BB's technique (was something else)
Mon Jul 21 20:20:53 EDT 1997
this illustrates my point. BB's "expertise" is hard to agree on. But what
we can agree on is that what he does sounds great!
And I must say that you put it very well when you
said,"weedly-weedly-weedly is not technique...."
At 04:29 PM 7/21/97 -0700, Don Cicchetti wrote:
>>I've got no problem with a long song if you've got something to say. I
>>can't say that I care for incessant noodling!
>>Technical expertise is at best, subjective! BB King is the best example I
>>know of. He's really not much of a guitar player over all, but what he does
>>sounds great! And he doesn't go on and on , he sticks in a stinger nere and
>>there and at most plays a verse every now and then. What he does speaks
>>volumes more than somebody like Clapton, who is a good and soulful player,
>>but just goes on and on!
>Actually, this is a common misconception.
>BB is, in many ways, the equal of a Charlie Parker or a Jimi Hendrix. His
>phrasing, timing, and harmonic/melodic development are fiendishly difficult
>to master, and I can name several "big name" and "technical" players who
>could not play his stuff with a gun held to their head....
>I have played guitar for 30 years as of this year, and I can tell you that
>BB's stuff ain't simple at all.
>Remember, phrasing, thematic/melodic development, timing, harmonic
>structure, and vibrato are *all* a part of technique.
>weedly-weedly-weedly is not technique....
>La Sierra University Library Media Services
>Academic support, Technology Education,
>Audio/Video Studio Production, Event Services.
>Web Page http://www.lasierra.edu/library/medias/media_main.html
>It is within our power to create places that are worthy of our affection.
>--James Howard Kunstler
More information about the Blues-l