Wynton Marsalis on the importance of aggressive inspiration in education ...

[A. Kingstone]

I thought he was getting at this

Louis Armstrong
Stevie Ray Vaughan
Count Basie
Hank Williams

Okay thanks. I've got plenty of each.

[Litterick]

All music is canonized; even pop and rock. Maybe not by teachers, since pop and rock isn't really taught in universities (except maybe places like Berkleee?)... but what Wynton suggests is no different than a kid sitting in his bedroom, learning Led Zeppelin and Beatles songs. It all came from somewhere originally. Education usually takes a wide swath for a reason: amassing knowledge, of as much of the -whatever- is reasonable and possible. That way, when you go out into the world to play with others and do your own thing, you can speak the language, and take it where YOU want to take it.

THAT is what cannot be taught. You have to figure that out for yourself. But knowing the language... and as much of it as you can... makes conversing in it alot easier.

All music is canonised. The Rock Canon by Carys Wyn Jones is an excellent book. Pop and rock are taught in universities. But does a kid sit in his bedroom, learning Led Zeppelin and Beatles songs? Would he not be more interested in contemporary bands?

Art schools do not teach the techniques of the old masters; that is art history. English Literature is no longer concerned with Austen, Conrad and James, to the exclusion of later writers.

Generations come and go. The language changes.

[kris]

From what I understood, Marsalis wants the musician to have a thorough education as a jazz musician.
Musicians with such education will have a lot of knowledge that they will be able to use in the creative process.
I think it's about the basics.
Good examples from the past shouldn't be a bad thing.
Maralis assumes that jazz music has developed and evolved.
It's all just education.

[Christian Miller]

The ABRSM system needn't/shouldn't be followed dogmatically. And one needn't take an ABRSM certified exam. One can simply work through it with a good "non-ABRSM" teacher. It's not like there are cash prizes at each recital. I get it though, humans are are competitive and are herd animals and tend to jump on band wagons in any field you can think of.

I'm American and found ABRSM on my own. My classical guitar teacher was clueless.

I found it to be valuable in the following ways:

1. The repetoire in the 8 levels takes one from beginner to "ready to be a music major"
2. It provides structure and a roadmap for beginners, intermediate, and advanced.
3. Has well curated literature across three fairly broad musical periods, for all levels 1-8
4. The student has choices every semester for three recital pieces, one from each period
5. Other pieces from the list can/should round out one's studies, even if not chosen for the semester recital
6. It has some refreshing new music in it! (including blues, swing, etc.). A big plus.
7. It doesn't stop one from playing/studying the usual Sor, Carcassi, Giuliani, Segovia stuff, or the "standard" method books out there that almost everyone uses.

all agreed. As I say I like the exams. But in the UK they have become a bit too central to a lot of kids music education….

it’s interesting that you are in the states and found the ABRSM exams. I’m not sure how I would teach classical students without it. Quite honestly I don’t know enough repertoire (I’m not really a classical player) to teach my own syllabus so having exam books is incredibly useful.

[Christian Miller]

Re the rock/pop canon - a lot of kids out there playing zeppelin covers etc

[Christian Miller]

From what I understood, Marsalis wants the musician to have a thorough education as a jazz musician.
Musicians with such education will have a lot of knowledge that they will be able to use in the creative process.
I think it's about the basics.
Good examples from the past shouldn't be a bad thing.
Maralis assumes that jazz music has developed and evolved.
It's all just education.

Well, how’s your 1920s/1930s jazz guitar? Because that’s the thoroughness wynton means. You can see this in action at the Julliard, where James Chirillo has written the syllabus for jazz guitar. You start with Nick Lucas and Eddie Lang…

for my part I think swing guitar has helped me understand bop and everything after - but this is the kind of historical background Wynton is talking about. I think it has helped me, but I know plenty of jazz guitarists who wouldn’t be interested in that early stuff at all, and who play great. And of course others who fall in love with an specialise in that era (like the equivalent of baroque lutenists but in jazz.)

I do wonder if that’s like insisting someone who wants to play Chopin or for that matter, Contemporary music, on the modern piano to first play HIP interpretations of early baroque music on harpsichord. The instrument and technique are different, not just the music. It’s not a bad thing per se, but it is a fairly uncompromising take imo.

[kris]

Well, how’s your 1920s/1930s jazz guitar? Because that’s the thoroughness wynton means. You can see this in action at the Julliard, where James Chirillo has written the syllabus for jazz guitar. You start with Nick Lucas and Eddie Lang…

for my part I think swing guitar has helped me understand bop and everything after - but this is the kind of historical background Wynton is talking about. I think it has helped me, but I know plenty of jazz guitarists who wouldn’t be interested in that early stuff at all, and who play great.

It's about being interested in the history of jazz in general - it hasn't hurt anyone yet.
Does this large group of uninterested good guitarists move freely, for example, in the style of Freddie Green.
Giants like Kurt R know exactly what's up.

[Christian Miller]

It's about being interested in the history of jazz in general - it hasn't hurt anyone yet.
Does this large group of uninterested good guitarists move freely, for example, in the style of Freddie Green.
Giants like Kurt R know exactly what's up.

I don’t I’ve ever heard Kurt playing in that style. I’d be curious if you have a link, love to hear it.

tbh most jazz guitarists don’t even know what actual Freddie green style entails - they think it means straight fours with three note voicings - and this is one of Chirillo’s specialisms. Otoh you don’t hear him take soaring solos on odd time charts. Is this a bad thing though? I don’t necessarily think so. People have their niches and specialisms.

I think many modern jazz guitarists do have an interest in all eras of jazz. This doesn’t mean they have the kind of specialist technique and instrument required to play that music. Otoh, you can be great at that stuff and not have the technique to play the kind of fluid electric guitar that Kurt plays. Nothing Kurt has ever done gives me the impression that he can not sound like Kurt; which in my view is a strength.

I’m not saying you can’t learn both, and I’m sure there’s plenty who do. but to give an idea of what it entails to live up to Wynton’s ideal. Tbh I’m not sure many players -even pros - do… maybe more so in NY

im quite up for it myself, but I’m off my rocker.

[kris]

I don’t I’ve ever heard Kurt playing in that style. I’d be curious if you have a link, love to hear it.

tbh most jazz guitarists don’t even know what actual Freddie green style entails - they think it means straight fours with three note voicings - and this is one of Chirillo’s specialisms. Otoh you don’t hear him take soaring solos on odd time charts. Is this a bad thing though? I don’t necessarily think so.

I think many modern jazz guitarists do have an interest in all eras of jazz. This doesn’t mean they have the kind of specialist technique and instrument required to play that music. Otoh, you can be great at that stuff and not have the technique to play the kind of fluid electric guitar that Kurt plays. Nothing Kurt has ever done gives me the impression that he can not sound like Kurt; which in my view is a strength.

I’m not saying you can’t learn both, and I’m sure there’s plenty who do. but to give an idea of what it entails to live up to Wynton’s ideal.

im quite up for it myself, but I’m off my rocker.

I think I heard somewhere at the jazz clinic how Kurt showed it - or he just knows what it's all about.
It was a long time ago.
He doesn't have to play it at concerts, he is aware that someone/FG/ did something like that.
Kurt is a very conscious guitarist very familiar with different styles - a workhorse.
It's respect for history that's what I meant.

[kris]

Mike Stern is constantly looking for interesting things in playing McCoy Tyner or Red Garland....:-)

[Christian Miller]

I think I heard somewhere at the jazz clinic how Kurt showed it - or he just knows what it's all about.
It was a long time ago.
He doesn't have to play it at concerts, he is aware that someone/FG/ did something like that.
Kurt is a very conscious guitarist very familiar with different styles - a workhorse.
It's respect for history that's what I meant.

Well, to be more specific - I wouldn’t expect Kurt to bust out an old Epiphone Emperor and start playing an Allan Reuss or Dick McDonough style chord solo arrangements or something. He is a disciple of George Van Eps though, which connects those traditions (both Freddie Green and Allan studied with GVP) and I think you can hear that tradition in Kurts playing on albums like Reflections where he sounds like a sort of hyper modern Barney kessel…

I do think this type of thing is somewhat emphasised at Julliard by the sounds of it, because that’s the type of guitar Wynton tends to feature in his own music (he references it in article) and Wynton runs Julliard jazz. So he picks Chirillo, a pre-war and swing specialist and long time Lincoln center guy to put the syllabus together?

But without wanting to come across as a bit of a snob, because that is the inverse of my argument, how many would be comfortable playing purely acoustic early jazz rhythm guitar? How many would be good at doing it, have the right feel and harmonic language. I think not many, and those advocating Wynton’s ideas need to realise that that’s what he means.

(I didn’t have a clue about any of this stuff before I started doing it btw. Early/swing guys are very very picky about this stuff.)

I think it’s a good thing to do for everyone and I would recommend it, but I do feel it’s asking students to do something specialist that not many of us can do. I don’t personally feel that being able to play authentic acoustic swing guitar is a prerequisite for being a good jazz guitarist, esp given comments regarding ‘Freddie green’ style of other threads.

Aside from anything else the appropriate instruments are not what most jazz guitarists play… (mind you if you can afford Julliard fees maybe picking up an old acoustic Archie is pocket money lol.)

[Christian Miller]

Mike Stern is constantly looking for interesting things in playing McCoy Tyner or Red Garland....:-)

yeah that’s really not what Wynton’s talking about. He’d be talking about starting with Ragtime, Jelly Roll and Harlem Stride.

and some of the NY players do indeed have that depth and range. Ethan Iverson does, for instance. Ethan Cohen too. Maybe it’s more common than I think. otoh the instrument of Jelly Roll and Jarret is basically the same - the modern piano. This is not true of Eddie Lang and Pat Metheny.

So I don’t know. I am persuadable it’s a good thing. Otoh I do wonder if we’ll just end up like classical music and fossilises.

the thing is, in my limited abilities I think I’m probably closer to what Wynton is saying than I suspect Kurt Rosenwinkel is (unless that video I described surfaces haha.) And that obviously doesn’t mean I think I’m a better player than Kurt lmao

Bill Frisell and Julian Lage I would describe as being more that way.

Do you have to be able to convincingly play in historical jazz styles to have something to say in jazz? I would say no.

[djg]

(both Freddie Green and Allan studied with GVP)

you got a source for FG studying with van eps? you might confuse him with ted greene?

[Christian Miller]

you got a source for FG studying with van eps? you might confuse him with ted greene?

Clearly they changed the matrix, because it is impossible I would misremember this …

So I don’t know about GVE, ‘it is said’ FG took lessons with Allan Reuss, who studied with GVE. For the purposes of my point it doesn’t really affect it; and it is slightly less embarrassing than confusing Ted Greene with Freddie…

otoh I would imagine this is HARD to substantiate for sure. FG was not the most forthcoming on guitar playing. I’m sure Jonathan Stout has done some proper research on this… he was my main source.

[djg]

it might be his dad actually, Fred Van Eps. I remember Jonathan Stout mentioning it, I’ll dig it out.

i'd be very surprised. FG was a poor black teenager, living with his aunt. van eps sr was one of the most famous banjo players of his times, who even hád his own banjo model.

[kris]

yeah that’s really not what Wynton’s talking about. He’d be talking about starting with Ragtime, Jelly Roll and Harlem Stride.

and some of the NY players do indeed have that depth and range. Ethan Iverson does, for instance. Ethan Cohen too. Maybe it’s more common than I think. otoh the instrument of Jelly Roll and Jarret is basically the same - the modern piano. This is not true of Eddie Lang and Pat Metheny.

So I don’t know. I am persuadable it’s a good thing. Otoh I do wonder if we’ll just end up like classical music and fossilises.

the thing is, in my limited abilities I think I’m probably closer to what Wynton is saying than I suspect Kurt Rosenwinkel is (unless that video I described surfaces haha.) And that obviously doesn’t mean I think I’m a better player than Kurt lmao

Bill Frisell and Julian Lage I would describe as being more that way.

Do you have to be able to convincingly play in historical jazz styles to have something to say in jazz? I would say no.

Not everyone will be jazz giants.
The knowledge will certainly come in handy, the more that a jazz musician must be universal in some way.
...for example, you have to record a solo in a style you don't know and there is a need for it in a recording studio.
who is going to play it?
ps.
I don't know if Marsalis is an expert on jazz guitar...he's a great trumpet player.

[Christian Miller]

i'd be very surprised. FG was a poor black teenager, living with his aunt. van eps sr was one of the most famous banjo players of his times, who even hád his own banjo model.

See my last post. The timeline for this would have been when FG was in NY, so later 30s/40s.

FG was already a veteran working musician by the point obviously, and his early style was more ‘large chords’ (listen to the Savory collection recordings of the Old Testament Basie band late 30s) typical of Al Casey, The Hot Club etc in that era. something changed between this time and his New Testament style and he gravitated eventually to the ‘one note’ style.

if he did indeed have lessons with Allan (or GVE) the idea is it may have changed his approach to voicing chords. (If it actually happened). It seems likely. His later playing has much the same feel (flat four, little accentuation on 2 and 4), but sounds more ‘learned’ harmonically to me.

FG style comping as it’s commonly known (three note voicings) actually originated with GVE’s teaching according to Jonathan.

[djg]

So I don’t know about GVE, ‘it is said’ FG took lessons with Allan Reuss, who studied with GVE. For the purposes of my point it doesn’t really affect it;

i got no clue about chopin or bach, but i know my jazz history inside out. i think it is important to get this stuff right. those guys deserve better than just putting a wet finger in the air. which is the point that marsalis is making.

[Christian Miller]

Not everyone will be jazz giants.
The knowledge will certainly come in handy, the more that a jazz musician must be universal in some way.
...for example, you have to record a solo in a style you don't know and there is a need for it in a recording studio.
who is going to play it?
ps.
I don't know if Marsalis is an expert on jazz guitar...he's a great trumpet player.

he’s not, but he’s very exacting about rhythm sections. And AFAIK that’s how he sees the guitar.

Tbh I think unless you yourself have a good working knowledge of pre war jazz guitar you may not realise how different it is. Most modern jazz guitarists tbh haven’t listened much to pre bebop music in general at least where I am. Reference points for swing guitar tend to be Second Testament Basie etc.

So, Jazz harmony means seventh chords at least. The drummer plays a big ride cymbal, the bass walks a legato four to the bar, and so on. The guitar plays with a smooth sound and a light touch. The horn players lag the beat.

None of these elements are present in pre war jazz and yet these things are so reflexive in standard school jazz you have to train yourself out of them to play the early stuff. Which is a good to do I think. Nothing should be thoughtless and automatic in that way.

I could see the argument of versatility applying more obviously to playing modern styles of music. but there used to be quite a few gigs in early jazz guitar. I know because Ive done literally thousands of them including with musicians who’ve ended up playing with Wynton himself…but I feel it’s gone out fashion.

(I learned on the gig btw, mostly by being told off.)

I do think NY musicians are more rooted historically in general than where I am; and I think many jazz schools do dig into the history.

But really that’s not the impression I get from Wynton’s piece, I think he’s talking about something further reaching, including an emphasis on the jazz ensemble as an acoustic entity as the basis of our musicianship. Bear in mind this means most jazz guitarists will not even be soloists in this environment... but it is a very good thing for us… so I’m not against it if that makes sense.

What im saying is those in support of Wynton’s view may not in fact represent it themselves. Neither does it necessarily relate to the skill sets of every great player out there. But if you want to follow this path, I feel I can recommend if you are patient and open minded.

[dot75]

But does a kid sit in his bedroom, learning Led Zeppelin and Beatles songs? Would he not be more interested in contemporary bands?

Art schools do not teach the techniques of the old masters; that is art history. English Literature is no longer concerned with Austen, Conrad and James, to the exclusion of later writers.

The only one of my three kids interested in music does just that with his guitar playing mates, Hendrix Creedance Clearwater Revival & AC/DC
seem to be on the menu atm - All this is music that I listen to myself but he didn't discover it through me, I tend listen to music when I'm home alone.
He'll occasionally play me somethin on his phone & ask if I know it, J Geils Band's version of 'I'm Not Rough' was the latest - Youtube says they wrote it.
I pointed him to the original...

As with most things the good stuff stays relevant - that's how you know it's good.

Can't speak to Art education but the only English Lit. student I know has a 1st year reading list that includes Greek & Roman classics,
Cervantes, Beckett, I haven't asked what else is on it, those are just books they've asked to borrow...

[Christian Miller]

Otoh I’m pretty sure Jaco couldn’t play upright bass like Wellman Braud and he was pretty important to jazz… (just not the stuff Wynton likes)

[Litterick]

As with most things the good stuff stays relevant - that's how you know it's good.

Can't speak to Art education but the only English Lit. student I know has a 1st year reading list that includes Greek & Roman classics,
Cervantes, Beckett, I haven't asked what else is on it, those are just books they've asked to borrow...

If young people are no longer playing new music, then rock is dead. If there is hope, it lies in the girls, who have taken up guitar in large numbers.

I would be appalled if Eng Lit reading lists did not include the classics, but a syllabus that excluded modern works would be useless.

[ruger9]

All music is canonised. The Rock Canon by Carys Wyn Jones is an excellent book. Pop and rock are taught in universities. But does a kid sit in his bedroom, learning Led Zeppelin and Beatles songs? Would he not be more interested in contemporary bands?

Generations come and go. The language changes.

Not much. Pop/Rock songs are still using the 12-note scale, and normal chord progressions. Not much has changed (besides the production) in the modern pop song since the Beatles. Actually, the Beatles were far more advanced than most pop songs today are.

[ruger9]

but I know plenty of jazz guitarists who wouldn’t be interested in that early stuff at all, and who play great. And of course others who fall in love with an specialise in that era (like the equivalent of baroque lutenists but in jazz.)
.

haha. This is the very definition of "school", from the very beginning. I'll NEVER need to know chemistry or calculus, but I had to learn them (poorly). Now... math and algebra I HAVE used. Diagramming sentences? Absolutely no need in life unless you're going to be a writer or a journalist. But reading the classics? Can't do any harm, and most of the time even does some good... even for those who thought it was stupid to have to read them.

[ruger9]

Bill Frisell and Julian Lage I would describe as being more that way.

Do you have to be able to convincingly play in historical jazz styles to have something to say in jazz? I would say no.

Are you saying you think Frisell and Lage did NOT study early jazz? For real??? (unless I've misunderstood you)