T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
2982.1 | yeah, what he said | RICKS::CALCAGNI | There's no money to be made above the 5th fret | Mon Sep 26 1994 08:43 | 14 |
| Just picked up the CD; it's a nice shot of straight blues (no chaser).
I thought the SNL appearance was great, especially the second tune
"Five Long Years". This is one of the high points of the record
as well. I was looking forward to hearing Eric on the 335, but to be
honest the tone was a little disappointing. The Strat on the second
number worked better imo. Btw, I've been told that Eric is ditching
the Lace Sensors and going back to standard style pickups on his
Strats. Something about wanting some real tone again :-) I thought
I saw polepieces Sat night, but my TV isn't that clear; whatever, they
sure sounded great.
/rick
|
2982.2 | | POWDML::BUCKLEY | why do we have to fall from grace? | Mon Sep 26 1994 08:44 | 1 |
| Eric Clapton sucks!
|
2982.3 | Still, after all these years | WMOIS::POIRIER | | Mon Sep 26 1994 09:18 | 8 |
|
re: .2, why bother!
I agree, the second cut was better, but both were great. I also
had to take a closer look at the pickups so I did a freez frame,
LACE! Maybe it was just the Strat he was playing.
|
2982.4 | tape? | BIGQ::DCLARK | doin' that crazy hand jive! | Mon Sep 26 1994 09:24 | 7 |
| did anyone tape it? I really tried to stay awake that long but
didn't make it.
Got the CD friday. Listened to it once over the weekend with the
wife/kids in the room (i.e. softly). I need to listen more closely.
The slow blues all sounded great. Clapton's voice is in excellent
shape.
|
2982.5 | hey Monty, let's make a deal! | RICKS::CALCAGNI | There's no money to be made above the 5th fret | Mon Sep 26 1994 09:30 | 5 |
| Yeah, I got it on tape. What's it worth to ya? Say maybe a ticket to
the Centrum show :-)
re .2 yeah, and so does Primus!
|
2982.6 | | LEDS::BURATI | Network partner excited | Mon Sep 26 1994 09:42 | 4 |
| I tuned in for the first number, but thought the performance was kinda
stiff and uninspired, so I didn't bother to keep it on for the second one.
--Ron
|
2982.7 | Please be kind to my NEXT UNSEEN key | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | db | Mon Sep 26 1994 09:47 | 10 |
| Any reason in particular why we need yet another note on Eric Clapton?
Moderators, please move this to 687.
687 JACKAL::MURRAY 23-JUN-1988 48 Clapton on TV tonite
1745 NAVIER::STARR 23-MAR-1990 22 Eric Clapton Signature Model St
1970 ESKIMO::AUSTIN 19-SEP-1990 95 Clapton,Beck,& Page...
2637 KDX200::COOPER 2-DEC-1992 171 Clapton Bashing Topic
> 2982 WMOIS::POIRIER 26-SEP-1994 6 Eric Clapton, Man!
|
2982.9 | Five EC topics for every SM topic? Not enough! | PAVONE::TURNER | | Mon Sep 26 1994 11:20 | 11 |
| re: .7
At least people know that their NEXT UNSEEN key is proof against an
overdose of Eric Clapton
Avoiding Steve Morse in this notesfile is like trying to read a
newspaper without getting the latest on O.J Simpson ;-)
Dom
P.S. It's enough to give *my* NEXT UNSEEN key arthritis!
|
2982.10 | | LEDS::BURATI | Network partner excited | Mon Sep 26 1994 11:33 | 14 |
| RE .8
Clapton plays some very inspired guitar on his new release. It's the SNL
performance that was poor. At least the first number was. But then if
you ever did a gig where you had to come out and play one song and then
go sit down again, you understand why this is. I was disheartened
because I know many will watch it and think, "well that's not so great"
and then pass on giving the album a listen.
And his first solo album contained some great guitar work. His dramatic
change of "tone" put many "guitarist types" off, but I thought it had
some fine tunes and great solos, "After Midnight" for example.
The album's engineering was poor, IMO.
|
2982.11 | Openting act at the Centrum? | BORON5::WIGHT | | Mon Sep 26 1994 11:44 | 7 |
| By the way does anybody know who is going to open up for Clapton on
Oct 14, 1994 at the Centrum ?
I am going to the show and hopefully won't be disappointed.
Thanks,
Brian
|
2982.13 | Move over, maybe. | WMOIS::POIRIER | | Mon Sep 26 1994 11:49 | 16 |
|
Guitar Player, November, has a good write up on Peter Green. After I
read it I went over and pulled out Mac's "Then play on". Forgot about
his playing. Think it's a good thing for Eric that he, Green, drop out
of the picture.
|
2982.14 | Seen one, ya seen 'em all | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | db | Mon Sep 26 1994 12:02 | 7 |
| > Avoiding Steve Morse in this notesfile is like trying to read a
> newspaper without getting the latest on O.J Simpson ;-)
Avoiding I-IV-V/Blues players in this notesfile is like trying to read
a paper without encountering the letter "e".
;-)
|
2982.15 | I think it's JV with EC. | AIMHI::KERR | Lost in CyberSpace | Mon Sep 26 1994 12:04 | 8 |
|
.- a few:
I believe Jimmie Vaughn is the opening act for the upcoming Clapton
tour. Maybe someone can verify, but that is what I had heard.
Al
|
2982.16 | give OJ a chance! | GOES11::HOUSE | How could I have been so blind? | Mon Sep 26 1994 12:13 | 6 |
| OJ's playing on his most recent effort was far superior to anything
Clapton's ever done. His mastery of the guitar is obvious and his
taste is incredible. Oh yeah, and he has the most ROOLIN tone! Not
like that annoying whiney Clapton sound!
Gh
|
2982.17 | | BIGQ::DCLARK | doin' that crazy hand jive! | Mon Sep 26 1994 12:14 | 1 |
| yeah OJ's tone cuts through like a knife!
|
2982.18 | | WEDOIT::ABATELLI | | Mon Sep 26 1994 12:25 | 5 |
| RE: 2982.17
Must have been when OJ used that Telecaster! Too sharp for my tastes.
Fred
|
2982.19 | ? | LEDS::BURATI | Network partner excited | Mon Sep 26 1994 13:23 | 3 |
| > I prefer 'After Midnight' by J.J. Cale.
Uhhhhh, OK. <scratch-scratch>
|
2982.20 | | LEDS::ORSI | Willoughby...next stop Willoughby! | Tue Sep 27 1994 07:44 | 8 |
| Caught EC on SNL and thought the tone of the 335 through the tweed
'59? Fender twin on Toredown was awesome, even tho' he hit a couple
of clams. He then came back with a mucho distorted Strat (lace sensors)
for 5 Long Years and proceeded to noodle the song to death. Over-playing
and bad tone. He had created a gem......and took a dump on it.
Neal
|
2982.21 | | LEDS::BURATI | Easy Pour Spout | Tue Sep 27 1994 11:35 | 10 |
| I'm wondering if the difficulty he had getting into the groove in the
first tune (which is how I felt it went) was why he reverted to using
the Strat for the second. Could be that the amps weren't dialed up for
the Fender and on a live show there wouldn't have been an opportunity to
re-adjust them, either.
Maybe it was like "that sucked. I'm not feeling comfortable with the 335
so I'm going back to the Strat for the second number".
Just sheer speculation, mind you.
|
2982.22 | | E::EVANS | | Wed Sep 28 1994 08:44 | 5 |
| "Five Long Years" as done by Buddy Guy is played on a strat. I understand
that Clapton based his version on Guy's version.
Jim
|
2982.23 | | KUZZY::PELKEY | Life, It aint for the sqeamish! | Thu Sep 29 1994 13:47 | 24 |
| <<He had created a gem......and took a dump on it.
as pelkey roars ! Too funny.
I like Eric, don't get me wrong, but yea, he sure over
Calpton's just about everything he does... I mean the guy
is great and all,,, but I'd hate to be the 'other' guitar
dude in any of his bands,,, hell, take the night off....
You won't be noticed.... Not sure if it's popular demand,
or just a 50 gallon ego.
hell, maybe both...
Anyway, far as I know, that Jimmy Vaughn thing is pretty
much a done deal.... he'll be opening for Eric... yet another
coat-snap-has-been-never-was riding on his brothers fame....
(Please....)
Man I *still* MISS Stevie Ray......
|
2982.24 | | DNEAST::BOTTOM_DAVID | anti-EMM! anti-EMM! I hate expanded memory!- Dorothy | Thu Sep 29 1994 15:49 | 16 |
| Well I'e saw Clapton three times back in the '70's when George Terry was
the second guitarist. At each show there were two songs that showcased George,
and Eric usually left the stage (one exception where he sat in a wicker chair
at the front of the stage and drank a beer while Geroge did his thing). Since
George is and was essentailly nobody, I thought the gesture was more than fair.
And when Carlos Santanna joined Eric for an encore, they traded licks 3 ways.
Jimmy Vaughn riding on Stevie's fame. Perhaps, at least I can see it, and yeah
Jimmy isn't Stevie no argument. On the other hand Jimmy was recording albums and
touring as a name act well before Stevie (Fab Tbirds), yeah he never enjoyed the
level of success Stevie had, and I'm not certain the TBirds deserved it, but
he is an established artist on his own right.
me I prefer Stevie to Jimmy too...
dbii
|
2982.25 | | LEDS::BURATI | six strings down | Thu Sep 29 1994 16:25 | 6 |
| For the record, Tilt-a-whirl off Jimmy's Strange Pleasures is a very
cool tune. Nothin' flashy. Just drop-dead cool.
Thanks to \rick calcagni for recommending that purchase.
\rjb, dec-short-timer
|
2982.26 | | POWDML::BUCKLEY | why do we have to fall from grace? | Thu Sep 29 1994 16:33 | 4 |
| >For the record, Tilt-a-whirl off Jimmy's Strange Pleasures is a very
>cool
ride -- I love the Tilt-a-Hurl!!!
|
2982.27 | | BUSY::FISED::SLABOUNTY | I smell T-R-O-U-B-L-E | Thu Sep 29 1994 17:13 | 8 |
|
Santana and Clapton on the same stage?
If I saw that, I'd expect Clapton to be carrying water, or
maybe polishing guitars, or cleaning gum off the microphone
stands or something.
GTI
|
2982.28 | ;-) | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | db | Fri Sep 30 1994 09:13 | 6 |
| re: .26
> I love the Tilt-a-Hurl!!!
I knew that eventually Buck would end up saying something positive
in the Eric Clapton note.
|
2982.29 | The anti-guitar hero... | PAVONE::TURNER | | Fri Sep 30 1994 12:06 | 26 |
| Re: not wanting to be the "other" guitarist in Clapton's band
Funny, but I can't think of anyone that this is less true of (IMO).
Clapton often gets criticised for not taking *enough* solos, and often
leaving the spotlight to other members of the band. Certainly, George
Terry and Albert Lee could have no reason to complain.
Clapton's entire career is littered with examples of his attempts to
put the accent on group playing, rather than the obligatory solo (Blind
Faith, Delaney and Bonnie, most of his solo work in the 70s). Even in
the Chuck Berry film "Hail, Hail Rock & Roll", he seemed to shrug his
shoulders when they asked him to take another solo in "Wee Wee Hours",
as if to say "isn't one enough?".
And his worship of black blues players is second to none. You never
hear an interview without him saying he learned everything from Big Bill
Broonzy, Robert Johnson et al, "I'm only a poor man's Otis Rush", "why
listen to me when you can listen to Buddy Guy" etc.
Jimmy Page, he ain't!
Dom
P.S. Re. the SRV vs. Jimmmy Vaughan referendum, put my vote down for
Jimmy. SRV was extraordinary, but Jimmy's understated style (� la Steve
Cropper) is much more my scene.
|
2982.30 | | DNEAST::BOTTOM_DAVID | anti-EMM! anti-EMM! I hate expanded memory!- Dorothy | Mon Oct 03 1994 12:21 | 8 |
| Santanna/Clapton on the same stage?>
yeah in '76 they toured together, with Santanna as the opener...
It was cool, 20 mins of Little wing with 3 good guitarists swapping off the
leads...
dbii
|
2982.31 | RE: 2982.30 | PELKEY::pelkey | Life aint for the Squeamish | Mon Oct 03 1994 14:05 | 17 |
| well I guess not knowing, or seeing much other than a half a
dozen t.v. spots, (not much comparing to what a clpaton nut
would see him..) Perhaps my opinion was a little short sighted..
Like I said in .23,, I luv the guy, don't get me wrong.... We've
all learned alot of things from him,, and considering he was
in pretty bad shape sometime ago, he's now, playing better than
ever.....
RE: J-vaughn.. Understand this.. I know he was in the Fab- T-birds,
but it just seems to me, anyway,,, that he's become more 'present'
now than before Stevie died. WHY ?????? Could it be,,, maybe not...
I also heard that Stevie's brother was a guitar player before Steve
was himself... I may have misunderstood....
/r
|
2982.32 | | CUSTOM::ALLBERY | Jim | Mon Oct 03 1994 14:35 | 12 |
| RE: Clapton
As far as Eric having a huge ego, I've always had the impression he'd
just like to be the guitar player in a band. Certainly that was one of
the driving forces behind Derek and the Dominoes.
RE: the Vaughn bros.
Jimmy plays in a more understated style than SRV, a more traditional
(and less interesting to the typical rock guitarist) R&B style. While
it is entirely possible that the public has payed more attention to him
as a result of his brother's death, I can't conceive of this being any
attempt on his part to capitalize on the situation. It's not like any
of his previous efforts were blatantly commercial.
|
2982.33 | big brother | RICKS::CALCAGNI | There's no money to be made above the 5th fret | Tue Oct 04 1994 09:26 | 14 |
| Hey Ray, check out the SRV biography "Caught in the Crossfire"
for some good insight into the brothers history. Jimmy was always
the main man. He was a legend on the Texas blues scene and getting
national exposure long before Stevie; he made a clear decision NOT
to go commercial, and devoted himself to the traditional blues that
he loved. Stevie became the megastar, but that kind of over-the-top
celebrity comes in large part from being the right thing in the right
place at the right time.
Doesn't sound like anyone, especially the brothers themselves, ever saw
it as Jimmy riding Stevie's coat-tails; if anything, Stevie probably
saw it the other way around.
/rick
|
2982.34 | Great book! | AIMHI::KERR | Lost in CyberSpace | Tue Oct 04 1994 12:38 | 16 |
| .33
I would recommend "Caught in the Crossfire" to anyone interested in
knowing more about the Brothers Vaughn. There was a real competitive
side to their relationship, but there was also a strong bond between
the two. The culmination of that bond can be heard on "Family Style".
In much the same way that Clapton's current CD pays homage to his
roots, I think Jimmie's most recent effort, "Strange Pleasures" is a
look back into his musical past. I don't know what others in here
think, but I really like this CD a lot. I like it a great deal more
than anything he ever did with the T-birds. His guitar playing is
understated, but very tasteful. BTW, yesterday, Oct 3rd, would have
been Stevie Ray's 40th birthday.
Al
|
2982.35 | I got the blues after buying this album | POBOX::PATLA | Elvis Sells DECpc's at Digital! | Wed Oct 05 1994 10:43 | 22 |
| Is it me or is the ne Eric Album just TOO sterile. I am a player for
only two years, and I would consider myself a Eric fan, as well as a
person who can play 12 bar blues for hours and be entertained.
I go to Buddy Guys Legends as often as I can to rip off licks and I'm
just amazed at the guys that wail on the blues there. These guys just
seem to reach ouch for notes and try stuff on stage risk the dinks but
they don't care because they feel so much up there. Break a string,
who cares!
I was eagerly awaiting Eric's album, I have now listened to it alot
since I got it waited before I entered a response here, but I just find
the album to clean.
I mean no dirt, no amp hum, no surprises. This album just seems way to
concieved. Unplugged was great, Back To The Cradle is not.
Pat...
Who is eagerly awaiting Buddy Guys new album where he is backed up by
Double Trouble!
|
2982.36 | show not thine electronic face here! | BIGQ::DCLARK | doin' that crazy hand jive! | Wed Oct 05 1994 14:28 | 3 |
| re .-1
blasphemer!
|
2982.37 | After Midnight... | POWDML::BUCKLEY | why do we have to fall from grace? | Wed Oct 05 1994 23:08 | 1 |
|
|
2982.38 | Montreal review-EC | POLAR::KRESIC | | Fri Oct 07 1994 13:39 | 22 |
| Saw Clapton in Montreal on Oct. 3. First half of his show he was
playing a lot of rhythmn and the band sounded real good. But when
the second half rolled along, he started playing more solos. His
lead playing sounded soul-less. Maybe it's because I just don't
like the tone he gets from his guitar/amp. (Soldano?) setup. In
my opinion, the tone he got in the Bluesbreakers/Layla session
periods is what I liked the most. Of course, his playing was
hot back then (maybe youthful exhuburence?). The show was all
blues, with tunes from Robert Johnson, Bessie Smith, Elmore
James etc..... I don't think it's only me that had this opinion,
because the two friends I was with had the same thoughts. I saw
Clapton in '89, and when he played a solo, it grabbed you (you
could feel it), even though I still don't like that tone he
gets from his Strat/amp. setup.
Jimmie Vaughn opened up and the band sounded good. He had a very
good classical guitarist (yes, CLASSICAL) play rhythm and do
a solo piece during the set. His voice has improved and sounds
very similar to Stevie Ray Vaughn's (go figure). The 3 backup
singers were very energetic and added exitement to the show.
|
2982.39 | Happy B-day EC! | MKOTS3::KERR | Hell has our URL | Thu Mar 30 1995 07:35 | 2 |
|
Guess who's 50 years old today? (Layla told me).
|
2982.40 | | POLAR::KFICZERE | | Thu Mar 30 1995 08:43 | 4 |
| Can you imagine...when i'm 50 i'd like to be able to look back at a
carreer in music like his.
HB EC
|
2982.41 | turning 50 | OUTSRC::HEISER | Hoshia Nah,Baruch Haba B'shem Adonai | Thu Mar 30 1995 11:29 | 1 |
| puts a whole new twist to S L O W H A N D.
|
2982.42 | maybe he'll drop dead soon | POWDML::BUCKLEY | | Thu Mar 30 1995 11:48 | 1 |
| Who cares?
|
2982.43 | Sick of this sh!t | GOES11::LAMBERT | Sam, Storage Mgmt. S/W @CXO | Thu Mar 30 1995 14:04 | 6 |
| re: .42
Oh, grow up, willya?
-- Sam
|
2982.44 | awww | POWDML::BUCKLEY | | Thu Mar 30 1995 15:43 | 3 |
| re: .43
poor baby, don't cry now....
|
2982.45 | | GOES11::LAMBERT | Sam, Storage Mgmt. S/W @CXO | Thu Mar 30 1995 16:44 | 15 |
| Too bad you deleted your original .44 reply; it was much more fitting to
your .42. I was just going to point out that you missed putting in the
"nyah, nyah" line.
It's not that I'm such a big Clapton fan, it's just I'm really tired of
all the content-free "so-and-so sux" comments from certain people (notably
you), and especially find the "maybe he'll drop dead soon" comment totally
uncalled for. And I'm not the only one, as another "Can't we all just get
along?" type topic pointed out in here recently.
But, given your noting "style" in other conferences, I guess I shouldn't
expect much else.
-- Sam
|
2982.46 | Hi hip..... | GIDDAY::KNIGHTP | There's room for you inside | Thu Mar 30 1995 19:27 | 8 |
| re buck
Is that a "Cry baby wah"?
Happy Birthday EC.
P.K.
|
2982.47 | What a space cadet! | VARESE::TRNUX1::IDC_BSTR | Oh no! NOT Milan Kundera again! | Fri Mar 31 1995 02:19 | 20 |
|
Aw, c'mon, you should know by now that if you write a note in this
conference about anything other than shredders, shredding or the latest
super-duper rack-mounted plaything, then this zombie is going to come
out with one of his "X sux" comments. Obviously, he was feeling
imaginative yesterday when he wrote "hope he drops dead", though I see
he's still limited to monosyllables.
>It's not that I'm such a big Clapton fan, it's just I'm really tired of
>all the content-free "so-and-so sux" comments from certain people (notably
>you), and especially find the "maybe he'll drop dead soon" comment totally
>uncalled for.
You know I'm beginning to think that's our only hope with
POWDML::BUCKLEY. In fact, I can just see his tombstone now:
"THE WHOLE WORLD SUX.".
Dom
|
2982.48 | Fireworks so early in the year | STRATA::LUCHT | Is it a passion or just a profession? | Fri Mar 31 1995 03:06 | 1 |
|
|
2982.49 | | POWDML::BUCKLEY | | Fri Mar 31 1995 09:29 | 1 |
| I'm sick of EC and his "music". That's my opinion, period
|
2982.50 | | POWDML::BUCKLEY | | Fri Mar 31 1995 09:32 | 4 |
| re: .47
you've got it all wrong -- I really don't CARE about music ... it
interferes with my coaster riding!
|
2982.51 | | OUTSRC::HEISER | Hoshia Nah,Baruch Haba B'shem Adonai | Fri Mar 31 1995 09:47 | 2 |
| Now that he's 50, there's a rumor going around that he'll switch to
bass.
|
2982.52 | Not God, but good | GIDDAY::KNIGHTP | There's room for you inside | Sun Apr 02 1995 19:11 | 15 |
| if you think EC suxs then hit next unseen!
I was watching the "unplugged" tape over the weekend, and you
know Eric does some really nice stuff on that. The slide work is
good and the acoustic solos are quite nice. In particular the vocal
is what I really enjoyed.
Interesting that the quality of the sound is so good considering
he is singing into a Beta 58 and he is about 12" away.
He really is a Blues guy, you can hear it stand out in his
playing and singing.
P.K.
|
2982.53 | Clapton is just alright with me! | MILKWY::JACQUES | Vintage taste, reissue budget | Mon Apr 03 1995 15:06 | 30 |
| Clapton has always been primarily blues-influenced. Many of his
first hit's were old blues songs that he covered. The most notable
is "Crossroads Blues" written by none other than Robert Johnson.
I'd like to go on record here as saying that, in general, I like
Eric Clapton. My favorite Clapton recordings are from Derick and
the Dominoes, and Blind Faith. Most of the new stuff is relatively
simple, easy to play, but real crowd pleasers. The stuff I like the
least is from his 461 Ocean Blvd album. Strangely enough, that album
contains some great Clapton Tunes "Mainline Fla". as well as some of
the most lame tunes he has covered. "I shot the Sheriff, and "Willie
and the handjive" are my 2 least favorite Clapton tunes of all time,
and I don't see what the point was in including them.
Clapton does not suck. He has contributed to Rock and Roll history,
which is far more than any of us can say. At times, his music has
been brilliant, and at times, it has been forgettable. I think all
the Clapton fanatics have created an image that he cannot live up to.
He's a human being, not a god.
I think the reason for the huge success of "Unplugged" is that it
offered something differant than the usual gritty rock album. Most
rock-n-rollers never bother to listen to anything that is easy on
the ears. After a while, my ears get tired of hearing power-tube
distortion, and a little strumming on the old acoustic is just the
ticket. I don't understand why so many people were offended by the
acoustic version of Layla. At least he didn't steal someone else'
song.
Mark
|
2982.54 | | MPGS::MARKEY | The bottom end of Liquid Sanctuary | Mon Apr 03 1995 15:16 | 9 |
| I suppose if I have to listen to Layla for the billionth + n time,
I would actually prefer to hear the newer version as it least it's
a bit different from the same-old same-old.
I almost wish Page/Plant would do a new version of "Stairway To
Heaven" so at least the radio stations would have something
slightly different to annoy me with.
-b
|
2982.55 | Covers Repeated Ad-nauseum Please | EZ2GET::STEWART | donorcycle dot-rider | Mon Apr 03 1995 17:37 | 7 |
|
I think there's an idea for a Guitar Noters tape in here...something
like "Bad Covers of Rock Cliches", or something... there's gotta be a
better acronym, though...
|
2982.56 | | GANTRY::ALLBERY | Jim | Tue Apr 04 1995 08:42 | 31 |
| RE: having to listen to Layla for the billionth + n time
Just think how you'd feel about playing it for the billionth time...
I, too, am puzzled by the vehement reaction against the unplugged
version of "Layla." I agree, that the acoustic version pales in
comparison to the orignial (which IMO, is one of the quintessential
examples of great rock and roll), but I don't choose to compare the
two. Taken on its own merits, I find the acoustic "Layla" to be OK:
not great, but not that bad, either. Its EC's song-- he can do
with it as he pleases. After playing it for 25 years, I don't
blame him for wanting to do something a little different with it.
It would have been easy for him to try to play the original version
of the song on acoustic guitar (which would have sounded pretty
lame anyway) like most "unplugged" performances. Instead he tried
something else.
In fact, the thing I like best about Clapton Unplugged is that he
took a chance and tried something very different than that for which
he is known. He even plays fingerstyle on a number of tracks.
He's not a great acoustic guitarist, but I though he did reasonably
well. OK, maybe no real blues slide player would play slide in standard
tuning, but overall, he demonstrated a greater range of abilities
(especially for something recorded live) than I would have expected.
I think his singing on "Unplugged" is some of the best he's done.
Besides, he has execellent taste in guitars ;^)
My 2 cents,
Jim
|
2982.57 | A lot more versatile than he'd ever admit to being... | VARESE::SACHA::IDC_BSTR | Oh no! NOT Milan Kundera again! | Tue Apr 04 1995 09:00 | 19 |
| >OK, maybe no real blues slide player would play slide in standard
>tuning, but overall, he demonstrated a greater range of abilities
>(especially for something recorded live) than I would have expected.
I don't think anyone need question his ability as a slide player
anyway. Just buy a copy of 461 Ocean Boulevard (his touch on
"Motherless Children" and "I Can't Hold Out" is majestic), or the stuff
he did with Delaney and Bonnie. In fact, Duane Allman had a whole load
of positivethings to say about Clapton's slide playing after the Layla
sessions...and you can't get higher praise than that!
Of course, if you question Clapton about it, he'll probably say
something to the tune of:
"Slide? I can't even play slide! If I listen to Duane Allman or Ry
Cooder, it just makes me want to give up. I just copy Bukka White and
Elmore James, but I'm not really fit to tie their shoelaces..."
Dom
|
2982.58 | Random thoughts | GANTRY::ALLBERY | Jim | Tue Apr 04 1995 10:21 | 15 |
| RE: questioning his slide ability
I didn't mean to question his ability. I was merely pointing out that
from an idiomatic standpoint it was not authentic: most slide blues
work is done in open tunings. I agree that he has a nice touch--
but it is something not limited to just his slide playing though.
Overall, he's better without a slide than with, and better on
electric than acoustic.
I agree about EC's humbleness.
On an unrelated note, Martin plans to build 461 000-42ECs (the
reference to 461 Ocean Blvd reminded me).
Jim
|
2982.59 | A for effort, F for result | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | There can be only one | Tue Apr 04 1995 12:43 | 10 |
| re: .56 Jim Allbery
Jim,
I'm willing to give EC credit for "trying" it a new way. You don't
seem willing to give him credit for failing.
I.E. just because "he tried" doesn't mean we shouldn't say "he failed".
db
|
2982.60 | More like a C | GANTRY::ALLBERY | Jim | Tue Apr 04 1995 14:21 | 30 |
| RE: .59, db
I guess I don't consider it a failure. I consider the acoustic
Layla a somewhat interesting, if not overly inspired, new take on
the song. If I felt it was a failure, I would have said so, or I would
have chosen not to respond at all. I don't understand why you feel
that I am unable to look at EC objectively.
I'm far from an Eric Clapton fanatic (I own an old anthology albom,
Layla and other Love Songs, the Cross Roads set, and Unplugged).
There are a lot of guitarists that I listen to more often (here lately
its been Mark Knopfler, Christopher Parkening, Tony Rice, Sharon Isbin,
and even Chet Atkins).
I consider "Unplugged" to contain, on average, mediocre guitar playing.
There are some good moments, some bad. I think Chuck Levell's (sp?)
(the pianist's) work is very good. On the whole, I consider
Unplugged better than mediocre, but not great.
I'm glad your willing to give EC credit for "trying" it a new way.
Your entitled to your own opinion on the results. You obviously
feel strongly about your opinion. Since mine differs, you seem
to feel it must be a deficiency on my part. However, the fact my
evaluation differs from yours does not necessarily imply a blindness
on my part, only different criteria for judgement.
At least we agree on Bela Fleck and the Flecktones, so we are capable
of reaching a musical common ground...
Jim
|
2982.61 | You got me on my knees! | MILKWY::JACQUES | Vintage taste, reissue budget | Tue Apr 04 1995 15:05 | 56 |
|
DB, What exactly did he fail at? He played a new version of a song that
he wrote. The new version is differant from the original. I believe his
intention was for the new acoustic version to be much lighter, ie: Vocals
and guitar playing with a much lighter touch. I agree that the original
is more exiting, has more challenging guitar playing, and more urgent-
sounding vocals. However, I do not agree that the unplugged version
"failed". What are you basing this on? Perhaps it failed to impress YOU,
or it failed to provide music that YOU want to listen to, but this does
not mean it failed as a musical work. What constitutes success or failure
in Art/Music? Success can be measured in many differant ways. Record
companies measure success in dollars and in that regard, the Unplugged
album was a smashing success. I believe several million people that bought
this album consider it a success. Further evidence of the albums success
is that it triggered nearly every mainstream band in the industry to do
an acoustic album. I believe that many people are burnt out on the
Unplugged album because it got way too much airplay. This happens to
some of the best music produced, but it is never the fault of the
artist.
I know what you look for in music. You look for music that challenges
your' ear, and "pushes the envelope". Obviously, you're not going to find
this on an Eric Clapton album as this is clearly not his thing. You look
for music that is physically challenging to play. I've even heard you say
that you have listened to Morse and other players like Steve Howe at 1/2
speed to see just how accurate and smooth these guys actually play. I've
heard you criticize Steve Howe because his playing did not pass this 1/2
speed test of yours. I contend that there is more to music than physical
note-for-note perfection. I believe it is valid for people to like
something simply because it brings them enjoyment without passing some
kind of litmus test. If this is false, than I guess I might as well go
home and burn all of my guitars, because by your definition, I'm a failure.
Rock and Roll music was never intended to be picture-perfect. You want
perfection, listen to Classical Music. When you start analyzing art to
the nth degree I believe it takes some of the enjoyment away from it.
I believe that there are tons of artists out there that play music along
the same lines as Clapton. It may not be the most challenging music to
play, but this is not what the mainstream public wants anyways. For some
reason, Clapton gets held to a higher standard than most because of the
"Guitar God" status that people associate with him, which I believe he
never wanted to begin with. I don't believe that music has to be along
the lines of Steve Morse, Dream Theater, Joe Satriani, Steve Vai, etc.
to be considered valid, or successful.
I hope that this note does not cause a landslide of "Clapton Sux" notes,
but realistically, it probably will. We can debate this issue until the
second coming, but I would prefer if we just agree to disagree. I guess
what it boils down to is "Live and Let Live". If you don't like something,
don't listen to it, but please don't deny others the enjoyment. I know
a lot of people that like Garth Brooks and the entire new country genre.
Personally, this is not my cup of tea, but I would have to agree that
it can be fun to listen to at a party.
Mark
|
2982.62 | Geez, gettin' to be you can't say anything in here | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | There can be only one | Tue Apr 04 1995 15:38 | 31 |
| RE: Jim Alberry
Wow!
You guys are really taking quite a leap from what I said to what
YOU hear me saying.
> I don't understand why you feel that I am unable to look at EC
> objectively.
I didn't say that, nor do I believe that.
> I'm glad your willing to give EC credit for "trying" it a new way.
> Your entitled to your own opinion on the results. You obviously
> feel strongly about your opinion. Since mine differs, you seem
> to feel it must be a deficiency on my part.
Look... the jist of your original response to the criticism struck me
as "hey, he tried".
My response (summarized) was "Yeah, so??? Does that mean I shouldn't
say that I think he failed?"
That doesn't imply that I feel you're unable to look at EC objectively,
and it doesn't imply that I think my judgement is better than you
or anything other insult you've found in my note.
It only says, the mere fact that he tried to do something "different"
doesn't excuse him from criticism.
OK?
|
2982.63 | Yikes... what evoked this??? | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | There can be only one | Tue Apr 04 1995 15:53 | 100 |
| Mark,
I love how you've turned this into a shred vs blues thing. My hats off
to you.
> DB, What exactly did he fail at?
He failed to produce something that I think is worthy of praise.
Actually, I don't regard this change as all that ambitious anyway.
Basically he did a very straightforward swing version of it. You
can do that to any song. You can apply reggae to any song.
Fred Abatelli applies different formulas to songs at every gig.
Geez... someone requests reggae, and we don't know any so Fred just
picks his favorite tune and does a reggae version of it and we all
follow.
Bottom line is "does it create something interesting". For me,
in the case of the "Layla" the answer is "no".
> I believe several million people that bought this album consider it
> a success.
I hope then that all of you will agree that the Bay City Rollers were
a "success". They did that too.
> Further evidence of the albums success is that it triggered nearly
> every mainstream band in the industry to do an acoustic album.
I think this is credit where credit is NOT due. Clapton rode the
recent unplugged wave but he absolutely did not start it. Actually,
the earliest acoustic ballads *I* heard on the radio were from
HEAVY METAL bands like poison (Every Rose has its Thorn) and what not.
Sorry Mark, but I certainly do not give Clapton credit for the
unplugged trend. That's undeserved.
> I've even heard you say that you have listened to Morse and other
> players like Steve Howe at 1/2 speed to see just how accurate and
> smooth these guys actually play.
That's not true. That is not "why" is listened at half-speed. I
listened at half-speed in order to learn the tune, not to evaluate
his technique.
> I've heard you criticize Steve Howe because his playing did not pass
> this 1/2 speed test of yours.
And despite that, I still think he's one of the greatest guitarists
to walk the planet. And for 5 straight years, readers of Guitar
Player Magazine agreed with me.
You're trying to paint me as someone obsessed with technique but it's
not true and you're distorting things I've said.
>I contend that there is more to music than physical note-for-note
>perfection.
Couldn't agree more. Jimmy Page is a GREAT example of that.
>I believe it is valid for people to like something simply
>because it brings them enjoyment without passing some kind of litmus
>test. If this is false, than I guess I might as well go home and burn
>all of my guitars, because by your definition, I'm a failure.
You've really gone off the deep end here. Mark, did I get your dander
up or something? If so, I'm sorry.
> Rock and Roll music was never intended to be picture-perfect. You want
> perfection, listen to Classical Music. When you start analyzing art to
> the nth degree I believe it takes some of the enjoyment away from it.
Sheesh! Where is this coming from?
> I don't believe that music has to be along the lines of Steve Morse,
> Dream Theater, Joe Satriani, Steve Vai, etc. to be considered valid,
> or successful.
If all music were along those lines I would RAPIDLY get bored with
music.
> I guess what it boils down to is "Live and Let Live". If you don't like
> something, don't listen to it, but please don't deny others the
> enjoyment.
Gee Mark... to the best of my knowledge I have not made any effort
to get EC removed from the radio or record bins.
Have I convinced you that you just have a really distorted view of
"where I'm at"????
> I know a lot of people that like Garth Brooks and the entire
> new country genre. Personally, this is not my cup of tea, but I would
> have to agree that it can be fun to listen to at a party.
I love Garth Brooks! The guy also is probably one of the world's very
best on-stage performers.
|
2982.64 | Peace ! | MILKWY::JACQUES | Vintage taste, reissue budget | Tue Apr 04 1995 23:05 | 17 |
| Dave, I guess I did go off on a tangent, and for that I apologize,
but your reply .59 set me off. You implied that Jim was wrong if
he didn't admit that the song was a failure. Clearly, this is not
the only opinion on this song. This note was beginning to take a turn
for the better until you came along with the F-word.
I'm too tired to offer a blow by blow rebuttal. It's pointless
anyways. I'm sorry I was so harsh.
The ironic part is that I am no big EC fan. I own a couple of
his disks and only play them occasionally. I just feel that he
has been overly criticized in this conference. People that like
him cannot discuss his work without getting the opposing viewpoint
and accompanying critisicm. It takes the fun out of it.
|
2982.65 | I guess Hendrix "failed" a lot too, then ;-) | VARESE::TRNUX1::IDC_BSTR | Oh no! NOT Milan Kundera again! | Wed Apr 05 1995 03:58 | 33 |
| Dave:
I've never heard you say *anything* positive about EC (you'd probably
give his career an "F" rating!), so I'm not going to bother entering a
debate that has been repeated too many times in this conference. As it
happens, I wasn't wild about the acoustic Layla, but I wouldn't call it
a failure any more than I'd call Steve Howe's "The Clap" a failure.
I'd consider myself a great fan of EC, in as much as I've accumulated
probably 70% of the music he's made in his career. That said, I haven't
bought any of his solo albums since "Money And Cigarettes" (1983); quite
frankly, I found a lot of the stuff he did with people like Nathan East
and Greg Phillinganes very insipid. The stuff I love is the stuff he
did with the Yardbirds, John Mayall, Cream, Derek & the Dominoe, and
the session stuff with Dr. Jo, Steve Stills, Champion Jack Dupree,
Aretha Franklin, etc.
Incidentally, he's playing about 10 miles from where I live at the end
of this month...and I don't plan to go!
Jim:
I didn't think for one minute that you were criticising Clapton's
slide playing - I was just pointing out that he's more in line with the
George Harrison school (one of the most subtle slide players I've
ever heard) than the Joe Walsh school, i.e. sensitivity before blazing
licks. Duane Allman (surely the best of the lot) was probably a
halfway-house between the two.
And, sure, you won't find a more humble musician than Eric Clapton.
There's not a guitarist on the planet that Clapton hasn't elevated to
the status of "genius" during some interview or other.
Dom
|
2982.66 | Mark, you're stereotyping me | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | There can be only one | Wed Apr 05 1995 08:27 | 62 |
| > Dave, I guess I did go off on a tangent, and for that I apologize,
> but your reply .59 set me off. You implied that Jim was wrong if
> he didn't admit that the song was a failure.
Mark,
Let's set some context here OK?
Jim's note was almost apologetic about that song. Jim's early notes
gave ME the impression that HE didn't like the song all that much
and that rather than say "it failed" he was only going to say "at least
he tried".
I would be more than happy to list the Steve Morse songs which I think
"fail" IMO. I would be more than happy to tell you which songs on the
new Dream Theater album "suck" IMO.
> I'm too tired to offer a blow by blow rebuttal. It's pointless
> anyways. I'm sorry I was so harsh.
Frankly, I don't mind you being "harsh".
What I find interesting is that you're note so classicaly paints me
as your OWN personal notion of a shred-fan. Lessee if I can cover
just the main points without bogging this reply down:
1) I microscopically analyze music for technique
2) I have no appreciation of artistry, if there's no technique
it ignore it.
3) I have a very narrow appreciation of music: it all has to be
Morse, Vai, Satriani, etc.
I mean god, I couldn't have synthesized a more bigotted view of shred
fans if I tried.
And you know the funny thing is Mark, I'll bet you ask enough people
that know BOTH of us and they'll probably tell you that I have much
wider tastes in music than you both from a listening perspective and
a playing perspecitve.
> The ironic part is that I am no big EC fan. I own a couple of
> his disks and only play them occasionally.
The really ironic part is that *** I *** also own a couple of his disks and
only play them occasionally, at least in the past. I will be honest
and admit that I haven't put on any EC records for about 3 years now.
>just feel that he has been overly criticized in this conference. People
>that like him cannot discuss his work without getting the opposing
>viewpoint and accompanying critisicm. It takes the fun out of it.
I agree with this Mark. Don't lump me in with Buck and Mike. I would
like to see them stop these "EC sux" notes as much as you. Clapton
fans should be able to have a discussion about Clapton without those
disruptions. I consider those notes very uncool.
However, the reason I responded here was because Jim Allberry more or
less directed his note to the people who had a negative reaction to
that song and *I* was one of them, perhaps principle among them.
db
|
2982.67 | | JARETH::KMCDONOUGH | SET KIDS/NOSICK | Wed Apr 05 1995 09:10 | 24 |
|
Arrrrrhhhh. I can't stand it. I automatically skip any reply that
reposts/comments on any previous reply. Why does anyone feel the need
to convince someone else of their viewpoint or convictions? Take it to
SOAPBOX, please! It's no fun for me in here anymore.
To get back to EC, my band plays the unplugged Layla all of the time
because it goes over well. Personally, I'll take "Layla Classic" any
day, but the unplugged version does work for us.
I did like the fact that EC was willing to change an old standard to
fit it into the acoustic mold; too many others would have used an
acoustic guitar with strat pickups and cranked up the amp.
[**I specifically deny anyone permission to repost any part of this
note.**]
|
2982.68 | | BUSY::BUSY::SLABOUNTY | Trouble with a capital 'T' | Wed Apr 05 1995 09:26 | 5 |
|
Kevin, if you're so against commenting on a previous reply then
why did you comment on "Layla"? You only mentioned it because
it had been talked about in an earlier note.
|
2982.69 | | JARETH::KMCDONOUGH | SET KIDS/NOSICK | Wed Apr 05 1995 10:32 | 6 |
|
I'm not against commenting on an earlier reply, I'm against extracting
an earlier reply, reposting it, and disecting it frame-by-frame.
Kevin
|
2982.70 | | BUSY::BUSY::SLABOUNTY | Trouble with a capital 'T' | Wed Apr 05 1995 10:39 | 8 |
|
RE: Kevin
Well, someone had to take up the slack after Pete Cook left,
and I guess it just happens to be Dave.
8^)
|
2982.71 | This is sad... | WEDOIT::ABATELLI | In Pipeline Heaven | Wed Apr 05 1995 11:54 | 22 |
|
I'm still wondering why "db" mentioned me in one of his replies. I
guess I assume that everyone changes their style when necessary. Yes?
No? If you don't you'll just get bored with the whole thing and move
on! I've always liked Clapton, maybe not his attitude with other
musicians that he has had in his band in the past, "telling Robert Cray
that if he tries to play better than him, he'd cut him off at the knees",
but I can overlook that. Artists! Anyway, my point (if I can think of
one) is that it really doesn't matter what "anyone" thinks. It doesn't
matter what anyone's opinion is either. Here's a guy who sells millions
of records each year, sells out large venue concerts in *minutes* and
for every Clapton basher there are 20 Clapton fans!
So say what you want kids, I wouldn't mind having a career
like Clapton's and having people bash me because I'm successful!
I suppose all the Clapton bashers of the world would turn down that
kind of success right? I don't think so. Hey look, if you don't like
an artist, that's fine! We're all adults here... so what does it
matter who thinks [insert most disliked artist here] is a lousy
player, or emotionless player, or whatever. Who cares?????
<NEXT UNSEEN>
|
2982.72 | yes it is! | RICKS::CALCAGNI | more zip stupid juice | Wed Apr 05 1995 12:27 | 2 |
| This is not an argument!
|
2982.73 | oops, forgot the :-) | RICKS::CALCAGNI | more zip stupid juice | Wed Apr 05 1995 12:28 | 1 |
|
|
2982.74 | Clarifications | CUSTOM::ALLBERY | Jim | Thu Apr 06 1995 10:06 | 58 |
| RE: .62, .66
db,
I appologize if I jumped to conclusions about your comments. I would
like to explain the reasons for my leap, however.
You interpreted my orignal note:
Look... the jist of your original response to the criticism struck me
as "hey, he tried".
I admit my note was somewhat apologetic, but I was apologizing for
turning a (IMO) great song into a mediocre one. FWIW, I agree that it
was not musically a challenging change. However, since "Layla" is
probably EC's best known song, changing it at all is risky from
an audience appreciation standpoint (most people like thing to
sound like a the record). I was not apologizing for failure: my
exact words were:
Taken on its own merits, I find the acoustic "Layla" to be OK:
not great, but not that bad, either.
In short, mediocrity, not failure. I thought my statement was clear,
but, perhaps, "not that bad" gives a greater implication of failure
than I intended (particularly if read "not THAT bad").
The intended gist of your reply, you later stated as
My response (summarized) was "Yeah, so??? Does that mean I shouldn't
say that I think he failed?"
I have no problem with that. You have every right to say he failed.
I also agree that simply trying does not excuse failure. Your actual
response to my note, however, was
You don't seem willing to give him credit for failing.
^^^
Not "I agree he tried, but I believe he still failed."
Maybe I jumped to conclusions, but I interpreted your remark
as follows:
1) "failing" was the only valid evaluation for the song
2) I either thought EC failed, and refused to publicly admit the
failure.
OR
3) I was unable to evaluate the performance accurately.
As a result, I felt you were stereotyping *ME* as an Eric Clapton
fanatic who was either unable to accurately evaluate his playing
or unwilling to admit he was capable of something less than a
stellar performance. I am glad to know that this was not the case.
I'm sorry I assumed otherwise.
Jim
|
2982.75 | OK, it's mediocrity | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | There can be only one | Thu Apr 06 1995 11:46 | 16 |
| > In short, mediocrity, not failure.
OK. Fine. To me "mediocrity" for someone like Clapton should be
regarded as "failure" but let's half agree: the acoustic version
achieved full "mediocrity".
> My response (summarized) was "Yeah, so??? Does that mean I shouldn't
> say that I think he failed?"
>
> I have no problem with that. You have every right to say he failed.
> I also agree that simply trying does not excuse failure. Your actual
> response to my note, however, was
>
> You don't seem willing to give him credit for failing.
OK, my fault there. My "summarized" response was more of what I intended.
|
2982.76 | Hot mediocrity... | NOVA::ASHOKM::ASHFORTH | | Thu Apr 06 1995 12:09 | 18 |
| Um, not to cause a problem or anything, but...
I happen to *prefer* the acoustic version of Layla, though I liked the original
as well. To me, they just have different kinds of appeal.
The original is fun like cruisin' down the highway on a summer day in a fast
convertible, with a great tune on the radio. The blues version is like sittin'
on a rock in a cool green field near the side of the road, watchin' *other*
folks cruise down down the highway in a fast convertible...
Sort of "fast fun" and "slow fun." If my meaning doesn't come across, that's
okay; just wanted to burst the bubble as regards the Layla remake being
*unquestionably* and *unanimously* regarded as so-so.
(Now on the other hand, don't even *ask* me about "I Shot the Sheriff..." I just
ate!)
Bob
|
2982.77 | Layla revisited | GIDDAY::KNIGHTP | There's room for you inside | Thu Apr 06 1995 20:14 | 11 |
| re -1
funny you know, seeing though I started this....
I was driving home last night, and what comes on the radio?
The original version of Layla......
I prefer the new one. Funny the old one didnm't appeal to me
as much as I remembered it to.
P.K.
|
2982.78 | Anyone ever recorded a reggae version of "The Sabre Dance"? ;-) | VARESE::SACHA::IDC_BSTR | Oh no! NOT Milan Kundera again! | Fri Apr 07 1995 05:37 | 39 |
| I'm surprised that at least two people so far have said that they didn't
rate Clapton's version of "I Shot The Sheriff". I've always thought it
was very effective...great production, swirling organ, nice female
backing vocals. There's something "irregular" about it that really
grabs me; each time the band play that downwards scale at the end of
the verse, you never know quite when they're going to come in on the
chorus - the interval is different each time. Reminds me of the Rolling
Stones' "Citadel" in that respect.
In fact, I've always liked 461 Ocean Boulevard as an album, although
I'm a firm believer that, when people talk about their favorite
records, the intrinsic quality of an album often takes second place to
the time/place of first hearing (the "nostalgia" effect) - I *know*
that's the case with me! Anyway, it's a very varied record, the
songwriting's good, and it was Clapton's attempt to show the world that
good music is not dependent upon The Guitar Solo. There's also a real
relaxed, friendly sound to the band; no primadonnas trying to outdo
each other (which *sometimes* seemed to be the case with Cream).
Apparently, Clapton even called in the security guards at the studios
to play percussion on a couple of tracks!
Highlights for me are the slide solo in "I Can't Hold Out" and the
instrumental fade out of "Let It Grow", which slowly reaches a
crescendo. Oh yeh, I have to agree that "Willie And the Hand Jive" is a bit
on the naff side, though ;-)
Dom
P.S. Clapton did another obscure (believe me, only the staunchest Bob
Marley fans knew "I Shot the Sheriff" before Clapton did it!) reggae
cover on one of his solo albums (forget which one): it was "Don't Blame
Me" by Peter Tosh. I thought that was very good, too. The one that
shouldn't have seen the light, IMO, was his reggae version of "Knocking
On Heaven's Door"; that particular cover did nothing for me at all.
Then again, having heard the Guns And Roses version, I'd say Clapton's
effort was a bloody masterpiece... ;-)
|
2982.79 | | RICKS::CALCAGNI | more zip stupid juice | Fri Apr 07 1995 07:07 | 3 |
| Which 80's Clapton record is "The Core" on? I'm generally lukewarm on
his 80's stuff, put that particular track just grabs me.
|
2982.80 | 1977 | BIGQ::DCLARK | coed naked paradigm shifting | Fri Apr 07 1995 08:27 | 12 |
| re .-1
"The Core" is from "Slowhand", which also had Cocaine and
Wonderful tonight. I believe it came out in 1977. So it's
not an 80's EC album; maybe that's why you like it :-)
I agree, a lot of the 80's stuff is rather forgettable.
But I think that about everything Phil Collins is
associated with.
I always liked EC's reggae stuff. Didn't he also do a reggae
version of Swing Low Sweet Chariot on There's One in Every
Crowd?
|
2982.81 | | BUSY::BUSY::SLABOUNTY | Trouble with a capital 'T' | Fri Apr 07 1995 08:35 | 8 |
|
RE: .77
I heard "Bellbottom Blues" and was trying to "picture" what it
would sound like if he did an "unacoustic" version of that song,
like maybe turned up the Marshall stack to 11 and whomped on his
distortion pedal. 8^)
|
2982.82 | It's the keyboard equivalent to "Stairway to Heaven" | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | There can be only one | Fri Apr 07 1995 08:45 | 7 |
| I guess part of what bugs me about the new version, other than I don't
think that the "swing" idea works very well is that it rips out one
of THE all-time classic rock piano parts.
Remember, I'm a keyboard player more than a guitar player.
db
|
2982.83 | | VARESE::SACHA::IDC_BSTR | Oh no! NOT Milan Kundera again! | Fri Apr 07 1995 08:56 | 12 |
| >I guess part of what bugs me about the new version, other than I don't
>think that the "swing" idea works very well is that it rips out one
>of THE all-time classic rock piano parts.
...and that also means it's lacking some very eery slide playing by
Duane Allman. Yep, I can see your point.
Talking of D.A., possibly my all-time favorite ten seconds of rock
music is the intro to the Allmans' "Every Hungry Woman" on their first
LP. Duane's slide lick is something from another planet.
Dom
|
2982.84 | EHW rocks! | RICKS::CALCAGNI | more zip stupid juice | Fri Apr 07 1995 09:11 | 4 |
| Yeah, "Every Hungry Woman" really jumps out of the grooves on that
record. For years I tried to get bands I was in to cover that tune;
never had one that could do it justice.
|
2982.85 | | BUSY::BUSY::SLABOUNTY | Trouble with a capital 'T' | Fri Apr 07 1995 09:25 | 10 |
|
>I guess part of what bugs me about the new version, other than I don't
>think that the "swing" idea works very well is that it rips out one
>of THE all-time classic rock piano parts.
I don't miss that at all ... when the "outro piano" kicked in I
usually changed the station.
Much like the "YAH YAH" outro on "Hey Jude".
|
2982.86 | db and I agree on something! | CUSTOM::ALLBERY | Jim | Fri Apr 07 1995 09:57 | 5 |
| Re: Layla
I love the piano closer too.
Jim
|
2982.87 | | MPGS::MARKEY | The bottom end of Liquid Sanctuary | Fri Apr 07 1995 10:04 | 10 |
|
The piano... some open chord voicings; big deal.
Listen to Oscar Peterson, he's nowhere near as boring musically
as Clapton (overall), and has been doing that stuff (and better)
for ages.
ALL MHO, of course.
-b
|
2982.88 | O.P. and I.P. | GOES11::LAMBERT | Sam, Storage Mgmt. S/W @CXO | Fri Apr 07 1995 11:05 | 9 |
| re: .-1
Funny you should mention that; One of my currently favorite discs in
Oscar Peterson and Iysacc (sp? - I know it's wrong) Perlman's "Side By
Side", on which they cover a bunch of old jazz standards. That's right,
a classical violinist covering "Blue Skies". Amazing stuff.
-- Sam
|
2982.89 | | USPMLO::DESROCHERS | Mine's made outta unobtainium! | Fri Apr 07 1995 11:09 | 6 |
|
Lots of older Joe Pass have Oscar on 'em - love his playing.
And then add Nels Orsted Pederson (sp?) ... gotta get at
least once CD of that group since my albums are really
scratchy.
|
2982.90 | What goes into a "classic" | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | There can be only one | Fri Apr 07 1995 11:55 | 23 |
| > The piano... some open chord voicings; big deal.
That's it... I think Mark Jacques had me confused with you! ;-)
C'mon Brian, I think what makes that part so special for me is that
something fairly ordinary that just fits so perfectly.
At the risk of totally destroying Mark's concept of me as a shredder
I'll tell you that I have more respect for someone who can make
something "special" out of something "simple" than someone who can make
something "special" out of something "complex". It just seems like more
of a challenge. Thankfully, not having the chops that guys like Morse
and Satriani have, many folks take on this challenge. Unfortunately
most fail IMHO.
Some good examples exist in the realm of guitar. What are the first
two things every guitar player worth his salt ever learned: "Smoke on
the Water" and "Stairway to Heaven". THAT too me is greatness!
Unfortunately, the THIRD thing that guitarists seem to learn is
Van Halen's "Eruption"! ;-)
db
|
2982.91 | | MPGS::MARKEY | The bottom end of Liquid Sanctuary | Fri Apr 07 1995 12:32 | 34 |
| >C'mon Brian, I think what makes that part so special for me is that
>something fairly ordinary that just fits so perfectly.
Well, first of all, Clapton puts me to sleep. I won't say
he sux, that would imply he can't play. He can play. He
can even sorta write. But there's so many people out there
that are doing both (playing and writing) so much better
(IMHO) that bothering with Clapton strikes me as a waste
of time.
That said, I have to agree with your mediocrity comments
earlier, except that I would include the original Layla
in that category. Resoundingly dull in my opinion, nice
piano aside. My point was, if that's the piano style that
floats your boat, there's better examples in most of what
Oscar Peterson has done.
I have one Clapton CD/record in my collection: Unplugged.
And guess what, I didn't buy and it and I don't listen
to it. YAAAAAAAAAAWN.
I guess the final comment I would make regards what constitutes
a classic. It has nothing to do with the number of hacks
that want to play it/listen to it. It has to do with the
transcendent quality of greatness. None of the things you
mention have that quality in my opinion. It's extremely
rare in pop music, and in my experience, the presence
of greatness is inversely proportional to the size of
the audience.
(And before anyone assumes, greatness != playing a bizillion
notes a second in 15/8 time and the key of C#.)
-b
|
2982.92 | Oi Vay | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | There can be only one | Fri Apr 07 1995 14:02 | 6 |
| See Mark... it's Brian you WERE thinking of. ;-)
Apologies to all Clapton fans... we need a "Clapton bashing" note
to get this note back on track.
db
|
2982.93 | Ask and ye shall recieve!! | POLAR::KFICZERE | | Fri Apr 07 1995 15:55 | 5 |
| See note 2637---Clapton bashing note....
Have fun,
-kev
|
2982.94 | | SUFRNG::REESE_K | tore down, I'm almost level with the ground | Mon Apr 10 1995 14:21 | 21 |
| For those of you who don't care for EC, hit NEXT UNSEEN, geesh!!
Typically I'm read only in here; you couldn't pay me to go see
some of the other players ya'll rave about.
If the guy is over-rated or over-the-hill, why are some of us
having so much trouble getting tickets to his concerts?
When I first picked up Unplugged I groaned when I saw Layla included;
I loved the original version because I play the piano, when I heard
the acoustic version I fell in love with the song all over again.
The man has been telling people for *years* that playing the blues is
what gives him the most personal satisfaction; isn't he entitled to
devote a little more time to what gives him the most pleasure? I
think he's paid his dues.
If it weren't for EC I never would have delved into Robert Johnson,
Elmore James, Muddy etc. EC's turned many listeners on to the
traditional blues players; we owe him a debt of gratitude for that.
Right now I'm in the process of wearing out From The Cradle, almost
time to buy a spare :-)
|
2982.95 | | BUSY::BUSY::SLABOUNTY | Trouble with a capital 'T' | Mon Apr 10 1995 15:43 | 7 |
|
>If the guy is over-rated or over-the-hill, why are some of us
>having so much trouble getting tickets to his concerts?
Media brainwashing, of course.
|
2982.96 | YAWN | MASALA::JHYNDMAN | | Mon Apr 10 1995 19:13 | 7 |
| <<< Note 2982.95 by BUSY::BUSY::SLABOUNTY "Trouble with a capital 'T'">>>
> Media brainwashing, of course.
Appropriate P-name & node name,Sean (or Shawn),given the tone of your
contributions to all the other conferences I've seen them in lately.
|
2982.97 | | BUSY::BUSY::SLABOUNTY | Trouble with a capital 'T' | Tue Apr 11 1995 07:56 | 3 |
|
Thanks ... that's the nicest thing you've ever said to me!!
|
2982.98 | on the tube | GAVEL::DAGG | | Wed May 10 1995 08:12 | 7 |
|
Clapton rules on PBS tonight at 9:00. Its a special
produced under the direction of Martin Scorcese
(Last Waltz etc.). Includes footage from a recent live
gig at Filmore and historical clips, interviews.
Dave
|
2982.99 | a kinder, gentler Buck | POWDML::BUCKLEY | | Wed May 10 1995 08:37 | 1 |
| That's wonderful -- get your VCRs ready, men!
|
2982.101 | I'm TORN, man!! | KDX200::COOPER | Revolution calling! | Wed May 10 1995 09:02 | 4 |
| How are we supposed to watch Clapton with Beverly Hills 90210
being on tonight!
:-)
|
2982.102 | perhaps this will help... | RICKS::CALCAGNI | more zip stupid juice | Wed May 10 1995 09:10 | 5 |
| Well, I hear Shannon Dougherty is playing percussion in Clapton's band
now
:-)
|
2982.103 | excellent tango! | GAVEL::DAGG | | Thu May 11 1995 11:58 | 17 |
| Sorry for the tease, since the Clapton show on PBS
didn't show, at least in Boston.
Don't you hate it when you come home
to watch a cool show and instead its the Boston
Pops? Or Ballroom Dancing?
AAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH! I was relying on the GBH
program guide, which listed the Clapton
special as last night. Anyways I called and
raged to their answering machine, and
recommend everyone else does the same.
I don't know when they'll actually show it.
Dave
|
2982.104 | | USPMLO::DESROCHERS | Was this ignorance or bliss... | Thu May 11 1995 12:28 | 7 |
|
Well, there was a Clapton show on VH1 last night.
Yep, Eric and his band backed me up.
Tom
|
2982.105 | | SUFRNG::REESE_K | tore down, I'm almost level with the ground | Thu May 11 1995 16:58 | 13 |
| .104 Was Clapton show on VH1 the same as the one LOTS of folks
thought would be on PBS? Reason I ask is last October, VH1 had
an entire week of Clapton interviews, some old stuff and a clip
of the rehearsal prior to starting From The Cradle tour. Wonder
if this was just a rehash.
I made a note on my calendar after seeing a similar ad from PBS
here in Georgia and sure enough, I got ballroom dancing, ugh!!
Guess I'll just have to console myself knowing I got 2 seats 6
rows from center stage for Sept. 2nd :-)
|
2982.106 | Foxtrot to "Layla" | PRMS00::PBAER | ^�^ ^�^ ^�^ | Fri May 12 1995 07:56 | 4 |
| The PBS stations here in D.C. advertised Clapton would be on tonight at 9:00.
Does that mean we get to see ballroom dancing again?
Maybe I'll just go channel surfing and play "Where's Clapton?".
|
2982.107 | In Atlanta | SUFRNG::REESE_K | tore down, I'm almost level with the ground | Fri May 12 1995 12:04 | 10 |
| Checked out TV Guide for next week; saw that Clapton special
has been rescheduled for Friday, 19th @ 10PM. PBS Channel 30.
Didn't see anything for the other PBS channel. Since an outline
of the show also made the special liner notes for that date,
hopefully it will be shown this time.
Looks like stations might have taken some grief over this one :-)
Looks like broadcast dates will vary depending on geography.
|
2982.108 | good show! | GAVEL::DAGG | | Mon Jun 26 1995 08:47 | 18 |
| finally saw the Clapton show Saturday night on 'GBH.
I really liked it as a TV show - very well put together and
great live recording. Good interviews. As far as Clapton's
guitar playing goes, I'm still not going to go out and buy
any of his albums. The one clip of Muddy Waters (30 seconds?)
stole the show.
Clapton definately has an impressive stage show going, with alot
of players (including horns), which looks good and would go over
well even in a big hall (stadium?). And what a bunch of guitars!
I think his singing is getting more powerful.
Plus the research he's done into blues guitar is very serious.
He may just get better and better.
Dave
|
2982.109 | cool scrape | GAVEL::DAGG | | Tue Feb 20 1996 12:08 | 10 |
|
Anyone able to explain how EC makes that first
sound on the first Blues Breakers album? Its
like a scrape or something, before he starts
playing the intro lead. I know Tom D.
can do it since I saw him at the last Woods Jam.
Dave
|
2982.110 | slow hand, quick finger | RICKS::CALCAGNI | random acts of beautiful chaos | Tue Feb 20 1996 12:18 | 4 |
| I just use a quick finger slide followed by a quick mute and it sounds
pretty close. Is there more to the secret Tom? Oh, and it helps
to have a cranked Bluesbreaker combo too :-)
|
2982.111 | | EVER::GOODWIN | | Tue Feb 20 1996 12:34 | 6 |
|
Which tune are we talking about? I'm familiar with the album, but
don't recall a scraping sound??
/Steve
|
2982.112 | Many ;^)'s throughout! | PIET09::DESROCHERS | psdv.pko.dec.com/tomd/home.html | Tue Feb 20 1996 12:39 | 11 |
|
That's it, Rick. Sheesh, to me it was just sloppy playing!
If I analyze it, I'd say to grab most of the pick so there's
just a little showing. The more your index finger is perpendicular
to the strings instead of right angle the better. Then just start
about 4 strings from the one you want!!!
Btw, keep a hanky around for the blood. Or use a cherry red
ES335...
|
2982.113 | | RICKS::CALCAGNI | random acts of beautiful chaos | Tue Feb 20 1996 13:15 | 5 |
| re .111
It's the very first tune on the album; I think the name is "All My
Loving"?
|
2982.114 | | EVER::GOODWIN | | Tue Feb 20 1996 13:47 | 7 |
|
Oh... thanks Rick. If it's the one I'm thinking of, I believe he's
hitting an A minor bar and sliding it up... I think there's also some
delay happening in there to further confuse the issue.
/Steve
|
2982.115 | ya, clapton rules a little | GAVEL::DAGG | | Tue Feb 20 1996 14:43 | 12 |
|
Tanks dudes, makes me wanna a Les Paul
(isn't that what he's playing?).
I'll bet he does the bends at the beginning
of Hideway down in the low positions, but
its too tough down there for me. Those
would be easier on the shorter scale?
How did they do delay in '66?
Dave
|
2982.116 | | BUSY::SLABOUNTY | Don't like my p_n? 1-800-328-7448 | Tue Feb 20 1996 14:44 | 5 |
|
>How did they do delay in '66?
Record the album in '65 and release it the next year.
|
2982.117 | | EVER::GOODWIN | | Tue Feb 20 1996 14:50 | 16 |
|
re: delay in '66
Are you too young to remember the highly renowned Tube-Echoplex units?
A tape recorder with a continuous loop of tape that could spin past
record and playback heads at various speeds...
Actually there were many players using delay back then.... you've heard
Hendrix's Red House haven't you? Becks Bolero?
And of course Led Zep I used heavy delay on several cuts...
Gosh, now I feel ancient.
/Steve
|
2982.118 | ah yes, the Echoplex | GAVEL::DAGG | | Wed Feb 21 1996 05:35 | 6 |
| yes of course! Like John Klemmer used for his sax.
So there was life before digital effects processors
=B-)
Dave
|
2982.119 | | ASABET::DCLARK | voodoo mathematician | Wed Feb 21 1996 07:12 | 6 |
| re .117
you ARE ancient :-)
so are a lot of the rest of us, though. This conference is almost
10 years old; I've been noting in here more than 1/4 of my life!
|
2982.120 | tell me more, tell me more | GAVEL::DAGG | | Tue Apr 23 1996 07:16 | 9 |
|
And now, how does Clapton get that swell during
the solo? (on that first track of the Bluesbreakers
album). Like when he does the Am triad and holds it?
Is this like when Santana turns towards the amp and
gets feedback?
Dave
|
2982.121 | sympathy | RICKS::CALCAGNI | just back'in over the cats | Wed Apr 24 1996 09:28 | 7 |
| Yes, feedback. I find when you let the strings ring from the Am
it's pretty easy to get that swell happening. When played on the
top three strings (14th fret on the G string, etc.) that chord seems
to set up a particularly sympathetic vibration.
/rick
|
2982.122 | EC? | POLAR::KFICZERE | | Fri Jan 24 1997 17:43 | 8 |
| I just heard on the radio that EC is recording some kind of
techno-industial-blues-rock type of thing. Appearently he's not using
his real name for the release. Something like TPE or the like, is the
name of the band, and EC's psudo-name is quite bizzaro as well. Should
be interesting....
-kev_
|
2982.123 | good deal | FABSIX::K_LUCHT | Orbital | Fri Jan 24 1997 18:40 | 6 |
|
Techno...interesting indeed. I'm predicting techno hitting BIGTIME
for '97...
Kev --
|
2982.124 | | SUBPAC::GOLDIE | Resident Alien | Sat Jan 25 1997 06:45 | 6 |
|
I'm sick of this type of music,it's the only kind you hear on the
radio in the UK!
ian
|