[QUOTE=DemBonez]So in other words you had a completely irrelevant post just showing that Led Zeppelin had "bad taste"? Touché Ned. Quoting what I said and having an irrelevant comment on it is a great discussion starter.[/QUOTE]

Not at all irrelevant. As I said, it matters what you do with what you take. That's my point.

[QUOTE=Fatback]It's a shame we were robbed of Hendrix so quickly. We can only guess what he would be doing now.
He MIGHT be whoring himself out to the likes of P-Diddy (or whoever the hell he is nowadays) as Page did but I doubt it.[/QUOTE]

Difficult to say what he might be doing NOW. He might be long retired. Of more immediate interest is what he would have done in the early seventies if he had lived through them. What would the Gil Evans collaboration have been like? What would a Miles Davis collaboration have been like. What effect would Hendrix's venturing into jazz have had on the metal-heads who still revere him? Would they have repudiated him or would we have been spared tons of bull**** metal?

[QUOTE=Ned]Difficult to say what he might be doing NOW. He might be long retired. Of more immediate interest is what he would have done in the early seventies if he had lived through them. What would the Gil Evans collaboration have been like? What would a Miles Davis collaboration have been like. What effect would Hendrix's venturing into jazz have had on the metal-heads who still revere him? Would they have repudiated him or would we have been spared tons of bull**** metal?[/QUOTE]
Good point, Ned.
...and just FYI, my bud Jimmy Haslip is planning a tribute album to Jimi. I suspect that Robben Ford will be involved.
I personally can't wait!

Hendrix was a musical genius. Nobody can really specify what he would be doing if he were still alive. He could've done anything IMHO.

I don't think Hendrix or Page can hold a candle to Frank Zappa in terms of musical originality or musicianship. I'd like to see someone give a good arguement.

This is a thread about Hendrix. Not a thread against Hendrix and not about what Blues is.

[QUOTE=smart blockhead]I don't think Hendrix or Page can hold a candle to Frank Zappa in terms of musical originality or musicianship. I'd like to see someone give a good arguement.[/QUOTE]
Well.... it's apples and oranges, isn't it? I just know that when Hendrix hit, I was already playing for a little while and it seemed VERY original to me. He was re-inventing the guitar...playing licks that hadn't been heard before. i liked Zappa too but like 98% of people it was his off-the-wall lyrics and humor that caught my attention. I was a very young dude and his Edgard Varese-like stuff was of little interest. Suzy Creamcheese was what was cool about Frank at first....later we realized he had some chops.

[QUOTE=Fatback]Well.... it's apples and oranges, isn't it? I just know that when Hendrix hit, I was already playing for a little while and it seemed VERY original to me. He was re-inventing the guitar...playing licks that hadn't been heard before. i liked Zappa too but like 98% of people it was his off-the-wall lyrics and humor that caught my attention. I was a very young dude and his Edgard Varese-like stuff was of little interest. Suzy Creamcheese was what was cool about Frank at first....later we realized he had some chops.[/QUOTE]
yeah, the thing about zappa is that his technical ability was hidden beneath his mounds and mounds of songs that were based around his lyrics and wackiness.

But ****, he could play.

psh. yeah he could. his cover of whipping post? with steve vai in his band i believe. the solos they play are outrageous.

Hendrix was a down beat player.
 

Mitch was a slightly behind the beat drummer, a total match for Jimi's style. Slightly sloppy, but just in time. The whole Hendrix era was session after session of slightly behind the beat jamming. Most players that try to copy the Hendrix feel are too ahead of the beat or right on. Maybe time is running too fast today to ever get that (Just dropped, recovered, took a nap right before the recording session feel...)

[QUOTE=Jazzagog]Mitch was a slightly behind the beat drummer, a total match for Jimi's style. Slightly sloppy, but just in time. The whole Hendrix era was session after session of slightly behind the beat jamming. Most players that try to copy the Hendrix feel are too ahead of the beat or right on. Maybe time is running too fast today to ever get that (Just dropped, recovered, took a nap right before the recording session feel...)[/QUOTE]

Interesting reading.

[QUOTE=Fatback]Well.... it's apples and oranges, isn't it? [/QUOTE]

Or apples and kiwi from Pluto.

Jazzagog, Ned or anyone; for the curiosity, did Hendrix incorporate 4/4 swing rhythms in many of his songs or did he stick mostly to standard 4/4?

i wuv hendwix.

Pink Freud, would you mind sending me "Whipping Post"?

[email]mahavishnugrantkelly@gmail.com[/email]

[QUOTE=Popup-Box]Jazzagog, Ned or anyone; for the curiosity, did Hendrix incorporate 4/4 swing rhythms in many of his songs or did he stick mostly to standard 4/4?[/QUOTE]
He swung out fo a minute on "If 6 Was 9" at least...probably more stuff.

[QUOTE=Passion,Grace and Fire]Pink Freud, would you mind sending me "Whipping Post"?

[email]mahavishnugrantkelly@gmail.com[/email][/QUOTE]
sent

PinkFreud = kewlist username EVER. :thumb:

You guys listen to Nine to the Universe?

[QUOTE=Fatback]He swung out fo a minute on "If 6 Was 9" at least...probably more stuff.[/QUOTE]

Keep the answers coming. Thank you, I'll check out your example.

However, it is likely that the natural groove of the band as well as one of the drummers' tendency of staying slightly behind the beat are factors that made me react.

That said, I've listened mostly to standard 4/4 songs, so tend to notice when there's something different going on.

hendrix is undoubtfulli one ov the most well known guitarists and his music is bloddi awsum

[QUOTE=PinkFreud]yeah, the thing about zappa is that his technical ability was hidden beneath his mounds and mounds of songs that were based around his lyrics and wackiness.[/QUOTE]
Well, a lot of Zappa's albums/songs are instrumentals. It seems like people just remember the weird lyrics more.

[QUOTE=smart blockhead]Well, a lot of Zappa's albums/songs are instrumentals. It seems like people just remember the weird lyrics more.[/QUOTE]
not too many though. certainly not the majority.

Zappa had no delusions about his music's appeal. I saw him quoted several times saying that he made more of the recordings that his young fans bought so that he could AFFORD to make a few of the recordings that meant more to him personally.
He used one of my own favorite sayings more than once to describe some of his work:
"Like the old prostitute said, It smells but it sells!"
(not sure how to correctly do a quote within a quote) :p

[QUOTE=PinkFreud]not too many though. certainly not the majority.[/QUOTE]
Actually its about half and half. Its just that the weird stuff is more popular.

eh, i suppose. he was an excellent social critic when he was being weird though.

besides, around here, i would say his instrumental work is more popular. or at least his fusion albums, hot rats specifically.

I am still interested in learning more about Zappa. I've read quite some positive comments about him now, but I do not know enough about his music.

What should I listen to in order to get an impression of how his music is like?

Hot Rats is my favourite album of his. It's so the Zappa n00b's album on choice. (I think) That and Freak Out!.

Waka Jawaka is my favorite Zappa album, but Hot Rats is very, very cool.