YouTube comments

[Dave W]

This is pretty much how I feel.

[nofi]

do i ever agree! they are useless and very depressing. usualy these clowns end up fighting among themselves and topic be damned. if these assholes are the adults of tommorrow...

youtube could save a lot of band width by dumping this section.

[ack1961]

do i ever agree! they are useless and very depressing. usualy these clowns end up fighting among themselves and topic be damned. if these assholes are the adults of tommorrow...

youtube could save a lot of band wirth by dumping this section.

amen.

[Highlander]

Banning me might save this site some bandwidth...

Ah... what have I done...

[Denis]

I rather like reading the comments, especially when they are in reference to the "dislikes". If an old Skynyrd video has 2500 likes and 2 dislikes, some comments are something like, "2 people are Bieber fans".

[Highlander]

My daughter quite likes posts that show collages of that particular person gunned down on a popular police drama... all rather cruel and vindictive, if you ask me...

[OldManC]

I rather like reading the comments, especially when they are in reference to the "dislikes". If an old Skynyrd video has 2500 likes and 2 dislikes, some comments are something like, "2 people are Bieber fans".

Some of those are so redeemingly funny they almost even out all the other noise. 

[westen44]

I find that when it comes to Hendrix, there are often two camps on YouTube:  People who refuse to tolerate any criticism of him and people who name loads of other guitarists they feel are better.  Along with this is the assumption that your taste in music sucks because you made the mistake of overrating Hendrix.  I find myself completely unable to relate to either camp.  I don't know which gets on my nerves the most, the worship of Hendrix or the snarky, superior attitude that the person is too "advanced" to listen to him. 

[gweimer]

I find that when it comes to Hendrix, there are often two camps on YouTube:  People who refuse to tolerate any criticism of him and people who name loads of other guitarists they feel are better.  Along with this is the assumption that your taste in music sucks because you made the mistake of overrating Hendrix.  I find myself completely unable to relate to either camp.  I don't know which gets on my nerves the most, the worship of Hendrix or the snarky, superior attitude that the person is too "advanced" to listen to him. 

Kind of like the old joke about how many guitarists it takes to change a light bulb.   The answer is one, but 1300 of them could do it better.

[westen44]

Kind of like the old joke about how many guitarists it takes to change a light bulb.   The answer is one, but 1300 of them could do it better.

It can get really absurd.  Not long ago, on a board I read a comment by a bassist who said that although he was primarily a bassist, when he did play guitar he was on Hendrix's level.  The implication was that if he only tried, surpassing Hendrix would be a piece of cake.  Usually, it's only guitarists with over-inflated egos who make such statements.  But in this particular case, it was actually a bassist. 

[nofi]

he probably plays oboe. hey kids reinvent yourselfs on you tube.

[Dave W]

It can get really absurd.  Not long ago, on a board I read a comment by a bassist who said that although he was primarily a bassist, when he did play guitar he was on Hendrix's level.  The implication was that if he only tried, surpassing Hendrix would be a piece of cake.  Usually, it's only guitarists with over-inflated egos who make such statements.  But in this particular case, it was actually a bassist. 

You have to wonder if this attitude comes from the fact that greats like Hendrix, EVH and SRV have been analyzed and overanalyzed, with instructional videos to show you how to copy them lick for lick. Of course none of the greats grew up in a vacuum, but they built on what they learned and innovated. Learning what they did and how they did it is fine, just don't confuse that with being as good as they are or were.

[gweimer]

You have to wonder if this attitude comes from the fact that greats like Hendrix, EVH and SRV have been analyzed and overanalyzed, with instructional videos to show you how to copy them lick for lick. Of course none of the greats grew up in a vacuum, but they built on what they learned and innovated. Learning what they did and how they did it is fine, just don't confuse that with being as good as they are or were.

And so many people seem to forget what a great rhythm player Hendrix was.  It's not just about flying fingers.

[gweimer]

[westen44]

You have to wonder if this attitude comes from the fact that greats like Hendrix, EVH and SRV have been analyzed and overanalyzed, with instructional videos to show you how to copy them lick for lick. Of course none of the greats grew up in a vacuum, but they built on what they learned and innovated. Learning what they did and how they did it is fine, just don't confuse that with being as good as they are or were.

I think there must be a complete disconnect with some people on the difference between being able to play something and being able to create something in the first place.  You've also got people out there chiding Paul McCartney for his less than stellar technical skills, in their opinion.  Please go out, write some Beatles-level songs, sing them as well as Paul, come up with bass lines out of thin air the way he usually did, THEN, maybe then, people like that can brag how they're better bassists than Paul McCartney.  The same goes for Muse.  Being able to play the bass line to "Hysteria" does not automatically qualify someone as a replacement for Chris Wolstenholme.  It is he--not anyone else--who created that particular bass line.