Hendrix is contentious in that two thirds of the band were Brits, he got discovered here, and there's some wrangling about if he developed his image as a result of the scene over here... but I'll leave that as a great example of cross-pollination done right like umm, Fleetwood Mac?
All sorts of reasons are given for the Briddish invasion, usually based on the mood of America, but maybe some of those Brit bands were just better than their American counterparts?
I forgot The Kinks... are they rock'n'roll, [strike]or should they be ignored because that was during the British invasion when all talented American rock acts were abroad fighting communism?[/strike]
Even if you or I or George or Eddie or whoever thinks that Funkadelic was a great rock band, can anyone really say that Funkadelic was a better rock band than they were a funk band?
I think they kicked ass both ways..
I agree wholeheartedly, but that's not really the question.
When it comes to loud guitars, I fancy myself an Anglophile...but get the fuck outta here with that Cream shit...a band that featured the 2 most overrated players in all of rock history. Fuck them, they suck. Just Jack Bruce up there playing and singing by himself would be much more entertaining. God I hate Cream. The best thing they did was call a song, via acronym, "She was like a bearded rainbow", other than that...did I mention they suck?
I think we can all agree that lemmy is the greatest rocker of all time. There is no one alive today that embodies what rock n roll is more than Mr. Kilmister...
BTW here is a great British guitarist in league with Clapton:
Because we can sit here and point to Aspirational Clinton Quote X or Eddie Hazel Riff Y and say "See?! See?! Right there! Right there! That's rock!" and maybe cobble together a twenty- or thirty- or whatever-percent share to file under "ROCK," but when looked at in the context of things like, you know, Lyrics, and Rhythms, and Subject Matter, and Phrasing, and Presentation, and The Other Seventy Percent Of The Music They Ever Released, I think the wrongheadedness of trying to contain them within The Rock Conversation becomes clear.
Pretty much what I said, but in classic james style - thorough elaboration.
And Hook,
why all the Cream hate? Clapton wasn't yet overrated was he? Or maybe he was with the Clapton Is God thing. Still, at least a decent classic rock band.
To be fair I'm not Cream fan either, but they seem to be part of 'the cannon'.
Would go with Radiohead over Cream, and they're not even that rock'n'roll.
Because we can sit here and point to Aspirational Clinton Quote X or Eddie Hazel Riff Y and say "See?! See?! Right there! Right there! That's rock!" and maybe cobble together a twenty- or thirty- or whatever-percent share to file under "ROCK," but when looked at in the context of things like, you know, Lyrics, and Rhythms, and Subject Matter, and Phrasing, and Presentation, and The Other Seventy Percent Of The Music They Ever Released, I think the wrongheadedness of trying to contain them within The Rock Conversation becomes clear.
Pretty much what I said, but in classic james style - thorough elaboration.
And Hook,
why all the Cream hate? Clapton wasn't yet overrated was he? Or maybe he was with the Clapton Is God thing. Still, at least a decent classic rock band.
they are the prime example of mediocre IMO. They were the RC to Hendrix's Coca-Cola. Just so boring. Shit, a band named after a Cream song, Toad, was a 1000x better than them. Just nothing there to sink your teeth into, yet they are always mentioned in "great power trios" discussions. True, they might have been one of the first, but doesn't mean they were great at it.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
Van Halen is as good as any of the British invasion bands, period.
Even if you or I or George or Eddie or whoever thinks that Funkadelic was a great rock band, can anyone really say that Funkadelic was a better rock band than they were a funk band?
I think they kicked ass both ways..
I agree wholeheartedly, but that's not really the question.
With all due respect, that's a question I wouldn't have asked. Their name is Funkadelic, right? They've got the groove to make you shake ass, and they're just heavy enough to make you play air guitar in the bedroom. Best of both worlds, I'd say.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
Yes, dude. Obviously, if you grew up listening to their albums religiously like so many here in this country did. Seriously, listen to their albums I through 1984 in full and tell me that they aren't as genius as anything in rock history.
Yes, dude. Obviously, if you grew up listening to their albums religiously like so many here in this country did. Seriously, listen to their albums I through 1984 in full and tell me that they aren't as genius as anything in rock history.
I have yet to do that. I'll put aside my preconceptions and give some of them a go, but not sure I'll manage the lot.
Comes out fighting knowing that the GOATs of Van Halen are always there, ready to be pulled out of the back pocket at any time to trump your Who, Kinks, Stones, Beatles, whatever.
Y'hear that Duder?
Huh? Huh??!?!?
Now walk away son, take it like a man.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
I know tons of dudes who fully appreciate the Beatles, Stones, Who, and Kinks but could never go all in due to their Britishness (which was something they could hear in the music, whether that be singing accent or something broader in the style of When I'm 64...what do y'all call that crap?). They were steady jamming Van Halen without reservation though.
I mean, do you argue that Keith Richards or Pete Townsend, or even Eric Clapton or Jimmy Page for that matter, was a better guitarist than Eddie V.?
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
Thin Lizzy is right up there with Van Halen in my opinion, so I'm cool with you shouting them out.
But Eddie Van Halen being a great guitar player is just the beginning of what makes Van Halen so good. He was lyrical with that instrument like no other. I was listening to the Fair Warning album just this morning and if you deduce their songs to just his playing, they are awesome just like that. David Lee Roth and the rhytm section simply add to that quality, making them very well rounded.
But again and again, the albums speak for themslves.
Comments
Still waiting for something that measures up to Led Zep, the Stones, Floyd, Sabbath, Cream, and the odd Beatles track.
All sorts of reasons are given for the Briddish invasion, usually based on the mood of America, but maybe some of those Brit bands were just better than their American counterparts?
Awaits teh flame & teh red matter.
Which will be completely missing the point as usual and entirely yawnsome.
Damn you Duder.
Damn your eyes sah.
Get back to the mini-skirts and typing pool yo.
Take that shit to mostoverratedrockbands.com
Let's replace Cream with Mot??rhead.
Yes.
I think we can all agree that lemmy is the greatest rocker of all time. There is no one alive today that embodies what rock n roll is more than Mr. Kilmister...
BTW here is a great British guitarist in league with Clapton:
Pretty much what I said, but in classic james style - thorough elaboration.
And Hook,
why all the Cream hate? Clapton wasn't yet overrated was he? Or maybe he was with the Clapton Is God thing. Still, at least a decent classic rock band.
Would go with Radiohead over Cream, and they're not even that rock'n'roll.
they are the prime example of mediocre IMO. They were the RC to Hendrix's Coca-Cola. Just so boring. Shit, a band named after a Cream song, Toad, was a 1000x better than them. Just nothing there to sink your teeth into, yet they are always mentioned in "great power trios" discussions. True, they might have been one of the first, but doesn't mean they were great at it.
Say word...
With all due respect, that's a question I wouldn't have asked. Their name is Funkadelic, right? They've got the groove to make you shake ass, and they're just heavy enough to make you play air guitar in the bedroom. Best of both worlds, I'd say.
Does that include the Beatles or the Rolling Stones? The Kinks?
...................................................................................................
Is Van Halen as good as the The Who?
I have yet to do that. I'll put aside my preconceptions and give some of them a go, but not sure I'll manage the lot.
kinks ftw
::whoknew::
Y'all are hanging on to some ancient history that hasn't resonated the way y'all wish it to in a looooong time.
In fact, it's downright ignorant for y'all at this point to still be dismissing Van Halen as not on the same level as your so-called untouchables.
Dude above you says he hasn't even listened to Van Halen. But then throws darts at them all the same.
The wackness.
Y'hear that Duder?
Huh? Huh??!?!?
Now walk away son, take it like a man.
I mean, do you argue that Keith Richards or Pete Townsend, or even Eric Clapton or Jimmy Page for that matter, was a better guitarist than Eddie V.?
You try playing two hours of barre chords.
Anyways, great guitar players do not necessarily great bands make.
Cf Satriani
In fact, the GOAT real GOAT band Thin Lizzy had no player of outstanding virtuosity, a late surge by Moore and Sykes notwithstanding.
Not true...Eric Bell is very underrated. Listen to "Son of Farmer"...very very good and more exciting than Clapton
.
BJM
But Eddie Van Halen being a great guitar player is just the beginning of what makes Van Halen so good. He was lyrical with that instrument like no other. I was listening to the Fair Warning album just this morning and if you deduce their songs to just his playing, they are awesome just like that. David Lee Roth and the rhytm section simply add to that quality, making them very well rounded.
But again and again, the albums speak for themslves.
I have him down as a very competent blues rocker, but in the final analysis not really what Lizzy needed by 73.
In fact he told me as much couple or three years back.