Re: [Harp-L] Re: OB style Klezmer on the diatonic - introducingJasonRosenblatt

[<lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> I have heard a lot of overblowers, and I don't think I've heard
> anyone do something because someone else couldn't.  Yes, there is
> some aspect of pride and ego at being able to pull off a good
> chromatic run, but I don't think it's ever to stick it in the face
> of someone who isn't as technically proficient.  I've heard many a
> great player who didn't use overblows stun a group with something
> particularly tasteful, certainly because they could, but not because
> others couldn't.

You're right. they do it because they can. That was badly formulated on my
part. Still, doing it because you can is different from doing it because it
will sound good...

> I think there's something to be said for reaching above your
> ability, not below, for practicing and performing and recording
> things that stretch your abilities.  I'd rather hear Carlos Del
> Junco do something really innovative and miss a couple of notes than
> hear the same old rehashed blues number for the umpteenth time
> played "flawlessly".

In terms of practice, absolutely. Even in terms of putting youself in
danger. But a tasteful musician, in my opinion, needs to hear when he's
going beyond his ability to pull it off. And I'm surprised that some of
these overblowers, who are often presented as the consummate musicians,
don't know when to stop.

Would you rather hear Carlos del Junco integrate a bridge going through all
keys in a blues songs with many squeaks, chokes and lost rhythmic patterns,
just because that's devilishly tricky ? Not to slam Carlos, there's loads of
stuff he's done that I love, but I'd rather he simply hadn't done that...

To me, the consummate harp player is someone whose playing will appeal to
anyone. That kind of stuff only appeals to harp players because they are
impressed by the technicality of it.

That being said, I'm all with you about not wanting to hear the same old
blues rehashed. But then again some players like Paul deLay manage to steer
away from that without overblows...

> In fact, it's very difficult to hit overblows
> quickly and in passing without choking them.

But it's even harder to play certain sequences of note slowly, trying to
have round and beautiful notes that include obs. I think that was his point,
to some extent (and a lousy cop-out to boot).

> Something Rosco said to me at the Filisko workshop at SPAH this year
> stuck with me.  He said that when he's got a melody or a line that
> has a note with possibly questionable intonation, like a precise
> bend or overbend, that's a note he's going to lean on, to emphasize,
> to push to the limit.  His demonstration of that was eye-opening
> (and ear-opening).  Now, is that musicality or technique?  In my
> opinion, it is both.

I agree. But the fact that he works on it doesn't necessarily mean that it
will ultimately sound good...

> Anyway, I gave up a long time ago thinking that there was something
> called "perfection" in a musical performance.  There's a line beyond
> which musical nuance and interpretation and precision and perfection
> are all blurred together.  I can point out technical imperfections
> in nearly any performance I hear, regardles of the instrument, but
> those "imperfections" are what I think makes a performance perfect.
> They are what makes it a manifestation of the human condition, an
> expression of human emotion and ideas.

Oh, I'm all with you there. But there are flaws and there are flaws. I guess
I shouldn't have focused on overblowers, these traits are shared by many
harp players (and porbably many other instrumlentists full stop) It's just
that a lot of people seem to focus on overblowers as being the top of the
game, and my point (which was poorly expressed, I guess) was that despite
their technical mastery, they were not, on average, better musicians to my
ears than all the rest of the harp players.

Ben