View Single Post
  #1  
Old 09-18-2022, 11:00 AM
Guest 33123
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Jimi Hendrix and his posthumous legacy

Hi guys,

I'll preface this as coming from a place of true love and admiration for Jimi Hendrix and the original Experience. I came to "discover" Hendrix in my late teens, falling in love with the four albums released in his lifetime and early posthumous releases like Cry of Love. I read what I could (the McDermott book was a favorite) and bought up almost everything I could afford on a student's budget, though suffering through some egregious Alan Douglas releases. In the end I came away with a real appreciation for what Hendrix accomplished in such a short time. I honestly feel that, while some may have displayed more technical mastery, Jimi has never been truly equaled.

I will also say that I am happy that the Hendrix family gained control of his work. I feel that the right people are in control of Jimi's legacy, especially with the involvement of Eddie Kramer. I do understand that they are trying their best to preserve what they can and share the best of what they have access to with the public.

But while some releases are quite stunning (Miami Pop Festival, BBC, Monterey, a lot of Winterland) and some releases have strong moments (Berkeley, Atlanta, Maui), some of the material released since his death has been, quite frankly, so woefully underbaked that I feel slightly embarrassed listening to it. Isle of Wight is particularly bad and Both Sides of the Sky is completely awful (do we really need two Stephen Stills tunes on a Hendrix release?).

Which brings me to my point: What are some of the factors impacting the quality of these releases, especially his post-Ladyland work? I feel there are three major things:

1. Underdeveloped material: I do not feel that many of the post-Ladyland tunes were ever fully developed. Some are 100% there like Ezy Ryder, Drifting, Freedom. But often Hendrix was barely singing, borderline mumbling through these new tracks, such as Hey Baby in its multiple forms. The guitar work and most of the riffs are strong but a lot of the melodies are weak and the lyrics non-existent. Compared to the tunes on a release like Bold As Love, these tunes are simply not fleshed out nor ready for prime time.

2. Billy Cox was no Noel Redding: I get it, Noel Redding was very difficult according to some accounts. And yeah of course Jimi wanted to play with his old friend Billy. But Cox was just not of the same caliber as Redding. Cox was positively boring in comparison. It did work well on Band of Gypsys but comparing Noel’s driving bass lines and how they propelled the original Experience forward to Cox’s lines is particularly telling. I feel Cox dragged the trio down.

3. The Decline of Mitch Mitchell’s playing: After the release of Ladyland I feel that the quality of Mitchell’s drumming severely declined and is very evident in recordings of the time. Some have hinted at substance abuse but I think the blame falls mostly at Jimi’s feet. After playing with Buddy Miles, Hendrix was looking for a heavier drumming style in the group and this was the wrong thing to ask of Mitch. IMO Mitch’s swinging, beautifully busy, jazz influenced style was only secondary to Hendrix’s playing on those original sides. Mitchell is truly a genius on Bold and elsewhere. Asking him to abandon this for a plodding style influenced by pounders like Baker and Bonham was a critical error and the music suffered for it.

You’ve read my opinions (such as they are) so what are yours?

Last edited by Guest 33123; 09-18-2022 at 11:25 AM.