Header Graphic
Dirty-South Blues Harp forum: wail on! > Little Walter's thin tone
Little Walter's thin tone
Login  |  Register
Page: 1 2

kudzurunner
4328 posts
Oct 27, 2013
7:23 PM
I'm really enjoying listening to Little Walter these days, and most of all I'm admiring his thin, light tone: overdrive in the high-mids. One a few songs, of course, he's about "big tone"--Blue Midnight is an obvious call--but much of the time that's not the way he goes.

He goes for thin tone. He goes for the part of amplified harp that cuts through. He opens his hands. He lets go of the low end of the amplified harp spectrum. He flutters his tongue, he gets a breathy sound.....And of course he plays harp acoustically, rather than amped up, sometimes. Treble edge! Crisp and fresh.

Here are a few memorable examples:













Last Edited by kudzurunner on Oct 27, 2013 7:26 PM
WinslowYerxa
412 posts
Oct 27, 2013
10:08 PM
I'm not sure I'd call Walter's tone "thin" - perhaps you were being deliberately provocative. I would call it brighter and even more flexible than the tone cultivated by many later players - I suspect following George Smith's example. He's a panther to their woolly mammoths.

Another thing Walter did was to leave reveals for the guitar player - and not just the usual "back half" of the four-bar phrase. He didn't always have to dominate or even be playing during his own solo. I suspect this may have evolved out of the older "everybody play now" approach to instrumental breaks between vocal verses, where instead of a single soloist, the whole band went to town with different instruments poking out depending on the moment or even depending on how you paid attention to what was going on.
----------
Winslow

Last Edited by WinslowYerxa on Oct 27, 2013 10:08 PM
Kingley
3229 posts
Oct 27, 2013
11:01 PM
I agree with all of the things Winslow wrote. I wouldn't call Walter's tone on any of these "thin". It's just not that big fat muffled sound that seems to have become the norm these days. Walter's tone on those clips is well rounded, three dimensional and full of tonal variety. Which in my opinion is exactly how blues harmonica should sound. All of the great harp players in Chicago blues had tones that ticked all of those boxes. I can't understand for the life of me why so many people chase that big fat muffled sound nowadays and play it almost exclusively.

Last Edited by Kingley on Oct 27, 2013 11:04 PM
nacoran
7265 posts
Oct 27, 2013
11:48 PM
It's funny how different, opposing words, take on different shadings-

Warm v. bright
Fat v. thin
Light v. heavy

I must be getting old. Usually nearly 3 am is my wheelhouse; I thought I'd be able to make that list longer. I guess my point is, we have words that have opposed meanings, and it's interesting how when we chase one sometimes we assume the other is bad.

I'll expound more when I'm wider awake. :)



----------
Nate
Facebook
Thread Organizer (A list of all sorts of useful threads)
Komuso
187 posts
Oct 28, 2013
12:03 AM
I love that #4 Little Walters Jump with Hound Dog Taylor on guitar. It really sounds like his harp licks are emulating Hound Dogs trademarked riffs to an extent.

As for his tone? Sounds like Little Walter!

----------
Paul Cohen aka Komuso Tokugawa
HarpNinja - Your harmonica Mojo Dojo
Bringing the Boogie to the Bitstream
The Iceman
1241 posts
Oct 28, 2013
5:18 AM
All tone aside, perhaps LW's attraction is in his melodic linear ideas and long lines.
----------
The Iceman
Frank
3126 posts
Oct 28, 2013
6:26 AM
Is this considered thin? This is played LB, with octaves interspersed :)
harpdude61
1871 posts
Oct 28, 2013
6:44 AM
I don't think LW's tone is thin, just variations in mic/recording techniques.

If you listen to Cotton's new CD you hear differences between songs.

I doubt either of thes guys closed up their embrouchures and tightened up the kissy shape to thin their tone.
sonny3
64 posts
Oct 28, 2013
7:26 AM
Agree with Kingley, i think walter was somewhere in the middle as far as tone goes.I cant stand that super fat tone everyone seems to go for.Walter could shade tone any way he wanted.Never thought he had thin tone.
harpwrench
707 posts
Oct 28, 2013
8:22 AM
He was also using whatever mic Leonard told him to use, and didn't necessarily like it.
----------

The best you know is usually only as good as the best you've had.
Spiers Custom Harmonicas
Rick Davis
2602 posts
Oct 28, 2013
8:33 AM
Little Walter does not sound "thin" on any of these recordings. He is a little trebly but that does not equal thin. On video #3 -- Me and Piney Brown -- it sounds like he is cupping a bullet mic. There sure ain't nothin' wrong with that tone. On the other videos he may be playing acoustically into vocal mics and still sounds great. He sounds like Little Walter.

But Little Walter was not the only influence on harp tone. Some of the greats who followed him were known for a big deep tone, like Big Walter.



Man, I dig that marching shuffle groove Ronnie Earl was so good at...


----------
-Little Rick Davis
The Blues Harp Amps Blog
The Mile High Blues Society

Last Edited by Rick Davis on Oct 28, 2013 8:37 AM
chromaticblues
1494 posts
Oct 28, 2013
9:56 AM
I totally agree with Harpwrench about the mic.
Chess really screwed his latter recordings up by going for a more "Folk" sound. They were trying to cash in a the acoustic blues (they called it folk music) popularity during the 60's.
It changed the way he played and not for the better!
So next time someone says it's not the equipment, but tone comes from within. I say BULL!
When he stopped using bullet type mics his sound and then his style changed. He became just another harper.
I don't think he liked the sound of the vocal mics and it probably bothered him and effected his creativity.
tmf714
2137 posts
Oct 28, 2013
10:02 AM
"He became just another harper."

Hardly-
Thievin' Heathen
270 posts
Oct 28, 2013
10:16 AM
Perhaps he was just being versatile. After all, he probably never had to worry about mimicking the "Little Walter" tone.
5F6H
1682 posts
Oct 28, 2013
10:28 AM
@ Chromatic blues "When he stopped using bullet type mics his sound and then his style changed. He became just another harper.
I don't think he liked the sound of the vocal mics and it probably bothered him and effected his creativity."

Whilst he certainly used Astatic bullets, there isn't really any evidence to support that idea that he favoured them, nor used them with any kind of exclusivity. There are probably more pictures of him with a 545 than any other mic (though obviously these were after the bulk of his recorded output). In the interview he did, he stated a preference for "finger mics".

It's worth noting, regarding the OP, that the reverb Chess/Universal used impacted the tonality of the harp, reverb accentuated the chimey highs, when you listen to tracks recorded on the same session, those without reverb are duller, more grindy (Chicago Bound vs Hoochie Coochie Man/She's So Pretty is a good example, as is Oh Baby vs I Love You So - Oh Baby & Rocker).
----------
www.myspace.com/markburness

http://www.facebook.com/markburness

Last Edited by 5F6H on Oct 28, 2013 2:25 PM
Kingley
3232 posts
Oct 28, 2013
10:29 AM
" I don't think he liked the sound of the vocal mics and it probably bothered him and effected his creativity."

chromaticblues - Most likely what affected Walter's creativity was his excessive use of alcohol.

"But Little Walter was not the only influence on harp tone. Some of the greats who followed him were known for a big deep tone, like Big Walter."

Rick - Very true Little Walter wasn't the only influence on tone. Big Walter on the other hand isn't just known for a big deep tone. He had a huge palette of tones that he used. You only have to listen to his recorded material to hear the wide range of tones he used. Big and deep was merely one of them.

Last Edited by Kingley on Oct 28, 2013 10:30 AM
barbequebob
2365 posts
Oct 28, 2013
10:34 AM
On those late 50's cuts where he plays acoustic harp, he had NO choice in the matter and was constantly arguing with Chess about that, but you also have to bear in mind that back then, almost no recording studios had any of the musicians wearing headphones and then hearing their own track set up so that they can hear more of themselves over everything else, which many now take for granted, and headphones for each musician didn't become a standard thing until the late 60's or early 70's.

In fact, in one session i the late 50's, there were several tunes recorded on it, but Chess allowed only one tune to have amplified harp on it, and that was the instrumental Back Track.

You also also have bear in mind something else, and that until the late 60's-early 70's, the trend with amp companies and many musicians in general, the trend was to get cleaner sounding and NOT dirtier sounding, and I've heard gear heads saying that many of the old blues guys were looking for distortion back in the 40's thru the early 60's, and that is so totally NOT TRUE AT ALL, and most of them used whatever was available and they had no real choice in the matter with the distortion whether they wanted it or not, and tone as described by a gear head is just total nonsense and I stand by every word of that.

On that European tour LW had with Hound Dog, the soundmen expressly forbid him NOT to take the mic off the stand or cup the mic at all, and that is the REAL truth here and LW did many gigs playing thru the PA in the US, being that whatever rig he played thru, he also sang thru them as well, be it what we think of as a PA, or whatever amp, and amps until the mid 50's often had a seperate mic input voiced so that it would carry over the guitar regardless of the volume and the idea that this was set up for harp players and whatever mic they intended to use is nothing but 100% gear head BS.
----------
Sincerely,
Barbeque Bob Maglinte
Boston, MA
http://www.barbequebob.com
CD available at http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/bbmaglinte
Frank
3129 posts
Oct 28, 2013
11:46 AM
I understand where Adam is coming from in the way he describes LW sounds (notice I said HIS sounds) - it STARTS with him...what is added to it- is just that "added to" the sound he already created. I'm not saying that enhancement of his sound when using mics, verb, etc...is non-effective to the overall end product.

One of the main lessons I've learnt by digging into his way of playing the harmonica is what Adam describes as a "breathy sound"...

LW is the epitome of a player who is inhaling and exhaling life into his musical lines, he is BREATHING music as easily as someone talking in a relaxed casual way to friend.

And when LW or BW decide to manipulate their tone within a song, it really wakes my ears and imagination up - some great lessons in how to keep the music "ALIVE and DYNAMIC" in order to sculpt a Masterpiece :)
groyster1
2452 posts
Oct 28, 2013
12:08 PM
I can understand LW not agreeing with leonards choice of equipment and telling him about it with his "salty" language....would loved to have heard him play acoustically unamplified
Frank
3130 posts
Oct 28, 2013
1:13 PM
Little walter loved playin in the "DIRT" when he did his thing too :)

Dennis mixes it up real pretty here...

Last Edited by Frank on Oct 28, 2013 1:15 PM
kudzurunner
4331 posts
Oct 28, 2013
4:27 PM
Winslow, you got me right. I was being deliberately provocative--the word means to encourage voices--and it worked. I realize that the word "thin," applied to harp tone, is a fighting word these days. It's like saying somebody has a small d--k. Or at least that's how many--but, importantly, not all--members of this forum are inclined to take it.

Still, several forum members got the important point beneath my provocation: there are many models for great tone on the harp, not one model, and "big thick tone," which gets a lot of play around here, is only one.

James Cotton has, from the beginning, been much more of an influence on my own playing than Little Walter. Cotton is the epitome of big tone. No matter the context, he's almost always interested in supporting his notes with bass frequencies, frequencies produced by the way he shapes his mouth cavity, hands, the whole thing. It must have been difficult coming along after Little Walter, when that particular approach had become the model for great harp playing in Muddy's mind. In fact, it WAS difficult to come along and confront that: Cotton told me that himself. So I suspect that one reason for Cotton's "big sound" was to differentiate himself substantially from LW.

Which leaves Little Walter. The title of this thread is one way, an intentionally provocative way, of voicing his difference. But what I wrote in the second paragraph of my original post expanded on my point, and I stand by it. All those things are true, and they're worth attending to, and appreciating, in LW's playing.

Albert Collins has thin tone: Telecaster treble-pickup-on-extreme overdrive tone. Sonny Boy Williamson in his Trumpet Recordings featuring an F harp has thin, bright, sharp tone. Sonny Terry knows how to thin his tone on the 4 draw to make an unforgettable sharp across-the-fields sound. Miles Davis often plays, and Dizzy Gillespie almost always plays, with a thin tone.

Thin is--or can be, in the right hands--great tone. It's not necessarily a fighting word.

Last Edited by kudzurunner on Oct 28, 2013 4:34 PM
Rick Davis
2603 posts
Oct 28, 2013
4:51 PM


----------
-Little Rick Davis
The Blues Harp Amps Blog
The Mile High Blues Society
Rick Davis
2604 posts
Oct 28, 2013
4:55 PM


----------
-Little Rick Davis
The Blues Harp Amps Blog
The Mile High Blues Society
JTThirty
226 posts
Oct 28, 2013
5:17 PM
I think "bright" or "lighter" touch reflects LW's tone on a lot of his recordings. That struck me the first time I'd ever heard his recordings. Not really a "thin" tone, but i do believe he wanted to emulate the jazzy runs of a tenor sax on some of his work. His work with Muddy definitely went deeper in the well with some fat backed, greasy low down tones. I mean, hell, look at the song that set the stage for him..."Juke". Not exactly aiming for a down in the alley, gut bucket sound. He emulated a lot of what worked on that song for him with a slew of instrumentals. BUT, I'd bet my bottom dollar that when he played a "live" gig in a Chicago bar, though a Masco, that his "fat" tone couldn't have been beat.
----------
Ricky B
http://www.bushdogblues.blogspot.com
RIVER BOTTOM BLUES--crime novel for blues fans available at Amazon/B&N and my blog
THE DEVIL'S BLUES--ditto
kudzurunner
4332 posts
Oct 28, 2013
5:52 PM
Actually, JT, there is this claim that LW used to play through Masco PAs and used to string multiple speakers up around the clubs he played. Those were small speakers, not large bass-heavy speakers. So I'm not sure you're right.

But you're very right about one thing: his models were horn players. Sax players. There's a tenor sax, as we know, and an alto sax. They have different sounds. The tenor supports its sound with bass frequencies. The alto doesn't. And of course when the tenor is screaming--well, that's......thin tone. Screaming tone.
Frank
3132 posts
Oct 28, 2013
7:01 PM

Last Edited by Frank on Oct 28, 2013 7:19 PM
5F6H
1683 posts
Oct 29, 2013
2:50 AM
@Kudzurunner "Actually, JT, there is this claim that LW used to play through Masco PAs and used to string multiple speakers up around the clubs he played. Those were small speakers, not large bass-heavy speakers. So I'm not sure you're right."

The only 2 photos I am a ware of where LW is possibly playing through an amp in the photo are the White Sox photo where he is sitting in with Muddy's band (Cotton on harp, Masco above) and one where he is possibly playing through a blonde tolex Fender head & cab. The only amp he mentions, that can be directly related to an existing brand/model is "bandmaster" (not that he anything good to say about it). An amp that supposedly belonged to LW was a Danelectro/Silvertone (anecdotal).

It is pure speculation to claim to know what kind of speaker, or their attributes, that he used.

You cite "Oh baby" as an example of "thin tone", this is a wet harp sound, to hear what he sounded like it's better to listen to the dry tracks, here's Rocker, from the same session...



EDIT: The track in the OP titled "Oh Baby" & listed in the accompanying pic as 7608, is in fact 7605 "I love You So (Oh Baby), unissued in LW's lifetime. Raspy, overdriven, but not really what I'd call thin (lacking in harmonic content), considering key of harp. Key/pitch strike me as frequency related, rather than thick/thin in terms of timbre/tone.

FWIW, I have no doubt he used Mascos, they were common 'currency' at the time, but any claims as to preference are interpretations/revisionist theory.
----------
www.myspace.com/markburness

http://www.facebook.com/markburness

Last Edited by 5F6H on Oct 29, 2013 5:25 AM
tmf714
2148 posts
Oct 29, 2013
6:39 AM
Little Walter played and owned a Commando for sure-
Rick Davis
2608 posts
Oct 29, 2013
6:54 AM


----------
-Little Rick Davis
The Blues Harp Amps Blog
The Mile High Blues Society
Rick Davis
2609 posts
Oct 29, 2013
7:06 AM
Here is Nic Clark's "thin" tone.



----------
-Little Rick Davis
The Blues Harp Amps Blog
The Mile High Blues Society
5F6H
1684 posts
Oct 29, 2013
7:29 AM
@TMF714 "Little Walter played and owned a Commando for sure-"

I am sure he owned a lot of amps, I know the source of the anecdote to which you refer and it seems totally believable, I have no problem with that & certainly won't argue against the Commando being one of the amps he owned. However, it's when we come to putting specific bits of gear in his hand (without photographic evidence) and making assumptions about these specific bits of gear being certain contributors to his tone, or a certain track, that things get a bit "wistful"? We all love to speculate (me, as much as anyone) and there are amps from the period that fit the overall MO (in the early 50's many amps shared similar "backbone") & no doubt get you in the ball-park tonally...but being specific and stating 'as fact' is heading for thin ice.

For instance, I could say that LW's favourite coffee was Maxwell House, made in a Pyrex percolator, because these things were available & common at the time...it's plausible, certainly possible, but not a fact or something I'd try to convince people of.

Further to Kudzurunner's "Those were small speakers, not large bass-heavy speakers." Bass amps generally need more power to push low frequencies, back in the 50's paper voice coil formers couldn't generally handle a lot of W, larger paper cones could flap, so bass amps often had multiple speakers & smaller cones - this is exactly how the 4x10" bassman developed. In contrast, late tweed/early tolex Pros had neutered low end via small output transformers, likely to save low end from blowing the 15" speakers. So I'm just not convinced that speaker size is relevant to "bass heavy" tone, or the subject matter, in this scenario. Masco PAs may have come with 2x 10" cabs or 2x 12" cabs.

Certain other factors though are somewhat *likely* to influence early 50's amplified harp recordings: cathode bias, relatively low plate voltages & high plate currents, lack of NFB loops...as these things were common to the vast majority of amps (combos & tube PA/Masco style heads) made up until '53/54 (some manufacturers stuck with these things into the early '60s & even Fender did for some lower powered amps into the late 50's).

Cotton, likely Snooky Prior & BW (any number of active Chicago players at the time) are just as likely to have used Mascos too, but but we don't generally hear how they are responsible for, or contributors to, those players' tone. Nor do we hear it widely said that the 545 is the "LW mic", even though we can see it in his hand in plenty of pics.

----------
www.myspace.com/markburness

http://www.facebook.com/markburness

Last Edited by 5F6H on Oct 29, 2013 8:12 AM
1847
1244 posts
Oct 29, 2013
9:07 AM
Whilst he certainly used Astatic bullets, there isn't really any evidence to support that idea that he favoured them.




once you have used an astatic all other mic's pale in comparison!
----------



i get a lot of request when i play my harmonica
"but i play it anyway"
timeistight
1409 posts
Oct 29, 2013
9:11 AM
I once read a Little Walter quote in which he laughed at questions about mics and said he favored whichever mic was out of pawn when he needed it.

Last Edited by timeistight on Oct 29, 2013 9:12 AM
chromaticblues
1496 posts
Oct 29, 2013
9:40 AM
For years people have been saying his drinking is why his latter work wasn't as good as his earlier stuff.
Has anyone considered he was using different equipment and when you hear yourself it affects how you play and what you play. All those pics of LW with 545's are when playing in the last few years of his life. It has been said that he didn't travel with an amp or mic. I'll bet most of the 545 pics are promo pics for the European tours he did. Not only that, but Shure mics are all over and were when he was playing too. Some of those pics could very well be house mics?
OK my point! His early recordings are done with late 40's early 50's equipment and his latter stuff with 60's stuff. Man there have been a lot of post disagreeing with my earlier post. When it comes to LW a lot of people (harmonica players) stop thinking objectively/rationally!
I am a big fan of LW and I don't see the problem in saying I don't like his latter stuff (harmonica wise) and I don't think it was all his fault!
kudzurunner
4334 posts
Oct 29, 2013
10:03 AM
5F6H: I don't expect to shake your absolute certainty in your own rightness, but the truth is, Glover and Dirks present a LOT of anecdotal evidence in their Little Walter biography about what sorts of amps LW used and how he deployed them, both in the studio and live. I don't have time to type out all the quotes from the book, which is sitting right here on my desk--I've got a day gig--but I'll suggest that those who have the book look at pp. 95 (where Louis Myers talks about Walter would "hang it [his amp] up on the wall"), 121 (Where Joe Lee Bush talks about Walter's "National amplifier...it had a two-speaker set-up, one speaker went way on one side of the stage, and the one on the right side of the stage had the control knobs on it"), and, most importantly, 133-135.

"The only time he [LW] mentioned gear," according to the authors, "was in a 1968 interview, 'I had an amplifier built...and it had four speakers on each side...little bitty speakers too."

"Walter had these little shitty little fucking amps," Marshall Chess remembered of LW's studio setup. "...it was small, I don't think it was any major big amp he brought in [to the studio]."

There's more, but that gives a general idea. I try to remain evidence-based when I make my claims, Mark. While I may--as far as I can tell--be wrong, strictly speaking, when I talk about how LW strung up Masco PA speakers in clubs, each element of that claim is true. He played through the available tube-powered PA systems of the time; he played through multiple speakers driven by one amp; he played through "itty bitty" speakers.

I'm not engaging in revisionism, in any case. I'm doing my best to clarify the way in which Little Walter's amplified playing fails to accord with the common idea now that any self-respecting player needs to blow through a 4 x 10 cabinet and shoot for big fat tone. Walter did indeed come up with a range of hellacious sounds, including big fat ones and thin piercing ones, and he did it by any means necessary--which is to say, by ceaseless experimentation and innovation. He was protean; he generated lots of options and let his genius's sense of taste lead him in the right direction. That's the bottom line.

Last Edited by kudzurunner on Oct 29, 2013 10:12 AM
tmf714
2149 posts
Oct 29, 2013
10:34 AM
No doubt-he used and owned a Commando-dont care about mics tone or any other arguments to the contrary-there is no speculation about the Commando

Last Edited by tmf714 on Oct 29, 2013 10:35 AM
Rick Davis
2615 posts
Oct 29, 2013
11:20 AM
tmf, do you have a photo of LW playing the Commando? Why are you so certain about this?

----------
-Little Rick Davis
The Blues Harp Amps Blog
The Mile High Blues Society
tmf714
2151 posts
Oct 29, 2013
11:30 AM
Billy Boy Arnold confirmed it at one of David Barretts
Masterclass sessions years ago-there was a Dano Commando there,and when Billy saw it he said"yep-that's it-that's the one Little Walter had."

Biily would know-he was there,and being a harp player,would notice something like that. Of the other people that were asked which amp he used,none of them really cared,not being harp players number one,and most of them said it made no difference-he still sounded like Little Walter through any system.

Last Edited by tmf714 on Oct 29, 2013 11:34 AM
Rick Davis
2617 posts
Oct 29, 2013
11:35 AM
Cool story, tmf. Thanks.



----------
-Little Rick Davis
The Blues Harp Amps Blog
The Mile High Blues Society

Last Edited by Rick Davis on Oct 29, 2013 11:38 AM
5F6H
1685 posts
Oct 29, 2013
11:59 AM
If I have any "absolute rightness", it is only in the belief that you/I/we cannot know, or prescribe any attributes, specifically to certain LW tracks, or to "LW tones" with respect to speaker size, number, or frequency response. There aren't actually that many things in the world I know much about, but tube amps is one of them.

I never stated that LW didn't use "itty bitty" speakers (what exactly is itty bitty in inches, is a 10" itty bitty compared to a 15" or "just a bit bitty"), I believe he did use Mascos (they were designed for pairs of cabs that plugged into 2 parallel speaker sockets) & perhaps equivalent tube PAs, I believe he did use multiple speakers...but that's not to say he didn't use combos (Masco made these too, as you well know), nor single speaker amps (in the very early 50's most amps only had one speaker). But I can't say he definitely used this here, or there (though any tracks with amp tremolo, exclude Mascos because they never made an amp with tremolo).

What, to me, is a step too far is stating that you/anyone knows he had a preference for something he never specifically mentioned or that you presume to know the size, number & frequency response characteristics of what speakers he used (small speakers are not significantly less bassy, unless they are designed to be). He used amps made before/during 1968 - that is all we can say with certainty. The revisionist remark wasn't aimed at you personally, just at the idea of commonly held beliefs being accepted as fact.

The 4x10" issue is really a straw man argument. Most 4x10 used are Fenders/Fender based, post '58 designs (I'm not discounting your own bassman, just pointing out that most 4x10" used by harp players are a little later, yet still significantly different...the 50's was like the space race for amps, they covered a lot of ground in a short time) - amps that were conceived after LW was established, they overlap, but weren't a factor in establishing a/the LW sound. They are used today primarily because they are a good & useful tool for playing off the back-line in a regular band...I agree that they are not a certain route to any specific tone(s), nor that they are the only option for playing out.

The anecdotal evidence you reference (I'm certainly not calling anyone a liar, but again we can't actually put the gear discussed in LW's hand and say, "here, this is what was used on......track") seems to support the idea that multiple small speakers are a good thing...well, that's what a 4x10" has (12" being the most popular speaker size for a musical instrument amp). My earlier point about amp factors (voltage, bias, etc), was merely to point out that speaker number & size is speculative...but other factors are rather less so, if not exactly certain.

The custom amp, as Walter himself describes it, had 2 powered chassis & fuse points. Multiple speakers, driven by 2 amps.

"Walter did indeed come up with a range of hellacious sounds, including big fat ones and thin piercing ones, and he did it by any means necessary--which is to say, by ceaseless experimentation and innovation. He was protean; he generated lots of options and let his genius's sense of taste lead him in the right direction. That's the bottom line." This we agree 100% on, though we shouldn't exclude factors beyond his control, like engineers dictating what he used/how loud/how distorted/how wet & how they affected what we hear, because we can only hear what they actually issued, rather than live club dates, which may have differed/or not...more stuff that we just don't "know". In the interview, he does state some dissatisfaction with restrictions when recording & playing live, conversely he does credit an engineer with enhancing/realising a sound he liked.

Marshall's comment perhaps needs to be looked at in context, does he mean "little, shitty" in the context of what was typically available in 1952-4, or in the context of Marshall's career, starting at Chess in the late 60's & later becoming road manager for the Stones?

What actually do we "know"

Last Edited by 5F6H on Oct 29, 2013 2:05 PM
kudzurunner
4336 posts
Oct 29, 2013
12:58 PM
Rick: Cool amp! I want one.
colman
272 posts
Oct 29, 2013
1:37 PM
LW and his thin tone,thin as a pin and stick you in the brain every time,you will never forget.LW and his fat tone to the bone,so call the law , he wrote it...
Rick Davis
2622 posts
Oct 29, 2013
1:55 PM
Adam, me too. I think a couple of forum members own examples of that amp.

----------
-Little Rick Davis
The Blues Harp Amps Blog
The Mile High Blues Society
Joe_L
2380 posts
Oct 29, 2013
2:08 PM
Marshall Chess was born in 1942. He would have been between 10-12 years old when Little Walter was in the studio.

Scott Dirks (who knows more about Little Walter than Little Walter did) provides some interesting insight into Little Walter's choice of equipment outside of the studio.




----------
The Blues Photo Gallery
tmf714
2156 posts
Oct 29, 2013
2:13 PM
Johns amp on Flicker

Last Edited by tmf714 on Oct 29, 2013 2:27 PM
Rick Davis
2623 posts
Oct 29, 2013
2:25 PM
Joe, thanks for posting that video. Fascinating...

----------
-Little Rick Davis
The Blues Harp Amps Blog
The Mile High Blues Society
Frank
3137 posts
Oct 29, 2013
2:57 PM

Last Edited by Frank on Oct 29, 2013 3:02 PM
The Iceman
1244 posts
Oct 30, 2013
7:00 AM
What he played through is not nearly as important as what he played.
----------
The Iceman
chromaticblues
1500 posts
Oct 30, 2013
7:03 AM
I listened to a bunch of LW's later work last night (58-63) and I found a number of songs that are done with vocal mics that I actually like. Honestly it was about half and half. One song that stood out was Dead Presidents. It sounds to me like it is a vocal mic into a the board. I don't know, but I like how that mic picked up the harp more like you sitting in front of him while he was playing. I thought that was a perfect sound for the song.
Also this was a 1963 session and he may have gotten use to the stick mics by then?
Frank
3148 posts
Oct 30, 2013
7:04 AM
Absolutely adore how he so cunningly makes use of the 5 draw in many of his tunes - simply wondrous :)


Post a Message



(8192 Characters Left)


Modern Blues Harmonica supports

§The Jazz Foundation of America

and

§The Innocence Project

 

 

 

ADAM GUSSOW is an official endorser for HOHNER HARMONICAS