Although lots of truly noteworthy people have been writing about Earl Scruggs recently, I can't help myself.

When I was 10 or 11 I started playing banjo, taking lessons at the Village School of Folk Music in Deerfield, Illinois. I was learning Pete Seeger style banjo, but Eric Weissburg's "Dueling Banjos" had been on the radio, and I wanted to hear more of that, so I looked through the record stacks and found an album called "Dueling Banjos" by Earl Scruggs. It was astonishing to me.

Other early acquisitions included the "I Saw the Light" album by the Earl Scruggs Review and a Columbia double album "Flatt and Scruggs: 20 All-Time Great Recordings in a Deluxe 2 Record Set." (This album, by the way, reassures the purchaser that "Columbia Stereo Records can be played on today's mono record players with excellent results. They will last as long as mono records played on the same equipment, yet will reveal full stereo sound when played on stereo record players.")

It wasn't until later, after I'd moved to Houston and started taking bluegrass banjo lessons, that I learned that what I had been listening to was not the Earl Scruggs that I really needed to hear. The "Foggy Mountain Breakdown" on the Columbia set wasn't the "Foggy Mountain Breakdown," and I needed to hear the earlier recordings. I was able to find some great recordings, and yes, I could hear what everyone was talking about. Although I'd always loved the Seldom Scene's live double LP (in spite of the drunken crowd) and their version of "Doin' My Time," an old reissue album that also included "Pike County Breakdown" showed me Ben Eldridge's melodic playing (which I still love) had nothing on Earl's. I doubt he'd disagree. Rounder and Sugar Hill reissues like, "The Golden Era" and "Don't Get Above Your Raisin'" made more of those classic recordings available, and I loved them.

Only recently, through the Academy of Bluegrass's Tony Trischka School of banjo did I find the DVD's of the Flatt and Scruggs TV show (which is now available on Netflix instant streaming!) and see something that amazed me. I'd never had the opportunity to hear Earl play live, and I was stunned to see that he didn't always play his tunes like they were on the records or in the tablatures to his book. Earl, it turned out, seemed to be constantly improvising — effortlessly and beautifully. Much of what I'd learned was, as a recent blog post put it (sorry, but I can't remember who wrote it), just a snapshot of what Earl had played on a particular take.

I've been listening to lots of Earl's music the last few days, and I even put some of the Earl Scruggs Review albums back on the turntable. You know what? Even those late albums, the ones played by the "older Earl" were really good. Earl had already reinvented the banjo long before recording those albums in the '70's, but here he was doing something else revolutionary, moving into the territory of country rock and pop with his banjo and electric instruments long before it became fashionable. He didn't have quite the strength in his right hand or the powerful sound he'd had in the early days, but the "Revue" albums were still some great music. 

And, of course, it turned out that, when I was learning which Earl I should listen to and which I should ignore in the early '80's, when Earl was past his prime, that he still had about 30 years of stunningly great banjo to play. If you haven't heard Earl play "Earl's Breakdown Farewell Blues" (got that wrong on the first take) on Tony Trischka's "Double Banjo Bluegrass Spectacular," check it out. I can only hope that someday I might play as well as Earl did in his 80's.

Last night I got the opportunity to listen to Yo-Yo Ma talk about his life in music, which was the kickoff event for DePauw Discourse 2011 - Empowering Society Through the Arts. It was a wonderful talk and performance (and I'm looking forward to the concert tonight), but one section was especially interesting to me.

I am, after all, a banjo player. I'm not a particularly good one, and I would prefer to become a musician who plays the banjo rather than just a guy who knows how to play banjo. I spent most of my banjo playing life just learning how to play particular tunes, but not really learning how to play, so I'm trying to pay lot more attention to why i'm doing what I'm doing.

At one point Ma was talking about playing Shostakovich and how to try to get the right emotional energy out of it, and he started talking about tone production and that, as you fret any string, the length of the string changes. The higher note you play, the shorter the string becomes, as if the nut (on a banjo -- what do they call it on a cello?) moves down the neck toward the bridge each time you play a higher note. That changes the relative position of where you're bowing or picking the note, and he demonstrated how moving the bow fractions of an inch created a richer or poorer tone, and those movements have to happen each time a different note is played.

It's well nigh impossible to imagine actually moving the contact point of each note when playing bluegrass banjo, at least in Scruggs or melodic style. What's more, I think most players tend to play with their thumb a bit forward of the index and middle. (I did recently watch an interview on Tony Trischka's Academy of Bluegrass site with Alan Munde, I think, who talked about angling his hand so that it hits all the strings at about the same spot.) But this did make me think I need to pay much more attention to where and when I need to move my right hand as my left moves up and down my neck.

Of course, I was also really interested when he started talking about playing with Edgar Meyer and Mark O'Connor. He'd been interested in Mark's always thanking Benny Thomason, "the greatest Texas fiddler who ever lived" when he played. I felt reasonably sure I was the only guy in the audience who owns several Benny Thomason records.

Lovely run from the parents' place outside Brookfield.

With a finish that makes the climb on Fish Creek Road look easy.

Taken at Greencastle

Taken at Greencastle

Residents of Anderson Street rushed to their windows this morning to partake in an annual rite. "It's pure gold," says Bruce Dremmel. "You can't pay for comedy like this." Once again Dave Guinee, a professor at a local college, has revived his legendary one-man show, "Academic with a Wood Maul."

I was able to watch this year's performance, because I was at a Bruce's having coffee, but normally the show begins with no fanfare. "It's just an impromptu performance," says Bruce. One morning you'll hear the sound of that maul chunking ineffectively into a railroad tie, and you just have to run to the window and watch. Now with cell phones and all, you can call friends to come over and have a good time together."

Guinee's performance is similar each year, and the premise is a simple as it gets. He simply sets up wood and "tries" to split it into firewood sized pieces. The results are devastating. How he manages repeatedly to split off the tiniest little slivers of bark, while sending the log flying across the yard, is astonishing. At times he will hit the same piece over and over again, somehow never managing to split it. He's a modern-day Buster Keaton, and you're constantly worried that he's going to bury that wood maul in his shin.

Shows will, if past years are any prediction, continue through the winter. If you get a chance to join the crowd on Guinee's driveway or watch with a warm cup of cocoa from a neighbor's house, don't pass it up.

President Obama on cutting a deal to extend the Bush Era tax cuts, according to today's NYT: “It’s not perfect, but this compromise is an essential step on the road to recovery,” Mr. Obama said. “It will stop middle-class taxes from going up. It will spur our private sector to create millions of new jobs, and add momentum that our economy badly needs.”

A cut in payroll taxes might have such an effect, since the payroll taxes affect the part of incomes that people actually spend, but as a whole this statement is laughable.

The tax cuts were idiotic before the recession. News flash: trickle-down economics is and always has been a shell game. So if the President can "compromise" on something as patently stupid as this, where will he not compromise?

And frankly, this seems a lot more lake "caving" than "compromising." What about extending the cuts for the first million of income? That would be a compromise. Even the Democrats in Congress seem to be able to cut a better deal than the President.

A mile in the pool today for the first time in a while. It wasn't pretty.