[kj] Power Chord's - geordie's blueprint

[Paul Rangecroft]

cheers, todd. fascinating as ever. i realised after i'd sent my post through
that i'd missed your point, but glad i did now! i still think you could
argue page was doing a similar thing before geordie, but it's a moot point
at the very least.

yeah, dumb's ok once in a while. dumb and dumber and dumberer, these days,
though.

so who's gonna buy that burman? rob - wasted on you but we could all use it
then? go on...

On 11/23/05, fluw <fluwdot at earthlink.net > wrote:
>
> rangecroft says:  *<who WAS the first to do the Geordie thing? Not denying
> your claim, just interested.>>>
>
> **geordie* was the first to my knowledge to do it as his *thing*,,,just as
> *link wray* was the first to make power chords his *thing*.
> neither were the first to use a power chord, or chilling chimes and
> dissonance as many had used these as aggregate form of a more broad sound.
>
> to address the query of some others who used chilling chimes, repetitive
> tension, or dissonance in their music before *geordie* ---
> the answer is everywhere; *shostakovich*, *louis hardin "moondog" *,*gabor szabo
> * (a guitarist), *beach boys*, much of the *middle/eastern music*.. i'll
> cover how i perceive this variety might be influential further down -- but
> if one is looking for a good example of a guitarist who would be *
> geordie's* blue print, or *link's* blue print, in their cases, none exist
> that i know of.
>
> the key with *link *and *geordie* is they are two guitarists who might be
> better described as players who approached their instruments with less
> *convention*. why is the reason they played with less convention? was it
> forced by the necessities of limited skill, or a combination of limited
> skill and an attempt to imitate the power/affect they heard from other
> music? *link* might have been using his guitar to emulate the powerful
> slams of an orchestra playing *rachmaninov* or *beethoven* - albeit with
> less harmonic content. while *geordie* might have be following some
> eastern melodic muse ( amongst many, many others ) we all know. both of them
> play/ed with less regard for the instruments conventional limitations and
> that is key to their creative greatness.
>
> *did they create new music*? if one is looking for new "music", as in
> scales chords, inversions, modes, harmonic theory, it won't be found on this
> planet or *dimension* - if such thing exists. either that *new* found
> music will be ancient to the performer and not the "finder" or it will be a
> 'fresh' variation of some other music's migration on through the performer's
> interpretation.
>
> whether it is *fado guitara *music incorporated in *austrian zither *music,
> *polkas* taken to texas by czech/german immigrants interpreted by
> hispanics and forming *conjunto*, or it is indian sitar in brit pop. it
> has all been done before somewhere. the mutation/execution is the only
> aspect which is* new*.
> but this is not a critique of human musical efforts.
>
> back to *link* and *geordie*! --
> they interpreted something, either intellectually, or via some natural
> osmosis or experience, and for whatever reason where inclined to create a
> new way of transferring those musical emotions they encountered - in turn
> they passed them on in relatively fresh ways that created new interest!!!
> that is where the importance of their musical execution or singularity,
> requires homage.
>
> as to whether or not decay in music has taken place due to this transfer,
> it is an interpretation confined to the one/s who are receiving . as for the
> context*:* *is richness and potency of the former music incarnation's
> content compromised *? yes, i would be inclined to agree with paul, that *
> link* dumbed it down. *but* dumb can be fun once in a while.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://four.pairlist.net/pipermail/gathering/attachments/20051124/b13dcd96/attachment.html