[Harp-L] Re: Juke and Leap Frog (Winslow Yerxa)
- To: <harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [Harp-L] Re: Juke and Leap Frog (Winslow Yerxa)
- From: "Albey Scholl" <albey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 31 May 2015 22:40:59 -0400
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20140121; t=1433126478; bh=RuG9s2CNk1oIYr2z17JrL+MIROMNtjRgvHuM2KlHPaA=; h=Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version: Content-Type; b=gtcLMObdLklvAJSKBJJOomDIeyiEFj7J04KOI8TK1+iBG812k66FuTqWOQLJeTgj1 e0gk9W1+17f/dU1XBejaLp0GL+iSBq/05gybev5JQ4Qnn5NV2WlciVWBgc8EBrQglv pAW1fEmysZRfo4yRlYgrM8Fe4nLtJZHFwj78yQEBg/qLktg7/dSswHuhhisLu93P8F RykUxF5IzhmOXa2ygSBQZxmYPV70Cvhg9WWX4ffKfTtsp6hghdBssp1ykTmwcdSCLK zUtw4PXFEs2FD3BquOh+J6mBkGyS7wxhLGdbIhJXWdnGK5TOoNTyADFuIKuqv95Ny6 wuOImYA6RrHdw==
- In-reply-to: <201505311803.t4VI39VX019120@harp-l.com>
- References: <201505311803.t4VI39VX019120@harp-l.com>
- Thread-index: AdCbyba4wB86WR47TSKfKalfA7jkZgASeoaw
To even further reiterate Winslow's observations Juke had two takes recorded
that day. The second one didn't have the Leap Frog opening riff!
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 31 May 2015 02:26:54 +0000 (UTC)
From: Winslow Yerxa <winslowyerxa@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Harp-L] Juke and Leap Frog
To: "harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx" <harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID:
<187126178.2247543.1433039214905.JavaMail.yahoo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
The only point of resemblance between Juke and Leap Frog is the opening
riff. That riff is a common riff that turns up in many tunes of the swing
era. And once that riff is done and the tune moves on, there isn't even a
remote resemblance between the Juke and Leap Frog - chord progression,
rhythms, riffs - nothing.
A specific harmonica precedent is Snooky Pryor's "Boogie," which is also
cited as a model for Juke. But again, the resemblance ends once the tune
moves past the opening riff.
Given that this riff was such a commonplace, I don't see much evidence for
stating that Juke is based on Leap Frog or on Boogie, or any other tune that
has yet been presented as a model.
Winslow Yerxa
President, SPAH, the Society for the Preservation and Advancement of the
Harmonica Producer, the Harmonica Collective Author, Harmonica For Dummies,
ISBN 978-0-470-33729-5
Harmonica Basics For Dummies, ASIN B005KIYPFS
Blues Harmonica For Dummies, ISBN 978-1-1182-5269-7 Resident
Expert, bluesharmonica.com Instructor, Jazzschool Community Music School
________________________________
From: Harri Haka <harri.haka@xxxxxxxxx>
To: harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 8:41 AM
Subject: [Harp-L] Juke and Leap Frog
This must have been discussed on the list before but hope you don't
mind. A friend of mine just asked if Little Walter's "Juke" isn't based
on Les Brown's "Leap Frog". Which it is. LW loved horns and wanted to
imitate them. Which he did but matter of fact made the total sound
better than the role models.
Harri
Thanks,
Albey Scholl
Albey's "Too Cool" Reptiles
http://www.albeysreptiles.com
Facebook
mailto:albey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
(770) 936-8174
-----Original Message-----
From: harp-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:harp-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of harp-l-request@xxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2015 2:03 PM
To: harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Harp-L Digest, Vol 141, Issue 34
Send Harp-L mailing list submissions to
harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://harp-l.org/mailman/listinfo/harp-l
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
harp-l-request@xxxxxxxxxx
You can reach the person managing the list at
harp-l-owner@xxxxxxxxxx
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of Harp-L digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Juke and Leap Frog (Winslow Yerxa)
2. Re: overblow terminology (Winslow Yerxa)
3. Re: overblow terminology (Mike Wilbur)
4. Re: overblow terminology (Rick Dempster)
5. Re: overblow terminology (Robert Hale)
6. Re: Identify this 64 Chromonica (Robert Hale)
7. Inc. Magazine Battle of the Corporate Bands (Richard Hunter)
8. Re: 1 4 5 chord (Bob Cohen)
9. Re: 1 4 5 chord (The Iceman)
10. Re: Identify this 64 Chromonica (Winslow Yerxa)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 31 May 2015 02:26:54 +0000 (UTC)
From: Winslow Yerxa <winslowyerxa@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Harp-L] Juke and Leap Frog
To: "harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx" <harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID:
<187126178.2247543.1433039214905.JavaMail.yahoo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
The only point of resemblance between Juke and Leap Frog is the opening
riff. That riff is a common riff that turns up in many tunes of the swing
era. And once that riff is done and the tune moves on, there isn't even a
remote resemblance between the Juke and Leap Frog - chord progression,
rhythms, riffs - nothing.
A specific harmonica precedent is Snooky Pryor's "Boogie," which is also
cited as a model for Juke. But again, the resemblance ends once the tune
moves past the opening riff.
Given that this riff was such a commonplace, I don't see much evidence for
stating that Juke is based on Leap Frog or on Boogie, or any other tune that
has yet been presented as a model.
Winslow Yerxa
President, SPAH, the Society for the Preservation and Advancement of the
Harmonica Producer, the Harmonica Collective Author, Harmonica For Dummies,
ISBN 978-0-470-33729-5
Harmonica Basics For Dummies, ASIN B005KIYPFS
Blues Harmonica For Dummies, ISBN 978-1-1182-5269-7 Resident
Expert, bluesharmonica.com Instructor, Jazzschool Community Music School
________________________________
From: Harri Haka <harri.haka@xxxxxxxxx>
To: harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 8:41 AM
Subject: [Harp-L] Juke and Leap Frog
This must have been discussed on the list before but hope you don't
mind. A friend of mine just asked if Little Walter's "Juke" isn't based
on Les Brown's "Leap Frog". Which it is. LW loved horns and wanted to
imitate them. Which he did but matter of fact made the total sound
better than the role models.
Harri
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 31 May 2015 02:29:43 +0000 (UTC)
From: Winslow Yerxa <winslowyerxa@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Harp-L] overblow terminology
To: Robert Hale <robert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "philharpn@xxxxxxx"
<philharpn@xxxxxxx>
Cc: "harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx" <harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID:
<926393590.2266372.1433039383488.JavaMail.yahoo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Overblows are played by blowing.
Overdraws are played by drawing.
The "over" part refers to the fact that both produce pitches higher than the
plucked pitch of the reed.
Seems pretty clear to me that both terms have value.
Winslow Yerxa
President, SPAH, the Society for the Preservation and Advancement of the
Harmonica
Producer, the Harmonica Collective
Author, Harmonica For Dummies, ISBN 978-0-470-33729-5
Harmonica Basics For Dummies, ASIN B005KIYPFS
Blues Harmonica For Dummies, ISBN 978-1-1182-5269-7
Resident Expert, bluesharmonica.com
Instructor, Jazzschool Community Music School
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Hale <robert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: philharpn@xxxxxxx
Cc: "harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx" <harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 12:25 PM
Subject: Re: [Harp-L] overblow terminology
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 8:10 AM, <philharpn@xxxxxxx> wrote:
<snip>
I thought the distinction was that overblows produce a pitch HIGHER than
the reed's designed pitch. Whereas bends, both blow and draw, pull the
pitch DOWN.
I don't think OVERDRAW helps us clarify at all.
Do we have consensus?
Robert Hale
Serious Honkage in Arizona
youtube.com/DUKEofWAIL
DUKEofWAIL.com
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sat, 30 May 2015 22:42:26 -0400
From: Mike Wilbur <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Harp-L] overblow terminology
To: Winslow Yerxa <winslowyerxa@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "philharpn@xxxxxxx" <philharpn@xxxxxxx>, "harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx"
<harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <DE589CC6-0D59-4D3D-8449-DB12F722FE64@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
That is the ( IMHO ) best use of the terminology that should not require
more description.
Mike Wilbur
> On May 30, 2015, at 10:29 PM, Winslow Yerxa <winslowyerxa@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>
> Overblows are played by blowing.
>
> Overdraws are played by drawing.
>
> The "over" part refers to the fact that both produce pitches higher than
the plucked pitch of the reed.
>
> Seems pretty clear to me that both terms have value.
> Winslow Yerxa
> President, SPAH, the Society for the Preservation and Advancement of the
Harmonica
> Producer, the Harmonica Collective
> Author, Harmonica For Dummies, ISBN 978-0-470-33729-5
> Harmonica Basics For Dummies, ASIN B005KIYPFS
> Blues Harmonica For Dummies, ISBN 978-1-1182-5269-7
> Resident Expert, bluesharmonica.com
> Instructor, Jazzschool Community Music School
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Robert Hale <robert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: philharpn@xxxxxxx
> Cc: "harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx" <harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 12:25 PM
> Subject: Re: [Harp-L] overblow terminology
>
> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 8:10 AM, <philharpn@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> I thought the distinction was that overblows produce a pitch HIGHER than
> the reed's designed pitch. Whereas bends, both blow and draw, pull the
> pitch DOWN.
>
> I don't think OVERDRAW helps us clarify at all.
> Do we have consensus?
>
> Robert Hale
> Serious Honkage in Arizona
> youtube.com/DUKEofWAIL
> DUKEofWAIL.com
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Sun, 31 May 2015 13:57:08 +1000
From: Rick Dempster <rickdempster33@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Harp-L] overblow terminology
To: Winslow Yerxa <winslowyerxa@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "philharpn@xxxxxxx" <philharpn@xxxxxxx>, "harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx"
<harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID:
<CALH_261-djGkvT+8yg5ozn-88PE8AHa+OzRyVNTXLKFGvzmn0g@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
While this: "overblows produce a pitch HIGHER than
the reed's designed pitch. Whereas bends, both blow and draw, pull the
pitch DOWN." from Robert Hale, is perhaps a practical explanation (ie
that's what seems to be happening) it doesn't contribute to a proper
understanding of
the function of the reeds.
In fact, both normal bends and 'overbends' produce a higher note from the
reed.
The difference is that a bend that starts with the activating of the higher
of the pair, ends with the opposite reed
being played. So, bending draw 2 ends with blow 2 playing a semitone higher
than it's pitch.
"Over bends' are harder to achieve, because the reversed pitch of the
higher reed is not in sympathy with its paired reed.
You can always bend down a single, unpaired reed (ie like a valved reed in
a chromatic)
When you begin to bend, say, draw 2 down in pitch, the blow reed is
vibrating in sympathy, because its reverse pitch
(ie the drawn pitch of the blow reed) is within a semitone of the draw
reed. The more you bring down the draw reed, the more
the blow reed begins to vibrate, until the draw reed stalls and the blow
reed takes over, in reverse, a pitch higher than its 'natural ' pitch.
When you try to blow the draw reed, you get practically no sympathetic
vibration from the blow reed, because it's pitch is (in the case of hole 2)
a major third away from the blow reed, and any effort to lower the pitch of
the blow reed takes it even further away.
All bends are the same, but 'overbends' are harder because they are out of
sympathy with the paired reed.
I know I'm repeating myself, but it must be at least a couple of years
since the last time.
RD
On 31 May 2015 at 12:29, Winslow Yerxa <winslowyerxa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Overblows are played by blowing.
>
> Overdraws are played by drawing.
>
> The "over" part refers to the fact that both produce pitches higher than
> the plucked pitch of the reed.
>
> Seems pretty clear to me that both terms have value.
> Winslow Yerxa
> President, SPAH, the Society for the Preservation and Advancement of the
> Harmonica
> Producer, the Harmonica Collective
> Author, Harmonica For Dummies, ISBN 978-0-470-33729-5
> Harmonica Basics For Dummies, ASIN B005KIYPFS
> Blues Harmonica For Dummies, ISBN 978-1-1182-5269-7
> Resident Expert, bluesharmonica.com
> Instructor, Jazzschool Community Music School
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Robert Hale <robert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: philharpn@xxxxxxx
> Cc: "harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx" <harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 12:25 PM
> Subject: Re: [Harp-L] overblow terminology
>
> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 8:10 AM, <philharpn@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> I thought the distinction was that overblows produce a pitch HIGHER than
> the reed's designed pitch. Whereas bends, both blow and draw, pull the
> pitch DOWN.
>
> I don't think OVERDRAW helps us clarify at all.
> Do we have consensus?
>
> Robert Hale
> Serious Honkage in Arizona
> youtube.com/DUKEofWAIL
> DUKEofWAIL.com
>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Sat, 30 May 2015 21:50:39 -0700
From: Robert Hale <robert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Harp-L] overblow terminology
To: Winslow Yerxa <winslowyerxa@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx" <harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx>, "philharpn@xxxxxxx"
<philharpn@xxxxxxx>
Message-ID:
<CAMLFfH65ZdsNUBiphEceFpP5J69g8=vtP+BsbKKbCQWsHJFoDg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 7:29 PM, Winslow Yerxa <winslowyerxa@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> Seems pretty clear to me that both terms have value.
>
> b
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and
MHonArc 2.6.8.