Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Posts 51 to 100 of 170
  1. #51

    User Info Menu

    Jazz is more like life itself. Its has spontaneous conversations, among other life like traits.
    Jazz IS (one) representation of how energy manifests. The musicians use their instruments to let the energy flow through them, ideally. The musicians make sound in that moment, of the moment.

    Its beyond entertainment. It is an obvious focus on the exact moment in time that it is being played. It's one way to be totally present and in the moment. Just like life itself.

    My rambling is done.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #52
    fep makes a really good point- there is no getting to jazz without first taking a detour through the blues. You'll see that the styles of all the greats are firmly rooted in blues (to me, Miles was primarily a blues player- check out Straight No Chaser on Milestones if you have any doubts). Jazz players that can't play a convincing gut-bucket twelve bar blues (I've heard guys rip on Cherokee and get lost on a I-IV-V) ultimately don't swing and sound academic. Check out Sco on YouTube play a twelve bar on a telecaster. It's convincing.
    And on the topic of classical/jazz, I thought about a player that really epitomizes a blending of the styles: African guitarist Lionel Loueke. He studied classical guitar in Europe, went to Berklee, and plays with Herbie Hancock. His new album Karibu (definitely not straight ahead jazz) is a perfect example of how cool a nylon string played fingerstyle can sound in the jazz context. Great tone, right hand technique and, above all, feel.
    Cheers Jazzers!
    Shiffron
    Last edited by ShiffronLandren; 10-30-2008 at 12:08 PM.

  4. #53

    User Info Menu

    Bach is the best. He was the jazz musician of his time. Until I took a course when I was in college (sometime during the reign of Julius Caesar) I never realized how much improvisation he did.

  5. #54

    User Info Menu

    You are an educated man Hot Ford! It all begins with Bach, something for everyone and too much to listen to in a lifetime.

    I like Jamesjohns response a lot;very thoughtful. Maybe this interpretation applies to all music and art though. As a newer jazz player it DOES seem to be the most spontaneous, but I think members of any good string quartet playing Beethoven would say they experience the exact same thing even though there is a definitive score. It's still a temporal art, only in the moment!

    Sailor

  6. #55

    User Info Menu

    I'm with Sailor again as I heartily agree that Sor and Carcassi are the way to go if you're a jazzer wanting to learn classical guitar. And with nails too(!). Plus I would add Aguado into the mix. These guys had the genius to write real music that was also instructional for the chops. This definitely makes it more fun to learn. More hobby-ish then homework-ish you might say. Furthermore, you know this stuff was written by guitarists for the guitar, thereby making it by nature more "guitaristic" then some transcriptions can be. (Before you cry "j'acuse!" I did say SOME).

    I can read this kind of music pretty well, but single note jazz lines make me quiver in fright sometimes. (Does anyone remember Jerry Van Dyke trying to play the banjo when he was "awake"?). When I take the trouble to slowly learn the melody of the tune I want to play, it comes more naturally. Then I can start to feel it.

    I'm finding too that playing blues is a great bridge for me in learning to play over less familiar jazz progressions. And although it's poo-poo-ed on here sometimes, knowing the CAGED system inside and out is a tremendous help. It's helped me to understand how to "play inside" while I learn to vary it in order to "play outside".

    Herby

    P.S. What jamesjohn said was spot on. I'd only add that when I'm playing a classical piece well, I have that same feeling. It's still an exact moment in time, captured by (it so happens in this case) me! This makes it, arguably, an entire new and fresh moment of interpretation that is unique and that will perhaps ring throughout the ether. The idea that just because someone else has played the same piece before me with their own unique interpretation doesn't really matter. Listen to the different interpretations of any great classical music by any great players or orchestras and you'll hear tremendously different points of view as to how it should sound. Viva la difference.
    Last edited by Herby; 10-30-2008 at 03:12 PM.

  7. #56

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Sailor
    You are an educated man Hot Ford! It all begins with Bach, something for everyone and too much to listen to in a lifetime.

    I like Jamesjohns response a lot;very thoughtful. Maybe this interpretation applies to all music and art though. As a newer jazz player it DOES seem to be the most spontaneous, but I think members of any good string quartet playing Beethoven would say they experience the exact same thing even though there is a definitive score. It's still a temporal art, only in the moment!

    Sailor
    I would agree, one can find the same kind of transcendence in jazz as they can in playing a Beethoven quartet or Brahms symphony or whatever - it is just a matter of the music being powerful and the player being connected with it. Just because the notes are written down does not mean the music is not "in the moment" - I think that has to do more with the players like Sailor is saying. I do think, though, that when playing something like Beethoven that you are definitely playing his voice, whereas in jazz that in the moment expression is coming from the improviser. Though one could argue that it's not only the improviser but also all the his heroes and influences.

    Someone might say "then what about classical improv" and I would say that if we are talking about Bach or in modern day organ recitals, yes that is similar to jazz because they are within a form and "changes" so to speak. When I think of "classical improv" now, though, I think of sort of free-form 20th century type stuff, which is more far removed from what (in my opinion) constitutes jazz...but that would be a whole other thing to talk about!

    Quick side note, my favorite Bach improv story was that the first movement in the Musical Offering, the fugue, was made on the spot by Bach when he asked the king or whoever it was to give him a melody. He did so and then Bach improvised the entire fugue...if I could go back in time (this is a toss up, hearing Beethoven's 3rd for the very first time at the premiere, live Coltrane, and many others) I would go back to hear Bach's improvisations. In fact I would even go to church just to hear him play!

  8. #57

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Herby
    I'm with Sailor again as I heartily agree that Sor and Carcassi are the way to go if you're a jazzer wanting to learn classical guitar.
    and don't forget villa lobos!

  9. #58

    User Info Menu

    What about the story of Bach and Buxtehude(?), supposedly trying out for the same Kappelmeister position in some town. After hearing Bach improvising on the church organ at night the other dude left town!!

    Sailor

  10. #59

    User Info Menu

    Herby - single note jazz lines make me quiver too, but not sonatas by Ponce or Villa-Lobos. What's with this? We can read sophisticated music on one hand, and I can't even read the head to billies bounce on the other?????

    Hey Rio - Do you think the poor congregation that had to listen to hours of fresh Bach music each sunday appreciated it?? Poor saps, they probably wanted to listen to the "popular" songs of their day, their Brittany Spears! LOL

    Sailor

  11. #60

    User Info Menu

    And they were probably itching to get out of church to get to their Sunday afternoon soccer matches.

    You tell me Sailor. I've just spent the morning re-reading through Sor's #9 with no trouble, but just yesterday I actually was struggling through Billy's Bounce. The grass is always greener.... eh?

    Herby

  12. #61

    User Info Menu

    Ironic similarities. Sor is so "guitary". I too play Sor, Aguado, Carcassi, naturally. I am also working on billies bounce; it must have been an improv that was written down after the fact! I did figure out the incredibly simple head to Bags Groove and I feel like I accomplished something when in actuality it's probably like the simplest Aguado piece you could find. Jazz is HARD!

    Sailor

  13. #62
    Hey Mates
    I think the difficulty in reading jazz lines may be that jazz is first and foremost an aural art. The fake book is called "fake" for a reason. I think of the charts as friendly reminders, nothing more. The standard repetoire was passed down in essntially an aural tradition. Armstrong wasn't on the band stand reading charts. Heads have to be heard, transcribed, and memorized. This is why disciplined transcription is so important. How did Wes learn guitar? He didn't have a fakebook, or any other materials for that matter; he transcribed all of Charlie Christian's solos note for note until the records wore out- a feat so impressive that Lionel Hampton hired him for this alone. Classical music, on the other hand, is a written/notated tradition. The professional classical musician is expected to mentally translate the notation into sound. There are people who can hear everything just by reading-quite a fantastic skill. But this is quite different from hearing something and without hesitation playing it note for note.
    Ciao
    Shiffron

  14. #63

    User Info Menu

    You are so right shiffron - I am spoiled by having music as a written form first.
    It's hard for us classical guys, even with education, to transcribe a lot of these heads let alone the solos!! The 1/4s and 1/8s don't fit nicely between the bar lines and the solos don't stick to diatonic scales.

    A different art form to be sure with many similarities and differences; worthy of talking about and helping all to comprehend both styles.

    I wonder if this has been adequately written about in Ed. material?? Probably worth it seeing the response to this thread!!!

    Sailor

  15. #64

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Sailor
    Hey Rio - Do you think the poor congregation that had to listen to hours of fresh Bach music each sunday appreciated it?? Poor saps, they probably wanted to listen to the "popular" songs of their day, their Brittany Spears! LOL

    Sailor
    I bet not many of them appreciated it It still amazes me that his own sons did not appreciate him musically and regarded him as "old hat". The f***ing wrapped fish with his manuscripts after he died, how much more of a disregard can there be? Though it is ironic that the "new" style they were writing in (the whole Rococo thing) is not regarded as being much more than a transitional stage...

    And regarding single note lines, are you learning them fingerstyle? I always envied those that could do that...I can't get my feel to be right with fingers when playing single lines...though playing with fingers for anything else or specifically classical playing is not a problem. But then again when playing violin music on the guitar I can't use my fingers either (bad time feel compared to the pick) unless it's a very chordal thing like a fugue With that said, though, I think single line playing is definitely easier with a pick...just like with a bowed instrument it just seems to lend itself better to that technique.

  16. #65

    User Info Menu

    Rio- Not sure I understand the fingering issue. I definitely play single melodic lines with fingers/nails only; feels very good to me as long as the alternation between fingers is correct and string crossing principles are applied.

    There is certainly a different feel, and at one point I would probably play rock/pop leads with a pick but the kind of Jazz I'm playing, basically old standards/ballads is very condusive to fingertips/nails.

    I do enjoy your Bach anectdotes - can't get enough of that stuff!! How prolific was this guy and how much was lost!!!

    Sailor

  17. #66

    User Info Menu

    Sailor, Even for pop or rock you could play with fingers. Mark Knofler, for one, does.

  18. #67

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Sailor
    You are an educated man Hot Ford! It all begins with Bach, something for everyone and too much to listen to in a lifetime.
    Thanks Sailor but I must give credit to the teacher I had. This guy did something many music 101 teachers never even get close to. Along with all the Baroque, Classical etc etc, he threw in a healthy dose of jazz from Tatum all the way through modern jazz. He showed how the music was all tied together. Once he did that, a whole new world opened up. He was the best.

  19. #68

    User Info Menu

    Re: the RH issue:
    I sometimes find myself, when playing chord-melody standards, using my RH index nail just like i would use a pick — holding it against my thumb as if I were holding a pick and doing single note runs. I never do it in classical playing, but it's pretty easy in chord-melody. One drawback is in the instant it takes me to re-orient back into regular classical style playing position to get back on to the chord elements.

    Does anyone else do this? And how is it working out for you.

    Herby

  20. #69
    Mates,
    Let me chime in on the RH issue, being a former flat picker that made the switch. Sailor, you'd probably cringe at my techinique, but I alternate between the thumb and pointer/middle, depending on the passage, and use flesh. (I play a Martin). It is certainly more difficult to articulate single note lines on one string; hammer-ons and pull-offs are necessary. But what I've found is that I have a different approach and orientation to the instrument using fingers as opposed to pick - I'm not trying to duplicate what I'd play with a pick. Instead, I'll play across strings more, or switch positions, or employ rolls a la Chet Atkins to play arpeggios. Check out Kevin Eubanks on YouTube to see what fingers can do- he rips on both chords and lead. I can actually play faster between strings with my fingers. For some reason, I'm more in touch with the beat, more in the pocket. And maybe the constraints of using fingers forces us to dig deeper for melody and soul as opposed to aimless virtuosity.
    Cheers
    Shiffron

  21. #70

    User Info Menu

    Great posting Shiffron. I've never thought of it that way, and have been trying to "duplicate what I'd play with a pick." I'm going to give this a try.

    Thanks,
    Herby

  22. #71

    User Info Menu

    Shiffron - love your posts as always. I'm open minded enough not to cringe at anything. I don't completely understand it though.

    I still feel that a little nail goes a long way to producing a clear tone, more precise than flesh, and gives you volume when you need it.

    I would like to hear more about the way you play.

    Sailor

  23. #72

    User Info Menu

    Sorry if someone mentioned it already, I haven't read all the posts yet (but I will).

    The thing is that Adam Rogers, amazing jazz guitarist, plays with Chris Potter, Brian Blade, and all the great jazzers from nowadays, well, he did 4 or 5 years of classic guitar. Check out the album line by line by John Pattitucci. He plays some kinda classical stuff in there, his technique is amazing btw.

  24. #73

    User Info Menu

    I talked to Adam about this one night outside a club in Chicago. He told me that he studied with Frederick Hand for about 5 years, totally classical, then just dove into jazz and never really studied with anyone, just learned on his own.

    He also said that he still has all his students work on the Segovia scales and then applies them to improv. Kind of a cool way of thinking about the neck.

    Another great modern player that has a strong classical approach to jazz is Ben Monder. His solo compositions are on par with anything written by the great classical guitar composers. Really cool stuff, check him out if you can.

    MW

  25. #74

    User Info Menu

    I am studying jazz in highschool and it's awesome.
    You have to decide what you would like to do in the future and chose the best option. You would better don't hurry, take some time and make a good choice
    I love to play jazz and it was not hard for me to make this decision.

  26. #75

    User Info Menu

    I just feel compelled to say that I am really impressed with the caliber of ppl here. I have had some of these same thoughts/questions. I have played Classical guitar for about a dozen years combined and I agree that the experience can be limiting. I just picked up the electric guitar recently and feel like I have been completely re-introduced to music. Sure the technique from Classical is an advantage but that is about it in my opinion. I am relieved to see that no one here is making the statement that intelligence is directly related with the type of music they pursue. I turned my nose up from Classical for a time in consideration of the biased opinions towards other genres, even though I considered myself a classical player. I never thought that Jazz guitar would strike my interest but the more that I learn the more that I find that I love it all. Wow!

    Take care everyone

  27. #76

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by m78w
    ...remember that all of these great composers were amazing improvisers. ... Bach's "A Musical Offering" was wrtitten after he was asked to improvise several fugue's on a them given to him by the king(or some royalty). He was not happy with his performance so he went home that night and began writing ... And if we think blowing on a few tonal changes is hard, just imagine the level of musicianship it took Bach and others to improvise a fugue!!!
    MW
    Quote Originally Posted by Sailor
    ... Bach was a tremendous improviser, in those days off of a figured bass only sometimes. Maybe he was the predecessor to jazz???
    Sailor
    Quote Originally Posted by hot ford coupe
    Bach is the best. He was the jazz musician of his time. Until I took a course when I was in college (sometime during the reign of Julius Caesar) I never realized how much improvisation he did.
    Quote Originally Posted by rio
    ...my favorite Bach improv story was that the first movement in the Musical Offering, the fugue, was made on the spot by Bach when he asked the king or whoever it was to give him a melody. He did so and then Bach improvised the entire fugue...if I could go back in time ... I would go back to hear Bach's improvisations. In fact I would even go to church just to hear him play!
    I also used to think that there was some magical or mystical secret to Bach's reported ability to improv a fugue, but many years after learning jazz harmony I went back to re-investigate this question. The answer lies in "Figured Bass" practice, and beyond that in the Italian "unfigured bass" practice called "Partimiento". Figured bass means that a typical chart consists of a melody - or parts - and (importantly) a bass line with numbers written above the notes to indicate the chords. No numbers - play the root chord of the bass note. Numbers indicate various inversions, like 6/4 means the bass note is the 5th of the chord. It really isn't much different than jazz harmony in principle. Bach was big on figured bass and taught it to all of his students. It was the true basis of his improv practice.

    There is an advanced practice to figured bass, called "Partimiento Fugue", in which only the themes of the fugue are written down, leaving the other parts to improv. In the German style, figures are included for the chords, but you are expected to improvise the other parts. In the Italian style, NO FIGURES were used, so don't imagine that the German style was the hardest! The Italians memorized a complex set of rules instead based on what degree of the scale is to be harmonized and where the line is leading. This was all common practice in the 17th and 18th centuries, and German musicians raised on figured bass would also go study the Italian style, because the Italians had a private club where they could all improv on a bass line WITHOUT figures (i.e. chord symbols) and if you didn't know the rules you were up s**t creek trying to keep up.

    Bach knew all this stuff upside down and backwards... just like you guys study the crazy substitute changes in bebop.
    - jack

  28. #77

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Herby
    Re: the RH issue:
    I sometimes find myself, when playing chord-melody standards, using my RH index nail just like i would use a pick — holding it against my thumb as if I were holding a pick and doing single note runs. I never do it in classical playing, but it's pretty easy in chord-melody. One drawback is in the instant it takes me to re-orient back into regular classical style playing position to get back on to the chord elements.

    Does anyone else do this? And how is it working out for you.

    Herby
    index nail as pick:
    I thought I had replied to this, but I don't see the post, so here goes again...

    Yes, I use my index nail (re-inforced with polycarbonate sheet, a thin plexiglas-like substance which I prefer to acrylic) to do a flat-pick style tremolo such as a mandolin player might use. In this way I can get the sound that Mexican requinto players get with a thumb-pick, quite different in sound and mood from a classical tremolo. There is no reason that I could not have extended this into a complete flatpick technique, but the truth is that the tone is a little weaker than the conventional classical i-m-a scale technique, so I revert to a conventional classical scale technique for most purposes. I'm not Paco-de-Lucia fast (one of the ironies of a classical technique is that almost anybody is faster with a flatpick) but I do OK.

    On tone:

    This leads to another observation in the "classical vs jazz" apples vs oranges discussion, and that is that a trained classical player has an entirely different concept of tone than most jazz players (who are typically spoiled by the ease of playing, and getting tone from, an electric guitar, which is like power brakes, power steering and powered windows on a guitar). Take the revered Joe Pass acoustic solo recordings, for an up front example: yes the musical conceptions are brilliant, but - from any classical player's point of view - the tone sucks. Earl Klugh is pretty good in this respect, but Charlie Byrd, for another revered example, had a terrible scratchy tone. Some other pop-nylon heroes of mine (won't call them jazz cats) - Chet Atkins and Jose Feliciano - however wonderful musicians they may have been, always cause an initial shudder when listening to them because of the terrible scratchy tone. The Brazilian guitarists have better acoustic/nylon tone, but even so I can remember that same shudder when I first listened to Baden-Powell. Of course I got over it, because all of these players have taught me vitally important lessons about how to play music outside of a classical context.

    Still, it seems to me very ironic that the classical method of tone production is, as it were, hidden or disguised inside the peculiar limitations of a classical music education, and that for a player to break out requires a certain courage and independence that the classical music establishment does not encourage. (The guy mentioned above who studied with Fred Hand for five years had an advantage - Fred Hand is also into jazz and had already taken his own heat from the classical establishment for it. Although perhaps somewhat weaker nowadays, the classical establishment used to be able to almost smell the stylistic contamination of jazz (I can personally vouch for this from BOTH sides of the line), and so a wonderful player like Laurindo Almeida was never fully accepted as a classical player because of the hint of swing in his playing. Double for Charlie Byrd, who was not nearly the player Almeida was.)

    In my own interactions (often very educational and informative for me) with jazz guitarists, I have had the frequent experience of observing that these guys have no idea whatsoever of how to get the tone out of a nylon string guitar - whatever they are playing may be wonderful, but you can't hear them from two feet away - a goose is farting in the snow.

  29. #78

    User Info Menu

    lol. i agree.

    one question that i would pose is - do we believe that it is possible to use classical guitar right hand technique while improvising? i don't see why not. on the other hand, classical music enables you to "set up" your right hand for awkward passages because you know they're coming.

  30. #79

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by fumblefingers
    lol. i agree.

    one question that i would pose is - do we believe that it is possible to use classical guitar right hand technique while improvising? i don't see why not. on the other hand, classical music enables you to "set up" your right hand for awkward passages because you know they're coming.
    Not a question of "belief", which cuts no ice, but of "knowing"
    Quote Originally Posted by fumblefingers
    that it is possible to use classical guitar right hand technique while improvising...
    It's not an issue provided you spend the necessary time practicing the techniques that you will actually use in improvising. (Speaking about the right hand specifically here but in general this applies to everything.)
    Quote Originally Posted by Sailor
    Rio- Not sure I understand the fingering issue. I definitely play single melodic lines with fingers/nails only; feels very good to me ...
    Sailor
    What constitutes an "awkward passage" for the right hand? There are, after all, only six strings and five fingers, so how many combinations can there be? An "awkward passage", by me, is anything where you have to do right-hand cross-fingerings. My daily scale practice includes not only the several combinations of two fingers recommended by Segovia in his book of beginner scales, but also combos of three and four fingers: i-m-a, a-m-i, c-a-m-i, i-m-a-c, and more rarely c-a-m and m-a-c. I use these not only for scales but for seventh-chord extension arpeggio patterns: (which I combine freely with scales in improv)

    Code:
    ----------------4-5-4------------------------------
    --------------5-------5----------------------------
    ------------6-----------6--------------------------
    --------6-7---------------7-6----------------------
    ----4-7-----------------------7-4------------------
    --5--------------------------------5---------------
    This pretty much covers cross-fingerings. I actually avoid cross-fingerings in practice by the technic described in the next para, but they don't hang me up when I do use them.

    "i-m", obviously, is the strongest and fastest combo for straight scales, cross-fingerings not being an obstacle there. The trick with more complex passages is to learn to intelligently interpolate the "a" and "c" fingers (as well as the thumb) to facilitate string crossings. There is a simple logic to this, hard to describe, and as difficult to train as anything else, but once you have it going it works, and I don't think about it while I'm playing any more. The "a" and "c" fingers advance toward the higher pitched strings, the "i" finger and thumb reach toward the lower pitched strings, and then the "i-m" combo picks up again until the next "awkwardness". I don't think that this is in principle much more difficult than training crosspicking and sweep picking with a flatpick.

    For instance, in an ascending scale passage, I may reach ahead to each new (higher) string with the "a" finger, otherwise proceeding with "i-m". Descending, I will play the last note on a string with "a", then reach down to the next string with either "i" or "m". When I reach up across several strings I lead with "c". When there are two notes on a string ascending, the last one is played with "i". When there are two notes on a string descending, the last one is played with "a" or "c". Planning is minimized in favor of simple operating rules. (I do most of this with rest-stroke, which maintains a more secure connection of my fingers to the strings so I don't lose the position.)
    I have learned to do this as a matter of course and don't think about it, but I admit that it has been a very difficult technic to teach.

    Quote Originally Posted by ShiffronLandren
    Mates,
    Let me chime in on the RH issue... I alternate between the thumb and pointer/middle, depending on the passage, and use flesh. ... But what I've found is that I have a different approach and orientation to the instrument ... employ rolls a la Chet Atkins to play arpeggios.
    Shiffron
    I have never been an advocate or user of the thumb-index combo for scale passages, which many guitarist swear by. The tone is - in my opinion of course - lousy compared to reststrokes with the fingers. (On an electric this tone difference doesn't sound as bad, but on un-amplified nylon strings the difference is huge. ) I use the thumb for the low note of arpeggios, for bass note runs which usually include slurs (ie, hammer-ons & pull-offs in classical-speak), for banjo-style rolls, and for bass lines generally.

    Quote Originally Posted by rio
    ...And regarding single note lines, are you learning them fingerstyle? I always envied those that could do that...I can't get my feel to be right with fingers when playing single lines...
    Right, well, I don't swing, I still sound like a classical player. The up and down motion of the pick, and the similar effect of thumb/index, facilitate swing where my techniques don't. Touche'.
    Last edited by jack_gvr; 04-12-2010 at 10:43 AM. Reason: additional comments

  31. #80

    User Info Menu

    i can see that you are very detail oriented. for example, word choice is something that you zero in on. great, me too.

    with regards to improvising with classical guitar technique - i said "believe" because there is no demonstrable case of an improviser who can blow 5 minute hot solos over Giant Steps for example, with the tone of Julian Bream or David Russell etc, etc. no such person walks the earth. you know it, i know it.

    awkward or tricky or difficult could all be used to describe difficult right hand moves. if there were no such thing then everyone/anyone could play Albeniz like Williams, or Brouwer like Cobo, or Turina and Torroba like Bream etc, etc, etc. But they can't. Neither can you.

    don't get your knickers in a knot. it's not about you.

  32. #81

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by fumblefingers
    ...
    with regards to improvising with classical guitar technique - i said "believe" because there is no demonstrable case of an improviser who can blow 5 minute hot solos over Giant Steps for example, with the tone of Julian Bream or David Russell etc, etc. no such person walks the earth. you know it, i know it.
    ...
    don't get your knickers in a knot. it's not about you.
    Yeah, you're so right it's funny. Thanks.
    Maybe he walks on water instead.
    They say that Julian Bream was known to get out a pick and scratch up his guitars playing jazz after hours when he was younger.

  33. #82

    User Info Menu

    umm hmm.

    i was surprised by his biographical DVD that came out a few years ago near his retirement. he points out that his original inspiration was Django - and jazz! Then he heard Segovia and decided what he really wanted to do. he could play Nuages i believe it was, and in fact is shown bending strings while playing it and otherwise jamming with his friends in a decades old TV show filmed from his apartment after hours. grooovy baby!

    he played an archtop in an army jazz/stage band while in the service after discovering that soldiering was not his cup of tea (almost cut his hand with his bayonette and started crying like a baby).

    he also recounts a story where S. Grappelli asked him to play a solo on a tune in a jazz club. Bream worked up a memorized solo - one chorus. it sounded so good on the bandtstand that Grappelli signaled him to play another. he said he wanted to kill Grapelli because he didn't have another worked up.

    and like fellow Brits George Harrison and John McLaughlin, he also became enamored with Indian classical music in the groovy 60s (or 70s, can't remember). the film shows him jamming with a solid sitar playing man or whatever. He said his thinking at the time was (paraphrasing) "why not just go off and improvise and play whatever I want, and be free". etc. thankfully for us of course, that didn't happen.
    Last edited by fumblefingers; 04-13-2010 at 08:14 PM.

  34. #83

    User Info Menu

    that would be khan sahib, one of the great musicians of the past century. (passed away last year.)


  35. #84

    User Info Menu

    Thanks both Randall and Fumblefingers for pointing me toward the Bream video. Saw a few of the YouTube clips and want to order the DVD.

    Note Bream playing with rh fingers even in early swing jam way back whenever.

  36. #85

    User Info Menu

    you bet!

    i don't understand all of this Indian music very well i must say. it sounds OK i guess. but Ali Akbar for one (I actually know what that means now thanks to the terrorists! or do they say Allah Akbar before they set off their bombs? oh well, what do I know)

    it just sounds like he is jamming in a very relaxed way. cool, no problem. i just dont understand all the huge praise and everything.

    but I will trust Bream's and McLaughlin's opinions over mine on this topic.

  37. #86

    User Info Menu

    For classical guitar, I always liked Stepan Rak who was known to mix folk styles in his compositions. Here's a vid of a Rak composition (performed by someone else) that is a classical blues, and a vid of the man himself performing, too. Hope you like...

    Rak's Blues -


    Stepan Rak himself -

  38. #87

    User Info Menu

    I'll tell it to you straight.

    Unless you're Lang Lang, or the next Lang Lang. You will never make a real living performing classical music.

    So, what do you do? I'll tell you.

    If you want to become a real musician, then you need to diversify right now.


    Continue your classical studies. You need as much of an advantage that you can get in this business. Learn as much as you can about music theory and apply it to every style of music that you listen to.

    Develop your sight reading abilities. Read through charts like a motherfucker. Develop your chops big time.

    Diversify is the new standard. You can no longer specialize (unless you are one the next Lang Lang)!!!!!!!! You need to be a chameleon. That goes for composers and performers. One style is not going to cut it. You need to have very good chops in rock, classical and jazz.

  39. #88

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by KShri
    ...Unless you're Lang Lang, or the next Lang Lang. You will never make a real living performing classical music...
    If you want to become a real musician, then you need to diversify right now.
    ...You need as much of an advantage that you can get in this business. Learn as much as you can about music theory and apply it to every style of music that you listen to...
    Diversify is the new standard. You can no longer specialize (unless you are one the next Lang Lang)!!!!!!!! You need to be a chameleon. That goes for composers and performers. One style is not going to cut it. You need to have very good chops in rock, classical and jazz.
    I have to agree. The chances of making a career as a classical performer are those of the proverbial snowball in hell. (those grapes were sour anyway, he said ) I think that all of the successful classical guitarists I know of have academic teaching positions that pay the basic nut and provide a foundation for concert careers.

    Actually, in my opinion, classical music AND jazz are obsolete styles - what they offer are possible foundations for the next new thing. A lot of people have done pretty well following in Ottmar Liebert's footsteps with the Rumba Flamenco thing, but that's thirty years old now. (Don't think that I am necessarily defending Ottmar as an exceptional musician, he's more of an example of how a fairly unexceptional talent can be parlayed into a magnificent career merely by taking command of the right time and place with a new sound.) So the time is right for something new. Segovia and Bream, you must observe, both created their own repertories through transcription and commissions of other composers, even though neither of them admitted to composing themselves. But folks who go on playing those repertories 40 and 50 years later are boring, really. Anybody got a new sound for the nylon string guitar? The time is right. And there's probably more chance of inventing it with a very eclectic and hybrid stylistic background to draw on.

  40. #89

    User Info Menu

    I think Paco de Lucia is able to use the classical right hand technique and improvize, as many good flamenco players, They are usually not as restricted as classical players with their right hands and they have some additional techniques, play more with the thumb etc. And probably lute players could do as well, as a big part of their techniques is to play with thumb and first finger alternatively, which works very good even in fast passages.

    If you play enough classical pieces, you are able to improvise without thinking which fingers to use, it comes natural. But usually classical guitarists find it difficult to do so, as they are usually not trained enough in it. And IMHO the most promiment reason why classical and jazz rarely mixes is, that we as an audience rarely accept the cross over for whatever reasons. Its the same for violin although we have some examples there, but it seems that you get kicked out of the classical music business if you are playing jazz and you never get really accepted in jazz as a classical musician.

    I am currently playing Bach - which I thought is already complex but Sylvius Leopold Weiss beats it on the Lute. Actually Baroque music is much closer to Jazz for me than romantic music. Its the feeling of architecture, chords and bass lines, that you don't find as such in romantic music.

    Certainly playing different styles from various times helps to improve technique and musical capabilities. And that is all about

  41. #90

    User Info Menu

    i've never heard or seen him use classical technique, only flamenco. when has he used classical technique?

  42. #91

    User Info Menu

    I do not see a big difference in the right hand between classical and flamenco when you play scales. Usually flemancas play with more grip and attack but the general movement is the same. Or not?

  43. #92

    User Info Menu

    its the angle of the hand/fingers that i was referring to.

    it can take classical players years and years to get their attack, tone, nails just right. flamenco technique does not cut it soundwise, for classial guitar music. sorry.

    i would not be so fast to underestimate this.

  44. #93

    User Info Menu

    Modern flamenco right hand technique is equally as advanced as classical right hand technique (in many ways more so). The way the instrument is held in classsical restricts movement of the right arm excessively. Most modern classical guitar students will tell you they would love to be able to play like PDL.

    If you try and play flamenco with a classical technique, it sounds completely amateur. Listen to the tone quality and right hand control produced by this man: The approach to his sound may be different, but he's a genius IMO.

    Last edited by czardas; 05-07-2011 at 06:36 AM.

  45. #94

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by czardas
    Modern flamenco right hand technique is equally as advanced as classical right hand technique (in many ways more so). The way the instrument is held in classsical restricts movement of the right arm excessively. Most modern classical guitar students will tell you they would love to be able to play like PDL.

    If you try and play flamenco with a classical technique, it sounds completely amateur. Listen to the tone quality and right hand control produced by this man: The approach to his sound may be different, but he's a genius IMO.

    then you agree, they are different. that was the point.

    also, thanks for the post, that sounded nice. but it is not traditional flamenco music, is it? much more contemporary i would say. regardless, his tone is a far cry from that of the world's top classical players.

    ciao.
    Last edited by fumblefingers; 05-07-2011 at 05:11 PM.

  46. #95

    User Info Menu

    just to play devil's advocate, what is sight reading going to gain you in today's world in terms of making a living? Gone is the day of Tommy Tedesco where you could automatically make a mint recording jingles and movie scores 8 hours a day in a studio in LA. Sight reading is a great skill to have but it doesn't necessarily make it easier to make a living.

    Quote Originally Posted by KShri
    I'll tell it to you straight.

    Unless you're Lang Lang, or the next Lang Lang. You will never make a real living performing classical music.

    So, what do you do? I'll tell you.

    If you want to become a real musician, then you need to diversify right now.


    Continue your classical studies. You need as much of an advantage that you can get in this business. Learn as much as you can about music theory and apply it to every style of music that you listen to.

    Develop your sight reading abilities. Read through charts like a motherfucker. Develop your chops big time.

    Diversify is the new standard. You can no longer specialize (unless you are one the next Lang Lang)!!!!!!!! You need to be a chameleon. That goes for composers and performers. One style is not going to cut it. You need to have very good chops in rock, classical and jazz.

  47. #96

    User Info Menu

    a great question for a new thread but i'll keep it here.

    i wonder what Reg has to say about this question/statement?
    Fred Hamilton at UNT stresses reading capability. he claims that it directly affects his ability to get gigs and survive those gigs (not his exact words mind you). Jake Hanlon probably heard this a few times.

    the romantic (from the outisde) LA studio days of the 70s are indeed gone from what i hear. they were starting to say that in 1980 at Dick Grove's.

    what say you Reg and other gigging pros? is reading capability a must have to get called/called back?

  48. #97

    User Info Menu

    now wait...I'm not saying reading skills are not a must. Certainly to do reading gigs you need to be able to read. I'm just saying that mastering sight reading does not necessarily get you gigs. You still need to be a great player.

  49. #98

    User Info Menu

    aah. no doubt about that. that would be the first order of business.

  50. #99

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by fumblefingers
    aah. no doubt about that. that would be the first order of business.
    30 years ago, that wasn't necessarily the case. I knew plenty of musicians in DC who could read but weren't necessarily great players. However, they could play mandolin, banjo, classical guitar and electric guitar - Just enough to get a ton of pit-band gigs for broadway shows.

    It used to be that you could tell a student, "Learn to read fly-!@#$ and learn all your doubles and you'll always be able to make a living". That's no longer true.

  51. #100

    User Info Menu

    Paco de Lucia has a ravishing sound, as beautiful as any classical player. His version of the Concierto de Aranjuez lacks nothing tonally, and in many respects, certainly rhythmically, is far more faithful to the score and the intent of the music than most classical players. He also is a fine improvisor and holds his own with McLaughlin, Dimeola and Corea.
    Last edited by ronjazz; 05-18-2011 at 09:49 AM.