Re: Blues scale: is this accurate?

On Jun 22, 5:12 am, Danny Schorr <.@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 10:44:50 +0100, "David Webber"
>
> <d...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> >I just gave them as examples.  My horizons are indeed broader.   And
> >"horizons" may be the best way of expressing it.    The problem as I
see it
> >is,  if instead of saying "the b3 b5 and b7 were im****tant in
somebody's
> >work",  you say "he played on a blues scale",  then you are immediately
> >closing down the horizons.   You may be able to extract a blues scale
from
> >some of what he did, but it is only one way of looking at it, and, as
you
> >seem to agree, looking at it also from other directions is desirable.
>
> I'm with you, to a point. And that point is music that DOES use the
notes
> of the blues scale exclusively. And 5 of them- not even the b5.
>
> Voodoo Chile ( slight return) immediately comes to
mindhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHstsGfHoNc
>
> Danny

Dave,

If you read the posts, you will see that no one has said that blues
can not be more than the La Pentaton with the b5. This is a conclusion
that you jumped to all by your self. We all know that it is only a
starting point. This starting point, however, has been the result of
analyses of thousands of blues recordings by thousands of artists and
analysts and this is the common denominator that is shared by all
these efforts. If your experience is so limited that you can by any
stretch of the imagination think that any of these posts are trying to
limit the scope of the blues to this one scale, then maybe you should
try to find out why YOU seem to think that this limitation is inherent
in any of what has been said except in YOUR posts and in YOUR mind.

Maybe the symptom of your not being able to remember where you saw an
extremely unique chord symbol that is (as yet) not to be found by
anyone else is a symptom of a larger problem. Most would be inclined
to remember at least something about such a unique finding and this
collection of unrelated facts and half truths may be somehow related.
I don't know, all I can say is that your more recent posts have been a
fairly large departure from the earlier threads where you provided
much better information and you kept your observations and comments in
a much more clear perspective and your responses were either based on
something  relevant or they were the response of someone that cared to
learn if his conclusions were on the right track or that you learned
something from the challenge. I see none of this in your responses to
me or anyone else in your more recent threads.  I really don't know
how to account for the change in your more recent posts. As I read
them, and I re-read earlier posts in the archives, the more recent
ones just don't measure up to the Dave that I have seen in earlier
posts. I hope that it is just a phase and we can have the old Dave
back.

LJS