Re: Suzuki Pro-master valved

[Mike Curtis <wd6ehr@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> > There's no such thing as a "right" sound.
> > 
> > If you never try anything new, how are you going to progress?

> As Tim said, I'm not interested in jumping into this flame war, but in 
> this case I believe Neil should check out the difference 
> between progressing in your artform and just making noise.  Not appealing 
> noise, just very loud noise.  Rocket knows what he's talking about, he's 
> proven it many times before.

I also don't want to get into an argument, but do feel a need to point 
out that 1. I play a valved Suzuki, and 2. I play VERY melodically and 
polished.  I don't "make noise".  I gave that up in the late 60's when I 
quit playing acid rock and went into jazz, bossa nova, and other styles 
requiring a precise, quality sound.  You don't do tunes like "More", 
"Desafinato", "Quiet Nights of quiet stars", "Satin Doll", or "Mozarts 
concerto 21 in C major" sounding like the Sex Pistols running through a 
Big Muff and Kustom.  You do these getting nice, mellow, resonant harp, 
nice, mellow, plucked guitar, and nice, mellow bass and brushed drums.  
Or at least that's how _I_ do them.

I've corresponded with Rocket privately, and believe he's the harp player
you say he is.  His knowledge would certainly be indicative of a high 
degree of harp proficiency.  This is not what I'm taking issue with.

I actually play the valved harp and know its capabilities.  You don't see
me posting much on chromatic, bass harp, country harp, chord harp, etc.,
because I'm not much into C&W, don't play a lot of chromatic, and have
never played chord, bass, or other esoteric harps.  I've received many
comments from those who enjoy my posts.  I feel this is because I make my
best effort to speak on topics I know about, research facts to the best of
my ability, and keep my big mouth shut on things I don't know about.  Size
13-EEE's can be painful when taken orally :-)

But at the risk of making everyones "Popper list", I do things on the
valved harp that simply are not possible on normal diatonics, even with
overblows and overdraws.  Am I special?  Boy, I sure hope not!  I honestly
feel that there are MANY other harp players that could do these things, if
they'd give the valved harp a chance, and take the time to learn its
nuances, capabilities, and limitations.  Believe me, the capabilities FAR
outweigh the limitations. 

But when people make snap judgments about the valved harp, without ever 
actually trying it (giving enough time to use it right), this can be 
defined as "prejudice" (making ones mind up without all the facts.)  

Don't you all feel the same when some <fill in instrument of your choice> 
player tells you the harmonica is "not a serious instrument"?

Valved diatonic is _my_ instrument, and has been getting a lot of bad 
press from folks who've not heard one, or seriously tried to learn it.


Is there "no such thing as a right sound"?  Ask Little Walter when he came
up with "amplified harp", or Jimi Hendrix when he was working on his
stuff.  Or what about Bob Dylan, who received incredibly bad press about
his vocal style, but the "folk music" community ate it up!  What about
"Rap" music?  Hey, I'll even take a pot shot at Rap - I think they left
off the "C".  Most of it sounds bad to my ear. 

But is it "wrong" because I don't like it?  Is Clint Black "terrible" 
because he's not a great harmonicist?  (I've heard him on TV, and he 
sounded pretty good to me.)  Or is Dylan, for that matter?

In my not so humble opinion, no it's not.  Music is art, and art is
subjective.  I know some people who hate blues and Big Walter, jazz and
Coltrane, classical and Yo Yo Ma.  And I know some people who hate
harmonica altogether.  When I was 20 years old, this bothered me.  Now
that I'm 47, I've accepted this.  

People are different.  Ears are different.  Cultures are different

That's why there are so many different musical styles and sounds.  Some
play our "standard" 12 tone octave, be it equal or just intonation :-) But
in many parts of the world, they use vastly different scales, with as many
as 54 different notes per octave.  Octaves are determined by physics and
unalterable, but divisions within octaves can be, and are, divided
according to whim and whimsy.  

Tonality is also a matter of preference.  Listen to Indian Raga music,
with its subtle (and not so subtle) dissonances, distinct lack of bass,
heady dose of harmonic overtones, and improvisational nature.  Compare
this to European classical music, with its totally structured basis, full
range sound, and almost total lack of indivualistic expression other than
technique and intensity, compared to jazz and other improvisational forms.
Compare the highly structured form of classical music to the largely
unstructured. more atonal blues idiom, or the more structured and more 
tensioned form, jazz, with its emphasis on bass.

Certain sounds that work well with one form of music won't work well with
another.  Maybe an instrument I enjoy with a particular style of music
would be one you wouldn't enjoy.  Am I right and you're wrong?  Depends on
which of us is asked :-)

Art is not science.  It's opinion.  A rose, by any other name, would be a 
gzormitoff :-)

We're all better off being open minded about things, and this is what 
Neil was trying to say.  Bing open minded is not the same as being 
tasteless, mindless, or opinionless.  It's just the ability to wait until 
we have all the facts before making up our minds.

Please don't take this wrong.  I'm just trying to set the record straight 
on the valved diatonic, which I personally feel is the future of serious 
diatonic harp.


 -- mike