| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Diddleyfan
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 Posts: 6
|
Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 12:30 am Post subject: New Rolling Stone Article |
|
|
| Rolling Stone Magazine has a new article: the 100 greatest guitarists. It includes Joan Jett, but not Bo or Buddy Guy. What are they smoking over there at RS??? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
youdontknowdiddley
Joined: 22 Aug 2009 Posts: 2
|
Posted: Sat Aug 22, 2009 3:43 pm Post subject: ? |
|
|
They did what? I would like to meet whatever son of a gun thought that any guitarist could be better than Bo or Buddy. Then again look who's on the covers of that dadgum magazine anyways. It's such a dang shame that a bunch of three chord sissy guitarists could replace people with actual talent. Music's no longer based on quality, but rather the amount of money they can bring in.
That was in fact the reason that Bill Graham shut down the Fillmores in the 70's. He said | Quote: | | "I had always hoped to be able to present artists whose musical worth I felt was important: artists whose music was valid, whether commercially popular or not. There are more quality artists today; but many of those that do exist do not appear in public regularly. Therefore, in order to stay in business, I would be forced to present acts whose musicality fell below my personal expectations and demands. I could do this, and in having to book fifty-two weeks a year it becomes tempting because it is so much easier to do. Thousands might even to come to these concerts, but I personally would prefer not to present them. For who would gain?" |
Sadly however, most people were not as concerned about the future of rock and roll, but rather the money that they could gain off of it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Diddleyfan
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 Posts: 6
|
Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 1:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Great quote from Graham. Man of great of insight. He foretold the demise of the business of music...people like thos brothers in Chicago (who shall remain nameless...but WE know who they are!) who sucked the life blood out of Muddy, Bo, etc. But I do digress...
I still can't believe that any reputable music magazine would name the "100 Greatest Guitarists" and include Joan Jett and NOT Bo Diddley. You're right: look at the covers: Brittany Spears with boa constrictors, the Jonas Bros...all to sell to the "tween" set.
I was glad to read the blog posted on this site. Maybe here we will find the real deal without the "for profit" slant. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Diddleyfan
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 Posts: 6
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
youdontknowdiddley
Joined: 22 Aug 2009 Posts: 2
|
Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 1:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Isn't that the old list though?
I tend to disagree with most of that list still.
Jimi as #1?
Yes he was fan-freakin-tastic but everyone assumes that he is the ultimate god of rock and roll. I would probably have to delve deeper into the roots of music to declare a #1 and say someone like Son House or Robert Johnson due to their influence on music as we know it. But that's just me.
I personally love #2 however, but I'm biased as I totally adore Duane and the others. RIP.
Why is Les Paul at freaking 46? Why is T-Bone at 47? Johnny winter at 74? I am very mad at this list.
Where the hell is Muddy? He is constantly referred to in the descriptions, but does he show up on here at all? HELL NO.
What is this garbage?
The list is for the most part your average cliche list, with Bo once again getting looked over for more popular names. I personally wouldn't put Johnny Ramone (even though I love him to pieces) or Kurt Cobain above Bo. Not for talent, not for influence, it just doesn't make sense. I don't understand how Chuck Berry can be on the tip top of there Bo is under quite a few undeserving guitarists and Muddy just got totally left in the dust. They all contributed pretty equally to the development in rock and roll as we know it, but in different ways. I can't understand in what universe that this would be considered an accurate list at all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|