What is 'guitaristic language'?

[MarkRhodes]

Piano is percussion too. Guitar used to be called a lap piano probably because it's fretted.

This may be why the guitar and the piano are the defining instrument of many different genres / periods: they generate rhythm as well as harmony and melody.

I love this by Amos Milburn. (He didn't write this tune but this is my favorite version. I love this kind of piano.)

[John A.]

I have pondered about this for a while now because this forum has brought it up time and time again without really going in depth with it. What does it really mean to have guitaristic language? I mean the guitar is very versatile... you can play with pick, fingers, thumb, hybrid etc. It can cross over to many styles of playing. Has many different tuning possibilities (although most only play in standard). It also has a long history...

I actually have a hard time believing that there is such a thing when you look at it from a larger picture. Piano and horn players sure its easier to see but thats because they have their own kinds of phrasings and limitations that is readily apparent. What is unique about guitar is that you can bend and slide chords, strum,.. even vibrato.. perhaps the ability to play unisons (or not!). But maybe thats not so unique.. I mean there are banjo players. Or maybe I'm looking at this in a wrong way, maybe there is language but it changes over time. Or perhaps 'Guitar Language' is actually a bunch of different languages and the one we call now Guitar Language just happens to be the one that is most commonly heard?

So it seems that if I play Jazz Guitar now with my fingers solely not only would I have less chances of playing guitaristic language but also that I would be depriving of its full potential (because I'm not playing guitaristic language?)? Does playing guitarist language mean that you are deriving full sonic potential from the instrument? Most jazz guitar players are pick players after all and there is a certain sound gained from using a pick..

Sorry I ask too many questions and I'm bored lol

There are techniques and effects characteristic of guitar that can't be done on, say, a piano. For instance, bent notes, unisons, different timbres stemming from different right-hand techniques, picking the string at different locations, hammer-ons/pull-offs, pinched harmonics. There are also chord voicings that are characteristically "guitaristic" that the hand more or less naturally gravitates to, such as drop 2 or drop 3, or open voicings in general, and quartal harmony. You can, of course play these on a piano, but the hand more naturally drops onto clusters of 2nds and 3rds on a piano. There's also the dimension of amp coloration and overdrive. You can go for as clean and neutral a sound as possible, or you can let the amp sing a little (or a lot). Guitar "language" involves using these sorts of devices, and even emphasizing them as opposed to avoiding them or trying to make the guitar sound like a piano, as well as embracing amps' possibilities for coloration.


John

[Stevebol]

This may be why the guitar and the piano are the defining instrument of many different genres / periods: they generate rhythm as well as harmony and melody.

I love this by Amos Milburn. (He didn't write this tune but this is my favorite version. I love this kind of piano.)

Check out Stephanie Trick. She's great.

[MarkRhodes]

Check out Stephanie Trick. She's great.

Thanks! I was unfamiliar with her. Sure can play.

[MarkRhodes]

Might as well add some guitar boogie....

[christianm77]

[MarkRhodes]

Can't forget John Lee Hooker here...(He recorded this song several times; this is the original version from 1948.)

[cosmic gumbo]

[paulcw16]

I googled that phrase, and it only came up here. So it's not a universal phrase.

[matt.guitarteacher]

Does playing guitarist language mean that you are deriving full sonic potential from the instrument?

More than that, I think it's emphasizing things which basically can't be played on other instruments in the same way. Wes Montgomery was the master of this. Fully realized this aspect like no one before. Maybe since? His chord solo and octave choruses are obvious, but his phrasing generally, the muting, timing of releases etc is very idiomatic to the instrument.

I really like his take on dearly beloved , as kind of a contrasting piece. To me, it sounds like an exercise in trying to be less idiomatic to guitar. Great playing in its own right and one of my favorite solos honestly, but if he'd gone THAT direction as a whole, more towards horn playing style, we'd have missed a lot of great music. ...from a few generations of guitarists maybe?

Listen to his choruses on Cariba from full house. The sax solo before makes you uneasy, imagining trying to play something like it on guitar. Anyway, then his entrance sounds completely relaxed, like he is smiling and completely enjoying himself, and then he just OWNS the rest of it. But it's 99% specifically idiomatic to guitar. Sounds a lot like " play this on your horn". :-)

[JGinNJ]

Let me put this out there: there are more great electric guitarists than great sax players, and more distinctive ones who may not be great guitarists per se (say, Willie Nelson, Carlos Santana, Neil Young, Jack White, The Edge). Also, the guitar is at home in many more styles than the sax (or trumpet). Not to mention that one can perform solo. (Yes, Sonny Rollins did a solo horn concert back in the '80s but solo horn concerts definitely did not catch on.)

Guitar doesn't need a standard pedagogy like the saxophone does because the guitar is a far more versatile instrument. There are too many different things to do with it for a student to be instructed to address them all. (Among them, singing and playing at the same time, chords, bending strings, playing with fingers, playing with a pick, playing with pick and fingers, accompanying soloists, not to mention all the guitar-friendly genres: funk, R&B, bluegrass, folk, country, jazz, rock, singer/songwriter stuff, rockabilly, metal, et al. And of course, the classical guitar has its own pedagogy. (And that could be seen as a warning sign of the dangers of a pedagogy...)

In this sense, I don't think the guitar lags behind at all. The saxophone and trumpet are such limited instruments that there is a narrow range in which to define excellence. (This may be why so many horn players seem to think 'getting better' means 'playing more notes, a lot more notes, faster and faster.' This is one reason so few people listen to it anymore. I think Miles was right to see that as a musical dead end.)

Let me guess, you never played a horn? This being a jazz guitar forum, I don't even think all the styles you can or can't play with a guitar vs. anything else are even relevant. The comparison isn't even fair. No, there aren't heavy metal trumpeters, but there's no guitars in a brass quartet, either.

If you go outside the jazz genre, there's lots of ways to use a guitar where you barely have to know how to play it, let alone theory. Three chord rock, cowboy chords, strumming, box patterns for soloing. Play loud & distorted, people think you're a genius.

But if you want to play jazz guitar, of course there's a pedagogy of scales, chords, standard tunes. Same thing for a trumpet, the difference being, a much bigger challenge to physically play the instrument. To do that, there's a whole body of work- embouchure, flexibility, breathing, tonguing, range building, etc.

I would remind you that in the evolution of jazz, guitar plays a very small part, mostly as a rhythm section instrument. The major developments in jazz were led by horn players, and on so many of the seminal recordings, a guitar isn't even present.

[MarkRhodes]

I would remind you that in the evolution of jazz, guitar plays a very small part, mostly as a rhythm section instrument. The major developments in jazz were led by horn players, and on so many of the seminal recordings, a guitar isn't even present.

I agree that the guitar has played a small role in the history of jazz.

I disagree about the major developments in jazz being lead by horn players. Some were, yes, mainly bebop, but the piano is the far bigger deal in jazz: Jelly Roll Morton, Fats Waller, Art Tatum, Earl Hines, Count Basie, Bud Powell, Bill Evans, Duke Ellington, Thelonious Monk, Keith Jarrett, Herbie Hancock, Horace Silver, Chick Corea, McCoy Tyner, Nat King Cole, Ahmad Jamal, Erroll Garner...That's just off the top of my head. Also, the piano is a rhythm section instrument.... ;o)

I think it is an advantage to be a rhythm section instrument in a rhythm-dominated musical genre.

Since Coltrane's death in '67, what developments in jazz have been lead by a horn player? I'm sure there are some that I have missed but I can't think of any.

[JGinNJ]

I think you'd have to give Miles credit for the beginnings of fusion, Bitches Brew, for example. The avant-garde continued with the AACM after Coltrane, pretty light on guitars. Likewise the ECM stuff from the 70's and 80's. The Marsalis' and "Young Lions"brought a resurgence of New Orleans and modal hard-bop, if not a new development. I will grant you, Benson was a pioneer of smooth jazz, and jazz-rock is very guitar based.

[MarkRhodes]

I think you'd have to give Miles credit for the beginnings of fusion, Bitches Brew, for example. The avant-garde continued with the AACM after Coltrane, pretty light on guitars. Likewise the ECM stuff from the 70's and 80's. The Marsalis' and "Young Lions"brought a resurgence of New Orleans and modal hard-bop, if not a new development. I will grant you, Benson was a pioneer of smooth jazz, and jazz-rock is very guitar based.

Miles is an interesting case. (And let's be clear, I speak as a fan.) He pre-dates Coltrane. His fusion excursions strike me as among his lesser contributions. Even though I like some of Miles' later work---especially "Tutu"---I think he was chasing new trends and surrounding himself with key players rather than innovating musically himself. I don't think anyone has ever suggested he made any advance on trumpet playing in his last few decades. (Or did I miss something?)

I listened to Lester Bowie / Art Ensemble of Chicago stuff a lot in the '80s, but don't care to hear it much anymore.

I think Marsalis rates as a very influential horn player but his main thing is going back to the roots rather than breaking new ground. Some have called him a curator rather than an innovator. I'm not knocking him, by the way. I spent several years in New Orleans and love "trad jazz" (-but I realize it is that, trad jazz, and not some new thing. I'm not chasing some new thing.)

I don't have anything against horns. I think they are much more limited and limiting instruments than the guitar (or the piano), that's all. They're fine in their place. Their place is comparatively narrow. I think the longer jazz lasts, the more it will become apparent that the horn is not the main thing.

[gggomez]

Charlie Christian & Wes. Man they played guitar.

[citizenk74]

Horn players, like singers, have one advantage that sticks out: They are obliged, from time to time, to breathe. This helps their phrasing immeasurably. Guitarists would do well to ponder this. My Dad's highest praise for a musician ( he himself played clarinet, harmonica, organ, guitar, ukelele, and lord knows what else, as well as singing in the church choir) was "He can make that thing talk." People like the sense of communication - with the emphasis on the "commune" part, IMHO.

[John A.]

Miles is an interesting case. (And let's be clear, I speak as a fan.) He pre-dates Coltrane. His fusion excursions strike me as among his lesser contributions. Even though I like some of Miles' later work---especially "Tutu"---I think he was chasing new trends and surrounding himself with key players rather than innovating musically himself. I don't think anyone has ever suggested he made any advance on trumpet playing in his last few decades. (Or did I miss something?)

I listened to Lester Bowie / Art Ensemble of Chicago stuff a lot in the '80s, but don't care to hear it much anymore.

I think Marsalis rates as a very influential horn player but his main thing is going back to the roots rather than breaking new ground. Some have called him a curator rather than an innovator. I'm not knocking him, by the way. I spent several years in New Orleans and love "trad jazz" (-but I realize it is that, trad jazz, and not some new thing. I'm not chasing some new thing.)

I don't have anything against horns. I think they are much more limited and limiting instruments than the guitar (or the piano), that's all. They're fine in their place. Their place is comparatively narrow. I think the longer jazz lasts, the more it will become apparent that the horn is not the main thing.

The last few decades of Miles's Life is (depending on how you define "few", typically 3-5) is 1940, 1950, or 1960 to 1991. You want to maybe adjust that timeline for his lack of advancement and innovation? I'm listening to "On the Corner" (72) right now, and hearing some pretty innovative trumpet playing, and a bloody brilliant record over all. It's fair to say that the last ~15 years of his activity were not consistently up to the standards of the rest of his career. but even in that last decade, there were great bands.

As to horns in general, I'd put Wayne Shorter, Sonny Rollins, and Michael Brecker up on any list of major post-Trane innovators. Not particularly my taste, but a bunch of more avant garde figures (e.g., Anthony Braxton, Arthur Blythe, Sun Ra, some of the 80s-90s "Downtown" scene-sters), are a pretty big deal. It's a big world, with lots of people doing stuff you never heard before.

As far as horns being "limiting" vs piano or guitar? Let's just say I've heard Sonny Rollins play all by himself, and I think that's a very strange statement.

John

[goldenwave77]

At the risk of starting WW III, I think guitar is a "first rate, 2nd rate instrument".

Can't play single note lines like a horn...can't do half the harmonic stuff piano can.

It does a bit of both...yes it can bend notes, and has some expressive qualities that other instruments don't have.

But honestly, go listen to any well known jazz tune, and find the trumpet, sax, or piano players who can rip off great extended lines....they will be faster, more fluid, more rhythmically precise and just more "happening" to listen to, at least to my ears.

You'll struggle to find guitarists who can labor to keep up, and make it happen, IMO. Time after time, I'll sit down to listen to jazz guitarists and the heads sound really good but by the 2nd chorus, it's wearing thin for me, a lot of the time.

Chuck Wayne at the top of his game is as good as anyone. Johnny Smith, some of the time, though he even said he didn't consider himself a jazz guy. Joe Pass is pretty reliable...Hank Garland...Bruce Forman. Jimmy Raney is good and later in life was REALLY good.

I still say if I had to go to a desert island and had 100 jazz albums to take with me, I wouldn't be taking a lot of guitar jazz albums, but I can't imagine "listening life" without Dizzy, Lee Morgan, Coltrane, Bird, Stan Getz, George Coleman, Woody Shaw, Wynton, Artie Shaw, Sidney Bechet, Louis A., Earl Hines, Monk, Oscar Peterson, Miles, Dexter G. to name a few, and big bands.

As I say, I don't want to start a war. In the jazz realm, I think guitar is just a bit of an odd duck.

Blues or rock, it is supreme.

[citizenk74]

^^^^ "On the Corner" and "Doo-Bop" are very interesting albums, IMO.

[MarkRhodes]

As far as horns being "limiting" vs piano or guitar? Let's just say I've heard Sonny Rollins play all by himself, and I think that's a very strange statement.

Sure, Sonny made that solo sax album in '85. But isn't it the the only one he made? Solo sax recordings (much less tours) have not caught on. They just haven't. I've heard horn players play alone for tips in the French Quarter, and some are good, but a little of that goes a long way. By way of contrast, solo piano and solo guitar gigs are quite common.

An instrument that can't sound chords is limited, especially when it comes to jazz, a harmonically rich form of music.

[lammie200]

...
So it seems that if I play Jazz Guitar now with my fingers solely not only would I have less chances of playing guitaristic language but also that I would be depriving of its full potential (because I'm not playing guitaristic language?)?...Most jazz guitar players are pick players after all and there is a certain sound gained from using a pick..

...

I never play with a pick, but I also am conscious of what I can do fingerpicking versus playing with a pick. I can feel the strings with my fingers which I can't do using a pick. If playing with a pick enables "guitaristic language" then it is a language of few words IMHO. If no one ever judges me to have an ability at playing jazz because I fingerpick I would keep going anyway. Playing like I want to play means more to me than fitting into a box.

[John A.]

Sure, Sonny made that solo sax album in '85. But isn't it the the only one he made? Solo sax recordings (much less tours) have not caught on. They just haven't. I've heard horn players play alone for tips in the French Quarter, and some are good, but a little of that goes a long way. By way of contrast, solo piano and solo guitar gigs are quite common.

An instrument that can't sound chords is limited, especially when it comes to jazz, a harmonically rich form of music.

OK, sax is limiting in the sense that solo sax performances don't attract big audiences. But in practical terms I don't think sax players feel that as a limitation in what is fundamentally an ensemble art form. And it's expansive in other ways, which is what I was really trying to get at. There's a broad range of expressive possibilities, responsiveness to breathing, huge dynamic range, conduciveness to great speed, etc. Hearing a great player play by him/herself shows you the degree to which he/she contains him/herself in a ensemble performance. All instruments have possibilities and limitations unique to them. If they didn't we'd only have one instrument.

John

[Kirk Garrett]

At the risk of starting WW III, I think guitar is a "first rate, 2nd rate instrument".

Can't play single note lines like a horn...can't do half the harmonic stuff piano can.

It does a bit of both...yes it can bend notes, and has some expressive qualities that other instruments don't have.

But honestly, go listen to any well known jazz tune, and find the trumpet, sax, or piano players who can rip off great extended lines....they will be faster, more fluid, more rhythmically precise and just more "happening" to listen to, at least to my ears.

You'll struggle to find guitarists who can labor to keep up, and make it happen, IMO. Time after time, I'll sit down to listen to jazz guitarists and the heads sound really good but by the 2nd chorus, it's wearing thin for me, a lot of the time.

Chuck Wayne at the top of his game is as good as anyone. Johnny Smith, some of the time, though he even said he didn't consider himself a jazz guy. Joe Pass is pretty reliable...Hank Garland...Bruce Forman. Jimmy Raney is good and later in life was REALLY good.

I still say if I had to go to a desert island and had 100 jazz albums to take with me, I wouldn't be taking a lot of guitar jazz albums, but I can't imagine "listening life" without Dizzy, Lee Morgan, Coltrane, Bird, Stan Getz, George Coleman, Woody Shaw, Wynton, Artie Shaw, Sidney Bechet, Louis A., Earl Hines, Monk, Oscar Peterson, Miles, Dexter G. to name a few, and big bands.

As I say, I don't want to start a war. In the jazz realm, I think guitar is just a bit of an odd duck.

Blues or rock, it is supreme.

I tend to agree. But what about the other usual suspects that you didn’t mention?

For me, Barney Kessel is the “jazz guitarist” who is least apt to bore me pretty quickly. (Though I personally love studying music on guitar through the “jazz” doorway, along with blues. A peek through it, anyway.)

I can (and do) listen to decades of horn players and piano players all day. But jazz guitar...I listen to one or two albums and I’m good for awhile. And the more solo it is, the better (which brings us to “chord melody”....another WWIII starter....)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gggomez]

At the risk of starting WW III, I think guitar is a "first rate, 2nd rate instrument".

Can't play single note lines like a horn...can't do half the harmonic stuff piano can.

It does a bit of both...yes it can bend notes, and has some expressive qualities that other instruments don't have.

But honestly, go listen to any well known jazz tune, and find the trumpet, sax, or piano players who can rip off great extended lines....they will be faster, more fluid, more rhythmically precise and just more "happening" to listen to, at least to my ears.

You'll struggle to find guitarists who can labor to keep up, and make it happen, IMO. Time after time, I'll sit down to listen to jazz guitarists and the heads sound really good but by the 2nd chorus, it's wearing thin for me, a lot of the time.

Chuck Wayne at the top of his game is as good as anyone. Johnny Smith, some of the time, though he even said he didn't consider himself a jazz guy. Joe Pass is pretty reliable...Hank Garland...Bruce Forman. Jimmy Raney is good and later in life was REALLY good.

I still say if I had to go to a desert island and had 100 jazz albums to take with me, I wouldn't be taking a lot of guitar jazz albums, but I can't imagine "listening life" without Dizzy, Lee Morgan, Coltrane, Bird, Stan Getz, George Coleman, Woody Shaw, Wynton, Artie Shaw, Sidney Bechet, Louis A., Earl Hines, Monk, Oscar Peterson, Miles, Dexter G. to name a few, and big bands.

As I say, I don't want to start a war. In the jazz realm, I think guitar is just a bit of an odd duck.

Blues or rock, it is supreme.

Goldenwave I think you point is excellent and am sure there are many in the audience can feel that way. The jazz guitarist that can exploit the uniqueness of the guitar will woo and excite the audience.

I have recently started transcribing Charlie Christian. I was amazed at how rock n roll he is. All those Chuck Berry, Angus Young lines are there.

Early Benson, obviously Wes, Kenny Burrell they would have been so exciting to see.

Have you seen Jonathan Kreisberg live? Man the audience is on the edge of their seat. We have a guy in Melbourne James Sherlock yeah he plays some sophisticated stuff but he plays the guitar.

Exploiting the ability to play single lines and chords and then being able to bend stuff grab the third and give that sixth a little bend how cool is that! Can't do that on a horn or piano.

Perhaps a good reminder to us all, don't get lost in guitar noodle land, don't roll that tone down so much that the dynamic is lost.

[bako]

That live solo sax recording of Sonny Rollins happened at a free concert at the Museum of Modern Art NYC.
I arrived 90 minutes early thinking I could get a good seat but there was already a line 5 blocks long.
Never did get in, glad they recorded it. I don't know how well the record sold but the concert was highly successful.
At concerts it was typical for him to play very extended intros and codas unaccompanied.