[Harp-L] Re: future harmonicas and all that

[Jonathan Ross <jross38@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> As you said, in almost all musical genres harmonica plays a minor  
> role. But in blues the harmonica is NOT an occasional instrument.  
> Guitar and vocals are almost always present but in post war blues,  
> harp is also very dominant. No need to mention names but since SBW  
> 1 up to this day there have been countless harp players who have  
> contributed to the richness of the genre. Muddy Waters insisted  
> that a good blues band has to have an excellent harp player.

Very true, though I have a CD of Muddy touring Britain without a harp  
player that is amongst my favorites of his stuff.  In any event, look  
at the last fifty years and the majority of artists in that time-- 
sure, a good amount of harmonica players, but more guitarists and  
thus more bands without harmonica than with.

> Drums or bass central to the genre? Ok, in the sense that they are  
> essential to the total concept.

Exactly--the players may not be influential or well known, but they  
are always there and basically a pre-requisite for the overwhelming  
majority of blues acts over the last fifty years.

>  In any genre, all instruments play their part and in blues the  
> harmonica is very often in the leading role.

But that's part of my point--the harmonica is a lead instrument, and  
usually only a lead instrument.  Thus it is either there as the lead  
or not at all (for the most part).  The bass is almost always there,  
the drums are almost always there, the guitar is always there  
(individual exceptions do prove these rules--Richard has a long list,  
but it is a tiny fraction compared to the list of equally well known  
or well selling blues acts which fit the sense of what is commonly  
used and indeed thought of as needed).

Fernando actually covered this well, but I figured it bears repeating.




 ()()    JR "Bulldogge" Ross
()  ()   & Snuffy, too:)
`----'