Hummel had some strong notes; Kim plays some fine stuff, Bharath pretty much fits in and holds his own, and that's no small accomplishment. The surprise for me was what Rod does at about 2:50, where he flies up to the top of the harp. For me, this was the only real "Whoa!" moment of the whole video. It makes you realize that the other players are all pretty much working over the same ground: Holes 1-6, Little Walter style. I don't believe I heard one overblow here, but I'll be happy if somebody hears something I missed.
These are the cream of the crop of contemporary harp players, and they're manifesting the highest level of professional competence here. Maybe it's too much to want a little more WTF-factor out of them, but I always do. That's why Paul Delay blew me away, and why Jason does, and why Dennis blew me away on "Swing Time." Because you can't confuse what they're doing with what anybody else out there was doing. That goes in spades for Carlos del Junco. I think I'd instantly recognize his harp voice after five seconds in a blind test. I'm not sure if I can say the same thing about Mark Hummel. Kim: probably. Piazza: I'm not sure. But he's got that great moment here.
My feeling is that their great players but not that creative. Great representation of that style. IMHO they're still light years behind butterfield. That's just my taste not the law of the universe.
What is wrong with keeping old style Chicago and West Coast blues alive and heard ?
Its all about tone and the groove.
Overblows and overdraws sound thin to me and probably to Kim, Rod, and Bharath too.
These guys don't use them. Not because they can't, because they choose not to.
I appreciate some people like them. It horses for courses. Live and let live.
Personally, I'd rather listen to old school than modern.
Modern playing seems to be about "Look how technical I am. I can overblow and play at a million miles an hour all in the middle and upper octave"
Its tiring after 1 song and I get bored with it.
What is wrong with holes 1 to 6 ?
Its not about how many notes you can fit into 1 bar. It's about what emotion you evoke in your audience.
A guitar player I know described a visit to Chicago sharing the stage with Jimmy Burns. He said "I had more notes, but I couldn't tell a story like him"
That's what's missing in modern harmonica playing heart and soul.
I can easily tell which of any of the above are playing by they're own distinctive tone and phrasing. Well easily Kim,Rod, Rick,Gary- Primich and Smith,Steve,James. I could go on.
Maybe Bharath would be a challenge !
Last Edited by on Feb 15, 2010 4:04 PM
I'm afraid I often miss the point in this kind of discussion--I hear the music and it just grabs me by the balls, and, at my age, I just gotta love anything that does that!
I feel like this I been playing for 3 years now 59 years old. No music till then. I love to beg my way on stage and I dont even drink.I dont think my self a musicain. Last night I did the beg thing and got up with this band nobody dancing. I asked for shuffle in E. They gave it to me the next thing all the ladies are dancing and I am in shock myself.I stayed in the 6 holes.I kept it simply no over blows here either.I still for the life of dont even know why I do this crazy stuff. That is what this pocket of soul is all about moving people and that what those guys are doing. Those shows Hummel puts always moves people ---------- Fred HARP (Harmonica Assn 'Round Philly)
Last Edited by on Feb 15, 2010 5:27 PM
@Doggycam: Since you've brought up the question of soul, I'll come back at you with Ralph Waldo Emerson, one of my faves.
"The only thing of value is an active soul."
Please read what I actually wrote, not what you'd like to believe that I wrote.
I wrote with great praise for my fellow professionals. I praised each individual player for his strengths. They've got the tone and the groove. I said they were manifesting the highest level of professional competence. That is not faint praise, and I'm not damning them with it.
I also went out of my way to praise the innovative gambit of Rod Piazza--a guy I went out of my way to critique as retrograde in my (infamous) 1989 letter to Living Blues. Rod was first up in this clip, and he actually throws down. He works his shit really hard. He's not just doing "his thing," he's trying to throw something down that will force Hummel and Kim to up their game.
This leads Hummel to dig down deeper on certain notes.
I ALSO note, because I'm capable of keeping two opposed ideas in the air at the same time, that these players have decidedly placed themselves in the old-timer category. They're not interested in recent developments in the blues harmonica. They're interested in keeping an older style alive.
That's not invalid. Some might call it heroic.
But it isn't exploratory, it isn't particularly creative, it's just keeping a reperoire alive.
It's not the only valid approach to blues harmonica. And to the extent that it pretends that it is the only valid approach--to the extent that it hopes to convince those who purchase tickets to a "harmonica blow off" that what they're seeing is active souls at work--it's striving to fool most of the people most of the time.
It's valid for what it is. But the world has moved on.
I'll be the first one to say that I love old sports cars. I spent a whole summer in Downey, California when I was 15, working on my uncle's Jaguar XK-120. Old sportscars rule. But it's a really bad idea to pretend that the world of sportscars begins and ends with a 1960 XK-120.
If you love sportscars, it's worth acknowledging that the Bugatti Veyron exists.
If you love the spirit of crazed energy and innovative brilliance that was Little Walter, honor that spirit.
My point about overblows wasn't that overblows are required to be our day's sportscar.
But anybody who reads ROAD & TRACK knows that technology is constantly improving, and the spirit of sportcar innovation requires that engineers continue to take risks and try crazy things.
Jason did that in his new cross-dressing video. Right on.
Edgy.
Sugar Blue.
Paul Delay.
I'll invoke one last analogy by way of trying to communicate my vision. I don't expect everybody to share my vision, but I do hope people will at least get what I'm putting out there.
Kim Wilson is Jean-Claude Killy in 1968. He's an incredible skiier.
Jason Ricci is an X-games aerialist. He recognizes, and embodies the fact, that the world has moved on.
There's nothing wrong with Jean-Claude Killy. He was incredible. And if he was still active, out there on the skiing scene, and doing the same stuff he did in 1967: incredble! That's what Kim is. Incredible!
But he's not the be-all and end-all. He's merely a superb exemplar of an older approach that has, over the past decade or so, gradually been superseded by innovative younger skiiers who refuse to sit still when their elders--traditionalists!--point at Killy and say, "THAT is skiing!" They know it's skiiing, but they know there's something beyond it that is also skiing.
And they would rather keep striving to ski that "beyond" than remain content doing the same old slalom. They know what it feels like to manifest an active soul, rather than working a familiar groove.
It means doing crazy shit. That's what Muddy and Walter did when they were young. Of course they cooled off later on. Most musicians do. Not all.
Last Edited by on Feb 15, 2010 5:46 PM
I think that if you watch the video above and then watch this video, my point about Killy and the X-games will make more sense. There wasn't anything wrong with Sidney Bechet playing his stuff in 1944, but he wasn't Bird. Generations happen; music evolves. It's a good idea to acknowledge that fact:
I agree with each generation moving on an evolving with the exception of some areas of Jazz. Coltrane is a great example. Kenny G. is the big jazz sax player today. Popular but not reaching for the stars.
Well, they are all great...what would you expect? As usual, Rod's phrasing is top form...and he does some of his signature coughing. Mark was straight ahead. But the STAR of this vid is Kim! What he does is NOT easy to do ( although he makes it sound so ). He does a combined type of TB/LB with a warble, and does it tastefully. It was also very cool that he handed off HIS harp mic to Bharath, early on in the vid.
It's a great clip of four great harp players doing their thing. In this clip they are quite rightly playing to compliment each other and not to compete with each other. This is about their mutual appreciation for each other, not a cutting heads session.
As for each individual player. Here's my opinion on them as players, not based on this video but on the many recordings of each of them I have heard and the live gigs of Rod and Kim I have seen.
Rod Piazza has many stylistic elements to his playing and arrangements that no other harp player I have ever heard before him used. His use of stops and dynamics in particular are done to a degree that I have never heard done by any harmonica player before him. He and William Clarke are I suspect probably the biggest single harmonica influences on West Coast harmonica stylists in the last 20 years.
Kim Wilson is taste personified. His playing is always precise, perfectly formed and I don't think I have ever heard him play a bad note. His use of the three hole bends is simply amazing. No other harmonica player even comes close to his ability to use them.
Mark Hummel is a powerhouse player who's skilled in all the classic blues styles. He is probably the most adept chromatic player of the bunch.
Bharath Rajakumar is as we all know a little Walter devotee. However I'm certain that in time he will along with people like Aki Kumar take over the flame from the older guys and keep it burning. He will I suspect put his own twist on classic blues sooner or later in the same way that Rod, Kim and Mark have done.
Last Edited by on Feb 16, 2010 1:58 AM
"Please read what I actually wrote, not what you'd like to believe that I wrote."
Straight back at you!
Taking risks and being edgy is all well and good. BUT, how does it sound ?
Muddy and Little Walter may have did crazy shit, but it sounded brilliant and sold to the masses, because it moved people and made them want to dance.
Who sells more, Kim or Jason ?
The current trend in harp,reminds me of many guitar players, who try to use speed and electronic effects to hide the fact they are really not that good.
I prefer the likes of BB King who can say more with one note than most can say with 200.
Playing fast has its place, overblows have they're place.Used in context they can be very effective.
But please not all the time as I'd rather have a pleasant conversation, than listen to an auctioneer fire a blur of words at me at a hundred miles an hour.
Call and response. That's what the blues are about.
Good music takes you on a journey,tells a story,gives a sense of anticipation, lets you breath, then takes your breath away.
And as for Jason's X dressing video.................... Well nothing new or edgy there. Pop stars have been cross dressing in videos for years.
Last Edited by on Feb 16, 2010 4:40 AM
I think they are showing some nice tricks but, as Diggsblues said, not very creative. But I must say that, to my ear, the music in that vid is really horrible ; typically the kind of blues I dislike. I don't think of it as "Chicago Style" ; compared to any record from Junior Wells, this sounds like crap to me.
I would say that being "edgy" is all well and good and being innovative is an admirable trait. However if the emphasis is constantly placed on innovation as some people frequently do, then other far more important factors can be lost.
Tone, timing and fitting the tune. These things are more important than any single technique such as overblowing, tongue blocking, lip pursing etc
It's far, far, far more important to be able to say something with your music. Just endlessly twiddling on a hundred notes is pointless, self indulgent, arrogant and to be brutally honest a waste of a musical talent. If however those same notes are played with finesse and filled with emotion then they can truly be a thing of beauty. Unfortunately a lot of players lose sight of this and just do the twiddling thing.
I would rather listen to one note that is full warm rounded and filled with emotion than 100 that are just doing nothing. There are of course some great players who are exceptions to this and can play 100 notes filled with emotion, but they are in the minority amongst the supercharged types of players.
To me the late great Gary Primich sums it up perfectly in this video when he discusses his viewpoint on it. The segment I'm referring to is from 3:34 - 4:38
While others worry about overblows, these guys tear down the house, night after night ... I'd rather go to see one of them than somebody who can play the flight of the bumblebee in twelve keys on a C harp ... hell, I'd rather go and see one of them than almost anybody.
I think one of the most important things for a musician is to listen to his own music like a non musician. I'd rather make make the crowd dance than to please the five guitar and harp players down there. Overblows or holes 1-6, progressive or old school ... who cares ...
---------- If it ain't broke you just haven't fixed it enough ...
Making blanket statements like " Light years behind Butterfield" based on this video is silly to my mind. You have to look at an artists full body of work to make that kind of statement. You could easily say the same kind of thing about Carlos Del Junco, Lee Oskar, Magic Dick, etc on the strength of one piece of work.
If you really look at Piazza and Wilson in detail you will see many elements of high creativity within their music. That is why they have been held as benchmark players for as long as they have. I agree you could argue that Hummel and Rajakumar are not as creative as some people, but that simply isn't true of Piazza or Wilson.
My generation cut its baby teeth on heavy metal shredding, Garth brooks, Nirvana, and Dr. Dre. Do you think 1950's blues makes me want to dance? Nope. But Ricci's 'shake your hips' sure does.
Tone, timing and fitting the tune are important, but ultimately serve ENERGY and VITALITY.
Well, different strokes for different folks I guess. Butterfield never did a lot for me. That doesn't mean that I think he's inferior to anybody but it's all a matter of personal taste. I think the more you listen to a certain player, the more you discover in his playing. Kim Wilson is retro but with a different twist. I hear so many things in his playing that I don't hear played by anybody else. Same with Piazza ... it's not what they are doing ... it's HOW they do it. I am sure it's the same with Butterfield but since I don't go for that kind of blues I will probably never discover it.
---------- If it ain't broke you just haven't fixed it enough ...
Interesting that the JNRB track you mention is actually based on a 1950's Slim Harpo number. What Jason has done is simply to put his own spin on the number. This is exactly what Wilson and Piazza do. Jason does does it by playing faster and using overblows, etc. Whilst Piazza and Wilson take a different approach. The end result is however the same. Creativity
Which type of music people prefer is purely a matter of personal taste. But for anyone to say it's not as creative is simply not true (I know you didn't say it. I'm just using this as track as an example).
Last Edited by on Feb 16, 2010 5:18 AM
I agree with everything you say in your post of 1:54 AM above.
@Bluefinger: Please note that in my last long post, I mention Sugar Blue and Paul Delay as two exceptional representatives of "next generation" playing. Neither of them uses any overblows. A willingness to use overblows--as Carlos del Junco uses overblows--is one marker of "next generation" playing, but it's certainly not the only one.
@Kingley: re: your post of 5:16 AM, above: I deliberately picked a number in which Jason is updating an old blues standard that Little Walter helped make part of the contemporary repertoire. Here's my question: is an homage--conscious or unconscious--as creative as an updating that truly transforms?
That's the crux issue here. To my ears--and I've seen all but Bharath multiple times, live--the four players in the video I posted above all sound essentially of a piece. The degree to which that's true becomes obvious if you imagine substituting Sugar Blue or Paul Delay or Jason, or Carlos, or me, for one of them on that stage. I suspect, actually, that William Clarke would have shaken things up, and that's why I'll always treasure the handful of times I saw him. Despite individual differences, differences that you've noted with great acuity, they're all happily working a traditional groove with a set of (by now) extremely familiar reflexes, licks, techniques. To MY ears, there's a sameness in it all, and that sameness ultimately makes me a little restless and, in certain moods, a little sad. Still, when I was learning harp, as a twenty-something, I greatly enjoyed these sorts of events, although I eventually got restless with them. They ultimately felt too stylized to me, too clubbish.
But I sense that we've both made our visions clear, with mutual respect, and I'm willing to let the matter rest on my end. I'm happy to see that some here seem to agree with me, but if everybody agreed with me, things would be dull.
Last Edited by on Feb 16, 2010 5:41 AM
@Doggycam: It's worth remembering that the so-called "moldy figs" who defended so-called "trad jazz" in the 1940s attacked bebop for its more-is-more aesthetic. So I'm always leery when I see people critique something new as too fast, "not in tune," not blues, "noise," etc. I'm not saying that you've used all those words, but that's the gist of much critique of next-generation playing--and bebop was initially critiqued in precisely the same way. Now we all love bebop.
What was one generation's ceiling has become our own floor. This is how music evolves.
I'll certainly agree with you that taste is important, as is the ability to leave space. That's what Jason does brilliantly (in my estimation) in the opening two choruses of his slow remake of "Down at the Juke." Those two choruses perfectly exemplify the next-generation playing I'm talking about. For the purposes of this thread, of course, I picked a video (one I happened to have shot) in which JR is offering a vivid example of more-is-more aesthetics.
Last Edited by on Feb 16, 2010 5:48 AM
@Kingley. I agree that Kim is a terrific player and his delivery is consistently impressive, and also somewhat creative within the boundaries of this particular style.
I have listened to many other recordings by these guys (except Rajakumar) and, for the overwhelming most part, I don't hear any of them doing very much that hasn't been done before--unlike Carlos DelJunco, Magic Dick and Lee Oscar whom you mention and who, IMHO, are each innovators, and have each developed their own unique style.
All of these guys certainly play extremely well. But, stylistically, Hummel, Rajakumar, Kim and Piazza are engaged in what is more or less the musical equivalent of reenacting civil war battles (which, btw, some people find interesting and entertaining). But they don't take me anywhere I haven't been before.
Last Edited by on Feb 16, 2010 6:18 AM
"Here's my question: is an homage--conscious or unconscious--as creative as an updating that truly transforms"
Great question Adam. My answer is. Yes it can be. Is it as instantly recognizable by most people as being as creative? Maybe not.
I think that there is room for all different types in the world. For me it's a case that people that are creative will always be so, whether they choose to do so within the constraints of a given style or to try and stretch the boundaries by bringing in new ideas and/or creating new genres is purely a matter of their personal choice.
When people state things like "oh it's the same old stuff I have heard a million times before" to me it's pretty clear that they either can't (or don't want to) see the creativity at work.
I mean is a jazz trumpeter that is putting his own twist on Miles Davis tunes being creative or is he just rehashing tired old jazz standards and merely being an also ran? Is Dennis Greunling merely rehashing old material and not being creative when he plays Little Walter numbers and adds his own touch to it in such a way as to fit seamlessly and sound like Walter himself did it?
Not to my ear.
I can clearly see the beauty in both camps. I just happen to prefer the Greunling / Piazza / Wilson camp most of the time. Yet I also love from time to time to visit the Ricci / Del Junco / Gussow camp as well.
I posted a blog (see sig) and a post on Harp-l about this whole overblow thing and 6 common misconceptions. First an foremost, overblowing does not mean you have to play fast!!!
It is so crazy to me that again and again, obs are confused with playing fast!!! I get what Adam is saying about these guys being old school. They are all excellent players. I love Kim Wilson's music and could listen to it all day every day. However, I too yearn for the WTF moment.
That is true of anyone, though. The only issue I ever have with any music is when a musician spends too much time playing within the "rules". But you also need to listen in context. I like when an artist tells me, "I am playing my music", and not, "I am playing blues."
There is a lot of blues that is being played for he sake of playing blues and not because someone is using their own voice.
Kingley, I am going to have to sort of disagree. A rehashing is a rehashing and there are times where that isn't cool. It is hard to do a stylistic cover and come off as original as that isn't the point. I agree that if you're trying to do a Miles or Walter tune and add a touch, that can be cool (like in the Dennis example you gave). However, that is not the type of song in which I would be wanting another to judge my playing as that tune is more of a tribute than anything else.
Love it or hate it, the Ricci version of Mellow Down Easy is not a rehashing. It is honoring LW in a very different way, but the playing is clearly not based off of what LW was doing.
---------- Mike Fugazzi http://www.myspace.com/niterailband http://www.youtube.com/user/NiteRail http://www.twitter.com/NiteRail http://www.facebook.com/mike.fugazzi
The following video probably won't change the conversation, but it's worth posting nonetheless. Here's Kim Wilson at low volume, in a harp clinic, playing just about the most perfect, most in-the-pocket, most tasty old-school harp you are ever likely to hear. Quite frankly, if Grady Champion could play like this, he would rule the world. But he can't, and KW most definitely can. This is what people mean by "taking your time."
this is not a great example of what these harp players can do! to start with the volumes for the mics are not equal.piazza is way above any of the others in volume, bharath has the lowest mic,( in his third chorus he did a nice harp switch) kim and hummel are about even hummel a little louuder. the real problem i have with this jam verses old school blues jamming is that i defy anybody to tell me what song hummel was singing. you cant because all the players are stepping all over the vocal . for the old school players the song was most important. the story that they were communicating and playing to. you would not find this going on in peppers lounge with a similar group of harp players jamming ie big walter. little walter, junior wells, james cotton, they wouldnt be playing at the same time and usually they used the same mic even the same harp( i wouldnt suggest passing the same harp today) but just passed it off to each other. each one might also take a verse of the song. there wasn't this kind of confusion, the end result was a totally satisfying jam. each one let the other man do what he wanted to do and each player was totally distinctive in their style and they never forgot there was a song going on not just twelve bars, they didnt step on each others solos . if any players did play at the time it made sense like a horn section. piazza, hummel , bgarath and kim are great players. this video doenst show them in the best light. as to butterfield , i cant say that any of these players were light years behind butterfield in fact these players have evolved to light years past butterfield. buterfield field had a beginers mind he did not improvise in the same way butterfield inprovisations were basically note to note ascending and decending rather than phrase to phrase. the good thing about beginners mind is thats how so many players develop there style. i remember a story where this musician was trying to play a little walter lick and after he played it , he told an old timer i screwed that up. the old timer turned to the musician and said no you didnt you was just playing yourself,
Mike - I don't think anyone is confusing speed with overblows. It's simply that a lot of overblow players also play at high speed. That is why they always get mentioned in these kind of debates.
JNRB's version of Mellow Down Easy clearly owes more to Butterfields version than Little Walter. I suspect that if you asked Jason he would say he's nodding to his influences from both of them.
To me however it's immaterial really. The point is that however the music is played it's the music that's and important nothing else. If Jason, Carlos, etc had not used the effects and techniques they do they would still shine through because of their musicianship. The same (in reverse) is true of Piazza, Wilson, etc.
To me they are all creative, all talented and all great players. They all deserve to be listened to and acknowledged for the talents they have and the music they have given us. Whichever way they approach it.
Last Edited by on Feb 16, 2010 7:54 AM
In regards to alleycatjoes statement as far as volume levels go. I just purchased a 4X10 HarpKing from Rod Piazza. I built my own custom Bassman,and after years of money and mods,I sold it to buy a HarpKing. This amp is lightyears ahead of any amp I have played-and I have played through them all. It's louder and more feedback resistant than any amp out there. With all the built in Kinder controls and 2 KT-88 power tubes,this amp is a monster. Of course,Rod's technique and total mastery of the instrument counts for a lot too. I remember Adam writing for Living Blues magazine-that was when I first met Rod. Adam wrote a great article on my good freind Mason Casey,and how he would scientifically cut his speakers for that cone-ripping distortion.
I like good harp players,period. I don't want to split hairs on whether they are "modern" or not. Does their music/playing move me. Are they capable of making me go "ahhh". The harp blowout format is sort of confining and that vid,after about 3 minutes, had my mind drifting to whether I should do my laundry today.All those guys are capable of making me go "ahhh",but not on that vid. At one of his gigs,I asked Jason if he'd ever be in one of Hummel's Harp Blowouts. He just laughed and said"No way,I'd never get invited".
All of the above comments are valid. We enjoy the music we can or choose to wrap our head around. This experience is unique to the individual, and/or the generation. I remember my parents comment when hearing my new copy of "Fresh Cream", and I vowed to never become them. "You call this music?" Pluto
You know one thing I hate about "classical" music? It's dead to the world. It only lives when it is intentionally resurrected by people with a passion for it. Will the blues suffer the same fate? I think it will.
I like what Buddha said in response to the "overblows and playing fast" having no soul: Namely, that other instruments play BARRAGES of notes to express themselves, such as Stevie Ray vaughn, John Coltrane, Charlie Parker, etc. When listening to this clip:
THAT is how all other instruments play their guitar, sax, etc. The work required to play that free and in that manner is more than most are willing to do. IMHO, I think many resign themselves saying, "if I can't play that well I might as well just stick to old faithful (1-6)." Nothing wrong with that, just to me it's like playing the guitar and only playing 1/2 the instrument and 1/2 the scales available. All the players playing kinda sound the same to me. That's not bad, I just think for such masters their sound should be MORE distinctive than they are.
For example:
In jazz, when jazz masters play you can tell each individuals sound, no question. It is never a question of "why is he playing all the notes." That is just a ridiculous discussion IMO because the diatonic harmonica HAS all the notes and needs to be accepted as a chromatic instrument. Period. ALL harmonica players should be excited that their own instrument allows them full access!
Last but not least, if a harmonica player played like this:
"You know one thing I hate about "classical" music? It's dead to the world. It only lives when it is intentionally resurrected by people with a passion for it."
Well that simply isn't true. There are and always have been many composers and musicians that create and innovate in the arena of "Classical" music. That form of music has survived for hundreds of years. What we should maybe ask ourselves is whether or not any forms of contemporary music will survive for hundreds of years.
Point taken. When I was writing, I thought, "wait, what about that mojo song?" but decided to leave it out.
Kingley,
Gonna have to disagree with you there. Do I say it's not awesome? No, else my life would not be dedicated to it.
I just don't want to see blues slowly slide in the direction of classical and jazz music, where schools are full of professors who tell you how to do it. Where there is a shining ideal that you must strive for, which, once you attain, you ask yourself: "Ok, why am I doing this again?"
Especially if that ideal is to only stick to half the instrument.
I simply cannot understand the desire to frame the blues in such a small box.
