Bruce at The Super Bowl....

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".

OK, now everyone has to choose. All card-carrying audiophiles must register one way or the other and will be monitored for listening out of registration.
I do agree with Audiofeil about apples and oranges. I think of Dylan as more of a poet/musician and Springsteen as a musician/songwriter.

Dylan is also a superior Kvetcher.

Being a superior Kvetcher is not necessarily a good thing.