Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Posts 1 to 50 of 123
  1. #1

    User Info Menu

    ... to a level where you can gig with the best in each respective field.

    The reasons I'm interested in this subject are :

    1/ Like many I've been through the learning curve for both and

    2/ Bizarrely, there are posts I come across on this forum where people suggest that being good at plain old rock guitar is almost as difficult as being good at Jazz....

    So I'd like to get some thoughts on this from some of you guys, preferably from those of you who have climbed both "mountains".

    I'll start off with an analogy that sums up the difference for me-

    Getting my shit together to be gig ready in rock guitar (Hendrix, Clapton, Page etc) as a teenager took some work, probably 2 years of 1 to 2 hours a day. I could then play rock solos I heard (after many repeated listens), and then quickly moved on to improvise endlessly against all the usual rock progressions. Lotsa people did this.

    Now lets make the analogy for this work to be "washing windows". Learning rock guitar soloing was like having to wash all the windows for the entire ground floor of the old World Trade Centre.

    Learning Jazz on the other hand (again, to an "impressive" level), is more like having to wash every fucking window in not just the whole fucking tower, but both of them! Then, when you think you're done, you have to start again, to keep them clean!

    If you disagree, you might infer that I must be doing it all wrong (I've heard that one before). Just so I see you coming, let me just say that if you disagree that the difference is that great, I'll say outright, without a shred of doubt, that you must be doing it wrong!

    Novices watching this space will no doubt side with the "Nah, Jazz is not that complicated" brigade. I get it, it's what you wanna believe (and we all tend to read and agree with what suits us these days - Idiocracy an' all that...). Cool, come back to this thread in 5 years and let's see how you're travelling, in fact, let's make it 10!


  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    Just don't throw rock and blues into the same category. Learning to play old school blues well isn't as easy as it may seem. It's not only about learning to play pentatonics over a given key and that's it. There's a lot more below it's visible surface...

    Jazz on the other hand is an entirely different category for sure...
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A long journey starts with the first step...and although I have long forgotten about my destination I'm still enjoying the journey.

  4. #3

    User Info Menu

    "Rock" can get pretty wide, but generally speaking: Rock/Blues - especially blues - styles are less sophisticated in terms of:

    1. Compositional form
    2. Style variation, and
    3. The three primary elements of western music:
    • Harmony
    • Melody
    • Rhythm


    Probably by a factor of 5-10.

  5. #4

    User Info Menu

    They don't even come close in terms of being gig or even jam session ready. I'm surprised this is even a question. Shred guitar might come close, but strictly mechanically.

  6. #5

    User Info Menu

    This is the kind of talk that'll get one pegged for being a jazz snob, but it's absolutely true...jazz is just plain harder.

    It's challenging music. That's why it's not for everybody, and why few really get "good" at it.
    Jeff Matz, Jazz Guitar:
    http://www.youtube.com/user/jeffreymatz

    "Jazz is like life...it goes on longer than you think, and as soon as you're like 'oh, I get it,' it ends."

    --The Ghost of Duke Ellington

  7. #6

    User Info Menu

    To gig and to gig with the best are two diferrent things.

    To gig at a pro level, jazz is much more difficult. The guys in town that are playing jazz for tiny audiences in restaurants in San Diego are world class, imo.

    Those playing classic rock for larger audiences and getting much more work are generally not on the same level.

    But to play at a world class level, the best, I think the margin between jazz and rock narrows. Steve Vai, Eric Johnson, Joe Satriani, Jeff Beck, those are some talented individuals... Frank Zappa music, ...
    B+
    Frank (aka fep)

  8. #7

    User Info Menu

    To Frank's point, I have really developed an appreciation for people who really specialize and excel at one thing, even if it's not something that's necessarily technically demanding in the least bit.
    Jeff Matz, Jazz Guitar:
    http://www.youtube.com/user/jeffreymatz

    "Jazz is like life...it goes on longer than you think, and as soon as you're like 'oh, I get it,' it ends."

    --The Ghost of Duke Ellington

  9. #8

    User Info Menu

    I think equally hard but in different ways. Technically jazz is more sophisticated music. So you will have to spend much more time learning to improvise. You can't be a mediocre soloist and be a successful jazz musician.

    Otoh, imo, in blues and rock improvisation is not the main priority. I know many would disagree, but I'd put combination of strong rhythm guitar, songwriting, and stage presentation as the main things. Thousand of YouTube guitar wankers that go nowhere only prove my point. Being able to sing well also helps!

    of course, that's my 'from a career point of view' perspective, so you can argue with that.

    But another thing, being great at jazz doesn't by default make you great at rocknroll because it's less sophisticated music. At least on guitar, different feels, different goals!

  10. #9

    User Info Menu

    I think jazz has a comparatively high bar in terms of what you need to be able to do to play professionally. Having been bitten by the jazz bug relatively early, I have not much experience playing rock, but, to be a successful rock musician, I think you can get away with knowing the band you are playing in's repertoire, and if you sound good on that stuff, you can work from there. Most rock repertoire to my ears is fairly basic harmonically.

    Whereas with jazz, as Robert Glasper says, you have to work pretty hard at it to even sound bad at it.

  11. #10

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Hep To The Jive View Post
    But another thing, being great at jazz doesn't by default make you great at rocknroll because it's less sophisticated music. At least on guitar, different feels, different goals!
    One neat example of this can be heard / seen in some movies from the late '50s and early '60s aimed at teenage audiences. Studio pros were playing rock and it didn't...quite...work. Not because the guys couldn't play---they were great players---but they couldn't rock. It was something they didn't really get.

    "Learn the repertoire. It’s all in the songs. If you learn 200 songs, you will have no problem improvising."
    Frank Vignola

  12. #11

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkRhodes View Post

    Talk about garbage.

    The rockers would flounder worse in a jazz setting, though. Getting completely obliterated is different than not quite getting it.

  13. #12

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by corpse View Post
    Talk about garbage.

    The rockers would flounder worse in a jazz setting, though. Getting completely obliterated is different than not quite getting it.
    I agree. They are different things. Some people play classical well but not jazz, and vice versa. Blues especially is rooted in a feeling.
    "Learn the repertoire. It’s all in the songs. If you learn 200 songs, you will have no problem improvising."
    Frank Vignola

  14. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet View Post
    Bizarrely, there are posts I come across on this forum where people suggest that being good at plain old rock guitar is almost as difficult as being good at Jazz....
    I just don't remember seeing much of this.

  15. #14

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkRhodes View Post
    One neat example of this can be heard / seen in some movies from the late '50s and early '60s aimed at teenage audiences. Studio pros were playing rock and it didn't...quite...work. Not because the guys couldn't play---they were great players---but they couldn't rock. It was something they didn't really get.

    Hahahaha

    Yea, ive heard they disliked rock music anyway, just did it for paycheck. Sorry, doesnt work like that!

    In this regard, thanks heaven for the jazz guys who came later, like Sco or Bill Frisell- you knew right away they dig rocknroll with their hearts and souls.

  16. #15

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet View Post
    ... to a level where you can gig with the best in each respective field.

    The reasons I'm interested in this subject are :

    1/ Like many I've been through the learning curve for both and

    2/ Bizarrely, there are posts I come across on this forum where people suggest that being good at plain old rock guitar is almost as difficult as being good at Jazz....

    So I'd like to get some thoughts on this from some of you guys, preferably from those of you who have climbed both "mountains".

    I'll start off with an analogy that sums up the difference for me-

    Getting my shit together to be gig ready in rock guitar (Hendrix, Clapton, Page etc) as a teenager took some work, probably 2 years of 1 to 2 hours a day. I could then play rock solos I heard (after many repeated listens), and then quickly moved on to improvise endlessly against all the usual rock progressions. Lotsa people did this.

    Now lets make the analogy for this work to be "washing windows". Learning rock guitar soloing was like having to wash all the windows for the entire ground floor of the old World Trade Centre.

    Learning Jazz on the other hand (again, to an "impressive" level), is more like having to wash every fucking window in not just the whole fucking tower, but both of them! Then, when you think you're done, you have to start again, to keep them clean!

    If you disagree, you might infer that I must be doing it all wrong (I've heard that one before). Just so I see you coming, let me just say that if you disagree that the difference is that great, I'll say outright, without a shred of doubt, that you must be doing it wrong!

    Novices watching this space will no doubt side with the "Nah, Jazz is not that complicated" brigade. I get it, it's what you wanna believe (and we all tend to read and agree with what suits us these days - Idiocracy an' all that...). Cool, come back to this thread in 5 years and let's see how you're travelling, in fact, let's make it 10!

    i gigged with the best in both fields and have utmost respect for good rock players. i do disagree with you. it's both folk music and the learning process is similar. and from my experience it's usually the novices who think jazz is so much harder. i often think they may actually be afraid of jazz music. they carefully watch it from a distance, give scientific terms to their observations and will do all kind of preparartory exercises hoping these will make them worthy one day. instead of just eating it up. people used to listen so much to jazz they could sing along with the solos. can you?

  17. #16

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by djg View Post
    and from my experience it's usually the novices who think jazz is so much harder. i often think they may actually be afraid of jazz music. they carefully watch it from a distance, give scientific terms to their observations and will do all kind of preparartory exercises hoping these will make them worthy one day. instead of just eating it up. people used to listen so much to jazz they could sing along with the solos. can you?
    Can I? Yes. I think Jazz is harder, and Jeff said he thinks so, and neither of us are novices.

  18. #17

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by corpse View Post
    Can I? Yes. I think Jazz is harder, and Jeff said he thinks so, and neither of us are novices.
    all jazz? how about bulgarian wedding music? easier than jazz?

  19. #18

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by djg View Post
    all jazz? how about bulgarian wedding music? easier than jazz?
    If you're saying that is a sub-genre of rock, I'd have to check it out. Most things that are considered jazz, yes.

    I'm not interested in testing where lines are thin or blurred; that's another conversation.

  20. #19

    User Info Menu

    A great rock player has command of his idiom and can do it on stage at a high volume. None of that is easy.

    It's hard to get a good feel for a style, it's hard to sound good when playing loud. There's more time to relax in a jazz performance. Rock has to be burning all the time.

    So, all of that is challenging in rock.

    Of course, jazz isn't so easy either.

    As far as which is easier? Anything that a lot of people devote a lot of time and passion to, eventually breeds an elite level of skill that most people can't achieve. That's true in painting, dance, fly fishing, computer programming and probably everything else.

  21. #20

    User Info Menu

    What is harder, Stella By Starlight or blues/rock shuffle in E? My answer would be neither is harder or simpler. And mastering one does not garauntee you good at the other. Each one has its own set of challenges.

    Whats your answer?

  22. #21

    User Info Menu

    I do have a bit of a pet peeve on this topic: most non-jazz musicians, when they find out I play jazz, immediately start talking about all the theory you have to know to play jazz. I usually politely respond with "I've found that it's mostly a game of the ear", but, it bothers me that jazz has this mathematical reputation that requires a bunch of knowledge of esoteric scales and whatnot.

    It bothers me because I started out learning jazz by learning chord scales from jamey aebersolds, and practicing lining up notes perfectly and nailing changes. Of course, I sounded terrible, because I wasn't swinging and was over-focused on the harmonic concerns of playing "correctly". Once I got a teacher that got me singing solos, I started to sound a lot better, and I've found the more I focus on just playing by ear, and working on my ears, the better I sound.

    These days, I think it's mostly a disservice to think of jazz as a music where you have to know a lot of theory; many of the very greatest jazz musicians barely knew any theory at all.

  23. #22

    User Info Menu

    Yes I never understand why people learn rock by copying solos off records, then think that for jazz you must spend years on scales/theory etc. before you even learn a tune.

    In my ignorance, when I got into jazz I just carried on the same way as I did when learning rock, i.e. copy solos off records and learn tunes. Of course later on I did do some scales/theory along the way as needed.

    I just saw it as another genre of music so why approach it any differently.

  24. #23

    User Info Menu

    Yes, yes, of course jazz is harder, you must have a better technical command of your instrument to "hang with the best".

    Remember, music is not a contest. If our playing can help us to attain joy or bring it to others, we've done a lot, regardless of genre or degree of difficulty.

  25. #24

    User Info Menu

    My all time favorite jazz guitarist, Jim Hall, was not a guy known for massive chops.

    I heard Tom Morello with Bruce Springsteen and was boggled by his technique and melodic gifts for that style.

    Playing at that level, in either style, seems pretty hard to me.

    I think it's worth remembering that there are great jazz players who know no theory whatsover. Andres Varady is one.

    The old way, learning from records and on the bandstand still works.

    And, lest I be misunderstood, there are great players who use and value theory.

  26. #25

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by grahambop View Post
    Yes I never understand why people learn rock by copying solos off records, then think that for jazz you must spend years on scales/theory etc. before you even learn a tune.

    In my ignorance, when I got into jazz I just carried on the same way as I did when learning rock, i.e. copy solos off records and learn tunes. Of course later on I did do some scales/theory along the way as needed.

    I just saw it as another genre of music so why approach it any differently.

    That's interesting as I was the the opposite. I never lifted rock solos, I flew by the seat of my pants (I sounded bad). When I transitioned to upbeat music (jazz as opposed to downbeat music) I never lifted solos. Subsequently I never sounded good in this genre either. I'm happy to say that I no longer torment innocent instruments with my senseless flailing.

  27. #26
    Far from the best, but I've gigged professionally both in jazz and rock idioms. A lot of it comes from the musical background one may have. When kids start trying to play rock music they often know the repertoire inside out, have heard lots of music and bands, etc. Then they approach jazz from the theory perspective (I sure did ), and that's the long way around.

    For jazz, you have to really dive and learn the music or it won't work. And you have to be the type of player who will work on scales, arpeggios, chords, etc. But when talking about high level playing, I think all styles are equally difficult. The level is set by people who devote their whole lives to it, so it's always high. It may be harmonic complexity, the right groove, the right sound,musical nuisances, each style has things you need to master.

  28. #27

    User Info Menu

    I perform all three, and to me, how I think of it is that the biggest distinction is the object of authenticity of each style... from the audience perspective...

    Rock songs are typically historically popular tunes from bands that listeners know well, so the authenticity of performing a rock tune is pretty much gauged by the fundamental mechanics - adherence to the form, playing the right chords and riffs (the way they were voiced and phrased in the original), the same tone and feel, etc. Even the guitar solo, if not reproduced precisely, needs to capture the important and dramatic parts with fidelity to the original solo, and the rest needs to be well within the "sound and feel" of the original. Basically the listener enjoys the authenticity of "hearing the original band's sound again".

    Blues tunes, unlike most rock tunes, tend to get covered by multiple artists, so there is less focus on reproducing the original version and more freedom to "play it your way" while remaining true to the general types of blues styles. This usually means at minimum staying within a "style" throughout a whole song; the "Blues Police" get kind of upset if you mix things up and play the start of the song sounding like T-Bone Walker and the ending sounding like B. B. King... The authenticity in blues shifts from some band's mechanics to an artist's style that has made the tune popular, so the enjoyment of the listener is the authenticity of "hearing a particular artist's style again".

    Jazz authenticity is with respect to the song itself. Jazz tunes tend to have been recorded by and performed by pretty much everyone in the jazz world with little regard to sounding like who first did it or how others took their take on it. The "books" even allow for playing these songs without ever having heard anyone's version of them. There is a wide freedom combined with a respect for the song and the general "sound of jazz". The enjoyment of the listener is the authenticity of "hearing, even if in a new way, that jazz song again".
    "Bent my ear to hear the tune and closed my eyes to see."

  29. #28

    User Info Menu

    I've been watching Planet Earth. Talk about getting your perspective re-adjusted. I'm thinking "What's harder, being a penguin or a wildebeest?" Well both take a lifetime to become good enough to stay alive. Both take something exceptional to find a mate and be happy. Both follow their inner nature. Both would look at the other and say "Gosh. How do they DO that?" Ha ha.
    The first time I saw Sco, it was in the 80's; before Miles. It was a talk he gave and I was pretty new to the whole jazz thing. It was really mysterious and Sco was doing things that were way beyond what even most guitarists of the day. But he said one thing that stuck with me "Gotta know your scales. It's like the blues, you've gotta know what works. Once you know what chord it is, just play the scale and everyone will think you're a genius!". Ha, Sco's a joker and a humble guy but yeah, once you understand the game plan of your own nature, whether wildebeest or penguin, then you walk the migratory walk year after year. You get good at it.

    Rock rewards the player who pays attention to proficiency and an emotional tie with the audience. There is a deep and intuitive understanding of what connects. Jazz rewards the player who pays attention to the composition of that has not been done before. There is a deep and uncompromising aesthetic of what challenges. It's a disparate audience that shapes the nature of the beast.

    I spoke Chinese when I was a kid. 'don't any more. I remember in school people talked about the hardest language. I never got it when they'd say Chinese was hard. Well I don't do it anymore, it's not my language...and yeah, boy is it hard now! LOL.

    Jazz is easy. But it's plenty challenging every day of my life. And hopefully will be. Forever. But that's nothing when compared with making a dollar in a bar where you can get paid. Rock rules, ha. And singing and playing guitar at the same time? I am in awe.

    David

  30. #29

    User Info Menu

    In general, navigating jazz harmony is harder and usually takes longer to become competent than playing rock. Don't make the exceptions the rule.

  31. #30

    User Info Menu

    That's a good question, rock tends to be like classical music, you have to play a given "arrangement", to play or barely play a "written" solo, it's quite repetitive, sometimes it's very sophisticated.
    About blues, for rockers and jazzers, the blues is a form but for someone who really plays the blues it's something else, there are so many forms.
    I'd played the bass for several months in a blues band and the singer/guitarist calls himself "Ayatollah Of Blues", a solo was based only on a pentatonic, some blues had some weird parts because the chords underlined the lyrics, so sometimes there was a bar of 2/4 or 3/4 at the middle of a verse. I couldn't play the bass the way I wanted because my lines were too sophisticated... When I was talking about guys like Jack Bruce, they called them a jazzer/rocker, not a bluesman and too white and British to play the blues.
    With them I figured out there were blues standards.

    Many forms of blues in 8 bars, 12 bars, 16 bars... Very basic chords but none of those blues had to be played the same way.

    About jazz, it's something impersonal that can become very personal because it's about creativity. The good thing with, is that you can play with your own sound, sometimes there is no level, if you do the job it's OK, sometimes you can't play because the level is high.
    There are a lot of things to learn, playing with people is like cooking, a little bit like... prog rock if we can do a comparison with rock.

  32. #31

    User Info Menu

    The craft of any art form is endless. One can take it as far as they wish, and will never reach the end. Yes, a master player achieves things that are "harder" on an E blues shuffle, and it can be impressive. A player on Stella can be as bad as a person first holding a guitar.

    Don't you think it's harder to be a run of the mill jazz player doing a passable stella at a jam than to be a run of the mill rock player doing an E blues at a jam?

    That's about 1 year of playing vs. 5 or so maybe

  33. #32

    User Info Menu

    Playing rock or blues is about dealing with where you are...playing over one chord at a time.

    Playing jazz is about where you're going next.

  34. #33

    User Info Menu

    I can imagine someone without any musical training but with a decent musical sense being able to sing a melodic solo over "November Rain changes" by ear on par with Slash's solo on the recording (in terms of the inherent musical complexity of the solo).
    I don't see them being able to wing a sophisticated jazz solo on par with what Wes Montgomery played on a tune like "Nica's Dream". I don't mean meeting the level compositional quality Wes could produce, but I mean having a similar variety in melodic, rhythmic and harmonic devices while staying coherent over the changes:
    Last edited by Tal_175; 02-20-2019 at 10:12 AM.

  35. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher View Post
    I just don't remember seeing much of this.
    Revisit this thread from time to time and see if you can spot them....

  36. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Alter View Post
    .... But when talking about high level playing, I think all styles are equally difficult. The level is set by people who devote their whole lives to it, so it's always high.....
    Some people devote their entire life to being the very best shoe shiner they can be. Some people devote their life to being the very best brain surgeon they can be. Hmmm, I guess the degree of difficulty must be the same. Sorry, you're right, what was I thinking!

  37. #36

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet View Post
    Some people devote their entire life to being the very best shoe shiner they can be. Some people devote their life to being the very best brain surgeon they can be. Hmmm, I guess the degree of difficulty must be the same. Sorry, you're right, what was I thinking!
    people who are really good in their field usually appreciate exellence in other fields, because they know how hard it it to acheive.

  38. #37

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by corpse View Post
    The craft of any art form is endless. One can take it as far as they wish, and will never reach the end. Yes, a master player achieves things that are "harder" on an E blues shuffle, and it can be impressive. A player on Stella can be as bad as a person first holding a guitar.

    Don't you think it's harder to be a run of the mill jazz player doing a passable stella at a jam than to be a run of the mill rock player doing an E blues at a jam?

    That's about 1 year of playing vs. 5 or so maybe
    that's the point. it shouldn't take you 5 years to play passably over stella.

  39. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet View Post
    Revisit this thread from time to time and see if you can spot them....
    Ok. I see what you're talking about, but I think there's a distinction between "beginning the same way" - starting with copying favorite artists etc - vs saying that covering Stella is "the same/no more difficult etc" to covering a basic 12 bar blooze. They are "the same" and "different" at the same time.

    I have heard Reg and other pros talk about it basically being "the same" in the sense that you have to learn to play convincingly over a single chord type. In other styles the single chord type often might be generalized for most of the tune, where as in jazz, you're generally covering many different chord types and functions within a given tune. So, I just think that asking whether they are "the same" maybe isn't the right question.

    I think it's merely talking about a couple of slightly different things as if they're one thing...

  40. #39

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet View Post
    ... to a level where you can gig with the best in each respective field.

    The reasons I'm interested in this subject are :

    1/ Like many I've been through the learning curve for both and

    2/ Bizarrely, there are posts I come across on this forum where people suggest that being good at plain old rock guitar is almost as difficult as being good at Jazz....

    So I'd like to get some thoughts on this from some of you guys, preferably from those of you who have climbed both "mountains".

    I'll start off with an analogy that sums up the difference for me-

    Getting my shit together to be gig ready in rock guitar (Hendrix, Clapton, Page etc) as a teenager took some work, probably 2 years of 1 to 2 hours a day. I could then play rock solos I heard (after many repeated listens), and then quickly moved on to improvise endlessly against all the usual rock progressions. Lotsa people did this.

    Now lets make the analogy for this work to be "washing windows". Learning rock guitar soloing was like having to wash all the windows for the entire ground floor of the old World Trade Centre.

    Learning Jazz on the other hand (again, to an "impressive" level), is more like having to wash every fucking window in not just the whole fucking tower, but both of them! Then, when you think you're done, you have to start again, to keep them clean!

    If you disagree, you might infer that I must be doing it all wrong (I've heard that one before). Just so I see you coming, let me just say that if you disagree that the difference is that great, I'll say outright, without a shred of doubt, that you must be doing it wrong!

    Novices watching this space will no doubt side with the "Nah, Jazz is not that complicated" brigade. I get it, it's what you wanna believe (and we all tend to read and agree with what suits us these days - Idiocracy an' all that...). Cool, come back to this thread in 5 years and let's see how you're travelling, in fact, let's make it 10!

    I think to play rock or blues WELL is a bit harder...

    I recognise that teenage rock thing... But now I go back to tunes and realise I learned them wrong haha... There's quite a lot to that rock and roll music, you know :-)

    The real difficulty with learning jazz? I think it's a matter of immersion. When I was growing up, teenagers still used to gather around the guitar and play songs on the beach or whatever.... Imagine if those songs were jazz standards... May have been like that at one time, the Beatles used some pretty jazz chords.

    Of course to be a great jazz improvisor takes a long long time, esp. on the guitar... But being functional as a player, knowing the melodies and changes to a lot of jazz tunes, being able to play a little bit... That's not something that's valued now, so people either go all in to be jazz virtuosos or give up - even the amateurs.

    Perhaps the same is now true of Hotel California...

  41. #40

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    I think to play rock or blues WELL is a bit harder...
    Than jazz? gtfo

    John Mayer plays rock and blues well.



    pasquale grasso plays jazz well.



    yeah yeah not fair to compare artists etc whatever obviously it was bound to happen on this thread right
    White belt
    My Youtube

  42. #41

    User Info Menu

    Sorry, jazz police, I meant to say to play rock and blues well is a bit harder than it seemed when I was 16.

    I did once laugh at somebody for suggesting Julian Lage and John Mayer were on a par... I mean, no...

    But then, the way we judge a good jazz players is completely different from a good rock guitarist... And the number 1 thing that I value from any player is individuality and character... that goes for any genre.

    Mayer sounds like he listened to the same records I did when I was learning guitar and got really good at copying them.

  43. #42

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    Sorry, jazz police, I meant to say to play rock and blues well is a bit harder than it seemed when I was 16.

    I did once laugh at somebody for suggesting Julian Lage and John Mayer were on a par... I mean, no...

    But then, the way we judge a good jazz players is completely different from a good rock guitarist... And the number 1 thing that I value from any player is individuality and character... that goes for any genre.

    Mayer sounds like he listened to the same records I did when I was learning guitar and got really good at copying them.
    yeah i agree with all this except calling me the jazz police which hurt my feelings
    White belt
    My Youtube

  44. #43

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    I think to play rock or blues WELL is a bit harder...

    I recognise that teenage rock thing... But now I go back to tunes and realise I learned them wrong haha... There's quite a lot to that rock and roll music, you know :-)

    The real difficulty with learning jazz? I think it's a matter of immersion. When I was growing up, teenagers still used to gather around the guitar and play songs on the beach or whatever.... Imagine if those songs were jazz standards... May have been like that at one time, the Beatles used some pretty jazz chords.

    Of course to be a great jazz improvisor takes a long long time, esp. on the guitar... But being functional as a player, knowing the melodies and changes to a lot of jazz tunes, being able to play a little bit... That's not something that's valued now, so people either go all in to be jazz virtuosos or give up - even the amateurs.

    Perhaps the same is now true of Hotel California...
    The sad truth is 99% guitarists can't play Johnny B Goode right, and yet take it for granted that it's the easiest thing in the world.

  45. #44

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Hep To The Jive View Post
    The sad truth is 99% guitarists can't play Johnny B Goode right, and yet take it for granted that it's the easiest thing in the world.
    Probably the single most butchered intro lick in music history.
    Jeff Matz, Jazz Guitar:
    http://www.youtube.com/user/jeffreymatz

    "Jazz is like life...it goes on longer than you think, and as soon as you're like 'oh, I get it,' it ends."

    --The Ghost of Duke Ellington

  46. #45

    User Info Menu

    Perhaps learning to play rock guitar is a means to an end, while learning jazz guitar is an end in itself. We learn to play rock guitar because we want to emulate our heroes, because we want to play in a band or because we want to write songs. After reaching a useful level of competence, we stop learning. We learn to play jazz because of musical curiosity; learning continues and never really ends. Experienced and renowned jazz guitarists (Bill Frisell comes to mind) often talk of finding new ways of playing. Rock guitarists seldom talk in this way.

  47. #46

    User Info Menu

    You play rock to get laid. When it stops working you switch to jazz. Luckily at that point you have lots of time in your hands to finally practice and learn music.

  48. #47

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Tal_175 View Post
    You play rock to get laid. When it stops working you switch to jazz. Luckily at that point you have lots of time in your hands to finally practice and learn music.
    You mean you supposed to start learning jazz when you old enough to not need to get laid?

  49. #48

    User Info Menu

    I’m uncomfortable.
    White belt
    My Youtube

  50. #49

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Hep To The Jive View Post
    You mean you supposed to start learning jazz when you old enough to not need to get laid?
    No, that would be too bleak a prospect for jazz. I meant when people you date get old enough not to be infatuated by rock guitar playing crowd. Like, I don't know, 27 and older I guess. A lot of Jazz guitarist started by playing rock. Also I don't see this forum being filled with 15 year olds unlike other guitar forums.
    Last edited by Tal_175; 02-22-2019 at 07:25 PM.

  51. #50

    User Info Menu

    When I said "it stops working", I didn't mean the "it" I meant playing the rock guitar as a method of getting the opposite sex (or same sex whichever rocks your boat) be interested in you.