The Steel Guitar Forum

Someone posted this comment on my YouTube channel today:

Steel guitar is the only instrument I know of that committed suicide because the wrong artists ran away with it.

...the wrong artists?

I'm baffled.

Fake news!
Erv

Blaming the artist doesn't seem to make sense - I can't imagine someone like Bob Ross running away with a steel guitar.

It wasn't suicide. It was homicide. We all learned just a few months ago that Buddy Emmons killed it.

Always difficult to get inside someone's head, but....

Perhaps the writer is trying to say steel committed suicide because

a) the wrong "artists" (and I use that term loosely) ran away with "it"

"it" being country music, wherein the new "artists" don't use steel anymore

or

b) steel guitar didn't change ("committed suicide") and as a result did not get incorporated into current country "artists" music...


...cause those "artists" already have too many distorted guitars

Jim, please don't mention the war...

Maybe the writer is longing for some older style of playing, like 1950s Country or Hawaiian. Maybe instead of "suicide" he meant the steel "died" because today's artists have misused it, or are not using it in the style that he is fond of.

As John Hartford said, "Nobody eats at Linebaugh's anymore..."

OR, as Yogi said: "Nobody goes there anymore. It's too crowded."

OR, as Yogi said: "Nobody goes there anymore. It's too crowded."

Very true. And If people don't want to come out to the ball park, nobody's gonna stop 'em. Oh well, when you come to a fork in the road, take it.

George and Alan said country music was murdered down on music row.

Doug Beaumier wrote:Someone posted this comment on my YouTube channel today:

Steel guitar is the only instrument I know of that committed suicide because the wrong artists ran away with it.

...the wrong artists?

I don't think the wrong artists "ran away with it". I, rather, tend to think the wrong artists "ran away from it". For example: I got into a somewhat heated discussion once about my saying that Willie Nelson didn't seem to care for steel guitar. Some responded with indignation, saying that Willie had cut a couple albums featuring Jimmy Day, and that he and Jimmy were long-time friends. Be that as it may, Willie did have over twenty #1 records, and none that I can recall featured a steel guitar. The majority of Haggard's records also didn't feature any steel guitar. A few, like "Always Wanting You" and "Cherokee Maiden" had a little, but the only one that was a standout, as I recall, was "Going Where The Lonely Go". Likewise, most of Barbara Mandrell's hits had no significant steel guitar (even though she, herself, played pedal steel). Her "Standing Room Only" was one exception, and a very nice one at that. Marty Robbins had over fifteen #1 records, but only "Among My Souvenirs" featured a nice steel ride. Oddly enough, it was his last #1. (His #3 song "The Shoe Goes On The other Foot" did also have a nice steel ride.)

Had some other big artists in the 60's, '70s, and '80s, singers like Kenny Rogers, Dolly Parton, Glenn Campbell, Sonny James, Johnny Cash, John Denver, and Alabama featured a good amount of steel work, things today might have been vastly different.

We "old timers" tend to think that steel was far more popular decades ago. But in truth, even when times were at their best, steel still wasn't an essential element in country music. Nevertheless, we still remember the 60s and '70s as being pretty damn good!

Of course, it's impossible to get into the head of whoever wrote this comment, which is a bit cryptic and subject to multiple possible interpretations. We don't know who it is, and thus have no sense of what his or her angle is, so we only have the literal words to go by.

However, if we take the words literally, "Steel guitar is the only instrument I know of that committed suicide because the wrong artists ran away with it." - I can only ask, "What 'artist(s)' could have possibly run away with the instrument?" Certainly not the singer(s) - they don't really have anything to do with how the steel guitar is played or even used; they sing. Producers, who make a lot of the decisions about how it's used, are not usually refered to as "artists". Who's left? Steel guitar players - they are "artists", and they definitely could, in essence, "run away" with the instrument by deciding how it's played. So I would conclude, strictly from the reading, that the writer is arguing something about the direction steel players have taken the instrument. And that idea fits with the idea of "suicide". Of course, I completely disagree, but that's beside the point.

Ergo, with the caveat that we really can't possibly know what some anonymous chucklepluck on the internet is really thinking in his or her head, I think Jim's comment, quite likely, does triangulate in the general direction of the writer's intent. And with respect to Ian, no joke.

There are different possible ways even that idea could be interpreted. It could be a "no pedals" hardliner griping about the intrusion of pedal steel. It could be someone arguing against the complexity of the instrument and/or the styles that have developed over the last 50-60 years. These types of arguments have been advanced over the years, right here on this forum.

With all that said, I guess it could be argued that it doesn't matter. Blah blah blah...

Doug Beaumier wrote:Someone posted this comment on my YouTube channel today:

Steel guitar is the only instrument I know of that committed suicide because the wrong artists ran away with it.

...the wrong artists?

I saw this yesterday and thought it was a facetious post. I'm not saying I agree with it, but I think I get it. Steel guitar is a musical tool. Different tools are used to craft different things. If you use the wrong tool for the job - or use it incorrectly, you're going to get a shoddy product. Paraphrasing that old analogy, if you view the steel guitar as a hammer, every song is going to look like a nail - and it's going to end up with dents all over it.

What I'm getting at is that it's easy for us to become singularly-minded on steel guitar and entitled to play it that way without being mindful of the product it creates. It's a musical tool, and a narrow one at that. Guitars, bass, and drums can be thought of as general tools like saws and drills. Steel guitar is more like a router. If you use it to pound in nails, they'll go in crooked and your board is going to get banged up... and people will think it's worthless.

Curt------ Well said! ! ! ! ! !

What'd he say?
Erv

What I'm getting at is that it's easy for us to become singularly-minded on steel guitar and entitled to play it that way without being mindful of the product it creates. It's a musical tool, and a narrow one at that. Guitars, bass, and drums can be thought of as general tools like saws and drills. Steel guitar is more like a router. If you use it to pound in nails, they'll go in crooked and your board is going to get banged up... and people will think it's worthless.

I'm sure you'll be shocked - I largely disagree.

Of course, we're entitled to play any instrument any way we want, and some keep it pretty narrow. But I don't think steel guitar is a particularly narrow tool. I do think the way a lot of "out-worlders" (non-players) view steel guitar is indeed pretty narrow. But I think a lot of steel players have a very different view.

In a sense, much of the out-worlders' views of steel guitar are heavily predicated on just how successful its stereotyped role has been, and to a large extent, how no other instrument is really capable of truly fulfilling that role.

But lots of players have been stepping outside that role for a long time. What is sometimes hard is selling musicians in non-steel-centric styles on the legitimacy of other roles for the steel. Steel guitar outside its stereotyped role is outside their experience, not necessarily those of steel players.

Hey, this is just my take based on my own experience. I get kinda annoyed when people point their finger at me and say, "Your instrument is narrow-minded, just like you must be."

ERV: He said "sing a little louder and you'll get more pay" or maybe "The cops are coming get out of my way"'

No matter how much you disagree with YouTube comment Doug found, you can't invalidate it. There's something there at the heart of it, even if it's incorrect or misguided. And because it's such a strong opinion, I think it's worth trying to unpack and understand - instead of explain it away.

Paul,
Thanks!
Erv

Starting with your second statement first:

And because it's such a strong opinion, I think it's worth trying to unpack and understand - instead of explain it away.

In fact, I did try to "unpack" and "understand" it by offering what I think is a reasonable interpretation of its literal words. However, it's so cryptic that any attempt to do this requires some level of conjecture about the actual intent of the words. By your comments, it seems that your interpretation is pretty similar to mine, but I don't want to put words in your mouth.

No matter how much you disagree with YouTube comment Doug found, you can't invalidate it. There's something there at the heart of it, even if it's incorrect or misguided.

Well, one can't "invalidate" what is too cryptic to unambiguously interpret. In my mind, I have logically invalidated the way I interpreted it above. YMMV. But to your point: how are "incorrect" and/or "misguided" not synyonymous with "invalid"? Just because someone feels something strongly doesn't mean it's logically valid.

Dave Mudgett wrote:Starting with your second statement first:

And because it's such a strong opinion, I think it's worth trying to unpack and understand - instead of explain it away.

In fact, I did try to "unpack" and "understand" it by offering what I think is a reasonable interpretation of its literal words. However, it's so cryptic that any attempt to do this requires some level of conjecture about the actual intent of the words. By your comments, it seems that your interpretation is pretty similar to mine, but I don't want to put words in your mouth.

No matter how much you disagree with YouTube comment Doug found, you can't invalidate it. There's something there at the heart of it, even if it's incorrect or misguided.

Well, one can't "invalidate" what is too cryptic to unambiguously interpret. In my mind, I have logically invalidated the way I interpreted it above. YMMV. But to your point: how are "incorrect" and/or "misguided" not synyonymous with "invalid"? Just because someone feels something strongly doesn't mean it's logically valid.

Sorry, that was just a general statement to anyone reading the thread to spark conversation. I didn't mean it as a direct reply to your statement.

Curt Trisko wrote:There's something there at the heart of it, even if it's incorrect or misguided.

He might think he is being coy or deliberately cryptic in an attempt to appear clever.

But I'd think it's more likely that he is either inarticulate or just put little thought into the comment with no idea that it's impossible to parse. It's useless as it stands for exactly that reason.

Less to it than meets the eye. Calling re-write.

Well, he left the comment on my "Stranger on the Shore" video and I'm not sure how to take it. Either he means that I am one of the players (one of the wrong artists) who killed the steel guitar... or he likes the video and he's bemoaning the fact that modern music no longer features steel guitar. I think I'll take it as a compliment! 🤔