NorthC said:

When his album Together Through Life came out in 2009, Bob Dylan was interviewed by Bill Flanagan in the August issue of Mojo Magazine (#189). Here's a portion: Could you write a song about anybody? Well I bet I could yeah. How would you work Stevie Wonder into a song? When Stevie Wonder recorded Blowin In the Wind/ I was playin cards/ I was drinkin gin... Could you write a song like Stevie? I could write one like Superstition but I couldn't write one like Sir Duke.

Why is it that he can't write one like Sir Duke?

NorthC said:

I don't know, he didn't explain, the Stevie part of the interview ended there. But I guess Bob agrees with the posters here that there's things that Stevie did that he, Bob, couldn't do. And of course the reverse is also true. Both men respect each other, what more do we need? [Edited 1/18/17 13:05pm]

To post more on the topic, of course! If they won't argue we have to do it for them!

NorthC said:

Yeah... I can't picture Dylan going, "you can feel it all ohohohover!"

really? in the vein of Must Be Santa,Summer Days or Rainy Day Women?

RJOrion said:

so, because Graycap & I state emphatically that Dylan cant measure up to Stevie, musically, you feel "bullied"???... wow...you might want to stay off the internet if differing opinions cause you to feel "bullied"...seems pretty weak..how does one read a comment from a stranger, about music, and feel bullied????....lololol...

Nope! I'm not being bullied here; I'm too sharp to be bullied by anybody. I'm trying to prevent
bullying from occurring for others in this forum who have differing opinions. It's not "ridiculous" to
compare Bob Dylan to Stevie Wonder although I never made an effort to do so.

Like I said: you've no way to objectively show that Stevie Wonder is "better than" any other record-
ing artist, so I think you and Graycap could tone down your definitiveness regarding this issue.

heathilly said:

Dasein said:

Okay, but how does Stevie Wonder best Bob Dylan "musically, arrangments and all that, and
vocally"? Like I asked: what evaluative tool are you using to justify this opinion and how are
you using it?

214, often when people say things like "Stevie Wonder is better than Bob Dylan" what they really
mean is that they simply prefer listening to Stevie Wonder over Bob Dylan without ever making a
serious study to compositionally compare and contrast their work. Is this what you're saying, or,
did you actually do serious study where you compared and contrasted their compositions? If you
did, I wanna know what you know!

how does Stevie Wonder best Bob Dylan "musically, arrangments Im surprised this is even a question. Stevie is like the Mozart of the pop world when it comes to composition and arrangement of music. His music is so complex chordally and has such dimension and scope to it. It so lush it's like a tabestry of sound no one in the pop world comes close to him in this area and it's the strongest aspect of his songwriting is the music. Bob Dylan is like the antithesis of that he has better lyrics than Stevie for the most part his words have more dimension but musically it's standard blues rock or acoustic guitar music nothing spectacular. And of course when it comes to the ability to sing Stevie has one of the greatest voices ever a powerful tenor that still sounds masculine capable of expressing any emotion. Bob Dylan voice is like an acquired thing you get use to and maybe grow some attachment to how he sounds. [Edited 1/17/17 18:14pm]

None of this objectively "proves" that Stevie Wonder is better than Bob Dylan. But all of this
"proves" that you simply and subjectively prefer Stevie Wonder over Bob Dylan.

I used to be under the spell that Mozart was inherently a superior artist to, say, Stevie Wonder,
as the composition of Die Zauberflote is much more complex than Songs in the Key of Life. But
complexity does not necessarily or automatically mean "better than" a simple composition like
"Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star" when it comes to art. So if Wonder's compositions are "complex
chordally" and moreso than Dylan's "standard blues rock" it still doesn't mean the former's pieces
are therefore inherently better than the latter.

There is no objective tool used to measure the innate qualitative properties of art. Sorry! Some-
times, I simply prefer what is simple (BB King) over what is complex (Allan Holdsworth) without
some silly attempt to say "Holdsworth is a better guitar player than King because he's more com-
plex!"

I'm a musician and I don't know of any musician who views others this way. It is mostly un-
informed yet loud-mouthed opinionated fans who speak so definitively about art.

"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" seems appropriate here . . .

NorthC said:

Yeah... I can't picture Dylan going, "you can feel it all ohohohover!"

or imagine Bob Dylan trying to sing "Overjoyed" or "You & I", in that awful nasal mumbling spoken word delivery of his... c'mon man...

when someone gives their opinion on something, there is no burden of proof required... this is not a court case where someone has to show tangible proof to support an idea or support facts, or to provide an alibi...if i say Dylan isnt worthy to hand-wash Stevie Wonder's underwear, then thats all that matters ... if you differ, thats cool as well.... you keep asking people for "proof" of their opinion...you say you're sharp, but i cant tell by your line of questioning, and your demands for "proof"...

Dylan did a jazz song once: 'If Dogs Run Free' (1970)

.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZC-XgC1ZLo0

Shakira is much better than both of them, because i say so... there you got i said it at last.

Dasein said:

heathilly said:

Dasein said:

None of this objectively "proves" that Stevie Wonder is better than Bob Dylan. But all of this
"proves" that you simply and subjectively prefer Stevie Wonder over Bob Dylan.

I used to be under the spell that Mozart was inherently a superior artist to, say, Stevie Wonder,
as the composition of Die Zauberflote is much more complex than Songs in the Key of Life. But
complexity does not necessarily or automatically mean "better than" a simple composition like
"Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star" when it comes to art. So if Wonder's compositions are "complex
chordally" and moreso than Dylan's "standard blues rock" it still doesn't mean the former's pieces
are therefore inherently better than the latter.

There is no objective tool used to measure the innate qualitative properties of art. Sorry! Some-
times, I simply prefer what is simple (BB King) over what is complex (Allan Holdsworth) without
some silly attempt to say "Holdsworth is a better guitar player than King because he's more com-
plex!"

I'm a musician and I don't know of any musician who views others this way. It is mostly un-
informed yet loud-mouthed opinionated fans who speak so definitively about art.

"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" seems appropriate here . . .

I am saying Stevie wonder is better than bob Dylan at composition arrangement and singing. When I said Stevie wonder music is complex I meant to say it very intricate in its complexity. Yes I know know complexity doesn't equal superiority as the simplicity of a voice an one instrument can be superior to a whole orchestration of sound. But obviously this not the case when talking about Stevie's music compared to Dylan. In these three areas Stevie is just better by far it's just not that much to explain if you cant see that than I don't know what to tell you.

I'm with you

214 said:

heathilly said:

Dasein said: I am saying Stevie wonder is better than bob Dylan at composition arrangement and singing. When I said Stevie wonder music is complex I meant to say it very intricate in its complexity. Yes I know know complexity doesn't equal superiority as the simplicity of a voice an one instrument can be superior to a whole orchestration of sound. But obviously this not the case when talking about Stevie's music compared to Dylan. In these three areas Stevie is just better by far it's just not that much to explain if you cant see that than I don't know what to tell you.

I'm with you

heathilly said:

Dasein said:

None of this objectively "proves" that Stevie Wonder is better than Bob Dylan. But all of this
"proves" that you simply and subjectively prefer Stevie Wonder over Bob Dylan.

I used to be under the spell that Mozart was inherently a superior artist to, say, Stevie Wonder,
as the composition of Die Zauberflote is much more complex than Songs in the Key of Life. But
complexity does not necessarily or automatically mean "better than" a simple composition like
"Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star" when it comes to art. So if Wonder's compositions are "complex
chordally" and moreso than Dylan's "standard blues rock" it still doesn't mean the former's pieces
are therefore inherently better than the latter.

There is no objective tool used to measure the innate qualitative properties of art. Sorry! Some-
times, I simply prefer what is simple (BB King) over what is complex (Allan Holdsworth) without
some silly attempt to say "Holdsworth is a better guitar player than King because he's more com-
plex!"

I'm a musician and I don't know of any musician who views others this way. It is mostly un-
informed yet loud-mouthed opinionated fans who speak so definitively about art.

"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" seems appropriate here . . .

I am saying Stevie wonder is better than bob Dylan at composition arrangement and singing. When I said Stevie wonder music is complex I meant to say it very intricate in its complexity. Yes I know know complexity doesn't equal superiority as the simplicity of a voice an one instrument can be superior to a whole orchestration of sound. But obviously this not the case when talking about Stevie's music compared to Dylan. In these three areas Stevie is just better by far it's just not that much to explain if you cant see that than I don't know what to tell you.

When I tell you there's no objective tool available that will impartially render to us the inherent
qualitative properties of art, and you persist with your opinion without any reference to this
fact, I know precisely what kind of thinker I'm dealing with!

214 said:

heathilly said:

Dasein said: I am saying Stevie wonder is better than bob Dylan at composition arrangement and singing. When I said Stevie wonder music is complex I meant to say it very intricate in its complexity. Yes I know know complexity doesn't equal superiority as the simplicity of a voice an one instrument can be superior to a whole orchestration of sound. But obviously this not the case when talking about Stevie's music compared to Dylan. In these three areas Stevie is just better by far it's just not that much to explain if you cant see that than I don't know what to tell you.

I'm with you

You've admitted you've no musical knowledge, so of course you are!

Anyways, as a theist, another way I look at this is theologically: saying Stevie Wonder is
better than Bob Dylan is like telling God that one of God's creation is lacking in some form
or fashion comparatively; this is offensive, especially when God loves all of God's discrete
creations equally. If Bob Dylan was a just steward of his gifts, I don't think God reigns in
heaven thinking "Yeah, but Stevie Wonder is better." Bob Dylan is different than Stevie
Wonder and I feel no desire to judge their work as one being better than the other, but I
realize not everyone is as enlightened as I am!

I've said my piece, so peace!

Dasein said:

214 said:

I'm with you

You've admitted you've no musical knowledge, so of course you are!

Anyways, as a theist, another way I look at this is theologically: saying Stevie Wonder is
better than Bob Dylan is like telling God that one of God's creation is lacking in some form
or fashion comparatively; this is offensive, especially when God loves all of God's discrete
creations equally. If Bob Dylan was a just steward of his gifts, I don't think God reigns in
heaven thinking "Yeah, but Stevie Wonder is better." Bob Dylan is different than Stevie
Wonder and I feel no desire to judge their work as one being better than the other, but I
realize not everyone is as enlightened as I am!

I've said my piece, so peace!

Ahaha get off your high horse bitch.

214 said:

Dasein said:

You've admitted you've no musical knowledge, so of course you are!

Anyways, as a theist, another way I look at this is theologically: saying Stevie Wonder is
better than Bob Dylan is like telling God that one of God's creation is lacking in some form
or fashion comparatively; this is offensive, especially when God loves all of God's discrete
creations equally. If Bob Dylan was a just steward of his gifts, I don't think God reigns in
heaven thinking "Yeah, but Stevie Wonder is better." Bob Dylan is different than Stevie
Wonder and I feel no desire to judge their work as one being better than the other, but I
realize not everyone is as enlightened as I am!

I've said my piece, so peace!

Ahaha get off your high horse bitch.

Ironic that you are offended by comparisons and then you proceed to compare yourself favorably to other orgers. Surely you jest .

Perhaps I overlooked it in my previous scroll of the posts here, but I do believe Neil Young is someone who deserves a shout out here, especially for the era 1970 to 1979. The bookends are especially brillaint in that in 1970 he released my favorite After the Gold Rush as well as the CSNY classic Deja Vu. In 1979, he released the excellent Rust Never Sleeps and the enthralling Rust Live albums. In between, there were several good to great albums such as Harvest.

He became somewhat erratic after the 1970s but released great albums in every decade except perhaps the current one (I haven't heard the most recent ones, but they didn't garner his usual accolades). He is a true creative artist that is comparable to Joni Mitchell and arguably Bob Dylan (though I know Dylan made more of a cultural impact).

gandorb said:

214 said:

Ahaha get off your high horse bitch.

Ironic that you are offended by comparisons and then you proceed to compare yourself favorably to other orgers. Surely you jest .

why do these threads get personal ..rather than stick to the subject?

luvsexy4all said:

luvsexy4all said:

why do these threads get personal ..rather than stick to the subject?

Because most of these posters are weak and immature and don't know how to respectfully disagree. They are also all men so... there is that. Stevie Wonder is way more talented than Bob Dylan. Is this really a debate? The man was a child prodigy! He was a gifted and excelled in all areas of music. He was a gifted writer, singer, musician and performer (some might disagree but in his prime he was a charismatic performer) Bob Dylan was a great artist BUT he is not a good vocalist or performer. So how in the world could he be more talented than Stevie Wonder? Bob Dylan is legendary but Stevie Wonder made more iconic and timeless music and he is just overall more talented. They are both legends though although imo Stevie is more iconic.

[Edited 1/18/17 19:29pm]

214 said:

gandorb said:

Ironic that you are offended by comparisons and then you proceed to compare yourself favorably to other orgers. Surely you jest .

Nope, I was responding to the person who insulted you and all those perceived to be beneath him/her.

Lol.....this reminds me of this kid I knew from Brooklyn years ago who purchased a brand new Pontiac Fire Bird some years ago and kept arguig with anyone who would listen that it was better car than a Ferrari. Smh.......

RJOrion said:

when someone gives their opinion on something, there is no burden of proof required... this is not a court case where someone has to show tangible proof to support an idea or support facts, or to provide an alibi...if i say Dylan isnt worthy to hand-wash Stevie Wonder's underwear, then thats all that matters ... if you differ, thats cool as well.... you keep asking people for "proof" of their opinion...you say you're sharp, but i cant tell by your line of questioning, and your demands for "proof"...

Giving an opinion versus stating an opinion as a fact is different and if a person does not want to support their post or opinion what is the point in posting on a discussion board in the first place? If all you want to do is post your opinions and don't want anyone to respond to your posts, why not just blog? If a poster doesn't want another poster to disagree with their post or ask them to support their opinion, then they shouldn't be posting on a discussion board. If someone makes a statement as a fact that is downright false or vice versa, there is nothing wrong with anyone asking for information or facts to support the stance after all that is what you do on discussion boards. If you don't want anyone disagreeing with you, that is a immature attitude and you shouldn't be posting on a discussion board in which posters respond and give opinions, analyze, or question your post and DISCUSS.

[Edited 1/19/17 0:57am]

Graycap23 said:

Lol.....this reminds me of this kid I knew from Brooklyn years ago who purchased a brand new Pontiac Fire Bird some years ago and kept arguig with anyone who would listen that it was better car than a Ferrari. Smh.......

This is a HORRIBLE argument.




Just because Ferrari is known to make wonderful cars doesn't mean it's necessarily better than
any other car on the road; where the hell do you guys and gals go to school at? Does no one
in this forum know how to think critically? What's the test that makes one car "better" than the
other? The Ferrari is more expensive? Faster? Handles better? Bigger engine? Babe-magnet?
Eye-catching? Sure, a Ferrari has all of these things. But these qualities alone do not necessarily
mean that it's better car than my Nissan Versa which will get me from spot A to spot B just as
efficiently as my Nissan will, and do so with a better safety ranking. And this is not considering
the attached to my Nissan; there is no test for "sentimental value" either when it comes to objects
so the shitty Peavy guitar that was given to me by my grandmother is my favorite guitar even
though I've an expensive Gibson Firebird. Notice I used the word "favorite" not "better" here.

So, mutherfuck your Ferrari! The proof is in the pudding: if anybody who is able to, please tell us
why Stevie Wonder is "better than" Bob Dylan inherently, and I'll change my tune, pun intended.
Let me remind you that the qualities we attach to art is mostly subjective: that which makes us
like a song, dislike a song, or say "meh" about a song is not inherent to the song itself. We import
these qualities into the song based primarily upon preferences! Stevie Wonder's chromaticism
is not inherently superior to Dylan's straightforward approach to songwriting, for example. I just
happen to prefer chromaticism so I prefer Stevie Wonder. This doesn't mean Wonder is "better"
than Bob Dylan - you guys and gals are taking your preferences as an indication that something
is "better" but that's going waaaaaaaay too far.

I love debating this stuff . . . !