View Poll Results: How many Charlie Parker tunes do you know?
- Voters
- 75. You may not vote on this poll
-
I don't know any
16 21.33% -
A couple
32 42.67% -
A half dozen or so
17 22.67% -
At least a dozen, probably a few more
6 8.00% -
Twenty, easy, probably more
4 5.33%
-
Originally Posted by henryrobinett
If it's true, then it's not just your opinion. Further, a contrary statement (such as 'somebody holds the corner on truth') would be false, not just another opinion.
But if it is just your opinion, why should anyone else agree that it is true (-or a worthy opinion)?
-
03-23-2015 09:43 AM
-
Mark, if the forum rules here were such that one should not fall foul of logical or lexical semantics, then you'd be the only member left!
-
Originally Posted by princeplanet
But I used to have a roommate---he's a doctor now---and he used to say, "Everyone has an opinion and they're all worth exactly the same." That irked me. I once asked him, "How come when you have a problem with your motorcycle you never ask me what I think it is?" He said, "Duh, you don't know [beep] about bikes." And I said, "Exactly! Some opinions are worth more than others..." He agreed with this. Yet he would still say, "Everyone has an opinion and they're all worth exactly the same." Still irks me... ;o)
-
Originally Posted by Broyale
Another guy whose solos you might want to check out is Dexter Gordon. I actually found it easier to learn a lot just by listening to him, because his playing, while influenced by Parker, is a lot more straightforward. Also tenor sax lines are easier to transfer to the guitar, I mean they fit inside the range of the guitar better than alto sax.
-
Originally Posted by destinytot
I always assumed this was because the ultimate source of those rhythms was non-Western, i.e. African.
Which I hasten to add, makes the music sound so great to me.
-
Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
In Jazz, there is much speculation about the historical importance of various players, and most of it subjective (naturally). But I sense, in the Jazz community, a de facto acceptance of the following indisputable "truths" -
You don't fuck with Satch, Prez, Bird, Miles, Monk or Trane!
Amen.
-
03-23-2015, 11:47 AM #132Dutchbopper GuestOriginally Posted by MarkRhodes
This is not meant as detraction of the art of jazz guitar. Most guitarists play jazz in a, well ... guitar way. Personally, I don't think it can be done physically on guitar.
But of course this could be said about other instrumentalists too. I realize that. I mean, you can hardly play like Keith Jarrett on a guitar. Or like Chris Potter. Check this out. Note how the solo develops into stellar orbit (after 3.30 minutes) ... and than imagine having to do this on guitar. Yikes.
DB
-
Just think, maybe there's some horn players sitting around talking about how they wish they could play like a guitar...maybe...
But yeah, nothing "guitaristic" about Parker. I bought that "Charlie Parker for GUitar" book like 15 years ago, looking for a shortcut into the tunes...and learned that pretty quickly!
-
Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
I'm not sure what you're trying to say or why you are always arguing with almost everything I say. But no, I don't believe there are any absolutes. And I don't believe there is a god who is holding the corner on truth regarding aesthetics or even ethics and mores. And even gravity relates in density and amount to this planet and might not apply to others. So for this moment the adage "what goes up must come down" is even relative. And even here, if the moon changes even that will change.
So let me clarify - as regards aesthetics nobody holds the corner on truth. I love Bird. That he has changed the face of music since the 1940s is without question. But there can be very learned, creative people, even jazz aficionados who do not like him or his music. I've met them. That's OK with me. I don't take it as personal affront. Even though I've spent the better part of my life dedicated to understanding Bird, it means nothing to me if someone thinks it sounds like note-vomit. I will either think he hasn't the taste refined enough to understand it, or maybe it's just not for him. Parker IS an acquired taste.
It's taken me YEARS to not be offended when someone takes exception to jazz or my playing or my music or something else very personal to me. Sometimes it can be a personal attack - a passive aggressive assault. But sometimes the person himself is tired of being assaulted by groups massive assumptions and disagrees in a big offensive way. Who cares? I feel this way by opinions from certain political or religious groups, let alone metal guitar players, shredders and the like who assault jazz. Most of these guys hate jazz. Who cares? That's their right for whatever reason. I can get ruffled and snobbish, but that's what they want.
I think that everyone has a right to their opinion regardless how wrong headed I think it is. Now if that opinion directly affects me - like it's a racist opinion and he is using that opinion to block me or in anyway cause harm to me or my family, THEN we might have a problem. But regarding Bird? Jazz has other more pressing problems.
-
03-23-2015, 12:25 PM #135Dutchbopper GuestOriginally Posted by henryrobinett
I don't get it. I call that selective indignation. And you are not practising what you preach.
DB
-
Originally Posted by destinytot
I got in trouble one time with an owner of an art shop when I used the term "anal-retentive." We used it all of the time in my workplace so it did not carry any "bite" for us, but for that owner, it was very offensive. Out of courtesy, I no longer used it in casual conversation once I found out the weight it carried.
Also, when you apply it (the term "vomit") to the revered art form that Charlie Parker ushered you, its easy to see how those who are passionate about his music could be offended.
Just imagine applying the "vomit" description to the utterances of a your young child, your favorite political figure and his views which you share, or maybe your even your elderly mother who likes to talk a lot and may be experiencing dementia.
I don't see how anyone can find it acceptable considering the connotations the comparison to vomit carries - very irreverent and disrespectful. Of course, giving Broyale the benefit of the doubt, this may not have been his true intent. One can only know that by asking the direct question to him.
Personally, I give him the benefit of the doubt as I try to do with everyone.
-
Back to the music, here's some Charlie Parker for non Charlie Parker fans. 2.6 million views on YouTube:
-
This has been a very enlightening thread for me. I too came to straight ahead jazz guitar backwards ie. Rush, pink floyd, hendrix, vaughan, holdsworth,scofield,ecm era frisell,jim hall, wes...then ed bickert who really floats my boat. I remember a time when I was searching jazz artists that I could "feel"... not just be amazed at what sounded at the time to me like emotionally empty massive technique fanciness. It took years. I remember trying to listen to "bird" early in my development and not being able to connect with any of it but kc blues... I finally eventually bought an omnibook and tried and tried and tried to find another "bird" tune I could comprehend, feel, hear... I kept trying because I could recognize his genius in comparison to my not-genius. Anyhow as flawed as the omnibook approach may be it helped me in the sense that by reading it so slowly I finally started to "hear" the melodies in his lines and licks..Then all of a sudden I could hear the "blues" in it and the light in my brain became a little bit more bright. I am glad I stuck with my initial intuitive belief that there was someting important in his music to learn that would benefit me greatly. Bird Lives!!!!
-
Yeah, I would think coming to jazz backwards is more and more common...I've said often that the Dead were my ticket to jazz, when I heard they and Duane Allman were into Miles I checked that out, but it wasn't instantaneous for me...
I think my first experience with Parker was somebody playing me a recording of "Kim," and you can bet I couldn't hear that at all!
-
Originally Posted by Dutchbopper
-
Originally Posted by Dutchbopper
I think Jimmy Bruno mentions this in his material on picking. (I think what Jimmy does is what is generally referred to as 'economy picking.')
George Benson couldn't play as fast as he needed to the conventional way either. His "Benson picking" is what I'm after now. It's a lot of work for a long time. But I think George is a great player and seems to be able to do whatever he wants to do on the guitar.
Frank Gambale developed his "sweep picking" technique because he couldn't play as fast as sax players the conventional way. (<<<He is very fast but what he plays fast doesn't grab me the way Parker's playing does. Or Charlie Christian's, for that matter.)
Some of what Charlie Parker did had a lot to do with how the alto saxophone is made and played. (Thomas Owens talks about this in his analysis of Parker's playing.) If he had played guitar himself, he probably would have played differently, but we'll never know just how....
-
Originally Posted by Dutchbopper
He attacked no one that I saw. He only attacked the bop sensibility. It wasn't personal. I don't see where this is contrary to my beliefs.Last edited by henryrobinett; 03-23-2015 at 03:09 PM.
-
Originally Posted by henryrobinett
Similarly, if Broyale's "personal opinion" is to be respected, then why not the personal opinion of someone who thinks Broyale's personal opinion is objectionable?
-
Mark, c'mon, that's getting a bit petty and silly wouldn't you say? I think Henry's been pretty clear about what he's saying.
Let's get back to talking more Parker...I was in the half dozen or so camp...let's see, I know Scrapple, Billie's Bounce, Now's the Time, Little Suede Shoes, Moose, Au Private...lol...I know the easy onesLast edited by mr. beaumont; 03-23-2015 at 03:22 PM.
-
Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
with attacking THE PERSON for said opinion.
No. I'm not playing this silly intellectual game. It is my opinion that there is no god standing over us pontificating what is good vs bad taste. That is an opinion. It can be no other. That is not an absolute.
-
Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
-
Originally Posted by pkirk
-
I think it best if we veer back onto the main topic---playing Charlie Parker tunes. How many do you know? Which are your favorites? Which were the biggest challenges for you? Like that.
-
You know, of all the things Parker has done and of all the reasons he is so widely revered today, the one thing I respect him for more than anything else is how he GOT BACK at those cats in the famous jam session where he was laughed out of the jam following a certain cymbal related incident. His embarrassment and subsequent dedication involving (as I understand) 15 hours of his day is one of the most inspiring things I have ever heard.
Another one is how Coltrane reportedly took his saxophone to a dinner once, asked for an empty room, played right until dinner was served, ate his meal and packed off...what a legend.
While we are talking about good stories, one of the best ones I heard is when Bud Powell reportedly took a solo so good, he walked off the stage mid-tune, applauding himself!
But the Parker story is the greatest.
Maybe worth a separate thread? Sharing famous anecdotes?Last edited by pushkar000; 03-23-2015 at 04:44 PM.
-
Originally Posted by Dutchbopper
I find this very interesting for a variety of reasons, the first of which is Potter's playing. I've heard him live a few times, and he never disappoints. I also began to wonder what other saxophonists have approached Bird's style. And by approached, I mean more than borrowed from it, which they all did. I'm not sure I know enough to tell, but the first name that came to mind was Sonny Stitt because Sonny's playing reminds me of Bird more than many other great saxophonists. I think this is because Sonny had monumental chops of his own, and he sometimes sounds like someone strapped a jetpack to his behind. I'm not sure about his timing and phrasing - I know these are important - but Sonny had speed when he wanted it. I suspect Coltrane's name would be offered up too.
Part of my limitation is that I'm a swing person at heart, and I don't listen that much to the saxophonists who may be approaching Bird (guys like Potter, Bergonzi, Berg, Liebman, etc.). A short list of my favorites includes Stitt, Dexter Gordon, Ernie Watts, Sal Nistico, Sam Butera, Zoot Sims, Buddy Tate, Houston Person, Stanley Turrentine, and Stan Getz. My point is that none them sounds to my ear a lot like Bird except Stitt on some recordings. I'm not sure what to make of that. I'm also not sure I can distinguish between Parker's "style" and his "voice". All these guys have a beautiful voice. If their phrasing and timing is like Bird's, I am not yet able to discern that. (They do certainly have masterful timing and phrasing though.)
I'd be interested in other people's thoughts on this.
BTW, thanks for this post too DB. I went to the source, Charles McNeal's website, and downloaded the Potter transcription. Just to 'fess up to how humble my perch is: I could not even follow along very well except where the playing was punctuated with longer tones or rests. So my first goal is to be able to read along at speed. Not that I would ever download a video, but if I did, I would run it through Transcribe at slower speed.
Incidentally, saxsolos.com is another good source of transcriptions. I have used them a few times in the past.
The Unwritten Theory of Guitar Harmolodics
Today, 07:33 PM in Guitar Technique