Way back last Friday, Terry wrote:
> ps enjoyed reading the transcripts of the A-list Nashville session
> musicians, from the 50s to early 70s, in the Journal of Country Music. I
> was wondering how much of those guys' nostalgicizing about the way things
> used to be, and about how the session business has changed, is
> understandable romanticizing, and how much is on point. One point they
> made was that these days session guitar and keyboard players don't have
> recognizable styles, while in the "old days" players had a signature
> sound, and if they didn't, they were in big trouble.
I think there are elements of each (romanticizing/on point). Steve Gibson
makes a good point in the discussion about how folks are mostly using
basically the same equipment these days, which reduces the variation in
sound from one player to the next, but on the other hand, while Grady
Martin's sound may have been instantly identifiable to his fellow studio
musicians, I'm not sure how much it was to the general audience, and I'm not
sure whether his fellow studio musicians can't pretty easily tell Brent
Mason's sound today. BTW, the big trouble thing referred, I think, not to a
player's having an individual signature sound, but to a record having a
signature sound or lick, and that is certainly true today as well;
instrumental hooks or signature licks are frequently substituted for
full-fledged instrumental solos.
Jon Weisberger Kenton County, KY [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://home.fuse.net/jonweisberger/
