As Howard hints, it's all in what you hear. To my ear, the bluegrass/country
players fall into four discernable styles: chronologically... Oz, Josh,
Mike, and Jerry.
I use those names because these guys are whom I consider the key innovators
for each style, but a lot of other folks have contributed heavily to each. A
lot of
great players have straddled these "styles"... in fact I'm blown away by
some
who can seamlessly and convincingly slip in and out of any of them. Note
that I'm
talking about Bluegrass here, which is a small application of this
instrument. Get
outside of that, and there's a lot more to consider.
Not trying to pigeon hole the music or anything like that, it just seems to
shake
out that way for me. It's kind of like trying to put a name on regions of
the Atlantic
Ocean. Anyway, that's what I think... but then, what do I know!
Pete Reichwein
> Bill Woolet wrote:
>> Please excuse me for putting my 2 cents in, but when it comes to style I
>> don't know that there is just a certain "style".
>
> ==>A legitimate comment.
>
> I think style equates to the players major/minor influences plus
> individual interpretation.
>
> Many players, including myself, think in terms of a "timeline" that may
> start with Oz and then adding influences up to 2007. We take bits and
> pieces from previous "styles, add our own spin, shake well and eureka...a
> new style.
>
> BTW...if your world includes players that "Everything else seems to fall
> in between" (Oz..Jerry), believe me when I say..there is lots that fall
> outside of those two guys. :-)
>
|
Re: [RESOGUIT-L] R
Reply to this message