The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Posts 26 to 50 of 76
  1. #26

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by fep
    This strikes me as a joke after the Louis Armstrong backlash, Kenny G does have a sense of humor.
    I hope this is the answer. I've never been a fan of his commercially successful sound or music, but he's got a fantastic cameo in Michael Bolton's Netflix/Valentine's/Christmas special. The show is way funnier than it has a right to be.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #27

    User Info Menu

    I’ve always liked Kenny’s appearances on What’s Up With That.

  4. #28

    User Info Menu

    Well somebody appreciates Kenny’s achievements.

    Kenny G has a new project impacting us.-43b66d8c-d81b-4eef-849a-b66231c406cd-jpeg

  5. #29

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by wintermoon
    He plays the same solo from the record he made of this tune!

  6. #30

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by sgcim
    He plays the same solo from the record he made of this tune!
    Regardless, I thumbs up both. Nice easy listenin'. Good musicianship all around. How can you not nod or tap along?

  7. #31

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles

    Like I've been saying....

  8. #32

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by zdub
    How can you not nod?
    Agreed - I nod whenever I hear Kenny G....

    Kenny G has a new project impacting us.-nodding_off-gif

  9. #33

    User Info Menu

    The only thing I hear commonly described as ‘impacted’ is a wisdom tooth.

  10. #34

    User Info Menu

    So,
    Kenny G was one of the great success stories in the Smooth Jazz wave. His popularity was directly related to people enjoying the music and included some truly great musicians like George Benson, Gerald Albright, Grover Washington, David Sandborn to name a few. It brought many listeners to a form of Jazz considered accessible to everyone much as the Big Band era did before it. Many of its practitioners made millions and it is this fact, for me, that brought the wrath of the aesthetes rather than their lack of artistry or talent. And, in light of Metheney's comments about K's improvisational skills, a reasonable person might respond: there was no reason to play complicated improvisations since they wouldn't fit with the genre or feel of the music. Perhaps K is capable of more improvisationally but they wouldn't make sense in this style/genre. So, when Benson got involved in Smooth Jazz, no Jazz radio stations in Chicago would play his music--new or old. He was blackballed because he "sold out???" The bottom line ,for me, was that talented Jazzers who devoted their lives to their idiom were still struggling, living day to day, while others prospered and became rich by not selling out, but rather taking advantage of a real trend in music. None of them lost their "talent"; many became rich and were able to return to their true love as Benson and Albright certainly did after the wave ended.
    In regards to K's musicianship, I speak as a former saxophonist and ask: "What's wrong?" He's not trying to play bop . . . he wants to play music that reaches a wide audience and there's nothing wrong with his technique or sound. The only comment I would make ,as a former saxophonist, is that he is not a natural "tenor man" since he doesn't have the body structure to get a big sound out of the instrument but his playing on alto/soprano are spot on.* And, as far as the Getz project . . . why not? Getz was never a bopper but he certainly was one of the most melodic tenor players of all time. He was never a disciple of "sheets of sound" like Coltrane and never lost the melody improvisationally.
    Finally, almost every Jazzer in my generation(Boomer) started out playing pop gigs(R@B/Funk/Soul/R@R, etc.) to pay the bills. It was only after many years of honing their skills on the job that they transitioned full-time to Jazz. Savants like Chet Baker, Lee Morgan, Miles, etc. were the exception to this practice. So, there lies the rub.
    Play live . . . Marinero

    *The "barrel-chested" tenor man was not myth but reality since physiognomy, as a general rule of thumb, is essential to a big sound with rare exceptions: Baritone player Pepper Adams, and Tenor player, Johnny Griffin--the Little Giant. M

  11. #35

    User Info Menu

    Well I don't disagree with any of the above, but let's face it anything that's labelled smooth jazz is a snooze-fest for any real jazz aficionado.

    I love GB (and Grover and Lee Ritenauer, etc.) as much as anyone and don't begrudge him his success, but the 30% or so of his catalogue that's smooth jazz or urban R'n'B is just way less interesting than any straight-ahead session he did.

    I really don't have an opinion about Kenny G. Which is a pretty negative thing to say about a musician, actually.

  12. #36

    User Info Menu

    That is some next-level snarkmanship by Randy Napoleon (who also happens to be a terrific guitar player).

  13. #37

    User Info Menu

    Kenny G is providing a valuable educational service - we can safely assume anyone who listens to the album possesses complete ignorance about Stan Getz

  14. #38

    User Info Menu

    I've torn up my Kenny G-bashing membership card. Who is he hurting? It's impossible for Mr. G to sully the ever-sterling reputations of Getz and Armstrong. If you don't like his music, don't listen to it. The Desafinado cut posted above is actually pretty nice pro-level playing. I don't seek out his music and it's been a long time since it found me in an elevator. I say live and let live.

  15. #39

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by BWV
    Kenny G is providing a valuable educational service - we can safely assume anyone who listens to the album possesses complete ignorance about Stan Getz
    I make a similar point when someone comments on a remake of a film; that the remake is a much weaker film than the prior version and thus shouldn't have been made: Remakes bring attention to prior versions. Many in the "current" generation may not have seen or even know that a prior version existed.

    E.g. Spielberg's 2021 release of West Side Story - how many people will now seek out the 1961 version?

  16. #40

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by jameslovestal
    I make a similar point when someone comments on a remake of a film; that the remake is a much weaker film than the prior version and thus shouldn't have been made: Remakes bring attention to prior versions. Many in the "current" generation may not have seen or even know that a prior version existed.

    E.g. Spielberg's 2021 release of West Side Story - how many people will now seek out the 1961 version?
    Well WSS is a musical which was adapted into a film. It's certainly subject to reinterpretation on the stage, but it'd be hard for a movie to come anywhere close to the 1961 film version, which IMO is one of the most perfect movie musicals ever filmed.

  17. #41

    User Info Menu

    "Well I don't disagree with any of the above, but let's face it anything that's labelled smooth jazz is a snooze-fest for any real jazz aficionado." Dr. Jeff

    Hi, D,
    That would be a difficult statement to rationally defend . . .
    Play live . . . Marinero


    https://youtu.be/ybnltKJLyN4

  18. #42

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Jeff
    Well WSS is a musical which was adapted into a film. It's certainly subject to reinterpretation on the stage, but it'd be hard for a movie to come anywhere close to the 1961 film version, which IMO is one of the most perfect movie musicals ever filmed.
    Uh, it was an EXAMPLE!!! Are you saying that remakes don't bring attention to prior versions?????? THAT was the point I was making (related to that Kenny G will bring attention to Getz music and that is a good thing).

    As for WSS: can a musical where the two leads don't do their own singing but instead are dubbed by pros, be a "most perfect movie musical"? I don't think so.

    Anyhow, I see that others are disputing your POV "but let's face it anything that's labelled smooth jazz is a snooze-fest for any real jazz aficionado". It appears you being you're a "real jazz aficionado" and anyone that doesn't label smooth jazz as a snooze-fest isn't a "real" jazz aficionado.

    Read that back a few times: doesn't it come off as very arrogant and smug?

  19. #43

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Lobomov
    Jazzguitar.be 101??
    1.Define your self as a real
    2.Shit on random music that millions of people love

    I guess I'm not a real jazz aficionado?
    I am a real person. I passed the “not a bot test” 3 times today.

    If you want to like smooth jazz, go for it. I don’t find it nearly as worthwhile as mainstream jazz, but that’s JMO of course. Millions of people like stuff that’s highly processed and bland (again, IMO) like Twinkies and Coors Light and Barefoot Wine. But I wouldn’t compare them to fine cuisine or libations.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marinero
    "Well I don't disagree with any of the above, but let's face it anything that's labelled smooth jazz is a snooze-fest for any real jazz aficionado." Dr. Jeff

    Hi, D,
    That would be a difficult statement to rationally defend . . .
    Play live . . . Marinero

    https://youtu.be/ybnltKJLyN4
    Well it’s an opinion of course, but we have to have some standards. Let’s take the George Benson album In Your Eyes. It’s pleasant and inoffensive. But it’s no Giblet Gravy or Bad Benson or even Breezin’. Once you go smooth…you lose your groove…

    Let me put it this way. Which “smooth jazz” records would you nominate as anywhere close to a good classic Miles or Coltrane or Blue Note recording?

    Quote Originally Posted by jameslovestal
    Uh, it was an EXAMPLE!!! Are you saying that remakes don't bring attention to prior versions?????? THAT was the point I was making (related to that Kenny G will bring attention to Getz music and that is a good thing).

    As for WSS: can a musical where the two leads don't do their own singing but instead are dubbed by pros, be a "most perfect movie musical"? I don't think so.

    Anyhow, I see that others are disputing your POV "but let's face it anything that's labelled smooth jazz is a snooze-fest for any real jazz aficionado". It appears you being you're a "real jazz aficionado" and anyone that doesn't label smooth jazz as a snooze-fest isn't a "real" jazz aficionado.

    Read that back a few times: doesn't it come off as very arrogant and smug?
    I am not critiquing WSS as a musical but as a movie. It is a very, very fine movie which won 11 Oscars, including best director. The acting is excellent and the musical performance and recording are superb. Hard to improve upon, but I’m not opposed to people trying. Spielberg is pretty good. He has never directed a musical though. I would probably watch it.

    As far as my opinion, yes I am a jazz snob. I don’t deny it. “Smooth jazz” is nice and sedate and pleasant, but it isn’t jazz. If you want to prove me wrong, feel free to offer some counter examples.

  20. #44

    User Info Menu

    I'll be interested to discover what timbre KG chooses or is able to achieve to pair up with Getz.

    Does he do it naturally or electronically? Which voice(s)?

    Not joining the KG value debate here and don't expect to be 'impacted.'

  21. #45

    User Info Menu

    His new project has not 'impacted' me in the slightest.

  22. #46

    User Info Menu

    "Let me put it this way. Which “smooth jazz” records would you nominate as anywhere close to a good classic Miles or Coltrane or Blue Note recording?" Doctor Jeff

    Hi, D,
    I think you "stepped in it" with your last comment( "real Jazz aficionados") and ,wisely, want to change the focus. So, let's look at your above remark which is a classic "Red Herring." Simply, the danger in comparing genres is that you're usually comparing canaries and falcons. SJ never was intended to duplicate nor compete with straight ahead Jazz. It was a blending of elements of Pop Music with a Jazz feel that people listened to regularly and was played in clubs across the country. It sold millions of albums and was a huge commercial success that transformed many hard-working musicians into millionaires while giving others good paying years of steady work. For me, that's a win. In addition to this factor, the SJ bands were loaded with experienced musicians, studio players, and ,yes, hard-core Jazzers' as I mentioned in a previous post. So, that's a win.
    Secondly, many serious listeners and musicians have eclectic tastes much as a food, wine, or cigar connoisseurs. Personally, I listen to straight ahead Jazz, Classical, R@B, Funk, Soul, and Smooth Jazz depending on my mood and understand after a lifetime of music, listening to ,say, Wagner's "Tannhauser" is not a daily experience; nor is Smooth Jazz. However, I always enjoyed the soulful "Smooth Sounds?" of Grover Washington, Gerald Albright, George Benson, Kenny G, David Sandborn, Gato Barbieri, Chuck Mangione, to name a few very accomplished musicians who succeeded in this genre. So, D, we can't compare completely different forms of music and be fair in the process as was suggested in your above comment. Thanks for your honest reply.
    Play live . . . Marinero

  23. #47

    User Info Menu

    Smooth Jazz didn't start off so bad...I think of like the CTI stuff, that was really the beginning, wasn't it?

    When it was being made by actual people and a real band, it was great. Now when it's made with a Korg Workstation and a sax player with three overdubs of himself, it lacks...well...everything.

  24. #48

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Marinero
    "Let me put it this way. Which “smooth jazz” records would you nominate as anywhere close to a good classic Miles or Coltrane or Blue Note recording?" Doctor Jeff

    Hi, D,
    I think you "stepped in it" with your last comment( "real Jazz aficionados") and ,wisely, want to change the focus. So, let's look at your above remark which is a classic "Red Herring." Simply, the danger in comparing genres is that you're usually comparing canaries and falcons. SJ never was intended to duplicate nor compete with straight ahead Jazz. It was a blending of elements of Pop Music with a Jazz feel that people listened to regularly and was played in clubs across the country. It sold millions of albums and was a huge commercial success that transformed many hard-working musicians into millionaires while giving others good paying years of steady work. For me, that's a win. In addition to this factor, the SJ bands were loaded with experienced musicians, studio players, and ,yes, hard-core Jazzers' as I mentioned in a previous post. So, that's a win.
    Secondly, many serious listeners and musicians have eclectic tastes much as a food, wine, or cigar connoisseurs. Personally, I listen to straight ahead Jazz, Classical, R@B, Funk, Soul, and Smooth Jazz depending on my mood and understand after a lifetime of music, listening to ,say, Wagner's "Tannhauser" is not a daily experience; nor is Smooth Jazz. However, I always enjoyed the soulful "Smooth Sounds?" of Grover Washington, Gerald Albright, George Benson, Kenny G, David Sandborn, Gato Barbieri, Chuck Mangione, to name a few very accomplished musicians who succeeded in this genre. So, D, we can't compare completely different forms of music and be fair in the process as was suggested in your above comment. Thanks for your honest reply.
    Play live . . . Marinero
    I like most of those players TBH--was a big Chuck Mangione fan back in the day, and of course Grover and George B and David Sanborn. And Spyro Gyra. I don't hate Kenny G but don't find him very interesting compared to the great sax players. All these players have chops of course--I wouldn't dispute that.

    I don't even dislike smooth jazz, just don't find it very stimulating. Good background music. I like the vocal music labelled smooth jazz--Sade, Anita Baker, Al Jarreau--quite a bit more, because vocals usually carry more feeling that instruments in those arrangements.

    There are different types of smooth jazz though. Feel So Good by CM and Breezin' by GB are both very commercial and helped start the smooth jazz movement. But they are melodically very accomplished, and with great arrangements. And of course Bob James, Spyro Gyra and Grover Washington.

    After that though in the '80's IMO most things labeled smooth jazz became overproduced and too commercial. GB's more commercial RNB albums since the '80's just don't compare to his previous output. Great players like Chet Atkins, Lee Ritenour, Larry Carlton and David Sanborn put out very slick albums that were easy listening and not very interesting musically. They also put out some good stuff as well, and most of these guys (who are still with us) have "come back into the fold" with straightahead jazz albums in the last decade or so.

    There are a whole bunch of other musicians who have been very successful in the smooth jazz realm who just don't have the cred with straightahead jazz. Real jazz isn't just chord changes or fast scales, it's taking risks and having an interplay with the other musicians you are playing with in real time. That's what's lacking in the smooth jazz genre on the whole.

  25. #49

    User Info Menu

    It's an LA thing. Producers there in pop have been using software programs for years to come up with songs/melodies.

  26. #50

    User Info Menu

    Smooth jazz can just be an excuse to show-off your roller skating chops;