****If nothing can be perfect, then it's just FLAWLESS!**** - Rok2id re "Blues And The Abstract Truth".
Well, I suppose that the fact that it was in the No.1 slot in my first response to this thread says all that I need to say about how I feel about this record. I have long felt that this record, not Kind Of Blue (in spite of all it's excellence), should be the audiophile-go-to jazz recording. Before I get skewered, let me say that KOB is clearly the "more important" recording with the presence of Coltrane and all that he precursed, as well as the "Modal Jazz, here I am" vibe that the record is so rightly admired for. BATAT features some incredible playing and arranging. I can't imagine a more perfect hard-bop solo than Freddie's solo on the title cut. For comments re Oliver Nelson's improvising style see my comments a few posts back (if anyone cares :-). Dolphy's presence on the record is like a splash of cold water on the face after a great workout; talk about unique. Evans? What can possibly be said that hasn't already be said about his beautiful lyricism. A great record; and, oh yeah, great sound too.
****Why isn't Freddie Hubbard mentioned more often, when people talk of the Jazz Trumpet ****
Well, we tried; didn't we? Trumpet players talk about Freddie all the time. Jazz fans? Well, I suppose his stint with CTI records caused him to lose some credibility among the elite at a time when jazz, clearly waning (in a way) was starting to move in a direction that punished (intellectually) anyone who sought commercial success. Success; can't have that! Also, a serious lip injury caused his playing to be sub-par during his last active years. |
Today's Listen
Hugh Masekela -- The Best Of Hugh Masekela
Most of his greats are here. Including one I could have done without (grazing in the grass).'Chileshe', 'Don't Go Lose It Baby', 'Nelson Madela', 'Mama' and of course the madatory 'Stimela' and others. No filler. All very good. Good happy infectious music. The blowing and the vocals.
Masekela has one of the most beautiful tones I have heard. I could listen to his Flugelhorn all day. He has a very unique voice also.
The Frogman once enlightened us on the unique sound of Mariachi trumpet. I wonder if he or anyone else could do the same with African Vocals. The singers have a very unique sound, esp the background singers. Ladysmith is a good source to hear that.
The liner notes include a one paragraph synopsis of each song. I like that. I think these are the best of his recordings for CBS/Columbia. Production quality is high. Great sound.
I am sure The frogman and O-10 already have this, they being such stalwart champions of third world music/Jazz.
Highly recommended. BTW, His stuff on youtube has horrible sound quality.
Cheers |
The frogman:
"Also, a serious lip injury caused his playing to be sub-par during his last active years."
I hope he was not another victim of Mingus' right hand.
Cheers |
I've been out of town for a day, but I'm going to catch up and not slight anyone's posts. Rok, your honesty is what makes your reviews so good; "you calls em like you sees em".
I thought, without listening for myself, "Jazz At The Pawnshop" was one of the best recordings ever; the hype was all I had to go by. As you know I like good sound, but without good music, you can keep it. As for your reviews, "keep em comin"
Enjoy the music.
|
Frogman, I did not know that about the end of Hubbard's career. That's every brass player's worst nightmare. I really enjoy Hubbard's early stuff - brass players definitely know who he is and talk about him quite a bit. Lee Morgan is another one like that - you don't hear many casual jazz fans talk about him, but the brass players do. |
As far as trumpeters respected by brass players more so than the casual jazz fan I'd add Kenny Dorham and even the lesser known Jack Sheldon.
When Jack was paired with Harold Land in the Curtis Counce band Sheldon's tone and playing was really good.
Regards, |
|
Charles1dad, Jack Sheldon was primarily known on the West Coast; good musicians could make a living, and never leave the LA area. Yes, he had a beautiful tone.
Enjoy the music.
|
Thanks for the kind words O-10. With you onboard, my readership has just doubled!
Today's Ray of Sunshine:
Louis Armstrong and his Orchestra -- SATCH PLAYS FATS
SACD only CD. Not a Hybrid.
Louis Armstrong Plays the music of Thomas 'Fats' Waller. In this realm of Jazz, King louis Rules. He don't need no stinking bebop!!
All of Fats' best known stuff is here. All have vocals. Is this New Orleans Jazz? Fats waller Jazz? Speakeasy jazz? Harlem jazz? No matter what, it's great, feel good, party music. Oustanding Booklet insert.
Of course Louis has the most unique voice on the planet. He can convey feelings like no other. Every song he sings becomes his own. We learned that from 'Hello Dolly'. Velma Middleton duets on some songs.
Half of the tracks are 'bonus' tracks. Alternate takes. Some from the 30's. Normally a turn off to me, but not in this case. The more the better. Great sound quality.
This SACD sells on Amazon new for 4.99! Hard to believe, esp when you consider the prices of all the noise and static on sale there.
For Armstrong / Waller fans, this is a MUST HAVE. For any other Jazz fans its an ought to have. For $4.99 what's there to think about? We have all spent a lot more for a lot less.
Cheers |
Rok, this would have to be placed into a category I don't even have; "feel good music", although I could sure use it about now.
I saw the musical "Ain't Misbehavin" performed locally, and I left all smiles. It's for sure Fats Waller's music had that ability to make one smile and feel better. In these times that are trying men's souls, I'm sure we could all use a mood changer, I know I could.
When you mix Louis, and Fat's, that's got to be a mood changer, it's on order, and I'm looking forward to feeling better.
Enjoy the music.
|
Latest Listen:
Nat Adderley Sextet -- AUTUMN LEAVES (live at sweet basil)
Sextet includes two(2) Alto Sax Players. Sonny Fortune and Vincent Herring. I guess it took that many to replace Cannonball.
Only four numbers. They are long, but do not get tiresome. They will hold your attention. The sextet is totally engaged on all the songs. No throwaways, filler or blowing just to be blowing. That is getting to be the highest compliment you can give these days.
All solos are excellent. Well constructed and played. Esp the Saxophones, but I am not so sure about their tone. Seems like they squeak and squawk a bit. But fine playing all around.
Nat does take the lead role (muted) on the title track.(autumn leaves)
Good, but brief, liner notes. Talks about the Adderely brother's Southern roots.(florida) How the church influenced their musical development. I didn't know that, but I always felt it in Cannonball's music.
Although they were Episcopalin, it seems as if they were most influenced by the Baptist church, as a result of just passing by it on sundays and hearing the music within. hahahahahahaha Now, that's INFLUENCE!
All in all an excellent effort. One of Nat's best.
Highly Recommended.
Cheers |
Rok, I've been listening to a CD that I don't even know how it got into my collection, but I like it. Nowhere do I even remember purchasing "Mardra & Reggie Thomas"; but now, her soothing vocals take me places, and even her selection of songs are the one's I like best.
Mardra's vocals are not "seductive", like Nancy Wilson's, or sexy, like Carmen McRae's, or jazzy like Ella Fitzgerald's; her voice is soothing, like one I've heard before, like the girl next door who understood me, and she's singing to me for me. The more I hear Mardra, the more I like her.
Now that this CD has gotten my highest recommendation for a new vocalist, (new to me) it's time for the master reviewer to give it a listen, they have it on Amazon. Tell me what you think.
Enjoy the music.
|
O-10,
Very nice singing. I listened to every snippet and they all were well done. The two songs written by her husband were good also. As you said very nice voice and a good song selection.
I youtubed and googled them. They do a lot of good stuff exposing and teaching young people to Jazz. This in itself is most important thing. He is also a faculty member in the Jazz Studies Dept at Michigan State. Also works with Lincoln Center projects. Impressive. We need more people like this at the grass roots level.
I noticed they are from the St Louis area. Same as Trio Tres Bien. Is St Louis your stomping grounds also?
http://music.msu.edu/faculty/profile/reginald
Cheers |
|
Today's Listen:
The Timeless All-Stars -- ESSENCE
The all-stars are: Bobby Hutcherson,(vibes), Harold Land,(ts), Curtis Fuller,(tb), Cedar Walton,(p), Buster Williams (b) and Billy Higgins.(d)
I have had this one for decades. A great CD to use as an introduction to high quality Jazz playing.
Improvisation at it's best. All playing and songs are of the ideal degree of complexity. They grab your interest and hold it.
The Bass player, Buster Williams, is awesome throughout. Very intelligent playing as soloist and in support. I am sure his intonation would even meet the approval of The Frogman.
Most of the tracks were written by members of the group. 'Messina', by Hutcherson, is my favorite. Excellent sound. All digital. No Hiss.
Higly recommended. Check it out.
Cheers |
I found three similar CD's with different release dates, and Harold Land looked old on one of them. I need numbers for the exact CD you have. |
O-10:
http://browse.delosmusic.com/Essence-The-Timeless-All-Stars-p/de%204006.htm
This is the one. recorded in 1986 Delos label 4006 |
When you sent me the post on Mardra & Reggie Thomas, you sort of made a comparison of her style with McRae and Ella.
It occurred to me how tough it must be to be successful in the music business. One of the major reasons being, the Great artists never really go away. They are still here, on LP and CD.
So if a current player is talented enough and lucky enough to record for a major label, their CD goes in the bin right next to the Ella's and Coltrane's' of the Jazz world. A new artist is always in direct competition with the greats of the past.
I guess classical composers suffer the same way. Of course this is stating the obvious, but your post just brought it home for me.
BTW, I am not sure that 'ESSENCE' is the Timeless All-Stars' best work. But it is good. 'These Sellers' want mega bucks for their other stuff.
Cheers |
Rok, although I'm a big Bobby Hutcherson, and Harold Land fan, I didn't like the "Timeless" I found; however, I did find "Delilah" by the Bobby Hutcherson quartet. This music is absolutely amazing. It's current, that's what makes it so amazing. While the bass player is young, he's making his own unique sound and contributing to the whole. Although Bobby Hutcherson is old, he sounds young and fresh. My albums by him go all the way back to when he was young with curly hair. He sounds as good now as he did then. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amgLychKCMYEnjoy the music. |
"I didn't like the "Timeless" I found;"
The title of the CD is 'Essence' the group is called the timeless all-stars. Hope you followed the link.
You are right about these guys getting old. I always think of them as they appear on the CD covers, some of which are almost 30 years old. All my Hutcherson CDs show him which a full head of hair. Not gray either.
Cheers |
Frogman: Why isn't Freddie Hubbard mentioned more often"
The CTI recordings introduced me to Freddie. Some feel that the CTI recordings do not represent "real" jazz. They do in my book and in front of my speakers.
He is my favorite trumpeteer'. (yes,I just made up that word for him) |
Isochronism, could you give us your favorites by Freddie Hubbard? |
Live broadcast from the New orleans Jazz fest:
Wayne Shorter, Dee Dee Bridgewater and otherss are on today. Check it out. Last day I think.
WWOZ 90.7 FM New Orleans.
http://www.wwoz.org/blog/218226
Cheers |
Tenderly, Love For Sale, Summertime, Laura, Round Midnight; those are songs somebody wrote. They've been around for ages, and played by jazz musicians, popular musicians, rock musicians, and possibly even country and western musicians. A person can go to school, practice, and perfect his skills on his chosen musical instrument, learn how to play all of those songs perfectly in his chosen musical style; but none of that will enable a person to write one of those songs.
No amount of practice, school or many other musical attributes will enable a musician to mesmerize a crowd of people with his improvisational skills on his chosen instrument night after night. "Only" jazz musicians can do this, and not all of them; it's a gift that's reserved for those who are recognized as being at the very highest pinnacle of musicianship, Charles "Yardbird" Parker for example.
One step down from this pinnacle, are the musicians who have successfully led groups of other musicians over the years and written music as well; Horace Silver, Thelonius Monk, Dave Brubeck, and Art Blakey come to mind. And last on this ladder of success are musicians who have simply excelled on their chosen instrument. Since this group is so arbitrary, I won't give any examples because there is too much disagreement as to how we should rank them overall as jazz musicians.
If a "jazz" musician can excel on his chosen instrument, and play someone else's music better than it's ever been played before, that's fine; but it drops him down a notch if he can't create "original" music of his own that excels in the ears of other "jazz" musicians and aficionados.
Fame and fortune might be the determining factors in other endeavors, and music even; but not in "jazz". If that were the case, Kenny G would be "Da man". Unlike any and everything else, the high priests of jazz are determined by aficionados and other jazz musicians. Charles "Yardbird" Parker, the recognized high priest of jazz, was relatively poverty stricken.
While it's almost impossible to compare current and past jazz musicians because of the generational gap, one of the most important factors is the stability of current musicians who also reject drugs and alcohol. That certainly helps their economic success. "Jazz" musicians are still rated the same way now, as they were when "Bird" was blowing his horn, they're rated by other jazz musicians and jazz aficionados, not by Newsweek, Time, or MSNBC. Jazz is the only anything, where the unofficial word on the street is the last word.
"They've had no real experience with the real essence of those guys (Miles, Trane and Monk) -- the way they help their instruments, the way they acted, what really caused this music. Most of the cats trying to play hardcore contemporary jazz don't have their own style. Or there are some people like Wynton [Marsalis] who play the horn, but don't play no hip jazz. They're just into playing the instrument good. They're not creating ideas." That was a quote from Freddie Hubbard and my own personal opinion as well. His statement and my opinion have absolutely nothing personall to do with Wynton Marsalis, that's just the way it is.
Enjoy the music.
|
When I first heard Wynton Marsalis, "We've got a new worlds best trumpet player" are the thoughts that ran through my mind. Wynton was playing with Blakey at that time.
After he went on his own, I bought every album as soon as it hit the record store. I had acquired 5 of his albums before realizing, I didn't really like them. Although I couldn't put my finger on exactly why I didn't like them, why bother? I sold 4 of them at a good price and I still have one. It's been so long since I heard it, that I've forgotten what it sounds like.
When you sit in your listening spot, you're the king, and it should not matter what I think.
Enjoy the music.
|
This is the prefect example of why Wynton is under attack.
http://www.thedailypage.com/daily/article.php?article=29820
It has nothing to with his playing, it has to do with his definition of Jazz. That's what they cannot stomach. He does not cave to the free / avant garde / world, crowd. He sees them and calls them for what they are. The want politican correctness, they get brutal honesty.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, he is defending the music!
Read this article carefully. Really carefully. And then tell me what is this guy's complaint. He speaks for all the Modern, free, and world, noise makers.
The envy and the hatred is almost palpable!!
With this article as evidence, I rest my case. He says it all. I assume all he said about the awards etc.... are correct.
He made the case FOR Wynton in the process of trying to discredit him!!! Desperation!!! hahahahahah
Cheers |
Orpheus10 wrote: "No amount of practice, school or many other musical attributes will enable a musician to mesmerize a crowd of people with his improvisational skills on his chosen instrument night after night. "Only" jazz musicians can do this, and not all of them; it's a gift that's reserved for those who are recognized as being at the very highest pinnacle of musicianship."
There are a couple of things not true about this. Leaving aside the statement that only jazz musicians could do this, which is frankly insulting to a great many professional musicians, and not deserving even of the mention I give it here, I want to reply to the first part of the statement. No amount of talent, no gift, no matter how great, will be of any use whatsoever if the musician does not work VERY hard, all through his whole schooling and subsequent career, to develop these natural abilities. Period. Yes, there are geniuses, in all fields of music. But every single one of them has worked, and continues to work extremely hard to continue to develop and maintain the craft you are speaking of. The ones you mention who mesmerize audiences night after night are these individuals. For every one of them, I guarantee you there were many others equally gifted, who did not have the work ethic, or the discipline, or the drive to make it. I have known many incredible players and musicians in my life of whom this was the case, and I am sure Frogman does too. I know, Orpheus, that you think you are complimenting these artists by talking of their gifts, but many of them would consider it insulting that you are belittling their very hard work, because THAT is the reason they are at the very highest pinnacle of musicianship, without which their natural gifts would avail them nothing. |
learsfool, you are a classical musician. You think and speak like a classical musician. By now you should realize that "all" musicians don't even live in the same world, even when they only live blocks apart.
I'm sure the jazz musicians I knew had to learn their skills somewhere, but they did not practice. As often as they performed, they didn't need to. Yes the kind of musician I knew was rare, but I have no reason to fabricate.
Your world as a musician, is so different from the the jazz world, that you're having a hard time accepting it. You stated that all the musicians you knew were into the high end. Now I know why, "Classical music sounds like noise when it's played on less than high end equipment", but that's another subject. According to Branford Marsalis, he was the only jazz musician he knew who was into the high end. John Lee Hooker had several homes before his death, and he had Kenwood rack systems in all of them, he said he liked a "funky" sound. Musicians I knew were either working on a gig, or digging a set, and rarely sat down to listen to recorded music; of course we were both young then.
Wynton Marsalis could be one of the most perfect "Classical" trumpets ever as a result of all the things you have stated about musicians, and he could be the best "side man" ever. If you call that "Wynton bashing", so be it; but I'm using him as an example of what you think the most accomplished musicians have to be.
Erroll Garner was self taught and remained what's called an ear player. Learsfool, you are imposing your reality on a world that's foreign to you. We all do that at times.
Enjoy the music.
|
Extensive improvisation, sometimes hours long, is at the heart of classical Indian music. |
Rok, I wish Wynton all the success and happiness in the world, but in regard to "the music", I agree with his critics, and this is what I thought a long time ago before I even knew he had critics. As far as I'm concerned, his critics are agreeing with me, as opposed to me agreeing with his critics.
Enjoy the music. |
I've got a DVD "Garth Fagan, Griot New York" , that has music composed and arranged by Wynton Marsalis. Since I had seen Garth Fagan's dancers, there was no doubt in my mind, this was going to be spectacular. The music killed it. For confirmation I stuck it in the player, and it still sucks.
Youse guys found You tubes of Wynton playing someone else's music, and it was fantastic; but nobody said Wynton couldn't play the trumpet, all of Wynton's critics said he could play the trumpet very well. I even stated that he might be the worlds best trumpet player, especially since he plays classical and jazz; but classical is not his own music. It's just when he composes and arranges that the music totally sucks. That is something that can not be debated because beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and that music is one ugly duckling to this beholder.
Enjoy the music.
|
Learsfool,
I understand the point Opheus10 is making. My passion is definitely jazz but I respect all skilled and talented musicians. Do classical musicians also improvise Learsfool? I`d like your perspective.It fascinates me when jazz musicians play an entire set(or the full evening) with no sheet music to be found anywhere. In no way do I want this to become a jazz vs classical battle(pointless arguement).I`m asking strictly for a musician`s unique vantage point.I`m convinced it takes much work and ability to master either.
Regards, |
|
Orpheus10, this thread continues to be, without a doubt, one of the most interesting on this forum. Your passion for jazz is palpable, and you and I actually have very similar sensibilities re which performers are truly capable of communicating something to the listener. I am in basic agreement with you about Wynton in that respect, although I share Rok's feelings about Wynton's overall relevance. I am somewhat surprised we have returned to the subject of Wynton and have other thoughts about this which I will contribute when I have a little more time. For now, I would like to address your comments about the "musician's world".
I have found that there is an understandable tendency among non-musicians to romanticize the process of being a musician; I emphasize "process". The idea that in every creative musician there is a force within that is guiding, dictating, and controlling the process required to make music come out of his chosen instrument as if it were all beyond the control of the player is as romantic as one can get; the "Muse". This notion is very far from reality. We have discussed this subject previously so I am surprised that we are here again. Surprised because if we read the biographies of the great players like Bird and Trane we learn that they were incessant practicers ("shedders" as musicians, themselves, call it). They also studied a great deal; recordings, formal harmony studies, or piano wether that was their main instrument or not. I don't know who the jazz musicians you know (knew?) were, and I acknowledge that some players (have to?) devote more time to shedding than others. But, at some point, if not currently, every great player has put in a tremendous amount of practice time. Additionally, one of the things that hour upon hour of practicing teaches a player is how to achieve what previously may have taken two hours, I fifteen minutes. You would be amazed what an experienced player can accomplish in a ten minute "warm-up" before (or during!) a gig.
With all due respect, some of your comments directed at Learsfool and "his world" are not simply inaccurate, but unfair as well. Yes, a classical musician's "world" is different in many respects than a jazz musician's world. But, not nearly as different as some might think in many key respects; not the least of which is what it takes to develop the mechanics of playing an instrument (any instrument in any genre). I would encourage you to consider the fact that while they may be different worlds, they are most definitely part of the same universe; while musicians (all musicians) live in an all-together different universe than non-musicians. Great jazz players are no less mesmerized by the beauty of phrasing, elegance, tone and ultimate control of the instrument that a great classical player offers in a performance, than a classical musician is of the amazing understanding of harmony, musical looseness, and individuality that a great improviser offers. Because they live in the same universe, if not the same world, none of these are mutually exclusive; simply emphasized to different degrees. |
Not intended to imply judgment of the value of one discipline over the other, but simply to underscore my comments above. Two absolutely true stories that I have first hand knowledge about:
During his tenure as conductor with the NY Phil, Zubin Mehta, while on a flight back to NYC, met the great Gerry Mulligan and invited him to take part in an upcoming performance of Ravel's "Bolero". The piece, as some may know, features instrumental solos for, among others, soprano (actually sopranino, but that's a different subject) and tenor saxophones. Soprano, being Mulligan's second instrument of choice, was to be played by Mulligan. I can't emphasize enough how often I have heard excellent jazz players downplay the difficulty of that seemingly easy solo. After all, it's not technical, easy key, etc.; but, it requires good intonation, control, and rhythmic accuracy (with it's displaced rhythmic emphasis) while all the time allowing for individuality of expression. To say that Mulligan's performance during rehearsal was a disaster would be an understatement. But, this was the great Gerry Mulligan, and surely he will come through in the end. At the performance, the first phrase of the solo was fine, then he got off by a beat and played the entire last two thirds of the solo off by a beat. At the end of the performance, during the obligatory bows, Mulligan turns to the soprano sax player and says: "We played the shit out of it, didn't we? Clueless!
During the 1980's, Sting was the star of a Broadway production of Kurt Weill's "Three Penny Opera". Branford Marsalis was saxophonist for Sting's touring band. Can you see it coming? :-)
Players on Broadway are allowed to "sub-out" a certain number of performances during the run. Well, Branford thought it would be cool to sub on the show, and being Sting's horn player, well..... Instead of doing what a player needs to do to be successful subbing on a show, he went in without sitting through the show (without playing) nor studying "the book"; he went in cold, thinking: how hard can this possibly be? By intermission, the conductor wanted him to go home. |
Frogman, believe it or not, I agree with you on all counts, that's why I'm going to return this subject back where it belongs. Do you remember "Johnny Smith", who put out an album titled "Moonlight In Vermont". I was listening to that late last night, and it sounded every bit as mellow as when the first time I heard it. Stan Getz sure sounds good on the title track. There are a total of 3 tenor sax men of this CD including Stan Getz. It's a must have, with Zoot Sims, and Paul Quinichette. (that's pronounced Quin-a-shay) also on tenor sax. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xf3rAXoYjAEnjoy the music. |
"....but they did not practice..."
Orpheus, am I understanding you correctly? Are you saying Jazz musicians don't practice, or just this group of guys you know personally? 'Cause I'm sure you know there are Jazz musicians that practice to the point of obssesion. John Coltrane had a rep for shedding that I've read bordered on annoying! We all know the legends about Sonny Rollins shedding on the Brooklyn Bridge. You obviously have an above average knowledge of Jazz so my guess is that I'm misunderstanding you. If you're saying that steady gigs is 'enough' practice, I'd disagree. Not if the musician is striving to heighten his art. |
O-10:
I think we can agree that
1. Wynton is not the best Jazz player in the world.
2. Wynton is not the worst Jazz player in the world.
So, that begs the question, why are we talking about him?
You answer that, think before you answer, and you are on the road to understanding what this 'wynton' thingy is all about.
hint, hint, Skill at Improvisation has nothing to do with it.
Frogman: Your comment about Branford was really funny!
I betcha Wynton would not have missed a beat!
Cheers |
I suspect a classical musician would be equally out of their element if asked to sit in with a group in a jazz venue. Two diiferent disciplines.Neither a piece of cake.Like pro athletes,a NBA player and NFL player would`nt automatically fill the other`s shoes.
Regards, |
Charles1dad:
You are absolutely correct. I guess the answer is, know your lane, and stay in it.
Cheers |
Chazro, one musician I knew did not practice. Yes you misunderstood me. Others who have been following this thread should have gotten a better understanding. |
I am a Jazz musician,but I was trained as a classical musician as well.I lived for a short period in "both worlds"but the last 20 years I have with a few exceptions made a living playing jazz and jazz related music.
In my experience the amount of study time put in by both musician types is more or less the same.one funny thing though, all my jazz musician friends study classical pieces but very few of my classical friends study jazz or improvisation. |
@Orpheus - I appreciate your passion for jazz. What I don't get is why you think I am having trouble "accepting" anything?? I was merely trying to explain to you the kind of work it takes to become a professional musician of any kind - my comments were in no way specific to classical music, and I am sorry if this was not clear. I will let Frogman's great answer stand - he writes much more clearly than I, that's for sure.
@Charles1dad - yes, some classical musicians do still improvise, though this is largely becoming a lost art in the classical world. Even well into the 19th century, almost all musicians had to develop some ability for it, but after that point, the incredible technical advances in both instruments and players brought about such specialization that the focus now is almost entirely on learning to play the instruments as well as possible. It also has to do with the sheer size of the "standard rep." There is so much music out there that the orchestral musician must know now that most feel there is no time to develop improvisational skills that they would probably never be called upon to use. This is a very sad thing, IMO.
That said, there are still many who do on a regular basis, though in a different way from the jazz musicians. They are mainly keyboardists - those who perform baroque music are the best example. A harpsichordist must do what is called "realizing" the figured bass. Basically, the composer has written down some figures (numbers) below the bass note that tells the performer what chord is required. It is entirely up to the performer how this chord is spaced, or voiced, and sometimes even the chord required is flexible. None of the rest of the part is written out, just a bass note and these "figures." So the harpsichordist is making up his entire part above the bass note, often elaborating it. Singers and instrumental soloists also often improvise ornamentation of their melodies in baroque music, as well, and there are many musicians very adept at this - much of the time, it is done on the spot, not written out beforehand. There are also still some soloists who improvise cadenzas on the spot in their concertos, but this is becoming more rare. Stephen Hough is one example. In undergrad, besides my horn performance major I also did a music theory major, and had to take a course in keyboard harmony, including learning to 'realize" figured bass. It was fun, though I have not done it since, and would have to brush up on it to try it - that's not something I could just sit down and do anymore.
This is not so different from what jazz musicians do as you might think. Once you know more about how jazz works, musically, much of the mystery goes away. To grossly simplify it, (and Frogman, feel free to jump in and help me out here) let's say you have a group getting together in a club to play a couple or three sets of standards, a typical one night club gig. Yes, they are improvising, but within a strict framework. There are standard harmonizations and forms for all of the standard tunes, which these players all know (a significant part of their study and practicing). If they haven't played a tune before that is going to be played that night, they also have resort to what are called "Fake Books," which list songs and their standard harmonizations, etc. This is how people who haven't played together before can still get together and sound as if they have - they can study up beforehand, and also talk through stuff beforehand and even on the spot if necessary. So they are actually working within a strict system, though it does not appear that way. This is why even a group that has played together a very long time and that takes requests sometimes has to refuse one, if they don't all know the obscure tune requested and don't have time to figure it out because of lack of a "book" on hand. I've witnessed that happen before in jazz clubs (and I will admit to have mischievously thrown out an obscure tune at my friends, in fun), though usually experienced players will have an almost encyclopedic knowledge of the tunes. Some groups that have been playing together for a very long time would be very hard to "stump" that way. Hope that somewhat answers your question, though Frogman could give a much better description, I'm sure. |
Learsfool, I want you to know that I respect your comments as a classical musician. There was an event that made me think about classical music and high end equipment.
When I went to sell my son's sax, the music store owner told me he would pay a lot more if I took it to an instrument repair shop and got a clean bill of health for the horn.
Although there was only one person in front of me, the clerk took a long time explaining what was wrong with their horn. While waiting, I noticed photographs all over the walls; they were taken in this very same shop with the owner, famous musicians with recognizable faces. There were jazz musicians, classical musicians, popular musicians, blues musicians, and local musicians that I knew personally. He certainly had the right recommendations.
Classical music emanating from high end horn speakers made the wait a pleasant one. Normally I don't like classical music, but not only did I like this, I wanted to know everything about it. I suspect the equipment that was generating the music had something to do with this. Since no electronics were visible, I had to rely on my "audiophile sensibilities" to make a determination; old tube high end with a "golden glow" similar to CJ, but possibly older, was my conclusion.
It was a really large room, and all the workers were out in the open at their work stations repairing brass and reed horns of every description. There was a serene expression on their faces as if there was no place else they would rather be, and nothing else they would rather do; it was a very relaxed atmosphere. They actually played music on each horn after a repair; this indicated they were musicians as well as repair people.
On the right equipment, classical music sounds very good. I suppose that's why classical musicians are always into the high end. When the clerk beckoned that my horn was ready, I almost wasn't ready to leave.
It's absolutely amazing how your description of a one night club gig, fit the description of my friend's gigs, and what I didn't know. I saw them talking "musical gibberish" and making sounds less than an hour before a performance. There's no way this can come out right, is what I thought; but they always sounded like they had been playing together for years.
Enjoy the music.
|
Learlsfool,
That explanation really Cleared up a lot of questions I`ve always had regarding the ability of jazz musicians to play so many different songs.I have seen on "rare" occasions where a requested song was not able to be played.I appreciate you sharing your considerable knowledge and experience with the rest of us interested music loving folks here.
Charles, |
Learsfool, your description is excellent; no need for qualifiers. I would contribute to it only by approaching it from a somewhat different angle.
There is no possible way to exaggerate the level of skill possessed by an excellent jazz musician. Their understanding of, and ability to move around within the world of harmony, is simply astounding. As you point out, there exists a fairly well established "repertory" of tunes that working jazz players tap for their performances. This list of "standards" grows over the years with more modern tunes by contemporary/current composers. Learning the melodies of tunes seems like child's-play when you consider what it takes to improvise (spontaneously compose) a credible solo (new composition) within the unique harmonic framework of any given tune.
Consider a typical "standard" jazz tune with a 32 measure, AABA form such as "Cherokee"; a tune that is 32 measures long, with an 8 measure verse (A) which is then repeated (A), followed by another 8 measure section (B) referred to as the "bridge" which harmonically bridges the two A sections to the returning and last (A). This bridge is usually recognized by a seemingly harmonically abrupt and even unrelated harmonic center; but, usually sets-up the return to the harmonic center of the "A" section. Now, consider that each of those 8 measure sections is made up of a sequence of harmonic "changes" (chords). Each of those eight measures will have one, two, three or even more chord changes within that measure. The choices of harmonic changes (chords) that a composer chooses create a "harmonic rhythm" which gives a tune harmonic pulse or momentum; a sense of forward movement. Each of these chords, while related, has it's own "palette" of color choices (note choices) that it offers the improviser as he travels through this sequence of palettes in real time. The improviser then has to choose from each individual palette (chord) and play notes that not only are found in that particular palette, but also relate to the palette before it, the palette that follows it, and most importantly the entire "box" of palettes (AABA/32 measures). The best improvisers can choose colors (notes) that are not found in any given palette (they are outside the harmonic center of that particular harmony) and still make them relate to the overall harmonic scheme. Consider just how little time an improviser has to react to the constantly changing harmony, and still choose notes that are more than simply "correct" notes and actually add musical meaning to the improviser's spontaneous composition.
Musical meaning; THAT is what seperates the "good" improvisers from the greats and what defines a true artist. It's possible to master the mechanics (physical and intellectual) of the process of improvisation to an extent that can be very impressive, but still shortchange the listener with an absence of music. While this can be subjective, the educated listener usually knows it when he hears it (or doesn't). This is the main reason that a more in-depth understanding of the music making process helps to appreciate who the real artists are. A visceral, non-analytic, appreciation of music is great and truly the bottom line; but, understanding the proces better can clear the way for a deeper understanding of the art. |
******"On the right equipment, classical music sounds very good. I suppose that's why classical musicians are always into the high end."******
Not so fast my friend!
All music can be appreciated on almost any system worthy of the name. Even table radios. I remember many enjoyable sunday afternoons listening to classical music broadcast by Bayerischer Rundfunk on a portable / table Grundig radio. All the in-laws gathered around.
Stereo review once did a series on the stereo systems of professional musicians. I was shocked. My little run of the mill stuff was the equal of them all, at least price wise.
Do not connect or associate music appreciation with the so-called 'high end'. The two are not related in the least. Those people have done enough damage as it is.
Music appreciation of the 'high end' seems to stop at 'Kind of Blue', and then only if it's an 'audiophile' pressing. Just saying.
Cheers |
************"A visceral, non-analytic, appreciation of music is great and truly the bottom line; but, understanding the proces better can clear the way for a deeper understanding of the art".*********
Your post was very informative. You should be a teacher. Maybe you are?
But the quote above is the most IMPORTANT thing you said. It just so happened that I was listening to to the following CD as I read your post.
Fred McDowell -- Amazing Grace
Mississippi Delta Spirituals by the
Hunter's Chapel Singers of Como, Mississippi
These folks are as far away from understanding music theory on your level, as a person can get. But they do indeed get the visceral part. To me it says, HOME.
BTW, I do pause every now and then to make a joyful noise to The Lord.
In that spirit let me recommend:
Various Artist -- Say Amen, Somebody Org Soundtrack
Chanticleer -- How sweet the Sound
Robert Shaw -- American Hymns and Spirituals
Chanticleer -- Where the Sun Will Never Go Down
Fairfield Four -- Standing in the Safety Zone
As Cannonball once said, "it's all the same thing"
Cheers |
*****These folks are as far away from understanding music theory on your level, as a person can get. But they do indeed get the visceral part. To me it says, HOME.*****
You would be surprised. What I described above is as rudimentary as one can get when one considers just how much there is to learn. The folks you mention would most certainly have this knowledge and more. I think that the point is how little most non-musican music lovers/audiophiles understand, how much there is to learn (if wanted), how much learning can improve appreciation, and that there is often a visceral aversion to learning more.
I hope that this does not offend anyone, but IMO, if a jazz lover doesn't know (for example) that most blues tunes are 12 measures long, I would suggest that the love doesn't go quite deep enough. |
If I said anything to give you the identity of my "jazz friend", I would appreciate it if you just forgot it. His heirs, who I respect, might object to my revelation of the fact that he never practiced.
Maybe Frogman, or Learsfool could tell us how he selected the musicians to accompany him on what they called "pick up gigs". Although none of them were famous, they were accomplished jazz musicians. These sets were always in what I call "deep in the pocket" jazz clubs, no requests of standards, all improvisation, where the musicians had to really be down with it. "If you can't git down, don't git up".
That last note reminds me of a local jazz musician I knew. When I asked him why he wasn't famous, he explained that he preferred the life of a family man to being on the road, and then he opened a large album of photos which contained photographs of him accompanying many very famous musicians when they came to town.
The last time I saw him, he really put on a show. Since he knew all my favorite tunes, not only did he nail them, but he added his own licks which indicated, not only did he have what it took, but that he knew he had what it took.
I recall an interview of Horace Silver by a famous DJ, where Horace was telling him about problems with his bass player. "He told me that he was tired of playing that same old "beeng bong", I told him that's what makes my sound, I've got to have that "Beeng bong". he wanted to stretch out and make it known that he could play more than "beeng bong". I don't recall how Horace resolved that issue, but if you listen to the 1956 version of Senor Blues, with Hank Mobley, tenor sax; Donald byrd, trumpet; Doug Watkins, bass; Louis Hayes, drums; you'll hear how "beeng bong" blends in with the piano and makes that jam so spectacular. Maybe Horace gave him a raise, I don't know, but this is a remarkable revelation to both sides of that "beeng bong" coin.
|
