Crossroads: How the Blues Shaped Rock 'n' Roll

[paul secor]

But Muddy said that the blues had a baby named rock 'n' roll.

But did Muddy say it or was it something his record company laid on him?

[Chuck Nessa]

Muddy knew who paid for the butter on his bread.

[Shawn]

I am really tired of the "road to rock" crap. The blues is much better and more important than that.

Give me a fucking break.

[Chuck Nessa]

Ok, you can take a break.

[Jim R]

[Chuck Nessa]

[Stefan Wood]

+1

[AllenLowe]

#2

(that's how I feel)

[Hot Ptah]

I am really tired of the "road to rock" crap. The blues is much better and more important than that.

I agree very much with Chuck. I have had a recent experience which brings this point home to me. An old friend, who has about 20,000 hard rock and metal albums, asked me if I had any blues he could listen to, because he had liked a snippet of Howlin' Wolf's "Smokestack Lightning," which was the music in a TV Viagra commercial. He really loves music and is a real devotee of his rock and metal.

Over the past two years, I have lent him about 125 blues albums, in batches of about 15 at a time. He has been very enthusiastic about anything that sounds somewhat like hard rock, such as some of the most rock oriented Buddy Guy albums, Roy Buchanan, Johnny Winter's blues albums, Albert King's 1960s albums, Otis Rush's 1970s albums which are heavy on the electric guitar solos. He has no use at all for any acoustic blues recorded before World War II--all of the blues masters don't get past the first ten seconds in his CD player. He does not like any blues led by a piano player (because there is no screaming electric guitar). He does not like any song oriented blues recordings with no electric guitar solos.

This has really brought the point home to me that there is only a very limited area of overlap between blues and rock--the rock of any era. Some music lovers do not hear the connection between blues and rock, or if they hear it, they don't care--they still don't like most blues.

Edited August 16, 2013 by Hot Ptah

[Hot Ptah]

yes; the mythology is so pervasive, as you know; even college texts I have read follow the same washed-out evolutionary theories (and not just with rock and roll). It's always the same 5 people who did this, which led to that.

I have noticed that some writing about jazz has been in the same vein--swing was the evolutionary precursor to the more highly evolved bop, which led to the further evolutionary improvement into avant garde, which had an interesting evolutionary permutation into late 1960s/early 1970s electric fusion--all told with a few iconic musicians as the only important figures. Anything which does not fit into this tidy, simple narrative is ignored or condemned.

[bluenoter]

well, hate to plug myself (actually I don't mind); but my own history of rock and roll, 1950-1970 should be out later this year as an e book

Would be extremely interested in this, but an e-book? Too bad ... Not likely I am going to spring for an e-reader even for this ...

Well, we'll see ...

If an e-book is available on Amazon, you can read it on your computer or possibly on a portable device that you own---no e-reader required.

[Amazon:] Read Anywhere with our Free Reading Apps

If an e-book is available at your library, chances are that it offers several platforms, free, that will allow you to read the e-book on your computer or portable device---likewise, no e-reader required. My library does.

Edited August 16, 2013 by bluenoter

[Big Beat Steve]

Thanks, Bluenoter. That might be a way out. I wil keep it in mind.

[Big Beat Steve]

I agree very much with Chuck. I have had a recent experience which brings this point home to me. An old friend, who has about 20,000 hard rock and metal albums, asked me if I had any blues he could listen to, because he had liked a snippet of Howlin' Wolf's "Smokestack Lightning," which was the music in a TV Viagra commercial. He really loves music and is a real devotee of his rock and metal.

Over the past two years, I have lent him about 125 blues albums, in batches of about 15 at a time. He has been very enthusiastic about anything that sounds somewhat like hard rock, such as some of the most rock oriented Buddy Guy albums, Roy Buchanan, Johnny Winter's blues albums, Albert King's 1960s albums, Otis Rush's 1970s albums which are heavy on the electric guitar solos. He has no use at all for any acoustic blues recorded before World War II--all of the blues masters don't get past the first ten seconds in his CD player. He does not like any blues led by a piano player (because there is no screaming electric guitar). He does not like any song oriented blues recordings with no electric guitar solos.

This has really brought the point home to me that there is only a very limited area of overlap between blues and rock--the rock of any era. Some music lovers do not hear the connection between blues and rock, or if they hear it, they don't care--they still don't like most blues.

Have you tried to get him interested in the not quite so obvious names (compared ot the examples you mentioned)?

Elmore James? Earl Hooker? Hound Dog Taylor? Or even T-Model Ford?

Should have enough wild guitar solos to suit his tastes ...

OTOH, your buddy does not quite sound like one who would really be open to exploring blues (even electrified blues) on its own terms but rather on the lookout for blues-tinged rock.

But if he owns that many hard rock albums he ought to have a good dose of Ten Years After, Cream and the like anyway (must invariably have come across them, I'd guess). And that should have made him aware of Johnny Winter, Roy Buchanan or Albert King. Or else he has managed to evade this "blind spot" (without being aware of it) for a long time in accumulating that many albums.

Reminds me of a couple of friends of mine (who are out and out 50s rockabilly diehards) when it comes to advancing their interests in black 50s R&B (Tarheel Slim and his ilk aren't the worst starting points - works every time ... so do classics like "Shake Your Moneymaker", "Strange Kinda Feeling", "Boogie Chillen" etc.)

[John L]

I also agree completely with Chuck. The problem is not with the taste of people who might prefer rock to blues, or prefer blues that sounds closer to rock. The problem is the plethora of blues documentaries and articles that could lead you to believe that the blues is important only because it is part of the roots of Rock.

I am thinking in particular of a recent documentary (I can't remember its name) that was narrated by Morgan Freeman. It was relentless in that respect. There was some very nice footage of BB King, Buddy Guy, and a few other blues giants. But the theme of the movie was almost like a defense of the Blues as being important because a number of major Rock artists think so, and have actually covered a number of blues songs. They selected specific songs for which they could highlight each and every one of the rock covers.

As Chuck writes, it all gets very very tiring. The blues stands on its own just fine without rock.

[colinmce]

I think you'll all get a kick out of this:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaM6lTmhnak&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DZaM6lTmhnak

[Hot Ptah]

I agree very much with Chuck. I have had a recent experience which brings this point home to me. An old friend, who has about 20,000 hard rock and metal albums, asked me if I had any blues he could listen to, because he had liked a snippet of Howlin' Wolf's "Smokestack Lightning," which was the music in a TV Viagra commercial. He really loves music and is a real devotee of his rock and metal.

Over the past two years, I have lent him about 125 blues albums, in batches of about 15 at a time. He has been very enthusiastic about anything that sounds somewhat like hard rock, such as some of the most rock oriented Buddy Guy albums, Roy Buchanan, Johnny Winter's blues albums, Albert King's 1960s albums, Otis Rush's 1970s albums which are heavy on the electric guitar solos. He has no use at all for any acoustic blues recorded before World War II--all of the blues masters don't get past the first ten seconds in his CD player. He does not like any blues led by a piano player (because there is no screaming electric guitar). He does not like any song oriented blues recordings with no electric guitar solos.

This has really brought the point home to me that there is only a very limited area of overlap between blues and rock--the rock of any era. Some music lovers do not hear the connection between blues and rock, or if they hear it, they don't care--they still don't like most blues.

Have you tried to get him interested in the not quite so obvious names (compared ot the examples you mentioned)?

Elmore James? Earl Hooker? Hound Dog Taylor? Or even T-Model Ford?

Should have enough wild guitar solos to suit his tastes ...

OTOH, your buddy does not quite sound like one who would really be open to exploring blues (even electrified blues) on its own terms but rather on the lookout for blues-tinged rock.

But if he owns that many hard rock albums he ought to have a good dose of Ten Years After, Cream and the like anyway (must invariably have come across them, I'd guess). And that should have made him aware of Johnny Winter, Roy Buchanan or Albert King. Or else he has managed to evade this "blind spot" (without being aware of it) for a long time in accumulating that many albums.

Reminds me of a couple of friends of mine (who are out and out 50s rockabilly diehards) when it comes to advancing their interests in black 50s R&B (Tarheel Slim and his ilk aren't the worst starting points - works every time ... so do classics like "Shake Your Moneymaker", "Strange Kinda Feeling", "Boogie Chillen" etc.)

Good suggestions. I have in fact included about 75 different blues artists in what I have lent him, including Hound Dog Taylor, Elmore James, Muddy Waters, Howlin' Wolf, Sonny Boy Williamson II, John Lee Hooker, Little Walter, Magic Sam, Freddie King, Michael Bloomfield, Son Seals, John Mayall, T Bone Walker, Albert Collins, Luther Allison and many more. Really, about any electric blues guitarist from 1950 on has been included. He really liked Albert Collins and Luther Allison. He does not say much about a lot of them, one way or the other.

He has a massive collection of the Allman Brothers when Duane Allman was with them, and a massive Eric Clapton collection. So he has heard a lot of blues rock in his life.

[Bluesnik]

You should check out more Ike Turner/Kings of Rhythm. I highly recommend this, if you can still find it:

Thanks for the rec. But on that cd I wrote about I have a Jackie Brenston version. I meant the tune. But I like Ike Turner and will sure dig deeper into him.

[jeffcrom]

You should check out more Ike Turner/Kings of Rhythm. I highly recommend this, if you can still find it:

Thanks for the rec. But on that cd I wrote about I have a Jackie Brenston version. I meant the tune. But I like Ike Turner and will sure dig deeper into him.

You've got the Ike Turner Kings of Rhythm version. Jackie Brenston was the vocalist and Chess released the record under his name. Ike didn't sing on records in those days, and some of his records were released under the names of the vocalists, like Billy Gayles, Brenston, or Clayton Love. Others appeared as Ike Turner and His Kings of Rhythm.

[Bluesnik]

[Big Beat Steve]

Jeff has nailed it.

Other voclaists under whose names Ike Turner's Kings of Rhythm recordings were released are

Raymond Hill, Johnny O'Neal, Dennis Binder and Bonnie Turner.