On The Road With Al and Ivy: A Literary Homeless Chronicle: strat

Showing posts with label strat. Show all posts

Sunday, December 25, 2022

The Delta Snake Review: A Music And Arts Blog By Al Handa

Note: The following content is for entertainment purposes only and some parts are works of satire.

IN THIS ENTRY:

- New! Did 70s Disco Really Suck?

- New! Some Thoughts On AI Art

- Gear Talk From The Archive: Review Of 2004 Fender MIM Nashville Telecaster

- Archive Review From 2014: Classic 60s Album Review - Paul Butterfield Blues Band “East-West”

- New! Short Takes on Rap, Blues, and African Music

- The Boogie Underground Think-Tank: How To Find The Perfect Expert For All Occasions!

DID ‘70s DISCO REALLY SUCK?

In every era, great thinkers add to The Pantheon of Slogans that provide hope and inspiration to aid humanity's never-ending quest to combine intelligent thought with the ability to walk on two legs. But, as the Internet has proven, this melancholy crusade is a work in progress.

In Ancient times, a Carpenter from Gallalee said, "Love your brother and don't interfere with Caesar's business."

In the Renaissance, a poor son of a peasant became the first artist to feature nude scenes in art, saying, "The leaf covers the brain of man."

In the Victorian Age, a great Monarch instructed all women who distressed their male masters by secretly imagining adulterous love with Jaime in the Outlander Series to "Just close your eyes and think of England."

In World War II, General MacArthur established the day-after-Christmas ritual with his pungent exhortation, "I Shall Return!"

In the tumultuous 60s, forward-thinking minds who tried to increase brain activity by growing long hair and pondering the meaning of album liner notes cried, "Revolution Now!"

The March Of Civilization reached its apex in the 70s when humankind yearned for a return to the salubrious days of Satan-worshipping song lyrics and sticking one's head into P.A. columns during concerts with the battle cry, "Disco Sucks!"

The Disco Sucks Movement was a reaction against the woosy decadence of silk shirts with Chinese Dragon designs, platform shoes, and guys with gell in their hair getting all the beautiful women instead of rockers with boots, spandex, and cheap hairspray in their hair getting all the beautiful women.

As you can see, the battle line was a stark contrast in style, fashion, and male prerogative.

However, the issues of this bitterly fought war became blurred as even the standard bearers of rock and roll took short vacations from the demands of artistic integrity to push out a quickie four beats to the bar anthems for the platform shoe crowd for a quick buck.

The question that all of you are probably asking, besides the subject's relevance to anyone under the age of 30, is, "What was Disco?"

The long answer one can look up on Google and hash out the mean in the various contradictory theories, which could provide a pleasant break from killing people in RPG video games and still being butthurt over the Game Of Thrones ending (I feel your pain my brothers and sisters).

I'll provide a short answer for the purposes of this essay.

Assume it's the definitive explanation until you reach the end of this penetrating meditation and have formed the opinion that I'm too old to write about music.

Disco didn't appear out of the blue; it'd been around since D.J.s and dance clubs came into being and has never gone away. It's still alive and well in various permutations, which escapes the notice of old farts because the audience is in the 20-30 age range, and nobody ever really knows what their kids are doing or listening to.

The 70s version of Disco came out of the New York Gay Dance Club Scene and featured the traditional pounding 4/4 beat with whatever was in style on top.

The Disco movement became supercharged by the surprise success of the movie Saturday Night Fever which, like with Elvis in the 50s, the Industry managed to get everyone to adore a straight white male hero, and that got the cash registers ringing like church bells on Sunday.

That led to the rise of bands and artists such as the Bee Gees, K.C. and The Sunshine Band, Donna Summer, Tramps, Ohio Players, and Rick Dees with his infamous "Disco Duck" song.

That's an oversimplification, but accurate enough for my sacred mission to illuminate hard-hitting truths without wasting time on actual research.

There are two reasons why rock and roll audiences reacted with such hostility to Disco. Of course, there are more than two, but let's not test your patience.

The most important was that these immaculately coifed and dressed artists began to suck up all the P.R. oxygen and profit from sensitive singer-song writers and heavy metal studs; thus driving up the price of cocaine to unsustainable levels and forcing them to play music with a simple dance beat with even less than three chords to compete.

Needless to say, the spandex rockers resented being out dumb downed by the silk shirt upstarts who often didn't even feature guitars, much less an actual band, in the music.

Plus, the sophisticated clothes and Gay origins of 70s Disco may not have played well to the mullet-haired males that made up a large percentage of the audience in a typical metal concert.

That's admittedly an unscientific observation, but strict stickling to details doesn't belong in an article about rock music anyway.

The Disco Sucks Movement reached its zenith when protestors began burning huge piles of disco records or destroying said discs in public displays of righteous indignation, which was OK with major Labels as long as the stuff was paid for. They didn't care what anyone did with the product once they got their money.

The Disco Sucks movement suffered a setback when major Rock and Punk groups started coming out with Disco crossover singles. However, rage soon turned to reassurance and approval once fans realized that their heroes made lots of money on the hits. Americans are generous and quick to forgive selling out as long as it's successful, which is the bedrock of Democracy and The American Way.

Rock artists who recorded these thumping anthems for the glitter ball set helped the healing process by instructing their publicists to issue sincere statements of regret about the regrettable lapse of artistic integrity and commitment to that old-time rock and roll.

Indeed, the protectors of the sweaty standard of stadium rock returned to basics and staunchly held the line of uncompromising purity until the 80s, when it became necessary to wear even more eye makeup and add cheap synthesizers to the music.

- Al Handa

Dec. 2022

SOME THOUGHTS ON AI ART

The hype surrounding A.I. Art obscures the fact that historically the effect of new tech innovations creates a wide range of results, from outright failures, a significant middle ground of mediocrity, and about the same percentage of genius, which is maybe one in a million or less.

The development of AI Art won't kill human beings like self-driving cars or create processes like autocorrect, which makes writing as easy as putting on makeup or cooking from scratch. Still, it's good to remember that the real-world effect will be as good or bad as humans allow, and it isn't inevitable that AI will take over the world on its own.

There will always be apocalyptic types (and artists are among the most enthusiastic) who assert that the end of the world is coming and AI will find a way if an asteroid doesn't do it.

...back on track...

That being said, I'll return to the subject at hand and resist the temptation to add my thoughts about the End Of Days. Instead, I refer you, good readers, to my Vella series, "The Boogie Underground Think-Tank: How To Survive The End Of Civilization," for the definitive word on our impending doom.

... it's tough being an artist...

What makes it more challenging for artists is that AI software is kinda sorta protected from liability (that is, the Internet sites that control distribution like YouTube, etc.) because of the fear that intrusive regulation stifles innovation.

...the primary issue...

What appears to be the primary issue with this new tech, besides its theoretical ability to kill us or turn us into enslaved people, is that it must "scrape" the Internet to educate itself enough to crank out the requestor's desired product.

It's already legally established what would happen to a human being who does the same thing; they'll probably get sued if any attempt to make a profit out of an overly derivative work without permission or license.

...not perfect ..

It's not a perfect process. For example, it's almost impossible to prevent merchandise sales with unauthorized images completely, and products often get copied using reverse engineering to evade patents.

These days, one can create an illustration in the "Warhol" or "Modern Art" style in most graphic editors, and genre writing like SciFi or Romance can have similar elements in books by different authors.

On the one hand, there are only so many ways to describe a spaceship or sex scene, but historically, there'll be rare geniuses who find a new, unique way (who, in turn, will be imitated).

...derivatives...

The use of derivative elements is more evident in the visual arts. If you're copying Mickey Mouse, people will know it's Mickey Mouse. Copying the famous rodent is legal as long as you don't try to sell it. AI Art software won't change that; even if it can replicate on a scale no human can, none of it can be sold (legally).

Where it can harm is if it copies elements like style and other unique aspects of art created by humans.

...window of opportunity...

The important thing for an artist who creates an original work is that there's a finite window of opportunity to profit from it. After that, the work is created, builds an audience, and hopefully is a financial success.

That's a process that AI can disrupt. A new artist who begins to find an identity can discover that the scraping process can assimilate and co-opt those unique elements into a current commercial project.

That's why the US Copyright office is wise not to allow registration of AI-created artwork. There would inevitably be people who'd game the system (like with patent farming and domain squatting) and scour the Internet to collect unique artistic elements and combine those into copyrighted art (one step ahead of artists who don't have the resources to protect their work).

...scraping...

Scraping isn't going to hurt Stephen King or Taylor Swift, and AI Art software will undoubtedly benefit a lot of art departments and artists producing functional or commissioned works.

There's also no doubt that AI software will and does give millions of people pleasure with the ability to edit their photos and art in an almost unlimited number of ways. So it's a capability that's here to stay.

However, suppose you are an artist who works to create a unique new vision that no one's ever seen. In that case, there might come a time when it's best to complete the work offline and keep it that way even when marketing it because there'll be AI software beating the Internet bushes for the inspiration it'll never have on its own.

The need to give those developing AI the room to innovate may stifle human genius and creativity that makes new art possible and limit it to technically amazing feats of mediocrity.

GEAR REVIEW: 2004 FENDER MIM NASHVILLE TELECASTER

Archive From September 2014

The 2004 Fender MIM Nashville Telecaster ended up in my collection the same way more than one guitar has ended up in someone's collection; I was using the Nashville to test out amplifiers and bought it instead.

It wasn't so much an impulse buy as it was fate. I had been in the market for a second tele, and the Mexican-made Nashville was one of the models I was watching. The most familiar is the one with the semi-hollow body, but when I was looking for a guitar to check out some amplifiers, I saw the solid body version on the rack.

As you can see from the picture, it looks like a standard, except it has a Stratocaster pickup in the middle. The selling point is that you have a telecaster and Stratocaster combined in one guitar.

That is only technically true.

Putting a strat pickup in the middle does give you some Strat-like tones, but as a general rule, most strat players rarely use the middle pickup (by itself). Of course, the fact that most don't could be a good reason for you to go ahead and do that. Why follow the crowd?

One legendary telecaster player, Clarence White, who was most famous as a member of the late 60s Byrds, put a strat pickup in the front neck position. It was an effective mod that produced a very useful tone, and the "twisted pair" pickups in some recent Standards give the player a similar sound.

The MIM Nashville is one of the more admired Mexican-made teles from Fender. From what I can see on the Internet, most of those who own one love it.

To a small extent, the main point of controversy is the Tex-Mex pickups. Those are like the ones used for the telecaster and strat standards, except that the wire coils around the magnet have extra winds to create a "hotter" sound. Though in guitar terms, that doesn't necessarily mean more fierce sounding. Just a little fuller.

I bought it based on how it sounded in the store instead of researching it first on the Internet and ordering it. It was a good reminder of the basic rule of guitar buying: to trust your ears and not what people say.

I didn't know there were "Tex-Mex" pickups on that guitar. I wouldn't have even taken the guitar off the rack if I had known that. One of the strats I once owned (and didn't keep) had the Tex-Mex. I hated the sound and returned it to the store within a week.

Add to that the small but vocal chorus of bad-mouthing that goes on about those pickups on the Internet, and you have a guitar that I would generally avoid. Actually, I should've known better. My first telecaster was a '73 Standard that I played for 25 years. It had a rewound front pick up, in other words, what they now call a Tex-Mex.

That was the first thing I realized while playing the guitar at the store. The front pickup sounded like the one on my old telecaster. I generally used it because my old CBS-era telecaster had a crappy bridge pickup, and I preferred the sound of it with the treble turned up.

If you listen to those few songs where I played the solo or lead guitar in the Handa-McGraw & The Internationals recordings, that's the sound of the rewound front pickup (on an old small amp with gain and volume high). In the previous Delta Snake Review, I provided a list of those links on YouTube.

The general word on the Nashville deluxe is that it has a hotter or "darker" sound and won't give you the "traditional" twang. By traditional sound, I mean that thinner 50s sound on old country records. By the same token, the term has lost its meaning. Fender's been making telecasters for over 60 years, most of which have certain things in common regarding tone, but there's no longer any such thing as a single classic sound.

The Fender Nashville Deluxe is Mexican-made, though most parts were manufactured in the United States and sent down to Mexico for assembly. In the case of my candy apple red version, it has an alder wood body and a maple fretboard.

The neck profile is a "modern C" or "fast neck," meaning it's a little slimmer. I have small hands, so that's a desirable feature. The basic hardware, like the bridge and pegs, is good enough. I've heard some criticism about those metal parts, but these tuners are better than the ones I had on my old '73.

The heart of the electronics is the three-pickup configuration, with the middle pickup being a strat type. The two Tex-Mex's sound like standard telecaster pickups except a bit fuller, basically as advertised. If you want to sound a little sharper and thinner like a standard, I'm sure you can adjust the tone on any decent amp.

While electric guitars haven't changed much due to the conservatism of most guitar buyers, amplifier technology has always advanced quickly. In fact, it would be moving even faster if it wasn't for the fact that most of the older guitar players want amplifiers that duplicate the old vintage sounds. How amplifier makers responded to that demand is a story in itself.

I can say that these telecaster pickups will give you the old twangy sound, the classic front pickup jazz sound, and a great blues tone. If you have a decent amp, it can produce pretty much any tone. The middle Strat pickup on the Nashville works very well. It sounds like a strat pickup that's closer to the neck (your ears might hear it differently).

Another thing about this telecaster is that it has a five-position switch instead of the traditional three. So you can combine the bridge and middle, and middle and neck, but to the anguish of many traditionalists, you can't combine the bridge and neck pickups.

That neck and bridge combination isn't one that I used very much, but plenty of telecaster players do. In the early 70s, you would've been SOL, but we live in an era where you can easily have the front and back setting installed or even do it yourself.

Suppose you want the "standard" telecaster tone. In that case, you'd probably be better off buying one of the standards, if for no other reason that you won't have musicians looking at your Nashville and psychologically not being able to hear a standard-type tone.

When I was in the store, there was a standard American Tele on the rack next to this one for only $300 more, but after trying it, I felt that it didn't sound $300 better. I've owned a couple of other American standards, one I would say sounded better than this Nashville, the other nowhere near as good. That may sound strange to those who don't play guitar, but most musicians know what I'm talking about.

The Fender Nashville deluxe telecaster has been one of its more successful Mexican models, and given what I've seen of it, it's probably one of the best values in the midprice range. So if you can find a used one at a good price, it'll be both a bargain and a keeper.

Note: The used price in 2014 was 350.00.

In my case, I've found a telecaster with a front pick up that sounds like my old '73, which is priceless.

Note 2022: This review was written in the 90s and was part of the Delta Snake "Classic 60's Blues Album" series of reviews. It was republished online in 2014 and now, in 2022, edited down from its original length.

It's a special piece to me, as one of the founding members of the Butterfield Blues Band, Mark Naftalin, took an interest in the review and looked over early drafts. He gave me a great deal of feedback and backstories, which increased my insight into the album, and my conversations with him about the album are some of my fondest memories from that time. Mark was a generous person with his time and insights.

For that reason, I've made very few edits, only where there were obvious grammar mistakes. I wanted to leave the review basically as Naftalin saw it published.

CLASSIC 60'S BLUES ALBUM REVIEW: EAST-WEST by The Butterfield Blues Band

Note: You'll notice that many songs are discussed out of order as the review unfolds. The reason is that I wanted the review to follow the flow of my discussion and because the most influential changes often come from particular songs, not entire albums.

I owe a lot of thanks to one of the founding members, Mark Naftalin. He looked at the early drafts and offered many critical and helpful comments about the text. But, of course, the final opinions are my own and don't necessarily reflect Mark's view of this classic recording.

The Paul Butterfield Blues Band's "East-West" recording is one of the most important 60's era records, particularly in its effect on other musicians.

Given Mike Bloomfield's charisma at the time, particularly after their work with Dylan, they could have become rock stars. As it was, many later guitar greats like Carlos Santana (who stated it in an interview) admired Bloomfield, who was probably the first of the 60s American "Guitar Heroes," and as a side note, one of the guitarists who popularized the use of the Gibson Les Paul in rock.

Instead, the Band moved into more intricate jazz and modal territory, with at least one step into popular rock. It wasn't a sound that evolved in the often insular blues world. Instead, it was as much a part of The Times as the San Francisco psychedelic bands and, in many ways, predated and anticipated what happened later in the 60s.

Their awareness of the outside world differentiated them from all of the young blues bands of the day. Instead, the Butterfield Blues Band took the blues and related to the music as younger musicians aware of rock and jazz would have. The East-West record clearly shows a band aware of modal scales, jazz of all types, New Orleans R&B, and rock.

One change was Sam Lay's replacement on drums, a genius of a drummer named Billy Davenport. While Sam's work on the first album was superb, Davenport had a flexibility that could only come from a drummer who understood rhythm as a "pulse," providing propulsion as opposed to a beat, very much in the jazz sense.

It may be a digression, but it's interesting to briefly look over what happened in 1966 when East-West came out. Folk-rock was becoming big, the Jefferson Airplane was a harmony folk-rock band, the Beach Boys and the Byrds were beginning their periods of adventuresome work, and Miles Davis was Exploring modal-based jazz that seemed more straightforward on the surface but had a concept of space and time that became highly influential. The Beatles and Stones were turning everyone's idea of what a rock group was upside down.

The English Blues scene was splitting into a traditional faction exemplified by early Fleetwood Mac and John Mayall and an experimental one typified by the Yardbirds. By the late '60s, many of the above trends and ideas had merged...long improvisational jams based on interpretations of Coltrane, Miles, Sitar music, and other influences could be heard everywhere. Music seemed more "serious" but freer.

But back in 1966, there was "East-West." As you listen to the title cut, "East-West," and follow the changes in dynamics over its 13-minute length, one realizes that this work was visionary. One can see the entire gamut of jazz, modalisms, and even San Francisco psychedelic.

I've begun discussing what was the album closer first, but we do have the advantage of hindsight, and that cut did become the most famous and influential. The title cut was also a microcosm of the changes in the Band's sound. Gone was the straight-ahead attack of the first release. In its place was a complexity that wasn't always apparent on the surface. A careful listen will reveal a complex jazz-like undercurrent. It had a rhythm track that could have accommodated a multitude of ideas and tonalities. Instead, it made the various improvisations that followed work like a seamless flow of related ideas.

Elvin Bishop took the first solo and opened with the fieriest of the improvisations. Although not as technically adept as Bloomfield, his solo was more aggressive. His ideas and riffs were more straightforward, with a lot of attack, and on the surface, could strike the listener as showing less understanding of the modal concepts being explored. One thing is obvious...his solo works well as pure sound. The distorted riffs had tonal ideas that wouldn't have been out of place on an early 70's jazz-rock album. Although Bishop's solo is rooted in rock and blues, it still sounds fresh, and more so today.

At the time, Bloomfield's work tended to get the most attention, but to these ears, Bishop's work was just as integral to the arrangement's success. It is hard to quantify and put into words, but the best way to say it is that it is his energy that draws you into the song.

Butterfield's harp solo comes next, and he amplifies the sonic attack with which Bishop opened the song. The harp tone is aggressive, and as it unfolds, it comes across as a series of sharp, rapid ideas. At times, the music would seem to call for a fast flurry of notes (as in a traditional blues solo). Still, he would reverse practice and follow a trail upwards, then explore the tonal microtones and subtleties of a particular note or chord.

One could imagine that Butterfield may have shared a closer bond with Bishop than with Bloomfield (Bishop being the original guitarist in the Band). It shows in the music. The two solos sound as if they were built from the same mindset.

Bloomfield comes in next, and his cleaner tone and rapid-fire ideas are an ideal change in dynamics. His solo builds impressively, and the modal explorations show us a guitarist who seems exhilarated at discovering and exploring new and freer territory. Bishop's guitar comes back in, and the two build up to a peak that once again becomes almost pure tone and sound. One would be hard-pressed to find a better example of such pure sonic beauty, all the more remarkable for being created in 1966 by what was known as a blues band.The peak then subsides, and the rest of the song builds from a series of ideas that, at least on record, anticipate the "spacy jams" of the San Francisco bands.

One other significant departure in the group sound was not of the intellectual or theoretical variety. For whatever reason, the Band also covered a song by Mike Nesmith was, at the time, a member of the famous pop group the Monkees. The Band wasn't aware of this as the song was submitted to them by the publisher in the usual way songs are looked at and evaluated for a new album in demo form.

Anyway...the song was "Mary, Mary," which many rock critics considered a good one. It is a remarkable and successful rock-blues experiment that still sounds as good as any modern blues artist has done since. The arrangement, originally a riff-song in its pop form, is done here as a darker piece, using a heavier guitar opening with harp and piano counterpoint. It was an arrangement that owes much of its success to Naftalin, an excellent keyboardist.

The other extended number on the record is "Work Song," which shows a jazz sensibility in the sound. It covers a wide range of approaches, which include the theme played in stop time, a succession of solos with ever more intricate and wild overlaps, and rhythm breaks on the downbeat of the final theme. It flows a lot better than I describe it. Bloomfield's use of the telecaster as a jazzy guitar in this song is something I wish other musicians would do more often. His solo builds and climaxes with octave runs, which in 1966 was a rare technical effect in the blues. If you love Albert Collin's "Highway is Like A Woman," you'll understand what I'm talking about.

Naftalin contributes organ work that is both adept and beautifully conceived. One interesting aspect is that he uses a lighter, cooler tone than the funkier Hammond sound of the day. It may not have come across as powerful as a Jimmy Smith number on the Hammond organ, but the more relaxed tone sounds more modern and hasn't dated.

Bishop's solo is the final one. It's interesting to hear him here and in later cuts, as it contrasts strongly with the Southern and Goodtime rock and roll he later did in the 70s (with considerable success, I might add).

One of the most robust jazz-flavored songs, yet firmly rooted in blues, is "Two Trains Running." It opens with a unison riff, hard bop style, and the shuffle rhythm that follows moves forward with an energy that reminds me of Art Blakey or Cannonball Adderly (who did some pretty fine blues also when he was in the mood).

PAUL BUTTERFIELD BLUES BAND (FIRST ALBUM)

The record opens with the Robert Johnson classic "Walkin' Blues" and features the arrangement that became one of the definitive versions. Nowadays, most rock and blue bands use that same march rhythm that drives the cut along. Perhaps this version isn't as well known as Elmore's "Dust My Broom arrangement," but Johnson was rarely covered better.

Next comes "Get Out Of My Life, Woman," performed about as flawlessly as you can. Most versions go hard on the rhythm and use a hard funk approach. In this case, the Band decided to lay back a touch, and the result is dramatic for such a small change. Davenport and Arnold's work is superb. Laying back on the rhythm made it an ideal keyboard song, and Naftalin's work here is the backbone of the arrangement. His right-hand work interacts with the rhythm section perfectly, and his fills and melody give the music a sophistication that will appeal to a modern listener even today.

"I've Got A Mind To Give Up Living" is a slow blues, done ballad style. Paul sings with great power and a natural sense of emotion that makes it classic. A cut that still sounds great now. Also, the way the piano and guitars interact and combine to create a single chord at some points is impressive. "All These Blues" turns the tempo up and is a chugging style of blues. Like the song before, the keyboards and guitars are used as an ad-hoc horn section. Butterfield's harp solo cuts through and combines with vocals in a call-and-response manner. Each musical phrase sounds perfect and focused.

"Work Song," Mary, Mary," and "Two Trains Running" follow and have already been discussed in detail.

Next up is "Never Say No." It's called (by its author Percy Mayfield) "Never Say Naw." It's a quiet number in the "Tin Pan Alley" mold, but done like, say, Mose Allison would have done it. The general mood is atmospheric, and the Band's playing is understated. It should also be noted that this was Elvin's first recorded vocal and a fine debut.

The set ends with "East-West," and its placement is ideal. It's as if all the changes and subtle touches throughout the work led to this point. It's one of the greatest album-closers of all time. As time passes, I think there has been and will be an awareness that the blues underwent many changes during the '60s that were as momentous as any that occurred in the 50s. At the forefront of that change was the Butterfield Blues Band. What they did with the blues makes the Band's music so great. They chose exploration, change, and, most of all, the idea that the blues was an expression of the times.

In this, they were akin to the great explorers in the jazz scene.

- Al Handa

May 2014

BLUES AND RAP MUSIC

I planned to include a 2014 essay on Rap and Blues from the archives but realized that it would be better to write a new piece which should run later this month or in February.

Rap and Blues are very different genres on the surface, but from a musical standpoint, the two, during their early stages, are very similar in structure. Both started as improvised street poetry/lyrics sung over a beat or "vamp."

The main reason that old blues records from the 20s-30s seem like short songs with set arrangements was due to the limitations of the recording technology at the time. In reality, most blues songs were performed live as longer improvisational pieces with lyrics that covered a wide range of subjects and were made up on the spot for a particular audience.

Blues artists in that era were as heavily criticized as modern Rap artists were, and the mainstream church openly characterized the blues as "Devil's Music" played by musicians on a fast track to Hell.

The history of Blues was bowdlerized in the 60s, and the audience became predominantly white for various reasons. As a result, the subject matter of the lyrics narrowed. Still, in the 20s, nothing was out of bounds and included hundreds of topics, including Gay and lesbian themes, politics, and historical events.

The bluesmen lived tumultuous lives that paralleled Gangsta Culture and would be viewed similarly now.

The subject will be covered in a series, as it's a complex subject worth examining in detail.

AFRICAN MUSIC

Americans can be provincial about their Music and assume it's the only big thing in the world, but there are stars in other countries that can fill a stadium and create Music that even influences artists here.

The rest of the world does love rock and roll and welcomes those acts, but it can inadvertently come off as America spreading its modern culture and not what it is, which is that people in other countries are often more open-minded about Music.

For example, one of my favorite genres is African Music, and my group, Handa-McGraw International, does some. In fact, one of our numbers that get the most streams is "Madagascar Summer," a guitar and percussion piece that stems from my admiration for D'Gary, a singer and guitarist from Madagascar.

One of the essays coming up in the future is a survey of African Music that focuses on guitar. I might do that one in parts, as there are many regional differences.

- Al HANDA

deltasnake@yahoo.com

SAMPLE EPISODE: HOW TO FIND THE PERFECT EXPERT FOR ALL OCCASIONS!

One of the critical decisions that we all must make to survive the end of civilization is choosing the right experts to guide us in such dark times, and indeed, for many, to be told how and what to think!

To the savvy doomsday shopper, the best expert is the one who will validate your cherished prejudices and ego at a fair price.

The right sage will express your sentiments in the best and most persuasive way, like finding the perfect greeting card or flipping someone off while in a moving vehicle.

The right expert opinion, backed by impressive credentials, will add lots of power and credibility to even the most fallacious or silly assertions, amaze the gullible, or pique the interest of those who'd otherwise ignore your banal statements.

That isn’t the same thing as hiring a publicist. No matter how smooth or adroit the prepared statement, people will still know it’s still you talking. You’re renting the expert’s credibility, not merely dressing up your ignorance or self-interest.

It's not wise to promiscuously trust any old expert. In past eras, such esteemed final arbiters in the search for wisdom have asserted that the world is flat, that sicknesses can be healed by the application blood-sucking leeches, bathing more than once a year causes colds, garlic repels vampire attacks, and that men are more intelligent than women.

In fairness, it should be noted that for the right sum of money, one can still engage the services of a distinguished advocate, lawyer, or politician who'll verify with a straight face that the previously listed assertions hold the fragrant force of truth even in the face of widespread skepticism or derision by the general public.

It's never been easy to know if an expert is competent or not, but thanks to the advent of that vigorous organ of truth, the Internet, the innovation of having no actual standards for the profession of expert opinion has produced a safe free market environment for those shopping for an expert.

Requiring a valid email address from a free account weeds out 99.999% of fraudulent and incompetent experts, leaving only 1,345,000 fakes, which is a very manageable number.

Freed from the tyranny of having to provide documentation of qualifications and allowing free market forces to police the supply of pundits, the Internet has fostered an abundance of professional opinion makers to fit any need or buttress even the weakest argument.

After all, nobody hires an expert to prove them wrong, and that creates downward pressure on rates. The free market is your friend.

One of the most popular reasons to hire an unassailable crackerjack of data is, of course, to cancel out the prosecution's expert in a murder trial. Since you could very well find yourself in such a situation when society breaks down, it's handy to know how the process works.

In a nutshell, two experts with an opposite opinion will generally cancel each other out in the eyes of a jury unless there's overwhelming physical evidence that makes the defendant look guilty as hell.

Before you think that we at the Boogie Underground are saying that as if it were a bad thing, remember that the silver lining in such a case is that in the chaotic, lawless atmosphere of dystopian anarchy, there'll be no need for courts, and stuff like that.

One might think that in a world without Cable TV News, Sports Talk Radio, or even nutrition when everyone is fighting over the last cans of beans, but in such dark times, The Boogie Underground assures you that the need will be greater, not less.

There are two things that'll still be necessary in a world without food, water, or electricity, and those are knowing who to blame for the mess and what religion promises the best comfort in the afterlife after you starve to death.

A cynic might suggest that a first-rate religion can provide both, but we at the Think-tank know that nuclear mushroom clouds and food riots won't covert atheists, who, of course, will be blaming God.

In spite of past errors in judgment and belief in nonsense labeled as science, experts have led us out of the stone age and, for the right price, will do so again.

Don't hesitate to contact the Boogie Underground Think Tank for our list of affordable services ranging from expert testimony to making outrageously false statements at rates cheaper than any lawyer.

Here's an update on each of my Vella books:

The Quitters

https://www.amazon.com/kindle-vella/story/B09PC3L6PC

It's the first book, and after ten months, it's finally developing an audience, and the stats are trending upward this month. I think it's due to the blog and the new book/music video short format I'm using for its promotion. I’ve moved the plot lines away from potentially over technical descriptions of playing live to more emphasis on the personalities and in particular, the main character Nym. Also, some of the romance elements are now coming into play.

It's at 31 episodes, though as an ebook, we're talking maybe 15 traditional-length chapters. I'm keeping the format episodic and short, kind of like a weekly TV show, which works for Vella but will need to be restructured for the ebook.

I, Ivy

https://www.amazon.com/kindle-vella/story/B0B3RCBT4D

The story got off to a decent start, but I didn't notice that as it's obvious now that the daily totals on the Vella dashboard can differ or not jibe with the monthly or overall total, which have to be accurate as those numbers determine the royalty and bonus payouts. I'll be paying more attention to this one in November, as it’s being read more than I thought. The latest chapter, Ivy’s view of the efforts by a human to give her a pill should strike a familiar chord.

The Forbidden Lost Gospels Of Murgatroyde

https://www.amazon.com/kindle-vella/story/B0BJ2TW4P1

This is a new one, though it'll be the most familiar to blog readers. I'll be changing the format of the blog in November, and putting the Lost Gospels here will allow me to fully expand that line of humor and satire in a way that simply being a blog feature doesn't permit.

The Boogie Underground Think Tank: How To Survive The End Of Civilization

https://www.amazon.com/kindle-vella/story/B0BG6LNXTG

This one is a revival of an old humor column I ran in my old "Delta Snake Blues News" publication in the 90s and 2000s. The slant is about survival in the upcoming hard times, but it really will be topical and cover subjects that are offbeat but relevant. The next one coming in a few days will be "How To Shop For The Perfect Expert," which obviously will be a humorous commentary on the use of experts in general.

The Adventures Of Queen Khleopahtra: Ruler Of Egypt, Time Traveler, and Literary Detective

https://www.amazon.com/kindle-vella/story/B0BJC122G7

This is another new one and will be a fun fusion of the old "Peabody and Sherman" cartoon, which was about a time-traveling dog and boy, Robert Graves' often satirical take on history, and the old "Fractured Fairy Tales" cartoon that used to be featured on the "Rocky And Bullwinkle Show."

I chose Khleopahtra as the main character because it will offer the widest range of literary situations to explore, and I happened to have a cool drawing of her and liked the idea of expanding the character. After reading the first episode, you'll agree that the possibilities are endless.

In the latest episodes, we meet Achilles and the poet Homer, who will become recurring characters!

- Al Handa

October 2022

ontheroadwithalandiivy@yahoo.com

The ebook “On The Road With Al & Ivy: The Anthology Volume 1 2016-2018 is now on Kindle Unlimited!

I’ll run free promotions later this month, but members can read it for free now.

I Can Make It To Christmas by Mark McGraw (of Handa-McGraw International). F IPlease check out and listen to Mark McGraw’s Christmas single from his album on Bandcamp,Can

Make It To Christmas by Mark McGraw (of Handa-McGraw Intern

https://markmcgraw.bandcamp.com/album/songs-from-southern-pacific-spur-46

Please check out and listen to my music on Spotify, YouTube, Apple Music and other music sites. Please add any cuts you like to your playlists!

Saturday, December 3, 2022

The Delta Snake Review - A Music And Arts Blog - Dec. 3, 2022

THREE REVIEWS FROM THE DELTA SNAKE ARCHIVES: VOL. ONE

NOTE: VOL. 2 COMING SOON. THIS ISSUE WILL HAVE THAT LINK WHEN ITS LIVE.

Wednesday, July 2, 2014 (Revised Dec. 3, 2022)

(Model: Klaudia)

No. 1: Are American-made guitars really better?

As a general rule, American-made guitars, particularly electrics, are better made and of higher quality (There are important exceptions, but for the purposes of this essay, we'll stick to the generality).

The reason isn't that Americans are better at making guitars. It's about cost.

It's because America uses foreign factories to make the lower-priced economy models. When making first-line guitars for their own market, countries like Japan generally make guitars that are as good as American ones.

One example is Stevie Ray Vaughn. He played some Japanese Stratocasters before signing an endorsement deal with Fender. The main reason was that Fender wasn't producing guitars in the United States for about a decade or so. It was after the infamous "CBS era" when that company bought Fender in the early 70s.

The CBS-era guitars were criticized for various quality issues. For example, players and critics characterized the sound of the Telecaster back pickups as an "ice pick" tone. In lay terms, a sound that's like a flat-sounding, high-pitched tone similar to, perhaps, a buzzer or trumpet blast. That's the best way I can describe it.

In 2023, those complaints about the CBS era have faded away, and those 70s models have become vintage classics with a sound no modern version can duplicate (and priced accordingly).

During the 80s, Gibson was owned by a Norlin company, and that era was also considered a low point.

During that era, Japanese companies like Tokai, Burney, and Ibanez flooded the market with lower-cost, high-quality (and low-quality) copies of Gibsons and Fenders, the best examples of which have become collector's items today.

That was known as the "lawsuit era," where overseas companies had to stop copying the Gibson headstock. It's since become an era that's developed a whole set of myths, where every Japanese guitar made then was superior and of legendary quality.

I won't go into it here, as it's a subject that really should be discussed in a separate blog as it's a long story in itself.

…quality costs…

The fact is that a guitar made overseas will be as good as the contractor/customer wants it to be. This is because the guitars are manufactured to a particular specification and budget, not because somebody wants to make an inferior guitar.

All things being equal in terms of materials and craftsmanship, one of the primary reasons an American guitar is more expensive is labor cost.

One good example was a particular limited-edition budget guitar line Gibson came out with several years ago at $500 each. The guitars were crude, the paint job cheaply applied, the fretboard was baked maple instead of Rosewood, and the only sign that it was a real Gibson was that each had a single stock pickup and the distinctive headstock shape Gibson has patented.

You could've removed that stock pickup and put it in a Korean-made Epiphone of the same body shape, and you would have had a better guitar for $200 less (or more).

It was funny reading the various reviews for that line of Gibson guitars. The reviewers stressed the simplicity, that it was for players, not collectors, and that it was a Gibson. In other words, they walked a fine line between telling the truth and not saying something that would cause Gibson to pull ads from their pubs.

The guitar forums were more entertaining. The opinions varied between those who were happy to have a Gibson at a low price, those who saw that if it could be had cheaper (like when Gibson reduced the price to 300) that it wasn't a bad "fun" guitar and those who brutally pointed out that the production shortcuts produced a guitar that was a worse value than their cheaper Epiphone line.

I should add that I briefly owned one at the 300.00 price but gratefully took advantage of the store's 30-day return policy. Nowadays, you can get a decent guitar with tone controls, two pickups for that amount, and an excellent one at 500.00.

… Fender's big gamble…

Fender was one of the first major American companies, at least the main one that most American guitar players cared about, which was willing to put out a foreign-made guitar with its logo.

Their cheaper Squier line was already manufactured overseas, but around the 90s, the first Mexican-made fenders appeared. Those guitars were cheaply made and didn't sound particularly good. However, the price was certainly right, particularly for those who knew how to upgrade a guitar.

There was some of the usual contempt from some in the guitar community, but Fender continually improved the process and created several lower-line Fenders and Squires that all but the most hardline have accepted as exceptional values in each price range. They helped make the mid-range price market competitive with models that cost more.

Fender could do this because its customers have a different culture than Gibson owners. Fenders are intended to be affordable quality made assembly-line guitars, screwed and bolted together, allowing users to mix-and-match parts.

…on the Gibson side…

The Gibson culture values a guitar that is a top-quality American guitar with no equals. Of course, companies like PRS and Fender would dispute that, but there's no denying that Gibsons are like Harleys. It doesn't have to be better; the name has that much cachet in the United States.

Gibson kept their economy lines separate, with Epiphone being the leading brand, which is ironic, as that company was a major competitor with Gibson, particularly in the hollow body guitar lines. Gibson is American-made (though not always 100% US parts), and the Epiphone line varies from high-end products made by Japanese and Korean manufacturers to lower-end models made in China and Indonesia.

…in the 60s…

In the 60s, you could say that a Japanese-made guitar (for export) was inferior to an American one. However, most of those companies didn't try to be better, as the idea was to capture the low-end market (though many of those models are now worth over a grand in the vintage market).

As Japanese guitar makers got better, they got more expensive. So the next generation came from Korea, and the usual denigration began again.

…now to China…

The ironic thing is when production shifted to China and Indonesia, guitar players began to value Japanese and Korean guitars as if those were the good old days, and the perception of Japanese craftsmanship rose even higher.

But like I said, when these countries decide to build a good guitar, they're certainly capable of it. One good example is jazz great George Benson's Ibanez, who also makes guitars that are favored by the metal crowd.

…the American Way…

America is a more affluent country than most, so we have strange ideas about guitars and guitar-making. Most American guitar players seem to assume a certain superiority in American craftsmanship, and our attitude that a $400 guitar is only adequate for beginners would probably make many musicians worldwide roll their eyes.

We're one of the few cultures that think if you buy a guitar at a certain price, it will make you that level of good, even if some of the most legendary music England and America ever produced was recorded using cheap or catalog quality instruments.

The fact is the world can make instruments just fine, thank you.

Any good flamenco guitarist will want one made in Spain. There are probably plenty of good luthiers in the United States that can make a decent flamenco guitar, but if they opened up shop in Spain, they'd find that there are centuries of subtleties in the craftsmanship that they don't know.

Guitarists who look down on Chinese guitar makers forget that the Japanese had the same learning curve in the 60s, and they are making excellent guitars now.

The Chinese now make nice guitars, which shouldn't be surprising, given that their culture made vases centuries ago that are now worth millions. A markup that would turn any red-blooded American capitalist green with envy and make computer software makers nod their heads in approval.

The primary value of an American guitar is that it's made better with finer materials. If you gave the same budget and materials to a Japanese maker, I'm sure most guitar players these days would admit that they would come out with an instrument that is just as good and cheaper to boot.

One of the reasons the Asian guitar companies haven't tried to take on Gibson is that, as a rule, they don't want to. The idea that the average American wants to pay over $2000 for a first-line guitar is a philosophy that would put most guitar makers out of business fast. The meat of the industry is in the 300 to 1000 range.

…purity…

Plus, not all Gibsons are 100% American anymore. Some of their acoustic line was made in Canada, where good quality wood is still cheap. I'm sure the reasons why a Canadian-made guitar seems perfectly fine with the Gibson crowd run the garment from the apparent quality to stereotypes about Asian factories (compared to ones in the Western Hemisphere).

…the Les Paul…

For example, aspiring Gibson Les Paul owners can check out opinions about the guitar in the various guitar forums about that type, not just the ones dealing with or hosted by Gibson.

A Gibson Les Paul isn't a complicated guitar to make. In fact, except for the fact that the neck is glued on and the top layer requires some shaping, it's as simple as any Fender, which is why it's one of the most imitated and counterfeited guitars in the world.

Many players say that if you find a Les Paul copy made with the same craftsmanship and materials and stick Gibson pickups in it, you probably will have a guitar that's as good as Gibson makes. Plus, more than a few Gibson owners don't like the stock pickups either and replace those as soon as possible.

That's my opinion; I'm only as right or wrong as the next guy. I have owned Les Pauls and liked some, hated others.

…craftsmanship…

Craftsmanship does count. A lower-line Epiphone copy that is well made can play better than a Gibson made by a worker who might've been at less than top efficiency that day or passed and approved by a careless QA inspector. That goes for guitars as much as tables or anything made of wood. Even with a lot of the CNC-made guitars, care in the assembly and manufacturer is a factor.

My point of view in guitar reviews is that whether it was American-made is only one of the factors. However, it's undoubtedly important, as there's no denying that an American guitar has an aura about it that can't always be quantified.

As a matter of disclosure, I own some American-made instruments at this writing. To be exact, two electric guitars, a 12-string, and a banjo. The banjo was made in the 30s, but the other two are modern American electric guitars (Note: my instrument lineup is different in 2023).

…in conclusion…

One recent development is the proliferation of super cheap guitars, mainly from China, that can start as low as one hundred dollars (or even below). For that sum, you can get a replica of any classic model like a Les Paul, Telecaster, or Strat.

That's not surprising. When mainstream guitars get too expensive, that leaves a big opening for those who make economy guitars. As US manufacturers moved from country to country to find cheap labor, they left behind subcontractors with equipment and guitar-making expertise who needed a new market.

Those cheap Chinese guitars being reviewed and hawked on YouTube were probably made by the same people who made lower-line Epiphones, Gretsch, or Squiers before the manufacturing moved to Indonesia. This is a win-win situation as there will always be players who want a reasonably priced guitar, to own more than one, or to have a cheap platform for upgrades to create a dream guitar.

My opinion on buying an American guitar is that if it gives you what you want, it's worth it. Paying more because it was American-made certainly is a valid reason, but I wouldn't pay more simply because it's an American guitar.

Paying 200 or 300 more because a guitar is American-made is patriotic; paying a thousand or more is just a crass exercise in capitalism.

Guitar Review: 2016 Fender MIM Standard Telecaster (review and essay - Revised in 2022)

I remember my first Telecaster, purchased from a friend for its new price, 250.00. It was a 1971 CBS-era Standard with fretwork done and a rewound front pickup. The back pickup produced a typical CBS-era ice pick sound, but that wasn't a concern as I preferred to use the front pickup with the treble cranked up (which has been my preference since then).

It wasn't my first guitar, which was an old Gold top Les Paul that I hated, but it was the one that created a connection that lasted 20 years, and to this day, my primary guitar is always a telecaster. Of course, that could change if Gibson ever creates an affordable SG with a shorter scale that won't neck dive. But even then, a tele would always be kept on hand.

One of the things guitar shop salesmen said back then (and was described in reviews) was that the Fender Telecaster was the cheapest "pro-level guitar" you could buy. For 250.00, a musician had a "serious" gig-quality instrument.

That wasn't entirely true. With many underpowered PA systems, a big professional amp was also necessary back then, but the psychological effect was real. If you played a Fender, you had graduated from playing with toys.

Whether a Fender was American made wasn't as big an issue as it is now. The main controversy was whether CBS buying the company was good, and there was plenty of criticism of the stock pickups, neck quality, and various QA issues. All of which have been subject to revisionism in today's vintage-loving age.

There was a short period when the only new Fenders available were made in Japan, and those are esteemed today as excellent values even at collector prices. That's because Fender was never viewed as a premium product by most of its customers, and where it was made was a secondary issue for a small minority.

Leo Fender designed the Telecaster to be a cheap appliance guitar that would make it possible for the masses to own a decent instrument. The parts were standardized, designed to be easily replaced to keep the guitar operational for a lifetime, and, just as importantly, could be easily repaired or modified by its owner.

I'm sure even the first Ford Model T cars were constantly tinkered with due to the ingrained restlessness of the American character. However, with the electric guitar, that urge to modify it didn't truly become possible until a third-party parts market emerged.

Fender moved the guitar away from the concept of a crafted piece that reflected a central artistic philosophy (or price range, of course) and into the realm of industrial design and mass production, customizable to even the smallest whim of the customer.

The Telecaster is perceived differently after a few decades. One remarkable thing is that the Fender guitars that were designed to be more expensive models, like the Jazzmaster and Jaguar, are now considered esoteric. Those two were also promoted as equal to the later Stratocaster model, which was to be the next big thing.

It's been said that the true test in the marketplace is survival, and the Tele has certainly met that test. It's no longer seen as an entry-level guitar for the pro market, which is reflected in the current price of the American-made version. Even if it still costs less than a Gibson or a PRS, it's not a cheap guitar anymore.

That is unless you buy one of the Mexican or Asian-made models. Then a telecaster can be had for a couple of hundred bucks, and even cheaper if you buy an off-brand.

There was a lot of debate when the first Mexican Fenders came out. Part of it was a concern (and criticism) about quality, but a lot of it was the perception that it diluted the brand. But, in retrospect, it was a great move. It kept the price of a Fender down and helped boost the third-party parts industry, keeping it an affordable guitar that could be played as-is or modified into the perfect vision, however long that took.

Which brings up the question, what is a genuine telecaster?

That was an easy question back in the early days, and now, after over 60 years, it's still clear that if it looks like a tele, it is one. People can argue what it takes or costs to create a "good" one, but there's no doubt what one is. In my case, if it has an alder body and a maple neck, then it's a real tele.

The Internet and the vintage market (or the nostalgia market, to be exact) have created a sense that cost is a factor, which is certainly true to an extent. There is a difference between a good wine and a cheap bottle of Night Train, which holds true for guitars. There is undoubtedly a qualitative difference in materials and construction in the various price ranges.

Whether that truly makes one guitar sound better than another is open to debate, and if the discussion boards on the Internet are any indication, it always will be. We're talking about sound, and that's as individual a thing as wine tasting.

The pleasure will always be a mix of cost, packaging, and mojo. If a person perceives that a thousand-dollar guitar is better than a six-hundred-dollar version, it will sound better. That's a scientific fact, at least how it applies to that person.

If you ask a bunch of telecaster lovers what the perfect one is, there'll be an endless variety of answers.

The one thing that's hard to change is the human notion that money denotes quality. Many Fender guitar owners will say that the headstock means nothing and that the guitar itself and how it sounds and plays are what counts.

Like most concepts, it's true when it is true and not when it isn't. There'll always be a perception that American-made Fenders are superior to Mexican or Asian versions.

I've owned American-made teles, the best being a '66 Esquire and a 2013 Standard. There was a 2010 American Special and a 1976 Standard modified with a B Bender that I never could connect with, and being American-made didn't make any difference.

The 2016 Fender MIM Standard Telecaster reviewed here is better than another tele I own, a Squier affinity, but not because it has better components or a better finish.

The fact is, both are good players that are a pleasure to play. However, I like the front pickup of the MIM Standard a lot more, and that's important because, as I've said earlier, that's the one that's used (by me) the most.

I went into the Guitar Center to try out the slightly cheaper Modern Player Nashville style tele with the Strat pickup in the middle position, but I didn't like the feel. There happened to be a used 2016 MIM Standard in the rack, and after playing it, I couldn't put it down. That it was cheaper sealed the deal.

A bargain price has a lot of mojo in the Fender world.

I once said in an earlier review that decades of existence had made the notion that there is a definitive or "traditional" telecaster sound almost meaningless, and it's true here.

I bought this Standard because it had a great sound with various levels of gain, and a great front pickup, so it's an excellent complement to my Affinity, which has a great middle (both pickups) sound (but a so so neck pup).

I did due diligence and checked the back pickup, which with the stock ceramic, had a nice chimey tone, which is the most usable sound in my case. There's some twang and spank there, but whether it's sufficient for country or chicken picking is a question for a different kind of player.

It has a nice clean tone and sounds loud and musically clear unamplified, which I like in a tele. It's a bit heavy, but that's not an issue for a sit-down player who'll mainly use it to record.

I was able to test it on the same amp model it would be played on at home, so that was a real help in determining how it'd sound. It's fun to try out a new guitar on a high-end Marshall or Fender twin, but always try to play on an amp similar to the home unit.

What will make this Tele good for you depends on what will music will be played on it. The prevailing wisdom is that the stock ceramic pickups here are best for higher gain sounds in blues and rock and should be replaced with alnico-type pickups for a more traditional sound (whatever that means).

The main thing was that I could get the front pickup sound that seems to come out of any telecaster I've owned when playing blues. There are other sounds, of course, but that one has to be there. If a ceramic pup does the job, then there's no need to replace it with alnico.

I'll be using this Tele to play blues, alternative rock, and electric fingerpicking pieces, and so far, so good.

Another question is if a MIM Standard is worth six hundred dollars new when a used American version can be had for around the same price.

Again, that's a yes or no...if that American Tele sounds better, yes, but one can't know that until one comes along at that price range. On the other hand, if having an American Tele is important from an emotional point of view, then it's better to wait for one.

Owning a guitar is all about fun and pleasure, what dreams it gives you, and so yes, what's on the headstock can be important. It's your money.

I got this one for 370.00, in new-like condition and fully returnable. Since I was in the market for a mid-priced tele, it was perfect. However, I'd have passed on it at even 200.00 if I didn't like it. Any dollar spent on something you don't like is a wasted dollar on a guitar that won't be played.

That's empirical wisdom from a guy who suffered from severe GAS when younger.

The most important piece of advice from most Fender owners is that your ears are the essential way to judge a guitar. It's also an excellent idea to like the stock guitar being played and not what you think it'll sound like after modifying it.

The often vocal minority of players who think all stock parts are crap that this or that guitar will need this or that change to be good, are sometimes right, but not often enough to bet a few hundred dollars on.

This 2016 MIM Fender Standard Telecaster isn't the same as my first; in many ways, it's better. I like the slimmer modern necks with better frets, and the slightly hotter pickups give me the same sound that rewinding produced back then. The fit and finish are better, though I think that's more of an aesthetic judgment. My '71 got pretty beat up, and I didn't notice any sound quality drop-off.

The beauty of a telecaster is that the right one gives you the sound in your head. I've owned some nice ones in the past, including that great '66 Esquire, and while there's wistful regret at their loss, thanks to Fender consistency, I've never lost the sound. You'll find that after all is said and done, telecasters are more similar than different.

Given how this one has sounded so far, I'd have passed on the Modern Player and spent the extra hundred on this one. That I got it cheaper just confirmed it was destiny.

Note: I did make some practice recordings with that original '71 Tele back in the 80s that were digitized and put on my Boogie Underground Media channel on YouTube. The transfer from analog is a little primitive, but check those out if you'd like to hear how that Tele sounded. It was mainly the front pickup, treble cranked, with high gain on a nice little Peavey amp.

The cuts are Internationals Rock The Blues (you should be able to tell which parts are done by Tele), VJ Hook, Rocking Juke Joint Shuffle, Night Train, and Texas Jook Blues.

Specs (as stated on Internet:

Body:

Body Type: Not Specified

Cutaway: Single Cutaway

Top Wood: Not Specified

Body Wood Back and Sides: Alder

Body Bracing Pattern: Not Specified

Body Finish: Gloss

Orientation: Right Handed

Neck:

Neck Shape: C modern

Nut Width: 1.65 in. (42 mm)

Fretboard: Maple

Neck Wood: Maple

Scale Length: 25.5"

Number of Frets: 21

Neck Finish: Satin

Other:

Headstock Overlay: Not Specified

Tuning Machines: Die-cast sealed

Bridge: Not Specified

Saddle and Nut: Not Specified

Number of Strings: 6 String

Case: Not Specified

Accessories Included: Not Specified

Origin: Mexico

(Model: Klaudia)

A MUSIC LOVERS CONFESSION: I LOVE “BAD” MUSIC

Friends who know me well know that a significant part of my collection is made up of what music others call bad, stupid, in bad taste, crass attempts by an artist to cash in on the latest trend, or a deliberate attempt to offend or shock.

I think a more accurate term would be "music you either love or hate."

For example, my latest acquisition, "Bombay Disco: Disco Hits From Hindi Films 1979-1985," is a bizarre mix of Indian percussion pounding out disco rhythms, high-pitched Indian singing, and a riot of sitars, cheap electric guitars, exotic string arrangements, and from what I could tell, any sound a person could identify as being from India.

Keep in mind; I don't buy these kinds of CDs indiscriminately. However, I first listened to the samples in the store (yes, I still go to record stores) and found it to my liking. Then, as I purchased the disc, the young guy at the counter nodded and said, "oh yeah, I got to check that one out too."

It's that empathetic understanding by two jaded music fans who heard it all and who have abandoned ordinary norms of taste and now wallow in the clearance bins stocked with abandoned, discredited, or passé music to feel the thrill of discovery again.

The best way to describe it is that it was an attempt by the Indian film industry to duplicate the success of Saturday Night Fever, a disco classic in its R-rated version, and a sappy love story with a good soundtrack in its cleaned-up version.

Of course, India being India, they chose the latter. This is understandable, considering that they equate an on-screen kiss as tantamount to butt-pounding jokes on South Park.

The disc is full of everything I like about hard-charging Hindi music. Exotic rhythms, punchy bass, great Indian-style vocals, and music with an atmosphere that hints at the sleaziness of a dive strip bar in San Francisco's North Beach area.

It's probably more like a merchant Marine sailor's view of India since the general atmosphere of a Hindi film is more like an old Abba video on MTV.

Does the music have a cool trashy aura, or am I just putting it there?

I don't get hung up on such questions; it's good enough that my friends roll their eyes when the CD is played. But don't get me wrong, I didn't buy it purely for shock effect; it's ultra-cool music for anyone wanting to hear something out of the mainstream.

These types of records aren't unusual. In the 60s, when psychedelic music was at its peak in the Western world, it didn't exist in a vacuum. Musicians from countries as far away as Nigeria did psychedelic music too, often adding it to the funk they had already picked up from James Brown.

Even Brazil in the 60s had a psychedelic pop movement, which was critically acclaimed, and thus out of the scope of this blog entry.

I wasn't always like that as a music collector. But, it was after playing in a punk band that forever changed my ear for music. Suddenly, harshly dissonant sounds started to seem sweet sounding or more "real."

Before Punk, I didn't understand the free jazz movement of the 60s and thought John Coltrane had made a horrible mistake recording the infamous Ascension album. Now the music makes perfect sense, and I see it as one of his greatest works.

Also, my view of audience acceptance changed. Before our first gig, the leader of our band informed us that the club owner had advised him that since Punk was still very new and they didn't know what was good or bad, we would be asked to come back if we either got loud cheers or provoked extreme hatred and boos from the crowd.

In other words, don't be boring. I won't go into all the details of what we did in our 20-minute debut to be booked again; suffice it to say, I would never do any of it again at any polite dinner party.

For one thing, most of it was staged and assisted by shills in the audience, which shocked me initially, but I later learned it was common practice by the other bands at the club. In addition, I later became a pretty good shill myself for bands that we were friends with and could put on a convincing show of wanting to assault the lead singer for his insults and shoving me off my chair before the bouncers dragged me out (and let me back in through the side door).

It was the entertainment business and all in good fun.

But that ended my usual habit of buying the latest James Taylor record or even the Stones or Led Zeppelin. In fact, I became reluctant to buy any critically acclaimed or popular record.

Instead, I began to seek it all out: avant-garde, electronic, Punk, and especially ethnic music.

Like most such impulses, that settled down to a specific taste, bad music.

The technical term is "so bad that it's good" or "good-bad" music, and there's always some element of humor, however dark or esoteric.

One of the pioneers in bad taste (in music) was Dr. Demento, whose radio show is probably most remembered for launching the career of Wierd Al Yankovic. It introduced the listener to a host of classic cuts like Fish Heads, Kinko The Clown, and other cuts with a spark of genius and humor to the right set of ears.

There is such a thing as bad music; I mean awful music. Probably the classic of that genre was the Bee Gees and Peter Frampton's version of the Beatle's Sgt. Pepper movie soundtrack. It's probably the only movie I ever went to where people started booing.

Most "good-bad" music can't be created by design. Instead, the singer or artist has to have the enthusiasm of someone attempting a piece of music that's either thoroughly out of their depth or coming from incredibly bad taste, energized by the conviction that it's an actual piece of art.

One of my favorites is the Butthole Surfers' "Lady Sniff, a nearly atonal mix of pre-grunge guitar, a lousy attempt at sounding like a cowboy singer, and an assortment of realistic sounds like farts, vomiting, sounds and strange exclamations that have distant roots in redneck vocabulary.

It was as ingeniously as an old Spike Jones number, and it's become the best song that the group ever did that very few people hear.

My other favorite subgenre of bad is what seems like lousy cover numbers on paper but actually is good. But, again, it just can't be as bad as a karaoke backing track. It has to have the passion of an artist or group who thinks they're doing a very cool version of the song or are at least doing their best to shut the producer up by doing it as quickly as possible but have too much talent to do it truly bad.

The jazz great Ella Fitzgerald probably did one of the stone classics of bad when she did a big band version of Cream's Sunshine Of Your Love. Her piano version was merely bad, just another typical attempt by many artists of the time to tap into the 60s youth market.

But the single version was something else. With a full band blasting out the guitar riff, Ella became transcendent.

Many people would bring up Frank Zappa in a discussion like this, but he's in a different category. His music was pure genius and satire, disguised by obnoxious song titles.

One of the classics is Lou Reed's "Metal Machine Music," which to most ears was nearly an hour of what sounded like scraping metal. Most understand that he did that to get out of this RCA contract, and it was a record that turned off even many of his fans.

Ironically only a few years later, copies of that record were fetching $50 apiece, which is the ultimate tribute that a record buyer can bestow on a piece of music that wasn't intended to be liked.

I've only covered a few examples. Avant-garde classical would require a blog entry of its own, and most performance art tries to be crummy and shocking, which violates the essential rule of good-bad music: it can't be your intent to be bad.

Good-Bad music is an aesthetic, a specific taste, and it must manifest a genius and humor that wasn't the piece's intent.

It's like any other form of music. You combine the elements, and what comes out of the mix is unpredictable. It could turn into a hit song, bore people, or be misunderstood until the right people hear it.

Sometimes it takes time, but genius persists until eager bottom-feeders like me discover it.

-Al Handa