Favorite guitar players that really play outside?

**christianm77** · 03-07-2015, 01:30 PM

Ha, outside ain't nothin' new. Check out the Stuff Smith solo at 0:40 ish. Pretty hip no?

As he used to wear a stuffed parrot on his shoulder, it's likely he was doing this sort of stuff to be 'clowning around' as part of his act - after all the tune clearly references the use of shall we say, recreational narcotics. None the less, it's a clear early example of intervallic transposition for outside effect. The tune, is needless to say, a Rhythm A section.

I like the way playing outside used to for fun and now it's all dead serious.

BTW - the Bryan Baker solo doesn't really sound outside to me. Perhaps I'm just used to people playing random stuff on modal vamps. I like his lines a lot though.

**feral guitar** · 03-07-2015, 01:55 PM

joe morris
derek bailey
nels cline
fred frith (the master of making something out of nothing)

**fumblefingers** · 03-07-2015, 02:08 PM

Did we say Holdsworth yet?

**fumblefingers** · 03-07-2015, 02:13 PM

Originally Posted by AndyV

Hard to get more "outside" than this guy ...

Oh yeah.

outside the norm, outside melody, outside the form, outside the storytelling, outside the harmony, outside the rhythm, outside the audience, outside the paycheck.

**Hep To The Jive** · 03-07-2015, 02:29 PM

Originally Posted by christianm77

Ha, outside ain't nothin' new. Check out the Stuff Smith solo at 0:40 ish. Pretty hip no?

As he used to wear a stuffed parrot on his shoulder, it's likely he was doing this sort of stuff to be 'clowning around' as part of his act - after all the tune clearly references the use of shall we say, recreational narcotics. None the less, it's a clear early example of intervallic transposition for outside effect. The tune, is needless to say, a Rhythm A section.

I like the way playing outside used to for fun and now it's all dead serious.

BTW - the Bryan Baker solo doesn't really sound outside to me. Perhaps I'm just used to people playing random stuff on modal vamps. I like his lines a lot though.

Stuff Smith, wow, never heard of him, but what a gem! He can play outside all day long, I don't mind, with the rhythm like that it can't be bad.

**pingu** · 03-07-2015, 03:50 PM

metheny on song x

**Stephen_Bridgland** · 03-07-2015, 05:22 PM

Originally Posted by fumblefingers

Oh yeah.

outside the norm, outside melody, outside the form, outside the storytelling, outside the harmony, outside the rhythm, outside the audience, outside the paycheck.

Outside the norm and outside the paycheck perhaps, but everything else you said here is wrong. You even acknowledge it yourself by saying "outside the norm". In all of Derek Bailey's playing there is a clear engagement with all of the other elements that you mention, but it is an engagement that is not based on oversimplified ideas on what these things are or can be.

**b_goat** · 03-07-2015, 06:40 PM

Allan Holdsworth. Scott Henderson can do so as well...

**rob taft** · 03-07-2015, 07:13 PM

I don't know about the term "outside" as one person's outside may be another's "inside". But James Emery is a composer and guitarist who has done some very original works.

**goldenwave77** · 03-07-2015, 08:12 PM

Vic Juris. He's written a book on it for Mel Bay. And he played with David Liebman for a while, who I think is regarded as adventurous and scary-good as well, on sax. I think Vic J. on his website talks about almost playing as a 2nd horn kind of thing when they played together.

**sgcim** · 03-07-2015, 10:02 PM

Originally Posted by boognish23

I'll throw in Tim Miller and Ben Monder.

And based players you listed, I'm guessing you will enjoy this one. Around the 6 minute mark, Ben kicks on the Rat throws in some outside shredding.

Monder is really flyin' on the last part of Wichita Lineman, and if you notice he's using his FOREARM to control his picking motion, like Jimmy Bruno, Johnny Smith, and many others.
Looks like Richb got it wrong again; what else is new...

**TigerJazzMan** · 03-08-2015, 12:12 AM

Oz Noy

Anything off Fuzzy or Shchizophrenic.

**fumblefingers** · 03-08-2015, 01:56 AM

Originally Posted by Stephen_Bridgland

You even acknowledge it yourself by saying "outside the norm".

i have to admit, i'm struggling a bit with this statement's logic. what do you mean please?

**Hep To The Jive** · 03-08-2015, 02:58 AM

Originally Posted by Stephen_Bridgland

Outside the norm and outside the paycheck perhaps, but everything else you said here is wrong. You even acknowledge it yourself by saying "outside the norm". In all of Derek Bailey's playing there is a clear engagement with all of the other elements that you mention, but it is an engagement that is not based on oversimplified ideas on what these things are or can be.

For example rhythm is not a oversimplified idea. You either have it, or you don't. In that video Derek Bailey had no rhythm to speak of, which made listening to him playing random notes and chords even more torturous. Doesn't look like it's because of his abilities though, just his choice. In my view, it's not a good choice, but sure someone would find its enjoyable.

**Stephen_Bridgland** · 03-08-2015, 06:50 AM

Originally Posted by fumblefingers

i have to admit, i'm struggling a bit with this statement's logic. what do you mean please?

Yes I wasn't very clear, sorry!
I've changed my mind a bit about what I wanted to say, but what I was originally trying to get across is that his playing is very much involved with melody, form, storytelling, harmony, rhythm, and audience...but not with so-called "normal" concepts of what these things are or can be. So if you'd have said "outside the normal idea of melody" etc, I would have agreed with you.

...but as I said, I've changed my mind a bit, and wouldn't have said the same thing now. I probably would have just brought up the old question about what this so-called "normal" is that he is outside of? I actually agree with your first post on this thread, I will never understand why Derek Bailey gets brought up, discussed and judged as if he was a calling himself a jazz guitarist, or as if he was in the jazz tradition.

Improvisation doesn't belong to jazz. Not everyone who improvises is a jazz musician or wants to be associated with jazz. Heck, you might even say that there are a lot of jazz musicians that aren't even improvisers!

His playing deals very much with all of the elements that you mentioned, as well as musical elements that are often completely ignored by the majority of jazz guitarists, such as timbre and textural concerns, extremes of dynamics, extended techniques, relasionship to instrument, relasionship to body, relasionship to space, density etc...

It would be just as ridiculous for a free improviser to listen to a Joe Pass record and say "well, this guy has a pretty limited idea of what a guitar can sound like! That same instrumental tone for every note throughout the whole song! And his dynamic range was so limited! Where was the very loud and the very quiet? And there didn't seem to be much drama to his storytelling, just plodding along, eighth note after inevitable eighth note. And his limited concepts of form, harmony, melody and rhythm!! It's as if this guy has never heard of Wagner, Debussy, North Indian music, Stravinsky, Bartok, Messiaen, the music of Noh Drama, Schoenberg, Webern, Berg, Nancarrow, Balinese Gamelan, Stockhausen, Boulez, Cage, Feldman, etc..."

But you see, I'm 100% sure that that would never happen, because all of the free improvisers that I've ever met and worked with have all been passionate, open minded students of all kinds of different music. And of course it's stupid and overblown!

**Stephen_Bridgland** · 03-08-2015, 07:03 AM

Originally Posted by Hep To The Jive

For example rhythm is not a oversimplified idea. You either have it, or you don't. In that video Derek Bailey had no rhythm to speak of, which made listening to him playing random notes and chords even more torturous. Doesn't look like it's because of his abilities though, just his choice. In my view, it's not a good choice, but sure someone would find its enjoyable.

I disagree. I don't think of rhythm as an "it" that you can have or not have. If you're thinking of timekeeping, groove, then perhaps you are right...maybe. But I definitely think that there is a lot more that can be said about and done with rhythm than timekeeping and groove. And I'm not thinking of odd time signatures either!

I hope that I'm not coming across as confrontational, that's not my intention at all. It's just a subject that I'm really interested in, and Derek Bailey is a musician that I have a great respect for.

So again, apologies for the long post and possible thread derailment!

**Fidelcaster** · 03-08-2015, 07:33 AM

Hard to play more outside than these guys.

**fumblefingers** · 03-08-2015, 12:00 PM

Originally Posted by Stephen_Bridgland

Yes I wasn't very clear, sorry!
I've changed my mind a bit about what I wanted to say, but what I was originally trying to get across is that his playing is very much involved with melody, form, storytelling, harmony, rhythm, and audience...but not with so-called "normal" concepts of what these things are or can be. So if you'd have said "outside the normal idea of melody" etc, I would have agreed with you.

...but as I said, I've changed my mind a bit, and wouldn't have said the same thing now. I probably would have just brought up the old question about what this so-called "normal" is that he is outside of? I actually agree with your first post on this thread, I will never understand why Derek Bailey gets brought up, discussed and judged as if he was a calling himself a jazz guitarist, or as if he was in the jazz tradition.

Improvisation doesn't belong to jazz. Not everyone who improvises is a jazz musician or wants to be associated with jazz. Heck, you might even say that there are a lot of jazz musicians that aren't even improvisers!

His playing deals very much with all of the elements that you mentioned, as well as musical elements that are often completely ignored by the majority of jazz guitarists, such as timbre and textural concerns, extremes of dynamics, extended techniques, relasionship to instrument, relasionship to body, relasionship to space, density etc...

It would be just as ridiculous for a free improviser to listen to a Joe Pass record and say "well, this guy has a pretty limited idea of what a guitar can sound like! That same instrumental tone for every note throughout the whole song! And his dynamic range was so limited! Where was the very loud and the very quiet? And there didn't seem to be much drama to his storytelling, just plodding along, eighth note after inevitable eighth note. And his limited concepts of form, harmony, melody and rhythm!! It's as if this guy has never heard of Wagner, Debussy, North Indian music, Stravinsky, Bartok, Messiaen, the music of Noh Drama, Schoenberg, Webern, Berg, Nancarrow, Balinese Gamelan, Stockhausen, Boulez, Cage, Feldman, etc..."

But you see, I'm 100% sure that that would never happen, because all of the free improvisers that I've ever met and worked with have all been passionate, open minded students of all kinds of different music. And of course it's stupid and overblown!

i guess "normal" might also be described as "conventional". normal could also refer to what is done the majority of the time. not necessarily good or bad.

i did hear some architecture to DB's performance, some logical organization. but a lot of "conventional" listeners might not. they would head for the exits quickly, but then he wasn't playing for them, so whatever.

even for the devoted, i think some of these "free" performances would be more effective if kept fairly short.

BTW - I checked out your link. I like that short piece "One More".

**marcwhy** · 03-08-2015, 12:50 PM

I'm a fan of Chris Crocco:

[Mela is a ridiculous drummer, too!]

He's a great teacher, and when he discusses "out" playing, he's very "in" about it, in that he wants you to know exactly where you are in the progression (assuming it's a "tune"), and you need to be locked into the groove, too.