Diatonic # blues (was Re: harp-l-digest V11 #79)

[Fred S <fsstov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

It was written in response to
>>   Music interest - Jazz, Swamp Blues, Folk, Pop, Classical
that
>My guess is that, with your experience on other instruments, you would
find a diatonic,
>with the notes F and A missing from the bottom octave, the note B
missing from the top
>octave and the two middle octaves laid out differently (not to mention
the absence of
>any chromatic notes, obviously) pretty frustrating, compared to a chro
which has all 12
>notes in all three octaves and the layout of each octave is the same.
>There's no doubt a diatonic is great for playing blues...

To which I reply (noting that the # in the title is meant to be a 'not
equal' sign):
I wouldn't be so hasty in writing off a diatonic for the styles the
original poster mentioned.  Certainly there are lots of examples of
swamp blues, folk and pop on a diatonic without extended techniques.
Yes, some bending is required, but this is often used to a positive
effect.  Lots of songs in these styles can be played with minimal
bending.  A fair amount of (simple) classical can be played in 1st
position.  Also, don't forget about Melody Maker or Paddy Richter
tuning, which does get you the low A without bending.  Jazz is certainly
more of a reach, but even there a MM tuning can be used on some
chestnuts.  So while a chromatic might be your best bet for jazz and
classical, I'm not sure that is necessarily true for swamp blues, folk,
pop, (or country).  It may be best to make a modest investment in a
diatonic (although that will definitely limit your key selections) and
see how you like the diatonic approach before buying a chromatic.  Even
if you end up on a nice chromatic, it will be fun to honk on the
diatonic every now and then.
My $0.02
Fred S