Originally posted by Scribble
I did that around my other arguments, famalam, it wasn't my entire argument, like you're doing now
i'm not arguing the point anymore since you cannot provide proof of your assertion that jimi's tracks were used. in fact at this point i would find a "you mad" exchange more entertaining than this silliness.
Originally posted by Bashar Teg
i'm not arguing the point anymore since you cannot provide proof of your assertion that jimi's tracks were used. in fact at this point i would find a "you mad" exchange more entertaining than this silliness.
stop ignoring me bro. I'm trying to learn from you. share your knowledge and elite fighting skills
Originally posted by Bashar TegYou can listen to the song and tell me that isn't Hey Joe, if you like. I really don't need proof for that. Anyone who's heard the song could be able to tell. Unless, of course, they're losing an argument and need a new reason to pretend to be right.
i'm not arguing the point anymore since you cannot provide proof of your assertion that jimi's tracks were used. in fact at this point i would find a "you mad" exchange more entertaining than this silliness.
Originally posted by Scribble
You can listen to the song and tell me that isn't Hey Joe, if you like. I really don't need proof for that. Anyone who's heard the song could be able to tell. Unless, of course, they're losing an argument and need a new reason to pretend to be right.
you can tell that it was jimi's track and not another guitarist copying him? wow you're like a wizard.
Originally posted by Bashar TegThe sample is literally chopped and skewed, showing it to be a sample, since a guitarist can't do that
you can tell that it was jimi's track and not another guitarist copying him? wow you're like a wizard.
And yeah I am pretty good at recognising things like that – not because of the specific guitar player, but because it literally sounds the same as the original recorded song, except it stutters and repeats, because it's a sample