What's the difference, musically, between London Blues and Chicago Blues?!
Question: In my lecture notes, it says "There's a temporal difference: Strange balance of familiarity and strangeness"
What are the actual differences though, between London and Chicago Blues?
Answers: In my lecture notes, it says "There's a temporal difference: Strange balance of familiarity and strangeness"
What are the actual differences though, between London and Chicago Blues?
Chicago blues came out of ... well ... Chicago (duh) in the late 1940's and 50's.
Muddy Waters, Willie Dixon, Howlin' Wolf and the like.
The London sound was an imitation of it. By the mid 1950's America was moving past the blues into Rock and Roll and the old bluesmen were having a tough time with their careers.
By the early 60's, England really re-discovered American blues and many bluesmen were able to cross the pond to play sell out crowds over there.
So, the young English musicians started to play the music as well.
THere is an unqantifiable difference between the London blues and the Chicago blues that is more about feel than structural difference. Guitar and drums became even more important, and harmonica was falling a little by the wayside
Well, London Blues have rock infused in them, Listen to Led Zeppelin, Cream, and John Mayall and The Bluesbreakers
Chicago Blues are almost like 12-bar pattern, Listen to Buddy Guy, Elmore James, and Otis Rush
Chicago Blues is the Original, English is imitation.
The difference is like black and white.
(lame pun...)