Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[nimrod]

Cream was lucky to have Jack Bruce as the front man.  RIP Jack.

Thats nonsense Todd, Jack wasnt the front man, Clapton was THE star of that band, and every band he;s been in.........what happened to Jack after Cream? how many No 1's did he write or sing, how many stadiums did he fill, didnt he just keep trying to reform Cream with an Eric soundalikes like Gary Moore and a few others, never quite worked though. Whereas Clapton became bigger than Cream with more records sold.

I liked Jack a hell of a lot but he wasnt the front man at all, Eric sang just as many Cream songs as Jack, I think you dont like Eric and you dislike for him is shining through your posts

[tkitna]

I love Claptons music and his playing, but i'll be honest and admit that I passed up two concerts of his purely due to the fact that I didn't want to spend that kind of jack and be bored for half the show.  I know I would have been.  Others not.

Clapton has more talent then Mick Jagger, but Mick can grab a crowd and have them eating out of the palm of his hands in a way that Clapton could only dream about.  That's what a great frontman does.  I don't care how much more talent Clapton has then Ringo, he will never have his personality and presence. In the big scheme of things, that doesn't mean anything except for the point I was trying to make.

[Mr Mustard]

The way I read your post Mr M is like this

your a Ringo fan

your not a Clapton fan

ie

blinkered

I really dont understand how you can rate Ringo a better singer than Clapton

When and where have I ever said that?

Your not right about Ringo, he is a pub singer, he cant write songs, he's famous because he used to be in The Beatles

Here's what I actually said:
"Ringo personified the bonhomie which helps to carry a live show and whilst lacking the talent of, say, Stephen Stills, Eric Clapton or James Taylor, had more "presence" and star quality than the three of them put together. Very limited both as a singer and a songwriter, he relied on a web of support and if it wasn't for the fact he was a Beatle - his passport to immortality - wouldn't seriously figure in the debate alongside those artists already mentioned."

Don't you read posts properly?

Clapton was the star man in John Mayalls Bluesbreakers (when he was known in London as God)

Which means a lot to "serious" music fans like yourself... less so to many, many others. Call me blinkered by all means but like it or not I'd argue that being an esteemed part of JMB just doesn't carry the same WOW factor as "He was one of The Beatles!!!" 

Clapton was the star man in the Yardbirds

That says it all. Arguably the most faceless/least starry group of the 60s.

Clapton was the star man in Cream

Possibly true but very debateable.

He is a renowned songwriter, one of the best guitarists in the history of rock, he is also a great singer, listen to him sing Crossroads or Tears In Heaven

Songwriter and guitarist agreed, singer I disagree. I have listened to those tracks - vocally unremarkable. He never was or will be a great singer, nor will Ringo.

Ringo is a bit of a joke, the way he gets people clapping like its a singalong in a pub, most of his concerts are done/sung by others, anyway as I said I think your talking tripe and I think deep down you know it.

From your lofty, opinionated, sneering perch you might think Ringo's a joke. I don't. He knows how to work a crowd, is aware of his serious limitations and, as I've already said, does trade heavily on his Beatle past. Why shouldn't he? OK so his tongue is firmly in his cheek when he gets 'em all giggling along to "Octopus's Garden"...it's called FUN, Kevin, harmless FUN Ringo is an entertainer who is comfortable with his limits and doesn't try to live up to an embarrassing epithet like "God" (give me strength!!!)

Its fair enough not being a Clapton fan, I can easily dig that, but to say Ringo has more talent than Clapton is a complete joke.

Dear me, there you go again, completely misquoting me. I don't mind some of Clapton's stuff. PLEASE read the last paragraph of my original post again. Charisma and talent ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS!!!!

You have lost all credibility in my eyes as a knowledgeable music fan.

I won't lose any sleep over that since you've fallen even further in my estimation than I have in yours.
When you resort to telling people who dare to have a different opinion (actually not so different if you'd have the courtesy to read my posts properly) that they are talking through their arse, any credibility you might have had is gone.

Bobber gets it, tkitna gets it, how come you don't?

I'll stop talking through my arse when you get your head out of your own.

[nimrod]

I love Claptons music and his playing, but i'll be honest and admit that I passed up two concerts of his purely due to the fact that I didn't want to spend that kind of jack and be bored for half the show.  I know I would have been.  Others not.

Clapton has more talent then Mick Jagger, but Mick can grab a crowd and have them eating out of the palm of his hands in a way that Clapton could only dream about.  That's what a great frontman does.  I don't care how much more talent Clapton has then Ringo, he will never have his personality and presence. In the big scheme of things, that doesn't mean anything except for the point I was trying to make.

I really dont see this, any crooner can do a singalonga show, Ringo has become a parody of himself over the years, he's a bit of a joke with his constant peace signs (which are empty & meaningless) his public announcements that he wont sign any more autographs which gave him huge bad worldwide press and he insulted every citizen of Liverpool by saying he doesnt miss it one iota, I dont even think he's very welcome there

They even cut his head off they dislike him so much

http://www.noiseaddicts.com/2008/07/ringo-gets-beheaded-or-maybe-someone-just-forgot-to-water-him/

anyway enough of this, I'll shut the f*** up now.

[Mr Mustard]

I'm not in a position to comment on most of this stuff because I don't and have never listened to it, and I don't care a jot about anything after the 60s.

Careful OBS, you'll be called "blinkered" in a minute! 

Now, I can see how, if younger, in the middle of the 60s fans of The Beatles had rivalries with school-friends over The Stones and vice-versa, and I can see that Dylan may have appealed to a less 'poppy' crowd, and more to older brothers/6th Formers than to the young girls who loved John and Paul, but......in 2014......the notion that someone who claims to like The Beatles can't stand Dylan's voice is, sorry, absolutely ridiculous.
That's HISTORY. It's like saying you don't like the colour of the aircraft that got man to the moon!

I think you're missing the point though. Nobody's denying the influence Bob had on The Beatles. They could appeal to that younger, pop crowd (he couldn't) but they could also appeal to the rock crowd who appreciate Dylan, they never stopped growing and exploring. With respect you're talking nonsense in claiming that someone can't like The Beatles and at the same time dislike Dylan's voice. I'm one among many who provide living proof of this fact! Your Apollo analogy is silly and wrong. Nothing to do with bending history either by the way, just because someone dislikes the colour of the space vehicle doesn't mean they don't accept the importance of the vehicle's essential role.

Or are you saying that the voice (like the colour) doesn't matter much anyway, it's all about the overall equipment? In a singer-songwriter context I'd say the voice matters! And plenty like me think Bob's is rubbish. But we still love The Beatles. You don't subscribe to that way of thinking, fair enough.

Dylan's impact on The Beatles is vital and it's difficult to imagine the 60s without him. Indeed I'd argue it's more difficult to imagine the 60s without Dylan than it is to imagine the 60s without The Beatles. The crowd at Woodstock is more made in Dylan's image than Paul McCartney's.

For me and I suspect millions of others it's not impossible to imagine the 60s without Bob. He was a very important part of it and I've already acknowledged his considerable influence on The Beatles (would you not agree they in turn influenced him?). But he was just one of myriad influences upon them; they distilled so much into the fabric of what made them the personification of the 1960s (and come on, they were). To imagine the 60s without The Beatles is, frankly, ludicrous. Wouldn't dispute your point about Woodstock but for me Shea Stadium screams "1960s" louder than Woodstock ever could, being as how the 60s were very 70s-ish by August '69 

[tkitna]

Kevin left because of this thread?  I don't know what to say.  Can we not have differentiating opinions about music?  Sheesh.  I didn't think it got that bad that people were getting offended, but I didn't read all of it.

And just when I was about to mention how Clapton was the worst guitarist in the Yardbirds.   

[tkitna]

Thats nonsense Todd, Jack wasnt the front man, Clapton was THE star of that band, and every band he;s been in.........what happened to Jack after Cream? how many No 1's did he write or sing, how many stadiums did he fill, didnt he just keep trying to reform Cream with an Eric soundalikes like Gary Moore and a few others, never quite worked though. Whereas Clapton became bigger than Cream with more records sold.

I have to comment on these posts.  I never was trying to downplay Clapton in Cream.  Everybody knows he was the main attraction, but I have always considered Jack Bruce to be the frontman of that band.  He sang the most and easily wrote the most music.  That's all I was saying.  Was he as important a player in the makeup of the band as Clapton?  No, and everyone knows that.  Who cares what he did after Cream.  He did enough within that band the become respected by his piers in writing, singing, and his bass playing for sure.  Ginger Baker is a legendary drummer too, but he didn't do a whole lot either besides Cream. I guess Blind Faith if you want to consider that.

I liked Jack a hell of a lot but he wasnt the front man at all, Eric sang just as many Cream songs as Jack, I think you dont like Eric and you dislike for him is shining through your posts

You couldn't be more wrong.  We were all talking about solo careers in a thread that you started and a couple different aspects of the topic came to light, and you have a problem with it for some reason.  Clapton has a fantastic career.  One of the biggest in popular music and nobody is disputing that, but he isn't a very engaging presence.  Is that so bad.  I don't think anybody was questioning or comparing Claptons solo career with Ringo's because that's silly.  We were merely talking about personality and mannerisms.  I just cant see the big deal here.

[Bobber]

Sorry you left because of this, Kevin. Really unnecessary.

[Ovi]

Kevin left because of this thread?  I don't know what to say.  Can we not have differentiating opinions about music?

Agreed, I don't get it either. But maybe we all need a break once in a while. Hopefully Kevin comes back.

[Moogmodule]

Geez. I turn my back on a thread for a couple of days and this happens.

Ringo clearly inspires deep passions.

Hopefully Kevs just having a smoko.

[oldbrownshoe]

If it means I don't have to listen to all the stuff after the 60s, then I'm blinkered, no, blinkered x 10, no blinkered x 100, frankly, anything it takes.

Not going to wade through all the above comments re: Clapton, and wasn't going to mention it again following the recent news about Jack Bruce, but the group who 'completely' enveloped the 60s (I hate pretty much everybody afterwards as you know) who I most 'don't get' is Cream.

WAY AHEAD of their time, they were making 1976 soft rock (in awful clothes as well - check out the Albert Hall!) when everyone else seemed to be doing 'Blonde on Blonde', 'Are You Experienced' and 'Safe as Milk'. I've never been more disappointed with an L.P. than when I got the record out of that Martin Sharp psychedelic sleeve, and started to play it. 

Going back to the beginning re- 'Blinkered'.....make that x 1000.

[tkitna]

Agreed, I don't get it either. But maybe we all need a break once in a while. Hopefully Kevin comes back.

I like Kev too and I hope he comes back, but man, you need to have thicker skin then that.

[Hello Goodbye]

Hopefully Kevs just having a smoko.

I hope so.

[Hello Goodbye]

Just my thought on "charisma" vs "talent."  Charisma has a couple of meanings:

1. A compelling attractiveness or charm that can inspire devotion in others.
2. A divinely conferred power or talent.

Thus, charisma and talent are not two different things.  A better choice of terms to debate would be "talent" vs "showmanship."

[Moogmodule]

Just my thought on "charisma" vs "talent."  Charisma has a couple of meanings:

1. A compelling attractiveness or charm that can inspire devotion in others.
2. A divinely conferred power or talent.

Thus, charisma and talent are not two different things.  A better choice of terms to debate would be "talent" vs "showmanship."

I suppose all of this is in the eye of the beholder.  There's certainly talented artists who I wouldn't consider have enormous  charisma. Richard Thompson could be one example. Excellent guitarist and songwriter. But not personally charismatic as far as I'm aware.

Although some would say that their talent itself gives them charisma. So defining it as you've done with respect to showmanship is helpful. Certainly Ringo has lots of showmanship. If he didn't his post Beatle career would have been quite short, given his limitations in actual performance beyond his drumming.

Is Clappers a showman of that order as well? He probably let's his music do the talking more than anything else.

But I think we can agree on:

1.  Eric is a better guitarist than Ringo.

2.  Ringo is a better drummer than Eric.

3.  They each have their appeal to what are likely very different audiences.

[tkitna]

I don't even know how this thread came to comparing Ringo and Clapton in any aspect, but Kevin did have some merit in what he was saying about Ringo's solo gig.  I have no desire to go see another All-Star Band concert with Ringo and his buddies.  I cant take the same old 5 Beatle tunes and Ringo's few patented solo hits anymore.  I want to see him with the Roundheads playing songs off of his last 5 or 6 albums.  That's never going to happen so i'll probably never see him again.  He does try to make it fun when he performs though and theres something to be said for that.

[Moogmodule]

I don't even know how this thread came to comparing Ringo and Clapton in any aspect, but Kevin did have some merit in what he was saying about Ringo's solo gig.  I have no desire to go see another All-Star Band concert with Ringo and his buddies.  I cant take the same old 5 Beatle tunes and Ringo's few patented solo hits anymore.  I want to see him with the Roundheads playing songs off of his last 5 or 6 albums.  That's never going to happen so i'll probably never see him again.  He does try to make it fun when he performs though and theres something to be said for that.

I'm sure the All Stars would be quite fun. But it's hardly high on my concert going list.

[Mr Mustard]

I don't even know how this thread came to comparing Ringo and Clapton in any aspect

Furore erupted on DM's Beatles Site recently when forum loudmouth Mr Mustard had the cheek to suggest he finds Ringo Starr more of a magnetic personality than Eric Clapton, once famously nicknamed "God".

But Mustard was quick to protest his remarks had been taken out of context:

"I'm not saying that Ringo's better or greater or comparing Ringo with Eric as a talent or God the musician or whatever it is....I just said what I said and it was taken wrong and now it's all this...."



 


Come back Kev, no hard feelings on my part 

[tkitna]

 

Nice photoshop work there Mr.M.

[Dcazz]

HaHa, thats only your country Todd, America is only 1 country, 10cc had numbers 1 hits (that they wrote) all over the world, Ringo cant write and cant sing, he is big only because of John & Paul, no other reason, if they handt have hired him he would still be playing in Butlins cabaret.

so you never heard of the songs  "Heart Full of Soul", "Evil Hearted You" and "For Your Love" for The Yardbirds, "Look Through Any Window" and "Bus Stop" for The Hollies and "No Milk Today", "East West" and "Listen People" for Herman's Hermits. Dreadlock Holiday, Im Mandy Fly Me

All written by 10cc members, when did Ringo write songs as good as these? All the 10cc guys are tremendously respected musicians/writers

I cant believe youve never heard this 

10 CC - DREADLOCK HOLIDAY

or this

Wall Street Shuffle - 10cc

and Hits before they were 10cc

The Mindbenders - A Groovy Kind Of Love

I'm partial to Life Is A Minestrone from The Original Soundtrack!


http://youtu.be/eP2yxRgnR8Q