Joe Pass Chord and Scale Grips

[Cunamara]

I agree with Joe above that trying to decide "the best" is crazy. I do, however, think a pretty factual case can be made that Joe Pass was/is the most fully realized mainstream jazz guitarist in history. Note I didn't say "best" but simply the most fully realized. He explored more of the potential of the jazz guitar than anyone before or after.

Man, that's quite a list. I'm in awe. FWIW Jim Hall called Joe Pass "the most complete jazz guitarist ever" in a interview I read online somewhere.

[EarlBrother]

Lawson Stone.Shocked just Shocked that you left out Joe Pass plays the Rolling Stones or what ever that was called Lol!.Anyway i am so glad they were/are all recorded and documented.If you see them together hanging this would be the farthest thing from their hearts.

[gmek]

LS, I agree that we aren't arguing who is better. I disagree that Joe was 'more fully realized' than Jim Hall.

I know we are not debating the talent of either man, but I'll mention a few items for why I disagree that they are on different levels. Jim was very innovative on the instrument, performed in some very unique and new musical landscapes (just check his discography), and had a strong compositional voice. He was always striving for something new and I believe did his best to stop himself from repeating himself. Not to mention a sensibility that made is playing so tasteful and elegant.

They were stylistically different though... it's difficult to directly compare them as musicians without personal opinion muddying things up (but for further analysis check his discography).

Joe Pass did great playing with Oscar Peterson. Jim Hall did great playing with Bill Evans.

I think they were both masters of their instrument and craft. How could one be more realized than the other?

[gmek]

PS for the record I am a big fan of Joe Pass and he led me down a path of learning that I am very grateful for. I sought out his own influences, and he referred to the big 3: Charlie Christian, Wes Montgomery, and Django Reinhardt. I had heard bits of Django and Charlie, but not Wes. All of this was a big part of my jazz guitar education (didn't pay much attention to it before even though I always listened to jazz and played guitar... weird right?).

But I found Joe Pass first in an instructional video with him breaking down how he thinks of music in simple terms and how one doesn't have to make it harder than it is.

I'm of course still working on "it," and it ain't easy, but he broke the wall in my thinking it was an impossible task. All my respect to JP (this is his thread after all)!

[lawson-stone]

LS, I agree that we aren't arguing who is better. I disagree that Joe was 'more fully realized' than Jim Hall.

I know we are not debating the talent of either man, but I'll mention a few items for why I disagree that they are on different levels. Jim was very innovative on the instrument, performed in some very unique and new musical landscapes (just check his discography), and had a strong compositional voice. He was always striving for something new and I believe did his best to stop himself from repeating himself. Not to mention a sensibility that made is playing so tasteful and elegant.

They were stylistically different though... it's difficult to directly compare them as musicians without personal opinion muddying things up (but for further analysis check his discography).

Joe Pass did great playing with Oscar Peterson. Jim Hall did great playing with Bill Evans.

I think they were both masters of their instrument and craft. How could one be more realized than the other?

Good points, all. You will never, ever hear me making any case to lessen the achievement of Jim Hall! I'm happy to think of Joe Pass and Jim Hall as occupants of a very elite circle of guitarists whose very virtuosity makes them hard to compare. Jim Hall certainly did perform in a wide array of settings, and much more than Joe Pass, he experimented with pushing the frontiers of jazz in some very new directions. He was the teacher of many of our most creative players today, as well.

So... I'll happily give you that whole point. Just a tabulation of Hall's recordings makes the case.

[Groyniad]

i do think it makes sense to talk about who is best - the fact that it can be hard to come to a conclusion that everyone will readily agree to does not entail that there is no conclusion to come to. (you're not a relativist about all this stuff are you LS???) just because many people believe that shakespeare is boring or that andrew lloyd webber writes all the best tunes - it doesn't mean we can't say that shakespeare is not really boring and that many people have written better tunes than alw. that would make a nonsense of just about everything that is important.

and

wes is the best (best full stop - not best 'all-rounder')

there - this is not a statement of some eccentric personal preference. its based on (aesthetic) facts about his playing that can quite easily be identified (and are identified all the time on this forum).

joe's place in the tradition is very very different from barney's (that's a historical fact about an aesthetic tradition)

my claim that barney is the jazz guitar all-rounder is based on his importance in the tradition more than on his actual playing - and you could take issue with that method of coming to a conclusion perfectly reasonably.

joe may be more 'realized' as you put it - more 'evolved' - but if that's true its very largely because of how much he learned from barney.

and the whole 60's thing is huge - but nevertheless boring:

this is why i can't relate to what many people insist on calling jazz post - oh - 1965??

its obvious that lester young's music - or coleman hawkin's music or billie holiday's music or louis armstrong's music (most importantly) is the same type of music as parker's and monk's and powell's (even if many at the time failed to hear this).

its obvious because both types of music 'swing' - have that totally addictive and immediately obvious rhythmical feel. they both have the same feel despite their huge and important differences.

most of the 'new' music that involves fusing jazz with rock or folk post 1965 (??) does not have this feel - and it is obvious that it doesn't. those of us who worry about whether this stuff should be called jazz at all do so because we think that the feel of the music is by far the most important thing

i need to say this because i don't think its fair for ls to represent me as suffering from some sort of eccentric musical blindness/deafness. i've an obvious musical reason for the attitudes i have about what happened to jazz after 65 (??).

(i adore early ornette coleman and miles with tony williams - but i loathe 'tutu' and all 'jazzy' music with a rock beat)

[lawson-stone]

i do think it makes sense to talk about who is best - the fact that it can be hard to come to a conclusion that everyone will readily agree to does not entail that there is no conclusion to come to. (you're not a relativist about all this stuff are you LS???) just because many people believe that shakespeare is boring or that andrew lloyd webber writes all the best tunes - it doesn't mean we can't say that shakespeare is not really boring and that many people have written better tunes than alw. that would make a nonsense of just about everything that is important.

and

wes is the best (best full stop - not best 'all-rounder')

there - this is not a statement of some eccentric personal preference. its based on (aesthetic) facts about his playing that can quite easily be identified (and are identified all the time on this forum).

joe's place in the tradition is very very different from barney's (that's a historical fact about an aesthetic tradition)

my claim that barney is the jazz guitar all-rounder is based on his importance in the tradition more than on his actual playing - and you could take issue with that method of coming to a conclusion perfectly reasonably.

joe may be more 'realized' as you put it - more 'evolved' - but if that's true its very largely because of how much he learned from barney.

and the whole 60's thing is huge - but nevertheless boring:

this is why i can't relate to what many people insist on calling jazz post - oh - 1965??

its obvious that lester young's music - or coleman hawkin's music or billie holiday's music or louis armstrong's music (most importantly) is the same type of music as parker's and monk's and powell's (even if many at the time failed to hear this).

its obvious because both types of music 'swing' - have that totally addictive and immediately obvious rhythmical feel. they both have the same feel despite their huge and important differences.

most of the 'new' music that involves fusing jazz with rock or folk post 1965 (??) does not have this feel - and it is obvious that it doesn't. those of us who worry about whether this stuff should be called jazz at all do so because we think that the feel of the music is by far the most important thing

i need to say this because i don't think its fair for ls to represent me as suffering from some sort of eccentric musical blindness/deafness. i've an obvious musical reason for the attitudes i have about what happened to jazz after 65 (??).

(i adore early ornette coleman and miles with tony williams - but i loathe 'tutu' and all 'jazzy' music with a rock beat)

I am not a relativist, but I do believe some things are either relative, or very difficult to resolve because they inhere in the distinctive sensibilities and perceptions of individuals.

I don't see a future for this conversation between us. I"ve had a fair shot at stating my point of view and have nothing to add. I don't know how you judge things like "importance" in the tradition, for example. I can't debate something that has no real criteria.

So I'm just going to give you the last word on this point between us.

[John A.]

At times I've thought along the lines that Lawson is laying out -- that Pass covered the potential of the instrument more comprehensively than the other "classic" bop-based guys and this gives him a higher "score" in the GOAT-stakes. But then I go listen to some of the others, especially, Tal Farlow, Jimmy Raney, Barney Kessel, and I realize that they covered an awful lot of that ground themselves. The one thing that I think Pass did perfect to a greater degree than those guys is solo contrapuntal truly polyphonic improvisation -- with him, it wasn't just an impressive chops display; it was a completely integrated natural musical thing that he got to work (IMO) to a unique degree. Since he set the bar for this, I think others have managed to equal it or to reach it in other ways (Earl Klugh and Bill Frisell come to mind). But as far as the rest is concerned (phrasing, note choices, comping, burning with amazing energy and vibe, mixing single note and chord solos), the "classics" are all amazing, just in somewhat different ways. I don't think of Pass as "better" than Farlow or Raney and enjoy them all more or less equally. (I do, however, enjoy listening to Pass more than I do Herb Ellis or Barney Kessel, but that's just me).

Wes and Jim Hall I put in a somewhat different category because I think of them as more artistically interesting and innovative and more involved in pushing the boundaries of jazz itself (as opposed to jazz guitar) than, say Pass, Farlow, Raney and Kessel (though I recognize that Farlow, Raney and Kessel have cred as nearly first generation boppers). Sort of like comparing OP to Bill Evans or McCoy Tyner. OP is incomparable within a certain definition of "jazz piano" but BE and MT pushe(d)(s) jazz in a way that OP hasn't.

John

[Groyniad]

I am not a relativist, but I do believe some things are either relative, or very difficult to resolve because they inhere in the distinctive sensibilities and perceptions of individuals.

I don't see a future for this conversation between us. I"ve had a fair shot at stating my point of view and have nothing to add. I don't know how you judge things like "importance" in the tradition, for example. I can't debate something that has no real criteria.

So I'm just going to give you the last word on this point between us.

no no lawson - i'll give you the last word!

[Groyniad]

At times I've thought along the lines that Lawson is laying out -- that Pass covered the potential of the instrument more comprehensively than the other "classic" bop-based guys and this gives him a higher "score" in the GOAT-stakes. But then I go listen to some of the others, especially, Tal Farlow, Jimmy Raney, Barney Kessel, and I realize that they covered an awful lot of that ground themselves. The one thing that I think Pass did perfect to a greater degree than those guys is solo contrapuntal truly polyphonic improvisation -- with him, it wasn't just an impressive chops display; it was a completely integrated natural musical thing that he got to work (IMO) to a unique degree. Since he set the bar for this, I think others have managed to equal it or to reach it in other ways (Earl Klugh and Bill Frisell come to mind). But as far as the rest is concerned (phrasing, note choices, comping, burning with amazing energy and vibe, mixing single note and chord solos), the "classics" are all amazing, just in somewhat different ways. I don't think of Pass as "better" than Farlow or Raney and enjoy them all more or less equally. (I do, however, enjoy listening to Pass more than I do Herb Ellis or Barney Kessel, but that's just me).

Wes and Jim Hall I put in a somewhat different category because I think of them as more artistically interesting and innovative and more involved in pushing the boundaries of jazz itself (as opposed to jazz guitar) than, say Pass, Farlow, Raney and Kessel (though I recognize that Farlow, Raney and Kessel have cred as nearly first generation boppers). Sort of like comparing OP to Bill Evans or McCoy Tyner. OP is incomparable within a certain definition of "jazz piano" but BE and MT pushe(d)(s) jazz in a way that OP hasn't.

John

i agree - its because wes and jh made the instrument sound new - or even the music itself (a bit at least) - that they go in a different category. (along with cc for example)

and i think the aspect of jp's playing you identify as the most original and musically significant is spot on too.

[henryrobinett]

I am not a relativist, but I do believe some things are either relative, or very difficult to resolve because they inhere in the distinctive sensibilities and perceptions of individuals.

I don't see a future for this conversation between us. I"ve had a fair shot at stating my point of view and have nothing to add. I don't know how you judge things like "importance" in the tradition, for example. I can't debate something that has no real criteria.

So I'm just going to give you the last word on this point between us.

I haven't followed this debate so I don't who is stating what side but I gave up long ago. I normally just make my statement and leave. What gets my ire up is an argument or debate who is the best. It's so trivial and sophomoric. There IS no best. Impossible. There's a BEST for who you like personally, but there's no objective determination of who is the BEST as an artist.

[lawson-stone]

no no lawson - i'll give you the last word!

No, darn it, I said YOU were going to have the last word!

Philosophers... never can settle anything!

Hey this has been fun to bat around, seriously. I respect your experience and knowledge of this music very much and it's always helpful when my #1 Icon, Joe Pass, gets the "What's so great about him?" question asked. Icons should never become idols.

On Wes, what do you think of his pop turn? Is "Wendy" or "Goin' Out of My Head" not a move in the wrong direction?

[monk]

On Wes, what do you think of his pop turn? Is "Wendy" or "Goin' Out of My Head" not a move in the wrong direction?

The majority of the tunes in the Great American Songbook were Pop Tunes when they were first played and recorded by Louis Armstrong, Django Reinhardt, Benny Goodman, et al.

One can argue IMO that the quality of these GAS "pop tunes" are harmonically, lyrically and melodically of higher quality than much of what followed in later decades but Wes' excursions into what was then contemporary pop were, again IMO, little different from what Armstrong, Reinhardt and others did decades earlier.

During the last few years of his life, Wes was the most famous jazz guitarist in the world and, more importantly, he was able to support his family.

[lawson-stone]

The majority of the tunes in the Great American Songbook were Pop Tunes when they were first played and recorded by Louis Armstrong, Django Reinhardt, Benny Goodman, et al.

One can argue IMO that the quality of these GAS "pop tunes" are harmonically, lyrically and melodically of higher quality than much of what followed in later decades but Wes' excursions into what was then contemporary pop were, again IMO, little different from what Armstrong, Reinhardt and others did decades earlier.

During the last few years of his life, Wes was the most famous jazz guitarist in the world and, more importantly, he was able to support his family.

I'm not criticizing Wes. I'm addressing those who hold him up as the icon of the unsullied, unspoiled tradition of jazz that somehow went into the toilet after 1968. I totally respect what Wes did with pop songs, and I don't think jazz died or went flat in the 1970's.

It changed. (gasp)

The last thing the jazz greats of the 40's-50's would be is preservationists of a fossilized past.

We have Wynton Marsalis for that.

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

The majority of the tunes in the Great American Songbook were Pop Tunes when they were first played and recorded by Louis Armstrong, Django Reinhardt, Benny Goodman, et al.

One can argue IMO that the quality of these GAS "pop tunes" are harmonically, lyrically and melodically of higher quality than much of what followed in later decades but Wes' excursions into what was then contemporary pop were, again IMO, little different from what Armstrong, Reinhardt and others did decades earlier.

During the last few years of his life, Wes was the most famous jazz guitarist in the world and, more importantly, he was able to support his family.

Aside: last weekend I went to a jazz concert put on by local middle and high schools. A quartet (with a very Miles muted trumpet) did a version of Hotline Bling. It was awesome!

... In case you've been living under a rock, this is the original:

Another quartet did a version of Flamenco Sketches, where they set lyrics to the tune.

It made me think jazz was alive and well in the schools. (And my daughter played a tenor solo over Sing, Sing, Sing with her grade 9 jazz band.)

[gmek]

Interesting... did they keep it as a soul/r&b feel or switch it to a more trad jazz feel?

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

Interesting... did they keep it as a soul/r&b feel or switch it to a more trad jazz feel?

It sounded like a cool Miles quartet.

[lawson-stone]

...

this is why i can't relate to what many people insist on calling jazz post - oh - 1965??

its obvious that lester young's music - or coleman hawkin's music or billie holiday's music or louis armstrong's music (most importantly) is the same type of music as parker's and monk's and powell's (even if many at the time failed to hear this).

its obvious because both types of music 'swing' - have that totally addictive and immediately obvious rhythmical feel. they both have the same feel despite their huge and important differences.

most of the 'new' music that involves fusing jazz with rock or folk post 1965 (??) does not have this feel - and it is obvious that it doesn't. those of us who worry about whether this stuff should be called jazz at all do so because we think that the feel of the music is by far the most important thing

i need to say this because i don't think its fair for ls to represent me as suffering from some sort of eccentric musical blindness/deafness. i've an obvious musical reason for the attitudes i have about what happened to jazz after 65 (??).

(i adore early ornette coleman and miles with tony williams - but i loathe 'tutu' and all 'jazzy' music with a rock beat)

I'm not sure why you adduce all this stuff about the 60's in connection with Joe Pass. Joe wasn't a "follower" of Kessel or Wes. Wes (and Barney Kessel as well) was only 6 years older than Joe, who started actively gigging with Tony Pastor in 1943. Judging from very early recordings of Joe with Les McCann and Richard "Groove" Holmes (early 1960's), he acquired most of the features of his style quite early. His recordings Sounds of Synanon, Catch Me, For Django, Simplicity, and Joy Spring to tease out albums with him as leader, were all prior to 1965 and roughly contemporary with Wes Montgomery's "Riverside" years, typically taken to be his best ("Smokin' at the Half-Note" excepted!) Joe won Downbeat's "Best New Artist" award in 1963.

So it's not like Joe Pass came along as some young 70's guy who copied Kessel and Wes and then added his own stuff to it. He is not really derivative of either of those guys, though he certainly knew of them. By the time he made "Virtuoso" he'd been playing solo guitar for years--judging from the enormous number of tunes made in that single session (Virtuoso I and the 2-disc Virtuoso IV).

I'm not saying he's without influences, of course. But your description of him makes him sound later, more distinctly a successor, to Wes and Barney, when he really was not. I hear almost no Kessel influence in Joe's playing, and actually not even much Wes. In fact, you could say Joe's approach with harmonizing melodies was dramatically different from Wes' "block chord and octaves" sound, and again very different from the way Kessel operated.

[Cunamara]

Aside: last weekend I went to a jazz concert put on by local middle and high schools. A quartet (with a very Miles muted trumpet) did a version of Hotline Bling. It was awesome!

A local New Orleans style band (but decidedly not Dixieland) plays a great version of Lady Gaga's "Bad Romance." Sounds like a jazz tune.

Miles recorded "Time After Time" by Cindy Lauper.

Joshua Redman recorded Eric Clapton's "Tears in Heaven."

My quintet plays my arrangement of "In Memory of Elizabeth Reed," although it's hard to call that a pop tune as such. And I am working them up through the Dead's "Shakedown Street" and Santana's "Flor de Luna" too. Neither of which are exactly pop tunes, either. But there is a lot of newer music adaptable to jazz that doesn't come from the Great American Songbook or the Miles, Coltrane, Shorter, etc., songbooks.

[lawson-stone]

A local New Orleans style band (but decidedly not Dixieland) plays a great version of Lady Gaga's "Bad Romance." Sounds like a jazz tune.

Miles recorded "Time After Time" by Cindy Lauper.

Joshua Redman recorded Eric Clapton's "Tears in Heaven."

My quintet plays my arrangement of "In Memory of Elizabeth Reed," although it's hard to call that a pop tune as such. And I am working them up through the Dead's "Shakedown Street" and Santana's "Flor de Luna" too. Neither of which are exactly pop tunes, either. But there is a lot of newer music adaptable to jazz that doesn't come from the Great American Songbook or the Miles, Coltrane, Shorter, etc., songbooks.

One could argue these titles are part of the expanding Great American Songbook on some level.

[pubylakeg]

Thought you might like this rarity from the World Pacific vaults,

"Charisma" by Bud Shank, feat. Joe Pass and David Crosby (yes, that David Crosby).

[lawson-stone]

Thought you might like this rarity from the World Pacific vaults,

"Charisma" by Bud Shank, feat. Joe Pass and David Crosby (yes, that David Crosby).

Nearly all our jazz heroes found themselves doing session work in the late 50's-60's. Howard Roberts was probably the most prolific studio guitarist in the LA scene. Joe Pass also did his share of that work. It paid the bills!

David Crosby... oh my...

[neatomic]

good info on shank track- (for those that care)

pass rather tentative on nylon!

Record </head>

good stuff

cheers

[lawson-stone]

good info on shank track- (for those that care)

pass rather tentative on nylon!

Record </head>

good stuff

cheers

this forum is such an amazing place for those (like me) addicted to obscure and arcane information about these artists and recordings!

Thanks!

[destinytot]

good info on shank track- (for those that care)

pass rather tentative on nylon!

Record </head>

good stuff

cheers

My favourite solo Joe Pass is with him on nylon: