h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I'm sorry but I really have to take issue with the statement that Clapton only produced a "smattering" of the blues in the seventies. I feel the article glossed over his biggest acheivement of the early seventies - Layla and Other Assorted Love Songs. This entire album is electric blues at its finest. Not only do you get Clapton but also him collaborating with the late Duane Allman. Talk about blues! I still prefer this to his more recent From the Cradle,which is a heavily traditional blues album with Clapton showing his influences. What makes the Derek and the Dominos album so powerful is the fact that he took all those influences and went somewhere blues artists had never gone before.

Well, it was such well disguised blues that it totally fooled me!

Not quite totally, but just because you play a guitar slowly, doesn't mean you're a blues man.

But what you say is perfectly valid, but after that then what? Slowhand? Not totally blues. 461 Ocean Boulevard? Same again.

Methinks you know more about this sort of thing then me (should have caught me while I was waiting for this to be approved, man!) So I'm well waiting to hear what you gotta say.

I definitey agree that playing slowly doesn't make you a bluesman, but playing the blues slowly can make the music very soulful.(God I wish I could format this text!)

We are hinting at fast blues?!
Yeah, the Dominoes album.
Damn, I was real excited then.

Well, I'm more of a metal fan so I wouldn't really get blues. Not 'get' as in not understand what all the songs are about, but 'not 'get'' as in what you've just been describing.

Am I talking rubbish now? A proze to you if you understand what I'm saying *^_^*.

Well Clapton doesn't do a lot of fast blues, hence the nickname "Slowhand". That's not to say he never plays fast or that the blues aren't played fast as well as slow. The first person who comes to mind when you're talking fast blues would be Jimi Hendrix. Now most of what he played wasn't specifically blues but was heavily blues influenced. Stevie Ray Vaughn would be a better example of "fast" blues playing or Gary Moore. But even these artists also played some amazing slow stuff as well.
If you really look at it, most rock music is heavily based on the blues. The major British guitar "heroes" of the early
'70's i.e. Jeff Beck, Jimmy Page, Clapton all cited American blues artists as major influences.

Oh yeah. It seems that most 'proper' music (not dance or that) is based on blues. I mean you can listen to a few HM songs and pick out pretty bluesy sounding stuff, like .

Metallica has pulled that off well in the past, Nothing Else Matterrs is kind of a bluesy progression. Personally for modern guitarists I really like Joe Satriani and Gary Hoey. They've both got that really hard,processed guitar crunch, but they play some incredible "blues/metal" type thing. (and they're amazingly fast)

You obviously know this sort of thing much better than me. I am way out of my depth.
In case you ever wonder my knowledge of HM goes as far as Iron Maiden (ask me -anything-) with dapplings of Slayer and a various NWOBHM bands if I can be bothered to do some research.

I had a friend in college who was a big Iron Maiden fan, all I remember is "Run to the Hills"...
and that mummy kind of guy on all of their covers. NWOBHM?

New Wave Of British Heavy Metal

God I love saying that!

I can play the intro of Run To The Hills on bass. I can also play Cream's Sunshine Of Your Love, and Black Knight by Deep Purple.
That's it really *^_^*.

The mummy guy is called Eddie, actually! He's a zombie, as well.

So how did you decide to write about Clapton if your real love is heavy metal? I'll bet there aren't many entries about that. I guess I always followed the rule, write about what you like, it will keep your own interest longer.

Oh, this article was the first thing I wrote on h2g2! The day I registered here was the same day I bought The Number Of The Beast...

My big love in music then was Clapton. Maiden became #1 about a month later, as I gradually spent more an more time playing that CD.

Thing is, I managed to learn an awful lot more about Eric and his bands in 14 months than I've managed to learn about metal. So, generally all my metal articles are shoddy, whereas I think my Clapton ones are pretty good (apart from the one on Derek & The Dominoes).

I think I need to scrap my Iron Maiden article and start again. I gave it a major re-editing a few weks ago and it's still kinda poor.

I would think Iron Maiden would be harder to write about. If I remember correctly they put out quite a few albums in a relatively short period of time(that is, the time they were really popular, in the mid-1980's). Add to that the fact that most metal bands then went through band members like underwear, somethings changing every day, and I think it would be hard to keep track of everything.
I guess that's one reason I've always preferred solo artists and some of the "traditional" rock bands, they just plod along, you know what to expect to a degree. Don't get me wrong, that came out sounding like I prefer predictability, I guess I prefer to know what I'm gettting for my money.

Iron Maiden have had 19 different band members. I'm wondering how long Bruce and Adrian (who re-joined last year) will last.

With Maiden, it's just getting the first five years sorted out. Striking the blanance between describing every line-up and going "they were founded then had loadsa different members fist album 1980 now I'll start properly".

Personally, I think it's pretty neat! That's the way the band evolves!

Me, well, you tend to hear enough about an album if it's a totally radical sound from what that artist/band normally does. The critics will totally pan it

That's very true, if it's different they won't like it. I think this comes from their(the critics) expecting one thing and when they don't get it they complain.
I have a problem with bands that have that many lineup changes. To me, it's not the same band if you've changed the lineup that many times. I work for a sound company and we do quite a few outdoor concerts every summer. Last year we did Three Dog Night and they still had 90 % of their original lineup from the 1970's. That's pretty amazing. Compare that to Steppenwolf, they are still constantly touring but without half of their original lineup. And then to top it off John Kay, the original lead singer is out touring as "John Kay and Steppenwolf" with a completely different band! I think the fans are the ones who are getting ripped off, they don't even know who they're seeing or not seeing when they go to a concert like that.

???!!!???!!!

That's ludicrous!
I've just been editing (not official editing) an article about a band called Samson. I had all the info from one website, and had to take out the important bits and (effectively) reword them.
Here's me wondering how much of the article was about lineup changes.
Honestly, if the band weren't touring Yugoslavia (strange location for a British band) then they were changing their lineup.
The noticeable thing about them was that they housed both Clive Burr and Thunderstick, who both went on to Iron Maiden...

What's ludicrous? The fact that bands do that? Welcome to American Marketing 101. Anything that can sell needs to be packaged in the most attractive form to maximize sales. In this case, use a name that people will recognize and sell as many tickets as possible.
Look at the fight that went on when Roger Waters left Pink Floyd. He and David Gilmore ended up going to court over who could use the name Pink Floyd.
Or take Clapton. Cream was formed for the sole purpose of selling records based on Clapton and Baker's reputations. When Clapton became quickly disillusioned with the whole idea, Jack Bruce and Ginger Baker wanted to get another guitar player and still market themselves as Cream. I'm not sure on the specifics, but I think that ended up in court too.

Ouch. Well, I keep finding more stuff about Cream, and recent findings have got a bit startling. Guess it shows how ignorant I've been.
Of course, Clapton's response is the only thing that doesn't surprise me. No wonder they didn't last long.

Well, here's me thinking that maybe this snippet of info should be included in the article. Or maybe it should stay here as a reward for people who bother to read this thread.

Yeah, save it for that. So far it'll be the great mystery since noone else has posted anything here. Plus as I said, I'm not sure of all the details, and I'd hate to get it wrong.
I found your favorite guitarists post too. You've gotten a pretty good response there.

Yeah, I was impressed by the response! What gets me is the lack of peoplw who've gone on to the threads for drummers and singers *^_^*.