The young Joe Bonamassa

[27sauce]

This is not about his music, and I am a fan BTW.

Every time I read something about him there is some mention/focus on how young he is.

WTF happened?!? When did 34 years old become "young"!?!?!

Perspective:

Gibbons was 34 when Eliminator was released
Clapton was 34 in 1979
Keith was 34 when Some Girls was recorded.
Page was 34 in '78.

Those guy were OLD at 34. 34 IS OLD!

F'n boomers.

 

[mj07]

I agree, especially since he came on the scene such a while ago.

 

[Eskimo_Joe]

The difference is that those guys were mainstream rockers. Joe is a non-mainstream blues player (my opinion).

34 is young for the blues.

 

[tapeworm]

He is young compared to the rest of the music industry in his genre in his age range. In the 25-35 range, there aren't many guys doing it at the level Joe B. is. In the "Blues" genre there are even less "young" guys doing it at the level he is. By bluesman standards he is still a kid. And if you think about it, at the age of 35, Joe has put more mileage on a guitar and touring than most 60 yrs olds have and 4 times the mileage that other 35 yr olds have. He got an early start so he isn't a newcomer, but still very young to have accomplished as much in the industry as he as, especially for a "blues" or "blues rock" guy. Much different music industry these days than when those mentioned were 35 also.

 

[Cado]

Jimi made Electric Ladyland when he was 25.

 

[27sauce]

He is young compared to the rest of the music industry in his genre in his age range. In the 25-35 range, there aren't many guys doing it at the level Joe B. is. In the "Blues" genre there are even less "young" guys doing it at the level he is. By bluesman standards he is still a kid. And if you think about it, at the age of 35, Joe has put more mileage on a guitar and touring than most 60 yrs olds have and 4 times the mileage that other 35 yr olds have. He got an early start so he isn't a newcomer, but still very young to have accomplished as much in the industry as he as, especially for a "blues" or "blues rock" guy.

Did you read my examples, and what had they accomplished by 35 as blues rock guys!?

 

[tapeworm]

Did you read my examples, and what had they accomplished by 35 as blues rock guys!?

I did. 35 THE was OLD, now it is very young. At the basis of it, 35 is a youngin by todays standards. Times have changed.

 

[tapeworm]

Funny this video was posted yesterday. Norm seems to think Joe is still a kid.

 

[V-Type]

This is not about his music, and I am a fan BTW.

Every time I read something about him there is some mention/focus on how young he is.

WTF happened?!? When did 34 years old become "young"!?!?!

Perspective:

Gibbons was 34 when Eliminator was released
Clapton was 34 in 1979
Keith was 34 when Some Girls was recorded.
Page was 34 in '78.

Those guy were OLD at 34. 34 IS OLD!

F'n boomers.

Yep I agree 2000-2001 he was young and looked it but today 34 isnt that young.

 

[Eskimo_Joe]

It's a bit of an unfair comparison because the genre was invented by the guys like Clapton, Hendrix, Page, whereas Joe is 1-2 generations behind. Different times and circumstances.

 

[tnvol]

lol Of all the things Joe B could be criticized for, I never thought his age would be one of them. lol

 

[CowTipton]

He's younger than I am.

 

[27sauce]

lol Of all the things Joe B could be criticized for, I never thought his age would be one of them. lol

It's not him I'm talking about. No criticism to him at all, he's not the one calling himself young.

 

[monstermike]

He first made his name before he was a teenager, so "young" is a descriptor that will follow him around at least through his forties.

 

[V-Type]

Yeah dont get wrong either.
Joe is one of my top non air waves performers that I constantly find playing in my cd/mp3 players.
His touch ,tone and yeah voice is Great Top Shelf musician based entertainment.
Just I guess 34 isnt really young but then Again he's 6 from 40 and I was by no means knocking what and how Joe B. has built for himself and with mind blowing musical talent and tones.
Great Younger player sure I guess if your 40'on up but How about just Great New/ Player.
Anyways Joe is a Smokin Player and Performer and I submit any 40 minutes of him on Youtube for pure guitar Playing Pleasure.

 

[frennis]

This is not about his music, and I am a fan BTW.

Every time I read something about him there is some mention/focus on how young he is.

WTF happened?!? When did 34 years old become "young"!?!?!

Perspective:

Gibbons was 34 when Eliminator was released
Clapton was 34 in 1979
Keith was 34 when Some Girls was recorded.
Page was 34 in '78.

Those guy were OLD at 34. 34 IS OLD!

F'n boomers.

I think he's mostly talked about as young for someone who has been a professional musician for over 20 years. 34 is young for someone who has been in the music business as long as he has.

Also,
He's younger than the majority of his fans, so that may have something to do with it...

 

[Crimson Queen]

He is not young anymore, but he was 16 when he recorded Bloodline and he was 19 and really great when I first saw him live. I met him at that time, and his father was touring with him to protect him from bad elements. He has been at this for a long time and started really young. The young label is sticking, that is all.

It is kind of like Angus who is still perceived as a school boy at 53. Also 34 is young when you have past it for some time. It is a matter of perspective.

 

[spamsponge]

He was somewhere around 12 when Danny Gatton had him come up and play with his band. Joe was pretty damn good for his age.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ln3N3tvPRvk

 

[mvd18969]

I've posted this before, but here is Joe at 21 yrs old on a friend of mine's local cable access TV show:

 

[jsa61]

It's all relative. To someone who is 25, 34 is not young. To someone who is 50, it is young.