-
Derek Bailey interview from 'Guitar' magazine, 1974.
-
02-24-2019 10:18 AM
-
From the link:
Um, I know he was a session musician at one point but is there any actual evidence of this virtuosity?
-
No idea, but I listened to some clips of his ‘standards’ record once, and it sounded like he knew how to play those tunes quite well with conventional voicings etc.
I think they mean virtuosity in his chosen improvisation technique. Whilst I’m not a great fan or anything, the way he can endlessly mix different sounds and harmonics clusters is pretty impressive, it doesn’t sound easy to do.
-
Mmm, I don't think it applies to free improv, or was applied that way in the article, to be honest. Although I know what you mean.
Originally Posted by grahambop
-
Yes I think that introduction was a bit over the top, but I thought some of the points Bailey made are certainly interesting, even if free jazz isn’t really my thing.
-
I love his first CD, where he moved from Webern-influenced serial composition into atonality and texture-focussed sounds. You can hear him become himself - it's quite an extraordinary thing. But once he found himself, I'm afraid it became a little too predictable to me as listener. But I'm very glad he existed when he did, and through his explorations found a new way of playing guitar. He influenced me at one or two moments in my playing life, and for that I'm thankful. He showed me another world existed, one I can visit whenever I feel moved to, without having to set up a permanent home there.
-
I wish he'd got together with Don Van Vleit (Captain Beefheart). What a recording that would have been!
-
The way that Derek Bailey approached the guitar is wonderful and unique. I think this recording exemplifies some of what he said in the interview. There is a sonic world that Derek Bailey explored with the guitar that is in an entirely different dimension than jazz is accustomed to dealing with. Derek had suberb sensitivity to the timbre and he took tremendous care in his technique to bring out much more than just the notes. In this solo performance, Derek Bailey fills the harmonic space of an entire orchestra.
It's a shame that any mention of his name gets the attention of his vocal detractors more quickly than it can spark a thoughtful exchange of ideas.
-
This is good:
-
unlike many contemporary "free" players...derek bailey started "in" and then took it "out"...his professional career goes back to the 50's...including radio, tv and studio work
an insightful and erudite study on improvisation..written by derek bailey..who played with many of the worlds greatest musicians...a good read
cheers
-
Yes, he paid his dues. He even played for Morecambe and Wise (which will mean a lot for British readers of a certain age). I concur about the book, which includes interviews with John Zorn, Jerry Garcia, Steve Howe, Paco Peña, Max Roach, Evan Parker, Ronnie Scott, and others. Originally Posted by neatomic
-
This is the sort of 'music' I play now and again when I feel in a funny mood, don't want to practice, just want to be myself instead of following a tune's parameters, etc. It's a sort of equivalent to lying down in a dark room after a hard day. It's great for a short time and then we get back on the wagon again.
But doing it all the time? Releasing albums of weirdo plinking? Is he COMPLETELY MAD? Because something's going on, isn't it?
Signed: The Emperor's Clothes Guy.
I just made this. It's really good. I'm off for my Grammy soon.
-
^ r1...thats just the point...he wasn't doing it to win a grammy..or for billboard hits! he was doing it because that's the music he wanted to hear..and nobody else was playing it...and furthermore, he found a host of like minded players to participate in his dream..giants like dave holland, even parker, jamie muir, hans bennik, anthony braxton etc etc etc
never underestimate something you don't like
if you read his book you'll find he was a musical thinker of the highest degree
cheers
ps- he also had business savvy enough to start his own label- incus...which is now considered one of the great early independent labels...and a treasure trove of classic recordings
-
Rags has a point. Music can be as dissonant as you want it to be, but this sounds like random "plinking." I'd call it noise, but not the noise how you think I mean.
Noise is an art form that has a following and is known by that name. I actually see value in it. I especially like circuit bending type stuff. Prepared guitar is another example.
The example above isn't too weird for me; it's just boring
-
If I may try to redirect the conversation from its detractive direction toward a practical conversation, rather than a endless debate regarding the validity of experimental music*, I think there's still a lot to glean from his reflections and his playing. The statement that the same note played differently is not the same note is illuminating. There are other players who are more mainstream who embody a similar idea. Bill Frisell, for example, uses open strings and harmonics substantially and when he plays solo, this gives his guitar a timbral ("spectral"?**) quality that was never the focus of traditional chord melody. In fact, Bill published a lesson in vol 1 of John Zorn's Arcana that is all about how to play a scale using open strings, overlapping sustain, and other devices. That lesson changed the way I think.
Other players who use non-harmonic dimensions of sound for effect in their solo playing include Peter Bernstein, who also uses open strings and plays with a hard touch at times to get his guitar to produce a unique "clang". Miles Okazaki, another great solo artist explicitly cites Derek Bailey as an influence. Check out his rendition of Pannonica, wherein he plays the melody using harmonics as much as possible.
This has been a new focus for modern jazz guitarists, too. Mike Moreno and Lage Lund both have said similar things about their playing: compared to older traditions of jazz guitar, they spend time trying to avoid playing positions and spend more time thinking about how the note is going to sound depending on where and how they play it. Lund goes really deep into his discussion of technique talking about how his left hand is very strongly involved in the attack of the note. This gives his playing a very acoustic sound and creates a resonance that is unique to his playing. Interestingly, Lage Lund's technique also yields a pleasant dissonance: if you listen carefully, you frequently hear the string resonating behind the fretted note.
What are some techniques and devices that you've discovered about the physical instrument (guitar in most of our cases) that have affected your playing? For me, I've stolen some tricks from Bailey and Takemitsu to play clusters using harmonics that would be impossible to fret otherwise.
I think guitar (jazz or otherwise), going forward, is inevitably going to continue in this direction. It's a simple combinatorial problem. If you are trying to innovate, the challenge arranging 12 notes in time becomes a less interesting and smaller domain of research given the contributions of past generations. Expanding the harmony and exploring dimensions outside of harmony are becoming increasingly attractive to younger generations of musicians (check out Julian Lage's stuff with Nels Cline).
---------------------------------------
* If you want, you just need to type 'Derek Bailey' into the search bar to get to read a decade's worth of Rag's opinion(s) on Bailey and hear more clips of his supposedly illustrative weirdo plinking.
** Derek was hip to what was going on in the classical world. He was employing atonal harmony of people like Messiaen and Webern in his compositions/improvisations, and he dove into this spectral investigation soon after it gained attention from classical composers.
-
omphalopsychos has it nailed here. Professionally, I come from the world of contemporary "classical" music where these sorts of ideas are common currency. In listening to Bailey, I instantly recognize the amount of thought and technique that his performances demand. He is in command of his instrument in a way that is intentional and masterful.
This is not easy.
Give a Big-5 orchestral violinist a copy of Salvatore Sciarrino's solo caprices. For many, the technique required is so *different* from what they've honed that it would prove intimidating or not easily accessible. And this is a fairly straight ahead example. ***
For something else "classic" at this point and closer to home, listen to French composer Tristan Murail's guitar piece, Tellur:
Listen to Grisey. Lachenmann. Anything by Ferneyhough. The work of Saariaho. And so many others.
These are all examples from the classical world. And none push boundaries as we typically view them today. Musical vocabulary evolves. Technique often evolves with it. Some ways of "speaking" musically persist, others do not. They all inform the collective language in some way, though.
That's to say nothing of what we prefer to listen to as individuals. But individual tastes are just that: different strokes for different folks. There's nothing wrong with that and no obligation on anyone's part to listen to any of this.
*** Just to preemptively counter any claims of this music being relegated to second-rate players, I've heard Irvine Arditti perform this piece. Arditti became the concertmaster of the London Symphony at 25—the top of his profession at a preternatural age. And he left the group a few years later to dedicate his career to music that "speaks" differently than what major orch rep offers.
-
One of the things I did that really gave me a great respect for what Bailey was doing was to try to do it. It's not easy, to really divorce yourself from conventions of melodic, melodic rhythm, etc. He was truly a master at what he did...or maybe even better to say "he wasn't the best at what he did...he was the ONLY ONE who did what he did."
-
As has been pointed out, we've had this conversation before... many a time! And, as I've said before many a time, I've no objection to atonal music, quite the contrary.
It's true I don't get much out of Derek's plinking but there you are. I'm probably just a philistine whereas you lot are cultured, educated, elevated, sophisticated and refined. I hear it as plinking but you obviously hear something else :-)
But the real point I was making was that was ALL he did, all the time. Personally, I don't see what possible satisfaction he got from it. Imagine if all art, music, film and literature was completely abstract - no form, no structure, just discordant sounds, words, visuals, and so on, all the time. What sort of people would we be?
But a bit now and again, providing it's good, is fine. How do we know it's 'good'? I have no idea except it must touch something in oneself.
But I absolutely think we should avoid intellectual posing, affectation, and all that. That does nobody any good.
-
Oh, please do. Help yourself :-) Originally Posted by omphalopsychos
I've nothing against Derek Bailey. If I met him I'd probably like him a lot and appreciate his intellect. But that doesn't mean I could sit through a lot of plinking. I couldn't, and I'm sure he be the first one to concede and acknowledge it.
Don't forget I came from Brighton. There were a lot of alternate poets, artists, musicians, storytellers, comedians, performance artists and writers. I knew them personally and liked them a lot. They were great fun, but it doesn't mean I was necessarily a fan of everything they did. Which was fine and no problem at all. I don't expect they liked my stuff much either
-
Someone I know is really into the free stuff e.g. Cecil Taylor and Anthony Braxton. But even he says he finds Derek Bailey a bit too much for him.
-
There is a distinct difference between plinking and plonking. Bailey is intentionally playing those notes and is therefore plinking because he chooses to do so. I miss notes because of a distinct lack of talent and that is considered plonking. Although vastly different, they both require oodles of time in the woodshed.
-
This I like a lot. It's not completely out, but enough. This I can tolerate but, more importantly, learn from.
-
How many posts are you going to make, Ragman, to inform us that you don't like what he does? Wasn't one post enough? It seems you are now trying to persuade us, almost arguing that you don't like it, while no one here is trying to persuade you one way or another. It all seems a waste of energy.
========
I'm also used to the classical compositions outlined above, and have played fairly out scores myself quite a few times, and thoroughly enjoyed doing so. Here's a deeply serial piece, where every note is calculated, predetermined, yet to me it is searingly beautiful. it really is:
Bailey was attracted to Webern - he tells us he played an album of Webern's music every day for a year - and wrote in his style his Three Pieces, which I recorded here (jump to the 4'10" mark)
Crucially, in writing in this style, Bailey tells us he found clusters, atonal-like licks, etc that he could use in free improv. The serial style opened that door to him, gave him a vision, so to speak, of how the guitar could be used in what he called a non-idiomatic improvisation. This was liberating for him, and he developed it while drawing in random noise elements and effects, to create the DB sound. Within a year he had delved deep into Webern's strict serial style, copped a few weird licks, and jumped into a totally free style. It was quite a journey. He had found his voice, and he stuck with it. The irony is that his non-idiomatic improv became an idiom in itself.
I see nothing wrong with him playing his way ALL THE TIME, much as did Jackson Pollock, whose paintings I love. There is no reason at all why an artist should try to please everyone by indulging in a variety of styles.
Well, he is no longer with us, and I think he lived his life in an exemplary way: seek, find, explore.
-
bravo all around rob
cheers
-
Durn, the term plonker is already taken! Urban Dictionary: plonker Originally Posted by SandChannel
Reply With Quote
Has anyone played or had a Supro Amulet ?
Today, 04:44 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos