The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Posts 26 to 50 of 54
  1. #26

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Hey Hep, if you haven't done it yet you should do a trio album with double bass and eclectic percussion, that tele with the bigsby and as much fender reverb as you can handle playing those sorts of tunes. I'd buy it!
    Like jazz with a surf sound? Good idea, that's the sound im going for these days. But what is 'eclectic percussion'? Eclectic is not exactly a word from my lexicon

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #27

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Hep To The Jive
    Like jazz with a surf sound? Good idea, that's the sound im going for these days. But what is 'eclectic percussion'? Eclectic is not exactly a word from my lexicon
    Rather than a drum kit a selection of cool and random hitty things

  4. #28

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Rather than a drum kit a selection of cool and random hitty things
    I played a percussion solo on a Bacardi bottle with a chopstick the other day, at a party, so I think I understand now.

  5. #29

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Hep To The Jive
    I played a percussion solo on a Bacardi bottle with a chopstick the other day, at a party, so I think I understand now.
    That's the sound.

  6. #30

    User Info Menu

    I think the OP was talking about two distinct things. One is playing rubato, pulling and pushing a beat, but still recognisably in (for example) 4/4. The other is free-form doodling around the chord changes. By free form I don't mean Ornette or Derek Bailey, just dwelling on a chord or phrase, stretching it beyond the 4/4 time signature, avoiding what some have called the tyranny of the bar line.

    I think this is OK to do in an introduction section, and I'm sure I've heard Joe Pass and others indulge in it.

  7. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Rob MacKillop
    I think the OP was talking about two distinct things. One is playing rubato, pulling and pushing a beat, but still recognisably in (for example) 4/4. The other is free-form doodling around the chord changes. By free form I don't mean Ornette or Derek Bailey, just dwelling on a chord or phrase, stretching it beyond the 4/4 time signature, avoiding what some have called the tyranny of the bar line.

    I think this is OK to do in an introduction section, and I'm sure I've heard Joe Pass and others indulge in it.
    Yeap, that's what I'm talking about. People still refer to it as rubato I think but it isn't. Perhaps it is not a thing in the classical theory, it's just a folksy thing to do.
    Last edited by Tal_175; 10-31-2019 at 07:41 AM.

  8. #32

    User Info Menu

    It has a long history in classical music, especially in the 19th century as composers tried to break away from the rigidity and predictability of four to a bar in two and four-bar phrases. Schubert started doing a five-beat phrase followed by a three-beat phrase, but his feet were too embedded in the early classical culture. It took some rebels like Chopin and Liszt to pull things apart further, and then along came Wagner with his three-hour long phrase before resolution. The main form would be referred to as a fantasia, with many using bits of fantasia inside a more closed form, which is closer to what Tal_175 is referring to.

    Doing so inside a jazz culture of four to a bar is as revolutionary and (to some) as disturbing as it was in the 1840s.

  9. #33
    Oh I'm using fantasia in closed forms alright. Just trying to retrofit theoretical justification instead of fixing it as an easy solution.

    PS. Kidding.

  10. #34

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Tal_175
    Compared to piano players, I think it easier for guitar players to add/drop beats when playing chord melody. When alternating chord punches and solo lines, there is less room for melodic ideas to develop which leads to playing over barlines. That's fine when done because that's how one hears the line. But when it happens due to "congestion", it demands more concentration to not add/drop beats.
    Yes, fucchtupato is our hallmark.

    John

  11. #35

    User Info Menu

    I thought this was interesting enough to repost. The idea of playing rubato over accompaniment was apparently quite early in early 20th century classical music performance practice.


  12. #36
    I always find these conversations fascinating. Here's something very interesting to me personally:


    The way this is transcribed is pretty close to how I heard this rhythmically when I first listened to this record years ago . Lots of extra beats and mixed meter etc. Now, listening to it years later, I think that Joe conceived of most of this as being in pretty straight 4/4, although somewhat rubato in the intro. Most of the weird things that are coincidentally in 6/4 etc are more like quarter note and eighth note triplets from a players perspective.

    Almost as kind of a separate conversation, there's the aspect of "If the listener can't hear it, does it really matter?". I think Joe left most of us behind to a certain extent when he played some of this without a backing ensemble.

    In contrast, listen to his final live solo performances on video, last few months of his life. He has become a master of contextualizing everything and bringing the listener along at that point. Much easier to hearIt's really a beautiful evolution of his style. I'll have to find a link.

  13. #37


    Okay. Beautiful love is pretty triplet-y. 9:32. Uses the same formula of "true rubato" + "rhythmic abstraction by way of triplets" as the other tune, but it's much easier to hear in my opinion. He gives slightly more context.

  14. #38

    User Info Menu

    "The way this is transcribed is pretty close to how I heard this rhythmically when I first listened to this record years ago . Lots of extra beats and mixed meter etc. Now, listening to it years later, I think that Joe conceived of most of this as being in pretty straight 4/4, although somewhat rubato in the intro"

    As someone just getting up to speed on the basics of music notation, I found this particular point interesting. There's a youtube video featuring a transcription of Bill Evans playing "Danny Boy", and the transcription's meter shifts constantly (4/4, 5/4, 7/4, 8/15, back to 4/4..etc. etc.).

    It seems like this might be an artifact of some kind of computer analysis of the soundfile, a "music-to-text" program of some kind. The score, as played back in a notation program using the sampled sounds, sounds reasonably close to what Evans played. But I can't imagine Evans sitting there thinking "okay, and now for a bar of 7/8...and now I think I'll take it into 5/8".

    If you want to transcribe and stick to the logical meter (usually 4/4 or 3/4, let's say), I guess there's an art to learning how to fit and massage all the notes played into the number of bars (32, let's say) in the form. I was working on a transcription of Bill Frisell playing "What the World Needs Now Is Love" as a solo guitar piece, and I found this aspect of it super-challenging. I'm guessing one part of doing it well is the skillful use of symbols for breaths, pauses, and articulations like fermatas.

  15. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by 44lombard
    "[COLOR=#000000]
    If you want to transcribe and stick to the logical meter (usually 4/4 or 3/4, let's say), I guess there's an art to learning how to fit and massage all the notes played into the number of bars (32, let's say) in the form.
    Definitely

  16. #40

    User Info Menu

    I think rubato is fine for an intro. It can help change the beat from the previous tunes---a good idea if you're slowing things down and need to lull the crowd into it---and, frankly, gives you another chorus without having to work much. ;o) Then it sounds better when you play the head in time.

    Like anything, it can be overdone. Playing in strict tempo relentlessly can be overdone too.

  17. #41
    joelf Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Hep To The Jive
    Rubato is a disease of chord melody. More often than not people are trying to hide their lack of groove chops, thinking they sound 'pretty'. It's all BS. Get to the point or don't waste my time. I usually quit listening a tune after a few seconds of rubato. Of course there are some good exceptions. But in general, nah, spare me.
    Man, I could not disagree more. Be careful, if you would, of painting with a broad brush like that.

    For me, rubato requires patience and trust. It's not the rubato player who's not in the groove---it's the nervous world which can't slow down to hang with it.

    Nervous world: take two Chris Anderson solo ballads and call me in the morning...

  18. #42

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by joelf
    Man, I could not disagree more. Be careful, if you would, of painting with a broad brush like that.

    For me, rubato requires patience and trust. It's not the rubato player who's not in the groove---it's the nervous world which can't slow down to hang with it.

    Nervous world: take two Chris Anderson solo ballads and call me in the morning...
    I agree with Hep if I take his point correctly. There's absolutely a good use for rubato on the right tune (ballads, intros). But "chord melody" arrangements often wind up being extremely compromise-centric music unless the player is very good. I don't need to hear the entire head of Out of Nowhere performed in rubato chord melody style for example.

  19. #43
    joelf Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by drbhrb
    I agree with Hep if I take his point correctly. There's absolutely a good use for rubato on the right tune (ballads, intros). But "chord melody" arrangements often wind up being extremely compromise-centric music unless the player is very good. I don't need to hear the entire head of Out of Nowhere performed in rubato chord melody style for example.
    Sorry, but you seem to have missed my point. Who said anything about arrangements? Not me.

    We're talking about suspending time, not set chord changes. That IS boring---I know b/c the 'money' tunes I play I can play in my sleep, and yawn, think I'll turn in.

    Again I point you toward Chris Anderson...

  20. #44

    User Info Menu

    Great conversation and one that is necessary for a player if he/she wants to develop their OWN STYLE. There are three concepts at play here: strict time, rubato, and impressionism. I think, initially, a serious musician must first understand time and its importance. This is the most basic requirement to developing musically since it requires mastery of the instrument and an understanding of its musical structure. As Hep stated, rubato can be used by an inferior player to mask his/her own lack of technique (if they can't play in time) and this is common in beginning players and should be avoided. After mastering technique, rubato is necessary to bring the music alive since it is a mimicking of the human voice with all of its necessary breathing and emphasis required for an interesting performance. So a good musician must play in time and use rubato effectively.
    Now, we enter another world: impressionism. The best guitar artists I've heard had the ability to play impressionistically. The best examples I have of this style are players like Yamandu Costa, Roland Dyens, and, Bireli Lagrene. Although they do not strictly ignore time, their ability to bend and twist it into a magical compote is unique and highly musical but beyond the ken of even most very advanced players. I don't believe this can be taught; it is an innate and special gift to a select few.
    So, must a solo performance be played in strict time: no. Should rubato be used: yes. Is impressionism accessible to all: no.
    Here's Yamandu Costa with Brazilian vocalist Hebe Camargo. Please excuse the language differences and go to 5:10 for a remarkable performance where rubato and impressionism are used muscially and exceptionally. Every time I hear this piece, I am always moved. Good Playing . . .Marinero


    Last edited by Marinero; 11-17-2019 at 11:48 AM. Reason: addition

  21. #45

    User Info Menu

    There goes Marinero again, mr growth mindset

    Ah your probably right, but it’s fun to try and work what’s going on and emulate it however imperfectly?

    If I didn’t find that fun I may as well quit this life of crime and do something more sensible, like studying active volcanoes.

  22. #46

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    There goes Marinero again, mr growth mindset

    Ah your probably right, but it’s fun to try and work what’s going on and emulate it however imperfectly?

    If I didn’t find that fun I may as well quit this life of crime and do something more sensible, like studying active volcanoes.

    Hi, C,
    Not that there's anything wrong with volcanoes . . . may I suggest Popocatepetl on the plains of Puebla, Mexico . . . it's ripe for eruption, resplendent with creative possibilities and appropriate for those with a volcanological disposition! Good playing . . . Marinero

  23. #47
    Some people only want to create within whatever boundaries they've set for themselves.
    Some people want to try and create with no boundaries.
    Some people want to do both, depending on the situation/piece of music.

    Count me as a member of group #3.

  24. #48
    Boundaries are good. Without boundaries no music could be classified as baroque or Japanese folk or reggae. And all music or art would be equally good or bad no matter how it's created. Implicit human aesthetic appreciation constraints are one set of boundaries that make art possible. Commonly observed and adhered to constraints of sub styles of an art form that define that style and inspire artists in that period are another.
    Without boundaries there wouldn't be art. Parameters of boundaries can change however.

  25. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by Tal_175
    Boundaries are good. Without boundaries no music could be classified as baroque or Japanese folk or reggae. And all music or art would be equally good or bad no matter how it's created. Implicit human aesthetic appreciation constraints are one set of boundaries that make art possible. Commonly observed and adhered to constraints of sub styles of an art form that define that style and inspire artists in that period are another.
    Without boundaries there wouldn't be art. Parameters of boundaries can change however.
    Fair enough, your point is valid.
    But without the willingness to push the boundaries, or step outside of them, is progress possible?

  26. #50

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Keller
    Fair enough, your point is valid.
    But without the willingness to push the boundaries, or step outside of them, is progress possible?
    Progress within the boundaries is what Jim Hall did, among many others. It's what great tennis players do, as well. Pushing and going outside the boundaries is harder to "sell", and, of course, going outside the lines in many cases is a foul or fault.

    I think the boundaries exist to allow the observer to have an idea of the beginning, middle and end. Even free jazz depends on some kind of kindred concept to succeed with an audience. Imagine, for instance, watching two people playing tennis without net or lines.