It really IS a matter of the style of music involved. I tend to think melody lines when I play and not as rhythmically as in this style, though I do use octaves and chords.
Fiddle versions of this song that are old time or bluegrass have lots of fiddle ornaments that Grant's approach parallels wonderfully. Bouncing the bow, playing chords, etc. Vocal versions may have more direct melody and fewer ornaments and rhythm elements. Grant is great at playing in the style he uses in this song. Listen at 2:10.
You may prefer hearing a more direct melodic approach.
I just enjoy when any style is executed competently, even if it isn't my approach. Joe Filisko's rhythmic playing is also extraordinary. I greatly appreciate his playing, and Grant's playing, but I am not aspiring to play that way, just to borrow any elements that I can fit into my approach.
Grant is a powerful, skilled player who enjoys playing in this style, and he does it very well. ----------
Doug S.
Last Edited by dougharps on Jul 26, 2017 3:26 PM
Playing straight melody on a song like that is dull and sounds much better with the adornments. ---------- Wisdom does not always come with old age. Sometimes old age arrives alone.
You can't compare Dermody to Filisko. Dermody DOES leave space and allows the music to breathe. Filisko's concept of space is to fill every available nook and cranny of it with harmonica.
hvyj_ I just spent a week with Filisko at Augusta Heritage and I have to disagree. While he plays a few tunes where he is very busy,he is mostly from the "less is more" school. I must say that his approach is rather eye opening for me. I've spent a lot of time concentrating on single note playing and pretty much ignored the chordal aspects of the harp.It is really the strongest thing the harp has and adds a richness and complexity to the music that single notes can't match.Whenever I hear a really good harp player,they almost all use the chordal effects. Of course,there are always exceptions-Micky Rafael,for one. But even a clean single note player uses chords to sound better sometimes. You can use less than Grant's example but I don't think it's better leaving them out entirely.
After thought: You seem to be mostly into jazz. I think some of the slaps and pulls would be inappropriate there. Chicago blues-always. Other types of music-not so much,but chords are good in most music.
Last Edited by Tuckster on Jul 26, 2017 8:14 PM
I know there is not really a fair comparison between Grant and Paul no offense. The point I'm adding here is Paul's version has all the slaps, chords, whoot's and hollars, sloppiness and clean notes that anyone could want. And sounds Great! Love this version! I've always thought that a clean single note sound is better with a bigger band and a "dirty/embellished" version is better with just a guitar or harp alone. Just my opinion. In the end do what you like! Sometimes clean is good but sometimes dirty is good too!
---------- "The only way to get better is to play a little outside your comfort zone every time you play!"
@hvyj I enjoy Grant Dermody's music, though I don't try to play that way. We disagree about Grant's style. We also disagree about Joe Filisko (and probably on other things, too), but that is OK. I understand Joe's approach and his reasoning and I enjoy his music, though I don't necessarily apply all of his concepts to my approach.
Opinions on playing style and what music we enjoy are personal, and it is OK to differ. ----------
Well, there's some of Filiako's stuff I've downloaded to my phone and I like. But as far as his reasoning is concerned, I've studied his instructional materials pretty closely and I got into a big blow out with a since banished former MBH member when I said his text didn't make any sense musically--and it doesn't. Even Adam has acknowledged this a couple of times without elaboration.
Every pundit/teacher/innovator's approach has a lot to do with their orientation to music as well.
Joe is a great archivist and old school pre-war style analyst - more intellectual than creative spark type person. He can analyze another's creativity in order to transcribe it and gets into the tiny details, but Joe himself is not what I would consider a creative artist.
Grant is more of a creative artist type, so would approach this style from that orientation.
Neither is better than the other - just different.
I prefer the creative artist type over the analyst. However, everyone listens/learns/looks for something different, so glad there is so much choice out there. ---------- The Iceman
a lot of interesting and valid observations. And yeah, style begets technique. I've been known to say that I don't play my harmonica like it's a harmonica, meaning I don't regularly employ a lot of the harmonica specific techniques that are so prevalent in, for example, Dermody's style of play. Apart from subjective preference, there is another reason for this, which is that you can't "build" chords on a harmonica like you can a a guitar or a keyboard. So, we are stuck with the relatively primitive chords and chord fragments available on the instrument--which is ok as far as it goes. Fine for, say Delta Blues or Piedmont Blues played more-or-less in their traditional style.
If you are playing with real good guitar players who use sophisticated chord voicings you can really interfere with what they are doing if you are wanking on harmonica chords all the time, even if they are playing relatively simple progressions. And this certainly is even more so if the chord progressions are not the usual that are common to most blues.
And the point was made that the intentionally sloppy stuff and "adornments" work better in a duo context than with a band. I wish more harmonica players would realize this. It's so embarrassing (as a harmonica player) to watch some other harmonica players sitting in with a band and playing this way thinking it sounds cool while the other musicians are rolling their eyes because the harp playing is getting in the way of everybody and everything else.
But even playing in a duo, where there is more space to fill, I think, in general, it is easier to more effectively express emotional content without a lot of slop by using note movement and note selection (which does not completely exclude chords, splits, double stops and shakes). Sound effects can be cool, but don't often reach me aesthetically as a listener when they are a staple of the harp player's performance. Dermondy is very good and very skilled. But I don't recall ever hearing him play anything that really evoked a strong emotional response from me. But preferences are subjective and tastes differ...
Actually in my personal playing I've been using chords and double stops somewhat more often when stylistically and musically appropriate. In part, this is because lately I've been playing through an EV-PL-35 snare/tom drum mic (adding a Blows-Me-Away in-line VC). It has a nice sonic depth and deep fat (but basically clean) timbre that puts me below the guitars frequency range. It also has an EXTREMELY powerful proximity effect. So strong, that when I back off the mic and open my cup the tonal color changes to a still thick but much softer more airy sound that works well to provide a nice texture for chordal playing when chords fit musically and stylistically. BUT if I were to play slop through this mic with its thick tonal character, I suspect it would just sound like slop and not particularly aesthetic.
A very good musician/bandleader who I respect told me that sometimes the audience responds well to what they expect to hear from a particular instrument, so it may not be the best idea to avoid cliches entirely.
Last Edited by hvyj on Jul 27, 2017 2:50 PM
not me, I love the slaps and adornments.. They are the spice and seasoning of the blues harp IMHO.
tough crowd on Filisko! He came and did a private solo concert for a group of Dave Barrett's students after a country blues workshop. I assure you creative spark was there in abundance but different strokes I guess.
---------- 4' 4+ 3' 2~~~ -Mike Ziemba Harmonica is Life!
Even defining "creative spark" differs from person to person. Joe has absorbed other player's creative ideas for analysis and transcription. When he plays, from what I've heard over the years (and I've heard him since the beginning, as we were all part of that innovative harmonica group in the 80's that moved diatonic forward in so many ways), it is other's ideas regurgitated. Now, that's not a bad thing - it's just his thing.
Most listeners who are not familiar with the vast blues harmonica musical ideas, licks, patterns played by all the old masters would hear this as something creative in itself.
That's not to say that it isn't eminently listenable and cool sounding, just that the creativity here lies in how these other original ideas are repackaged.
A player like a Paul deLay would be a great example of that unique creativity that came forth from within him and not a repackage of other's ideas. A Kim Wilson and a Rick Estrin have that vintage harmonica sound and approach developed by the old masters, but they come up with unique and original ideas/musical lines from within that genre.
I kinda like them all, but am most excited when I hear individually crafted creative ideas. The Iceman
As it relates to the original question, I like both of Grants approaches in that video even though he's pitching that it sounds better with the tongue slaps etc.
I'm curious hvjy, if someone walked up to you and you said you were a harp player (and you had one on you) and they said "well, play me something." what would you play them? For arguments sake, lets just assume that you do want to play something for them to demonstrate that you can, in fact, play harp.
I'd probably play MISS YOU (Rolling Stones) and/or HESITATION BLUES (Rev. Gary Davis/Hot Tuna) and/or LOW RIDER (WAR). Other easily available possibilities: FACTORY GIRL (Stones), LITTLE WING (Hendrix), I'D RATHER GO BLIND (Etta James), COLD DUCK TIME (Eddie Harris), PURPLE RAIN (Prince), AFRO BLUE (Mongo Santamaria), THE CISCO KID (War), WATERMELON MAN (Herbie Hancock), SLIPPIN' INTO DARKNESS (War), ONE WAY OUT (Allman Bros.), WHO'S BEEN TALKIN'? (Howlin' Wolf), ALL BLUES head, (Miles Davis), I'LL FLY AWAY (spiritual), WHEN THE SAINTS GO MARCHING IN. These are reasonably well known tunes that I like and can comfortably carry and play recognizably, unaccompanied. Some of the jazz tunes may be too esoteric for most people, though. I'd only play those if it were a musician who asked me.
Last Edited by hvyj on Jul 27, 2017 4:17 PM
I agree. One of the Filisko tunes I downloaded was a natural minor blues played in 5th position. Sorta busy, but extremely well executed.
BUT what Joe wrote in the liner notes about this tune was bizarre. He claimed it took "years and years" of study to understand this song because it used notes "so rarely heard" in traditional blues music. WTF !? It's a fucking straight natural minor that takes about 15 seconds to identify if the listener knows anything at all about minor key music. Even I can hear it and I don't have a particularly good ear. Give me a break... is his head so far up his ass that it impairs his hearing or is he actually that ignorant about basic music theory? I mean who is he trying to kid? It insults my intelligence.
Last Edited by hvyj on Jul 27, 2017 11:27 PM
hvyj: I believe that Joe comes from a different mold in regards to understanding blues harmonica without going the route of basic music theory. His orientation is analysis/examination/transcription of other's ideas with an understanding of where the notes "live" in the diatonic and the techniques used to reproduce these ideas.
One can do this successfully without music theory and I do not believe that Joe is that interested in theory.
We've talked at length here over the years about the advantage of understanding music theory in order to make one a better creative musician, but not everyone wants to go down this particular path.
Joe's "it took years and years of study to understand this song" is true to him because he didn't approach it from a basic music theory orientation. This is very similar to players remarking "it took years and years of work before I could bend notes successfully" when bending can be learned within a week or two with the proper understanding of tongue placement.
timeistight: I do not see any comments regarding how Joe and Grant should be playing, just a theoretical discussion/analysis of their particular approach. ---------- The Iceman
Well, if a player is going to pontificate about the nature of certain music and hold himself out as an authority, it seems that he should have acquired a basic understanding of the conventional analytic descriptions of that which is common to the genre. Otherwise, what he propagates is misleading to those he is addressing. It makes him appear to be either an ignorant blowhard, or one of the proverbial five blind men describing an elephant. Difficult to maintain credibility that way, IMHO.
I mean, if it takes you "years of study" to recognize what a natural minor is, you must be a very slow learner which, at least to my way of thinking, is nothing to brag about in liner notes.
Last Edited by hvyj on Jul 28, 2017 6:44 AM
This reminds me of a post about why Kim Wilson was so special. I don't doubt Filisko knows some theory. He does know his instrument. Perhaps the "years of study" refereed to getting every little nuance of the player he was trying to copy? He is very chord oriented. Last week,we worked on a tune that had a 6 2 5 1 progression. It was in C and we used 2 harps- a C & D to play just the chords. I asked him why you couldn't play it on 1 harp and he told me you couldn't get all the chords. I think he wanted to keep it simple,but that's really not the way I want to play it.
I don't think it is as bad as you say, hvyj..."blues" was always a style that existed or was born out of non-intellectual understanding of music theory. Those that I've found who consider themselves "true Blues Men" (and Joe is, I believe, one of these) never venture very far into music theory, as that was not how it was done at all when developing this style.
I found it interesting during that discussion of "blue 3rd" how many intellectual pundits out there were offering up elaborate and complicated musical theory explanations of what was going on here...now, I'm pretty sharp in regards to my music theory knowledge, but even my eyes started to cross in reading the intellectual analysis of basic blues tunes and note pitches. Seemed to me like one step removed from what was happening and made something so simple into a very complicated concept - trying to fit the square peg of real blues into the round hole of music theory. ---------- The Iceman
@hvyj I now greatly regret having mentioned Joe Filisko in my response to your Grant Dermody video. I thought it was relevant because they both use tongueblock chords and slaps. I had no idea of the disdain and scorn you bear regarding those who play a different style or study and teach in a way that differs from yours. I have tried to strike a "different strokes for different folks" stance in my posts above here.
Since I did raise the name of Joe Filisko here, I feel I need to respond to your ongoing criticisms of him in this forum. Once again, my approach to making music with harmonica is different from his, but I respect his abilities and commitment to harmonica.
I value the effort he has made to study old harmonica styles and learn to use them. I value his playing the old styles in new songs, playing which is exceptional despite being far different than mine and using techniques that are difficult to master. I value his skills as a teacher both from attending a couple of his workshops and from the number of really good players in blues styles who have studied with him. I value his contributions to harmonica in having organized ongoing afternoon workshops at SPAH, with instructors who are outstanding players and who cover a wide range of topics and styles that differ from his. I value that he essentially invented an organized approach to harmonica customization that has improved the instrument overall and enabled musical innovators to play chromaticly on customized diatonic harmonicas.
I am not a harmonica great, but I do OK. I am one of those who learned by doing, listening, and doing again, but I am somewhat informed by theory, which has benefited my playing. I don't think scale degrees or chord names when I make music. Instead, I think the sound of the note that I believe will fit. It is an internal process, and does not impose language upon music. I learned by ear and intuition, but I value what theory I have learned. However, theory is a description, a map, not music itself. And as noted in a recent thread, theory is a product of Western European culture and carries internal bias against the music of other cultures (like blues).
There are many good players of harmonica and other instruments who have learned without theory, many who have learned starting with theory and developed their ears, and many who mix the approaches from the start. I believe that is up to the player to decide whether learning by doing as in an apprenticeship or learning from a didactic pedagogy is the approach that best meets their needs. I bear no malice toward those who choose a different path or make music in a different way. It is a big world. I enjoy the product of their efforts, music played well.
hvyj, you are excellent at "doing the math" and you have made many positive contributions to the discussions here. Over the years your presentations of theory have been well worth the time to study, and I thank you for them. It saddens me that you have not adopted a “live and let live” philosophy to differences in players' approaches to music, and instead judge others by your own preferences. Ultimately you judge a tree by the fruit it bears. Since you express such disdain for the years of work done by others, and disregard their style of music making, I have come to the point that I must pose this question:
Can you play as well as you talk? Can you show video or audio that demonstrates how the approach you promote (while denigrating the approach of others) is indeed superior to the road others have chosen? Enough of your put downs.
Stand and deliver. ----------
Doug S.
Last Edited by dougharps on Jul 28, 2017 7:30 AM
I've looked over my posts in this thread and I don't see where I've been critical of anyone's style of play--I've just expressed subjective personal preference for cleaner phrasing over deliberately sloppy phrasing. Other than saying I think Filisko's playing is very busy, I haven't suggested that he or anyone else I named is playing badly.
I hold Filisko in the highest esteem as a customizer and have profound respect for him as a true innovator who advanced the instrument to a point that we are all deeply in his debt.
He also has a superlative grasp of the MECHANICS of various techniques and explains them extraordinarily well and in deep and useful detail. He has helped untold numbers of players enormously with instruction of real value.
But what I don't share is your high regard for his "reasoning." What has got me in trouble on MBH before and appears to be doing so again goes back to when someone posted a link to Joe's instructional text. I read it and expressed the conclusion that it made no sense MUSICALLY, and it doesn't, although it IS filled with EXCELLENT instruction on the mechanics of technique. I am old enough to realize there is some risk in saying that the emperor has no clothes, but I am philosophically inclined to give honesty and candor higher priority.
I don't equate such candor with denigration. Joe Filisko has my deepest respect and admiration and I think we are all deeply indebted to him. BUT, I don't think he understands music qua music particularly well, based on the content of his instructional text. Yeah, I get sorta disrespectful about that, since I react negatively to blind hero worship. By all means, give someone credit for what they are good at, but you allow yourself to be misled if you imbue that someone with infallible expertise about everything because he is excellent at several other things. That is the difference between critical thinking and hero worship.
I am self taught, but have had the good fortune to spend time around some really good musicians with formal training who have helped me a lot. To the extent that you (and others) say you find some of my insights helpful (and thank you for saying so) that tends to validate the notion that I may actually understand some of this stuff well enough to be able to independently evaluate what I read dealing with the same subject matter.
Last Edited by hvyj on Jul 28, 2017 8:59 AM
Filisko seems like the kind of guy who might, say, take "years of study" to perfect a certain scooped bend on an old DeFord Bailey 45, so one may be mistaking his geeked-out"diving deep into the rabbit hole" of an old song as not understanding a simple chord structure (and I'm saying "geeked-out" in the most admirable way). Filisko is amazing to me, but I also appreciate players who are stylistically 180 degrees from him. Players who use predominantly single notes are likely rare in acoustic old-timey and country blues, though. I'd love to hear some. To play "John Henry" without some rhythmic ornaments("slop") would get a bit lame after awhile to my ears. But maybe through a snare drum mic and some pedals it would be "aesthetic".
Before I met Joe,I thought of him as a customiser first and then as a very good player. Now that I know him,I think of him as a teacher first. That is his passion and I know he put a lot of thought into his teaching methods.Say what you will about his method,but proof is in the pudding. He's been very successful in teaching people how to play BLUES on the harp. That's all he cares about,teaching wise. The fact that he is always a major presence at SPAH,verifies that.
People that know him tell me that he is also very personable and a really nice guy.
BTW, I agree that if a player has a good enough ear (which I don't), theory may not be all that important. But it sure is an efficient means of communication. For example, saying "blues scale" or "natural minor" conveys a bunch of information that takes much more time and effort to describe if the person doesn't understand those terms. It's better to be able to devote all that extra time and effort to practicing. But, whatever....
Last Edited by hvyj on Jul 28, 2017 10:52 AM
