-
I'm half embarrassed about the fact that one of the things inspiring me to play every day is the look of my guitar. I know something is wrong with this. It's too indulgent. Buried deep in my conscience is something that tells me I should not need to have the look of the instrument to motivate me to play. A serious guitarist would never have such a superficial need, right? Music is about sound. A guitar is just a tool. The most important thing for the musician is the playability of the instrument, and it's the sound not the way it looks that ultimately matters. Yet...I can't stop wanting to have an attractive looking instrument.
Recently this issue has gotten even more absurd: I keep thinking because the guitar I have (it's a modified strat with a blocked Floyd Rose bridge) is not really a "jazz guitar," I'm lacking something to play jazz until it's replaced with a "jazz guitar." Even when you look at the instrument it will say this is a jazz guitar, as if it's possible that the jazz style is either in whole or part inherent in the design of a specific guitar.
I do know there really is no such thing as a "jazz guitar" if what you mean is an instrument that a musician uses to play jazz. Musicians are only influenced by tradition and history and cultural expectations to believe such a thing exists. I'm talking about the so-called jazz box: arch top, hollow or semi-hollow type of design; f-holes, dark sunburst finish, black or tortoise shell pickguard. (Even gypsy jazz seems to have it's own acoustic instrument intended for the genre, as with Selmer and Maccaferri.) The assumption is that jazz players preferred this one type of guitar, but actually I think it's more about the evolution of the electric guitar. The jazz box was the type of instrument more commonly offered to guitarists at the same time jazz in the form of bebop and swing were popular and hip. It's what instruments jazz virtuosos were playing, perhaps with the exception of someone like Joe Pass on a Fender Jazzmaster (a solid body but with a similar tone), but note: It's called a JAZZMASTER. To this day, it sends musicians the same indirect message that urks my conscience: The messengers of jazz need a guitar worthy of the task or you might not be able to deliver.
The notion is that there's a more suitable guitar out there for a specific genre like jazz. I guess what I'm wondering is why I can't look at the instrument as transparent, and instead of the strings and the fretboard being all that matters I can't stop thinking the thing has to be a unified whole (including its appearance) capable of speaking a language that others immediately recognize as jazz.
It's about psychology too, and this probably pertains to many players out there: I realize that I may be transferring the doubts I have about my playing to doubts about the instrument. If this is so, then as long as I have doubts about my abilities to play jazz I will probably never have a guitar that looks like it fits the part.
So, two dilemmas: The need for inspiration from what looks like an attractive guitar, and the need for a guitar that looks like something that fits the jazz genre. The first is fairly subjective when it comes to what is an attractive guitar, but I'm not so sure about the second if jazz is your thing. Anybody know what I'm talking about?
-
10-18-2017 03:45 PM
-
ZERO
A guitar is nothing without someone playing it, if a guitar could speak it would tell you it only exists to be played and make music. I got a used custom guitar and I called to luthier to talk to him about the instrument. His comment before he hung up the phone, please play the guitar, don't just look at it, play the dam thing!
-
Go read about Les Paul's guitar, "the Log". It was pretty much a 2 x 6, with guitar "wings" glued onto it that he chopped off a hollow-body Epiphone. Sounded pretty darned good, too, acc'd to Les P.
(I still think steel guitars, which are pretty much planks glued together, can sound as rich and full as any type of guitar, if you have the right pickup on them... a Fender Dual Professional, for e.g., or Stringmaster can sound really good, acc'd to my ear. The original Rickenbacker "frying pan" steelers are very primitive instruments in design, but man they are sweet sounding.)
-
There is no question that in the abstract the appearance of the guitar should be irrelevant. However, in reality, the people with whom one interacts in the process of playing music (and getting paid for it) frequently have other ideas. Club owners, band leaders, producers, not to mention audiences, all come with preconceived notions of what does and does not constitute a "jazz" guitar and, to a lesser extent, amp. Say you get a call as a sub for a jazz gig. Which rig will it be - the pointy axe and Marshall, or the nice archtop and Polytone? We all know the job could be done nicely with a Tele and a Deluxe - but that scenario had best wait until the player is well established as a draw in his own right to try that. It may not be right, but it is real. IMHO.
-
eyes = smell = touch = ears...looks matter!
Charles Bukowski> Quotable Quote
“Style is the answer to everything.
A fresh way to approach a dull or dangerous thing
To do a dull thing with style is preferable to doing a dangerous thing without it
To do a dangerous thing with style is what I call art
Bullfighting can be an art
Boxing can be an art
Loving can be an art
Opening a can of sardines can be an art
Not many have style
Not many can keep style
I have seen dogs with more style than men,
although not many dogs have style.
Cats have it with abundance.
When Hemingway put his brains to the wall with a shotgun,
that was style.
Or sometimes people give you style
Joan of Arc had style
John the Baptist
Jesus
Socrates
Caesar
García Lorca.
I have met men in jail with style.
I have met more men in jail with style than men out of jail.
Style is the difference, a way of doing, a way of being done.
Six herons standing quietly in a pool of water,
or you, naked, walking out of the bathroom without seeing me.”
Charles Bukowski
cheersLast edited by neatomic; 10-18-2017 at 09:05 PM.
-
Yeah looks matter to me
I admit I'm shallow
Its gotta be a fat jazz box ....
Mind you it doesn't matter to me what Ed Bickert plays !
But then I'm not Ed Bickert ....
Oh well
-
No doubt many people "hear" what they see. (So said Bobby Darin's manager who told him to go back to the hairpiece and tux, after his guitar-strumming folkie phase.)
The problem with style, as such, is that it can descend into mannerism. (Then, you end up being like Quentin Tarantino who could have been a great filmmaker instead of just a clever, film-student-y phenomenon. I watched a bit of "Reservoir Dogs" the other day, and it is so over the top, stylized that it is farcical, and unconvincing, at least to me. Authentic humanitas is hard---smirky, stylistic conceits are easy: The Coen Brothers films are also like this.) Anyway, big topic for a different discussion.
Does Ed Bickert have less jazz style than a 'jazz box-er", or Vic Juris who plays a hollow guitar with no f-holes?
One reason I like a lot of the older blues guys (Albert King, BB, T-Bone Walker) is that they are minimalists---plug and play...no stomp boxes or processing....just like an empty basketball court where you show what kind of game you have.
I mean you're right---some audiences would be swayed one way or another, by appearances.
I just close my eyes and listen to what they're playing.
-
but even albert king (flying v), bb (lucille black 355) & t-bone (3 p-90 gibby) are closely associated with a "style"..their guitars, if nothing else...
and i do think that bikerts use of a tele de-legitimized him to some extent...a 175 would have worked wonders!!! hah
cheers
-
Albert King didn't always play the Flying V: I've seen pictures of him with a semi-hollow.
I saw BB play live once, but the others I never saw live. Aside from seeing pictures in a guitar magazine, or the like, I couldn't have told you what they played.
What I'm saying is that what they looked like couldn't interest me less: It's what they sounded like that matters. I mean you can tell by the end of a chorus, at most, which one is playing.
As for Bickert, I'm not sure he'd sound as good on a 175. Teles or any other solid body have more tonal clarity, I think, than any other type of guitar...they just sacrifice some complexity and overtones...so Bickert's playing of fast chordal passages would probably sound less distinct.
(At least when I'm practicing, I prize tonal clarity above all....it just makes it easier to figure things out, and hear them. I think this is why Gibson electric semis and hollow bodies sound good---they sound fat, without the ringing, overtone-y stuff of more acoustic guitars...more of the fundamental tone, and less layering and nuance which just ends up getting lost in a mix, or sounding indistinct when playing fast passages.)
In a nutshell that is the genius of Gibson---they figured out to produce an electric tone, that is entirely artificial in a sense, but which works really well for its uses in small groups and larger groups, as well. It's a little like the difference between a Hammond B-3 and a Grand Piano....Jimmy Smith's stuff wouldn't sound that great on a concert grand, but man it cooks in an up-tempo number. Try playing an electrified classical guitar for Hank Garland's stuff on Jazz Winds From a New Direction, and I don't think it will sound that great.
These guitars that Gibson invented are not just acoustic guitars, that are amplified: They are an entirely different creature that come alive once they are plugged in.
-
Well, I try to keep my stuff in good working order, and most of it is vintage.
Years ago I'd clean up/polish my guitars semi regularly but have gotten lazy/indifferent as I get older.
I'll wipe em down occasionally maybe the gold hardware more than the finish.
it's less frequent these days. I still take care of everything but am less obsessed
As time goes on they become more utilitarian, at least my gigging stuff.
-
To me Reservoir Dogs is a classic, a true art. I watched it many times, and no doubt will watch again. It's that good! Same with Coen bros- some of my fav movies are by them. I have to say Hollywood more often than not is pretty dull, so thanks God for these guys.
Originally Posted by goldenwave77
On the topic, I do believe in style, but don't believe in being snob. I love that Bukowski poem that Neatomic posted. The guitar should be part of it, of course.
But some things when they are too ubiquitous, they become too boring. How many Gypsy jazz players use the same guitar? Well basically all of them lol! I don't wanna do it, I want to be different, and I am different, so if they gonna judge me on that- it's a snobbery. Or if you play mainstream jazz and you don't use a big archtop and someone is vibing you- it's a snobbery.
So play whatever you want, just do it with style! And of course, play good, so maybe you start a new trend or something, who knows!
I have to say though, some guitars don't inspire me to play jazz, like at all. Stratocaster doesn't, and neither does SG. But it's just my personal thing. I won't judge anyone if they do, and make a good sound with it.
And I hope at this point in time, no one is surprised by a tele in a jazz setting?? You gotta be a derelict to hate on a jazz tele
-
Wow. Great replies so far. Thanks guys.
-
Reminds me of Chet Atkins story. When someone commented to Chet that “that guitar sounds good”, Chet placed it in a stand and asked “how does it sound now?” Originally Posted by docbop
-
In principle zero, but in practice a lot. We are emotional beings us humans and we get inspired. There is a reason why our wives spend our fortunes decorating our houses
My local guitar pusher has been saying for years that looks and feel are primary factors in selling guitars, while sound is a distant third.
-
If you can play, it doesn't matter. If you suck, Wes's own L5 isn't going to save you.
-
Well, similar to a romantic relationship, the "look" might've been the first thing I noticed, but the other, more important, features kept me in.
-
Hmmm. It almost sounds like we should feel better about ourselves if our guitars are ugly and cheap. Houses too? Cars? Wives and girlfriends? Ourselves? Where does it stop, should we all wear rags, stop shaving, stop bathing and smell like barn animals?
No. As a side note, part of what I do professionally involves detailed design. Design can have elegance, and construction can have elegance too. Everything doesn't have to be shoddy, cold, hard, rough, and grey.
So, everyone who visions, models, designs, and builds something should push him/herself to do their very best given the domain constraints. You know, kind of like how we approach musical performance.
Competition, design excellence, build quality, aesthetics, technological evolution all combine to help man progress and evolve. Modesty is a virtue, but on the other hand, guilt trips about excellence and aesthetics are ultimately misguided and self defeating. Balance is a good thing.Last edited by Jazzstdnt; 10-19-2017 at 09:30 AM.
-
If the look of your guitar inspires you, that's a good enough reason to care. It's weird to me, as I don't care how my guitars look, and my prettiest guitar is the one I like playing the least.
But there is one point I think is important on this topic: I, and most jazz guitarists I know, play differently on different styles of guitar. Things like sustain, feedback, attack, feel, response, etc affect what and how we play. The overwhelming conventional wisdom that the pinnacle of jazz guitar is a big carved archtop seems to keep many players in that one zone. Thanks to Bickert for breaking the mold, but most of the modern players use things other than archtops, and even the few that do (eg Kreisberg or Lund or GHex) use a lot of processing which changes the sound. A Strat might just be the instrument on which your jazz guitar playing is destined to thrive, and if you are blinded by the need to play an archtop you might miss out.
-
That brings us to the relic market: pay significantly more than a shiny one because it looks beat up. Originally Posted by Jazzstdnt
-
I've heard great jazz played on Strats, Teles, Pauls, and SGs. I've played many genres on many sorts of guitars. Citizen's right that a paying gig comes with expectations, but aside from that, I'll play what I want on what I have.
-
[QUOTE=Hep To The Jive;810073]To me Reservoir Dogs is a classic, a true art. I watched it many times, and no doubt will watch again. It's that good!
A bunch of guys sitting around in a diner wearing identical black suits, white shirts, and black ties, and spouting phony "criminal lingo" is not high art--it is just artistic conceit. (It's in the film.) So over the top phony, it makes it unbelievable...suspension of disbelief, notwithstanding. I've read comic books that worked better.
Compare this to the scene in The Godfather where Clemenza is showing Michael how to cook...that scene is actually believable. I've known some guys who knew some guys, or had relatives, who were "connected"...they didn't going around driving cars with gangster whitewalls, and wearing Borsalino hats. Tarantino's problem is that he's digested too many movies, and has mistaken movie-visual style for reality...this is the artistic sin of mannerism...like Bronzino's paintings which show women with anatomically impossibly long wrists and fingers.Last edited by goldenwave77; 10-19-2017 at 11:35 AM.
-
"Compare this to the scene in The Godfather where Clemenza is showing Michael how to cook"
"and ya shove in the sausage...."
-
[QUOTE=goldenwave77;810148]
If I want 'realistic', I watch a documentary. The Godfather was a good movie, from different time. When Tarantino came on the scene it was breath of fresh air. I love the acting, dialogues, aesthetics, everything. Super hip. Sorry you didn't get it. Originally Posted by Hep To The Jive
-
Everyone's different, but if aesthetics matter to you, they matter. don't beat yourself up about it! for me, I like having good, not too old strings, and a clean instrument that's playing in tune as possible. those things make it feel good to me to play, and I end up playing more and enjoying my time playing more, which are both good things. if it makes you feel good to play an instrument that looks good, what's wrong with that?
I recently got a tele (a danocaster) after playing pretty much exclusively archtop for 20 years. I really enjoy playing the tele, and I find that it sounds way better in the upper registers than an archtop, which causes me to play different things. also the sustain is different, and the neck width means I can't play some solo guitar things as precisely as I can on my archtop. I'm enjoying the difference and getting a second guitar has meant that I've enjoyed the variety a bit more.
-
[QUOTE=Hep To The Jive;810168]
It's not a question of "getting it". It's a question of what he's capable of saying. Tarantino is like a perpetual teenager, smirky and condescending. He can't risk authentic emotion, because he's afraid to try. Originally Posted by goldenwave77
One more e.g. and I'll leave off. Consider Michael C. and Kay, his wife in Godfather II. She's an upper class WASP from a different world with different expectations and understandings, and she asks him, hopefully, whether he's killed someone.......and he lies to her, and she accepts the lie, and then later figures out what has happened. By the end of the movie, he shuts the door on her, literally and figuratively, as she leaves, and the message is authentic, and complete, and it works, dramatically. He asks his mother "Can a man lose his family (meaning his wife)" ? His mother is perplexed, and says "How can a man lose his family...?" It is beyond her comprehension, and that sums up the tragedy of he and Kay. His mother would not ask about the Don's business, but Kay needs to know, and understand, and will walk away... This is true to life: We think we know someone, and find out we really do not.
In Pulp Fiction, we get Tarantino himself who has 2 criminal characters show up on his doorstep. What do we get from Tarantino? A framed announcement---"The Bonnie Situation". The whole thing is played like a joke, because it is a joke. Yes, and Hitchcock inserted himself into his movies...how hip, but hollow and empty....that is what pure "style" gets you.
Miles D's solos didn't sound any better because he turned his back to the audience, but I'm sure a lot of people in the audience oohed and aahed, "How cool...." Again, pure style.
Reply With Quote
Incoming 1968 Gibson Johnny Smith
Today, 09:42 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos