Quote:
Originally Posted by blastingas10
Neil young really isn't that much better musically than Dylan. I saw them both live last year, I was blown away with how good Dylan was at the organ. Of course Neil blew me away as well but he hasn't really progressed as a musician as much as Dylan. Neil youngs acoustic music is every bit as much as simple as bob Dylans. I might even give the edge to bob. Songs like "I was young when I left home" demonstrate a great fingerpicking ability that Bob possessed. That level of fingerpicking combined with singing at the same time surpasses anything that Neil did on a level of difficulty. Another example of great Dylan picking is on the track "buckets of rain". It's Neil's electric playing that gives him the edge on Dylan. But from my experience as a guitarist, the fingerpicking of Dylan is still more difficult than Neil's electric soloing. But it's the tone and style that makes Neil's electric guitar playing great, not the level of difficulty.
They're pretty musically equal in my opinion, being that they both have something different to offer.
|
I'm sorry, but Bob Dylan hasn't done much anything interesting
music-wise since he started, and Neil's been trying things hardly attempted by rockers, folkies, or pop music in general at least since "Broken Arrow." His acoustics may not be as difficult or whatever but at least their more melodically interesting. I'd take "Needle and the Damage Done" over "Blowin in the Wind" or "Times they are blah blah" just for the melody alone. We can argue technicality or lyricism, but as far as the music is concerned, Neil (mostly) makes
music, not words with accompaniment. I appreciate this more, in fact, because that inseparability of music and lyrics makes it much more essential.
Threaded Mode