So, what have you been listening to lately?

[doombass]

Uli is great as long as he does'nt sing.

[uwe]

Not that Hendrix was a good singer, but perhaps still a notch or two above Uli, true. 

[doombass]

Hendrix rarely makes me cringe so I'd say a couple of notches better yes. On the subject Bruce Springsteen (another thread) I think he surely does'nt have the best singing voice (far better than Dylan though) but he is skillful at vocal expressions.

[uwe]

I think Springsteen's voice is perfectly ok for his own music. When he does other people's material - as he did with his current soul tribute album - the inherent limits become glaring. Sam Cooke he ain't.

[doombass]

Indeed, as long as he sculpts his songs to suit his own voice he's fine.

[uwe]

Springsteen is not a varied singer nor is his music really varied (the last song he surprised me with was Philadelphia, that's a while back, 30 years to be exact) - with him it's all about the larger-than-life images he paints of little people with his lyrics. Of course he's an American icon. Live, his messianic shtick gets to me after a while.

[westen44]

Springsteen is not a varied singer nor is his music really varied (the last song he surprised me with was Philadelphia, that's a while back, 30 years to be exact) - with him it's all about the larger-than-life images he paints of little people with his lyrics. Of course he's an American icon. Live, his messianic shtick gets to me after a while.

Springsteen may be an American icon, but I don't know why.  He doesn't represent America at all as far as I'm concerned.  He may be one of the most overrated singers of all time.  As I've said before, I simply do not get his appeal, period. 

[uwe]

There's more than one America that can be represented. Springsteen represents ideals, a mythological America if you like. From a European viewpoint that vision of hope his brand of singer-songwriter-rock with a deep folk foundation always exudes is already very American, a cliche no doubt, but a very vibrant one. He's the Robert Redford of rock. Now you might like Robert Redford or not, but you can't say he's un-American.

[westen44]

There's more than one America that can be represented. Springsteen represents ideals, a mythological America if you like.  From a European viewpoint that vision of hope his brand of singer-songwriter-rock with a deep folk foundation always exudes is already very American, a cliche no doubt, but a very vibrant one. He's the Robert Redford of rock. Now you might like Robert Redford or not, but you can't say he's un-American.

Springsteen isn't un-American.  But like you stated, whatever he is doing is pushing something mythological.  As an American, I can't take his music or his lyrics seriously.  Because to me what he is singing about isn't the real America.  To me personally, I also find his music meaningless and boring.  There are certainly others worse, but they usually don't get the attention Springsteen does.  If I tried to find someone doing what Springsteen does, but doing it far better, I would probably choose Billy Joel. 

[uwe]

Billy Joel is great too - he wrote a major part of the contemporary American Songbook. I've always dug his songs. He's the American Elton John minus the Don't Go Breaking My Heart/Nikita cringe.

Besides, he has two ex-Rainbow musicians in his current band (David Rosenthal and Chuck Burgi - from the last Rainbow line-up in the 80ies)




(I'm sooo glad Rainbow never made a corny video at all ...)

and is reportedly always rather inquisitive about their time with Blackmore, so how could I possibly knock the guy? All rivers of dreams end somewhere over the rainbow. 

[westen44]

Billy Joel and Bruce Springsteen fans tend to be different, IMO.  The Billy Joel fans, for the most part just seem to be interested in the music.  The Springsteen fans remind me more of Deadheads.  Not that there is anything wrong with that.  One of the prettiest and nicest girls I ever met was a devout Deadhead.  I mentioned this in an old thread under a different context, 

[uwe]

Billy seems a lot more urban to me, the disenchanted office worker type while Bruce pretends to be from the factory floor. There is also a jazzy, sophisticated piano ingredient to Joel's music that is totally lacking with the Boss. Springsteen's chords tend to be meat and potatoes (I'm not knocking him, he's written great songs with the set of colors available to him, I could kill for "I'm On Fire", but on Joel hits you sometimes hear a chord you don't remember ever having heard before). Of ourse it's all explained by Joel being a trained pianist while Springsteen is essentially a folk guitar strummer.

[westen44]

Both artists claim to have been heavily influenced by the Beatles, but I do hear a folk background in Springsteen's music, which you mentioned, that is lacking with Billy Joel. 

[Dave W]

[uwe]

Alas!, Dave doesn't like Billy Joel either with his "garage & vintage"-elitist rock journo musical taste.