Hendrix Argument

[MasterCylinder]

I've been listening to the Jimi Hendrix "discography" ever since that NEPTUNE thread was posted a couple of weeks ago.
I put quotes around the word discography because I'm only talking about those original three albums............ARE YOU EXPERIENCED?..............AXIS : BOLD AS LOVE..........and.......ELECTRIC LADYLAND.

While listening to these three CDs over the last two weeks, I wonder if anyone here at the RR will agree that approximately half of the material recorded on those albums is definitely cutting-edge, amazingly brilliant work and the other half is composed of filler and worse.............a few of which are total crap.
I don't know what kind of deal he had with Noel Redding, but his stuff is bad Brit-pop.

[kexodusc]

Yeah, I'd agree with that, half filler...

Though, I don't think it's completely fair for me to comment since I wasn't alive when they were released and didn't listen to Hendrix for the first time in the same context as the world did at that time. When your frame of reference includes a few more decades of music (heavily influenced by Hendrix), it's probably a lot different than hearing him for the first time when it was something altogether different.

[MasterCylinder]

Yeah, I'd agree with that, half filler...

Though, I don't think it's completely fair for me to comment since I wasn't alive when they were released and didn't listen to Hendrix for the first time in the same context as the world did at that time. When your frame of reference includes a few more decades of music (heavily influenced by Hendrix), it's probably a lot different than hearing him for the first time when it was something altogether different.

During the Summer of '67 when we first got our hands on ARE YOU EXPERIENCED ?, it was totally magical...........a new and different approach to rock in so many ways.
Most of that first album is great stuff..........less filler than the other two, for sure.

[3LB]

oh, I'd say the last two albums were about 30% filler. I wouldn't say any of it was crap in the context of the times. Other Top-40 acts of the day were putting out worse pap.

That was a superb trio. Virtuosity and ideas are an amazing combination. I wished Jimi had lasted long enough for that trio to delve into an actual jazz project (not that they didn't bring that to the table already).

[MasterCylinder]

Virtuosity and ideas are an amazing combination.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Good point..........and I agree, Yes they are.

Now we need record companies that allow such combinations to happen.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmet_Ertegun

[Troy]

During the Summer of '67 when we first got our hands on ARE YOU EXPERIENCED ?, it was totally magical...........a new and different approach to rock in so many ways.
Most of that first album is great stuff..........less filler than the other two, for sure.

Man, you're old.

I like the first album pretty much all the way through, but am totally bored by the other 2. No argument that he changed the way the instrument is played and influenced virtually every lead guitarist since 1967, but those 2 later albums (and all the millions of posthumous releases) are pretty much unlistenable for me. He was too busy getting high to compose.

[nightflier]

Well couldn't we make the argument that most albums have "filler" in them. Even my favorites have tracks that I think they could have left out.

By the way, I'm currently enjoying Valleys of Neptune, but my favorite Hendrix song is still "Hey Joe" from his first album.

[3LB]

my fave Hendrix lyric has to be, "I won't do you no harm"...he says that in what, 4 different songs? Had to keep an eye on ol' Jimi I bet.

[poppachubby]

The problem with a trio like Jimi and the Experience is they were a live band all the way. The albums were simply a quick snapshot and glance into the songs and playing. I can guarantee that the fillers made for epic live jams, as Jimi was a prolific jammer. As most albums go, they were limited to popular song structures.