Breaking the rules of blues...

[pete1951]

The most common of the ‘12bars Blues, but not 12 bars’ is probably ‘Rollin and Tumbling ‘ which usually has extra 1/2 bars tacked on to the start of each verse, so it’s 13 1/2 bars if you only count in 4/4 . Most people don’t notice it is ‘odd’ until they try to play along. Sometimes extra bars are also added, but generally it ends up with a spare 1/2 bar if you are just counting in 4/4.
Pete
A lot of European bands play it as a 12bar which is a shame

[twang1]

Greame, you explained it better than me.

I have this little theory, and you can tell me what you think...
In many different old traditional music cultures in the west I've noticed that when they sing they keep the time during phrases, but at the end of the phrase they often just breathe (skipping time) and start the next phrase. The main important thing is the singing.
I heard that peculiarity expecially when there was a choir involved, from the mass gospel I saw in Mississippi to old italian folk and eastern-countries music.
And that I think what might have happened to the Blues. In the beginning it was just the singing.
When they added instruments the time-keeping between phrases became important, with the 12 bar progression well executed entering the game.
And maybe that's why in the most primitive kind of Blues we find that peculiarity that for them is so natural.

And I also think that one of the main differences between old and new kind of Blues is the importance that it used to have the singing. Nowadays you find some fabulous players and not so many good singers.
Even in Rock music the singing is important; not so much in “modern” Blues.

Pete, hearing Rolling and Tumbling played as a 12 bar progression sounds...so wrong, isn't it!!! It's like taking away the magic...
Frank

[twtx]

Apr 18, 2020 20:58:36 GMT richclough said:

Can this be learned? Can it be taught? 

Yes, it can be taught, but it probably would sound better if it wasn't learned -- hope that makes sense!

Rory's got it going on:

[richclough]

Hi all,

Thanks for all the contributions. I'd still love to hear some more exampled of your favourite primitive, out of the box, expressive playing, if you have any to share.

Cheers,

Rich

[twtx]

Apr 20, 2020 16:21:42 GMT richclough said:

 I'd still love to hear some more exampled of your favourite primitive, out of the box, expressive playing

Mance Lipscomb is like no one else, IMO.  With a broken finger and a pocketknife!

[Michael Messer]

I am not sure that I am understanding this thread. All of the musical examples posted as what I thought are supposed to be examples of people completely stepping out of patterns and/or doubling up or half timing the groove (Lightning Hopkins, Rory Gallagher, Junior Kimbrough, Mance Lipscomb), all sit absolutely in the pocket on the groove to a formula, and every change is anticipated and sits right in what is expected will happen. Am I missing something because it all sounds great, but not particularly related to the original question. I thought that the question is asking about performances where the song is stepped out of for a moment to say, play or express something that is not a part of the song. This is a conversational thing that usually happens when a performer is very experienced and totally relaxed within the song and the performance, which makes it easy to stop and start and shift around.

This might be somewhat contentious, but a lot of what is perceived to be cool and "I change when I want to change" type of stuff, is often the result of to much alcohol in the system at the time of recording, and is therefore something that to me sounds sad, not cool. Many of the legendary masters of the blues made recordings at times in their lives where alcohol had taken over. Sometimes it sounds great because we love that artist no matter what they are doing, but often it is probably a performance they would not have been proud of. Hmmmm...

Shine On
Michael

[twtx]

I was focusing more on the OP's request for "primitive, out of the box, expressive playing," so I posted what I thought was a couple of unorthodox players. Apologies for misinterpreting.

[Michael Messer]

Apr 20, 2020 21:51:58 GMT twtx said:

I was focusing more on the OP's request for "primitive, out of the box, expressive playing," so I posted what I thought was a couple of unorthodox players. Apologies for misinterpreting.

I'm not sure if you have. The only person that can clarify this is Rich, as he asked the question.

Shine On
Michael

[pete1951]

It seemed to me that part of the original post was about ‘rules’ of the Blues, perhaps rules was the wrong word, framework? template? So I, like several others, gave examples of non-standard (if there is such a thing) Blues tunes. The second part, breaking tempo, stopping in mid-song , was not something I fully understood so I ignored it. MMs comments on old blues men hopefully shed some light on that part of the post.
Pete
Rich can now tell us that we were, A) helpful or B) got the wrong end of the stick

[richclough]

Hmmm...was I entirely sure what I was asking. Perhaps not. I keep hearing things in the music, that really don't fit into my 'framework' (thanks Pete).

I think everyone has been helpful here. Thank you.

I've been doing a lot of hard listening to acoustic blues over the last few years. All the players would be familiar to the people on this group, and it's been a real mix of performance quality and recording quality.

I've never considered before "Was this person drunk when they recorded this?", but something I'll be thinking about in the future and it makes a lot of sense. There has been occasions when I've been asking myself why a player has such a strong reputation given what I'm actually listening to. Thanks Michael.

Sometimes it's hard to hear past the recording quality.

There is still a kind of playing that I can't really describe. I'm going to be listening to a lot more music over the next few weeks - my home office now has my old studio monitors in it - so if I find an example I'll try and share it.

Cheers,

Rich

[Deleted]

Just feel it man.

[bonzo]

Overthinking springs to mind.
I've said before on this forum that I've been lucky enough to have seen most of the great and lots of the pretty good from feet away in Toronto clubs.
Pretty much without exception everyone knew they were working for a living, some doing better than overs some hand to mouth basically. Sometimes you'd get a 'dems da bloos' set and another time the same band would burn the paint off the walls! As Ronnie Hawkins would say about booze 'the drunker I get, the better looking l am to women'!
Rambling on a bit. My point is, if you have to think hard about whether your enjoying or understanding something well maybe........

Best wishes and good health to you all, John

[richclough]

Hi Bonzo, overthinking is one thing I'm definitely good at.

If overhearing is a thing....then that too.

[bonzo]

Good man Rich!
Don't think there were many sober clubs that the guys would play back in the day!
They had been around and would be just as drunk or stoned as they wanted to be.
Whole 'nother world! Let's drink some juice an' all get loose!

Best wishes and good health to you all, John

[Michael Messer]

There is a difference between being drunk and being a drunk. Sadly many of the early greats of the blues became the latter and it affected their work in negative ways.

Shine On
Michael