Re: Poll


"RichL" <rpleavitt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:j1yej.1135$Ug5.809@xxxxxxxxxxx
"OscartheGrouch" <tondaleo@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:Tbuej.1949$Xe5.783@xxxxxxxxxxx
Mike Rieves wrote:
"js" <nothing AT nothing DOT com> wrote in message
news:4778756f$0$4987$4c368faf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Spinal Tap was around a long time too. And that proves what, exactly?

Spinal Tap wasn't a real band, but they still play concerts
occasionally. I
really don't think longevity has much to do with whether a group is a
great
power trio or not. Cream was great because they basically invented and
defined the power Trio. Rush is great because they took the power trio
where
it had never been before, and made it sound like there were more than
three
musicians playing. Grand Funk, when they were a trio, were great
because
they took it further out than Cream did, and because they put on one
helluva
show live. There were other great power trios too, either because they
expanded the territory, or because they took it somewhere else, and
occasionally because of the talent of the musicians involved, and how
well
they worked together.



Let's not fail to mention The Jimi Hendrix Experience while we're at it.

They were mentioned in the original post, in the context of the OP trying
to
steer the discussion *away* from trios in which one member dominated.


I really don't think it matters whether one member is dominant, the overall
sound is what we have to use to make a judgement as to whether the group is
great. In any power trio, how the musicians work together and interact is at
least as important as how good they are individually.


.