Re: SRV

dinosaur · Post by **dinosaur** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 7:42 am

One of the funniest posts I have read. Completely agree and well done!

Lots of people can play faster and cleaner than me, but that doesn't make it good music.

haledixon · Post by **haledixon** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 9:01 am

to be fair, that's not much of a defense.

I always felt that there were too many guitarists doing more innovative and important things to waste my time listening to SRV.

it wasn't meant as a defense. the man doesn't really need any defense. it's simply amusing to hear a bunch of guy bashing an incredible musician just because they don't like his style of music. the man did what he loved to do and did it better than anyone in this thread could possibly do it. seriously, i've listened to a lot of ya'll's music... you really don't have a lot of room to talk.

if he had played a jazzmaster you would all think he was the greatest fucking guitarist of all time.

chrisjedijane · Post by **chrisjedijane** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 9:04 am

haledixon wrote: if he had played a jazzmaster you would all think he was the greatest fucking guitarist of all time.

Not true. Sure, the guy was a great player and all that, but the actual music that he played was - while technically impressive - boring IMO, not to mention unimaginative and severely lacking any kind of innovation.

I would never want to play that kinda of music, or play like SRV. I'd rather do my own thing, thanks.

Edit: got a bit carried away there, no need for that.

haledixon · Post by **haledixon** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 9:07 am

well, shit.. if you say it's boring then i guess it is. i dunno what the fuck i was thinking.

thanks for setting me straight.

Maggieo · Post by **Maggieo** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 9:09 am

I don't have a problem with Stevie, but I do get sick of the amount of hero-worship about him that seems to infect Fender-related discussions. Pro or con, people can't seem to discuss Fenders without having a discussion about SRV.

For better or worse, it seems that Stevie = Fender.

I mean, here's a Jazzmaster/Jaguar website and we've got a thread devoted to SRV and he hardly ever played one.

Oh, and remember boys- music is not a competition, so please no wagering on who is or who isn't better than Stevie.

Post by **fullerplast** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 9:47 am

music is not a competition, so please no wagering on who is or who isn't better than Stevie

Well put... I was thinking the same thing. I like many styles, including so-called "Texas blues" or blues-rock.

"Better" is a relative term. Stevie considered Jimmy (Vaughn) as being "better" than himself. I find Jimmy to be exceptional, and way underrated. Many of you are not country fans, but I put Vince Gill into the 'underrated guitarist' category as well. And I've never seen him playing my favorite offset guitar either. You don't have to be a fan of the style to appreciate a great guitarist.

For that matter, Jimi was rooted in blues. There's not many Jimi-bashers around.

Everyone is entitled to his/her own likes and dislikes... but for the sake of courtesy, as well-placed IMO goes a long way when making sweeping statements.

Oh yeah... I don't think every composition has to be innovative or experimental either. Sure, there's a need for that and I respect it... but sometimes a song can just be entertaining without breaking the "rules" or being an earth-shattering event. There hasn't been much in my lifetime that completely redefined music, with the few obvious and notable exceptions.

Post by **mezcalhead** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 10:18 am

chrisjedijane wrote: boring as shit

haledixon wrote: well, shit.. if you say it's boring then i guess it is. i dunno what the fuck i was thinking.

Come on guys, you can disagree and still be polite about it.

I really have no idea how innovative SRV is because I don't know what was going on in blues rock when he started playing. I know that the first few times I heard Hendrix I was fairly underwhelmed because I was told to expect something completely alien and I'd heard lots of people do Hendrix-like stuff .. but then when I put his work in the context it was made and realized where he came from and what he achieved .. pretty mind-bending.

chrisjedijane · Post by **chrisjedijane** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 10:43 am

mezcalhead wrote: Come on guys, you can disagree and still be polite about it.

Yeah, sorry about that. I got a bit carried away and kinda forgot myself.

flatfiver · Post by **flatfiver** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 10:50 am

mezcalhead wrote: I really have no idea how innovative SRV is because I don't know what was going on in blues rock when he started playing.

There wasn't much going on in blues/blues-rock when SRV came around. I don't think Buddy Guy even had a record deal at that time. I think there were a couple guys that were doing okay in France and that was about it. Clapton was doing a lot of pop stuff. For fans of the genre, he pretty much resurrected it and made it viable again.

Whether or not we think that's a good thing is an entirely different consideration.

I tend to blame a lot of his fans for turning him into a messianic figure.

idiotbear · Post by **idiotbear** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 10:51 am

haledixon wrote: you really don't have a lot of room to talk.

Check out the "how good a player are you, really" thread. Most of us are well aware that we are technically limited, thanks. And most of us are agreed that being able to play clean semiquavers at 240bpm is irrelevant if you're not doing anything interesting.

IMO (and Doug's right that an IMO or an IMHO or even a IMNSHO goes a long way - sorry), SRV has nothing to interest me. And if we mouth off about how much he "sucks", that's probably because we've all had to endure $trat fans putting the guy up on a pedestal and telling us that "that Sonic Youth horseshit ain't even music, boyyyyyyyy" or that Tom Verlaine was a shit guitarist or a "faggot" (and yes, I have seen that last opinion expressed on a music forum, by a blues-rock fundamentalist).

So I think we can be forgiven a little stridency.

tsalwel · Post by **tsalwel** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 11:32 am

[quote author=mezcalhead I really have no idea how innovative SRV is .. but then when I put his work in the context it was made and realized where he came from and what he achieved .. pretty mind-bending.
[/quote]

," as if their technique-for-technique's-sake scale-jogging is the word of God. (And by God, we mean Yngwie Malmsteen, of course." (thanks flat5 )

it was (imo)

all so much without emotion srv so much schowing off
as for hendrix he did change the way an el guitar sounded

and as doug said jimmy was way better "emo wise"

oh and mississipi john hurt !!

d

haledixon · Post by **haledixon** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 1:43 pm

while i may think people like thurston moore or jay mascis or cobain suck(ed) ass as guitarists, they're still better than i am (albeit not by much) but i can, however, appreciate the fact that a lot of people dig their music. im not assuming everyone here is fans of these guys just because they're better known for playing offsets, but that does seem the be the way people think around here. i also didnt form my opinion of their abilities after listening to half a song but rather after listening to several albums worth of material and giving them a chance. i've never gotten into the debate of this guitar is better than that guitar nor has it ever bothered me that strat players extoll the virtues of SRV - the popular opinion is one i happen to share; he's a great guitarist. so is clapton, david gilmore, duane allman, steve vai, slash, santana, etc. so, i dont understand the vitriolence behind such ass-showing remarks as "And you're right, he sucks. I've only heard one "tune" by him, and it was the most awful, redneck, solo-for-solo's-sake shit I think I've ever heard."

the only profound truth in music is that aaron neville's singing kills angels. everything else is just a bunch of IMOs.

Sauerkraut · Post by **Sauerkraut** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 2:16 pm

haledixon wrote: while i may think people like thurston moore or jay mascis or cobain suck(ed) ass as guitarists, they're still better than i am (albeit not by much) but i can, however, appreciate the fact that a lot of people dig their music. im not assuming everyone here is fans of these guys just because they're better known for playing offsets, but that does seem the be the way people think around here.

"im not assuming everyone here is fans of these guys just because they're better known for playing offsets, but that does seem the be the way people think around here."

So, let me get this straight: you're not assuming everyone likes them just because they use offsets, but you are assuming everyone likes them because they use offsets. Sounds logical.

and why are you judging musicians purely on technical ability?

chrisjedijane · Post by **chrisjedijane** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 2:22 pm

For the record, I was into Sonic Youth back before I ever knew what an offset really was (i was more into Les Pauls then). I just thought Teen Age Riot was a great song, and I'd never heard people use feedback like they did.

Sauerkraut · Post by **Sauerkraut** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 2:32 pm

chrisjedijane wrote: For the record, I was into Sonic Youth back before I ever knew what an offset really was (i was more into Les Pauls then). I just thought Teen Age Riot was a great song, and I'd never heard people use feedback like they did.

Yep, I got interested in Jazzmasters because of Sonic Youth, not the other way around.