-
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
-
04-22-2023 10:26 AM
-
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
That said, there are other leveled studies out there, just not all in one place that you can get your hands on as quickly. The Stanley Yates series is a good example.
-
What I've noticed among the players I've played with, listened to, and learned from is big ears, often (but not inevitably) accompanied by an analytical (or at least appreciative) understanding of what they were hearing and sometimes imitating. Marsalis is a very articulate example of this sensibility--I return to that series of videos he did about swing, as much for his way of talking about the music as for his demonstrations of its operation.
My formal-training background is in literature, with a lot of standard-humanities boot-camp stuff behind that, so Marsalis' poetic-historical take on the aesthetics of jazz resonates with me. (I should point out that my take on literature and art in general is currently not all that fashionable in the academy. In the fig department, I'm all-around moldy.) And as an escaped English teacher, I know very well that deep understanding of historical roots and branches is not essential to enjoying the art. But the best teachers do have that understanding, and it supports the way they teach the skills of enjoyment to non-specialists.
BTW, Kurt Rosenwinkel was just a name to me, and I was pleased to see from the videos posted here how listenable his playing is. I suspect he might have real big ears. Does that mean that he should include older styles in his own performances? I'm with Christian--of course not. But I really dig an artist who knows where the art has been as well as where it might be at the moment.
-
Originally Posted by ruger9
-
Originally Posted by ruger9
Music ultimately not chemistry or grammar even if aspects can reflect those disciplines. Comparisons with STEM subjects are flawed I would say for a number of fundamental reasons. There’s an interesting conversation to be had about this- especially the history of this idea which is ancient- but when discussing music education, I regard this type of comparison as little more than a rhetorical flourish. I could go into my reasons for thinking this, but I’ll leave it for now.
Language is a better analogy, but still flawed.
If we study for instance, Shakespeare, the onus is not on the student to write Shakespearean works in early modern English. I’m not convinced even creative writing students would spend much time doing this. Presumably a journalism student would not explore the grammatical vagaries of Elizabethan English.
So I don’t think there’s a direct comparison. Music is … weird? We actually spend a fair bit of time in jazz writing those faux-Elizabethan sonnets so to speak.
How far do we go with this sort of thing? I’m not sure. I’ve done it myself and used to be super dogmatic that everyone should do the same. These days I think life is not so simple … these rabbit holes go as deep as you like and there’s brilliant musicians who know very little of the history and just play what is current and needed within their immediate community of practice.
Bottom line. What do you teach and how? What do you do in three or four years?Last edited by Christian Miller; 04-22-2023 at 01:25 PM.
-
Seems most jazz guys are overlooking #4 which is detrimental. Did anyone even mention it in 3 pages instead of just arguing about jazz education and whether it will become like classical music? I wish someone would wake up and realize that jazz is originally low brow working class music. Classical was always the music of the elite. Some try to make jazz a glassed in art piece at a university museum for cork sniffers and hopeful competitors in training for music olympics. It's damaged it. Music should always be entertainment first and for the listener. Actual danceable jazz would probably be revolutionary at this point. I guess I'm glad I play blues. No one ever puts that stuff on a pedestal in the university so it is still music for us low folk.
-
Originally Posted by DawgBone
The Blues: Understanding and Performing an American Art Form | Coursera
-
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
-
Originally Posted by ruger9
-
Originally Posted by dot75
-
They made all the music teachers in NYC go to an annual meeting where Wynton was the guest speaker.
All I remember was his speech being so stupid, I couldn't stop myself from muttering curses as I walked out on it.
Then there was the time he started putting down Phil Woods on a Jazz Cruise over the mic, and PW's daughter happened to be in the audience.
She complained to the cruise director, and they made him apologize to the audience over the mic.
He should keep his trumpet in his mouth at all times.
-
Originally Posted by DawgBone
Let's give it a little time. We're dumbing down our schools as rapidly as possible.
-
Originally Posted by sgcim
W. Marsalis is a brilliant trumpet player.
He has a point of view on jazz education and tries to present it.
He sees that it has a deeper meaning because it influences the development of jazz music in general.
He is very active as a jazz musician and educator and no one will stop him from doing so.
-
Todd Rundgren's album Initiation 1975
"The Death of Rock and Roll"
Just the other day I got a call from a friend
"i heard what you been playin' and I think it's a sin
Why can't you make a living like the rest of the boys
Instead of fillin' your head with all that synthesized noise? "
Jackals wait nearby, watching rock and roll die
And no one dared to help it
Vultures fill the sky
I thought we was supposed ta, supposed ta be free
But we all got sold
It must be the death of rock and roll
The critics got together and they started a game
You get your records for nothing
And you call each other names
Things got out of hand and somebody got sore
Now we're all tuning up for the rock and roll war
Time to take up sides, helping rock and roll die
Pick up your check at the window
No one left to cry
I thought we was supposed ta, supposed ta be free
But we all got sold
It must be the death of rock and roll
Nobody paid, nobody played, nobody stayed
Just my lonely guitar
Nobody paid, nobody stayed, nobody played
Just my lonely guitar
-
Originally Posted by ruger9
I’m sure if you want to you can think if several blindingly obvious and fundamental differences as well as similarities between being a writer and a jazz musician. I identified one in my previous post for instance.
It’s… different? Analogies with other subjects may not be a total waste of time, but I think you have to be realistic and specific about the differences and similarities. Which means pedantically talking about details I’m afraid. No one likes doing that because we all want to have Big Ideas.
to whit - I don’t think Wynton is wrong exactly. I don’t think he is right exactly either. It’s more nuanced than that.
-
Originally Posted by sgcim
-
Originally Posted by Litterick
-
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
-
Originally Posted by ruger9
-
Originally Posted by Jazzjourney4Eva
-
Originally Posted by DawgBone
And don’t jazz musicians play for the wealthy? We all want to paid. That’s the bottom line. Same for Mozart, same for a jobbing guitar player. These pedestals are all posthumous aren’t they? Mozart died young and impoverished and no one knows where he is buried.
Otoh I spent ten years playing swing dance gigs for technology professionals.
Make of that what you will
-
Tbh thinking a little about what Dawgbone said…
300 years ago music was not taught at institutions like the Julliard. It was taught by an apprenticeship system at trade schools. Musicians have always been artisans…
perhaps over time a form of music just gets posher. The middle classes want to do it, even the upper classes… I mean in the UK we have best selling folk musicians who happen to be minor aristocracy lol.
-
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
Did you study musicology ?
-
Originally Posted by Lionelsax
i mean all the jazz educators lament the demise of the apprenticeship system… I can’t imagine Wynton being any different …
-
A lot of art history can be clarified by answering three questions: Who plays (or paints or writes or acts), who listens (or looks or reads), who pays? There are certainly other important questions, but that socio-economic framework can't be ignored. And since not all artistic activity is professional or life-sustaining, "who pays" actually means "where does the material support for artistic activity come from?" (Which is another way of looking at audiences and reception.)
As Christian points out, the conservatory/university/formal-school institutional machinery didn't always exist--though from the middle ages onward there were insititutional settings where musical training occurred (monasteries, churches) and where something like curricula could be generated. But yes, training in what we would recognize as professional-level music and painting happened in apprenticeship and workshop settings, because they were skill-sets that could be acquired via an apprentice-journeyman-master model. And pro-level musicians like the players Haydn led at Eszterháza were employees or servants or contractors. Individual master-level or rising-star artisans might find patrons (as some poets and dramatists* did), but the notion of the Great Artist developed along with the emergence of the middle classes and the decoupling of patronage from production. As far as I can tell, the professional/commercial writer/dramatist is an invention of the late Renaissance. Music, I suspect, can be seen to follow a similar trajectory.
* Including Shakespeare--happy birthday, Will!Last edited by RLetson; 04-23-2023 at 12:58 PM.
Tour of Gibson Custom Shop
Today, 06:04 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos