Tell Me :
Talk
hahahahaHAHAHAHA funny! I laughed, out loud.
Slow Train is considered a classic even by many who don't agree with Dylan's religious views in the lyrics. I think Saved is also a great album, especially in terms of some unique chord modulations, etc. If the preaching bugs you, dig the music and give Bob credit for having the balls to sing about his beliefs, knowing full well a lot of people would hate him for it. Just like today, Bob didn't care what anybody thought about it but himself. He was following the artist's credo "Be true to yourself." Anything less forces an arist to compromise themselves.
I am Happy to hear you love it. Have fun listening to it. I dont care enough to debate it... the fan's credo "Be true to yourself.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-01 16:03 by Max'sKansasCity.
I agree.
- I have to say this: When Keith went outside of his box and made one of the most fascinating ethnic albums of the decade Wingless Angels - nobody cared. And at the same time people were complaining about Stones doing the same thing over and over (and never experimenting). People dont seem to want anything interesting or different from the Stones ( nobody gives a damn when Charlie plays Jazz) and at the same time people moan and complain about them doing the same thing, funny.
I like Dylan, but I'm allso suprised that he can totally get away with plagiarism. He keeps on playing old blues classic's with new lyrics. In fact - the best thing Dylan does is his lyric writing but not his ..well, where are the vocal melodies ? He's a real poet - and Stones are not poets. Most of Dylan's recent material have been musicially stolen from old blues legends. Re-written blues songs " Hell Is My Wife's Hometown" ( new lyrics for Muddy Waters/Willie Dixon classic " I Just Wanna Make Love To You") or "Early Roman Kings" (New Lyrics for Bo Diddley's I'm a Man) etc etc....
Do you really think that stealing somebody elses musicial compositions and giving them new lyrics, is being musicially inspired ? - Dylan writes great lyrics and his band is great and professional, but I wish he would write something more orginal, than re-writing old blues standards.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-01 17:59 by seitan.
Yes, pandering I don't think would be a fair criticism of Dylan.
Ok, so did Dylan steal the "Early Roman Kings" riff from Bo Diddley, or from Muddy Waters (who stole it from Bo Diddley!)? As Dylan recently pointed out, it is traditional in blues and jazz to "borrow" things. Musically, there are only a few blues tunes that keep getting recycled. Its the lyrics and performance that makes each one unique.
Ross
I agree. However, he did go through a stage from Empire Burlesque when he obviously wanted a hit and hired the latest hip producer and guitarist around but at the same time wanted things his own way. So, for example, he hires Slash and then removes most of his solo for 'being too G&R'.
It was only when he became Jack Frost and used his touring band that things picked up.
To go back to the original point I think the way too look at it is if Tempest had come out at the same time as a new Stones CD which one would people have enjoyed most? Maybe which one was the most creative might be a better notion.
I look at as which one will I go back to and listen to again? I can pick off recent (since 1997) Dylan tracks and enjoy them. I can find some unreleased stuff or the occassional soundtrack album that stands out. I cannot say that about the Stones. Voodoo Lounge, BTB, the filler cuts from 40 Licks, A Bigger Bang? Excepting Rough Justice, they don't move me.
Actually - most of the recent Dylan songs are recycled old songs with new lyrics with no credit given to the orginal songwriters. I like old blues, - nothing wrong with old blues and I like Dylan too, but I cant say that new Dylan records are inspired or anything special - I'm sorry but I have orginal blues versions, so I dont really need Dylan re-writing them.
I'd be happy to get a poetry book from Dylan, but I dont really need new lyrics for old John Lee Hooker songs or new lyrics for old Otis Rush, Willie Dixon songs - Dylan isnt moving musicially forward - he's guilty of plagiarism and re-writing old standards.
I mean if the topic is "Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?" - I would like to know if Dylan is even moving ahead, it seems to me that he's going back to old blues vinyl compilations to find out old songs that he could re-write, rather than writing any new ideas.
I rest my case.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-01 23:42 by seitan.
that album was for charity
But due to his lack of knowledge/contributions in the areas of hip hop, funk, disco, new age, heavy metal, death metal, punk, classical, acid jazz, bee bop, axé, balinese gamelan, bubblegum pop (or dance), funk metal, techno, techno pop, zydeco....too name but a few, I find bob highly overrated.
Yes, Tempest might be his best album since TOOM. ( I've heard Tempest only twice - so maybe I should give it another listen) but I dont agree with you.
Good As I Been To You and World Gone Wrong were cover songs. Unplugged had old Dylan classics recorded live again,Love & Theft, Modern Times, and Together Through Life were fillied with plagiarism. I use the word plagiarism, cause the liner notes keep lying that - "All songs written by Bob Dylan" and that's load a crap.
For instance: Heres Modern Times album's songs for you:
the opening track "Thunder on the Mountain" has lyrics based on the song "Ma Rainey" by Memphis Minnie. The guitar licks and riffs are typical of Chuck Berry's famous records, with the melody sounding closest to "Let It Rock."
"Rollin' and Tumblin'" is a blues standard first recorded and possibly written by the bluesman Hambone Willie Newbern.
When the Deal Goes Down" is "Where the Blue of the Night a signature-song for Bing Crosby with new lyrics
"Someday Baby" is based on an old blues standard that can be traced back to "Worried Life Blues", recorded by Sleepy John Estes,
"Working Man's Blues" features lines stolen from June Christy's songs.
"Beyond the Horizon" is "Red Sails in the Sunset," written by Jimmy Kennedy and Hugh Williams in 1935 using its melody and basic structure.
"Nettie Moore" is "Gentle Nettie Moore" by Marshall Pike and James Lord Pierpont,
"The Levee's Gonna Break" is based on "When the Levee Breaks" by Kansas Joe McCoy and Memphis Minnie.
."Ain't Talkin'" derives its chorus from the more up-tempo "Highway of Regret" by The Stanley Brothers. Some of the lyrics are derived from "As I Roved Out", a traditional Irish song.
And still the liner notes' say "All songs written by Bob Dylan", - So I would call that plagiarism and I dont agree, when people say that Dylan is moving ahead, no he is not. He keeps re-writing old songs. And that's a shame, cause Dylan used to write more orginal songs on his own, without having to use old ideas from other people.
And yes - I understand your point Ross about Muddy Waters re-writing old blues songs too - but in my opinion, that's beside the point. Muddy Waters is not a legend becouse he recycled songs, no - he's a legend, cause he was also able to do great songs without stealing, just like Dylan in the past.
My point is that, no matter how great legend you are, - You should still be able to come up with new orginal ideas. If you start doing covers or recycling old songs: you become a cover artist and your music is less important. If you want to do important music - you have to use your own new ideas and your own imagination without plagiarism.
Now, having that said - I enjoyed some of Dylans recent recordings, - but I value the orginal old artists and orginal songwriters lot more - than Dylan becoming an plagiarist and copyist at his old age.
it doesn't but it seemed like you were using that to say dylan made a crap new album.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
Max'sKansasCity
()
Date: October 1, 2012 15:22
Quote
Come OnQuote
Max'sKansasCity
Typical IORR thread.
Black is Black.
reply 1
No Black is white
reply 2
No Black is Blue
reply 3
I always liked the color Blue
reply 4
The color Blue sucks, it hasnt been good since pairing with yellow to make green
reply 5
green is a great color, it makes me happy.
reply 6
Yeah, I agree green is awesome.
reply 6
green is horrible, it is just blue and yellow blended
reply 7
yadda yadda yadda
..so far so good, but then comes reply 8:
Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah
Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah
Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah
Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah
Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah
Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah
Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah
Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah
Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah
Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah
Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah
Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah
Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah
Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah
Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah
Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah
I love two-liners....
hahahahaHAHAHAHA funny! I laughed, out loud.
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
stonesdan60
()
Date: October 1, 2012 15:52
Quote
Max'sKansasCity
"Slow Train Coming" put him so many laps behind that there was no way he would ever catch up, let alone ever pull ahead, of The Stones. Thank goodness my Stones never did that type of thing.
Slow Train is considered a classic even by many who don't agree with Dylan's religious views in the lyrics. I think Saved is also a great album, especially in terms of some unique chord modulations, etc. If the preaching bugs you, dig the music and give Bob credit for having the balls to sing about his beliefs, knowing full well a lot of people would hate him for it. Just like today, Bob didn't care what anybody thought about it but himself. He was following the artist's credo "Be true to yourself." Anything less forces an arist to compromise themselves.
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
Max'sKansasCity
()
Date: October 1, 2012 15:59
I bought the album when it came out and we saw that tour (my first for Dylan) and I thought they both sucked, but I gave him a try. I never saw Dylan again until a couple of years ago, and still cant understand a word he mumbles.Quote
stonesdan60Quote
Max'sKansasCity
"Slow Train Coming" put him so many laps behind that there was no way he would ever catch up, let alone ever pull ahead, of The Stones. Thank goodness my Stones never did that type of thing.
Slow Train is considered a classic even by many who don't agree with Dylan's religious views in the lyrics. I think Saved is also a great album, especially in terms of some unique chord modulations, etc. If the preaching bugs you, dig the music and give Bob credit for having the balls to sing about his beliefs, knowing full well a lot of people would hate him for it. Just like today, Bob didn't care what anybody thought about it but himself. He was following the artist's credo "Be true to yourself." Anything less forces an arist to compromise themselves.
I am Happy to hear you love it. Have fun listening to it. I dont care enough to debate it... the fan's credo "Be true to yourself.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-01 16:03 by Max'sKansasCity.
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
seitan
()
Date: October 1, 2012 17:14
Quote
Mathijs
Sure, but its much easier for His Bobness than for the Stones. First, the Stones have always been much more popular. When Dylan sold a million albums, the Stones sold 10 million. Whereas Dylan ca concentrate on just making art, the Stones as always in need to 'deliver' (a hit song, a new bigger-than-before tour etc). It simply is much harder to remain 'really big' than just 'big'. Second, it's easier for Dylan to remain 'Dylan' than for the Stones to remain the 'Stones'. Dylan can switch from singer/song writer to swamp blues band to folk band to jazz band to swing band and still be Bob Dylan, and with still pleasing the fans. If the Stones would just experiment a hair left or right from classis open G Stoner rock, the fans start to complain (see Undercover, see Anybody Seen My baby etc). Then, the Stones are a bit trapped in their own format -it's the 4/5/6 of them that will have to work together, whereas Bob can fire and hire bandmembers as he wishes.
Mathijs
I agree.
- I have to say this: When Keith went outside of his box and made one of the most fascinating ethnic albums of the decade Wingless Angels - nobody cared. And at the same time people were complaining about Stones doing the same thing over and over (and never experimenting). People dont seem to want anything interesting or different from the Stones ( nobody gives a damn when Charlie plays Jazz) and at the same time people moan and complain about them doing the same thing, funny.
I like Dylan, but I'm allso suprised that he can totally get away with plagiarism. He keeps on playing old blues classic's with new lyrics. In fact - the best thing Dylan does is his lyric writing but not his ..well, where are the vocal melodies ? He's a real poet - and Stones are not poets. Most of Dylan's recent material have been musicially stolen from old blues legends. Re-written blues songs " Hell Is My Wife's Hometown" ( new lyrics for Muddy Waters/Willie Dixon classic " I Just Wanna Make Love To You") or "Early Roman Kings" (New Lyrics for Bo Diddley's I'm a Man) etc etc....
Do you really think that stealing somebody elses musicial compositions and giving them new lyrics, is being musicially inspired ? - Dylan writes great lyrics and his band is great and professional, but I wish he would write something more orginal, than re-writing old blues standards.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-01 17:59 by seitan.
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: October 1, 2012 19:14
Quote
stonesdan60Quote
Max'sKansasCity
"Slow Train Coming" put him so many laps behind that there was no way he would ever catch up, let alone ever pull ahead, of The Stones. Thank goodness my Stones never did that type of thing.
Slow Train is considered a classic even by many who don't agree with Dylan's religious views in the lyrics. I think Saved is also a great album, especially in terms of some unique chord modulations, etc. If the preaching bugs you, dig the music and give Bob credit for having the balls to sing about his beliefs, knowing full well a lot of people would hate him for it. Just like today, Bob didn't care what anybody thought about it but himself. He was following the artist's credo "Be true to yourself." Anything less forces an arist to compromise themselves.
Yes, pandering I don't think would be a fair criticism of Dylan.
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
runrudolph
()
Date: October 1, 2012 19:59
i think he has pulled shit
jeroen
jeroen
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
Ross
()
Date: October 1, 2012 21:53
Quote
seitan
I agree.
-I like Dylan, but I'm allso suprised that he can totally get away with plagiarism. He keeps on playing old blues classic's with new lyrics. In fact - the best thing Dylan does is his lyric writing but not his ..well, where are the vocal melodies ? He's a real poet - and Stones are not poets. Most of Dylan's recent material have been musicially stolen from old blues legends. Re-written blues songs " Hell Is My Wife's Hometown" ( new lyrics for Muddy Waters/Willie Dixon classic " I Just Wanna Make Love To You") or "Early Roman Kings" (New Lyrics for Bo Diddley's I'm a Man) etc etc....
Do you really think that stealing somebody elses musicial compositions and giving them new lyrics, is being musicially inspired ? - Dylan writes great lyrics and his band is great and professional, but I wish he would write something more orginal, than re-writing old blues standards.
Ok, so did Dylan steal the "Early Roman Kings" riff from Bo Diddley, or from Muddy Waters (who stole it from Bo Diddley!)? As Dylan recently pointed out, it is traditional in blues and jazz to "borrow" things. Musically, there are only a few blues tunes that keep getting recycled. Its the lyrics and performance that makes each one unique.
Ross
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
Braincapers
()
Date: October 1, 2012 21:55
Quote
treaclefingers
Yes, pandering I don't think would be a fair criticism of Dylan.
I agree. However, he did go through a stage from Empire Burlesque when he obviously wanted a hit and hired the latest hip producer and guitarist around but at the same time wanted things his own way. So, for example, he hires Slash and then removes most of his solo for 'being too G&R'.
It was only when he became Jack Frost and used his touring band that things picked up.
To go back to the original point I think the way too look at it is if Tempest had come out at the same time as a new Stones CD which one would people have enjoyed most? Maybe which one was the most creative might be a better notion.
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: October 1, 2012 22:28
Quote
Braincapers
To go back to the original point I think the way too look at it is if Tempest had come out at the same time as a new Stones CD which one would people have enjoyed most? Maybe which one was the most creative might be a better notion.
I look at as which one will I go back to and listen to again? I can pick off recent (since 1997) Dylan tracks and enjoy them. I can find some unreleased stuff or the occassional soundtrack album that stands out. I cannot say that about the Stones. Voodoo Lounge, BTB, the filler cuts from 40 Licks, A Bigger Bang? Excepting Rough Justice, they don't move me.
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
seitan
()
Date: October 1, 2012 23:25
Quote
RossQuote
seitan
I agree.
-I like Dylan, but I'm allso suprised that he can totally get away with plagiarism. He keeps on playing old blues classic's with new lyrics. In fact - the best thing Dylan does is his lyric writing but not his ..well, where are the vocal melodies ? He's a real poet - and Stones are not poets. Most of Dylan's recent material have been musicially stolen from old blues legends. Re-written blues songs " Hell Is My Wife's Hometown" ( new lyrics for Muddy Waters/Willie Dixon classic " I Just Wanna Make Love To You") or "Early Roman Kings" (New Lyrics for Bo Diddley's I'm a Man) etc etc....
Do you really think that stealing somebody elses musicial compositions and giving them new lyrics, is being musicially inspired ? - Dylan writes great lyrics and his band is great and professional, but I wish he would write something more orginal, than re-writing old blues standards.
Ok, so did Dylan steal the "Early Roman Kings" riff from Bo Diddley, or from Muddy Waters (who stole it from Bo Diddley!)? As Dylan recently pointed out, it is traditional in blues and jazz to "borrow" things. Musically, there are only a few blues tunes that keep getting recycled. Its the lyrics and performance that makes each one unique.
Ross
Actually - most of the recent Dylan songs are recycled old songs with new lyrics with no credit given to the orginal songwriters. I like old blues, - nothing wrong with old blues and I like Dylan too, but I cant say that new Dylan records are inspired or anything special - I'm sorry but I have orginal blues versions, so I dont really need Dylan re-writing them.
I'd be happy to get a poetry book from Dylan, but I dont really need new lyrics for old John Lee Hooker songs or new lyrics for old Otis Rush, Willie Dixon songs - Dylan isnt moving musicially forward - he's guilty of plagiarism and re-writing old standards.
I mean if the topic is "Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?" - I would like to know if Dylan is even moving ahead, it seems to me that he's going back to old blues vinyl compilations to find out old songs that he could re-write, rather than writing any new ideas.
I rest my case.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-01 23:42 by seitan.
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
slewan
()
Date: October 1, 2012 23:50
What's so new about the fact that Dylan is miles ahead of the Stones? It used to be that way in the sixties and it's the same way since the late 80s.
(if you don't believe it - just compare Dylans "Live 1966" to the Stones' "Got Live if you want it" – 1st is rock music for grown-ups while the latter is rather children's music)
(if you don't believe it - just compare Dylans "Live 1966" to the Stones' "Got Live if you want it" – 1st is rock music for grown-ups while the latter is rather children's music)
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
Ross
()
Date: October 2, 2012 00:22
I think you missed my point, Seitan. Sure Dylan has borrowed borrowed blues riffs, quite frequently lately, but he has always done it. "Pledging My Time" ("It Hurts Me Too" ) comes to mind form BOB.
My point is that all of the old blues masters did this. It was/is accepted within that art form to recycle riffs. Dylan has now morphed into his own version of bluesy elder statesman, so I have no problem with it. Dylan borrows these riffs (as bluesmen have always done), then adds his own amazing lyrics and expressive singing that make these performances uniquely Dylan.
Here is another example of Muddy Waters "borrowing" from Robert Johnson. Same riff & melody, totally different songs, and I love them both! Do you consider Muddy Waters a plagerist?
Ross
My point is that all of the old blues masters did this. It was/is accepted within that art form to recycle riffs. Dylan has now morphed into his own version of bluesy elder statesman, so I have no problem with it. Dylan borrows these riffs (as bluesmen have always done), then adds his own amazing lyrics and expressive singing that make these performances uniquely Dylan.
Here is another example of Muddy Waters "borrowing" from Robert Johnson. Same riff & melody, totally different songs, and I love them both! Do you consider Muddy Waters a plagerist?
Ross
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
Slick
()
Date: October 2, 2012 05:32
but dylans's brown sugar live in 2002 cuts to shreds any vegas stones version.Quote
GravityBoy
Dylan never.. ever... moved it like Brown Sugar moves it.
Never.
Never could.
Bob does other loveable things though.
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
JimmyTheSaint
()
Date: October 2, 2012 05:44
Apples and oranges.
They were both great. Arguably the best at what they each did.
Dylan has kept on keeping on with his 'never ending tour' still rolling since the late 1980's while the Stones have been pretty much a reunion outfit in that same time.
They were both great. Arguably the best at what they each did.
Dylan has kept on keeping on with his 'never ending tour' still rolling since the late 1980's while the Stones have been pretty much a reunion outfit in that same time.
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
doubledoor
()
Date: October 2, 2012 06:27
Dylan has reworked some old classic blues songs with new lyrics. But to say that is all he does, or most of his songs, is ridiculous. A few songs from such a prolific songwriter is not most, or all. Not even close.
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
lazzzybones
()
Date: October 2, 2012 15:54
Yeah. Remember that Xmas album "Christmas In The Heart" from a couple of years ago?
Anyone buy it? Anyone LISTEN to it? Anyone?
Be great if the Stones did one to catch up on ol'Bob eh.
Anyone buy it? Anyone LISTEN to it? Anyone?
Be great if the Stones did one to catch up on ol'Bob eh.
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
tomcasagranda
()
Date: October 2, 2012 15:59
If you look at what's better, Superheavy, or Tempest, then the answer, obviously, is Tempest.
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
gimmelittledrink
()
Date: October 2, 2012 16:02
The real difference is that Mick and Keith can no longer write a decent song. Sad but true.
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
keefriffhard4life
()
Date: October 2, 2012 16:08
Quote
lazzzybones
Yeah. Remember that Xmas album "Christmas In The Heart" from a couple of years ago?
Anyone buy it? Anyone LISTEN to it? Anyone?
Be great if the Stones did one to catch up on ol'Bob eh.
that album was for charity
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
jamesjagger
()
Date: October 2, 2012 17:16
Quote
seitanQuote
RossQuote
seitan
I agree.
-I like Dylan, but I'm allso suprised that he can totally get away with plagiarism. He keeps on playing old blues classic's with new lyrics. In fact - the best thing Dylan does is his lyric writing but not his ..well, where are the vocal melodies ? He's a real poet - and Stones are not poets. Most of Dylan's recent material have been musicially stolen from old blues legends. Re-written blues songs " Hell Is My Wife's Hometown" ( new lyrics for Muddy Waters/Willie Dixon classic " I Just Wanna Make Love To You") or "Early Roman Kings" (New Lyrics for Bo Diddley's I'm a Man) etc etc....
Do you really think that stealing somebody elses musicial compositions and giving them new lyrics, is being musicially inspired ? - Dylan writes great lyrics and his band is great and professional, but I wish he would write something more orginal, than re-writing old blues standards.
Ok, so did Dylan steal the "Early Roman Kings" riff from Bo Diddley, or from Muddy Waters (who stole it from Bo Diddley!)? As Dylan recently pointed out, it is traditional in blues and jazz to "borrow" things. Musically, there are only a few blues tunes that keep getting recycled. Its the lyrics and performance that makes each one unique.
Ross
Actually - most of the recent Dylan songs are recycled old songs with new lyrics with no credit given to the orginal songwriters. I like old blues, - nothing wrong with old blues and I like Dylan too, but I cant say that new Dylan records are inspired or anything special - I'm sorry but I have orginal blues versions, so I dont really need Dylan re-writing them.
I'd be happy to get a poetry book from Dylan, but I dont really need new lyrics for old John Lee Hooker songs or new lyrics for old Otis Rush, Willie Dixon songs - Dylan isnt moving musicially forward - he's guilty of plagiarism and re-writing old standards.
I mean if the topic is "Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?" - I would like to know if Dylan is even moving ahead, it seems to me that he's going back to old blues vinyl compilations to find out old songs that he could re-write, rather than writing any new ideas.
I couldn't agree more!
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
andrea66
()
Date: October 2, 2012 17:33
i like dylan but i think that his latest albums are overrated. tempest is an album full of dignity, he didn't become ridiculous and he is not playing the part of the mythical artist or the old wise man; this is a good thing.
but i don't think we will talk about tempest in 10 years .
back to the thread, it is easier for dylan than for the stones. he is alone and basically he can do what he wants. stones are 4 and they have to deal with ego, strong personalities, illness (4 gentlemen between 65 and 71 have more chances to get sick than 1 alone)and many other things.
if dylan wants to record a new album he just has to book the studio, if he wanna go tour he goes..
btw, this is not a total excuse for 2 stones albums in 15 years..this is a shame
but i don't think we will talk about tempest in 10 years .
back to the thread, it is easier for dylan than for the stones. he is alone and basically he can do what he wants. stones are 4 and they have to deal with ego, strong personalities, illness (4 gentlemen between 65 and 71 have more chances to get sick than 1 alone)and many other things.
if dylan wants to record a new album he just has to book the studio, if he wanna go tour he goes..
btw, this is not a total excuse for 2 stones albums in 15 years..this is a shame
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
stonesrule
()
Date: October 2, 2012 18:58
I truly admire Bob Dylan for his vast knowledge of 20th Century music -- blues, soul, folk, movie musicals, pop, rock and roll.
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
Ross
()
Date: October 2, 2012 18:58
The only song on Tempest that is close to fitting the description of "recycled old blues songs with new lyrics and no credits given" is "Early Roman Kings". And even that varies greatly from Bo Diddley's "I'm A Man" when it jumps to the IV chord after the first eight bars. And the riff is played on accordian for Christ's sake!
Dylan is in the middle of a remarkable run that actually dates back to Oh, Mercy in 1989, the only clunker is Under the Red Sky. Oh, Mercy, Good As I Been To You, World Gone Wrong, Unplugged, TOOM, Love & Theft, Modern Times, Together Through Life, Tempest; that's 9 great studio albums in the past 22 years. Not to mention 9 volumes of "The Bootleg Series", one of which was comprised of 3 cd's of outtakes recorded between 1989 and 2006.
Quite Impressive compared to most everyone else, not just The Stones!
Ross
Dylan is in the middle of a remarkable run that actually dates back to Oh, Mercy in 1989, the only clunker is Under the Red Sky. Oh, Mercy, Good As I Been To You, World Gone Wrong, Unplugged, TOOM, Love & Theft, Modern Times, Together Through Life, Tempest; that's 9 great studio albums in the past 22 years. Not to mention 9 volumes of "The Bootleg Series", one of which was comprised of 3 cd's of outtakes recorded between 1989 and 2006.
Quite Impressive compared to most everyone else, not just The Stones!
Ross
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: October 3, 2012 00:26
Quote
stonesrule
I truly admire Bob Dylan for his vast knowledge of 20th Century music -- blues, soul, folk, movie musicals, pop, rock and roll.
But due to his lack of knowledge/contributions in the areas of hip hop, funk, disco, new age, heavy metal, death metal, punk, classical, acid jazz, bee bop, axé, balinese gamelan, bubblegum pop (or dance), funk metal, techno, techno pop, zydeco....too name but a few, I find bob highly overrated.
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
seitan
()
Date: October 3, 2012 01:20
Quote
Ross
The only song on Tempest that is close to fitting the description of "recycled old blues songs with new lyrics and no credits given" is "Early Roman Kings". And even that varies greatly from Bo Diddley's "I'm A Man" when it jumps to the IV chord after the first eight bars. And the riff is played on accordian for Christ's sake!
Dylan is in the middle of a remarkable run that actually dates back to Oh, Mercy in 1989, the only clunker is Under the Red Sky. Oh, Mercy, Good As I Been To You, World Gone Wrong, Unplugged, TOOM, Love & Theft, Modern Times, Together Through Life, Tempest; that's 9 great studio albums in the past 22 years. Not to mention 9 volumes of "The Bootleg Series", one of which was comprised of 3 cd's of outtakes recorded between 1989 and 2006.
Quite Impressive compared to most everyone else, not just The Stones!
Ross
Yes, Tempest might be his best album since TOOM. ( I've heard Tempest only twice - so maybe I should give it another listen) but I dont agree with you.
Good As I Been To You and World Gone Wrong were cover songs. Unplugged had old Dylan classics recorded live again,Love & Theft, Modern Times, and Together Through Life were fillied with plagiarism. I use the word plagiarism, cause the liner notes keep lying that - "All songs written by Bob Dylan" and that's load a crap.
For instance: Heres Modern Times album's songs for you:
the opening track "Thunder on the Mountain" has lyrics based on the song "Ma Rainey" by Memphis Minnie. The guitar licks and riffs are typical of Chuck Berry's famous records, with the melody sounding closest to "Let It Rock."
"Rollin' and Tumblin'" is a blues standard first recorded and possibly written by the bluesman Hambone Willie Newbern.
When the Deal Goes Down" is "Where the Blue of the Night a signature-song for Bing Crosby with new lyrics
"Someday Baby" is based on an old blues standard that can be traced back to "Worried Life Blues", recorded by Sleepy John Estes,
"Working Man's Blues" features lines stolen from June Christy's songs.
"Beyond the Horizon" is "Red Sails in the Sunset," written by Jimmy Kennedy and Hugh Williams in 1935 using its melody and basic structure.
"Nettie Moore" is "Gentle Nettie Moore" by Marshall Pike and James Lord Pierpont,
"The Levee's Gonna Break" is based on "When the Levee Breaks" by Kansas Joe McCoy and Memphis Minnie.
."Ain't Talkin'" derives its chorus from the more up-tempo "Highway of Regret" by The Stanley Brothers. Some of the lyrics are derived from "As I Roved Out", a traditional Irish song.
And still the liner notes' say "All songs written by Bob Dylan", - So I would call that plagiarism and I dont agree, when people say that Dylan is moving ahead, no he is not. He keeps re-writing old songs. And that's a shame, cause Dylan used to write more orginal songs on his own, without having to use old ideas from other people.
And yes - I understand your point Ross about Muddy Waters re-writing old blues songs too - but in my opinion, that's beside the point. Muddy Waters is not a legend becouse he recycled songs, no - he's a legend, cause he was also able to do great songs without stealing, just like Dylan in the past.
My point is that, no matter how great legend you are, - You should still be able to come up with new orginal ideas. If you start doing covers or recycling old songs: you become a cover artist and your music is less important. If you want to do important music - you have to use your own new ideas and your own imagination without plagiarism.
Now, having that said - I enjoyed some of Dylans recent recordings, - but I value the orginal old artists and orginal songwriters lot more - than Dylan becoming an plagiarist and copyist at his old age.
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
roryg
()
Date: October 3, 2012 01:42
It seems a better comparison would be Leonard Cohen and Bob Dylan. I'll take the Bard of the Boudoir over his Bobness in a heartbeat (or two).
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
lazzzybones
()
Date: October 3, 2012 02:10
x
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-03 02:14 by lazzzybones.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-03 02:14 by lazzzybones.
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
JimmyTheSaint
()
Date: October 3, 2012 05:39
I like Leonard Cohen, but in their respective primes Dylan was far more prolific.
And Cohen's latest isn't anything to get excited about.
As for Bob's borrowing of old ideas (pun intended), check out the latest Rolling Stone interview. He's not trying to pull a fast one, he's doing it deliberately.
And 'Pay in Blood' from Tempest is awesome, the high point of the release.
And Cohen's latest isn't anything to get excited about.
As for Bob's borrowing of old ideas (pun intended), check out the latest Rolling Stone interview. He's not trying to pull a fast one, he's doing it deliberately.
And 'Pay in Blood' from Tempest is awesome, the high point of the release.
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
lazzzybones
()
Date: October 3, 2012 05:45
Doesn't make it anymore listenable.Quote
keefriffhard4lifeQuote
lazzzybones
Yeah. Remember that Xmas album "Christmas In The Heart" from a couple of years ago?
Anyone buy it? Anyone LISTEN to it? Anyone?
Be great if the Stones did one to catch up on ol'Bob eh.
that album was for charity
Re: Has Dylan pulled far ahead of the Stones?
Posted by:
keefriffhard4life
()
Date: October 3, 2012 06:27
Quote
lazzzybonesDoesn't make it anymore listenable.Quote
keefriffhard4lifeQuote
lazzzybones
Yeah. Remember that Xmas album "Christmas In The Heart" from a couple of years ago?
Anyone buy it? Anyone LISTEN to it? Anyone?
Be great if the Stones did one to catch up on ol'Bob eh.
that album was for charity
it doesn't but it seemed like you were using that to say dylan made a crap new album.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
austrianstones , Doxa , falo01 , frankotero , fredricA , Irix , IsakSun , joguema , mikey C , rcfoxy , RobertJohnson , straycatuk
Guests:
1505
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10