Dredge if it pleases you. If you think I said you said that, you must have misread something.
Yeesh. Okaaay ... I will. Geez, it's like pulling teeth here. Who exactly were you referencing in the following? If not me, then who you were arguing with? (It was my post you were answering, after all.)
You sound like a religious zealot who has just heard someone say their saviour is a faker.
No loss to me. You are missing the part where I said I like him, just don't think he is or was the greatest guitarist.
Your argument about Ernie Isley is laughable. Keep track of the discussion. I said I got the information from the sound guy. It could be wrong. You totally missed my point about the other guitarists. Yes, with the exception of SRV, they are not usually in his genre, but they are all very accomplished musicians. So was Jimi.
Now I am tired of repeating myself, so I will say one more time only. I am only arguing the statement he is "The worlds greatest guitar player." I don't think he was and I don't even know how you can quantify such a thing. They are all different. Let's throw Wes Montgomery into the mix and see how he stacks up.
Are you starting to get it now? Let's recap:
Hope that clears it up for you. If you opinions differ, that is okay.
- I like Hendrix
- He was an excellent guitarist
- He was in innovator, especially with effects and feeback. He taught us all that and we should be thankful
- He was a great showman and knew how to work a crowd
- It is sad he destroyed himself at such a young age
- He was not the world's best guitar player
- There is no such thing as the world's best guitarist
So you most certainly exaggerated what I was saying, engaged in a bit of hyperbole there. And yes, you implied that I was saying Hendrix was "the best in the world", when you said (among other things), and I quote, "I am only arguing the statement he is 'The worlds greatest guitar player.'" That "greatest guitar player" bit is not a statement I ever made, yet you're clearly attributing it to me (as well as comparing me to a religious zealot). If you're not attributing that statement to me, then who are you attributing it too, and who exactly are you arguing with, since that's not a position I ever advocated? Can you see where this would be a little irritating, when it's simply a misrepresentation of what I was saying? Religious zealot? Really? What part of anything I said has even a hint of that?
OK, I think maybe the tooth is pulled now ... ("No it isn't." Yes, it is." "No it isn't ... I came here for an argument"