It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
It’s a pointless discussion; if you don’t see what’s special about a certain guitarist no amount of explaining will change your mind.
The distance in development he covered between purple haze and his final recordings, whether they be Machine Gun or Straight Ahead over that self-same 4-year period puts to shame the lifelong career of Clapton. I don't believe Peter Green's misfortune prevented a development as potent as Jimi's.
Careers such as Stevie Wonder's or Prince's begin to compare, yet I firmly believe his career, had he lived beyond 1970, would have gone beyond any of our expectations. I mean, he didn't even get to properly use his own recording studio. Who knows what he would have come up with had he changed management, stopped touring, and holed himself up in the studio, rather than suffering the stress and poor health of being pushed to the limit.
I don't believe he would have gone into jazz-fusion as he had already done it. Silliness and gags just weren't part of that scene and I can't imagine Jimi enjoying it for longer than he did. He already did soul and funk and certainly was a precursor to funkadelic with his electric church routine and band of gypsies. His sonic experimentation may have pushed his recordings and perhaps encouraged his live performances to include larger bands and symphony orchestras. Classical music no doubt would have had a significant influence on him. But here's the thing: Jimi was an artist who not only absorbed everything around him but also included everything about his life and identity to create and produce his music. His love of comic book heroes and sci-fi were as relevant as the vietnam war and muddy waters. as relevant as the distant mother he loved and the women he made love with. While I cannot predict what we would have done, I firmly believe that it would have been a lot.
+1
ESBlonde is right. Playing with a Marshall stack is something to be experienced at any volume level. There's nothing quite like it. Once you've done it, you will understand my shoulder shrug to any modern gear, however incredible a modeller or amp it may be.
You know, somebody should open a museum dedicated to Hendrix and Marshall stacks....
Now, who do I know who could do this?
Here in Bologna, Italy?
About a block from where I live...?
More about that after the summer.
I hate this shit. Listen or don’t listen to the guy but don’t suggest he’s not a significant part of the evolution of rock ‘n’ roll.
The boy could play.
Guitar Bomb Giveaway – Win a FREE set of Oil City Pickups Deep Six humbuckers
Every time I challenge my mate's Marshalls with a 'didn't jimi use a .... amp on that recording', he goes and messes with the Marshall superbass or lead or P.A and gets the very same tone.
Interesting to think about the runners example though. Unlike physics or music, it's not really building on an existing knowledge base is it? It's still just running as fast as one can, yet still people get better as time goes on. I suppose it's partly to do with sports science and nutrition whereas back in the day the athletes would just be eating the same as everyone else; so will the improvement tail off now that they know about nutrition or will people just continue to get faster?
Just one: a fuzz
I mean two: a wah and a fuzz
I mean three: and an octavia
Sorry, I meant four: a univibe as well
On stage...
In the studio, a leslie (footswitch) and an echoplex (footswitch) whether used as a pre-amp or echo fx. And double tracking, reel to reel effects.
But no doubt, throw any guitar at him, even a 12 string acoustic and he'll make it sing.