Re: Subject: Blues vs classical - was: Re: Subject: [Harp-L] The name "blues"

[EGS1217@xxxxxxx]

Barry Bean singles out (cutting and pasting) to again make a post of mine  
come across quite differently than that which I actually wrote. I'd  like to 
clarify this.
 
Here's his latest. Following is the post I actually wrote on June 6 with  
the sole removal of my mention of another person's name and comments.
 
"Message: 12
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 11:33:16 -0500
From: Barry  Bean <bbbean@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Subject: Blues vs classical -  was: Re: Subject: [Harp-L]
The name "blues"
To:  harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx


On 6/6/2014 10:58 AM, EGS1217@xxxxxxx  wrote:
> What I WAS talking about were musicians who play from their  hearts-

Are there musicians or genres known for NOT playing from their  hearts? 
In my experience, one of the differences between adequate musicians  and 
great musicians is the ability to play from the heart regardless of  
whether one is improvising alone or playing in a 60 piece  orchestra.


> However--contrary to your experience, I've also met  and, as a life 
> long music fan watched certain classically trained  musicians 'phoning 
> in' their performances and becoming hopelessly lost  without their 
> sheet music while having no sense of what lies behind the  music when 
> out of their element.

Let me assure you that I've  played with a great many blues, jazz, rock, 
country, and folk musicians who  have done the same when they were having 
a bad night. Not every performance  is a gem. Some nights you just 
survive the gig.

BB

Mr. Bean. My post was written two weeks ago to make clear that the  parts 
you previously singled out to alter my meaning thereto were explained. Now  
you're again singling out parts of sentences and paragraphs where I  
qualified my statements in order to change what I'm actually writing  about into 
something you can find insulting.
 
 Following is what I actually DID write, with certain parts removed  which 
aren't salient to this discussion (relative to another poster and deemed  
Meta by the list owner).
 
 
"From June 6, 2014: 
Mr. Bean, when I posted I made QUITE SURE to qualify my statement by  
specifying that I was NOT 'knocking' formal music education and said so clearly  
enough for presumably anyone to understand; perhaps I didn't repeat the 
salient  point sufficiently enough or apologize profusely often enough in 
advance to  those of you who fail to read qualifiers...


 

Your statement: "the notion that a blues (or jazz, or folk, or whatever)  
musician is somehow expressing deeper or more closely held feelings through  
their playing than players in any other genre is misguided at best, and  
insulting at 
worst."
 

What?
 

Fascinating, but that's not even CLOSE to what I wrote. If you're  
'insulted' then the problem is yours since I did NOT narrow it down to any genre  or 
write anything of the sort. Especially since I love, enjoy and play music 
of  ALL types--including R&B, old standards, folk, rock, Smooth Jazz,  
Pop--anything and everything which catches my fancy and I've written about this  
MANY times before).
 

Except blues--I believe I specified THAT point as well.

What I WAS talking about were musicians who play from their hearts--even IF 
 they don't use actual instruments (as I'd mentioned earlier in my  
previous post)--talking about those who began by using their VOICES and their  
BODIES to make sounds to express their innermost feelings when they had no other 
 way to do so..
 
...their VOICES and BODIES expressing their pain and awful conditions of  
life. They didn't use harmonicas at all...
 
 


Blues and folk music existed long before people used harmonicas... People  
sang, thumped on their chests, used spoons on their legs, bones tied 
together,  jawharps, washboards, rudimentary banjos and guitars long before they 
played  harmonicas--so where did [the other poster] come up with 'blowing' as  
the source of 'blues'? 
 
 
THAT was my main point yet your sole focus is my having the chutzpah to  
express my own personal opinion that this kind of soul-deep music is more  
expressive to ME than formal music education? Well, shoot me for having a  
contrary opinion to yourself but isn't that what this list is all about?  
Expressing different opinions? 

 
 

In NO WAY am I 'insulting' everyone who has a formal musical education.  
This is a particularly grating charge because I'm personally a huge fan of  
Robert Bonfiglio--own every one of his CD's and have attended his performances 
 many, many times--have posted at least half a dozen times (both here and 
on  Slidemeister) his playing of The Thais Meditation--referring to it as THE 
most  sublime and heartfelt performance which moves me to real tears each 
time. I KNOW  Robert feels HIS music deeply. I've taken his class at the 
Grand Canyon. Robert  is clearly a proponent of formal music education so why on 
earth would I make  the trek out there from NY if I demeaned formal music 
education? Michal Adler is  another classical harmonicist who affects me 
deeply and I also was the  beneficiary of 'some' formal music education as a 
child.
 
 

However--contrary to your experience, I've also met and, as a life long  
music fan watched certain classically trained musicians 'phoning in' their  
performances and becoming hopelessly lost without their sheet music while 
having  no sense of what lies behind the music when out of their element. I've 
never  seen that happen with ear players although I'll allow for the 
possibility that  it 'could' occur. THAT is what I'm also referring to. It fits 
other musicians  too, including some jazz musicians I've seen who play 
everything from sheet  music and never really 'hear' and who have no concept of 
'groove'. I could name  a dozen harmonica players who are likewise awful, but I 
won't since I've never  put down a single harmonica player since joining this 
list. It's not what I  do.
 
 In fact I don't know many music fans who have NOT seen such 'phoned  in' 
performances, or the resultant confusion/chaos if the sheet music is blown  
about outdoors. 
 

I'm not at all down on classically trained musicians: to my mind the best  
have both a great 'ear' as well as formal training. I was talking about  
'feel'--an entirely different thing altogether and I stand by my original  
statement: the MAJORITY of people and musicians I've met over my fairly lengthy  
life who play and 'feel' the music from their hearts and 'soul'--whatever  
one's interpretation of that word is, TO MY MIND (there's my  qualifier 
again) touch ME far more deeply than anyone who simply plays  written notes. 
Have I qualified this sufficiently now? Am I not allowed to have  this very 
personal opinion?
 


I wasn't 'born' when I began posting on harp-l, nor when I listed myself as 
 an amateur harmonicist. I'll likely always remain an amateur harmonica 
player  which does not displease me. However, I'm a music aficionado as so many 
people  are--outside of their playing-- and I DO believe my opinion there 
is as valid as  anyone else's. What's particularly odd to me is the rush to 
attack my single  qualified comment specified as being personal to me while 
ignoring an  extremely offensive comment pointed at a whole group of people. 
 
EGS







 
Message: 11
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 14:18:32 -0500
From: Barry Bean  <bbbean@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Blues vs classical - was: Re: Subject:  [Harp-L] The name
"blues"
To: harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx


On 6/4/2014  2:33 AM, EGS1217@xxxxxxx wrote:
> 'Formal' music education is all well and  good--and I'm certainly not 
knocking it(emphasis newly added by EGS)but  to my mind (emphasis newly added 
by EGS) nothing touches as deeply or  beats hearing someone
> expressing their innermost feelings through their  music.

I grew up on a steady diet of blues, soul, and gospel, and I've  been 
privileged enough to meet and work with some of the world's finest  
players in the genre (and others). But I have to say that the notion  
that a blues (or jazz, or folk, or whatever) musician is somehow  
expressing deeper or more closely held feelings through their playing  
than players in any other genre is misguided at best, and insulting at  
worst. I've never met or worked with a good musician who didn't feel  
what they were playing, regardless of genre. To suggest that improvised  
genres are somehow "truer" than classical genres is on a par with the  
suggestion that "untrained" musicians are somehow lesser musicians than  
classically trained players.

Crux of the issue: There's a reason  Baskin Robbins sells 31 flavors.