-
I think the speed thing in jazz (guitar) is one of the most misunderstood aspects of it. People (even jazz guitarists) often state that it's only scales bla bla, that there is too little emotion, that'it is mechanical bla bla and then invariably Jim Hall appears magically as proof of the good taste of the listener and you get the "one note by Jim Hall is more musical than Bireli's entire solo" nonsense.
I always hate when the umptieth discussion of Bireli (or Martino, or Oberg or fill in any chops player) ends up like that again. It tells me more about the listener than about the players that are being dissed for their ability to play fast stuff. Slow any fast solo down and listen again. It will all be there still content wise. But somehow people do not hear that.
So the point is that all the speed monsters (George Benson, Bireli Lagrene, Tal Farlow, Pat Martino, Joe Pass, Jesse van Ruller, Martijn van Iterson, Ulf Wakenius, Andreas Oberg and probably all of the modern jazz guitar players that I am leaving out here) do not lose much if anything at all content wise or when they are burning. They are just as musical as on slower tempi. They simply have the ability to play fast (Genetic thing ... they seem to have a faster processor in their system) where others do not have the capability to play musically at these tempi anymore.
IMHO it is really popular myth that chops players do not play musically. That they play scales without emotion and all that crap you read under vids on Youtube. Sometimes even here.
If you can play meaningful stuff on high tempi, you are probably even more musical on slower tempi.
It's not about speed. It's about being able to play competently on all required tempi. Pro jazzers that can only handle slow tempi?????? I think not.
And what about audiences not liking burning solos? That is something that you often read too but .... The strange thing is that gypsy jazz is very popular in my country. Way more popular than mainstream jazz. Audiences are exposed to flurries of notes that must be totally incomprehensible for them (?). Yet they all love it over here. The best paid jazz musicians in my country are those that play the most notes. How can that be? I am sure the audience has no clue whatsoever about what is going on when Stochelo or Jimmy are playing but I think they simple like the excitement it generates and they all seem to be in awe of the virtuosity, even those that hate jazz otherwise ...
Quarantine rant over. I have too much time on my hand, yeah sorry about that.
DBLast edited by DB's Jazz Guitar Blog; 04-02-2020 at 09:36 AM.
-
04-02-2020 08:57 AM
-
So here’s the thing. Some players play fast and it’s empty and boring and some players play fast and it’s interesting and swinging and all that good stuff.
otoh some people play slow and it doesn’t swing or have any musical content either haha. They’d be the first to lecture you about playing to many notes lol.
And yes, some people play fewer notes and it sounds great. The latter people are the rarest group I’d say which makes them super interesting.
I think a lot of players make the mistake that if you play less notes it will sound good. This I think is not generally true. What is more true (and once again here I go, regurgitating paragraphs of Hal Galper) playing fewer notes is actually an editing process. I think this is more generally the case. But you need something to edit, right?
I also think you can hear all the notes going on and just not be able to catch all of them, and it still sounds good. I get this impression with Sco for instance. I think Scos chops used to be a lot more polished in Miles days than he’s been for a long time... now he sounds like playing all of what he hears is just a bit keen, and he’ll just catch bits of it. Sounds good to me!
(OTOH maybe Jim Hall was always in that position of having to edit... but then he was listening I think more to Lester and Charlie Christian than to Parker.)
Rhyrhm is also a really big deal. Listen to the way Benson digs into the upbeat accents and it’s clear he’s not just stringing notes together, but the notes are a vehicle for the rhythm, kind of like a hand percussionist but with pitches.
I do have to say I rarely listen back to something I’ve done and think ‘hmmmm could have really done with some more notes’, so I think editing is a good shout. Otherwise I’m just doing the autobop thing.
-
I would expand it beyond the speed discussion and say that in general any critique that so-and-so plays without emotion is suspect, whether speed, or scales, or tone, or any other characteristic is cited as a reason. All you ("you" generically, not you DB) can really say is that you are not feeling whatever emotion the player is trying to put out. That doesn't mean it's not there, it just means you are not on that wavelength, which is neither a good thing nor a bad thing IMO; it's just how it is. Also, many of the people who get cited as exemplars of non-technical expressiveness are actually way more technically proficient than it may seem. I mean, e.g., Jim Hall was always humble about his own chops, but the reality is he could play straight 8ths at crazy tempos, and could play contrapuntal harmony at any tempo. Very few people can actually execute what he did.
Originally Posted by DB's Jazz Guitar Blog
Another one is Sco -- I often joke that he is much less sloppy than he sounds. If you actually try to transcribe his greasy "easy" stuff, it's not easy at all. And in a weird way, someone who is playing pattern-based stuff at high tempos is almost easier to understand than some of the "slower" guys. That's the point of patterns -- less to think about note-wise, more opportunity to develop themes, motifs, and dynamics. I mean Martino is in some ways simpler than Hall, for example, but his approach brings a different energy. Birelli and Benson, are just in a whole 'nother universe when it comes to both technique and content though. Anyone who accuses them of playing without feeling is just completely missing something.
John
-
As one who struggles with speed, especially with improvising at quick tempos, I agree. I have started thinking not of "speed" but of "fluency." If I'm conversing with someone in a language that is a second language for me, and I say really deep and amazing things, but have to look up every other word, have to consult a grammar to get the right verbal form, and then still end up with a wrong idiom... my "content" won't matter because it will be lost in the delays and static in my speech. But if I have internalized the language so that as ideas are formed they transition into correct sentences smoothly so that I can maintain the pace of the conversation, my speech keeping up with my thinking rather than bogging it down, then what I say will have more impact.
I know that the analogy between jazz and "language" has lots of weaknesses, and honestly, I don't find it as useful as I used to. But still, I find "fluency" a better concept that "speed." What I notice with Pat Metheny and Joe Pass is that they never seem to feel like the guitar is an obstacle that is in the way of expressing their musical ideas. Joe even told me once that the guitar is basically a typewriter. We use it to spell out our ideas. That of course involves enormous technical ability, but without the ability to express readily on the instrument the musical ideas in our minds, those ideas are pretty useless unless we switch over to being a keyboard-and-paper composer (which isn't a bad thing, ether).
Whatever, I find I can play a memorized piece up to about 225 bpm, and with practice, can play it fluidly. But I find my ability to think of musical ideas and express them on the instrument is far, far, slower than that. Partly because my technical ability lags, but also... I still don't have really great musical ideas in my head to start with!
-
Haha John A - we both chose Sco. He's a master of sounding like he's dipping in and out of something.
-
Yes. But the empty and boring stuff will be found only in guys trying to do stuff they cannot handle. Never the masters. And my entire post was about the masters. I do not mean amateur or student level playing, which is of course a diffent thing.So here’s the thing. Some players play fast and it’s empty and boring and some players play fast and it’s interesting and swinging and all that good stuff. otoh some people play slow and it doesn’t swing or have any musical content either haha. They’d be the first to lecture you about playing to many notes lol.
Agreed. When editing is a conscious attempt and you have your stuff together you will sound good anyway But if you lack content, skills or musicality, you will lack musicality at all tempi. I cannot imagine a competent player only sounding good on slow tempi.I think a lot of players make the mistake that if you play less notes it will sound good. This I think is not generally true. What is more true (and once again here I go, regurgitating paragraphs of Hal Galper) playing fewer notes is actually an editing process. I think this is more generally the case. But you need something to edit, right?
It is yes but even that is different in all great players and is less dominant in some. I just love Pat Martino machine gunning 16th notes.Rhyrhm is also a really big deal. Listen to the way Benson digs into the upbeat accents and it’s clear he’s not just stringing notes together, but the notes are a vehicle for the rhythm, kind of like a hand percussionist but with pitches.
DB
-
We'd all burn on Cherokee and 330 if we could
Fast playing is an important part of jazz playing. It's the balance to slow playing, which is also important.
Balance is the most important. We pick put Jim Hall as the "slow" player. Whatever. Listen to the ways he creates balance. That's why it sounds good.
-
There's a lot of rhythmic shape in Martino's playing. You might think - oh a big long string of notes, but then you get into it... the way he creates patterns of accentuation using the contour of his lines. And his placement is just - delicious. I would say rhythm is a dominant aspect of his playing, actually. It's just expressed in a different way to Benson or Grant Green. Originally Posted by DB's Jazz Guitar Blog
I used to not like his more recent playing, then a light bulb went on one day and I heard it.
-
In a way, the faster you want to play the more musical you have to play. Originally Posted by DB's Jazz Guitar Blog
Paradoxically, I think this is what makes some fast playing boring for some listeners---not that the technique is poor (it isn't) or the notes are wrong (clash in an unwanted way): it is all fast, fitting and impressive but 'fast, fitting and impressive' can tire the ear in a hurry. (As can anything else that is overdone.) This is what bothered many people about Sonny Stitt: no one doubted his ability or thought he was playing wrong notes; he just wore some listeners out with it. (I'm a Sonny Stitt fan but I acknowledge a lot of jazz lovers found him dazzling but not--often enough--emotionally gripping.)
I think some boppers were especially prone to this because they added changes and raced the tempo so that 'making the changes' could be truly improvisation (not pre-planned), very impressive, and yet very same-y (-there are only so many moves one can make on the fly at 300+ bpm. You have yours, I have mine, and may both our storehouses grow, but the faster you're going, the more "automatic" your playing must be just to execute it. This was even true of Coltrane.)
-
Is boring the right word here? It's more like a listener saying "there's so much information in the playing I cannot process it anymore." On the other hand a more experienced listener who IS able to process it may say "wow, now that is virtuoso and exciting playing" I think the type of info in a fast Sonny Stitt is more or less the same as in a slower playing Stitt. Only the amount of info will differ. He is executing more or less the same stuff only faster!Paradoxically, I think this is what makes some fast playing boring for some listeners---not that the technique is poor (it isn't) or the notes are wrong (clash in an unwanted way): it is all fast, fitting and impressive but 'fast, fitting and impressive' can tire the ear in a hurry. (As can anything else that is overdone.) This is what bothered many people about Sonny Stitt: no one doubted his ability or thought he was playing wrong notes; he just wore some listeners out with it. (I'm a Sonny Stitt fan but I acknowledge a lot of jazz lovers found him dazzling but not--often enough--emotionally gripping.)
But maybe overstimulaton is the same as boring for most people ...
DB
-
I often wonder if I was able to play fast whether I'd appreciate the faster guitar players more. Allied to that, I often think I don't even hear fast enough, let along be able to move my fingers fast enough.
You mentioned gypsy jazz, I've been watching some Jimmy Rosenberg recently and have been amazed and delighted at some of the melodic and rhythmic twists and turned he puts into the standard melodies, but then he goes off into Sweet Georgia Brown at a tempo that is simply crazy. The fact he can play at this dazzling tempo is almost unbelievable and mind-blowing but it leaves me a little cold.
Similarly, only last night I was watching an old Stochelo DVD in which he demonstrates many tunes at slow / medium / fast tempos. Watching many of the performances it struck me that my description of these tempos would have been fast, very fast, and ludicrously fast. I enjoyed the "slow" versions most of all.
But, as I said above, I can't hep wondering if I was able to play at these tempos (or even hear at these tempos), would I be saying and thinking differently?
I think the answer is probably yes. Which means this issue is with me, rather than with the players.
-
I'm one of those who can't play fast (yet!!) but still really enjoy hearing fast players, as long as they are not monotonous. I hate to say it, but sometimes Pat Martino really is monotonous to me. On "Sonny" he has practically a whole chorus that is just one figure played over and over. Sure, accented differently, but I find it not boring, but annoying. Grant Green on "My Favorite Things" also has a long section of just one figure. These are amazing, great players, but that's something the "fast" players often do that I find un-interesting and even detracting. I'm sure they are deep within their own feeling at the moment, so no doubt it's very sincere, but it does not communicate to me.
But guys like Joe Pass, Birelli Lagrene, Tal Farlow, Jimmy Raney, who keep a lot of variety in their fast lines are very engaging to me.
-
What baffles me is how popular the Rosenbergs are over here. They have been very succesful for many, many years and have made lots of money. They are the most commercially succesful jazzers in the Netherlands. How come all these people - that really cannot be bothered with mainstream jazz - like them so much????? Originally Posted by digger
DB
-
Of course there are limits. Here's Robert Anchipolovsky plaing Cherokee at over 450 BPM on his sax way beyond anybody's processing level I guess. Would be interesting to slow it down and see what he is really playing. I don't know him but he seems to be an established player in the Bird tradition with a good cv. The backing is sped up but not the sax!
and here he is on a slow blues to assess his "regular" playing.
-
Last edited by Vladan; 04-02-2020 at 01:25 PM.
-
I slowed it down to half speed to see if I could tell whether he was really hanging with the tune. It seemed like mostly he wasn't -- his notes seemed pretty much random, except he would every once in a while play something consonant. He also he slipped in and out of time with the backing track. But he did keep up with sort of the basic direction of the tune, and it did seem like he knew where he was. Surely better than I could do, but I wouldn't even try. Originally Posted by DB's Jazz Guitar Blog
JohnLast edited by John A.; 04-02-2020 at 02:18 PM.
-
I know what you mean about Martino's repetition, but experiencing that sort of thing the in the flesh is a very different experience from a recording or a video. Originally Posted by lawson-stone
John
-
Yeah there are things that work in the room that don’t work on recordings
-
True that. Originally Posted by christianm77
DB
-
Thanks for that. I did the slowing down too and could not make much of it either! Originally Posted by John A.
DB
-
For me, it's the player.
I once walked out of the Keystone Korner in mid-show because I was so bored by a famous guitarist. He played faster and cleaner than I thought possible, but I didn't care for a single note. I do like his records and some performances I've seen on video. But I didn't like that show.
OTOH, there are players with burning speed who are nothing short of thrilling to listen to. And, on the third hand, I rarely want to listen to any of that a second time.
The music I've listened to repeatedly is generally played at a more modest tempo. So, I love Jim Hall's ballad playing. But, I also love Wes (who doesn't sound so fast until you try to play his lines).
I can't play fast, so I don't play flurries of meaningless notes. But, I'm absolutely certain that if I had the chops, that's exactly what I'd do.
-
I really like the doesn’t sound fast until you try to play it thing. Bernstein does that.
also I went to see Birelli a couple of years back and it was just ... dull. Two hours of sweep picking on electric. His bass player was awesome though, and played the best most musical guitar solo all night on Hono’s d hole. Not bad.
And I say that as a Birelli fan. One of the few GJ things I find constantly inspiring is his stuff because he is always struggling against the boundaries of the tradition probably because he’s so bored of it - that’s why he sounds good imo!
It’s like he’s bored of music tbh. Too easy. He got the cheat codes. Competed every level.
-
Very well said DB. I think a lot of the dissing is envy/jealousy driven. I knew a guy that would start criticizing when a player was starting to throw in fast phrasing, saying he was "playing too many notes," even when it was done tastefully. He was clearly envious.
-
I know. I checked out at 45:00. Originally Posted by lawson-stone
-
For you reading enjoyment, the 50 fastest guitarists of all time. Not jazz focused, but it includes folks like Django, DiMeola, McLaughlin.
https://www.guitarworld.com/magazine...rists-all-time
Take it with a grain of salt, of course. It's also from 2015.
Reply With Quote
Transcriber wanted
Today, 04:35 PM in Improvisation