Fusion

[Tom Z]

The brecker brothers were pretty important...its real easy for us to downplay more contemporary musicians because of fusion. If you have heard them play straight ahead jazz, you would def change your mind. They hold their own.

Metheny uses chorus or something, I can't hear the guitar, he's good but his tone bugs me and I like more straight ahead stuff.

You should look online for the metheny interview where he pretty much told KennyG he sucks. It is funny.

[mr. beaumont]

Hey I think I know where Mr. Beaumont is coming from. Being a tele player that digs hillbilly music and jazz, can tell you there is nothing more important than tone. A lot of the fusion guys mentioned like Henderson use so many effects that it leaves me cold too..

actually, no, not for me. i don't mind effects on a jazz guitar--i love bill frisell, abercrombie, metheny, and many others who aren't using a traditional archtop tone. it has nothing to do with that for me.

the biggest thing that leaves me cold is the writing, often. it's very hard to explain, and again, it's just my personal taste, which means nothing, but when i see a song named something like "iberian dance" and the theme is something phyrgian, it's just so contrived and cheesy to me...and i do think there's a whole brand of fusion that's really just "music for musicians," which, while there's nothing wrong with that, leaves me cold because i want something more--i either want a song, or some kind of strong emotional content that i just don't hear in a lot of that kind of music...when i hear it, the only reaction i get is, "wow, this guy is talented," not "wow, i want to listen to that again," or, "wow, what were they thinking when they wrote that," or "man, what a melody!"

again, this is just my opinion, and worth what y'all paid for it.

[gravitas]

actually, no, not for me. i don't mind effects on a jazz guitar--i love bill frisell, abercrombie, metheny, and many others who aren't using a traditional archtop tone. it has nothing to do with that for me.

the biggest thing that leaves me cold is the writing, often. it's very hard to explain, and again, it's just my personal taste, which means nothing, but when i see a song named something like "iberian dance" and the theme is something phyrgian, it's just so contrived and cheesy to me...and i do think there's a whole brand of fusion that's really just "music for musicians," which, while there's nothing wrong with that, leaves me cold because i want something more--i either want a song, or some kind of strong emotional content that i just don't hear in a lot of that kind of music...when i hear it, the only reaction i get is, "wow, this guy is talented," not "wow, i want to listen to that again," or, "wow, what were they thinking when they wrote that," or "man, what a melody!"

again, this is just my opinion, and worth what y'all paid for it.

I'm with you on that one Mr. Beaumont... I find a lot of 80's fusion leaves me cold now too, because it's performed with such seriousness but the technology sounds so processed and outddated. That's not to say there isn't some great stuff from the era that I really enjoy, but just imagine "Iberian Dance" sounding Phrygian sounds coming out of a Concertmate 800, haha

[Jazzarian]

The brecker brothers were pretty important...its real easy for us to downplay more contemporary musicians because of fusion. If you have heard them play straight ahead jazz, you would def change your mind. They hold their own.

Metheny uses chorus or something, I can't hear the guitar, he's good but his tone bugs me and I like more straight ahead stuff.

You should look online for the metheny interview where he pretty much told KennyG he sucks. It is funny.

Metheny has a real problem with tone. In the old days of the PMG, his tone was very bright and full of reverb. These days it sounds like his tone knob is set on 1.

Not to mention his sense(less) of direction. I haven't liked much of his music since the mid 1990s. It's like he revolted against being played on smooth jazz radio, and had no place to go. The Brazilian style beat was gone, Lyle Mays in and out of the scene.

Itls almost like he turned over the keys to Canadian Brian Hughes.

Metheny did some good work with Brecker and McCoy Tyner, to be fair. I haven't like much else in a long time.

[gravitas]

Not to defend Mr Gorelick, Metheny shouldn't talk. Yes I do remember the article well.

Metheny has made his share of mush and profited well. How would he feel if Russell Malone torn him a new dump shoot?

I think in the article it wasn't the nature of Kenny G's music that made Pat angry, it was that Kenny G had rerecorded a Louis Armstrong tune with himself soloing alongside Louis. "Musical necrophilia," I think Pat dubbed it.

I do agree though, Pat Metheny has made some bland music. It's just a good thing he has other recordings that are head and shoulders above the radio fluff.

Have you heard him on Michael Brecker's last disc?

[alan holcome]

Someone mentioned Greg Howe; anyone ever notice His how wide His vibrato is? What's the deal? Sounds like He tunes down waaay low so the strings are super loose so He can get that unreal wobble. When I first heard Him I thought maybe He plays a fretless? I read an article but nothing was mentioned about tuning or whatever.
Anybody know?

[Tom Z]

Beaumont, we agree on the need for some emotional content. I do agree that the writing is often uninspiring too.

I do have quite a few fusion CDs, Bitches Brew, one or 2 metheny CDs, some abercrombie. I refuse to sell them or trash them only because maybe sometime down the line I will be able to understand what the heck is going on...especially w/ Bitches Brew.

Its all cool though, if everyone sounded the same, jazz would be pretty boring!

[mr. beaumont]

now bitches brew--i think that album is BRILLIANT. sets a mood, and doesn't let up--it's heavy.

[Ray C.]

I have to say over the years, I've purged a lot of the fusion from my collection. I'm 90% sure the only fusion I have in my collection is:

RTF: No Mystery, Romantic Warrior
Stanley Clarke: School Days
Miles Davis: Bitches Brew, In A Silent Way
Herbie Hancock: Headhunters
Mahavishnu Orchestra: Inner Mounting Flame
Alan Holdsworth: Metal Fatigue
Weather Report: Heavy Weather.
Jaco Pastorious: Jaco Pastorious

I do have about 6-7 Metheny albums, but the styles vary to the extent that I'm not sure I would put him in the "fusion" box. I also have some Jeff Beck, Steve Vai, and Eric Johnson, but that is a genre I would list as, "Instrumental Rock"-which I do like. I just don't see it as jazz or jazz fusion. But that's just me.

It's, "In A Silent Way," that I return to most often. It's somewhat ironic that an album that was built on "loose" playing, has gained a kind of density of time (for my taste, anyway). I wish it had gone more in this direction.

[Dystonian_Mode]

I tend to like - and still like - a lot of the old school fusion. I'm not a big fan of this shredding type fusion; that's not to say there aren't some great players doing it, but I tend to gravitate more towards an emphasis on composition as opposed to something that comes off as a vehicle for chops.

[franco6719]

I've seen Pat Metheny live several times and I still think he is one of the greatest STRAIGHT-AHEAD jazz players who has ever lived. Enough said. His tone is a but muddy though on the Trio albums and so on. I used to like it, but it is getting to the point that you can't even here the notes anymore.

Still, he is an absolute genius and can play just about anything in any style as well as anyone. Listen to "Missouri Sky" with Charlie Haden and hear some beautiful melodic playing indeed.

As to the criticism of Kenny G., I think he had a point about Kenny G. not being a very good JAZZ soloist and that the recording on top of Louis Armstrong was unbelievably arrogant and idiotic. If you read the article, though, it seems the man doth protest too much. I think he is projecting a bit of his anger at critics of his undeniably "lighter and fluffier" music with the Group onto Kenny G so as to dissociate himself from that strand of "smooth jazz".

Fusion is a mixed bag, like everything else. I like Scofield's brand of funk/fusion, a lot of the Metheny stuff (especially earlier on), early Larry Carlton, Weather Report, Mike Stern, Brecker and some other stuff. I'm not a big fan of the "shredding fusion" ala DiMeola and some Chick Corea and I don't care for Kenny G. style music (whatever you want to call it). Just my preferences.

[franco6719]

I also love Steely Dan. Pop with strong jazzy elements? I don't know how to classify it, but it is some of my favorite music.

[gravitas]

I've always appreciated Steely Dan but it seems like mainstream music fans (and even some jazz fans too) lump them in with the Smooth L.A. West Coast scene. It's hard to deny the link there- vritually every pro in L.A. has played on a Steely Dan record, but the lyrics are way too hip for me to think of it that way. I'd be curious to hear other people's thoughts on Mr. Fagan and Mr. Becker

[Jazzarian]

I've seen Pat Metheny live several times and I still think he is one of the greatest STRAIGHT-AHEAD jazz players who has ever lived. Enough said. His tone is a but muddy though on the Trio albums and so on. I used to like it, but it is getting to the point that you can't even here the notes anymore.

Still, he is an absolute genius and can play just about anything in any style as well as anyone. Listen to "Missouri Sky" with Charlie Haden and hear some beautiful melodic playing indeed.

As to the criticism of Kenny G., I think he had a point about Kenny G. not being a very good JAZZ soloist and that the recording on top of Louis Armstrong was unbelievably arrogant and idiotic. If you read the article, though, it seems the man doth protest too much. I think he is projecting a bit of his anger at critics of his undeniably "lighter and fluffier" music with the Group onto Kenny G so as to dissociate himself from that strand of "smooth jazz".

Fusion is a mixed bag, like everything else. I like Scofield's brand of funk/fusion, a lot of the Metheny stuff (especially earlier on), early Larry Carlton, Weather Report, Mike Stern, Brecker and some other stuff. I'm not a big fan of the "shredding fusion" ala DiMeola and some Chick Corea and I don't care for Kenny G. style music (whatever you want to call it). Just my preferences.

Geez I remember Metheny saying something like Kenny G was constantly playing slightly sharp and a bunch of other crap that sounds like it might have come from a 17 year old guitar hack, jealous of a fellow 17 year old guitar hack.

Long ago, I did like the Jeff Lorber Fusion, before there was a Kenny G. Lorber used to have some great guests, like Freddie Hubbard and Corea. Smooth "jazz" $$$ changed all that in a hurry.


I think you were remiss in not including Robben Ford in your list of people we both like :}

[Jazzarian]

I also love Steely Dan. Pop with strong jazzy elements? I don't know how to classify it, but it is some of my favorite music.

I'd agree, but not with present day Steely Dan. The old stuff was classic. New stuff, fluff.

[Jazzarian]

I've always appreciated Steely Dan but it seems like mainstream music fans (and even some jazz fans too) lump them in with the Smooth L.A. West Coast scene. It's hard to deny the link there- vritually every pro in L.A. has played on a Steely Dan record, but the lyrics are way too hip for me to think of it that way. I'd be curious to hear other people's thoughts on Mr. Fagan and Mr. Becker

Many of the guitar solos I once attributed to Larry Carlton were really Walter Becker's handiwork. Sometimes it's really hard to tell until you see them live.

Fagan's voice, well, these days it's more like a whisper. Not much for lungs it seems.

[Ray C.]

Some interesting points; some I agree with; others...

I think the issue with fusion and what is or isn't jazz, is not really that complicated-largely because the label "fusion" was a marketing tag. And to a large extent, I think people look at it inside out: it's really a rock genre, infusing elements of jazz. Older posters here will remember, that in its heyday, the more popular fusion acts were major label artists with decent size marketing behind them. They were marketed like rock stars. You can see this with Pat Metheny-look at his albums with ECM vs what he's done with Warner Bros. Now, I wouldn't call him a sell-out; he's done very non-commercial stuff on Warners. But I think it has some influence. Which is very different to the ECM way that Manfred Eicher runs his label by. So I don't get too worked up over the notion of "fusion," as it was a contrived style. Which gets to deadcow's point about playing the music you hear; playing what's in you and being true to your art.

Now that's a big ask for a musician-making a living doing instrumental music of any kind is a tough row to hoe. You're not gonna make a lot bread-in fact, you're probably will not gonna make a living. But with the internet you can at least be heard and be part of a community. If you're lucky enough, you may be able to build a small but appreciative audience for your work.

The sticky point-and what brings us back to my first point about fusion-is honesty. Being honest is the hardest thing for an artist of any kind IMO. This is place in the road where Tie Dye and deadcow meet head-on: how do you bring something new to the table without it being contrived? That's the real knock on a lot of fusion isn't it? The commercial potential put in in a dead end. That's the interesting thing about Bitches Brew and In A Silent Way. They are not commercial-in fact I know a lot of people who really find them too esoteric. Those albums seem grounded in an honest exploration of where music was at that time-he wasn't jiving. Which I don't think can be said of some of Miles' other stuff.

For me, the basis of jazz is blues, swing, and improvisation. What you do with those three components...I think there's no limit. The fact that the old way of distribution is dead, and we no longer have these big pronouncements from critics or labels, introducing the next, "new thing"....that can make things difficult on one hand, but also can free you. It all depends what you want from your life and your art. So I don't think jazz has reached any kind of dead end. What's changed is the distribution method of music. And while it has some down side, I think it will also eliminate a lot of record company hype-which is what fusion became IMO.