Was having a couple pops last weekend and somehow the conversation dovetailed into whether Bruce or Billy Joel was more famous or popular (I suppose those are two different criteria). Being from NJ, I thought the clear cut answer was Bruce and frankly didnt even think it was that close. However, all of the NYers present thought I was crazy.
So like all great debates in life, I look to BBI for the final resolution. And this isnt about who you happen to like better (personally I lean Bruce but am a big fan of both), but who is more famous.
This is perfect lol..
Bruce has 100 million (certified) and 120 claimed.
AC/DC wins. 112.4 million (certified), 200 claimed.
Bruce has far more Grammy Awards as well as an Oscar.
Both are in songwriters and RnR HOF.
Bruce has a more obsessive following.
Both are awesome.
Joel has sold 81.5 million albums and has had 23 grammy nominations.
Bruce has sold 64.5 million albums and has had 20 Grammy wins out of 49 nomination. Bruce also has an Oscar and two Golden Globes.
Bruce is 3rd overall in #1 albums behind the Beatles and Jay-Z. He is also 4th overall in #1 albums in the UK. Wikipedia doesn't have Joel's info but he's clearly behind in both.
Joel definitely has more hits, but I think Bruce is the bigger name worldwide.
So Billy Joel would have a wider audience to appeal to.
For example my mother like Billy Joel.
she never listened to Bruce Springsteen, he just wasn't played o her easy listening stations.
I will say this though Billy Joel played in Hawaii at my company "President's Club" event for a couple thousand people (maybe less). And it was incredible to see him in such a unique setting.
I can't see Bruce doing that, since I assumed it was purely financial why Joel did it), financially I think Bruce has done much better. Just my opinion on that though.
I think both guys are fine with doing intimate settings on occasion.
I'd give the slightest of slight edges to Bruce.
Neither makes my top ten list of pop/rock acts from the seventies.
pink floyd
Eric Clapton
Allman Bros
Jimi..(he died in 1970)
Dead
Jefferson Airplane/Hot Tuna
Stones
Led Zepp (meh)
oops...back to work
way more.
42 Bill Board Top 100 for Billy Joel, 3 #1s
(http://www.billboard.com/artist/284376/billy-joel/chart?f=379)
26 for Bruce, never a #1
(http://www.billboard.com/artist/298448/bruce-springsteen/chart)
According to Wiki, Joel has had 32 top 40 singles and 3 at #1 overall.
Bruce has had 18 top 40 singles and the highest he ever got was the #2 spot.
Bruce does more album rock and Joel does a lot more singles...
I disagree. Bruce sells out stadiums worldwide, Joel has to play MSG once a month to get sellouts, and has to perform with Elton John to sell out stadiums.
It's Bruce, and it's not close.
Joe Piscopo/Bruce Springsteen - ( New Window )
What about Sinatra? Was he more popular?
They aren't in the same category.
Bruce is different in that he does not look for commercial success. He certainly is capable of writing top 20 hits, but it is not his goal. Look at the hits he gave away! Billy is a bit more commercial in my opinion but please do not take that as underestimating his talent.
Billy has a net worth of 180M
Bruce has been more frugal? - not saying it makes him more famous or popular
(this is through 2014, at which time Bruce had another tour to probably add another $10M or so).
per therichest.com
Check out Bruce's concerts in Australia, New Zealand and South Africa in 2014 and his European gigs over the last three months. All or parts are on youtube. Bruce is extremely popular internationally. Not sure Billy has played internationally in recent years.
And he's been doing a ballpark tour this summer as well that has consistently sold out.
Billy has a net worth of 180M
Bruce has been more frugal? - not saying it makes him more famous or popular
(this is through 2014, at which time Bruce had another tour to probably add another $10M or so).
per therichest.com
Billy's been divorced more
What about Sinatra? Was he more popular?
They aren't in the same category.
They are both from the same region of the country and with careers that began in a similar time period of the early 70's. I can see why people from the NY metropolitan area would sometimes link them.
I don't think they are so much elsewhere in the country.
Billy has a net worth of 180M
Bruce has been more frugal? - not saying it makes him more famous or popular
(this is through 2014, at which time Bruce had another tour to probably add another $10M or so).
per therichest.com
Billy was bankrupted at least once, his ex-wife and brother in law were managing him/robbing him blind in the late 70s early 80s, cost him lots of $$.
Billy has a net worth of 180M
Bruce has been more frugal? - not saying it makes him more famous or popular
(this is through 2014, at which time Bruce had another tour to probably add another $10M or so).
per therichest.com
Even if we are to even believe net worth figures published from online sources which likley aren't truly accurate possibly it is nothing more than more money lost in divorces or different spending/investing habits.
Quote:
has a net worth of 300M
Billy has a net worth of 180M
Bruce has been more frugal? - not saying it makes him more famous or popular
(this is through 2014, at which time Bruce had another tour to probably add another $10M or so).
per therichest.com
Billy's been divorced more
And didn't Brinkley basically steal everything right from out under him???
Billy Joel: . He has received 23 Grammy nominations {not awards), is a member of the Songwriter Hall of Fame and the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, as well. 100 million record sales, so it's close.
Interestingly, they were born 4 months apart.
I give it to Bruce, by a fair amount. Joel probably could have done even more than his illustrious career if he stayed sober, longer.
Although he looks like he does
Guys selling million dollar horses - Bruce
(when he actually pays for them)
Quote:
In comment 13044597 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
has a net worth of 300M
Billy has a net worth of 180M
Bruce has been more frugal? - not saying it makes him more famous or popular
(this is through 2014, at which time Bruce had another tour to probably add another $10M or so).
per therichest.com
Billy's been divorced more
And didn't Brinkley basically steal everything right from out under him???
No that was just a divorce. His first wife and her brother are the ones who robbed him blind.
I feel as though more people know Born in the USA than uptown girl. Piano Man is probably the most popular out of either, but slots 2-7 I would probably give to Bruce (in todays terms).
Mike in Long Beach : 3:21 pm : link "
me too Mike. never understood his appeal and can barely make out what he is singing. some of the songs are well written albeit simplistic. Billy Joel is far more harmonically competent and just a better singer.
link - ( New Window )
Mike in Long Beach : 3:21 pm : link "
me too Mike. never understood his appeal and can barely make out what he is singing. some of the songs are well written albeit simplistic. Billy Joel is far more harmonically competent and just a better singer.
me three
I could be wrong about that which is why I started the thread.
I don't think there's much debate on who had more widespread appeal with more songs. Bruce had some rock anthems that will keep him legendary.
Joel has had more individual hits and more #1's - which sort of negates the point that Bruce has more appeal of his songs if one judges just on popularity.
Myself, I can listen to Billy sing for a very long time, but I get tired of his songs after a while. I think Bruce has some great songs, but honestly, I don't think he sings very well. At least for me, I dislike his voice.
I give Billy the overall win purely because with his looks, to bang Christie Brinkley you must have something great going on somewhere.
I don't think there's much debate on who had more widespread appeal with more songs. Bruce had some rock anthems that will keep him legendary.
Joel has had more individual hits and more #1's - which sort of negates the point that Bruce has more appeal of his songs if one judges just on popularity.
I'd say "Born in the USA" and a few others are up there.
I like both artists, but from a musical standpoint, they are pretty different. Bruce is a rocker who plays to the crowd. Joel is a songwriter who is an absolute genius in crafting songs.
Joel has taken on several different musical genres like the Doo Wop/ 50's scene with An Innocent Man, his 70's anthems about his life and NYC on The Stranger and 52nd Street, then the gritty progressive music on The Nylon Curtain. I always felt Joel had more range, but both are great musicians.
I could be wrong about that which is why I started the thread.
interesting that outside of Born to Run and Hungry, the seemingly best known Bruce songs to casual fans (Glory Days, Dancing in the Dark, Born in the USA) were all huge MTV hits at the time. Whereas Billy had a ton of pop hits that never even had a video. Not sure what that means, just an observation. I do think that among casual music fans, you're going to find people are more familiar with Billy's catalog. The love songs like Just the Way You Are and She's Got a Way are simply going to reach more people IMO. And there's certainly no shortage of monster pop hits (My Life, Still Rock and Roll, You May Be Right, Only the Good Die Young, Piano Man, We Didn't Start the Fire, Tell Her About it, Uptown Girl, etc.
Heck Philadelphia may have been Bruces most "popular" song commercially but I dont think many of his more hard core fans would list it in the top 15. Probably say the same thing about River of Dreams. I absolutely loved that song at the time (was 10), but really didnt hold up for me in the long term.
Another not relevant observation is that when Billy Joel had his sirius channel I found myself thinking that they were running out of stuff to play, possibly because I am not sure if they had the rights to his live concerts.
true, although I'd argue those songs have little to no cultural footprint 20 years later. Your average fan isn't going to be able to sing any of the words. But put your average fan at a Billy Joel concert and they can probably sing along with almost every song.
Still, I think the breakdown is that Billy Joel has a bigger fanbase and Bruce had/has a more fervent one.
If you're trying to be funny, it ain't working. But, stand in there, you got 2 more swings.
This is such a ridiculous statement...
Point Springsteen.
Quote:
and 50 years later I'm still waiting to hear a Springsteen song I thought was worth listening to twice.
This is such a ridiculous statement...
Not that ridiculous
Quote:
In comment 13044807 Vinny from Danbury said:
Quote:
and 50 years later I'm still waiting to hear a Springsteen song I thought was worth listening to twice.
This is such a ridiculous statement...
Not that ridiculous
Yes it is. I get people not being a huge fan, but seriously? But there isn't an objective person out there who can't at least acknowledge Born to Run and The River as terrific albums (not songs, but ALBUMS)...
For the most part...I find Bruce overly bombastic and Anthem type music...
' Turnstiles' is a great album...Top 15 Albums for my taste...
Early Bruce seems more my style...
And I didn't read the whole thread....
Or you hate Bruce because of his politics or his persona or because his fans can be utterly insufferable.
Billy Joel probably has a broader fanbase because he does cross genres, because a lot of his stuff has a pop sound and so climbed the charts when it came out, and because one does not feel like an outsider if one can't rattle off his favorite five shows. And he did manage to have a reasonably successful musical on Broadway and on the road, ten years after anything commercially successful.
Whether you like one or the other, both or neither, they each deserve their due.
gtt350 : 6:41 pm : link : reply
given the option to attend a Springsteen show or a Joel show on the same night Billy might be singing to the janitorial staff
Did you miss the part above where from 2014 to 2016 Joel sold out 74 consecutive shows, all in major arenas or stadiums? It's fine to not like him, but don't make shit up
Then this Spring/Summer, he did a tour of baseball stadiums and sold out every one.
not sure where the myth started that he doesn't draw well.
I think a Billy writes much better melodies.
Bruce as an entertainer is far and away better imho. He plays piano as well as harmonica does slow ballads as well as rocks but what is little known is how well he plays guitar. he would do a blues set that would blow your mind. . His guitar playing would freak some of you out if you heard him in a small club as i was very fotunate to witness in my youth. blues, rock the whole nine yards
Quote:
In comment 13044865 speedywheels said:
Quote:
In comment 13044807 Vinny from Danbury said:
Quote:
and 50 years later I'm still waiting to hear a Springsteen song I thought was worth listening to twice.
This is such a ridiculous statement...
Not that ridiculous
Yes it is. I get people not being a huge fan, but seriously? But there isn't an objective person out there who can't at least acknowledge Born to Run and The River as terrific albums (not songs, but ALBUMS)...
Not ridiculous at all. It's the truth. I'm 54, lived here in the Northeast all my life, I am a musician for almost 40 of those years, and there's not a single Springsteen song that I've ever felt was worth listening to twice. I've felt that way since I was in High School. His songs just grate on my nerves like few others can. I'll play'em at gigs as needed, but I'd never listen to one for pleasure. Other than maybe Santa Claus is Coming to Town around the holidays. Billy Joel, on the other hand, I can listen to anytime. He's a fantastic songwriter, with an amazing feel for melody. Hands down my choice between the two.
I think as far as popularity goes, it's close, which in itself is a testament to Bruce since he has less fluff and air time on more popular radio stations.
Bruce is a street poet, a modern day Bob Dylan, Joel is a self described entertainer, more apt to please the masses, sacrificing depth and creativity to sell records.
While Joel couldn't possibly match songs such as "Thunder Road", "Jungleland", and "Lost in the Flood" as quality songs in the history of rock n roll, I will admit that Billy Joel puts on a great live show. There's nothing quite like a Springsteen show, but Billy Joel is comparable as far as energy and entertainment value, Billy Joel can rock when he wants to.
Aside from sharing locality and energy exerted during live shows ( points to Billy for how many shows get must have done hung over) I don't see much of a comparison between the 2. I think a more appropriate comparison would be Billy Joel and Rod Stewart.
Not "get".
Try to get over your obsession with me and move on shorty.
I don't see much of a comparison between the 2. I think a more appropriate comparison would be Billy Joel and Rod Stewart.
you might have a point there if Rod Stewart wrote his songs or was an accomplished piano player (or any instrument). Other than that, great comparison! Although it's certainly true that both Rod and Billy blow Bruce out of the water vocally.
Thanks Dunedin81, I am proudly one of those "sanctimonious twits' who indeed say his music is the soundtrack of my life. I'm 62,Bruce is 67. I grew up listening to his music & have for over 40 years. As we have both gotten older, the type of music he has written has changed as he has gotten older, so,yes, many of us can relate to what he has to say as it is, in may ways, about our lives. I just retired from teaching after 37 years & I always said to my students (who strangely understood my "undying love" as a "sanctimonious twit") that I hope they are able to find an artist who they can grow older with, whose music they can relate to & can still be relevant to them throughout their lives. I hope you've been able to do the same. Music has been, and continues to be, an important part of my life. And, a large part of that has been the music of Bruce.Sincerely "Sanctimonious Twit"
Quote:
I don't see much of a comparison between the 2. I think a more appropriate comparison would be Billy Joel and Rod Stewart.
you might have a point there if Rod Stewart wrote his songs or was an accomplished piano player (or any instrument). Other than that, great comparison! Although it's certainly true that both Rod and Billy blow Bruce out of the water vocally.
Because Bruce is an accomplished piano player?
me too. I tried to be polite yesterday. He's a screaming cro magnon look alike who isn't in the same league as Billy vocally or as a musician.
What I always found incredible about Joel is his ability to play by ear on the piano. His ability to harmonize the melodies on the piano with that of other parts of the band. When you hear him explain the origin of how his songs were created, you see a talent there that not many other musicians have.
Both are American icons - both in different ways and for different reasons. Not really sure why one has to be knocked down a few pegs to prop the other guy up.
Quote:
In comment 13045084 Cruzin said:
Quote:
I don't see much of a comparison between the 2. I think a more appropriate comparison would be Billy Joel and Rod Stewart.
you might have a point there if Rod Stewart wrote his songs or was an accomplished piano player (or any instrument). Other than that, great comparison! Although it's certainly true that both Rod and Billy blow Bruce out of the water vocally.
Because Bruce is an accomplished piano player?
WTF? I'm saying comparing Billy to Rod is stupid because Rod doesn't write lyrics or play an instrument while Billy is a master at both.
And for those trying to downgrade Billy for writing "fluff" or whatever you want to call top 40 hits - coming up with songs that have catchy hooks and melodies is HARD. It might not be your cup of tea, but denying the songwriting gifts and craftsmanship it takes to write songs like that is foolish.
Quote:
In comment 13045104 Enzo said:
Quote:
In comment 13045084 Cruzin said:
Quote:
I don't see much of a comparison between the 2. I think a more appropriate comparison would be Billy Joel and Rod Stewart.
you might have a point there if Rod Stewart wrote his songs or was an accomplished piano player (or any instrument). Other than that, great comparison! Although it's certainly true that both Rod and Billy blow Bruce out of the water vocally.
Because Bruce is an accomplished piano player?
WTF? I'm saying comparing Billy to Rod is stupid because Rod doesn't write lyrics or play an instrument while Billy is a master at both.
And for those trying to downgrade Billy for writing "fluff" or whatever you want to call top 40 hits - coming up with songs that have catchy hooks and melodies is HARD. It might not be your cup of tea, but denying the songwriting gifts and craftsmanship it takes to write songs like that is foolish.
Hey I was being as kind as possible to Billy. The comparison to Rod Stewart would be more appropriate since both are fluff artists that rock occasionally. Stewart is a great live show also, then again, so is Neil Diamond.
Bruce is in a different league but if you like Billy Joel, that's fine, just keep your headphones on or your windows up.
The different genres of rock he's successfully taken shows that.
Not many people can have hits ranging from a piano solo to a doo wop sound to electronica to full rock band hits and Joel has all of those.
You had to be a big shot, didn't ya...
Quote:
In comment 13044865 speedywheels said:
Quote:
In comment 13044807 Vinny from Danbury said:
Quote:
and 50 years later I'm still waiting to hear a Springsteen song I thought was worth listening to twice.
This is such a ridiculous statement...
Not that ridiculous
Yes it is. I get people not being a huge fan, but seriously? But there isn't an objective person out there who can't at least acknowledge Born to Run and The River as terrific albums (not songs, but ALBUMS)...
You have it backwards. What would be ridiculous would be assert that an album is objectively terrific. That would be especially true for non-musicians because they wouldn't know what they are hearing from a musical standpoint. Their opinions are entirely subjective and based on feelings about the music. Musicians can analyze tunes in terms of the theory and communicate on that level, but even then, liking or not liking a piece of music is subjective.
Quote:
In comment 13045110 Cruzin said:
Quote:
In comment 13045104 Enzo said:
Quote:
In comment 13045084 Cruzin said:
Quote:
I don't see much of a comparison between the 2. I think a more appropriate comparison would be Billy Joel and Rod Stewart.
you might have a point there if Rod Stewart wrote his songs or was an accomplished piano player (or any instrument). Other than that, great comparison! Although it's certainly true that both Rod and Billy blow Bruce out of the water vocally.
Because Bruce is an accomplished piano player?
WTF? I'm saying comparing Billy to Rod is stupid because Rod doesn't write lyrics or play an instrument while Billy is a master at both.
And for those trying to downgrade Billy for writing "fluff" or whatever you want to call top 40 hits - coming up with songs that have catchy hooks and melodies is HARD. It might not be your cup of tea, but denying the songwriting gifts and craftsmanship it takes to write songs like that is foolish.
Hey I was being as kind as possible to Billy. The comparison to Rod Stewart would be more appropriate since both are fluff artists that rock occasionally. Stewart is a great live show also, then again, so is Neil Diamond.
Bruce is in a different league but if you like Billy Joel, that's fine, just keep your headphones on or your windows up.
If you can't see the difference between Billy Joel and Rod Stewart then you should really avoid talking music with other people. And BTW, Rod Stewart's early stuff as a solo artist and with the Faces is far from "fluff". But knowing that would require a basic understanding of popular music....
The different genres of rock he's successfully taken shows that.
Not many people can have hits ranging from a piano solo to a doo wop sound to electronica to full rock band hits and Joel has all of those.
Agreed. Springsteen is an awesomely talented artist but could he successfully pull of something like the Innocent Man album? Doubtful.
The different genres of rock he's successfully taken shows that.
Not many people can have hits ranging from a piano solo to a doo wop sound to electronica to full rock band hits and Joel has all of those.
And don't forget to add that he also composed and put out a classical music album. May not be for everyone but not many pop or rock musicians could pull that off in their wildest dreams.
I agree with you. I like them both and see no need to knock either of them.
I grew up my mother would play the Beatles, Billy Joel, John Denver, Elvis on the piano or guitar (she was an aspiring musician in her younger days) or just the cassette tapes or records.
So I know almost every Billy Joel song. When I hear Billy Joel it's nostalgic for me same with the Beatles and John Denver.
Bruce, I found myself by listening to WPLR on the radio as a 10 - 12 year old boy and as I grew up his music seemed more "about me" than any of the Billy Joel songs. So naturally as a teen and young adult who could start making choices I gravitated to Bruce and more hard rock/punk like the Clash, Led Zep, etc.
Any Bruce fan who didn't grow up that way or at least exposed to Billy Joel extensively far underestimate the range and volume of popular songs Joel has and he only really became the bubble gum pop "uptown girl" guy at the end.
Anyway, point is this, like other debates is not one people should be offended by.
I'm going to see Bruce Springsteen for the 2nd time on his River tour in September, and it will probably be the 100th time I've seen him and every one is ingrained in my mind and an event i'd not trade for almost anything.
I've seen Billy Joel a couple times too, once at Fenway, once in Hawaii I mentioned before and it was a great time both times and a hugely entertaining night.
Joel is probably both more famous and popular for the reasons I mentioned above. And there is nothing wrong with that.
Someone posted the top selling artists above and I think Joel was 3rd and Springsteen 4th and Jay-Z was 2nd. I've listened to some Jay-Z, but never considered him a better musician/artist than either Joel or Springsteen yet his net worth (some of it from non-music sources) dwarfs them combined and clearly he's sold more records. I don't find that offensive either.
Quote:
In comment 13045123 Enzo said:
Quote:
In comment 13045110 Cruzin said:
Quote:
In comment 13045104 Enzo said:
Quote:
In comment 13045084 Cruzin said:
Quote:
I don't see much of a comparison between the 2. I think a more appropriate comparison would be Billy Joel and Rod Stewart.
you might have a point there if Rod Stewart wrote his songs or was an accomplished piano player (or any instrument). Other than that, great comparison! Although it's certainly true that both Rod and Billy blow Bruce out of the water vocally.
Because Bruce is an accomplished piano player?
WTF? I'm saying comparing Billy to Rod is stupid because Rod doesn't write lyrics or play an instrument while Billy is a master at both.
And for those trying to downgrade Billy for writing "fluff" or whatever you want to call top 40 hits - coming up with songs that have catchy hooks and melodies is HARD. It might not be your cup of tea, but denying the songwriting gifts and craftsmanship it takes to write songs like that is foolish.
Hey I was being as kind as possible to Billy. The comparison to Rod Stewart would be more appropriate since both are fluff artists that rock occasionally. Stewart is a great live show also, then again, so is Neil Diamond.
Bruce is in a different league but if you like Billy Joel, that's fine, just keep your headphones on or your windows up.
If you can't see the difference between Billy Joel and Rod Stewart then you should really avoid talking music with other people. And BTW, Rod Stewart's early stuff as a solo artist and with the Faces is far from "fluff". But knowing that would require a basic understanding of popular music....
Someone with a basic understanding of popular music would have known that Rod Stewart wrote his own lyrics when he was with Faces and wouldn't have stated otherwise in his "non comparison" with Billy Joel.
Hey, I like Billy Joel, I like Rod Stewart, I've gotten laid to both, I said both rock occasionally and both have great live shows. What else do you want? I understand that some people don't like Springsteens style but there's no comparison to Billy Joel and Bruce Springsteen as rock artists.
I'll concede "fluff" may be detrimental, I'll use "pop" instead.
Take the Springsteen ticket and sell it for twice as much as the Joel ticket.
Time to throw on some "Uptown Girl" and go wash my car. Have a nice day...
I'd say Bruce is more famous, Billy is more popular, and Billy is more musically talented but Bruce created more.
I'd certainly rather hang out with Billy than Bruce, though.
[quote] Know a guy who's been to like 80 Bruce concerts. I just don't get it.
I'd say Bruce is more famous, Billy is more popular, and Billy is more musically talented but Bruce created more.
I'd certainly rather hang out with Billy than Bruce, though. [/quote
Csonka, Music is in the ears of the beholder & it's okay if you don't get it. I'm sure there's another artist that you get it with. And, by the way, I've attended 184 Bruce shows & am looking forward to the upcoming shows at MetLife & Philly!
I grew up on LI and was very into Joel as a teen, but am more into Bruce, now, though I know a relatively small fraction of his catalog, while I know almost all of Joel's material (so, Bruce seems "fresher", to me).
As an aside: I wonder how many people realize Manfred Mann's version of "Blinded by the Light" is a cover, and how much better the original (Bruce) version is...
That was the album that introduced me to BS. I was in jr high at the time and at my best friends house hanging out. His dad came home from hitting garage sales and gives is the album that he got cheap that he thought we might like. Never had heard of BS at that point. I loved the guy and went out and bought his his second album, The Wild, the Innocent & the E Street Shuffle, which was just out and is still probably my favorite of all time.
Because the Night by Patti Smith (and 10,000 maniacs)
This Little Girl by Gary US Bonds
Fire by the Pointer Sisters (Bruce wrote it for Elvis, but he died before he could record it, Bruce never released it until much later than the Pointer Sisters)
And Atlantic City by Bruce is covered by so many bands:
The Band (love this version) as well as Levon solo
Hank Williams
The Hold Steady
Gaslight Anthem
Eddie Vedder
and tons more
Johnny Cash covered I'm on Fire (and almost all of Nebraska)
David Bowie covered Growin Up and others
Rage against the Machine has an awesome version of The Ghost of Tom Joad
Southside Johnny and the Jukes made their career off Bruce's work (practically)
Point Springsteen.
What did I miss here?
Quote:
trolled Billy Joel.
Point Springsteen.
What did I miss here?
Spirit of Radio by Rush has a line in it that is allegedly mocking Billy Joel after he "stole" his first wife from one of his band members or something like that.
Can still be open-hearted
Not so coldly charted
It's really just a question of your honesty, yeah
Your honesty
if you listen to Geddy Lee sing it, he says "yeah your honesty" even in a mocking sarcastic tone.
I don't think the band ever admitted it, but it's been rumored that was what is was about for a long time.
Not sure of the origination, but I believe it.
Quote:
In comment 13044869 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
trolled Billy Joel.
Point Springsteen.
What did I miss here?
Spirit of Radio by Rush has a line in it that is allegedly mocking Billy Joel after he "stole" his first wife from one of his band members or something like that.
Quote:
...All this machinery making modern music
Can still be open-hearted
Not so coldly charted
It's really just a question of your honesty, yeah
Your honesty
if you listen to Geddy Lee sing it, he says "yeah your honesty" even in a mocking sarcastic tone.
I don't think the band ever admitted it, but it's been rumored that was what is was about for a long time.
Not sure of the origination, but I believe it.
huh, I never heard that before... timing makes sense as Honesty was released in 1978 and Spirit was written in 79
if you listen to Geddy Lee sing it, he says "yeah your honesty" even in a mocking sarcastic tone.
Doesn't Geddy Lee sing everything in a sarcastic, mocking tone, as if he's making fun of singing?
Quote:
if you listen to Geddy Lee sing it, he says "yeah your honesty" even in a mocking sarcastic tone.
Doesn't Geddy Lee sing everything in a sarcastic, mocking tone, as if he's making fun of singing?
Yes, but this is worse, listen to the song and if you never noticed it before you'll notice it now.
Your point is probably correct, but it shouldn't be. Springsteen has been writing and performing for a living, what, over 40 years now? Unless he possesses musical aptitude that's well below average he's probably an awesome guitarist who merely doesn't perform or write in a way that would showcase his abilities too often.
I don't know enough about his own tastes and preferences to claim I can hear them expressed in his guitar playing, but I'd bet that he's more than capable in most meaningful ways. Playing guitar well enough to pull off an evocative, rocking, soulful, technical, impressive, whatever-criteria-you-hold-highest solo isn't the mystical ability most people think it is.
Quote:
His guitar playing would freak some of you out if you heard him in a small club as i was very fotunate to witness in my youth. blues, rock the whole nine yards
Your point is probably correct, but it shouldn't be. Springsteen has been writing and performing for a living, what, over 40 years now? Unless he possesses musical aptitude that's well below average he's probably an awesome guitarist who merely doesn't perform or write in a way that would showcase his abilities too often.
I don't know enough about his own tastes and preferences to claim I can hear them expressed in his guitar playing, but I'd bet that he's more than capable in most meaningful ways. Playing guitar well enough to pull off an evocative, rocking, soulful, technical, impressive, whatever-criteria-you-hold-highest solo isn't the mystical ability most people think it is.
So lets say he's played 150 shows a year, each 2 hours. That's 300 hours of playing a year or about 7 hours per week.
You become a great guitarist by having talent and playing 7 hours per day, not 7 hours per week, no matter matter how many years you play.