garymd Posted January 25, 2007 Share Posted January 25, 2007 What's a phish? http://www.phish.com/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Songer Posted January 25, 2007 Share Posted January 25, 2007 OK, I looked all over YouTube and tried to find the BEST example of what you guys call "random horn blowing" and came up with this short clip of Marshall Allen on alto with the Sun Ra Arkestra, probably from the mid-1970s. Personally, I LOVE this stuff, but I can really understand why it tends to have (ahem!) limited appeal: But you know what? This band is probably the closest thing to a "jam band" in that most of the members worked and LIVED toghether for years and years and years and they practiced and rehearsed about 5-6 hours per day, EVERY day for decades. It took YEARS for Marshall Allen to get to this point. And you know what? During this same performance this band would have delivered straight-ahead Fletcher Hendersonesque swing charts with Allen playing sweet, "standard" solos. This was truly an amazing band. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark1101 Posted January 25, 2007 Share Posted January 25, 2007 ...... I'm really liking the type where it's more mathematical, hard, where they are actually doing interesting/complex time-signatures, etc. where there's a backbone to it that is constant/consistent. Perhaps I'm meaning.... more of a groove type jam band. ......That's Phish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomac Posted January 25, 2007 Share Posted January 25, 2007 Allan One recording of Sun Ra that you sent me was quite good but listening to that is worse than having a cavity drilled out without the benefit Novocain! I hope Craig doesn't click on it or he'll be lost forever![]<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audio Flynn Posted January 25, 2007 Share Posted January 25, 2007 The best thing about JAZZ is that the genre offers a million options. Theres somethin there for everybody. A few years ago when ssh started the jazz thread I got hooked. I sort of liked smooth jazz but soon learned that soft bop and hard bop were great listening. I bought 82 CDs (based on recommendations by Allan) before I had one I couldnt stand. Thats a lot of music. The best thing about most of them is that I can listen to the entire album. That, for me, has never been the case with rock. I know what Craig means by random horn blowing and Im not keen on it either; at least in large doses. It aint just late Coltrane either. Gary mentioned live performances and hes absolutely right. Ive seen Von Freeman and Herman Riley, (tenor men) and enjoyed both immensely but while I could listen to Riley, (on LP/CD) for hours, I hardly ever spin a Von Freeman disc. Why? For me Von is too random, as Craig would say. Thats not a jab at Von or his music. Its just my preference. The guy was a treat to see live. The bottom line: I prefer jazz that makes my head go up and down more than side to side! BTW, I dont at all care for the stuff that makes your head go round in circles. [] Jazz cool Cat #3 just got promoted too a tie for Jazz Cool cat #2[] I couldn't of typed that post with such finesse if my life depended on it!! You explained my misgivings and nailed the type of Jazz I'm referring too. Allan said earlier in the thread "It's amazing--there is NOTHING like listening to a group of musicians who are all on the same page, flying" Now to me I get the exact opposite impression of much of the "Random Horn Blowing" type Jazz it really seams to me that none of the players are actually in the same band. They all just seem to be flying off in different directions like their intent is to draw the listeners attention to them personally rather they the entire piece of music or band. No organized melody so to speak. Much to my amazement I think I have actually started a great thread for once. Keep it going folks I'm learning as I'm sure others are.......... Craig My kind of jazz is like Craig's description. Herbie Mann, Weather Report, Pat Metheney, and Sonny Rollins to name a few. If the first 2 songs seem to have no cohesive melody, I change the music. Never liked soprano sax even before Kenny G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomac Posted January 25, 2007 Share Posted January 25, 2007 Please do not mention Kenny G in a jazz thread! There are some things we don't joke about![] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshnich Posted January 25, 2007 Share Posted January 25, 2007 OK, I looked all over YouTube and tried to find the BEST example of what you guys call "random horn blowing" and came up with this short clip of Marshall Allen on alto with the Sun Ra Arkestra, probably from the mid-1970s. Personally, I LOVE this stuff, but I can really understand why it tends to have (ahem!) limited appeal: But you know what? This band is probably the closest thing to a "jam band" in that most of the members worked and LIVED toghether for years and years and years and they practiced and rehearsed about 5-6 hours per day, EVERY day for decades. It took YEARS for Marshall Allen to get to this point. And you know what? During this same performance this band would have delivered straight-ahead Fletcher Hendersonesque swing charts with Allen playing sweet, "standard" solos. This was truly an amazing band. I take it back...I am afraid! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garymd Posted January 25, 2007 Share Posted January 25, 2007 Sorry Scott. Pat Metheny's Initial Message Board Comments on Kenny G (June 5, 2000) kenny g is not a musician i really had much of an opinion about at all until recently. there was not much about the way he played that interested me one way or the other either live or on records. i first heard him a number of years ago playing as a sideman with jeff lorber when they opened a concert for my band. my impression was that he was someone who had spent a fair amount of time listening to the more pop oriented sax players of that time, like grover washington or david sanborn, but was not really an advanced player, even in that style. he had major rhythmic problems and his harmonic and melodic vocabulary was extremely limited, mostly to pentatonic based and blues- lick derived patterns, and he basically exhibited only a rudimentary understanding of how to function as a professional soloist in an ensemble - lorber was basically playing him off the bandstand in terms of actual music. but he did show a knack for connecting to the basest impulses of the large crowd by deploying his two or three most effective licks (holding long notes and playing fast runs - never mind that there were lots of harmonic clams in them) at the keys moments to elicit a powerful crowd reaction (over and over again) . the other main thing i noticed was that he also, as he does to this day, play horribly out of tune - consistently sharp. of course, i am aware of what he has played since, the success it has had, and the controversy that has surrounded him among musicians and serious listeners. this controversy seems to be largely fueled by the fact that he sells an enormous amount of records while not being anywhere near a really great player in relation to the standards that have been set on his instrument over the past sixty or seventy years. and honestly, there is no small amount of envy involved from musicians who see one of their fellow players doing so well financially, especially when so many of them who are far superior as improvisors and musicians in general have trouble just making a living. there must be hundreds, if not thousands of sax players around the world who are simply better improvising musicians than kenny g on his chosen instruments. it would really surprise me if even he disagreed with that statement. having said that, it has gotten me to thinking lately why so many jazz musicians (myself included, given the right ��������bait�������� of a question, as i will explain later) and audiences have gone so far as to say that what he is playing is not even jazz at all. stepping back for a minute, if we examine the way he plays, especially if one can remove the actual improvising from the often mundane background environment that it is delivered in, we see that his saxophone style is in fact clearly in the tradition of the kind of playing that most reasonably objective listeners WOULD normally quantify as being jazz. it��������s just that as jazz or even as music in a general sense, with these standards in mind, it is simply not up to the level of playing that we historically associate with professional improvising musicians. so, lately i have been advocating that we go ahead and just include it under the word jazz - since pretty much of the rest of the world OUTSIDE of the jazz community does anyway - and let the chips fall where they may. and after all, why he should be judged by any other standard, why he should be exempt from that that all other serious musicians on his instrument are judged by if they attempt to use their abilities in an improvisational context playing with a rhythm section as he does? he SHOULD be compared to john coltrane or wayne shorter, for instance, on his abilities (or lack thereof) to play the soprano saxophone and his success (or lack thereof) at finding a way to deploy that instrument in an ensemble in order to accurately gauge his abilities and put them in the context of his instrument��������s legacy and potential. as a composer of even eighth note based music, he SHOULD be compared to herbie hancock, horace silver or even grover washington. suffice it to say, on all above counts, at this point in his development, he wouldn��������t fare well. but, like i said at the top, this relatively benign view was all ��������until recently��������. not long ago, kenny g put out a recording where he overdubbed himself on top of a 30+ year old louis armstrong record, the track ��������what a wonderful world��������. with this single move, kenny g became one of the few people on earth i can say that i really can't use at all - as a man, for his incredible arrogance to even consider such a thing, and as a musician, for presuming to share the stage with the single most important figure in our music. this type of musical necrophilia - the technique of overdubbing on the preexisting tracks of already dead performers - was weird when natalie cole did it with her dad on ��������unforgettable�������� a few years ago, but it was her dad. when tony bennett did it with billie holiday it was bizarre, but we are talking about two of the greatest singers of the 20th century who were on roughly the same level of artistic accomplishment. when larry coryell presumed to overdub himself on top of a wes montgomery track, i lost a lot of the respect that i ever had for him - and i have to seriously question the fact that i did have respect for someone who could turn out to have have such unbelievably bad taste and be that disrespectful to one of my personal heroes. but when kenny g decided that it was appropriate for him to defile the music of the man who is probably the greatest jazz musician that has ever lived by spewing his lame-***, jive, pseudo bluesy, out-of-tune, noodling, wimped out, fucked up playing all over one of the great louis��������s tracks (even one of his lesser ones), he did something that i would not have imagined possible. he, in one move, through his unbelievably pretentious and calloused musical decision to embark on this most cynical of musical paths, shit all over the graves of all the musicians past and present who have risked their lives by going out there on the road for years and years developing their own music inspired by the standards of grace that louis armstrong brought to every single note he played over an amazing lifetime as a musician. by disrespecting louis, his legacy and by default, everyone who has ever tried to do something positive with improvised music and what it can be, kenny g has created a new low point in modern culture - something that we all should be totally embarrassed about - and afraid of. we ignore this, ��������let it slide��������, at our own peril. his callous disregard for the larger issues of what this crass gesture implies is exacerbated by the fact that the only reason he possibly have for doing something this inherently wrong (on both human and musical terms) was for the record sales and the money it would bring. since that record came out - in protest, as insigificant as it may be, i encourage everyone to boycott kenny g recordings, concerts and anything he is associated with. if asked about kenny g, i will diss him and his music with the same passion that is in evidence in this little essay. normally, i feel that musicians all have a hard enough time, regardless of their level, just trying to play good and don��������t really benefit from public criticism, particularly from their fellow players. but, this is different. there ARE some things that are sacred - and amongst any musician that has ever attempted to address jazz at even the most basic of levels, louis armstrong and his music is hallowed ground. to ignore this trespass is to agree that NOTHING any musician has attempted to do with their life in music has any intrinsic value - and i refuse to do that. (i am also amazed that there HASN��������T already been an outcry against this among music critics - where ARE they on this?????!?!?!?!- , magazines, etc.). everything i said here is exactly the same as what i would say to gorelick if i ever saw him in person. and if i ever DO see him anywhere, at any function - he WILL get a piece of my mind and (maybe a guitar wrapped around his head.) NOTE: this post is partially in response to the comments that people have made regarding a short video interview excerpt with me that was posted on the internet taken from a tv show for young people (kind of like MTV) in poland where i was asked to address 8 to 11 year old kids on terms that they could understand about jazz. while enthusiastically describing the virtues of this great area of music, i was encouraging the kids to find and listen to some of the greats in the music and not to get confused by the sometimes overwhelming volume of music that falls under the jazz umbrella. i went on to say that i think that for instance, ��������kenny g plays the dumbest music on the planet�������� - something that all 8 to 11 year kids on the planet already intrinsically know, as anyone who has ever spent any time around kids that age could confirm - so it gave us some common ground for the rest of the discussion. (ADDENDUM: the only thing wrong with the statement that i made was that i did not include the rest of the known universe.) the fact that this clip was released so far out of the context that it was delivered in is a drag, but it is now done. (it��������s unauthorized release out of context like that is symptomatic of the new electronically interconnected culture that we now live in - where pretty much anything anyone anywhere has ever said or done has the potential to become common public property at any time.) i was surprised by the polish people putting this clip up so far away from the use that it was intended -really just for the attention - with no explanation of the show it was made for - they (the polish people in general) used to be so hip and would have been unlikely candidates to do something like that before, but i guess everything is changing there like it is everywhere else. the only other thing that surprised me in the aftermath of the release of this little interview is that ANYONE would be even a little bit surprised that i would say such a thing, given the reality of mr. g��������s music. this makes me want to go practice about 10 times harder, because that suggests to me that i am not getting my own musical message across clearly enough - which to me, in every single way and intention is diametrically opposed to what Kenny G seems to be after. Comments �������© Pat Metheny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Lindsey Posted January 25, 2007 Share Posted January 25, 2007 First of all, what a great thread this is. I just finished reading the whole thing... including the Kenny G *****-slapping by Pat. [] Jazz music, especially the 50's and 60's be-bop, has really taken ahold of me of late. Of all the genre's I have been listening to I would say it is this kind of Jazz that I prefer most. My problem is I prefer it on vinyl, and my local record store charges $30 - $50 per lp for this stuff. So, if any of you Cool Cats got any extras lying around don't hesitate to send 'em my way. [] BTW, Gary... checks in the mail. [] Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEvan Posted January 25, 2007 Share Posted January 25, 2007 That YouTube Naima perfprmance clip is downright luminous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted January 25, 2007 Share Posted January 25, 2007 First of all, what a great thread this is. I just finished reading the whole thing... including the Kenny G *****-slapping by Pat. [] Jazz music, especially the 50's and 60's be-bop, has really taken ahold of me of late. Of all the genre's I have been listening to I would say it is this kind of Jazz that I prefer most. My problem is I prefer it on vinyl, and my local record store charges $30 - $50 per lp for this stuff. So, if any of you Cool Cats got any extras lying around don't hesitate to send 'em my way. [] BTW, Gary... checks in the mail. [] Mike Bebop is my personal favorite as well. I can find used albums at the recycled store for usually less than $10, maybe they are not in the best of shape but still playable, from time to time. Send me a list or preferences and Maybe I can help you out. I should be able to do better than $30 for you anyway. Bebop to me took jazz back from disappearing into pop, it was a real revolution at the time, and still sounds pretty darn revolutionary today when played effectively. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lascaladan Posted January 25, 2007 Share Posted January 25, 2007 I do not know if you would call this "random" playing, but one musician I have a hard time getting into is Mr. Eric Dolphy. I have not heard his entire repitoire, but what I have and what I have heard is really out there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebes Posted January 25, 2007 Share Posted January 25, 2007 Very interesting reads here. I'm eclectic, and I like a lot but not all jazz. Just like all music I listen to. Truthfully,many jam sessions often leave me cold unless I'm in the audience, andwhoever invented zylophones (sp) should be taken out and shot. I would state however, that jazz, like gospel and blues, are theunpinnings of almost everything out there in the popular (notclassical) vein we hear today. What's a big disappointmentto me is not the lack of appreciation for fusion and bebop jazz whichseems to have a strong following. To me it's the littleregard held out for the best of the Latin jazz, New Orleans jazz,what's commonly called Ragtime and the early Chicago School of Jazz. With the latter three we're also talking horns baby andboy a good ragtime piece is jamming at it best, has beat you can followand energy to burn. I guess jazz-heads tend to ignore it because of itsplebian nature. Our entire musical experience would be so much poorer without those hep cats workin the groove. JAZZ LIVES! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-MAN Posted January 25, 2007 Share Posted January 25, 2007 Dman, it's not about the person playing it. The person playing it is expressing music in a medium that is all about freedom of expression, yet it is within rules that make it sound good. That's one reason why it is all American. It's like the constitution, with checks and balances, yet flexible enough to allow for new ideas. I don't know what you listen to right now, but when you get right down to it, all music has an element of "this is what I wrote" listen and enjoy. Mozart could sit down and improv his way to an a ovation, just as jazz players do. Will you not listen to Mozart because of this? What kind of impersonal music do you you listen to, and why? It's about sharing the experience of life with others, not so different than any other music, and it is ours. Mozart is dead, so I can't listen to him. I can listen to others playing his compositions. And THAT isn't about those doing the playing, is it?! Improvisational Jazz, however, it is EXACTLY about the person playing it, even down to an instrument-by-instrument level... Sharing? No, its a matter of "listen to me and what I can do". Improvising is a VERY personal thing. You can call that "sharing" but it changes nothing. For instance, classical is about the music - no personalities involved - but - improvisational jazz is always about the person playing it. That's it's POINT, for crying out loud! Other analogies - let's see - here's one: I PAINTED this painting on the wall. You can look at it if you want, AND I don't care what you think about it because it's finished and cannot be changed to suit anybody, even me. It's what it is and nothing more. But now let me PLAY a piece that I composed, that I DO care about what you think of it, I'll add flourishes that I think you'll like, I like playing them anyway, even if you don't. I'm the one performing, and YOU are the one listening. One is personal, one is not. DM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkrop Posted January 25, 2007 Share Posted January 25, 2007 Real Jazz is all about IMPROVISATION! Tunes start out with a limited amount of written or fixed structure and then expand upon the whims and moods and interactions of the personalities of the collaborators . That's why someone "sitting in" with a group can change a song's sound completely or a song can sound different from different nights or even sets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted January 25, 2007 Share Posted January 25, 2007 Dman, it's not about the person playing it. The person playing it is expressing music in a medium that is all about freedom of expression, yet it is within rules that make it sound good. That's one reason why it is all American. It's like the constitution, with checks and balances, yet flexible enough to allow for new ideas. I don't know what you listen to right now, but when you get right down to it, all music has an element of "this is what I wrote" listen and enjoy. Mozart could sit down and improv his way to an a ovation, just as jazz players do. Will you not listen to Mozart because of this? What kind of impersonal music do you you listen to, and why? It's about sharing the experience of life with others, not so different than any other music, and it is ours. Mozart is dead, so I can't listen to him. I can listen to others playing his compositions. And THAT isn't about those doing the playing, is it?! Improvisational Jazz, however, it is EXACTLY about the person playing it, even down to an instrument-by-instrument level... Sharing? No, its a matter of "listen to me and what I can do". Improvising is a VERY personal thing. You can call that "sharing" but it changes nothing. For instance, classical is about the music - no personalities involved - but - improvisational jazz is always about the person playing it. That's it's POINT, for crying out loud! Other analogies - let's see - here's one: I PAINTED this painting on the wall. You can look at it if you want, AND I don't care what you think about it because it's finished and cannot be changed to suit anybody, even me. It's what it is and nothing more. But now let me PLAY a piece that I composed, that I DO care about what you think of it, I'll add flourishes that I think you'll like, I like playing them anyway, even if you don't. I'm the one performing, and YOU are the one listening. One is personal, one is not. DM You still are not clear on this. Why should a painter not care because it's finished yet a musician cares? The piece is finished, the dudes have played it. It also can't be changed, it's done. When I finish a piece I have given it my best shot, do you like it? Maybe not, maybe yes. They are both personal. The painter can't change what has been done (if kept a respectable distance) and neither can the musician. We both care to whatever extent we choose to care. I have a friend who is a painter and would knock your socks off. The painter performs, the work is recorded. The musician performs, the work is recorded. Whether we care what you think or not has little to do with the work produced. They are both personal products of the artist. Mozart is dead, Charlie Parker is dead, they both would rock your socks off live. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted January 25, 2007 Share Posted January 25, 2007 Very interesting reads here. I'm eclectic, and I like a lot but not all jazz. Just like all music I listen to. Truthfully, many jam sessions often leave me cold unless I'm in the audience, and whoever invented zylophones (sp) should be taken out and shot. I would state however, that jazz, like gospel and blues, are the unpinnings of almost everything out there in the popular (not classical) vein we hear today. What's a big disappointment to me is not the lack of appreciation for fusion and bebop jazz which seems to have a strong following. To me it's the little regard held out for the best of the Latin jazz, New Orleans jazz, what's commonly called Ragtime and the early Chicago School of Jazz. With the latter three we're also talking horns baby and boy a good ragtime piece is jamming at it best, has beat you can follow and energy to burn. I guess jazz-heads tend to ignore it because of its plebian nature. Our entire musical experience would be so much poorer without those hep cats workin the groove. JAZZ LIVES! Thebes, are you talking about vibraphones? (metal keys, vibrato, pedal damper) Xylophones go way back and have little to do with jazz instrumentation. Vibes (as the lingo goes) are very hard to play with effectiveness for most of us but in the right hands are magical. They take the dexterity of a percussionist combined with the musicality of a keyboardist (dare i say pianist) which is very rare. I played a decent (read passable) marimba in my day but really would have needed 5 years or more to do a vibraphone justice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sputnik Posted January 25, 2007 Share Posted January 25, 2007 I really dug these cats in my younger days [H]. "You gotta get hot to play real cool." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTSOjbp0Hs0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted January 25, 2007 Share Posted January 25, 2007 Dman, classical was just as much about the composer as any other time. Their jobs depended on it. Personalities were always involved, piss off the benefactor and you were screwed. Jazz and Rock represent a break from that past. Now artists make money based on what the public pays. Back then, the artist was at the mercy of the royal court. I don't want to lecture on music history, but that's the way it was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben. Posted January 25, 2007 Share Posted January 25, 2007 When someone talks about jazz players playing with "no relationship" to one another's playing, what they're really saying is that they don't understand the relationship. That's fine. I don't place a value judgement there, but a little humility is in order. There's plenty of music out there that I don't "get". I don't necessarily deem it artistically unworthy. I think it would be helpful to think in terms of tension & release. Without some level of dissonace and tension, consonance or release is pretty much meaningless. There's room for personal choice in the spectrum between Mr. Bungle and Barney the Purple Dinosaur. I'm going to go dance about painting now... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.