JERRY REED, "STAGGER LEE"

On this clip, Reed is in more of a burning mode than usual. Which is not to say that it's hotter than his usual fingerstyle acoustic playing, but it's just hot in a different way.
(MORE)

BARNEY KESSEL, AUTUMN LEAVES

I admit it-- I've been neglecting this guitar site, in favor of its country cousin, the Telecaster site. straubcountryguitar.blogspot.com/

Sorry about that-- I've been in a country groove for a while now, and for some reason there seem to be a ton more old country clips on youtube than there used to be. At any rate, to tide you over, here's some Barney Kessel. There's some breakup on the original source tape, unfortunately, (making some bits hard to listen to) but some beautiful playing from all. It starts out with nice chord melody stuff, then gets a little more bluesy--
(MORE)

"WILDWOOD FLOWER," MAYBELLE CARTER

Here's Maybelle Carter, with one of the later editions of the Carter Family. This arrangement is "slick" by comparison with the austere classic sides with Sara and A.P., but the quality picture makes it relatively easy to see Maybelle's unusual technique up close. Check out the solo-- I've always been skeptical when I've read that she used fingerpicks for up and down strokes, but apparently that's exactly what she was doing. I didn't go back to check the original recording for comparison, but it sounds to me like she's playing the same way she always had. (If you're quicker on the draw than me, and notice any differences, please post a comment.)
(MORE)

"TICO TICO NO FUBA", BY THE AMAZING DUO SIQUEIRA LIMA

thanks to my dad for forwarding this.
(MORE)

LES PAUL DOCUMENTARY

Here's a great documentary on Les Paul. I have only skimmed it, but among other things it has some nice clips of Les Paul playing with younger musicians. Late in life, Les's technique had largely wilted away from arthritis etc., but his tone is intact and you can get some insight into the way he thought about melody, chords, etc. Plus it's cool to see Les Paul's pedalboard-- okay, for me it's kind of fetishistic, so sue me.

Also, no complaints please about the commercials. You get serious length and quality here, unlike youtube. The downside is, you can't fast-forward through the ads. I know a lot of young people think the whole world should be available to them for free; maybe anyone that dumb won't want to watch Les Paul anyway.

Thanks to Howard Parker for forwarding this.
(MORE)

HANK GARLAND TRANSCRIPTIONS NOW AVAILABLE

karlstraubguitar.blogspot.com/2009/09/hank-garland-transcription-book-out.html

Mike Joiner's book of Hank Garland transcriptions is now out. the link takes you to a post where I provided more info about it, and an excerpt from the book. I don't have time now to write in detail about this fine product, but I'll just say it looks great. The guitar parts from the Hank Garland lp "Velvet Guitar" are all transcribed. This is a classic album; it leans a bit to the schmaltzy side by comparison with the more famous "Jazz Winds" lp, but the chord melody stuff on here is really exquisite. If you plug in and play excerpts from Mike's transcriptions, it'll transport you back to the fifties jazz guitar sound. Beautiful stuff.

Mike's notation/tab book is in PDF form. Anyone interested can contact Mike Joiner at jazzguitarist27@yahoo.com.
(MORE)

DIDDLEY BOW

Wow-- pretty damn cool. Buy one now, before Jack White records a whole album on this instrument.

email this guy for details--

wadester1969@yahoo.com
(MORE)

LES PAUL TRIO, "DARK EYES"

Any footage of Les is welcome, but the Ziggy Stardust outfit he has on is an unexpected bonus. This day is turning out okay after all!
(MORE)

ONLINE LESSONS AND TRANSCRIPTIONS, MADE TO ORDER

ONLINE LESSONS DESIGNED TO MEET YOUR NEEDS


If you're interested in doing online lessons with Karl Straub, here's how it's done.

1. Imagine that you are going to an hour long guitar lesson. Make a list of all the things you want to learn about, and think about questions you would ask the teacher. In theory, you can ask just about anything. Here are some general categories and sample questions to give you some ideas.

CHORDS

"Can you tell me about chord progressions and how they work?"

or, more specific--
"Can you tell me about how the chord changes work in a specific style, like western swing, Beatles music, blues, etc.?"

MELODY

"Can you tell me how melodies fit with chords?"

or, more specific--
"Can you tell me how melodies fit with chords in Elvis Costello's music? or Joni Mitchell's? or Bob Dylan's? or Otis Redding's?"

IMPROVISING

"How can I get better at improvising solos?"

more specific--
"How can I get better at improvising blues solos? or country, jazz, rock, etc.?"

TECHNIQUE

"I'm having trouble with bends/pulloffs/slides/vibrato etc. What can I work on to get better at these techniques?"

THE STYLE OF A SPECIFIC GUITARIST THAT YOU LIKE

"How does Jimmy Page put together a solo? or Hendrix? Clapton, Freddy King, Clarence White, Tony Rice, Norman Blake, Albert King, Joe Pass, Charlie Christian, etc."

SPECIFIC SONG OR SOLO

"Can you show me how to play 'Satisfaction'? or 'Blackbird'? or 'Iron Man" by Black Sabbath? flatpicking traditional tunes like 'Bill Cheatham'? 'Stormy Monday' by T-Bone Walker? 'Ornithology' by Charlie Parker? etc."

NOTE-- depending on the complexity of a song or solo that you want to learn, it may involve extensive transcription. Transcription rates may apply-- when you let Karl know what you are looking for, he'll work out payment with you.

LESSON FORMAT
Usual format is email, including text and pdf files of notation and tablature. Video lessons are also possible. I'm still working out the logistics of video lessons, but I can probably email movie file to you or post on a private site for you to view.

PAYMENT

When you explain in an email what you are looking for, Karl will come up with a lesson plan that fits an hour format. Hour lesson rate is $70.00. Once you have okayed my lesson plan, you pay 50% down payment, which is $35.00. Remainder is due when you've received your lesson by email.

You can pay by sending a check to KARL STRAUB, 406 CLOVERWAY DRIVE, ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA, 22314. PLEASE MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO KARL STRAUB.

If you are looking for transcription more than a lesson, the basic rate is $30.00 per transcription. (Transcriptions are notation and tablature that show what someone played.) Transcription is very time-consuming. I can give you a price quote for whatever your transcription project is, depending on how long the work will take. NOTE-- I tries to keep the price around $30.00, but some projects are very complex. It depends on what you're looking for.

I have a back catalog of transcriptions I've done already. Current price for these is $5.00 each. I haven't put a list up yet, but information available on request.
(MORE)

EARL HOOKER, "EARL'S BOOGIE"

You may not have heard of Earl Hooker; he's not as well-known as a lot of his contemporaries. He's pretty good, though, as you can see here.
(MORE)

INSTRUCTIONAL VIDEOS, STEVE TROVATO, ALBERT LEE, ETC.

I've been watching Steve Trovato's instructional video "Learn Country Guitar Techniques." It's more or less a tutorial on Albert Lee style playing, and as such is very helpful. I've spent a lot of years incorporating chicken picking sounds into my playing, but I have to admit the flashier side of this approach has mostly eluded me in the past. This is the side of chicken picking that has become the lingua franca of modern Nashville guitar. Trovato does a great job explaining all of it, and all the technical nuances that I've missed (how to get a real snap out of the strings, chicken muting technique, etc.) are much more clear to me now.

There's no notation/tablature provided with this video, but Trovato patiently breaks down every tiny sliver of it. Watching this video, I was reminded of some gripes I've seen on amazon about this and other similar videos. People get really apoplectic sometimes about lack of tablature, or the inability of certain celebrity pickers to really show you what they're doing; sometimes it gets really righteous and the players are accused of selfishness. Having met a lot of brilliant players, I'd like to say that some musicians are just inarticulate about what they do. Others develop to the point where it's difficult for them to even think about the foundation of their style-- I can attest that, as you get better at playing and improvising, it becomes harder to understand how you got there. I've even tried to take notes as I've progressed, and it's still very challenging to remember all of the steps later.

Here are some thoughts about learning from instructional material.

REGARDING INSTRUCTIONAL VIDEOS COVERING INTERMEDIATE AND ADVANCED MATERIAL--

While I agree that beginner players need a teacher who can walk them slowly through everything, I think that serious players should start to realize that they're going to have to do some struggling if they want to join the big leagues. If you need every note spelled out for you, even though you have footage of the guy playing all of it, you may be tackling a job that's over your head. I think a lot of people believe that if you can just get the tablature to something, you can play it. Another phenomenon I've noticed (mainly in teenagers) is the notion that I have some kind of guitar secrets that I'm withholding from them. Maybe this is all part of our increasingly impatient society, I don't know; I do know that if many of the guitar innovators we all listen to had sat around whining about the defects of instructional material, music would have ground to a halt. There were no instructional videos years ago; even a guitar instruction book was a pretty scarce thing as recently as the fifties and sixties. When I was a teenager, there were plenty of highfalutin books around to help you with jazz, reading, etc. but not a whole lot showing you how to play blues, country, Hendrix, and the like. I know this sounds like the old "I used to walk ten miles through snow to return a library book" kind of rant, but Lord! I would guess that Albert Lee spent countless hours figuring out stuff that his heroes had played, and put it all together into his own style over a period of many years. It's "hard damn work," as Louis Armstrong once observed. I think that if you can't figure out anything Albert Lee does just from watching and listening, maybe you're not ready to play like Albert Lee. It's fine to buy a video, as I do all the time hoping for some insight, but you're still going to have to work hard. It's not just a matter of paying twenty bucks, popping in a DVD, and now you get to be as cool as Albert Lee. Even if Albert Lee came and crashed on your couch for a few weeks, and let you ask him questions all day long, sooner or later you'd have to sit down and do some work yourself.

(MORE)

HANK GARLAND TRANSCRIPTION BOOK, "VELVET GUITAR" ALBUM

Guitarist Mike Joiner has done guitar transcriptions from Hank Garland's "Velvet Guitar" album.

Hank was a true musician's musician-- aside from playing on countless Nashville country sessions, he made a handful of top-notch jazz recordings before a car accident in 1960 made it impossible for him to play professionally. Garland's "Jazz Winds from Another Direction" is his most celebrated jazz album, but the "Velvet Guitar" lp has some beautiful playing as well. This album, currently available as part of the "Move" two-disc collection, may have been originally promoted and packaged as a "mood music" type of record, but it's nonetheless excellent. It actually has one advantage over the more well-known "Jazz Winds;" Garland is virtually the whole show. Impeccable single-note lines alternate with hip double-stops and some of the sweetest chord melody playing I've ever heard.

I'm looking forward to spicing up my playing with as many of these Hank Garland licks as I can steal!


Mike's notation/tab book is in PDF form. Anyone interested can contact Mike Joiner at jazzguitarist27@yahoo.com.


Here's a sample from Mike's book. "Ed's Place" is a slow and swinging blues. The hammer-ons and pulloffs are a great example of how to use slurs to get a bluesy jazz flavor. Listen to the track here--

www.karlstraubmusic.com/2-03 Ed's Place.mp3

click on "MORE" to see track listing from Mike's book.

. The tracklisting is:

1. Secret Love
2. Scarlet Ribbons (For Her Hair)
3. Greensleeves
4. Tammy
5. Polka Dots And Moonbeams
6. Autumn Leaves
7. Like Someone In Love
8. Ain't Nothing Wrong With That, Baby
9. Blame It On My Youth
10. Ed's Place

(MORE)

MOVING UP AND DOWN THE NECK ON ONE STRING

This exercise is designed to let you move up and down the neck on one string, while avoiding stretches. That means you're always in a four-fret span position, one finger per fret. Use your pinky to shift, and observe the tablature carefully. (Although there are certainly some effective alternate fingerings, I suggest you use the tablature exactly as written until mastered. Moving around with this approach can help loosen up your left hand, which should be relaxed at all times. After a while you may start getting ideas for variations, changing my note pattern, fingerings, or both. It's really just a foundation for getting used to moving around this way.)

The version without accidentals will fit musically in some situations where the chromatic notes sound awkward or wrong to your ear. Unfortunately, it's harder to play! The accidentals were used so the pinky could be the consistent shifting finger, and you could play it all on one string. The diatonic one (meaning no accidentals in the key of C, no chromatic notes outside the key) requires you to use the B string sometimes, and shift either with ring, middle, or pinky. If you use the four-fret span fingering principle (one finger per fret) the fingerings should be obvious. It will take some practice to get used to the shifts.

(MORE)

PETER GREEN "JUMPIN' AT SHADOWS" excerpt

Here's an excerpt of a Peter Green solo, from a live early Fleetwood Mac clip, beginning about two minutes in. Even this short snippet has the usual stellar playing from the underrated Green. I think my transcription is pretty accurate, but notation is a pale rendering of the subtle use of time and dynamics Green employs here--

I only did the beginning of the solo as a sample for a customer, but I thought someone else out there might like to see this. If anyone would like to see more Peter Green transcriptions, let me know! I'm thinking about doing a lesson based around his playing on "Greeny," and making it available as an inexpensive download.
(MORE)

"PONY BLUES," CHARLEY PATTON ARRANGEMENT, COVERED BY PHIL DRUM

Phil Drum has worked his ass off trying to play like the great Delta bluesman Charley Patton. Sure, his vocal suffers by comparison with the master, but his playing is strong and he's obviously labored to figure out the intricacies of Patton's style. Good work, Phil! Phil's clips will be an invaluable reference for anyone trying to play like Patton, a genius who typically gets unfairly cast as an also-ran after Robert Johnson. Johnson is great, of course, but many other geniuses like Patton and Skip James tend to get overlooked, as if Robert Johnson was a giant that towered over his Delta blues rivals.
(MORE)

MECHANICAL GUITAR, OPERATED BY FEET, ENABLING GUITARIST TO USE HIS HANDS TO PLAY FIDDLE

Another crazy clip from Charlie McCardell. This guy's built a mechanical guitar setup that he operates with his feet, while playing fiddle tunes.
(MORE)

HOW TO SOUND LIKE CHET ATKINS, (tips from Steve Wariner)

On the Gibson site, Steve Wariner offered these tips on how to sound like Chet Atkins. Stay pure: “Chet did not use a lot of processing. When I was touring with him he used a Lexicon rack mounted delay and the only other thing between his guitar and amp was a distortion pedal, like a Tube Screamer. Earlier I guess he used an Echo-Plex type of tape delay. And he rarely used that fuzz pedal. He would use it when we’d play a funky piece and he’d play one solo with it turned on. He also used a Music Man amp on tour. In the studio he had a vintage Standel amp that was once owned by the great steel guitar player Jimmy Day. It had a plaque with Jimmy’s name on the back.”

Master vibrato: Atkins used heavy strings on the bass side of his guitar neck and light gauge strings for his top three notes. “He used those heavier strings to pick his bass lines with his thumb, so he could play bass and melody at the same time. He kept his vibrato arm set where he could lay his pinky over it, so he could dip it with his little finger. He was also a master of creating vibrato with the fingers of his left hand.”

Pick clean: “So much of what Chet did was with his hands. He had amazing articulation on the guitar.

His notes were always pure and clean and gorgeous. Chet had a reach and tone that was unreal. He had enormous hands, so he could play a chord by wrapping his left hand around the back of his guitar’s neck and pinning down a note with his thumb. He did that on his intro to ‘Mr. Sandman,’ and he’d tell me ‘Steve, why don’t you try it this way?’ And I’d say, ‘With my pudgy little hands? I can’t!’ ”

Think old school: “For Chet, everything was in service of the melody. He could have played a lot of flashy licks, but he was really interested in playing music that everybody could enjoy, not just guitar players. So he would make sure the melody was always at the front of whatever he played.

“He also liked to record with super clean amplifiers and ribbon mikes. One of his favorites was the RCA-77. If you’re really looking for authentic vintage tones, you’re going to need the vintage gear.”

(MORE)

LES PAUL-- MY KIND OF GUITAR HERO

I offer without comment a clip of Les Paul showing what he does. (thanks to Howard Parker for sending this to me.)

Then here's a Les Paul trio side of Irving Berlin's "Blue Skies." I like Les's early work, because in the absence of all the later studio inventiveness you get to just hear good guitar-playing.

www.karlstraubmusic.com/1-17 Blue Skies.mp3

I guess I always knew Les Paul wouldn't live forever, but (like Irving Berlin) he certainly did his best to try. I'm sure tons of people are writing about him now, somewhere, but I hope it doesn't sound arrogant if I prefer to just ignore what they're all saying. I'm sure there are tons of people who know more about Les Paul's career than I do, and probably many who have stolen more from him than I have. I doubt, though, that there's anyone who enjoys his playing more than I do.

I keep forgetting how much I've stolen, borrowed, or inherited from him-- while people always talk about his recording achievements, and his role in the development of the electric guitar (and rightly so), I'd just like to briefly mention all the things I like about his actual guitar playing, which somehow gets typically ignored or slighted.

I guess that jazz critics and rock critics are for once in agreement in their lack of appreciation for Les Paul's guitar playing. I remember reading some Philistine rock critic in the Rolling Stone Record Guide saying, in essence, Les Paul is really important but his records aren't so great. I guess the idea was that we can all thank Les Paul for developing technology that the real musicians like Jimi Hendrix and Jimmy Page could use to make the real important records.

Well, naturally I love the records those guys made, but it's important to remember that Les didn't just invent a bunch of technical gizmos. He demonstrated how electric guitar parts can be overdubbed and layered to create a guitar-encrusted world of sound-- with tape echo, sped-up tracks, and sometimes just picking down by the bridge, Les gave different personalities and colors to the timbre of different guitar tracks. This gave much of his best work the timbral richness of a string quartet, and I don't think it's a stretch to say that he was a kind of link between people like Haydn and people like Hendrix. He also brought a puckish sense of humor to the way he attacked a note and developed a line. Not for all tastes, I suppose, but I'll always remember what a friend said to me when we were very young. I'd just played a few Roy Nichols licks, and a skinhead buddy of ours chuckled at my playing. I felt bad until my friend said that if you can make someone laugh by the way you play guitar, you really have something. In retrospect, it may be that that bit of advice was the most valuable of my career; when I needed ideas on bringing more wit into my playing, I knew where to look. I don't think anyone recorded more amusing and comical electric guitar playing than Les Paul.

If Les was arguably "corny" by comparison with the likes of Charlie Parker, or Charlie Christian, who cares? I'm not too concerned with the views of hip jazz purists about thiings like this. I'd argue that most jazz guitarists could benefit from Les's ability to orchestrate with mostly electric guitars, and in fact many jazz records with beautiful improvised playing could arguably still benefit from the orchestral and timbral blending ideas Les used. Hendrix and Page certainly did-- and I'd even argue that, great as their playing is, it wouldn't have had nearly the impact it did if not for the orchestral approach that they both probably learned from Les Paul. Les Paul taught us that electric guitars could paint landscapes and jungles of twang and tone.
Beyond the timbral tone-painting he did on his most famous recordings, he had a beautiful way with articulation. I think he played melodies better than most "hipper" guitarists. I'm tempted to call him the Bobby Hackett of the guitar, except that leaves out his twangy, goofy, country-fried side. I think a lot of jazz and country players were influenced by him; sometimes the influence was one of many, but sometimes people put out whole albums in the Les Paul style. I had a Vinnie Bell record like that, and I found a download of a George Barnes album in that vein too. I suspect there were similar knockoffs by others. Then there's the undeniable influence on rockabilly players, either directly or indirectly (through Chet Atkins).

Any time you catch me playing with a ridiculous amount of slapback, or just trying to sound big, bright, and melodic, you can thank Les Paul.

(MORE)

GUITAR TABLATURE AND TRANSCRIPTIONS BY STRAUB

BELOW YOU CAN FIND INFO ABOUT MY TABLATURE AND TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE. I CAN DO TRANSCRIPTIONS IN TABLATURE OR STANDARD MUSIC NOTATION. I CAN ALSO RECORD VIDEO OF ME SHOWING YOU HOW TO PLAY THE PARTS. My policy information is all here-- please feel free to email me with questions at karlstraub@hotmail.com

CUSTOMER FEEDBACK
(Karl transcribed various instrument parts from several Warren Zevon recordings. He then arranged the parts for three horns.)

"Karl helped transcribe my most basic head arrangements into three perfectly harmonized horn parts for my performance fronting a thirteen piece band. There was only one run through just prior to the show and so the notation had to be correct, and it was. His experience as a musician playing in many different styles makes him especially easy to relate to conceptually and I would recommend him for any project requiring a keen ear and an accurate transcription."

David Kitchen

There is a ton of guitar tablature available on the web, as you probably know. My students bring in tablature all the time, wanting me to help them learn guitar parts from records. Some of the online free tab is accurate; occasionally it's excellent. However, the vast majority of it that I've seen is flawed. I've seen everything from small mistakes to huge ones; some of the tab online is so wrong it actually works against you. (An awful lot of it is posted by novice players; in many cases I wonder why the person thought they were qualified to post tablature at all.)

The main problem is, unless you already are a pretty good player with a good ear, you're not going to have any idea whether you're looking at good tablature or lousy. Another problem is that most of what's online is current mainstream stuff-- this is not a problem if you're 15 years old and only know the music that's sold to teenagers. The rest of us are aware of an endless avalanche of other music out there, new and old, much of which is not transcribed online anywhere.

That's where I come in-- I have a music education degree, and 25 years of professional playing experience. When I transcribe a guitar solo, I know what I'm doing.

If you're serious about playing music correctly, I'm available to provide quality transcriptions of whatever you're interested in. please contact me at karlstraub@hotmail.com.

PRICING
My base price for a transcription is $30.00. This can vary depending on various elements.

MORE EXPENSIVE

Complicated music, such as chord voicings on a jazz record, 3-part harmonized lines such as you'd find on a Bob Wills record, Chet Atkins fingerstyle arrangements, etc.
These kinds of things take a long time to transcribe. It also takes much longer if you want notation, as opposed to tablature. Notation includes rhythms, adding a lot of extra work. I can also provide a video clip of me demonstrating how to play the parts, or certain techniques. That takes a lot more time, of course.

LESS EXPENSIVE

Single-note solos and fills are easier to transcribe. It's also easier for me to transcribe using tab only, and not notating rhythms. I prefer notation myself, because it's more accurate than tab, but if you don't read notation or rhythms, I can do tab-only quicker for you. The tablature will tell you frets and strings, but you'll have to figure out the rhythms on your own.

BULK RATE

If you are interested in an ongoing service, like taking lessons, I may be able to offer a discount.

SOME THOUGHTS ABOUT THE VALUE AND COST OF THIS WORK.

I've had some customers tell me my prices are too high. Naturally, I understand the concept of "what the market will bear," and I don't expect anyone to pay more than they want to. I also understand money is tight in this economy-- this is part of the reason I'm trying to augment my income with transcribing. If you honestly can't afford what I'm charging, please tell me what you can afford and we may be able to work something out. However, if you think I'm overcharging, please consider the following information, presented as cheerfully as possible--

If you take a guitar lesson from a qualified professional, you would very likely pay more than my transcribing price for just one lesson. (note-- I recognize that I live in a large metropolitan area-- lesson rates may be cheaper where you live.) If your teacher has to write down something he's figuring out by ear, that takes additional time. This is assuming you can find a teacher you trust to figure things out accurately. If you think of one of my transcriptions as a guitar lesson, maybe it won't seem overpriced. (In my view, learning a solo by a master like Oscar Moore, or Eldon Shamblin, or Peter Green, is really the equivalent of a whole bunch of lessons.) Please keep in mind, I encourage customers to ask questions that will enable them to play the transcribed music more easily.

If you have a trained professional come to fix something at your house, in many cases they charge more than $30.00 just to walk in the door.

Transcribing is not like raking leaves-- it's very complex work, and not everyone can do it. I have a music degree and years of experience teaching and performing many different styles. I think sometimes people have trouble thinking of musicians as qualified professionals who should be paid well. Part of the problem is that there is so much free tab and online information. This conditions people into thinking they should be able to get tab without paying for it. Some of the free stuff is good, but much of it is worthless. There is also an awful lot of music you will never find free tab for.

I provide a service for people who are serious about music, and want their transcription to be accurate. I also am doing this for people interested in music that's hard (or impossible) to find in tab form. If I charged my hourly teaching rate for my transcriptions, my price would be much higher! I'm charging less than I think I'm worth because I'm trying to establish an online reputation and not scare people away.

PAYMENT POLICIES

I ask my customers for a 50% down payment before I begin a transcribing project. Customers interested in samples of my work can find some on this site, listed on the right side of the site.
If a customer would prefer to see a brief sample excerpt from the work they have in mind, I can post or email them a few measures before they decide. Please note-- I sometimes get emails from customers reluctant to pay me anything until I've finished the job. I can understand their concern, of course. I don't know if any of you have paid money upfront to someone and then been burned; I do know that quite a few students have taken lessons from me and then told me they would send me a check, but somehow never got around to it (even with numerous reminders from me.) From now on, I require a down payment as a gesture of good faith. (note-- I'll probably have a paypal option pretty soon, so you won't have to mail a check if you don't feel like going through the extra hassle.)
At this time, I ask for payment by mailed check at the conclusion of the work. My address is Karl Straub, 406 Cloverway, Alexandria, Virginia, 22314. I can post the transcription while it's in progress, in case a customer wants to give suggestions for me to do it differently in some way.

MY TRANSCRIBING SYSTEM

I can email a file with the transcription to you. I usually post it on my private site, where you can watch it in progress, and print it out for your own use.

WHAT I NEED FROM YOU

Customers must make the recording available to me in one of the following ways.

1. Mail me a burned CD of the music.

2. Email me an mp3, using YouSendIt (www.yousendit.com/) or similar program. (Note-- if you have ITunes program, it's easy to make an mp3, drag it to your desktop, and send it it to me in an email using YouSendIt. My email address is karlstraub@hotmail.com.)

3. If the song is on YouTube, send me the link. I can usually transcribe from a YouTube clip.

I also need very clear information from you about what you want. This means a clear description of which parts, solos, chords, etc. I also need to know the timings of where a part comes in. (i.e. if you want a guitar solo, I need to know that it is 1:40 to 1:58.)

Here is a partial list of players and styles I've transcribed in the past--

• Chuck Berry


• Bo Diddley


• Freddy King


• Clarence White


• Norman Blake


• Tony Rice


• Dan Crary


• Jimi Hendrix


• the Beatles


• Keith Richards/Rolling Stones


• Jimmy Page/Led Zeppelin


• Black Sabbath


• Angus Young/AC/DC


• B.B. King


• Albert King


• Eric Clapton/Cream/Bluesbreakers


• Roy Nichols/Merle Haggard


• James Burton


• John Cipollina/Quicksilver Messenger Service


• Magic Sam


• Otis Rush


• Jeff Beck/Yardbirds


• George Barnes


• Hank Garland


• Eldon Shamblin/Junior Barnard/Tiny Moore/Bob Wills


• Charlie Christian(Benny Goodman)


• George Benson


• Mick Ronson (David Bowie)


• Nokie Edwards (Ventures)


• Marc Bolan (T. Rex)


• Peter Green/Danny Kirwan (original Fleetwood Mac)


• Hubert Sumlin (Howlin' Wolf)


• Don Rich (Buck Owens)


• Grady Martin (tons of old country records)


• and tons more!

(MORE)

"PANHANDLE RAG," ARRANGED BY KARL STRAUB

www.karlstraubmusic.com/PANHANDLE RAG straub arrangement.mp3

Here are three different Straub arrangements of "Panhandle Rag."

(Please note-- anyone who would like a copy of these arrangements should email me at karlstraub@hotmail.com. I'm happy to sell a copy to anyone who would like to use it for their own group. I'm also available to write similar arrangements for anyone who wants to spice up their country or western swing music with harmonized stuff like this. Want a Bob Wills style arrangement written for your group? I'm here to help!)


Some of this is in four-part style-- I played these sections as two parts, both playing double stops. It takes a lot of work to play a four-part arrangement with just two players-- the double stops are tough, and it took me many takes to get it right.

(Of course, if I learned how to punchin while overdubbing, it would be easier. But one man can only do so much.) It's a lot easier to play these kinds of lines with four players, but how many groups have that many soloists handy? (In fact, this arranging approach is even stronger with five players-- with a fifth line an octave below the top line.)

The eight bar intro is four-part style.

Next is thirty-two bars (the whole head) in two-part style. This is two lines, and could be more easily played by two players. This section is a fairly straight rendition of the original melody, harmonized.

Then I have more four-part style, thirty-two bars. This is again played by two guitars with double-stops.

Last, I have another two-part section. This is the variation that departs most from the original melody. It's hotter and more swinging.

(MORE)

"LIMEHOUSE BLUES," FRANK VIGNOLA AND BUCKY PIZZARELLI

Hot jazz-- after a slow reading of the melody, a nice uptempo version of this old chestnut.
(MORE)

JAVA JIVE-- INK SPOTS GUITAR INTROS

The Ink Spots were a pre-rock vocal group. Along with great harmonies and amusingly ponderous recitations (which probably influenced Elvis), their records featured classic single-note riffs plus chord-melody guitar intros. (Huey Long, a guy who played some of these intros, just died at 105. I don't think he played on this cut, but I'm not sure.) Usually, the guitar intro arrangement was the same one they used on every other record; sometimes with a slight variation. (One of my first experiences with a compact disc was listening to each successive intro on an Ink Spots collection; with the new technology, it was now possible to hear twenty Ink Spots guitar intros in about a minute. They were almost all the same.)

This is "Java Jive," more of a fun novelty than their typical material, most of which is in a ballad vein. Classic!
(MORE)

NOISE IS OKAY WITH ME, AS LONG AS IT'S NOT BORING

http://sonicmassrecords.com/02buddingpeonies.mp3

I'm listening to some solo "experimental" music by guitarist Anthony Pirog. It's excellent. Anthony is using a pretty broad palette here. Many sounds on here have wandered far away from traditional notions of what "music" is; lack of clear pitch identity and use of unorthodox sonic sources (plus no doubt some other things I didn't notice yet!) Many would hear this recording and dismiss it as bullshit for these reasons. I wouldn't, though; nor do I dismiss music as "not music" if it doesn't check every box on the list of what music "should be."

On the other hand, I don't question the idea of a check list of desirable musical elements. I use one myself when evaluating music. Everyone does this, including people who say they don't. It's just that different people have dramatically different checklists. Most people have a fairly short list, I imagine, but the crucial difference between mine and those of "most people" (an assumption, of course, but it's definitely based on data I've observed), is that we weight certain items very differently.

For instance, traditional indicators of competence such as intonation and tuning have remained in place in the culture regardless of certain significant factors. These factors include the shading and blurring of intonation used in African-American blues idioms (in fact, a highly complex, if mostly intuitive, system of expressive devices) and the reality of keeping stringed instruments in tune in weather-affected environmental conditions.

Whether you're talking about the blues (with its unorthodox use of rough timbre, between-the-cracks intonation, etc.) or "twentieth-century classical" compositional innovations (unorthodox musical sources such as devices not designed to produce music, alteration of traditional instruments such as Cage's prepared piano, etc.) it should be clear that music has been made that deviates from long-established norms. The only real issue is how to evaluate this music. I argue that music avoiding "standard practice" in some areas should be evaluated on its achievement in other areas. I would further argue that, in many cases, inability to evaluate music this way reflects a lack of knowledge of the other areas.

For example, Pirog's piece "Budding Peonies"

http://sonicmassrecords.com/02buddingpeonies.mp3

has a large variety of timbral mixtures and dynamics. It's an example of my view that music trafficking in so-called "avant-garde" sound should demonstrate mastery of other musical and structural elements. The balance of colors and textures here is complex. There is a variety of register as well, and dynamics shift from one color to another quite often. It seems to me that much "avant-garde" music is, once you can accept radical notions of the use of sonic textures, actually pretty bland and dull. When formal considerations are ignored, even the craziest use of sound can be as boring as beer-commercial music.

In short, I am happy to listen to music both traditional and not; this is because, for me, an ability to play traditional instruments with some basic level of competence is not, in fact, directly connected to a mastery of music itself. There is a difference between a writer and a typist; an orator and an auctioneer are masters of unrelated arts. The issue is your material, not your instrument. I admire techical mastery of any instrument, but it's a non-musical achievement; it's more like learning to climb a ladder without falling off, or driving a stick shift. Technique should always be in service of the idea. When technique is allowed to dictate musical decisions, artistry flags.

MORE ON THIS TOPIC LATER--

TREMOLO AS ONLY EDDIE PEABODY COULD SUPPLY IT

Here's Eddie Peabody, one of an army of now-forgotten musicians who get lumped into the dismissive "novelty" category. Once upon a time, "entertainers" were often technical virtuosos as well. In those days, you couldn't just strut around like an underwear model with bedroom eyes as pyrotechnics explode in the background; people expected you to be able to play your instrument. I'm only dimly aware of this "genre," if you can call it that, but fortunately I have a cadre of informants who are always happy to enlighten me about this kind of stuff. Enjoy, and be sure and watch Eddie's right hand (grainy youtube quality, regrettably!) for insight into plectrum tremolo technique. (thanks to the anachronistic George Welling for passing along this gem.)
(MORE)

CAPTAIN BEEFHEART'S TEN COMMANDMENTS FOR GUITARISTS

Captain Beefheart's various guitarists, especially the divine Bill Harkleroad and Jeff Cotton, played some of the most memorable guitar parts in rock history. The blend of blues, counterpoint, syncopation, dissonance, and distorted timbres on "Trout Mask Replica" is an essential frame of reference for many artists. Any time you hear a rock band where the guitarists are working on rhythms, overdriven rather than high-gain distortion tones, counterpoint, dissonance, etc. rather than speed-based fluidity, there's a pretty good chance they have been listening to the Captain and his various Magic Bands.

I'm not going to get into the issues of authorship of Captain Beefheart's compositions here, but I will say this--

1. All of the musicians deserve a lot of the credit for Beefheart's sound, because of the hard work and creativity they brought to the music.

2. It seems likely to me that without Beefheart's irrational combination of self-confidence, willful perversity, ideas about combining elements of Bo Diddley, Chicago blues and free jazz, controlling personality, etc. none of that music would have ever happened.

So, I recognize the Captain's genius. It may or may not be possible to achieve results using his suggestions below. I like the idea of practicing in a traditional manner, but I am intrigued by his tips, so here they are!

(incidentally, one of the things that led me to doing these guitar instruction blogs was my plan to transcribe and analyze a lot of the guitar parts from the Trout Mask album. I've come to believe that this is a project which, at least in the short term, is not the best use of my time; I do have one interesting transcription I've done, though (Dali's Car). I hope to get to that project one day, but in the meantime I'd love to get feedback from anyone who is interested in transcriptions of Beefheart guitar, and who wouldn't be scared off by the prospect of paying for something like that. if anyone knows of any transcriptions online, please let me know also.)

Captain Beefheart's Ten Commandments For Guitarists 1. LISTEN TO THE BIRDS. That's where all the music comes from. Birds know everything about how it should sound and where that sound should come from. And watch hummingbirds. They fly really fast, but a lot of times they aren't going anywhere. 2. YOUR GUITAR IS NOT REALLY A GUITAR. Your guitar is a divining rod. Use it to find spirits in the other world and bring them over. A guitar is also a fishing rod. If you're good, you'll land a big one. 3. PRACTICE IN FRONT OF A BUSH. Wait until the moon is out, then go outside, eat a multi-grained bread and play your guitar to a bush. If the bush doesn't shake, eat another piece of bread. 4. WALK WITH THE DEVIL. Old delta blues players referred to amplifiers as the "devil box." And they were right. You have to be an equal opportunity employer in terms of who you're bringing over from the other side. Electricity attracts demons and devils. Other instruments attract other spirits. An acoustic guitar attracts Casper. A mandolin attracts Wendy. But an electric guitar attracts Beelzebub. 5. IF YOU'RE GUILTY OF THINKING, YOU'RE OUT. If your brain is part of the process, you're missing it. You should play like a drowning man, struggling to reach shore. If you can trap that feeling, then you have something that is fur bearing. 6. NEVER POINT YOUR GUITAR AT ANYONE. Your instrument has more power than lightning. Just hit a big chord, then run outside to hear it. But make sure you are not standing in an open field. 7. ALWAYS CARRY YOUR CHURCH KEY. You must carry your key and use it when called upon. That's your part of the bargain. Like One String Sam. He was a Detroit street musician in the fifties who played a homemade instrument. His song "I Need A Hundred Dollars" is warm pie. Another church key holder is Hubert Sumlin, Howlin' Wolf's guitar player. He just stands there like the Statue of Liberty making you want to look up her dress to see how he's doing it. 8. DON'T WIPE THE SWEAT OFF YOUR INSTRUMENT. You need that stink on there. Then you have to get that stink onto your music. 9. KEEP YOUR GUITAR IN A DARK PLACE. When you're not playing your guitar, cover it and keep it in a dark place. If you don't play your guitar for more than a day, be sure to put a saucer of water in with it. 10. YOU GOTTA HAVE A HOOD FOR YOUR ENGINE. Wear a hat when you play and keep that hat on. A hat is a pressure cooker. If you have a roof on your house the hot air can't escape. Even a lima bean has to have a wet paper towel around it to make it grow.

(MORE)

FLIGHT OF THE BUMBLEBEE

here's Stravinsky's gem of a musical joke, played on classical guitar by Dimitris Kotronakis. If I can figure out something to say about this, I'll add it later. In the meantime, enjoy!

(MORE)

LEARNING GUITAR FROM VIDEO AND/OR NOTATION

Here are some of my thoughts about learning guitar ideas and techniques from a video, from notation, etc. These ideas reflect a lot of my experiences trying to learn from pre-recorded material; I'm also dealing here with a lot of the difficulties my students have had learning this way. I hope that some of the ideas and tips below will help. Please feel free to post comments with questions, suggestions, etc. I want the material here to serve the needs of guitarists out there-- and I don't know what you need if you don't let me know!

(PLEASE NOTE-- THIS ARTICLE WILL TAKE ME A LONG TIME TO FINISH. I'LL POST IT IN BITS AND PIECES-- FEEL FREE TO COMMENT ALONG THE WAY.)

The following are in no particular order, and can be related to various styles/skill levels etc.

NOTATION VS. TABLATURE

Standard musical notation and tablature both have their pros and cons. My preference generally is standard notation, but I've certainly used tablature a lot in my own learning and with my students.

Notation (using notes on a staff) has only one disadvantages over tablature, and this is the reason why most guitarists out there choose to avoid it.
It takes a lot of work to learn it. (Even if you already read notation, the guitar has special reading challenges due to the repetition of many notes in different places on the neck.)

I'm going to talk in a bit about what you can do if you want to avoid reading notation. There are, in fact, some advantages to avoiding it, and I know some very fine, even brilliant, players who don't read. That being said, I think that most students avoid reading for the wrong reasons. Most of my students through the years have preferred to avoid tedious work in general when it comes to learning the guitar.

I hope it doesn't come across as righteous when I explain the following crucial concept-- IT TAKES A LOT OF WORK TO PLAY THE GUITAR, AND BY WORK I MEAN WHAT YOU PROBABLY THINK WORK IS-- BORING, TEDIOUS DRUDGERY. I know there's a danger that this statement will turn off a lot of you. I hope it won't drive you away, but I need to make this point clear to all. (I've had a lot of students who were absolutely unwilling to do certain kinds of work to learn the guitar, and I have often felt like a doctor writing out prescriptions for patients who are unwilling to take the medicine.) If you see me recommend something that sounds boring or hard or both, and you're wondering if there's an easier way-- the answer is most likely no. Certainly I've tried to avoid work myself as a player, mostly with weak results. I do design exercises as efficiently as possible, so you get the most back for the least amount of time and boredom invested. Whenever possible, I try to design exercises to benefit you in more than one area. I do this for my own use as well as for students-- I don't like tedious exercises any more than you do, and I don't have tons of free time to waste either. But there are simply some things you need to do to progress on the instrument.

At any rate, I'm trying to say that avoiding notation because of the work involved is not out of the question if you're serious about being a serious player. You should, however, be honest with yourself about whether you are avoiding it as a practical, well-reasoned decision, or just through laziness. I have a principle that I tell people about the guitar, which probably applies to much of life as well.

IF YOU AVOID WORK IN ANY AREA OF GUITAR PLAYING OR MUSIC, IT WILL PROBABLY CREATE OTHER WORK FOR YOU IN ANOTHER AREA.

LEARNING LICKS FROM A VIDEO

I've probably watched at least forty full-length instructional videos, most of which I own. Typically, I watch them over and over obsessively. Sometimes I follow the actual lessons note-for-note; other times I just watch them without a guitar, hoping to pick up ideas or understand a concept better. I've watched videos in various styles (country, jazz, rock, blues, etc.) and at various levels of difficulty. I've spent many hours with videos that were over my head-- sometimes way over what I was capable of at the time. Many times I only learned something after many viewings, and many attempts. I am a big advocate of studying videos that are over your skill level, as I believe you can benefit over a long period of time this way. I don't consider an instructional video to be useless if I can't immediately understand everything the player is doing.

Apparently, judging from the comments of guitarists I've seen online, this attitude makes me unusual. Many people watch an instructional video, have initial difficulty, and pronounce the video worthless. I just read a review of an Albert Lee video where the viewer was frustrated because he couldn't follow any of it. I haven't seen this video; I don't doubt that it could have been made more accessible in some ways. I do say this, though. Even a self-described "intermediate" player is not always going to be able to play or understand everything a world-class technician can do. I have had the experience as a teacher of explaining a lick multiple different times, and multiple different ways, to the same student with no effective result. There are a lot of technical and fundamental things you must master before you can play anything on the level of an Albert Lee. If you haven't done this foundation work already, no amount of slowing down and explanation will enable you to play like a world-class virtuoso. I often run into the phenomenon of the student who thinks that playing advanced music is largely a matter of learning certain "tricks" and shortcuts. Certainly there are some shortcuts, and even some tricks, that advanced players learn. But if you are thinking in this way, I predict you will be sorely disappointed as you try to spend money on lessons/videos etc. under the assumption that there are magical skeleton keys that unlock the guitar. I have definitely learned many particular things that had a miraculous effect on my playing, but without exception all of these things were difficult. Generally they involve, at minimum, learning to think and play in some counterintuitive way. Often an unwillingness to work is the obstacle to progress, but many times I find that the more insidious and crippling factor is the unwilingness to think in a new way. (I should point out that there are many guitar "teachers" out there who encourage students to believe in the short-cut model of learning. No doubt some of them are sincere, even helpful; nonetheless, in general I put these people in the category with the pitchmen who tell you you can lose weight without eating less or exercising. Good luck with that!)

(MORE)

FRANK ZAPPA ESSAY ABOUT GUITAR

Here's an essay I found online; I remembered reading it in Guitar Player Magazine years ago. I agree with a lot of it, as I did then. And, as then, I don't agree with Zappa's dismissive attitude toward the Byrds, James Burton, Nokie Edwards, and probably many others he implicitly deals with here. Still, there's a lot of truth here, and (most importantly) a handful of tracks Zappa says nice things about. Even if you disagree passionately with some of his criticisms, you could probably benefit from listening to the stuff he recommends. When I read this, I went out and tracked down Guitar Slim, etc.

Good Guitar Stuff Or Stereotypifications? The Evolution Of The Guitar's Use in Pop Music [Short Version]
by Frank Zappa

During the '50s it was rare to find a guitar solo on rock or R&B singles - it was usually the honk-squeak tenor sax syndrome taking up the space between the bridge and the third verse. When a guitar was
heard (usually on the blues or country blues items I was collecting), its function bore little resemblance to today's collection of pathetic lick-spewage and freeze-dried stereotypifications. (All of you sensitive
guitar fans who actually get off on our current pseudo-academic era of polished efficiency had better read another article.)

If you have access to them, take the time to listen to the guitar solos on "Three Hours Past Midnight" (Johnny Guitar Watson), The Story Of My Life (Guitar Slim), or just about any of B.B.King's singles from that period. For my taste, these solos are exemplary because what is being played seems honest and, in a musical way, a direct extension of the personality of the men who played them. If I were a
music critic, I would have to say that these values for me mean more than the ability to execute clean lines or clouds of educated gnat-notes.

Other examples of good guitar stuff from that era might include "Lucy Mae Blues" (Frankie Lee Simms), "Happy Home" (Elmore James - even though Elmore tended to play the same famous lick on every
record, I got the feeling he meant it), and the work of Hubert Sumlin (and Buddy Guy couple of times) on Howlin' Wolf's things. I'm sure there are other hot items, but this is a short article.

Also to be fair about it, there were some classic examples of sterility then, too, in the kind of rock solos on the Bill Haley singles and the obnoxious cleen-teen finger work on the New York based R&B
vocal quintet records (on labels like Gee, on the up tempo numbers with the ice-cream-cone chord changes).

Then we get to the '60s. We get there partly because R&B was being produced to death (strings on Ray Charles and Fats Domino records, etc.) and because England was starting to ship back some
recycled '50s music, played by people who were younger and cuter than the original performers, to be consumed by people who were younger and cuter than the original consumers (and who, especially in
the case of Rolling Stones fans, had never heard the original recordings of their revamped Slim Harpo/Muddy Waters repertoire...and not only that, folks; if they had heard the originals, they probably
wouldn't have liked them at all, since neither of the original artists named above were a prance-worthy as Mick Jagger).

Obviously, part of the recycling process included the imitation of Chuck Berry guitar solos, B.B.King solos, and even some abstractions of John Lee Hooker guitar solos. The guitar was becoming more
prevalent in backing arrangements on singles, especially as a rhythm instrument. Solos on mostly white-person records of that day and age tended to be rhythmic also, especially in surf music. Almost
everything that survives in popular memory (the greatest hits, in other words) was designed for the purpose of dancing - but mainly just to sell. The '60s saw the beginnings of record production as a science in
the service of commerce, with heavy emphasis on the repetition of successful formulas. The best that can be said about this period is that it brought us Jeff Beck at his feedback apex, Jimi Hendrix at his
overkill -volume best, and Cream, which sort of legitimized jamming a lot onstage (so long as you could prove British decent, usually by reeling off musical quotations from blues records which most Americans
had never heard. [Radio programming nerds made sure you never heard any of that stuff because Negroes were playing it, and they did their best to protect the young audiences of the '50s and early '60s from
such a horrible culture shock, while over in England the better musicians were lusting after vintage blues records, actually obtaining them, and having these records from the basis of their playing traditions.
So briefly to review: I would have to characterize guitarism of the '50s as having, in its best cases, some real humor, style, and personality, and, in its worst cases, mechanical sterility and lack of musical
interest.

I would characterize the '60s as having, at its best, exploratory qualities not possible before the advent of heavy amplification and recording studio machinery; more rhythmic interest; and, in some instances,
real humor, style, and personality. At its worst, the guitarism of the '60s brought us amateur strummery; several swift kicks at the Fender Twin Reverb springs; the archetype of folk-rock 12 string swill (the
predecessor of the horrible fake-sensitive type artist/singer/songwriter/suffering person, posed against a wooden fence provided by the Warner Bros.. Records art department, graciously rented to all the other
record companies who needed it for their version of the same crap); and the first examples of the "psychedelic guitar solo," not to mention Inna-Godda-Da-Vida-ism.

Obviously, this is condensing and leaving out a lot, but I'm sure that all of you entirely -too-modern persons who have read this far are getting anxious for something more relevant to your life style - and
you're probably right! A perspective of musical history has absolutely no place in today's thrilling musical world. Yes, that's right, you heard right!

How could any of this information be useful to a musical world that has reached a point of sophistication that accepts concepts like The Super-Group, The Best Guitar Player In the World, The Fastest
Guitar Player In The World, The Prettiest Guitar Player In The World, The Loudest Guitar Player In The World, The Guitar Player In The World Who Has Collected The Most Oldest Guitars In The World
(some of which have been played by dead guitar players who were actually musicians) and so forth?

The history of Pop Music has a habit of telling us who we really are - 'cause if we weren't that way we wouldn't have spent billions of dollars on those records, would we? After careful training by the
media and merchandising people, the entire population (even guitar players) has been transmuted into a reasonable well-groomed, ordor free, consumer-amoeba that is kept alive only to service manufacturers
and lives its life by the motto: biggest, fastest, loudest is most and best.

So forget about the past; it means nothing to you now (unless you can find a way to play it louder/faster - which probably wouldn't be too hard since even infants today can play as fast as the earliest
Mahavishnuisms). Let's face it, once you learn the 28 or 29 most commonly used rock guitar doodads ( a few country licks, a little Albert King, a pentatonic scale here 'n' there, get yer heavy vibrato
together), you are ready to live; to be what will be known in the future as "The Guitar Player Of The '70s." Yes, soon you will belong to the ages, and when you've finally got your album contract, and it finally
comes out, and it sells 10,000,000 copies, and when every beginning guitar player sits at home and hears you wanking away at phenomenal speed with your perfect fuzz and your thoroughly acceptable
execution, and when that little guy with his first guitar (him and the 10,000,000 other ones) says to himself: "Shit, I can do that," and proceeds to memorize every awe-inspiring note, and then plays it faster than
you...(maybe gets his thirty-second-notes up to around a dotted whole note = 208). And not only that; after leaning your solo faster, he transposes it up a minor third, steals some of his mother's clothes, gets
a job in a bar, gets discovered, gets a record contract (with an advance 10 times bigger than yours), makes an album (with a better budget than yours because he's going to be the next big thing, according to
the executives at the record company, and they don't mind spending a little extra for real talent). And not only that; while you just figured out you can't play any faster because you got coked out on the
royalties of your first album (and you still have to record 10 more according to your contract), and it's time to do your second album, and you've been asking recording engineers how a VSO works,
meanwhile the little guy with his mother's clothes on gets his album out on the street, and it sells 20,000,000 copies, and somewhere out there , there's 20,000,000 other little guys with their first guitars and
they're listening to your recycled wank, and they're saying....

(MORE)

PRIVATE LESSONS ON VIDEO

I now have the technology to record myself playing guitar on video, and send it to you in an email. You can then watch it on your computer, or even put it on your Ipod/Iphone.

If you're interested in doing a "virtual lesson" where I record short musical examples on video, please email me at karlstraub@hotmail.com to discuss what you're looking for, and how much it will cost.

A video lesson done this way could be structured in a variety of ways, just like a regular in-person lesson. Examples-- I could play a lick you're trying to learn, or a solo from a record. I could also show how I might improvise in various styles, or over a certain chord progression, etc.
Please note-- it doesn't have to be shot in the "point-of-view" angle. Some people find that camera angle offputting-- I can shoot it traditional style if needed. (If you are going to put it on your Ipod, you can have your cake and eat it too, though, because you can just hold the Ipod upside down.)

PLEASE NOTE-- virtually all levels/styles can be accomodated. I don't have any beginner stuff on here, but I teach beginners all the time and I can certainly provide some beginner info if anyone wants it. There are tons of guitar books out there for beginners, but these are often lacking in helpful tips about practicing, what to work on based on your musical interests, etc. If anyone wants me to tailor some beginner material to fit their interests, I'd be happy to do that.
(MORE)

E PEDAL TONE EXERCISE

Another provocatively titled exercise.



Pedal tone is when you keep one voice held on one note, while the other voice has more movement. Keep a droning pedal tone note on the B string, fifth fret, while moving lower voice chromatically up and down. I use a pick for the low voice, and ring finger for the pedal tone, but you can use any finger combination you prefer.

This is a great technique warmup, mostly for left hand, although the right hand part can be tricky too, especially when the spread between strings is wider. Besides being good for technique, you can use it to prepare various pedal steel-ish licks. Charlie McNamara reminded me that you can also find a lot of great Grant Green/Kenny Burrell bluesy jazz lines too.

Any kind of line you want, as long as it's not moving superfast, is in there somewhere. You can play simple pentatonic stuff, get a little more chromatic, bluesy, etc.

A great way to make your line "denser" so that it's less thin. It's effective to throw in this texture once in a while as a contrast if you typically play single-note lines-- textural contrast of this kind can make a long solo sound more interesting.

Here is some additional material from guitar colleague John C. McCain--
These are some chords suggested by the double stops in the exercise. (editor's note: depending on the musical situation, the double stops can imply various chords, or you can just hear the non-pedal tones as tension tones against an E chord, or an A. A lot of pedal steel counterpoint licks use the pedal tone as root or fifth of a chord, with lines below. Steel players often will alternate licks using root on top with fifth-on-top licks, in the same solo or same passage. It's also hot to think of the pedal tone as the 7th of a dominant chord. But all that's another discussion-- perhaps I need to do some more posts on this topic!)


some common harmonic implications (courtesy John C. McCain):


e & d = E7 or Asus
e & c# = AMaj or c#m
e & c - CMaj or am
e & b = E Maj or Em
e & Bb = C7 or Em7b5
e & a = AMaj or am or B7sus
e & g# = EMaj
e & g = em or CMaj
e & f# = D9 or F#7
e & f = FMaj7 or dm9
e & e = EMaj or em or modal anything
e & d# = EMaj7 or B7add11
(John C. McCain can be found on myspace. www.myspace.com/johncmccain

(MORE)

'ROUND MIDNIGHT, SOLO GUITAR ARRANGEMENT

Here's my first attempt at a video of me playing guitar. I've shot it upside down, so guitarists can see the neck as if they were playing. (some people like instructional videos done this way-- let me know if you love it or hate it, because I'm going to be doing many more of these and I want viewers to be happy!)

this is a sketch for my upcoming session with Jack O'Dell and Johnny Castle. I plan to record this Monk tune, plus some new originals featuring a lot of guitar.
here's a link to another version of this, which is better in some ways, and I wrote more about how I got the sound, etc.
karlstraubcountryguitar.blogspot.com/2009/03/monks-round-midnight-on-telecaster.html

(MORE)

FREIGHT TRAIN

Here's a bare-bones arrangement of "Freight Train," the Elizabeth Cotten fingerstyle classic. My basic fingerstyle approach here is as follows-- quarter notes in the bass part, and mostly half notes in the top voice (melody). Once you can play this arrangement as written, you can spiff it up in various ways-- adding notes in between the top and bottom parts (this usually involves the G string, which is mostly not used in the melody part) or syncopating the melody, adding more notes to the melody, etc. Adding even a little bit in this way can make it really come alive-- it will sound much more complex, even though it's only slightly more work for you.

I'm not a fingerstyle specialist-- my strategy for getting the maximum result with minimum result is to be pretty repetitive with the bass/accompaniment, then add melody on top. I may put up more complex variations later, but for now work this arrangement up. It's a bit stiff, as you'll hear, but it's rhythmically repetitive to make it easier to absorb.

A few tips-- use the thumb for the root on the F chord. (The F chord is a lot harder than the others. You may want to skip that section for a while so you don't get too frustrated. Playing up the neck with a capo can make it a little easier, because the stretch is less extreme.) I sometimes finger chord notes that are not in the notation-- it varies with different chords. I leave out the A string notes unless (as in the case of C major chord) the root is on the A string. With the G, E, and F chords, I'm leaving out the A string. This gives you a less cluttered sound in the bass, and in most cases makes the chords easier to play. I'm often fretting a G string chord tone, even though it's not in the notation-- this is so I can add that note in later for rolls, etc. (The G string can give you a thicker texture, moving you away from the stark sound of bass plus melody.)

(MORE)

CATASTROPHIC EQUIPMENT FAILURE AT A U2 GIG

Here's comedian Bill Bailey's take on U2 guitarist "The Edge." (thanks to Jack O'Dell for sending me this clip.)
For the record, I like guitarists who use effects to get an interesting sound. (I certainly use pedals a lot, as should be clear to anyone reading this blog.) It's not a dependence on pedals that makes me rate a musician as a B-lister; by that standard you'd have to call Hendrix an also-ran. For me, it's the variety and musical incident created by a player that I look at when evaluating. I put "The Edge" in the category of interesting one-trick ponies-- not because he requires effects for his sound, but more because he mainly has one idea. So, measured against players who have a larger palette of melodic/harmonic/rhythmic ideas, he comes in second. However, extending the logic, virtually any rock guitarist comes in second when viewed in the shadow of a real musical virtuoso like Joe Pass, Wes Montgomery, George Barnes, etc.

I try to enjoy and appreciate what any individual player can do-- it's not so important to judge him in the light of more technically gifted and creative artists. In general, when rock fans are arguing vehemently about which rock guitarists are the "best," I find it tiresome because it's usually the phenonenon I call "rock provincialism." This is the notion that a guy holding a note endlessly with a Les Paul and a Marshall stack is some kind of a genius, while a ten-hour-a-day practicer who can play Villa-Llobos guitar compositions beautifully is "boring" or "background music." I'll tell you this-- I love rock and roll, wah-wah, fuzztone, etc., but the day jazz and classical music stop being "foreground music" for me, that's the day you can check me into a hospice.

(MORE)

PETER GREEN VS. CLAPTON

Just picked up an interesting collection on early fleetwood mac.

It's called " the pious bird of good omen." Oddly, the track listing on the back is wrong, and the album includes a few of their best tracks, padded out with a bunch of outtakes, false start takes, etc. many of which have killer Peter Green playing. It's also a fascinating window into their recording process, communication, etc.

I bought this against my better judgment, as the online review was lukewarm at best, and it turned out to be an amazing find. It's a mixed bag, but it's really got some great stuff on there. After listening to this a few times, here's my new, polished take on the clapton vs. peter green debate--

1. Clapton has two or three albums worth of really top level playing, with a boatload of great phrasing and melodic ideas, plus some of the best guitar sounds in rock history. Essential listening.

2. Peter Green has as much technique as Clapton (if that matters), also with great sounds, and is arguably more emotionally intense and soulful than Clapton. His best work is also essential listening. I wouldn't call him "better" than Clapton, but Clapton partisans need to take Green into account-- He definitely makes it impossible to rate Clapton as the runaway best white British blues guitarist.

So, for what it's worth, here's my boiled-down take. I listen to Peter Green for the emotional intensity, and Clapton for phrasing and note choice.

(MORE)

PEDAL SHOOTOUTS-- PROS AND CONS

There are an unholy amount of guitar pedals available today. Overdrive, distortion, fuzz, etc., etc. It's not uncommon for a guitarist to own several of each kind of pedal. (My colleague Andy has observed that my collection of five different fuzz pedals is absurd overkill; I probably shouldn't tell him I'm considering buying more.) Many talented designers and modification gurus are building great stuff, and modifying generic assembly-line pedals to make them better than what you buy at the store.

The internet has helped this world of boutique pedals grow, until we have a bewildering array of variety out there, and a bewildering number of ways people can throw their two cents into the discussion. I've spent probably more than fifty hours online, watching demo clips, reading reviews, searching through forum chats, and trying to absorb all kinds of endless babble about all the pedals I can choose from. I've bought a huge pile of pedals, and mostly been happy with them. I want to talk here about the phenomenon of the "pedal shootout."

You see these clips on youtube where a guy plays through one pedal, then another, and talks about the pros and cons of each. As I'm about to make some critical generalizations about these shootout posters, let me offer a disclaimer upfront. I respect anyone who's gone to the trouble of trying out these different pieces of gear, and filming themselves demonstrating them. It takes a lot of work, and although I'm thinking about doing something similar, at this point I haven't done it. That said, I have some problems with the pedal shootout, in theory and practice.
Many of these clips suffer from pretty serious flaws-- as the commenters crassly observe, again and again. Some of these flaws are more cosmetic than significant (i.e. clip has too much unnecessary information about the player's personal life, dead time while player talks to his dog who wanders into the shot, etc. My pet peeve is the strange need many rock guitarists have to keep saying how much something rocks, or just to endlessly slip in tiresome verbal idioms to remind all of us that he is a "rock" musician). Beyond the numerous time-wasting indulgences, there is a more serious problem with the whole idea of comparing pedals individually.

I've found that many pedals sound best in conjunction with other pedals. The most obvious example is fuzz pedals; pedals like the Tone Bender and the Fuzz Face are nasty and obnoxious by nature, and they can often be more useful when mellowed out in combination with another kind of pedal. I typically combine a fuzz with an overdrive such as a Tube Screamer. I like the abrasive kind of in-your-face fuzz sound you hear on garage punk records like the Count Five's "Psychotic Reaction," but I don't usually need that kind of extreme sound in my own music. Blended with a Tube Screamer, a fuzz can become much less harsh. You can end up with a pretty warm sound if you experiment along these lines. Because overdrives are generally trying to mimic the sound of a cranked tube amp, I figure running a Screamer with a Fuzz Face is just approximating what Jimi Hendrix or Jeff Beck would have been doing when they stepped on a fuzz pedal.

Because the shootouts generally show you what a pedal sounds like by itself, it's not a complete picture of what a pedal can do for you. Where some pedals sound better, or at least different with another pedal in the chain, there are also some pedals that sound best alone. Compression, for example, tends to wipe out much of what I like about other pedals. Once I started combining pedals in various ways, and getting great sounds by mixing and matching, a pedal that doesn't "play well with others" started looking less useful to me. Maybe the things I'm talking about here are too complex for a three minute youtube clip to convey, but I am going to try to get into some of these issues myself when I eventually buy a webcam. Don't look for this soon, but it is something I'm planning to do.

The last issue is one that matters a lot to me; others may be less concerned. Most, if not all, of the youtube pedal demos involve guitarists playing in styles pretty different from mine. In some cases it seems to me the player is not using the pedal to its best advantage. Not to say that the playing is bad-- (although some of it arguably is) but rather that these players seem to be asking the pedal to work with their style, rather than the other way around. (This, incidentally, is part of the reason for a lot of bad reviews on harmonycentral.com.) Pedals are musical instruments, and you need to learn how to work with them to get the best sound out of them. Of course, this is very subjective and my idea of "best sound" might not be yours. (For example, in general I prefer to avoid chords when I'm playing through a cranked-up fuzz. A fuzz pedal demo that consists mostly of a guy playing really ratty-sounding chords is not such a good indicator for me of what the pedal can do.) I tend to start by looking at what someone like Beck or Hendrix was doing. I figure that Jeff Beck in the late sixties was spending a lot of time at home, playing through a Tone Bender and trying different pick attacks, muting techniques, volume knob adjustments, etc. He was also probably trying different kinds of musical lines, to see how different notes and rhythms worked with the sound of the pedal. Beck's playing style changed and grew to accommodate the strengths and weaknesses of a fuzz pedal; thus, I can learn a lot from his example. In the end, I don't want to just play a bunch of Yardbirds licks on my own records, but if I investigate the kind of muting Beck used, for example, I can get a better tone myself. From there I can go in any musical direction I want. Most of the youtube fuzz demos are guys playing generic hard rock/metal licks that don't (to me) suit the fuzz sound very well. I'll mention one specific thing here-- Beck made rests a big part of his style. I think this was to give the listener's ear a break, in part. In the Yardbirds and in his early post-Yardbirds career, Beck often relied on the device of playing an intense short idea, then cutting off the sound abruptly. This is a very dramatic effect; it allows the listener a chance to absorb the often gnarly sounds he's just heard. By contrast, modern guitarists often avoid rests almost entirely. When they run out of things to play, they either play the same idea again and again ad nauseam, or hold a note with sledgehammer vibrato. This is the kind of playing I hear on the rare occasions I wander into a place like Guitar Center. Too often, I hear the same thing on youtube clips, and on commercially released modern rock records.

(MORE)

JOHN CIPOLLINA

I've been listening to Quicksilver Messenger Service, the 60's San Francisco band that has been mostly forgotten. I think their second-tier status is due to this-- all the bands from that scene that broke through commercially had quality material (at least enough quality to have a few hits) or a singer that really stood out. Even the Grateful Dead, not known for their writing, had enough decent material to shore up the intermittently interesting noodling. Quicksilver's virtues are more abstract-- accounting for their neglect. The hippie bands of that era often featured long improv interludes in their work, especially live. Quicksilver, unlike most of those groups, did something pretty interesting with this approach. On the surface, their sound is pretty boilerplate Frisco-- a bland, folkie-type vocal sound on top of a competent (but not earthshaking) rhythm section, and twin lead guitars. The twin guitars are the attraction for me-- especially the mostly ignored John Cipollina.

Years ago, when I was working with local legend Kim Kane, he told me my guitar playing reminded him of Cipollina, and it took me til now to actually listen to Quicksilver. Now that I've heard a bunch of their stuff, I realize that his observation was perceptive, and also high praise. Check out the numerous live recordings on wolfgang's vault.
This one is from the period when they were collecting live recordings for the "Happy Trails" album, and has few of the debits mentioned below.
concerts.wolfgangsvault.com/dt/quicksilver-messenger-service-concert/604-5673.html

In general, if you can listen past the pretty white vocals, and often lame songs, you'll find a lot of great Cipollina. (A warning-- there are a lot of badly dated elements in their sound-- the embarrassing white r&b singing, pseudo-profound hippie-dippy writing, etc.) I think what Kim Kane heard in my playing twenty years ago, bad and limited as it was, was a combination of fuzztone and melody. Cipollina is an appealing mixture of those two elements; he's mostly known for his aggressive whammy bar vibrato technique, but I love the organic blend of melody and trashiness. Cipollina uses short ideas, avoiding both indulgent virtuosity and aimless noodling. He also goes back and forth between trash and twang, an important distinction when you're talking about the virtues of blues guitar. These days most blues-influenced and blues-rock players tend to go for a heavily overdriven "singing" kind of tone. I love that, but at its extreme that kind of approach can erase some of the individuality of a player-- the more gain you use, the less your picking attack can control your sound. Cipollina loved playing with a dark fuzz sound at the brink of feedback-- he'd let the feedback swell briefly, then he'd pull it back and play something more melodic. It was a subtly brilliant style, and I'm now trying to figure out what I can steal from him. (Incidentally, much of what's cool about his playing is probably the result of him listening to a lot of Bo Diddley. The Quicksilver album "Happy Trails" has a whole bunch of live extended jamming over Bo Diddley grooves, and the rich variety of Cipollina's guitar tones and ideas is indebted to Diddley's example. On some live material, Cipollina will combine guitar/amp effects to yield some pretty ripe sounds, and it's fair to say that in this he was following in Diddley's footsteps. Known mostly for his rhythms, Diddley was arguably the first real tone colorist among rock and roll guitarists. Well before Hendrix and Jeff Beck, Diddley was building and blending his own electronic effects, and his tone was often thick enough that he could play guitar unaccompanied and still sound like a whole rock band.)

(MORE)

PEDAL MODIFICATIONS (MODS)

Here's a guest editorial (from colleague Scott McKnight) on the subject of modified pedals, or "modded" pedals for those of you who get tired of saying (or typing) long words like "modification".

I've written a bit about this topic, and everything I know is based on my experience having my pedals modified by "Analog Mike" Pieri at analogman.com. I have nothing but positive things to say about Mike's quality work; I think the sound coming out of my amp is better than it ever was before I started using buying stuff from analogman.

However-- the work of Mike Pieri (and other established online guys like Robert Keeley)
is not cheap. I do think Mike's work is worth the money, for two main reasons. You know you'll get quality, and the pedals will have good resale value. (A side note-- I suspect, based on the endless reading I've done on the analogman site, that there are some very specific modifications that he can make that would be slightly better, or at least different, from what you could get from any other individual. This is because he has a lot of time invested in R&D, and has some personal approaches on some pedals. I do not claim to be able to tell the difference with stuff like this, by the way. I admit to taking much of what Mike Pieri says on faith. If you boil down my take on it, it comes to this-- I know that there are guys out there, Arch Alcantara being one of them, that can do quality work on your pedals, and you will be happy with this work, and you will save some money. Whether Arch, or anyone else, can literally offer you every single thing Analog Mike can, I don't know but I doubt it.) Nevertheless, most people who play guitar know that "worth the money" and "affordable" are often two different things. For this reason, I'm passing along the thoughts of my colleague Scott McKnight. If analogman and Keeley are out of your price range, you may want to talk to someone like Arch Alcantara, who has done some excellent modification work on pedals in the D.C. area. (Incidentally, analogman pedal mod work for me did not involve long wait times; the turnaround was pretty quick, even with the shipping time included.)

"I think there are two basic aspects/benefits to modded pedals. The first is a fairly objective improvement achieved when cheap parts are replaced with better ones. The sound is more hi-fi, you tend to get more ability to control the sound with how you play. This is due largely to decreased compression and wider frequency range. I think modded pedals sound more clear and less artificial. People tend to think that modded Boss/Ibanez/etc. pedals sound and feel more like going straight into an amp. The second aspect/benefit is more subjective. Modders may change the pedal to emphasize certain frequencies or otherwise change aspects of the sound. An example is getting rid of the classic mid-range hump in the Tubescreamer pedals. Another would be changing a pedal from symmetrical to asymmetrical clipping or vice versa. With these, one person's idea of an improvement may not be another's.

Guys like Keeley and Analogman deserve props for realizing that pedals can be modified fairly easily to obtain significant improvement in sound. These guys were the explorers that lead the way. That said, there are a lot of people who can mod pedals based on the knowledge that's available out there on the 'net, and their own experimenting. There are people who can modify pedals much less expensively than the famous guys. Advantages of using the famous guys is that you can be sure they know what they're doing, and (I assume) resale values hold up pretty well. Disadvantages include higher costs, shipping charges and long wait times. Assuming a local modder doesn't damage the pedal, I don't see any real downside in finding someone locally to do it, or doing it yourself if you're pretty handy.

I have a friend and bandmate by the name of Arch Alcantara who got into modding pedals. He's done several for me. These pedals include three overdrives, a distortion, a tremolo and a wah-wah pedal. His prices have been very reasonable and I've been very happy with the mods he's done. I've loaned some of these to several friends and every time they rave about them and want one of their own. Arch can be reached at arch@electricheadguitar.com.

-Scott McKnight

(MORE)