A word or two. . .

. . . here about 'coolness' and musical instruments, the relation of one to the other quite relative but very important. The 'uncool'-ness of the accordion which had become, in essence a new appendage, had long since been a non-issue to me musically. But it was an issue for audiences of popular music, not to mention for bandmates of accordionists in groups that played popular music. In other words, okay to me-uncool to them. And in truth, I was enamored with the idea of a new, and much more widely acceptable to younger audiences, instrument which was a mainstay in a preponderance of musical groups professional and unprofessional, young and old- the electronic organ. I had previously graduated from my first very own 120 bass accordion to a 'mic-ed' acoustic/electric hybrid accordion (not as sophisticated nor as expensive as the Cordovox) which had its merits: additional volume and the mere characteristic of being 'electric'. But NOW, I was ready for the electronic organ.

Remember Paul Revere and the Raiders and Paul Revere himself (stage name, I'm sure) who stood, sang and danced while banging out those gloriously wheezing chords on his Vox electronic? Well that's what I wanted, only I couldn't dance and I didn't want the HAT.

Not surprisingly to me, electronic organs were expensive. At least for an adolescent earning about $10.00 a week delivering newspapers. A then you would of course, have to buy an amplifier through which to play this wonderful instrument. After some shopping, comparing and arranging finance with my parents, I decided upon the Farfisa Fast Four and a used Ampeg bass amp with two 24-inch speakers and nary a watt of output. I do exaggerate, but it was FAR from powerful. The organ itself was off-white with chrome folding legs and gray keys (naturals) with which sharps and flats with a little more than an octave of bass keys in black instead of gray. It was GRAND. It was downright COOL!




What do YOU think?
http://www.rayjozwiak.com/guestbook.html


Download your
very own copy of
ANOTHER SHOT
by Ray Jozwiak

Please Visit
http://www.rayjozwiak.com


Tweet


Top Stories

"The First Amendment. . .

. . .DOES NOT bar religion from the public square and from government in general. Under the First Amendment, the resulting separation of Church and State puts restrictions on government but does not put restrictions on religion. . ."

(reaction to a recent blog by Howard Bess. See bottom)
The good Reverend seems to hit it on the head on a regular basis. He says that the current crop of republican presidential candidates, as well as the media 'reporting' on them, all miss the boat on their interpretation of the First Amendment. He would like to know how the religion of the candidates informs their views and intentions with regard to the following issues. "As president, would the candidate pursue the teachings of his religion?"

WAR AND PEACE - religions generally favor a path toward peace

POPULATION CONTROL, BIRTH CONTROL, AND ABORTION SERVICES - how long will the earth be able to sustain the needs of this huge (and growing) population so highly encouraged by their right to life 'philosophy'?

FULL RIGHTS FOR GAY, LESBIAN, TRANSGENDERED AND BISEXUAL PERSONS - many/most organized religions do not favor these just and necessary rights

PRESERVATION OF THE INTEGRITY OF THE WORLD’S ENVIRONMENT - what will the candidate do when scientific knowledge directly confronts the teachings of his religion?

PUBLIC SCHOOL EDUCATION - parochial schools have been known to practice discrimination

PROVISION FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE LESS FORTUNATE - entitlements and being 'thy brother's keeper'

The Rev. Howard Bess is a retired American Baptist minister, who lives in Palmer, Alaska. His email address is HYPERLINK "mailto:hdbss@mtaonline.net" hdbss@mtaonline.net

I HIGHLY RECOMMEND READING HIM!




What do YOU think?
http://www.rayjozwiak.com/guestbook.html


Download your
very own copy of
ANOTHER SHOT
by Ray Jozwiak

Please Visit
http://www.rayjozwiak.com


Tweet


Top Stories

It's me

From the Cool Cosmos website. . .

"Warm-blooded creatures, like mammals and birds, try to keep the inside of their bodies at a constant temperature. They do this by generating their own heat when they are in a cooler environment, and by cooling themselves when they are in a hotter environment. To generate heat, warm-blooded animals convert the food that they eat into energy. They have to eat a lot of food, compared with cold-blooded animals, to maintain a constant body temperature. Only a small amount of the food that a warm-blooded animal eats is converted into body mass. The rest is used to fuel a constant body temperature.

Cold-blooded creatures take on the temperature of their surroundings. They are hot when their environment is hot and cold when their environment is cold. In hot environments, cold-blooded animals can have blood that is much warmer than warm-blooded animals. Cold-blooded animals are much more active in warm environments and are very sluggish in cold environments. This is because their muscle activity depends on chemical reactions which run quickly when it is hot and slowly when it is cold. A cold-blooded animal can convert much more of its food into body mass compared with a warm-blooded animal."

My 'cold-blooded'-ness is not in relation to my attitude to others. The operative words here are "sluggish in cold environments."
Nuff said.

(Hear my music at http://www.rayjozwiak.com)