Blues Rock is the best subgenre of rock

[sweetness]

Lenny you overanalyze music like Miser overanalyizes facial hair. Music at it's core is supposed to be free, there aren't any rules, nothing is wrong, shut the hell up.

Have you heard the Black eyed peas?

Yes, and I really don't care for them at all. But somebody does, no matter how much I don't understand it theres no denying there's a lot of people who are really into them, they're one of the most successful "bands" out there today. If I were to post 6 paragraphs about how all of those people are idiots for enjoying something and I'm right because I dont, it would be kind of silly.. and verry condescending

There's nothing wrong with expressing that you don't like something, I do it all the time, I just don't act like my opinion is absolute truth.

[Guest Len B'stard]

See, this whole 'music should have rules maaaann" thing is all really cute but i think you'll find music is beset with rules, I mean it's a structured form, it's sort of informed by rules. And why is it that it ain't OK for me to say what is or isn't authentic but it's OK for you to go "at it's core music is supposed to be 'free' ", well who died and put you in charge ahead of me and my assertions? Exactly, no one, like you say, it's all opinions. And i didn't say all those people are idiots for listening to it, in fact if you read my previous posts i was saying i listen to the shit a fair bit and i have a good few albums, I was doing a relative comparison, what is it about the word 'relatively' thats difficult to understand? Where did i say it was 'wrong' as music? Where are you getting this from?

I love how when it suits people its like 'music is free, it's about having no rules!' and everytime you put on some music or talk about some music that truly follows that principle it's like "ugh, thats awful, thats not music it's horrible, it's just yoko ono caterwauling or Glen Branca molesting a guitar".

What is wrong with giving credit where it's due? I mean, thats basically what i'm saying, thats it, thats the long and short of it, thats the big music snob hipsters crime that i'm committing, by daring to suggest that original music has some measure of authenticity to it, it's not an indictment of anybody, it's not saying that one of the two shouldn't exist, it's not saying that there should be no more blues music post-1950s, it's just me saying what i prefer and giving my reasons for it. Is that overanalysis? To know what you like and why you like it?

And yes my opinion is the absolute truth, it is the absolute truth regarding MY taste, where in any of it did you interpret that i was saying it was some sort of rule that needs to be enforced by the secret police of music?

It just makes me wonder thats all, it makes me wonder why everything but giving credit to the originators is a viable option, every other measley excuse possible is dragged out of the woodwork other than just giving a nod in the direction of the boys that laid down the foundations?

It's really very very simple, i like one thing and like the other a little less and the reasons for me liking the thing i like is because of it's originality and my perception of the resultant effect it has on the way the music sounds/comes across, a certain *here comes the big evil word* AUUUUTHENTICITYYYY *gasp*. So what am i being told here, that no one ever has any right to ever make any claims regarding the authenticity of certain kinds of music?

I mean even the bands themselves in these instances state that their music ain't authentic blues, it was their take on it, if they ain't got a problem with the truth then whats twistin' your fuckin' tits about it? And i don't think they played it ever so well, RELATIVE (keyword) to the original people. That don't mean it's awful or unlistenable or totally without credibility, thats me expressing i prefer one to the other. I mean Clapton himself, who is a shit-hot guitarist, is on record saying that he was mortified when he was in the studio one time with Howlin' Wolf and Wolf was just like laying into him saying he was playing the shit wrong and physically demonstrating by shoving his wrist up and down the fretboard, showing him how to do the shit. It's in the Chuck Berry movie Hail Hail Rock n Roll (not strictly blues) when Chuck is on Keiths arse over a bend on the intro to Carol. I'm not saying all this to say that they were just 100 million percent inferior musicians, i'm explaining why i think they don't do the blues as good as citing examples. Members of The Stones themselves say that their version Little Red Rooster and most blues songs are relatively pale versions of the originals. Or Roger Daltrey laughing his arse off when he listens back to The Who doing I'm A Man and the notion of a teenage whiteboy from England trying to sound, in terms of his accent, like an old American black fella from the 40s...now those are his own words, not mine.

And as far as recording at Chess Records, big fuckin' wow, you put your money down, you buy studio time, whats that supposed to mean? Oh yeah, Keith Richards saw Muddy Waters painting the studio or something, funny how no one else but Keith remembers that, eh?

But like i say, i own tons of Stones albums, every Cream album, John Mayalls Bluesbreakers, tons of albums that could be considered blues rock and i love em to bits and i've stated this in my previous post as well, so where this idea comes from that i was suggesting that anybody who likes blues rock are idiots i don't know. But none of that will ever change my feelings on the people that really laid it down, they did it first, they did it best and that remains to this day. Sorry if it bothers you that i feel that way and if you wanna rewrite or blot out certain parts of history in your head because it suits you and where your heads at thats up to you but i don't really have any on-going neuroses about this shit, i like what i like and i think what i think and i have reasons for both, what can i say

Anybody has the right to play and listen to whatever music they want...nobody has the right to suddenly start re-imagining and configuring notions of authorship and authenticity. Honestly, people lay their fuckin' lives down in the pursuit or rather the creation and construction of this kind of music and all thats dismissed with one wave of the hand because "music is supposed to be free maaann", yeah, musics free but that don't mean it don't come from somewhere. I'm free too but whats that got to do with the fact that my mum and dad had to fuck for me to be here?

Edited January 22, 2013 by sugaraylen

[sweetness]

It just makes me wonder thats all, it makes me wonder why everything but giving credit to the originators is a viable option, every other measley excuse possible is dragged out of the woodwork other than just giving a nod in the direction of the boys that laid down the foundations?

I don't think that was ever the intention of blues rock, to take credit away from greats like WC Handy, Charlie Patton, and Robert johnson, more than anything I think blues rock is paying tribute to those guys, even introducing them to an audience that may have otherwise never known about them. Of course it isn't "authentic" roots blues music but isn't authenticity relative too? Who's to say one artist isn't as inspired as those before him just because he's been influenced and inspired by them?

and yes, music, especially specific genres, originate with somewhat strict rules. But they're rules that are meant to be broken down the road. Would we have ever had the classical and romantic periods if composers didn't dare to think beyond the strict guidlines of the boroque era? Nope. Does that make Antonio Vivaldi more authentic of an artist than Ludwig Van Beethoven? Nope.

Give all the credit in the world to the originators, I have no problem with that, I just don't think it's fair to take credit away from those who aren't afraid to try new things with the original ideas. There wouldn't be any growth in the world of music without that sort of innovation.

Edited January 22, 2013 by sweetness

[sweetness]

Anybody has the right to play and listen to whatever music they want...nobody has the right to suddenly start re-imagining and configuring notions of authorship and authenticity. Honestly, people lay their fuckin' lives down in the pursuit or rather the creation and construction of this kind of music and all thats dismissed with one wave of the hand because "music is supposed to be free maaann", yeah, musics free but that don't mean it don't come from somewhere. I'm free too but whats that got to do with the fact that my mum and dad had to fuck for me to be here?

Is that really how you interpet it? That an artist and all he creates is being dissmissed by those his work has inspired?

[Guest Len B'stard]

I wasn't talking about blues rock i was talking about a couple of the posts in this thread, i agree with you about that, hell, blues rock probably introduced me to the shit in a roundabout way too.

I wasn't taking credit AWAY from blues rock for what it DID (and it has done a lot), i'm just refusing to give it credit for what it didn't do, therein lies the difference. The fact that blues rock was like, a signpost in the road to SOOO many other genres and styles (metal, psychedilic) is to its credit and thats indisputable.

[Guest Len B'stard]

Anybody has the right to play and listen to whatever music they want...nobody has the right to suddenly start re-imagining and configuring notions of authorship and authenticity. Honestly, people lay their fuckin' lives down in the pursuit or rather the creation and construction of this kind of music and all thats dismissed with one wave of the hand because "music is supposed to be free maaann", yeah, musics free but that don't mean it don't come from somewhere. I'm free too but whats that got to do with the fact that my mum and dad had to fuck for me to be here?

Is that really how you interpet it? That an artist and all he creates is being dissmissed by those his work has inspired?

Not at all no, that part of my post was directly related to AAO's post, particularly his reaction to my comments regarding authenticity, that appeared to be the specific part of my post that he took exception to i.e. the validity behind my assertion regarding the authenticity of the original bluesmen, i'm saying that, firstly, it's one thing playing and becoming a part of the cycle and being into the music or even into playing it, it's another thing altogether to suddenly like, try and attach yourself to the authenticity of the authors and their output or worse still, devalue that with a view to heightening your own importance on the family tree, it could be interpreted by someone more cynical than myself as perhaps a measure of disrespect to the old boys, whether intentional or otherwise. To my mind, in my opinion, the response to someone offering respect to the old guard is "yeah, respect to those guys, they really laid down the foundation for us/them to carry the thing forward" as opposed to "who died and made you King Shit in terms of assigning authenticity?", that statement is a direct challenge to the prior assertion regarding the originators and their input, thats what i was tryna say with that.

Maybe it's just me but to me just doing a person or persons shit ain't enough of a measure of respect, that just the doing, the measure of respect is giving the credit where its due, saying the shit. Now i'm not saying every fuckin' musician under the sun needs to wear a big badge of a sandwich board with the names of those that originated their chosen field of music emblazoned on it or just constantly be going on about the originators and be an elitist snob about it, this wasn't a case of that, this was someone entering into a pre-existing discussion with a view to offering their two cents and the best they got is "who are you to make the rules about authenticity?" like thats what i was doing Thats what i was getting at, whys that easier to say than just giving respect where it's due? Clearly because the individual in question is challenging the prior assertions. That, to me, is kinda topsy turvy.

And i resent being told to 'shut up' or that i'm getting on your nerves for having an opinion, if you got something to say or you hold a particular position in a discussion, state it, thats what these boards are for, no? Would it just be better if we all thought the same thing and just gave one word posts like and agree on everything?

[dalsh327]

I'm just glad a lot of real blues has been preserved, money spent on tracking down and cleaning up the hard to find 78s, and an interest still continues. Blues rock was just something that British rockers had helped kickstart and spread worldwide.

[sweetness]

And i resent being told to 'shut up' or that i'm getting on your nerves for having an opinion, if you got something to say or you hold a particular position in a discussion, state it, thats what these boards are for, no? Would it just be better if we all thought the same thing and just gave one word posts like and agree on everything?

lets take a look at your first post

Load of fuckin' shit if you ask me. A lightweight bastardisation of a seriously authentic and powerful form of music that basically takes all the heart and soul out of the blues and puts it in a fuckin' 70s pre-mall revolution America so's weenies like Mick Jagger and Steven Tyler can write a bunch of songs centred around patronisingly obvious sexual innuendo and not a lot else Not that the original blues didn't have a lot of veiled and not so veiled sexual innuendo but it was a lot more to it than that. Blues rock is to the blues what MC Hammer is to proper hip hop, to paraphrase Bob Harris, a pale and unamusing derivative.

Come to that the majority of rock is pretty shite as well.

You kinda set the tone there buddy.

[Guest Len B'stard]

And i resent being told to 'shut up' or that i'm getting on your nerves for having an opinion, if you got something to say or you hold a particular position in a discussion, state it, thats what these boards are for, no? Would it just be better if we all thought the same thing and just gave one word posts like and agree on everything?

lets take a look at your first post

Load of fuckin' shit if you ask me. A lightweight bastardisation of a seriously authentic and powerful form of music that basically takes all the heart and soul out of the blues and puts it in a fuckin' 70s pre-mall revolution America so's weenies like Mick Jagger and Steven Tyler can write a bunch of songs centred around patronisingly obvious sexual innuendo and not a lot else Not that the original blues didn't have a lot of veiled and not so veiled sexual innuendo but it was a lot more to it than that. Blues rock is to the blues what MC Hammer is to proper hip hop, to paraphrase Bob Harris, a pale and unamusing derivative.

Come to that the majority of rock is pretty shite as well.

You kinda set the tone there buddy.

Last time i checked Steven Tyler, Mick Jagger and MC Hammer were not participants in this discussion.

Edited January 22, 2013 by sugaraylen

[sweetness]

Last time i checked Steven Tyler, Mick Jagger and MC Hammer were not participants in this discussion.

Point is, your first post was overly aggressive (imo at least), so you get some aggressive replies back. Then you act like your replies are coming at you too hard, and eventually start back peddling a bit to find common ground with whoevers replying to you. This is become pretty routine for you man, like its the millionth time I've seen this pattern when replying to a post of yours i disagree with.

If you believe everything you just said in your last few posts maybe you should have taken it into account in your first one, because I read your replies to mine and AAO's, then I read your first post, and I see two different opinions (or at least one thats not nearly as exaggerated).

Just a suggestion.

Edited January 22, 2013 by sweetness

[Georgy Zhukov]

I wouldn't call it the best since that is subjective but it is one of my favorites.

[DieselDaisy]

If your point is, that you prefer Howlin' Wolf, Muddy Waters and John Lee Hooker, to the Stones, Animals and Bluesbreakers, that is fair enough. I, semi, agree but I still say the Stones play the blues wonderfully. Especially when they produced original Jagger/Richards blues material (e.g. Doncha Bother Me, Parachute Woman, Ventilator Blues) as opposed to merely covers. Jones has to rank up there with the best slide players of all time and Taylor was also an excellent bluesmith. It is simply good to hear the Stones play the blues. I am in the situation of loving both: I like to listen to Robert Johnson, Chicago Blues and some of the British blues groups from the 60s onwards.

Incidentally, Yer Blues is proof that the Beatles could do a bloody good blues song when they wanted to. Also, listen to the slow version of Helter Skelter which is one the Beatles Anthology 3. It is a pity we never heard more of that side of the Beatles.

Edited January 22, 2013 by DieselDaisy

[Guest Len B'stard]

You won't find me getting less aggressive. My point was that you, len, are about as authentic as a $3 bill. So I don't really think you deserve to draw the lines on such issues. I really don't want that point to be missed. I'm not surprised that you didn't respond to it though.

As to the real content of the argument, I'll just reiterate that both whites and blacks have given their lives to the music. And I'm not only talking about Paul Butterfield, Charlie Musselwhite, Duke Robillard, William Clarke (just a few among the many "white men" who have brought their own flair and passion to the Blues), but also about guys you'll probably never hear about it. Like I said, I live in Upstate New York and there are guys up here who are raising money, going to jams, organizing festivals, etc. Just doing whatever they can to keep the music alive. I make $35 a week driving an hour away to do a four hour Blues show on the radio, every week. I am not making money but I love the music, and there isn't a more authentic part of me. I'm going to keep playing the Blues (and especially the old standards). And you know when it will stop being authentic? When the audience isn't having fun. That's all there is to it. The Blues is old. It is a dialogue. Robert Johnson took from Skip James and Son House. That's just one example and it goes on and on. If you have pissed me off in this thread, its because its important to me. And when an individual is telling me that white people can't do the Blues authentically, and that individual is either pretending to be British or used to pretend to be a black guy from Brooklyn, I have a fucking problem with that! Okay?

Firstly, lets address the whole Brooklyn kid thing, this big trump card that you don't want no one to miss, there you go, there's the raised hand you been asking for...and what?!?! Like thats a big fuckin' secret. And you got a problem with it?!?! Well be sure to lay one right on my chin the day you see me but until then spare me the fuckin' Billy Big-Dick routine, yeah? I got a problem with this and you won't find me getting less aggressive about that, well get aggressive then badman, what you gonna do? Exactly. "i'm not suprised you didn't address it", like i'm sitting here going "Damn, and i woulda gotten away with it too, it weren't that damned AAO!"

Who the fuck said anything about white people can't do the Blues? Seriously, where'd you get that 'white' bit from? I think perhaps that we're getting to the root of the issue here. Where did i mention 'white' people or white skin just once except for that quote from Roger Daltrey which cochise, is a quote i.e. not my words. So why are you making this a race issue, did i mention race at all here? See now we're kinda getting to the root of the issue here i think. YOU got a problem with what you do in your spare time. You got a problem with the fact that you're a white kid thats been playing blues since you were a kid and you ain't black, thats what this shit is really all about, isn't it? Otherwise why would be all of a sudden going "white, white, white!". THATS why you were giving it all that about "black people come and shake my hands after and everythingg!", I was wondering what that was all about. Look, if you got issues about the fact that you're white and you play the blues don't be fuckin' laying that shit on me OK cuz i didn't say shit about no ones skin colour, i was talking about Blues Rock now i dunno if it's escaped your notice or not but black people play that shit too.

If you got some on-going Freudian issue about being white and playing the blues and you saw me saying i thought blues rock sucked and suddenly it turned into this "how dare you say whiteboys can't play the blues" fuckin' avalanche, that ain't my fuckin' fault man, thats your fuckin' hang up, if you got a problem with your own fuckin' race don't be making out like i said that shit, thats your issue. Fuckin' goes to show you though, it's always the fuckin' RIGHT ON brigade that have these fuckin' deep-seated hang ups about race I even had to look back over my posts to see if maybe i did make some kind of mention of race but nope, not once, thats really fuckin' impressive man, so you just had some kind of fuckin' Freudian fit over my posts based on something that ain't an issue for discussion with me, it's an issue for you and your fuckin' therapist. Now doubt you'll have a fit over that comment now as well and hallucinate it into meaning "all middle class white males are into analysis and therapy, is that what you're saying?!?!?!"

Point is, your first post was overly aggressive (imo at least), so you get some aggressive replies back. Then you act like your replies are coming at you too hard, and eventually start back peddling a bit to find common ground with whoevers replying to you. This is become pretty routine for you man, like its the millionth time I've seen this pattern when replying to a post of yours i disagree with.

If you believe everything you just said in your last few posts maybe you should have taken it into account in your first one, because I read your replies to mine and AAO's, then I read your first post, and I see two different opinions (or at least one thats not nearly as exaggerated).

Just a suggestion.

The reason you see a difference between the first post and the rest of them because i didn't think this was gonna become some kind of party political broadcast so i just made the post in the simplest straightforward terms without really putting too much thought into it, particularly being that it's a Miser thread and those haven't exactly been ending in intellectual discourses lately but since it did get a little deeper into the shit i had to get a little deeper into the shit and less of an exaggerated assertion of my position regarding the topic.

As far as aggressive replies, you can curse your fuckin' heart out in conversation with me, there's a difference between that and saying some shit AT someone but whatever, we're all big boys, knock yourself out i guess.

As far as this whole backpedalling and trying to find common ground thing, see it works like this. You enter into a discussion with an open mind and when you talk to people sometimes they change your mind on some shit, sometimes you take what they say and go "yeah, OK, i guess i can see your point"...is that back-pedalling? Sometimes you totally agree, sometimes you disagree with vehemently...i've been accused of some pretty funny shit around here but now you're having a pop at me for AGREEING with people? I mean Christ, did you used to have a problem with my discussions going on and on and on ad-infinitum before, what, now my problem is trying to find common ground? I mean, what do you think discussions are some kinda war where each person has to maintain their position and not back down and then see whoose the "winner" or the "loser"? You know why i like this place? Cuz i learn stuff from discussing music with people, i've tried new stuff on music-wise based on comments or whatever made by people on this forum, to me thats sort of the point of discussions, the whole idea behind em for me. I had no idea it was this fuckin' cock-measuring competition.

Edited January 22, 2013 by sugaraylen

[sweetness]

now you're having a pop at me for AGREEING with people? I mean Christ, did you used to have a problem with my discussions going on and on and on ad-infinitum before, what, now my problem is trying to find common ground?

No, just something I've noticed after you initially take a super hard stance leaning one way or the other, we've done this dance a few times when I'm on the other side and I thought since we often end up meeting somewhere in the middle anyway we could save ourselves a few walls of text and be more reasonable in oppening statements.. but that would kind of defeat the purpose of a forum so fuck it. Thought I'd point it out for the hell of it.

Anyway, blues rock was pretty cool. Very important part of the much bigger picture of guitar/drum/bass music, I find myself enjoying a band that can appreciate and incorperate elements of the blues much more than those who dont. Not a load of shit at all.

Edited January 22, 2013 by sweetness

[Zint]

It's funny but, I don't see how len passing comment on a "subgenre" is any different than some of you (who are attacking him) divebombing in to a thread to trash what you don't like.

[sweetness]

It's funny but, I don't see how len passing comment on a "subgenre" is any different than some of you (who are attacking him) divebombing in to a thread to trash what you don't like.

Everybody talks crap about what they don't like, everybody stands up for what they appreciate, welcome to mygnrforum Zint.

God forbid anybody speaks up against Lenny's elitist bullshit

[Guest Len B'stard]

Firstly, I want to thank you for that great response that really clarified a lot for me on who you are. So are you a fake Englishman now? Were you a fake American then? Either way that makes you a liar and an individual who should have no authority to speak about authenticity.

And yeah, you are right, this is about my hang ups. Please, help me with my mommy issues next. Its called believing in something. The Blues is very important to me and it loses its vitality when you say that it was something that was only done right by a small group of individuals several decades ago. I believe that to be a false assertion, and while it is an opinion, it has to be a hypocritical one for the aforementioned reason.

I will admit that you never used the word "white," but it was definitely prominent in the subtext of your argument. You set up a dichotomy by putting Little Walter, Muddy, etc. up against Jagger, Tyler, etc. If that was not really your point, fine. But it looked that way to me for obvious reasons. I have no hang ups. Maybe you have some kind of deep-rooted psychological obsession with authenticity since you are so fake yourself? See what I did there? I really should stop because I just don't respect you.

Perhaps I was being a little vague on the first issue so let me clear it up for you, what i was trying to say there was 'fuck you'. Is it that clear enough for ya? I'll fuckin' wake up tommorow and claim to be Lord fuckin' Lucan if i feel like it, the reincarnation of Steve McQueen, Herman Goerring, what the fuck are you gonna do about it? THAT was the point i was trying to make, i hope thats clearer for you now but if you like we can walk through it again.

And as far as your second point, y'know, for someone essentially claiming my opinion is wholly invalid thats a very odd assertion you're making, that my opinion somehow robs the fuckin' shit of it's vitality on my say so. Why would that be, do you think? I mean, what is is what is, right, it don't change just cuz somebody says it ain't so, so why the issue? And this i think, is where the issue is at. Deep down, even you don't believe what you're saying. In fact, i'm willing to bet money on the fact that at some point in your not so distant past you espoused some of the same notions i did, or some variation thereof, some of your own of this sort of "snobbery" but now you're a little grown up and older you've had enough time to cook up some kind of bullshit roundabout justification of line of logic to make you feel about what you do in your spare time. I'm right, aren't i? And thats what your problem is here, this is why you jumped on me right off the bat in this thread, having imagined i'd said a load of shit that i hadn't.

Nothing loses it's vitality on my say so, no matter how loud i shout. It has absolutely jackshit to do with "believing in something", thats a total cop out and you know it is. It's about you personally, nothing one individual says is gonna go out and damage the fucking genre, don't embarass with yourself with that crap, what, you were striking a blow for The Blues there? And thats seriously more believable in this context than you jumping on me for thinking i said i had some problem with white people playing the blues when i clearly didn't? Please, making yourself out to be the knight in shining armour thats standing up for the blues, it's was completely personal and an insecure knee-jerk reaction of a white guy that plays the blues that percieved someone to be having a dig at white people for playing the blues, when they clearly weren't. Like i said, it's an issue for you and your therapist. Thats the best one yet, so now you were like, standing up for the blues?!?! Nothing to do with any personal issues on the matter though no? Course not, thats just unrealistic, isn't it, sorry. Don't try and cover up for the fact that you jumped on me over some shit that ain't there and now that you've had a shower, popped a fresh tampon in and realised that i didn't anything like what you were saying i said, you're coming up with this whole "i was defending the blues because what you were saying is destroying the blues" bullshit

Yes you will admit i didn't say white, you can't not admit it because i didn't fuckin' say it. Subtext? OK, so now clairvoyance has become a factor well you'll excuse me if i don't put too much stock in your ability to read minds, this is just becoming farcical. I set up a dichotomy involving Little Walter and Jagger and Tyler because Little Walter was the last old blues guy i'd listened to and Jagger and Tyler because they are the standard bearers in their career for what i percieved to be the dilluted end of that shit, that weren't about fucking race, thats you seeing through race goggles sir, perhaps i should've mentioned black contempory blues artists but since i wasn't saying anything about race, race wasn't on my mind, though clearly it was on yours. Perhaps i should've thrown Slash in there but i wasn't looking at it from the perspective of someone tryna fill a fuckin' equal oppertunities quotient for a bunch of job openings, quite frankly your argument is kinda pathetic here and it amounts to "you didn't say it but i know thats what you were thinking"

And perhaps you're right about me, indeed, we all have some form of deep rooted psychological issues in your lives but suffice to say not everybody inadvertedly illuminates theirs in quite so bumbling a fashion as you've done with yours in this thread You're right, you really should stop. As far as your respect, save it for the next black man that shakes your hand.

Edited January 23, 2013 by sugaraylen

[wasted]

It seems unlikely that anything is best. other than me of course.

[Dan H.]

Lenny is right and the rest of you are hooray for tolerance!s

[Lithium]

[Guest Len B'stard]

My argument is pretty simple and I really don't feel any need to address all of your psychobabble at length. The Blues is a longstanding tradition that people of all stripes have devoted their lives to for almost one hundred years. It is a tradition that is important to me and one that I would like to see continue, whoever does it. For you the Blues ended 50 or so years ago and everything subsequent has been inauthentic. I disagree, and would argue that the Blues has not only continued to live on, but has gone down some very interesting avenues over the past 50 years. Some of the artists to participate in this have been black, some white, some Native American, some European, etc. All of them have been authentic because they have loved the music, studied it meticulously, and brought their own styles and developments to it. In short, they have played good Blues. The Blues did not crystallize into a perfect form and then turn into a fossil all at once. This view, in fact, reflects a misunderstanding of the music in general, which is one that has thrived on mutation and adaptation throughout its history.

Are you saying that I should be ashamed for being a white guy who plays the music that I love? Because I definitely don't feel that way at all. I've been doing it for so long that it is about as natural to me anything. This has very little to do with me.

Why do I care so much, then, you ask? Well, it has a lot to do with the fact that you, who are a fraud, seem to always be the first to say what the "real shit" really is. I used to like you as a poster, but when you woke up one morning and started nibbling on crumpets and knowing "fuck all" about America, I lost my respect for you. Maybe it bubbled over in this thread. I at least know who I am.

Right OK so repeating the same shit again, i think older blues is more authentic you don't, fine, agree to disagree, more shit about you being white and playing the blues, never mentioned race cept to address your going on about it, as far as your emotions " bubbling over", perhaps you should have a glass of water? Thank you for your time

Edited January 23, 2013 by sugaraylen

[WhazUp]

I agree, I love blues and blues inspired rock.

The thing with a lot of the bands in this current "indie rock" scene don't have a blues influence and just overall have a lack of balls. Whenever I see these up and coming bands on like Letterman they all have that geeky glasses wearing indie kid look with sing-songy folk inspired stuff. I don't mind it overall - but I much would rather see bands like The Black Crowes then let's say Wilco

Edited January 23, 2013 by WhazUp

[Johnny Drama]

I agree, I love blues and blues inspired rock.

The thing with a lot of the bands in this current "indie rock" scene don't have a blues influence and just overall have a lack of balls. Whenever I see these up and coming bands on like Letterman they all have that geeky glasses wearing indie kid look with sing-songy folk inspired stuff. I don't mind it overall - but I much would rather see bands like The Black Crowes then let's say Wilco

This but even as folky stuff it just sounds like ass. They all sing like poofs with their shitty, monotone airy voices, everything is coveted with that same reverb effect all the time and when you make folky stuff all you have is good songwriting because you probably don't have riffs, guitar solos, drums, groove.

All you got is a melody, a couple of chords and a story and yet these sinfully boring cunts can't even do that properly.

On the debate of Lenny vs the world, how about we take a step back and say Lenny thinks traditional blues is more authentic, doesn't necessarily equate blues rock with the blues or put it on the same level. Fuck bitches chill out.

[classicrawker]

I agree, I love blues and blues inspired rock.

The thing with a lot of the bands in this current "indie rock" scene don't have a blues influence and just overall have a lack of balls. Whenever I see these up and coming bands on like Letterman they all have that geeky glasses wearing indie kid look with sing-songy folk inspired stuff. I don't mind it overall - but I much would rather see bands like The Black Crowes then let's say Wilco

This but even as folky stuff it just sounds like ass. They all sing like poofs with their shitty, monotone airy voices, everything is coveted with that same reverb effect all the time and when you make folky stuff all you have is good songwriting because you probably don't have riffs, guitar solos, drums, groove.

All you got is a melody, a couple of chords and a story and yet these sinfully boring cunts can't even do that properly.

On the debate of Lenny vs the world, how about we take a step back and say Lenny thinks traditional blues is more authentic, doesn't necessarily equate blues rock with the blues or put it on the same level. Fuck bitches chill out.

JMO but I don't think anyone has an issue with Len preferring the old blues masters over the Rock oriented blues players that followed but I think it is more the way his criticism of rock blues players implies that anyone who likes them is an idiot and knows nothing about good music.

His posts used to annoy me until I got to understand that he is very passionate in his opinions so I don't take it personally but I can see how it can rub some the wrong way...........

Edited January 24, 2013 by classicrawker

[Zint]

That plus he's usually spot on.