Bruce at The Super Bowl....

He was good and a good original All-American/Joisey fit for the event.

>>LOL, and John Hammond was an idiot for discovering them both!<<

Irrelevant.

Bruce is just another rock and roll "super"star.

Dylan is the single most prolific songwriter in the history of rock. Bruce couldn't carry his guitar and/or harmonica.

It's an apples and oranges comparison.

Hope that helps you to understand better.

John Hammond discovered Bob Dylan like Columbus discovered America.From all reports his "Production" on the first LP consisted of reading the newspaper in the booth.Robert Zimmerman discovered Bob Dylan and made him what he is.As far as Columbus he was a pirate.People were living here when he discovered America.As for Bruce,could anyone possibly be more boring?

Audiofeil: How is Slothman's comment about John Hammond (who also worked with or discovered Benny Goodman, Count Basie, Billie Holliday, Aretha Franklin, Robert Johnson, etc) irrelevant when what you said was "it's ridiculous to mention Bruce in *any* sentence with Bob Dylan"? (my emphasis).

This whole thread is **opinion**; who we like and dislike, etc., including John Hammond's opinion (who happened to love Springsteen's music). Would you really think it fair if someone simply called one of your opinions irrelevant? I respect your right to disagree; but irrelevant?

"As far as Columbus he was a pirate"

Technically, that is a true statement.

"As for Bruce,could anyone possibly be more boring?"

Based on his record sales and long-time popularity, the answer is also yes.

I am ambivalent regarding Springsteen myself. I like him at times and he has some classic tunes but I am also often bored by him as well.

If I had to choose between foregoing either Dylan or Springsteen, I'm afraid it would be "Bye Bye Boss".