Quote:
Originally Posted by Urban Hatemonger
As I was born a good few years after Jeff Buckley was i'd rather not consider myself as being a part of his dad's generation. Besides I don't think somethings age should count against it. I prefer his fathers music because he seemed more aware of music in general & experimented more often ,plus I think he was a better songwriter.
Is it fair to compare his body of work with his sons one and only finished album? Probably not ,but that's all there is to go by. He may have ended up a better songwriter , his music may have got more experimental , he could have done plenty of things , but he didn't. And that is my biggest problem with people who love this album. People want to heighten up all the positives of it & think what could have been and it's treated as a 'what could have been' rather than what it is. And what it is to me is an album that shows some promise but relies far too much on other peoples songs.
|
I disagree strongly and besides Grace only has 3 covers, I don't see why anyone should be discredited becaused they covered other peoples songs, Elvis sure as hell ain't discredited for that. I prefer Buckleys cover of Hallelujah over Cohens original by a great deal.
I don't think people praise Grace simply because of "what could have been", IMO it wasn't an album that promised that Buckley would one day make a great album, it WAS a great album, and sometimes one great album is all you need. At least in my opinion.
His voice is godly and he was a pretty great melodicist too.