how is that a lame argument? it just seems to add to
the proof that instruments, no matter how popular, are
often relegated to or left out of certain genres
because they don't fit either the musicians' or
audiences' idea about which instruments play which
kind of music. there will always - ALWAYS - be
exceptions, but that isn't to say there is no merit to
JR's point.
> facing extinction:
> CLARINET-once was king--good luck today in jazz or
pop, relegated to
> emotional and comic status in advertising. I am not
counting orchestral
> appearances!
> tenor banjo
> tuba
> bass sax
> accordian (there is a reason that so many old tube
amps had an accordian
> channel)
> solo basson
> solo oboe
> solo bass clarinet
i find it interesting, for no particular reason, that
at least 2 of those have shown up alot recently in
"jam" jazz recordings - the tuba and the bass
clarinet. i think that's true for bass sax as well,
but i'm not sure. by the way, Hazmat Modine has not
only TWO harmonicas, but a tuba and often a (sort of)
bass sax ;)
it's also fair to say that "jazz" as it was known when
alot of those intruments were more popular is VERY
different than it is today.
> BTW: This year's Downbeat Critic's Poll gave
Miscellaneous Instrument honors
> to:
> Once again Toots
> and
>
> RS (Rising Star) Gregoire Maret (Harmonica)
>
> not bad for this dinosaur instrument that gets no
respect.
of course, both are chromatic players. this discussion
began with the a look at the diatonic harmonica's
limitations in genres like jazz. has Howard ever
gotten that honor, by the way?