"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."
I think you're really misunderstanding what we've been talking about. Nobody is saying you need to OB to be a great or innovative player. Go back and read ALL of Adam's posts on this thread, he even mentions two modern and progressive players who don't use OBs.
Like I was saying, it isn't about whether or not you OB, it is about whether you try to push outside the set boundries of the instrument and create your own sound, instead of simply emulating the greats of the past.
All the people on Adam's "greats list" are players who were innovative in their own time and created their own unique sound instead of simply playing like their predecesors. There's nothing wrong with keeping that style alive, and trying to play just like Little Walter, or one of the other greats, but you will never truly be like one of the greats if you don't push the boundries (or try to innovate), and create your own unique sound. Using OB can be a part of this innovation/boundry pushing(because it opens a whole new range that wasn't previously available on the instrument), but you don't necessarily need to use them(look at Sugar Blue for example).
It seems this same type of argument keeps popping up in different forms. It makes me think people aren't actually bothering to read what has already been written in this thread, and are just immediately jumping to conclusions(although I understand it takes a long time to wade through over 100 posts).
Last Edited by on Feb 18, 2010 11:19 PM
"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."
The point being made is that if you want to write Haiku you have to observe the forms. If you go outside the forms then you are not writing Haiku. Equally, if you want to play certain kinds of blues or jazz or country, amongst certain musicians, then you have to observe the forms. Of course, you can go outside the forms, and it can be very cool. There's nothing stopping you except your possible desire to play within the form as an artistic choice.
Phogi wrote:
"I simply cannot understand the desire to frame the blues in such a small box. "
My analogy is one way of answering that. Just as some people want to write Haiku within the confines that define the genre, so too do some people want to create blues without moving on to blues-rock or whatever. There is still beautiful haiku being written today, within the form - just as there is beautiful blues being made within certain forms. The fact that you can use unlimited vocabulary within Haiku does not change the fact that it is limited by the structure. Three lines. Five, seven and five syllables. Use whatever words you want, but if you use too many or too few syllables or lines, it's no longer Haiku. It may be fantastic, just as stretching outside of the blues may be fantastic, but it's no longer Haiku. I totally respect anyone's artistic decision to play inside, outside or across genres. But what I am trying to explain is why some people prefer to create within self-imposed constraints, and why that is still perfectly valid and creative.
Hope this helps. Or refer to my earlier explanation if the analogy isn't clear to you:
"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."
@jodanchudan: welcome to the discussion. Looks like you'll have no trouble fitting in.
Last Edited by on Feb 18, 2010 11:00 PM
OK - crappola.... I made it to this far (actually only the top of page 3 only) in the thread and decided my time was better spent smoking a CAO Brazilia and figuring out how I could best make folks cry, laugh, or whatever the emotion it was I hoped to convey. Then again I can attest to several interlopers into my mental space such as; work pages for a problem resolution in the ICU, reflection on the loss of friends that has been my misfortune to endure, familial malfeasances, Olympic athletic observances for my entertainment, and political deferences that have me more than melancholy and perplexed as to how to make a difference. Somehow the dialogue of OB's vs. non-OB's has me feeling that whatever your bent is on this issue is acceptable and there is no point in arguing over preferences. Pardon my malfeasant demeanor - I mean no offense. Peace all.
Here's traditional blues guitar/harp setup, just simply amazing. Carlos is immediately recognizable and I'm sure if he was playing among those 4 harmonica players, he's the only one I'd be sure was Carlos Del Junco. I think he has the BEST tone on his overblows I've ever heard. VERY consistent.
talking about famous harpists, I don't know why people talk so much about Little Walter and so little about Junior Wells. To me, JW was much better than LW, plus he sang a lot better and made better music.
