what list?

* Behind Blue Eyes is awesome. One of my favorite songs.

Forgot "Behind Blue Eyes"...curious..but yeah, it should definitely make the list. Maybe in place of one of the other "Quadrophenia" songs...unless it's too late.

edit: posted too late =p

I don't think I've ever heard a good Who cover, but Phish are awesome, so I'm sure they did it justice.

Pearl Jam covered Baba O'Riley. And as I already explained, Behind Blue Eyes didn't make the upload list.

[QUOTE]I heard a cool Who cover done by Phish, do any of you know what song it might have been?[/QUOTE]

Phish actually covered all of Quadrophenia. So it is most likely a song off of that album.

[QUOTE]Nice reading skills.[/QUOTE]

Just addin' emphasis, juice bag. ;)

It is indeed a good song.

So is this FA going up tonight?

[QUOTE=lunch998]Ok guys, for my upcoming Who FA, I need help compiling a list of 10 or so songs to upload for the thread? Give me your favorites (I'm trying to get a general feel for what people like rather than posting my own personal favorites that most people don't enjoy quite as much).[/QUOTE]

The punk and the Godfather
5:15
Drowned
Who Are You
Trick of the Light
Won't Get Fooled Again
Bargain
My Generation
Amazing Journey/Sparks
My Generation

well, they're my favorites

[url]http://rateyourmusic.com/lists/list_view?list_id=22393&show=25&start=25[/url]

^Took some time and thinking, but it needed to be done...for some reason.

I don't think I'm done either.

[QUOTE=MalcolmYoungRock]So is this FA going up tonight?[/QUOTE]

No, it's not for another week and some I think. 2 weeks from whenever Riva posted his Metallica one.

-Clapton
-Bruce
-Baker

Clapton's woman tone and his blues-tinged rock guitar is really what made musicians take notice of Cream. Bruce wrote wonderful lyrics with Pete Brown, but when it came to them performing live, his vocals wasn't up to par, but I do like his bass improvisations while Clapton is improvising too. Baker is an awesome drummer, but he is between to other great musician who gave more to the band. Baker couldn't write songs, but he understood the role of a drummer, and he did it well.

Of course, I'm a guitarist, and a Clapton fan at that, so I might be a little bias. But I believe people went to see Cream more because of Clapton, and they owe much of their success to him.

Oh, and I just bought today King Crimson's [b]In the Court of the Crimson King[/b]. It's good, but I expected more. It kind of reminds me of Traffic at times (the flute parts, basically) and the Mars Volta took their formula to the extreme, which I like more.

^ I just dicoverd King Crimson today and am listening to them right now. Great band, overlooked and underated. I'm really digging the prog sound lately.

[QUOTE]Oh, and I just bought today King Crimson's In the Court of the Crimson King. It's good, but I expected more. It kind of reminds me of Traffic at times (the flute parts, basically) and the Mars Volta took their formula to the extreme, which I like more.[/QUOTE]

How can you expect more out of that album?! That's like perfect. (IMO)

[QUOTE]Clapton's woman tone and his blues-tinged rock guitar is really what made musicians take notice of Cream. Bruce wrote wonderful lyrics with Pete Brown, but when it came to them performing live, his vocals wasn't up to par, but I do like his bass improvisations while Clapton is improvising too. Baker is an awesome drummer, but he is between to other great musician who gave more to the band. Baker couldn't write songs, but he understood the role of a drummer, and he did it well.[/QUOTE]

I think you are giving Clapton too much credit. You seem to think that his technical ability, improvising, writing and vocal ability are well ahead of the others, while I just think that is completely wrong. But it is all opinion.

:)

[QUOTE=Badmoon]How can you expect more out of that album?! That's like perfect. (IMO)



I think you are giving Clapton too much credit. You seem to think that his technical ability, improvising, writing and vocal ability are well ahead of the others, while I just think that is completely wrong. But it is all opinion.

:)[/QUOTE]

In Cream, yes. I love his vocals on [i]Crossroads[/i]. If Bruce would've taken the vocals, it would've been a completely different track, and dare I say, a worst one at that. Bruce shone in the studio, but live, it was Clapton's show. I also don't think that his writting abilities are better, as you see in my other post, I gave all the writting credits where they were due (Bruce and Brown), but with [i]Tales of Brave Ulysses[/i], though not a solely-Clapton composition, holds much of it's greatness to the guitarist. But I do believe thatr his improvising were ahead of the others, but they others could keep up with him, which is why I think this band is one of the greatest, and way better than the Experience because of that.

And now, for the [b]In the Court of the Crimson King[/b] I expected it to be a little more heavier, and the flute solos dragged on a bit. I believe it's a great album, don't get me wrong, I just expected more. Maybe I would've enjoyed it more if I hadn't listened to the Mars Volta before King Crimson.

Which songs did Bruce sing on?

ITCOTCK is an incredible album.

[QUOTE=slowhand]Bruce shone in the studio, but live, it was Clapton's show.[/QUOTE]

That's a hard argument to make. I'd say in the studio it was Clapton's show, but live there's rarely a dull moment in the rhythm section. Maybe guitar stands out more to people, but that doesn't mean he was far superior to the other two. Bruce and Baker often propelled improvisations, and that was their strong point coming from a free-form jazz/R&B background. Clapton was great at doing it, but I would never say it was his show. Listen to Bruce behind Clapton's guitar solos, and Baker's blast beats or his off-beat stuff.
[QUOTE=ArrestThisMan]Which songs did Bruce sing on?[/QUOTE]
Most of them.

Lunch, I think we missed the blues festival :upset:

I would definitely disagree on your stance of the writing and singing. Nothing other than Clapton's guitar playing, improvisation and perhaps one or two melodies have impressed me. My opinion though.

[QUOTE]And now, for the In the Court of the Crimson King I expected it to be a little more heavier, and the flute solos dragged on a bit. I believe it's a great album, don't get me wrong, I just expected more. Maybe I would've enjoyed it more if I hadn't listened to the Mars Volta before King Crimson.[/QUOTE]

Perhaps overhyped.

[QUOTE]Baker often propelled improvisations, and that was their strong point coming from a free-form jazz/R&B background. Clapton was great at doing it, but I would never say it was his show. Listen to Bruce behind Clapton's guitar solos, and Baker's blast beats or his off-beat stuff.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, Baker and Bruce live were flawless and just exploding with style. Nothing short of the Rhythm Devils and Carlton and Ashton Barrett would impress me more.

[QUOTE=ArrestThisMan]Lunch, I think we missed the blues festival :upset:[/QUOTE]

Yea I know, hopefully I'll eventually go to it though.

[QUOTE=slowhand]I also don't think that his writting abilities are better, as you see in my other post, I gave all the writting credits where they were due (Bruce and Brown), but with [i]Tales of Brave Ulysses[/i], though not a solely-Clapton composition, holds much of it's greatness to the guitarist.[/QUOTE]

And Behind Clapton's wah experiments at the end, Bruce has an amazing bass line towards the fade out. The rhythm part of Cream is at least equally as important as Clapton. And Songwriting wise, Bruce was mostly in charge of the direction of the band.

I'm hoping to catch Kraftwerk at the 9:30 club. Have you been to any shows there?

Clapton
Bruce
Baker

I haven't heard a lot of their live stuff, so that's just going by their studio stuff. Plus I'm a (blues) guitarist so I'm kinda biased towards Clapton. I think they were all great though.

[QUOTE=lunch998]That's a hard argument to make. I'd say in the studio it was Clapton's show, but live there's rarely a dull moment in the rhythm section. Maybe guitar stands out more to people, but that doesn't mean he was far superior to the other two. Bruce and Baker often propelled improvisations, and that was their strong point coming from a free-form jazz/R&B background. Clapton was great at doing it, but I would never say it was his show. Listen to Bruce behind Clapton's guitar solos, and Baker's blast beats or his off-beat stuff.

Most of them.[/QUOTE]

Somehow, I knew the jazz background thing was going to pop-up.

Yes, Bruce and Baker come from a free-form jazz background, but Clapton, mainly with the Bluesbraker, improvised everynight. Nothing was played the same when Clapton played with that band. A different lick, different solos, he did his share of improvisition, which is basically where he gets the credit of being the 'God' of blues guitar. People back then saw Clapton, or rather [u]heard[/u] Clappton live more than on record, that's where he gets his following.

Watch the [b]Farewell Concert[/b] and tell me who takes the lead and who follows when they were improvising. Baker and Bruce pushed Clapton to his limits, which is why they are great, but Clapton pushed back also. Bruce had an amazing tallent of being the link between Clapton and Bruce, I'm not putting him down, but listen to Bruce vocals on album. Their fantastic! I then listend to them on Cream's [b]Live Cream Vol. 1 & 2[/b] and I was let down, and also hearing them on the [b]Farewell Concert[/b] left me wanting for more.

Of course, to each his own.

[QUOTE=ArrestThisMan]I'm hoping to catch Kraftwerk at the 9:30 club. Have you been to any shows there?[/QUOTE]

No, unfortunately. My friends saw someone (I forget who) there a couple weeks ago and it was great.

[QUOTE=Thickasabrick]Plus I'm a (blues) guitarist[/QUOTE]

OH HO! I see how it is.

Leave me and Gumboot to be the last Bluegrass players. :angry:

:p

I'm not trying to say Bruce's vocals were always fantastic live, in fact I was only looking at his instrumental parts. And while Clapton never played the same way any nights, neither did Bruce or Baker. Bruce himself said that the Graham Bond Band played around 330 gigs a year, so they rarely practiced. That means they developed everything live, and were constantly experimenting. I'm not even trying to say that Bruce and Baker were better than Clapton at improvising, I'm just arguing back that Clapton wasn't the best out of the three. Baker and Bruce are equally impressive live, and are equally improved live (at least they were at the time) as Clapton was. Again, Clapton is pushed out in front because of Ginger and Jack having parts that could easily be the melodies of their sound at any given time.

[QUOTE=lunch998]And Behind Clapton's wah experiments at the end, Bruce has an amazing bass line towards the fade out. The rhythm part of Cream is at least equally as important as Clapton. And Songwriting wise, Bruce was mostly in charge of the direction of the band.[/QUOTE]

Again, I don't and will never say that Clapton is the leader lyrical-wise, it was Bruce-Brown who did that part. And with [i]Tales of Brave Ulysses[/i] I'm refering to the lyrics, not the musical aspect of the song. The bass in this song is bassically the lead, and the guitar is just giving the guitar fills with the wah-wah fury.

[QUOTE=slowhand]Again, I don't and will never say that Clapton is the leader lyrical-wise, it was Bruce-Brown who did that part. And with [i]Tales of Brave Ulysses[/i] I'm refering to the lyrics, not the musical aspect of the song. The bass in this song is bassically the lead, and the guitar is just giving the guitar fills with the wah-wah fury.[/QUOTE]

When you said it was focused on Clapton I figured you meant the instrumentals.

And Bruce sings great on ToBU, since you keep bringing up vocals.

[QUOTE=lunch998]I'm not trying to say Bruce's vocals were always fantastic live, in fact I was only looking at his instrumental parts. And while Clapton never played the same way any nights, neither did Bruce or Baker. I'm not even trying to say that Bruce and Baker were better than Clapton at improvising, I'm just arguing back that Clapton wasn't the best out of the three. Baker and Bruce are equally impressive live, and are equally improved live (at least they were at the time) as Clapton was. Again, Clapton is pushed out in front because of Ginger and Jack having parts that could easily be the melodies of their sound at any given time.[/QUOTE]

Then you're bassically saying what I've said. I've mentioned it already, Bruce and Baker were no push-overs at this. They were as good as Clapton, but Clapton was the leader when it came down to improvisation and everyone follow suit. If you listen to Bruce's bass line, his just following what Clapton's doing on guitar, while Baker is just hitting everything in sight.

We aren't saying the same thing, because I don't always believe Clapton was leading the imrpovisations. All my points earlier were made in defense of Baker and Bruce leading their instrumental sections at times. Again I'm not saying all the time, but at times they pushed Clapton out, Clapton didn't lead them out.

Well, from what I've heard of them live, he did. Specially in the [b]Farewell Concert[/b]'s [i]Sunshine of Your Love[/i]. You can hear it clearly when Clapton changes what he's doing, Bruce follows. And when something like that doesn't happen, they're just improvising on their own, without regarding the others in the band, and still the guitar stands out more (not because it sound higher, because if you listen to the bass on the live recordings, it can easily be distinguished from the background noise, and has it's own singing voice).

Of course, I'm biased. I much rather listen to the blues than to jazz.

Anyways, this has been the most fun I've had in this forum for a while. Thanks.