Modern jazz guitar sound

[RClegg]

In a lot of threads I see people referring to this or that amp, guitar or player getting a more "modern" or "contemporary" sound. I am curious what that really means to people, given our post-modern world where what is old is new again and given the age of a lot of jazz players.

Is it a more "rock" tone, an x-braced hollowbody, or something harmonic? A particular player's sound? I don't expect one particular answer, but I would like to hear what it means to people. A lot of days something from the 1960s or 1980s sounds "contemporary" compared to the something from the swing era, but that hardly constitutes contemporary at this point.

Russ

[Bill C]

to my mind it refers to players such as Kurt Rosenwinkel, Lage Lund, Mike Moreno

[AmundLauritzen]

From my observations it has the most to do with rhythmical freedom and creativity in all aspects, as well as phrasing and timing.

Many people think that "modern" sounding players use all sorts of weird scales nobody ever heard about, but oftentimes they play simple ideas. It's just the timing, rhythm, phrasing and tone(often a few effects added) that makes it what it is.

You can take a player who identifies as playing from any era. Put him in a group with contemporary NYC players, and then in a traditional swing band and listen to how he is influenced by the rhythm section. A good player will adapt. It is the group interaction that first and foremost creates this whole notion of "modern" or "traditional".

I'm going to generalize and say that just about all the "modern" players have a good grounding in the bebop language.
Then there is the new extension of the jazz language that has become part of the vocab: agumented scale, harmonic major, multi tonic systems, and other quasi-modal ways to play on chord changes that takes them outside the paradigm of being a slave to the changes. But this doesn't play such a big role in creating a "modern" sound as one would think. They are mere assets- icing on the cake to add something more to a solid foundation.
Taken to the extreme, you have Garzones "triadic chromatic approach" which is a system that disregards the changes but establishes a new foundation of melodic strength built on a different principle: the inherent melodic strength of triads and creating rules that ensure enough variety to keep the momentum of the line from dying out.

There are all sorts of new ways of conceptualizing music that one can explore when they feel they've mastered playing the changes. But can anyone ever say that?

Just some thoughts.

[jorgemg1984]

Delay, reverb, lots of triads and pentatonics More 335s than archtops too.

[RClegg]

Thanks, that is very helpful for thinking about how to approach different tunes.

Russ

[nado64]

semi-hollow, roundwound strings, paf humbuker, dark tone, a lot of reverb, a touch of delay and sometimes distortion.
Triad pairs, surimposed pentatonics, dodecaphony, moving a motif to different beats in the measure,...

[jorgemg1984]

Forgot about rounds

[mangotango]

semi-hollow, roundwound strings, paf humbuker, dark tone, a lot of reverb, a touch of delay and sometimes distortion....

....to summarise - all the tonal changes that have come with people who grew up with rock guitar now turning to jazz.

Ordinarily, I would also point to the changes in rhythm section composition that would accompany the "modernisation" in contemporary sound - i.e. how early jazz rhythm began with a marching band bass drum/snare and tuba or sousaphone or bass sax, and evolved to have the tuba replaced by a string bass and the marching bassdrum and snare by a drum kit. In the '80's you saw electronics creeping in, bass guitars replacing the upright, synth drums and programming, and how all of this helped to determine the "Modern Sound"......

However, these guys seem for the most part to prefer to have their rhythm section comprise a string bass and a drummer playing the smaller drums of a "jazz kit" rather than a full-on rock kit (both choices much better IMHO). So despite the guitar moving in this direction, most of the guitarists are still responding to a traditional rhythm section.

Which I find really interesting - it's almost like an anchor to a more traditional sound, as if not to lose that connection. Or maybe I'm just wanting to see something that isn't really there and bolting on my interpretation after the fact.

[nado64]

....to summarise - all the tonal changes that have come with people who grew up with rock guitar now turning to jazz.

I'm not right with that. A lot of youngs lions come from the rock, that is correct, but ...

The piano was and it is the main chordal instrument for the jazz.
We need to simulate this piano sound to stay "jazz" when we comp.

So, the modern chords are pretty similar to the piano chords. We are in a digital "high definition" era, so semi-hollow and vintage humbuker reduces feedback and noises, but stay close to the archtop sound and have the sustain of a piano. The grand piano played on jazz recordings has a lot of natural "hall" reverb, too. Just listen McCoy Tyner with Coltrane. Most of the young guitarists use their delay with an expression pedal, like the pedal of a piano.

The distortion is mainly used to simulate the saxophone sound. I know that the latin rock guitarist Carlos Santana uses this effect in this vein. Who copy who.

In their play, they play the changes. Of course, they incorporate some things from the rock, but I hear mainly pair triads, guide tones and surimposed pentatonics. Closer to a John Coltrane than an Angus Young or an Jimi hendrix.

And the tonal changes come mainly from the albums like the "real McCoy", "Inner Urge", "Speak no evil",...

[jorgemg1984]

People tend to associate modern jazz with fusion. This is funny to me... most people and historians have not caught up with the post 1990 jazz scene, which is one of the most vibrants ever. The electric bass, big drum kits thing was mostly done in the 80s.. it actually sounds pretty dated now. Most guys don't do it any more - except maybe Mike Stern who seems to have not replaced his watch batteries since 1988.

Modern jazz - Brad Mehldau, Mark Turner, Chris Cheek, Ben Street, Ben Monder, Kurt Rosenwinkel, Jeff Ballard, Brian Blade, Larry Grenadier, Jorge Rossy etc.. - is much more routed in bebop and has returned to a fairly conservative jazz group setting. It's time people stop thinking Pat Metheny or Joe Zainwul is modern jazz

[jorgemg1984]

I'm not right with that. A lot of youngs lions come from the rock, that is correct, but ...

Until Jim Hall, the guitar was only used for blues comping.
The piano was and it is the main chordal instrument for the jazz.
We need to simulate this piano sound to stay "jazz" when we comp.

So, the modern chords are pretty similar to the piano chords. We are in a digital "high definition" era, so semi-hollow and vintage humbuker reduces feedback and noises, but stay close to the archtop sound and have the sustain of a piano. The grand piano played on jazz recordings has a lot of natural "hall" reverb, too. Just listen McCoy Tyner with Coltrane. Most of the young guitarists use their delay with an expression pedal, like the pedal of a piano.

The distortion is mainly used to simulate the saxophone sound. I know that the latin rock guitarist Carlos Santana uses this effect in this vein. Who copy who.

In their play, they play the changes. Of course, they incorporate some things from the rock, but I hear mainly pair triads, guide tones and surimposed pentatonics. Closer to a John Coltrane than an Angus Young or an Jimi hendrix.

And the tonal changes come mainly from the albums like the "real McCoy", "Inner Urge", "Speak no evil",...

Wow.. before Jim hall the guitar was used for lots of stuff other than blues comping. Ever heard of Charlie Christian? But I agree Jim Hall was the father of modern jazz guitar and first guy able to replace piano players as a comper.

Can you please elaborate on the difference between piano chords and guitar chords? To me, chords are chords...

I agree on the rest

[nado64]

Thank you Jorge, I didn't understand that.
I think my brain has skipped the fusion period.

Charlie Christian, freddie green played in a big band context with a piano. For me it's more a support to the the drummer than a chordal instrument. Of course, we can talk about exceptions.

The chords I'm talking are the 4-notes rootless chords on the top strings than you don't strum but pick with your fingers. For an simple example a ii-v-i : Dm9 - G13 -C6/9 (quartal chord).

[kris]

Most modern sound in my opinion has John Scofield.
How he can get it?
this is a good question...
I have all his CD's .
He started with clean sound on Gibson es-335...than Ibanez As-200 and today also Telecaster.
He use diffrent configuration of pickups-sometimes he use bridge pick up for solo.
He is very creative musician and has few completly different music projects.
Attachment 9361

[3625]

People tend to associate modern jazz with fusion. This is funny to me... most people and historians have not caught up with the post 1990 jazz scene, which is one of the most vibrants ever. The electric bass, big drum kits thing was mostly done in the 80s.. it actually sounds pretty dated now. Most guys don't do it any more - except maybe Mike Stern who seems to have not replaced his watch batteries since 1988.

Modern jazz - Brad Mehldau, Mark Turner, Chris Cheek, Ben Street, Ben Monder, Kurt Rosenwinkel, Jeff Ballard, Brian Blade, Larry Grenadier, Jorge Rossy etc.. - is much more routed in bebop and has returned to a fairly conservative jazz group setting. It's time people stop thinking Pat Metheny or Joe Zainwul is modern jazz

That's a really good point Jorge - particularly I've noticed how the mainstream media (downbeat...) is always waaaayyyy behind on this stuff. Only after about a decade of nearly every jazz college student around the world showing an obvious Mehldau or Rosenwinkel influence, do these journo's sit up and take notice of what's actually going on and start to write about it, instead of in the late 90's/early 00's when this stuff was new and fresh.

[nado64]

Most modern sound in my opinion has John Scofield.
How he can get it?
this is a good question...
I have all his CD's .
He started with clean sound on Gibson es-335...than Ibanez As-200 and today also Telecaster.
He use diffrent configuration of pickups-sometimes he use bridge pick up for solo.
He is very creative musician and has few completly different music projects.

I think Scofield uses so well the pedals, it's very natural and helpful in his play.

[oldane]

Until Jim Hall, the guitar was only used for blues comping.

I beg to differ. Listen to Tal Farlow with the Red Norvo trio around 1950. Listen to Jimmy Raney with Stan Getz around the same time. Or earlier than that, listen to Oscar Moore comping behind Nat King Cole in the latters trio in the mid 1940s. Even earlier, listen to Eddie Durham in 1937 on The Kansas City 6/7 records with Basie alumni (on those records, Freddie Green held the rhythm guitar chair - and BTW also sang on "Them There eyes"). .

Charlie Christian, freddie green played in a big band context with a piano. For me it's more a support to the the drummer than a chordal instrument.

Actually they had very different roles in their respective bands. Freddie Green in the Basie band was the archetypical acoustic rhythm guitarist and he did indeed see himself as a part of the drum set ("A snare drum in Eb, a hihat in Ab"). Charlie Christian in the Goodman band was a featured soloist - on electric guitar - along with the wind players and didn't play rhythm guitar.

[nado64]

Billy Bauer, too.

But my purpose was : the guitar was not the main chordal instrument at this period.
Not also famous like today.
And in my opinion, it's Jim Hall who popularized this instrument like the chordal instrument in a combo.

Hey guys ! You are fussy about details. But, it's well.

[jorgemg1984]

Jim Hall took the instrument in a whole new direction, that is factual. He also was the first to be able to act as a solo comper with "monsters" like Rollins, Desmond or Farmer. But there were plenty of relevant guys before him... I would not call that a detail.

Piano players play tons of chords without the root... also not a detail. Guys like Mehldau or Jarrett are even very economical on the number of notes on their voicings.

4-note chords were used before Jim Hall... I think what Jim developed like no one was the idea of a voicing instead of a chord - this is the use of speficific degrees on each chord that were related on a progression instead of jumping positions (chords). He us a big inspiration on me because of that - Gary Burton states the same. In any case Hall's way of voicing a chord is quite different from a piano player... as it should be. On the rhythmic aspect he's clearly a guitar player!! Just listen to "My Funny Valentine" with Bill Evans or "Beatiful Love" with Michel Petrucciani...

@Kris I love Scofield... but I think he's quite different from the kind of players we're talking about here. I am not saying he's not modern but he's clearly different (sound, rhythm, melodic devices) from the post 90s generation.

[jorgemg1984]

That's a really good point Jorge - particularly I've noticed how the mainstream media (downbeat...) is always waaaayyyy behind on this stuff. Only after about a decade of nearly every jazz college student around the world showing an obvious Mehldau or Rosenwinkel influence, do these journo's sit up and take notice of what's actually going on and start to write about it, instead of in the late 90's/early 00's when this stuff was new and fresh.

Thanks! Not only the mainstream media but also plenty of jazz lovers / consumers and even jazz history books... Just talking about the guitar I know plenty of guys who love jazz who stopped on Metheny or Scofield and have no idea of all the great post 90s guitar players... and that's true for other instruments as usual. Weird...

[kris]

Jim Hall took the instrument in a whole new direction, that is factual. He also was the first to be able to act as a solo comper with "monsters" like Rollins, Desmond or Farmer. But there were plenty of relevant guys before him... I would not call that a detail.

Piano players play tons of chords without the root... also not a detail. Guys like Mehldau or Jarrett are even very economical on the number of notes on their voicings.

4-note chords were used before Jim Hall... I think what Jim developed like no one was the idea of a voicing instead of a chord - this is the use of speficific degrees on each chord that were related on a progression instead of jumping positions (chords). He us a big inspiration on me because of that - Gary Burton states the same. In any case Hall's way of voicing a chord is quite different from a piano player... as it should be. On the rhythmic aspect he's clearly a guitar player!! Just listen to "My Funny Valentine" with Bill Evans or "Beatiful Love" with Michel Petrucciani...

@Kris I love Scofield... but I think he's quite different from the kind of players we're talking about here. I am not saying he's not modern but he's clearly different (sound, rhythm, melodic devices) from the post 90s generation.

I think that some guitarist want to sound modern and some not.
in example Jesse van Ruller playing great standards-you can not say he sounds modern but if he take Tele -he sounds modern...:-)
For me still the best modern sounding guitarist is JS.
Not only that he actually play Tele but he use very modern own language.

[Toat]

Solid body. Anyone who plays an archtop is silly, this isn't 1940.

[calgarc]

alot of cafe del mar/chillout type stuff sounds modern to me, compared to traditional jazz...

[Daniel Kuryliak]

Wow.. before Jim hall the guitar was used for lots of stuff other than blues comping. Ever heard of Charlie Christian? But I agree Jim Hall was the father of modern jazz guitar and first guy able to replace piano players as a comper.

Jim Hall was certainly one of the modern fathers of the jazz guitar "sound" but not the only one.
Yes, before the jazz guitar came into being as a solo artist instrument it was part of the big swing band
era with orchestras such as Count Basie (Freddie Green) and others. Lots of Jazz guitar players became
session artists such as Kenny Burrell.

As far a "modern sounds jazz" question that the OP is asking...its an evolution of different techniques and
styles over the years, not just the availabilty of more electronic equipment and recording techniques out
there these days..
Anybody remember Jimmie Webster's "touch system/tapping" album using his invention ..the Gretsch White Falcon...

Stanley Jordan has taken that up a notch with his jazz-fusion style.

Jordan's touch technique is an advanced form of two-handed tapping.. The guitarist produces a note using only one finger by quickly tapping (or hammering) his finger down behind the appropriate fret. The force of impact causes the string to vibrate enough to immediately sound the note, and Jordan executes tapping with both hands, and with more legato than is normally associated with guitar tapping. The note's volume can be controlled by varying the force of impact: tapping with greater force produces a louder note.

[jorgemg1984]

Can you point out other fathers of the modern jazz guitar? And explain why? Hall is the only one obvious to me (pre Metheny of course).

Your point about Jordan - and Kris point about Scofield - it's correlated to what I was saying. To a lot of people modern means post 60s, Metheny and beyond. To me modern means post 90s, Rosenwinkel and beyond. There's a clear generation line between Metheny, Scofield, Frisell, Abercrombie, Stern and Rosenwinkel, Monder, Kreisberg, Lund, Hekselman, etc... The differences are in sound, melodic devices, group settings, composition approach, etc...

A lot of the stuff made by the first ones (where Jordan could be included) sounds pretty dated to me these days, much more dated than Wes or Hall stuff in the 60s... that's why it's hard to me to call them modern.

[3625]

Pat Metheny: "Jim Hall, who is to me in many ways the father of modern jazz guitar" - said in the 1st 20 secs of this doco...