Playing in a trio format
Larry Vigneault
background chords, I usually have no difficulty in improvising or
playing whatever comes to mind. The problem I have, and I find it
extremely frustrating, is trying to play a decent solo in a trio format
with just guitar, bass, and drums. It always tends to sound really
empty to me, and I find it difficult to hear the changes in my head at
times. Some tunes are pretty straight forward, but when I get into a
tune with a lot of changes, let's say something like Around Midnight, I
really have a difficult time trying to play an interesting solo while
trying to maintain/imply the context of the chord changes. Like I said,
if there's someone laying down the chords, I have no problem, it's when
you take that element away that things seem to fall apart. What are some
good ways to approach this problem and overcome it?
jimmyb
know where you are
"Larry Vigneault" <lar...@ma.ultranet.com> wrote in message
news:38FED981...@ma.ultranet.com...
Rick Ross
bass and drums...
Larry Vigneault wrote in message <38FED981...@ma.ultranet.com>...
Brent
your improvising. You bass player should be picking up the 1 and the 5
tone.
Brent
Scott Krohn
You could drop them in at places where you might normally breathe.
It can break up you line in a good way.
This can create a pretty full sound without any chording instrument.
Playing and recording this style with a metranome can go a long way
to demonstrate where your playing is at.
If you can generate melody and swing by playing this way, you
should be able to feel good with a trio.
"Larry Vigneault" <lar...@ma.ultranet.com> wrote in message
news:38FED981...@ma.ultranet.com...
Kevin Van Sant
On Thu, 20 Apr 2000 05:34:29 -0700, "Rick Ross"
<roki...@simplyweb.net> wrote in message
<cTCL4.789$VW1...@newsfeed.slurp.net> :
>get a different rhythm section...this is precisely why I went to sequenced
>bass and drums...
>
Yikes ! Rick, that's pretty sad if band in the box is more solid and
pushes you harder than the actual real live musicians you play with
can.
_________________________________________
Kevin Van Sant
Jazz Guitar
www.mindspring.com/~jazure/music.html - to buy my CDs and listen to J'Azure
www.onestopjazz.com - for a comprehensive index of internet jazz resources
www.mindspring.com/~kvansant - for jazz guitar samples and info
Victor Magnani
My problem isn't so much soloing without chords, it's maintaing a
full-sounding texture. Or more precisely keeping in control of the texture in
a trio (Gt-Bs-Dr) context.
I think this is the most challenging format for a guitarist, and truly
separates the "men from the boys". Finding a way to accompany yourself,
supply a full texture and still maintain a coherent solo line is, I find, more
a mental than a technical challenge (though it's a fair amount of that, too).
I've been spending lots of time lately practicing ways to do just this.
The best thing you can do, I think, is to listen to lots and LOTS of piano
trios. Bill Evans above all. Pianists can generate harmony with their left
hand while doing single lines in the right. Guitarists tend to think it's an
either/or situation - single line OR chord. Listening to pianists and the way
they use their left hands will prove instructive. Trying to do piano left
hand voicings (often only root/7th) is one way to fill out the texture. Or
doing 3rd/7th voicings underneath single lines. This will help to state the
harmony (rather than imply it, which is all you can do playing single notes)
and not clutter up the texture too much with big, full, 4 or 5 note "guitar"
chords.
Practice playing all root/7th (2 note) chords on 6th and 4th strings, and 5th
and 3rd strings, (and 4th and 2nd, and 3rd and 1st, though these, for me don't
seem to work unless the melody falls lower than the chords you're going to
play). And also doing 7th/3rd voicing on adjacent strings. For a ii-V-I you
could play (d min) C(fourth str, 10th fret) - F(3rd str, 10th fret), (G7)
B(fourth str, 9th fret) - F(same as before), (C MAJ7) B(same) - E (3rd str,
9th fret). This gives you the top two strings (or bottom) to play single
lines on. I have a good handle on this thing on the fourth-third string, but
then do 5th-4th, 6th-5th, this will open up more range for your solo. What
I've been trying to practice is whenever I hold a long note during a solo, I
try to "punch" a chord underneath, without letting go of the melody note.
I think what you need to make this work is LOTS of stuff in your arsenal. You
need to be able to play full sounding chord-melody type things during your
solos, sort of shout-chorus type stuff (like Wes' last choruses), be able to
"punch" chords, block chord type playing, call and response between the single
note and comping. Pianists with their two fisted approach have an easier time
gainng command of these varied textures, but I think it's possible on guitar,
some guys pull it off quite well. That's whylistening to pianists is so
important, IMHO, to get ideas on ways to vary and build the texture.
There are tons of great guitarists, but only a few sound completely at home in
this type of format. My two favorites are Jim Hall and Ed Bickert. Their
approaches are quite different. Jim doesn't (to my ears) make that single
note/chord distinction. He plays the whole guitar, all the time. He moves
freely back and forth, interspersing chords amidst his single lines. One of
my favorite of his techniques is holding a note up top (first string) and
changing the chord underneath. He has the best command of the texture of a
trio, building tension and release masterfully in the way he uses the whole
instrument.
Ed Bickert may be the most pianistic of guitarists in a trio format. He seems
to me to come closest to a Bill Evans approach (complex voicings, moving inner
lines), especially on older records - trios with Don Thompson and Terry
Clarke, and Paul Desmond quartet records. His voice leading is amazing.
Lots of players, even some of my favorites like Kenny Burrell and Pat Mehteny,
treat the guitar almost like a horn in trios (Pat even says this in the liner
notes to the album he did with Roy Haynes and Dave Holland). This is a
different approach, and just as valid. Listening to the guys mentioned above
just seems more instructive to me in how to texture a trio.
Other guys whose trio playing I especially like are Howard Alden and Lorne
Lofsky. Again, these are guys who use the whole instrument in ways I find
fascinating.
Guys who use the whole instrument well in other contexts are Lenny Breau
(played MORE guitar than anyone I've ever heard) and Gene Bertoncini (my
teacher for 3 years. Great player, even better person. Check out his records
"Jobim - Someone to Light Up My Life" and "Body and Soul"). Also, Joe Beck
did two great duo records with Red Mitchell which I dig a great deal. For a
slightly older approach I like Barney Kessel's records with "The Poll
Winners".
Anybody out there have any other suggestions? Playing trio is far different
from other formats. Most of the time I play with a horn player in the group -
the tunes I write don't tend to fall well on guitar and I need that melody
voice while I provide the harmony. I've been doing more trio playing lately
precisely to address these issues. Even playing solo or duo is different than
trio. Somehow I found those both, though more challenging in their ways, to
be more forgiving formats.
I'd be interested in hearing others opinions and coments and suggestions.
Mark Kleinhaut
"jimmyb" <jbg...@bellatlantic.net> wrote:
> so why don't YOU sometimes play a chord in your improv. That way you
will
> know where you are
That's how I approach it too. Sprinkling chords in not only adds
interest to the solo generally, but also provides your bassist and
drummer with some clear (and sometimes needed) sign-posts of where you
are in the form. If your bassist is solid, the harmony should be
evident all of the time, but if he/she's lost, then they'll just keep
walking until they can find you. This will help them out, which will
enable them to better help you out. Its teamwork. This trio setting
is my favorite because the harmonic possibilites are wide open.
--
Mark Kleinhaut
Info and soundclips available at
www.invisiblemusicrecords.com/Resources/Amphora.html
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Kevin Van Sant
<lar...@ma.ultranet.com> wrote in message
<38FED981...@ma.ultranet.com> :
>When I play in a setting where I have another instrument laying down the
>background chords, I usually have no difficulty in improvising or
>playing whatever comes to mind. The problem I have, and I find it
>extremely frustrating, is trying to play a decent solo in a trio format
>with just guitar, bass, and drums. It always tends to sound really
>empty to me, and I find it difficult to hear the changes in my head at
>times. Some tunes are pretty straight forward, but when I get into a
>tune with a lot of changes, let's say something like Around Midnight, I
>really have a difficult time trying to play an interesting solo while
>trying to maintain/imply the context of the chord changes. Like I said,
>if there's someone laying down the chords, I have no problem, it's when
>you take that element away that things seem to fall apart. What are some
>good ways to approach this problem and overcome it?
While you're getting suggestions of what TO do, let me suggest what
NOT to do. Don't try to fill up that space with tons of notes. Don't
be afraid of space. Space is your friend, but it is a trouble making
friend. It wants to mislead you and tempt you into chasing it all
over. I think a common tendency is for players to start actually
listening to the space and reacting to that (maybe for fear of being
boring) instead of hearing and reacting to the harmony. Try to relax,
let the space be, and hear the harmony in your head (a tune like
'Round Midnight is good to practice this on because it has such
defined harmonic movement) Internalizing the changes makes this all
the more easy to do. The better you know the tune, the easier it is
to hear in your head, the easier it is to relax and play through it.
Rick Ross
rhythm section...the top cats are not available for slugs like me...what you
end up with
typically is a debilitating rhythm section..BIAB is a trade off...you get
perfection in exchange for that "human" feel....for improvement..it's
better...Jimmy's suggestion of inserting your own chords in the mix is a
great idea....but not a solution to the
initial problem of flailing drums and dribbling bass...
Kevin Van Sant wrote in message
<464ufsct538boofju...@4ax.com>...
>
>
>On Thu, 20 Apr 2000 05:34:29 -0700, "Rick Ross"
><roki...@simplyweb.net> wrote in message
><cTCL4.789$VW1...@newsfeed.slurp.net> :
>
>>get a different rhythm section...this is precisely why I went to sequenced
>>bass and drums...
>>
>
>Yikes ! Rick, that's pretty sad if band in the box is more solid and
>pushes you harder than the actual real live musicians you play with
>can.
>
>
Keith Ganz
>On Thu, 20 Apr 2000 06:18:41 -0400, Larry Vigneault
>let the space be, and hear the harmony in your head (a tune like
>'Round Midnight is good to practice this on because it has such
>defined harmonic movement) Internalizing the changes makes this all
>the more easy to do. The better you know the tune, the easier it is
>to hear in your head, the easier it is to relax and play through it.
>
Amen, Kevin. Get comfortable with hearing all that space. I crave
that space and usually sorely miss it when a pianist is filling it all
up. In fact, I love playing duo sessions with the right drummer-- even
more space, more freedom. If everyone in the band can hear the form
and the tune no one needs to state it. (Check out Sonny Rollins or Joe
Henderson trio albums.)
Practice soloing over tunes with just the meteronome (instead of
playalongs) to get used to hearing silence behind you and to hearing
the changes in your head and/or from your lines. This exercise has
many other positive benefits as well.
On the other end, it is quite possible to play chords in the middle of
lines wherever and whenever you want just like a pianist. Take a solo
you like and put a chord underneath each note and learn to play it. 2
or 3 note chords are plenty but 4 or 5 is fine too. This should give
you some ideas for how you can slip in chords with your lines. And, of
course, being familiar enough with the neck and the chords to be able
to play any voicing anywhere on the neck helps too. I use pick and
fingers for this but you can do it with just pick and certainly with
just fingers. Good Luck.
Keith Ganz
_____________________________________________________
Sound clips and info at http://www.mindspring.com/~mushmouth
Jonathan Byrd
play with just don't listen to enough jazz.
If you are "losing the song" when you improvise, it is partly (if not
mostly) the bass player's fault. If you can't hear the changes in the
bass player's line, he/she is playing the wrong notes. Even though I'm
not a seasoned jazz player, I have been forced to educate almost every
bass player I've ever played with. I spell it out for them: "This chord
here is really important to the harmonic structure of the song. If you
fail to play a root, third, or fifth on beat one of this measure, our
listeners will miss a crucial landmark in the song. Without those
landmarks our listeners will become lost, and our music will sound noisy
and confusing to them." They usually get the point.
The drummer can help, too. My favorite drummers all place landmarks by
altering their basic rhythm pattern at crucial points in the song, like
the end of a section, or at the turnaround for another chorus.
--
Jonathan Byrd Campus Box 8039
j...@isu.edu Idaho State University
(208) 282-4256 Pocatello, Idaho, USA 83209
Chris Goodchild
some where that at one point in his development, he would spend around 6 hours a
day playing along with the sonny rollins live at the village vanguard album, which
is a trio. this would explain his horn like approach to the trio. I personally
utilize this approach to trio playing. However, after recently catching kurt
rosenwinkel play with mark turner, i noticed that he was utilizing guide tones and
clusters in his improv, to add the comp feel. it was very interesting, and its
something i'm working on now myself
Larry Vigneault
does lie in the rhythm section as people have noted. Some great suggestions
here so far. If the rhythm section isn't cutting it, then when I leave some
space, it's just not happening, so I tend to want to play more. I think
Jonathan sums it up with his statement that the cats he plays with just
don't listen to enough jazz. I'm experiencing the same thing, mainly because
it seems to be so difficult to find good players who want to play jazz where
I live. It's almost like a hobby for most of the players I know, and they
seem to think that they can dabble in it at will. Thanks for all the
suggestions so far.
Clay Moore
Frankly I have a very clear idea of how I want to direct the harmony, and I
most pianist's comping to be distracting. The ticket for me was getting
really secure in the forms of the tunes, which came from a lot of
practicing. I think that's just a necessary step, to play a lot on the forms
until they become second nature. When I practice I work out mostly with
Band-in-a-Box, because I never have to worry about it losing the time, so no
matter how far away I go I can find my way back. At least half the time I
turn the keyboard off and practice with just bass and drums. That's my two
cents.
Clay
Larry Vigneault <lar...@ma.ultranet.com> wrote in message
news:38FED981...@ma.ultranet.com...
J Donovan
ideas established during formative years.
BTW, his long awaited songbook was released by Hal Leonard and it has 167 leadsheets to
play with.
jd
Paul Craig Sanwald
: utilize this approach to trio playing. However, after recently catching kurt
: rosenwinkel play with mark turner, i noticed that he was utilizing guide tones and
: clusters in his improv, to add the comp feel. it was very interesting, and its
I saw Kurt at small's with just a bass and drums a while back, and noticed
that he's *very* good at slipping in chords in a very pianistic fashion.
Maybe this is because he's a pretty good piano player from what I hear.
A friend of mine that plays tenor says he likes Kurt's piano playing better than his
guitar playing.
--paul
icarusi
> Well, I do try to slip in chords to help out. I think a lot of the
problem
> does lie in the rhythm section as people have noted. Some great
suggestions
> here so far. If the rhythm section isn't cutting it, then when I
leave some
> space, it's just not happening, so I tend to want to play more. I
think
> Jonathan sums it up with his statement that the cats he plays with
just
> don't listen to enough jazz. I'm experiencing the same thing, mainly
because
> it seems to be so difficult to find good players who want to play
jazz where
> I live. It's almost like a hobby for most of the players I know, and
they
> seem to think that they can dabble in it at will. Thanks for all the
> suggestions so far.
Would it be worth sitting out completely for some sections, at
rehearsal maybe, so your rhythm section get used to carrying the song
reasonably well alone without you. If they can't do that for some
period, then it's always likely to fall apart, if you're always the
one
anchoring the rhythm.
One thing worth doing is playing rhythm interchanges with the drummer,
where he's aware of this, so that you concentrate more on syncing your
syncopations, so to speak, and because it's a rhythm thing it doesn't
need to be so melodically and/or harmonically complex for the rhythm
interaction to be highlighted.
Icarusi
--
remove the 00 to reply
Jim Kangas
I've only really started playing regularly with other people in the
last few years, so when I first tried playing with just a bass player
it was definitely challenging. I found that single line things sounded
too thin (and also as someone said - you really need to effectively
outline the changes more than you would normally), and chord melody
things were a little too lush to play at tempo for me. So I've been
working on the in between things -- such as using those 3/7 type
voicings in a call/response mode, or other two/three note chords. I'll
actually go so far as to say that in this situation I really do have
to have the tunes pretty well memorized -- it's difficult for me to do
this and read the chart at the same time.
That said, I really think it's just the coolest format. I got into
jazz from listening to Kessel, Pass, Lenny, etc., and I realize that
this is one thing that most of those guys have in common.
-Jim
Thomas F Brown
Larry Vigneault <lar...@ma.ultranet.com> wrote:
>When I play in a setting where I have another instrument laying down the
>background chords, I usually have no difficulty in improvising or
>playing whatever comes to mind. The problem I have, and I find it
>extremely frustrating, is trying to play a decent solo in a trio format
>with just guitar, bass, and drums. It always tends to sound really
>empty to me, and I find it difficult to hear the changes in my head at
>times. Some tunes are pretty straight forward, but when I get into a
>tune with a lot of changes, let's say something like Around Midnight, I
>really have a difficult time trying to play an interesting solo while
>trying to maintain/imply the context of the chord changes. Like I said,
>if there's someone laying down the chords, I have no problem, it's when
>you take that element away that things seem to fall apart. What are some
>good ways to approach this problem and overcome it?
Practice playing single-note solos by yourself at home, with no chord
backing. Outline the changes with arpeggios. Concentrate on connecting
the arpeggios smoothly, using guide tones when appropriate. You can
also toss in a lot of the standard bebop licks (the ones that bebop
composers embed in the heads of their compositions). These tend to
sound ii V changes fairly obviously, and often use guide tone lines
in creative ways.
Tunes with lots of key changes are good for this kind of practice,
like Stella, Giant Steps, All The Things, etc. Tunes that tend to
stick in one key with a lot of I vi ii V movement are less useful
for this kind of practice.
I don't claim to be a great jazz soloist, but I am good at making
the changes sound in my solos, and this is how I learned to do it.
The other good thing about this approach is that it gets you away
from scales and into different kinds of melodic movement.
On the other hand, who says you have to imply the chord changes?
What's wrong with less obvious harmonic approaches?
Thomas F Brown
><roki...@simplyweb.net> wrote in message
><cTCL4.789$VW1...@newsfeed.slurp.net> :
>
>>get a different rhythm section...this is precisely why I went to sequenced
>>bass and drums...
>>
>
>Yikes ! Rick, that's pretty sad if band in the box is more solid and
>pushes you harder than the actual real live musicians you play with
>can.
I'd rather play with beginners than BIAB, not that there's anything
wrong with BIAB. But it can't compare to real people, even if it
does have more chops than they do.
Thomas F Brown
Victor Magnani <vmagn...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
>Ed Bickert may be the most pianistic of guitarists in a trio format. He seems
>to me to come closest to a Bill Evans approach (complex voicings, moving inner
>lines), especially on older records - trios with Don Thompson and Terry
>Clarke, and Paul Desmond quartet records. His voice leading is amazing.
There are also two Bickert duo albums that I know of. One with Don Thompson
on bass; one with Rob McConnell on bone. The highest energy Bickert
playing I've heard is a quartet he did with Ruby Braff.
>Guys who use the whole instrument well in other contexts are Lenny Breau
>(played MORE guitar than anyone I've ever heard) and Gene Bertoncini (my
>teacher for 3 years. Great player, even better person. Check out his records
>"Jobim - Someone to Light Up My Life" and "Body and Soul"). Also, Joe Beck
>did two great duo records with Red Mitchell which I dig a great deal. For a
>slightly older approach I like Barney Kessel's records with "The Poll
>Winners".
I love the Joe Beck albums you mentioned, but he's a block chord guy,
and doesn't sound much more modern to me than Barney. Maybe his
harmonic sense is more modern, but he's playing Barney's voicings,
with an awful lot of drop-2 and variants on that. His playing on these
records is very much in a Wes/Barney harmonic style, except in a
duo situation.
>Anybody out there have any other suggestions?
No, you mentioned all the same guys I would have, except Ron Eschete,
Joe Diorio, John Scofield, and early George Van Eps. Grant Green is
a good example of how you can play in a trio and not use chords at all.
I'd like to add that Barney Kessel basically invented the modern
jazz guitar trio sound, and he's a wonderful resource to listen
to in that format. It's amazing how much can be traced back to
him.
Also, that Jazz Guitarist computer midi program that Oliver Gannon
made is a great way for advanced intermediate guitarists to learn
this kind of thing. You can listen to Oliver, and watch the notes
on a fingerboard on the computer screen. You can slow it down if
there are licks you want to cop--and there will be, if you like
that older Kessel style of trio playing.
Thomas F Brown
Jim Kangas <kan...@tiac.net> wrote:
>I've only really started playing regularly with other people in the
>last few years, so when I first tried playing with just a bass player
>it was definitely challenging. I found that single line things sounded
>too thin (and also as someone said - you really need to effectively
>outline the changes more than you would normally), and chord melody
>things were a little too lush to play at tempo for me. So I've been
>working on the in between things -- such as using those 3/7 type
>voicings in a call/response mode, or other two/three note chords.
Some folks have been suggesting that big fat chords are inappropriate
for duo or trio settings. I think they work fine, if you let them
sustain and ring. It's just when you punch them or try to harmonize
a fast-moving melody that they get unwieldy. But slowly strum a five
or six string chord and let it ring for a couple of bars while the
rhythm section works out underneath it, and you've got a beautiful
texture. Or do chord melody by harmonizing melody notes that sustain
with fat chords, while using smaller voicings or single notes on
the fast-moving sections. There's a place for all voicings.
I disagree that single note lines necessarily sound too thin in
a g/b/d trio. Grant Green plays almost nothing but in his trios,
and it works. So do Kenny Burrell and...that guy from New Jersey
who sounds kind of like Grant Green and has some records that are
popular in Japan whose name I'm spacing at the moment.
Rick Ross
Thomas F Brown wrote in message <8door3$1lcj7a$1...@news.jhu.edu>...
David Moss
"Mike Ellenberger" wrote...
> Lots of good advice here. I play with my own trio weekly and love it
> for all of the reasons everyone mentioned (space, total freedom, space,
> no clutter). I don't know if anyone mentioned it but when you play
> single note lines they have to be harmonically STRONG. Someone
> listening should be able to hear you playing the changes. It's a little
> different when you have a keyboard playing the changes. If a keyboard
> is providing the harmony you can get away with less substantial
> noodling. Take away the the keyboard and you're naked and
> you better be saying something.
Having heard Mike's trio, I can testify that whatever he's doing,
he's doing it right. In fact, until reading this post it never occurred
to me to question where the chords I thought I was hearing were
coming from - even on tunes that I was hearing for the first time.
rainman
piano style; however the issue really is how interesting are
your lines. It's really a perception thing. Rollins and Trane
for instance dropped the chord instrument because they felt
hemmed in by it. It's a particular texture- like a line drawing
vs. a painting. I think the self-consciousness provoking the
frustration- "this sounds too thin" might also be one's
perception that there's not enough happening in the music. It
simply that you're forced to contemplate the quality of the line
more- there's no where to hide. This can be a good thing. One
has to be careful about consciously outlining changes too. There
are many different approaches that work as many posters have
mentioned. Jim Hall "Live" from 1970 (?) is a great example of
how to solve the issue. Jim Hall plays motivicly(sic) and with
space. When you throw in chords you have to make them sound like
ideas too. The reason for this is you don't want to break a good
line to play a chord. As a piano player. I know that sometimes
I'm leaning on my left hand to fill out the picture. At times I
practice soloing with just the right making sure that the line
is happening enough and that I'm not just comping and reacting.
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
peatea
I started playing as a trio but got into larger groups for many years.
When I went back to playing in a trio, not only had the music changed but
my ability and knowledge grew. At first I found myself much too busy. I
felt that I had to fill in every space, keep the progression going and
continuously play melodies, harmonies and solos. There aren't many
guitarists who can do all of this at the same time. I eventually learned
to play with my group. The bass player changed his style from playing a
percussive "root, five, seven, octave" line to playing harmonic lines.
When I played single note solos he would be playing harmony.
Much like Stanley Clarke's sound. Then the drummer carefully tuned his
drums so that they would create another harmonic tone. The result was
excellent. But all in all playing in a trio is hard work. Today I prefer
jamming where I can relax and improvise freely.
Pt
Kevin Van Sant
Brown) wrote in message <8dopl1$1lep8f$1...@news.jhu.edu> :
>
>I'd like to add that Barney Kessel basically invented the modern
>jazz guitar trio sound, and he's a wonderful resource to listen
>to in that format. It's amazing how much can be traced back to
>him.
Here here !
Victor Magnani
> As mentioned a lot can be gained by throwing in comp chords a la
> piano style; however the issue really is how interesting are
> your lines. It's really a perception thing. Rollins and Trane
> for instance dropped the chord instrument because they felt
> hemmed in by it. It's a particular texture- like a line drawing
> vs. a painting.
Good point. I think something guitarists in trios need to be wary of, and this
is the basis of my looking for different textures as outlined in my earlier
posts, is that TOO MUCH single line playing (without chords) during EVERY (or
almost every) solo contributes to a monotonous texture. That's what I think the
challenge of trio playing is, varying the texture to avoid monotony. Trane, in
particular, would have McCoy drop out to build a certain type of tension, get
into a dialogue with Elvin. Then when McCoy would re-enter it was this
beautiful release. Playing without the piano was a NEW texture in context, and
sounded fresh after all that had come before.
It's easy in a guitar trio to get caught up in your lines (single notes) and
lose sight of the texture. The Jim Hall record you mention is a great example
of someone using the whole instrument to control the texture of the band. It's
hard to do on guitar, and Jim is a master at it (listen to the way he answers
his single lines with chords during the beginning of his solo in Angel Eyes, and
then, I think it's his last bridge, the way he holds out notes on top while
punching chords underneath -damn I love that record!). Of course, he learned
from the master, Bill Evans, don't you think? That particular rhythm section
(Don Thompson/Terry Clarke) is the closest to the "classic" Evans trio
(Motian/LaFaro) in terms of texture and interplay, especially on records during
the 70's with Jim or Ed Bickert.
Varying the texture is what I'm after, to avoid monotony and keep the audience
from getting fatigued. I think that, subconscioucly at least, an audience will
get bored if the texture stays the same all night. Many things go into this,
choice of tunes, keys (play a whole set in Bb and watch everyone, including the
band, start to fidget), grooves (throw in a waltz, a bossa, a samba, a funk
tune), some unison heads (Scrapple Form the Apple on JH Live), some tunes with
nice arrangements instead of just blowing on changes, do a solo or duet (how
about a duet with the drums? Again, JH had the bass drop out often and plays a
chorus or two during a tune with just drums).
The thing about guys like Jim Hall, Ed Bickert, Lorne Lofsky, is that they can
control the texture so well in a loose structure. Their performances don't seem
overly mapped out before hand, yet they always stay on top of the texture.
(This may be more appearance than reality. A few times I would go see Jim Hall
2 or 3 nights in a row when he would do a week somewhere like the Vanguard, and
it was fascinating to hear him build his interpretation of the tune over time.
I remember him playing Funny Valentine and really hearing it develop from one
night to the next. Then, a year or two later he records it and you hear where
it finally wound up. Fascinating).
My point about listening to pianists is that they make better use of the tools
at their disposal than the average guitarist.
Forgive me for going on so long, this is a topic I've been spending LOTS of time
thinking about lately.
Victor
Jonathan Byrd
>
> On the other hand, who says you have to imply the chord changes?
> What's wrong with less obvious harmonic approaches?
A good point, and I think there's nothing inherently wrong with taking a
less obvious approach. Having said that, my feeling is that taking a
nonobvious approach is not legitimate if one does not first understand
what the obvious approach is. I guess I have an "old school" mentality
that says you have to learn the rules before you can make intelligent
decisions about how and when to break them.
When my trio stinks the place up with a tune, I can count on the drummer
coming up with all kinds of elaborate ways to punch up the song
rhythmically. I patiently listen to the suggestions (some of which are
quite good), and then say, "Those are good ideas, but first we need to
make this song sound good when we play it simple and basic. Then we can
think about adding fancy stuff."
I swear that some bass players I know are afraid to play a root or a
fifth in a jazz song. I wonder if they think those notes are just too
pedestrian for jazz, and they need to impress somebody by playing a
demolished seventeenth. I'd prefer to hear nothing but roots and fifths
from the bass player, rather than some distantly related notes that make
me wonder whether he is superimposing Coltrane changes, or has misread
the key signature.
Jz514
youre soloing. I play with a trio and a duo (bass and guitar). I'm getting to
like the duo better for its intimacy.
Players like Ed Bickert and even Jimmy Bruno play the changes. You can hear the
changes when they play so the bass player can play off the guitar.If youre
playing more chromatically it is much harder to identify the tune's structure.
Andy D.
Joey Goldstein
Jonathan Byrd wrote:
>
>
> I swear that some bass players I know are afraid to play a root or a
> fifth in a jazz song. I wonder if they think those notes are just too
> pedestrian for jazz, and they need to impress somebody by playing a
> demolished seventeenth. I'd prefer to hear nothing but roots and fifths
> from the bass player, rather than some distantly related notes that make
> me wonder whether he is superimposing Coltrane changes, or has misread
> the key signature.
The last guy who should be fucking around with the harmony is the bass
player. Only young eager inexperienced bass players really do this in my
experience. The ones who keep doing it never get to be older experienced
bass players! The often become arrangers though. <g>
--
Regards:
Joey Goldstein
Guitarist/Jazz Recording Artist/Teacher
Home Page: http://webhome.idirect.com/~joegold
Email: <joegold AT idirect DOT com>
Thomas F Brown
rainman <yran60N...@ny.freei.net.invalid> wrote:
>As mentioned a lot can be gained by throwing in comp chords a la
>piano style
And yet, there are any number of great pianists who frequently blow
chorus after chorus with nothing but single-note lines in the right hand:
Keith Jarrett, Paul Bley, Bill Evans, etc.
Thomas F Brown
Jz514 <jz...@aol.com> wrote:
>I agree with Mike. The bass player should be able to hear the changes when
>Players like Ed Bickert and even Jimmy Bruno play the changes. You can hear the
Whether or how much you emphasize the changes is a stylistic choice.
Jimmy Bruno
you have to create lines that make the harmony visible to the ear. After a while
this can get monotonous. The other side of the coin goes like this: you repeat a
note or a
Thomas F Brown wrote:
riff and hope the listener can hear the changes in his head coloring your line.
With a piano this becomes quite evident. You can try this effect your self in a
dramatic way. Play the note "C" on the top string 8th fret. Put a C triad under it
then move the triad up in half steps. YOu will hear the color of the note "C"
changing. IN a more subtle way that is what happens when you improvise over
changes. Sometimes you outline them, play outside of them, super-impose over them
or let the line be colored by them
Joe Finn
Jimmy Bruno wrote:
> two things are happening at once when you play over changes. If there is no piano
> you have to create lines that make the harmony visible to the ear.
I'd like to put in a good word for someone who I think is a very strong trio player:
Fred Fried. He is highly deserving of greater recognition. He plays a seven string
strung up with nylon strings and is able to achieve a great range of texture and
expression. He combines single lines with chords and can also improvise counter point.
His two CD's feature Steve LaSpina and Gary Johnson.
joe
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
jimmyb
"Jimmy Bruno" <jbg...@bellatlantic.net> wrote in message
news:3900B4C2...@bellatlantic.net...
> two things are happening at once when you play over changes. If there is
no piano
Chris Goodchild
and I were blown away by his ability. HOwever, I still enjoy is guitar playing better,
but I guess I might be biased.
Ybotha
player refused to play roots, fifths or 3rds. On the first break I asked him
what was going on, and he said that that was the old style of bass playing,
and his style didn't use that way of playing. I told him that it didn't sound
good and he got bugged and accused me of being old fashioned.
I could see this was going nowhere so I just thought "fuck it" and tried
to play as many chords as possible. After 4 hours of this I started to get used
to it and actually had a great moment in "Recorda Me"(Joe Henderson tune) where
it felt like we were "talking to each other" musically, with no one laying down
any semblance of a bass line. By the time the gig ended, I felt like maybe we
had hit on something new, but I never worked with him again (Thank God!).
There is something lost when you have no chord player behind you- no matter
how great you think you sound, the listener will get bored with the sameness
and the abstractness of the sound. However, when you do add chords to it, it
can sometimes break your flow- Wes Montgomery never played without some kind of
chordal accompaniment behind him. This is an interesting subject- I've got to
get off now, but I'll add more later.
e_meth
like you. But about the emptyness, it's not a big problem..
because if you try to improve from your heart and feel the
chord,'slow but sure' you'll find the ideas.
I'm sure people will understand your phrase and story.
Just try to feel and remind the song+chord.. and pratice
the song with ballad tempo. Relax and play it by your heart
when you play on the stage.. OK!!
cheers!
-endah-
* Sent from AltaVista http://www.altavista.com Where you can also find related Web Pages, Images, Audios, Videos, News, and Shopping. Smart is Beautiful
Bob Valentine
>utilize this approach to trio playing. However, after recently catching kurt
>rosenwinkel play with mark turner, i noticed that he was utilizing guide tones and
>clusters in his improv, to add the comp feel. it was very interesting, and its
KR's self-comping is definately masterful. East Coast Love Affair (live trio
recording) really displays it, with little punches at different dynamic levels
that really feel like a "left hand" or "another player".
Bob Valentine
Keith Ganz
> There is something lost when you have no chord player behind you- no matter
>how great you think you sound, the listener will get bored with the sameness
>and the abstractness of the sound. However, when you do add chords to it, it
>can sometimes break your flow- Wes Montgomery never played without some kind of
>chordal accompaniment behind him. This is an interesting subject- I've got to
>get off now, but I'll add more later.
I BEG to differ. These days 99% of the audience has never heard Autumn
Leaves and to them the changes to standards are just as abstract and
unfamilar as anything else. With the rare exceptions of older people
who know the tunes and young musicians, the audience absolutely does
not need to hear the chord changes being outlined by either the
soloist or the bassist because (a) they aren't even aware that there
are chord changes or what that means, and (b) that's not what they
listen to in music.
The typical non-jazz enthusiast audience (which is usually the case)
responds to elements like dynamics, texture, color, contrast, vibe,
mood, melody-- i.e., the elements of rock, pop and classical music
that they grew up listening to and elements too often neglected in
jazz-- and interaction and spontanaeity- the special qualities of
good jazz that draw them into the moment with the band. Playing the
changes or playing some hip lines is something jazz musicians get
caught up in but the audience for the most part couldn't care less
about since they don't know the game of changes and lines, they aren't
familiar with the context- the bebop language is just as foreign to
them as anything else.
You refer to the audience getting bored with the sameness and
abstractness of the sound-- there is nothing more boring and
'sameness-y' to a typical non-jazz audience than the bass player
walking quarters, the drummer going ding-ding-a-ding and the soloist
playing eight notes. And to them it is usually still melodically and
harmonically abstract to go along with the extremely unvaried context.
Of course, 'non-changes' playing can just as easily be done in an
undynamic way which is boring in the same ways and, of course,
straight ahead can be done in a way that IS dynamic, and, of course,
if a real straight ahead band is REALLY grooving and the soloist is
REALLY compelling the audience will respond anyway. The point is,
straight ahead or abstract makes no difference-- the audience hears
the big picture- the sound of the music as a whole. So many jazz
musicians get hung up in the details that only musicians pay attention
to and completely neglect all the elements of music that the audience
responds to-- they completely miss the big picture.
Jazz musicians often speak condescendingly of the audience- that they
are ignorant because they don't get it. Or, they make the mistake of
playing down to what they think the audience will get. I have been
shown time and time and time again by non-jazz audiences that if the
band is really connected and there is a vibe and a mood and color and
dynamics and texture and melody (not bebop licks, MELODY), and the
band is letting the audience in on the creative process, *AND* the
band is really playing some honest music that they love to play, the
audience will 'get it' no matter how abstract or out or in or
old-timey or modern it is.
This has been proven to me over and over in so many different
contexts-- playing totally free trio with no bass player at a college
bar or a beach bar, playing sparce, abstract group improv at a Smooth
Jazz concert, playing abstract counterpoint sax/guitar duo with no
chords or bass notes in a restaurant, playing totally straight ahead
at a middle school, playing totally abstract at a middle school-- if
it is real and honest and happening and organic, any audience will get
it.
In my expericence, the question usually isn't 'Does the audience get
it?', it's "Does the band get it?"
Keith Ganz
_____________________________________________________
Sound clips and info at http://www.mindspring.com/~mushmouth
Jimmy Bruno
the music.
Keith Ganz
>The only thing a non-musician audience reacts to is the feel and the sincerity of
>the music.
>
Exactly. Thanks for the short version.
Jeff Gower
> The only thing a non-musician audience reacts to is the feel and the
sincerity of
> the music.
I don't know if they can always discern the level of "sincerity" in the
performance or not, but they sure connect with the "feel", yes. Many
people who are not musicians talk to me about such vague qualities as
"feel", "mood", "flow", "vibe", and even "swing". Haha. Bottom line is,
if the music FEELS good to them, it IS good to them - forget about
complexity, intricacy, subtlety, and yes, "sincerity", all those qualities
we strive after so hard - what they want is "feel". Make 'em feel the
music, and you've won 'em over. For example, when a small group like a
guitar/singer duo can actually get restaurant patrons up dancing, you're
there. ;-)
Jeff
--
Jeff Gower - Jazz/Classical Guitarist
http://www.jeffgower.com
John S. Clifford
I thought the whole point of practicing and learning all of the skills of the
musician's craft was to be able to produce that "feeling" in the audience - even
if the audience is a group of other musicians or only yourself. Is there some
higher purpose that I'm not aware of?
John C.
Pat Smith
nine standards and one original, the second had six originals and four standards.
And even though we (the band) thought the second one was better in every way, guess
which one all the families and friends liked... the one with the familiar melodies.
The most requested tune we play is Mercy Mercy Mercy which we play as a two chord
jam fest and the "normal people" love it because it's easy to understand. Even my
wife always tell's me how important the melody is and she's right.
This is a great thread, thanks to all of you I'm learning lots
Pat
Jeff Gower
<jcl...@mediaone.net> wrote:
> I thought the whole point of practicing and learning all of the skills of the
> musician's craft was to be able to produce that "feeling" in the
audience - even
> if the audience is a group of other musicians or only yourself. Is there some
> higher purpose that I'm not aware of?
I won't get into "higher purposes" or the various reasons people are
musicians. That would lead nowhere. I was just trying to suggest a
reason why (I'll use a random example here) Ottmar Liebert sells more CDs
and draws a larger audience than Gene Bertoncini.
Notice that I didn't say this was a GOOD thing. ;-)
Conjecturally yours,
jbd...@my-deja.com
Larry Vigneault <lar...@ma.ultranet.com> wrote:
> When I play in a setting where I have another instrument laying down
> the background chords, I usually have no difficulty in improvising or
> playing whatever comes to mind. The problem I have, and I find it
> extremely frustrating, is trying to play a decent solo in a trio
> format with just guitar, bass, and drums. It always tends to sound
> really empty to me, and I find it difficult to hear the changes in my
> head at times. Some tunes are pretty straight forward, but when I get
> into a tune with a lot of changes, let's say something like Around
> Midnight, I really have a difficult time trying to play an
> interesting solo while trying to maintain/imply the context of the
> chord changes. Like I said, if there's someone laying down the
> chords, I have no problem, it's when you take that element away that
> things seem to fall apart. What are some good ways to approach this
> problem and overcome it?
>
>
Solo guitar.
Practice playing *all* the songs you perform with your trio in the Joe
Pass-ish chord-melody, solo-guitar style. *Not just the melody.*
Improvise on the form at length. Follow the changes closely and play
*in time*. This forces you to imply and/or directly state all the
changes for yourself, while soloing at the same time. At any moment,
you (and any listener that knows the tune well) should know exactly
where you are in the chord progression.
This is essentially what you need to do in a trio setting, but not even
as much. If you can make it float by yourself, it's even easier with
the bass and drums.
You might want to try, at least for now, avoiding long single note
passages. Force yourself to *stop playing like a saxophone* and insert
chords, octaves or double stops. A lot of times, just a simple double
stop or two in the middle of a long single note passage might add just
that little bit needed to fill things out. Or try playing a whole
eight bar section with *only* chords, or only double stops.
Listen to some piano trios and how the piano player comps for himself,
and try to translate some of that to guitar. Piano trios rarely ever
lack "fullness" because the pianist is accompanying himself. It can be
done (to a degree) on guitar.
JBD
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Bob Valentine
>If you are "losing the song" when you improvise, it is partly (if not
>mostly) the bass player's fault.
No, it is your fault and yours alone. If you can play a song solo, then
you should be able to keep the song going with any parallel noise activity.
>If you can't hear the changes in the
>bass player's line, he/she is playing the wrong notes.
Don't agree to this either.
I believe the issue to making a guitar trio full is to recognize that it
can't be "me and them", treating the bass and drums as if they are responsible
for the song while the "soloist" gets to go nuts. It is everyones
responsibility to occasionally define the sections, the important harmonies,
the important "feel changes", etc... If the material is tricky, or the playing
has gotten sufficiently ambiguous, then it is everyones responsiblity to help
out with finding the barlines, the top, etc...
But I like looser, free-er sounding trios, Keith Jarrett Standards trio is
my model these days. That may not be everyones model.
Regarding educating bass players regarding important chords/landmarks, it
is most often going to be the bass players job, but if the music has put
them in a different place right then, theres no reason why the guitar or
drum can't do it. Everyone should know the song.
Similarly regarding drummers defining the sections/turnarounds nicely, yes,
the drummer can do it, and it can be very difficult if there are "feel
changes" and the drummer is not being really clear about them. But there
is no reason why a soloist should not define a turnaround. If you play
multiple choruses and don't do that, then your solo is probably going
to stall badly (the "third A" syndrome, if you don't define the
turnaround on an AABA tune, then the third A that occurs, actually the
second in the form, sounds awkward and is where players often lose
the form).
Everyone should know the song, everyone should be able to play the song.
Bob Valentine
Bob Valentine
>Jimmy Bruno <jbg...@bellatlantic.net> wrote:
>
>>The only thing a non-musician audience reacts to is the feel and the sincerity of
>>the music.
>>
>
>
Thanks for the long version too, it was a keeper.
Bob Valentine
Kent Burnside
hear.
For example, the audience at an upscale restaurant seems to connect with
songs they recognize; unfortunately, as someone has pointed out in this
thread, that connection occurs almost exclusively among older patrons if you
happen to be playing standards. The audience at a banquet or corporate
reception might respond primarily to a sound that you create--i.e., pleasant
audio "wallpaper" that fills in the background when the conversations lag.
(Hey, I hate this aspect of these gigs too, but work is work, and I can play
the music I like best [standards]; I prefer to think of these as well-paid
practice.)
It's primarily in a club or concert setting that you really get an audience
connecting with what you're doing as a creative artist. Even there, though,
audiences can be hard to understand. An audience might seem barely to
notice a beautiful or unusual long melodic line, but yet will cheer on a
player repeating the same three-note riff throughout a chorus of the blues.
We need to be thankful for all these audiences, however much we might want
to play only for the last type. The sad reality of the marketplace is that
you can make more money playing for audiences who aren't listening that
closely; however, the upside of that reality is that you can often satisfy
these audiences without compromising the music, and that's worth a lot.
Personally, I'd rather play standards for a corporate party where no one's
listening than play lounge or country music for the most attentive group in
the world.
Kent Burnside
----------
In article <390345c9...@news.mindspring.com>, mush...@mindspring.com
(Keith Ganz) wrote:
Kevin Van Sant
If I wanted to show someone the "Art of the Trio" I would play for
them Ahmad Jamal's "live at the Pershing"
On 25 Apr 2000 00:56:59 GMT, ybo...@aol.com (Ybotha) wrote in message
<20000424205659...@ng-bg1.aol.com> :
>It cracks me up when pianists make recordings entitled "The Art of the Trio".
>Everytime they play it's usually a trio, even if they're playing in a sextet or
>even big band.
> However, when a guitarist does it, it really is an art. The main problem
>here is fast tempos. With a drummer, it's made a whole lot easier; if there's
>a trainwreck you can usually find One again if the drummer has some pity for
>you, but I've worked with enough drummers who couldn't give a shit about group
>communication and just want to play Elvin Jones polyrhythms all night, to know
>that a sensitive player is few and far between.
> There's still the problem of comping at tempos at or above half note = 160.
>A player like Jimmy Raney rarely played chords when blowing at those tempos and
>as a result could sound like a bunch of noise if you couldn't follow the
>changes, melody, or form.
> Joe Pass solved the problem on "Intercontinental", but I haven't heard it in
>so long I forget what he did.
> One great solution I've always used is to use pedal point basses to delineate
>the form. There are some tunes this works so good on it makes you want to cum
>in your pants. Of course I'm not gonna tell you what tunes I've worked this out
>on cause that's my little secret: )but a good example is the one everyone
>knows-"I'll Remember April". This at least gives the listener a breather.
> However, when it comes to comping for yourself at a fast tempo, it can't
>help but break the flow in your solo if you're blowing single-line sixteenth
>notes. The only guy I've ever heard capable of maintaining the flow in that
>situation was Lenny Breau. The guy deserved a freaking medal or something for
>achieving that!
> Wayne Krantz sounds like he's near that level, but I've never heard him play
>straight ahead stuff so it's hard to tell. Again, I'm not saying there are
>literally hundreds of players that don't sound good in that situation- just
>that the only guy who could bring it to the level of a great jazz pianist like
>Bill Evans, Keith Jarret, McCoy Tyner, Phineas Newborn,etc. was Lenny Breau.
> On the other hand, there are masters like Jim Hall, Ed Bickert, Barney
>Kessell, Ralph Towner, Geo. Van Eps, and Joe Pass who can play fast tempos and
>sound great without having to resort to constant streams of 16th notes, by
>using space nicely, but I'm just concentrating on that aspect of jazz here, so
>don't start preaching about that stuff to me. I'm a believer already in that
>type of playing. There's still alot more to be said on this subject, but I
>think I should stop now.
Kevin Van Sant
Ybotha
Keith Ganz
Slyce7475
>in
>so long I forget what he did.
Just got my copy (import) from Amazon.Com two days ago and I love it!
"Intercontinental" was one of the first Jazz Guitar recordings I acquired back
in the early seventies and thanks to an earlier posting to this newsgroup I
have found it once more. Another early acquisition was an album called "Swing
It Lightly" by Django Reinhardt. It was actually a project where some french
guitarists took Django's guitar parts and rerecorded the backing tracks. Anyone
know if this recording is still available and where I might find it?
Finduhbayz
I remember that album and especially liked the arrangement of "Night And Day".
The album reminded me of George Barnes' "Guitars Galore" album.
Ybotha
in a situation without any chordal instruments behind him. Even when he did
trio playing, he used Melvin Rhyne rather than a bass player.
I think he was thinking of what sounded solid musically, rather than using
a chord instrument as a crutch. Johnny Smith,early Tal Farlow and Jimmy Raney,
etc. all did the same thing.
Of course, playing professionally you don't have a choice sometimes, and
you're lucky nowadays to even get a drummer in a guitar trio gig. It just makes
more sense musically to have a chordal approach (Ed Bickert, Jim Hall
etc..)rather than just playing single line all the time.
However, even the best chordal players of today, Howard Alden and others,
seem to lack that fire that a great jazz player should have. Which is not to
say that they lack it, but are forced to play differently to make a chordless
situation work. The alternative unfortunately is that we can blow the shit out
of a tune, and know that it sounded great at the time, but when we hear the
playback, it's just not the same as we heard it in our heads because we were
hearing the changes aurally. Then, to expect listeners to dig it when they
don't even know the tune...
I have to admit, when I hear a guitarist playing a tune I don't know, and
then blowing on it with no changes behind him, it's difficult to understand
what's going on the first time I hear it. To me, this presents a big problem we
have when performing. A good example of this is Pat Metheny's recording of
ATTYA on Q.and A. I hated this version when I first heard it and didn't even
give it a second listening. Then last night I heard his version of ATTYA with
Jim Hall and thought he blew the shit out of the tune! What's the difference?
Jim Hall comping.
I know that you have more freedom without a chordal player, and I never use
one except when I'm forced to on club dates, but the basic problem still
remains.
My solution is to invent a device that we can control with our feet that we
can comp with. Of course I'll never be able to make it cause I'm a mechanical
incompetent, but that's my solution.
I know someone's gonna suggest pre-recorded tapes you can use, but you might
as well chuck it all away and buy a juke box. That repulses me to no end.
Well, like a good case of diarreah, or enema, I think I've finally said my
fill on this topic and will try to break the prozac in half from now on, like
Dave Letterman advises.
Kevin Van Sant
<20000425140238...@ng-fd1.aol.com> :
> However, even the best chordal players of today, Howard Alden and others,
>seem to lack that fire that a great jazz player should have. Which is not to
>say that they lack it, but are forced to play differently to make a chordless
>situation work.
Ybotha, have you heard Bireli Lagrene in a trio format? I just pulled
out his "standards" record for the first time in a year or so...
good googly moogly !
Keith Ganz
> I know that you have more freedom without a chordal player, and I never use
>one except when I'm forced to on club dates, but the basic problem still
>remains.
> My solution is to invent a device that we can control with our feet that we
>can comp with. Of course I'll never be able to make it cause I'm a mechanical
>incompetent, but that's my solution.
> I know someone's gonna suggest pre-recorded tapes you can use, but you might
>as well chuck it all away and buy a juke box. That repulses me to no end.
> Well, like a good case of diarreah, or enema, I think I've finally said my
>fill on this topic and will try to break the prozac in half from now on, like
>Dave Letterman advises.
I don't know what the fuss is all about. If you play strong melodies
and have good time you can play completely unaccompanied and not play
any chords for yourself and it will sound good- and you don't have to
play continuous 8th notes either, a la Joe Pass.
If the reference point of the changes is so crucial to making a line
sound good, the line probably isn't too strong melodically. A good
line or melody will stand on its own just fine.
It's also not that difficult to play chords while you're playing
lines- just a matter of being able form voicings on the fly (knowing
the neck) with any note on top (knowing the harmony) and develop some
right hand technique for controlling them- which just takes some
practice like anything else. Certainly no new foot controlled chord
making device is necessary. Besides, Taurus pedals have been around
for years if that's the solution.
Jack A. Zucker
unbelievable. I know sax and pianists who have copped that solo.
Playing guitar trio ain't about making it sound like 4 pieces. Throw away
the preconceived notions and listen to it for what it is, not for what it
isn't.
Jaz
--
Jack A. Zucker
E-Mail: j...@jackzucker.com
Web : http://www.jackzucker.com
"Ybotha" <ybo...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000425140238...@ng-fd1.aol.com...
> I don't think it's any coincidence that Wes Montgomery never recorded
himself
> in a situation without any chordal instruments behind him. Even when he
did
> trio playing, he used Melvin Rhyne rather than a bass player.
> I think he was thinking of what sounded solid musically, rather than
using
> a chord instrument as a crutch. Johnny Smith,early Tal Farlow and Jimmy
Raney,
> etc. all did the same thing.
> Of course, playing professionally you don't have a choice sometimes,
and
> you're lucky nowadays to even get a drummer in a guitar trio gig. It just
makes
> more sense musically to have a chordal approach (Ed Bickert, Jim Hall
> etc..)rather than just playing single line all the time.
> However, even the best chordal players of today, Howard Alden and
others,
> seem to lack that fire that a great jazz player should have. Which is not
to
> say that they lack it, but are forced to play differently to make a
chordless
> situation work. The alternative unfortunately is that we can blow the
shit out
> of a tune, and know that it sounded great at the time, but when we hear
the
> playback, it's just not the same as we heard it in our heads because we
were
> hearing the changes aurally. Then, to expect listeners to dig it when they
> don't even know the tune...
> I have to admit, when I hear a guitarist playing a tune I don't know,
and
> then blowing on it with no changes behind him, it's difficult to
understand
> what's going on the first time I hear it. To me, this presents a big
problem we
> have when performing. A good example of this is Pat Metheny's recording of
> ATTYA on Q.and A. I hated this version when I first heard it and didn't
even
> give it a second listening. Then last night I heard his version of ATTYA
with
> Jim Hall and thought he blew the shit out of the tune! What's the
difference?
> Jim Hall comping.
Jack A. Zucker
>
> > I know that you have more freedom without a chordal player, and I
never use
> >one except when I'm forced to on club dates, but the basic problem still
> >remains.
> > My solution is to invent a device that we can control with our feet
that we
> >can comp with. Of course I'll never be able to make it cause I'm a
mechanical
> >incompetent, but that's my solution.
Uggh - You and I be on a different wavelength.
Guitar trio playing is beautiful.
Keith Ganz
>Playing guitar trio ain't about making it sound like 4 pieces. Throw away
>the preconceived notions and listen to it for what it is, not for what it
>isn't.
>
Amen, brother. That is the truth.
Ybotha
which I define as half note =160, and only when the bass is walking.
In situations like this, unless he's George Mraz, most jazz bass players
playing upright have trouble playing in tune some of the time (in keys like Db,
Gb, Ab, especially), hence creating an ill-defined sense of tonality without
something (a chordal instrument) to clarify things for the listener.
I'm not saying the trio situation is bad- it's my favorite situation in
which to play!- but it's the typical listener who might have problems with it.
Birelli Lagrene plays great in the trio setting on "Standards"-you have no
argument with me on that!
This topic is important because playing live is soon gonna be the only way
musicians are gonna be able to make any bread. The music business (recording
industry) is soon gonna be coming down in flames. There's no way to stop people
from getting music for free on things like Napster- if anyone passes any laws
here, they'll just use a computer in another country.
As soon as super-fast internet access is enabled by cable, people will be
able to download a CD in a matter of minutes rather than the hours it now
takes.
The results of this will turn musicians into the "wandering minstrels" of the
days of yore, playing for our dinners if we're lucky!
The days of "fat cats" in the recording industry are literally numbered.
Look at the NY Times of last Sunday and read the article on this in the
Magazine section.
Then look at the front page and read the article on the machine in Japan
that people drop a few coins in, and then insert a blank disc into, and come
out with virtually any recording they want.
The equation reads: turn the information into ones and zeroes (music) and
then sooner or later it's going to be replicated and sold for pennies.
The effect this will have on jazz musicians is unclear right now, but any
change in the music business has got to be for the better- could it get much
worse?
peatea
The entire music business today is outrageous. The days of long running,
big buck making young musicians is long over. A few of the old farts who
survived drug addiction and other demises are now considered as ploitically
correct examples for our kids to follow. Thus they hit the spotlight
again. Santana, Clapton, Tom Petty, Crosby-Stills-and-Nash, not to mention
Neil Young. The new stuff is aimed at 13 year old white girls. They are
the people who buy the pop music. And every 13 year old white girl has a
computer. The internet is fairly new and you can bet that it will be
around for many decades to come. What we see now will change. Anything
that you download in the future will cost $$ and be automatically added to
your credit card or phone bill. The internet, MP3's, CD Roms, and Midi's
are the records of the future. Soon..when you want a recorded song you
will just download it and pay for it. It will be considerably easier and
faster to get any songs you want in a matter of seconds. I don't see the
end of musicians and promoters making big bucks. It is just the beginning.
Pt
Thomas F Brown
Ybotha <ybo...@aol.com> wrote:
>I should clarify things and say that I was talking only about uptempo playing
>which I define as half note =160, and only when the bass is walking.
> In situations like this, unless he's George Mraz, most jazz bass players
>playing upright have trouble playing in tune some of the time (in keys like Db,
>Gb, Ab, especially), hence creating an ill-defined sense of tonality without
>something (a chordal instrument) to clarify things for the listener.
But tempos that fast usually don't happen but once a set on a guitar
trio gig. And on any kind of gig, that tempo is for burning, for
blowing pure energy. You're likely to be doing a lot of skating,
and sounding the chord changes is secondary to kicking up a
dust storm. I don't see it as a big issue, as long as the drummer
is making it.
Tom McEvoy
news:h4s9gsctu0pimgfih...@4ax.com...
> Was that you or the caffine talking ? :)
>
> If I wanted to show someone the "Art of the Trio" I would play for
> them Ahmad Jamal's "live at the Pershing"
I'm with you, man, that and Bill Evans' recordings at the Vanguard with
Scott LaFaro and Paul Motian... I'd emphasize Bill for group communication
and Ahmad for melodic ideas. The incredible thing about Ahmad is that he
doesn't lapse musically for the entire cd! Even the Evans trio has
occasional uncomfortable moments, but everything Jamal plays is fresh and
moving forward.
Tom
Jack A. Zucker
Years ago, before Paul Bollenback was playing with Joey Defrancesco, I used
to hear him alot in DC playing trio. He was the closest guitarist I ever
heard to what Keith was doing...
--
--
Jack A. Zucker
Cleveland, OH US
email: j...@jackzucker.com
web: http://www.jackzucker.com
"Tom McEvoy" <tmc...@vt.edu> wrote in message
news:8e8t17$rta$1...@solaris.cc.vt.edu...
Clay Moore
<20000425232340...@ng-cl1.aol.com>:
> This topic is important because playing live is soon gonna be the only
> way
>musicians are gonna be able to make any bread. The music business
>(recording industry) is soon gonna be coming down in flames. There's no
>way to stop people from getting music for free on things like Napster-
>if anyone passes any laws here, they'll just use a computer in another
>country.
I respectfully disagree with your prognosis, and here's why. Lots of people are
assuming that cheap and easy distribution will kill off the record industry. I
offer an anecdote from my stepfather Glenn that he told me over 25 years ago,
which happened even longer ago than that. Glenn had a friend who worked in
radio, and once happened to see the staggering number of LPs and 45s that this
friend had at his disposal (a word I didn't choose lightly). He was astounded
at the volume of material, and his friend said "oh, you want some of these?
Take as many as you like." Wow! He was in hog heaven, or so he thought. After
taking away piles of stuff and listening to some of it he quickly came to the
realization that the overwhelming majority of this music was crap.
Gee, does this at all sound familiar? Go to MP3.com, just to name the most
well-known freebie music portal, and try to wade through that clogged mess of
music. So how do you sort it out? Simple. You don't. Record companies with huge
advertising budgets and highly trained marketing staff are going to continue to
decree or determine what and who is going to be popular, and they are going to
make sure everyone knows about it. The Internet changes all that? No, it
doesn't. Why do you think there is now an alliance between AOL, Time Warner,
and BMI? Or Microsoft and Sony? AOL is the most most popular online service in
the world last I heard; do you think that having that many eyeballs and a
largely technically un-savvy user base is going to help them sell music easily?
Think about it. They'll develop a secure file format, and make it so that it is
really easy to buy a song or a collection from them. They'll advertise the crap
out of the people who they want you to hear (ie, the ones on their labels).
They'll make a few landmark cases against pirates and shut down a few of the
portals to discourage other pirates, and they'll make it so that trying to
access those portals and download "unapproved" file formats will become more
difficult. Impossible, you say? Think about the operating system that is on
most the world's computers right now. It's Windows. Microsoft and Sony? Digital
distribution? Secure formats? We control the horizontal? No, Microsoft (and
their pals) will. Yes, you'll have techno savvy kids who will break these
formats and they'll trade stuff and they'll run alternate operating systems
like Linux or BeOs. And how much of a percentage of the population is this
going to be? Not large, I predict. I hot rod and fix computers, have a box that
I've installed Linux on, and I download all kinds of interesting programs from
the net. It's a hell of a lot of work. Most people aren't going to know or care
how to do any of this. They'll log onto Windows and AOL or MSN and they'll get
what's easy.
In the meantime, there will probably be a lot of legal file trading of music
that isn't on the major labels. Once again, this isn't new. How many of us back
in the 70s bought records at tiny specialty shops or through mail order that we
couldn't find anywhere else? Didn't we make cassette tapes of these for each
other? Did this hurt the big labels? Remember in the 80s when lots of Indy
labels sprang up, and then got bought out by majors? Two things I think are
important to remember from all this. One, whoever controls the way people see
and hear things, wins. Two, the record companies have a long history in
changing things to suit their needs. I think they're going to profit from music
for a _long_ time to come.
Clay
Tom Walls
says...
>
>ybo...@aol.com (Ybotha) wrote in
><20000425232340...@ng-cl1.aol.com>:
>
>> This topic is important because playing live is soon gonna be the only
>> way
>>musicians are gonna be able to make any bread. The music business
>>(recording industry) is soon gonna be coming down in flames. There's no
>>way to stop people from getting music for free on things like Napster-
>>if anyone passes any laws here, they'll just use a computer in another
>>country.
>
>I respectfully disagree with your prognosis, and here's why.
snipped(interesting exposition)
One, whoever controls the way people see
>and hear things, wins. Two, the record companies have a long history in
>changing things to suit their needs. I think they're going to profit from
music
>for a _long_ time to come.
>
>Clay
I'd like to add my observation that playing live is the only way most
musicians make money now. I feel relatively comfortable speculating that you
could count the musicians in this newsgroup who have actually *made* money on
recordings on one hand.
--
Tom Walls
the guy at the Temple of Zeus
http://www.arts.cornell.edu/zeus/
Jeff Gower
> .......the overwhelming majority of this music was crap.......
> Go to MP3.com......and try to wade through that clogged mess of
> music. So how do you sort it out? Simple. You don't.........
> Record companies with huge
> advertising budgets and highly trained marketing staff are going to
continue to
> decree or determine what and who is going to be popular, and they are
going to
> make sure everyone knows about it. The Internet changes all that? No, it
> doesn't. Why do you think there is now an alliance between AOL, Time Warner,
> and BMI? Or Microsoft and Sony?
I think you are right on the money here, Clay. The folks who sense a
earthshattering music-biz revolution on the horizon are underestimating
the ingenuity, power, and ruthlessness of the movers-and-shakers.
> They'll advertise the crap
> out of the people who they want you to hear (ie, the ones on their labels).
Yep, there will still be the same massive marketing campaigns by the big
boys, intended on literally defining the tastes and preferences of the
mainstream audiences. And it will continue to work, for the most part.
> Yes, you'll have techno savvy kids who will break these
> formats and they'll trade stuff and they'll run alternate operating systems
> like Linux or BeOs. And how much of a percentage of the population is this
> going to be?
Same as it's always been, probably <10%.
> Most people aren't going to know or care
> how to do any of this. They'll log onto Windows and AOL or MSN and
they'll get
> what's easy.
Precisely. Just as most people in the 70s and 80s used to buy their
recordings from Camelot Music or Sam Goody's and the like, rather than the
smaller more interesting shops which have so much more to offer.
> In the meantime, there will probably be a lot of legal file trading of music
> that isn't on the major labels. Once again, this isn't new.
Well, no it is not new, but one thing that IS revolutionary w/r/t this
internet thing is the breadth of options and the ease with which they are
accessed. I mean, you can get anything you want very quickly, and that
(to that <10%) is THE appeal to this internet. That, and meeting others
with similar niche tastes and interests. But this does not hinder
significantly the power of the big boys to steer and guide the mainstream
90%.
> One, whoever controls the way people see
> and hear things, wins.
And the main reason for this is that it is the way most people like it -
most people don't mind it at all. Many actually LIKE to be led and told
what to think and do - it sure is much easier that way. Haha.
> Two, the record companies have a long history in
> changing things to suit their needs. I think they're going to profit
from music
> for a _long_ time to come.
As much as I hate to agree with this, I think it is right on the mark.
But to leave on a positive note, I just want to reiterate that for those
of us who enjoy the off-the-beaten-path and niche-genres of music and
other arts, the internet has been a god-send. I personally welcome all
the techno advances and look forward to seeing what the future will
bring.
jazzer
produces, records and acquires music that ends up in many different outlets, I of
course follow intently what's going on in cyberworld and online. I believe that
Clay is absolutely correct and makes a lot of sense. People in general and most of
the music buying public always have been lazy and want to be spoonfed what is
"popular" and what they should and ultimately will like and of course buy. Whether
the format is vinyl, cassette, 8 track, DAT, minidisc, compact disc or online
downloading to a hardrive, it's all the same marketing. The majors will dictate
what you listen to and how you'll pay for it. Is it any wonder that most of the
major record companies were bought out by the makers of the hardware (delivery
systems), owned the distribution companies and are now all consolidating and
merging with online companies? People will pay for downloaded online tracks that
are spoonfed and advertised to death the same way they run out to the store now and
buy their 'Nsync, Backstreet Boys or Britney Spears when radio or MTV or something
else is blitzed enough at them. You think everyone's going to MP3 all the music
they want, kill the record industry and not buy online? You think it would've been
just as easy to sit by your radio and tape everything you wanted for free anyway,
considering that a good percentage of the business is driven by the music that's
played over and over and over again? The record business doesn't care about the
scraps left over from their financial projections for the independent Jazz label
they just bought , or the cool instrumental fingerstyle record that they just
released that an exec plays in his office. Cool techno savvy kids who want to
trade the new Bill Frisell album or new Clay Moore record online are no different
than when we were kids and swapped tapes of the new guy we were so impressed with.
Nothing ever changes, only the distribution channels are going to be revamped, all
owned or affiliated by the same bigwigs who own them now......
Clay Moore wrote:
> ybo...@aol.com (Ybotha) wrote in
> <20000425232340...@ng-cl1.aol.com>:
>
> > This topic is important because playing live is soon gonna be the only
> > way
> >musicians are gonna be able to make any bread. The music business
> >(recording industry) is soon gonna be coming down in flames. There's no
> >way to stop people from getting music for free on things like Napster-
> >if anyone passes any laws here, they'll just use a computer in another
> >country.
>
> I respectfully disagree with your prognosis, and here's why. Lots of people are
> assuming that cheap and easy distribution will kill off the record industry. I
> offer an anecdote from my stepfather Glenn that he told me over 25 years ago,
> which happened even longer ago than that. Glenn had a friend who worked in
> radio, and once happened to see the staggering number of LPs and 45s that this
> friend had at his disposal (a word I didn't choose lightly). He was astounded
> at the volume of material, and his friend said "oh, you want some of these?
> Take as many as you like." Wow! He was in hog heaven, or so he thought. After
> taking away piles of stuff and listening to some of it he quickly came to the
> realization that the overwhelming majority of this music was crap.
>
> Gee, does this at all sound familiar? Go to MP3.com, just to name the most
> well-known freebie music portal, and try to wade through that clogged mess of
> music. So how do you sort it out? Simple. You don't. Record companies with huge
> advertising budgets and highly trained marketing staff are going to continue to
> decree or determine what and who is going to be popular, and they are going to
> make sure everyone knows about it. The Internet changes all that? No, it
> doesn't. Why do you think there is now an alliance between AOL, Time Warner,
> and BMI? Or Microsoft and Sony? AOL is the most most popular online service in
> the world last I heard; do you think that having that many eyeballs and a
> largely technically un-savvy user base is going to help them sell music easily?
> Think about it. They'll develop a secure file format, and make it so that it is
> really easy to buy a song or a collection from them. They'll advertise the crap
> out of the people who they want you to hear (ie, the ones on their labels).
> They'll make a few landmark cases against pirates and shut down a few of the
> portals to discourage other pirates, and they'll make it so that trying to
> access those portals and download "unapproved" file formats will become more
> difficult. Impossible, you say? Think about the operating system that is on
> most the world's computers right now. It's Windows. Microsoft and Sony? Digital
> distribution? Secure formats? We control the horizontal? No, Microsoft (and
> their pals) will. Yes, you'll have techno savvy kids who will break these
> formats and they'll trade stuff and they'll run alternate operating systems
> like Linux or BeOs. And how much of a percentage of the population is this
> going to be? Not large, I predict. I hot rod and fix computers, have a box that
> I've installed Linux on, and I download all kinds of interesting programs from
> the net. It's a hell of a lot of work. Most people aren't going to know or care
> how to do any of this. They'll log onto Windows and AOL or MSN and they'll get
> what's easy.
>
> In the meantime, there will probably be a lot of legal file trading of music
> that isn't on the major labels. Once again, this isn't new. How many of us back
> in the 70s bought records at tiny specialty shops or through mail order that we
> couldn't find anywhere else? Didn't we make cassette tapes of these for each
> other? Did this hurt the big labels? Remember in the 80s when lots of Indy
> labels sprang up, and then got bought out by majors? Two things I think are
> important to remember from all this. One, whoever controls the way people see
> and hear things, wins. Two, the record companies have a long history in
> changing things to suit their needs. I think they're going to profit from music
> for a _long_ time to come.
>
> Clay
Ybotha
week the prof. tells us the music business is going to die a screaming, bloody
death! I argue with him about it, but he still insists that people like
napster will just relocate to a computer in another country if they pass any
laws prohibiting it here. I don't think he'll agree with you, but at least it
will be better than hearing this guy rave about the "Digital Revolution" for 2
hours!
juvenal
jazzer wrote...
> People in general and most of
> the music buying public always have been lazy and want to be spoonfed what
is
> "popular" and what they should and ultimately will like and of course buy.
I think the psychology of musical taste is more complex than that.
Part of the reason people like certain types of music is culture
identification. People want to identify, and be accepted into, cultural
subsets; part of the picture is music. Folks who like C&W might wear boots
and big belt buckles, people who like Rap often wear their baseball caps
backwards and wear baggie pants. The music is part of who we want to be,
and who we want people to think we are.
Some people identify with the mainstream culture, others self-identify as
rebels; but the still want to be accepted by their fellow rebels. Sharing
the same clothes and music is all a part of that.
Also, I think that there is an aspect of music appreciation that is a lot
like reading: just as people have different levels of reading comprehension,
so do they have different levels of music comprehension. Henry James may
have been one of the greatest novelists of all time, but far more people
will read Steven King's books. Henry James is hard for most people to read,
and he uses an immense vocabulary. I think that more complex musical forms,
such as jazz, have the same affect on people: It's hard for most people to
understand. And just as relatively few individuals can relate to the
abstract surrealism of Burroughs' writing, relatively few people can relate
to abstract music.
And just as one can improve one's reading skills, one can improve ones
ability to appreciate more complex music. But who would bother, if it would
cast you outside of your circle of cultural peers? One isn't as likely to
learn what Rap's all about if one's peers strongly disapprove of it.
juvenal
Jonthefox
I received this e-mail a while back stating legislation was in the works that
would make all songs recorded on a major label the property of that label by
making them "work for hire". Anyone know anything about it? I was not aware
of anything prior to receiving the e-mail, nor have I seen, read, or heard
anything more about it since.
what follows is what I received:
Jon Fox
______________________________________________________________________
Imagine if every song an artist wrote immediately became the property
of their record label? IMAGINE NO MORE, THAT IS NOW THE LAW. Artists,
white and black, are now officially slaves to their label. Read on...
_____________________________________________________________________
I have just become aware of a bill recently signed into law by
President Clinton (on 11/29/99) containing an amendment to the 1976
Copyright Act which will make EVERY song written by an artist signed
to a major label a "work for hire" owned by the record company to
which they are signed.
THIS IS LEGALIZED SLAVERY as the work which artists pour their sweat
and
blood into creating will be owned wholly by their record labels, in
perpetuity.
The April 8th 2000 issue of Billboard contains information on this new
legislation, buried within a cover story on legendary
songwriter/musician
Don Henley, who is fighting this law.
The article notes that the amendment can be found as Section
1101(e)
of Title 1 of the Satellite home Viewer Improvement Act, part of the
appropriations bill H.R. 3194, Public Law No. 106-113 as Section 101
of
Title 17, United States Code, paragraph 2.
In mid-May, artists such as Henley, James Taylor, Deborah Harry,
Coolio, Mary Chapin Carpenter, and Jon Bovi will participate in
hearings
to repeal this amendment.
Billboard reports that teh amendment was not even written by a
Congressperson, but by a congressional staffer who was later hired as
an
executive at the RIAA (the Recording Industry Association of America,
the leading lobby for record companies on Capitol Hill). Coincidence?
I
think not.
Be prepared to mobilize in mid-May to show public outrage at this
atrocity of lawmaking. More information to come as I receive it...
DISTRIBUTE THIS E-MAIL FAR AND WIDE. Injustice does not last long
when it is brought to the light.
...K.Rene'
scorsi
derivations. Many don't realise that their artistic choices are made
for them; with the increase in media information due to the internet
this is more likely to continue and in fact increase. Unfortunately
many of the poor internet users of today are just sitting ducks.
Especially the young.
Scorsi
--
Free audio & video emails, greeting cards and forums
Talkway - http://www.talkway.com - Talk more ways (sm)
Jurupari
I've read through some of the most heavily weighed and well considered dialogue
that's appeared in this newsgroup since I've been reading it. I'm unfailingly
impressed with the level of intellect that appears here. It brought up a
number of truisms about the music business, and nicked some stuff I've been
thinking about as well. For some fine tuning only I'd like to offer a couple
of background thoughts. The salient stuff's already been said, though.
The recording industry is of course a numbers game. Most of us earthlings
aren't geniuses, much less musical geniuses, and the music that pushes peoples'
buttons is usually pretty simplistic. The stuff we jazz musicians (at any level
of development) do isn't. Our market will be those who aspire to certain
pinnacles as performers of the music (or maybe speakers of the language) posers
who get some mileage or the other out of being perceived as hip by associating
with our efforts, and the non musician who is somehow (and I sure as hell can't
explain it) in emotional sync or musical sync with what we do - someone whose
sense of musical awareness is unexpectedly refined.
That's a pretty small market. Also, save the posers, those people may not get
sucked in by star wars technology applied to production techniques. If they
hear what you hear, that's probably enough. Indie jazz guys can take those two
thoughts where they will.
We've never made a dent in the ass of music consumption, and that's the way it
is with artists as opposed to entertainers. We're not shooting for average and
our median mean and mode numbers will reflect that per se whenever compared to
whatever's pop.
Jimmy's in a much better position to be saying what I'm dealing with next, but,
there has to be a break even point in terms of units shipped before a label
could take you on. This is obviously no problem for him, since he has a
well-deserved recording career, and his audience is large enough to support
major label involvement.
If you're doing recording in a home studio and releasing it as liquid audio,
small batch CD releases and so on your break even point will have a couple of
zeros missing, and your product may not be compromised at all in the ears of
your real target market.
This smells like opportunity to me, and some of us whose market for a
recording may be only a few thousand instead of the hundreds of thousands that
Jimmy reaches may still be able to get some good money out of an independent
venture, even though a major label might be wasting its capital on our behalf.
If you're a pop performer, though, you have to deal with the fact that you're
only successful if you're average by definition - the average person likes your
music.You'll need a lot of help, viz. a major label, media hype and all the
stuff that goes into what's called music but isn't really. You won't clear ten
bucks a CD, either.
Jazz musicians and our classical brethren are involved first in music as we
perceive it and secondly if at all in media hype. It isn't necessarily that way
with the devised genres - they're whatever the industry fashion police can get
away with saying they are, as was pointed out earlier in this thread. That kind
of credibility requires a costly sledge hammer media approach to enforce.
What I'm saying is that the "music business" has very little to do with art,
and any artist who wants to make that art available to the audience of
avantists (or misfits - you choose!) who appreciate his or her work will
probably benefit from the net. I get solicitations for recordings from
countries I've only read about and can't get arrested in Denver, for a personal
example.
Next, I wanted to address the attachment regarding "work for hire". This
doesn't sound correct, but I'm no attorney. There must be a few lurkers here
who are familiar with intellectual property case law and where it appears to be
headed. I'd personally like to hear from some of you lawyers wha would be jazz
guitarists re this matter. Anyone care to enlighten us?
Regards,
Clif Kuplen
http://members.aol.com/jurupari
Clay Moore
>Very well nailed, Clay! Zing!
Thanks.
>Jimmy's in a much better position to be saying what I'm dealing with next, but,
>there has to be a break even point in terms of units shipped before a label
>could take you on. This is obviously no problem for him, since he has a
>well-deserved recording career, and his audience is large enough to support
>major label involvement.
I'd just like to point out that with all due respect to Jimmy B, Concord isn't
a "major" label. It's a respected jazz label, but in the grand scheme of
things is still closer to a mom and pop than a major label. Most of the small
jazz labels of yesteryear have been bought out by companies such as Sony, but
as far as I know Concord has remained independent.
Just as added fuel to this discussion, let me tell you about a meeting I had a
couple of months ago in LA. I won't reveal this guy's name because I don't
know whether he would want me to, but suffice to say he manages some name jazz
artists and handles recording contract negotiations fairly high up on the
food chain in the R&B world. A friend of mine set this meeting up so I could
ask him some career advice. One of things he mentioned was that jazz labels
are increasingly moving towards less involvement in the process. To be blunt,
they are more and more often taking artists' self-produced, finished products
and simply slapping their label on them. In other words, the artists (and/or
their management I assume) are doing more of the grunt work of booking studio
time, mixing, mastering, and so on, AND paying for it. Then the label steps in
with their standard contract and presses and distributes the recordings. On
the one hand it sounds as thought the artists get more control, on the other
it means more and more work for the artist for the same traditionally
artist-unfriendly percentage of sales royalites. I guess that at least the
recoupment costs in the contract are less, but that's because the artist has
already paid for them up front out of his own pocket. Less financial risk for
the label, same crappy deal for the musicians.
Last, this guy and I got to talking about players, and he asked me about some
of my influences. At the mention of Pat Martino he lit up and told me how much
he loved Pat's playing. He then said that he had been offered to manage Pat
several times over the years, and had turned it down because there wasn't
enough money in it. Needless to say he didn't offer to manage me either. :-)
Clay
Tom Walls
scene in 1978, as the "indie" scene began to develop. The majors were
interested in bands who could "do it all"; ie, had an act, developed a
following, caught the attention of the media, produced a promising recording.
Once a band could demonstrate that they were capable of all this, then they'd
step in and "take things to the next level". It takes much of the risk out of
A&R.
Stephen G. Carl
Jonthefox <jont...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000428013101...@ng-fo1.aol.com...
QXWTFH...@webtv.net
theory----If you got a flailing/dribbling rhythm section--Then
flail/dribble along with 'em---Do anything play anything-----Yeah
man!!!!! That's what I say!!!!
Thomas F Brown
Jack A. Zucker <j...@jackzucker.com> wrote:
>
>Years ago, before Paul Bollenback was playing with Joey Defrancesco, I used
>to hear him alot in DC playing trio. He was the closest guitarist I ever
>heard to what Keith was doing...
I've only heard him on the radio, and it usually struck me as bluesy
burning organ trio type guitar playing. In what sense do you compare
him to Keith? Does he have any recordings in that vein?
Thomas F Brown
Ybotha <ybo...@aol.com> wrote:
>Thanx for the feedback. I've been taking a graduate computer course where every
>week the prof. tells us the music business is going to die a screaming, bloody
>death!
Karl Marx predicted the fall of capitalism 150 years ago, and many
others keep reiterating that prediction. And yet people keep finding
new ways to make a profit, no matter what happens.
icarusi
> Thanx for the feedback. I've been taking a graduate computer course
where every
> week the prof. tells us the music business is going to die a
screaming, bloody
like
> napster will just relocate to a computer in another country if
they pass any
> laws prohibiting it here. I don't think he'll agree with you, but at
least it
> will be better than hearing this guy rave about the "Digital
Revolution" for 2
> hours!
If folks can get what they want and like at a reasonable price the
format is down to their personal convenience. If downloading and
taking care of your digital purchase is preferable to browsing and
obtaining a reasonably robust bit of pastic, it's your choice. The
price/convenience/need equation will determine how the distribution is
done.
Icarusi
--
remove the 00 to reply
icarusi
news:3908ED7A...@total.net...
Cool techno savvy kids who want to
> trade the new Bill Frisell album or new Clay Moore record online are
no different
> than when we were kids and swapped tapes of the new guy we were so
impressed with.
> Nothing ever changes, only the distribution channels are going to be
revamped, all
> owned or affiliated by the same bigwigs who own them now......
I have some reel to reel stuff that I recorded by hanging the mike
over the TV loudspeaker in the mid 60s. I knew a guy who had a massive
collection of live FM jazz concerts on an Akai 4000DS R-R circa '72. I
wasn't particularly interested in jazz then but I'd like to hear them
now.
Dev
Thomas F Brown
Thomas F Brown <tomb...@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu> wrote:
>In article <20000427232124...@ng-fs1.aol.com>,
>Ybotha <ybo...@aol.com> wrote:
>>week the prof. tells us the music business is going to die a screaming, bloody
>>death!
>
>
>others keep reiterating that prediction. And yet people keep finding
>new ways to make a profit, no matter what happens.
Any industry that can make money off Monty Rock III--not to mention half
the bands that play Saturday Night Live--isn't going to be fazed in the
least by mere technological advances.
Jeff Gower
(Thomas F Brown) wrote:
> Any industry that can make money off Monty Rock III--not to mention half
> the bands that play Saturday Night Live--isn't going to be fazed in the
> least by mere technological advances.
Haha! Remember when SNL used to have great pop musicians like Kate Bush,
Randy Newman, Paul Simon, Todd Rundgren, and such? OK, OK, I am sounding
like an old fart, but I used to actually look forward to the music part of
the show (they usually got to perform two tunes back then too). Now, when
I see the show (I always tape it to watch later), I almost always
fast-forward through the music part (usually only one tune per week
now....for good reason, haha). Every now and then they'll still have a
good one, like Bjørk or Sting, but you're right - most of them are pretty
bad.
Time to go take my Prilosec, tend to my heel spurs, and color my grey
beard........
Keith Ganz
Thomas F Brown
Jeff Gower <jgo...@gator.net> wrote:
>
>Haha! Remember when SNL used to have great pop musicians like Kate Bush,
>Randy Newman, Paul Simon, Todd Rundgren, and such?
I remember seeing Keith Jarrett and Ornette Coleman on SNL, but when's
the last time you saw a jazz band on that show? A couple of years ago
they did have Josh Redman sitting in with Jewel, anonymously.
Bob Valentine
>
Amen!
>Years ago, before Paul Bollenback was playing with Joey Defrancesco, I used
>to hear him alot in DC playing trio. He was the closest guitarist I ever
>heard to what Keith was doing...
>
What? I bought the "... Gemini ..." recording (can't remember the full
title) and must say I was extremely dissapointed. Maybe its the smoothish
material... but I expected a lot more given DeFrancesco, Jeff Watts, and
Bollenbacks reputation. Are there other of his recordings that show him
in a more fiery, or Jarrett-ish setting?
(A side note, I bought the Ivery session with DeFrancesco and Clint Strong
at the same time. For fans of a very live and cooking straight ahead session,
this one is great).
Bob Valentine
TomLippinc
>at the same time. For fans of a very live and cooking straight ahead session,
>this one is great).
>
>Bob Valentine
Clint is definitely an unsung hero. When I used to hear him play at jam
sessions at North Texas (I was 18 and I think he was 19) I would inevitably
feel halfway inspired to go practice for two weeks straight, and halfway like
quitting.
Tom Lippincott
eddie-lee
My name is Ed Fila, and I too was at North Texas when you were -
we played in the guitar ensemble together.
I saw your name and wanted to say hello!
Ed
kgro...@geocities.com
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
TomLippinc
>
>My name is Ed Fila, and I too was at North Texas when you were -
>we played in the guitar ensemble together.
>I saw your name and wanted to say hello!
>Ed
>kgro...@geocities.com
Hey, Ed. Good to "see" you again.
Tom
Rick Stone
>
> Chris Goodchild (jgoo...@emerald.tufts.edu) wrote:
> : utilize this approach to trio playing. However, after recently catching kurt
> : rosenwinkel play with mark turner, i noticed that he was utilizing guide tones and
> : clusters in his improv, to add the comp feel. it was very interesting, and its
> :
>
> I saw Kurt at small's with just a bass and drums a while back, and noticed
> that he's *very* good at slipping in chords in a very pianistic fashion.
> Maybe this is because he's a pretty good piano player from what I hear.
> A friend of mine that plays tenor says he likes Kurt's piano playing better than his
> guitar playing.
>
> --paul
I myself am a pretty mediocre pianist. But sitting at the instrument
and learning to develop an independent two hand approach (comping in the
left hand while soloing) taught me an incredible amount about rhythms
that once "felt", almost immediately translated over to my guitar
playing. You start to realize that the idea of chords and melody
happening at the same time is often an illusion. The chords are more
frequently residing in rhythmic "spaces" of the phrases in a loose sort
of call and response between the left and right hands. Once you learn
to "feel" this, your solo and trio playing, as well as comping, improves
exponentially.
/=====================================================\
|RICK STONE guitarist/composer/teacher |
|email: jaz...@inch.com |
|Check out my CD the Rick Stone Quartet "Far East" |
|with Kenny Barron at: http://www.inch.com/~jazzand |
\=====================================================/
Rick Stone
>
> Kevin Van Sant <kvan...@pobox.com> wrote in message
> news:h4s9gsctu0pimgfih...@4ax.com...
> > Was that you or the caffine talking ? :)
> >
> > If I wanted to show someone the "Art of the Trio" I would play for
> > them Ahmad Jamal's "live at the Pershing"
>
> I'm with you, man, that and Bill Evans' recordings at the Vanguard with
> Scott LaFaro and Paul Motian... I'd emphasize Bill for group communication
> and Ahmad for melodic ideas. The incredible thing about Ahmad is that he
> doesn't lapse musically for the entire cd! Even the Evans trio has
> occasional uncomfortable moments, but everything Jamal plays is fresh and
> moving forward.
>
> Tom
Absolutely!!! I've been talking a lot with my students about trio
playing and the recordings I'm constantly telling them to listen to are:
Ahmad Jamal "Poincina" and "But Not For Me" (these are the titles on the
vinyl releases I have of the Pershing stuff)
Bill Evans Vanguard recordings
McCoy Tyner "Inception" and "Nights of Ballads and Blues"
Jim Hall "Circles"
and
Pat Metheny "Question and Answer"
Any other specific titles that should be added to the "definitive" list?
Having had the great pleasure and privledge to have had Vernel Fournier
in my group in the early nineties, I'm still in awe of his incredible
economy and taste and the grooves he laid down on those recordings.
Unfortunately, as many of you might know, Vernel suffered a stroke in
1994 and is no longer able to play. I think having played with him kind
of spoiled me for other drummers although there a bunch of good ones out
here right now (lately it seems like almost every day when I tune in
WBGO I hear some young drummer playing a copy or thinly disguised
variation of one of Vernel's rhythms). I say all this because I feel he
was/is one of the great innovators in jazz and really hasn't received
the recognition he deserves. Listen carefully to his work on those
Pershing recordings and you realize that nothing he plays is
superflous. Everything contributes to the groove and vibe of the
arrangement.
mike ellenberger
admired his groove on Poinciana forever and shamelessly copied it.
In an interview, Amahd said they had stopped playing Poinciana
because he knew their arrangement was special and would be BIG.
He didn't want to perform it live because Amahd was sure someone
would hear it and steal his arrangement before he could record it.
He arranged for a recording to be made LIVE at one of the trio's
performances and I think this is what is preserved on CD and vinyl.
Mike
Rick Stone wrote:
> Having had the great pleasure and privledge to have had Vernel Fournier
> in my group in the early nineties, I'm still in awe of his incredible
> economy and taste and the grooves he laid down on those recordings.
> Unfortunately, as many of you might know, Vernel suffered a stroke in
> 1994 and is no longer able to play. I think having played with him kind
> of spoiled me for other drummers although there a bunch of good ones out
> here right now (lately it seems like almost every day when I tune in
> WBGO I hear some young drummer playing a copy or thinly disguised
> variation of one of Vernel's rhythms). I say all this because I feel he
> was/is one of the great innovators in jazz and really hasn't received
> the recognition he deserves. Listen carefully to his work on those
> Pershing recordings and you realize that nothing he plays is
> superflous. Everything contributes to the groove and vibe of the
> arrangement.
>
> /=====================================================\
> |RICK STONE guitarist/composer/teacher |
> |email: jaz...@inch.com |
> |Check out my CD the Rick Stone Quartet "Far East" |
> |with Kenny Barron at: http://www.inch.com/~jazzand |
> \=====================================================/
Mike Ellenberger
Listen to some soundclips at
http://home.att.net/~grumpmeister/MikesJazzPage.html