Was this their attempt at copying Canned Heat?

Was this their attempt at copying Canned Heat?

Attached: 51F-JrWga3L.jpg (500x500, 40K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=mBpu3ia7Lwo
youtube.com/watch?v=hnhCJcMc3sQ
youtube.com/watch?v=C7PjLtnO_bE
youtube.com/watch?v=3dznyMxypCY
youtube.com/watch?v=-iX-k1flBAE
youtube.com/watch?v=k_3zCMuwQWw
youtube.com/watch?v=3oK1_y8Jgfc
youtube.com/watch?v=L5CKAoy-a8c
youtube.com/watch?v=d71hpgDVTIo
youtube.com/watch?v=Krl---QD5dY
youtube.com/watch?v=_RNe1aRQ9V8
youtube.com/watch?v=YEqiWTb-UWA
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

wtf is canned heart

canned heat is fucking shit
cream for life

Attached: fc.jpg (600x600, 110K)

fresh cream sucks
youtube.com/watch?v=mBpu3ia7Lwo

even canned heats first album is better than that

Attached: MI0000601120.jpg (500x500, 69K)

nah... but they liked canned heat during the sessions, think they do a cover.
youtube.com/watch?v=hnhCJcMc3sQ

the only explanation for not liking fresh cream is being a moron. you're not a moron, are you user?

Attached: dg.jpg (1500x1497, 569K)

cream and that sorta hard rock was the equivalent to shoegaze and noise rock today. its overly loud and thus people think its good. i dont. i prefer canned heat subtler more dynamic approach to sound

Attached: 1556855352257.jpg (125x123, 4K)

they liked cream but during the sessions they piss all over that last royal albert hall gig.

fresh cream is the only good cream album and the only good thing clapton ever had a vital role in.

it's not overly loud at all. the whole appeal is the specificity of sound and the intricacy mined from seemingly simple ideas.
it's certainly the best cream alum, but i love all their records. live cream is golden too, and the bbc sessions are awesome. i even like goodbye, which i feel is extremely undervalued. i would agree that outside of cream clapton has been total shit.

Attached: wof.jpg (953x953, 448K)

>it's not overly loud at all.
clapton had to get ear surgery because pools of blood was forming in his ears. it may not be loud now compared to other stuff, but i certainly dont enjoy it as much. its the kind of style that help created the loudness wars

the loudness wars were a mixing and production thing not an actual playing thing. the actual records sound great, just use the volume control. and as for clapton's ears, that's rock and roll baby.
the royal albert hall gig might not be the best thing cream did, but it certainly isn't bad.

Attached: gb.jpg (500x500, 43K)

>as for clapton's ears, that's rock and roll baby.
kevin shields claimed to have similar problems and started wearing ear plugs. alan wilson of canned heat is the same. he went to cream shows and complained he couldnt listen for very long and had to start wearing ear plugs himself for his band. i dont think your health has to suffer to create great art, especially loud rock and roll. canned heat is plenty loud and rock'n'roll-ish but doesnt have that wall of sound noise approach to it, even though they do have bits of feedback noise rock here and there, its not over done

they were just following dylan's lead (again)

Attached: 220px-Bob_Dylan_-_John_Wesley_Harding.jpg (220x220, 16K)

not me brother ... its paul & ringo who thought it was shit!

More of a cross between weirder Canned Heat, the Doors, and the Grateful Dead's live shows:
>youtube.com/watch?v=C7PjLtnO_bE
>youtube.com/watch?v=3dznyMxypCY
>youtube.com/watch?v=-iX-k1flBAE
Some Velvet Underground vibes too:
>youtube.com/watch?v=k_3zCMuwQWw
>youtube.com/watch?v=3oK1_y8Jgfc
>youtube.com/watch?v=L5CKAoy-a8c
And folk, of course:
>youtube.com/watch?v=d71hpgDVTIo
>youtube.com/watch?v=Krl---QD5dY
>youtube.com/watch?v=_RNe1aRQ9V8

you may not like the volume, but that doesn't change the quality of the music on display on their released material--just as it doesn't inherently make the music worse if it's recorded very quietly. i never got to see them live (i wish) but i can judge from what's been recorded for posterity, and i love it all.
not sure how much quality music they've made of late themselves...

Attached: lc.jpg (500x483, 30K)

this stuff's pretty cool, has any of this been put out on record? is it on those anthology box sets?

Attached: lcvii.jpg (640x640, 105K)

cream's goodbye sucks

gonna have to disagree on that one. does it stack up to the first three records? no. is it still a great album full of memorable moments? yes.
i'd take goodbye over the best records by lesser bands.

Attached: cream.jpg (1600x1273, 403K)

Wasn't he following their lead though?

No, it's all unreleased, on bootlegs

>is it still a great album full of memorable moments?
no, literally the only saving grace is "badge" which was put on the best of cream album that came out a few months later. its shit

that's too bad. if they collected all that stuff i'd pay for it.
that's the popular opinion regarding it, yes. i know it's not their best work, but the live tracks are killer and what a bringdown is one of my favorite baker tracks. i will never understand the hate for it.

Attached: cream2.jpg (1280x852, 459K)

They and their british faggot compadres tried to copy Chuck Berry and failed.

more like tried to copy muddy waters. chuck berry was pop blues.

Beatles were pop rock. Your point. Many riffs from Berry's work was bitten.

And Berry bit other people's work. Such is life.
youtube.com/watch?v=YEqiWTb-UWA

john wesley harding came out in 1967, in 1968 the beatles released the white album with big production values, next thing you know the beatles are going back to their roots with the stripped down let it be

You seem to be unaware of the difference that CB was a pioneer and basically defined the rock n roll genre, whereas the Beatles were just a flaccid, european rendition of american Soul.

>Such is life

Yeah dont lecture me kid

Sure but The Beatles debuted on Ed Sullivan show in 1963. The next thing you know Bob Dylan wanted a band too and released Bringing it All back Home in 1965

>whereas the Beatles were just a flaccid, european rendition of american Soul.
Oh what American artists played skiffle?

Chuck Berry didn't define rock and roll. Bill Haley predates him by a year, and even Haley didn't define rock and roll. The Beatles were extremely influential, and so was Berry. Making it a competition is retarded.

>Oh what American artists played skiffle?
The origins of skiffle are obscure but are generally thought to lie in African-American musical culture in the early 20th century. Skiffle is often said to have developed from New Orleans jazz, but this claim has been disputed.[1] Improvised jug bands playing blues and jazz were common across the American South in the early decades of the 20th century.[2] They used instruments such as the washboard, jugs, washtub bass, cigar-box fiddle, musical saw and comb-and-paper kazoos, as well as more conventional instruments, such as acoustic guitar and banjo.[3]

The origin of the English word skiffle is unknown. However, in the dialect of the west of England to make a skiffle meaning to make a mess of any business is attested from 1873.[4] In early 20th century America the term skiffle was one of many slang phrases for a rent party, a social event with a small charge designed to pay rent on a house.[5] It was first recorded in Chicago in the 1920s and may have been brought there as part of the African-American migration to northern industrial cities.[1]

The first use of the term on record was in 1925 in the name of Jimmy O'Bryant and his Chicago Skifflers. Most often it was used to describe country blues music records, which included the compositions "Hometown Skiffle" (1929) and "Skiffle Blues" (1946) by Dan Burley & his Skiffle Boys.[6] It was used by Ma Rainey (1886–1939) to describe her repertoire to rural audiences.[1] The term skiffle disappeared from American music in the 1940s.

Keep going...