Well, they were played by a blind guy who was only 17 years old.

The Hendrix version isn't something I particularly like, but it's not terrible. As a jam it's OK.

King Curtis actually did a pretty good job with it. Not that it's great or anything, but a nice enough instrumental.

http://grooveshark.com/#!/search/song?q ... o+Love+Her

Certainly much better than the Hendrix.

Why?

Because it became about theatrics on guitar rather than about the overall record. Like Diane sais about the song....

The lyrics and the joyous way Stevie Wonder sang them were a major part of the record's appeal.

But Hendrix made everybody want to instead strive for guitar theatrics rather than joyous singing.

I recognize the skill and imagination that Hendrix had, I just don't want to hear guitar theatrics. To make an analogy to sports, Hendrix is like having someone like Carmelo Anthony on your team. He can shine brightly, but it's usually at the expense of the team's overall play. Hendrix's guitar bullshit usually detracted from the overall sound of the record IMO.

He has plenty of songs that have no trace of "guitar theatrics".
And he's probably the most copied guitarist in the history of rock.

Perhaps, but since he can't sing, why would I want to listen to them?

Something like "The Wind Cries Mary" might be pretty good is it was done by somebody who could sing.



Yes, Which is why I blame him and his influence for the music starting to suck in the 70s and later. I just have no interest in guitar theatrics on records like "Eruption" by Van Halen, which is clearly Hendrix influenced.

I like "records," as opposed to recordings that are merely forums for musicians to show off their virtuosity.

Anybody who likes "I Was Made To Love Her" better by Hendrix than the Stevie Wonder version misses the entire point of a "record" IMO.

I dont really think much of his voice either, but he isn't THAT bad. He has plenty of songs with genuine emotional resonance - most notably Castles Made Of Sand (my favorite lyrical performance in rock) and Little Wing.



No, we can blame disco for that....



It's actually more Jimmy Page-influenced. It's basically a creative interpretation of the Heartbreaker solo, just with much more power and volume.



Which is fine, but at the same time you're kind of limiting yourself with that opinion. Not all "virtuoso"-based music is bad. Are you not into jazz rock fusion at all?



Who likes the Hendrix version better?

At any rate, I prefer the Jackie Wilson/Count Basie version over both.
Much rawer and more exciting.

I'm not a HUGE disco fan, but I like it much better than I like most of hendrix's shit.



Absolutely hate it.





Horns are much too loud on that version, and Jackie doesn't sing it, he shouts it, like he's Roy Brown. Unlistenable if you ask me.

Getting back to the "groups where all the members had solo albums" thing (perhaps we should spin that off to its own thread?), I've found one group with SIX original members who have all made solo albums: NWA.

The Monkees also all made solo albums.

With Fleetwood Mac, we need to get into the definition of "solo album". John McVie did an outside project credited to "John McVie's 'Gotta Band' with Lola Thomas. Hard to really call that a solo album, but if it counts then all four members of the classic blues lineup (Green, Spencer, Fleetwood and McVie) and all five members of the classic pop lineup (Buckingham, Nicks, C. McVie, Fleetwood, and J. McVie) have solo albums, plus some other members along the way. That's an awful lot of members with solo albums.

No. Nothing ruined music you philistines.

I can see (and agree with) the point that Hendrix's guitar theatrics were a crappy addition to rock, but it wasn't that big a part of 70's music, unless you practically don't hear anything else than certain parts of hard rock and the sorry remains of psychedelic rock. Neil Young is the only 70's artist i like who was affected by it, and the only great album it affected was EKTIN, which was technically a 60's album.. I'd say it was just (if not more) prominent on late 60's albums, just to be fair..

I agree with Mulshine here 100%.

http://blog.nj.com/njv_paul_mulshine/20 ... ce_wo.html

I caught both the Chris Christie show and the Beach Boys show last week.
I preferred the latter.

On Tuesday, the governor held a concert — oops, I mean a town hall — in Brick Township. It’s easy to confuse the two. The Christie show is a lot like a Bruce Springsteen concert, from the guitar riff intro to the way Christie talks with the audience.

The Guv is a great fan of the Boss. Christie sees Springsteen as one of the great rock stars of all time. I’m sad to say this is yet another area in which he and I have a basic disagreement. I see Springsteen in the very first rank of the second-raters, far ahead of Billy Joel and Elton John but far behind the seminal ’60s rockers.



(Danny Clinch)Bruce Springsteen: If any fun, fun, fun threatens to break out at his concerts he'll fix that by singing about some Okie.

I got a chance to see one of the best such acts the following night. The Beach Boys were playing the PNC Bank Arts Center. I decided to go at the last minute. No worries. A scalper in the parking lot sold me a lawn ticket for a mere $20.

That’s equivalent to about three bucks back when the Boys started recording 50 years ago. For the equivalent of what a burger, fries and a malt cost back then, I got to see one of the few acts that can be mentioned in the same breath as the Beatles. They modeled “Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band” after “Pet Sounds.” “Pet Sounds” has held up far better, by the way.

Here, we come to the core of my disagreement with Christie. In an article in this month’s Atlantic magazine, writer Jeffrey Goldberg told of accompanying Christie to a Springsteen concert in Newark. He quoted the governor as saying “the thing that attracted me to his music is how aspirational it is — aspirational to success, to fun, to being a better person, to figuring out how to make your life better — and you can’t say that about most people’s music.”

You can’t say that about Springsteen’s music, either.




New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie sings "Born to Run" with Bruce Springsteen tribute band.

Governor Christie joined the band on stage during his inaugural gala at the Prudential Center in Newark.

Watch video

Aspirational? The typical working man in a Springsteen song lives just a chord change away from the poorhouse.

Fun? You need the Beach Boys for that. When fun threatens to break out during a Springsteen show, he’ll start singing about some Okie in the Dust Bowl days.

The Okie issue is key. As a Jersey guy who grew up at the Shore in the ’60s like Springsteen, I can affirm that we Shore kids did not know or care about Oklahoma. We cared about cars and the beach, and we loved the Beach Boys.

The Boys also lived near the beach, of course, but they grew up in a thick yeast of Okie culture. Southern California towns, like the Boys’ home town of Hawthorne, were peopled by a lot of the actual Okies who had moved out of the Dust Bowl not long before.

And you know what the sons of these ex-Okies wanted to do? They wanted to drive fast cars and go surfing. In that sense, the Beach Boys music sounds more modern than Springsteen’s, even though it was recorded years earlier.

And, of course, it’s infinitely more original.

A special treat at the Wednesday show was the return of David Marks to the group. Marks was a mere 13 years old when, on songs like “409,” he helped fashion the driving rhythm guitar style that became a rock staple.

Springsteen is just a year younger than Marks, but by the time he emerged on the scene in the ’70s, all of the innovations had been spoken for. He employed them well, but offered nothing new, either musically or lyrically.

And when it comes to lyrics, here we encounter the clear superiority of the Beach Boys music: It is content-free. There is no more message in the lyrics to a song like “Heroes and Villains” than there is in a Bach chorale. The harmonies, however, are comparable.

Springsteen, by comparison, has spent his career searching for content. At first, he found it at the Shore. But then he descended into passing left-wing political screeds off as songs.

In the Atlantic piece, Christie struggles with this. I sympathize. It’s just bad timing. Christie was born in 1962, too young to appreciate the Beach Boys at their peak. He’s left trying to pick up good vibrations from the Boss.

But that’s hard work, not fun, fun, fun.

ALSO: In the comments section please just try and make your point politely. If you think you know more about rock history and have better taste than I do, please show it through some pithy observation not some misguided attempt to criticize my knowledge. As I noted, I grew up at the Shore and know more about Springsteen than just about anyone who will read this who's not his wife.

And for anyone who thinks Bruce's music is fun, I offer the video below. Leave it to Springsteen to take all the fun out of fast cars. Warning: Don't blame me if you feel like committing suicide after eight minutes of this.

(Video of "Racing In The Street")

Here's an example of Chuck Berry's impact with other rock musicians. Eddie Cochran does a strong version of one of Chuck's classics. There's a microphone problem in the begining, but it gets fixed.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XLuHHX5K24[/youtube]

Johnny Burnette Trio Live:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ps7LNI2ABSY[/youtube]