Re: "Tribute to....." - was NEW Clapton CD with Jerry Portnoy

[Indiana <gdubya@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Who IS better than the original?  Unless, they are "original" enough to be 
called "original" too.

Seems strange to be perplexed that the tribute and/or cover must be 
compared to the "original"
as to whether it is "better" or "as good as".

To my ear, Joe Cocker did some Beatles songs as good or better than the 
Beatles... or at least
made them his own.  But can't it just be good on its own and not be 
compared?  I'm a great lover
of Jimi Hendrix, but the more I listen and learn, the more I hear Hooker, 
Magic Sam, Buddy Guy
and others in his sound.  I used to think he was 100% original, a spaceman 
that figured out what
nobody ever did before.

I read in a recent magazine that there's a book on Robert Johnson himself 
coming out, where
it compares the music he did with some of the people he covered/and or 
learned from or potentially
copied.  As good or better.... no matter to me.... I love to hear 
him.....  that's really all I need to know.
Original or derivative, I think it doesn't matter if it sounds good to YOUR 
ear.

Although music can be a competitive sport I guess.... it sure doesn't need 
to be, IMHO.

Who was it that said, "there are no bad notes, just bad choices"?



At 02:01 PM 4/15/04, IcemanLE@xxxxxxx wrote:
>In a message dated 4/13/04 11:05:11 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
>ftoral@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
>
>
>>just a tribute to RJ,
>
>What's with this "Tribute to...: music craze? (It's real big in jazz, too).
>
>I have as yet to hear a "Tribute to..." recording that is as good or 
>better than whom the "Tribute to...." is.
>
>The Iceman

- --
Gary Warren

"I take my woman on the beach, fellas, and set down in the sand
  and play."  Muddy Waters (Deep Down In Florida)