Bluesbreakers

This is a pretty run-of-the-mill blues album overall, and it probably wouldn't even be on this list if it wasn't for Eric Clapton's guitar. His work here is absolutely the saving grace of the entire record, completely injecting life into these standard blues covers with his fiery, aggressive tone and incredible speed. You can definitely hear the exact moment where he was transitioning into a true guitar hero, especially on tracks like "Hideaway" and "Steppin' Out" where his solos just completely steal the spotlight. However, John Mayall's vocals and the rest of the band's backing arrangements feel a bit too rigid and traditional to make the album truly stand out as a whole. While the musicianship is tight and professional, the songwriting and structures stick so closely to the standard Chicago blues blueprint that the deep cuts start to feel repetitive after a while.

Siinähän oli hyvin bluushahtavaa rokkia ja taiturimaista kitaralla kitarointia. Ei aivan omaa juttua mutta ihan okei tämä oli kuunnella.

Blyysiä blyysiä, kyllähän sieltä Eerikki Taputatonnin tunnistaa, hyvältähän se kuulostaa. Ei ehkä omaa suosikkigenreä edusta, mutta kitarataiturointia ihan mukava kuunnella siltikin.

Wasnt as wild about this one as the last Clapton one. Still some good blues here and a fun listen to go through once. 2.5 stars and rounding up

Some fun solos but it’s hard to make this much blues sound inventive.

It's fine I guess

Clapton steals the spotlight on this one, enjoyed it

Technically a masterpiece. Emotionally complicated. Much like Clapton himself. The guitar work is genuinely stunning, which is deeply inconvenient. Every time Clapton launches into a solo, you're forced to briefly forget that he exists as a human being outside of this recording, which is honestly the best thing he could do for everyone involved. John Mayall does his best to carry the moral weight of the album on his harmonica. John McVie holds down the bass with the quiet dignity of a man who just wants everyone to get along. Hughie Flint plays drums with the energy of someone who absolutely did not sign up for any of this legacy. Clapton, meanwhile, shreds like a man who hasn't yet discovered that he also has opinions. This is peak Clapton — fingers fully engaged, mouth mercifully silent. The last 58 years have sadly inverted that ratio. They used to write "Clapton is God" on the walls of London. God, at least, has the decency to stay mysterious and not give interviews. 3 out of 5. One star deducted for general reasons. One star deducted because somebody has to. The three remaining stars have been placed in a trust, to be managed exclusively by the rhythm section, who seem genuinely lovely and are not the problem here.

Quality blues

The music: Five stars. The man: Zero stars. Result: Three stars.

I never really understood why Clapton was so highly regarded but he is awesome on this one.

3.3 744 albums in and I can count on one hand the number of blues albums we have had. Except for Clapton, it sounds like a bunch of white dudes playing the blues. Vocals felt small compared to some of the greats, but I guess this was more palatable for the audience at the time

They might have been the ones to 'break' the blues to an audience that hadn't heard it and perhaps that sounded revolutionary at the time but I don't hear anything here that the blues artists that they largely cover weren't already doing. this just has better production. So this is fine, it's a decent slab of blues but I'm more likely to reach for Robert Johnson, Ray Charles or Memphis Slim than I am for this.

Rock

Aight

Decent background music while I worked.

By all accounts, this blues ain't bad. But not many of the tunes stood out to me as anything particularly remarkable. In fact, I was listening to the album on Spotify, and one song caught my ear as sounding the most inspired, so I went to check what it was - lo an behold, the album had ended and Spotify was playing other blues songs. Which is to say the blues I liked best on the album... isn't even on the album. There's also a certain irony that, for an album that is guitar-forward, my favourite parts were the keys and organ. To each their own. (The song Spotify queued up for me afterwards was mean Old World by T-Bone Walker, fwiw.) I reckon it's difficult for a blues album from 1966 to stand the test of time, since new music has undoubtedly taken inspiration from it and built on it. So is it the album's fault if it sounds a little dated? No, probably not. But even at that, there is other blues music from the same era, and even older, that does resonate with me more. I'm surely missing some historical/cultural context. Maybe if I was discovering this album in 1966, I'd pick up on what's groundbreaking about it. But listening to it for the first time 60 years later, and being unable to remove myself from the context I'm discovering it in, I'm not blown away. All in all, the album was clearly made by talented musicians, I'll give it another couple listens at some point to see if it grows on me, but my first impression is that it's not my cup of tea.

I know it's reductive and dismissive to just say "boomer blues" and move on. I liked the drum solo on "What'd I Say" though.

As far as white blues goes, the score maxes out at four, and y'all lost a point for all that talk about "little girls". Its good, I guess, like ZZ Top with less beard. Just good. Not great.

Pretty good blues rock

Started with an open mind and tried to be objective listening to this. Its blues, I'm not a fan but it's not a bad album. It's definitely not a great one though. 3 all round here.

Hard to keep me hooked on full albums of 12-bar blues

Seemed to me less refined

It's British 1960s blues! It's fine! Not much more to say about this one!

Bit too old school bluesy for me but some of the instrumental bits were decent

quite noodly, but this worked ok for me

A fun and enjoyable album with Eric Clapton at his finest. Lacks having some of his highlights to make the album more of a standout. 8/10 [KEEP]

Legal

Back when Eric Clapton didn't have many songs to his name. I believe Clapton's guitar work is the highlight of "Blues Breakers". Everything else is average mid-60s stuff. The first half is competent, and "All Your Love" is the best on "Blues Breakers" If only I could say that about "Key to Love" onwards. 3 stars for "Blues Breakers".

Slow and edgy at the same time does well as background music Really loved little girl

El blues nunca ha sido mi onda, pero es indudable la calidad de este disco

An album made by a group of musically talented people, though I can't say I cared for every song. Generally, though, it's a solid blues album. A side note, I don't understand how someone can say they've appropriated the blues. I can only assume those are reviews by Americans. John Mayall listened to black American blues musicians as a kid and wanted to make his own music, because he liked the blues. That's all.

Meh, not horrible, not great either.

Never heard of John Mayall. That Clapton fellow seems familiar though... Yeah, kinda standard blues fare with Clapton on guitar, like on paper you can't really go wrong with that. But in practice it falls flat. Its got the technicality, but no real feeling behind it. Empty blues. I dont really have any love for Mayall's vocals either; he's very bland. But luckily he is much more proficient with his other instruments. Standouts are "Another Man" as a very good harmonica track, "Have You Heard" and "It Ain't Right" Can't give this one more than a 3. It's got some good moments and even though Clapton is an absolute chode, the man could play a guitar. It just feels a bit soulless and falls flat for me.

I liked this.

Enjoyable if standard blues rock

Decent vocals. Instrumentals could've been better. The guitar didn't really stand out, and the brass(?) instruments and harmonica didn't fit in.

What band wasn't Clapton in? Pretty good bluesy stuff here. Nothing stands out as particularly notable.

There's Eric Clapton again.

Rock-solid blues album, and one I wasn't as familiar with.

The most amazing guitar blues!

Ruined by Clapton using sledgehammer to put in a drawing pin.

It's good enough but i don't see anything that stands out. Just smooth blues rock like any other?

Not what I typically listen to but I can hear how influential it would go on to be and how influenced it was by Black Blues musicians. Really good.

questionable lyrics in Little Girl, but decent blues riffs Would I listen again: eh Deserves to be on this list: didn't feel groundbreaking but sure 3.4

3.0

This album feels really well made for the kind of album it is and I get the feeling that fans of the genre would love this. Its hard to find fault in the songs them selves other than I just don't like listening to this kind of music a lot so its hard to rate it high.

Cool guitars but quite same-y. Probs wont listen again

The guitar playing is indeed very good. The covers are very good. However, I'm not a huge fan on blues. This is between 3 and 4 for me. It can't even get close to 5 stars because most of the songs are covers and, to be honest, I don't see this as being as creative, distinctive, or disruptive as I would expect from 5-star albums. These are very good songs (but not originals), very well played. That's it.

Old wankers by now, 60 years later, all dead or way past it, but fucking minted. As for the Beano, pretentious wankers.

Just fun. Fun to hear something, someone trying. Always nice to hear Clapton go off. And not just him. You don't have to take it too seriously.

Solid blues rock. Clapton's lead guitar chops are on full display. Favorite track: Hideaway

Actually quite chill to listen to. Enjoyable.

All Your Love 3.7 Hideaway (instrumental) 3.5 Little Girl 3.6 Another Man 3.2 Double Crossing Time 3.4 What'd I Say 3.3 Key to Love 3.5 Parchman Farm 3.6 Have You Heard 3.7 Ramblin' on My Mind 3 Steppin' Out (instrumental) 3.4 It Ain't Right 3.2 Score: 3.425

guitars are pretty good but whenever anyone opens their mouth it's a bad ol time. keeps doing the same thing for the whole album, more or less.

Solid and not boring, but still, a lot of stuff like this on the list and I'm ready to start skipping it.

It’s perfectly competent blues, but to me it lacks soul and lived experience. I’m increasingly uncomfortable with white British musicians co-opting southern Black American blues. In the 60s, it was egregious - just straight covers and copying. A 3 for the excellent facsimile, but I can’t go higher than that.

Enjoyable

I think this is what people mean when they say "sounds about white" All jokes aside, they pick some good songs and the arrangements are decent. John McVie's bass work is good, Mayall's harp playing is stellar. Clapton's guitar work is serviceable, but not necessarily at "god" level, and certainly not soulful. I'm not convinced Clapton *has* a soul for that matter. Probably best off listening to the original artists recordings of these covers instead. 2.5 stars.

This was Cream before Cream. So if you’re looking for some blues and vintage Clapton, this is for you.

Clapton here shines with his virtuosic guitar work but everything else is just imitation blues of the time that would be done much better in the coming years.

It's workable, but no real magic.

I thought this album was okay

This was alright for white guys doing blues in the 60s but largely forgettable in the grand scheme of things. Not bad, but not sure it needs to be on the list either.

Сара 3 Марко 3

Ok but not great.

average

Solid blues album, I think I just get tired of Clapton, could just be a bias. Doenst feel different enough from original blues music but still pretty solid.

Pretty solid blues rock release. could see myself listening to it again. Claptons guitar playing here is as always really good. Songwriting wise its kind of just some typical blues lyrics. 7/10 Favourite: All Your Love Least Favourite: Little Girl

Bluesy with lots of guitar solos. The kind of thing that’s more enjoyable live. I could enjoy this a lot when in the mood. 3/5

It was an enjoyable album, but I don't really have much to say about it.

I have a soft spot for cultural appropriation in music

it's fine. it's got the mac half of fleetwood mac on it. none of the covers surpass the originals.

“Can blue men sing the whites? / Or are they hypocrites?” As sang Vivian Stanshall from The Bonzo Band once sang. Ive never liked Eric Clapton but I think this is alright.

blues aren't for me but I actually liked this one as background. chill and groovy

This one gets and extra bump due to the influence it had. But I wouldn't relisten to it again.

Blues rock. Blues. Ni fu ni fa. But seriously, this does nothing for me. It's perfectly fine, just, yeah.

meh

It's ok

Standard blues rock sounds and me no like Clapton

I liked Bluesbreakers okay but not as much as I wanted to. I would listen on the radio. Three stars

Good album. Not the greatest blues record, but it was Ok.

I liked the jazz vibes

Alt, nicht speziell.

I thought this might be some sort of corny blues rock but it turned out to be quite good! There are a lot of interesting things going on with the arrangements and there’s a nice mix of blues styles. The recording is also great. You can pretty much hear the fire in their playing! Another name to add to the list of musicians to further check out their discography.

It's good, but it's alot of the same.

Blues Breakers is a solid blues album that flows well. This sounds a bit like the Beatles, if they really leaned into the blues, which checks out for 1966. The cover of Ray Charles’ “What’d I Say” isn’t as fun (what could be?), but I enjoyed the transition of jazz/R&B to blues! Blues is not a fast genre, so it was an interesting rendition, especially with the drum solo.

6/10 Could be higher. But while I like the guitar and the rods, there is something missing. Maybe it's the songwriting, but lacks the heart that other bands bring to the blues

OK blues rock

This feels more like a history lesson than a recommendation to me. I get that a lot of talent came out of this band, and that this album helped springboard Eric Clapton, and that this was some of the first English Blues Rock, but it isn't a genre I really love, and in hindsight, I don't think this is a particularly special execution of it. But, I do think it's ultimately fine. Decent songs, and decent performances do go a long way, but it doesn't get this into the list of albums I really enjoy, or see myself going back to. It's fine.

Regardless of certain musicians personal views I was surprised by how much I enjoyed this. Part of it was probably the fact that it’s just a well tuned band playing other artists greatest hits

Aika tasapaksua blues rokkia. Levy on kyllä kokoajan tasaisen miellyttävää, muttei oikein mitenkään erikoista. Yksittäiset kappaleet ei sillein erottunut joukosta niin vaikea sanoa parhaita.

Pretty good! Bluesy!

First, the idea of a majority-covers blues album is sort of funny to me like the idea of being the world's most famous replica painter; half the songs have the same melody, did you just really need *those particular* lyrics about how you've got it bad That being said the variety is decent, even if the genre's repetitive nature creeps in just slightly by the end, and the sound itself of the album feels varied, compelling, and full, so overall enjoyable listen

Maybe it was cool at the time because England couldn’t access real blues music, but please do yourself a favour and listen to the real deal by musicians that inspired Mayall and Clapton instead. This one is a pale imitation. I’ll give one extra star for introducing blues music to 1960s England, and another for Eric Clapton’s guitar playing. But boy I hate their version of What’d I Say. Took all the soul out of the Ray Charles version and put in a cucumber sandwich instead.

I really don't know what to think about this. Clapton may be a terrible person, but he can certainly play the guitar well. That's the best part of this album. The vocals range from ok to damn that's bad. He's singing a Ray Charles song and actually trying to sound like Ray. Then there's the one where he's singing about the infamous Mississippi prison. These are white dudes from the UK. Really? It's about a 2-2.5, but I'll round up because Clapton can certainly play guitar.

I feel I should like this album more than I do. I love the blues, and several of the songs on the album, which is played very well. But I struggle with the production, the guitar tone, and the vocals. I even find some of the solos a bit too rushed. I can see why it would have made such an impact at the time, but for me these aren't the best versions of these songs.

I generally like blues, but this felt too sterile and unexciting for reasons that are difficult for me to pin point. An album that is mildly boring but never fully lost my attention gets a 3.

Was I expecting Eric Clapton to be good at the blues? No. Is he good at the blues? Yes. But I'm not sure it's enough to actually make this a standout album or earn it a 4-star or 5-star rating. It's a solid 3.5 stars, rounding down.

Nice Blues rock, but ultimately forgettable.

Good enough.

Two things worth noting here. One is the amount of Clapton hate on this site. And Fair enough. Although if we're here to rate personalities there's quite a few artists on here that wouldn't stand up to scrutiny. So I'm going to rate the album, while noting that Clapton is "personally problematic". The other is a comment Mick Jagger made once. "I mean what’s the point in listening to us doing ‘I’m A King Bee’ when you can listen to Slim Harpo doing it?" And that very much applies to this album. When you can put on Robert Johnson or Ray Charles, what's the point of this? The first point is the playing. Clapton is pretty much on fire throughout, producing solo after solo of blistering intensity. McVie is no slouch on Bass either. The drumming serves to make you appreciate other, better drummers. Mayall's voice is, well, adequate. (Although he's stretched beyond his limits in the Ray Charles cover) The second point is its importance as a gateway for so many to the Blues. Jagger's answer to the question he raised about "King Bee" was to say people might get switched on by the Stones and then go and find the original. Blues was pretty niche in 66 and if people heard this and then went to discover Chicago Blues for themselves, then well and good. So, this is fine, but go and listen to Mose Allison and Robert Johnson and Little Walter and see why, as good as it, this is second best. I'll give you a tip. Go and listen to Robert Johnson's two takes of Ramblin' On My Mind and hear why he's the REAL God.

Running music for my final morning in Antigua. Need to read on this one.

Highlights: Hideaway, Double Crossin' Time, Key to Love, Parchman Farm, It Ain't Right Kinda your classic blues rock record with a pronounced southern twist. Sounds a lot like the stuff Clapton would do later in his career, but a lot less interesting. This early version of that sound was standard - nothing special. Just Brits recycling American music. It's as if it's tailor made for a retro hipster radio show and nothing else. Not bad but passable.

Oh hell yeah! Blues by a bunch of white British guys!

Some people like to call blankets COVERS. I like to get under the COVERS at night & pretend that I'm taking COVER. Sometimes I get too cold & I have to put more COVERS on top my COVERS. My wife has to toss off her COVERS if she gets too hot. Apparently British bluesman like black COVERS. Even Ray Charles can see that is way too many COVERS. They play 'em well but can't they write more of their own. How many times is Clapton on here? And I happen to love well done COVERS. 3.5

Temp

feeling them blues = absolute shredding

British Santana cover band? Oh no, British blues cover band. I liked it fine, but didn't really connect with it.

I’ve noticed that anytime an album features Eric Clapton—whether as part of a band or on his own—I’m almost guaranteed to enjoy it, and that holds true here. This record feels like the moment that firmly established him as England’s premier blues guitarist. If that weren’t the case, it’s hard to imagine he would have exited so quickly to form Cream.

This was an ok blues album. I have no strong feelings one way or the other.

I should like the blues more than I do, I recognise when it’s done well like this it is impressive and claptons playing is excellent throughout but just feel slightly removed from it all. That said there’s a lot worse way of spending 45?minutes

C carre

Ils ont bien cassé le blues, c’était bien mais un peu trop musical

3 out of 5. Got some points for the guitar work, and while I appreciate the blues and its impact on music and rock history especially the genre doesn't hold me.

good!

Pure Blues Music at its best.

It’s great and way more interesting than I expected for a 60s blues album. Everyone is doing what they do really well and the inclusion of some occasional horns was a nice touch. A 60s blues album is just not something I can get too excited about.

Classic blues, but nothing too original.

Strong 3. This is a great album! I must say I wasn’t familiar with John Mayall and The Bluesbreakers before this. Eric Clapton is a fantastic addition to this project. I’m a sucker for a harmonica too. I love the British rock/blues fusion. It sounds really great and can see why it’s so beloved. I don’t connect to the lyrics, which is something I weigh pretty heavily most of the time. I really didn’t like “Little Girl” but enjoyed “All Your Love” and “Steppin’ Out.”

Blues'er der ud af og det er fint, men lidt... meh... i længden.

Det bliver rigtig godt når det bliver meget blues’et. Det gør det desværre for sjældent.

This is fine. It's not quite in my wheelhouse as I'm a little picky about 60's music. Meaning, I don't like most of it unless it's really bringing something new or interesting, or timeless. This doesn't seem to be any of these. I know people love Clapton, but he's never really grabbed me. Again, he's fine for what he does, but I never found it to be groundbreaking. I can think of 3 dozen guitar players I'd rather listen to. Of course, I'm biased by time. Maybe if I was a teenager then, I would have a higher estimation of him. This album loses me because of the production. Sounds like it was recorded in a bathroom or a cheap bar. (This would probably be a Great band to see live!) I don't love the singer's voice. Just seems like an average Joe. No real emotion or interesting phrasing. So it sounds like I'm bashing it, but it's not bad or annoying at all. I don't think anything made me want to skip ahead. But, nothing here made me double-back and go Wow! I guess it's fine to be on the list as it marks a time period in music and shows a young Clapton breaking out. But would I come back to play it intentionally. Not a chance. I'd give it a 3.5 if that were possible. But since it's not and I'm not feeling super generous or inspired, it's getting a 3.

Not bad for a white blues album. Would have rather been listening to some Howlin' Wolf, but alas he did not make the list 😔 Favorite track: All Your Love

Chilly run this morning, through a somewhat apocalyptic neighborhood. This felt fine.

I'm back! With a weeks-worth of album debt, no less. I've been suffering from the flu for a little over a week, which caused me to cease writing these reviews over fear of them becoming increasingly shitty. I talked about it more in my cool, pre-written hip-hop reviews that have yet to come out. The funniest story to come from the whole affair is that I was suffering from violent impulses while I was writing my review of PJ Harvey's "Dry". The flu was constricting my breathing while I was writing that review, which I think activated my fight-or-flight response. I really wanted to punch something for the entirety of my time spent writing that review. I only clocked that I was having such a reaction when I got up to do the dishes and felt compelled to smash all of the plates on the floor. Anyways, second and final Eric Clapton, though I suppose this is more of a Bluesbreakers stint. I don't recall much from 461 Ocean Boulevard. It was just a stock standard blues album, if I'm recalling correctly. While I'm not a fan of blues, I'm hoping this album will be a 30-something minute romp through 60s rock music. Ideally something relaxed, too. I'd say I was pretty dead-on with my prediction. A 30-something minute blues album with a prominent rock and roll influence. This was alright. The music is pretty by-the-numbers and certainly isn't pushing any boundaries, but it works well within that niche. The guitar performances are solid across the board and are easily the strongest aspect of this album. I was nodding my head along to much of this album as a result. Everything else is less remarkable. I didn't care much for the lyrics or Mayall's vocals, and the percussion may as well have not been there with how little attention I gave to it. Still, there's a respectable level of variety on this album and, above all else, I greatly admire it for being concise. A decent listen overall. Book time. "Anyone who doubts Clapton's credentials as a bluesman should listen to this scorching 1966 recording, which ignited the British scene like a tinderbox". Clapton was previously in the Yardbirds. Big surprise there, as I quite liked Roger the Engineer. That's about it for the book. Wikipedia reveals that this album "...pioneered a guitar-dominated blues-rock sound." It was also well-received by critics and appears to have only been a chart success in the UK. Clapton seems like a prolific figure within music history and this album didn't bug me in the same way that his blues contemporaries do, so I'm thinking I can let this one through. I cosign this inclusion.

Never heard of these guys before, solid album.

для любителей блюза пойдет.

Totally fine album. 60s era, some slow parts and guitar heavy.

good bluessss

mid

Pretty talented group of artists on this record. My issue with this album is its cliche blues rock. All of the quips are present. But it was still a fun listen. Haven’t listened to a lot of blues rock on this list yet, so a decent change was nice.

Pretty good

Decent listen.

Just some blues. 3 stars

Must have been mind blowing for white middle England at the time. Some nice arrangements but fundamentally this is a blues covers band and Clapton was happy to lap up the credit. Sure he may have paid some dues many years later after a few stints in rehab but he build his bank account and fan base on the backs of disenfranchised black American former slaves. Some of this is a note for note mugging. It's no Muddy Waters. It's no Freddie King. It's no John Lee Hooker. It's no Buddy Guy etc. to mention only a few big names contemporary to this album that stand out from a much deeper bench. Only possible due to technological limitations, geographical separation and privatised recording industry domains. maybe we should be grateful that exploitation is unlikely to happen on this scale again? There were perhaps worse offenders who didn't even record decent renditions 2.5

This is the classic blues! Very 60s and fun. The album rips overall and is so enjoyable. Its very strong. The vocalist isn't my absolute favorite but it is a lotta fun! Actual rating...3.5 Liked Songs: "All Your Love" , "Hideaway" , "Little Girl" , "Double Crossin' Time" , "Parchman Farm" , "Have You Heard" , "Steppin' Out" , "It Ain't Right" , "Bernard Jenkins"

3.25

I am not fond of Clapton for various reasons but he is good here. The drum solo less so. White people playing the blues? One of these reviews said it is like a white British person in 2010 covering 1990s gangsta rap. I can see their point... but rap is a genre much more built on recounting your personal experience. Blues has always had far more standard songs, so it is hard to argue that you have to have lived them to sing them. And aren't some of them relatable enough outside their origins? One of the reasons why black American musicians found an appreciative but largely white audience in 1960s Britain is because divisions between races were less stark in the UK. The notion that black and white people should restrict themselves to certain kinds of music would have been quite alien here. So which aspect of US culture should we have appropriated: the blues? or the racial segregation of music?

Ordinary white guy blues from a terrible man. I try to separate art from artist, but Clapton makes this so difficult. An open racist appropriating blues is pretty crazy and it actually plays on my mind while I listen. I'm not a huge fan of his playing, but this might be more of my favourite side of it at least

First track was insane, it got a little boring after that

Not as good as I expected it to be. Got better as it went along. Been a while since we got an album about a 30+ year old man lusting over a teenager. Also, fuck Eric Clapton.

Those white boys sure had the blues

It was decent, no takeaways from me but seems good. Hadn't heard any of the songs before.

Decent easy listening. Nothing super memorable

3/5

was ok

It was fine, wouldn't go out of my way to put it on, but didn't feel a need to constantly skip, except track 3 because wow that was creepy.

Lot of great music but just not my vibe

As expected very bluesy and guitar jamming. Not my thing, but I imagine it was well done.

The Good: We get Bluesbreakers! The Bad: We don’t know what they are… The Ugly: We don’t know who they are either… So, I am uncertain when the iconic “Clapton is God” graffiti was placed somewhere in London, but I am pretty sure it was around this the time that this album came out. Clapton, for all intents and purposes, is not God… but he’s not Satan either. He’s just a person who appreciates the blues and shows this via his playing. John Mayall, he too appreciates the blues, as do the rest of the Bluesbreakers… however, let’s just say that this album was NOT easy to listen to… And I like me some blues… I guess it has to do with this album being a couple of British musicians trying to emulate the feelings of real bluesmen in the USA… and it just doesn’t sound right. Clapton went on to make some excellent albums where he uses his guitar like a true master… those are the ones I do hope to listen to on this journey, however, 560 albums in, and this is the first time I get to listen to ol’ slow-hands and I am playing From The Cradle to rinse out the bad taste that this album left in my mouth… Should be a 2*… upgraded

This sort of thing does nothing for me.

Mestadels nice, lite väl bluesigt ibland

Funky ahh beat I'm liking this it's very jivy. We re getting some instrumental tracks?? This is nice. I'm really grooving with this. Is it really an old rock album if there isn't a song about being in love with an underage girl? Sometimes you just gotta roll with it. Funky ass harmonica work. I liked this one it just didn't really speak to me. Favourite: Key to Love Least favourite: Little Girl

Enjoyable interpretation of some blues standards. Quality stuff.

Hard to hate a blues album

Decent album with more interesting anecdotes of groups that Eric Clapton has been involved in

Work a day white boy blues

This was bluesy and mildly interesting. But nothing really stood out to get me too excited.

Just a good rock/blues jam!

Some great guitar playing

Enjoyed it. Definitely felt more like a long jam session as opposed to a cohesive album though

In his book, Clapton talks a lot about how he learned guitar by emulating Delta Blues legend like Muddy Waters, and he shows this off here. This album definitely is the evolution of English Blue-Eyed Blues, and both added to the tapestry of blues-rock and shows the path that lead to Clapton supergroups like Derek and Dominos, Bonnie and Delaney featuring E.C. (which is a great friggen album) and Cream. As a stand alone this album is good for English-white-boy blues, but not mind blowing. John Mayall does a great job switching between vocals, harp, and keys, and you have to give a shout out to pre-Fleetwood Mac John McVie on bass. Most of this album is good covers, like the Ray Charles “What’d I say” or Robert Johnson’s “Ramblin’” which would later inspire Clapton to sing on his solo album and light up “Crossroad Blues” for Cream. But I think my favorite on the album was Mayall’s original “Have You Heard” where the entire band just clicks. For Clapton or blues fans, this is a classic! For the casual listener, it’s guaranteed a good listen.

Random thoughts: * This was jammy and good. I enjoyed the white boy English blues. * I never listened to this before but am quite aware of the history with Clapton getting his start here. * Nothing too amazing here but super solid. Don't have a lot to say.

I enjoyed this musically but found it was all the same towards the end. I also had no idea what a horrible racist Eric Clapton was.

When Elwood Blues (or was is Jake) penned the line "you can't sing the blues in an air conditioned room" I wonder if he was referring to this album.

Some genius work by Clapton on an otherwise unremarkable album.

The Little Girl song isn't my favorite Isn't that the day tripper riff? I mean it's the same year, so whatever... They like doing solos that's for sure I'm by no means a blues rock expert, but seems to be pretty early on the timeline of like what this sound sounds like, so even tho I hear, let's say some Hendrix from time to time, it's not really liked they ripped him off or anything! With that said, with all the talent contained within these recordings, I can't really say that I'm enjoying the songs all that much. This is just okay to me, let's give 3

Solid white boy blues. Easy listen but nothing special

The most interesting thing about this album is that the first version of Fleetwood Mac spun out of it.

Eric Clapton is a hell of a guitarist (almost more than he is a racist twit). But this wasn't an album I'd say is his finest work. It's good, don't get me wrong. But I have heard better from him, and honestly I found myself not realizing a new song had started a couple times.

This was new to me. The blurb on Apple Music describes it as “potent and scruffy”, which I liked, and it is quite apt. A nice feel to it, albeit very much of its time. The playing is great too. It doesn’t do anything to re-wire my brain, but it is enjoyable enough.

Technically fine, but sounded like a band doing the numbers, instead of anything that really stood out. Three stars, because it was pleasant in the background.

Doesn't sound British, so nice job with that. John Mayall was likely a bigger deal than this one album featuring Clapton can express.

Too much blues for my taste

Deram

I thought it was decent blues. Noting absolutely extraordinary or breathtaking, but solid.

Solid blues rock album. As always, Clapton comes through strong. In the end though it is just that, a blues rock album.

Not really my kind of music but I respect that it's well done.

I'm not entirely sure what to make of this album. It's a fun set of blues tracks (and I particularly enjoyed their version of Ray Charles' "What I'd say"), and Eric Clapton's presence and guitar work is more interesting than much of the other albums in this collection where he appears (in part because Mayall does most of the vocals). Yet given the accolades as one of the most influential blues albums ever, it also feels like yet another example of how a lot of mainstream/commercial rock music from Elvis to the present owes much if not all of its success and wealth to black (and mainly American) musicians who were neither financially compensated nor adequately recognized for their immense contribution to white culture and music (American and British). It doesn't mean, of course, that Mayall and Clapton and others aren't allowed to provide their own versions of these songs and tunes, but it feels a bit like injustice, especially when you have a douchebag like Eric Clapton enjoying the fruits of other people's genius (although admittedly in the 60s only the record labels enjoyed *anyone's* fruits).

My dad and his mates used to gather together on weekends, bring their families round and they’d just jam into the evenings…it felt like this was a turbo charged version of that kind of thing. I did like it though - a 3.25 to be way too granular.

I struggle to really get enthused about albums that are largely (or entirely) a collection of covers or standards. However, I do enjoy a touch of bluesy rock and there was plenty of that here. I actually enjoyed the two instrumental tracks the most.

Don't have too much to say about this one, to be honest. fav tracks: What'd I Say, It Ain't Right

I guess I’m not too familiar with the hate on Eric Clapton. Remind me why he was cancelled again? I think this is a solid blue album, the blues themselves can get very repetitive but it’s a fun little jam session at times. Some of the lyrics are a bit outdated.

Pretty decent blues but I kind of wish Clapton was doing the singing--Mayall is better on the music than he is singing. It's not bad all around, but I can't help but think what Howlin Wolf, or John Lee Hooker, or Muddy Waters album got left off the list because this is. Or even Johnny Winter, who is also a little better. 3/5

White guys play the blues, technically well, lacking soul?

makes me think of jackie!

Super groovy guitar! I appreciate how this record helped pave the way for more heavy British blues rock tracks in the late 60s (3.5).

nichts spannendes

Nice blues rock. This guy Eric Clapton sure made a lot of music over the years!! Some tasty licks and noodling

Classic blues rock, this stuff is decent.

Good blues

Great old Clapton. 3.75

I always try to listen to the album before reading the reviews, especially when I’ve never heard of the musicians before. So when I finished this album, I wrote my review and then went to see the others, only to discover that this dude, Eric Clapton, was super racist. I ended up falling into an internet rabbit hole about racism in the 1970s in the UK and the Rock Against Racism movement. Today I learned new things, but not new music I’ll go back to.

Meh

Pretty solid in that it's enjoyable blues rock, but there's nothing special about the album. What's worse is that it's mostly other people's music. So we have some white British dudes playing blues covers. Even though they do it well, their takes aren't really all that impressive. It's also a bit problematic, including for their own songs (the lyrics about/to an 18 y/o girl written by a 33 y/o guy comes off pretty poorly). As someone who loves blues rock, I only thought this was one was OK. Some of it is good, and I wouldn't say any of it is bad music. But it's also not really all that great. There are way better albums out there than this. Overall: 2.8/5

There’s a lot to like here, the bluesy guitars and piano. It’s quite jazzy at times and there is the odd drum solo to boot. For all its merits, it wasn’t really landing with me in the first half, I’m not sure the vocals grabbed me really, not that there is anything especially wrong with them mind. However, the album grew on me and the instrumentation seemed to get more interesting towards the second half of the album and I was much more engaged, if I’d experienced the whole album with this level of enjoyment, I’d have probably been leaning towards a 4. There might be something here to me to return for but realistically, I don’t know where I’d find the time and there are other albums in this genre I’d sooner reach for. Furthermore, Clapton is a wrong’un, so there is that.

Musically enjoyable, it feels like a lot of it is fairly basic 12-bar blues for Eric Clapton to riff over. At its best, it's really good but I could've almost been listening to about three or four tracks on a loop as it felt very samey and predictable after a while.

3.4 2x good but nothing stands out

The album is good, and has some unique ideas. Some blues albums can just be the same song 10+ times, but each song here has pretty different sonic palettes. However, Eric Clapton is one of the most overrated guitarist and a terrible person. I also can't hear really any of what he contributed, besides the solo on Have You Heard. Mid 3.

The bluesiest of the blues. Can't say it challenges the form too much, or that it diverges from the center of the curve. Enjoyable if you like blues, but that's about it.

Wow

Nice

Fine and dandy blues. I enjoyed it broadly speaking but it didn’t stand out over any other music of its kind. (3.5 stars)

Stabil bluesrock.

Liked it better than I thought I would. What’d I Say reminded me of some song… not sure which…

Clapton's great and everything, but this is just an album of blues covers. 3

Not my favorite blues album, but I understand why it's here. Some awesome guitar work from Clapton on this album. Mayall's voice isn't the best.

Good

Pretty good. Clapton's guitar is by far the best part. Another Man and Ramblin' on my mind stand out.

enjoyed this. manageable as background music for rock music.

I was thinking I wouldn’t like it as a lot of 60’s blues rock can be boring. This was pretty decent.

I was ready to not like this but I did. Definitely listen again and could be a 4.

feels like something you'd hear on the dust

If the guitar player at your gig brings this album up unprompted, you're either at the absolutely RIGHT jam session, the absolutely WRONG jam session, or what is soon to become the most interesting church gig of your life. 5/10

The music is cool, bluesy obviously. Not a fan of the vocalist though

very nice blues album some good tunes

Favorite: Hideaway

Certainly an album full of talent and easy listening blues. The drum solo was probably my favourite part of this. Honestly though this was fairly unremarkable, there wasn't much else in here apart from the fact that it's the blues. I've heard shit exactly like this a million times. Sounds the same as literally every other blues album I've listened to. It honestly started to bore me toward the end. Scratch that - holy fuck this dragged on. I am only keeping this at a 3 because I can't fault on the talent required to play the blues. I can only assume that this was added on here because of the Eric Clapton feature. BOOOORRRRIIIIINGGGGG

It was good but I didn’t find it particularly memorable

Super Bluesy but it's not heartbreakingly bluesy. I'm not going to cry into my BBQ with this album. However, I did not love the 5 minute drum solo.

First, let me say that I don’t like Eric Clapton as a person or endorse his views. But… "Bluesbreakers with Eric Clapton" stands as a seminal album in the history of British blues, showcasing the virtuosic talents of Eric Clapton during his tenure with John Mayall's Bluesbreakers. The album not only propelled Clapton to iconic status but also solidified Mayall's reputation as a preeminent figure in the blues revival of the 1960s. That’s why it is on the list. 3.5⭐️

Iha chilli lwk

Decent blues album.

Eric Clapton is a really good guitarist.

Review based on the music only!

Fine British blues covering American blues artists

Pretty good, would have prefered it as an instrumental album though.

Good

Simply put, Clapton’s guitar shines, especially the bluesy “crying” in the All Your Love interlude. I enjoy the sound itself, but I wonder whether ignoring the cultural context and Clapton’s later statements is appropriate.

Fuck Eric Clapton.

Some classic blues

juste assez correct pour un 3, mais genre limite

absolut, lite najs country/blues gitarrspelande

Yeah quite similar to a lot of different albums that have already appeared here in terms of non-offending music that is okay to listen through but will it ever bring me back for another listen, even for a song or two... the answer would be no, and so this will get a similar 2.5/5 which will be bumped to a 3.

Got irritating after awhile. 2.5/5. Raising to a 3.

3.5

I listened to the original release (12 tracks). Here’s another example of British guys covering old American blues records. This record was released in 1966, so some of those blues songs they covered weren’t very old. Maybe this album should be titled Eric Clapton plays the blues, since his guitar playing is front and center throughout. Clapton was still playing the blues when I saw him in concert with Muddy Waters in 1979.

Quite groovy. Eric Clapton is still a cunt

Very influential at the time even if it seems stiff now.

Chouette, mais pas forcément notre style de prédilection. Pas de chanson coup de cœur

Am I a blues enthusiast? Nay. But this album had its moments!

LOVED the drums in What’d I say

Cool guitar solo's didnt care much for the rest

Standard stuff. Couple of a good numbers but no better than most stuff you here in any bar in town

There are some flashes of great playing here and there but it is in the end a stiff rendering of the blues.

John Mayall & The Bluesbreakers / Eric Clapton: Blues Breakers: This is a pretty solid and fun album. Its not revolutionary really, but all but one of the songs is just a really solid and fun listen. 7/10

Obviously very good, but that 60s London Blues gets a little repetitive

perfect fantasy football draft background music

Well played blues that's missing the "stank" that you get with the really good shit. Another example of Eric Clapton being great only when he's in a supporting role.

Enjoyable but nothing spectacular. The Ray Charles cover was fun.

Incredibly skillful blues, harmonica, and guitar playing on display, and the influence on rock is evident! Amazing and classic guitar tones that make this record great but I don't find much standout to revisit here

Pretty standard Blues. Not bad

I like the blues in small doses, I really do. I appreciate the fact that informs much of the music that I really love. However, an entire album of this is a little bit too much for me. Clapton is on fire here I can appreciate that, and again, in small doses I really enjoy it, but I am u able to sustain interest for an entire album and I can’t stretch to 44 minutes.

Look, because his name is in the damn album title, let's just get this out of the way real quick: Eric Clapton is a racist piece of shit. Everyone knows that. Personally, I can't look at him without thinking about that one part of Kurt Cobain's journals where he says Clapton plays nothing but "musty old blues riff." I do not like him. But, with that said, I review music, not people. I'm not gonna stick this album with a 1 just because it features a guy I don't like, and features him so hard he's, again, in the damn album title. I mean, let me be 100 here: I will openly admit to liking some stuff he's been involved in. "While My Guitar Gently Weeps"? Amazing guitar solo. "Layla"? I enjoy the coda more, but the first half is damn good, too. "Sunshine Of Your Love"? It's a classic for a reason. Do I wish someone who **wasn't** racist was involved with these songs? Yes, absolutely. But sometimes shitty, awful, horrible people make good music, and, dammit, that's just life. And of course, how much their shitty, awful horribless affects the music varies from person to person, and I am not advocating any incorrect readings of "death of the artist," but if I like something, I'll grit my teeth and bare it. If I can give Kanye a 4, I can give one to Eric Clapton, no matter how much I don't like it. Though I sure won't be giving Clapton one for this album, 'coz, whoo, boy, imagine putting all of that preamble and disclaimer ahead of a review/babble of this white-ass blues album. Now, look, I'm a sucker for a good guitar. I mean, apparently the thing this album is most famous for is its guitar sound, and, well... Yeah, it's a good sound. I'll say I dig it. But look past the guitar sound and, yep, it's English white blues alright. To which, I'll be upfront about that as well: it's not even like I **hate** English white blues. I'm a dad at heart; I love Led Zeppelin, even despite their well-documented history of plagiarism. But at least Led Zeppelin turned their shit **all the way up**. They're not just white blues; they're **proto-metal**. I mean, you ever hear "Dazed And Confused", or "Whole Lotta Love"? Those are some heavy as hell hard rockers, and they kick all kinds of ass. Meanwhile, with John Mayall and crew (with Eric Clapton)... There's nothing unique about how they do the blues. It's just... The blues. Just not as cool because I know it's a buncha pasty English honkies playing. And it's not even like they play badly: far from it. Even Eric Clapton puts in a good performance (though maybe not enough that I'd nickname him "the God"). But honestly, listening to this just makes me wonder, "Why would I listen to these guys over any legit bluesman out there?" Like, B.B. King? Muddy Waters? Howlin' Wolf? Elmore James? Heck, even the record that compiles Jimi Hendrix's blues performances. Why would this album (with Eric Clapton) be the **first** thing I pick? It's not even necessarily a matter of race; it's just, when you put these dorks next to these legends... I mean, right? I just really can't figure on a good answer for why you'd pick this album first unless this was just the first blues album you'd ever heard and you hold a nostalgia for it. I suppose being an introductory point to the genre isn't a bad thing, but if you're still claiming this is one of the best ever made after exposing yourself to more... I mean, different strokes for different folks and all; you do you. I just can't agree at all. It's not terrible, but you could and **should** be doing so, so much better. Just for the "dad" part of my brain, I can't say I really disliked this album, and, again, no one here is doing that bad of a performance — I'd say those are both enough to keep this from fully falling into a 2... But those are both the highest compliments that I feel like I can afford this album. It doesn't surprise me too much that it seems like this thing's biggest legacy is just its guitar sound. It's a sound that deserves much better blues and much less "with Eric Clapton," I tell you.

I am a blues guy but this seemed a bit too much at times. On the plus side its all the blues riffs you already know! love the technical prowess behind this, but it makes for a bit of a boring entry unless you really enjoy 60's white guy blues.

Decent 60s blues album. Its Eric Clapton so it even makes it better!! I enjoyed the What I Say cover with the Ray cameo at the end.

This album was alright. It was very much "Eric Clapton on electric guitar with generic classic rock around it". Clapton, while I don't agree with on a personal basis, is a really talented guitar player...and I wish that was all he was known for. He's had some great music over the years, and this album showcases his talent well. But what surrounds him was just very generic, without any particular song really sticking out or catching my attention. It blends into the background well enough, but isn't an all-timer.

A low 3 for me, not my style but prettt enjoyable.

Its ok

Pretty decent bluest album - decent vocals 6/10

Classic sounds but nothing stand out - guitar work is first class

I was prepared to write this off as just another British blues-rock album in a world where there's a seemingly endless number of them in "the canon" or whatever, but this one had a little more juice than I anticipated. I am choosing to give the entirety of the credit to John McVie, who is here on bass in his pre-Fleetwood Mac days.

Definitely classic. Maybe dated, but an important one

John Mayall & The Bluesbreakers – Bluesbreakers (1966) Score: 6/10 Favorite Track: “What’d I Say” This one has the reputation, but honestly, it did not do much for me. The band is tight and Clapton’s guitar work is obviously solid, but most of the album just kind of blurs together. “What’d I Say” stands out with some real spark and energy, but it is surrounded by a lot of blues tracks that feel more like exercises than moments. It is more respectable than exciting. “Parchman Farm” in particular drags things down. It feels forced and awkward, and breaks the flow more than anything else. The rest of the album is fine, but nothing really sticks. For a record that helped shape British blues rock, it feels more like a history lesson than something I would come back to.

Straight blues-rock. The band is obviously influential and has withstood the test of time. The musicianship is exceptional and the non-lyrical parts are the best parts of the album. Clapton is talented, of course, but here, it’s hard for me to separate art from the narcissistic cretin who created it. The music’s strength is mitigated by the vocals. The singer is fine — hits the notes, mostly — but his voice is wavering and high-pitched/falsetto, with none of the gravitas or gravel I appreciate in really good blues/blues rock. The singing is humorless and unsexy. Put the same lyrics in Robert Plant’s mouth and it might make you blush; Mic Jagger’s tongue-in-cheek delivery would make you smile, despite the misogynistic lyrics (which are characteristic of the genre). But, here the lyrics come across as leering, stalkerish, and creepy. On the whole, this is a super influential album; presumably that’s why it’s on the list. But I’d rather hear the amazing guitar-driven blues-rock and great vocalists that came afterwards. It’s a 3.

A bit like those Country Fish people a week or so ago, John Mayall did a good job of lowering expectation with the band name, before presenting you with something not totally unpleasant. It's about 40 minutes too long, of course, because guitarists simply can't keep it in their pants.

Fun but probably not worth listening too again

Clapton’s very early days and this clearly showcased his raw brilliance.

Норм

A good sound

Dit album 1 ster geven puur en alleen omdat het Eric Clapton is, is nogal lame. Daarom geef ik dit een 2.7. Het is inderdaad geen top album, eerder een normaal, simpel blues album.

The epitome of blues-y. Mostly. Decent listen, not a fave.

Menevää bluesia, mikäs siinä. Taitavaa, ei ihan täysin sielutonta. Pidän kyllä rämpyttävämmästä, orgaanisemmasta jos niin voi sanoa, mutta kyllä tässä sellainen kuistillasoittelun idea oli saatu mukaan. Siitä ekstraa.

Claptonin kitara on tällä LP:llä niin vastustamaton, että se saa skeptikonkin heltymään. Biisit ovat hyviä, mikä ei välttämättä johdu pelkästään lainamateriaalin statuksesta. Vokalistin suorituksen ohuus ei myöskään merkittävästi vähennä musiikin toimivuutta. 3,5

I hadn't heard of this before. I really liked it. I think there could be a time where I'd listen to this again.

It was okay.

Weird lyrics aside, this is a killer blues rock record with some awesome tones and guitar solos. The stereo mix left a lot to be desired, but I enjoyed this one overall.

It was ok

Helt ok, sikker bare på lista fordi den lanserte Clapton

test

#92 - Enjoyable but for white people blues they don't beat The Doors.

Gemensam recension av Muddy och Bluesbreakers. Två bluesalbum i rad. Där många skriver att Bluesbrekers är dåliga (många 1:or med motivering, "A bunch of privileged white dudes signing about how they want to get over on girls while they misappropriate blues music." etc) och på Muddys står det saker som "now this is blues. clapton can fuck off." Så vi fick "turen" att få dessa album, back to back. Först och främst, blues är helt ok. Inte svinbra. För mig kommer det aldrig blir svinbra. Jag tycker dock Muddy är bättre (delvis för att jag säkert påverkats av kommentarerna) mest för att jag inte är såld på allt gitarrtjafs på Bluesbrekaers. Eric Clapton är säkert "God", men jag gillar inte gitarsolon på detta vis. Det har aldrig kittlat skönt. Sen är det mysigare att Muddy är live. Därför är nog Muddy skönare blues, men det blir för mycket att skilja betygen åt, de är båda "meh". Så det blir 3:a på båda. Men på en tiogradig skala hade Muddy fått 6 och Bluesbreakers 5.

Pretty standard blues rock. There are some fun solos, but the rest is nothing special.

Not my usual genre, but this was an enjoyable listen. All Your Love, Have You Heard, and Bernard Jenkins the highlights.

Pretty much mid blues throughout, with a couple nice licks. 3.1

Fantastic blues! I grew up listening to stuff exactly like this.

The songs on this blues rock album strike me as neither particularly good nor bad. I discount the idea of rating it based on legal issues (as in 'Little Girl') or accusations of cultural appropriation, as my assessment is focused solely on the music itself. That said, I fully support and encourage political and legal action where effective.

idk it wasn't that special

im not fan of blues rock

Damn. Another 4/20 without getting that Snoop Dogg album. My disappointment is immeasurable and my day is ruined. I'm just kidding! How could my day be ruined by an album that is, by my account, pretty solid? Here we have my third album on the list to feature Eric "Keep Britain White" Clapton, who plays guitar for this album with John Mayall and his Bluesbreakers. I think I've gone through the whole "separating art from artist" spiel enough times by now. Fortunately, it's very doable here since none of the lyrics tie into his issues and he really only plays guitar here, aside from one song that he sings. The lyrics, by the way, do their job. None of them are too problematic. Good on John Mayall for specifying that the titular "Little Girl" was 18. Of course, a lot of these songs are covers. That's kind of how the blues genre goes, isn't it? The singing also just does its job. Where this album stands out in my mind is the instrumentation. Obviously, Clapton's guitar playing is strong, but stuff like the basslines from John McVie (yes, that John McVie) and Hughie Flint's drumming, as well as the additional work that John Mayall himself brings to the table aid in creating a strong bluesy atmosphere that I happen to enjoy quite a bit. Overall, while Blues Breakers may not be the most exciting album for me personally, it's an album that I mostly respect. It's good. High 3/5.

2.5

A higher end standard of white British man blues music. Excellent in skill, but mostly covers.

Great blues record with some nice variety and acoustics. Hadn't heard of this group before, but I really enjoyed this one.

I don't think I'm that into blues rock, but this seems like a solid album for those who are.

With multiple tries I couldn't get past track nr 5

Beginning of blues rock legend Eric Clapton.

On the one hand it's a bit stale and phoney, on the other it has some historical value

5/10

Highlights: All Your Love, It Ain't Right, Another Man. Drums are fire, some good clangy piano. Listen to this album instead of 451 Ocean Boulevard to get an idea why music writers praise Eric Clapton's guitar prowess (cos as a human, I'd put him in the bin). Overall: 6/10