AllenLowe

that's ok - and yes Ron - I'll still take $900 for that imaginary Nat Cole - as a matter of fact, the imaginary Nat Cole probably makes more sense than the last book on this list -

and just a suggestion - 12AU7s are readily available on Ebay cheap - I''d go with an RCA -

it does get a little crazy - there are so many different guitars and amps and a very aggressive industry -

well, come on, the guitarist's relationship to his guitar is probably not any more neurotic than yours with the B3 or the horn player with horn (reeds, mouthpieces, etc) -

JSangry is very right in those distinctions, though I wonder if it may be not because of equipment used but because of the WAY it was used (and I do like Johnny Smith, but understand his point) - another distinction might be types of guitars, good archtops versus cheap ones, good pickups vs lousy pickups - those older blues guys were working in muich different types of clubs than jazz guys, noisier, probably, maybe more dancing less listening than the place a Johnny Smith (or Jimmy raney) may have been playing - driving those amps more, cheaper, lower-powered amps - and I also really believe a big part of the older sound is speaker; the older speakers had much less coloration than current (and for the record I have 3 amps, a Hilgen, which is an old Ampeg-syle amp, a re-built Bassman/'59 bassman, and a head that's been built to Fender Pro/Deluxe specs - I have only been playing about 4 years, I don't work "out" much but have been recording - and I use only NOS tubes )

that thing is awful purty...

I'm awake again (more or less) - to me it is a matter of sound - the classic jazz guitar sound is neck pickup, humbucker, dark, high end rolled off. Much different from the classic rock and roll sound which can be either neck or bridge pickup in combination (twang) - or by themselves (shrill and trebly for the bridge, bright and plumby for the neck). Jazz guitarists tend to like it mellow and round - and have since the days of Charlie Christian. Rock and roll and rhythm and blues guitarists since the late 1940s have tended to be different, particularly rockers starting in the middle 1950s. Both jazz guys and rockers, in the old days, used exclusively tube amps, which have a nice sense of natural compression as volume is achieved; while jazz guys tended to avoid that kind of distorted overdrive, rock and rollers welcomed it, used it as a musical technique. Than came the 1960s and rock's unprecedented popularity, which made jazz guys perk up and listen - rock guys started using more effects, fuzz, wah, etc and etc. More than a few jazz guys (Coryell, Hahn, Sam Brown, McLaughlin) started pushing the instrument more, and started using effects. In many cases, even in the early days, the result was not great, was too slick, with a sense of musical slumming, as though some of the jazz guys were overqualified and could not achieve the same sense of basic blues-touch as a lot of the rock (and older blues) guys. As digital technology developed it became easier and easier to achieve "rock" effects - distortion and/or overdrive, delay, fuzz, etc. In all of this something very nice about the guitar's original sound was lost, IMHO; the use of digital effects results in a series of conversions - ie. the analog guitar signal is converted to a digital signal and than back again to an analog signal. The result is a loss of original tone, sometimes a digital sheen - it loses the sound of the string itself vibrating over the pickup and then being amplified through the pre-amp and power stages (assuming a tube amp is used) - add solid state amps and you get an even greater loss of guitar signal. Now all of this is not necessarily bad - as the saying goes, if it sounds good it is good. It's just not to my tastes and sounds more and more like the guitartist could be playing anything, a keyboard, a wind synth, anything. Personally I find that there is a warmth and natural compression to the direct signal of a guitar through a tube amp, a power and presence in both clean and distorted sound that has been largely lost (by the way, this applies to not just jazz but to most rock guitarists) - and even though I'm not even crazy about the classic jazz sound (too rolled off, too quiet) I still find it preferable to the multi-pedaled way of most contemporary guitarists -

I can give more on my opinion but apologize as I am about to go to sleep; will post more specifically tomorrow -

don't fight, boys - just buy books -

thank you - a gratuity is in the mail -

"Allen, you got caught triping over your own tongue; be a mench and lick your wounds in a quite place. You're not such a bad guy." well, what can I say? Rachel would disagree with the last part - now, I'm supposed to slink off into the corner - though I still maintain my points were clear if arguable. And, as for starting off with an acoustic guitar, that is true and has been done already - all electrics are essentially playable acoustically when un-plugged; some just have more resonance than others -

yes, and if anybody orders a book I didn't like, and than LIKES the book, there will be an extra charge -

excellent point -

yes, Rachel, whatever you say. Well, I think my work is done here. Time to fly over to the political forum and take care of that anti-Semite Che -

I've got a few books I'm selling, left over from my internet sales days - here they are with honest appraisals: Goin' to Kansas City - Nathan Pearson's very good oral history of KC jazz - I have three copies I will sell for $10 each, shipped media rate. Paper, excellent condition. Blue Note Records: The Biogaphy. Richard Cook's solidly written story of Blue Note Records. $8 shipped media rate. Hard cover, good condition Hole in Our Soul. Martha Bayles on the state of American pop. She's wrong, but makes her arguments well. Paper. Ok condition. $7 shipped media. Sounds of Reform: Progressivism and Music in Chicago 1873-1935. Derek Vaillant. Another academic takes on early music. Cover is a little bent (probably from when I flung it across the room in disgust). Good research, writes like a term paper. $5 media shipping. Culture on the Margins: The Black Spiritual and the Rise of American Cultural Interpretation. Jon Cruz. Reads like a parody of academic writing - impenetrable, made-up words, blind-man's clarity. Might be fun to get high and than read this aloud, I dunno, but DO NOT operate heavy machinery while reading this book. Paper, fine condition. $6 shipped media rate, your money back if you get past the first chapter (no - let's make that the introduction) - I take paypal, check or money order - thanks, email me directly at alowe@maine.rr.com

it's a little hard to let go when Rachel persists in personal attacks - "Hell, you had to ask B-3er if he played a real B3. I don't necessarily believe this to be true at all, but in your case it might apply: Those who can, do; those who can't, write about it. " Rachel - you can do a little research - I'm in the New Grove dictionary of jazz as well as several of the Penguin guides - I have led recordings that included Don Byron, Doc Cheatham, Julius Hemphill, David Murray, Roswell Rudd. The REASON I asked B3 what kind of organ he played was to make a point (not surprised you missed it as you've missed a lot in this thread) - B3 replied that he would only use the real thing - and this was exactly my point about guitar sound. If you look back over this thread (Joe and Rachel) - it escalated only because you could not merely disagree with my points but had to turn your disagreement into personal attacks; it is one thing to make the point that you don't understand MY point; another to try to turn this into an issue of my coherence and writing abilities - and if you read through, several other posters were quite aware of the argument I was making -

to add - I also like Abercrombie, Frisell, etc. I 've just gotten a little weary of that synthesized sound -

well - I play both solid and hollow body and they both have their very distinctive sounds - the reason those older records sound good, in my opinion is: 1) older speakers (1950s) tended to have less mids and upper mids; the mids are now used as both a sweetener and a way to produce early overdrive - which is pointless anyway with high powered amps and distortion pedals - the older cones on the older speakers tended to produce a sound that had a darker bass, less mid-range, and a nice but very plain sounding high end - 2) lower powered amps - in the 1950s particularly; Wes liked an old Tweed deluxe; some other guitarists like Jim Hall (and I think Kessell) used the Gibson GA-50, high powered but not super clean with a midrange that went well with the kind of seakers they used . Blackfaced Fender amps changed the sound a lot in the 1960s, but rock guitarists did not have digital pedals than, so the sound produced, pushed hard enough, had a very nice natural rising volume and some-breakup - in the 1950s there were a lot of older, low powered amps, raised up off the ground (probably to reduce the bass), giving a nice grainyness, breaking up early in a very pleasant way. Early hollow bodies fed back very quickly, so volume was often kept low. The smaller (second generation of) hollow bodies that we see in blues photos were a little easier to handle; note also that in the later 1950s a lot of the blues guys started using Les Pauls or Les Paul knockoffs; also they loved p90 pickups, which have a lot of dirt and break up quickly and, once more, go pariticularly well with the old-styled speakers. This is just my take on the whole guitar-sound thing. Rachel, I didn't use too many big words, so I hope this is all clear to you -

Skeith - that's EXACTLY what I meant - thank you -

well, the first two books were written in Esperanto - limited audience -

oh-nay. I-ay ike-lay very e-ay itarist-gay in eh-thay orld-way. ank-they ou-yay ery-vay uch-may.

Am I the only one here who finds her decidedly un-sexy?

all future posts here will be entered in pig-Latin to improve clarity -

exactly my point...

I don't think I count 57 of mine - but maybe you're not being clear enough - and I've had many reviews of my writing - not a one has ever complained about clarity -