re: TONE [ain't ~sound~]

[tom ball <havaball@xxxxxxx>]

This is why I love Harp-L.  Seriously! <g>
__________
Robb:
>Okay Tom, I'll give you the point on ~semantics~ and
>we'll call it square. I should have said ~This is not
>ONLY semantics~[or, ~I'm NOT splitting hairs here~,
would have been more apt].
___________
Thank you, sir. :)  <gloat>
>___________________________________
>  TB wrote:
>RE the "one man's ceiling" comment:
>>  A few days ago someone here on the L stated that
>>  they thought SBWII
>>  had lousy tone.  Other folks jumped in and
>>  disagreed, contending he
>>  had terrific tone. 
>______________
Robb replied:
>Exactly my point. One of them is wrong [Ak! He made a
>value judgement! Call out the Generalization Guard!].
>I think we all [95% of us who take harp seriously]
know which one.
_______________
(Laughing)  I agree with you on this one.  But at the same time I 
suppose we also need to leave room for the dissenting vote... (?)  Or 
maybe we don't.  Actually I am reminded of a couple things Dave Barry 
wrote in his "Book Of Bad Songs:"

"It would not trouble me if the radio totally ceased playing 
ballad-style songs by Neil Diamond. I realize that many of you are 
huge Neil Diamond fans, so let me stress that, in matters of musical 
taste, everyone is entitled to an opinion, and your's is wrong."

And later:

"Finally, let me say that music is subjective.  There is no 'good' or 
'bad'; there is only individual preference, which varies from person 
to person.  If person A likes the song 'My Sharona,' and person B 
hates it, who is to say which one is right?  I am.  Person B is 
right.  'My Sharona' sucks."
________________
R:
>  That people on harp-l will argue about
>something isn't evidence that ~tone is relative to
>what your preferences are~. No it isn't.

________________
Well, heck, all due respect, but I think we need to agree to disagree 
on this one.  True enough, you and I *know* who's right and wrong in 
the aforementioned SBWII case, but it is still non-quantifiable (at 
least as yet, until somebody builds the inevitable "Tone Polygraph 
Machine.")

I'm sure there are SOME people in the world who truly believe that 
sumptuous, fat, deep tone (on any instrument or even vocally) sounds 
bad. <shrug>  If today's music on MTV is any indication, there are 
record producers out there who *prefer* thin nasally tone on vocals, 
trebly and wimpy guitar sound, bad recording techniques, cheesy 
electronics, etc etc.  How else can one explain the dreaded Kenny G 
or this EminEnema guy?

Anyhow, I've gotten a bunch of broad smiles out of this discussion, 
not to mention that your list of "Absolutes" should be required 
reading for beginning harpers.

Thanks for the thoughtful posts - hope to see you in CA or at SPAH 
one o' these days, Bing... I look forward to laughing at the music 
"business," and the Guinness'll be on me. :)

cheers,
- -Tom


.