Quote:
Originally Posted by doodyhead
I am personally a fan of Michael, who left just a cupfull of good stuff and so much unfilled expectations.
It is incredible the amount of output of superior music considering the circumstances
doodyhead
|
I was typing this on a sticky keyboard before leaving for work
The last sentence was in reference to Peter Green
Michael left a fraction of great stuff amidst less than worthyoutput.
Peter's output was substantial and prolific besdes being of superior quality
I do not think Peter ever played with Micael and my suposition was Michael was intimidated by Peters talent. This exhibited itself with Michaels encouner with a host of fine blues and rock players.
Oh Well
Clapton on the other hand (the slow one) also does not have the quality output that peter has despite the extensive catalog. I dare anyone to put a retrospective without resorting to his pop tunes. Once you leave the 60's he is overshadowed by so many others . I too feel that until he did his blues album after the death of his son he had a lot of unmemorable releases.
Yet he is recognizable and a part of the fabric of our listening. I am still influenced by him and would not have learned the pentatonic scale without his riffing sojourns in the Cream era.
I like him more now as an approachable person. Much better than the bitter arogant one. He really likes racing bicycles.
doodyhead