Standout Standardization

Bill Hankey · Post by **Bill Hankey** » 9 Feb 2006 6:41 am

I've always wished for a steel guitar standardization. Award Shows have fallen short in recognition of merits in the past. Credits are still pending, and musical diversities could exasperate the hope of correcting the situation.

Bill [This message was edited by Bill Hankey on 09 February 2006 at 06:46 AM.]

Earnest Bovine · Post by **Earnest Bovine** » 9 Feb 2006 7:44 am

To my taste there is too much standardization and not enough diversifitude.

Bill Hankey · Post by **Bill Hankey** » 9 Feb 2006 9:22 am

Earnest,

Errant diversification would be great, provided it doesn't detract from what has created the bonding in adherence to good entertainment. It is my hope that the durable steel guitar backup in past years, will proliferate to new levels in the future.

Bill

Jim Sliff · Post by **Jim Sliff** » 9 Feb 2006 9:28 am

"provided it doesn't detract from what has created the bonding in adherence to good entertainment."

Diversification would mean *more* people involved with the instrument and bonding to the steel community, I would hope.

Mike Perlowin · Post by **Mike Perlowin** » 9 Feb 2006 10:00 am

diversifitude?

Ernest my lad, you need to study John Barth's "Giles Goat Boy" to learn correct suffixes.

The correct word is "diversifitudehoodshipskyism."

Charlie McDonald · Post by **Charlie McDonald** » 9 Feb 2006 10:02 am

I loved Giles Goat Boy.

And I'm for non-standarization.

Bobby Boggs · Post by **Bobby Boggs** » 9 Feb 2006 10:10 am

steel guitar standardization in what area Bill? Are you in favor of a standardized pedal-set up?? Not me.A lot of builders are.

Bill Hankey · Post by **Bill Hankey** » 9 Feb 2006 11:42 am

Bobby,

My inference is based upon steel guitar artistry, and reliable accounts given which tend to preserve a given tradition. It is possible that trendsetters may promote or detract appreciably from individual musical tastes. Upholding a standard, or at least conforming to expectations in a given musical endeavor, allows for choices to be made by the listener. Specifiable utterances pertaining to musical preferences, could derail efforts to head off that which contributes the least to the betterment of the steel guitarist.

Bill

Fred Shannon · Post by **Fred Shannon** » 9 Feb 2006 12:17 pm

Wow, folks, just like old times. BILL'S BACK, and now to go to work on my vocabulary again. I understand standardization, I think, but that diversi-- or whatever lost me. Against standardization in music.
phred

Jim Sliff · Post by **Jim Sliff** » 9 Feb 2006 12:35 pm

It's pretty hard to decipher what he really means. but...

"or at least conforming to expectations in a given musical endeavor"

Does that mean you want Steel players to conform to a standard style? That they should all play alike? Or perhaps that they don't need to play alike, but should not be allowed to go outside conformity within the style they are playing, like throwing rock licks into a country tune or something?

"Specifiable utterances pertaining to musical preferences, could derail efforts to head off that which contributes the least to the betterment of the steel guitarist."

Does that mean that people who speak out in favor of diversification of steel styles are not

"My inference is based upon steel guitar artistry, and reliable accounts given which tend to preserve a given tradition."

And does this say that you want all "artists" to conform to some standard? What standard? And who supplies the "reliable acccounts", and who determines the qualifications of those supplying such accounts?

I'm not trying to argue at all, I'm just not sure what it is you're actually saying and trying to get a couple clarifications.
[This message was edited by Jim Sliff on 09 February 2006 at 12:38 PM.]

richard burton · Post by **richard burton** » 9 Feb 2006 12:54 pm

Bill,

Why do you phrase all your posts so that they are almost indecipherable ?

It takes a lot of valuable time to work out what you are talking about, time that I personally can't afford.

I'm fairly sure that you are writing something of consequence, it's such a pity that a lot of readers will become so confused after the first sentence, that they will go on to the next topic, negating your contribution to this forum at the click of their mouse.

Bottom line:
If you want people to read your posts, use a vernacular that can be easily comprehended.

Calvin Walley · Post by **Calvin Walley** » 9 Feb 2006 1:15 pm

yea Bill
you need to keep it very very very simple here otherwise you will confuse people

Terry Edwards · Post by **Terry Edwards** » 9 Feb 2006 1:41 pm

I like Bill's posts. The grammatical equivalent of Sudoku!

I'm against standardization. Chaos rules!

Terry

Jim Phelps · Post by **Jim Phelps** » 9 Feb 2006 1:53 pm

Bill's back, I'm glad.

He has his own style of writing. It would be boring if we were all the same, wouldn't it?

I'd like to see steel viewed more as a standard instrument too, same as bass, keyboards, regular guitar are considered "standard" instrumentation.

Bill McCloskey · Post by **Bill McCloskey** » 9 Feb 2006 1:57 pm

Whew...

I thought it was just me?

Can anyone translate for us non PHD candidates?

Bill McCloskey · Post by **Bill McCloskey** » 9 Feb 2006 1:58 pm

"Award Shows have fallen short in recognition of merits in the past. Credits are still pending, and musical diversities could exasperate the hope of correcting the situation."

Actually this sounds like something out of the I-Ching.

Bill Hankey · Post by **Bill Hankey** » 9 Feb 2006 2:10 pm

Gentlemen,

There are many standards in this world. Why exclude the steel guitar from the list? I feel that there is something lagging in the credit department of traditional steel guitar backup. Who's who in steel guitar, is always a subject of interest.

Bill

Bill McCloskey · Post by **Bill McCloskey** » 9 Feb 2006 2:15 pm

Bill,

It would help to understand what you mean if you could site a couple of examples of what you mean by a musical "Standard". Who defines the standard, and isn't a standard an anethema to individuality which is the hall mark of most inovative and thus admired players?

Bobby Boggs · Post by **Bobby Boggs** » 9 Feb 2006 3:26 pm

Well Bill, I'm still not sure what you're really after. But I dig your vocabulary. Ever consider going into politics??

Jim Sliff · Post by **Jim Sliff** » 9 Feb 2006 4:00 pm

Bill, are you looking for some kind of awards for steel players? If so, based on what?

It's still not clear at all what you mean by standardization - or what it is you want.

basilh · Post by **basilh** » 9 Feb 2006 4:14 pm

At Last..

Per Berner · Post by **Per Berner** » 10 Feb 2006 2:55 am

Note to b0b: move to "Humor" section, this can't be meant to be taken seriously. If it is, whoa...

Bill Hankey · Post by **Bill Hankey** » 10 Feb 2006 5:37 am

I was taken aback to learn that something is askew in the actual musical preferences existing among steel guitarists. Each player develops a style of his/her own. No doubt, influences in early life play a part in an individual's musical development. Have you ever tried to imagine, how many musicians would be great steel guitarists, had they not been coaxed to proceed on another instrument? Perhaps, a Steel Guitar Anthem, one that would create a wide range of interested parties, and effectively allow for judgment of fellow musicians, is worth consideration.

Bill

Per Berner · Post by **Per Berner** » 10 Feb 2006 7:03 am

Still not a clue what it's all about. Bet noone else has either.

Mike Perlowin · Post by **Mike Perlowin** » 10 Feb 2006 7:12 am

Have you ever tried to imagine, how many musicians would be great steel guitarists, had they not been coaxed to proceed on another instrument?

I don't think this is a problem. Most of us started off on other instruments. Usually guitar.