Pat Metheny on the best guitar player he has ever heard: Pasquale Grasso

[christianm77]

Listen to and transcribe metheny's solo on this brecker tune, "slings and arrows".

That's rather imperative. Do you have to even if you'd rather transcribe something else? I mean are you going to break my legs if I don't? :-)

Few guitarists could pull off this feel and dynamic slipping in and out of the time and harmony the way metheny can. If you don't like this it's fine but please don't make passive-aggressive statements resulting in the conclusion that he is an overrated pop star.

I don't think this comment was necessarily directed against me, but part of the reason why I might have been stirring things a little bit is the defensive reaction of Metheny fans, which gets my mischievous side going I'm afraid.

Personally I really dig that Metheny is able to make instrumental, jazz influenced music that perfectly normal people want to listen to, even though it might not be my thing. I wish more people would do that.

Anyway if you said 'Wes doesn't swing' or 'Charlie Christian doesn't swing' everyone would laugh at you because you are clearly a fool. You say 'Metheny doesn't swing' and Pat fans get a bit defensive and starts posting counter examples. Why I wonder?

Anyway, there's a difference between saying someone has flaky time and that they don't swing.

The second is value judgement based on the effect of music. Some people thought Bird didn't swing, and some people though Coltrane didn't swing - and that was true for them in the same way as some people don't get emotionally affected by music. There is no absolute standard on what swinging, but you can tell someone who can't really play in time.

Anyway I actually mentioned this solo a while back as an example of Metheny's propulsive groove.

I really like this album and rediscovered it recently as it was one of the first jazz albums I owned, certainly the first contemporary jazz record. I'm particularly fond of the compositions, and Brecker (of course) sounds fantastic on this record. I like the fact that there are some slower swing tunes too.

In my case if I haven't really gone deep with Metheny, it's because I've never really dug him that much, but the dude can certainly play.

[Groyniad]

the issue has to do with whether music can be good primarily because its interesting - or whether it can only be good primarily because its moving

('moving' here does not mean 'touching' - that's just one way of being moved in the sense i'm appealing to here - which is perfectly familiar. in this sense 'moving' just means - such as to affect you in some way, to make you feel some way. a classic one would be e.g. being made to feel like you've got to dance or jiggle about or shout out etc. - this usually involves feeling excited or exuberant. but this is obviously just one way of being affected by a bit of music. when i was a lad i listened to a lot of beethoven - especially the slow movements - and especially the slow movements of the eroica symphony and the emperor piano concerto. i would be very hard pushed to say very much about how or what they used to make me feel - but its perfectly clear that they made me feel a lot of something or other (not like i had to start jiggling about particularly - though swaying a bit would maybe have been involved.)

i feel very strongly that there is no good music that is good primarily because of how interesting it is.

[zdub]

Listen to and transcribe metheny's solo on this brecker tune, "slings and arrows".

Few guitarists could pull off this feel and dynamic slipping in and out of the time and harmony the way metheny can. If you don't like this it's fine but please don't make passive-aggressive statements resulting in the conclusion that he is an overrated pop star.

So have you actually transcribed it or am I dense and that was just making a point? If the former, can you share?

(Not being snarky, I'm a Metheny fan-boy).

[christianm77]

the issue has to do with whether music can be good primarily because its interesting - or whether it can only be good primarily because its moving

('moving' here does not mean 'touching' - that's just one way of being moved in the sense i'm appealing to here - which is perfectly familiar. in this sense 'moving' just means - such as to affect you in some way, to make you feel some way. a classic one would be e.g. being made to feel like you've got to dance or jiggle about or shout out etc. - this usually involves feeling excited or exuberant. but this is obviously just one way of being affected by a bit of music. when i was a lad i listened to a lot of beethoven - especially the slow movements - and especially the slow movements of the eroica symphony and the emperor piano concerto. i would be very hard pushed to say very much about how or what they used to make me feel - but its perfectly clear that they made me feel a lot of something or other (not like i had to start jiggling about particularly - though swaying a bit would maybe have been involved.)

i feel very strongly that there is no good music that is good primarily because of how interesting it is.

I agree.

Although to survive contact with the jaded palette of the music nerd (such as I) it probably helps if it is a bit interesting in the way it communicates.

[Gabor]

... this is definitely one of the saddest thread around... but interestingly reflects how to communication an misunderstandings works in real life.

Just imagine how an innocent positive opinion by Pat Metheny on Pasquale Grasso leads to misunderstandings:

1) Some (or more) fellow member interpret the article as Pat said negative opinion on Sco and Bill Frissel, which is practically the opposite, in the article he respects them. (re-read, if you have doubts)

2) Some (or more9 fellow member who understand the Pat respected Sco and Bill Frissel, feels offended that his favorite guitarist was not mentioned this list, and stamps Pat boastful...

3) In the thousand sentence article he said two sentences about nowadays generally the guitarist who asked a rehearsal by him are not too revolutionary original. He did not qualify them bad, just saying there is a hearable influence of Pat Matheny, Sco and Bill Frissel, and the players deny this fact. Note, he did not talk about generally all new generation guitarist on the world, still many reader feels offended because of... why?

Conclusion and results:

So having the misinterpreted sentences this thread transformed from the topic:

- Why Pat thinks Pasquale Grasso is good, is he right or is he wrong?
- What we think about Pasquale Grasso

to

- Why Pat is a bad or good musician, or at least overrated, and why he say cruel things, and generally what is he thinking who the hell is he- Literally arguing the stupidest low level: Is Pat swings or not? or similar. Next time start a topic about is the note in Bill Evans's X recordings at 16:14, if not then Bill Evans is overrated.

This is ridiculous.

(I practically suffer when reading this thread from multiple reasons. The communication flaws, the infantile statements. Well, then do not read one can say :-). Well, I can't stand I answer, plus I am subscribed... :-)

btw: I have much more better idea about who is overrated in the hall of fame of the jazz guitarists, I am sure everyone has one or more candidate, but really, is this a smart topic idea?

[Groyniad]

i'm not saying good music can't be interesting - just that it can't be good mainly because its interesting

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

As I read this thread, I keep hearing this sound in my head...

[Groyniad]

its understandable that there should be conflict between guitarists who take themselves to love jazz guitar and treat players like metheny as leading examples of great jazz guitarists - and others who treat players like charlie christian or wes montgomery as leading examples of great jazz guitarists.

and that conflict should not be written off as empty or simply a matter of exchanging a kind of personal abuse. there are real issues about the music at stake that are important and engaging.

[Gabor]

...and treat players like metheny as leading examples of great jazz guitarists - and others who treat players like charlie christian or wes montgomery as leading examples of great jazz guitarists.

Interestingly I love and respect Wes, and also love and respect Pat. I am sure they much more close and related as musician and artist, like say Pat and Pat Martino, or Wes and Pat Martino.
Maybe I am wrong, I can not imagine if one respects and love Wes and the same time he does not love and respects Pat. So the two musician are not the best example to demonstrate your point, which is btw correct.

and that conflict should not be written off as empty or simply a matter of exchanging a kind of personal abuse. there are real issues about the music at stake that are important and engaging.

Completely agree.

[Gabor]

As I read this thread, I keep hearing this sound in my head...

You succeded to express my exact feelings what I wrote a few minutes earlier a much more compact and expressive way (I mean yours is is more compact and expressive). Thanks.

[zdub]

The main thing I got from this thread was that Pat Metheny digs Grasso, so PG should at least be given a listen. The thread has had some interesting observations, and when it moves away from the music and gets into negative stuff about personalities I just tune out. It's all peripheral to the music anyway.

[agentsmith]

I have transcribed it. It's in a notebook somewhere but it would take a lot of effort to dig up.

I haven't gone through it but someone on the gearpage transcribed it here:

https://www.thegearpage.net/board/in...ption.1215044/

So have you actually transcribed it or am I dense and that was just making a point? If the former, can you share?

(Not being snarky, I'm a Metheny fan-boy).

[destinytot]

Mr Flory with Ms Sullivan:

Mr Grasso:

[zdub]

I have transcribed it. It's in a notebook somewhere but it would take a lot of effort to dig up.

I haven't gone through it but someone on the gearpage transcribed it here:

https://www.thegearpage.net/board/in...ption.1215044/

Excellent - the link at gear page is dead, but I found this one: http://www.mikatourunen.com/uploads/...theny_solo.pdf

[Vladan]

PG plays with 4 left hand fingers, thhrefore he can not be good.

[Gabor]

...Personally I really dig that Metheny is able to make instrumental, jazz influenced music ...

Your statement is just as indefensible like saying "Wes does not swing". (your sample)

(Note: I am not expect to anyone like any particular music, or musician. What would be great otherwise, to know the subject what we are talk about and making statements.)

"jazz influenced music" Well, Pat Metheny created and participated more pure jazz albums than some well respected musicians within a lifetime. I also do not think that say the drummers like Billy Higgins, Roy Hayes, Tony Williams, Jack DeJohnette and Antonio Sanchez would be involved multiple times in just "jazz influenced music", (more than a dozen albums, and note those drummers belong to the hardest core). They must be tricked in. The same true for Charlie Haden, Ornette Coleman, Dewey Redman, Joshua Redman. Michael Brecker

• (Gary Burton Quintet - Dreams So Real (ECM (G) ECM 1072), 1975)
• Pat Metheny - Bright Size Life (ECM (G) ECM 1073), 1976
• Pat Metheny - 80/81 (ECM (G) ECM 1180/81) 1980
• Pat Metheny w/ Charlie Haden And Billy Higgins - Rejoicing (ECM (G) ECM 1271) 1983
• Pat Metheny, Ornette Coleman - Song X 1985
• (Michael Brecker (Impulse! MCA-5980) 1987)
• (Jack DeJohnette - Parallel Realities (MCA MCA-42313)) 1988
• (Jack DeJohnette, Pat Metheny, Herbie Hancock, Dave Holland - Parallel Realities Live... (1990)
• (Jack DeJohnette, Herbie Hancock, Dave Holland, Pat Metheny - Under The Sky (Sound Board SM 001/002) 1990
• (Introducing Joshua Redman (Warner Bros. PRO CD 5974) 1992
• (Joshua Redman - Wish (Warner Bros. 9 45365-2)) 1993
• (Tony Williams - Wilderness (Ark 21 Records (Eu) 7243 8 54571 2 8) 1995
• (Michael Brecker - Tales From The Hudson (Impulse! IMPD-191) )
• Charlie Haden And Pat Metheny - Beyond The Missouri Sky (Verve 314 537 130-2) 1996
• (Gary Burton, Chick Corea, Pat Metheny, Roy Haynes, Dave Holland - Like Minds (Concord Jazz CCD-4803-25))
• Jim Hall And Pat Metheny (Telarc CD-83442) 1998, (I can not understand how the great Jim Hall could be involved in this "jazz influenced" thing
• Pat Metheny - Trio 99->00 (Warner Bros. 9 47632-2) 1999, (including "jazz infuenced" Giant Steps in "jazz influenced" classic trio setting)

and so on...

If the list is too long, just take the items what are not in parentheses. I've also left intentionally the live recordings. Also note, this is not the "early Pat". The recordings date spawns decades.

...know your subject...

***

...Anyway, there's a difference between saying someone has flaky time and that they don't swing...

This is very true. This is why the "he does not swing" statement is pointless. Mozart and Bach also does not swing, still the music is valuable. Bad example one can say, so back to jazz, John McLaughlin also does not swing. (please do not search for samples where he does, I know he can, just saying his created wonderful music is not about swing. (If you say McLaughlin is not a jazz guitarist, I will reply: Really? then Miles also not a jazz musician?) To jump to an other style, Bill Frisell also does not swing.

Now about Pat. Jazz is evolving, obviously the last 100 years is about that. Rhythm and timing has central role in jazz. I do not think that 60s (or earlier) rhythm patterns and feeling the end of this evolution, an now we are in the terminal perfect form of jazz, and nowhere to evolve from here. Maybe there is some rhythm, what are also authentic evolution of jazz, gives the flowing rhythm feeling, but it is beyond the swing.

[christianm77]

@jazzjackrabbit you seem to quite emotionally involved in this which makes it very tempting to wind you up, but no, I won't! Pat is a great musician and I have no axe to grind. I have listened to a good cross section of those albums listed. I even play some of his tunes from time to time.

I also enjoy Pat as a sideman because I am a jazz head, but I would say that his popular work is in the PMG sphere. I went to hear him 10 years ago and I was disappointed that he played primarily PMG material and no straight up jazz, but that's completely fair enough.

I remember thinking that 'come on Pat, play some jazz.' He did an great duet with Antonio Sanchez, but the rest of it was that kind of straight pop/fusion stuff that he does, and that's what the audience wanted to hear so fine! I found it boring and had a train to catch, so left early. This may make your blood boil, but it's how I felt.

People get very hung up about this term 'jazz' - it seems to me for the first half of jazz's history musicians like Charlie Parker, Miles Davis and so on were keen to escape the word, but these days people seem curiously wedded to it. To me jazz is in the rhythmic language and the way it is used in improvisation - the swing for want of a better term - and this remains an influence on today's music, but why are people so keen on a term that used to be almost a dismissive term? I think it's about legitimacy.

I don't want people to be fixated on pastiching styles of the past, and Pat hasn't.

Pat is certainly influenced by this language and knows the music intimately. And I begrudge him none of his mainstream success. In fact, I think it's the way forward to take our influences and create something new, that might not in fact by jazz at all.

Anyway:

A few points:

This is very true. This is why the "he does not swing" statement is pointless. Mozart and Bach also does not swing, still the music is valuable. Bad example one can say, so back to jazz, John McLaughlin also does not swing. (please do not search for samples where he does, I know he can, just saying his created wonderful music is not about swing. (If you say McLaughlin is not a jazz guitarist, I will reply: Really? then Miles also not a jazz musician?) To jump to an other style, Bill Frisell also does not swing.

No of course not! I love and listen to loads of music that does not swing.

Miles would have absolutely rejected the term 'jazz musician' certainly by the time he was working with MacLaughlin.

Obviously I agree re: JM. But, you know what he did have a great groove. He was known in London as a feel player before he got his picking together. I actually think Miles picked McLaughlin over Benson (who he also recorded with in the late 60s), because he represented something different - something more modern. He didn't want a bebop, swing rooted guitarist, he wanted a rock and soul guy who also played jazz.

I barely think of Bill as a jazz guitarist at all, really. He's a musician to me.

But swing is not nothing - it's something you feel in your body. I feel it when Wes plays guitar for instance - it's just such a feeling of joy and dance, it's one of my favourite feelings, and that's why I love the jazz of the past so much.

Metheny doesn't create that vibe for me, or at least not in the same way and it's not his fault - he didn't have to apprentice in the same way as Wes, playing medium bounce for dancers etc. PM's dance gigs are more likely to have been rock, funk and latin American music based. With his schooling from great swing era players (such as Hampton) I doubt Wes ever needed to practice with a metronome, while PM may well have. Drummers played differently in 1950s to the way they played in the 70s, and that's a HUGE deal.

PM's music represents his own time, and his rhythmic language is a reflection of that just as much as his harmony or sonic choices.

[agentsmith]

Christianm77, if you're implying that Metheny doesn't swing then the problem isn't him, it's you. He swings his ass off. If you don't hear the swing in the Slings And Arrows clip I posted then its about like asking my 10 year old neighbor whether she likes Jay-Z better than Charlie Parker.

If I've mis-characterized your view on metheny I apologize but I'm seeing a lot of passive-aggressive comments on metheny's playing and time. And yet, he's played with DeJohnette, McCoy Tyner, Michael Brecker and Elvin Jones.

[mr. beaumont]

I think part of the problem is a literal definition of swing. Swing is groove, not just a triplet feel. It might have meant one thing 70 years ago...I dunno. It doesn't mean that now. Maiden Voyage swings. Moja from Dark Magus swings. Bright Size Life swings.

And yeah, that "Slings and Arrows" swings like mad, in every sense of the word.

[agentsmith]

Swing has nothing to do with triplets. Swing is the art of playing in the groove, propelling the beat and playing with a feel that makes you want to tap your feet.

The notion that swing is something that has anything to do with dotted 8th and 16th or triplet is just a silly attempt to categorize something that is too dynamic to be defined by a strict rhythmic analysis. If it were just about triplets or dotted 8th and 16th, any machine could be taught to swing.

[christianm77]

Christianm77, if you're implying that Metheny doesn't swing then the problem isn't him, it's you. He swings his ass off. If you don't hear the swing in the Slings And Arrows clip I posted then its about like asking my 10 year old neighbor whether she likes Jay-Z better than Charlie Parker.

Good grief man, I've just made as measured, fair and non-judgemental a post as I can. You seem to be angry about something. It's not worth getting pissy about dude.

Slings and Arrows is great! Crikey if my playing was half as good as Pat's I'd be very happy. It's a style thing, perhaps. I am fascinated by that old school thing. Also, it's about listening.

I I think the fact I have sought out and transcribed and studied the players I have is an indication of my aesthetic preferences. PM - I respect him, but never studied him and maybe it's just because I'm not that into him and finding reasons for it.

Possibly you'd feel the same about some of the players I go nuts for.

But consider this:

If I said 'I love Wes's swing, it's so great but I wonder if that feel would work in a contemporary jazz context?'

I'm not sure anyone would have a problem with that statement on a visceral, emotional level. Some might say 'well, who cares' or disagree I guess.

If I say 'I enjoy PM's playing and he has great time and interesting rhythmic ideas, but I don't find much of that fat greasy swing groove I hear in some of the older jazz players' why is that an issue either?

I mean criticism of any player could be seen as a bit douchey, fair enough. I should probably concentrate on factual statements without any implicit criticism in them, which is more interesting and useful. It's also not a great idea for one's career to be critical of any musician, and jazz players tend to be very bland in their statements on other musicians - except when you look at the older cats, who loved to trash talk!

But the reason why this kicked off here is that I think Joel - who is a player who can really swing in that old school way BTW - has a valid musical opinion (aside from the personal stuff - check out some of the stuff on other threads about PM's double time for instance) particularly valid given his experience and expertise - and some solid points that are critical of PM's time, which got the ball rolling on this. And then the PM fans weighed in with 'you can't say that!'

To which the contrarian in my says '**** off, of course he can, if he can back it up in his playing and listening.'

But I would try these days NOT criticise a player off my own bat. The one's I'm not that interested in I tend to ignore, until I become interested.

[agentsmith]

It's not a matter of pm fans. It's a matter of being educated and having studied the music. Anyone can badmouth someone on the internet. This group is a prime example of folks who can type a mean solo.

[christianm77]

Swing has nothing to do with triplets. Swing is the art of playing in the groove, propelling the beat and playing with a feel that makes you want to tap your feet.

What therefore differentiates swing from any other type of groove? Or are the two terms synonymous in your mind?

The notion that swing is something that has anything to do with dotted 8th and 16th or triplet is just a silly attempt to categorize something that is too dynamic to be defined by a strict rhythmic analysis. If it were just about triplets or dotted 8th and 16th, any machine could be taught to swing.

This is a huge statement to make because 1) it characterises something I've said in a very simplistic way and 2) it ventures into a huge topic of conversation.

Jazz is nothing to do with dotted eight, dotted 16th. But, it has everything to do with the interplay of duple and triple time.

Jazz is a polyrhythmic music. For example, Miles can play straight upbeats against a very tripletty skip note from Philly Joe and the whole thing will swing even harder.

Triplet rhythms - particularly quarter triplets are a really important. If you only ever study duple time - eighth notes etc - you are missing out on something huge.

Anyway Metheny actually advocates triplet subdivision in his teaching.

If you are saying practicing triplets is not important because that's not really what swing is, I think you are confusing causes and effects.

Anyway, Wes's triplet (12/8 and 6/8) phrasing is all over his medium tempo stuff.

[christianm77]

It's not a matter of pm fans. It's a matter of being educated and having studied the music. Anyone can badmouth someone on the internet. This group is a prime example of folks who can type a mean solo.

I don't think it's worth discussing anything with someone who has already decided that I am wrong. This is a waste of both our time.

[mr. beaumont]

What therefore differentiates swing from any other type of groove? Or are the two terms synonymous in your mind?

Again, this is "swing" in the literal sense versus "swing" as in, "these cats swing, man."

Swing can be quantified. You can make a drum machine "swing." You can't make it "groove" organically, really.

Christian, it seems to me your definition of swing is both of the above, whereas some other folks lean more to the latter "swings, man" definition. I most certainly do. Tony Williams swings when playing straight 8ths, IMHO. Bossa Nova can swing...