Clint Strong - Mastering Jazz Licks

**derek** · 06-14-2010, 10:52 AM

Originally Posted by Jazzyteach65

Dont you find Clint to be too much of a lick player?

What exactly does that mean? Everything we play could be seen as licks.

I emailed Clint the question also. His website has been up for a while, but it is not fully formed, and hasn't been, so not sure how responsive he will be, or if he will have any answers.

**mr. beaumont** · 06-14-2010, 11:17 AM

Originally Posted by Jazzyteach65

Dont you find Clint to be too much of a lick player?

not really.

western swing is a lot like jazz, but it has it's differences too...It's not uncommon for a player to have a little more defined "bag" to draw from which might contain some recognizable "signature licks."

but in the end, we're all just "recombiners."

**Jazzyteach65** · 06-14-2010, 11:49 AM

Originally Posted by derek

What exactly does that mean? Everything we play could be seen as licks.

I emailed Clint the question also. His website has been up for a while, but it is not fully formed, and hasn't been, so not sure how responsive he will be, or if he will have any answers.

Derek, there has been this long-running "lick vs not lick" conversation here and in general. When I say lick player," I mean one who regergitates phrases, modified or not. Around 2:00 and 2:10 Clint plays some of his obvious licks that can be heard in some of his other stuff:

I would say guys like (don't get upset, I know you love him) Joe Pass, Pat Martino, Bob Conti and Clint Strong are more lick-heavy/oriented, while Jimmy Rainey, Kenny Burrell, Jim Hall, Abercrombie ect play lines based on motifs and concepts (intervals, rhythms, call and response ect) than licks they've worked on.

An idea or concept IMHO is different from a lick. A lick is something you've played before, modified or not, that you know will fill in space and get you from point A to B, meanwhile an idea is using a concept (let me start this chorus using sixths and fifths, throw in some triplets ect)

I'm not saying licks are bad, Grant Green could take one lick and morph the hell out of it for hours, and sound great, but I personally favor exploring new territory everytime I solo

**monk** · 06-14-2010, 12:21 PM

"A motif ain't nothing but a lick".-Buddy Guy

**FatJeff** · 06-14-2010, 12:27 PM

Originally Posted by derek

What exactly does that mean? Everything we play could be seen as licks.

I emailed Clint the question also. His website has been up for a while, but it is not fully formed, and hasn't been, so not sure how responsive he will be, or if he will have any answers.

Which question did you email him about? if we could get copies of his video, or if he thinks he's a "lick" player?

**gersdal** · 06-14-2010, 02:38 PM

Originally Posted by monk

"A motif ain't nothing but a lick".-Buddy Guy

It depends if the motif is pre-written or not, doesn't it?

Not that I care to much, tho...

**derek** · 06-14-2010, 03:09 PM

Originally Posted by Jazzyteach65

Derek, there has been this long-running "lick vs not lick" conversation here and in general. When I say lick player," I mean one who regergitates phrases, modified or not. Around 2:00 and 2:10 Clint plays some of his obvious licks that can be heard in some of his other stuff:

I would say guys like (don't get upset, I know you love him) Joe Pass, Pat Martino, Bob Conti and Clint Strong are more lick-heavy/oriented, while Jimmy Rainey, Kenny Burrell, Jim Hall, Abercrombie ect play lines based on motifs and concepts (intervals, rhythms, call and response ect) than licks they've worked on.

An idea or concept IMHO is different from a lick. A lick is something you've played before, modified or not, that you know will fill in space and get you from point A to B, meanwhile an idea is using a concept (let me start this chorus using sixths and fifths, throw in some triplets ect)

I'm not saying licks are bad, Grant Green could take one lick and morph the hell out of it for hours, and sound great, but I personally favor exploring new territory everytime I solo

Upset? Hehe, the only thing that gets me riled on this site (so far) is the rampant piracy that take place and the lame justifications for it. Guys having opinions about players is just that, opinions mine included.

Yeah, I hear the runs/licks/phrases you are talking about in those players for sure. My question is, isn't everything we play pretty much a lick on some level? We are creatures of habit, and tend to play a lot of the same things over and over. So when someone says X player is a lick player, I really am not sure I know what he means.

Does that mean Clint (in this case) plays the same collection of licks over every song? Does that mean his phrases sound like just a bunch of licks strung together, rather than improvisation? I am just wondering what you mean by that. I hear repeated stuff from Jim Hall also, and certainly Grant Green. Does that make them licks guys too?

**Jazzyteach65** · 06-14-2010, 03:43 PM

Originally Posted by gersdal

It depends if the motif is pre-written or not, doesn't it?

Not that I care to much, tho...

EXACTLY!

**Jazzyteach65** · 06-14-2010, 03:59 PM

Originally Posted by derek

Upset? Hehe, the only thing that gets me riled on this site (so far) is the rampant piracy that take place and the lame justifications for it. Guys having opinions about players is just that, opinions mine included.

Yeah, I hear the runs/licks/phrases you are talking about in those players for sure. My question is, isn't everything we play pretty much a lick on some level? We are creatures of habit, and tend to play a lot of the same things over and over. So when someone says X player is a lick player, I really am not sure I know what he means.

Does that mean Clint (in this case) plays the same collection of licks over every song? Does that mean his phrases sound like just a bunch of licks strung together, rather than improvisation? I am just wondering what you mean by that. I hear repeated stuff from Jim Hall also, and certainly Grant Green. Does that make them licks guys too?

IMHO, and just as Mr B said, Clint has (like other Western swing guys) has his own bag of licks. Of course, Clint doesn't play the SAME things over and over again, b/c that's called insanity. If you listen to him closely, IMHO he sounds like a bunch of licks strung together, with obvious ideas and variations of them in other places. Don't get me wrong, he's great, and he does play some spontaneous motives, but he also recycles and morphs licks and certain things and inetject certain things in a lot of places. Ex: He uses this a lot: (say we're on c minor) f,e, eb, g-that right there, a chromatic descending from the fourth then reaching up to the fifth, is ALL over his playing. It's disguised, but it's there.

These bop cliche's are there to enlogate lines between chord tones, what that does is (if abused) lets players rely too much on them, like IMHO Martino does.

I would say that Grant Green does play licks, it's obvious that he favors certain ones (the Honeysuckle Rose line) and Parker ideas, but he morphs them, calls and responses them, adds and deletes.

As for Jim Hall, there are certain things that he plays that repeat in other places, but I would say about 10% of the time. 90% he reaches for areas untapped, space and motifs. It's obvious. In fact, he used to tape all his strings except two to limit himself from position and lick playing. John Abercrombie talks about this a lot.
Now, Scott Henderson once admitted that he plays 50% licks and 50% stuff he's never played before, meanwhile Emily Remler says that she is 30% licks, 70% other.

I would not classify arps as licks BTW

Now listen to the following two, see which is using space, time and fresh, on-the-spot melodies vs. which is using a flurry of bop lines:

**FatJeff** · 06-14-2010, 04:41 PM

Hard to use those two videos in a side-by-side comparison, because the Strong solo is what - 45 seconds long? And the Raney solo is almost all of that 4 minute clip. But to my ears, the Strong solo is more adventurous harmonically, at least right out of the gate, whereas the Raney solo is more based on the melody (at least for the first two minutes which is all I listened to since I'm at work). Two equally viable approaches to soloing.

Of course I'm probably not thinking straight. I was mesmerized by that singer's boobs.

**BigDaddyLoveHandles** · 06-14-2010, 04:53 PM

I need to learn that ciggie thang!

**gersdal** · 06-14-2010, 05:50 PM

Originally Posted by FatJeff

Hard to use those two videos in a side-by-side comparison, because the Strong solo is what - 45 seconds long? And the Raney solo is almost all of that 4 minute clip. But to my ears, the Strong solo is more adventurous harmonically, at least right out of the gate, whereas the Raney solo is more based on the melody (at least for the first two minutes which is all I listened to since I'm at work). Two equally viable approaches to soloing.

Soling of the melody, and using that as a motif? That would be a prewritten motif, right?

**monk** · 06-14-2010, 09:07 PM

Originally Posted by gersdal

It depends if the motif is pre-written or not, doesn't it?

Not that I care to much, tho...

Are you saying if the motif is written out then it's a lick? Oh no, all of classical music is a lick.

**monk** · 06-14-2010, 09:12 PM

Originally Posted by Jazzyteach65

As for Jim Hall, there are certain things that he plays that repeat in other places, but I would say about 10% of the time. 90% he reaches for areas untapped, space and motifs. It's obvious. In fact, he used to tape all his strings except two to limit himself from position and lick playing. John Abercrombie talks about this a lot.
Now, Scott Henderson once admitted that he plays 50% licks and 50% stuff he's never played before, meanwhile Emily Remler says that she is 30% licks, 70% other.

"97.3% of all statistics are made up."

**princeplanet** · 06-15-2010, 12:06 AM

Although I agree it's an unfair comparison, it was interesting to hear Raney and also to spy his technique, I really liked a lot of it. He did an Aebersfold that i recently scored a copy of. Any idea where I could get the "playalong" disc that was meant to come with it? Is that any good?

**gersdal** · 06-15-2010, 05:42 AM

Originally Posted by monk

Are you saying if the motif is written out then it's a lick? Oh no, all of classical music is a lick.

No, I'm saying that it is prewritten!

If I wrote a motif that I could use for improvisation over say "Alone togheteher", I will while improvising present the motif - develop it, change it, etc etc. Some of this I could have been tested out prior to the performance. Eg what kind of developments are cool. How it can be rhythmically displaced. I guess this will not be true improvisation in Jazzytech definition. The question is if we know what Rainey did. He used the melody as basis for his improvisation... How free is then the improvisation? More or less than the lick player he compared this with? I don't know the anwer, and most pro jazz players I have asked questions like this becomes slightly anoyed, and talks about other jazz players doing this and that....

I think the idea of pure and totally new ideas used in every improvisation is a utopia that we would like to belive, but it is and will be a utopia.

Ahm, I'll better have an other coffee ...

**gersdal** · 06-15-2010, 07:44 AM

Re licks and motif debate: The important bit for me is not if things are prewritten in form of planned motif or licks, it is: Does it sound good! Too many people in the jazz police are sitting on their high horse having a lot of concerns about things being fresh and new. I really don’t care as long as it sounds good.

For myself, I do not have the neccessary lick and prepared motifs, so I do a rahter fresh attempt each time, but this is not by choice ...

If Jim Hall, John Scofield, Joe Pass or whatever tomorrow plays something that was played at the A-trane in Berlin November 1957, I don't mind! It's still jazz to me, and I guess they would have problems remembering exactly what they did in 1957.

A jazzmagazine here in Norway had a long debate about Eric Dolphys solo to a tune, and that it was so and so much equal to another performance by Eric Dolphy. I don't see the point, but it is certainly something that a lot of people are very concerned about.

**musicalbodger** · 06-15-2010, 11:34 AM

Is it just me, or does anyone else find it difficult to take someone seriously when they're called Clint Strong?

Not knocking his playing, just his taste in names