Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Posts 251 to 269 of 269
  1. #251

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
    Never noticed it, but if you listen to the beginning and then skip right to the end, it's pretty obvious...

    Now to wonder...just naturally slowed down...or is there a splice somewhere I never noticed...time to listen closer.
    Iirc several cuts on Kind of Blue get faster.

    Think how much better that music would have been if they cut it with a click track /s/

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #252

    User Info Menu

    Idle moments slows down at almost twice as slow as at the beginning... probably becasue of its particular idleness, they are gradually falling asleep dusrin 15 min of performance...

    But seriously... this kind of discussion we have became possible only with records ... and the exaples we discuss come from musicians who still thought in terms of live performance... I mean they considered record just as a possibility to preserve live performance and played still more or less the same way as if they would have played live concert (more or less of course... they were already a bit influenced by recordeing process metality).
    It is possible even now... but many modern players are affected with recording engeneering metality .... they play in a live gig and think in terms of 'how it will sound if it will be recorded'.... it is not necessarily concious.
    But I think this is very important shift in performance psychology... and this could affect aspects we discuss here: like technical perfectionism, precise and abstract conventional timing etc.

    and it concerns audience too by the way.
    Last edited by Jonah; 09-27-2019 at 03:58 AM.

  4. #253

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Gabor
    Now we are completely hijacked, but regarding this thread this not necessary a bad thing :-)
    I really loved Benson's (actually knew it, and listened multiple times a years ago on Spotify)

    If anybody mentions Kreisberg's mechanical patterns are annoying I must agree. I simply do not understand why is he keep doing this... But this is only the part of the story I think.
    When I wrote he is great in ballads, I was thinking about something like this below.

    Just take the song interpretation, the rhythm freedom and the many nuances of every note's volume is really just soulful. (imho) The interpretation is faithful, still many points new and creative. Builds on Ed Bickert, but goes further both rhythmically both harmony wise.
    Regarding the solo, well some points there are the patterns, so focus on the remaining 50%. (I know it may ruins the thing for someone, still try to accept a listen the remaining parts) On the remaining 50% you hear many surprises, melody, and also goes even further in independent harmony and melody playing.
    In some point seeing his hand just not understand, how could this sound like pianist two independent's hand.

    Hey... this track was the first that attracted my attention to JK... but (again this 'but') a bit later - and now when I relistened today - I hear all the same thing I discussed before...
    When he plays the head listen how precise are all the small motives (daaaa dan - dada - da), I do not compare myself with him but I think I just cannot play like that physically it is some kind of specific breath and time I do not have in my nature.

    Then when he solos - I have quite a good ear today, I mean I can more or less follow even fast lines... and he sounds like combination of 'licks' (which is not bad but still I hear them namely as 'licks' as some kind of fixed motivic figures) and fast pattern-like runs based on some modal conception (I do not know how he does it exactly - I just analyze what I hear)... As a result I do not hear it as something integral and I do not hear much conviction in it really...
    yes it is very pleasurable sound... but his choices do not sound like something inevitable here in the music. He could play something else and it would not have changed the music much...

    Overall it begins to remind me 'ambient music' where general atmosphere is more important than details...

    I may be wrong and maybe I just miss something other guys hear... it can be a different language I do not understand... and I am ok with that.

    Great technique of course... these chords with melody line with different articulations (but also it sounds too much elaborated to my ear((((
    Last edited by Jonah; 09-27-2019 at 04:24 AM.

  5. #254

    User Info Menu

    Kenny G? After all Mr Pat has said about this hero to some and douchebag to others?? OUCH! Ha.

  6. #255

    User Info Menu

    I found this interview with Pat on Alana Alda's podcast interesting. He really seems to try to make a connection to the other person's experience.

    Pat Metheny: Discovering Spontaneity in Music and Everything Else | Alda Communication Training - Relating is Everything™

  7. #256
    I have mixed feelings about Metheney, too. Not a huge fan of his straight ahead playing. I find it repetitive especially when he's playing faster. He has a very distinctive sound and style but it isn't that varied.

    In contrast, Bright Size Life is an incredible album that blows me away to this day. I also enjoy some of his PMG stuff. Pat's gifts, IMO, are in his song writing and the uniqueness of his compositions. His soloing seems more focused and melodic in that context than when he is "blowing" over changes.

    He definitely is one of the most unique artists out there. For that, I think he deserves respect.

  8. #257

    User Info Menu

    Any musician that can hang with Ornette Coleman deserves the outmost respect in my book

    song x full album - YouTube

    Metheny did create a whole chapter in modern jazz guitar, both in improvisation and composition. In sound also. That's quite an accomplishment..

  9. #258

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by charlieparker
    I have mixed feelings about Metheney, too. Not a huge fan of his straight ahead playing. I find it repetitive especially when he's playing faster. He has a very distinctive sound and style but it isn't that varied.
    Do most jazz guitarists have much variety in their playing, having said that? And if so, what creates this variety for you?

  10. #259

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Iirc several cuts on Kind of Blue get faster.

    Think how much better that music would have been if they cut it with a click track /s/
    That might be true. Not that I’ve ever noticed. Wonder if it’s still there in the remastering?

    Engineers sometimes did tricks with the speed in the studio for one reason or another. Sometimes it was unintentional of course.

    I would have thought they could have had a metronome if they wanted to use it, or the engineer could have done this post-production.

    Here’s a list of rock songs with various engineering anomalies:

    Songs that gradually speed up | Steve Hoffman Music Forums

  11. #260

    User Info Menu

    I think I posted this elsewhere but check out Metheny’s new album. It’s brilliant—highly composed, but not necessarily straight-ahead jazz.

  12. #261

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonah
    Idle moments slows down at almost twice as slow as at the beginning... probably becasue of its particular idleness, they are gradually falling asleep dusrin 15 min of performance...

    But seriously... this kind of discussion we have became possible only with records ... and the exaples we discuss come from musicians who still thought in terms of live performance... I mean they considered record just as a possibility to preserve live performance and played still more or less the same way as if they would have played live concert (more or less of course... they were already a bit influenced by recordeing process metality).
    It is possible even now... but many modern players are affected with recording engeneering metality .... they play in a live gig and think in terms of 'how it will sound if it will be recorded'.... it is not necessarily concious.
    But I think this is very important shift in performance psychology... and this could affect aspects we discuss here: like technical perfectionism, precise and abstract conventional timing etc.

    and it concerns audience too by the way.
    I am really digging that song. Great sound. It does slow down...maybe intentional, given the title. It certainly fits with the mood of the piece.

    Not a lot of Grant out front with that song—it takes a confident bandleader to let the sideman take the primo role, as Joe and Bobby did in this one.

  13. #262

    User Info Menu

    I showed up late to this gig. However, I don't like Metheny for the same reason I don't like McLaughlin, Lage, Frizell, Rozenwinkle, Scofield,Coryell, etc. They are, imo, rock -based guitarists who morphed into "Jazz." I detest Rock Music, generally, and this influences their style which shows clearly in their playing. My favorite Jazz guitarists come from a Blues/R@B/Funk background and reflect a more soulful style of playing. They include: Wes, George, Kenny, Grant, Freddie, and Russell Malone among many unknowns to this Forum. Here's Russell with the Billy Taylor Trio. How do you say: "Straight ahead, Jazz???" Play live . . . Marinero



  14. #263

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Jeff
    That might be true. Not that I’ve ever noticed. Wonder if it’s still there in the remastering?

    Engineers sometimes did tricks with the speed in the studio for one reason or another. Sometimes it was unintentional of course.

    I would have thought they could have had a metronome if they wanted to use it, or the engineer could have done this post-production.

    Here’s a list of rock songs with various engineering anomalies:

    Songs that gradually speed up | Steve Hoffman Music Forums
    Well the truth is that jazz is not metronomic music and never was. Playing jazz to a click is not something that would have occurred to them. Maybe practicing to a click, but even then highly questionable.

    The musicians of this era had great ‘human’, body time. They learned it by listening, playing with great experienced musicians, dancing and playing for dancers.

    If you sit down with a device that measures it, there are actually tremendous tempo fluctuations in things that seem rock solid. This is true of jazz, rock, funk, soul, everything from the era before sequencers. (And pop/jazz music school.)

    For instance, Hendrix... and no one says Jimi had bad time.


  15. #264

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Marinero
    I showed up late to this gig. However, I don't like Metheny for the same reason I don't like McLaughlin, Lage, Frizell, Rozenwinkle, Scofield,Coryell, etc. They are, imo, rock -based guitarists who morphed into "Jazz." I detest Rock Music, generally, and this influences their style which shows clearly in their playing. My favorite Jazz guitarists come from a Blues/R@B/Funk background and reflect a more soulful style of playing. They include: Wes, George, Kenny, Grant, Freddie, and Russell Malone among many unknowns to this Forum. Here's Russell with the Billy Taylor Trio. How do you say: "Straight ahead, Jazz???" Play live . . . Marinero


    Nothing says you have like Metheny, but your view that he and McLaughlin are. "rock based guitarists who morphed into jazz" is not really the case. Metheny started on trumpet playing swing. Hearing the Beatles fired up his interest in guitar, but he got into jazz very early and didn't really go through the blues-rock -> jazz evolution that so many guitarist do. I mean he was a gigging pro jazz player at 15-16 and teaching in jazz colleges at 19.

    McLaughlin played trad and gypsy jazz and flamenco before he ever played rock based music, which he got to initially via his work as a session player/sideman in bands. Given his age (contemporary of all the Brit blues-rock guys) he couldn't have gone through that cliched path of hearing Clapton/Beck/Beatles and then stumbling onto Kind of Blue (the way the rest of us got here).

    For the both the rock elements of their music are a product of their broader eclecticism and exploration. If you don't like either, fine (I've never gotten that into McLaughlin myself, but love Metheny, fwiw). But if you come to their music with a preconception as to why you dislike them, maybe reconsider, or skip the explanation, and just accept that there's no accounting for taste.

    John

  16. #265

    User Info Menu

    " But if you come to their music with a preconception as to why you dislike them, maybe reconsider, or skip the explanation, and just accept that there's no accounting for taste." John A.

    Hi, J,
    I disagree, conditionally. There IS accounting for taste( a doubled-edged sword) and it comes from a witches brew of environment, exposure, and personality. For example, why is one drawn to Bach versus Beethoven? I believe if you are exposed to a certain type of music at an early age, it will be a ground zero, for most, in your tastes. However, as a person is exposed to varying forms of music and the vagaries of the human experience, the personality takes precedence and that illusive thing both the Romantics and some contemporary musicians call "Soul" will surface in your tastes. And, this "Soul" music can be Romantic, Classical, Baroque, etc. or in the case of Jazz--"Straight Ahead," Avant Garde, Progressive, Cool, etc. So, it is not a "pre-conception" of why you like or dislike a certain genre of music but something more innate and and ontological, in some cases, as you correctly said "there's no accounting for taste." Some men prefer blondes . . . others brunettes . . . can you explain why?
    Play live . . . with Soul . . . Marinero

  17. #266

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by John A.
    Metheny started on trumpet playing swing

    Yeah .. He came to prominence in this teenage years as the kid that played and sounded exactly like Wes. Gigged for several years being a Wes clone

    Abandoned that in search of his own voice

    I guess a story of him being rock influenced and thus choosing his path out of ignorance for the jazz tradition is just more edible than that he discarded your beloved music and came up with something else

  18. #267

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Marinero
    " But if you come to their music with a preconception as to why you dislike them, maybe reconsider, or skip the explanation, and just accept that there's no accounting for taste." John A.

    Hi, J,
    I disagree, conditionally. There IS accounting for taste( a doubled-edged sword) and it comes from a witches brew of environment, exposure, and personality. For example, why is one drawn to Bach versus Beethoven? I believe if you are exposed to a certain type of music at an early age, it will be a ground zero, for most, in your tastes. However, as a person is exposed to varying forms of music and the vagaries of the human experience, the personality takes precedence and that illusive thing both the Romantics and some contemporary musicians call "Soul" will surface in your tastes. And, this "Soul" music can be Romantic, Classical, Baroque, etc. or in the case of Jazz--"Straight Ahead," Avant Garde, Progressive, Cool, etc. So, it is not a "pre-conception" of why you like or dislike a certain genre of music but something more innate and and ontological, in some cases, as you correctly said "there's no accounting for taste." Some men prefer blondes . . . others brunettes . . . can you explain why?
    Play live . . . with Soul . . . Marinero
    Of course, people's experiences and acculturation affect their tastes, and one tends to like the familiar and dislike the unfamiliar. But within a culture (and rock, jazz, folk, blues, and classical are all part of the culture I was raised in), why one likes one particular subset is somewhere between idiosyncratic and inexplicable.

    John

  19. #268

    User Info Menu

    I get the white thing, absolutely. Although I did catch a set of the Brubeck Bros Quartet from Dizzy's the other night on sat radio and man did they swing. The RS was amazing and the guitarist was throwing in all these little licks, homages to Burrell and Grant Green. Had me shouting while driving.
    Haven't been moved by a piece like that in some time.
    I remember seeing Roy Haynes years ago at a club in Amsterdam. The cat was killing it and grown men were jumping out of their seats and hollering at the swing. Same thing. Great memory.

  20. #269
    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Do most jazz guitarists have much variety in their playing, having said that? And if so, what creates this variety for you?
    Good question.

    Jim Hall and Scofield are two guys who always surprise me. I also love a lot of the classic jazz guitarists like Montgomery, Farlow, and Pass.

    Maybe variety isn't the right word. It's just my impression of Metheny's straight ahead playing. I actually don't feel that way about his playing in other contexts. I kind of also have the same feeling about Martino.