Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Posts 176 to 199 of 199
  1. #176

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by S F
    About the OP's original post:

    Jazz is something you ultimately teach yourself. At least more than classical. All you need to learn jazz is inspiration to pick up the instrument! If you had to pick between the two to study at university, I'd always pick classical.
    That is true. Paul Desmond said that writing was like jazz: it can be learned, but not taught. I never actually studied jazz guitar, I studied guitar technique and modern theory, jazz came from what I heard, and as I learned the guitar and the theory, the jazz got better.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #177

    User Info Menu

    Classical guitar is a bit of a ghetto, a relatively small repertoire compared to piano and no access to the top tier classical and romantic period composers. Always surprising how little interest many guitarists have in music written for other instruments. Hard to play Carcassi or Guiliani once you get to know the Beethoven sonatas (although Sor is actually quite good).

  4. #178

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by BWV
    Classical guitar is a bit of a ghetto, a relatively small repertoire compared to piano and no access to the top tier classical and romantic period composers. Always surprising how little interest many guitarists have in music written for other instruments. Hard to play Carcassi or Guiliani once you get to know the Beethoven sonatas (although Sor is actually quite good).
    Very true. But I would say rather 'a sect' .. not quite ghetto.
    I studied classical for 7 years since 10... I had very good teacher who was very open-minded, and accomplished pianists ...I saw him perform 3rd Rakhmaninov concerto (yes he had to cut nsils)
    In my 2nd year I moved into symphonic and piano music and began to play piano..

  5. #179

    User Info Menu

    "Classical guitar is a bit of a ghetto, a relatively small repertoire compared to piano and no access to the top tier classical and romantic period composers."
    BWV



    Hi, B,
    This, in my opinion, is is no longer true for those compositions that are capable of being transcribed for the Classical Guitar. Many piano compositions are simply not capable of being transcribed for the guitar since the range of piano is so different from the guitar. However, there is a wealth of compositions ,from all eras, that have been transcribed successfully and it would take a serious musician several lifetimes to even scratch the surface of this material. And, although some movements in a Classical Symphony have the ability to be transcribed, the differences between instruments is too great to successfully transcribe the entire work in most cases. Good playing . . . Marinero

  6. #180

    User Info Menu

    Well.... one problem the modern guitar has is that the original plucked instruments of 17th, 18th century etc are becoming more common. I think a lot of working classical guitarists double on theorbo and so on.

    A lot of the baroque repertoire just sounds better on baroque guitar or lute for instance. After hearing this, for instance, I don't want ever again to hear it on modern guitar. So much more dynamic, and the campanelas and so on really pop. And as a lot of those pieces are simple lightweight dance piece as opposed to for instance, Bach, it needs that vibe...



    Transcription is a thing... would the music work better? Sometimes it can work in a new way... The Arpeggione sonata is an example, I suppose.

    There's also the problem that no one really wants to write fort the guitar. It's a pain. Bream had to agitate for years and often the composers in question never wanted to go near the thing again.

    So you need people who are good composers and guitarists... Or players who are advocates for the instrument too (like Bream and Segovia of course) and willing to do what it takes to build repetoire for it all the time.

    OTOH it does mean a classic guitarist has to be more creative and active as an artist than a pianist, perhaps. This seems to be the case.

  7. #181

    User Info Menu

    This is not a million miles away from the situation with jazz guitar of course. It's really a small ghetto, although fusion made the guitar trendy, and Pat and Kurt were influential in the recent history.

    Today I think most young bands would prefer a fusion/rock guitar player who can play jazz than an archtop player...

  8. #182

    User Info Menu

    Hi, C,
    When one considers construction, tonewoods, design, choice of strings, and size, the Classical Guitar is a rich and varied instrument. Many artists seek to replicate the sound of the 19th century, for example, by playing Romantic style guitars. And, there is a difference. One of our members, Rob MacKillop, I believe, has focused much energy on these instruments. I have toyed with the idea of an original period instrument for my Romantic era repertoire but, according to feedback from many owners, they are expensive, quirky, and require constant maintenance/care. And, I have 3 luthier-built professional instruments that have wonderful voices and solid construction. So, maybe someday. Good playing . . . Marinero

  9. #183

    User Info Menu

    There's also the problem that no one really wants to write fort the guitar. It's a pain. Bream had to agitate for years and often the composers in question never wanted to go near the thing again.
    It often depends on some circumstance... my friend - Boris Yoffe - to me probably greatest composer living... never liked classical guitar and never wrote anything for it.. but once he was approached by Augustin Wiedemann who was deeply impressed by his quartets. And Wiedemann ordered some music - at the begining Boris declined it but they kept communicating and finally he suddenly (it always happened like that) brought a few pieces.
    It is interesting that Boris does not know guitar and did not study it before writing (except maybe general idea of range) but everything fit well but Augustin is a real master.
    At the end this collaboration brought to life beautiful album of original music "Symphony' composed of solo guitar pieces and ensembles of guitar with different instruments and voice... you never know.

  10. #184

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Been on a classical guitar kick as I have to teach it atm. Mostly reading through the grades so I can be prepared to teach them. I always enjoy going through these phases. It’s very satisfying.

    I do find myself marvelling at a lot of the bad teaching of classical grades though from some of my students who have been with other teachers previously... I would hardly hold myself up as an exemplar of CG, wouldn’t give a recital, but I know how it works.

    and you get poor technique uncorrected, fingerings ignored or simplified, no attention paid to dynamics or interpretation.... it’s pretty bad. the people doing the teaching are jazz guitarists tbh.

    I’ve had a few classical lessons (probably more than jazz tbh) and I do think it makes you a better musician, maybe even more than a player. Paying close attention to sound and interpretation.... stuff that would also make you a better jazz player.

    There’s an argument that ever player should do a bit of classical. I’m more sympathetic to that atm. I think it did me a lot of good.

    I was always amazed at the way my CG teacher would play the most difficult lines, and his LH seemed like it barely moved. This might have something to do with exercises which used "Preparing",i.e. descending chromatic scale exercises that started with the pinky, where fingers 1, 2 and 3 would already be down, and it would just be a matter of picking up a finger to play a note (one motion) rather than picking up a finger and placing down a finger (two motions). I think we used the Aaron Shearer Method book for this. Are there any other exercises that are used in the standard literature for "Preparing"?

  11. #185

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by sgcim
    I was always amazed at the way my CG teacher would play the most difficult lines, and his LH seemed like it barely moved. This might have something to do with exercises which used "Preparing",i.e. descending chromatic scale exercises that started with the pinky, where fingers 1, 2 and 3 would already be down, and it would just be a matter of picking up a finger to play a note (one motion) rather than picking up a finger and placing down a finger (two motions). I think we used the Aaron Shearer Method book for this. Are there any other exercises that are used in the standard literature for "Preparing"?
    Pujol's excercises are very good and in different variations they seem to migrate through different methods and teachers.
    His slur excersises are actually not for slurs but for the genral hand physiology.

    But imho it worls properly only when it is directed by a good teacher.

    Most of the classical guitar technique is based on efficiency and stability.

    the thing is jazz gutarists mostly play their own stuff - they can afford it - they can elaborate what is convinient for them (how to build a line of make a pause etc)and jazz is less demanding to the subtle nuances. Classical musicians must be able to perform things that may be naturally not that convinient for them... and clasical music is demanding about dynamics and nuances control (how many jazz guitarists use dynamics at all?)... that is why they need - I would say - a higher discipline of performance.

  12. #186

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Marinero
    "Classical guitar is a bit of a ghetto, a relatively small repertoire compared to piano and no access to the top tier classical and romantic period composers."
    BWV



    Hi, B,
    This, in my opinion, is is no longer true for those compositions that are capable of being transcribed for the Classical Guitar. Many piano compositions are simply not capable of being transcribed for the guitar since the range of piano is so different from the guitar. However, there is a wealth of compositions ,from all eras, that have been transcribed successfully and it would take a serious musician several lifetimes to even scratch the surface of this material. And, although some movements in a Classical Symphony have the ability to be transcribed, the differences between instruments is too great to successfully transcribe the entire work in most cases. Good playing . . . Marinero
    think you overstate the depth of the repertoire with the ‘several lifetimes’. Beethoven wrote 32 piano sonatas, then you have all the other 19th century repertoire. Nothing for the guitar, including transcriptions, approaches this depth of quality material. Classical guitarists have scrounge for material from nearly every forgotten 19th century guitarist composer. In the meantime they too often ignore the great contemporary repertoire by real heavyweights like Carter, Henze, Takemitsu etc.

  13. #187

    User Info Menu

    I think I'd prefer a title of classical and jazz guitar are good together...why vs.?

  14. #188

    User Info Menu

    Dear OP,

    Greetings from 12 years in the future, where the answer is "it doesn't matter, because nobody has gigs due to a thing called coronavirus"

    :-)

  15. #189

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonah
    Pujol's excercises are very good and in different variations they seem to migrate through different methods and teachers.
    His slur excersises are actually not for slurs but for the genral hand physiology.

    But imho it worls properly only when it is directed by a good teacher.

    Most of the classical guitar technique is based on efficiency and stability.

    the thing is jazz gutarists mostly play their own stuff - they can afford it - they can elaborate what is convinient for them (how to build a line of make a pause etc)and jazz is less demanding to the subtle nuances. Classical musicians must be able to perform things that may be naturally not that convinient for them... and clasical music is demanding about dynamics and nuances control (how many jazz guitarists use dynamics at all?)... that is why they need - I would say - a higher discipline of performance.
    Out of Plectrum guitarists, I'd say Johnny Smith is the guitarist that most classical guitarists admire. Have you checked him out?

  16. #190

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by sgcim
    Out of Plectrum guitarists, I'd say Johnny Smith is the guitarist that most classical guitarists admire. Have you checked him out?
    I know Johnny Smith of course.

  17. #191

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonah
    Pujol's excercises are very good and in different variations they seem to migrate through different methods and teachers.
    His slur excersises are actually not for slurs but for the genral hand physiology.

    But imho it worls properly only when it is directed by a good teacher.

    Most of the classical guitar technique is based on efficiency and stability.

    the thing is jazz gutarists mostly play their own stuff - they can afford it - they can elaborate what is convinient for them (how to build a line of make a pause etc)and jazz is less demanding to the subtle nuances. Classical musicians must be able to perform things that may be naturally not that convinient for them... and clasical music is demanding about dynamics and nuances control (how many jazz guitarists use dynamics at all?)... that is why they need - I would say - a higher discipline of performance.
    TBF you do practice other people’s music to a large extent in jazz. If you aren’t doing this often with jazz then you are probably not really practicing.

    To play bop well for instance you need to be able to play things that really don’t sit naturally.

    The challenges are different to playing some difficult polyphonic music, but they are very real. For instance getting 26-2 up to speed on an acoustic guitar has taken me quite a while... and that’s 32 bars of music...

    I spend quite a bit of my practice time working on other people’s stuff. My own stuff I can already play so that doesn’t need work so much.

    one reason why I like acoustic is dynamics actually

    there are phrasing nuances in jazz but they are fundamentally different? I think ironically the switch to a more notation based pedagogy has made us less aware of this stuff, while classical has always been about breathing life into the score...

  18. #192

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    TBF you do practice other people’s music to a large extent in jazz. If you aren’t doing this often with jazz then you are probably not really practicing.

    To play bop well for instance you need to be able to play things that really don’t sit naturally.

    The challenges are different to playing some difficult polyphonic music, but they are very real. For instance getting 26-2 up to speed on an acoustic guitar has taken me quite a while... and that’s 32 bars of music...

    I spend quite a bit of my practice time working on other people’s stuff. My own stuff I can already play so that doesn’t need work so much.

    one reason why I like acoustic is dynamics actually

    there are phrasing nuances in jazz but they are fundamentally different? I think ironically the switch to a more notation based pedagogy has made us less aware of this stuff, while classical has always been about breathing life into the score...
    yeh.. I thoght about bop when I was writing that... and I myself know that problem of getting bop heads to uptempo with nice and natural phrasing..

    But - in some sense - there is a way to avoid it in jazz if you really want to))) Of course if your challenge is to be verstile session player you have to do everything (which is not always good)... but if you are more in to your thing ... Frisell or Jim Hall - they play bop heads in quite interesting manner really... they keep it up to proper tempo but they do not seem to try to articulate it in virtuoso style.. they switch some kind of 'humming'...

    I do not say that jazz players do not have to practice...

    You know I have a hobby: early traverso flutes... and with flutes it is seen quite clearly because how they are made reflects the approach to performance.
    If you take Irish flute (which is basically just a bit modified early classical wooden flute with a few keys) and compare it with hiagh baroque flutes (they are basically the same but just have one key)... you will see how much easier Irsich flute is .. easier to articulate, to play high notes, to pronounce ' typical problematic notes' to play fast, to play loud etc.
    But eventually you will notice that some baroque Rottenburgh or Buffardin models give such sweet and subtle nuances of colour, tone, dynamics, articulatio that you can never get from the Irish flute...

    And that reflexes the performer's metality to a great deal..



    With guitar it is the same... at one point I actually came to conclusion that classical guitar is still generally folk instruments (yes there are great classical players I admire -- though... not so many). It has always been.. (even baroquw guitar at its prime -- yes there was Gurrau but it is an exception).. in 19th century ti was a salon instrument mostly,,, and 20 it began a fight to be one of the academic instruments (I still think Segovia created a world of his own just for himself).

    And other guitars are just other instruments: American steel string guitar, or manouche or rock guitar, or jazz archtop guitar.. they all belong to the style very much. It does not mean you cannot use them in other styles but to establish it there - the time is needed... and the musical culture.
    Jazz achieved a level in my opinion where it - as a style - can consume any instrument and raise it to the level of style sophisitcation.

    Same thing happened to violin many many years ago --

  19. #193

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by BWV
    think you overstate the depth of the repertoire with the ‘several lifetimes’. Beethoven wrote 32 piano sonatas, then you have all the other 19th century repertoire. Nothing for the guitar, including transcriptions, approaches this depth of quality material. Classical guitarists have scrounge for material from nearly every forgotten 19th century guitarist composer. In the meantime they too often ignore the great contemporary repertoire by real heavyweights like Carter, Henze, Takemitsu etc.
    <br>
    <br>
    <br>
    Hi, B,<br>
    One of the great players/composers/transcribers living today is Edson Lopes. If you go to his website, you will find not only his excellent performances but also his outstanding transcriptions for Classical guitar. And, you can download the sheet music free from his site. There is literally a performer's career of transcriptions in the music he provides. One of the problems, B, is that there are many fine players today but very few musicians capable of transcribing the repertoire. And, some of it is just not possible since it looses the magic of the original piano/symphonic music because the harmonic complexity and depth is lost. Imagine a guitar transcription of Wagner's Valkyries, Ring Cycle, or Tristan and Isolde??? However, if you look more deeply, you'll find Beethoven, Schubert, Schumann,Chopin,Mendelssohn, Bach,Bartok, etc, as well as those who wrote specifically for the Classical Guitar: Villa Lobos, Aguado, Carcassi, Giuliani, Mertz, Sor, Regondi, Paganini, etc. for which one could never scratch the surface of the material available ,as I said previously, in a player's lifetime. My biggest problem is not finding suitable material but having the time to master the wealth of these pieces playing 3-4 hours daily including time for my original 1966 Gibson ES125 and its repertoire that I resurrected from a long sleep. I hope this makes sense to you. Thanks for your reply. Good playing . . . Marinero

  20. #194

    User Info Menu

    I do not follow classical guitar scene much but Lorenzo Micheli is one my favourite players today (I know him from his lute projects and then I began to listen to his guitar performances)

    Here is pretty simple Fughetta - sounds more like a counterpoint study but played very well




    Here is neo-romantic - almost pop- piece of music. But this is an example of how good musician can bring in (or discover) subtlty and multifoldedness through similicity




    Passacaglia by Castelnuovo-Tedesco


  21. #195

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonah
    I know Johnny Smith of course.
    What do you think of his approaches to dynamics and nuance, and what's your opinion on his interpretations of Spanish pieces such as 'Romance de los Pinos, "Nortina", "Sevilla" and "The Old Castle?
    He also recorded his interpretations of short pieces by French composers such as Debussy and Ravel. What is your opinion of them?

  22. #196

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by sgcim
    What do you think of his approaches to dynamics and nuance, and what's your opinion on his interpretations of Spanish pieces such as 'Romance de los Pinos, "Nortina", "Sevilla" and "The Old Castle?
    He also recorded his interpretations of short pieces by French composers such as Debussy and Ravel. What is your opinion of them?
    I don't know -- I do not really like it... he plays it all a bit... throughout?

    Romance sounds sweet but just becasue this ia generic song (what Johnny Smith did all the time)... but anyway compare it with for example Segovia - how muc more subtle and interesting it sounds... and instead of general backgrount please?t music we hear some poem with the themes, form, ideas, drama...

    It is interesting that Segovia sounds more free and flexible but still more accuarate.

    But again eith Romance Johnny interepretation works - he just turns it into some kind of regular song.

    But ''Old Castle'' is a different story... it is not just a tune, or just a song... this is the case where music is extremely concrete - it is not traditional form... one should use all the tools to perform it... but Johnny again plays it as if it is just a nice semi-imrovized romance


    and there is not much dynamics by the way in his performance - if any... not that it is a problem, just what I noticed.

    Jonny Smith is the master of course but I do not find it relative to what I was talking about.
    i appreciate what he did in his approach to guitar, his influence to jazz guitar playing but I am not a big fan even of his jazz work musically - he just thinks in absolutely different direction than I would probably.. he is interested in other things.





  23. #197

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Marinero
    <br>
    <br>
    <br>
    Hi, B,<br>
    One of the great players/composers/transcribers living today is Edson Lopes. If you go to his website, you will find not only his excellent performances but also his outstanding transcriptions for Classical guitar. And, you can download the sheet music free from his site. There is literally a performer's career of transcriptions in the music he provides. One of the problems, B, is that there are many fine players today but very few musicians capable of transcribing the repertoire. And, some of it is just not possible since it looses the magic of the original piano/symphonic music because the harmonic complexity and depth is lost. Imagine a guitar transcription of Wagner's Valkyries, Ring Cycle, or Tristan and Isolde??? However, if you look more deeply, you'll find Beethoven, Schubert, Schumann,Chopin,Mendelssohn, Bach,Bartok, etc, as well as those who wrote specifically for the Classical Guitar: Villa Lobos, Aguado, Carcassi, Giuliani, Mertz, Sor, Regondi, Paganini, etc. for which one could never scratch the surface of the material available ,as I said previously, in a player's lifetime. My biggest problem is not finding suitable material but having the time to master the wealth of these pieces playing 3-4 hours daily including time for my original 1966 Gibson ES125 and its repertoire that I resurrected from a long sleep. I hope this makes sense to you. Thanks for your reply. Good playing . . . Marinero
    i have done a fair amount of arranging piano music and am familiar with the possibilities and limitations. FWIW is an example of a Schumann piece I did:



    I also did the Arabeske op 18, but it’s quite difficult- a better player than me could pull it off. Have also done Bartok, but 20th century piano music is far more challenging because you can’t simply rely on basic theory to thin the harmony. Am also working on some Mahler that I may record and post soon. The point is take any Romantic piano composer that is not named Isaac Albinez - there is maybe a handful of smaller pieces that will work on guitar

  24. #198

    User Info Menu

    " but 20th century piano music is far more challenging because you can’t simply rely on basic theory to thin the harmony. " BWV

    Hi, B,
    This is also the challenge when writing chord/melody for Jazz guitar. I've found, irrespective of genre, that a good arranger/transcriber must know how to "fool the ears." Whether through inversions, doubling the root, omissions of 5th's, or broken chords, he/she must get the feel and forget about exactitude. In reality, any transcription is merely capturing the essence of the music. . . and, especially in the case of the guitar when playing piano music. Good playing . . . Marinero
    Last edited by Marinero; 06-05-2020 at 02:14 PM. Reason: spelling

  25. #199

    User Info Menu

    good gracious what a discovery this bleak june morning when the clocks struck 13..on a serious note thank you Jonah for posting Lorenzo Micheli...not a player myself but love classical guitar.