...rapid playing, as a method, attracts snark and dismissals while sparer playing , as a stylistic preference, generally recieves no such insults. No one complains that Lee Oskar or BB King play too slow or not enough notes. Ted Burke __________________ ted-burke.com tburke4@san.rr.com
Last Edited by ted burke on Jun 03, 2015 7:29 AM
seems like a contrived argument. can we see an examples of where people have made a point of announcing to the world that players with a more accelerated style who use more notes in their playing are doing it wrong.
if you mean, why are people more likely to find fast notey playing uninteresting or irritating than sparer more lyric playing, i think the answer is obvious. spare lyrical playing is probably at worst uninteresting and is unlikely to be presented as amazing, whereas fast notey playing is more likely to be presented as impressive, thus more likely to draw comments from those who find it to lack merit.
I don't give a rat's ass whether someone plays fast or slow. I care that it is MUSICAL. Period.
I CAN tell you that the players who can play fast AND are musical, frequently DON'T. Just as "loud all the time" pales in power compared to playing with dynamics, playing fast all the time just because one can doesn't make it musical. It makes it wanking. ---------- *************************************************** /Greg
i understand that taking the bait by contributing wil possibly only make it worse, but i really question the premise of the OP and whether its within the spirit of the forum creed. Seems like a post contrived to start an argument.
As quoted in the intro to the movie Talladega Nights...
"America is all about speed. Hot, nasty, badass speed." -Eleanor Roosevelt, 1936
I love to play fast, I really do. Sometimes I get to and sometimes I don't - it depends on the song.
This past weekend I had a cool opportunity to play a festival and jam with some nationally touring acts. I got to play several songs with Rachelle Coba, Joanna Connor, and Bobby Messano.
Being that this is a blues forum, and knowing the music usually brought up here, no one will know who those people are, as they are clearly blues rock.
It was your typical jam fest set, way too loud, and not very feedback friendly - but it was SO fun and the crowd just ate it up.
I bring it up as it was totally appropriate for me to be loud, fast, and flashy. Would I play every song like that in every context? Nope.
Personally, I think the trick is to be able to serve the music your playing and serve it well. I think you shouldn't stop at playing just modern or just post war-style. I think you should find a way to serve a song in your own style.
There are a few players out there that are very ego driven in their approach and playing. However, when they step back and are used as side men, play some beautiful music. ---------- The Iceman
All soloists are ego driven, in my view. One needs a certain amount of confidence in their ability to take the spot light and have the raw nerve to believe that they have something worth paying attention to. Whether the player is the speedster or someone who cleaves close to the melody, whether professional, intermediate or beginner, there is an ego-based need to be at the center of music being made. What matters is the personality and imagination and, yes, skill level of the player, harmonica or otherwise. Ego is a tool among other tools, and the distinction between people using the tool is what they do with it. ---------- Ted Burke __________________ ted-burke.com tburke4@san.rr.com
Here's the original premise, for those who missed it:
"(Why is it)...that those who are partial to fast players, guitar or harmonica, don't make it a point to announce that musicians who have a less accelerated style and who use fewer notes in their playing are not doing it right? I mean, Johnny Winter and Joe Satriani fanatics don't complain that BB King or David Gilmour play too few notes and aren't playing fast enough. Jason Ricci and LD Miller don't base on Lee Oskar or Sonny Boy Williams because what they play isn't crammed full of jacked up tempos and rapid fire note clusters. It seems from what I've read in forums over many years is that fans of the fast and furious appreciate the more lyric musicians,the sparer stylists, the nuances from which they draw. Partisans and supporters of speed as valid technique and element in modern playing seem better able to appreciate the differences in ways to play the particular instrument they are attracted to. Just saying/ ---------- Ted Burke _____________
and follow up:
"...whereas fast notey playing is more likely to be presented as impressive, thus more likely to draw comments from those who find it to lack merit..."
The question is actually why fans of fast notey playing generally don't complain when slower, sparer players are discussed. My guess, anecdotal though it may be, is that speed partisans are better rounded in their tastes that more conservative harmonica enthusiasts give them credit for. JR, Sugar Blue and LD Miller fans I know (and there are many) appreciate and tend be fans of soloists who don't speed at all. Conservative harmonica enthusiasts seem a crankier breed, I think. ---------- Ted Burke ----------
Last Edited by JInx on Jun 03, 2015 8:10 AM
yep that was the original post.the Revised one is a bit more efficient and to the point. Don't you think? Let's see if we can have a discussion without malice. ---------- Ted Burke __________________d http://www.yourURL.com tburke4@san.rr.com
Last Edited by ted burke on Jun 03, 2015 8:20 AM
It's not fair to start an argument, then rewrite the premise after soliciting a forum response. ----------
Last Edited by JInx on Jun 07, 2015 11:38 AM
Totally fake premise. Wish I had a dollar for every internet post I've read that says "BB KIng [for example] is totally overrated!!!! Any kid at guitar center could play that stuff!!! Yngwie Malmsteen [for example] is a million times better!!!"
Well, there are alot of harmonica players but fewer musicians who play the harmonica. In general, harmonica players tend to deify older blues styles and tend to learn to play by imitating that sort of material which, for the most part, is not fast tempo. It is not uncommon at a jam to hear harmonica players complain about any groove that is not laid back and old timey, probably because that's how the recordings they learned to imitate sound.
So, I suspect the criticism of high tempo fast playing is sort of a defense mechanism to trivialize something the critic never learned how to do or doesn't understand.There seems to be a preocupation with mastering style specific techiques on the harp instead of learning to play it as a musical instrument. EXAMPLE: A lot of players obsess about tongue pulls and slaps which for the most part don't have utility in positions above third. High tempo players tend to get more mileage from extension tones than they do chords. FWIW
i'll add that for myself, I've noticed my taste has changed as it relates to rock and blues guitar as I've aged (I'm in my 50s). As a teen I was ALL about the face melting solos, drum solos, keyboard solos, and while faster wasn't always better I definitely loved the shredders. Now? It bores me. I'd much rather listen to a tune with a great groove and great lyrics, with the occasional tasty short guitar/harp/keyboard/drum flourish or embellishment.
My interpretation as to why this is true is that as a young buck all full of testosterone, piss and vingar and what not: IT IS all about you, or at least you think it is. Then after you've lived some of life and had it knock the crap out of you a few times (and experienced the joys) you're more receptive to the other aspects of the artform, the message it can contain, the mood and feel it can create. A well crafted and/or deep lyric. This would sort of tie-in with iceman's take on the definition of ego vs. egoless musicianship above.
Bonus points to dougharps for weighing in with a Haiku......sweet.
Last Edited by Honkin On Bobo on Jun 03, 2015 9:42 AM
There is a place for high tempo fast playing - I just don't like to hear it all the time.
For instance, Miles Davis....as he matured, he started to figure out how to leave out notes that weren't necessary to get an idea across. However, no matter how sparse he may play, he occasionally will do lightning fast runs.
To me, it shows he can do it when he wants to, but chooses not to do it all the time. Much more mature playing in my opinion - best of both worlds. ---------- The Iceman
Like Greg and others, I think that dynamics is part of the issue, and is the reason that I don't like "too much" fast playing. The other issue, which has also been touched on here, is that music has to be "followable", or tell a story, in order for the listener to maintain interest. If it is a constant stream of notes with little or no structure, I tune out, and pay attention to something else, ... or get bored. This is particularly true for "chromatic" runs that throw in every note in book. And finally, I suggest that raw speed limits emotional expression to a narrow range -- more to the anger side than sadness, say. I would apply these principles of musicality to all lead instruments and solos. ----------
Last Edited by mr_so&so on Jun 03, 2015 10:21 AM
Yeah Doug, terrific poetry--I am sure that Ted appreciated that! My general sense of this is a hazy quote, "Yeah that guy was good but that other guy played that one note and blowed him away." I wonder sometimes if I actually heard this or just imagined it. Edit--you inspired me, here's a haiku back at you!
Miracle of life Intention springs from nothing Into the daylight
Don't mind me, I'm in the middle of fixing Billy Branch's harps and needed a break.
Last Edited by Gnarly on Jun 03, 2015 10:44 AM
I truly dislike Miles' playing on the Dial stuff, here he sounds more in control. I bet it's easier to play fast on the trumpet or sax than on the harmonica!
@Gnarly: Rod Piazza starts a tribute song to George 'Harmonica' Smith talking about when they played together in Bacon Fat that Rod would start out playing everything he knew trying to get things going and then George would come out and bring the house down with just one note. But then George said, "Rod, do your thing."
In answer to the OP: because certain sectors of the contemporary blues subculture are defending the subculture's boundaries from what they imagine is the pollution of rock, and because rock--especially rock guitar--is defined in many people's view by an over-reliance on high-speed note-production: shredding, in a word.
Of course a fair number of blues guitarists through the years--black blues guitarists--have played a lot of notes. I'm just watching a clip of Albert Collins and Buddy Guy from 1990. They're shredding. Magic Sam was pretty fast. Luther Allison shredded. All West Side players.
Rico McFarland is one of the fastest guitar players I've ever seen. He's a contemporary black Chicago blues player.
Of course quite a few blues guitarists DON'T play particularly fast. BB and Albert lead the pack. Wes Montgomery, playing blues in a jazz vein, plays with his thumb, and doesn't shred.
I played for many years with a guitar man who played very, very fast. Mr. Satan. Maybe some here have heard of him.
Iceman: Buddy Guy and Albert Collins dressed flashy, wore rings, and definitely had look-at-me personas. Ego-based? Sure, if you insist. Dennis Gruenling wears look-at-me shoes. He definitely steals spotlight. Ego-based? Sure, if you insist. Same with Mr. Satan. I think they're all great musicians, though, and I think you've invoked a distinction without a difference.
Last Edited by kudzurunner on Jun 03, 2015 11:44 AM
Here is a reprint of part of my posting to which you are no doubt referring:
<<"Ego based players usually have a "look at me" style of stage performance (unusually flashy or colorful clothes and exaggerated stage movements).
Non ego based players seem to blend in to the whole picture in an organic sense, either as part of the ensemble or in service to the song.
Not to split hairs or be shown that "so and so has flashy clothes and still services the song".
These are merely my generalities.>>
No doubt you read quickly through the postings and missed my point, which was to avoid responses like "sure, if you insist" and the beginning of a back and forth that usually is just both sides re-affirming their positions or one side trying to poke holes in the other's philosophy.
No insisting here. Just a general statement about my personal outlook, which isn't carved in stone, but very flexible, as there will always be a few exceptions to the "rule". Being an ego based player isn't always a bad thing, y'know. ---------- The Iceman
Last Edited by The Iceman on Jun 03, 2015 12:04 PM
I heard a local blues band that is getting some traction at a show. They played blistering blues, and the first number killed. The third number was okay. Around the 5th or sixth song the singer joked that they were going to do a ballad before launching into a song that sounded just like all the others.
When you are fantasizing as a kid about being up on stage one of the more interesting aspects of putting on a show doesn't come up- putting together a set list. There are few things like designing a set list to give you an idea of what your range and style are. You'll realize you have to mix up your keys, in our band we mix up the order of who is singing, give me a rest to catch my breath, rest voices, start strong, finish strong, figure out where to take breaks for banter, and mix the styles up.
Our set has a few songs that would fall somewhere between alternative and pop, some blues, some rock, even sometimes some klezmer and an Irish Jig, and a couple country style songs. There is one song where I use 2 holes, 5 notes and play the entire song and songs I don't pick up the harp at all.
You can talk about ego and 'look at me' playing vs. 'fitting with the band' but there is something else- being lost in the music. I want to entertain the crowd, but the whole reason I am playing is because I want to have fun playing. I'm in a band, and part of that is making sure the other guys are having fun too, quid pro quo, and yeah, there are times you want to just go up and show off, but most of the time when I want to play a faster riff up front it's because I really really like the sound of the riff and I figure my tastes can't be all that different than everybody else out there.
I've read a lot of articles that say that by early adulthood most people have stopped musically evolving. They like what they like and new stuff sounds like noise. I noticed at one point that I was starting to get that way and I made a conscious decision to try to keep my ears open. To an extent it has worked. I listen to smatterings of hip hop, and I think I can judge a pop song on it's merits. Dubstep seems to be a bridge too far for me, but I at least gave it a shot. There are times I love fast playing, but I don't want to hear it on every song, but hey, on my computer I can design a playlist however I want to keep things mixed. I also love slow melodic pieces.
There are times when I try to listen to jazz when I don't hear the melody and it bugs me because my ear isn't trained to listen to jazz melodies. The patterns are more complex and sometimes I miss them altogether. I know from listening over and over that eventually they emerge.
When this debate comes up on the forum though, it seems there is always a camp that says you can't be melodic and fast. I've heard melodic in fast. It can be done and it's done pretty regularly by guys on this forum. I've heard fast that moves me, so quite frankly it doesn't matter to me that some people don't hear that as melodic. (I still love some slow blues though.)
You can say, hey, I don't hear it as melodic, but that's not what most people say. They say, 'That's not melodic'. Instead of saying 'It has too many notes for my taste' they say, 'It has too many notes'. If you say it one way it sounds like you are expressing your personal opinion on a matter of taste. If you say it the other you sound like you are shouting at kids for playing their music too loud, get off my lawn.
And here is the thing, it's fine to have opinions about music. It's wonderful. It means you are listening, but after a while, when you are just expressing opinion everyone knows your opinion. I could tell, before I opened this thread, who was going to come down which side of the argument. It's like a friend who keeps telling you he doesn't like pizza. The first time it's interesting. The second time, eh. The 25th time you realize he is trying to socially identify himself as someone who doesn't like pizza. Pizza is an amazing food with all sorts of variety. You say, 'I don't think this fast playing is melodic', well, that is a specific complaint. You are the one making the argument, so demonstrate your point- show us that you aren't just complaining about the speed by citing some fast stuff that is melodic. Surely there is fast melodic stuff out there and contrasting what is fast and melodic against what is just fast would be a valuable teaching point.
Of course, melodic isn't always the point. Music is designed to elicit emotion. There are all sorts of emotions. Even in classical music, pieces that are considered tame today at one point stirred up emotions. Try moshing to slow blues. It just doesn't work.
edit- cross posted with the boss. I should have given more examples. I think he said what I was trying to say more succinctly.
".rapid playing, as a method, attracts snark and dismissals while sparer playing , as a stylistic preference, generally recieves no such insults. No one complains that Lee Oskar or BB King play too slow or not enough notes."
There's a bit too much "straw man" aspect in this premise for my taste.
That said, it strikes me that CarlA hit the bullseye. This is all personal opinion and individual preference. What others may or may not say about an artist's ability/style matters not a whit.
What matters is that the artist enjoys it, and follows her/her passion. If an audience also enjoys it, all the better (and if not . . . they don't have to listen)
Nacoran sez "I heard a local blues band that is getting some traction at a show. They played blistering blues, and the first number killed. The third number was okay. Around the 5th or sixth song the singer joked that they were going to do a ballad before launching into a song that sounded just like all the others."
Great statement. Also a reflection of our short attention span evolution.
I've been impressed as well after 1 song, 2 songs, maybe 3 songs - but after that my impressed meter goes down quickly if this is the extent of the talent, showing a lack of depth.
However, those w/that short American Idol type mindset will walk away impressed. ---------- The Iceman
Iceman states "There is a place for high tempo fast playing". I would add that there is a place for everything, the hard part is to use the right thing at the right time. The more skills you have a good command of, the less likely you are to apply the wrong one, just because your good with it. The old phrase "When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail" comes to mind.
My first response to Ted's question was that when someone plays slow and without musicality, we can just dismiss it without much thought. When someone plays with speed and precision but without musicality, there is a bit of a disconnect. There is clear skill on display but the musicality in not there. In some cases, one may be so impressed with the skill, they forgive the non-musicality. Because this can happen, there may be a tendency to think that all fast playing is just trying to cover up for a lack of musicality.
Last Edited by STME58 on Jun 03, 2015 1:35 PM
My earlier posts are hung out to dry since the posts they refer to have been altered; it would take an effort to get the context now. Fwiw, the amended OP is less inflammatory but I think it's more indicative of the poster's mindset than a real issue. As Hvyj illustrated, there is plenty of snark for everyone, it's not limited to those who play quickly. players outside the speed game will be criticised for their lack of innovation or imagination, adherence to slavish imitation of 'traditional' stylists, failure to advance the perception of the instrument as having relevance in modern music. And, if one considers the potential to be annoying, the sort of fast playing referred to probably is more likely to excite the nervous system and if found to be disagreeable will be more irritating, just as the effect of cocaine on the nervous system is more likely to make people annoy others than is the effect of opium. If I found mellow music not doing much for me, I'd probably just sigh and choose something else, whereas if something fast and intense was annoying me I'd probably acknowledge it with an expletive and choose something else. Music is communication, and encourages responses which accord. Imho
I've got no kick against modern jazz, Unless they try to play it too darn fast; And change the beauty of the melody, Until they sounded like a symphony, That's why I go for that Rock And Roll Music ... Chuck Berry
Playing fast is not an end in itself- Its a technique to be used where needed.
If you just wanna smoke the fretboard or harp all of the time for speeds sake- its just a mechanical exercise
In the 80's a guitar teacher told me that nothing is WRONG with speed, but he was constantly faced with kids who could shred, but fell apart of asked to play over a slow blues progression.
If someone can ONLY play with great speed (and can't play well slowly), I'm not likely to have as much respect for their playing.
It's not like I would say it aloud - I'm not an asshole. But that's what I would feel.
I said in another thread that I recently watched a (porch?) clip Adam did about playing slow and I was blown away again at how much work I have to put in. That clip impressed/daunted me more than any shredding clip I would watch.
---------- My YouTube Channel - Any Likes or Comments appreciated. :)
It blows my mind when i look at those tube vids of kids guitar shredding..how do they learn to do that at their age.But even though i enjoy it i can only watch it for about 10 minutes .. Same with harp shredding.....
I see it like this. Yes, I am an extrovert personality. I was also turned on to harp and blues at a young age. When I hit my 30's I finally got to the stage. In the past approx. 25 years I have grown and developed as a musician- harp player and singer, writer, arranger. Side man, front man, whatever was called for. The dynamics of music, connected to the ear of the beholder, demand variety in tempo, volume, intensity, etc, to stay exciting and appealing. My job as a musician is to engage an audience and give them a pleasing show. This means my work has been cut out for me. If I want validation from others- peers and listeners alike- then my mandate is to bring my best to the board, mic, stage, studio, etc. Tempo is a mechanical device, as is all the tricks we have in our bag. The real challenge is to get the best combination possible at a given moment, and not repeat that moment too often. Have a variety of moments. We call them money songs sometimes and a lot of them are faster snappier tempos, people want to react. A head shake, foot tap, dancing, clapping- feeding the tip jar- these are indicators of success. Most times playing on the street a medium to fast tempo seems to draw listeners more so than a slow burner. But the real key is the change-up. Attention spans are short sometimes and listeners are on to the next thing if they've "already heard that".
The way I see it I as an artist and entertainer, I will do best when I bring variety to a set.
Side note, our newly finished cd has no two songs that are the same. She did new stuff every time and that drove me to try different positions, tempos, keys, effects, etc. Result we have a real variegated piece of work about to hit the market in its small way. ---------- http://www.reverbnation.com/jawboneandjolene
Bronze wailer: Brilliant quote selection Sir! Jbone! Well said man!
For me it's also all about variety. "Playing in service of the song"? Of course! The song/situation may very well ASK for more OR for less…Just as we see in nature: Is a rain forest more beautiful than a desert because it has more to look at? Is a Desert more beautiful than a rainforest because it is subtle, sparse and wondrous in it's own way? The song may call for attitude, humor, anger,love, respect quite or loud! May call for ego may not...Of course I'm going to use all my musical facility to express those emotions,textures colors.
It's easy to find an out of context video,song,scene,dish etc or such to prove/suggest this is ALL a player,actor,artist or chef can do. When the fact is many working artists with a reputation (For anything) frequently display the opposite values they are known for throughout their performances. Unfortunately and frequently these talents go largely uncommented on. In the acting world they call it "type casting" and it happens very frequently in the music world as well. People are very surface oriented viewers (which has been said here) and rarely consider the other factors and politics that going into making art or don't want to consider the potential of an artist who's less polarizing work is simply less viewed or celebrated. We like to compartmentalize artists for easy distinguishing, debate and reference. Thats natural but not always true. Like the question: Do you like Miles Davis or the Beatles or Pink Floyd or Sibelius for that matter? The next question often from a true fan is:" which period" ? Subscribing to only one single taste or preference of any art form much more a single style of an art form ("less is more blues") lends to a myopic, limited, closed off attitude which is everything new art tends to tear down even if that appears or is is sometimes reckless. It's the natural order of things. Again that doesn't take anything away from those older styles!!! NEVER!
I don't know I like lots of stuff…I can't NOT... and can't NOT want to express that, wether it's sparse or busy, slow or fast, loud or quiet ...It's in me and" it's got to come out "let that boy boogie woogie!" even if later it means I end up singinging " Night life ain't no good for me".... Different times in my life have different results. Thats art. Thats real, It's not contrived, cooked up, fabricated or designed all that much, it's how it IS at that time,when it's not…Thats when it really sucks... slow or fast less or more, when it's insincere is when my BS detector goes off and I have seen plenty of very insincere "less is more players" playing less is more in a way that is FAR pompous and more intellectually driven than the fastest scale hounds playing to seek the approval of moldy figs and boys clubs..Of course the lessons these folks have are REAL, TRUE and Beautiful and are coveted for GREAT reasons so many here have pationately and eloquently expressed, but like all things/ideas they can be taken too far, too literal and worshipped as false idols.
This argument is as old as the hills in any pursuit of the arts and the first any true initiate will instinctively ignore intellectually in favor of being instead experienced, never once until afterwards considering the results. Some of us call that soul and it comes in all shapes, sizes, speeds, and volumes. "Magic unassuaged of purpose, delivered free from the lust of result, is in every way pure and perfect"-Crowley ….
Meow, Meow Meow , Meow here I go again... pointless pontification... play the damn thing, play it too fast, play it too slow, make mistakes, make it too perfect, play it from your heart, play it from your mind, record it, don't record it, write it, cover it, jam with everyone, play by yourself, try shit, don't try shit too much, just do it, live it, BE IT!!! "The Heart has it's reasons which reason knows nothing about" - Blaise Pascal ---------- www.mooncat.org
Last Edited by Moon Cat on Jun 04, 2015 1:15 PM
An essential thing for a lot of us to cop to is that fast harmonica playing is exciting when the right harp player is doing it and playing fast as well can well put the player into a euphoric state. Think Coltrane, think Freddie Hubbard, think Allan Holdsworth; what's more interesting in these players is not when they play choose to play fast but rather how they've turned an accelerated approach to improvisation into a seamless kind of spontaneous composition. Speed for the sake of speed is perfectly okay in my book, provided the player has a distintinguishing expressive genius that marks he or her as more than mere technocrat. ---------- Ted Burke __________________ http://www.yourURL.com tburke4@san.rr.com
"Think Coltrane, think Freddie Hubbard, think Allan Holdsworth...."
These artists played fast, but constantly came up with new ideas that didn't sound like pattern playing.
Problem with harmonica is that many play it as it is laid out, thereby somewhat limiting the number of ideas that can be created. Result is repeated ideas that a semi trained ear can start to pick out after a while.
Also, many speedy gonzales harmonica players chose to learn patterns that lay easy on the harmonica and spend years increasing their tempos rather than branching out and finding ideas that fall outside of the hole/inhale/exhale lay out. I recognize these types of solos, as over the years I've increased my hearing/comprehension abilities and can listen quite fast with understanding.
The most I've heard from many are the recognizable patterns that might land on a different note as a sort of change to carbon copy, but the whole recognizable pattern still remains.
The worst case scenario is recognizing these same patterns played in many different songs and solos.
Howard Levy will surprise me, as he doesn't approach the harmonica from a harmonicky mind-set and has also developed ungodly high velocity (but his high velocity playing is so relentless that my ear/brain will shut down after listening for about 10 - 15 minutes).
Carlos del Junco also offers some unique twists and ideas to his fast playing.
Paul deLay did play some recognizable patterns if you listen to enough of his music, but his element of surprise would constantly and pleasantly pull the rug out from the most critical listeners. His sound was also so full of unique good natured fun that he could pull off almost anything he wanted to. ---------- The Iceman
Last Edited by The Iceman on Jun 04, 2015 1:24 PM
Your quoting me out of context in order to make a point. The full context: " Think Coltrane, think Freddie Hubbard, think Allan Holdsworth; what's more interesting in these players is not when they play choose to play fast but rather how they've turned an accelerated approach to improvisation into a seamless kind of spontaneous composition. Speed for the sake of speed is perfectly okay in my book, provided the player has a distintinguishing expressive genius that marks he or her as more than mere technocrat."
You've basically reiterated what I've already stated, that speed is good if you've the genius to make it consistently varied, interesting, exciting. Coltrane does that, Holdsworth does that, Jason and Sugar Blue that, Freddie Hubbard does that. These players are the bar to which all speedsters have to reach and from there create their own version of sonic heaven.
"Speedy gonzales" is a name given to a cartoon character, a Mexican mouse. It was a racist caricature and ought not be used in this current time. I know you're not racist, Iceman, but this is a careless useage. Perhaps edit your post. If you do so, I will amend this post with this particular note. ---------- Ted Burke __________________ http://www.yourURL.com tburke4@san.rr.com
Just used your sentence to mention the players that you did. Not trying to twist anything out of context. (actually, Lazy Larry found it easier to cut and paste rather than type).
I used lower case on speedy gonzales and used it as an adjective. No need to change what I posted into capitalization and a proper name noun and propel my comments into racial caricaturedom, which they are not.
Please don't take my comments as some kind of attack aimed at you. They are not. They are just my opinions.
edit...someone posted and then deleted this link... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/03/speedy-gonzales-hispanic_n_4039787.html
I read it and this should put to bed the worry about using that proper name as some kind of racial insult, although I'm sure everyone will have an opinion on that one, too. ---------- The Iceman
Last Edited by The Iceman on Jun 04, 2015 3:43 PM
Ted, Speedy Gonzalez is actually a little more complicated than that. He was actually a very popular character in the hispanic community, and after he was pulled there was a backlash. If you really look at the cartoons it's not that Speedy is a racist caricature, it's that he's being used as a contrast to the slow mice.
Hey Larry, I posted it, spam filter took it away, and now it's back. I like to keep it brief (sometimes), and the spam filter perceives brief comments as potential trouble. I would like to mention that, in my experience as a player, most people aren't listening to you anyway. And to quote Wim Dijkgraff, "Nobody cares if you don't play". Can't please everyone, so you got to please yourself--hey, it's a song. Or as my mother used to say, "Some people like raisin pie".
Last Edited by 
Last Edited by 
