The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Posts 1 to 25 of 135
  1. #1

    User Info Menu

    hello

    To those of you who have purchased McLaughlin's course:

    --did it meet your expectations?

    --where did it fall short?

    --beginner, intermediate or pro: which group is it geared for?

    --one (mediocre) through five (outstanding) stars: please provide your overall rating...

    thank you!

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    I've seen it - not all of it mind you, I couldn't bear to sit through too much of that white noise....anyway it's just JM playing his typical scalar stuff over chords. The approach is 95% scalar (like his playing). Awful incoherent soloing with no arc, no development of ideas, stiffest feel, heavy handed picking....As you can tell I wasn't impressed. But then I never cared one whit for that brand of soulless "white" music, so take my opinion with a huge grain or two of salt...

    it's geared to more advanced players

    HE "analyses" his own soloing at points. It's so funny to see. JM doesn't play solos that can be analysed because they dont make sense, so it's funny to see him try to pretend that there is a "point" to his solos. So he actually struggles along trying to talk about motifs etc etc, but it's pointless because it's just not there, and then he just resorts to reporting which scale he is using over which harmony which is all his playing ever really consists of.
    Last edited by Richb; 08-01-2013 at 08:26 PM.

  4. #3

    User Info Menu

    its great. and its not quite like rb said above. JM flies through skips as easily as steps. just try to keep up with his skips, hahaha.

    JMs solos are well constructed and never boring. they build in intensity from start to finish. they are, and always have been viscerally thrilling, no matter what else you can say about them. people are rightfully jealous about that. yes, he has been known to "just blow" - there's no doubt about it. its just one of those things with great players - if you've got it , flaunt it.
    and he did.

    he's gotten better at being compositional/melodic in his solos since the 70s, and he's made no secret that he's making a conscious effort to do so.

    in the course he covers a lot. he does include an "analysis" section. but this is not composition, remember, it's improv. he states that he doesn't have a chromatic "system" as such - no bebop scales, no specific use of upper and lower neighbors, enclosures, blah, blah, blah. he just plays.

    would richb prefer Dave Liebman's chromatic "analysis"? everybody knows what that is, right? chicks crave it. or perhaps the old bebop way of playing through changes? hate to tell ya, but Miles put that on notice in '59.

    as far as a course of improv study goes, you have to ask yourself, do I want to play like Bird, or do I want to play like Trane? do you even know the difference? JM does, and he has chosen the latter. he's a modal kind of guy. are you? or do you want to play like a bop man? you have to pick your poison.
    Last edited by fumblefingers; 08-02-2013 at 12:14 AM.

  5. #4

    User Info Menu

    It's a good set, especially if you are a JM fan. It gives you a good insight into how he approaches things. It's meant for advanced players mostly. There is little discussion of fundamentals, or technique, only hints at what is essentially neccesary to work on. He discusses scales that he uses, patterns within those scales, deriving chords from scales, chromatics, playing in odd signatures, hemiolas and other polyrhytmic ideas and soloing over increasingly complex tunes. Each volume has a section of idiosyncratic licks that relate to the material. The background tracks are all midi sequenced, and he plays with his 'laptop tone', which I could do without, but it's still the brilliant John McLaughlin. I think the set was originally priced to high, but the current sale price is reasonable.

  6. #5

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by fumblefingers
    as far as a course of improv study goes, you have to ask yourself, do I want to play like Bird, or do I want to play like Trane? do you even know the difference? JM does, and he has chosen the latter. he's a modal kind of guy. are you? or do you want to play like a bop man? you have to pick your poison.
    Spot on. If you like JML's style, get the DVDs, especially if you can find them 2nd hand. It's all in the title really, it's the way JML improvises. Very modal indeed, very scale oriented in my opinion too, but very interesting nonetheless. It's aimed at advanced players as already mentioned, although the major scale lessons are great for beginners.

  7. #6

    User Info Menu

    From 'Miles: The Unauthorised Biography' - chapter 27:

    "So I was trying to record some sh*t, you know, Bitches Brew, and it just ain't happening. 'Cos we had too much heavy black sh*t goin' down, so I said to Teo, hey, we need to mix some dumb-ass white sh*t into this. So I'm thinking, who is the whitest, stiffest, dumbest cat who can do this? So I called John, and I said, hey John you motherf***er, I'm doing a record and I need you to come over and lay down some real white, stiff sh*t, you know what I'm saying? And he says 'sure Miles, I'd be honoured' in that cute British accent. So we get to the studio, and John says, 'what do you want me to do?' So I look him right in the eye, and I say, 'Play the guitar like you only know how to play like some totally incoherent, white, dumb, pointless motherf***er.' And John went kind of quiet for a couple of seconds, but then he started to play. So when he did his white, soulless sh*t and mixed it up with my heavy black sh*t, well man, it all came out just the right consistency of sh*t. You dig what I'm sayin'?"

  8. #7

    User Info Menu

    That's hilarious! ... I wonder what he said to Bill Evans....

  9. #8

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by grahambop
    From 'Miles: The Unauthorised Biography' - chapter 27:

    'Play the guitar like you only know how to play like some totally incoherent, white, dumb, pointless motherf***er.' And John went kind of quiet for a couple of seconds, but then he started to play. So when he did his white, soulless sh*t and mixed it up with my heavy black sh*t, well man, it all came out just the right consistency of sh*t. You dig what I'm sayin'?"
    Agreed, hilarious! Particularly the "play guitar like you...." sentence. Great stuff!

  10. #9

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Rowland
    That's hilarious! ... I wonder what he said to Bill Evans....
    Jimmy Cobb said Miles used to bug Bill and play 'mind games' with him, saying 'we don't need your white opinions' or something like that. But I expect Miles used to do stuff like that to everybody!

    By the way I should make it clear that I do like John McLaughlin, at least some of his stuff, for example 'To the One', and the record with Elvin Jones and Joey DeFrancesco. And that raunchy guitar bit on 'Jack Johnson' is great.

    I only saw JM once, playing acoustic guitar, with Jonas Hellborg on bass, and a percussionist (Trilok Gurtu?). It was impressive, and I enjoyed some of it, though it did get a bit 'samey' with all those notes!

    Although JM isn't my favourite player by any means, I don't agree with RB's assessment.

  11. #10

    User Info Menu

    I was a fusion fan from the start. Bought a couple of Mahavishnu records. The only time I ever saw him was the group that grahambob mentioned. And it was good.

    Fast-forward 25 years. I'm working with a brilliant old Nashville guitarist who was learning how to play bebop. He loved Hank Garland and by extension Wes. He had taken lessons from Lenny Breau. But he had never played rock or modal jazz. Just country, old standards and bop oriented jazz.

    One day he starts talking about some unknown guitar teacher up in Tennessee who was actually a teacher to some of the top guys in Nashville. He was curious about what this guy was teaching, which he described as a modal system like Coltrane and a lot of rock guys use for soloing.

    So I went and listened to some Coltrane and realized that I play a lot like him. Of course the huge difference between me and Coltrane is he was a master of his instrument. The difference between JM and JC is a lot less.

    The point is, I used to listen to JM. Now when I want to hear that kind of stuff, I prefer JC. And when I want to dig deeper into that stuff, I look to Coltrane. But I appreciate McLaughlin exposing me to it.

    Also, it seems to me that to play that style you don't really need to study anybody's method. Just get as technically good as you can on your instrument, and since we have all heard so much of that kind of music, then playing that way just comes naturally.

  12. #11

    User Info Menu

    I first heard of JM when he was with Miles, but wasn't into his playing. I did kind of get into JM back in the Mahavishnu days part was the chops for sake of chops and I was getting into modes. The turning point for me was going Jeff Beck and Mahavishnu Orch toured together and hearing both back to back. The Mahavishnu set got old fast then Beck came on stole the show. As expected the end of the show was Beck and JM jamming. JM because all about chops and Beck his soulful lines and how he can make one note count. Then during the last jam they reverse roles and JM tried to slow down and play more like Beck and more into phrases. Beck went into the whole chops speed thing. Funny Beck pulled off the chops thing and still has some soul in his lines, JM failed trying to play without the super-chops thing.

    Since then I still check out JM stuff to hear what he's up to. I liked some of the Shahti stuff, but not his later fusion stuff. I have heard him on the Round Midnight soundtrack playing straight ahead Jazz and it was good. I since got his tribute to John Coltrane he did with Joey Defrancesco and listen to that now and then.

    So for me I like a few things JM did, but most his playing just doesn't do it for me.

  13. #12

    User Info Menu

    I think JM is a very original player. Nobody sounds like him and he sounds like nobody but himself.
    Then people can like him or dislike him all they want, but nobody can argue that he's one of a kind. His resume also speaks for itself.

    He has a very staccato way of playing which partially comes from his alternate picking approach. To some, that might sound stiff but it is part of JMs sound.

    To me the most interesting aspect of the instructional method is when he plays on tunes because the harmonic movement in those tunes are interesting to me. Then he employs different scales, some I haven't thought much of, and it is explained in the notation what he does.
    Just that alone can give a player a lot of ideas even if JMs playing is not their cup of tea.

    See the problem with creating instructional material is that people will have different expectations based on their own experience on the instrument. If it's too advanced, it alienates a large part of the audience for such a product. If it's too simple, then it's just another method out there.
    I think JM aims towards the intermediate/advanced player with his method.

  14. #13

    User Info Menu

    I haven't been awake very long so this post may lack coherency....

    I feel compelled to say here that if I'm being honest, I think richb was pretty much spot on with his review.

    I struggle with just how honest I / we should be when discussing some of the things we do.

    For example, there are some very well known jazz players that have a simply horrendous time-feel. But if we name names, people get bent out of shape. Sometimes is a subjective, opinion type of thing but sometimes it's just not.

    I have only seen clips on YouTube of JM's video series, so I can't really comment on them in particular, but since we're being honest, I feel compelled to mention that JM YouTube video of him playing Cherokee with a big band. I think that is a good example of what richb was refering to. Everyone is free to like what they like but if you were to transcribe that solo, you'd see that the majority of it is just scales played either in sequences, or step-wise. Nothing wrong with those things but the whole thing is like that.

    I've seen that particular clip referenced many times as an example of a great solo and I'm sorry, if you slow it down, it's the most uninteresting, unimaginative thing ever. Saying zero. And yet it get's held up as great. Why? Pretty obvious why - it's very FAST. That's all.

    When I was growing up, JM was often talked about as "the fastest guitarist" and I really feel like all that praise just made him concentrate his efforts into being almost a circus side-show of technique-driven material. And I have heard him play stuff that I've liked but he so often falls into sacrificing motivic development and all the things that go into make a coherent statement, for the sake of note choice that lend themselves to speedy execution.

    To be clear, I'm not saying JM can't play - not at all. I'm saying that he often chooses to impress, rather than to play something thoughtful / interesting / creative.

  15. #14

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Spirit59
    To be clear, I'm not saying JM can't play - not at all. I'm saying that he often chooses to impress, rather than to play something thoughtful / interesting / creative.
    I doubt that JML tries to impress really, it's just the way he plays and creates, by extensively messing around with scales. 'This is the way I do it' actually depicts this fact pretty honestly. It's a fairly excellent method to study scales and modes imho.

    One thing maybe worth mentioning is that he studied indian music a lot, it may have had influenced his style deeply (I'm no indian music expert, that's just a guess). From what I understand of it, it sounds more hypnotic than soulful.

  16. #15

    User Info Menu

    I was really into the JML and the whole fusion genre back when it was happening, and then Shakti came along and blew me away. I still love Shakti and that sort of acoustic world music/fusion, but the loud-fast-rocking-fusion, well, it can sound like wanking to me now. I guess I grew old.

  17. #16

    User Info Menu

    The most common criticism I hear about JM is that rhythmically, he can't really swing.

  18. #17

    User Info Menu

    John McLaughlin has never resonated much with me, and I kind of unfortunately get much of what richb is saying (not really about the racial stuff....I think there's lots of professional soulful, white players). Shredding scales for shred's own sake just doesn't do it for me. There are too many players today I can listen to that not only play fast, but they also create great lines and composition.

    In general however, I would not state these thoughts on a public forum. Mainly because I try to focus on the strengths, rather than the deficits of other players. And also because I wouldn't say these kind of thoughts about players I personally know; so why would I slam at a well-known figure. No reason to needlessly hurt another individual. There just doesn't seem to be a real purpose to it.

    But I guess this is completely off-topic, as the OP wants to know about the educational materials....of which I have not had the chance to view. Frankly, I'd be most interested in hearing from JM on the development of his right-hand technique; but I suspect that this is an issue of mostly talent....though I am sure he also practiced like crazy.

  19. #18

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by srlank
    ...In general however, I would not state these thoughts on a public forum. Mainly because I try to focus on the strengths, rather than the deficits of other players. And also because I wouldn't say these kind of thoughts about players I personally know; so why would I slam at a well-known figure. No reason to needlessly hurt another individual. There just doesn't seem to be a real purpose to it...
    I try to emphasis and post about aspects of players that I like in general too. I guess in this case, I feel like I'm kind of criticizing JM for the path he's taken and not so much for his playing ability. It's like since he was given the moniker "Fastest Guitarist in World" back in the '70s (for which of course in modern times the bar has been raised considerably), he feels like he has to live up to that at the expense of crafting better lines.

  20. #19

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by cosmic gumbo
    The most common criticism I hear about JM is that rhythmically, he can't really swing.
    Yeah, I dunno...I don't usually care for his time-feel either but sometimes in the right environment, I can dig some of the stuff he does...

    But when he's in a situation where the band is swinging, he's usually really not. He shines more in other environments...

  21. #20

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by cosmic gumbo
    The most common criticism I hear about JM is that rhythmically, he can't really swing.

    After mentioning the JM tribute to Coltrane earlier today I was listening to it and on melodies and laid back solo sections JM is fine, but as soon as he tried to play streams of eight notes he went from swinging to a straight-eights than just didn't fit. So he can swing until he tried to play fast streams and then loses the feel.

  22. #21

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Richb
    I've seen it - not all of it mind you, I couldn't bear to sit through too much of that white noise....anyway it's just JM playing his typical scalar stuff over chords. The approach is 95% scalar (like his playing). Awful incoherent soloing with no arc, no development of ideas, stiffest feel, heavy handed picking....As you can tell I wasn't impressed. But then I never cared one whit for that brand of soulless "white" music, so take my opinion with a huge grain or two of salt...

    it's geared to more advanced players

    HE "analyses" his own soloing at points. It's so funny to see. JM doesn't play solos that can be analysed because they dont make sense, so it's funny to see him try to pretend that there is a "point" to his solos. So he actually struggles along trying to talk about motifs etc etc, but it's pointless because it's just not there, and then he just resorts to reporting which scale he is using over which harmony which is all his playing ever really consists of.
    Without going as far as Rich I don't think these DVDs are worth the money. A friend lend me his a few years ago and I have not learned anything useful... As Rich says he's basically analyzing his own stuff, something anyone can do alone. I always suspect jazz educational material that comes with tabs actually (and this one is particularly expensive...)

    To the OP, get your favorite JM solo and transcribe / analyse it. You'll save a lot of money and learn much more...

  23. #22

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by jorgemg1984

    To the OP, get your favorite JM solo and transcribe / analyse it. You'll save a lot of money and learn much more...
    On point!

  24. #23

    User Info Menu

    JM is very up front about the course. A master breaks down what HE does, then explains it to the pupil one step at a time. JM explains the harmonic context, shows you some jazz patterns to help build vocabulary, then plays a "simple" solo and an advanced one. You get a PDF file for each and can se both of his hands up close along with the video with a cross hair on the note being played in real time. Very innovative, as one would expect from him. Then he does a brief analysis of the solo.

    he takes the student from a breezin or so what type two chord tune to much more advanced harmonic context.


    Regarding other comments here. He has been recording steadily since to 70s so a number of comments here are really not helpful. You might want to catch up on his catalog since then. His time is as good as it gets people. He flies through the most challenging harmonic situations, with changing time signatures, never missing a beat, and burns. There isn't a soul reading this who can do the same, most likely.

    his groove on a few of the tunes on the cd with Elvin and Joey is as deep as it gets. Take another listen to Crescent.

    finally, it bears repeating - he does NOT play swing or bebop. That's why he lives in Monaco, not Brooklyn. There are a number of books that examine how to play like Wes or Joe. Have those of you who are complaining mastered those yet? If not, best get to work.

    regarding that Johnny Carson show thing, one can easily conclude that JM dropped into town and with little or no rehearsal agreed to jump on stage and play something up tempo that the band already knew. In other words a tune he DOESN'T play and in a style he doesn't play, on that stage on THAT show. Again, there isn't anyone reading this who has or will ever get an equivalent opportunity, so the best you can do is imagine even trying it. Did he look like he was sweating it?

  25. #24

    User Info Menu

    If you wanna know how JM does it, then this thing seems pretty good.

    The criticisms are interesting and well defended, but not sure what they have to do with the OP's questions.

    Who was the first guitartist Miles ever called for?

    If Coltrane were to rise from the grave, what other guitar player could hang with him? Who you gonna send? Seriously. Who you gonna send?

  26. #25

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by jster
    Who was the first guitartist Miles ever called for?
    I think George Benson recorded with Miles before John did.


    I love J McLaughlins playing.