collapse

* Member Info

 
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
It's like being in guitar heaven - Rob(Trish) R, on the PTCBW experience

Author Topic: Are Robert Johnson's recordings fraudulent?  (Read 9198 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline uncle bud

  • Member
  • Posts: 8306
  • Rank amateur
Re: Are Robert Johnson's recordings fraudulent?
« Reply #30 on: June 09, 2010, 07:39:21 AM »
But, of course, you can't count on it. I have two copies of Prince Albert Hunt's "Blues in a Bottle," one on reel-to-reel tape and one on a CD. One of them is in B-flat, and the other in B. I'm almost positive the fiddle was being played in C, but the only thing I can tell for sure is that the two recordings are at a different pitch, not where the speed variation might have occurred. And, worse yet (although not part of this discussion), I've never been able to get the timing right, particularly when I try to play it with our band -- it remains a futility piece.

I was feeling bad about that, until I got a copy of the Texas Sheiks' CD, and found that even those talented musicians had regularized the time so they could play it. I wonder what Hunt's timing secret was?

Complete disregard for bar lines? What's amazing is his band follows him so tightly. 10 bars, 9 1/4 bars, 9 1/2 bars, 10 1/2 bars, they're still there...

edited to add: this reminds me of Hunt's "Katy On Time". Talk about speed fluctuations. Maybe Hunt had the same drunken engineer as Johnson.
« Last Edit: June 09, 2010, 08:07:06 AM by uncle bud »

Offline Stuart

  • Member
  • Posts: 3177
  • "The Voice of Almiqui"
Re: Are Robert Johnson's recordings fraudulent?
« Reply #31 on: June 09, 2010, 08:27:52 AM »
Strong accusations.  Please elaborate:  How are Gibbens' reasoning and argumentation unsound?  What are his presuppositions, and what makes them arbitrary?  What syllogisms does he employ, and what are their flaws?

Anyway, "truth in facts grounded in objectively verifiable evidence" is what I seek as well.  Else I would not have raised the issue.

Nice try, but it won't work. It's not my responsibility to educate you in the basic rules of logic, reasoning and argumentation. Seeing through Gibbens is sandbox stuff.

Forget about Gibbens and focus on the question: "Are the recordings we have of RJ accurate reproductions of how he actually sounded at the time he made them?"

The only thing that I can say with any confidence is that given what I know about the recording technology (and even that may be suspect), if the individual records (what are referred to as 78s--not the tape, LP, CD or other recordings of the original 78s or masters) are played at the exact speed at which they were recorded, the tempo of the songs should match that of the original performances.

Do we know the exact speed at which the original individual recordings were made?

I don't. Can we speculate and discuss this? Sure. But there is a difference between disciplined speculation that is well reasoned and the result of rigorous thinking and what is commonly referred to as junk thought.

In case you didn't find my post at IGS, this is what I wrote:

"When I worked out some of the RJ pieces ca. '71-'72 my impression and assumptions were that he was tuned high. I did it on a 14 fret clear Gibson with a thick top and a three piece maple neck, so tuning up with lights and slapping on a capo posed no problems. I knew that some speed adjustments could be made to recordings, but it never crossed my mind that that was the case with RJ. There was a certain internal consistency that either fooled me or convinced me that there was nothing unusual (speed wise) going on."

It's impressionist, speculative and neither conclusive or definitive. But it speaks to another possibility. If I could do it, I believe that so could RJ. Try it yourself (if you haven't already), and tell us what you think.

« Last Edit: June 09, 2010, 08:44:35 AM by Stuart »

Offline dj

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • Posts: 2833
  • Howdy!
Re: Are Robert Johnson's recordings fraudulent?
« Reply #32 on: June 09, 2010, 08:46:21 AM »
Quote
When I worked out some of the RJ pieces ca. '71-'72 my impression and assumptions were that he was tuned high. I did it on a 14 fret clear Gibson with a thick top and a three piece maple neck, so tuning up with lights and slapping on a capo posed no problems. I knew that some speed adjustments could be made to recordings, but it never crossed my mind that that was the case with RJ. There was a certain internal consistency that either fooled me or convinced me that there was nothing unusual (speed wise) going on."

It's not just you, Stuart.  The internet is full of videos and soundclips of people playing Robert Johnson's songs, with many of the versions at a pitch matching the original 78s.  If all those people can do it, I suspect that RJ could, too.   ;D

Offline LD50

  • Member
  • Posts: 158
Re: Are Robert Johnson's recordings fraudulent?
« Reply #33 on: June 09, 2010, 08:54:46 AM »
Then why not do the same for Tommy McLennan, Booker White, Robert Petway, and others?  Why only Johnson?  Why not for hillbilly artists, or jazz or swing, or pop?  Or other ethnic musicians?  Why did this make good commercial sense only for Robert Johnson?  

EVERY day that Johnson recorded, other people also recorded in the same studio.  Why would the recording engineers adjust the recording equipment to run fast for Johnson and not do the same for W. Lee O'Donnel & His Hillbilly Boys, Hermanas Barraza, The Chuck Wagon Gang, Andres Berlanga y Francisco Montalvo, Al Dexter, Eva Garza, The Hi-Flyers, Roy Newman & His Boys, The Crystal Springs Ramblers, Zeke Williams & His Rambling Cowboys, The Light Crust Doughboys, Clifford Gross and Muryel Campbell, The Blue Ridge Playboys, John Boyd & His Southerners, and Bill Nettles & His Dixie Blueboys?  The obvious answer is, they wouldn't.

This is actually one of the most compelling arguments I've heard against RJ's records being deliberately sped up.

I'm more inclined to accept that maybe a few of RJ's recordings got sped up accidentally by inept mastering than that they were all sped up deliberately. But I get the impression that that kind of mastering screwup was nowhere near as common in the late 30s as it was in the 20s.

Offline LD50

  • Member
  • Posts: 158
Re: Are Robert Johnson's recordings fraudulent?
« Reply #34 on: June 09, 2010, 09:12:27 AM »
But, of course, you can't count on it. I have two copies of Prince Albert Hunt's "Blues in a Bottle," one on reel-to-reel tape and one on a CD. One of them is in B-flat, and the other in B. I'm almost positive the fiddle was being played in C, but the only thing I can tell for sure is that the two recordings are at a different pitch, not where the speed variation might have occurred. And, worse yet (although not part of this discussion), I've never been able to get the timing right, particularly when I try to play it with our band -- it remains a futility piece.

I was feeling bad about that, until I got a copy of the Texas Sheiks' CD, and found that even those talented musicians had regularized the time so they could play it. I wonder what Hunt's timing secret was?

Complete disregard for bar lines? What's amazing is his band follows him so tightly. 10 bars, 9 1/4 bars, 9 1/2 bars, 10 1/2 bars, they're still there...

edited to add: this reminds me of Hunt's "Katy On Time". Talk about speed fluctuations. Maybe Hunt had the same drunken engineer as Johnson.

All the more impressive when it is remembered that Hunt was, as he told his friends later, "drunker than a hoot owl" at that session.

The mastering on "Katy on Time" was totally BLATANTLY screwed up by the engineers. Like to the point of unlistenability. I'm amazed Vocalion still issued it.

I've always wondered if someone paid Nevins enough, if he could actually 'fix' it.
« Last Edit: June 09, 2010, 09:33:44 AM by LD50 »

Offline Stuart

  • Member
  • Posts: 3177
  • "The Voice of Almiqui"
Re: Are Robert Johnson's recordings fraudulent?
« Reply #35 on: June 09, 2010, 09:17:57 AM »
It's not just you, Stuart.  The internet is full of videos and soundclips of people playing Robert Johnson's songs, with many of the versions at a pitch matching the original 78s.  If all those people can do it, I suspect that RJ could, too.   ;D

Where were they (and all of the other superior musicians that have since come on the scene) in the early 70's when they could have saved me all of the time and trouble I spent beating my brains out trying to figure out this stuff?

I was either born too soon, or was "A day late and a dollar short," as usual. (Probably both!)  ;D

Offline Johnm

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • Posts: 13190
    • johnmillerguitar.com
Re: Are Robert Johnson's recordings fraudulent?
« Reply #36 on: June 09, 2010, 09:48:50 AM »
Hi all,
This whole non-issue speaks to the credulity of Robert Johnson's most rabid fans and their need to exceptionalize him in every way, rather than seeing him as a musician working in a style and tradition that was common to a host of musicians of his era and place.  He was a modern musician in the extent to which what he played was influenced by recorded sources, viz. the Scrapper Blackwell-influenced accompaniments to all his A standard pieces and the Lonnie Johnson-infuenced "Malted Milk" and "Drunken Hearted Man", but even in that regard, he was not in the vanguard.  People started copying Lemon's and Lonnie Johnson's licks as soon as they started coming out on records.  
The most salient thing that can be said about the playback speed of the 78s versus the recent "slowed-down Robert Johnson" is that while the 78s may or may not be operating at a doctored speed, there is absolutely no doubt that the "slowed-down Robert Johnson" is operating at a doctored speed.  And if doctoring playback speed is "fraudulent", why is it any less fraudulent when it is couched as being corrective?  Corrective according to whom?
All best,
Johnm    
« Last Edit: June 09, 2010, 11:42:26 AM by Johnm »

Offline LD50

  • Member
  • Posts: 158
Re: Are Robert Johnson's recordings fraudulent?
« Reply #37 on: June 09, 2010, 10:08:36 AM »
This whole non-issue speaks to the credulity of Robert Johnson's most rabid fans and their need to exceptionalize him in every way, rather than seeing him as a musician working in a style and tradition that was common to a host of musicians of his era and place.  He was a modern musician in the extent to which what he played was influenced by recorded sources, viz. the Scrapper Blackwell-influenced accompaniments to all his A standard pieces, the Lonnie Johnson-infuenced "Malted Milk" and "Drunken Hearted Man", but even in that regard, he was not in the vanguard.

I think EVERYONE who claims to idolize Johnson, or who says he's the best blues guitarist ever, should be forced to read Wald's book. It does an impeccable job of sweeping aside the bullshit and putting him in perspective. They should then be made to listen to Yazoo's Back To The Crossroads CD.

This is not to denigrate RJ's music -- it's just he's best seen as a brilliant synthesizer of the different sounds swirling around him at the time. (AND, he had great taste in records.  ;))

Offline Stumblin

  • Member
  • Posts: 520
  • Got the Blues, can't be satisfied
Re: Are Robert Johnson's recordings fraudulent?
« Reply #38 on: June 09, 2010, 02:02:11 PM »
Seriously?  Are we really doin' this right now?  Again?  Of all the ridiculous discussions I've read on guitar forums....  This one definitely ranks up in the top 5.  I'm completely dumbfounded every time it comes up again.  But it's always good for a quick laugh, so....  Who am I to stand in the way of some harmless repetition?  Though it would be fun if someone came up with a new country blues conspiracy theory that had nothing to do with Robert mother-f#@in' Johnson.
Seconded.
This streak of shine just runs and runs. Same goes for all the lucrative new "Robert Johnson" tunings.

Offline Lyle Lofgren

  • Member
  • Posts: 245
    • Lyle & Elizabeth Lofgren
Re: Are Robert Johnson's recordings fraudulent?
« Reply #39 on: June 09, 2010, 02:38:59 PM »
Quote
Complete disregard for bar lines? What's amazing is his band follows him so tightly. 10 bars, 9 1/4 bars, 9 1/2 bars, 10 1/2 bars, they're still there...

It helps that the guitar seems to be playing in 1/4 time -- I've never been able to get our guitarist to play that way. He finds it too boring.

Most of the musicians who ignored timing (such as Fiddlin' John Carson) evidently learned without playing with others, and then never quite got the hang of keeping time.  I wonder what Hunt's history was: learned how to play by himself, or was he just so drunk he was keeping time in another universe? Or did he meet the Demi-Devil of Inconsistency at the Crossroads instead of Satan himself?

Lyle

Offline repeater

  • Member
  • Posts: 20
Re: Are Robert Johnson's recordings fraudulent?
« Reply #40 on: June 09, 2010, 03:10:07 PM »
Quote
Nice try, but it won't work. It's not my responsibility to educate you in the basic rules of logic, reasoning and argumentation. Seeing through Gibbens is sandbox stuff.

What nonsense.  But you go on thinking you're the second coming of Aristotle if that keeps you from driving off a cliff.

Offline Montgomery

  • Member
  • Posts: 94
  • Howdy!
Re: Are Robert Johnson's recordings fraudulent?
« Reply #41 on: June 09, 2010, 03:39:48 PM »
Come on, this repeater guy is clearly a troll.  Nobody could be so dense and illogical, proposing a theory that is backed up by absolutely no hard evidence whatsoever, but demanding evidence to the contrary regardless; and when you do deliver evidence, he writes it off as simply a part of the vast conspiracy.  They have a name for these people - they're called Birthers.

Offline Stuart

  • Member
  • Posts: 3177
  • "The Voice of Almiqui"
Re: Are Robert Johnson's recordings fraudulent?
« Reply #42 on: June 09, 2010, 03:56:53 PM »
You're confusing critical evaluation with negative personal criticism. Focus on the question.

Offline Slack

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 9213
Re: Are Robert Johnson's recordings fraudulent?
« Reply #43 on: June 09, 2010, 04:01:08 PM »
Yes, clearly a troll -- but good for a few laughs nonetheless.  Maybe he'll move on to say.. Arizona?  :P

Stuart, I don't think he'll focus on the question -- in fact there is no question, repeater is already convinced of the absolute logic of his position.  Doesn't matter that there is nothing to back it up.

Offline banjochris

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 2578
Re: Are Robert Johnson's recordings fraudulent?
« Reply #44 on: June 09, 2010, 04:40:05 PM »
If you play "Hellhound on My Trail" backwards you'll hear the voice of Louella Parsons urging you to vote for Wendell Wilkie.

Tags:
 


SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2024, SimplePortal