|
Post by zak71 on Dec 28, 2013 22:25:34 GMT
most of the time those who choose Marshalls play rock not blues whatever they claim. Ever play a 60s Marshall model 1958 18-watter? How about an 18-watt model 1974? Couldn't ask for a bluesier amp. The 60s Marshalls (the good ones, as far as I'm concerned) are MUCH lower gain than most people expect. THEE best Robert Nighthawk tone I ever got in my life came from a JTM-45 turned up to about "5" with the tone controls set low. There are Marshalls, and then there are Marshalls. Don't judge 'em all by JCMs... As for the 20-watt JMP in the photo - you'd never tell it apart from my Supro Thunderbolt in a blindfold test...
|
|
|
Post by pete1951 on Dec 29, 2013 13:23:32 GMT
I`m with Zak on amps , Marshall made some great amps, the master volume is the thing that kills tone, and 18watts is usually more than most need for small gigs. So why when doing a semi-studio gig does this guy use a 50 or 100 watt stack? PT
|
|
|
Post by obrienp on Dec 29, 2013 14:25:50 GMT
WRT Scissormen: I would have to be in the mood to listen to much of that and I am not sure what mood that would be!
Having said that, I get a bit of George Thorogood in the guitar sound and drive; just not the same level of control.
Slide on, Pat
|
|
|
Post by pete1951 on Dec 30, 2013 13:41:28 GMT
More Ranting...... We are `Standing on the Shoulders of Giants` and should try to learn from what went before. Many people ask , "who`s the best guitar player in the world?" There is no answer, Derek Trucks can be called `a step farther ` than Duane Allman but Duane came first. Robert Johnson, likewise had heard and played with Son House etc. before he became "King of the Delta Blues Singers" . So come on Scissormen (Scissor man? Scissorperson?) go and listen.
I get like this if I haven`t had my pills Pete T PS: I do think Derek Trucks is the greatest guitarist in the world, but that messes up my rant, please ignore this sentence .
|
|
|
Post by bod on Dec 30, 2013 17:34:51 GMT
More Ranting...... We are `Standing on the Shoulders of Giants` and should try to learn from what went before. Many people ask , "who`s the best guitar player in the world?" There is no answer, Derek Trucks can be called `a step farther ` than Duane Allman but Duane came first. Robert Johnson, likewise had heard and played with Son House etc. before he became "King of the Delta Blues Singers" . So come on Scissormen (Scissor man? Scissorperson?) go and listen. I get like this if I haven`t had my pills Pete T PS: I do think Derek Trucks is the greatest guitarist in the world, but that messes up my rant, please ignore this sentence . I'm finding this thread - and the Scissormen - very interesting. When Harriet first posted that initial Scissormen clip, I really didn't like their work and found myself entertaining mean thoughts about the role of, for want of a better word, antics in their performance. However, with the second - 'not gimmicky' - clip and Harriet's reference to Iggy and the Stooges I saw and heard them very differently and started to think again about their performance style (been reading David Byrne on performance recently, and I think that is probably factoring in too). It also feels to me like the Scissormen have been listening to the Velvets ('Run run run' leaps to mind). So although I do want to say that we should listen to and learn from what came before, I also find myself thinking the Scissormen likely have been listening to and learning from what came before, from the likes of the Stooges and The Velvet Underground / Lou Reed (among others). The result may not be a solid act of blues conservation (or however the idea might adequately be expressed), but perhaps that's not their project? If it turns out that they are attempting to do blues conservation then I'll have to agree they are not doing it very well, but my hunch is that they are doing something else - arguably, they do it rather well.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2013 18:30:26 GMT
I get it but I don't like it. And the 'mad cap stuff' seems awkward and badly executed. However, the amp power does often depend on how much stick the drummer is giving out. My pal woodpecker almost drowns me out with 120w and two cabs. And Gwyn Ashton brought along a 1200w PA to our village hall for a solo gig! Very loud, but I wasn't gonna tell him to turn it down - I liked it. This might be funnier though...
TT
|
|
|
Post by mitchfit on Dec 30, 2013 21:19:42 GMT
music tastes change.
as far as those who take a different approach than my ears are accustomed to liking, go for it!!!
run it up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes.
how can i [in clear conscience] say their music is no good? it comes to mind that some music i used to love doesn't really appeal to me very much anymore. on the other end of the scale's balance point, some music that i used to care for very little, i now like.
there was a time way-way back when music composed in minor keys was considered "satanic" by the church. same-oh for seventh notes and/or chords in blues music, and early R&R music. later on lyrics that induced real or even what was perceived to be morally undermining messages was taboo. [see: elvis, the rolling stones, the doors, the byrds ~VS~ ed sullivan]
then it became necessary to promote these ideas/messages in stealth mode. as in: beatle's "lucy in the sky with diamonds", doors' "back door man", etc. obvious what was being said, but nothing that could be proved.
some even clearly stated exactly what the saturation was in their lyrics. below from peter, paul and mary. ironically named "i dig rock and roll music":
..."I dig Rock and Roll music I could really get it on in that scene. I think I could say somethin' if you know what I mean But if I really say it, the radio won't play it Unless I lay it between the lines!"...
building up to any kinda tangible point here mitchfit?
in both of my brain cells, there is ample evidence that since the late '50's, music ~usually~ needed to be offensive to the parents of the younger pop/rock market listeners to have much commercial viability. i feel that paul simon and bob dylan may have never achieved the longevity their music has enjoyed if they hadn't branched out beyond the folk format that originally propelled them into the spot light. even though both are great songwriters. [among some of the best, IMHO].
why? perhaps because mom 'n pop didn't immediately yell "turn that '+&^@$' down" when folk music played on the radio. even though songs like "masters of war" and "big bright green pleasure machine" seem to obviously have messages the parents of that time frame wouldn't be in favor of.
so---if like itself you are smart/lucky enough to have achieved old age, there is a very real possibility the '+&@$' that offends our eardrums today will be tomorrow's "the kind" of music. if you really just can't stand it IN ANY WAY, play it safe and pretend it is your favorite band, otherwise you may unknowingly be promoting it.
$0.02 mitchfit
|
|
|
Post by pete1951 on Dec 31, 2013 11:25:59 GMT
Thanks to bod and mitchfit for their more considered input, as a blues nut since the `60s I have little knowledge of musical `references` from Velvet Underground, Iggy,etc. and look at things from a very narrow window PT
(PS: He is still using an amp too big for the gig , and has done bad things to a great song)
|
|
|
Post by slide496 on Dec 31, 2013 14:46:27 GMT
as a blues nut since the `60s I have little knowledge of musical `references` from Velvet Underground, Iggy,etc. and look at things from a very narrow window PT I am interested in that perspective, Pete, although I was on the periphery of the punk music scene and got to see the NY located punk bands such as iggy, the Ramones, Television, the Dolls, Mink deVille etc - and the velvets I saw earlier than that. Actually my first job was bartering posters for meals at Max's Kansas City for their club upstairs, and I got to do one for John Hammond Jr. Musically I was more into John Hurt and Mance Lipscomb at the time. I don't listen to that music now though, maybe if you aren't attuned to that it doesn't make as strong a connection. I think the playful aspect of the performance kind of creates two possible focuses though, or a 'is it performance or is music." As a listener, it seems that some may have rules about amps and time that my ears don't relate to, but I am interested in knowing what the rules might be. I like the sound of the guitar, the beat, energy, spirit and the vocals of the scissormen. IMHO I don't think the blues genre owns Roll and Tumble, anyone can do that any which way they want - Jazz, Blues, Rock as far as I'm concerned. But that's just me. With respect!
|
|
|
Post by pete1951 on Jan 1, 2014 13:43:15 GMT
After years listening to a very narrow field of music some songs have become almost Holy, and I don`t think I`ll change at my age. I did see live many of the `new wave` and punk bands of the `70s (the Damned, Stranglers ,Elvis C. etc.) but never got any albums. PT
|
|
|
Post by mitchfit on Jan 2, 2014 2:57:58 GMT
after defending differing music styles above, yet even more drivel about the show/music balance aspect.
a consummate showman, in a 1969 rolling stone magazine interview, Jimi Hendrix was quoted as saying:
..."I don't want to be a clown anymore. I don't want to be a 'rock and roll star,"...
almost as if a verification of pete1951's, ..."Standing on the Shoulders of Giants"... Jimi burned his guitar like Jerry Lee Lewis' pyro piano. played it behind his back like Charlie Patton. trashed his guitar like Peter Townshend. chewed guitar strings like Butch Snipes**. and later destroyed amps also, like they were Keith Moon drum kits at a 4th of july celebration.
eventually, he also realized how Dr. Frankenstein had felt. regardless of the musician's intrinsic ability on their instrument, the "show" part of the performance can become too much. even for the one who creates it.
that said, his complete visual presence on stage likely helped to get him the recognition he was after in his quest for stardom. and it also got him fired for upstaging Little Richard.
so it could be argued that the "show" had achieved the desired results. in the same way, it also achieved the undesired.
yin and yang.
mitchfit
"I May Not Agree with What You Say, But I Will Defend to the Death Your Right to Say It?"
[unsure origin for that quote]
**---or acted like he was, when did 3 prong plugs become standard issue on guitar amps?
|
|
|
Post by uatru on Jan 2, 2014 9:09:26 GMT
after defending differing music styles above, yet even more drivel about the show/music balance aspect. a consummate showman, in a 1969 rolling stone magazine interview, Jimi Hendrix was quoted as saying: ..."I don't want to be a clown anymore. I don't want to be a 'rock and roll star,"... almost as if a verification of pete1951's, ..."Standing on the Shoulders of Giants"... Jimi burned his guitar like Jerry Lee Lewis' pyro piano. played it behind his back like Charlie Patton. trashed his guitar like Peter Townshend. chewed guitar strings like Butch Snipes**. and later destroyed amps also, like they were Keith Moon drum kits at a 4th of july celebration. eventually, he also realized how Dr. Frankenstein had felt. regardless of the musician's intrinsic ability on their instrument, the "show" part of the performance can become too much. even for the one who creates it. that said, his complete visual presence on stage likely helped to get him the recognition he was after in his quest for stardom. and it also got him fired for upstaging Little Richard. so it could be argued that the "show" had achieved the desired results. in the same way, it also achieved the undesired. yin and yang. mitchfit "I May Not Agree with What You Say, But I Will Defend to the Death Your Right to Say It?" [unsure origin for that quote] **---or acted like he was, when did 3 prong plugs become standard issue on guitar amps?
|
|
|
Post by uatru on Jan 2, 2014 9:10:21 GMT
Voltaire was the origin of your quote
|
|
|
Post by mitchfit on Jan 2, 2014 15:51:18 GMT
|
|
|
Post by uatru on Jan 2, 2014 17:18:26 GMT
Ha! Well spotted - I always relied upon John Mortimer quoting it correctly!
|
|