Albert King Tone
Stephane Boucher
>>>>> "Thad" == Thad Brown <10263...@CompuServe.COM> writes:
> Hey Folks, My little computer doesn't do the quote thing like it
> should, but I read in the "blues originality" thread that if someone
> played SRV licks slower and with a thinner tone, they would be
> called a Albert King clone.
I would probably argue that this is rather simplistic. SRV could play
lead and rythm. I haven't heard much rythm playing from Albert King on
the CDs that I have.
--
,
Stephane Boucher, ing s...@nortel.ca
- NORTEL - Tel: (613)763-9778
Bell-Northern Research / Recherches Bell-Northern
Thad Brown
Hey Folks,
My little computer doesn't do the quote thing like it should, but I
read in the "blues originality" thread that if someone played SRV
licks slower and with a thinner tone, they would be called a Albert
King clone. Whether that is true or is not interests me very little
(I am happy when people say I ripped off Albert, but everyone seems
to think I sound like a bad B.B.), but if you think that Albert had
a thin tone and played slow, I beg, plead, and order you to you
nearest record store to buy a copy of Albert's "Blues at Sunrise."
Tone don't get no thicker than that, and in my opinion blues don't
get no better either.
Thad Brown
James Andrews
"Jack A. Zucker" <j...@en.com> wrote:
>Stephane Boucher wrote:
>>
>> >>>>> "Thad" == Thad Brown <10263...@CompuServe.COM> writes:
>> > Hey Folks, My little computer doesn't do the quote thing like it
>> > should, but I read in the "blues originality" thread that if someone
>> > played SRV licks slower and with a thinner tone, they would be
>> > called a Albert King clone.
>>
>I would argue that Albert King did not have a thinner tone. I love
>SRV but Albert plugged a funky guitar into a funky solid state amp
>and made it sing.
>And who cares how fast he could play ? I mean, Yngvie smokes both
>of them but what does that mean ? Albert King had soul deep to the
>bone.
>Don't get me wrong, I love SRV but don't be messin' with Albert.
Whoa, folks! Hold everything!
I was the one who made that comment. At the time I was sitting there
listening to The Best of Albert King, or Albert King's Greatest Hits,
or whatever that best of album is. You know that one that's kind of
70's sounding, with the horn backups and all, the big long version of
"I'll play the blues for you" that almost sounds like it could be sung
by Marvin Gaye (and no, that's not an insult either; I'm just talking
about the arrangement). There are a couple of songs on that album
where his tone is surprisingly thin and weird sounding. Of course,
I'm at work right now and don't have it right in front of me so I
don't have it off the top of my head. On the other hand, "Wednesday
Night in San Francisco" (and I'm sure Thursday Night too, although I
don't have it), is some of the fattest, tastiest sounds I've ever
heard coming out of a guitar. But that statement was influenced by
that other album, not by a general impression of Albert King.
So let me defend myself real quick, lest someone think I was
dismissing my number one (well, maybe number 2, or maybe tied or
something) guitar hero.
If I remember right, we were talking about borrowing riffs and licks,
and influences and things like that. What I was essentially saying in
that statement was that Stevie Ray Vaughan was known, in part, for
playing speeded-up Albert King licks (and no, I'm not saying thats ALL
he did either, I think he was a fabulous guitarist, and that was PART
of his style), and for his amazingly fat tone. What I was saying was
that if someone ripped off SRV and had a thinner tone (i.e. not
SRV's), people might think he was an Albert King clone, when in fact
he wasn't knowingly trying to imitate Albert, he was trying to imitate
Stevie.
There's my defense of that statement. Take it for what it's worth.
Albert King and Freddie King are 2 of my gods of guitar, and believe
me I would never say anything bad about them. I was not saying that
SRV was "better" because he played faster, I was just trying to make a
point about ripping off licks, and how it's all circular.
Now, on to one other thing real quick: I disbelieve in the concept of
"tone" regarding the deific status it's recieved around here, and the
mythic proportions discussions on "tone" take. Given that, I probably
shouldn't have so casually tossed that word into the discussion.
Sorry about that.
But don't get your panties in a bunch, folks! If you've ever read any
of my posts, you'll know that one thing I never do is say any
guitarist or band or whatever is "bad" or "good". I leave the
subjective judgements to others, and stick to attempting to help
people, discussing stuff, and making jokes. That's why it worried me
when I read what Jaz wrote up there, and why I went so far to defend
myself here. I'd like to think I'm a hell of a lot more intelligent
and rational to have said that SRV was "better" than Albert King
because he played faster.
And if I ever do make any comments as asinine as that last one, you
have my permission--no, my request, to flame me off of Usenet.
Thanks for listening.
Jas.
------------------------------------
James Andrews
Philadelphia, PA
and...@ben.dev.upenn.edu
Jack A. Zucker
Stephane Boucher wrote:
>
> >>>>> "Thad" == Thad Brown <10263...@CompuServe.COM> writes:
>
> > Hey Folks, My little computer doesn't do the quote thing like it
> > should, but I read in the "blues originality" thread that if someone
> > played SRV licks slower and with a thinner tone, they would be
> > called a Albert King clone.
>
I would argue that Albert King did not have a thinner tone. I love
SRV but Albert plugged a funky guitar into a funky solid state amp
and made it sing.
And who cares how fast he could play ? I mean, Yngvie smokes both
of them but what does that mean ? Albert King had soul deep to the
bone.
Don't get me wrong, I love SRV but don't be messin' with Albert.
-Jaz
--
>
> Jack A. Zucker | ESP Music
> j...@en.com or | Voice: 216 349 5881 (home)
> Jack....@software.rockwell.com | Voice: 216 646 7796 (work)
> | Fax: 216 646 7766 (work)
bch...@hubcap.clemson.edu
> > > Hey Folks, My little computer doesn't do the quote thing like it
> > > should, but I read in the "blues originality" thread that if someone
> > > played SRV licks slower and with a thinner tone, they would be
> > > called a Albert King clone.
tape with SRV and Albert king together in the studio, its pretty
eerie. You can see the influence that Albert had on SRV very clearly,
but you can also see how stevie added to that, built on it. Yes, there
are times that stevie copied albert note for note on his records,
and jimi and hubert and john lee and lonnie and BB and Buddy etc,
stevie was the master of all the forms that the blues had
ever taken before him, and he could put it all together
sometimes in one song..listen to little wing for instance,
he took the hendrix riffs and built on them to put together
an awe inspiring instrumental, in my opinion the best instrumental
guitar peice ever recorded. Stevie was nobodys clone, plus I
don't think anyone (with the possible exception of Albert Collins)
has ever had Stevies appreciation for tone...he could make that
battered strat scream, sing, hum, or purr
again often all in one song. Check out the El mocambo
version of Texas Flood for example. Plus, in those
early years lets not forget that SRV was heavily into
drugs and alcohol...maybe giving him reason to fall back
on the tried and true..note for note. if you listen to any
of the live material recorded after he got out of rehab,
or In Step, you can definitely hear stevie becoming something more
..reaching higher..taking the SRV blues to a new level that even
the die hard fans couldn't believe, right to the very last note
of sweet home chicago on Aug 26th 1990.
guess I'll get off the soapbox now.
-Brantman
tomb...@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu
In article <9xoivd4...@bcarsf26.nortel.ca> s...@nortel.ca (Stephane Boucher) writes:
>>>>>> "Thad" == Thad Brown <10263...@CompuServe.COM> writes:
>
>> should, but I read in the "blues originality" thread that if someone
>> played SRV licks slower and with a thinner tone, they would be
>> called a Albert King clone.
>
>lead and rythm. I haven't heard much rythm playing from Albert King on
>the CDs that I have.
He chops on chords now and then, but he don't work too hard.
He's got flunkies for that.
--
------------------------------------------------------
"Use your guts, man! That's what you've got them for!"
--Roy Scheider in Seaquest
tomb...@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu
SRV wasn't the first guy to clone Albert. Clapton plays Albert's solo
from "Personal Manager" note-for-note on one of those Cream albums.
Jim
Did someone mention Clapton copping licks?
First of all, you are 100% correct.
Secondly, he also stole every lick Freddie King had....remember,
that EC played backup for FK, then, after Freddie's death in 1974,
guess who (hint: EC) toured with George Terry as his backup playing
what was, almost, Freddie's old set. Check the CD "E.C. Was Here."
BTW, there's nothing wrong with copping licks...almost everyone does
it...but, when Freddie King was copping licks, at least he'd say, like,
"This song was originally performed by Elmore James (as in "Dust My
Broom"). I'm a big EC fan and have been since the 60's. And, I believe
that, no matter how it was presented, he has done his bit to keep the
real blues alive.
What is really fun to me is the chase: EC plays the lick...EC stole it
from Freddie King...Freddie King stole it from Elmore James...who did
Elmore lift it from...I mean, we are backing up to the beginnings of
the recording of blues, here. Who taught Elmore?
To me, the history of the blues is just as much fun as playing them...and
I'll be the first to admit that I have lifted my share of licks..big
time. That's what leads me over to Albert Collins....who did he lift his
licks from (I mean, playing a Tele with a humbucker with a capo on the 9th
fret, tuned down 1-1/2 keys and played raw finger, sans pick, is pretty
original to me)?
jim n tejas
tomb...@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu
In article <31C0C3...@intcomm.net> Jim <jro...@intcomm.net> writes:
>
>Did someone mention Clapton copping licks?
>from Freddie King...Freddie King stole it from Elmore James...who did
>Elmore lift it from...I mean, we are backing up to the beginnings of
>the recording of blues, here. Who taught Elmore?
Elmore stole a lot from Robert Johnson, or someone who sounded like RJ.
>That's what leads me over to Albert Collins....who did he lift his
>licks from (I mean, playing a Tele with a humbucker with a capo on the 9th
>fret, tuned down 1-1/2 keys and played raw finger, sans pick, is pretty
>original to me)?
Check out some Gatemouth Brown for the provenance of
a lot of AC's style.
Jim Nelson
On Thu, 13 Jun 1996 18:41:58 -0700, Jim <jro...@intcomm.net> wrote:
>That's what leads me over to Albert Collins....who did he lift his
>licks from (I mean, playing a Tele with a humbucker with a capo on the 9th
>fret, tuned down 1-1/2 keys and played raw finger, sans pick, is pretty
>original to me)?
>
>jim n tejas
Check out Gatemouth Brown. Gate was a well-known player in Houston
when Albert was coming up, and Albert has always acknowledged the
strong influence (though Gate might tell you he taught Albert
everything he knew!)... And less you think I'm verring to far off
this thread, Gate has been touring on and off for the last year and
half with (opening for) Eric Clapton...syncronicity, gotta love it!
jay...@smart.net
> jlne...@private.nethead.co.uk (Jim Nelson) writes:
> On Thu, 13 Jun 1996 18:41:58 -0700, Jim <jro...@intcomm.net> wrote:
>
> >That's what leads me over to Albert Collins....who did he lift his
> >licks from (I mean, playing a Tele with a humbucker with a capo on the 9th
> >fret, tuned down 1-1/2 keys and played raw finger, sans pick, is pretty
> >original to me)?
> >
I read in an interview that Albert stole his licks from horn and piano players.
Sax players are a great resource for licks. Since it is not laid out like a
guitar, the patterns and licks that come from a sax sound really fresh when
transcribed to guitar. Piano licks are similar in this fashion. They aren't
necessarily easy to play, but good is it, if it isn't a challange?
Troubleman