Re: [Harp-L] Re: groove or not..and "Difficult" as a concept
- To: "JON KIP" <jonkip@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Harp-l" <harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [Harp-L] Re: groove or not..and "Difficult" as a concept
- From: gnarlyheman@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2013 17:15:41 +0000
- Cc:
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:content-transfer-encoding:reply-to:references :in-reply-to:sensitivity:importance:to:subject:from:date :content-type:mime-version; bh=1Zf5AEuxkIB0nHkXgSGfgR2nkeMfTaXiSkUz5Rajlc0=; b=sF7hc07llG27nEMrRWgrWPVRLRVNEtMQeBVEqN5Nanv5IfCnaxV77Ci/3D6oQznOIF 3srCHtzZrPEs05IhI5JitFpGggH5/ig2DwmcgrhcP+7MRgYVZOs/OZz5sdh2kmHKfysi f3pD0b3HE266gHbazBBo3te6xJfv2b04tnz3U8pauWAmgaMrefNwCRU1GXH49eWc23cl SB3Q1iX1Hmd2ATDxIiNXeCQ1R9M1iTZJfLyq4230zGXNsMUcPe2d42uvR0vn1HsTRUab RGyLR6fhkmLyq9ZMZVWfftVHTtsxASuISArIs3zvkE68gDi2EX0UoSKiZuIiO8kdzN5q YXVw==
- Importance: Normal
- In-reply-to: <64D91B79-A505-47C1-9734-344F1E132746@earthlink.net>
- References: <201309091340.r89De05S006474@harp-l.com> <64D91B79-A505-47C1-9734-344F1E132746@earthlink.net>
- Reply-to: gnarlyheman@xxxxxxxxx
- Sensitivity: Normal
I got name checked--and so will respond briefly (I have a big pile of Special 20s all with one missing reed to attend to) . . .
Solo tuned chrom needs retuning, bebop makes more sense--but learning to be in the moment is the key to finding the groove.
Sometimes it's what you don't play (or say) . . .
G
Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry®
-----Original Message-----
From: JON KIP <jonkip@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: harp-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2013 10:01:40
To: <harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Harp-L] Re: groove or not..and "Difficult" as a concept
On Sep 9, 2013, at 6:40 AM, harp-l-request@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Subject: Re: [Harp-L] Re: The Groove?
>
>
> So Jon, you're saying context is everything and it's hard won? fjm
well, sure, but I used way more words
So sure, very good point....context is a determining factor for Groove. Nicely said.
However, If by "hard won" , you mean "difficult".... naah......difficult to explain, a lot easier to assimilate with sound.
The word "Difficult" has too much potential brain baggage to be useful.
(This is the end of the Groove part of this note, but I was reminded of how we tend to use "difficult" as a word, so will meander on. And then, I'll stop. We'll all go home and watch Oprah.)
Approaching Practice:
I think it's really really important to try to NOT ever (as in NEVER) approach a musical task, a challenge, whatever , by saying to yourself "GEE, THAT'S REALLY HARD". OR, worse yet.... "Heck, I"ll NEVER be able to play that"....
When I have stuff I can't play right off, I ask myself:
1. is it possible? (or is it a Snipe Hunt?)
2. do I want to learn to do it? (desire)
3. do I really want to spend the time to learn it? (time/effort)
4. at what point will my wife shoot me if she hears me play the same lick for hours, and which body part is she likely to hit? (check with medicare for coverage)
There is a more "modern" approach, which seems to be:
1. Oh, I heard this great lick that Toots played. It sure sounds difficult.
2. I wonder if someone will retune my chromatic harmonica so I can play it?
that second approach seems a lot less...er......difficult....
hmm
HEY!! Gnarly? Where are you? Want to retune one of my Deluxes?
jon kip
tedious, isn't it? Sorry, I think today's going to be a difficult day.
http://jonkip.com
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and
MHonArc 2.6.8.