[Harp-L] re: These overblow guys?

[Jonathan Ross <jross38@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

All quotes JohnnieHarp:


"Bottom-line, why should a player care what their acoustic tone is, IF
they play through electronics in any case, and end up with the desired
result through their customary rig?"

Perhaps they shouldn't.  But, if one wants to get the most it would  
probably be good to start from a more solid ground than not.  Even  
with effects (though less with more radical things than most  
harmonica players use--including Ricci and even Madcat) the  
individual's acoustic tone comes through to an often startling  
degree.  So any properties the acoustic tone has will be reflected  
when amplified (which is really what playing "electric" harmonica is).


" I doubt that tone is a contentious
discussion amongst UN-PLUGGED electric guitarists. "


I wouldn't know.  But they aren't amplifying the acoustic sound of  
the string, rather they are using the magnetic signal generated by  
pickups and amplifying that.  A better example would be acoustic  
guitarists using pick-ups and microphone systems to amplify their  
sound (as most do nowadays), and I think you would find a very  
similar discussion about tone there.



"The “biggest/fattest” acoustic tones that I've “perceived” in any vids
belong to Christelle (any recent ones with usb condenser mic) and
Chris Michalek (Rock'in in the Rockies Mr. Magic vid from a few years
ago). Both are primarily “non-tongue blockers” I believe."


This shows what makes talking about tone and timbre so very  
difficult: it is entirely based on individual preferences and tastes  
and very subjective.  I certainly wouldn't call either Christelle's  
or Chris's tone "big" or "fat" in the same way I would someone like  
SBW2 or Big Walter.  In the same vein I would say that Adler had a  
very large, round tone whereas Toots had a much cleaner, tighter  
tone.  And there are reasons why all of these people developed the  
tone they have for the music they play.  Big Walter's large and round  
tone might not work in the more jazz-fusion music that Chris plays  
where his, complex, cutting tone fits, for instance.  Similarly,  
Adler's huge sound might not have worked in the smaller post-bop  
combos where Toots made his living.

Consider Louis Armstrong and Miles Davis.  Armstrong had a much wider  
sonic pallete to work with (all the various growls, for instance, and  
a higher high-range) as well as a much more dominant, thicker and  
commanding tone than Miles.  But, I doubt Armstrong's tone would have  
worked in "Sketches of Spain" or "So What".  The key to discussing  
all this for me is to try and be as neutral as possible in phrasing-- 
if you describe Armstrong's tone as "thick", don't then call Miles'  
tone "thin" in order to create a direct (and negative) comparison but  
rather see Miles tone for what it is on it's own right, and use a  
word like "clear" or "clean".  Similarly, don't use "clear" for Miles  
and than "muddy" disparagingly for Louis.  Same with Chris,  
Christelle, SBW2 and Big Walter above.  (I'm not saying JohnnieHarp  
did this, he didn't, just a general observation)


"The bottom line is that not all techniques work equally well for
everybody. We always tend to want what we don't have; grass always
greener on the other side of the fence.  Perhaps a quick harp switch,
is more effective many times (Norton Buffalo, MadCat, etc), if less
elegant? "

Why is it "less elegant"?  Was Rahsaan Kirk's use of multiple saxes  
"less elegant" than Dexter Gordon's use of a single sax?





JR Ross