Doggycam- I think part of the problem is for music to have edge a little dissonance can be a good thing, but depending on what you grew up listening to different things will have a dissonant edge to it. The Muddy Water's video you defied us not to move to really didn't move me. The plinky piano sounded dissonant to my tastes, but, maybe because that wasn't the focus of the song it didn't add anything and the tempo didn't do anything for me. I've heard lots of covers that I liked better.
Of course, I come at this from an odd direction. I grew up on heavy metal and hard rock and am looking to inject blues into my playing, not starting from blues looking to inject (or not inject) something into it.
I am not really sure it is fair to use Jason Ricci as an example of modern blues harmonica... he says he just plays music. It seems like for him blues is a touchstone, but he really has freed himself from most of the formality of the form. Modern harmonica, for sure, modern blues harmonica.. more than that.
Del Junco and DeLay, on the other hand I can buy for that argument.
One thing is certain, most people contributing to this thread care deeply about music and the place of harmonica in that music. That is really great.
I share the enthusiasm for Stevie Ray. I'm working on a version of "Pride and Joy" for harp and footdrums. I think that that sort of deep-groove blues-rock is under-exploited by harp players. That's where I'm going these days.
Okay you blues Guitar players. I got into this argument with a buddy about which one of the Vaughn brothers was the better blues guitar player. Give me your vote. Perhaps this should be another thread.
LR-most traditonal? Jimmie. Most emotive and fun to listen to? Stevie.
Kudzu-Pride and Joy, Cold Shot and Willie the Wimp-all great on harp-I've done them for years. I use a leslie effect pedal(rotovibe) on Willie the Wimp sometimes. Actually, that last one would be a great OMB tune, I would think. ---------- Todd L Greene. V.P.
Last Edited by on Feb 17, 2010 10:30 AM
LR, in my opinion (as a non-player) Jimmy Vaughan is a really solid player. But with his speed, agility, innovation and sheer face-ripping intensity, Stevie is on a completely other plane.
You can hear it in the songs where they play together.
As far as what musics are "dead," if you tend to listen from the hobbyist view of things, your listening scope is decidely narrower than the majority of pro musicians tend to be.
There was a time as a young pup musician, I couldn't stand to listen to a lot of things, like the Lawrence Welk show on TV and hearing endless Beer Barrel Polkas, of the big band swing thing, but as you evolve as a musician, especially more so as a pro, you tend to find out that many of your heroes had a far wider ear for listening to stuff you'd never think they'd listen to, or understand the grooves to, etc., and that's where I am today at 54 years old.
I've probably listened to a far wider variety of music genres and sub genres than the vast majority of people who post here do and so I have a wider ear for things.
Learning groove of all these different styles helps out a lot and I've been in situations where I suddenly had to learn to play stuff I wasn't crazy about, or found it difficult to dance to as some have pointed, but once you gain a true understanding of how things work, that mindset you wind up thinking was pretty dumb and you learn to adapt.
One thing to remember, something older can be adapted to something newer, but unfortunately, it doesn't work very well the other way around.
Nacoron, since you're coming from the heavy metal thing, the whole groove is so totally different, usually played far ahead of the beat, often off the 1 and the 3, and it takes a big learning curve to adjust to blues or black music as a general rule because the grooves are so vastly different and metal rarely uses space well. ---------- Sincerely, Barbeque Bob Maglinte Boston, MA http://www.barbequebob.com CD available at http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/bbmaglinte
Music is "dead" when it does not live on it's own. That does not mean it's not good, that does not mean its not worth listening to.
Gonna have to (respectfully) disagree with your stereotypes though Bob.
I'm no "Hobbyist" in the realm of classical music. Yet my opinion stands firm: Classical music has lost much of its vibrancy. That does not mean that it is not moving or worthwhile or not great music. But despite its elaborate support network, it's having trouble staying afloat. While I do see a few upswings (of interest), and major developments in players abilities (primarily owing to quality teaching), most people (the prospective audience) just don't give a damn. Symphonies all over the country have been going broke for my whole life. Major innovations are not necessarily moving things forward. So wait...we are going to have stuff that's even MORE dissonant that Pierre Boulez? Gee, sign me up that, it'll be a great time. /sarcasm
Perhaps its a failure to adapt. Perhaps its a failure to connect to the audience. Perhaps the tide will turn and the artform will thrive again. I don't have the answer, and I don't think anyone does. Perhaps its just a sign of the gradual death of white culture in America. Perhaps the world is waiting for another great communicator like Bernstien. In my mind the genre is dying, and desperately needs new life breathed into it.
I think the problem is too big for me to wrap my pea brain around. How can so many people not care about that which I care about so deeply my whole life (personal and professional) is dedicated to it?
Everything comes and goes in cycles and public taste, as I have personally seen things in my lifetime,is extremely fickle.
The so called "Nazis" of Classical music are generally are found here in the US far more than Europe. White culture's roots are clearly rooted in Europe and even the blues has some of that too, but it's biggest roots, being from Africa, when first introduced to the white audience, it basically stuck European based musc conventions AKA Westen Music on its ear with great use of minor 3rds played in major, etc., much as does what's happening with hiphop or even the newest Latino music offshoot, reggaeton is doing right now.
Things I've seen that were "hip" years ago, became un-hip, I've also seen become "hip" again, maybe not played exactly the same way, but nevertheless, it's there.
Even as someone like myself, being from a more traditional approach, even if one is doing something with a 50's groove and feel, you cannot completely go back to it in its entirety, but things do have to adapt, usually more subtle than in your face.
It's something on the classical front that many centuries ago, guys like Mozart improvised fugues on pianos and today's classical music often shuns even the slightest hint of improvisation, and maybe there will be someone that will come around to get that back into the game again, as Larry Adler did to classical music when he was the first harmonica player to play Minuet in G on harmonica, an instrument many classical musicians/fans at the time looked down upon. ---------- Sincerely, Barbeque Bob Maglinte Boston, MA http://www.barbequebob.com CD available at http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/bbmaglinte
I love these guys too...they are like the tasteful B.B.Kings of the harp world. But after a while, you may want to listen to some guitar playing that makes you go...hey...what did he just play...haven't heard that before. Something like you might get from a Robbin Ford or Scott Henderson or Larry Carlton. It's like those older style harp players have say a vocabulary of like 100 licks that they use over and over with slight variations. I think the reason Adam was so suprised when Rod Piazza actually went up to the second octave was that these guys almost never go there. But Adam plays in the second octave all the time. Jason most certainly as well. And they still know the 100 licks the other guys know as well. Jason plays fast but it's not just a bunch of notes for the sake of playing fast. They are mixed in with all the soulful stuff. To my ears, I love them all but Adam and especially Jason are just more interesting.
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.
The surprise for me is that you found that impressive.
It makes you realize that the other players are all pretty much working over the same ground: Holes 1-6, Little Walter style.
I think your use of the phrase "Little Walter style" doesn't tell the whole story, and is also telling. To me the least interesting players were Piazza and Hummel. Also, Piazza, Hummel and Bharath had more of a Little Walter bag going on. I heard quite a bit of James Cotton and Big Walter coming from Kim Wilson, who is NO Little Walter copyist. You gotta listen more widely. Sometimes I think it's not the trad guys who are obsessed with Little Walter.
I don't believe I heard one overblow here, but I'll be happy if somebody hears something I missed.
And so what? For you OBs are the cutting edge? WTF?
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.
Estrin: yes. He's got a distinctive voice.
What's the value in analysing these players when they were playing in what to my ears sounds like an over-loud trainwreck of a jam. I bet it was WAY too loud. We even see Hummel turn around and turn up his amp - but he doesn't need to. I hate it when guys do that and I know I don't play my best stuff when I am trying to blow my brains out through the harp. Who does?
As to distinctive sounds, I'd agree with you regards Hummel. To me he is the prime emulator of older guys. I wouldn't be able to pick out Bharath. He certainly sounds like Little Walter.
But Piazza and Kim definitely have recognizable tones. (Though I don't go for Piazza's sound).
Back to this issue of 1-6 limitations and your desire to hear people advancing the harp... I suggest you buy Wilson's Smoking Joint album. His work in 3rd position IS an advance. If I could find an OB practitioner who could match that killer 40s and 50s style sax phrasing with the huge tone, I might consider messing with OBs. But Wilson proves you don't need them to sound better and more muscular, with a deeper sense of swing, than anyone playing jazz stylings on the harp.
Last Edited by on Feb 17, 2010 10:31 PM
"I simply cannot understand the desire to frame the blues in such a small box."
That's because you clearly are obsessed with the technicalities. Blues isn't about that. It's about a deep groove and the boundless possibilities within the discipline.
Nobody with any artistic sense would say, "I simply cannot understand the desire to frame poetry within the small box that is Haiku." Instead we enjoy the amazing skill that a great poet has in evoking moods and concepts within the constraints of the form. No one would consider Haiku a dead art - it retains creative possibilities limited only by the skill and imagination of the poet and the reader. If you simply can't enjoy and appreciate the beauty of the blues and understand why people dedicate their lives to the impossible goal of mastering it, then that is down to the limits of your own taste and artistic vision, not any failings of the form.
IMHO they're still light years behind butterfield. That's just my taste not the law of the universe."
Horse for courses - exactly. To me, Butterfield is the least interesting, most overrated harmonica player, with the exception of a few others.
Butterfield sounds way too pushy and rocky for my tastes. His near contemporary, James Cotton, leaves him in the dust for creativity, tone and a unique identifiable voice on the harp. Of course, just an opinion.
@Ev630 "Nobody with any artistic sense would say, "I simply cannot understand the desire to frame poetry within the small box that is Haiku." Instead we enjoy the amazing skill that a great poet has in evoking moods and concepts within the constraints of the form. No one would consider Haiku a dead art - it retains creative possibilities limited only by the skill and imagination of the poet and the reader. If you simply can't enjoy and appreciate the beauty of the blues and understand why people dedicate their lives to the impossible goal of mastering it, then that is down to the limits of your own taste and artistic vision, not any failings of the form."
Just as Haiku is a form, so is blues and music in general. But Haiku allows all the different words, simply in different combinations. Your analogies are WAY off. And nobody is disagreeing with you that these 4 players are not master blues harmonica players, but at this point in time, the harmonica is advancing towards becoming a fully chromatic instrument and newer generations of players will NOT help to contribute to making the blues a dogmatic idiomatic form. It is an ever evolving style. I think an important question to ask is why these players don't play chromatically? A hint for the answer: it's not because they can't STAND the sound of E-flat, F#, B-flat, C#, etc. ;)
I agree with Michael, your haiku analogy is off. The haiku form is more analogous to the 12 bar blues form(which is not what was being refered to when saying blues was being framed in too small a box).
Also it seems you chose to not completely read and understand everything Adam wrote. Adam never said the high end riff Piazza played was extremely difficult and impressive. What he was saying was it stood out and made him pay attention, because, for the most part, the guys who play in that style almost never play things like that. They rarely make it up to the top octave when playing in 2nd position.
"And so what? For you OBs are the cutting edge? WTF?"
Here again you misrepresent what Adam was saying. He even addressed this in one of the replies he made in this thread, I suggest you go read it because he really doesn't need me to speak for him.
Last Edited by on Feb 17, 2010 11:14 PM
"Just as Haiku is a form, so is blues and music in general. But Haiku allows all the different words, simply in different combinations. Your analogies are WAY off."
But Haiku doesn't allow any number of lines or syllables. My analogy is perfectly correct. Your understanding of the Haiku form is what is "WAY off." If you don't understand that Haiku is a form that imposes severe restrictions, then I suppose it can't be expected that you would grasp the analogy.
Ryan. See above in response to your not grasping the relevance of the analogy.
Regarding the Piazza run and the OBs: Adam raved about a flashy run up the harp then made a comment that he hadn't seen any OBs, alas. I think it's perfectly reasonable to infer from that - and from knowing Adam's interests and skills - that he kind of wished he had heard some OBs.
Hope this helps.
Last Edited by on Feb 17, 2010 11:18 PM
@ Ev630 no need to insult my understanding of Haiku. Take a second and realize that Haiku does NOT impose restrictions on the the WORDS used, just as BLUES doesn't impose restrictions on the NOTES used. Just as you CAN use all the notes (on the chromatic scale) in blues (and all the different modes too!), you can you all the words in the english language! Amazing, I know. The blues musicians who impose restrictions do so out of dogma and tradition, not because it is "more expressive" or "better".
@ Ev630. No, you're at absolute zero. I understand that hearing aids are expensive but if you can somehow crank your speakers up and listen to this and still say that overblows sound shitty in a blues context (traditional? what is that? Blues is modern, not a dogmatic classical music), then this is simply a difference of opinion, and for help with that you should see your PCP:
I'm spent. There will probably be overblow haters out there for a while, just like some people hated the Boehm clarinet system. Of course, the Boehm system is now widespread cause it simply opens up more possibilities for technique. History tends to repeat itself, luckily.
You can continue to insist that your haiku analogy fits, but that doesn't make it so. You are talking about the form restrictions of haiku, but we are NOT talking about the form restrictions of blues (such as it chord structure). What we are talking about is self-imposed restrictions that harmonica players place on themsleves that have nothing to with blues form restrictions. There is no reason that a harmonica player couldn't explore outside of these self-imposed restrictions, but still remain within the blues form restrictions.
Last Edited by on Feb 18, 2010 12:04 AM
"Regarding the Piazza run and the OBs: Adam raved about a flashy run up the harp then made a comment that he hadn't seen any OBs, alas. I think it's perfectly reasonable to infer from that - and from knowing Adam's interests and skills - that he kind of wished he had heard some OBs."
I think you need to go back and carefully read ALL of the posts Adam has made in this thread. I don't think there is any need to "infer" anything, he explains exactly what he was saying.
Right, Michael. So, from your perspective there are no limitations imposed when writing Haiku. I can see why the analogy fails to resonate with you.
Regards "traditional"... playing OBs in the blues can be great. I meant that in certain contexts you are expected to work within genre confines, not play outside the genre. If you sat in with Pinetop Perkins and played super fast OB runs with a pedal-enhanced spacey tone, you would be about as welcome as Yngwie Malmsteen sitting in with Oscar Peterson or Norah Jones.
I'm sure you can understand the point being made and that it is not about being dogmatic.
"There will probably be overblow haters out there for a while"
I am not an overblow hater, so don't try that on. But as someone who plays 40s, 50s and 60s blues styles, I am entitled to challenge the intellectually arrogant view that the form is dead and that we all need to embrace a minor facet of the breadth of techniques available to us.
By the way, as it happens, I am a BIG fan of Adam Gussow. His book about his life in the blues, working with Satan, was absolutely terrific and he is an excellent musician. But this is a discussion forum and I came to play.
Last Edited by on Feb 18, 2010 12:17 AM
"There is no reason that a harmonica player couldn't explore outside of these self-imposed restrictions, but still remain within the blues form restrictions."
I completely agree with you. Do that! But if you sat in with Rick Estrin and the Nightcats and played "shred harp" you'd be a disrespectful ignoramus. That's the point I'm making. There were no OBs in that video for the same reason there were no zithers or bongos.
I don't diss OB players. But I'm entitled to push back when OB players slam blues players who want to use traditional methods.
:)
By the way, the Haiku analogy fits perfectly. Your criticism of the analogy by citing traditional players self-imposing limitations would be like criticizing Haiku poets for not embracing iambic pentameter or free verse.
Last Edited by on Feb 18, 2010 12:10 AM
What makes you think I was refering to playing "shred harp"? When we talk about playing outside the box, or modern blues, it doesn't mean we're talking about playing fast, or even using OBs. I also disgree that OBs can't be used to play tastefully in an older blues style. Using OBs doesn't mean you have to play fast (although many people seem to lumb the two together as if they're synonymous), nor does it mean you need to play a bunch "jazzy sounding" notes.
Old school blues players use the blue third/minor third(3 draw with a half step bend) all the time (it's part of the blues scale). Well the 6 OB is that same exact note, only in the second octave. So by using that OB you can move all those old school blues riffs from the bottom octave up to the second octave. So why wouldn't OBs fit perfectly in that old school style of blues? It simply gives you more range. I think Dennis Gruenling has been able to do a great job of this. Here's an example (granted it's more of a swing style and not old school Chicago blues, but if you check out more of Dennis's stuff you'll find better examples):
Do you think the OBs stick out and sound out of place in this? I don't.
Last Edited by on Feb 18, 2010 12:40 AM
@Ev360: "And so what? For you OBs are the cutting edge? WTF?" If you'd read my subsequent posts, I clarify by invoking two non-overblowers, Sugar Blue and Paul Delay, who strike me as wonderfully cutting-edge and entirely individuated. I'd rather not keep repeating myself on this point, and I'd ask that if you're going to challenge me on it, you take the time to read what I've written in this thread.
As I say, I loved my uncle's 1960 Jaguar XK-120 and I respect the guys who create sportscar clubs and stand around admiring such cars. But it's a mistake to pretend that such cars remain as cutting edge as they were in 1960. Little Walter in 1952 WAS cutting-edge. I'm a huge Little Walter fan for that reason. I'm excited by players who honor his approach to music-making, just as I admire car designers who honor Enzo Ferrari's approach to sportcar design: make it beautiful and stylish, but keep pushing the boundaries and don't be dissuaded by people who tell you that all the cool stuff has been figured out already.
Finally, re: your point about Kim Wilson and Little Walter: you and I agree here, at least to some extent. Kim's best stuff is definitely NOT in the LW vein. You've mentioned something from "Smoking Joint," I've mentioned, in another context, "Down at Antone's." But the Little Walter style, as I put it, is where KW tends to go these days. If you listen to the harp-clinic clip that I posted earlier in this thread, his style there is entirely in a Little Walter bag. I don't blame Kim for going there. When you're a young harp player and Muddy Waters says something to the effect of, "You're the best player I've heard since Little Walter," you'd have to be a fool not to honor the master with the sounds you know he likes.
Last Edited by on Feb 18, 2010 4:45 AM
Here let's do a simple analysis of your analogy here Ev630:
Simple Haiku form (5,7,5 syllables) = Simple 12 bar blues form (12 bars!)
English language words used in Haiku (the vocab available) = 12 chromatic notes used in western music (the vocab)
Haiku poet who says "I will only use 7 or 8 words out of the english language) = Blues harmonica player who says "I will only use 7 or 8 notes and 1.75 octaves out of the full chromatic, 3 octave range I have available)
Here's a model for the sort of attitude I'd like to see blues harp players cultivate: Shaun White's approach to the halfpipe. Here he is, getting a new trick ready for the Olympics. (He won the gold medal yesterday.):
Thank you Adam-for that refreshing lillte respit from the rants of EV630-he's trying to do the same thing here that he has on other forums. Tasteless,gruff and frustrated,he requires the onslaught of verbal diarreha for his palet of ubiquitous,sometimes hostile posts.
Last Edited by on Feb 18, 2010 10:31 AM
"Haiku poet who says "I will only use 7 or 8 words out of the english language) = Blues harmonica player who says "I will only use 7 or 8 notes and 1.75 octaves out of the full chromatic, 3 octave range I have available)"
Michael, the point is that both blues and Haiku have restrictions which must be observed. It's a simple point. Your reductio ad absurdum examinations of the analogy are irrelevant. It's an analogy - an analogous situation - not literally identical in every way or form. If it was identical, it would be identical and not an analogy. But that's why we call it "an analogy".
Hope this helps.
Last Edited by on Feb 18, 2010 12:54 PM
"Thank you Adam-for that refreshing lillte respit from the rants of EV630-he's trying to do the same thing here that he has on other forums. Tasteless,gruff and frustrated,he requires the onslaught of verbal diarreha for his palet of ubiquitous,sometimes hostile posts."
Is that you Tom? I think we both know who the hostile one is. Thanks for sending me those angry little off-list emails. Quite a few guys off list have enjoyed reading those exchanges.
Amazing how emotional people become when someone challenges the consensus!
@kudzurunner: Thanks for your response. I know you get what I'm saying Adam, and I know you get that I am not opposed at all to people extending the genre and using advanced techniques. I just think that a) some trainwreck jam or even an hour workshop likely for blues aficionados rather than players are the best place to dissect someone's true style and real importance on the instrument and b) to insist that blues players move in new directions is to miss the point.
By the way, on a related tangent... You're a very experienced player who has studied the length and breadth of the blues genre. Don't you get frustrated when people make statements saying that KW is a Walter clone? I know I do, because I hear very strong influences from Jerry McCain, James Cotton, George Smith, SBWI and II, Junior Wells and Horton. I can't be the only guy hearing all of that, but maybe these younger guys only listen to Walter so they assume all of those phrases are Walter. And of course, this doesn't address the fact that the way KW puts this stuff together and his own signature phrasing and techniques add up to an identifiable style that says "Kim Wilson". These are the same guys who think Cotton is a Little Walter student but can't hear the influences of guys on Cotton before Cotton ever heard Walter and the signature characteristics that Cotton has that came from no one but Cotton.
It seems the more info is on the internet, the less people listen for themselves.
Ev630, I can see lack of logic pervades you so it is rather irrelevant debating with you, but I can't help myself!
"Michael, the point is that both blues and Haiku have restrictions which must be observed."
Wrong - they have FORMS that must be observed. Just as the english language has a certain form and rules that must be followed, yet there are unlimited combinations of expression by using the full vocabulary.
"It's a simple point. Your reductio ad absurdum examinations of the analogy are irrelevant."
You must make them irrelevant in your mind because your ego cannot stand to let logic get in the way of thinking your right, or proving you are wrong.
" It's an analogy - an analogous situation - not literally identical in every way or form. If it was identical, it would be identical and not an analogy. But that's why we call it "an analogy"."
A definition of "analogy" is "transferring information from one particular subject to another particular subject (the target)" in this case Haiku --> Blues. My simple examination shows the weak points in your analogy. If you would like to update it, or spell it out more clearly for all to understand, please do.
Hope this helps.
Last Edited by on Feb 18, 2010 1:59 PM
My own harp listening for blues goes far beyond LW, and it includes nmany predecessors like both SBW's, Rhythm Willie, Will Shade, the whole jug band thing that many here probably never listened to at all.
Cotton comes more from the Rice Miller school of harmonica and had to adapt more of the LW/JW thing when he came to Chicago because those two guys when he came up in the early 50's were the standard bearers.
When I worked with Louisiana Red, subbing for Carey Bell on a short portion of the tour, Red told me he wanted LW and I told him, no problem, but not once did I ever do LW note for note, but basically kept the man's concept and still sounded like me.
Some of the postings here have, unfortunately, been coming off as kind of really hostile sounding and at times over generalizing from both sides that seems like if you don't dig this or that, you're an idiot, and this is sounds too much like the crap that's been going on on Harp-L for too long. ---------- Sincerely, Barbeque Bob Maglinte Boston, MA http://www.barbequebob.com CD available at http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/bbmaglinte
"Ev630, I can see logic pervades you so it is rather irrelevant debating with you, but I can't help myself!"
Michael, thanks for the comment. The word you were looking for was "evades". Your lack of precision in your writing may explain why you can't grasp a simple analogy, and sadly undermines the triumphalism evident in your posts.
Hope this helps.
BBQ Bob, thanks for the metacommentary. I make no apologies for expressing myself in a robust manner when responding to equally robust statements.
Now you can address the rest of my post, Ev630, since it is obvious you let little details distract you in light of the big picture (or post). This would explain why your overall analogy is way off and why instead of simply correcting it, all you can say is "you can't understand it". I think your view of the blues as a "restrictive" form explains why you think "overblows sound shitty in a traditional blues context." Striking out on owns own involves incredible amounts of work and experimentation, which most aren't willing to do, or even accept. I thank you Ev630 for your "robust manner" because it shows me a road I clearly would not want to go down.
As a harp player and as a fan I worship the traditional guys and I love listening to the modern guys also. When I went to hear Jason Ricci (in November '07) he absolutley blew me away. What I would like to know is: As somebody who still can't overblow, will I EVER be a modern player until I do?
"What I would like to know is: As somebody who still can't overblow, will I EVER be a modern player until I do?"
Of course you can be a modern and progressive player without overblows : ) Adam has even mentioned this a couple times in this thread, and he also named a couple of modern/progressive players who don't OB(Sugar Blue and Paul Delay). I don't think anybody could argue against the fact that Sugar Blue has developed his own progressive and modern(and completely unique) sound, and all without the use of OBs.
Last Edited by on Feb 18, 2010 3:06 PM
Ev630: I have to say, while pointing out that someone used a word incorrectly may make you feel better about yourself, it's pretty lame to use it as a way to completely ignore everything that person said.
Last Edited by on Feb 18, 2010 3:15 PM
After doing my newbie best to soak up this thread, I'm still pretty much in the dark about why Hummell et al. don't use overblows. It seems there could be two main classes of reasons: ideological and technical. Ideological: OB's are non-traditional; the Old Masters (their teachers) didn't use them. Technical: they don't like the sound of them. I can't believe that they find them too difficult. The ideological rationale seems silly to me--why forego a great tool just because it's new? The technical rationale seems more plausible to me, even though players like Adam, Jason, Howard, Buddha, Carlos and others can make them sound good to my ears. Maybe they still don't sound good to these guys.
Last Edited by on Feb 18, 2010 4:57 PM
BBQ BOB- Thats why I left harp-l. I liked it here for a while. Then a certain person,who shall remain nameless,shows up to stir the pot-too bad. I have been freinds with Adam since our early days in NYC-I will not be leaving here anytime soon. But it still bothers me.
100 posts on this thread alone...mostly on the advocacy of OB versus traditional. Then, check out the link to the left of "all-time harp greats". The top twenty are ALL non OB'ers and most of the HM's are too.
Arguments like this - traditionalists vs. progressives -always make me think of that scene in Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure, where Beethoven is in the Mall, freaking out on the synths.
If the technology had been there in his day, I bet he'd have used it.
Same goes for Little Walter. I reckon he'd have had a monster pedal board. He was an innovator and a musical explorer. He pushed the boundaries with what he had available to him there and then.
Traditional, progressive, fast, slow, chromatic, diatonic: it's all harp. It's all good to me.
