Frogman, I've been ruminating on that b.s. solo concept you exponded on. Having never heard it before I'm been trying to come up with the best improvising artist I know of with my limited knowledge of jazz .
I keep coming back to Sonny Stitt who, to my ears, makes these endless runs away from the center of the melody while nevertheless enhanceing same and doing wonders to harmonics at the same time.
Another one is Ron Carter who can keep a steady baroque like beat while at the same time being very melodic , how this can be on one instrument is beyond me.
If I am full of b.s, fell free to say so, I really want to understand a bit more. |
Not full of b.s. at all, and you make some excellent observations. No time now, but more to follow. |
Orpheus 10, wise words , but the best improvisers have mastered the "rules" first . |
Thanks Mapman,glad I'm not the only Sophie fan. |
Orpheus10, thinking about it, at one time in Berlin my wife and I lived next door to a full-time mom who was also a sub wind player for the Berlin Radio Symphony Orchestra(R.I.A.S.)and with whom wifey was good friend and baby-sitter.
They had some big parties in the summer and a lot of those
classical players could play the hell out of jazz and vice-versa.I still remember about a dozen of them laying down a fab "Cherokee" . |
O, that sounds like a request my 1st wife made, the more I explained the less she liked me. I would prefer to be the Chauncy Gardner of Audiogon, but I will try. |
Acman, although that post was short, it communicated very well; I do remember Chauncy Gardner. However, I believe you are denying us your vast storehouse of knowledge.
Enjoy the music.
|
We're going round and round like a dog chasing his tail in regard to new music VS old music, and new musicians VS old musicians. The reasons for this have absolutely nothing to do with the music or musicians; I'll explain.
The primary reasons are economic; back then, there were many more "Juke Joints". While the term "juke joint" is normally used exclusively for "blues joints", I'm using it in reference to all small clubs that hire live entertainment. For example: I saw Phyllis Diller and Richard Pryor at such a small club before they became famous. Not together or on the same night, but at the same club.
Albert King, Ike and Tina Turner, worked the same juke joints in St. Louis. I saw them many times before they became famous; the same for Grant Green. I saw more dynamite jazz groups than I can shake a stick at. My point for bringing this up is that musicians, and all other entertainers have to have a place to work while honing their craft. The number of "juke joints" have shrunk by at least a "gozillian"; now you get my drift.
Since you can't resurrect the dead, when it comes to live music we don't have a choice; but that's no problem for me, because live music is usually better than recorded music, and new musicians have more formal training than yesterday's musicians from what I can gather. (If you kant git what you wont, like what you can git) That's what Rok told me, and I know he knows.
Enjoy the music.
|
|
Schubert, I love Sonny Stitt; and you're right, he was one of the greatest improvisers with a wonderful ease in how the ideas flowed out of him. When he played there was never a sense that he would run out of ideas and seemed like an endless font. A great tenor player as well as alto; he was, nonetheless, an alto player at heart and it could be heard in his sound and concept when playing tenor. He started playing tenor as a way to combat the idea that he was trying to sound like Parker on alto. This is a piece of one of my favorite stories in all of jazz lore. When Stitt and Parker first met they realized that even though they had never heard each other play, they sounded a lot alike. I think the says some interesting things about the natural and inevitable evolution of an art form.
Re Ron Carter: well, can one say about Miles" own choice for one of the greatest (perhaps greatest) rhythm sections ever. Carter, Herbie Hancock and Tony Williams. Fantastic player! |
Thanks, Frogman. I'm going to trot over to the U of MN's gigantic bookstore and buy a theory text, though that will never tell me how Cater must be able to play the front and back of his string at the same time.
I have done several compare and contrast sessions between Stitt and Parker. Great as Parker was, I prefer Stitt because his sliding in and out of dissonance reminds of how Bach and Brahms maintained the forever forward sound in their music I love so much. |
*****I said all of this to say that as fans we don't seem to realize how special a good jazz musician is; they're born, not made. No amount of study or practice will enable a person to improvise at the level of a good jazz musician, and no matter how financially successful some other musicians are, a jazz musician knows within himself that he can do something very few people can do, and no way can they learn how to do it. Financial success does not equate to being a good jazz musician and being able to rapidly improvise good sounding music; "either you got it or you don't".*****
It cannot be stated better than this. Case closed!!
As usual, the OP has restored order.
I was reading the Downbeat Issue listing all the Jazz studies programs across the country. I was amazed at the number! I always thought Jazz studies sort of started and ended with Indiana and North texas. Silly me.
I wonder what happens to all those students. They sure aren't playing Jazz for a living.
Cheers |
Geri Allen: Not bad to listen to, while you are doing something else. I am sure their N&Bs were impeccable.
Cheers |
What you do for a living is petty compared to how you make a life. Study what you love and the hell with everything else. |
O-10:
A lot of things in the Music / entertainment world aren't what they used to be. But, lack of venue is tied to changes in the society at large. You can't find any Juke Joints in the Delta anymore. The last refuge seems to be New Orleans, and it's fading.
I think the best analogy for the state of Jazz, is the state of Music in general. Simply, all the great creators / innovators are gone. The current music pales in comparison to the original.
I cannot think of any genre that is better, save Classical. They have the advantage of playing the same repertoire.
Hold on to your Blue Notes!
Cheers |
Rok2id, I'd wager that more new Classical is being written than jazz.
You hear it less in the USA than Europe though for obvious reasons. |
|
****I'd wager that more new Classical is being written than jazz. You hear it less in the USA than Europe though for obvious reasons.****
This may be true. The question is, how much of this new music 'sticks'? The same applies to Jazz.
Cheers |
I wonder why no one ever mentions the music channels on cable TV (Time warner) , as a source of new music, or as a source to get introduced to old music. Not only do they play all genres, all day, but you get some excellent factoids on the music / composer. Heard some great CPE Bach today, then realized I have nothing by him on CD. Hamburg symphonies I think it was.
Gotta start my search.
Cheers |
Some thoughts on recent posts:
It always comes back to those famous and simple words "There's only two kinds of music, good and bad". It is true that a good jazz musician has something special in the ability to improvise, and it is also USUALLY true that to be a great artist one has to "have it"; to be born with, at least, with the seed of a special gift. However, this reality applies not only to jazz musicians but to musicians in any genre. Yes, the great improviser has something unique that the classical musician doesn't (although, as Schubert points out, some Classical musicians improvise); but, the great Classical musician brings certain things to the table that the great Jazz player doesn't have. In that regard, other than wether it is a preferred genre for a particular listener or not, no genre is any more special than another. Moreover, anyone who thinks that to achieve the level of proficiency required to be an artist in ALL genres including jazz, doesn't require a tremendous amount of practice and study (formal or otherwise) is mistaken. Sure, there is the occasional rare exception of the player that appears to never have done so, but they undoubtedly did at some point.
Re old/new: As Acmnan3 said, we go around in circles. Actually, more accurately, some just spin their wheels staying in the past without exploring more of what current jazz as to offer. Too bad. |
******the great Classical musician brings certain things to the table that the great Jazz player doesn't have. *******
Such as??? |
*****Moreover, anyone who thinks that to achieve the level of proficiency required to be an artist in ALL genres including jazz, doesn't require a tremendous amount of practice and study (formal or otherwise) is mistaken.*******
This is a pet peeve of The Frogman, but, no one thinks this is the case. No one has ever said it was the case. Strawman??
Cheers |
Actually, it most certainly has; several times. But I'm glad you understand. |
There are Classical conductors , notably Ivan Fischer, who actually encourage their players to improvise as far as possible in Classical.
His Budapest Festival Orch. is the most beloved musical group in Hungary which ,in that most musical of countries ,is saying a lot . |
Agreed, and as we know, it was even more common in the past for classical musicians to improvise. |
****the great Classical musician brings certain things to the table that the great Jazz player doesn't have. *****
°°°°Such as???°°°°
A short list:
- ultimate control of their instrument dynamically and tone-wise. Most jazz wind players don't know how to play a true "piano" (very soft); never had to. The type of tone required for jazz would be totally inappropriate for classical.
- ultimate technical command of their instrument necessary for playing much of the solo literature written for the instrument. Even Bird or Trane would not have able to get through, for instance, the Glazunov concerto; never mind in a credible manner.
- rhythmic accuracy. Yes, you read that right. Most jazz players, when playing written music, play on the back side of the beat (behind the beat). Perfectly acceptable and preferred in jazz, but not in Classical.
- Perfect intonation. Many jazz players, even the great ones, had terrible intonation by classical music standards.
- fully developed tone with the kind of tonal nuance and finesse required to play classical is rare in jazz players for whom tonal individuality is paramount.
I could go on, but the point is simply that they each have their strengths. |
WOW, thanks for all that Frogman.
I've been "dissing" many jazz players in my mind for decades
for being behind the beat ! who knew-LOL
It seems the old saying "anything worth doing is worth doing well" comes into play here as well.
90% of jobs in a mass society really ain't worth doing
but all the ones that are require constant study.
A GOOD nurse, teacher, clergyman has to study every soul that presents to them and is burned out in 15 years .
So, most settle for being fair at best and mail it in another 20 years till retirement and get away with it.
A musician gives to others as well, but its a lot more noticeable if they are mailing it in ?? Or not?
Most I've known say they draw energy from the audience so perhaps they last longer???
I know ,fact certain, a teacher gets sucked dry by his. |
I have 'ROUND MIDNIGHT by The 12 Cellists of The Berlin Philharmoniker.
I'll give it a listen later. When I purchased it, I thought it would be Jazz. Has some Ellington, Monk, Gershwin and Corea. But for some reason I filed it in the Classical section. hmmmmmmm.
I am digging Kenny Barron and Dave Holland now, and cannot break away!!
Frogman, I do hope you know that the obvious time, and effort, that you put into your posts, and answers to questions, is greatly appreciated.
Cheers |
You got that right Rok2id, IMO Frogman is the best human being on here .And that's saying a lot. |
*****You got that right Rok2id, IMO Frogman is the best human being on here .And that's saying a lot.*****
I know that. The fact he still talks to me is proof. He is like the Johnny Appleseed of Music. Loves to teach and to share his knowledge.
Cheers |
"We don’t have to know a lot of stuff about sharps and flats and chords and all that business in order to understand music; if it tells us something – not a story or a picture – but a feeling – if it makes us change inside, and have all those different good feelings music can make us have, then we are understanding it. And that’s all there is to it. Because those feelings aren't like the stories and picture we talked about before; they’re not extra; they’re not outside the music; they’re what music is about. And the most wonderful thing of all is that there’s no limit to the different kinds of feelings music can make you have.” -Leonard #Bernstein (Young People's Concerts: What Does Music Mean, January 18, 1958) |
I remember a friend who told me that at North Texas they forced the jazz sax majors to perform in classical training with an orchestra. He mentioned that anyone could tell they played jazz, because they all had different tones and played around the beat. It seemed to be allowed. |
Today's Listen: The 12 Berlin Cellists -- 'ROUND MIDNIGHT Great players of course. Misleading title. Not much if any Jazz here. Some interesting takes on popular tunes. Pink Panther was very good. I thought this one was the best of the lot, although "A Rap for Mozart" was good. Sort of reminded me of "A Soldier's Tale". Simon Rattle did the spoken part. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZVFV4T2cCYNice effort, but they should not leave Beethoven and company for the world of Jazz. Kenny Barron & Dave Holland -- THE ART OF CONVERSATION https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkyD8Vdnkl4This answers the question, is great Jazz being played today? Excellent CD. Aptly titled. Two Masters! Holland plays Bass like most people play guitar. Barron is just his routine brilliant self. Holland actually plays 'notes' on the bass. Dexterity comes to mind! They sound like a larger group. Ain't got it git it. Cheers |
***** He mentioned that anyone could tell they played jazz, because they all had different tones and played around the beat******
Whatever the differences between Classical and Jazz players, I can only say, Thank You Jesus!
Cheers |
*****We don’t have to know a lot of stuff about sharps and flats and chords and all that business in order to understand music; if it tells us something – not a story or a picture – but a feeling ******
We seem to be moving towards a consensus. Which would be a first on Audiogon!!
Cheers |
Rok, Frogman is referring to the summer that my friend the professional musician lived in my apartment. He never practiced or expressed the desire to practice, not only that, but an organ would not have fitted in my apartment. (he played organ since childhood in church) Since he was playing three gigs a week of hard driving improvisational jazz, he didn't even know what he was going to play, it's for certain there was no need for him to practice.
I drove him to every gig ( still had the infamous duece), and was mesmerized on each set. The intensity of the music (The dynamic range of live organ can never be recorded)
was in stark contrast to him playing with his eyes closed and a sublime look on his face.
As you stated, the "No practice" was a straw-man, it's for certain no one could get to that level of proficiency without practicing. I understand Frogmans wishes and desires in regard to old and new music, but it is what it is, although when it comes to live music, you have to like what you can get; that's your only option.
Enjoy the music.
|
Military bands evoke lots of feelings, very few of them good. |
Alex, when I heard "South Side Soul", I was immediately transported back to another time and place; 63rd and Cottage Grove in the late 50's. That's when you could see Dinah Washington, or Ahmad Jamal going to or coming from the Pershing Lounge, it was on 64th and Cottage where he made his first famous album, "Ahmad Jamal at the Pershing".
This was the hippest neighborhood on the planet. I lived with my cousin on 65th two blocks east of Cottage Grove, and I liked to stroll Cottage just to see the beautiful people. I remember seeing Dinah Washington's Lincoln Continental with the spare on the trunk parked in front of the Pershing. This car was so exclusive that only celebrities owned one.
John Wrights name was forever changed after he made that album, he's now known as "South Side Soul". The magic of music is too incredible for words; how can music communicate the vibrancy of a neighborhood that was a magical place which is no more, it only lives through his music and our memories.
Did you experience the magic of "South Side Soul" and the streets mentioned, or did you just luck up on the album?
Enjoy the music.
|
The Johnny Appleseed of Music! Damn! I've been called a lot of things, but never that. Thanks for the kind words.
Acman3, it's not that playing around the beat is "allowed"; in fact, it most certainly would not be allowed in a classical orchestra setting. Rather, it is that classical training helps the jazz players better learn the rudiments that I spelled out in my previous response to Rok. It is more a case of it being tolerated for the sake of the student's growth as a more well-rounded musician.
O-10, this is certainly not a topic worth going round in circles over, but there is no "straw man" and why would there be a need for one? The truth is that we previously had long discussions (and one of your recent posts seems to suggest again) in which it was asserted or, certainly suggested, that jazz players didn't practice and study. A revisiting of those posts would certainly show this. I am glad to see that you no longer feel this way.
I don't know what you mean by my "wishes and desires" about old vs new music. I have no wishes about this, other than the hope that jazz lovers who are clearly steeped in the jazz of certain eras, learn to appreciate the simple reality that there is much worthy music being performed currently; including live music.
As "second in command" I needed to set the record straight :-) |
|
Frogman, that is one of the best posts I have ever seen on this site, where you explain differences between jazz and classical musicians to the layman. I was very tempted to chime in first when I read that question, but refrained, as I knew you would give a much better written reply. Kudos!
I want to emphasize one point Frogman makes - he states that in jazz, individuality is paramount, and that this is one reason why jazz players are not so great at playing classical. This hits the nail on the head. What I want to elaborate is that, for instance, as a section horn player, my job is to blend my sound as much as possible with my principal, articulate exactly the same way he/she does, play exactly together rhythmically with him/her, play exactly in tune with him/her, so much that we sound like one player. This is actually my greatest strength as a player/musician, my ability to match others in this way, hence why I have the job I do as opposed to a principal job - I make the principal's job much easier. It is seldom that I have a solo of my own, where I can express some individuality appropriately, though I do get the occasional opportunity. I get to actually play principal probably only once or twice a season.
Classical players are much better at this sort of blending/matching than jazz players are - this is one thing Frogman is referring to when he speaks of ultimate command of the instrument, especially in respect to tonal nuance and finesse. You wouldn't want to hear Miles Davis play the Haydn Concerto, or John Coltrane play the transcription of the Hindemith Alto Horn Sonata (which, believe it or not, is actually performed much more by classical saxophonists than it is by horn players). |
The Minnesota Orch. could use you Learsfool, only a horn player or two away from former glory.
Nicer place to live as well.
IMO Frog's post was best ever on A'gon and yours added greatly to it |
|
The gurus make good points, and they should know. However, it seems as if the overall tone is that (1) 'Jazz players aren't GOOD ENOUGH to play classical, and (2) Classical music is somehow SUPERIOR to Jazz.
I beg to disagree.
I think players like Wynton and Ellington have demonstrated Jazz players can play anything at the highest level.. As far as playing together as a group or section, check out some Ellington, Goodman and Miller. They play together as well as any Classical group. They ARE playing Jazz, so the music calls for different things, but to say they CAN'T play classical? Hmmmmmmmmmmm
Can the Berlin Philharmonic play "Hog Calling Blues"? They could if it was written down. But what would it sound like? Ever hear the German Radio Bands try their hand at Jazz?
Of the two, Jazz musicians are better musicians. Because what they do is harder, and they don't get any help from a written score and / or Conductors. They are out there alone.
As the OP pointed out, you either got it or you don't. A person can learn to do all required of Classical players, by hard work and practice. In Jazz it takes hard work, practice AND that certain something within the person
Jazz is Jazz, and Classical is Classical, and Never The Twain Shall Meet. The efforts of MJQ and others, Notwithstanding. And as I said before, Thank God for both, and for the differences.
Cheers
BTW, my post of the Berlin Cellists, which demonstates certain points of this disccussion was completely ignored.
OP, how long will I have to suffer these indignities???
Cheers |
To state Jazz players are better than Classical ones is just plain stupid.
|
***To state Jazz players are better than Classical ones is just plain stupid****
Was about to respond, then I considered the source.
Cheers |
Good, then I don't have to explain to you how Learsfool
in a symphonic horn solo is "farther out there" than any jazz player could ever be. |
Apples/oranges.
Its impossible to quantify the recipe for success in any endeavor that requires a certain level of skill to undertake. That's why its an art not a science.
For any theory that relates the two there is bound to be cases out there that disprove it.
So not worth getting very worked up about really. But it is worth noting that the two do have one thing in common in that both rely on people in order to exist. At least so far..... |
*****Good, then I don't have to explain to you how Learsfool
in a symphonic horn solo is "farther out there" than any jazz player could ever be.******
Aficionados:: Remember when I said they say things that are "Breathtakingly Stupid". This is an example of that.
Cheers |
I started to bring into discussion the difference between, at least to me, the difference between modern and older jazz styles, but I just don't have the ability. Maybe Frogman can help, although I do realize this is asking a lot, and would fully understand if he choose to avoid it. It may be that these differences make up why some prefer older jazz, and find newer music academic.
1) vibrato slow vs fast
2) scale runs vs angular
3) simple blues head to solo around vs complex music themes
I am already in over my head, but doesn't take much. These are just a few of the things I hear. I also hear math and music patterns, but I think that is just me, and a whole different discussion. |
