Sorry, totally disagree
can't explain, my english is too bad
I could argue in french, but too difficult for me in english
sorry, but I use google to translate some words or sentences, so apologize if my meaning is not accurate
I think It's a pity that when people think to Hendrix, they only think of live music, playing with teeth, guitar burned,and so on...
but Hendrix was more more more more than that
he "revolutionized" the recording in studio
of cours many other musicians of that era did some wonderful music, but after 66-67, many of them were inspired by his sutdio recordings technique, his guitar tones.
You can only think at the Beatles, the stones, led zep, CSN, Santana, Calpton, Beck...
all guitarists from this era would said to you they were totally blown away by him
just few days after
Sergent Pepper's release, he listened to it backstage and played it live a few minutes after while Lennon and Mccartney were in the audience, saying, what the F... ? Who would do that nowadays ?
Mick Taylor said that he played backstage with Jimi, and there wasn't left-handed guitar available, but no problem, Jimi played with a right-handed guitar (strings reversed) without difficulties
there are many other examples of his musical facilities, and despite all this, he was very very humble
he explored all kind of musics : blues, rock, soul, funk, early hard-rock, "hard-blues", early fusion, psychedelic, british pop (yes, with vocal harmonies, and subtil arrangements), jazz (just before his death, he was playing with Miles Davis)
he was miles ahead from other musicians of his era, not necessarily in terms of techniques
and yes he was a wonderful songwriter, far more than MK.
That's the difference : MK is my favourite guitarist / musician /song writer, but I think that one of the best guitarists / musicians /song writers in the rock history is Jimi Hendrix, no doubt for the guitarist.
There was rock guitar before and after Jimi, it's obvious
Even Ritchie Blackmore was obviously influenced by Jimi, but never reached his level (although I like Deep Purple a lot)
DP without Blackmore is like DS without MK.
I disagree.
DS was obviously MK
but DP wasn't only RB.
Songs were composed also mainly by Lord and Glover
MK wrote and composed all songs.
He produced all, he choosed the arrangements
He sings, and play the main instrument in his music
so of course, MK is DS
DP is RB's guitar tone, but also Ian Gillian's voice, Lord's typical organ sound (listen to
Lazy's intro), Glover and Lord's arrangements, etc...
So DP without RB is'nt really DP, but you can't compared it to the Straits, IMHO
There's big diffrences between DS which wasn't a band, and other bands like Floyd, Queen, DP, Led Zep, Who, Beatles, Stones.. which blended ideas from (almost) all musicians in their bands
In the end, I'm not trying to convince you
Just want to say that there are artists with some obvious genius, and even if we don't like them, we can recognize their talent
there are many artists I don't like, but I must say : wow, respect
and there are many other artists I love, but must admit : errr...not big references in art history
e.g I like watching
Lethal weapon many times, but I know it isn't a "great" movie
I think some Godard's movies are sublimes, but I hardly manage to reach the end....
I think that Bowie or Coltrane are great musicians in music history, but their music don't do anything to me
Sometimes, I like to listen to FM soft-rock from the 80ies, but I am aware it's not essential in the rock history
cheers