Ultimate music poll: Jim Morrison vs Bob Dylan

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: preslove

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
I think Dylan would probably make a better poet, but as far as a musician goes, Dylan sucked. His songs just weren't very good. You could give me the best piece of poetry of all time and I can make a song out of it, but that song will suck since I'm not a musician. On the other hand, you can make a great piece of music even if it had no words at all.

Dylan is probably the most covered musician of that era. Musicians love his songs.

I should have stated myself more clearly.I know a lot of musicians like Dylan, I'm just saying that he wasn't a good singer/performer. I like the songs of his that others have covered, but the actual Dylan-performed song just doesn't sound good to me, mostly because of his horrible voice.

That's true about his voice, but that's part of what makes him so great at the same time. He certainly would not win American Idol, but the very fact that he has the gonads to sing in public makes him great.

 

[LS20]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
His songs just weren't very good.

Songs, and music, in general, goes farrr beyond catchy, sweet-voiced singing. What you are looking for and defining, I believe, is POP. There are a lot of great voices out there singing cookie-cutter studio-written songs. Those people might be decent performers, but definately not great musicians. Dylan's songs evoke imagery, make people think, and influenced generations.

I'm sure you've heard of the story of Dylan at the Newport Folk Festival in 1965. Morrison never made an impact of such magnitude.

If you want something just aurally pleasing, listen to Blood on the Tracks. And, for what it's worth, I really do like his voice; it complements his music well (before he lost his voice in the 90s, that is)

 

[Iron Woode]

Wow.

I had no idea this thread would be so divisive.