Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 242.2K All Categories
- 22 >> Start Here <<
- 12 New Members
- 8 FAQs
- 86.9K Gear
- 39.6K Guitar
- 3.4K Acoustics
- 1.3K Bass
- 14.7K Amps
- 17.3K FX
- 275 Digital & Modelling
- 766 Other Instruments
- 8.3K Making & Modding
- 422 Gear Reviews
- 107 Guitar Reviews
- 73 Amp Reviews
- 119 FX Reviews
- 87 Other Reviews
- 750 Made in the UK
- 975 Theory
- 1.9K Technique
- 2.1K Live
- 3.2K Studio & Recording
- 2.1K Making Music
- 220 Events
- 15 Guitar Show 2018
- 832 Plug My Stuff
- 105.5K Classifieds
- 41.2K Guitars £
- 2.8K Acoustics £
- 140 LH Guitars £
- 903 Basses £
- 10.6K Parts £
- 18.4K Amps £
- 34.2K FX £
- 2.8K Studio & Rec £
- 6.1K Misc £
- 465 Personnel
- 54.9K Chat
- 36.6K Off Topic
- 1.1K Tributes
- 6.6K Music
In this Discussion
Become a Subscriber!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Why is Hendrix so revered amongst guitarists?
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
Supportact said: [my style is] probably more an accumulation of limitations and bad habits than a 'style'.
:ar!
How much more rock can you get?
\m/
Yours
Eric Behringer Weary
Hendrix was to a large extent a magpie - bits of his act from Little Richard, Guitar Slim, Buddy Guy, T Bone Walker; bits of his playing and writing from Albert King, Chuck Berry, Muddy Waters, Bob Dylan, The Beatles, early psychedelia. He wasn't the fastest or the most consistent guitarist.He wasn't the first to use Marshalls or wah or fuzz boxes. Whilst he had some innovative approaches to recording those had been usurped by the Beach Boys and many others no doubt. Indeed, none of this seems to have been denied by him at the time.
BUT what he did do was put all this together; he was the complete package. Everyone who did what he did earlier or better still didn't do all the other things he did. His short solo career also creates a microcosm ( not sure I've ever used that word in a sentence before so here goes...), a compact period in which all of this happened (his musical career up to that point having been the training ground). His death means we have an end to this short period of intense activity, had he lived his legacy as it stands now could have only been diluted; it is part of his legend - young for ever with James Dean and Marilyn Monroe and Kurt Cobain and Richard Beckinsale.
Debating who had the greatest influence - Marvin, Hendrix, Clapton, Burt Weedon - is a hiding to nothing. It will always ignore strands of music that evolved seperately. However, for me influence is not just about how many people go back to the source ( although I suspect many teenagers picking up the guitar now do learn Hendrix riffs - they are Rock Guitar 101 now)but how that influence comes down through the generations. So anyone picking up a guitar now because they love RHCP, Van Halen, Metallica and some contemporary people who I haven't got the foggiest about will have that indirect Hendrix influence.
I think I understand now
Some people can't enjoy an artist's work unless they are convinced that the artist is the "best" at something, so once the favourites are selected, it becomes an article of faith that the artist is "like no other", and in some cases "the chosen one", without whom music would have been entirely different
Most of the Pro-Hendrix comments here haven't been "I love his stuff, it has always been the most important to me", which is the measure I use for identifying my favourites (well, even then I don't insist on liking everything an artist has done)
Instead, it's been "No-one else was doing stuff like he was, he was the prophet without whom others would have waited, scratching their heads, with no possibility of developing their own styles ". The evidence presented has been that some old Jazz stars started using electric instruments more, and that other guitar heroes (some who were stars years before Hendrix emerged) have named him as an influence in an interview, did Hendrix never name any of them in the same way?"
Hats off to someone who does something different, but there are dozens who qualify for that honour. However, I don't care if an artist sounds just like 500 other players, if he writes or plays good quality songs and uses his skill in a way that suits the music, whilst taking care to play accurately. On that last point, some people are happy listening to sloppy playing, mistakes and out of tune guitars, since "it's more rock and roll". Well it's torture to me, it distracts from enjoying the art being expressed. Who would argue that a Booker-prize winning novel would not be diminished if there were 5 spelling mistakes and 2 grammatical errors per page. It would break the concentration of the reader, and this is what I experience when I hear out of tune, sloppy playing. Since over 90% of Hendrix's live output is sloppy or out of tune, I can't bear to listen. I really like a few of his studio tracks though.
Go on then, list these paragons of impeccable technical virtuosity that don't offend your delicate ears.
I'm more interested in the music and I really can't stand discussions that focus purely on technique and daft conversations about who is best. Music's not a sport. Steve Vai is a technically gifted guitarist who replaced Adrian Vandenberg in Whitesnake - he was appalling. Bernie Marsden would have pissed all over him - horses for courses. Vai was just the wrong guy for what was a essentially a heavy blues rock band.
I haven't listened to Hendrix for years as my tastes have changed. As I type this I'm listening to a guy called Eivend Aarset on my iPod who is Norwegian - very experimental and not to everyone's taste but he revolutionised guitar playing in his own way. My tastes these days are left field - 99% of rock music leaves me cold.
The fact is many guitarists say they were influenced by Hendrix. Who gives a shit if there were 'better' players around whatever that might mean ... if anything it disproves your comment as you don't think he's very good.
Remember, it's easier to criticise than create!
I think I understand now
Some people can't enjoy an artist's work unless they are convinced that the artist is the "best" at something, so once the favourites are selected, it becomes an article of faith that the artist is "like no other", and in some cases "the chosen one", without whom music would have been entirely different
Most of the Pro-Hendrix comments here haven't been "I love his stuff, it has always been the most important to me", which is the measure I use for identifying my favourites (well, even then I don't insist on liking everything an artist has done)
Instead, it's been "No-one else was doing stuff like he was, he was the prophet without whom others would have waited, scratching their heads, with no possibility of developing their own styles ". The evidence presented has been that some old Jazz stars started using electric instruments more, and that other guitar heroes (some who were stars years before Hendrix emerged) have named him as an influence in an interview, did Hendrix never name any of them in the same way?"
@ToneControl Some people can recognise Hendrix's qualities and influence despite not even particularly liking his records. That's a mature stance.
Also, your literature analogy speaks volumes (pardon the pun). You don't appreciate Rock music in quite the same way most of us do.
A live gig is not a piano recital.
Tonecontrol I think you've hit the nail on the head. All of those people in this thread who have said they understand Hendrix's reverence have failed to take an objective view. Every comment is solely based on their personal opinion which is clearly misguided by an idol worship. Vai, Van Halen, Frusciante, Stevie Ray Vaughan, Prince, Frank Zappa, Richie Blackmore, Joe Satriani, Duane Allman, Yngwie, Pete Townshend, Eric Clapton, Jeff Beck, Brian May, Tom Morello, Dave Murray Marcus Miller, George Clinton and Miles Davis - all those guys who have gone one record describing Hendrix as a phenomenon are indeed utterly clueless hero worshippers.
Meanwhile this thread benefits from the fact that there are at least a couple of open minded musical illuminati who can see through all of that crap. You guys are f'ing geniuses and we salute you. I envy the time you guys must save. In my work I spend so much time listening to music thinking "What do I like about this and what do I not.". It would be a fantastic tool to be able to interpret art with such clear scientific parameters on what makes something good or bad. For me the time it would save would be staggering.
Funniest self-congratulatory post of the year.
Supportact said: [my style is] probably more an accumulation of limitations and bad habits than a 'style'.
Just how many Miles Davis albums have you heard?
Play Bitches Brew. Play Jack Johnson. Play Live Evil. Play Big Fun. Play Get up With It. Play Pangea. Play Agharta.
It'd be easier to tell me where you can't hear the Hendrix influence on the general vibe, rhythms, the instrumentation and crucially the choice of personnel.
I've left off On the Corner cause that was more of a James Brown/ Sly Stone feel.
Get up with it was more of a mix of everything with some Stockhausen ideas added.
- we didn't start the fire it was always burning since...
:ar!
[I might go to Costa now, I clearly need more caffeine]
Remember, it's easier to criticise than create!