>
the difference in quality would be only the music itselfThat's the technical side of music though -- not so the much the music as cultural significance / art, in which one could argue Dylan might be not just on par with Cole but probably much ahead.
Even if he could play with Mingus, many did, but only the very best of them we count as significant in general (Powell, Byard). I mean we wouldn't count Cole as among the top, but rather players like Tatum, Peterson, Monk etc.
If we judged only sophistication in the sense of chord changes, complex harmony, orchestration and such, then any half-decent conservatory graduate could be said to be better than lots of titans of song, not just Dylan but people like Lead Belly and co.
I, for example, would still consider Robert Johnson a better artist (more artistically significant) than, say, Steve Vai or Al Di Meola, even if those two can obviously play circles around him. And I think they'd might agree too.