Re: [Harp-L] Not the same

[Grant Walters <grant@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I've been hiding off in the bushes until you guys got back to this...

Blues guys that play with an OB...
You mention Adam Gussow who you'all know quite well I take it.
I have never had the pleasure of hearing him live...only seen his playing on you tube lessons.

Is there a particular song or two I should look into to hear him in action.

search of internet finds an Octavio Castro...any tune I should look for...of his.


Finally, I Found Chris Michalek  (I've seen some links posted here before)
Any particular tunes for him I should find?

Thanks again Mr. Ross for getting to the point I was looking for in all this...
Obviously I can find some on my own...just wondered if there are any shortcuts to this illustration.

Thus far Carlos Del Junco has had the greatest impact on me ( due to following Harp-L)   Revolutionary mambo stuff.
Thanks again for any feedback..(wait... not "feedback " please...bad omen)...any ideas.  
Or other revolutionary OB on the Blues guys.

Grant







On Feb 11, 2010, at 4:55 PM, Jonathan Ross wrote:

> All quotes are Zach:
> 
> "The one thing I STILL haven't figured out is why people are flipping out
> over this! An overblow is the SAME as a bend! "
> 
> No it isn't.  Overblows are a different physical interaction than either dual or single reed bends.  A technical answer, perhaps, but an important one when talking about these things.
> 
> 
> "If you think a bend sounds
> more natural than an overblow you aren't listening good. "
> 
> I would avoid the term "natural" entirely.  It is a weighted term, and poorly applied if it includes bends and doesn't include overblows.  Given notes (the notes the reed plays at a steady pressure and not coupled to a tuned resonant chamber), bends and overblows all exhibit differences in timbre and articulation.  I have used the terms "natural" and "accidental" as a borrow from pianos to categorize the difference between how these three groups of sounds are created: a dichotomy where the first group (given) is distinct from the second and third (bends and overblows) due to the processes used in playing them.
> 
> "If a guitarist
> bends a note and he isn't experienced, it will sound sucky. It's that way
> with EVERYTHING. Just because you hear a few bad players doesn't mean
> everyone sucks. "
> 
> I've heard everyone.  I've heard bends, overblows and natural notes played well and horribly.  It mostly depends on context and the individual playing.
> 
> 
> "Otavio, Michalek, Levy; those three in my opinion proof the
> musicality aspect of them as they use them extensively for musical purposes.
> I don't state Jason Ricci because he is mostly a blues rock player and he
> used the flat third and flat fifth mostly, those other guys are using ALL of
> the overblows and overdraws for every scale degree."
> 
> And whether they succeed or not musically is often in the ear of the beholder.  But, isn't talking about why, when and where they do and do not succeed of worth in terms of learning both the possibilities and limitations of the technique they tend to focus on (playing highly chromatic jass-fusion on the diatonic)?
> 
> Besides, I'd say for the discussion of overblows in the blues (which is where this thread started) the people I'd most think would be significant would be Del Junco, Ricci and Adam Gussow.  But perhaps this thread is now more about the "chromatic diatonic" approach, which isn't really about overblows but using overblows and bends in a particular genre and with a particular goal.
> 
> 
> 
> JR Ross
> 
>