-
Originally Posted by NSJ
Like so?
-
10-30-2012 12:50 AM
-
As if "melody" and "lyricism" indicate anything but "sounds good to me."
-
Much use is being made of the well-known unmelodic scale.
...According to a good friend of mine.
-
Originally Posted by Reg
IMO that applies to all music, but to jazz even more so.
Originally Posted by Reg
As I say, I don't think jazz is any different in this respect, except that it requires better listening and (of course) better playing - not only because of its more complex nature (compared to other popular musics), but because of the centrality of improvisation, which is peripheral at best in other genres (blues excepted, although we can make that part of "jazz" I guess).
And I've been improvising from the beginning too, athough obviously in a fairly crude, instinctive way to start with.
Originally Posted by Reg
Originally Posted by Reg
My first "real jazz" experience was playing Django-style music, but to folk club and college audiences back in the 1970s.
More recently (from the early 90s until a few years ago) I played sporadic jazz gigs in various line-ups, mostly amateur, but sometimes with professionals too, although rarely to the most discerning jazz audiences.
I'm still painfully aware of the gulf between my skills (mainly in technical terms) and those of the pros I know. (In the 1970s band I was lucky to play alongside a pro sax player; a truly inspiring musician who remains a good friend, but what he could do then is still ahead of where I am now.)
Originally Posted by Reg
It's certainly true that I've never committed myself sufficiently to jazz to develop those skills. I've been more interested in (or at least involved in) other forms of music, and in any case only became a professional musician around 10 years ago (and that's largely in a teaching capacity, more than playing).
But I have to say, I've also seen highly skilled jazz players fail to "draw an uneducated audience in". That's no reflection on their playing skills, although I can see it might be a reflection on poor audience communication skills.
Yet again, in that pseudo-Django band, we always managed to "draw uneducated audiences in", because we (at least our frontman) had very good audience skills. I was no Django, needless to say, but they always liked us. (Naturally, it's debatable whether it was the "jazz content" of what we were doing that caught their imagination. I don't imagine we converted many of them into jazz fans, if they weren't already.)
Originally Posted by Reg
-
Originally Posted by Jake Hanlon
-
Originally Posted by Insufferable_Rhythm
well, maybe "song like melody" would be more to the point.
but i think that "lyricism" is descriptive enough.
some people prefer instrumental performance to seem sing-song like, or at least something that approaches it. Busy "blowing" is not to their liking. i've noticed that the less a person has listened to instrumental jazz, the more they have this tendency. (and that's a pretty large group of people).
i dont think that there's any way around this. that is, intensive blowing in a modal context is just not going to be attractive to the average joe or josephine - especially josephine.
so be it.
-
Hey Jon... My naive comment was directed at anyone reading... and many post besides yours... Not the brightest comment... I apologize to anyone offended. (Jon your included).
But one needs to open their ears, eyes and knowledge base, (I'm talking about music), to play jazz... Jake's point about music having a message, also is about the performance. The composition is not the only message... With out jazz performance skills... that message is rarely expressed.
That message thing... I tend to keep music, just what it is... music. It doesn't always need to define, explain or save life.
Reg
-
From a 2006 All About Jazz interview with Sonny Rollins:
"AAJ: Well, to conclude, what advice or guidance do you
have for aspiring young jazz musicians?
SR: Oh, boy, that’s a big question. What you have to
confront if you’re a young gifted musician is what
some people call the “real world.” But your music,
which is the real real world, that comes first. The
world of making a living, putting bread on the table,
you meet a girl and get married, support a family. But
music takes a lot of time and dedication. You run up
against the so-called “real world,” so that’s a big
wall between your aspirations and what you are
actually able to accomplish. If you love music and
think you have some aptitude, then I would just say,
“Do it to the greatest level you can, feel privileged
that you have that gift, and as for the rest, who can
say?”
Being a musician and raising a family are often two
antithetical things. But as far as the music, if you
have the aptitude, the talent, and you love it,
consider yourself blessed that you have that
understanding and love of music in this life. That in
itself is a great blessing. But as far as earning a
living, there’s not much one can say. We live in a
world that’s all about making money and having
things—big cars, big homes—and you’re running into a
conflict. But if you love music, there’s nothing like
it. If you’re gifted and you can play it, I wish you
well, and just continue doing it. But don’t expect
anything, because in the world in which we live,
people who are artists, painters, musicians, writers,
we can’t expect anything in this world. The way the
world is set up, it’s not for us. But it’s not a
negative thing. It’s still a wonderful thing anyway."
-
Sonny knows.
Man, I'd like to just like to sit and talk to him for a half hour...I bet I'd learn a lot.
-
2nd on Sonny gets the last word.
-
I see that some musicians are personally attracted to the intellectually advanced math/logic aspect of modern jazz, and that path challenges, stimulates, and satisfies them as much as other more esoteric facets of the music, and I feel you can hear that in the music. Some folks dig it, some not so much. There is no right or wrong. Jazz musicians don't all have the same goals.
However...I have played some pretty crazy stuff with advanced musicians, creating stuff without an audience that was totally phenomenal, yet it does not hold a candle to the transcendent experience and musical outcome of tapping into the energy created by engaging/capturing the collective consciousness of an audience that involves real communication, where communion with others is the ultimate goal. You can never dismiss the audience and achieve this. This has always been where real jazz happens, not alone in your living room. IMO.
Originally Posted by mr. beaumontLast edited by cosmic gumbo; 10-30-2012 at 03:14 PM.
-
I listen to about an 80/20 split in favor of modern jazz. I dig the old stuff too but feel more of a connection to what guys like Moreno, Kreisberg, Hekselman, Christian Scott and Robert Glasper are doing.
The modern influences appeal to me as they echo the other types of music that I grew up with before getting into jazz. It makes sense to me that jazz musicians would draw on everything that's come before them as opposed to ignoring the last 50 years and trying only to imitate the past.
Just my personal tastes. Good jazz is good jazz, no matter what era (of course 'good' is subjective).
The Hours of Listening
Today, 05:02 AM in Getting Started