Likes Likes:  0
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Posts 1 to 46 of 46
  1. #1

    User Info Menu

    I know this is probably a question you guys get all the time, but I think with each person his/her case may be different. I am very torn on which to study, and would appreciate some of your input. I am pretty much just starting out, I never learned music as a child, but I picked up and began playing rock guitar at 16, now 20 years old, I have been studying theory and music basics for the past year (since i was 19) and am torn between which to study.

    I started out when I took a Class for guitar music theory in which a classical instructor taught, and for some reason, he was looking for students who were interested in becoming music majors, and getting private lessons. During the summer of last year he called me and for some reason chose me, wanting me to get into it. So I agreed and spent a semester studying basic classical, although struggling with my right hand technique and playing alone in front of others. I slowly got better at it but I seemed to have an issue with playing for this specific instructor, as he was very strict and impatient.

    I didnt mind the fact he was strict, I felt it was good for me, but I wasnt getting the hang of the right hand technique, and repitoire that I could play easily at home alone, would end up coming out off tempo and alot of times, playing for him, I would completely mess up the piece, he would get extremely irritated with me. I eventually just told him it wasnt for me, and am now taking up Jazz basics with an incredible Jazz guitar instructor. But sometimes I wonder if I should have stuck with classical longer, but then other times I feel that Jazz is a more personally expressive music style.

    Now that you know a little more about me, I can probably pose my questions now.

    I think I like the structure of classical, the philisophical and spiritual aspects of classical as well. I also feel I like the virtuosity that classical players achieve. But at the same time I like Jazz and lots of other more contemporary styles of music.

    What I want to know is A) Is there a spiritual and philisophical approach to Jazz like there is with classical guitar. Many Classical musicians seem to have an almost spiritual bond with their music, the music flows through them, and I really admire that. B) in your educated oppinion, for someone who has a history of being anxious which style of music would be better for me?

    any input you guys can give me would be really appreciated and sorry for the long backstory, I just have such a huge love for all aspects of music, I feel that i have begun a spiritual awakening towards music of my own, my eyes are opening and I am seeing and listening to things I would have never done before.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    Hey Weswood, What part of So. Cal do you live?

    I've struggle with the same question you're asking. Classical or Jazz... I've spent time with both. I'm going to continue to pursue both.

    Classical... an beautiful piece played well can really touch a listener in a very emotional way. Imagine a wedding and a well played classical piece and many a tear is shed.

    On the other hand, I don't care for the attention to detail that often is part of classical guitar. Spending 6 months perfecting one difficult piece is just not for me.

    On the other hand, I sure like writing my own pieces for classical guitar.

    Jazz... in addition to mastering technique you need to have a bunch of theory/fingerboard/chord/arrpegio/scale knowledge; way beyond what is necessary to play classical guitar. I like that challenge. And there is a constant creative journey when playing jazz (i.e. you don't stick strickly to the notes as written as in classical). Also, jazz chops translate easily to pop and rock... which means more opportunities to play in bands and in front of audiences.

  4. #3

    User Info Menu

    There are a few answers here:
    fep is right about jazz knowledge being more transferrable into other styles. I've known classical players whose playing was so stiff and wooden you wouldn't want them playing other styles.

    When you say that Classical players have an almost spriritual bond with the music, in my experience, this is true of any good musician. While the Jazz tradition may not be as old, it is definitely more relevant. Don't forget that there is no long running history of "classical" guitar. Until 100 years ago it was a peasant instrument used for playing "common" music.

    I think the anxiety is a separate issue. There have been so many musicians with drug and alcohol addictions and mental problems that anxiety is not genre-related.

  5. #4

    User Info Menu

    ...but without that horrible teacher!

    Why not?
    If only.....

  6. #5
    I am not sure what you meant by spiritual and philosophical aspects and approaches towards classical guitar but from what I can infer, if one looks deep into the particular genre of music that he is playing, any music genre does possess and need this spiritual and philosophical approach.

    But as you have described, you have already said that you like Jazz and contemporary style of music. The most important thing now is to ask you what you truly enjoy. To be able to work hard towards what you really enjoy is the greatest thing. To overcome your anxiety, I think you really need a lot of practice. If you have done enough practice and feel confident, then will you ever feel anxious? If you believe that you right hand is very weak, you can try to go through classical right hand practices such as those found in Pumping Nylon. I did the Mauro Giuliani Right Hand studies and I am amazed at how much it has helped me. So I am suggesting you to go through the book.

  7. #6

    User Info Menu

    Thanks guys, your responses were very helpful, I can see this is a very friendly enviroment and I am glad I chose to come here.

    First of all, I would like to say that alot of the anxiety I endured was probably due to the fact that with very little to no classical skill, I was taught a simple song, and put up in front of class, in a music majors program, every month, to play that song with only a short times practice of classical technique and etiquette. I had been playing with a pick for 4 years, and at the time, was not even sure what my major was going to me. Like I said, this teacher wanted me to get free lessons from him, so he had me enroll it what I later found out was a Music Majors program. When I am up there with my electric guitar though, I dont feel quite so nervous, because there isnt as much pressure to play every note exactly as it was composed, and I am already really used to the steel string and picking style of playing guitar.


    As far as classical guitar's short history, you are right. It's only become a true classical instrument and respected in the classical community in the last 100 years, thanks to Segovia. It does pretty much seem like that classical guitar has its own seperate culture from the rest of the classical world, but at the same time, I think alot of the cultural and spiritual ideals stemmed from the music written on more traditional classical instruments.

    I dont think I ever really wanted to get to the point where I was playing complex pieces at a stuffy classical orchestra. I am in a amateur classical guitar ensemble, and I have to say, I don't think it could get much more fun than this. We have fun even when we mess up, the fact that were not completely anal about our pieces and technique makes it fun and relaxed, though we do sound great and get the job done.

    Anyways, I see alot of you have the same issue with choosing as me, I love both like I said, I think both are equally challenging in their own aspects. Jazz, improvisation and scale knowledge, where as classical is hugely demanding on sight reading (Alot of really great classical guitarists don't memorize their pieces, as they are so long and complex, so they must sight read through the whole song, which also takes a huge amount of skill)

    I will probably stick with Jazz, just because I deeply feel that it is something I would be better at. I will eventually continue to take classical lessons so that I may play for my own enjoyment. I guess my issue with taking classical on the side is, if I do something, I want to do it correct, and well. I will take the classical ideals that I have learned, and that have helped me grow and to appreciate more styles of music, and apply that to ALL of my playing. Its Just sometimes It is hard to decide which mindset and road to take. Whether I want to be a great Jazz guitarist, or a great classical player.

  8. #7

    User Info Menu

    Weswood- As someone who rode out a classical guitar program but did everything to learn jazz, I've come to appreciate both sides. Classical, like you seem to have noticed, is very helpful for sight reading, although I've never known of a performance where the music wasn't memorized, at least for solos. My teacher in college made us memorize everything that was a solo performance, which actually helps improve memory. A 32-bar song form is a lot easier to tackle after an intricate, 13 page solo piece. Classical is also good for cleaning up technique in both hands. If you end up doing more jazz, the right hand might not come into play, but good classical left hand technique makes everything easier.

    Jazz study helps with creativity and also translates into more current forms of music also. The big thing to watch out for in that is that you don't start trying to fit super-locrian scales and altered dominant chords into AC/DC songs. No matter how hard you try (and I've been there), it won't work. You won't sound sophisticated and intelligent, you'll sound arrogant, condescending, and totally moronic (again, been there, got burned, learned the lesson).

    As far as performance anxiety, don't worry too much about it. I would get really bad performance anxiety with solo classical stuff as well. It's terrifying. Everything else you have people up there with youand most likely music to read from, and you can feed off their energy, even if it is a classical duet. With solos, there's nothing. Not even a music stand to hide behind. The first two songs on my junior recital sounded like I was sitting in a paint mixer. It was rough.

    One thing to keep in mind is that we all tend to think the grass is greener on the other side. One of the former teachers where I work was fascinated with the classical stuff that I could do and could care less about blowing over real book tunes, and I was totally fascinated by the fact you could open a real book to any song, and he'd play it on sight like he knew it his whole life.

    From your last post it looks like you're leaning towards jazz, but I would recommend studying a little classical to keep the reading chops up. Also, don't worry too much about the right hand. It took me about a year to be able to do anything with it, and another year to get comfortable with it. Lastly, about the whole "spiritual bond" thing, watch Stevie Ray Vaughan or Carlos Santana play or talk about their playing. There's not much more of a bond that that.

  9. #8

    User Info Menu

    Just dedicate some of your practice time to reading lead sheets and improvising on changes. But I say classical.

  10. #9

    User Info Menu

    Stay away from jazz. You will go nuts. (;

  11. #10

    User Info Menu

    Actually, I don't know the answer of which is best to study first and who gets the better education, etc. But it's an interesting question that I've often thought about from the perspective of someone non-classically trained.

    I often regret especially the lack of fingerpicking discipline and training. Also, there is the ability to just "pop off" from memory some nice, beautiful piece of Mozart or whatever that EVERYONE recognizes and appreciates and then people would not say "Well, we don't understand that jazz stuff over here" (small-town part of Italy).

  12. #11
    CC323 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by franco6719 View Post
    Actually, I don't know the answer of which is best to study first and who gets the better education, etc. But it's an interesting question that I've often thought about from the perspective of someone non-classically trained.

    I often regret especially the lack of fingerpicking discipline and training. Also, there is the ability to just "pop off" from memory some nice, beautiful piece of Mozart or whatever that EVERYONE recognizes and appreciates and then people would not say "Well, we don't understand that jazz stuff over here" (small-town part of Italy).
    Ah Franco... you don't understand American culture my friend (no offense). Unless you bring out your 'bubblegum pop' guns and play Britney Spears and the Jonas Brothers, people will have very little clue of what you are doing... The first day in my piano proficiency exam prep. class this year, the teacher played a bunch of little pieces that would be suitable for midterm recitals, one of which was Bach's Minuet in G major no.1. This is a class of 30 music majors mind you... but anyway, when the teacher asked if it was familiar, one person said "Isn't that a ringtone?".

    I sincerely hope Italy isn't like that.

    Take care,
    Chris

  13. #12
    CC323 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by weswood88 View Post
    I know this is probably a question you guys get all the time, but I think with each person his/her case may be different. I am very torn on which to study, and would appreciate some of your input. I am pretty much just starting out, I never learned music as a child, but I picked up and began playing rock guitar at 16, now 20 years old, I have been studying theory and music basics for the past year (since i was 19) and am torn between which to study.

    I started out when I took a Class for guitar music theory in which a classical instructor taught, and for some reason, he was looking for students who were interested in becoming music majors, and getting private lessons. During the summer of last year he called me and for some reason chose me, wanting me to get into it. So I agreed and spent a semester studying basic classical, although struggling with my right hand technique and playing alone in front of others. I slowly got better at it but I seemed to have an issue with playing for this specific instructor, as he was very strict and impatient.

    I didnt mind the fact he was strict, I felt it was good for me, but I wasnt getting the hang of the right hand technique, and repitoire that I could play easily at home alone, would end up coming out off tempo and alot of times, playing for him, I would completely mess up the piece, he would get extremely irritated with me. I eventually just told him it wasnt for me, and am now taking up Jazz basics with an incredible Jazz guitar instructor. But sometimes I wonder if I should have stuck with classical longer, but then other times I feel that Jazz is a more personally expressive music style.

    Now that you know a little more about me, I can probably pose my questions now.

    I think I like the structure of classical, the philisophical and spiritual aspects of classical as well. I also feel I like the virtuosity that classical players achieve. But at the same time I like Jazz and lots of other more contemporary styles of music.

    What I want to know is A) Is there a spiritual and philisophical approach to Jazz like there is with classical guitar. Many Classical musicians seem to have an almost spiritual bond with their music, the music flows through them, and I really admire that. B) in your educated oppinion, for someone who has a history of being anxious which style of music would be better for me?

    any input you guys can give me would be really appreciated and sorry for the long backstory, I just have such a huge love for all aspects of music, I feel that i have begun a spiritual awakening towards music of my own, my eyes are opening and I am seeing and listening to things I would have never done before.
    I'm currently doing both. I'd say officially major in jazz, and study as much classical as you can tolerate in your 'free time'. The technical benefits provided by classical are wonderful, and the right hand techniques are very liberating for chord melodies and hybrid picking-comping. I love working on pieces that I like (A lot of Bach, some Renaissance lute stuff, Villa Lobos Etudes, Barrios' work...), but I hate having to shed the same Carcassi etude for 5 weeks that isn't that interesting in the first place. I'm told that I need to build the basics, but I figure that working out of Iznaola's Kitharologus and doing guiliani right hand stuff covers that, and digging right into the hard stuff will give me the most benefit.

    I think that classical also provides enough of the classicist technical perspective as well. I think that as guitarists, we either do the rusty cooley thing and pick 92 notes per second on one string and don't listen to what our ears tell us, or are content with technical limitation on what ideas our ears give us. For me, the ideal is to have enough technique to execute any idea I hear, and to hear any ideal I want to execute. I find Steve Morse cross string exercises to be great for development of right hand electric technique btw...

    Anyway, I hope you find SOME insight in that clustered, ADD-filled message

    Take care,
    Chris

  14. #13

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by franco6719 View Post
    Stay away from jazz. You will go nuts. (;
    why do you say that?

  15. #14

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by CC323 View Post
    Ah Franco... you don't understand American culture my friend (no offense). Unless you bring out your 'bubblegum pop' guns and play Britney Spears and the Jonas Brothers, people will have very little clue of what you are doing... The first day in my piano proficiency exam prep. class this year, the teacher played a bunch of little pieces that would be suitable for midterm recitals, one of which was Bach's Minuet in G major no.1. This is a class of 30 music majors mind you... but anyway, when the teacher asked if it was familiar, one person said "Isn't that a ringtone?".

    I sincerely hope Italy isn't like that.

    Take care,
    Chris
    Actually, it's worse that that over here these days. I once asked one of my cousins if they knew anything about jazz and they said "You mean Guns n' Roses." Western civilization is dying, I tell you. DYING!!|

  16. #15

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by fast1 View Post
    why do you say that?
    Just a joke.

  17. #16

    User Info Menu

    shrug.
    If I asked a lot of great musicians about impresionism I'd probably get some silly responses too. Don't think it's such a big deal, musicians are like dentists, a dentist thinks teeth are the most important part of the body, musicians think music is the most important part of life.
    Jazz is a fragment of music, which is a fragment of culture.

    People often put down the Jonas Brothers for some reason, but their music is connecting to a great number of people. Whether it's complicated doesn't matter.

  18. #17

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Dalton View Post
    shrug.
    If I asked a lot of great musicians about impresionism I'd probably get some silly responses too. Don't think it's such a big deal, musicians are like dentists, a dentist thinks teeth are the most important part of the body, musicians think music is the most important part of life.
    Jazz is a fragment of music, which is a fragment of culture.

    People often put down the Jonas Brothers for some reason, but their music is connecting to a great number of people. Whether it's complicated doesn't matter.
    Yes, but this forum is not about impressionism and painting. It's the JAZZ GUITAR forum. Let the impressionists complain on their own forum.

  19. #18

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Dalton View Post
    shrug.
    People often put down the Jonas Brothers for some reason, but their music is connecting to a great number of people. Whether it's complicated doesn't matter.

    I have never complained about the Jonas Bros. Who are they anyway?

  20. #19
    CC323 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Dalton View Post
    shrug.
    If I asked a lot of great musicians about impresionism I'd probably get some silly responses too. Don't think it's such a big deal, musicians are like dentists, a dentist thinks teeth are the most important part of the body, musicians think music is the most important part of life.
    Jazz is a fragment of music, which is a fragment of culture.

    People often put down the Jonas Brothers for some reason, but their music is connecting to a great number of people. Whether it's complicated doesn't matter.
    Does connecting to the lowest common denominator count as artistic satisfaction? If it does, nothing wrong with it then.

  21. #20

    User Info Menu

    *shrug* I would say it's fair to argue the same about jazz. Much fewer people find it pleasant sounding, one of the main atributes of good music. It's only harder not better, if we argue about merrit of music a jazz musician will have a different opinion than a rock musician. Better or worse to me is a pointless stance to take.

  22. #21
    CC323 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Dalton View Post
    Much[sic] fewer people find it pleasant sounding, one of the main atributes[sic] of good music. It's only harder not better, if we argue about merrit[sic] of music a jazz musician will have a different opinion than a rock musician.
    Man, where'd you get that definition of good music? Bach almost disappeared out of the public eye for several decades, and may never have been rediscovered had it not been for Frederic Chopin finding him. Does that mean that Bach wasn't good music because it didn't conform to 'classical' era standards and people weren't as interested in it?

    Of course people have different standards. However, I don't think that many rock musicians would express their feelings toward the Jonas Brothers and other commercial pop groups as being positive. Just as Jazz musicians will generally look at Kenny G playing over Louis Armstrong tunes as sacrilege... Among serious musicians, the general concensus is that commercial music, regardless of aesthetic or genre, isn't the creme of the crop, to put it lightly.

    I, however, am not in anyway trying to say that you're wrong for liking the Jonas Brothers and other commercial groups in the same vein. To each his own. I just don't really understand why you're adamantly defending them as equally musical as the jazz greats on The Jazz Guitar Forum.

    Take care,
    Chris

  23. #22

    User Info Menu

    No one ever told Franco who the Jonas Brothers are.

    Franco, the Jonas Brothers are a trio of brothers over here in the States that are your basic, run-of-the-mill, bubblegum pop group. One of them has a guitar when he's on stage and the other two don't. They're sort of the male counterpart to Hannah Montana, if you know who that is. They're sort of manufactured by the Disney Channel and sell lots of records and concert tickets to 10-14 year-olds, and are very popular to hate amongst us "real" musicians.

  24. #23
    Stringbean Guest
    There are 15 posts, and 8 topics here mentioning the Jonas. I gotta hand it to them (disney?) for breakin way over here at the jazz club. Not too shabby.
    Last edited by Stringbean; 05-27-2009 at 01:37 PM.

  25. #24

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by bkdavidson View Post
    No one ever told Franco who the Jonas Brothers are.

    Franco, the Jonas Brothers are a trio of brothers over here in the States that are your basic, run-of-the-mill, bubblegum pop group. One of them has a guitar when he's on stage and the other two don't. They're sort of the male counterpart to Hannah Montana, if you know who that is. They're sort of manufactured by the Disney Channel and sell lots of records and concert tickets to 10-14 year-olds, and are very popular to hate amongst us "real" musicians.
    And they performed with Stevie Wonder on a couple of songs at the grammies

  26. #25

    User Info Menu

    Isn't it awesome that someone's question about whether to take a jazz or classical path in his studies has turned into us telling our Italian friend who the Jonas Brothers are?

  27. #26

    User Info Menu

    Not just Italians! I had no idea who the Jonas Brothers were/are.(Probably shouldn't use present tense when referring to mass-market pop idols. They may already be "soooo 10 minutes ago!!")

    In fairness to the mass-product music business, it does employ a lot of musicians who can then afford to indulge in jazz, classical, etc. Celine Dion has probably fed more violinists than many Symphony Orchestras. And back in the lean jazz period of the early 60s guys like Johnny Smith, Barney Kessel and Howard Roberts did pretty well out of the Top40, even though their names never appeared there.

    Some people will use their pop fame fame to launch more substantial careers. One guy from Australian Idol used his boost to go to Memphis and record an album of all his favourite soul from the 60s using original musicians from those tracks. As a lover of 60s Motown, Atlantic and Stax, I find that a wonderful way to spend your money.

  28. #27

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by CC323 View Post
    I, however, am not in anyway trying to say that you're wrong for liking the Jonas Brothers and other commercial groups in the same vein. To each his own. I just don't really understand why you're adamantly defending them as equally musical as the jazz greats on The Jazz Guitar Forum.

    Take care,
    Chris
    I wouldn't say I listen to them, but the notion that one genre of music is better isn't a very artistic one. I would say on a jazz forum, with a genre that prides itself (more than any) on being artistic, to dismiss art that doesn't fit your style is pretty silly. No song simpler than knocking on heavens door by Bob Dylan, made as a movie soundtrack and much much less complex than any Jonas' Brothers tune. Noone really complains about it's merrit.

  29. #28

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by bkdavidson View Post
    No one ever told Franco who the Jonas Brothers are.

    Franco, the Jonas Brothers are a trio of brothers over here in the States that are your basic, run-of-the-mill, bubblegum pop group. One of them has a guitar when he's on stage and the other two don't. They're sort of the male counterpart to Hannah Montana, if you know who that is. They're sort of manufactured by the Disney Channel and sell lots of records and concert tickets to 10-14 year-olds, and are very popular to hate amongst us "real" musicians.

    I've been off the net for a few days, due to a computer virus infection. I was amused by the discussion here. Anyway, I was born in the US and only reside in Italy for the last ten years. I just don't keep careful track of the commerical/pop music scene. I looked up Jonas Brothers on Wikipedia, though, and found I don't mind their music, so much as their fundamentalist sort of political and theological views.

    On the substantive topic, we seem to get into the usual philosophical puzzles about subjectivity vs. standards, and so on. I do agree that one genre (i.e. jazz) cannot and should not be classified as "better" just because it is more complex. Jazz is not better than rock or classical or country and classical is not better than progressive fusion or whatever.

    On the other hand, there must be some standards. The fact that something is commericially successful, in any case, does not necessarily say anything about it's artistic or moral value. Take, for example, all the recent discussions about hip-hip. It seems that many of the first-generation hip-hop artists and people who know a lot about hip-hop music insist that their music has been hijacked by corporate executives who only allow the publication of the worst stuff with the most angry and hateful lyrics because "controversy sells". It seems that there IS something about modern capitalism that allows for the artifical generation of demand (via subtle brainwashing) of whatever music that the people in power find to be useful and most lucrative. Now, this is ANTI-art, I have to say. But the situation is what it is.

  30. #29

    User Info Menu

    People said Bebop was the death of jazz, rap was the death of music, rock was satans music, etc etc.
    To me it seems as long as the last generation keeps saying the new music is dreadfull and everything is going down the shitter, it's still going in the right direction, if the last generation is satisfied that's when I'd worry.

  31. #30

    User Info Menu

    On the other hand, an 18-year-old friend of mind says that everything has gone down the toilet in all of the arts and it is the fault of James Joyce (almost 100 years ago). (;

  32. #31

    User Info Menu

    let the "Jonas Brothers" be the "Jonas Brothers", there are tons of stuff like that. ( although I don't know them all...)
    Why nobody mentions Tarrega or Sor or Leo Brouwer?
    Jazz is an experience, but a part of "music"
    and truly a mysterious one regarding "musical language"
    And if you don't listen to Johann Sebastian Bach's music, you miss a lot.
    Study "classical guitar" and if you don't like it, leave it aside.
    On the other hand, play James Joyce's "Ulysses" on the guitar.
    Regarding "going down the toilet" - things like that happened all over
    the thousands of years within "our history of mankind"

    sorry, austrian two cents

  33. #32
    CC323 Guest
    You're right, and the current 'academization' of guitar and its being more accepted by the classical community could be viewed as 'going down the tube' by more traditionalist classical musicians, and would have been complete blasphemy to the mid-to-late 19th century classical community.

    And actually, there was a brief discussion on Tarrega's non-use of nails somewhere on this forum, but that got kind of brushed over.

    Take care,
    Chris

  34. #33

    User Info Menu

    chris or something like that,
    I honestly appreciate your posting within many useless ones

  35. #34
    CC323 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by hubert54 View Post
    chris or something like that,
    I honestly appreciate your posting within many useless ones

    Sarcasm? If so, my apologies for offending you. If not, then thanks!

    I assume you play classical as well then? What pieces have you studied?

  36. #35

    User Info Menu

    oh, of course no sarcasm intended!
    I only try to focus an a "musical language"
    (btw. I'm "autodidact") and have tons of papers around here
    Bach, Sor, Aguado, Brouwer, Heitor Villa Lobos, Tarrega(would like to hear him playing "live")
    and after all notes for the bassoon
    struggling with mickey baker books etc. etc.
    My main "instrument" and the most important one is the voice.
    I think if you want to play "jazz", it makes no difference playing it on electric or "nylon",
    I think it's only the "inner voice" that matters.

    Appreciated your answer
    take care or stay tuned

    Always have been a fan of Julian Bream

  37. #36

    User Info Menu

    Personally I think Tarrega would put on a wonderful show... I hear he used to crazy stuff with lights and fog machines. Just kidding about that last bit. But seriously who wouldn't want to see those guys live. Its been said (by whom I don't know) that Tarrega had the most beautiful tone of any guitarist before or after and could bring audiences to tears with even his simple compositions like La Grima.

    Anyway, if anyone contests the value of classical technique to a jazz guitarist they should take a look at Johnny Smith. Particularly his take on My Funny Valentine on the Moonlight in Vermont album. Both genres are useful to the other. Jazz teaches musicians to break the mould and add their own flair to everything and create something from nothing. Classical music teaches musicians how to play one measure three thousand different ways and convey a different emotion each time even though the line itself doesnt change. I'd equate jazz to painting on a blank canvas -creation, impression, etc. - and classical music to photography - how many different emotions can we bring through that one persons face just by changing the light, or angle, etc.

  38. #37

    User Info Menu

    weswood88:

    sounds like a rough go with your classical teacher, but try not to let that influence your long-term choices. There is a marvellous world waiting halfway between classical and jazz to explore!

    Have a listen to Gene Bertoncini play Cavatina (Body and Soul) and the Chopin Prelude/How Insensitive medley (Jobim: Someone To Light Up My Life) or listen to Larry Coryell's take on Ravel's Pavane (Private Concert) or also on that CD, Spanish Suite by Rodrigo. Nice mixes of classical AND jazz...

    maybe jazz can give you the chops, but classical can offer some of the bases for doing your improvising? maybe it's not either/or but both??

  39. #38

    User Info Menu

    Why not Study Both you can get the right finger exercises and movements from classical and then have lots and lots of fun in Jazz, as classical is fun too

  40. #39

    User Info Menu

    Why are you asking us? What do you listen to? That's what you should play. You will only enjoy playing music you enjoy listening to. In time you will grow to appreciate other types of music, and in that case you can learn those, too.

  41. #40

    User Info Menu

    if I were you, i would choose where I'm comfortable with. for three years of taking
    music education in college and teaching beginners, i've realised that music is more than playing those instruments
    and learning new styles--it's all where your heart at.


    Both jazz and classical provide rich expression and detail to their listeners.
    Music washes away from the soul the dust of everyday life. ~Berthold Auerbach
    music lessons at home

  42. #41

    User Info Menu

    for me, i prefer to keep these tww worlds separate. even when its done by someone like gene bertoncini, i still wish i was hearing him play on his D'Angelico. it can work, but only for some things. def not bebop.

    you will learn alot from studying both intensely, but at different periods. trying to do both at once is very difficult i think. if not impossible. they are completely different instruments in many ways.

    when i was playing classical seriously, i was doing it 5 hours a day and still had a hard time playing some of those pieces. i think with jazz, listening is more important. i was listening to so much more music when i was into jazz. in classical, you can find some of the most beautiful music. but there is ALOT of stuff that is pretty ehh...

    i think that why i couldnt stick with just classy. you get to a point where you have learned most of the pieces you love, and then there is all the carcassi and giuliani stuff...a lot of it. (for me) of which maybe 1% is good.

    plus, to be honest, i found most of the classy players are kind of up tight and strange. not sure what it is. but i think they get so caught up with what their hands are doing, they arent even listening. some seem like they would be just as happy looking at their hands in a mirror and not even hearing what they were playing. still there is nothing like playing some bach by yourself late at night.

  43. #42

    User Info Menu

    "still there is nothing like playing some bach by yourself late at night."

    Best thing in the world......

    Sailor

  44. #43

    User Info Menu

    Probably 95% of all music for the past 500 years was throwaway dance music. For every Beethoven or Mozart there were hundreds of "pop" composers writing minuets and gavottes for the local weekend get-togethers. Mass appeal generally involves simplicity and affordability. Chevies and Fords sell better than Maseratis and BMWs, but aren't really of the same quality.

    Classical guitar will open your ears and hands to voice-leading and phrasing in useful ways, and may give you enough technique to be able to play solo gigs with tunes related to jazz. And it's never uncool to be able to play well.

  45. #44

    User Info Menu

    Well,

    Perhaps... ask yourself... really... honestly... ask yourself... what do you want to do with this music?

    Do you want to be a performer? Why are you studying? What is your objective?

    I ask this question to all of my students because I want to know what exactly we're doing here.

    After that, I will be glad to help you in any way I can.

  46. #45

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ronjazz View Post
    Probably 95% of all music for the past 500 years was throwaway dance music. For every Beethoven or Mozart there were hundreds of "pop" composers writing minuets and gavottes for the local weekend get-togethers. Mass appeal generally involves simplicity and affordability. Chevies and Fords sell better than Maseratis and BMWs, but aren't really of the same quality.
    True... but the difference is that the examples you used are all respected as great. Mozart was always considered THE composer (and still is), even by people who knew nothing about music; everyone "knows" BMWs are high quality vehicles, even people who don't know anything about cars. But people who know nothing about music these days admire artists like the Jonas Brothers and the Black Eyed Peas, whereas the truly great musicians are only respected by those in the know.

  47. #46

    User Info Menu

    You can do both-I did 2 yrs classical about 30 yrs ago never regreted it ,but once a Jazzer always a Jazzer. The guy I always admire is Andre Previn-great classical pianist and now conductor-but what a great jazz pianist made a lot of recordings with Barney Kessel and Joe Pass to mention a few,so go where your heart is-music is music after all!