wut?

Not impressed with a lot of his wankery, actually. Sure, he could feel his way through a lot of what he did, but technically there's way better imo. There's never been a moment in my life where I've said to myself: "You know... I think I'll listen to some Hendrix today". If I hear a Hendrix tune come on the radio, I change the station. I just don't care for his music, but I do recognize his abilities on the guitar, hence the 4.

That is a you problem. Hendrix is a 12 on that scale, at least. You'll come around.

phhht lol no I won't

I've done this dance way too many times already. Consider it like the TH and the OS argument except I've heard every JH tune there is in existence, and I just don't care for any of it.

So it's definitely a you problem.

Say what you will about the songwriting or style, but his playing is impeccable. No ifs ands or buts about it.

Is it? That's great.

Technical skill =/= good music

Beatles

I like Jimi but come on.

100%, but what's that got to do with Hendrix?

Beatles made much better music? And Hendrix, relative to any single Beatle, had much more technical skill.

Since you asked: they're obviously great but the Experience albums are impeccable outside of a couple of filler tracks. Hendrix's style just nails it, man. I'm the last person to make that argument that technical skill = quality, but I won't deny that skills used effectively can be amazing. The Beatles were technically brilliant songwriters, but technical ability =/= quality my dude.

Huh? I've never heard people ever talk about "technical songwriting". It's not a physical process (that can be performed live), it's a mental one.

Would you be so kind as to cite your favorite Jimi songs? I admit, my knowledge on him is quite stale, and my personal discography of his has deteriorated over the years, as I kind of stopped listening to him in my early 20s. The songs of his that I do still have are pretty unremarkable.

EDIT: 5000 posts @ 1.25 / day since 08-12-2008. Woo arbitrary number.