Ya Page was heavily into heroin in the late seventies. Actually, when Bonzo died Page said it kinda snapped him out of his heroin addiction for a while..although not completely. I despise heroin with all of my heart.

And "My God" is Jethro Tulls best song. That flute solo is their best, his singing is great (plus the choir dealy), not to mention the whole concept of the song...it blows my mind.

I never really payed attention to that song. I always like day dream when it gets to that part of the album, but the emotion behind that solo is amazing. Personally I think it's better than any guitar solo I've ever heard.

[QUOTE=thickasabrick]Ya Page was heavily into heroin in the late seventies. Actually, when Bonzo died Page said it kinda snapped him out of his heroin addiction for a while..although not completely. [B]I despise heroin with all of my heart.[/B][/QUOTE]
Same here, I lose alot of respect for musicians who do it.

Well, people say Clapton isn't as good as he was when he was on heroin...

He's just a puss[COLOR=White]y[/COLOR] now.













/flees

...............




He has lost his edge....

[QUOTE=slowhand]Well, people say Clapton isn't as good as he was when he was on heroin...[/QUOTE]
Including me. You can't honestly say his clean music is better than his drug music?

Depends, really, on your taste in music. I know a friend who preffers Clapton's Tears in Heaven rather than anything from when he was with Cream.

I think he was better during his addiction years. Now, he's just a blues player, very B.B. King style...

Dont forget Nazareth..Nazareth is often overlooked..But albums like Rampant, Hair of The Dog, Razamanaz were killer

[QUOTE=slowhand]Depends, really, on your taste in music. I know a friend who preffers Clapton's Tears in Heaven rather than anything from when he was with Cream.

I think he was better during his addiction years. Now, he's just a blues player, very B.B. King style...[/QUOTE]
I will admit, that straight up blues music he plays now is kind of boring.



/flees

Blasphemy

[QUOTE=Woodstock]I will admit, that straight up blues music he plays now is kind of boring.



/flees[/QUOTE]
Yea, I find it very boring, and it's like there's no feeling to it. It's jst all very bland.







/flees

Well, you see... he's old... he doesn't take drugs... he isn't with Cream... But he's still God to me.

[QUOTE=slowhand]Well, you see... he's old... he doesn't take drugs... he isn't with Cream... But he's still God to me.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, he's a now unoriginal God.


/flees

I don't think he's unoriginal now, he just doesn't carry the potential to captivate the modern audience.

[QUOTE=slowhand]I don't think he's unoriginal now, he just doesn't carry the potential to captivate the modern audience.[/QUOTE]
Hence unoriginal...

That's what I've been trying to say...

[QUOTE=Woodstock]Hence unoriginal...[/QUOTE]

Not really. To be original often means to be unnacepted by the standard of the masses. Hence, you become and outsider. Today's generation are really a 'hardcore' generation, losing their innocence at a very early age (I've been insulted by 5 year old kids, when I was 5, I wouldn't even know how to insult my sister other than saying "You're ugly" or "Mom doesn't love you")

Now, this generation has grown up with a mellow Clapton, who never went metal, hip hop, or punk. He's just a pop merchant, like Steve Winwood and Paul McCartney, few of the survivors of the 60's music scene. They are not tough enough for the youth (the ones who the music industry depends on) and are overlook as old-timers who sing pop songs for their old folks (something that each generation tries to separate themselves from).

How many people out there do a cover album of Robert Johnson's songs? What about an album with B.B. King? Who appreciate the blues, as they were originally?

See, to call someone "unoriginal" just because of his lost of fame is just wrong. In fact, he is one of the few artists out there that can actually do what he wants without really blemishing his reputation as an artist.

Of course, if you think Clapton is 'unoriginal,' then so be it. Clapton will still be Clapton for me and it's better than a lot of the crap out there.

To bad Clapton didn't stick to rock

[QUOTE=slowhand]Not really. To be original often means to be unnacepted by the standard of the masses. Hence, you become and outsider. Today's generation are really a 'hardcore' generation, losing their innocence at a very early age (I've been insulted by 5 year old kids, when I was 5, I wouldn't even know how to insult my sister other than saying "You're ugly" or "Mom doesn't love you")

Now, this generation has grown up with a mellow Clapton, who never went metal, hip hop, or punk. He's just a pop merchant, like Steve Winwood and Paul McCartney, few of the survivors of the 60's music scene. They are not tough enough for the youth (the ones who the music industry depends on) and are overlook as old-timers who sing pop songs for their old folks (something that each generation tries to separate themselves from).

How many people out there do a cover album of Robert Johnson's songs? What about an album with B.B. King? Who appreciate the blues, as they were originally?

See, to call someone "unoriginal" just because of his lost of fame is just wrong. In fact, he is one of the few artists out there that can actually do what he wants without really blemishing his reputation as an artist.

Of course, if you think Clapton is 'unoriginal,' then so be it. Clapton will still be Clapton for me and it's better than a lot of the crap out there.[/QUOTE]

:chug: Greatest post Ive seen in this thread in long time :eek:. Rep for you.

*loves blues*

There is not enogh blues talk in MX.

[QUOTE=slowhand]Not really. To be original often means to be unnacepted by the standard of the masses. Hence, you become and outsider. Today's generation are really a 'hardcore' generation, losing their innocence at a very early age (I've been insulted by 5 year old kids, when I was 5, I wouldn't even know how to insult my sister other than saying "You're ugly" or "Mom doesn't love you")

Now, this generation has grown up with a mellow Clapton, who never went metal, hip hop, or punk. He's just a pop merchant, like Steve Winwood and Paul McCartney, few of the survivors of the 60's music scene. They are not tough enough for the youth (the ones who the music industry depends on) and are overlook as old-timers who sing pop songs for their old folks (something that each generation tries to separate themselves from).

How many people out there do a cover album of Robert Johnson's songs? What about an album with B.B. King? Who appreciate the blues, as they were originally?

See, to call someone "unoriginal" just because of his lost of fame is just wrong. In fact, he is one of the few artists out there that can actually do what he wants without really blemishing his reputation as an artist.

Of course, if you think Clapton is 'unoriginal,' then so be it. Clapton will still be Clapton for me and it's better than a lot of the crap out there.[/QUOTE]
Whoa, I never meant Clapton was completely unoriginal. I love his work in Cream, Blind Faith and Derek & The Dominoes. I just find that some of his solo career and his current work are unoriginal. It just doesn't seem up to par compared to his previous material. And I never sayed I disliked the blues because they're not "hard or heavy" enough. I just don't find anything attention grabbing or interesting in itself. However, when the blues are mixed into rock, like Cream, I love it.

A 1940 Delta bluesman > A 1966 British bluesman

Robert Johnson and Son House own any British dude who tried to immatate.

This isn't a blues thread. :angry:

/likes the blues

/doesn't flee

Blues influenced classic rock though.

I like blues, but not this crappy Clapton blues he's making now. It just all sounds like the same old thing over and over just being recycled.

[QUOTE=Schyma000]Blues influenced classic rock though.[/QUOTE]
That it did but we still don't talk about sraight up blues in this thread. :angry:

I liked the blues songs Clapton did at the Crossroads festival.

[QUOTE=jpjrulestheworld]I like blues, but not this crappy Clapton blues he's making now. It just all sounds like the same old thing over and over just being recycled.[/QUOTE]
True.

[QUOTE=jpjrulestheworld]I like blues, but not this crappy Clapton blues he's making now. It just all sounds like the same old thing over and over just being recycled.[/QUOTE]

Amen. Every now and again he'll come out with a really really good blues song but then everything else is sounds like garbage. If he mixed his style of blues and rock together it would probably sound really good, that way he could have his blues that he loves so much and still be a kick@ss rock artist

Some of you seem to forget that all Clapton ever wanted to do was to play the blues. The reason he went through so many bands is because he never liked when they started straying away from real blues, into more rock or mainstream stuff.

It was the same way with Hendrix actually, although I think both Hendrix and Clapton wrote way better rock/blues-rock songs than just straight blues songs.

I am a big fan of blues, but I prefer Claptons more rockish stuff.

[QUOTE=thickasabrick]Some of you seem to forget that all Clapton ever wanted to do was to play the blues. The reason he went through so many bands is because he never liked when they started straying away from real blues, into more rock or mainstream stuff.

It was the same way with Hendrix actually, although I think both Hendrix and Clapton wrote way better rock/blues-rock songs than just straight blues songs.

I am a big fan of blues, but I prefer Claptons more rockish stuff.[/QUOTE]

I don't Eric Clapton is very good at writing blues unfortunately. I like blues and all but his isn't that great but like I said earlier, every now and again he'll come out with a really good blues song