The Steel Guitar Forum

I'd rather be controversial than just another example of the same old thing.

2 quick points.

1: Susan is a former student of Jeff Newman, and can play country as well as, if not better than, anybody on this forum.

2: At the premier of the Ride of Spring that Glenn referred to, Stravinsky is reputed to have fled to the men's room, climbed out the window and ran from the theater in fear for his life.

BTW I was thinking of recording a steel guitar version of The Rite the way I did his earlier Firebird, but decided one Stravinsky piece was enough.

Julian Tharpe. If there is a top 5 greatest pedal players list...he is on it, but you won't see him in the "vaulted" Steel Guitar Hall of Fame. He is still too controversial even though he has been dead for years. What a player.

Mike, to stray off-topic for a moment, I thoroughly enjoy your performance of "The Firebird Suite". I'm sure your take on the "The Rite" would be cool, too. As you can guess, it would be way more difficult than the Firebird because of the complex dynamics and rhythms. Stravinsky composed a 4-hand piano transcription of it, but Dikran Atamian has performed an unbelievable 2-hand piano transcription. I have the CD and it's a mind blower.

About SusanAlcorn: It's not surprising to find out she was a student of Jeff Newman. Watching her right-hand, it becomes apparent, as her technique is impeccable.

Keep on pickin'!
Glenn

Brint Hannay wrote:But Twayn, were you truly only hoping to watch some fireworks, or do you have a dog in this fight? (to mix my metaphors)

I wanted to encourage discussion on the issue, and no, I had no intention of causing any flame wars. I thought a little humor might help things along, but either my sense of humor is too subtle or too blunt Still, there have been some excellent insights posted so far, so on the whole I'd have to rate it a success, though certainly not without consequences.

I think what makes a player controversial is when you have very strong opinions about said player/music being expressed, both positive AND negative. If all the opinions were either positive OR negative, then there would be no controversy, only agreement.

Glenn Suchan wrote:Mike, to stray off-topic for a moment, I thoroughly enjoy your performance of "The Firebird Suite". I'm sure your take on the "The Rite" would be cool, too.
Glenn

Thank you Glenn. I'm glad you like it. Right now I'm still working on all the peripheral stuff for the new Spanish Steel CD, but it's getting a lot closer to completion. Right now I'm looking at a mid-July release date.

Getting back to the issue of controversy, the reason Julian Tharpe is controversial is that there are some pretty serious allegations of wrongdoing in his part.

I wish these stories would either be conformed or debunked. It would be nice to know the truth. If the stories are false, then Tharpe should be inducted into the SGHOF. If they are true, he does not deserve that honor.

Character counts.

I'll say this about Lanois:

I am not a pedal steel player, yet, and so I cannot comment on his technique or proper execution, or lack there of, regarding this instrument specifically.

I am however a recording artist with 13 albums written, produced and recorded, a musician of 17 years, and a long-time admirer of "good music," and with this experience under my belt I can safely say that it is rare to find a musician who has inspired me and moved me as much as Daniel Lanois has.

Whether it's as a producer, a writer, a singer, or a musician, I find Lanois to be consistently amazing. He has helped to create some of the most interesting sounding rock albums ever recorded - fact - and his own albums push the boundaries of rock as much as any I've ever heard.

I understand why he might be considered controversial to long-time, traditional pedal steel players, but I also know that he kicks a metric ton of ass.

That's all I got.

mike...thanx...i can now compare myself to stravinsky...there was a restaurant in santa cruz, ca. that many people used to escape through the bathroom window to avoid paying for their meal!

It was pretty clear RR had displaced JG
from the hot seat some time ago.

JG was in it for a little good work
and not enough great work.

RR with the bigger sin of too much good work,
bringing MUCH more recognition,
but a body of work so much different,
that some think it is very bad work.

Transitional characters often get the hotseat
from old guard holdouts.

Could someone cite some specific examples of what these intolerant "old guard holdouts" are doing to harass these transitional/nontraditional/controversial players, please? How are they inciting the trouble?

The 39% says a lot.

In a nutshell:
RR has been seen by many as
'too far from what the pedal steel guitar is'
in their opinions, these views have been
egged on by blythly under-informed guitar press
calling RR any number of superlatives, while
ignoring most of the greats on the instrument.

This appears to gall a fairly high percentage.
And that makes him controversial.
Personally; I find him a great boon for the instrument.

Just do a search for him or his initials in this
and the old forum. The evidence rest there,
for all to see.
Then you tell me... controversy?

No no, David, that is not an answer to my question.

I asked for specific examples of what the "old guard" is doing to harass transitional players, and incite trouble. Simply telling me approximately which beach to go combing for the answer is not acceptable.

Furthermore, the 39% says nothing. That only reflects the consensus that he's controversial - it's not a 39% vote against him as a player (it might as well be a vote for him, depending on who voted that way and why).

Tell me specifically, who is putting him and others in the hot seat, and how so. I'm not looking for examples of heated reactions from traditional players to the non-traditional supporters' heavy-handed accusations and insinuations of "old guard" intolerance either - I'm looking for examples of "old guard holdouts" initiating the conflict.

Duane, if you search for Robert Randolph you will find any number of posts attacking him, including one that said that the poster would rather see the steel guitar die out altogether than to see R.R.'s style become popular.

There have been so many posts over the past few years that it would take hours to go through them all.

If they are so abundant, then find me a few of them. Don't just tell me where to go looking for them - you bring them here if you say there is such a landslide of them.

Mike Perlowin wrote:Susan is a former student of Jeff Newman, and can play country as well as, if not better than, anybody on this forum.

Now that's what I call a serious compliment!

Duane,
it is a perfect answer.
It isn't us against them.
Youagainst me, my point is made.

It is a clear observation,
and all the data is right here on the forums.
It is so overwhelming as to not need
the transition from anecdotal preponderance
to statistical precision.

Some times town meetings count the yehs and neys,
and other times just acknowledge that
the air is full of hands.

If you disagree go look.
That's why the forum has search,
to look up old subjects and READ THE ORIGINAL WORDS.

I am not here to wave people around saying;
'Look there's and old guard taking a shot at RR.'

Leave it be said there are many who just prefer
classic country and classic country steel playing.
And many didn't even like it when Big E used a
fuzz box back in the 60-70s.
A few are purist Hawaiian players, and stay in that realm.

They have made no bones about it on this forum.
I see no need to cherry pick their words.
I have no expectation of changing their minds.
Nor desire too.
I just happen to disagree, and wish RR well as
an ambassador to a new generation of potential players,
REGARDLESS of STYLE.

And I doubt they have any expectation of narrowing
down my wide ranging tastes.

I came to classic country the other way round
from rock to jazz to bluegrass to western swing
to country to classic country.
And if I and others here can retrace those steps,
I see no reason why RR's youthful fans
won't eventually do the same.

Susan is a serious player.
I have no doubts she can play most anything she wants.

No no no, Donald - that is not acceptable. You are making the assertion that there are people in the "old guard" who are putting Robert Randolph in the hot seat; fine - all I'm asking of you or anyone else who makes this assertion is to prove it.

All I'm asking for is a handful of examples where it is the traditional country player on the initial offense in these discussions, and not the other way around. You are making the assertion, so it's your responsibility to support it, not mine.

To anyone else who feels so inclined, just show me a few examples of a peaceful discussion about Robert Randolph or another non-traditional player being disrupted by a dissenter on the offense.

It's not hard to find very negative comments about RR. Just doing a search for Robert AND Randolph AND noise yields a few, even on the new forum. For example, this: Recent Thread. It starts on the first page, but really got heated up here. If you just look for Robert Randolph threads, you'll find plenty of very serious negativity - especially some of the earliest threads on the old forum when he was just "discovered". If I thought it was remotely difficult to find this stuff, I'd add more links, but it's real easy, IMO. [BTW - I don't think this was necessarily a bad discussion, nor do I call it "harassment". But we need to acknowledge that there are a lot of seriously negative views about RR on this forum.]

With that said, I agree with Duane that this poll is about perception of who's controversial, not whether one likes or dislikes these players. I have no way to measure it, but based on the reaction of many members to this thread, I would hazard a guess that the sample of forum members who voted are, primarily, not "mainline" country pedal steel players. I could be wrong, but that's my guess.

In general, I also don't think negative comments necessarily constitutes harassment of a player. People have different likes and dislikes. Nobody can force anybody else to like or even accept a style of music or a player, nor should they be able to. Trying to force it is futile and wrong, IMO. Trying to insist that we be politically correct about our comments and squelch dissent just drives those bad feelings underground instead of letting them air and be discussed. Maybe you think that it's hopeless, and that people are just completely closed to anything new. Perhaps some are, but I don't believe everybody is.

The only thing we should expect here is that we stay civil in our disagreement. I think personal insults of players, other members, or styles of music are a real bad idea. But I think it should be perfectly fine to express our likes and dislikes in a civil way. I think plenty of people here are open to impression. Why insist that all discussion follow a strict prescription to avoid offending the closed-minded?

That's it, I'm forgetting controversial and going for notorious or even infamous.

This guitar strap should work nicely on this pedal steel....

Now we are getting somewhere.

Thank you for that very even-handed analysis, Dave. I won't deny that many people on here don't necessarily like Robert Randolph's playing (this can be applied to other non-traditionalists) - my point in asking for examples of traditional players going after non-traditionalists was to say that this is a two-way street; the "old guard" starts out on the defense more than people realize. My worry is that many here are loosing sight of that.

Other than that, I'd say Dave's post pretty well covers it in my book. I will also concede that maybe there is indeed value in this thread.

Susan is a lot like jazz guitarist Charlie Byrd. (I don't know if he is related to Jerry.) Byrd studied classical guitar, and was at one time a student of André Segovia. But once he had mastered the art of playing classical guitar, he went out on his own and used his classical technique to do something different. In his case it was playing jazz. (Segovia never forgave him for his "treason.")

Likewise, Susan, having totally mastered (Mistressed?) the art of playing E9 country, to the point where she could easily compete for session work in Nashville, or get a top gig in Branson, has also branched out on her own and is creating something new and different. In her case, experimental music.

Whether you like her music or not, there's no denying that she is a true virtuoso.

I mean, you really ought to here here version of 'Louisiana.'

This has been a curious tread to follow...What exactly are you guys arguing about?

The most daring thing that EVER goes on musically around here occurs when every now and then someone sticks his neck out and plays Steel Guitar Rag in a different key than Leon! (And of course they are thoroughly chastised for it!)

Try thinking of the steel guitar as an "instrument" not a style of musical expression.

FWIW, I just perused Clapton's new autobiography and Robert Randolph is mentioned in it. Heady stuff.

By the way Duane 'harassment' was your word, not mine.
Same for 'intolerant'. I never used it.

I never said anyone was harassing RR or newer style players, you did.

I made an observation and DM put up a clear example.
Along with exactly what I was saying in more verbose fashion,
but well said. As usual.

I was trying, in vain,
not to drag others down the pipe in this thread also.

Thus turing it into, not a vote on controversalness,
but a defence of individual musical tastes,
personified in RR's deviation from the main stream.

Joe D. in the other thread is a recent good example.
BOOM> RR thread horror. Those who do like RR,
can't seem to have a simple disccusion of his work,
with out someone else saying make it all go away,
in no uncertain terms. Far from the first time.

He is speaking for many on his own accord,
not because a proxy fight has given him a signed affidavit
to fight on others behalf this 'disrespect of our instrument'.

Duane a simple search and look
a) doesn't turn this thread nasty because I have picked examples,
thus putting the writer in the hotseat,
b) that data is there and you can find it,
and it upsets no one to read it there
and form your OWN conclusion... that was my intent.

'Let YOU form your own conclusion,
and not drag others kicking and screaming into the fray.'
They of course will want to defend their view,
if personally called on, and off we go.

RR creates controversy here.
Jerry Garcia creates controversy here.
Recently RR has created more.
Simple observations to make.