This posting from the Slowhand Listserve was an excellent example of the expertise of long-time contributor, DeltaNick. Thank you DN ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 05:11:14 -0400 From: "DeltaNick" Subject: [Slowhand] A Civil Debate, Part 1 To: "Slowhand Digest" Jason, In general, I disagree with your post (RE: Slowhand Digest, Vol 7, Issue 264), but let me state up front that you make some great points. I agree with several of them and can appreciate some of the others. I would have responded sooner, but I was out of town for the 4th of July weekend. What's significant here, however, is that you have responded intelligently and in a spirit of civility. I think this should happen more frequently on the Slowhand Digest. >> Are you forgetting that the first period lasted only from 1966 to, at best, 1971. That's only six years, and it's probably really closer to five. << First of all, I would list Eric Clapton's initial "great guitar" period as 1963-1970, possibly until 1971, when EC went into self-imposed hibernation and heroin-induced stupor. I count nine years, if you include 1971, or eight through 1970. This period includes Clapton's membership in the Roosters, Casey Jones & The Engineers, the Yardbirds, John Mayall And The Bluesbreakers, Eric Clapton And The Powerhouse, Cream, Blind Faith, Delaney & Bonnie And Friends With Eric Clapton, Derek And The Dominoes, and even his first solo album. In any case, this 8- or 9-year period is twice as long with what I consider to be his second "great guitar" period of approximately 4 years: late 1992 through early 1996. Why 1963? "When he was 15 his parents bought him an acoustic guitar, after he had been impressed by an album of songs by Big Bill Broonzy. But he gave up attempting to play anything for two years" (Chris Welch, "Eric Clapton: King Of The Blues Guitar," "Melody Maker," 13 October 1973). "The story of Clapton the musician begins quite late in his life. Whereas many will claim they began their careers by beating time with toothbrushes at eighteen months, Eric did not start to play guitar seriously until he was 17" (Chris Welch, "Eric Clapton: King Of The Blues Guitar," "Melody Maker," 13 October 1973). The above two quotes show that EC tried playing guitar around 1960. But after a while, he gave it up because he felt that he was getting nowhere. It seems that he picked it up again in 1962, perhaps after having discovered Robert Johnson. This time, it seemed to come naturally, very naturally, and his talent grew immeasurably. By January 1963, he was in a band called the Roosters, playing songs such as "Hideaway." Both Tom McGuinness, who later went on to Manfred Mann and the Blues Band, and Ben Palmer, who played in Eric Clapton & The Powerhouse and became Cream's road manager, realized that he was already a damn good player at this time. "McGuinness first set eyes on Clapton on 2 January 1963. The former, a proficient musician himself, was quickly aware that 'technically, Eric was superior' -- a view Clapton endorsed -- though 'nothing yet like the later legend'" (Sandford, Clapton: Edge Of Darkness, p. 28). [R]ecalls Ben Palmer. "He joined the band there and then. He was so good, obviously a natural, we didn't even have to discuss it." . Most important, though, were the nights on which he could hone his guitar playing with critical colleagues in the band and audiences who were talking about Clapton's exceptional verve . "It was immediately obvious that he was something that none of the rest of us were," says Ben Palmer. "And he had a fluency and a command that seemed endless. The telling factor was that he didn't mind taking solos, which people of our standard often did because we weren't up to it, I noticed immediately with Eric ... give him a solo and he didn't care how long you let him play. He'd go on and on ... until sometimes you'd have to stop him, to bring the singer back in. I knew from the very first that he was quite different from the rest of us in the Roosters. Coherent, lucid, fresh, powerful -- and always building. He had a sense of dynamics quite remarkable for someone of his age." He was also intensely serious about his playing, negotiating the repertoire with Palmer and McGuinness, the nominal leaders (Ray Coleman, Clapton! pp. 18, 20). --------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 05:12:01 -0400 From: "DeltaNick" Subject: [Slowhand] A Civil Debate, Part 2 To: "Slowhand Digest" In October 1963, having developed quite a reputation as a guitarist, Clapton joined the Yardbirds to replace original member, Anthony "Top" Topham. We have but one recording from 1963: "Sonny Boy Williamson & The Yardbirds," on which Clapton plays tentatively, probably in awe of Williamson, and damn nervous from the paces Williamson had put them through in rehearsal. Furthermore, the live gig was nothing like the rehearsal. What I hear on this record is a sensitivity and emotional intimacy that no other rock generation guitarist had ever exhibited at this point in time, except for, maybe, American guitarist Mike Bloomfield. One can also hear Clapton's emergent solo architecture. And let's not forget that several of his Yardbirds solos in 1964 were truly advanced: on the cutting edge. They also gave a real indication of the way Eric Clapton was going: "I Ain't Got You," "A Certain Girl," "Good Morning Little Schoolgirl," and "Got To Hurry." There's some pretty damn fine guitar playing on these, and we can hear Clapton maturing, "Slowhand" already in the process of revolutionizing the electric guitar, wowing folks. He wowed some enough to be invited to play on an Otis Spann album, along with Muddy Waters, when he was only 19. For those who don't know, Spann was Muddy Waters' legendary piano player, and his half-brother or cousin. The session took place on 4 May 1964, while Clapton was a member of the Yardbirds. Mike Vernon himself used to get up and join the band, but mainly because he gave Eric Clapton the chance to stretch out . "The reason I sued to sing with the band was because Eric was the one who always used to get me up there to sing; I was the only one who wanted to do a slow blues, everybody else wanted to do something fast. I wanted to do "Stormy Monday" or "Going Down Slow." I mean, I didn't do them very well, but that didn't matter; Eric didn't care about that, it just gave him a chance to play, and that's why I like to do it, to hear him play. That's how the friendship came about really. Of course, my crowning glory at that particular time was appearing at the Richmond Jazz and Blues Festival. I got up and sang in front of about twenty-five thousand people and sang a slow blues. It was one of the best spots of the whole show: not for what I sang, but for what Eric played" (Bob Brunning, "Blues: The British Connection," p. 37). How did Eric Clapton revolutionize, redefine the electric guitar? Well, Clapton was the first virtuoso rock generation player of note recognized worldwide. This took time, and looking back, one can see the recorded history since 1963; the written history going back to 1962 or even 1960. Next, he was the first who deliberately employed overdrive, distortion in his playing. Previously, this had been, at most, an unanticipated and unwanted by product of an electric guitar turned up too loudly. This required learning the parameters of the effect and its control, setting the way for all who came after him. Clapton turned it up past that point, as he was in uncharted territory, an explorer. He also learned how to control and employ feedback. And next, with his uncompromising, hardcore attitude, Clapton quit the Yardbirds. "Clapton's walk out on the Yardbirds is still regarded as something of an example of a man sacrificing fame for musical principles" (Keith Altham, "Cream Are The Very End!" "New Musical Express," 28 October 1966, http://www.rocksbackpages.com/article.html?ArticleID=8866). --------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 05:12:32 -0400 From: "DeltaNick" Subject: [Slowhand] A Civil Debate, Part 3 To: "Slowhand Digest" But the blues -- but Eric was the one who stood out. And I didn't think any more of it until I heard the B-side of 'For Your Love,' which was an instrumental, 'Got To Hurry.' That's when I thought, 'Jesus, I gotta have this guy'" (John Mayall as quoted in Michael Leonard, "Bluesbreakers," "Guitarist Icons: Eric Clapton Special Issue" [UK], 2001 [Issue 1], p.14). Clapton joined the Bluesbreakers on 6 April 1965. He demonstrated incredible control and mastery of his craft as he squeezed all he could get out of his guitar on three Immediate Records recordings which Jimmy Page produced: "I'm Your Witchdoctor," "Telephone Blues," and "On Top Of The World." "This also, according to Jimmy Page, marked the birth of the 'Marshall' sound, paving the way for Hendrix and Led Zeppelin" (The Editors Of MOJO, "London 1965," MOJO (UK), September 2000 [Issue 82], p. 4). Among musicians, Clapton had already become somewhat of a legend. In May 1965, Bob Dylan went into the recording studio with Mayall and his band, including Clapton. Dylan would not have done so without holding Mayall and his band in the highest esteem. The session, however, produced nothing of any significant musical value, but the fault here lies primarily with Dylan, as anyone who has heard a snippet of the session will understand. In the summer of 1965, Clapton left Mayall's band to tour the world with a group of friends. However, they didn't get very far, reaching Greece. In November, Clapton returned to the Bluesbreakers, his position having been reserved for him by John Mayall. And it turned out that Clapton was as hungry, passionate, aggress ive, and inspired as he's ever been in his career. A John Mayall And The Bluesbr eakers live recording from 28 November 1965 (Mayall's dates are wrong, and he ag reed with the 28 November 1965 dating for this and the live Clapton recordings o n "Primal Solos"), "Stormy Monday," included on the album "Looking Back" stands out as what some consider to be Clapton's finest recorded guitar solo. He also r ecorded, along with John Mayall, several tracks on an album with Champion Jack D upree, a highly acclaimed single ("Lonely Years'/"Bernard Jenkins"), several rec ordings with a one-off studio band known as Eric Clapton And The Powerhouse, and the legendary "Blues Breakers ." And Clapton was the ONLY one who received top and equal billing with Mayall: the artists on the album are listed as "John Mayall With Eric Clapton." Mayall did that. Mayall never did that again. The album was a showcase for Clapton's guitar genius, his performance totally do minating the proceedings. Clapton's sunburst 1960 Gibson Les Paul Standard guita r contributed to a fuller, more dynamic sound, which contrasted sharply with the anemic "twang" of a Fender. "Although the Mayall-Clapton collaboration is still talked about as one of the great turning points in rock history" (Chris Welch, "Eric Clapton: King Of The Blues Guitar," "Melody Maker," 13 October 1973). "With its stark sound, uncompromising sleeve notes and surrealist cover, Blues Breakers was one of a quintet of albums -- alongside [The Rolling Stones'] Aftermath, [The Beach Boys'] Pet Sounds, [Bob Dylan's] Blonde On Blonde and [The Beatles'] Revolver -- to establish a recognizable rock music culture that summer ... Along with these, Blues Breakers helped define the future direction of rock ... It also made Eric Clapton a star. Previously admired by art students and those who spray-painted walls, by July 1966 he was on level creative terms with, if not Lennon-McCartney and Jagger- Richards, at least George Harrison and Brian Jones. Reviews of Blues Breakers ("It's Eric Clapton who steals the limelight and no doubt several copies of the album will be sold on his name") singled him out; requests for interviews increased; even Mayall, a man not given to excessive promotion of his colleagues, allowed Clapton's name to appear in the title -- none of which seemed conspicuously to gratify him" (Sandford, Clapton: Edge Of Darkness, 1994, revised 1999, pp. 60-62). --------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 05:14:29 -0400 From: "DeltaNick" Subject: [Slowhand] A Civil Debate, Part 4 To: "Slowhand Digest" >> I agree that his vibrato has changed significantly, and there is something ab out that Mayall-era vibrato that's really great. However, while I will grant tha t most of it is in the fingers, I wonder how much of this might have to do with equipment. I find the significant difference in the quality of my vibrato when I switch from my Les Paul to my Strat. The sound changes, but I stay the same. Mi nd you, I'm not comparing myself to EC, I'm just raising a question. << Hmmm, the Gibson vs. Fender argument again. Sounds like you agree with me on thi s one. I think it's part of the answer, but a small part. If you can't play guit ar, then no Gibson and no Fender will help. Today, Clapton simply doesn't play h is "stretch vibrato" any more, which I'll define as bending a string, and applyi ng vibrato WHILE BENT. He bends strings all the time today. He plays vibrato, bu t only on unbent strings. There may be exceptions, but they're SO few and far be tween. This was, however, a regular occurrence during the 1960s. >> Not sure, I agree with this. To my ears there have been some trade-offs. Whil e he does definitely use the three and four note riffs more often, I believe tha t maybe a function of two differences between the 60's and now. 1. Where studio records are concerned, songs today are typically longer and have room for longer solos. 2. Clapton has stated that he feels a need to play more notes when on a Fender because of the reduced sustain. Further, while I really don't hear anythi ng (other than the vibrato change) missing from his playing today that wasn't th ere in the 60's, I do hear several new things. He now occasionally uses chord pa tterns in solos, which he did not do then (in my experience, I have found this r ather difficult.) Also, to my ears, he has a much better harmonic sense now than he did then, in that he now occasionally takes solos places I do not necessaril y expect, whereas I find many of the Cream and Mayall solos spectacular, but mor e logical (for lack of a bette r word). Finally, he has incorporated slide and finger picked leads into his pl aying much more than he was capable of in the 60's. << Ahem, remember Cream, and their LONG instrumental passages? I think this disprov es your point #1. As far as #2 goes, yes, perhaps he plays more notes with the S trat. But it's funny to hear this from the Master of the Electric Guitar: he cou ld come up with a better one than this. You'll have to let me know where some of those "chord patterns" are. I'm not challenging you here, I'm just not sure I u nderstand what you mean: which tracks. It doesn't really seem to be a big deal, though. And yes, he does play slide guitar in public today. However, per his own admission, he always played slide guitar, only very few slide parts were ever i ncluded on any of his recordings. I think that his very first recorded slide par t was probably "Anyone For Tennis," which he played with Cream. He later played slide guitar with Derek And The Dominoes, and it appeared on some bootleg record ings from 1970, so it really isn't new at all. And he finger picked, maybe less often, back then too. What about "I'm So Glad," which has a finger-picked introduction? ------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 05:15:48 -0400 From: "DeltaNick" Subject: [Slowhand] A Civil Debate, Part 5 To: "Slowhand Digest" >>> Furthermore, Clapton was always noted as a very neat and tidy player: his gu itar articulation was always >near perfect. I've noticed that this isn't the cas e any more: he's quite a bit sloppier today. <<< >> Again, I find myself wondering how much of this is equipment. While I will gr ant that was very sloppy in the 70's, I don't think that's really the case today . To use myself as an example again, I find my playing comes out much cleaner on the Les Paul than the Strat. This is probably a combination of the difference i n pickups and the slight larger distance between the strings on a Les Paul, but I don't think anyone would argue with the notion that a Strat is a very "noisy" guitar. When he has played Gibsons, I've found his playing to be just as clean a s it was in days of yore. << Here we go again with the Gibson vs. Fender argument. I can't disagree with you on this one. However, a few years back, EC played a concert in Portland, Oregon, using Gibson guitars only. Although I think it sounded better, I still think he was neater much earlier in his career. So, I only agree with you halfway on thi s one. The Fender is an unnecessarily "noisier" guitar, but it alone doesn't mak e EC's guitar playing sloppy. I think it's in his fingers or the ROM chips above . >> I think you are romanticizing a little bit here. I can't count the number of times I've heard EC talk about how awful Cream could be on off nights, or the ti mes when he would completely phone in performances with John Mayall. I think the issue might be that we have many fewer high quality recordings of the earlier e ra and tend to assume that what we hear is how it was most, if not all the time, when, in fact, those recordings were typically released because they represente d the very best. << I think you're taking a bit out of context here. EC has stated, not just once bu t several times, that his most gratifying period, in which his chops were best, was the Mayall era: Tommy Vance: "Way back in the 60s and in the very early stages of your career -- prior to Cream, the supergroup of all time in the minds of just about all rock fans around the world -- which were your most gratifying periods then? Was it wi th Mayall?" Eric Clapton: "Yeah, doubtless with Mayall, 'cause we worked hard. We worked abo ut seven nights a week, sometimes two shows a night in different places and my c hops were probably better than they have ever been. That was really the peak, I think. And that's why I think I felt a lot of disappointment when I was with Cre am was because I was doing something that wasn't quite the same and I was unfami liar with the territory . You know it was -- that's what we invented -- a new fu sion of music. None of it was familiar. I mean, Ginger didn't know anything abou t rock'n'roll, for instance. Jack was into a form of very free jazz. And I was s traight into the blues. The three of us had to communicate somehow and we put a melting pot together. That's how it happened, but I think pre-that, Mayall had t o be the one where I really felt most at home" (Tommy Vance, "The Eric Clapton S pecial," Rock Hour Special, BBC Radio 1, 20 April 1980, London Wavelength Series [O01-AA], http://www.xs4all.n l/~slowhand/specials.htm#features). Above, EC clearly refers to the long jams that Cream played, above, which was on ly part of what Cream did. They also made records and recorded some pretty good songs, including blues tunes. And the blues tunes stand out among the rest of Cr eam's live repertoire. Don't fixate on Cream's long jams, as I never did so, con trary to what some others on the Slowhand Digest believe. I think the best track on "Wheels Of Fire" is not "Spoonful" (16+ minutes) but "Crossroads" (4+ minute s). In fact, I prefer the shorter, studio version of "Spoonful" to the live vers ion. And don't forget, not all of Cream's performances were recorded officially. In fact, very few of them were. End of Slowhand Digest, Vol 7, Issue 289 ----------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 05:16:41 -0400 From: "DeltaNick" Subject: [Slowhand] A Civil Debate, Part 6 To: "Slowhand Digest" I disagree furthermore because of Clapton's solo architecture: the structure of his solos. If you compare his solo architecture from the earlier days, it was pe rfect or near-perfect. Today's solos, while still good, are somewhat more disorg anized or less "on task" than during his earlier career. And they all sound much more alike. In his early days, Clapton's solos were mostly of the "song within a song" variety. Yes, they sounded well-thought-out, well-planned. But he did th is in a live setting, it was natural. Bottom Line: He played that way naturally back then; today's solos simply don't compare, and when they do, it happens WAY less often. Clapton played BETTER than textbook examples of improvisational solos back then. In my opinion, he doesn't do so today. Although this skill -- this extraordinar y gift -- seemed to come automatically back then, it no longer does. Yes, he can play an adequate blues solo any time. He's said so himself. But Clapton is and has done WAY more than simply adequate in the past, and this is what I mean. Yes , he's got to squeeze every ounce of creative energy available out of each and e very solo that's noteworthy, I don't think he does it today, except in the rares t of circumstances. He seems too lazy. That architecture, with Clapton's ability to express levels of ascending or desc ending tension and release, relaxation, further intensity, rest, negative space verses excess, climax, and finally resolve was unsurpassed. Clapton transcended everyone in solo architecture with his ability to slowly build, with weaving bea utifully constructed modal riffs and occasional small triad clusters, to a blazi ng climax, lifting the listener to an apogee, with either perfectly, (and emotio nally intense) executed stretch vibratos or bends with just the right amount of speed to exhilarate the audience. This was normally achieved without pyrotechnic s and gimmickry. It was no accident that Jimi Hendrix asked to meet Clapton as o ne of the prerequisites for his first trip to England. Hendrix understood immedi ately what he heard when Clapton's recorded notes -- from the Yardbirds, to Eric Clapton And The Powerhouse, to "Beano" -- reached his ears for the first time. And Hendrix understood quite well that what Clapton played far exceeded what he heard from other guitarists in the blues-rock genre. Clapton's style of playing guitar has, no doubt, changed since the 1960s. But I really don't think it's changed appreciably since the '70s or '80s. In studio recordings today, Clapton plays far fewer solos altogether, relegating the guitar to third or fourth place in importance, when it was at the top of the heap earlier in his career. Yes, he sings more and better today, but is playing guitar a sin? Other well-respected guitarists and musicians play their instruments their whole careers, without EVER singing a note: Wes Montgomery, John Coltrane, Chet Atkins, we can go on and on. Why does playing good guitar have to be considered pé or "retro"? And calling Clapton a "guitar god" is simply insulting, as it denigrates a true artist. Does anyone refer to Segovia as a "guitar god," or Coltrane as a "sax god"? >> I mostly agree here. I do think "Pilgrim" is an outstanding album, but overpr oduced. "Reptile" is okay, as are "Back Home" and "Me & Mr. Johnson." "Sessions for Robert J," I find quite enjoyable. Some of the acoustic work he does there i s easily as impressive as anything else he's ever done, though perhaps less flas hy. << We're in general agreement here, but I don't really see too much of a difference in the two Robert Johnson albums. They pretty much sound as if they were record ed at the same time, although the second one seems a bit more relaxed. They are really BOTH quite relaxed, maybe even TOO relaxed, and the relaxation has somewh at eliminated the intensity that Johnson gave these songs initially, the intensi ty with which Clapton played "Crossroads" on "Wheels Of Fire." It sounds like th e old Clapton is definitely gone, and the newer Clapton is a bit tired, as he st ates unequivocally on "Back Home." Clapton's intensity -- his ability to improvi se passionately -- seems partly gone, the burning hunger seems now, finally, sat ed. Simply compare the instrumental "Hideaway" on both "Beano" and "70th Birthda y Concert." To paraphrase Bryan Reid quoting Walter Yetnikoff in a recent Slowhand Digest, C lapton is a man standing in his own shadow, and that shadow was cast way back du ring the 1960s. DeltaNick