I came across this and knowing there are no end of folk willing to offer opinions on this forum thought I would post it and see what the consensus might be.
Hurtville
---------- LSC
Last Edited by LSC on Apr 24, 2013 7:43 AM
LSC, where in this recording did you think we might hear the "modern," however one defines that? Myself, I hear nothing that makes me sit up and go "Now THAT is something new." I hear familiar rhythms, familiar riffs (including a semi-stop time), familiar harp sounds, a white blues singer who is good enough to get work but doesn't stand out as a stylistic innovator or a mixer-of-modes.
Sure, you could say this is modern (or contemporary) urban blues, because it was recorded recently and doesn't have an overtly retro feel, but I don't hear anything that I'd call a modernizing impulse in it--a desire to "make it new." On the other hand, I DO hear that impulse in Keb' Mo''s "Perpetual Blues Machine," in almost everything Michael Hill and his Blues Mob have recorded (such as "Bluesman at Heart"), and in the 12-bar uptempo harp workout in Jason Ricci's ROCKET NUMBER NINE, the name of which escapes me.
Here's a Michael Hill cut called "U.S. Blues Again":
Last Edited by kudzurunner on Apr 24, 2013 8:30 AM
Straight up Chicago, in my opinion. Classic Muddy Waters/Little Walter type thing. Having said that, there's nice touches of 60s soul in the vocals. I find it quite enjoyable.
Last Edited by harpburn on Apr 24, 2013 9:04 AM
Not sure what modern is but this is pretty good rb/blues bar band stuff. Sounds like the kind of song Fabulous Thunderbirds might have worked over in the day.
Why does it need mention that he is a White blues musician-
I liked the arrangement. It wasn't predictable and there was a definitive hook that 1. wasn't derived from call and response phrasing and 2. included back-up vocals. ---------- Mantra Customized Harmonicas My Website
@kudzrunner - I never said that I expected anyone to hear "modern". I simply asked the question as to whether anyone on this forum thought it might be included in that category. Of course the question fell into a semantics trap. In your response even you question the definition of the term, "..whatever that is." That question was part of the reason I posted this. I was curious what the consensus definition might be considering the name of the forum.
You go on to acknowledge that by one definition it could be called modern if contemporary was one definition and you add, "because it was recorded recently and doesn't have an overtly retro feel."
It would appear that your definition of "modern" must include some new and unique feature that has not been heard before or is taking the form to never before heard places. But then you cite the Michael Hill track which, although I really liked it, has elements of Robert Cray, War, loads of funk bands, and other influences, which begs the question, "What is new and unique?" Perhaps you could explain, particularly what in the vocal is stylistically innovative or mixes modes. I'd also really like to know why you felt the race of the vocalist on Hurtville was relevant.
Again, though I liked the recording and the performances I did not hear anything that has not been done before many times, yet by some definitions could certainly be called "modern".
As an aside, I thought the video a bit weird with the harmonica player appearing to play where there's no harmonica on the track and playing through a bullet when the harmonica sounds to me like it was recorded acoustically, which BTW though obviously played with skill is also not exactly a new sound. Not being critical. Just an observation.
Not sure of the "Gimme some Hendrix" unless that is the harp players name. ---------- LSC ---------- LSC
Last Edited by LSC on Apr 24, 2013 2:44 PM
There´s something slightly wrong with the harmonica -- lack of reverb and too harsh sound probably. (Not obejctively wrong -- just my opinion.) Otherwise nice and laidback. The M H Blues Mob video was pretty embarrasing.
To aid in the discussion here is the Jason Ricci take on what Adam cites as a prime example of "modern blues". My only comment would be, all art is subjective.
Other than blues trad instrumentation and the notion that rock/funk is mothered by "Blues"-I would say in my worthless opinion the Hill video has nothing to do with blues. If I had heard that as my intro to blues instead of the Chess artists - I would have had zero interest in blues-sometimes its good to be an old man
I much prefer Jon Spencer Blues Explosion to the Hill clip
Last Edited by Goldbrick on Apr 25, 2013 9:15 AM
"It would appear that your definition of "modern" must include some new and unique feature that has not been heard before or is taking the form to never before heard places. But then you cite the Michael Hill track which, although I really liked it, has elements of Robert Cray, War, loads of funk bands, and other influences, which begs the question, "What is new and unique?"
Thanks! You've made my point brilliantly. Any contemporary blues band that mixes elements of Robert Cray, War, and "loads of funk bands" into what they're doing is way ahead of the curve compared with, for example, "Move Out Baby," the opening cut on Rod Piazza's 2011 release ALMIGHTY DOLLAR. Rod plays wonderful chromatic harmonica on the tune--that's not in question--but the bag, so to speak, is all the way retro. That's just what it is: a contemporary blues player whose stylistic approach is anchored in a Central Avenue sound created in the 1940s and 1950s.
Next to that, Michael Hill is a modernist. He incorporating a range of sounds from the past 25 years, a range of idioms evolved after the 1950s. He's also, and importantly, using his blues to speak to contemporary politics. His blues are modern for those two reasons.
@Goldbrick: the Hill clip is definitely within the contemporary blues continuum, just as Sugar Blue's funk/rock remake of "Messin' With the Kid" is blues. There's a whole lot of interesting blues being made these days. And remade, too, of course--as Rod remakes Jimmy Liggins's "Move Out Baby," an exciting and very modern sound when it was released in 1948. I find the sound somewhat less exciting sixty-five years later, but that's just me. I love Rod's harp playing on the cut, but I just can't work up much interest in the retro approach.
Here's Hill playing a 12-bar blues, for those who need that to be part of the mix in order to recognize the idiom in action. It's not a great performance, but that's not my point. It's modern blues--weird fast turnarounds that owe more to Frank Zappa than Muddy, and the blues' age-old impulse to preach (Rev. Gary Davis does this) fused with a pressing present-day political concern in the aftermath of 9/11:
Hill's funk/rock approach to the blues works especially well on "Bluesman at Heart." This was cutting-edge blues when it was released in 1994 as part of his debut Alligator release, BLOODLINES. You don't need to like it, but if you try to argue that it's not blues--well, Bruce Iglauer disagrees with you, but of course it's only his opinion, etc.:
Here's one live version of Blue doing "Messin' With the Kid." This is modern Chicago blues. Twelve-bar, too. Post-Hendrix, post-funk. I understand that some folks prefer the old stuff, and that's cool. I like Henry "Ragtime" Thomas, too. I'm genuinely amused by those who settle back into their prejudices against the new stuff, because history isn't kind to them. Some folks preferred Dixieland in the 1940s, for example, when bebop was being invented, and they insisted that bebop was noise, not jazz. They were wrong, although it took them a while to figure that out. Heck, there may even be some 95 year olds around today who insist that jazz took a wrong turn when Bird came along. Twenty-three skidoo to them. Jazz kept right on growing, far beyond the lines they'd drawn around it. Same thing with blues:
Last Edited by kudzurunner on Apr 25, 2013 11:00 AM
'Thanks! You've made my point brilliantly. Any contemporary blues band that mixes elements of Robert Cray, War, and "loads of funk bands" into what they're doing is way ahead of the curve compared with, for example, "Move Out Baby," the opening cut on Rod Piazza's 2011 release ALMIGHTY DOLLAR. Rod plays wonderful chromatic harmonica on the tune--that's not in question--but the bag, so to speak, is all the way retro. That's just what it is: a contemporary blues player whose stylistic approach is anchored in a Central Avenue sound created in the 1940s and 1950s.'
So, stuff from the '40s and '50s is "retro" while stuff from the '60s and '70s is "modern"? Isn't it really just a different flavour of retro?
'Hill's funk/rock approach to the blues works especially well on "Bluesman at Heart." This was cutting-edge blues when it was released in 1994 as part of his debut Alligator release, BLOODLINES.'
That's the trouble with being on the cutting edge: it gets old fast.
"incorporating a range of sounds from the past 25 years, a range of idioms evolved after the 1950s. He's also, and importantly, using his blues to speak to contemporary politics. His blues are modern for those two reasons."
So Adam, let me see if I understand you correctly. To be considered "modern blues" the music in question must make a lyrical statement relevant to contemporary politics and include idioms evolved after 1950?
The Sugar Blue take on Messin with the Kid does not make a political statement of any stripe. He messes with the signature riff, no pun intended, and the backing rhythm is more or less jazz/funk. IMHO, there are some vague elements of blues, i.e. the use of harmonica and starting with a blues standard, but other than that I wouldn't call it blues.
I'm not a purist by any stretch nor do I condemn those who play outside the strictly traditional forms. Having said that, I am not a fan of guys who play like they're getting paid by the note, even though I respect what it takes to develop that technique. To me what is lacking in that style is emotional content. I believe the foundation of any blues must make the listener feel like crying, laughing, dancing, or getting laid. If it does not contain at least one of those elements it takes some convincing for me to call it blues.
Though I may disagree with you on some points I thank you for contributing to an interesting discussion. ---------- LSC ---------- LSC
Last Edited by LSC on Apr 25, 2013 2:25 PM
As a further aside I would comment that I don't give a damn what you call it this is good stuff.
I also should now disclose that "Hurtville" is a cut off my just recorded CD. I was super fortunate and greatly honored to have Carolyn sing the backing vocals, along with Michael Cross on "Hurtville" and two other tracks. The CD is not a blues record as such but an Americana album covering a range of styles, though all are based in blues. I think blues people often do not give proper respect to the place of country music in the idiom just as country often does not give proper respect to blues in country music.
Sorry for the deception. I felt that I would get more honest comments and opinions if I kept quiet about who created "Hurtville". Seems like most of you liked it which is heartening. Thanks kindly. ---------- LSC ---------- LSC
Last Edited by LSC on Apr 25, 2013 2:49 PM
LSC, your deception--and the phrase "I came across this," applied to your own considered work, is indeed deception--got you my honest answer. I assume that's what you wanted.
I call them as I see them, within the limits of the forum's creed and my knowledge that anything I write here may well show up on p.1 of the Google search results for certain players' names. That's happened a few times. It tends to make me circumspect. (This thread, right here, shows up on p. 2 of the Google search for "hurtville blues."
Driving home this evening, I heard a cut on Bluesville by a player named Kevin Selfe called "Mama Didn't Raise No Fool." I have no idea who he is, or if he was playing the harmonica solo, but the solo was some of the best stuff I've heard in years. (The band's sound was good, but less original; not really retro, but not forward-leaning, either. Just basic contemporary jump blues.) The harp was chromatic played in third position, I believe, and the player tracked all three chords using chord tones, arpeggios, and the like. At a couple of moments there were long chromatic runs--chromatic in the other sense: half-step movements up and down. It was a wonderfully inventive and original solo: anything but retro, and yet a completely comprehensible elaboration of the tradition. If it's Selfe playing that, he's a monster. If it's somebody else, I take my hat off to whomever it is. THAT is modern blues harmonica playing.
@timeistight: Cutting-edge only gets old fast if you make a fetish of one particular moment's cutting edge and stick with it forever. Real musicians--like Charlie Musselwhite, for example--keep on growing. Have you listened to "Bluesman at Heart," BTW, or are you just attitudinizing? It's a good piece of music. Give it a listen. It might speak to you.
Last Edited by kudzurunner on Apr 25, 2013 6:13 PM
Kudzurunner- Your honest answer was indeed what I wanted, from you and anyone else. Again, I thank you for that.
Right from the git I've felt a little irritation in your answers but maybe that's just in the nature of these discussions from afar and I'm misinterpreting. In any event, I apologize if my little deception annoyed you but I do think it served its purpose and I did fess up in the end.
The Kevin Selfe track you mention unfortunately ends before any harmonica is played.
It's interesting you mention Charlie Musslewhite. He's one of my earliest influences and right up there in my top 3 or 4 favorite players. One of the reasons I like him so much is the way he's taken the instrument to outside the box places, inserting it in unexpected genres. Some of the Latin things I particularly like. The thing is he always somehow stays a blues player. You never loose Chicago. He also never plays an unnecessary note and don't get me started on his tone. OMG! He's one of those very very few that you can recognize who it is after about one bar, no matter what he's playing or who he's playing with. Can we agree that Charlie Musslewhite has created some great modern blues by any definition? ---------- LSC ---------- LSC
That's Mitch Kashmar on that Kevin Selfe cut. Nice stuff.
"Attitudinizing" is a good word. Michael Hill's other stuff left me cold so I didn't seek out "Bluesman at Heart". I've heard the preview now; it hasn't changed my opinion.
I know I tend to be conservative about everything, but I do not like "modern" blues. I know, I know, I can't generalize something so vague and vast, but except for a couple songs here and there, I do not like blues post-60s or -70s. It either sounds too funky, or too... soulful? (as in the genre of soul), but all of it sound off. It sounds too empty, too tight, too (or not enough) something. Imagine hearing an engine from an old American vehicle versus an engine from a modern one. It is a different quality of sound.
Give me Muddy, Howlin' Wolf, Elmore James, Hound Dog Taylor. Give me Robert Johnson, Son House, Leroy Carr, Mississippi John Hurt.
As far as examples of good modern blues, I think Keb' Mo', who I am still kinda iffy about.
EDIT: About the original post, I like the song. I don't know if I would classify it as modern blues other than the fact that it was recorded in modern times and it doesn't fit in with older blues. I guess it is modern in the fact hat it departs from the old, but not in the way of trying to carve out new territory (which is not bad IMO).
Last Edited by Bugsy on Apr 25, 2013 10:24 PM
most Modern Blues is really not very good. Heck, most music of any stripe isn't very good. even if you comb through 40s and 50s blues records you will find most of it is not very good. it just happened that Muddy, Wolf, Sonny Boys, etc. were there to make great music.
my criterion for listening material is i have to like it. i really don't care if it is creative or not. if it is, i make note of it but that is the extent of my interest.
check out my Chromatic workout on an original tune i wrote called Gypsy Jump before you jump down my throat as being anticreative though. you can find a snippet on my repair video. ---------- MP affordable reed replacement and repairs.
"making the world a better place, one harmonica at a time"
click user name [MP] for info- repair videos on YouTube. you can reach me via Facebook. Mark Prados
Last Edited by MP on Apr 26, 2013 12:17 PM
I truly did not know it was Mitch Kashmar on Kevin Selfe's cut, but that's great. It only adds to my admiration for him. I purchased the track after I posted above and the solo is as good on second listening as the first time around.
The track in question is modern only because it was recorded recently. Stylistically, it is a competent rendering of a blues style that has been around for decades longer than my sixty years of life. For blues rock, I would cite ZZ Top who, while profoundly blues based, mix in a number of things traditional blues wouldn't have, such as odd time signatures and changes in keys mid song and the judicious use of synthesizers. Theirs is the stuff that outrages purists, but the kind of music they make proves that the blues is vital, relevant and alive. The same applies to Michael Hill's Blues Mob, whom I have been a fan of for several years. Coming from a solid blues base, Michael Hill is superb guitarist and singer who applies a SRV - Albert King quality virtuosity against not just traditional blues arrangements but also combines them with other African American musical traditions, such as gospel and Impressions/Curtis Mayfield quality vocal stylings. In both cases, the sounds are unique, vital, distinctive, the blues brought into the modern era, relevant. ---------- Ted Burke http://www.youtube.com/user/TheoBurke?feature=mhee
http://ted-burke.com tburke4@san.rr.co,
Last Edited by TheoBurke on Apr 26, 2013 1:05 PM
I thought modern blues players was all just us cats that hang here at the *modern blues harmonica forum*. ---------- Sun, sun, sun Burn, burn, burn Soon, soon, soon Moon, moon, moon --------- Sun, sun, sun Burn, burn, burn Soon, soon, soon Moon, moon, moon
Last Edited by JInx on Apr 26, 2013 5:10 PM
Just my two cents…to me Modern Blues Harmonica is anything that does not sound like Traditional Blues Harmonica as established by the GOLD STANDARD of the Walters, Sonny Boys, etc…
It can be “modern” because of speed (Sugar Blue), overblows (Carlos del Junco, Adam Gussow), speed and overblows (Jason Ricci), tone (Mark Ford, Andy Just), phrasing (Dennis Gruenling, Dave Morris,Paul Delay) or just because they are constantly trying new things (Charlie Musselwhite). IMHO all these players (and many others) can play traditional and modern blues songs with a modern blues harmonica approach.
FwiW There's a live version of 'Mama Didn't Raise No Fool' featuring a few living legends. One of which is Chris Mercer who provided the unforgettable Sax solo on 'Let's Stick Together' Track starts at 4:45.
cheers, Mark.
Last Edited by King Casey on Apr 26, 2013 10:59 PM
If it's too modern, some say it's not blues. If it's too bluesy, some say it's not modern.
Kudzurunner says: "None of the above. Blues harmonica can be modern AND bluesy".
I'm probably... no, strike probably, definitely on the traditional blues side of the equation when asked what I like, and what I characterize as blues. My notion of blues isn't the definitive answer, though. There is no right answer.
I watched/listened to all the videos in this thread. My favorite was Sugar Blue doing "Messing With The Kid", a video offered (and endorsed?) by Kudzunner.
Why is it my favorite? 'Cause Sugar Blue be funky. The rhythm jumps out at you. You wanna to be modern, brother, go for it-- but don't lose the time.
@Rick: Your question about what defines a modern blues harmonica player is a good one. At one point I intended to create a manifesto that would answer the question in an aggressive way. I never did that, but I came up with a list of 11 representative players and I included a couple of representative cuts for several of them, including me. Mitch Kashmar should be added to the list.
In answer to your question: no, overblows are not required, although they're not uncommon in this cohort. At least five of the twelve players below don't overblow (or at least not in any measurable way in their recordings and live shows, although they may certainly be familiar with the technique).
If pressed right now to come up with a one-sentence definition, I'd say something like this: "A modern blues harmonica player is one whose aesthetic and spiritual orientation toward the instrument and the idiom is focused on extending and updating the tradition rather than conserving it, so that the sound the player creates speaks to the present moment rather than strongly echoing (or merely replicating) earlier stylistic developments, earlier great players."
Too wordy by far, but it's a start. (Of course nostalgia is always a present-moment phenomenon, even though it yearns powerfully for a past moment, so one could argue that the most flagrant note-perfect replicant-copy of Big Walter's "Easy"--one recorded last week, for example--speaks to the present moment. That seems like sophistry to me, but I'm sure there are people here who will want to make that sort of argument.)
Another one-sentence definition might be, "Modern blues harmonica playing has absolutely no interest in nostalgia but a great deal of interest in twisting, transforming, and otherwise manhandling 'old time blues,' however one defines that term, so that the music becomes something audibly new."
Here's my list. I've added Mitch Kashmar to make an even dozen, but I won't argue with folks who see him as more in a traditional West Coast bag. This list is NOT comprehensive; it's not a Top-12 list of the best modern blues harmonica players. It's just a representative list, one that, from my perspective, shows the range of approaches that I would personally put on the "modern" end, or in the "modern" direction, of contemporary blues harmonica playing. It should go without saying that Little Walter would have been on any list of modern blues harmonica players circa 1955. In fact, he's the spiritual father of this list:
1) Carlos del Junco
2) Sugar Blue (One More Mile, Pontiac Blues)
3) Jason Ricci (Down at the Juke, Mellow Down Easy, Goenophany)
4) Billy Branch (Son of Juke)
5) Hakan Ehn
6) Lyndon Anderson
7) Wade Schuman
8) Adam Gussow (with S&A: Sweet Home Chicago, Don’t Get Around Much Anymore; solo, Crossroads Blues)
9) Brandon O. Bailey (Whammer Jammer, Blues Ball)
10) Son of Dave (Hellhound)
11) Paul Delay
12) Mitch Kashmar
Dennis Gruenling has one foot, or at least several toes, on this list, but not more than that. He's been a notable innovator in the matter of using alternate positions (such as 12th) and low harps, but he is aesthetically and spiritually committed to the jump blues and swing of decades ago.
Hakan is the most uncompromising modernist on this list.
Last Edited by kudzurunner on Apr 27, 2013 5:55 AM
Adam, I think your wordy sentence (the first one) is a very good definition. I could have put together a similar list of players who seemed to be modern players, but I would have been feeling my way along. I was thinking overblows were the signature thing, and if you played them you were automatically "modern." I get it now. It makes sense. Thanks.
“Dennis Gruenling is a leading light among a new generation of blues harp players…a true innovator… Gruenling stands poised to claim a spot in the pantheon of blues harp greats” – BLUES REVUE
I have no objection to anybody who, like Tom, would like to put Dennis on the list above, along with Sugar Blue, Jason, Hakan, and Carlos del Junco. This doesn't change what I wrote: Dennis is a true innovator in the matter of adding low harps and 12th position to the contemporary mix. In other respects--including band stylistics and repertoire--he's trying to pull us backwards through time into a 50s jump blues style that he loves. He's spoken often of his admiration for Lester Young and other players from that era. Much of the music that he plays on his radio show dates from that era. He's just not very interested in absorbing the range of things that black music has done since the 1960s, especially funk, rock (as in Hendrix), and hip-hop, and using that to update the blues. His approach in this respect is markedly different from Sugar, Jason, Hakan, and Brandon--and it's much more in the direction of, for example, Rod Piazza, who is (as least by the two definitions I've offered above) a traditionalist rather than a modernist.
"Teenage Beat"--a track that I purchased on iTunes and enjoy--perfectly exemplifies the opposite of a modern blues harmonica style, again speaking with reference to the provisional definitions I've offered. Dennis is working within a familiar, long-established stylistic tradition. The recording in question is an homage to Little Walter, and a terrific, virtuosic one, not an attempt to give that sound a pointedly new twist. Dennis, here, is trying to make an older style live, not create a new style for a new era. Which is a long-winded way of saying, Tom, that if you're invoking that video in particular as the quintessence of modern blues harmonica playing, I completely disagree with you. It is, however, superb blues harmonica playing. Dennis is clearly one of the finest contemporary blues harmonica players. Contemporary and modern aren't the same thing. Contemporary means you're alive now and making music, period. Modern means something quite different.
I certainly agree with BLUES REVUE's high estimation of Dennis; thanks for posting that.
I should note that more than a decade ago, in a column about Jason Ricci, I called Dennis one of the two best players of his generation. He's a brilliant player--as is Rod Piazza. I've often said that I wished I'd made JUMP TIME. It's one of the great debut harp albums.
Last Edited by kudzurunner on Apr 27, 2013 8:39 AM
Dennis Gruenling is one of the harp players I admire most, but much of that is because of his respect and homage to the traditional sound of blues harp. In fact, I'd rather listen to him than to most of the people on Adam's list of modern players.
But that is why Dennis is not included on the list. When I think of a "modern player" I think automatically of Jason Ricci and Carlos del Junco. Dennis does not sound anything like that. He was number one on my list of living players with the biggest blues tone. He's not Sugar Blue. He doesn't even try to be.
I'd nominate Ronnie Shellist for a spot on the list. Listen to his newest album. I think he moves the art forward.
Rick, what I personally like most about Dennis's approach is the subtlety of his swing--his placement of the notes relative to the beat. That's where his close study of guys like Lester Young pays off. More blues players should put in hard time with jazz horn players. William Clarke's playing benefits from this, too. It's a useful counterpoint to the rock approach, which tends to be more on-the-beat, more straight up and aggressive. The swing thing is a good thing; it's perennial knowledge.
I agree with you about Ronnie being a major player. He has amazing tone, live, whether playing through the PA or through the vocal mic, and he's as good as any player on the scene at adding in little bits of double stop and chord to the ground note he's playing. There's always a clear, sensible logic to his phrasing, he's clearly rooted in Rice Miller (it's his most audible influence, as far as I can tell), but he never just recycles familiar licks. Everything he plays is fully digested into Shellist Style. I've joked that we make a good team because I'm a down home modernist and he's a progressive traditionalist. He agreed with that assessment.
Last Edited by kudzurunner on Apr 27, 2013 6:44 PM