-ist remarks...

douchebag

Douchebag has got to be one of my all-time favorite words; it just rolls right off the tongue, doesnt it? Strangely enough, douchebags (like myself, I suppose) are the only people Ive ever -in my entire life- heard use the word 'ageist' (or age-ist, as you pre-fer).

fatjack wrote:And the fact the you said you aren't gonna call us ignorant most likely means that you do think were ignorant.

Sweet lord, its sherlock reincarnated :roll:

Seriously though, I said that because I really dont call it ignorant. If I could call it anything I guess Id call it an 'opinion without perspective', which without getting into too much detail, basically means that his opinion differs from mine. Oh well, the world still turns. The funny thing is, I like srv's 'little wing' better, too; I was only arguing the way the poster got to that opinion.

fatjack · Unread post by **fatjack** » Wed Sep 10, 2003 7:41 pm

hopelessposeur wrote:
fatjack wrote:So we all appreciate your age-ist remarks...

douchebag
Douchebag has got to be one of my all-time favorite words; it just rolls right off the tongue, doesnt it? Strangely enough, douchebags (like myself, I suppose) are the only people Ive ever -in my entire life- heard use the word 'ageist' (or age-ist, as you pre-fer).

fatjack wrote:And the fact the you said you aren't gonna call us ignorant most likely means that you do think were ignorant.
Sweet lord, its sherlock reincarnated
Seriously though, I said that because I really dont call it ignorant. If I could call it anything I guess Id call it an 'opinion without perspective', which without getting into too much detail, basically means that his opinion differs from mine. Oh well, the world still turns. The funny thing is, I like srv's 'little wing' better, too; I was only arguing the way the poster got to that opinion.

Interesting... I wasn't upset because you said you disagreed with our opinion. I was mad because you assumed that we thought we liked SRV better for a specific reason. And I'm sorry, if you say you aren't gonna call us ignorant, you mean were ignorant (what do you think 'opinion without perspective' means?)

And I al-so apo-lo-gize for my mis-use o-f th-e wo-rd ageist. I guess that makes me ignorant...

and I still think you're a douchbag.

skilly · Unread post by **skilly** » Thu Sep 11, 2003 8:55 pm

i knew this was gonna happen it always does on these posts

fatjack · Unread post by **fatjack** » Thu Sep 11, 2003 9:02 pm

TaylorsBaby225 wrote:i knew this was gonna happen it always does on these posts

werd

DMBTabs.com

SRV beasts Hendrix 100x over!!!

Who is online