The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Posts 1 to 25 of 46
  1. #1

    User Info Menu

    I'm just thinking, there are the local professionals that are great musicians but then there are the superstar players like pat metheny, scofield etc. what do you think happened to separate the ones that went on to be huge successes and then the ones who work day jobs teaching at universities or do theatre gigs or cruise ships and local gigs. Is it just practicing and playing? just curious.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    Hey great question! I'm lead to think if I knew the answer I'd be a superstar. But I'm game to offer my two cents. I think superstars play like 40 year olds when they are teenagers. They impress with their skills while still being very young. They work unbelievebly hard but also have bit of luck in the sense of being in the right place at the right time. They are completely committed to success, they are prepared to capitalize on their once in a lifetime opportunity. Superstars also have someone getting their name out there from the very beginning usually a parent, then a manager etc. Dont underestimate the paramount importance of the team...manager/agent/attorney/publicist you will never be famous just by becoming a great guitarist.... there has to be someone other than you setting up gigs,interviews, guest apppearences etc. etc. Inevitably they go to New York City and kick it's ass... They thrive while others just survive. The stars seem to latch onto their own personal sound/concept/approach earlier than most and this is crucial. So to sum up mad skills while still a youth, a bit of luck right place right time, someone pushing their name and music out into the world, mad skills, huge work ethic, a bit of luck right place right time, huge work ethic, mad skills, a bit of luck....

  4. #3

    User Info Menu

    I think there's a LOT at play.

    There's drive...a lot of great local players stay local because they don't have that weird recessive gene that makes folks want to tour, or pick up roots and move to somewhere with a "scene.". There's the ability to self promote...many really great players I've met have kind of an "aw shucks" attitude when it comes to that--if you really want to be heard you have to be knocking down every door in town. There's the comfort level--taking a job at a university and teaching instead of relentless gigging and touring is much "safer" money. You can buy a house...support a family, and not live with as much worry about where the next one is coming from. Gigging for a living is NOT easy. There's a little luck too...who do you know and who do they know? Who needs a guitar player and is willing to take a chance on you?

    I think the importance of actual playing ability thing reaches a peak after a certain point, and you get players who develop original voices and those that don't. But sometimes I think that's chicken or egg...do you develop that before and then, hey--somebody likes it? Or do you get a good gig being solid and reliable and then get the freedom to develop who you are? I can think of examples of both among the "big names."

    It's an interesting topic.

  5. #4

    User Info Menu

    So much of it is the people you connect with, and the energy and attitude that comes from immersion. Yes there are people who are really good, but I do see an edge, an extraordinary leap of perception and mastery of playing that comes from music becoming even more than second nature. When you have the luxury of playing with good people in a viable community, the support of venues, the excitement of gaining the competence and attaining respect of players in a scene, you acquire a language, a working command of the music. That is beyond what you can get from youtube, learning solos and playing in a controlled environment. You need the ability and support to get your foot in the door, and the community inside the door so you can learn the dance. It's a balance but the people you hang with is what I believe is a most important factor. They'll take you to a relationship with the music that comes before anything like fame or recognition.

    That's just the way I see it though
    David

  6. #5

    User Info Menu

    A big thing is writing. The guys who are household names have a sound that's *theirs* ... so they're not just good - they're unique. Their playing and writing will reflect that. I think anyone who says it's about skill and drive isn't really thinking about the whole picture. It's definitely part of it but everyone who turns themselves into a monster player had to push themselves and commit to doing it - but that doesn't mean they make $5000 for masterclasses and $50/ticket on 48 state plus Europe tours three decades after their first jam session.

  7. #6

    User Info Menu

    What's the line from the Bachman Turner Overdrive song? Something like "getting in with the right bunch of fellows".
    I don't know if it's true or not but there's a story about George Harrison visiting his sister who lived in the U.S., before the Beatles, and wowing some cats at a little session. One of whom told him that he could make it big if he hooked up with the right guys.

  8. #7

    User Info Menu

    Like-ability....and the image factor is not to be underestimated....Also a signature sound....which does not have to be entirely original, but is at least recognizable when heard.

    There is something in "stardom" that must make an audience WANT to embrace a particular personality.

    Either the audience really likes/admires a particular persona or is intrigued by them:

    Miles Davis---the cool black prince of 50's jazz who had cross-over appeal to white audiences...the slight distance tempered by the Brooks Brothers suits

    Pat Metheny---an original sound, that had a lot of appeal to non-hardcore jazz listeners

    Duke Ellington---the epitome of elegance but swinging, too, and complex musicianship

    the Basie Band---how can you not love a band that swings that hard, and makes you want to move?

    Jaco Pastorious----an uberman on his instrument....playing it like no one before...someone who dared to say "I am the best bassist in the world"....and probably was...people watched/listened to see what he might try next

    Willie Nelson---the outlaw image----180 degrees from his early days as an apprentice Nashville hit-meister songwriter (though some of his early stuff is his best, I think, the songs "Nightlife" and "Crazy")

    Dionne Warwick---coolly elegant voice, conservatory-trained and intelligence in delivery of WAY-above average pop sounds (Burt Bacharach/Hal David)

    Nat King Cole---cool and elegant, but also hip...listen to "Straighten Up and Fly Right" which is anti-heroin....you got the sense he knew something about this world and its dangers

    ....originality is not always required but an individual stamp is needed. I just drove out to Detroit to see the gf...and listened to the George Strait boxed set on the way out....72 cuts, and only 4 original songs, but the man is the biggest hitmaker in the history of country....he has a way of delivering a song that makes it his own...and surrounds himself with really good musicians (Brent Mason, Paul Franklin)...but the liner notes mentioned he listened endlessly to old material to find something he could do over his way....so Franklin and Mason and others play on a ton of records, but most don't get noticed...BTW, he started out doing western swing stuff so he can do a lot more than sappy ballads which I didn't realize before listening to this collection which I'd borrowed from the gf. Strait is a bit like Sinatra, I think, in that he is a stylist, with really good musical intelligence in finding material he can deliver well.

  9. #8

    User Info Menu

    I think every superstar guitarist have to record new CD every year. It is really important thing to be in game.

  10. #9

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by eddy b.
    I think superstars play like 40 year olds when they are teenagers.
    And they play like teenagers when they are 40. The superstars seem to stay fresh throughout their careers, finding "new wire to bend" as someone once said about Albert King. They never seem to settle for "I play as well as I am going to play."

  11. #10
    So I'm getting some good responses. I'm still wondering if the top of the top players are the best around. Also, some mentioned environment. let's say new York is the best place to go for jazz, it's so oversaturated with jazz musicians that only the best of the best make it there. Is it really just practice and gig all the time and live below the poverty line until you start getting better gigs? Is that how to get into that next level? Also, do you think that previous examples of success will ever be reached by next generations? Do you think guys like Mike Moreno and Julian Lage will be able to get the same success pat metheny has gotten?

  12. #11

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by nick1994
    Do you think guys like Mike Moreno and Julian Lage will be able to get the same success pat metheny has gotten?
    Re: the original question - The superstars are the best players. Local pros (NY or wherever) might be very very good but people like Metheny are light years beyond.

    Julian Lage probably won't have the same amount of commercial success as Metheny due to changing social conditions, jazz being less popular with the public etc.

  13. #12

    User Info Menu

    Yeah, you def. need to write your own music, come up with something unique. A real good pro would read anything, play any standard, improvise great, but its not enough to be a superstar, need that little extra. I love Scofield not just because he can really play over changes, but the music he writes is very original and pleasing. I remember getting his album 'Time On Your Hands', and thinking, wow, what a beatiful tunes! It was even before I was fan of jazz. So cross-genre appeal counts too, i guess.

  14. #13

    User Info Menu

    [QUOTE=nick1994;535796]So I'm getting some good responses. Also, do you think that previous examples of success will ever be reached by next generations? Do you think guys like Mike Moreno and Julian Lage will be able to get the same success pat metheny has gotten?[/QUOTE]

    I think you need to clarify your terms a bit....What do you consider "superstar" status. It might mean someone who can play or do something of real quality (as opposed to purely popular phenomena, e.g. The Back Street Boys) AND who has achieved popular appeal--and or tangible success, or at least continued exposure on the music scene.

    There are scant few jazz acts/musicians who made big bucks. Miles Davis make a LOT of money. Dave Brubeck was really popular for a few short years. Pat Metheny was a big success for a number of years, but I think his star, commercially, has dimmed somewhat....he still draws big crowds, though. Coltrane I think did OK, commercially, for a few short years. Stan Getz was almost a world-wide star for a few short years with the Bossa Nova craze. Monk got very sporadic in his appearances, later, but wrote a relatively small number of tunes (75 or 100), that I think earned decent royalties, and maybe he even got paid for them. George Benson sold more records, and made more money, I think off of "This Masquerade" than his earlier hard-core jazz stuff all put together. Same with Herbie Hancock and his "Headhunters" album. (Herbie H. is probably the greatest jazz pianist of the last half of the 20th cent., IMO)

    Aside from commercial success, there are lots of artists who stay on the scene and continue to record/work steadily, and they make a living but not big bucks, and who are well respected for their musicianship, by other musicians, and die-hard fans, and somewhat supported by the public. E.g. Horace Silver, Lee Morgan, Kenny Burrell, J.J. Johnson, the Brecker Brothers, and the list could go on and on. "The Sidewinder" was a big hit for Lee Morgan, and maybe "Song For My Father" for H. Silver. Louis A. had some big cross-over hits. e.g "Hello Dolly". The list of great jazz players who never had a hit record is much, much larger and this is the norm----with a bona fide hit record being really, really rare. I have immense respect for Kenny Burrell who has been on over 100 records, and did something like 1700 studio dates in NYC in 5 years, and whose playing, it seems to me, never "has a bad day"---the consummate pro in other words, but he has never had a hit record, of his own, to my knowledge. I think he was a sideman on some. The same deal with Howard Roberts who made a good living in his studio work, but stated at the end of his life that he never saw a nickel of royalties from his records. The list of able and fine musicians who also fall into this category is huge.

    I don't mean to dump cold water on this discussion. But pick up a The Rough Guide to Jazz or Yanow's book on jazz guitarists, and read between the lines of the capsule biographies, and it seems to me that there are plenty of great musicians who just eke out a living, e.g.'s Oscar Moore---ran a gas station and laid bricks after the Nat King Cole trio, Jimmy Raney who wrote ironic/semi-humorous essays about being the best at playing music that no one was listening to, Duke Ellington who died owing money to the IRS, Joe Beck who twice left the music scene to run a dairy farm in NY (believe me, this is NOT the road to riches), Grant Green who wanted to achieve cross-over success, a la Wes Montgomery, but did not do it, and rode the white horse to an early death.
    Last edited by goldenwave77; 05-30-2015 at 07:47 AM. Reason: correct typos

  15. #14

    User Info Menu

    I would take 'superstar' in this context to mean 'a really big name in the jazz world'. Doesn't necessarily mean they make huge bucks or are well known to the general public (although a few lucky ones may manage this too).

    I think the 'big names' are just better all-round than the rest.

    As some have said, part of this may be that they have a sound, identity, compositional style etc. that helps them stand out. Which in itself is a rare ability in this homogenous world of ours.

    And they have probably worked their butts off to get out there and hustle.

    Didn't Pat Metheny spend some years driving a van to gigs all over the USA virtually every day, to build up his following? That is hard work.

  16. #15

    User Info Menu

    [QUOTE=grahambop;535834]I would take 'superstar' in this context to mean 'a really big name in the jazz world'. Doesn't necessarily mean they make huge bucks or are well known to the general public (although a few lucky ones may manage this too).


    Not to be argumentive...but I think it helps to specify what the criteria are, or people will end up talking about different people...and meaning different things, and the conversation will not be helpful, or clear.

    E.g., there was a guy named Carmen Mastren who was a great rhythm player back in the 30's or 40's...did a ton of studio work for NBC and others I think. I'm not sure he ever released many, if any, recordings as a leader. Probably he was a good sight reader, reliable, professional, etc. but as to a signature sound---maybe he had one, or maybe he didn't, and maybe the stuff he was doing, didn't require it, and as to image, etc. I think he was unknown to the public, but not to other pros. Was he a "superstar" within the terms of this conversation?

    How about Jimmy Wyble...acknowledged as a monster player....maybe the best at constructing counterpoint lines, but who played a lot of western swing, and again probably not known to the public.

    Bernard Addison--great player of the '30's...pretty much stopped playing for a while, then resurfaced doing non-jazzy stuff, I think.

    I suppose I'm trying to figure out why the OP is asking this question...and what he is really trying to figure out?! Maybe "superstar" is not really what he is getting at?

  17. #16

    User Info Menu

    I think it's important when considering the commercial potential of jazz, in general, these days to remember that back in the golden days jazz was the popular music of the time. Except for hillbilly music and race records and the nascent rock scene in the 50s. And it's of interest that as far as 50s rock and roll and R n B went, the independent labels way outsold the majors. Everybody young or old regardless of socio economic or ethnic background was listening to songs which have come to be referred to as Standards, played by seasoned pros. Not all of these pros were hard core jazz players and the music could vary depending on what part of town you were in but it was basically the same stuff. Tunes like I Got Rhythm were part of the cultural landscape. A guitarist in the 1930s with a basic vocabulary of vanilla chords and a tuxedo could often eke out a living. The contemporary public is just not on the same tip. I've played Charlie Christian at Minton's for people, music fans, not total fools, and they thought it was Dixieland. So here we are in 2015 a space odyssey and I think that anyone concerned with "making it big as a jazz guitarist" needs to survey culture from the past 75 years and seriously contemplate their position in it. Just memorizing the Real Book in all 12 keys is not going to guarantee a spot at the trough of stardom. A person might be better off putting together three sets worth of tunes in keys they dig and playing them like their life depended on it. A "Jimi meets Joe Pass and Wes at the Crossroads" concept.
    Last edited by mrcee; 05-31-2015 at 01:18 AM.

  18. #17

    User Info Menu

    Great question. Quick answer because I have to run. Just skimming some possibilities. Sometimes it's merely the luck of the draw: opportunity. Then opportunity capitalized. Superstars now have an excuse to work day and night on their craft. They play with the best musicians who in turn spur them on and inspire them. They CAN'T fall on their faces in front of these great peers or in front of an audience who has come to expect great things. They have to work on all aspect of their playing, if they're super stars who are also called on from time to time to be sidemen.

    Local guys can get in a rut, dissatisfaction and resentment from not being acknowledged. Sometimes they just learn to settle or give up in one way or another, or are happy with their lot. Sometimes locals are a one trick pony. Great at playing one thing but can't read or can't play various styles or whatever. Often local heros have to have other gigs to pay the bills. The super stars rarely do, unless it's a prestigious teaching gig and steady.

  19. #18

    User Info Menu

    [QUOTE=goldenwave77;535839]
    Quote Originally Posted by grahambop
    I would take 'superstar' in this context to mean 'a really big name in the jazz world'. Doesn't necessarily mean they make huge bucks or are well known to the general public (although a few lucky ones may manage this too).


    Not to be argumentive...but I think it helps to specify what the criteria are, or people will end up talking about different people...and meaning different things, and the conversation will not be helpful, or clear.

    E.g., there was a guy named Carmen Mastren who was a great rhythm player back in the 30's or 40's...did a ton of studio work for NBC and others I think. I'm not sure he ever released many, if any, recordings as a leader. Probably he was a good sight reader, reliable, professional, etc. but as to a signature sound---maybe he had one, or maybe he didn't, and maybe the stuff he was doing, didn't require it, and as to image, etc. I think he was unknown to the public, but not to other pros. Was he a "superstar" within the terms of this conversation?

    How about Jimmy Wyble...acknowledged as a monster player....maybe the best at constructing counterpoint lines, but who played a lot of western swing, and again probably not known to the public.

    Bernard Addison--great player of the '30's...pretty much stopped playing for a while, then resurfaced doing non-jazzy stuff, I think.

    I suppose I'm trying to figure out why the OP is asking this question...and what he is really trying to figure out?! Maybe "superstar" is not really what he is getting at?


    agreed. superstar or great master and virtuoso?

    "superstar" means much more than just a "star" - and a star is very popular. but more to the point, stars are commercially successful millionaires most of the time.

    superstars are sometimes order of magnitude richer than stars.

    are there any superstars in jazz? maybe we are talking about "jazz superstars" which is a big step down from pop, rock, hip-hop, country, etc. and its a big step down from acting or sports. so... maybe George Benson was? I can't think of a single contemporary jazz superstar (meaning Gen X or Gen Y), from a commercial perspective.

  20. #19

    User Info Menu

    [QUOTE=fumblefingers;535882]
    Quote Originally Posted by goldenwave77



    agreed. superstar or great master and virtuoso?

    "superstar" means much more than just a "star" - and a star is very popular. but more to the point, stars are commercially successful millionaires most of the time.

    superstars are sometimes order of magnitude richer than stars.

    are there any superstars in jazz? maybe we are talking about "jazz superstars" which is a big step down from pop, rock, hip-hop, country, etc. and its a big step down from acting or sports. so... maybe George Benson was? I can't think of a single contemporary jazz superstar (meaning Gen X or Gen Y), from a commercial perspective.
    Well that's why I suggested the definition 'really big name in the jazz world', otherwise we'll be left with hardly anyone to discuss! (Except Kenny G perhaps!)

  21. #20

    User Info Menu

    There is an X-Factor. Something that makes the public embrace a performer, their songs, their concert presence. But in jazz in the modern era, there are few mega stars at least by comparison with popular music and country. But then again, jazz is no longer the popular music of its zeitgeist. We play old music, as my son constantly reminds me.

  22. #21

    User Info Menu

    maybe stars ad superstars are create by recording company's... it is more complicated...

  23. #22

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by targuit
    There is an X-Factor. Something that makes the public embrace a performer, their songs, their concert presence. But in jazz in the modern era, there are few mega stars at least by comparison with popular music and country. But then again, jazz is no longer the popular music of its zeitgeist. We play old music, as my son constantly reminds me.
    Do You hear your son opinion...? we play old music...:-)Jazz is no longer popular music beacuse it is too good and advanced for global public! be carefull....:-)

  24. #23

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by targuit
    There is an X-Factor. Something that makes the public embrace a performer, their songs, their concert presence. But in jazz in the modern era, there are few mega stars at least by comparison with popular music and country. But then again, jazz is no longer the popular music of its zeitgeist. We play old music, as my son constantly reminds me.
    for me X-factro is waht it is.
    I did not see any of it.

  25. #24

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by nick1994
    So I'm getting some good responses. I'm still wondering if the top of the top players are the best around. Also, some mentioned environment. let's say new York is the best place to go for jazz, it's so oversaturated with jazz musicians that only the best of the best make it there. Is it really just practice and gig all the time and live below the poverty line until you start getting better gigs? Is that how to get into that next level? Also, do you think that previous examples of success will ever be reached by next generations? Do you think guys like Mike Moreno and Julian Lage will be able to get the same success pat metheny has gotten?

    No way Jose. Just think how Metheny came out of the gate, so to speak. Bright Size Life, Watercolors, Pat Metheny Group.

    His artistic status was gigantic compared to those other players that you've mentioned, solid as they are.

  26. #25

    User Info Menu

    What about Joe Pass or Pat Martino?They are superstars for me... John Mclaughlin is a megastar...he played with Carlos Santana and Jeff Beck. Maybe this is a key to be a superstar or megastar- to play with fameous pop artists on stadions. And ofcourse I lost distortion efect...:-)
    Last edited by kris; 05-31-2015 at 11:49 AM.