The Pat Metheny Interview (by Rick Beato)

**rabbit** · 08-22-2021, 04:29 AM

What happened in 1980? (1:13:00)

**grahambop** · 08-22-2021, 04:48 AM

Originally Posted by rabbit

What happened in 1980? (1:13:00)

I assume he’s referring to the Wynton Marsalis/neobop revivalist thing that happened around then.

**Christian Miller** · 08-22-2021, 05:34 AM

Finally found some time to listen to the whole thing. This interview is amazing. I will be revisiting it.

**pingu** · 08-22-2021, 06:36 AM

Originally Posted by grahambop;[URL="tel:1141776"

1141776[/URL]]I assume he’s referring to the Wynton Marsalis/neobop revivalist thing that happened around then.

yes i assumed it was the Wynton thing too

**Christian Miller** · 08-22-2021, 06:37 AM

Originally Posted by LifeOnJazz

I never get tired of listening to Pat talk about music. Great interview. I can't believe one of his secrets to a great performance is that he doesn't eat all day until after he plays. I guess no breakfast for me tomorrow... I'll see if it works. Haha.

The carbs crash is the enemy of good jazz.

**pingu** · 08-22-2021, 06:47 AM

Originally Posted by Tal_175

The triad pattern he uses to outline the tune starting at 1:31:53 is playing the triads in every inversion but playing every other note of the chord (open triads of sorts):

A maj:
A E C#
C# A E
E C# A

F#7: (starts from the first "inversion")
A# F# C#
C# A# F#
F# C# A#

B-: (I think he messes up the pattern a bit here, repeats the first pattern after the second)
B F# D
D B F#
B F# D

etc ...

big thanks for that tal
I found the explanation of the harmony
of the Bridge of James to be very handy

I’ve always struggled with understanding
it and playing over it

i got the first 4 bars as ....

|A. F#/Bb | Bm. A/C# |
| D Db/F. | F#m. E/Ab. |

(corrected to F#m thanks Tal)

**Gabor** · 08-22-2021, 06:47 AM

Originally Posted by jazzkritter

Least he’s smart enough to match the wig to age with it being grey.
He’s not like the guys out there with black as night hair and a whole bunch of wrinkles!

...so you did not even see the video... :-)

**Tal_175** · 08-22-2021, 06:58 AM

Originally Posted by pingu

big thanks for that tal
I found the explanation of the harmony
of the Bridge of James to be very handy

I’ve always struggled with understanding
it and playing over it

i got the first 4 bars as ....

|A. F#/Bb | Bm. A/C# |
| D Db/F. | Fm. E/Ab. |

does that look right to you ?

I think the form is right but the first chord of the forth bar is F#- (instead of F-).

I would also spell F#/Bb as F#/A#, Db/F as C#/F and E/Ab as E/G# as the bass notes suggest inversions.

**Gabor** · 08-22-2021, 07:03 AM

Originally Posted by grahambop

Some great discussion from Pat about ‘what is melody’ at 38 minutes, very interesting.

Yes that is one of the most interesting part for me. However he quickly shifts to explain "what mekes a solo great" instead of explain what makes a melody great, btw that is also interesting, and I really enjoyed the sentences about Wes, that octaves and thumb are interesting, but the seamless ease, how Wes connects musical thougths together is incredible. PM also great in this aspect.

**pingu** · 08-22-2021, 07:12 AM

Originally Posted by Tal_175

I think the form is right but the first chord of the forth bar is F#- (instead of F-).

I would also spell F#/Bb as F#/A#, Db/f as C#/F and E/Ab as E/G# as the bass notes suggest inversions.

fab thanks yes my ooops on bar 4
I’ll go back and correct it to F#m

(also thanks for the enharmonic spellings
I’m only semi-literate in music)

the D to C# (first inversion)move in bar 3 is cool isn’t it ?

**grahambop** · 08-22-2021, 07:34 AM

Originally Posted by Gabor

...so you did not even see the video... :-)

yeah it was more brown, with trendy sun-bleached highlights.

**Christian Miller** · 08-22-2021, 07:40 AM

I like in James how it’s all baroque moves in the bridge.

Going up by a semitone (mi-fa); use first inv major (6 3) to root position triad (5 3)

Descending by a semitone (fa-mi); use a third inversion dominant (6 #4 2) to descend to first inversion major (6 3)

This stuff is functionally similar to what Beato said ‘secondary dominants’ (fourthwise motion) but SOUNDS different (JS Bach would have heard them as totally different things - he didn’t buy the concept of chord inversions)

This was touched on in the interview a few times. I think Metheny also got a lot of this from Jobim, and of course Bach etc.

These examples of how to harmonise a major scale bass (Rule of the Octave or RO) in 18th century style are not that far from some of Pat’s harmony.

Also check out JC Bach’s variants on the RO in his treatise if you can get your head around figured bass. Some gorgeous ones there. When I have time I’ll put them into guitar language.

**jazzkritter** · 08-22-2021, 12:43 PM

Gabor I am about 50 minutes in and prioritizing the remaining hour of Pat over watching the NY Giants preseason game!
Sure looked grey to me, but im having cataracts removed this Wednesday so ill check again with my new eyes))).

**Tal_175** · 08-22-2021, 12:57 PM

Originally Posted by Christian Miller

I like in James how it’s all baroque moves in the bridge.

Going up by a semitone (mi-fa); use first inv major (6 3) to root position triad (5 3)

Descending by a semitone (fa-mi); use a third inversion dominant (6 #4 2) to descend to first inversion major (6 3)

This stuff is functionally similar to what Beato said ‘secondary dominants’ (fourthwise motion) but SOUNDS different (JS Bach would have heard them as totally different things - he didn’t buy the concept of chord inversions)

This was touched on in the interview a few times. I think Metheny also got a lot of this from Jobim, and of course Bach etc.

These examples of how to harmonise a major scale bass (Role of the Octave or RO) in 18th century style are not that far from some of Pat’s harmony.

Also check out JC Bach’s variants on the RO in his treatise if you can get tour heard around figured bass. Some gorgeous ones there. When I have time I’ll put them into guitar language.

This sounds very good. A simple concept but very effective.

**Doctor Jeff** · 08-22-2021, 01:23 PM

Originally Posted by grahambop

I assume he’s referring to the Wynton Marsalis/neobop revivalist thing that happened around then.

Wynton’s first album was in 1982. Yes he did create quite a stir with the neorevivalist thing, but it took a year or 2 for it to build up.

I came of “jazz age” around that time. There was a lot of energy and a lot of cool trends…fusion was still going strong, funk was coming into jazz in a bigger way, etc. But then the balloon deflated a bit. The old lions like Dizzy were on their last legs, and some of the stalwarts like Miles and Chick and Herbie and Jean-Luc Ponty and John McCutcheon were either on hiatus on moving away from the heavy jazz-rock sound that had brought them a huge audience.

So you had a couple of schools in the 80’s that had legs…the Marsalis-influenced neotrads, the Metheny-influenced group (Pat, Scofield, Mike Stern), the Benson-influenced pop superstars, and the smooth jazz crowd.

In retrospect I would say the neotrads and the Methenyites had the most influence.

**Gabor** · 08-22-2021, 02:06 PM

Originally Posted by jazzkritter

Gabor I am about 50 minutes in and prioritizing the remaining hour of Pat over watching the NY Giants preseason game!
Sure looked grey to me, but im having cataracts removed this Wednesday so ill check again with my new eyes))).

sorry to hear that, I did not mean to joke about a health condition.

**Gabor** · 08-22-2021, 02:22 PM

Originally Posted by Christian Miller

I like in James how it’s all baroque moves in the bridge.

Thanks for recall that. After Beato were saying how complex and hard the bridge of James, I went and listen that, and all I was found classical harmony, nothing revolutionary, (I am not saying it is not cool)

Having this topic, I also had some wtf feeling when PM was sharing his big revelation about harmony, meaning it is not just harmony, instead some tones are moving, so since then he have this unique view. Is not this what we call voice leading since a few hundred years and also conterpoint has to do with something "moving tones are formating harmonies"? Bach explicitely wrote two an three part inventions.

Beato was principled enough to not mention that...

**zdub** · 08-22-2021, 02:31 PM

Originally Posted by Gabor

Thanks for recall that. After Beato were saying how complex and hard the bridge of James, I went and listen that, and all I was found classical harmony, nothing revolutionary.

Having this topic, I was also had some wtf feeling when PM was sharing his big revelation about harmony, meaning it is not just harmony, instead some tones are moving, so since then he have this unique view. Is not this what we call voice leading since a few hundred years and also conterpoint has to do with something "moving tones are formating harmonies"? Bach explicitely wrote two an three part inventions.

Beato was principled enough to not mention that...

Haven't gone back to review it but I thought that the discussion regarding the difficulty of James was that a lot of folks have a hard time improvising over it, not that it is a complex song?

**Christian Miller** · 08-22-2021, 02:45 PM

Originally Posted by Gabor

Thanks for recall that. After Beato were saying how complex and hard the bridge of James, I went and listen that, and all I was found classical harmony, nothing revolutionary, (I am not saying it is not cool)

Having this topic, I also had some wtf feeling when PM was sharing his big revelation about harmony, meaning it is not just harmony, instead some tones are moving, so since then he have this unique view. Is not this what we call voice leading since a few hundred years and also conterpoint has to do with something "moving tones are formating harmonies"? Bach explicitely wrote two an three part inventions.

Beato was principled enough to not mention that...

Ah. But I think it was a breath of fresh air in the 70s; the ii V I paradigm and extensions had ruled pretty completely for a couple of decades (never mind that standards harmony wasn’t originally like that.) OTOH I remember Pat saying he was sick of jazz fusion vamps, he wanted harmony, just not necessarily bop harmony.

I think people get trained in chord symbols, back-cycling root movement and extensions and so on and think that’s the be all and end all of harmony.

From his videos, Beato tends to hear harmony that way; always up from the root with extensions being ‘interesting.’ He singled out a chord in Bach proclaiming that as an example of genius rather than, for example, his mastery of counterpoint. Maybe that’s why he thinks of major chords as difficult ‘jazz kryptonite’ while Pat simply embraces them.

The other side of it is of course the boomer guitar influence; the language of the guitar itself, via Beatles, James Taylor etc. James gives both…

I didn’t get the impression Pat thought this was novel per se, but I do think he is suggesting it was unusual for jazz at the time, and he is correct in this. And I do think jazz players who have studied the standard type of jazz harmony to not extend and mess around with chords - Jazzers are notorious for it…

Pat suggested a simpler way (never mind that Bird too is often that simple).

**Gabor** · 08-22-2021, 02:47 PM

Originally Posted by zdub

Haven't gone back to review it but I thought that the discussion regarding the difficulty of James was that a lot of folks have a hard time improvising over it, not that it is a complex song?

you are right, but the point is that nothing new is happening, because in the last 300 400 years Bach and Mozart were improvizing on the exact same stuff. Bach explicitely, other like Mozart, Beethoven in the cadences of the piano concertos.

**zdub** · 08-22-2021, 08:00 PM

Originally Posted by Christian Miller

I like in James how it’s all baroque moves in the bridge.

**pauln** · 08-23-2021, 12:23 AM

Beato did a great interview and PM revealed a lot of valuable insights.
What changed in the eighties... PM described from a few perspectives

mentions old guys vs new guys

mentions being in a band vs showing up playing with anyone

mentions never having music on stage vs playing out of books and charts

...full disclosure, I am an old guy, I play in bands, and I have never had a book or chart on stage.

**Christian Miller** · 08-23-2021, 05:32 AM

Originally Posted by Lobomov

Yes .. Indeed ... That is his shtick .. Presenting songs as root based and with the extensions as the explanation of what makes this song great

Now the thing is that is hard to know is whether he actually hears, sees or understands music like this .. or whether it's a deliberate choice cause it's in some ways advanced, but still simple enough so that the noobs to early intermediates that make up the vast majority of his target audience can nod along and go "Ahh yes .. I get it"

Hard to say! He knows his audience.

**kris** · 08-23-2021, 08:17 AM

Pat is a great guitar player.He has his own language of musical expression.

**dconeill** · 08-23-2021, 04:59 PM

Originally Posted by grahambop

I was amazed by Pat’s claim that he never eats anything on the day of a gig, because being hungry makes him play better. ...

I used to do this for exams when I was in school (geophysics, not music). I have no proof that it worked, but it seemed to help me concentrate. Of course my career in geophysics was mostly a failure, so there's that to consider.