mtbskisail wrote: 
Great title.

Sorry, I've tried, but... Some covers work, this just doesn't... The original was a volcanic eruption and this version's merely a mild, inoffensive fart...

Papernapkin wrote:

I have to agree, different twist on a classic.

Well, it's not like Tom Petty covering the Byrds where absolutely nothing new was done, or like Joe Cocker covering anything where it makes me want to drive spikes in my ears... and parts of it are listen-able but...

Damn! He's NOT A VOODOO CHILD!!

I was enjoying this and ready to give it a 7 for coolness and the evocative female voice, then yer man butted in and spoiled it. As it doesn't sound anything like the Jimi classic, and only has the title in common with that, it's best to be judged on its own merits IMO. 6 from the Nottingham jury.

now what did Jimi do to deserve this?

kaosmonkey wrote:
Well said. Though it does require some balls indeed to even attempt to cover anything Jimi...

Beaker wrote:

Well put.
After all, no-one sounds quite like the man himself!

OKay. Gave it a second listen, and there are some redeeming parts. There are certainly worse covers (can you say sitar?). Bump. 3 4

Wouldn't expect it to go much higher though.

Nice jam. Love the harmonica. It's raw.

jimi would :puke: and on and on and :puke:

I find this likeable background music but have to agree the combo of instruments and vocals really doesn't work, since it's live I can forgive it for being an improv session but parts of it do reek-- not to be listened to too closely. I like that they tried it, I don't like so much that they released it, but I figure they didn't hurt any small animals while doing it so there's no great harm done.

bc wrote:

Sure, sure...but he seemed to go the opposite way. Taking soft songs and strapping balls to them. Look what he did to "All Along the Watchtower". He didn't add water and mix, he added fire and watched it burn.

I need some Jimi after this to wash my ears out.

It was sort of okay (5 territory - I was able to pretend there was no Jimi blasphemy) until the female background vocal came in and then I said WTF?? She sounded terrible, horrible, ick.

Skidded from a 5 down to a 2 based on the horrible backing vocals alone.

This is just the opposite of "the whole is better than the sum of its parts." This is "the whole is not as good as some of its parts."

This is good - nice and mellow. What is it with you lot?

kaosmonkey wrote:

I bet Jimi would have appreciated it.
He was all about experimentation and doing things that aren't radio ready.

Geez, all you Hendrix fans need to relax a wee bit!

Open your ears to another talent who has chosen their own means of honoring Jimi's great song.

Never quite comes together.

Someone performed a vasectomy on this track....

Voodoo Mild!

Gaylord_Meatface wrote:

Exactly what I was going to say.

ummm... what happened to the voodoo? It's a good thing Jimi's not around or he'd chop them down with the edge of his hand...

Oh look honey, cottage cheese is on sale. Is it on the list?

Mark Knopfler and Jimi Hendrix, together again!



Oh, hell, this is just fun!

I like Harry Manx but oooh, ick, not good

This version lacks all the intensity of the original.

No thanks.

did this thing go through LRC? if so then the LRC process sux.

god this sucks. "If this was playing in an elevator i was on, i would stop it and take the stairs." - my boss