Worst Jazz Guitar Tone?

**fumblefingers** · 11-10-2013, 02:19 PM

Originally Posted by Vladan

Obviously, I'm lost case for any kind of Jazz. Neither I understand what's wrong with this tune, nor what is so specail about it, nor if Benson's tone is good or bad. It's like excersise in style of Swing (in all good conotation, think Raymond Queneau's Exercises in Style for a parallel in literature). Goodman is The Master of the style, while Benson stretched it a bit to far, I think.
Anyway, it all sounds just right to my ears, I would not change a thing, except I don't care for 2 solos at once, but guess that goes with the genre.

yes, this is common. there were two solos, plus an..... "improvisational duet"? whatever.

its not uncommon in the music to hear a round of solos, then trading 4s or 8s, then a cacophony of multiple soloists to raise the roof before returning to the head. (it worked too, you noticed the audience's reaction i'm sure). some have compared this practice to a "shout chorus"

jazz is a celebration music, a party music, a letting down your hair music, a raising hell music. this is not chamber music, right?

**Keira Witherkay** · 11-10-2013, 02:35 PM

judging tone is all in the ear of the listener ... and even tho i am quite a traditionalist when it comes to jazz tone (that i predominantly like the prescribed round fat tone ) yet i love a lot of telecaster tone on jazz , it depends on the player ...i'd sooner listen to a 'tone" i don't like than listen to a player i don't like .

**fumblefingers** · 11-10-2013, 03:41 PM

Originally Posted by Jim Soloway

I don't believe that Gibson was ever "the only game in town". Epiphone, Guild, and to an extent Gretsch all made some fine archtops. D'Angelico was also a favorite among quality players.

fair enough. speaking in absolutes is always precarious.

correction. "just about the only game in town".

PS - Gretsch huh? really?

**Jim Soloway** · 11-10-2013, 03:45 PM

Originally Posted by fumblefingers

fair enough. speaking in absolutes is always precarious.

correction. "just about the only game in town".

PS - Gretsch huh? really?

Indeed. One of the best archtops I've ever played was a mid-50's Country Club. I also owned a 59 Single Anniversary that was a dynamite guitar. George Van Eps and Bucky Pizzarelli played Gretsch 7-strings for years and Chet Atkins went from a D'Angelico to a Gretsch 6120.

**Spook410** · 11-10-2013, 04:42 PM

Back to tone for a moment, it is possible to have less than stellar tone, but make good music.

I like Bill Frisell even if I don't listen to his effects drenched stuff much. And really, this, to me, is pretty good tone. For a tele anyway. But it is good music without iconic acoustic archtop acoustic pluck.

**fumblefingers** · 11-10-2013, 04:50 PM

more thoughts on this:

R&D and startup costs for guitars aimed at the pop/rock/country market may well be worth it. you know, because of the market! you win some and you lose some, but when you win - you win big.

regarding another point that you made above about "new young guns" or whatever it was. I would suggest that one may want to consider their instruments of choice from a different angle. that is, today it's all about custom guitars. (wood binding, different sizes and shapes, different solid colors, minimalistic design, etc.). if you are a new innovative player who wants to make a statement and play the music differently (or very differently) you probably want a new, custom, one-of-a kind guitar built to your specifications and criteria. something as unique as you are (or think you are). do you really want to trot out there with a Wesmo or Johnny Smith? Who can outdo Wes and Johnny when it comes to being Wes and Johnny? today's young guns don't want to be that 40s, 50s, 60,s 70s, or even 80s guy. they want to be ground breakers. many of them play post-fusion and use distortion and a lot of other effects too. do they really need an archtop?

When you order a custom guitar with a one-man shop you get to deal one-on-one with the luthier. it is a very bespoke experience. Gibson is a large company comparatively speaking. it simply isn't realistic to do the bespoke thing at scale, although it has certainly been attempted and continues to be here and there. make no mistake though, it ain't the same.

**Doctor Jeff** · 11-10-2013, 05:27 PM

Re tone: it's all about making a statement with the instrument. If someone can say something interesting with an imperfect tone, that's great. I think everyone would agree Joe Pass was not so concerned about tone per se on his Virtuoso recordings, but they are stellar recordings because of his mastery of the instrument. (I would say the same thing about Charlie Parker and any number of horn players too.)

On a bit of a tangent, I read a recent tribute to Lou Reed that said his voice had only a passing acquaintance with pitch, which I thought was a pretty clever way to put it.

Re that Benson clip, he burns it--maybe overplays a bit given the song and the setting, but wow. Kind of a dry woody tone there compared to his usual.

Re Gibsons: they have become a boutique manufacturer for the most part. I like the term "lifestyle product". The price has increased quite a bit more than inflation-- the ES-175 I bought for $900 in 1980 should cost $2500 today, but the msrp is a whopping $5400 and street price $4000, an increase obviously not related just to the production costs. What they have done is to make Epiphone their reasonably priced division, with production overseas.

**Philco** · 11-10-2013, 06:26 PM

Originally Posted by Patrick2

I just finished listening to the Goodman - Benson clip for about the 4th or 5th time. Can't really get enough of it. Not really sure how Vladan can see this as just . . . "meh?" I definitely agree with Vladan's comments on not being sure if Benson's tone is good or bad. I tried a couple of time to really focus in on Benson's tone . . I was just totally distracted by the wonderful music he was making. Also, similarly to Vladan . . I usually REALLY . . REALLY dislike it when two solos are happening at once. I agree it does go with that specific genre and period of it. Even more so with Dixieland. But, in this case, I enjoyed it because it wasn't over played. Goodman seems to be recognizing that Benson was soloing and he almost seemed to be complimenting (comping) behind him. The true sign of a consumate professional and self effacing gentleman. Benson was smokin' hot . . as usual.

@Philco . . . Is Benson's solo really the only thing you find worth listening to in that performance? Not sure I can understand that.

To answer truthfully..... no. I respect to all those musicians playing in that piece.
What I should have articulated is that I am totally (literally) unfamiliar with that style of music.
I have no history with it. Usually I don't feel anything when I hear that style other than a desire to be doing something else.
But I feel that way about Gypsy Jazz as well and lots of other styles of music.
Blues as well.
Dixieland however does have a great impact on me. I loathe it. I will run out of the room. I will do anything to stop that noise.

I attribute my ignorance (and that's what it is) to an extremely sheltered and culturally bereft upbringing.

But I am learning, slowly but surely..... my palette is growing. I'm starting to fill in some of the missing pieces and this Benny Goodman track is a great turning point.

So this is Swing?
I love the groove of this and I think what Fumble is saying is true. This is party music. But it's not unsophisticated party music.
It's sophisticated in its simplicity. The verses are 3 chords (if you leave out the walking comping....which are the same chords but different inversions)
The bridge is also 3 chords and one from the verse.
No altered chords at all (although GB adds a #11 to the F7 in the bridge)

But here's what's revealing to me.
I can't play it.
That is to say, I can't improvise as GB is and make those changes smoothly.

Those incredibly simple changes. I really can't play fluently through them.
So this piece has made me realise that I have been practising the wrong things.
THIS is where my greatest failing lays.

So I'm going to go back and start with this and other simple pieces like it.

If I can swing through changes like this then I think I can really move forward.

I really need a teacher don't I?

Oh and BTW I think many have misinterpreted Gianluca's original post.
He was saying that he loves the tone of GB in the Goodman clip and not that he hates it.

**Philco** · 11-10-2013, 06:33 PM

Originally Posted by fumblefingers

you mean when they both played Super 400s? Those are still available. Here's a nice one, a collectable one at that. Somebody snatched it though. Don't worry, they'll make more.

The only thing I can't quite figure is the dealers price. The Gibson web site lists these at $17,300. The quilted maple should be a $4-$5K upgrade at max. Maybe $500 for the sunburst. I'm not sure how that gets to $31K MSRP. I would think that final sales price should be closer to $15K, so I'll bet I didn't go for $22K, but you never know.

Worth questioning for the serious buyer. Order yours today!

I think you are correct about the Super 400 but I wish you weren't.
The size doesn't worry me but they are expensive.
I have seen photos of both Pat and George playing 400's way back then.

**jorgemg1984** · 11-10-2013, 07:03 PM

Originally Posted by Philco

To answer truthfully..... no. I respect to all those musicians playing in that piece.
What I should have articulated is that I am totally (literally) unfamiliar with that style of music.
I have no history with it. Usually I don't feel anything when I hear that style other than a desire to be doing something else.
But I feel that way about Gypsy Jazz as well and lots of other styles of music.
Blues as well.
Dixieland however does have a great impact on me. I loathe it. I will run out of the room. I will do anything to stop that noise.

I attribute my ignorance (and that's what it is) to an extremely sheltered and culturally bereft upbringing.

But I am learning, slowly but surely..... my palette is growing. I'm starting to fill in some of the missing pieces and this Benny Goodman track is a great turning point.

So this is Swing?
I love the groove of this and I think what Fumble is saying is true. This is party music. But it's not unsophisticated party music.
It's sophisticated in its simplicity. The verses are 3 chords (if you leave out the walking comping....which are the same chords but different inversions)
The bridge is also 3 chords and one from the verse.
No altered chords at all (although GB adds a #11 to the F7 in the bridge)

But here's what's revealing to me.
I can't play it.
That is to say, I can't improvise as GB is and make those changes smoothly.

Those incredibly simple changes. I really can't play fluently through them.
So this piece has made me realise that I have been practising the wrong things.
THIS is where my greatest failing lays.

So I'm going to go back and start with this and other simple pieces like it.

If I can swing through changes like this then I think I can really move forward.

I really need a teacher don't I?

Oh and BTW I think many have misinterpreted Gianluca's original post.
He was saying that he loves the tone of GB in the Goodman clip and not that he hates it.

Phil if am not completely deaf it's a Rhythm Changes in Ab (not close to the instrument to check). There are more than 3 chords... although a lot of time they use "harmonic generalization" on the As, this is relating mainly to Ab. The bass and the piano sometimes "sense" this and also simplify what they are doing. Thinking mainly of bluesy Ab lines is a good way of avoiding the changes.. it works well on short solos but no so well on longer solos. Check Brad Mehdlau's Antrohpology, one of the best uses of both "harmonic generalization" and "playing the changes" I've heard on these type of tunes.

Again, just aurally, but Benson does a little more streches than the #11 on the F7. His melodies are not always my cup of tea but it swings hard as hell!

**Patrick2** · 11-10-2013, 07:42 PM

Originally Posted by jorgemg1984

Phil if am not completely deaf it's a Rhythm Changes in Ab (not close to the instrument to check). There are more than 3 chords... although a lot of time they use "harmonic generalization" on the As, this is relating mainly to Ab. The bass and the piano sometimes "sense" this and also simplify what they are doing. Thinking mainly of bluesy Ab lines is a good way of avoiding the changes.. it works well on short solos but no so well on longer solos. Check Brad Mehdlau's Antrohpology, one of the best uses of both "harmonic generalization" and "playing the changes" I've heard on these type of tunes.

Again, just aurally, but Benson does a little more streches than the #11 on the F7. His melodies are not always my cup of tea but it swings hard as hell!

Exactly what I was going to say. George ain't hitting on all the changes. He's blowing right through most of them. What impresses the shit out of me, is that there are three chord instruments there . . . and no one's stepping on anyone.

**Philco** · 11-10-2013, 08:03 PM

Yeah he does miss some of the changes but he does know where he is and he does come back home when it counts.
I know a lot of Benson from transcribing over the years and some of his early licks are in there.

That's all cool and I can certainly disregard the changes and go nuts as well BUT I'm guessing that these guys come from a school or a lineage that was brought up on changes and how to navigate them.

You have to know the rules before you can break them and I need to learn the rules

**jorgemg1984** · 11-10-2013, 08:29 PM

I like both approaches if used tastefully.

**Patrick2** · 11-10-2013, 09:22 PM

Originally Posted by jorgemg1984

I like both approaches if used tastefully.

Yeah .. .agreed. And only the "changes police" would let you know if the solo-ist was hitting and framing the changes. Really . . who cares? If the music they're making while they're blowing works and is great music . . . then, there is no correct and incorrect. I really don't care if they're bouncing 4ths in a pent . .. if it sounds good . . then it sounds good.

**Doctor Jeff** · 11-10-2013, 10:22 PM

"If it sounds good, it IS good."

Edward Kennedy Ellington

**ecj** · 11-10-2013, 11:33 PM

Four on Six is not rhythm changes. It's a static Ab7 over the A section, then a descending series of dominants around the cycle starting from a dominant a half-step down from the I chord (G7) on the bridge. The last two bars of the bridge switch harmonic rhythm twice as fast (Bb7 to Eb7, one bar each) which allows the cycle to come back to the I chord. A little different than the usual rhythm changes, although it sounds similar.

They aren't skimming the changes on the A section, because there are none.

**Philco** · 11-10-2013, 11:41 PM

Over GB solo I think it is this...
A sect x2
Ab \ Db7 \ Ab \ Eb7

Ab \ Db7 \ Ab Eb7\ Ab Eb7

B sect

C \ C \ F7 \ F7 \Bb \ Bb \ Eb7 \ Eb7

It sounds wrong to play RChanges over this. GB is outlining those 7th chords. He's always there.
Or am I hearing it all wrong?

**mr. beaumont** · 11-11-2013, 12:12 AM

It's a riff tune....during the head, yeah, no changes on the A.

during the solos it's a rc variant.*

*here. The original stays on the riff. It's become accepted to superimpose rc like changes over the a section over the years...Benny did it.

**jasonc** · 11-11-2013, 12:39 AM

Ecj has it except it's Seven Come Eleven not Four On Six. And I'm pretty sure it's sixteen bars of Ab6 not Ab7.

**jorgemg1984** · 11-11-2013, 06:07 AM

Originally Posted by ecj

Four on Six is not rhythm changes. It's a static Ab7 over the A section, then a descending series of dominants around the cycle starting from a dominant a half-step down from the I chord (G7) on the bridge. The last two bars of the bridge switch harmonic rhythm twice as fast (Bb7 to Eb7, one bar each) which allows the cycle to come back to the I chord. A little different than the usual rhythm changes, although it sounds similar.

They aren't skimming the changes on the A section, because there are none.

Absolutely not. It's so obvious I don't even need a guitar. The dominants on the bridge start on F7 and follow the typical RC descend motion. The As are sort of static on the melody but just hear Benson's chords on the solos... pure RC. Of course a lot of the times they "sense" the soloist is not doing the changes and will do vamps.

**jorgemg1984** · 11-11-2013, 06:09 AM

Originally Posted by Philco

Over GB solo I think it is this...
A sect x2
Ab \ Db7 \ Ab \ Eb7

Ab \ Db7 \ Ab Eb7\ Ab Eb7

B sect

C \ C \ F7 \ F7 \Bb \ Bb \ Eb7 \ Eb7

It sounds wrong to play RChanges over this. GB is outlining those 7th chords. He's always there.
Or am I hearing it all wrong?

It's a RC... which means the amount of variations on the As is almost endless. George outlines different harmonies on different chorus. The Bs are what you wrote but they're all 7 chords, no triads

**Philco** · 11-11-2013, 06:22 AM

Originally Posted by jorgemg1984

It's a RC... which means the amount of variations on the As is almost endless. George outlines different harmonies on different chorus. The Bs are what you wrote but they're all 7 chords, no triads

Yeah I've been watching a few different versions on YT and they are all different. There's even another version with Goodman and Benson and it's different again. (not very nice and complete crap guitar tone from GB or some engineer who wanted to try his reverb machine out)

Then there's a Tal Farlow version in G with other variations on RC.

Damn it guys I need Rules I tells ya!!!!

Actually it being RC makes it a lot easier.
I get it. The only rule is that there are no rules.

**jorgemg1984** · 11-11-2013, 06:32 AM

Phil one can go crazy with these things... I tend do use just 5 or 6 variations on RC and blues, the ones I hear aurally the easiest. Some guys like Sonny Stitt could do any changes they wanted but I don't find the musical result all that pleasing... it's nice to have some options because if you do a 10 chorus solo it's a good idea to change between changes / just tonality and also do variations on the changes. But, as Patrick said, if it sounds good.. that's what it's important, making it swing hard and good sounding, much more important than knowing all the theory

Just as a final not the common key for a RC is Bb not Ab.

**ecj** · 11-11-2013, 09:37 AM

Originally Posted by jasonc

Ecj has it except it's Seven Come Eleven not Four On Six. And I'm pretty sure it's sixteen bars of Ab6 not Ab7.

Ha! Whoops!

Got my Montgomery song titles mixed up with my Christian ones.

It ain't rhythm changes, guys. Go listen to the original recording from "Genius of the Electric Guitar".

**mr. beaumont** · 11-11-2013, 09:57 AM

Originally Posted by mr. beaumont

It's a riff tune....during the head, yeah, no changes on the A.

during the solos it's a rc variant.*

*here. The original stays on the riff. It's become accepted to superimpose rc like changes over the a section over the years...Benny did it.

I'm not steering you wrong, guys. The original stays on the riff. No changes. Here, it's an RC variant during the solos.

there's a lot of variations on rc...not one way to play it.