What Metheny Said

[Double 07]

A fun interesting Metheny interview I watched the other day. He makes a bold maybe contreversial statement between 7:49 - 8:27 of this interview. Wondering if others would agree or disagree with what he says during that part of this interview?

Pat Metheny - The Synclavier 1986 - YouTube

[paynow]

It's somewhat of a broad, sweeping generalization but as it relates to some pop musicians, yes, that is true. It's certainly not how I view groups such as the Beatles, the Who, etc.

Pat is being much more diplomatic than many jazz players would be when discussing the same subject.

If you haven't seen his rant on Kenny G, Google it. Hilarious.

[fumblefingers]

pretty mild statement actually. even more true today. could things be more superficial than they are today? i hope not.

[SearchForMeaning]

I'm glad he said that. There's certainly nothing wrong with being superficial, or living for external things, or using music to get chicks. I think that's what a lot of people want anyway, why not get it all and get guitar endorsements? Yay for Pat Metheny for being a star, rich, having chicks like him and having a guitar named after him. He's proved himself. He can play fast.

[djangoles]

hahaha....David Boo-e!!

[aniss1001]

Originally Posted by djangoles

hahaha....David Boo-e!!

Hehe +1 on that.. hilarious


And about Metheny.. Is that even controversial? To me it's just an obvious fact..

I guess I'm pretty "snobby" myself.. I basically consider most popular music to be comparable to fast food; it's cheap, easy, accesable, and requieres absolutely no effort or "aquired taste" from the consumer (=listener).

There is off course some popular music that is much more than that obviously, but even that doesn't interest me enough to actually listen to it anymore. It sounds a bit thin and infatile to me. But off course it reminds me off the stuff I was listening to and playing my entire early youth for most of my time awake..

Jazz however I would compare with fine french cuisine. Not that jazz is the ONLY music I'd say that about. Classical, World fusion, Bosa nova, Flamingo, Idian raga stuff.. etc.. Pretty much anything with an honest creativity, some sofistication and is played by folks who have spent an enormous percentage of their life becoming one with their instrument..

Though off course I prefer the aestethic tradiccion you call JAZZ :P

I don't mean any offense to anyone. This is simply my honest opinion. The funny thing is that this was my opinion even before I really started listening to jazz, when I was still playing rock, funk, pop, blues, etc..

[SearchForMeaning]

After thinking about it, I have to say I think Pat is oversimplifying things.

Here's one pop artist that I think would make Bowie look like a shallow hack:

YouTube Video

If you don't want those irritating pixel screens:
Dead Snow Music Video - Linni Meister 'My Ass' (Uncensored) - Trailer Addict

Now Pat, a new standard of serious art to aspire to.

[Kman]

I agree with Pat. They do it for fame and money, but I respect pop music as an art form. I don't listen to pop music, but it's what the masses like, even if you don't agree with it. Most of us have listened to popular music at some point in our lives.

[Double 07]

Originally Posted by SearchForMeaning

After thinking about it, I have to say I think Pat is oversimplifying things.

Here's one pop artist that I think would make Bowie look like a shallow hack:



If you don't want those irritating pixel screens:
Dead Snow Music Video - Linni Meister 'My Ass' (Uncensored) - Trailer Addict

Now Pat, a new standard of serious art to aspire to.

OH WOW LMAO LOVED that video. Nothing wrong with a man wanting some of that action, it's what perpetuates the species after all. The "BIG BRAIN" that made the universe knew we would need some of that enjoyement. Thanx

I think Pat may have oversimplified things a bit in his statements. There are some in "popular" forms of music who have loads of talent but I think we all know there are others who make it big and have little to no real talent. It's those artists who get big in popular music and have questionable or little to no talent who cause some people to look at the words "pop music" with a jaundice eye. Though really the same thing could be said of any "popular" form of music. rock, country, or whatever.

When it comes to jazz music though I doubt you could find many, if any examples at all, of musicians who rose to significant fame in the genre who are without talent and a true mastery of their instrument.

So yes I would say most jazz musicians are in search of something higher than just money or fame. Furthermore when they reach that goal of what they were searching for musically, practiced for many hours and years studying and playing for, perfecting their art, money and fame will find them/be the result. However I wouldn't over generalize and say that all "popular" musicians are only in it for fame or money, all though some definitely are. There are also many great very talented musicians in there who happen to just like that style of music and are expressing their art with that music!!!!!!!

[paynow]

And of course, so many of the standards jazz players love were the popular music of their time.

[TruthHertz]

Originally Posted by SearchForMeaning

After thinking about it, I have to say I think Pat is oversimplifying things.

Here's one pop artist that I think would make Bowie look like a shallow hack:

First I thought this was some kind of joke but what SFM said is true, it's deep. The artist is using "Ass" as a symbolic representation of pop music. Deep. "Take a long good look at my ass. How long long you think it lasts?" the eternal question of the ephemeral nature of pop music, the trendy, the fleeting, the faddish expression of the forgettable masquerading as the zeitgeist. A totally appealing sexy disembodied obsession that doubles as a way to pass fecal matter. And I love her voice. Some hip harmonic devices too.
Here we see the question being posed: Is pop music the art of the fleeting while jazz is the art of the eternal? And I think that's what Pat is saying.
Deep.
David

[JakeAcci]

If Metheny's statements are limited to true "Pop" in the sense of the stuff that's on MTV or the pop radio stations -Bieber, Spears, Black Eyed Peas, Beyonce, as opposed to artists that are getting popular but aren't exactly in the same category, like, for example, Fleet Foxes, St Vincent, Bon Iver, Robyn, then I agree with his statements about "Pop" music and I don't think it's controversial at all.

I'm not sure that, across the board, jazz musicians are reaching for something higher necessarily. There's just as much ego and self-involvement in jazz, and I think sometimes the goals of a jazz musician have less to do with the quality of his music as much as how his community 'rates' him as a musician. Jazz has so much to do with skill that I think it's very easy to get lost in a competition of skill, which is quite separate from actual music making, right? As an example, consider "cutting contests."

[Sphere]

It's about as huge of a generalization as saying that jazz is just a bunch of noodling. I'd give more points for creativity to Bowie and Eno's 'Heroes' than a lot of music I've heard from Metheny. I think he displays a common sin among jazzers, in that they talk about what they assume rock or pop is, without a real knowledge of the genre.

[fep]

Before I saw this post I had this thought that is kind of the opposite of what Metheny is saying.

In jazz someone may suck, but they can fool themselves by thinking they're really great and what they play is "art" and so "creative". They don't have a good measuring stick of how well they play (maybe they're just noodling in their bedroom).

If you make a lot of money as a pop musician at least you have that measuring stick and it's not subjective. As in, "I'm really good at making lots of money".

Of course none of this applies to Metheny as he is "really good at making money".

Me, perhaps I suck, but I'm really good at enjoying playing the guitar.

[Flyin' Brian]

Originally Posted by Sphere

I think he displays a common sin among jazzers, in that they talk about what they assume rock or pop is, without a real knowledge of the genre.

You're not giving Metheny enough credit for getting around. Some of his thoughts:

Earth Wind & Fire

their music has always had a very special place for me - "after the love is gone" was probably the last time that any pop/r & b artist ever managed (attempted?) to get anything that harmonically sophisticated out there to the masses via the top 40. but what makes them so special to me is the spiritual feeling that they were able to convey in the form of pop music - stevie wonder also had this same rare quality, by any standards, musical or otherwise, there was always so much there to love. i'm glad they are still out there hitting it....

Steve Morse

let me put it like this; the first day i arrived in miami (i had just turned 18 a few weeks before and had hardly been anywhere outside of missouri in my life), i heard steve morse and about had a heart attack. i heard jaco pastorius on the second day there and i think i DID have a heart attack. by the next day, i was afraid to leave my room! i was about ready to get back on the bus back to lee's summit!
i was thinking, "there must be people like these guys EVERYWHERE!!"
as it turns out, they were both one in billion type players, as we all know now. the thing about steve was, and is, the incredibly rare juxtaposition of this amazing classical guitar technique and conception (especially his contrapuntal thing which i have never heard anyone else do) with "southern rock" - of all things!! the guy loved the allman brothers but wrote solo guitar compositions that were at the same level as leo brower and had a sense of harmony that really, i to this day have never heard anything to compare with - just absolutely unique. and being truly unique may be the most rare quality in the music world.
there was never any question that he would go onto to do the great things that he has done. and he is great person too, who has done many interesting things OUTSIDE of music (he actually became a commercial airline pilot for awhile). i don't see him much, but whenever i do, we just take up where we left off before. a great cat...

Buckethead

i have been following bucketheads thing closely since he came on the scene about 10 years ago now. he is an interesting player that has found a way of dealing with the instrument techinically that is really extraordinary. he also seems pretty fearless as an improvisor in the best sense of the word. i always try to stay up on what he is doing and i always enjoy hearing him. i think i heard that he is going to join guns and roses or something like that? i may skip that one...axl's vibrato doesn't really do it for me... but i am sure that buckethead will bring something hip to the table.

Alan Holdsworth

i totally agree that alan is one of the greatest guitarists ever - his work on the mid-70's tony williams records was revolutionary and changed everything for guitarists everywhere. it is a real mystery to me why he is not a household name. but it really doesn't matter, his contribution is large and i think all musicians know it. i have never met him, but i would like to. other guitarists in a similar zone who don't get the nearly the props they deserve for me are wayne krantz, frank gambale and especially scott henderson. all great great musicians.

Nils Cline

ils is great and someone who i follow as closely as i can, but like you say, he is involved in so many things it is hard to keep up. last time i saw him was at a big rock concert where he was playing with a group called wilco. what was great was that he was his imitable self. he is someone who really has a way of playing that is all his own. one of my favorites. (ps- i saw that he has a record of andrew hill music coming out - that is something i will definitely not miss.)

[Double 07]

Oh Earth Wind & Fire I'm glad they came up in this thread they are so amazingly great.

Fact is that how much money some music or art makes is not the most reliable measuring stick for how good that art is. Sheesh that could be said of almost anything really. Alot of bad things are done every day for the sake of making money and some terrible music put out there for the sake of money. There are so many other things to consider.

[Kojo27]

Originally Posted by fep

Before I saw this post I had this thought that is kind of the opposite of what Metheny is saying.

In jazz someone may suck, but they can fool themselves by thinking they're really great and what they play is "art" and so "creative". They don't have a good measuring stick of how well they play (maybe they're just noodling in their bedroom).

If you make a lot of money as a pop musician at least you have that measuring stick and it's not subjective. As in, "I'm really good at making lots of money".

Of course none of this applies to Metheny as he is "really good at making money".

Me, perhaps I suck, but I'm really good at enjoying playing the guitar.

Haha - you don't suck, fep. But I dig your attitude. I could already play some stuff, could improvise -- and I understood basic theory, could play most of what I could imagine (simple though it might have been), when I began *gradually* easing into jazz (at age 48!) - and it had been 18 years since I'd played at all.

Almost exactly three years later, I still fairly suck at jazz (I'm learning, though!) But, like you, I love it, but it never crosses my mind to make money with it (with any style, certainly not jazz).

Money is simply not the measuring stick, thank goodness, and I'd even say that Despair is the lot of one who tracks his progress in jazz by the amount of money he's made from it. It just isn't about that -- can't be about that, imo. It's too hard, takes every speck of one's discipline -- it's as close to a spiritual pursuit as anything I know of.

kj

[willtheguitardude]

Totally agree with Mr. Metheny on this one. While yes, there are quite a few Jazz musicians that are in it for the status, I think that most of the mainstream, MTV pop stars are in it for the ego and money. The song writing is so generic, they can't possibly in it just for the music. Pat Metheny is the greatest example of someone who puts the music before himself. His music is fantastic, its unique, its complex, its just everything you'd expect someone on a real musical journey to create! He puts heart into every one of his solos, you can see it on his face. I enjoy his music so much because he enjoys it. There are tons of other Jazz players I could list who put heart into their music, but I can hardly think of any modern pop stars that do.

[No0N3of!mport@nce]

Originally Posted by SearchForMeaning

I'm glad he said that. There's certainly nothing wrong with being superficial, or living for external things, or using music to get chicks. I think that's what a lot of people want anyway, why not get it all and get guitar endorsements? Yay for Pat Metheny for being a star, rich, having chicks like him and having a guitar named after him. He's proved himself. He can play fast.

Nothing wrong with being superficial? Really? Does Pat use music to get chicks? He is 50+ and unmarried. Has it not occurred to you that he might be gay? Would you think any less of this amazing genius if he were? For some of us the "chick" we like most is Chick Corea. I am not immune to the charms of females, but let's not project ourselves onto others.

[No0N3of!mport@nce]

You are spot on.

[TrakaVobla]

Originally Posted by No0N3of!mport@nce

Nothing wrong with being superficial? Really? Does Pat use music to get chicks? He is 50+ and unmarried. Has it not occurred to you that he might be gay? Would you think any less of this amazing genius if he were? For some of us the "chick" we like most is Chick Corea. I am not immune to the charms of females, but let's not project ourselves onto others.

He is married and he has children...

[SearchForMeaning]

Originally Posted by No0N3of!mport@nce

Nothing wrong with being superficial? Really? Does Pat use music to get chicks? He is 50+ and unmarried. Has it not occurred to you that he might be gay? Would you think any less of this amazing genius if he were? For some of us the "chick" we like most is Chick Corea. I am not immune to the charms of females, but let's not project ourselves onto others.

Well now, people do get bent out of shape don't they? Who said anything was said of his sexual orientation? And no, it did not occur to me that he is gay, twice married with kids, no that totally irrelevant fact did not occur to me.
We were talking about the perception of superficiality, how it equates with popular music and the judgements passed on these issues by our community of jazz enthusiasts. I said there was nothing wrong with having chicks like you for your popularity. You made this into an issue of sexual preference. What got your knickers in a bunch? I see you have no issue with projecting yourself onto others.
So I would infer by your objection that if I said I thought it was a great thing that Jim Henson was popular with children I am making some statement about his sexual preference?

[Flyin' Brian]

Originally Posted by No0N3of!mport@nce

He is 50+ and unmarried.

Not so. More research before posting next time maybe?

[fumblefingers]

don't be too hard on Noone3of!mportance.

he didn't know that Pat was into Unity Village, he thought it was Scientology Village.

[Eric Rowland]

Thanks for the pic of Pat and his family. Really nice.