Conference napalm::guitar

    Well put,I think the traveling willberrys are a step in the right
    direction.

There is nothing new in rock and roll...

dbii

re. 0
      The beauty of music? Yes a very simple enjoyable pleasure has been
burdened with all sort's of effects,attitudes,and complications... and
don't forget Hollywood We have also blamed music for everything from death's 
to social issues.
     But where's the music? I think more time is spent on post production
techniques than harmonic/melodic/lyrical pursuit. I was also apalled at the
music education courses at my son's school and wonder if this part of the
problem. Even my 10 year old know's what a gated snare sounds like. 
     Join the club Brian,and maybe if we teach OUR Children what to listen
to and for and how to listen we can benefit too. In my house we run the full 
gamut of musical styles. I'm suprised at what my kid's choices are....without
peer pressures.
    I'd wouldn't say we are killing music,I just think alot of people have
run out of ideas perhap's. We've also still have a lot of good music being
played it's just manufacturuers advertising pay's better than the readers.

							:^) 
    
								Rick

         
   >> maybe if we teach OUR Children what to listen to          
                  ^^^^^
                                                                
    Isn't this censorship ? 
         
    Surely we can advise them on what to listen to and hope they follow
    our (your) interests, but how can you TEACH a child to follow a
    particular music style without forcing our (your) views on the child
    and thus causing resentment ?
                                 
    Remember, throughout the years, various bands have been branded
    as killing music or being a bad influence on the younger generation
    (The Beatles, The Stones etc..) but look at the influence these bands 
    have had on todays musicians thus expanding the whole range of MUSIC ?
                                                   
    Just some thoughts,           
    
    -Tony                     

    
    
    Perhaps as the world is changing, some of aus are growing older and
    changing ourselves.  It's kinda like when people say kids are not
    the same today as they were years ago.  Maybe the kids/music trends
    are relatively the same, just that as we grow older we see things
    differently.?  I'll bet that in the 50's, people said similar things
    about kids, rock/roll and the deteriation of music.  Play what you 
    like, listen to what you like, promote what you like - ya can't 
    change the world.  

"if we teach OUR Children what to listen to and for and how to listen we can 
benefit too."

    "Isn't this censorship?"

    Re .4 
    		no not at all!!!
    
	Perhap's you are misinterpeting what I am saying however it is the 
whole sentence which need's to thought about. If you replace teach with
expose perhap's it would be less threatening. BTW my parent's never said
to me that the RS and Beatles were bad,however they did warn me about a 
musician's lifestyles,and habit's there experiance being with jazz 
musicians. I made up my own mind as do my kid's what they listen to. 
I would not consider censorship part of teaching/influencing/exposing 
another person to different styles of music. I also encourage my kid's
to play instrument's and envolve them in what I do musically. 


							Rick
  

    
     Maybe everyone's just too narrow-minded.....I have taught my kids the
    importance of enjoying different kinds of music, they all have validity
    although some forms we may like more than others.
    
     I don't find the music today as exciting as it was when I was a kid 
    growing up in the 60's during the British Invasion. Wave after wave of
    music...but maybe when you're a kid things are new and therefore more
    exciting anyway.
    
     The other factor here is that society is older now.....there aren't
    as many youngsters as in years past. You can see it in the advertising
    too.
    
      Food for thought,
    
         Bob

    Cheer up, Brian :-)
    
    Yeah, a lot of "new" music stinks, or maybe we're getting old and
    it just seems that way.
    
    But strictly from a guitarists point of view, I find a lot of good
    things happening.  Look at the exposure guitar is getting these
    days.  There are at least 4 monthly mags devoted to guitars and
    players; not all of it is good, maybe whole issues are sometimes
    trash, but there's often good stuff to be found as well.  There
    are tons of quality guitars, amps, effects, etc. available today,
    much of it at very reasonable prices.  Reading this notes file,
    you often get the idea that you need a multi-K$ effects rack to
    do anything at all; fact is you can get fantastic sounds with a
    very small investment.  How about all the instructional videos,
    tab books, etc.  Again, not all if it is good, but some of the
    things I've seen are fantastic; I've got Jaco and Joe Pass in my
    living room, giving me lessons, whenever I want.  You've just got
    to separate the wheat from the chaff.
    
    IMO there's never been a better time to be a guitarist.  I wish
    half the stuff available today was around when I was 16.

    /rick

    oh yeah, you can't pick up a magazine these days without some noted
    headbanger downplaying the speed thing and telling how he's discovered
    the blues.  It'll all come round again.

    I think music has changed from being oriented towards the 
    LISTENER to being oriented towards the PLAYER. It just seems
    like all these speed demons are playing to an audience of
    fledgeling speed demons. 
    
    -DAve

	re: .0

	I stopped reading GP with any regularity years ago (around 1984),
	because It all seems to be nothing more than a constant stream
	or re-hashed ideas, with little new info. Why do you see all
	sorts of articles on hi-tech stuff? Because it's probably the only
	new information that's in the magazine (besides, advertisers like
	to see articles referancing thier products).

	Is the new technology killing music. I'd have to say no. The
	styles have changed, but the quantity of good stuff versus
	mediocre/junk appears to be about where it was 20 years ago.

	The new technology bits and pieces are fun to play with & I
	enjoy all the new gear I've got. I play in front of an audience
	and they don't care where the music is coming from, they enjoy
	the personalities of the band members and the personal experiance
	that playing records/CD's/tapes just don't have. I suppose if
	we all took some period of time and stayed only with that style
	of music, never experimenting, music would be considered dead
	(I don't care if the music is Classical, Rock, Folk Songs or
	Hindu Chants), It is however still alive. You only have 12 notes,
	you'd think that people would run out of things to do with them,
	but they haven't & probably won't in the next 1000 years.

							Jens

	Yes indeed . . . this topic is food for thought.  I was also a
	child of the sixties,  growing up during the 'British Invasion'.
	The music from that period left an indelible impression on me
	and has continued to shape my musical tastes and preferences.

	Modern music is very different. It has a much more *processed*
	sound.  Even the modern equipment which is marketed as able to
	produce 'vintage' tonal qualities sounds very different than
	the original equipment being emulated. To test this, you need
	only do a side-by-side sound comparison of a Boogie, Bedrock
	or Kitty Hawk amplifier (which all claim to be able to produce
	either vintage Fender or Marshall tones) against a 1964 Super
	Reverb Amp (if you can find one!).  It then becomes clear that
	the modern amplifiers do not sound like the true vintage ones.

	Electronic drums, which are used extensively in modern music,
	are immediately recognizable as such,  with a distinctly
	different sound than acoustic drums.

	Then there is the proliferation of electronic effects. Twenty
	years ago, many influential guitarists played without effects.
	Guitar, amp, straight cord. Period. A fuzz-tone and a wah-wah
	pedal were considered pretty 'far out' sound enhancements.
	These days, unless you've at least got a compressor, some form
	of overdrive or distortion, delay and chorus, you're just not
	happening. Not to mention the rack-mount madness - all of the
	above effects, only digital. Flangers, phasers, aural exciters,
	harmonizers . . . and on ad infinitum.  I won't even comment
	on MIDI.   Somehow, computers and artistic expression seem
	mutually exclusive to me. (And I develop software for a living!)

	It could be that when a musician has to be concerned with the
	settings of four dozen controls which affect the sound, it becomes
	more difficult to concentrate on the real matter at hand: musical
	expression.  With the advent of all this technology, I don't feel
	that the quality of music has improved . . . and at the risk of
	sounding like an old f*rt (at play), in some cases it seems to
	have deteriorated.

	I agree with many points made in earlier replies to the base
	note.  I also agree we're not going to stop this train.  The
	best solution seems to be to pursue what you perceive as quality
	in music and to bypass the rest. In the final analysis, electronic
	circuitry and computers will never substitute for musical talent.
    
        Steve

    I think it would do everyone a lot of good if they went back to
    the roots of rock.  I've developed an appreciation for rock when
    I traced back through the giants of the '60s, '50s, all the way
    back to Robert Johnson.  Players that do that develop a love for
    the music instead of trying to mimic Van Halen.
    
    Ever notice how all the great players have traced their roots!?!?
    
    Mike

    Many good comments here.   I agree with the fact that the audience
    doesn't care about the technical end of music.  They DO however
    react to the personalities in the band, and they know what they're
    used to hearing.  If all the tunes in the top 40 have a blazing
    guitarist, the audience wants to hear that at a club.  That includes
    the sound of the music as well as the chops.
    
    Far from killing music, I think the current explosion of hot 
    guitarists will take music another step forward.  I can't wait for
    the present generation of young players to come into their own.
    Folks like Eric Clapton grew up listening to Chuck Berry (maybe)
    and became better players.   Van Halen grew up listening to Clapton
    (maybe) and took the instrument another step.  What are today's
    youngsters going to sound like now that they're growing up with
    Malmsteen, Morse and the rest?   
    
    I hear what you're saying about the techno gizmos, but to cop today's
    stuff you still have to be able to play.   Folks like Robert Cray,
    and SRV (to name two of many) still manage to play musically 
    sound material.  I don't care what toys you have, if you don't know
    your stuff you can't cut the gig.
    
    Ted

    Maybe you should move to South Carolina....Tomorrow night I'm doing
    a "garage" jam with three or four friends (two of which are "metal
    heads" that happen to appreciate and like to play "old" standards),
    I do sit and play and sing with my daughters, both old and new tunes,
    and as I write this note, the local "Classic Rock" format station
    is playing "Sunshine of your Love" by Cream (circa 1968).  Our jam
    session tomorrow night is based on "old classics" from Neil Young
    to Cream, to Allman Bros., to B.B. King...The music I love is STILL
    ALIVE and WELL!!! If ya look around, you can find the stuff you
    love, and YOU can KEEP it ALIVE yourself!!  Go for it!!
    
    8^)  Steve

    re: .8 

    >Yeah, a lot of "new" music stinks, or maybe we're getting old and
    >it just seems that way.

    Yeah, but that's true for EVERY time period!  There are people around
    that will argue passionantly that the only good music ever produced
    came from the late 60's (and I've seen it in the notes files here), and
    that "new" music is trash.
    
    Well, what I think that these people fail to remember is that there was
    also a lot of awful music produced in the late 60s.  But that's the
    stuff you never see anymore, so it's easy to selectively remember it.
    
    I'm sure when we hit the year 2000 that the music that has survived
    from the '80s will also be the cream of the crop and people will go
    "gee seems like the music today doesn't compare to that"...
    
    I don't think that the technology is squashing music or musical
    creativity at all.  In fact I'd argue just the opposite point, since
    there is now available a much larger selection of sounds and varietys
    of tones for use in orchastration of music.  The current glut of
    heavily produced, multi-layer production oriented recordings certainly
    attests to this.
    
    I can't see how one coule say that this "overproduction" affects all
    the music produced today.  There are still artists that produce
    wonderful acoustic recordings (Tracy Chapman, Michael Hedges) and also
    artists which produce wonderful technical marvals (Steve Vai, Steve
    Stevens).  
    
    Greg

    Re: playing for family
    
    My kids love it when I play them the children's songs that they
    love so well!
    
    Too bad that's all I know :-)
    
    Mike

    
    Well, music is so complex, that all these different things are probably
    not going to kill it. I went to a store yesterday, and ogled all the
    newest, whiz-bang gadgets, and REALLY wanted a few of 'em. However, I
    write and play mainly '60's pop-style stuff, so I don't really NEED all
    this stuff...
    
    I listen to new groups like the Indigo Girls, R.E.M., Michelle Shocked,
    as well as Living Color, etc., and see diversity, although there is a
    tremendous amount of sound-alike, look-alike stuff on the airwaves. 
    
    A friend of stated that he believed that we're not too far away from
    the day that you wear an item on your belt, no bigger than today's
    Walkman, and merely punch in a style of music you'd like to here. The
    unit goes off, and, after a few seconds begins composing and playing
    songs in that style! He may be right, but that's not gonna stop me from
    playing and listening to what I want to....
    
    To paraphrase another personal-interest group, "You'll get my guitar
    from me when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers!"
    
    Bill

    As far as human expression in music goes, this is cyclical. You go
    along becoming more and more rigid in a style, and less and less
    creative, until a "back to the roots" movement starts. Then people
    start appreciating "raw" expression again. But even the roots movements
    start to become stilted over time (witness the folk music revival of
    the 60's, which led to a lot of commercialized junk).
    
    I would say that we're getting pretty far into a cycle where there is
    less and less creativity and expression. A symptom of this is the
    strike in Las Vegas, where the club owners argue that they can replace
    the live musicians with sound systems and nobody will notice. That says
    a lot about the human expression (or lack thereof) in the music being
    played.
    
    I personally have always considered myself a "folk" musician, even
    though I play mostly rock, blues, and other forms that technically
    aren't "folk". To me, a folk musician is somebody who plays music that
    is popular to the general public, and not necessarily for a living. For
    our culture, the songs of the Beatles, Rolling Stones, Cream, Hendrix,
    etc., are the folk music of today. When we get together for jams or
    whatever we are sharing a tradition of folk music, playing what we know
    and like. It is a common ground that makes up the fabric of our musical
    society.
    
    As far as technology goes, I'm not outright against it, but it doesn't
    do anything for me on its own. I have played with guitar-synths that I
    felt I could make some really good music on. But most synth music to me
    sounds cold and premeditated. Just my opinion, I happen to like
    listening to distorting tubes, noisy frets, clicking fingers, and all
    the nuances that make for live, human performances.
    
    As far as guitar rags go, I never read them. Somebody mentioned that
    they seem to say the same things over and over. What do you expect?
    There really isn't much to talk about here -- it's *MUSIC*. Play,
    listen and have a ball. That's what it's all about.
    
    - Ram

    I don't think we are killing music, but there are those that
    exploit and torture music as we know it.  It all comes out in
    the wash, though, and eventually the good music is all that
    is remembered from an era.  People may argue that the Woodstock
    days can never be equalled, and that among other things, technology
    is ruining music, but the fact is the sound quality at Woodstock 
    was herendous, as it was at most large concerts during the 60's.
    At large outdoor concerts today, sound quality is the least problem 
    thanks to the greatly improved PA technology. In the 60's you had to 
    have a rich daddy to afford to put together your own recording studio. 
    With todays recording equipment, your average musician can assemble 
    a workable studio for 2-3K. I think the key is to take advantage
    of the best of the new technology, but don't let yourself get so
    wrapped up in it. The equipment should serve you, if you find yourself
    serving the equipment, it is time to get back to basics. 
    
    Mark
    
    

    I don't believe music is being killed, rather that it is being
    enlivened by so many people being turned on to playing now. Admittedly,
    a lot of the 'over-processed' sounds are not for me, but again,
    many, many people are digging back into their roots, and surely
    that will also contribute to change and progress in music. I know
    plenty of people in the age range of, say, 18-23 who are getting
    right into blues, r'n'b, etc.
    
    There are a lot of good points in this topic, and like someone said
    earlier - there are only twelve notes, and we certainly haven't
    exhausted their possibilities yet.
    
    Bob

    I think I heard that argument when they yanked my harpsichord out
    for one of the new-fangled Piano.
    
    I pity the parents of teenagers  now, they have to put up with the kids
    insisting they need stereo mega bucks dweebe equipment, when what they
    really need is to sit on thier butts and do two hours of scales a day.
    
    Just Segovia's diatonic scales, ma'am, they'll make you so fast your
    head'll spin. Kepp those unused fingers down, down, down.

               
    	I think it comes down to this; What the media shows you (TV,
    Mags, Movies, MTV) is NOT necessairily "all that's going on" or 
    what's happening. There's still plenty of music being played that
    is not, nor will it ever be, dependant on anything electronic,
    synthetic or that you even have "speakers" of some kind. That this
    stuff isnt in the media's limelight, makes it simply less observable.
    It's still there, however.
    
    	Offset the influence of that 'Tube by taking the kids to a bluegrass 
    fest - and make sure you camp out overnight *both* nights. Listen to
    what you hear coming from the various performer's campsites till
    the wee hours of the morning. Move around and mingle - bring your
    acoustic 6 string and join in on a jam. You'll find this consistant
    lack of "drums and keys" present, yet the magic is there none the
    less!
                                                                 
    	Joe Jas

Are we killing music ?  Far from it !  I too have gone through this "get 
back to my roots" thing, and it's much easier to do with MIDI.  It doesn't 
matter if you have a Kent acoustic or a loaded 20 spack rack, it's still a 
form of expression, and that's what music is, a form of expression where mere 
words aren't enough.

The technologies of today allow the artist (the guitar player) to paint in 
more colors than before.  It's nice to have a herd of patches to program for 
your blues moods, metal moods, jazz moods, whatever.  Expression is the key.  
But as was mentioned earlier, the expression ends when you become a slave to 
the technology instead of using the technology to express YOUR style.



				Scary

    
    Well, being somewhat a protegy of the speed demon flame of the mid
    80's, I must say that I try to walk the middle ground in between 
    speed and feel...  I've heard both sides of the argument and I must
    admit I get pretty tired of hearing either one after a while.
    "British Invasion of the 60's"?  Didn't we get a wave of "Bach &
    Rollers" in the 80's???  Consider the possibility of your children
    sitting with their children and telling them how great the music era
    was in the 80's???  Personally, I must say that there are things to
    be learned from ANY kind of music.
    
    My personal taste varies greatly.  I love Led Zepplin and then I also 
    love Satriani's works.  At the same time I listen to Bach and Pink
    Floyd and also to Queensryche.  One thing I must say about the wave 
    of the 80's is that there is ALOT of different styles of music that
    is readily available to the masses, and not just two(Motown and Blues
    Rock).  
    
    Personally, I would love to have my kids turn me on to the type of 
    music they'd be listening to instead of being closed minded and 
    sitting around and saying "Are We Killing Music"???
    
    					J.

    
    This is great....love all the replies.
    
    Just a couple of quick responses:
    
    To Joe Jas:
    
    Hey, you don't need to talk to me about bluegrass, I played in a BG
    band years ago (my first paid gigs!!) and have been attending and
    working at BG fests for many years.  In fact, I just got back from one
    yesterday and it never ceases to amaze me how many people drive from
    far away (NJ to RI, frinstance) to get a fix of the stuff.
    
    To "J" (.24):
     
    I'm not saying the 60s were any better than the 80s, but there
    certainly were more than two musical styles popular in that time-frame.
    I'm not closed minded at all, in fact I *do* listen to speed metal,
    etc. although it usually gives me a headache!!!  8^)  8^)  8^)  More
    from the singers, though, it takes the top of my head when they hit
    some of those high notes....
    
    Actually, you make a good point..there is a *lot* of music *available*
    to the masses, but there is very little going on to *point out* where
    it can be found.  Many so-called "record stores" carry very little of
    any forms of "alternative" music (not talking just rock here, but folk,
    ethnic, etc.) and I always have enjoyed seeing people get totally
    turned on, like I did, when they realize what a wealth of great music
    is really out there.  I wish schools would spend more time on music
    appreciation/education classes, and give children more exposure to the
    valuable stuff that's there for the listening.  

> < Note 1448.25 by AQUA::ROST "Speak to dogs in French" >

{ Your personal name made my day.  Is there a story behind that? }
    
>    is really out there.  I wish schools would spend more time on music
>    appreciation/education classes, and give children more exposure to the
>    valuable stuff that's there for the listening.  

Somebody say "AMEN".

It really breaks my heart and p*sses me off at the same time when I think of 
the utter failure of most of our schools in the area of music 
appreciation/education.  It would be so easy to take thirty minutes a week
just to listen to some diverse recordings of interestng_stuff.  With a little
effort, it could be worked into Social Studies and History classes.

Write your school board!  Demand more music!

    Personally, I would rather see schools teach reading, writing, and 
    math. It's a disgrace to see high school grads that cannot read or 
    even write their own name, make change, etc. Besides, if you make 
    music a required course, the kids may not want to learn it. If the 
    schools can successfully teach my kids academics, I'd be more than 
    happy to take care of exposing them to music, sports, art, and any 
    other areas of interest they want. If you really feel that your
    child's school falls short in teaching them cultural things like 
    music, you can always volenteer your time to help teach music.
    If music is an extra-curricular activity, then only those with
    a genuine interest would participate, and there would be less
    distractions from those studends that are uninterested.
    
    I can recall when I was in junior high school (7-8 grade), and
    was in a JH music class. 90% of the students resented the fact
    that they had to attend this class.  They wouldn't sing or partic-
    ipate, but would interupt the entire class by acting up. One day
    the teacher went around the entire room and tried to get each
    student to sing a few bars to see what kind of voice ranges she
    was dealing with. Out of a class of 20-30 students, I was the
    only one that was willing to sing a single note. I recall freaking
    out most of my classmates, since none of them knew I could sing,
    and most regarded me as just another wise-ass kid out to undermine
    the teachers. I was amazed when I moved from New Jersey to Mass.
    I noticed right away, that people in Mass are much more enthusiastic
    about music than they were in NJ. During my senior year, there
    were at least a dozen people that wrote and submitted songs for
    our class song. The winning entry was an excellant ballad that
    the entire senior class sang with enthusiasm at our graduation.
    
    I must admit, it is a shame that many of us cannot afford to give 
    our children the type of quality education we got from public shools, 
    but one way we can help is to be involved with the school, and with 
    our childrens studies. Simply throwing money at your childs educational
    needs is not enough. My sister and her husband have 2 boys ages 10 
    and 15. Between PTA meetings, football, field hockey, cub scouts, boy 
    scouts, etc. it seems like they are running 7 days/nights per week, 
    but it is well worth it in the long run. Both of my nephews have A 
    averages, both are athletically inclined, and both aspire to go to 
    college.  So it is possible to get a good education from public
    schools even in today's troubled schools, if you put in the effort. 
    You must show your children that you care, otherwise they will not
    care.
    
    My two children are ages 3 1/2 and 6 weeks, so I won't have to worry 
    about their education just yet, but I spend a great deal of time with
    my son reading, counting, drawing, singing, watching educational
    videos, etc. I figure one more year, and it will be time to get
    him a real guitar, and start teaching him to play the basics.
    I would also like to get an old piano for the kids to bang around
    on. I won't force them to listen or play anything, but I will make
    sure that he is exposed to all types of music, and will listen
    to anything he wants, hopefully with an open mind.
    
    Mark

    Once upon a time, when I was growing up in Central Mass., our town's
    elementary school system taught music as a math supplement (Grades
    1-6).  It was for ALL students.
    
    My son just started kindergarten this week and I made sure that the
    school had a decent music program.
    
    Mike

    
    RE: .25
    
    Well, it seems that my reply in .24 sure got your attention.  I'm
    glad.  Yes, I realize that there were more than 2 types of music
    in the 60's but I happen to know alot of people that are so fond
    of the music from the 60's that they're constantly over looking 
    the good stuff that modern music has offer AND vice versa.  Not 
    too long ago I was guilty of the latter...
    
    All I really can say is that if you're learning from 1 or 2 style(s)
    only, than you're really limitting yourself and I pitty you.  Humans 
    need variety in order to keep us from being monotone.  I do....
    
    I hope nobody was offended by what I said....
    							J.
    

    No offense taken......BTW "pity" is spelled with one 'T' as well
    as "limiting"     8^)

re:.27

Uh..well, I don't think anyone is suggesting that music classes replace the 
three R's, or that music classes be required, or that money be thrown at the
problem.  What concerns me is that most kids don't get the opportunity to hear
even a tiny sampling of the incredible variety of music that exists on this 
planet.  To my mind, the minimum music offering in an elementary school should
be thirty minutes a week of just listening to a variety of music.  

Many (most?) elementary schools already spend at least that much time trying 
to make the kids swallow mindless musical silliness that they usually don't 
like because it's contrived just for them.  

The main thing that bothers me about high school music is that, at least in my 
part of the country, 95% of the effort and expenditure goes into a marching band
whose main reason for existing is to play half-time shows at football games.
I'm not knocking marching bands, but this is a poor substitute for musical 
enrichment.  When I was in high school, the band members spent five hours a 
week of school time rehearsing on instruments that most of them never touched 
again after graduation.  

My whole point is that, if we're gonna allocate the time and resources in 
schools for music, then let's at least let the kids be exposed to a variety of
music that people listen to and play because they like it.  I'm sorry for 
rambling off the subject so much.

Bob

    
    re .31
    
    Well, your point about high school music has some merit to it.... I
    played trumpet for ten years, now my trumpet sits under my dresser in
    my parents house, rusting....  WJB, when was the last time you
    practiced the trombone?  ;^) ;^)
    
    I played my trumpet about five hours a week, and it was always at band
    rehearsal.  That means I didn't PRACTICE much.  However, there were
    other people who practiced their instruments for hours outside of
    school, and became phenomenal musicians.  I think that HS bands give
    students who wouldn't normally do anything EVER with music an opportunity
    to get involved with music and be a part of it, at least for a few
    years.
    
    Playing in an organized band (Jazz band in particular) was an incredible
    experience that I am very thankful to have had.  There's something about
    playing as one part of a large ensemble that I really got off on, and
    really miss sometimes.  There were also a lot of aspects of music that I
    got a lot of exposure to that the typical guitar player isn't very aware
    of (in fact, as a guitar player, I've ignored many of these aspects).
    
    re Marching bands:  After high school, I was a member of my
    university's marching band, and participated only in the fall.  During
    those two years, my trumpet playing lost ALL its finesse and style, by
    me playing nothing but half notes and quarter notes in 1 dynamic range
    (LOUD).  It destroyed my trumpet playing ability.  A half year after
    my last year in the marching band, I took up guitar.
    
    Dave
    
    PS:  As far as us killing music is concerned.....I think the music
    industry is a joke, it isn't real, and it inhibits musicians from doing
    what they want to do and keeps their creativity low.  MTV sucks, IMHO. 
    The media has exploited music as best they could, I've never seen music
    raped for commercials like in the past couple of years.....
    
    ....but that is only ONE aspect of music, and there are so many aspects
    and worlds of music, many of which are unaffected by the times and the
    "music industry."  Music that has been created over the centuries is
    still very much alive today, and is still being created.  Music is
    music.....not MTV, not WBCN or WAAF, or Atlantic Records, or Pepsi
    Cola or Michelob.  Its just music, and as much as it appears that
    society is killing it, it all depends on how you look at it.  Music was
    alive and kicking at Great Woods last night.....
    

    In the UK, we had an equivalent to the high school marching band,
    namely the school orchestra, or individual training on piano (still
    quite common when I was a kid). I took piano lessons for about six
    years, and although I didn't like it, and wasn't playing the kind
    of music I wanted to, the grounding it gave me in theory and music
    appreciation helped no end when I found my 'vocation', i.e. guitar
    playing. I wouldn't have progressed so quickly on guitar without
    the piano lessons first (OK, to hear me play you might think I'd
    never had a lesson in my life)
    
    Bob