Peter H:

its all listening and trying to appreciate the music as it comes to you. hendrix was about emotion, heart besides the technical innovation and original lyrics and sounds. no one else in rock historyn has melded all the best of so many musical genres as jimi. taking these musical forms and creating something new. just try to relax and let the music and the sound world envelop you. its not a silly competition. i was lucky enough to have seen jimi over 37 times and every show was unique and different and souklful and heartfelt. even the 2 bad nights. thats how great he was. even his worst nights was far better than all the rest. peace

I have a long term substituting gig with some 11^th graders and today they were bashing Hendrix as over-rated when compared to Yngwie Malmsteen and Steve Vai. I tried to explain his importance as an innovator and incredibly soulful guitarist but these uh, scholars wouldn’t hear of it. “But Mr. H, those guys shred.” Rather than telling them to sit down and shut up and loading them up with meaningless homework I thought I’d turn to Vault people to answer Cookie’s question “what’s the big deal about Hendrix?” And Josh’s “what’s so great about Purple Haze?”

<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]-->

All responses that come in before Feb 7^th will be presented to the class and will only be edited for language that could get me fired.

<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]-->

(In interest of full disclosure I’m the guy who started the ever popular Led Zepplin bashing thread. But let’s just keep that stuff over in the LZ zone, please. ) 

<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]-->

Thanks

Mr. H

Ever heard of Neil Young? IMO as great a song writer as we have seen. Just one listen to his recently released "Live at Massy Hall" speaks volumes. You simply cannot talk about great songwriters without mentioning Neil.

RE: Shredders versus Jimi Hendrix

 

Excellent discussion, I regret joining after all the action - most likely, no one will read this.

 

There have been some extremely passionate opinions expressed here so, I thought I'd add one too.

 

1971: I was 11 years of age. Stayed up late to watch the new Don Kirschner's Rock Concert (ABC-TV) and saw, and heard, Jimi for the first time (posthumously).  "Shock and Awe". I was a budding drum student at the time.  The next day I traded my drum kit for a second-hand Harmony (Sears) acoustic guitar.  That is the kind of power Jimi Hendrix wielded. A more technical explanation is as follows:

 

Jimi Hendrix was from another planet..., Steve Vai attended Berklee School of Music (along with countless other "shredders" and notables).  Jimi Hendrix was a natural and self taught. Steve Vai learned to play guitar (albeit from the likes of Joe Striani). I had to learn how to play guitar..., enough said?

 

Periodically, throughout the history of mankind, there come along what are known as prodigies, natural talents that dwarf the efforts and talents of mere mortals. In the world of clasical music the "child prodigy" that immediately comes to mind is that of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (odd how his first name is in the url for this website?). Mozart, as did Hendrix, had the ability to express the music that he heard in his head.  I don't believe it would have mattered what the instrument was, guitar, piano, harpsechord.., the music just came rolling out of them.  And for this, they are considered geniuses.  All of the musicians/composers/song writers previously referenced in this forum were/are artists and their art expresses each of their individuallities. We have been blessed by all of their talents, whether we care for their product or not. All others that are not prodigies (naturals) are virtuosos, those that learn and practice their craft to achieve an extremely high degree of proficiency. Jimi Hendrix was a prodigy. Steve Vai is a virtuoso.

 

The big deal about Hendrix was that he was an innovator.  If he could not make the sound he wanted from his chosen instrument, he figured out how to do it.  This included the development of at least 6 sound effects "pedals" (stomp boxes) and multiple studio recording techniques and, thanks to engineer Eddie Kramer, microphone techniques that had not existed prior to these two gentlemen getting together to lay some tracks.  All of these have been used by countless other musicians since their origination.  Had Hendrix not existed, the same stuff probably would have come to pass; in time. However, Jimi spent a brief moment on the planet and advanced not only the art form, but the supporting technology as well.

 

Secondly, Jimi was a bluesman in every sense of the word.  You know, the genre of music that began as field hollers and chants in the southern states of the U.S. during the slave years, that eventually was transformed, through the roots of jazz, and blended with, um..., country & western, to beget the Rock n Roll we all know and love.  Want to listen to a good example of an extension of a field holler by the Fab Four? Listen to "Why Don't We Do It In The Road" - brilliant!

 

An aside here, what made Eric Clapton such a hot ticket was that he was the first "white man" to master and perform what had been traditionally black music and become reknown for it (blue-eyed blues it was called then).  Actually, the first blue-eyed blues guy (and arguable musical genius) was "Little Stevie Winwood". Only difference, Clapton had a better promoter/agent. (btw, check the liner notes on "Electric Ladyland" - Steve Winwood and Jimi Hendrix were good friends).

 

All that math!  Music is mathematics.  All those nice little intervals and time constants can all be put together to come up with "music" and it comes at you at approximately 1130 feet per second, at sea level at 70 degrees farenheit at 70% relative humidity.  Yes kids, not only is it art, it's science too.  That's why the group that gives out those little gold Gramaphone trophies (the Grammys) is called NARAS (the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences).  As with anything scientific (tangible) you can practice a lot (become a virtuoso) learn to read/write the language (music) and "compose" (song write).  So why does Steve Vai use so many notes?  Because he can..., he is proving his "virtuosity".  Is it right or wrong/better or worse? None of the above, it is different.  It is what he chooses to do and what he hears in his head.

 

It should be noted that one of the greatest (popular and financially rewarded) bands of all time started with a group of guys, none of whom could play or write music, that make their fortune cranking out little 3 to 5 note (or chord) tunes that continue to sell out arenas..., the band is U2.  Often less is more!  Of course, the real king of the three-chord tune is Tom Petty..., hands down!

 

And, in regard to Frank Zappa, another musician accused of using too many notes and, therefore, not understood by most of the masses..., if my memory serves me correctly, Frank tested an IQ of genius (dad was a chemist/mathematician).  And, oddly enough, upon leaving Berklee School of Music, Steve Vai worked for/with Frank on many projects...,  Hmmm, birds of a feather?

 

So, the bottom line is this..., Viva La Diferance!  If it were all the same we'd all go crazy and there'd be no spice to life, no critical comments in forums like this and no joy in discovering new stuff to listen to and download to our ipods!  However, in regard to Brittany Spears, the girl is tone deaf, I had the unpleasant privilige of running monitors for her one night!  Brittany is the unfortunate product of an over ambitious mother pushing her child into the limelight.  I think she would have been much happier in the long run calling it quits after the Mickey Mouse Club.  I truly feel sorry for her.  Now, Chistina Aguilera is another story..., that girl has talent!

 

And, for what it's worth, in regard to Jimi Hendrix, Rolling Stone Magazine named Jimi number 1 on their list of the 100 greatest guitar players of all time in 2003.

 

Of course, you can't always believe everything your read, can you...,

For an update on downloads, please check out

"What Performers Are Paid" in the Ladies and Gentlemen forum.

oldhippy:

just sit them down and let them listen to Angel or Little Wing ,or the long version of Voodoo Child on Electric Ladyland,there have been some great players around nanely Alvin Lee,Peter Green,Jeff Beck,Jimmy Page,Rory Gallagher,Paul Kossoff Eric Clapton,Johnny Winter,Duanne Allman,even Slash to a certain extent,but non come close to JIMI for emotion technique and the controlled use of feedback.If they can,t get it its apity but we know how good he was and we got the albums and memories to prove it . take care from Nev( a fellow Jimi fan)

Agreed, his emotion is what set him apart.

Hmmm  11th graders are at the know it all stage of life but here's the opinion of a Hendrix fan and audio collector of 35 years and BTW, good luck with the kids; Vai, Malmsteen, Steve Stevens, etc.. are all technically brilliant (and the kids will find Jimi eventually).

We listen to Jimi thrash and bash torture the poor guitar but we forget that in 1967/9, the electronics were exceedingly primitive.  There was a cord connecting the amp and guitar that corroded and failed, guitar necks warped on the way to the next gig, Fender Strats stayed in tune unless you played them, and the stacks of amps we oggle in the videos were a relatively new invention that blew apart, failed, and tubes (what's a tube and how old are you anyway?) burned out constantly. Add a couple of pedals and 3 microphones to the mix for a complete electronic nightmare.  A successful gig with no equipment failure(s) was almost a miracle and performers did not have an endless supply of tricks from endorsements.

I would turn the kids on to most of the Axis album and watch the kid whose eyes glaze over...he/she understands guitars.

Good luck with the rascals, they're a tough audience today!

snaker

man Billiam you really come off as a MORON! Zappa was and still is the best American Composer ever, aside from his genius outside of music. OK, maybe you dont like his music, its fine, you arent meant to get it as he would say. He had plenty to say, and all of it was highly inteligent, i dont even feel like getting into it, it aint worth it.

I have no idea what FZ interviews you could have heard or seen.
Zappa was usually EXTREMELY articulate. 
On the other hand he also knew how to dumb it down when needed -
Most of his lyrics had a mix of these two styles.
I suggest that you specifically listen to what he had to say when he appeared before the US Congress in 1986. He was clear as could be. I think they were shocked at how solid he was.

& apparently FZ's gtr playing may not be your cup o tea - oh well - that's your call.

I suggest that you try listening to the FZ's 'Yellow Shark' or 'Civilization Phaze III' discs.
These discs represent the compositional richness that FZ was about.
They're not about FZ's gtr - they are about composition & texture.

Hendrix was great, but he was limited by the electric/electronic guitar palette.
He pushed it's boundaries way out, and few have been able to go much further since (with gtr)

well considering when you posted this i have to assume that your gig as a substitute teacher might be over. but here's what i've learned when trying to tell kids about something like this. if you're lucky one or 2 out of the group will "get it". it's almost impossible to convey what the music world was like before someone as hugely talented and innovative as jimi hit. i tried to explain this same kind of thing to a group of kids who totally take the beatles for granted. the only way i got my point across was to play them a cut of louis armstrong singing "hello dolly" then a cut of "i want to hold your hand". why? because music like armstrong's single was what was on the charts when the beatles first hit in america. the revolution that that song created is in the difference between those 2 songs. one kid kinda got it. the same will go for trying to explain jimi. having the benefit of history doesn't make it easy for an 11th grader. in so many cases, you had to have been there to know why he just blew us all away. but those same kids wil "get it" when they try to explain what it was like to live in a world before cell phones/pcs/ and pre 9/11 to their kids. they'll probably be as frustrated as you are now....

I would just tell them that if it were not for Hendrix, the "shredders" today wouldn't be "shredding". I had seen Steve Ray Vaughn live twice. Both times he opened his show with a Hendrix tune, the first time he started with "Little Wing" and the second time he started with "Voodo chile".

Hendrix was an inovator and was responcible for a different "type" or feel for the music. I think everyone would agree that there are and have been many guitarest that are "technically" better than Jimi was. Clapton, Page, Santana, Trower and Knoffler come to mind almost immediatly and todays contemporaries are very good. I don't know of a single guitarest that can compare to Satriani  when it comes to speed and knowledge. But I don't think he holds a candle to Jimi Hendrix or Steve Ray Vaughn when it comes to "feel". I never got to see Jimi live and there aren't but a few of his live recordings around but if what I see in some of the great "feel" guitarest today is what Jimi was about, and I believe that's true, then he was one of the best.

No one today could compare with Steve Ray Vaughn as far as I'm concerened and I can tell you this much about him, about the second song into the set, Steve was no longer with us, in other words he'd start sweating, throw his head back, close his eyes and fly away with his music. Your choice was to either go with him or stay in your seat. I was one of the few that got to fly with Steve, it still gives me chills when I think about it. I think Jimi was all about this too. It wasn't the technic, it was the trip he put you on. Put Electric Ladyland on a good sound system, turn it way up until you can hear the buzz in Jimi's old Fender Twin Reverb Amp, turn the lights down low, tell everyone to imagon they're in a full concert hall and Jimi is there to take them on a little trip. When the recordings over ask them how they "felt". Some will get it and some won't but the one's who do will Thank you.

Listen I know Hendrix was revolutionary and great. There's nobody like him truthfully.

However I think Carlos Santana is the most skilled guitarist ever. He could do the same things as Hendrix only cleaner and faster. He had an incredible knowledge of his instrument. Playing violin only made him better haha.

I just don't think there is anyone else in rock history who can play guitar better than him.

But this is just my opinion.

By the Way,

I'm 18

And I discovered all of these guitarists when i was 11

In re Hendrix: Although I believe Electric Ladyland is the premiere rock album of the last 50 years, and without peer, my opinion is based solely on the emotive feelings derived from Hendrix's experiments in fusion, etc.  After reading the postings to the primary posted question , I would suggest loading the Polydor diskette of EL, and listening closely, with eyes shut, to "1983 (A Merman I Should Turn To Be)", and "Moon, Turn The Tides...Gently, Gently Away".  Never in my contemporary listening experience have I encountered anything remotely near to the effect and genius of Hendrix's successful attempt to create colors, seas, underwater aurae, and gentility, using a guitar and pedals as tools.  He was an original, without predecessor, much in the same way Stephen Crane 'triumphantly achieved his art with a technique absolutely his own and a perfect fullness of power. . . without predecessor. . . a perfect artist and interpreter of the surfaces of life' (Edward Garnett, 1920, "Stephen Crane and His Work").  If you are able to appreciate these two recommended masterpieces, I suggest you then read Crane's "The Open Boat" and ask yourself, how was he capable of trimphantly constructing a perfect short story at age 26 (he died at 28) when, according to H.G. Wells and Garnett, among others, peers such as James and Tolstoy were still attempting to to develop their expression.  Hendrix was a ONER.  Such individuals appear once or twice a century.  There is no rational explanation for their rapid and brilliant development.  As a great 20th century lyric poet once said, The Crane was "Son of the sovereign Sun indeed,/Courier of the Moon."  Hendrix's talent was lunar.  His early disappearance was no different than those of Crane, Keats, and Rimbaud.  Thank you, if you have read this posting to the end.