Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Blues School


onewilyfool

Recommended Posts

Well..I totally agree with John Lee Walker

 

And to prove it here is a skinny white girl from Streatham' date=' South London

 

-- Jo Ann Kelly -- [/quote']

 

I first heard Jo Ann on those Anthology of British Blues LPs back in the 1960s. Have been a fan ever since. Had to pick most of her releases up on import as her American catalog was pretty darn thin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 78
  • Created
  • Last Reply

 

 

You mean Doyle Bramhall II =P~

 

 

Yeah, some times my fingers get to going down hill.

 

I got to see Derek at Jazz Fest in New Orleans back in the summer. He's something else, though he was not as good as Keb Mo, who played earlier in the day with nothing more than a drummer simply giving him a bass thump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With respect re Landreth, Id venture he's another guy like Beck who is technically gifted, but another category from Skip J, the Alberts etc. Saw him on a Crossroads Festival vid (itself an an invention to excess), shredding away. Jaw dropping, sure, but where is the essence? Since this thread is a blues lesson, I think its useful to realize the distinction between chops and Tone with a cap T. Peace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read an interview with BB King.....he was doing his farewell tour, and the interviewer asked him who he admired in the blues world. He said he never heard anything from Eric Clapton that he didn't like. Amazingly, he also said that Bonnie Rait was one of the best slide guitarists he had heard........I think that is pretty high praise from someone who knows the blues

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BB King..... said he never heard anything from Eric Clapton that he didn't like [and] that Bonnie Rait was one of the best slide guitarists
.

 

High praise indeed but note both EC and Raitt have been very vocal in acknowledging their debt to BB et al.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read an interview with BB King.....he was doing his farewell tour' date=' and the interviewer asked him who he admired in the blues world. He said he never heard anything from Eric Clapton that he didn't like. Amazingly, he also said that Bonnie Rait was one of the best slide guitarists he had heard........I think that is pretty high praise from someone who knows the blues[/quote']

 

Back in the Late 60's or early 70's one however, when asked about Clapton et.al of the white English blues players he commented that none of them were as good as Peter Green. At the time, it would have been hard to argue. He was a big influence, along with Jeff Beck and Jimmy Page on a young Joe Perry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With respect re Landreth' date=' Id venture he's another guy like Beck who is technically gifted, but another category from Skip J, the Alberts etc. Saw him on a Crossroads Festival vid (itself an an invention to excess), shredding away. Jaw dropping, sure, but where is the essence? Since this thread is a blues lesson, I think its useful to realize the distinction between chops and Tone with a cap T. Peace. [/quote']

 

 

 

I'm not a huge Landreth fan, but frankly the Crossroads DVD doesn't showcase his best stuff.

 

Frankly, I didn't think the new one showcased much of anyone's best stuff.

 

I even talked to a guy that was at the show, and he said there were so many better performances that what was shown on the DVDs.

 

I understand they have time and contractual constraints for 2 discs, but how do you have 2 Jeff Beck songs and about an hour's worth of Vince Gill?

 

Nothing against Vince Gill, or country, but come one.

 

 

Now, I wouldn't compare Landreth with Skip James, Elmore, or any of the older blues guys, but he is a modern bluesman, who is keeping things going while pop culture is being drowned in hip hop. It, like disco shall pass, and thankfully we'll have guys like Landreth, et.al. still playing. Pick up an album or two of his, some of them are pretty good, or check out some of his live stuff on Youtube.

 

Also, Beck's playing on the DVD wasn't even Blues, that was some of his Jazz Fusion stuff.

 

If you want to hear one of the best blues & rock albums ever, do a favor and pick up a copy of Truth. Billy Gibbons tells a great story about the first time he met Hendrix and they listened to Truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i know this an old age debate, and that most folks will disagree, but can it even be considered blues though?

 

i never liked anything clapton ever did, but that's not why i'm saying this...i love zeppelin but page doesn't play the blues...and keith richards? come on...

 

i'm not very fond of the chicago school, but that's as i far as i'll go in terms of considering anything that's basically electric rock n' roll actual blues. howlin wolf, muddy waters, etc..

 

i think that anyone that says that clapton ever played the blues, would think that bo didley or chuck berry were true bluesmen.. =D>

 

son house, robert johnson, john hurt, gary davis and above all skip james and blind willie johnson, amongst many others that no one ever heard anything about..i really think that's what the blues is all about, its core so to speak, and i don't even like robert johnson.

 

when someone picks up something and adds his own thing, it's not what it was initially anymore, at least that's the way i see it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this an old age debate' date=' and that most folks will disagree, but can it even be considered blues though? [/quote']

 

Well, no.

 

Hard rock borrows from blues, (sometimes) gives a shout out to the blues , but isnt blues. Its a form of post Dylan pop/rock. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i know this an old age debate' date=' and that most folks will disagree, but can it even be considered blues though?

 

i never liked anything clapton ever did, but that's not why i'm saying this...i love zeppelin but page doesn't play the blues...and keith richards? come on...

 

i'm not very fond of the chicago school, but that's as i far as i'll go in terms of considering anything that's basically electric rock n' roll actual blues. howlin wolf, muddy waters, etc..

 

i think that anyone that says that clapton ever played the blues, would think that bo didley or chuck berry were true bluesmen.. =P~

 

son house, robert johnson, john hurt, gary davis and above all skip james and blind willie johnson, amongst many others that no one ever heard anything about..i really think that's what the blues is all about, its core so to speak, and i don't even like robert johnson.

 

when someone picks up something and adds his own thing, it's not what it was initially anymore, at least that's the way i see it...[/quote']

 

diogo..You are definitely a blues purist. In many ways I agree wholeheartedly with your comments. When I hear an electric guitarist attempting to play the blues....I mentally challenge them to prove to me that they are foundationally based in the vernacular and not just a rocker who learned a few blues riffs.

 

On the other hand we also need to remember that the blues needs to still be a living ...breathing ...thing. Just as the historic times and individual people shaped the blues initially...i.e. the move from the countryside to the urban cities such as Memphis and Chicago during WWII gave us greats like Big Bill Broonzy, Tampa Red, Howlin Wolf, "Sonny Boy" Williamson, and Muddy.

 

If we consider any evolution to be a departure from the blues then the blues will stagnate. If we consider Zepplin and The Stones to be the blues then we lose it's soul.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Is the blues definable?" I'd offer that Blues is adult cabaret (no romance, no Dylanisms). It's club music, so interactive, like church (cultural context). It's a "harmony system" (Steve James) that gets its effect mixing the bitter and the sweet. But all that's academic. Listen to the elder statesmen like Albert King and John lee Hooker and to new bloods like Bob Cray and Youngblood Hart and hear the difference.

 

Hard rock & jam bands lend/lease blues forms and licks for their own purposes. The cultural context is different (concerts) and they also borrow from pop (ie romance) and art ( ie Dylan). Colbert might call it "bluesiness."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess since this thread is called "Blues School"

 

From wikipedia:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blues

 

The Blues is a vocal and instrumental form of music based on the use of the blue notes. It emerged as an accessible form of self-expression in African-American communities of the United States from spirituals, work songs, field hollers, shouts and chants, and rhymed simple narrative ballads.[1] The use of blue notes and the prominence of call-and-response patterns in the music and lyrics are indicative of African influence.

 

The blues influenced later American and Western popular music, as it became the roots of jazz, rhythm and blues, and bluegrass. In the 1960s and 1970s, a hybrid form called blues rock developed from the combining of blues with various rock and roll forms.

 

OWF....I didn't want to sound like a purist... my opinion is that what ever innovative new blues comes about....I feel it needs to understand, respect and continue the traditional sense of the blues. I also want the blues to be alive and create new artists....but, maybe I am a "blues traditionalist" also ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being a blues 'purist' myself, I look at today's blues as a mere derivitave of actual Delta blues. Like anything else in our ever-advancing world, everything touched by man will inevitably be enhanced, upgraded, modified, reconditioned, renovated, rebuilt and redefined. The blues have evolved over the years due to many factors, the most prevalent being advanced technology and our social climate. It, for the most part, is all good time music, but nothing will ever replace or compete with real blues and where it came from - the old, black man with his old guitar playing on his old front porch.

 

For me, that is the epitome of the blues...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i know this an old age debate' date=' and that most folks will disagree, but can it even be considered blues though?

 

i never liked anything clapton ever did, but that's not why i'm saying this...i love zeppelin but page doesn't play the blues...and keith richards? come on...

 

i'm not very fond of the chicago school, but that's as i far as i'll go in terms of considering anything that's basically electric rock n' roll actual blues. howlin wolf, muddy waters, etc..

 

i think that anyone that says that clapton ever played the blues, would think that bo didley or chuck berry were true bluesmen.. =P~

 

son house, robert johnson, john hurt, gary davis and above all skip james and blind willie johnson, amongst many others that no one ever heard anything about..i really think that's what the blues is all about, its core so to speak, and i don't even like robert johnson.

 

when someone picks up something and adds his own thing, it's not what it was initially anymore, at least that's the way i see it...[/quote']

 

Well.....in my opinion yes.

 

As far as I'm concerned AC/DC is a blues band, we just define that type of Blues as Rock-n-Roll. Yeah they speed it up, yeah they turn the volume up to 11 thanks to walls or Marshalls, but most of their songs are made up of the I-IV-V chords with the Angus riffing and soloing over the minor pentatonic scale. Therefore, technically, from a music theory point of view that's blues, but also they have that groove that in my opinion distinguishes blues from any other music form. I.e., it makes girls shake their butts!

 

The Stones borrowed heavily from the blues. Is Sympathy for the Devil or Angie blues? Nah, but Spider and the Fly is. So is Midnight Rambler. Not to mention many of their Blues covers.

 

Zeppelin had some songs that took their cue from Moroccan and/or Celtic influences, but besides their blues covers, songs like Rock and Roll, are pure 12 bar blues songs, they just simply speed them up. You can play Rock and Roll to a shuffle. E-A-B.

 

So, I wouldn't argue that everything they've done is blues, but they definitely have some blues songs.

 

And I would disagree that Clapton hasn't done Blues......but I would agree that I have not always been crazy about the way in which he's done them. In my opinion, his best stuff is solo acoustic, or perhaps one other guitar. When you put an electric in his hand he wants bass, one or two drum sets, 1 or 2 other guitars, horns, keyboard, back ground vocals, etc. Those can all be neat elements periodically in a song, but not on every song, especially if your doing a blues song. Outside of one or two guitars, in my opinion, the more stripped the blues are the better.....because that's how it originated, but the latter day incarnations of it's evolution in most instances still holds true to the art form in my opinion.

 

And I give this as my defense for that assertion. Rock-N-Roll that was born in the 50's and then exploded in the 60's and 70's was heavily influenced by the blues. Be it Elvis, the Stones, Zeppelin, The Allman Brothers Band, Aerosmith, AC/DC, etc. were all fans of Blues. Elvis' first hit was Alright Mama that was a pretty close rendition of Big Boy Arthur Crudup's version. About that time, guys like Muddy and John Lee Hooker, etc. took Delta Blues to Chicago and added electricity. So people like the Stones, Zeppelin, et.al were influence by the early rock-n-roll of Elvis, but the Chicago Blues as well. Not to Mention the likes of Little Richard, Chuck Berry, T-Bone Walker, and Bo Diddley who were transforming the blues into Rock-N-Roll themselves.

 

Those bands then use that as their base to make rock from.

 

The reason music today sucks, is bands are playing off of their influences. Well, bands today's influence are 2-4 generations of influence removed from the Delta Blues. Hence, their musical foundation isn't very strong. They Like Eddie Van Halen, Some Guns N Roses, and then most were "influenced" by crap bands from the 90's who couldn't really play and took their music way too seriously. They took a snapshot of a genre and based their sound and playing off of it.

 

Of the above bands I mentioned:

 

Keith Richards has cited Chuck Berry, Muddy Waters, Howlin Wolf and therefore Hubert Sumlin, Robert Johnson, etc. as influences.

 

Clapton has cited those plus Albert and B.B. King.

 

Jimmy Page and Joe perry have added Otis Rush and Jimmy Reed to the list, etc.

 

According to Clapton Duane Allman was influenced by all of them because he could play any song that Clapton could think of!

 

Too often today when the blues is mentioned people think of Stevie Ray Vaughn or Clapton. Both are fine, but what about Mississippi Fred McDowell? Bukka White? Blind Lemon Jefferson? I mean, I can pick about a half dozen give or take rock-n-roll outfits that in my opinion were so much better than everyone else, and most other bands were just not as good and/or copying those half dozen or so bands, but the older Blues guys weren't the same.

 

Yeah, many played the same songs, but two guys would play the same song in a very different way.

 

The blues and blues players just had some Mojo. I read Slash's autobiography and during a hiatus between Guns N Roses and Velvet Revolver he stated that one of his best learning experiences was jamming with blues guys in clubs all over the country. Jamming to songs he had never heard. He said his playing improved.

 

So to me, all of the really great guys do play blues because they have their musical foundation built off of it, while lesser plays don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, I find it funny that it pretty much took the British invasion of the 60s and their music, which was heavily influenced by American blues, simply speeded up and electrified, for quite a few American guitarists to pause and look over their shoulder to discover what was coming from their own backyard all along. I've heard a couple of good stories in the past where famous musicians have paid due respect to some of the old blues players who, until recently, have been unrecognized and unrewarded for their talents, .

 

In 1984, the Stones were playing Soldier Field in Chicago, and Keith Richards paid a private detective to find Willie Dixon. It wasn't hard. He was a legend in his neighborhood, living in what was close to a tar-paper shack on the Southside. Had him delivered backstage, where the Stones presented him with a shiny red, brand new '84 Cadillac Coup deVille, and a check for $250,000. Then had him go onstage and play an acoustic intro to 'Honky Tonk Woman'. Hardly anyone there knew who he was, and they didn't care, but Keith was thrilled by the performance.

 

A few years ago, Clapton did as much when he donated some big bucks to the estate of Robert Johnson, in respect for all that RJ contributed to modern music.

 

I find it tragic and sad that so many big time musicians have made millions of dollars from bluesmen's songs, while most of the bluesmen who authored them died penniless and destitute.

 

Just my .02 cents

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Elijah Wald tells this story in Escaping the Delta: at a festival, Dave Van Ronk finished his set with a macho, blustering, raging version of Hootchie Cootchie Man. He comes off stage to see Muddy Waters watching. The Mudd says "you done good , Son. But you know, that's supposed to be a funny song."

 

In a nutshell, the difference between blues and hard rock. JK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...