And Clapton Didn't Even Know

Martykl---Johnny Kidd! He did a pretty good version of "Shakin' All Over", the inspiration for the Who's Live At Leeds recording. But if you haven't heard Link Wray, you'll want to. Whereas Johnny had the clean, non-overdriven tube amp guitar sound, Link was already into distortion in the late 50's (it is said he ripped holes in his speaker cones to achieve his tone), and was an inspiration to not only Johnny, but Jimmy Page, Jeff Beck, and lots of other British guitarists (though Jeff--- the best of his generation?---has lots of non-R & R influences (Merle Travis and Les Paul the two biggest). Of course the original Rock & Roll Trio was Scotty, Bill, and D.J. Ya'll better know who they were! There was also a great band who actually called themselves The Rock 'n' Roll Trio (later The Johnny Burnette Trio), with the great Paul Burlinson on guitar. Their smokin' version of "Train Kept A Rollin'" (an old Blues) just screams, making Aerosmith and even The Yardbirds sound like a buncha pussies.

Perhaps the Linn LP12 analogy wasn't clear enough. A casual examination of the LP12 versus the AR and Thorens' could lead one to say "What's so different about the Linn? It's just a suspended sub-chassis belt-drive table---so are the AR and Thorens". But what Linn did was revolutionary, not just evolutionary. Linn said: 1- A turntable is a mechanical device, not an electronic one. It's all about the mechanical design and the precision machining, 2- The turntable is the most important part of the system. The information on an LP that is lost by the turntable can not be gotten back. 3- System hierarchy: Each subsequent link in the chain is less responsible for the quality of a system that that preceding it. This was absolutely revolutionary in Hi-Fi in 1973, when loudspeakers were generally considered the by far most important component in a system.

The Band were equally revolutionary. But this horse is quite dead. Either you hear it (like George, Eric, and the best musicians, singers and songwriters I know and don't know---Los Lobos, Richard Thompson, Van Morrison, Nick Lowe, John Hiatt, Buddy Miller, Emmylou Harris, Neil Young, the list goes on forever) or you don't.

Map,

I merely pointed out that Buddy & co are often cited as the original power trio, not that I'd choose them. In the context of the time, I get the argument. Given the music of their day, The Crickets were probably a lot closer to a power trio than they seem today.

I went with Johnny Kidd because, even tho there's still a fair bit of twang in the music, his trio sometimes ventured into the distorted territory that bdp (correctly IMO) identifies as characteristic of the power trio. I also agree that Link Wray was an early adopter of the power chord. That's a key part of the musical approach that effectively defines the hard rock/power trio to many listeners.

As to damaging the drivers in a cabinet, my understanding is that Dave Davies (The Kinks) usually gets credit for being the first to put knife to cone. If Link went there first, he deserves even more credit than I already accord him.

The problem of a "ringing third" with high powered amplification probably led to the power chord IMHO. This is a significant example of technological innovation driving musical innovation. (How much of Mozart's music vs Bach's is attributable to the shift from harpsichord to piano?). In my book, Link Wray gets historical kudos (tho admittedly not quite at Mozart's level) on that basis!

Depending on how you want to define a "power trio", your choice of the first example will change accordingly. Per my first post, I still don't think there's a definitive answer here.

Bdp24,
So, in summary, you feel sorry for anyone who does not agree with your opinion, which is actually presented as fact.
I disagree, but I support free speech.

Bdp

Re: The Band

Another way to state your observations (particularly Clapton's view) is that The Band's greatest admirers were often high profile rockers that had simply their lost interest in rock, preferring The Band's blend of roots styles.

It's not like Clapton looked exclusively at The Band either. Clapton indulged a similar instinct when he hooked up with Delaney and Bonnie Bramlett. You could even reasonably argue that The Band was simply one flavor of the moment for Clapton, tho it is true that he never really looked back to electric blues rock. To this day, Clapton plays little rock music in concert. However, he does not play a lot of Band style roots music, either. His shows now tend to be acoustic blues sets littered with a few hits to keep the audience satisfied.

In recent years, it's become quite clear that Clapton is looking more at guys like JJ Cale than he is at The Band. Is he more astute today, or was he more attuned back when he was more specifically enthralled with The Band?

As to musicianship, The Band was hardly the standard bearer for instrumental technique. (I do understand that that is a big part of your point.). That does beg the question of why you'd accord them such respect as musicians. They were fine players, but not remarkable. As to their fine ensemble playing, that's largely a matter of personal preference. Bands from Yes to Rush to Earth, Wind and Fire combined expert technique with fine with ensemble playing. I'm not at all sure that I'd put them at the head of the line.

To me, the more remarkable aspect of The Band was their ability to incorporate American roots music into expertly played pop music. I'd suspect that that was more of the attraction for their admirers. The Band's particular roots blend was self evidently appealing to many musicians that were looking for avenues of expression that harkened back to acoustic blues, but IMO that doesn't make them singular. A terrific band, but not singular IMO.