The official forum for all things Joe Bonamassa, guitars and blues music
You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Joe Bonamassa Forum → Other Artists → Wondering about the Nature of the Music
So, I am working on a piece about Rod Piazza indirectly.
So, is the music made by the likes of Rod Piazza related in some way to the music of Junior Kimbrough or Hound Dog Taylor? Are these musicians even in the same genre?
Hi Dino. I am afraid I don't know Hound Dog Taylor, but I do know the others. Let me start by saying I'm not a big piano/harp only fan. I think Rod and Honey are talented, the favorites of many I know, but a whole show of theirs is too same/same for my taste. Give me guitar based Blues like J.K. anyday.
That being said, maybe the key is the regional nature of the Blues in this country, well, at least historically. When I think of Rod and Honey, I think Chicago, again, give me B.B. or Buddy Guy... When I hear J.K. it's the Delta that comes to mind. Head to Texas and you get SRV style... Is it all the Blues? In my book yes. Even the Blues Foundation can't give a definition of "The Blues". You know how often they call Joe a Rocker. So I think we all need to be inclusive, to keep the genre from becoming stagnant, and to allow for all tastes.
Now go ahead and blast me.....but I remain a fan of yours anyway! Cathy
I have an answer, but I am just asking.
Hi Dino. I am afraid I don't know Hound Dog Taylor, but I do know the others. Let me start by saying I'm not a big piano/harp only fan. I think Rod and Honey are talented, the favorites of many I know, but a whole show of theirs is too same/same for my taste. Give me guitar based Blues like J.K. anyday.
That being said, maybe the key is the regional nature of the Blues in this country, well, at least historically. When I think of Rod and Honey, I think Chicago, again, give me B.B. or Buddy Guy... When I hear J.K. it's the Delta that comes to mind. Head to Texas and you get SRV style... Is it all the Blues? In my book yes. Even the Blues Foundation can't give a definition of "The Blues". You know how often they call Joe a Rocker. So I think we all need to be inclusive, to keep the genre from becoming stagnant, and to allow for all tastes.
Now go ahead and blast me.....but I remain a fan of yours anyway! Cathy
Thank God it all aint the same.The only way any music can stay is to change and morph into other dimensions.Keep the blues alive all of it!
Gary et al...do you think that this inclusive thing (which is cool) leads to a water down version of the blues? With everyone, every crappy local dude with a strat, claiming blues, does it cheapen the blues?
Gary et al...do you think that this inclusive thing (which is cool) leads to a water down version of the blues? With everyone, every crappy local dude with a strat, claiming blues, does it cheapen the blues?
Good point Dino. I don't think it cheapens real blues, I think it may change peoples attitude towards what the blues are about and that can be a good thing if it in fact brings more people to the music. As far as crappy locals claiming the blues, who listens to that anyway.
fuzzy
You might say that Purists would take that viewpoint. In fact they've used that argrument when declaring that Joe isn't a Bluesman. On the one hand, it's great that boundaries are pushed and music develops in unpredictable ways. However, the real problem is getting the public to take a "first listen" to Artists and thus the categorization. Sort of a double edged sword. If you define "Real Blues" based on a pentatonic(?) standard, the genre shrinks. My feeling about that is that, thanks to the digital age, the works of the "Old Masters" will be with us until the end of time. As for bad bands...well, I could call myself a hot, young chick, but that won't make me one!!!! Cathy
Gary et al...do you think that this inclusive thing (which is cool) leads to a water down version of the blues? With everyone, every crappy local dude with a strat, claiming blues, does it cheapen the blues?
Often it does. It's not all encompassing, mind you, but the blues jams are full of crappy players that have all the answers, no experience & will never change.
The rare exception is the guy who starts in a jam in some dump and listens as much as he plays, maybe more. He then begins to understand about "feeling it."
There will always be varying degrees of blues distillation. Take the same guitarist outa the garage band he's used to and put an old head blues bassist & drummer with him...
Same song, different feel. Might even be blues.
BJJ
BTW Sister Cate: I'm thinking of one particular blues tune (Freddy King) that is a 1-6-2-5 chord progression that has a diminished chord as a passing chord to lead into a 1-4-5 progression. It is definitely not on a pentatonic scale and it's not anything but blues. GOOD POINT!
Dino wrote:Gary et al...do you think that this inclusive thing (which is cool) leads to a water down version of the blues? With everyone, every crappy local dude with a strat, claiming blues, does it cheapen the blues?
Often it does. It's not all encompassing, mind you, but the blues jams are full of crappy players that have all the answers, no experience & will never change.
The rare exception is the guy who starts in a jam in some dump and listens as much as he plays, maybe more. He then begins to understand about "feeling it."
Its always easier to catergorise music like that, blues jams are usually a level playing field for all people who play to play with each other.. nothing is easier then sitting in on a 12 bar song. My local jam has 1 blues man who I look at in awe he sits with his acoustic with no real timing and plods along with some absolute cracking made up / oldies I once saw him do A boy named Sue in the style of John Lee Hooker it had me smiling and trying to play it for a long time... I rarely see the old guy now so I try and keep the bluesy songs going when I get chance the Jam nights are totally country with the exception of me and this guy when hes knocking about..
I guess what I'm trying to get at in a long winded fashion is a 12 bar jam is usually always blues based. I personally love singing blues songs it just so happens I have a guitar with me nothing for me absolutley nothing beats singing a song like Another Kind of Love etc then trying to match singing with a bit of guitar play... Is it blues though? who knows when your in a jam session its usually just that a jam 
I do believe a drummer and a bassist rooted in blues can totally change how a blues song works though these country guys at a jam night seem to play the same drum / bass lines which can get irritating, It makes me miss playing in a band where you can help shape things.
In short Dino yes it can help to cheapen blues, but with the elitist mentality that alot of peeps have I cant see anyway for most young / even some older musicians to go out and play songs they like even the guitarist from my old band wouldnt show me how he plays (we had totally different styles anyhow) and he has been playing in blues bands along time I had to sit and watch him during a solo or rhythm section to try and dismantle his playing technique. Everyone starts somewhere even if it is a fret w**king version of Aint no sunshine (yes I've seen it being done :x). For me aslong as that feel is there whether its someone singing and you actually hearing emotion in the voice, or someone playing a solo like Peter Green's in All Over Now, thats what matters to me :x nothing worse than an emotional song with no emotion.
So, I sort of avoided my personal answer to this, but we had protestors again at work, so I am warmed up.
1. I believe that the blues is used as a marketing term now by far too many bands.
2. I believe that the use of the label is exploitive in a business regard.
3. I believe that fellows like Joe or my friend, who walk away from blues clubs, are making brave musical stands.
My theory is this...it is easy to say your a blues guy. It is sooo easy. If you seek to exist on a national stage, it is harder, and far more competitive to exist on a rock stage. I know for a fact that blues clubs nationwide pay better than rock clubs.
I think cats like Popa Chubby, or the two blonde guys, are clearly ready to make the leap to rock clubs and rock festivals, but they do not. My theory as to why, is it is easier for KWS to get 50 grand a show at blues festival, than it is for him to accept that he is not near that money at a rock festival.
I fault no one a right to money.
But I think that certain players have a chance to move out into rock promotion, and do not. I appreciate my friend playing 60% rock clubs to 40% blues clubs this past year, and the number will change even more in 2009.
I appreciate Jason Ricci for movie beyond accepting of a blues label, just because he has a harp.
When I heard about Joe moving to theatres, I thought it was lame. Then he started and keeps selling them out. Go on Joe. I was worried that Joe was going to take that earning, and batter festivals with it. But he has not. It is amazing that way.
Much love to the Bona-dork in Simpsons slippers.
When I see that KWS gets 50 grand a festival, I get it. But what happens to the other cats on the bill, they get less.
The fact is, KWS left blues behind a while ago, yet, stays in the pocket for the payday. That bothers me. Because then cats like Gomes, or Holt, or the other guitar dudes on the cusp, are left waiting for him to retire or whatever. They live in a shadow, and their brilliance is not seen.
I think that Rid Piazza is a pop band. In the Tony Bennet sense.
I get that it has a root in jump blues, but at some point you need to say that is pop, stop cashing my blues check.
I want blues guys to take the step down in pay, go earn it in rock clubs for less money now, but larger paydays later.
Hmm Dino, Dunno how it is over there but here in the UK Rock bands atleast on the club and pub circuit are in higher demand / get paid considerably more... I was told last night at a Jam night "Im wasted singing blues and playing blues if I want to earn money I need to do rock or covers"
He said to me "you need to do what the public want if you want paying and if it means playing shang a lang like I had to last week, then you gotta do it even if you dont like it."
I replied so you sold your soul... Hes a friend and I trust what he was saying and every credit for doing stuff he doesnt like doing because he relies on this to live..
But it kinda worried me, I love what I do its my hobby I play because I love it, but being told somets pointless because no one wants to listen to it kinda made me feel like I was wasting my time. Ive been in a blues band (doing muddy and hooker stuff etc) and we got by ok, but the demand was never there it was hard work getting gigs.
I'd never play somet just because someone else wants me too that isnt how I work but whats the point of me trying to start a new blues band if people just want to listen to covers? and we'd get no or little work. It would soon get boring... dunno lots to mope over
I guess over here where I am its the opposite end of the spectrum 
If your a covers band / rock band (providing your good) your guaranteed a gig, if your a blues band equally as good the second u mention blues its like auto disqualification..
Dino, You know I like you. But I have news for you. If KWS retired tomorrow Gomes and Scott wouldn't be the ones to fill the void.
For Scott to fill the void he would need to be signed by Irving Azoff and handed some songs and hire some musicians and come up with a hit. Open for Dylan, Stones you get the idea. None of that is going to happen now. Things have changed way too much in the last couple of years. The reality is there would be no void. KWS was pure timing. He arrived at the right place at the right time.
Don't get me wrong people I like KWS own all but the recent album and think he is a very good guitar player. I have seen him numerous times. But without Warner Brothers and the time he hit the scene he is just another Wes Jeans playing East Texas Jukes.
I won't even go there why Gomes wouldn't or couldn't fill the void. I will say you do Scott a disservice by putting him in a catagory with him.
Kenny's crossover appeal is why he got the money he got for festivals. I doubt he is still getting it. If he is more power to him. If he wasn't getting the 50 grand that doesn't mean somebody else would. Doesn't mean the other 10 acts would get $5,00. each more. A $1,500 dollar act is always going to be a $1,500 act.
What Joe has done is truly remarkable. Building his act in clubs and making that step to theatres. Being able to move from Blues Festivals to Jazz to Rock is icing on the cake. Getting out of the blues clubs was hard work determination and the single intangible. Talent. People want to say he is doing it by not really being a blues act doesn't bother me a bit. I like to say he has managed to do it even while still being willing to call himself a bluesman.
No Jim, its not really about filling the shoes.
I think I am having trouble more than anything with having a clear view of the national blues scene. I think I see it pretty objectively, regardless of my being an advoacate for my friend (I want to point out to YOU ALL, that I am hardly ever typing his name), I see pay scales for many bands, and many clubs. I compare that with similar level clubs in the college rock or rock world. Original rock, not joints that book cover bands.
And what I see is this, blues joints pay more. It is a step back financially to go play rock clubs. Though it is a younger, and stronger crowd, blues dudes do not chase that group.
Hardly ever do you see a blues band in a college club in any of the big party campuses across this country. I live in Wisconsin, and we migh have the biggest party campus ever.
I wonder why that is? Why do blues guys not step back, or in Joes case, step forward, into the next level. i think management would do the client a wonder by putting them in clubs for college kids, instead of for 50 year old white dudes who can name every session Freddie King ever played.
Not that there is not a place for it.
But, we all lament the loss of the youth in the blues, and maybe just maybe it is because of the artist themselves wanting to get paid, and stay stable. Not wanting to risk.
I say this blues artists...go play for college kids...the money is bad now, but the pay off is huge later.
Its just a theory I am working on. There is evidence to support it.
No Jim, its not really about filling the shoes.
I think I am having trouble more than anything with having a clear view of the national blues scene. I think I see it pretty objectively, regardless of my being an advoacate for my friend (I want to point out to YOU ALL, that I am hardly ever typing his name), I see pay scales for many bands, and many clubs. I compare that with similar level clubs in the college rock or rock world. Original rock, not joints that book cover bands.
And what I see is this, blues joints pay more. It is a step back financially to go play rock clubs. Though it is a younger, and stronger crowd, blues dudes do not chase that group.
Hardly ever do you see a blues band in a college club in any of the big party campuses across this country. I live in Wisconsin, and we migh have the biggest party campus ever.
I wonder why that is? Why do blues guys not step back, or in Joes case, step forward, into the next level. i think management would do the client a wonder by putting them in clubs for college kids, instead of for 50 year old white dudes who can name every session Freddie King ever played.
Not that there is not a place for it.
But, we all lament the loss of the youth in the blues, and maybe just maybe it is because of the artist themselves wanting to get paid, and stay stable. Not wanting to risk.
I say this blues artists...go play for college kids...the money is bad now, but the pay off is huge later.
Its just a theory I am working on. There is evidence to support it.
Thats avery interesting take on the whole rock clubs versus blues thing.I do think that rockacts, upcomming ones, mabe they make less money because they cater to a less affluent crowd(younger).The problem is that I think that it would be very hard for a "blues act" to draw well.Its more of a perception that the blues is for the older set.Even though many acts in the blues world like KWS really straddle rock more.The only way I see for a blues rock band to make in road in the rock world would be to be able to open for a large enough act that would be simliar enough in style to start to earn some new fans.Exposure if you will.I am saying this only from a casual fan perspective because I am not in the music biz.
I dont know if JB could gain anything at this point.But it would be food for thought for a young act like Back Door Slam.They have the advantage of being young and playing a more rock oriented style.They would be the type of band if anyone to try to go the rock club route dont you think?
Hmm Dino, Dunno how it is over there but here in the UK Rock bands atleast on the club and pub circuit are in higher demand / get paid considerably more... I was told last night at a Jam night "Im wasted singing blues and playing blues if I want to earn money I need to do rock or covers"
He said to me "you need to do what the public want if you want paying and if it means playing shang a lang like I had to last week, then you gotta do it even if you dont like it."I replied so you sold your soul... Hes a friend and I trust what he was saying and every credit for doing stuff he doesnt like doing because he relies on this to live..
But it kinda worried me, I love what I do its my hobby I play because I love it, but being told somets pointless because no one wants to listen to it kinda made me feel like I was wasting my time. Ive been in a blues band (doing muddy and hooker stuff etc) and we got by ok, but the demand was never there it was hard work getting gigs.
I'd never play somet just because someone else wants me too that isnt how I work but whats the point of me trying to start a new blues band if people just want to listen to covers? and we'd get no or little work. It would soon get boring... dunno lots to mope over
I guess over here where I am its the opposite end of the spectrum
I'd agree with your points in this post John. I have discussions too with friends, when an original blues/bluesrock band plays a venue places I have been the crowds are modest, yet when a covers band, in particular a tribute band comes to town, the place is packed. Whether the band is a Doors covers, AC/DC covers, Led Zep etc the place is heaving. A example I could quote was Buddy Guy. he came to an almost full Glasgow Academy in the summer, however a Stone Roses trinute band can sell out two full nights! I doubt many users of this forum could even name the Stone Roses. These tributes acts are really the lowest comment denominator of rock music and is popular with those that believe seeing live music should be some kind of nostaligia trip. The only blues people tend to listen is stuff like Mustang Sally, Midnight Hour etc. So sadly the bottom line is, if you want to get rich, don't play modern blues, play tribute act. You may even get lucky like the guy from Journey! That said I'm speaking from a UK perspective. What I would also say is that British blues rock acts find the only gigs they can get are in blues clubs, despite many of them playing very little in the way of blues in a traditional sence.
Having said all that, I do agree with Dino that blues acts should look to reach to younger audiences. Rock bands with blues influences like the Black Keys are loved by people in their twenties, blues rock acts would do well to appeal to the same fan base.
No Jim, its not really about filling the shoes.
I think I am having trouble more than anything with having a clear view of the national blues scene. I think I see it pretty objectively, regardless of my being an advoacate for my friend (I want to point out to YOU ALL, that I am hardly ever typing his name), I see pay scales for many bands, and many clubs. I compare that with similar level clubs in the college rock or rock world. Original rock, not joints that book cover bands.
And what I see is this, blues joints pay more. It is a step back financially to go play rock clubs. Though it is a younger, and stronger crowd, blues dudes do not chase that group.
Hardly ever do you see a blues band in a college club in any of the big party campuses across this country. I live in Wisconsin, and we migh have the biggest party campus ever.
I wonder why that is? Why do blues guys not step back, or in Joes case, step forward, into the next level. i think management would do the client a wonder by putting them in clubs for college kids, instead of for 50 year old white dudes who can name every session Freddie King ever played.
Not that there is not a place for it.
But, we all lament the loss of the youth in the blues, and maybe just maybe it is because of the artist themselves wanting to get paid, and stay stable. Not wanting to risk.
I say this blues artists...go play for college kids...the money is bad now, but the pay off is huge later.
Its just a theory I am working on. There is evidence to support it.
I have never heard the argument that a young band chooses blues for the payday. In my neck of the woods a blues band is lucky to get a piece of the door. There is no places with doors left. The last of the Blues clubs here just closed.
Taping the college/hip generation is a good market for young bands like BDS, Black Keys, JJ Grey and other blues based young bands. They can tap into the connected word of mouth generation who like to follow acts their peers endorse. They don't much care that it is blues based or not. If they like it they will come to shows. If it is labled blues they might be suspect of it. Average ticket price for these shows is 10 to 20 bucks.
You got to have a whole lot show up to bank anything at 10 bucks. This crowds tend to see many shows a year and need to be able to afford beverages. Maybe a T-shirt. They won't buy a CD because they don't have any use for them any more.
Joe's crowds are in the demographic that have more income, go out less, willing to spend more when they do. They still like CD's. Joe is still cultivating his younger crowd but he will never be considered hip to the masses. There are kids that get it.
The crowds are getting younger and will continue to. He will remain multi generational which has been the key to the classic rock bands continued successes.
Dino I think there is no magic formula whether you choose the blues clubs or rock clubs. You have to work your **** off and make your own luck and it sure helps if you are talented.
Dino Sometimes I wonder what you are talking about. You say things like:
"I know for a fact that blues clubs nationwide pay better than rock clubs."
in a coupla different ways in a coupla different posts. How do you know that?
Then you say things like:
"But, we all lament the loss of the youth in the blues, and maybe just maybe it is because of the artist themselves wanting to get paid, and stay stable. Not wanting to risk."
When was the "Blues" ever a thing for youth and when was it ever a sound financial decision to play "BLUES"... in your lifetime?
Enlighten me
BJJ FDOL
well i know blues musicians who play all over the country.
I know what they get paid.
I know rock musicians all over the country
I know what they get paid.
I know blues club owners all over the country.
I know what they say they pay.
I know rock club owners all over the country.
I know what they say they pay.
In that is a sort of median. An anecdotal middle ground.
Rock musicians get paid less than blues musicians. At both the grass roots level, and oddly enough at larger levels.
I believe that rock musicians at higher levels make more than blues musicians at similar levels.
I believe that if a rock musician was to step back, develop a rock club style fan base, said musician would get paid more later on in the game.
In my lifetime...SRV did okay financially. Double Trouble makes good money now. Trout does okay for himself. Sardinas does pretty well. Joe is the exception to the rule because being the best guitar player in america is going to have its perks.
Robert Cray cashes large checks (and in my opinion is as dull as watching paint dry).
BB King makes 6 figures each time he walks on stage, and is totally underpaid.
KWS makes equivilent to a starter house in Central Wisconsin when he walks onstage.
Clapton owns like half of England (with Maca owning the other half), as well as a home in Wisconsin (so that is cool).
I believe that if someone like say...poppa chubby took that show to rock kids, rock kids would eat it up. No matter what they call it. If they put that dude in from of 18 to 27 year olds, they would appreciate it.
I know a guy, who has been playing rock shows, and kids are eating it up. And after the show, when this dude talks about blues dudes, kids are eager to learn.
Like Moods says, either you have the show or do not. But I think a lot of these dudes have the show, but choose to play for old white people.
Joe Bonamassa Forum → Other Artists → Wondering about the Nature of the Music
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
Currently installed 2 official extensions. Copyright © 2003–2009 PunBB.