[Harp-L] RE: What makes a "good" player?

[Robert Coble <robertpcoble@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

So as to not be accused of quoting out of context, two entire quotes are below what I write. If I've misunderstood something, please forgive me.
I certainly agree with Elizabeth's caveat: 
"> It's all in one's interpretation of what good is."
But isn't that ALWAYS true, no matter what is being defined?
John's ending definition of a "good player" is:
> What makes a good player? Is the person having fun? That to me makes a good player.........Johnny
To which definition, Elizabeth "couldn't agree more."
Have exercised caution to this point, I now throw caution to the winds and respectfully disagree with this "definition." By it, my 19-month old granddaughter is a "good player"-she certainly does have fun honking on a harmonica! She al;so figured out (on her own) that there are blow AND draw notes. However, I suspect even John and Elizabeth would agree that she is NOT a "good player" by definition, even though she does meet the stringent requirement given. (At the least, as a proud grandfather, I have no expectations that she will be amazing SPAH audiences until after she turns 2 years old!)
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts."Daniel Patrick Moynihan
There must be some set of criteria (other than SOLELY personal opinion) by which one can determine and attribute "good" (which admittedly has several shades of subjectivity attached) to a particular player's attempts to play harmonica. Perhaps this is what triggered Maestro Bonfiglio's response recently.
So, other than simply "having fun", what is an acceptable set of criteria for defining "good" (as in a "good player")? Would a dictionary definition of "good" have any merit whatsoever? (Nah, not in today's "PC" world; that's why I drive an iMac.)
Regards,Crazy (but not insane; look up the definitions in Webster's) Bob
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Elizabeth (in response to John [below]):>  > Couldn't agree more. A 'good' player is one who plays because the music
> is inside and needs to get out, plays cleanly, makes pleasant music people
> are happy to listen to and want to hear more of...he/she doesn't have to have
> expertise.
>
> Perhaps his description is more applicable to a 'pro' or 'expert' player?
>
> It's all in one's interpretation of what good is. I'd be quite happy to
> simply be considered good. I'm not looking to be either a pro or an expert.
>
> Thanks for your down to earth post (still catching up after GSHC)... :)
>
> Elizabeth
>
John:>
> My friend Frank Franz says... Having a PROFOUNDLY solid EFFORTLESS
> unadulterated EXPERTISE- in musical FUNDAMENTALS makes a good player.
> I disagree. I know harp players who have none of that and, in my
> opinion, and to many of my peers, sound fabulous. Sometimes I read all
> the harp-l e-mails and I think, what the hell are they talking about?
> Double overblows, triple tongue blocking ect. ect. Some of the folks
> on this page get way to wrapped up in this kind of stuff. Just get out
> there and have some fun with this little 10 holed jem. For the new
> players who read the harp-l pages, I suggest you listen to your
> favorite players and practice there licks and before you realize it,
> you will be coming up with licks of your own. What makes a good
> player? Is the person having fun? That to me makes a good
> player.........Johnny
>

 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft's powerful SPAM protection.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141664/direct/01/
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141664/direct/01/