How much is enough?

It seems that I do a lot of responding to Daniel Mount.

Well, I will again here. I posted recently that I was open to any suggestions any of you had for topics I could post on.

Well, since Daniel is a frequent reader here(I'm proud to say), I might as well act on a suggestion of his(before I move on to other topics).

This got started when Daniel posted a link to a newspaper article about Jerry Trammell(erstwhile tenor for the Florida Boys, the Blackwood Brothers, and JD Sumner and the Stamps, among others). As a comment to it, he posted that in his opinion Jerry was the greatest tenor the Florida Boys ever had.

Well, you all know me...I'm not inclined to let something like that go unchallenged. But since I have a rule about not getting into public disagreements about anyone's favorites(what's the point? People are entitled to like anyone they choose...no justification is necessary for that), I decided to respond to Daniel's comment in private e-mail to him.

In the course of our exchange, I opined that anyone who opted to make such a visible contention ought to have heard enough of a sample of a given group before making any sweeping judgments such as the above.

Unbeknownst to me, Daniel has done a lot of listening to the Florida Boys and their recordings over a long period of time. I am proud that Daniel has learned so much about gospel music so soon...too many of his generation tend to make statements like that without such background. Common examples of this are all the 20-somethings who post on blogs or message boards that the Haase/Payne/Fowler/Younce/Bennett lineup of Cathedrals was their best ever, or others in the same age group proclaiming that Tim Riley is the best bass ever.

I know the YouTube phenomenon has helped make the work of a lot of these artists more visible(and audible)to people who have computers. And this is a good thing...I've said right here that the postings there of Dean Adkins of classic quartet performances from the 1960s and 1970s has been a public service to gospel music fans of ALL ages, and introduce surfers to gospel singers they otherwise would never have gotten the chance to hear.

And yes, CDs of all these artists are becoming more readily available...and for the particularly intrepid(like Daniel), even LPs are available of almost any gospel artist one cares to name.

But my initial response stung Daniel a bit...and given what background he's developed, I can understand why. So he felt led to ask me here how much of a percentage of an artist's work must one be familiar with before one can make educated judgments on who their best iterations and/or singers are.

Well, not to cop out by any means...but even a lot of allegedly objective evaluations of such things are based on personal tastes(how can they NOT be?). We all have our standards of what good and bad are, or what kind of music each of us prefers.

And even if we could get past that into truly objective evaluations of singing technique, crowd appeal, and the like...what would the point of all that be anyway?

There are those that pretend we can do that...but what point are they(and we)trying to make in those kinds of discussions?

As I wrote here not too long ago, the issue of who the best is at this or that means less and less to me as I grow older...particularly when it comes to gospel singers. For if the singers in question communicate their message effectively through their music, what use is it to be picky about all that other stuff?

All any of us can do is the best we can with what we are given....whether it comes to sports, singing, blogging, or life itself.

And for those of us who are believers in Jesus, whatever we lack, He will compensate with enough for us to do the calling we're chosen to fulfill.

So to answer Daniel's question as precisely as I can, I would say: As much as you're able to get as complete a picture as possible of whatever artist you happen to be discussing.

But to all of you, I add...what does it all matter? Just thank God for whoever you're hearing, and treat their work the way you would want yours to be treated.

All set for the GWSGFF

In a previous post, I solicited suggestions for future postings here.

One was by my good friend Daniel Mount, one of the leading southern gospel bloggers...he asked me to provide a full report on the upcoming Great Western Southern Gospel Fan Festival on May 1-3 here in Fresno.

Well, I have always tried to do so for the past few years...and I'm glad to tell Daniel and the rest of you that I have my tickets and passes for the entire three-day event, so expect a daily, comprehensive(at least as much as one person can do)report on all the goings-on at the GWSGFF for the third consecutive year right here in this little corner of the web.

And I'll really be looking forward to the music, the fellowship, and the atmosphere.

So keep it right here for this inquiring observer's observations of the West's leading gospel music event.

Back home again

It's been too long since I've posted here, and during this latest "lull", I've been getting beaten up in the cold, cruel world of commercial radio.

Four years ago, I would have had no "safety net" to cushion me from such blows from an industry I've always loved, but know it doesn't always care about things that I do. But since then, I've been able to share my love of gospel music with all of you, and doing that has given me pleasure that even I find hard to describe precisely.

And what got me through today and kept me from going stir crazy is that same gospel music...today we recorded our Sunday morning gospel music show on KMJ...the longest running gospel radio show in the nation(a fact I'm proud to brag about a bit). The music we played helped soothe my soul, and brightened my spirits.

One feature in particular I'm proud of is something we just started doing in recent weeks...our "Flashback" feature. The last song we play each week on our show is some classic gospel performance from yesteryear. In recent weeks we've played classic songs by the Harmoneers, the Rebels, the Sunshine Boys, and the Blackwood Brothers...all from the private collections of Earline Starnes(the principal host and the younger daughter of former Blackwood Brothers bass Don Smith)and yours truly.

We never made a big to-do that we were going to start doing that(unlike SOME radio shows who grind out ceaseless self-promotion). To coin a phrase of my good friend Neil Enloe(formerly of the Couriers), we just sort of "fell into it". At first it began with old recordings of Don's quartet, the Gospelaires...and when I realized Earline was going to make it a regular feature, I jumped in with all the energy I had...and decided that I would lend my own experience and recordings into the mix to make it a memorable part of the show for our audience.

And that it has become...people have responded quite well to it...I knew they would. A good gospel song performed by a dedicated and talented artist will always be well received...despite the favorite genre of any given listener.

I've already planned to unveil further classics in the weeks ahead.

The real blessing about this feature is that it allows me the privilege of combining two of the things I love most...gospel music and radio...and gives me a chance to share some gifts I've been given with the world...just as this blog does.

It's good to be home.

Don’t be shy…

In my most recent entry here, I asked if any of you had ideas or topics that I could write about here.

The response has been a little slow so far, and I hope it's not because none of you care, or you're a little put off that I would make such a request.

I know there are a number of you out there, and part of the reason I started this blog was to share myself with you, and maybe say something that might brighten your spirits or your days. I want to interact here. A very dear friend of mine expressed concern privately that I might be down, or in low spirits.

Nothing could be farther from the truth...I am in a good mood of late...God has shown me in many and various ways just how much He really does love and care for me.

As have many of you...and for that, I'm humbly thankful and grateful.

I am expecting my unexpected tax refund any day now, I have heard wonderful things from many wonderful friends, and I am immersing myself in His music as much as possible these days.

I am very fortunate to have at my disposal a number of the finest gospel singers who have ever lived, and hearing them sing their songs of praise and testimony is a constant blessing and source of pleasure to me. And I have ideas on new topics for my history articles...I can hardly wait to write them for you.

But I've just been grinding my gears when it comes to my private little corner of the web...so knowing that this isn't so much about me as it is all of you, I'm looking forward to finding out what you might want here.

The coming month will be a big one for me, and I want you all to enjoy it along with me.

So how about it...what would you like?:-)

Taking suggestions once more

Well, it's that time of year...the Great Western Southern Gospel Fan Festival is almost here, I'm awaiting my tax refund(at last), the weather is warming up, I am troubled by certain personal situations, and I'm having a tough time settling down and finding something to write about that all of you would like to read.

So, as I did some months back, I give the floor to you...you're all invited to post your own suggestions on what I can write on that you would be interested in seeing me comment on. Or you can just vent on something yourselves...if it'll help. I'm here to serve you in whatever way I can.

Some of your earlier suggestions I followed through on...some I've procrastinated on. Whatever you'd like to see me do(keep it clean...lol), just post it here...and I'll do my best to oblige. Maybe the shot in the arm might invigorate my imagination.

Or if you just have something to say, feel free. I'll listen.

THE car, period!

Maybe now ALL the drivers and fans of NASCAR will finally get it.

This is the first year that the so-called Car of Tomorrow(CoT for short)was introduced into the sport as the standard vehicle for the Sprint Cup series, the top series in NASCAR.

This after a year of criticism from drivers used to the old car's performance and looks, two things(especially the latter)that they said the newer car, heavier and boxier in shape, failed to measure up to by comparison.

The newer body style was developed in the wake of the death of the sport's biggest star, Dale Earnhardt, in 2001 after the legendary driver was killed in a crash against the wall in the Daytona 500.

Since then, the walls have been reinforced at NASCAR tracks as never before, and the cars have been built with various extra safety and restraint devices in order to prevent what happened to Earnhardt from happening again.

But it was felt that more than the extra safety devices, the cars themselves had to be built differently than before in order to better protect their occupants in the event of the inevitable high-speed mishaps endemic to stock cars in the sport.

Along with that, the feeling was that the older cars technological development had peaked, and that races tended to boil down more and more to how the cars were set up and the skill of the teams and manufacturers involved, and less on the skills of the individual drivers.

So the new cars have been built to more uniform and stricter standards, not just in terms of safety but in terms of their performance. The idea is to level the playing field, and make it easier for more teams and drivers to compete on an equal basis.

How well they've achieved the latter goal is still open to question, but after this weekend at the Texas Motor Speedway, there no longer can be any doubt that the newer car is better built for the driver's safety.

During qualifying for the Samsung 500 there this past Friday, rookie driver Michael McDowell inadvertently tested the car's safety features in a way he never intended.

He was going into a turn when it appeared that his car's tires slipped on the substance poured on the track after an oil spill, and his car careened almost headfirst into the wall at approximately 185 MPH.

The built-in barriers absorbed the impact, but the car nonetheless flipped over after the contact about eight times before it bounced down the track's banking and eventually settled in the infield below.

The car was totalled, but the driver compartment remained relatively intact. The crowd was hushed at what they saw, and they were quiet as much out of concern for McDowell's welfare as for the terrifying scene they had just witnessed. Was McDowell OK?

The crowd got its' answer relatively quickly, as McDowell was pulled from the car. To the astonishment of everyone near the track, in the stands, and no doubt the television audience watching the qualifying on the SPEED network, McDowell walked away from the mess to a waiting ambulance, waving to the fans as he did so.

Just moments later, McDowell was interviewed by a SPEED reporter, smiling and reassuring him that he was OK, but for a few bumps and bruises. He said he never lost consciousness during the incident, and that he "felt every roll" his car took. His tone of voice was like someone who'd endured nothing more serious than a fender bender, not like someone who went through the scary ordeal he actually went through.

Many of the drivers there feared for McDowell's welfare, if not his life. Two-time Sprint Cup champion Tony Stewart described the crash as the "hardest one I've ever seen", and pole sitter Dale Earnhardt, Jr. said it was a scary thing to witness.

Even McDowell conceded as such when he was shown the replay of the mishap. Yet, he was still smiling. The bottom line was, he was still there to see what had happened.

The commentators on SPEED were unanimous in their opinion that the design of the CoT was paramount in McDowell's being able not only to endure the crash, but to smile and discuss it just moments later with their reporters.

So, really, who cares if the newer cars ARE less attractive or less aerodynamic than their predecessors?

The fact is, they do what they're designed to do. If you still don't believe me, check out how competitive the races with the new cars have been.

And most important, ask Michael McDowell. Because the car is built the way it is, you can.

Here we go again

Some time ago, I attracted attention here in my little corner of the web when I challenged a notion held by many gospel music fans whose main exposure to the genre was in the 1980s and 1990s that the late George Younce was the greatest bass singer of all time. While not denying Younce's unquestioned greatness as a bass singer, I wondered aloud how people who were largely unfamiliar with bass singers from earlier eras could fairly make such a sweeping statement.

This week I encountered a similar pronouncement in a popular gospel music discussion forum. A poster was challenging an assertion that Mark Trammell was a prime example of a singer who made a habit of changing groups quickly and often. While he was right in arguing that Trammell is NOT an example of such a singer, he went a bit far, IMHO, to make his point. He stated that Trammell was "without a doubt" one of the two greatest baritones in the history of gospel music, along with Doy Ott.

Now the person who made this comment is one of the better bloggers out there today on the gospel music blogroll. But he is a relatively young man, and not likely that familiar with many of the quartet singers prior to the 1980s. I responded with the comment that his statement about Trammell was "incredible", and if any of my readers are privy to that discussion, perhaps an explanation for my own comment is in order.

The history of gospel music on record goes back over 80 years, and a quarter of a century more if the earliest days of the genre are figured into it. Nobody I know is familiar with every singer who ever sang in the genre during that time, but thanks to the recordings I'm familiar with(which date back some 60 years), I'm familiar with a lot of fine baritones in a lot of great quartets.

And again, the question I ask is this: How does someone familiar with only the past 25 years know that Trammell(who, IMHO, is an excellent baritone, BTW)is better than the likes of Erman Slater, James McCoy, Billy Carrier, Don Baldwin, Don Norman, Glen Allred, Earl Weatherford, R.W.Blackwood, Cecil Blackwood, John Mathews, Danny Koker, and many more that unfortunately escape my memory roll at the moment?

The answer is, unless he has access to that many recordings, he/she doesn't...I don't care how many so-called experts he/she may discuss the matter with.

Now, in fairness to the person I'm "picking on" to make my point here, I'm not arguing that Trammell isn't greater than at least some of the names cited above. This sort of thing is a matter of opinion anyway, now matter how many recordings one has or how many times one has seen a given singer in concert. I hasten to add that line because I don't want to be confused with another prominent blogger who sometimes holds his own opinions as almost a matter of law.

My only point is that there is certainly room for plenty of doubt as to the notion that Trammell and Ott are head and shoulders above every other baritone in gospel music history. Frankly, I'm not even sure myself who is the best of all.

But I know that the consensus of most gospel music historians is that Ott and R.W. Blackwood are usually cited by longtime fans as the preeminent baritone singers of all. In fact, my own top five, in addition to those two, would include Danny Koker, Glen Allred, and Don Baldwin.

But that is only my humble opinion...not worth any more than the paper one might print this post out on.

The bottom line is that there have been many great gospel singers over the past century...and no doubt many more will join their ranks in the coming century. And we're all entitled to our favorites...for WHATEVER reason they may be so.

Let's just try to keep our encomia under control, and not presume our tastes to be fact when they're only our tastes.

Credit where it’s due

As "March madness"(soon possibly to be renamed "April madness" for accuracy purposes)is winding down to a close for another year, I suppose it would be appropriate to recognize some history made there by the oft-maligned NCAA.

For the first time since the institution of a postseason tournament to determine its' NCAA men's basketball champion, each of the top-seeded teams in the four regional sections made it all the way to the semifinal round, or to put it in the now standard vernacular, the "Final Four".

The NCAA has gotten its' share of criticism, deserved or otherwise, over the years for its' selections to the tournament, and in many years, the seemingly inevitable upsets demonstrate that maybe their basketball selection committee is not the most well-informed collection of "experts".

Occasionally, I have been one of those critics, so in all fairness, I've got to congratulate the NCAA on "getting it right" this year.

Maybe the positive encouragement can motivate them to do such a prescient job every year.

Or it's worth a try in any case...so here's a pat on the back to one of the favorite whipping boys of sports fans across this country...the NCAA. Keep up the good work, and maybe American sports fans might take you off their "list".

After a “fashion”

Frequent readers to message boards are very familiar with the phenomenon of a topic wandering far from the point of the original post to begin the discussion.

While reading a popular gospel music blog, I had that same experience once more.

The original topic was the legal wrangling between a current gospel group and one of its' former members, but it didn't take long for the discussion to switch from the story to one of the most annoying side issues I encounter when reading gospel music discussions.

Namely, how gospel singers should dress for personal appearances.

It started when someone posted that the group in question appeared unkempt, with "...shirttails hanging out.." and "Salvation Army" styled apparel in an attempt to look "trendy".

I can't tell you how tired I am of this endless debate.

Once it starts, the adherents of the respective sides immediately take the most extreme positions on either side.

"Does it really make any difference if they wear matching suits?", one side asks. "As long as they sing well, who cares...after all, Jesus didn't wear Armani suits with ties.", they continue mindlessly. "People ought to care about how they present themselves in public", says the other side reflexively. "It shows class and professionalism to dress alike..that sort of thing is increasingly missing from too many singers today." Puh-leez.

I'm not trying to make fun of either side of this debate. There ARE good points raised by both sides. But do these points need to be raised every time there is a comment about the appearance of a gospel singer?

Some arguments cannot be resolved through endless discussion, particularly those where empirical evidence cannot be used by either side to settle the issue in question. Even Scripture cannot be used to settle questions of opinion(such as this)...because, let's face it, people can use Scripture to justify almost any opinion.

And I'm not going to solve that debate in this post, either.

All I can tell you is what I think.

Sure, one's singing ability doesn't depend on apparel whatsoever. Anyone who's ever sung a good tune in the shower can testify that you don't necessarily have to wear ANYTHING to sing a song well.

But realistically, when appearing in public, you've got to wear something! So what should the guidelines be?

Without meaning to sound as though I'm "copping out", much depends on the venue and the intent and context of one's singing appearance.

Many younger people who are accustomed to seeing their favorite artists dress relatively casually don't understand how or why the tradition of matching suits developed among gospel quartets.

That tradition began when quartets started to travel to different venues to sing(and sell their song books).

The idea behind matching suits developed naturally from the singers' intent to glorify God as best they could by looking their best when singing songs that tesified to His reality and His saving grace.

OK, John, why the matching suits, then? Wouldn't any nice suit do?

No, because(as evidenced by the hyper-awareness of what singers wear)if one member of the quartet had apparel that stood out from the rest, his appearance could distract the audience from listening as intently as possible to the message of the songs they were singing. Therefore, individuality was discouraged for those attempting to communicate through a song.

If all the singers dressed alike, reasoned those early pioneers, nothing would stand out except the songs...and the message.

OK, John, you say. I'll give you that. But do you really think people don't listen that closely now that a lot of singers dress differently on stage than they did back then?

No, I can't say they do. But when you sing to people you've never met, why take the chance that they might not?

It's possible that people who advocate uniform dress among group members are choosing to "err on the side of caution", if you will. And really, what's so wrong with that? Some who disagree with that position act as though a person's individual rights are violated when they're asked to essentially wear a uniform to perform their job, which is EXACTLY what professional gospel singing is.

I hate to remind you all of this, but the tradition of wearing a uniform for one's job is a long standing tradition that has been ably defended over the years.

So if you're singing pop music, or rap, or some other genre, perhaps those standards would be different.

But take it easy on the people who've sung gospel music for years, and done it well and honorably wearing suits(not necessarily Armanis)and ties...they mean well, and they have good reasons for doing so.

And maybe someday, if you feel differently, they may come around and agree with you.

But do me one favor. PLEASE stop arguing endlessly over the same things on gospel music discussion forums!:-)

Heart and soul therapy

It's just about bedtime as I post this latest missive.

And tonight, as I have for every night during the past six years, I will close my day with good gospel music.

I can't begin or end any day of my life anymore without a song.

And because of my nightly gospel song therapy, I can sleep well at night...and also have a song to sing in the new day.

I sometimes wonder if the artists who sing me to sleep each night ever wonder whether the music they made so long ago would be used to soothe a weary soul to sleep, or to plant the greatest message in the world into his brain to ruminate and dream upon, or even to start his day with a smile.

I'm sure that thought may have crossed their minds...sometimes more than once.

And I wonder if those same artists ever wonder whether their labors have made that kind of appreciative difference in a life, or do they get frustrated because it's hard sometimes to see the fruits of their work manifest amidst the long bus rides, and if they eventually abandon that calling because the monetary and personal benefits aren't sufficient for them

Well, I'm one person here to say...keep it up, guys and gals, because it's made a huge difference in the real quality of my life.

And if it's done that for me, imagine how many others have had similar or even greater benefits in their lives as a result of them making those little records of songs that tell the greatest story in the world.

Gospel music is one of the best therapies I can recommend to any person.

And if there are any singers reading this, hang in there...because you're all truly making a difference in people's lives...whether it's eternally, or just for a few moments in time.

It's worth it. I know.

Page 4 of 31 pages « First  <  2 3 4 5 6 >  Last »