What is the future of jazz guitar?
jcl...@mediaone.net
lately. Where do you folks see jazz (or jazz-oriented or jazz-derived)
guitar playing heading over the next 5-10 years? Where does the
interest lie? What are we going to hear that's different?
Tell me something exciting. I really need something to look forward to.
John C.
OASYSCO
I'm so glad you asked this question because I have the answer!
Jazz guitar is dead, Dead, DEAD, I tell you!
The next big thing will be drums - melodic drums, chanting and drums, turkey
drumsticks, drumstick ice cream cones!
It's the next big thing! Send me $50 for stock in "Drums of the Future". I
guarantee that at the end of this millenium, if I am still alive, I will return
100,000,000X your investment - guaranteed. You can't lose!
Greg
P.S. Heck, it's almost Friday isn't it?
Luke B
spawn a whole list of artists who want to be seen performing with eminem.
Pat Metheney & eminem
Kenny G & eminem
I hear Bill Frisell is always open minded about new ideas - he'll probably
jump on the bandwagon.
If Charlie Christian were alive he would want to duo with eminem - hey man!
that's an insult to Kenny Burell! ;-)
that's the future of jazz guitar as I see it.
(what can I say, it's early)
Luke B
<jcl...@mediaone.net> wrote in message news:3A948200...@mediaone.net...
Bob Russell
wrote on 2/22/01 8:28 AM:
> If Charlie Christian were alive he would want to duo with eminem - hey man!
> that's an insult to Kenny Burell! ;-)
That's the beauty part - he doesn't even have to be alive!! (See Kenny G and
Louis Armstrong...) :(
-- Bob Russell
http://www.uncwil.edu/people/russellr
SteveYetter
Everytime I get a Just Jazz Guitar magazine in the mail I think there's
a lot going on!
I think Ken Burns ("Jazz," -PBS) was good for Jazz, though the Pop media
has a short memory.
As for Jazz guitar, dang, I'd be happy to get up to 1960's standards!
Mike Stern keeps me hopeful, as does Pat Metheny and Jimmy Bruno, et
al.
I'll say this: whether or not players can relate to jazz guitar in its
traditional, straight ahead role, it IS the way theory is approached at
many Colleges.
That's good, Isn't it?
-SteveYetter-
Sebastian Scheurer
jcl...@mediaone.net wrote:
That depends on how you look at jazz in general.
If you think it is a style of music, jazz guitar is DEAD DEAD DEAD!!
But if you look at jazz music as a style of making music, listening music,
living music (and life), then now is the time, that all music styles melt
thogheter.
So there are no bareers or walls to play whatever you whant, whatever
sounds good to you.
I think one way leading into the future of jazz guitar is representet very
good by Scott Henderson and Tribal Tech. But there's a lot of stuff out
there, like Boomish (Bill Frisell), Nils Petter Molvaer,...
Sebi
gerry garavaglia
>
> I think the latest hoopla of the eminem/Elton John duo at the grammys will
> spawn a whole list of artists who want to be seen performing with eminem.
>
Do you think Eminem performed with Elton just to maybe get a little
peek into his lifestyle? After all Eminem may be going prison soon.
Gerry
Dick Onstenk
best Jazz was played a long time ago and it does not bother me one bit. I
consider my type of Jazz - Bebop - as a relic of the past to be cherished,
just like classical music, a Bogart movie or a vintage car. Nostalgia?
Probably, who cares ...As long as I enjoy it and play it with my friends at
the Crow it is very alive. Jazz dead? Ridiculous. Jazz is just as dead as
Mozart and Chopin's music and that music will always survive.
Why is everybody always whining about Jazz being dead? It's just as dead as
a Rembrandt or a van Gogh painting (yes, both countrymen of mine), the
Beatles, Rock & Roll James Dean or Marilyn Monroel. It simply lives on in
the hearts and minds of those that love it. It doesn't develop or evolve
anymore? So what ... Neither does Bach's music and it's still great.
I really don't care if you call Jazz a Dinosaur, a fossile or Nostalgia, it
simply isn't dead. It can't be as long as people are enjoying it and playing
it.
Dick
Sebastian Scheurer <bas...@blacksheep.ch> schreef in berichtnieuws
3A959BF5...@blacksheep.ch...
Joe Finn
emergence of jazz pedagogy. It's not just Berklee, North Texas and Indiana
any more. There are lots and lots of programs out there today. The musicians
[guitar players included] that are coming out of the academy these days are
really great. They can play more difficult music more accurately and with
more expression than ever before. The younger composers, arrangers and
instrumentalists seem to be reaching greater and greater heights. I
personally think this is one of the greatest things happening in music
today. The future is lookin' real good to me. ...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! =-----
Jeff Gower
"Dick Onstenk" <d.on...@chello.nl> wrote:
> Jazz dead? Ridiculous. Jazz is just as dead as
> Mozart and Chopin's music and that music will always survive.
> .....It's just as dead as
> a Rembrandt or a van Gogh painting (yes, both countrymen of mine), the
> Beatles, Rock & Roll James Dean or Marilyn Monroel. It simply lives on in
> the hearts and minds of those that love it.
> .......It can't be (dead) as long as people are enjoying it and playing
> it.
Amen.
Jeff
Mark Kleinhaut
"Dick Onstenk" <d.on...@chello.nl> wrote:
>When it comes to Jazz, I don't look forward at all. I tend to think that
the
>best Jazz was played a long time ago and it does not bother me one bit.
I
>consider my type of Jazz - Bebop - as a relic of the past to be cherished,
>just like classical music, a Bogart movie or a vintage car.
Oh Brother, that's one of the most fuck-ed up things I think I've ever heard
on usenet. I don't really want to piss in your sneakers, but this music
is very personal to me...very much alive and very much in the "now moment".
The very fact that new jazz composing ocurrs daily uterly refutes your contention
that this is some sort of relic. You may contend that nothing being written
today can stand up to the historical masters, but I'd remind you that many
of the works considered to be masterpieces (say, Monk, Trane etc..) were
rejected in their time by their conemporaries.
>Nostalgia?
>Probably, who cares ...As long as I enjoy it and play it with my friends
at
>the Crow it is very alive.
A sickley pale parody of itself (jazz), do you guys also play all the transcibed
solos of bird and diz? Sorry, but is having "fun" all this means to you?
Jazz dead? Ridiculous. Jazz is just as dead as
>Mozart and Chopin's music and that music will always survive.
Why do you insist on mixed metaphors. Jazz is not dead and neither is classical
music. Mozart and Chopin and Bird and Duke, they're all dead, and THEIR
music lives on in the nostalgic rememberances and tributes that some people
feel inclined to devote their energies too...and that's fine. But that has
nothing to do with the current life of the idiom.
>
>Why is everybody always whining about Jazz being dead? It's just as dead
as
>a Rembrandt or a van Gogh painting (yes, both countrymen of mine), the
>Beatles, Rock & Roll James Dean or Marilyn Monroel. It simply lives on
in
>the hearts and minds of those that love it. It doesn't develop or evolve
>anymore? So what ... Neither does Bach's music and it's still great.
Howls, booos, hisses. What a dreadful and horrible thought. You describe
a nightmare, my friend.
>I really don't care if you call Jazz a Dinosaur, a fossile or Nostalgia,
it
>simply isn't dead. It can't be as long as people are enjoying it and playing
>it.
>
>Dick
Last time I checked, I was still breathing...Jazz is alive. And they can't
kill us all!
Mark Kleinhaut markkl...@hotmail.com
Follow URL's for info and soundclips about:
my debut album "Amphora"
www.invisiblemusicrecords.com/Resources/Amphora.html
my newest album "Secrets of Three"
www.invisiblemusicrecords.com/Resources/SO3.html
Jeff Gower
"Mark Kleinhaut" <markkl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Oh Brother, that's one of the most fuck-ed up things I think I've ever heard
> on usenet. I don't really want to piss in your sneakers, but this music
> is very personal to me...very much alive and very much in the "now moment".
I think you are reading too much into Dick's post, Mark. Unless I
misunderstood him completely, I thought he was merely saying that as
long as someone is listening to it and playing it and enjoying it ("it"
being whatever one chooses to call "jazz"), it ain't "dead". I
certainly didn't think he was trying to say that jazz died after bop
(his personal favorite type of jazz) or that jazz is nothing more than a
musty museum piece.
Jeff
Dick Onstenk
> Oh Brother, that's one of the most fuck-ed up things I think I've ever
heard
> on usenet. I don't really want to piss in your sneakers, but this music
> is very personal to me...very much alive and very much in the "now
moment".
You DO want to piss in my sneakers and you can't wait to it so because I
said something you strongly disagree with. You must be one of those types
that start booing and howling right away and throwing dirt. If this is the
most fucked up thing you have ever read, I suggest you study the ways of
this wicked world better. What a silly a and childish statement.
> A sickley pale parody of itself (jazz), do you guys also play all the
transcibed
> solos of bird and diz? Sorry, but is having "fun" all this means to you?
I see. You are a real artist and we are not because we simply have fun
playing Real Book stuff and you are the real artist suffering for his art.
You don't even have fun playing Jazz anymore? Man, that's pathetic.
< Is having "fun" all this means to you?>
I am not a pro and not an artist. If Jazz would be no fun to me I would not
play it. I don't put Bebop on a pedestal though and worship it as some kind
of lofty and elevated art. Jazz was born in places that were frequented by
people looking for fun, not art.
If you insist on insulting me and my friends as sickly pale parodies I
suggest you go to my page right now and listen to the first tracks. You'll
hear fine bop players that play nothing new and arty, just bop and that
suits me fine. Frankly, I like their stuff much better than yours. I like it
even a lot better than Knitting Factory stuff (more howls, boos and hisses
...).
> Jazz dead? Ridiculous. Jazz is just as dead as
> >Mozart and Chopin's music and that music will always survive.
>
> Why do you insist on mixed metaphors. Jazz is not dead and neither is
classical
> music. Howls, booos, hisses. What a dreadful and horrible thought. You
describe
> a nightmare, my friend.
To me Jazz is not dead, can't you read?
A nightmare is a war in Bosnia or an earthquake in India. You sound like a
spoiled kid that has never experienced something really bad. Where did you
grow up? In a convent? Stop hyperboling all over the place.
I was talking about Bebop all the way, NOT about contemporary Jazz. My Jazz
is played in the now too but I'm afraid it had its prime 50 years ago. To
deny that would be very, very naive.
You go pursue your path of pretence but leave me my own fun.
What I really resent is the tone of your post.
Dick
jcl...@mediaone.net
> One of the big trends that I've seen over the last 30 years has been the
> emergence of jazz pedagogy. It's not just Berklee, North Texas and Indiana
> any more. There are lots and lots of programs out there today. The musicians
>
> [guitar players included] that are coming out of the academy these days are
> really great. They can play more difficult music more accurately and with
> more expression than ever before. The younger composers, arrangers and
> instrumentalists seem to be reaching greater and greater heights. I
> personally think this is one of the greatest things happening in music
> today. The future is lookin' real good to me. ...joe
Sorry. I'm not reading anything that excites me here. I guess it's nice that
we have developed EFFICIENT factories for producing MORE musicians with GREATER
skills that continually RAISE the bar by playing BETTER than anyone before
them. But what does that do for my soul or theirs?
Lots of folks here seem to think jazz guitar is DEAD. So what is their interest
here - necrophilia?
Other people are into pleasing themselves in their own personal way. Hey,
that's fine. I support that - it's what I do too.
What I'm looking for is a new revelation. A new way of hearing and seeing that
lets me relate my own true self to all of this apparently meaningless chaos,
fear, greed and deceipt that is everywhere around me. Music could do that for
me at one time. It's not happening now. Maybe that's just a consequence of
aging, and has nothing to do with music or creativity. I don't know.
Anybody got any bright ideas?
John C.
Bob Russell
jcl...@mediaone.net wrote on 2/23/01 11:11 PM:
> What I'm looking for is a new revelation. A new way of hearing and seeing
> that
> lets me relate my own true self to all of this apparently meaningless chaos,
> fear, greed and deceipt that is everywhere around me. Music could do that for
> me at one time. It's not happening now. Maybe that's just a consequence of
> aging, and has nothing to do with music or creativity. I don't know.
>
> Anybody got any bright ideas?
>
> John C.
Whew, John, that's a mighty tall order there, buddy. Maybe Lawson's got some
ideas for you? That sounds more like a job for the P&R department...
(Speaking of which: Lawson, are you out there? Haven't seen you in here
lately; are you OK?)
Joe Finn
> Joe Finn wrote:
>
> > One of the big trends that I've seen over the last 30 years has been the
> > emergence of jazz pedagogy. It's not just Berklee, North Texas and Indiana
> > any more. There are lots and lots of programs out there today. The musicians
> >
> > [guitar players included] that are coming out of the academy these days are
> > really great. They can play more difficult music more accurately and with
> > more expression than ever before. The younger composers, arrangers and
> > instrumentalists seem to be reaching greater and greater heights. I
> > personally think this is one of the greatest things happening in music
> > today. The future is lookin' real good to me. ...joe
>
> Sorry. I'm not reading anything that excites me here. I guess it's nice that
> we have developed EFFICIENT factories for producing MORE musicians with GREATER
> skills that continually RAISE the bar by playing BETTER than anyone before
> them.
>
Say what? I'll go way, way out on a limb here and take a stand in favor of more
musicians, greater skills, and better playing. ...joe
Bob Russell
bobrus...@hotmail.com wrote on 2/23/01 11:23 PM:
John:
Let me add that I am in no way making light of your questions. I just really
don't know if you'll find the answers in here. If you've been following the
traffic here for the last couple of days, you'll have noticed that there's
just as much chaos, etc. in here as there is in the world out there. But
maybe someone will come up with something...
Bob Russell
wrote on 2/23/01 11:36 PM:
> Say what? I'll go way, way out on a limb here and take a stand in favor of
> more
> musicians, greater skills, and better playing. ...joe
Whew. Pretty bold stand there, Joe. But I'll back you up on that one. :)
Joe Finn
>
> > Say what? I'll go way, way out on a limb here and take a stand in favor of
> > more
> > musicians, greater skills, and better playing. ...joe
>
> Whew. Pretty bold stand there, Joe. But I'll back you up on that one. :)
>
> -- Bob Russell
It's a risky business. Thanks for the support. .....joe
P.S. nice job on the web site.
crib
describing an art form as "dead" is rather abstract. is baroque music "dead"?
certainly, it's been stylized; i doubt any of us would describe anyone today as
a "baroque innovator." yet there are plenty of musicians today who love and
play that type of music. is it dead because its definition has been set in
stone, or is it alive because it continues to be performed?
in the former sense, i would agree with mr. onstenk: bebop is dead. we're not
going to hear any fresh new voices playing innovative ideas that'll make us sit
up and say, "wow, what an original new bebop player."
in the latter sense, though, bebop is certainly far from dead. there are plenty
of older musicians still playing the music (barry harris has just released a
new record), and there are even more younger musicians working bebop -- some
who are passing through along a path of growth, and some who will opt to remain
in that genre.
the reason why i think it's unreasonable to say that "jazz" is dead, is that it
hasn't even met the first criteria yet. not only do musicians argue about
whether kenny g or cecil taylor are playing "jazz," but even average music fans
haven't reached a consensus.
you could certainly write a new baroque composition. it would have to contain
certain stylistic elements, however, for a listener to describe it as
"baroque." "jazz," on the other hand, is applied to things which seemingly have
no stylistic commonalities. improvisational sections seem to be the only
"requirement" to get the "that's jazz!" reaction -- and even that rule has its
exceptions. i've been studying charlie haden's "silence" this week, which is a
good example; if i play through that tune a couple of times on the piano,
without improvising anything, almost any listener will recognize the harmony as
"jazz."
one of the most striking comments that mr. onstenk made, i fear will be
overlooked by other readers. he states that he's not a pro, but also that he's
not an artist. this is an important point, i think, but it requires agreement
about the definition of "art." i believe, as mr. onstenk seems to, that "art"
requires some element of intent. i think one can play jazz -- or sculpt, or
paint, or act (the latter being perhaps the most important and everyday
example) -- without artistic intent, thereby making that jazz, sculpture,
painting or performance not "art."
i think that to disagree with that view -- to believe that "art" is such by
resulting quality alone, and that even an everyday 'dramatic' lie is "artistic"
in some sense -- has the result of diluting the wonder of the word when you
wish to apply it to the ceiling of the sistine chapel, for instance.
is all jazz "art"? are all jazz musicians "artists"? if "yes," then is (for
example) wedding reception music (a) art, or (b) not jazz? if "no," then could
it be that this is what's so special about, for example, john coltrane, or bill
evans -- their artistic intentions, coupled with their ability to realize those
intentions?
crib
Joey Goldstein
Sounds more like you're looking for God, not music.
The fact of the matter is that today there are more people playing
better than ever in all styles of jazz and in all styles of music than
ever before in history. So much of music's development is an iherited
thing. We build on what came before, techniques, harmonic devices,
technologies, etc. We can't help it.
The people playing bebop guitar right now are playing with stronger
time, more technique and greater fluidity than the people who actually
invented the music. There is nothing really stopping someone today from
finding their own voice within an older style like bebop but I'd be hard
pressed to name someone.
The problem, as I see it, for the future of jazz IS that there are so
many good players right now. Only a very small few actually stand out
anymore to command our attention and the biggest part of why we become
aware of these people is because they have good press agents.
The "future of jazz guitar" will be a person. A person who can't help
but play like himself and who plays what he hears with discipline and finesse.
--
Joey Goldstein
Guitarist/Jazz Recording Artist/Teacher
Home Page: http://webhome.idirect.com/~joegold
Email: <joegold AT idirect DOT com>
jcl...@mediaone.net
> jcl...@mediaone.net wrote:
>
> > Joe Finn wrote:
> >
> > > One of the big trends that I've seen over the last 30 years has been the
> > > emergence of jazz pedagogy. It's not just Berklee, North Texas and Indiana
> > > any more. There are lots and lots of programs out there today. The musicians
> > >
> > > [guitar players included] that are coming out of the academy these days are
> > > really great. They can play more difficult music more accurately and with
> > > more expression than ever before. The younger composers, arrangers and
> > > instrumentalists seem to be reaching greater and greater heights. I
> > > personally think this is one of the greatest things happening in music
> > > today. The future is lookin' real good to me. ...joe
> >
> > Sorry. I'm not reading anything that excites me here. I guess it's nice that
> > we have developed EFFICIENT factories for producing MORE musicians with GREATER
> > skills that continually RAISE the bar by playing BETTER than anyone before
> > them.
> >
>
> Say what? I'll go way, way out on a limb here and take a stand in favor of more
> musicians, greater skills, and better playing. ...joe
Yeah, that's a pretty risky position alright.
John C.
Tom Lippincott
I've heard many different people, philosophers as well as jazz critics and
musicians, express the opinion in recent years that we've entered into what's
become known as the "post-modern" age. In jazz what this means is that the
conditions necessary for the "classic" jazz era, with all the great masters
from Louis Armstrong to Miles and Trane to Jaco, is now over and done with. A
lot of people, myself included, tend to think that there ISN'T going to be
another Louis Armstrong or Bird, at least not in jazz. The music and the
conditions surrounding it have reached the point where these huge innovations
aren't really possible anymore, and the new "innovations" are going to,
necessarily, be on a much smaller scale. What this also means, is that since,
as one critic put it, jazz isn't dead, it's just over, we as musicians are now
free to draw upon whatever influences, stylistic periods, sounds, ect. without
pressure of creating the "next big thing." To me the key is doing it
passionately and honestly as a search for one's own "truth and beauty." I've
seen this happening myself in the last 10 or even 20 years. The most
interesting, forward thinking, "innovative" stuff that's been done in recent
years has been more personal and subtle in nature than revolutionary, IMO.
With this in mind, I also don't see playing standards as any less artistically
valid than playing extended through composed pieces, or whatever. I agree with
Joey; the future of jazz guitar will be what each person makes his or her own.
Tom Lippincott
Guitarist, Composer, Teacher
audio samples, articles, CD's at:
http://www.tomlippincott.com
JoeNez
jcl...@mediaone.net wrote:
I think the future of jazz for you is entirely in your hands, unless you own a
record label or know someone who does. The future of jazz for anyone in this group
is only the result of what they are willing to invest in it now.
Maybe you should find a young kid -- son, daughter, nephew, friend, whatever -- and
try to teach him/her to love jazz as you do. And as the process unfolds try to see
what's going on through his/her eyes. You just may see the future of jazz.
JoeNez
jcl...@mediaone.net
I agree with everything Joey said, and most of what Tom said. While "huge
innovations" in music may no longer be possible, we live in a vastly different
world than existed in the '40's. It must be possible to find ways of
communicating, through music, the truth about this world - the way bop communicated
the truth about the frenzied, mechanized chaos of WWII and its effect on American
society. The way Lester Young communicated the truth about what conscripted duty
at a Southern military base could do to a sensitive black artist with no natural
defenses. I'm not saying those guys set out to make social commentary. I'm saying
they played what was in their hearts. It's not like there is nothing going on
today that's worth getting worked up about. And "jazz" doesn't have to mean music
from this period or that period, with this kind of syncopation or that kind of
harmony. It's supposed to be like a meaningful conversation. Like telling someone
close to you what is really in your heart - only more public. Who is doing that
today?
John C.
Dick Onstenk
banker who just plays guitar for a hobby. An amateur, just like me. My god
... how on earth did you dare to comment the way you did, slamming me and my
friends for having fun just playing Bebop. My o my, the irony. I thought I
was dealing with a real professional artist.
We have a poseur among us.
Still pissed,
Dick
Dick Onstenk
not
> going to hear any fresh new voices playing innovative ideas that'll make
us sit
> up and say, "wow, what an original new bebop player."
Right Crib .... and I don't have any problems with that. In my conception
Jazz equals Bebop because that is the type I prefer. Obviously some more
advanced souls (ahem ...) have problems with that. Not only on this list,
but right here in Eindhoven too. I don't care much about that though
normally.
> in the latter sense, though, bebop is certainly far from dead. there are
plenty
> of older musicians still playing the music (barry harris has just released
a
> new record), and there are even more younger musicians working bebop --
some
> who are passing through along a path of growth, and some who will opt to
remain
> in that genre.
Yes, Bebop is played in my favorite Jazz joint all the time and it is far
from dead when I consider the audience's and the players' responses.
> the reason why i think it's unreasonable to say that "jazz" is dead, is
that it
> hasn't even met the first criteria yet. not only do musicians argue about
> whether kenny g or cecil taylor are playing "jazz," but even average music
fans
> haven't reached a consensus.
Right, many types of improvised music forms I would not regard as Jazz.
> one of the most striking comments that mr. onstenk made, i fear will be
> overlooked by other readers. he states that he's not a pro, but also that
he's
> not an artist. this is an important point, i think, but it requires
agreement
> about the definition of "art." i believe, as mr. onstenk seems to, that
"art"
> requires some element of intent. i think one can play jazz -- or sculpt,
or
> paint, or act (the latter being perhaps the most important and everyday
> example) -- without artistic intent, thereby making that jazz, sculpture,
> painting or performance not "art."
Exactly my point. I play Jazz but I AM NO ARTIST. I am a guitar player at
best. I play for fun only and am working on a style that is easily
recognizable and probably even predictable from a Bebop point of view. I
have no artistic presumption because I play things that were composed by
others and even my improvisations are within existing stylistic frameworks
which means I do not create new stuff. I am perfectly happy copying the
artists I admire: harmonies, melodies, licks you name it. Mr. Kleinhaut -
like any artist full of pretense himself - cannot understand this and showed
a severe lack of empathy in his ill-mannered reply. Unfortunately there are
more pros on this list that have that tendency. They seem to think that
everybody should aspire for artistic integrity. Well, I don't have the time
and the talent for that, nor the ambition.
I hope to become a reasonable copycat bebop player one day and that's all I
ask. For the rest I am enjoying myself tremendously at the Crow organizing
jam sessions and promoting amateur Jazz in the area and playing with
musicians that are vastly superior to me. I am perfectly happy to leave the
artistic Jazz guitar path to others but I refuse to be patronized by them
and certainly not in the way Mr. Kleinhaut thought appropriate.
I find it all too striking that an accomplished artist such as Jimmy Bruno
never participates in this kind of unpleasant and patronizing snobbery.
Crib, I liked your post.
By the way, I am an amateur and I still hate Smooth Jazz.
Dick
http://livejazzatthecrow.iuma.com My fun Jazz MP3 site (warning: "to be
avoided by genuine artists")
Jim Kangas
different way, but it really sounds pretentious to me.
I really don't get where this and the thread by Jack is going. Do you
want all of us to just shoot ourselves so there are only 5 jazz guitar
players left? Should I apologize that I've only been working at this
for 30 years?
-Jim
Kevin Van Sant
wrote in message <sJxl6.36010$MH6.4...@nlnews00.chello.com> :
>When it comes to Jazz, I don't look forward at all. I tend to think that the
>best Jazz was played a long time ago and it does not bother me one bit. I
>consider my type of Jazz - Bebop - as a relic of the past to be cherished,
>just like classical music, a Bogart movie or a vintage car. Nostalgia?
>Probably, who cares ...As long as I enjoy it and play it with my friends at
>the Crow it is very alive. Jazz dead? Ridiculous. Jazz is just as dead as
>Mozart and Chopin's music and that music will always survive.
Dick, when you play bop, are you most interested in strictly *copying*
past players the best you can, or do feel like you want to assimilate
the influence of your favorites and come up with your own thing within
that bag? If it's the former then I don't think I've ever heard a
jazz player express such non-creative motivation. If it's the latter
than I would say that in fact you are looking forward, maybe not
particularly far. but anyone who is searching for their own voice is
moving forward.
>Why is everybody always whining about Jazz being dead? It's just as dead as
>a Rembrandt or a van Gogh painting (yes, both countrymen of mine), the
>Beatles, Rock & Roll James Dean or Marilyn Monroel. It simply lives on in
>the hearts and minds of those that love it. It doesn't develop or evolve
>anymore? So what ... Neither does Bach's music and it's still great.
Do you actually hear that said very often, jazz is dead? I don't know
any players who say that. I don't know any informed fans who say that
either.
>I really don't care if you call Jazz a Dinosaur, a fossile or Nostalgia, it
>simply isn't dead. It can't be as long as people are enjoying it and playing
>it.
I don't really care either, except that to some people the perception
of jazz as some sort of dusty old relic may keep them from going out
and finding out that in fact that is alive and vibrant and probably in
their neighborhood.
_________________________________________
Kevin Van Sant
jazz guitar
http://www.onestopjazz.com/kvansant
to buy my CDs, listen to sound clips, and get more info.
http://www.onestopjazz.com
for a comprehensive index of internet jazz resources
Florian Schmidt
wrote:
well, asides from your reasons to be pissed (i am truly not able to
understand them, like all the other fuzzing around on this ng at the
moment), i beg u to stop this bla bla "mr thisandthat is a <insert
favourite bad word>".. it's truly annoying. can't u do that via email?
thanks..
--
Florian Schmidt
mista...@gmx.net
http://mini.gt.owl.de/~floh
Dick Onstenk
Dick
Winston Castro
>
>I hope to become a reasonable copycat bebop player one day and that's all I
>ask. For the rest I am enjoying myself tremendously at the Crow organizing
>jam sessions and promoting amateur Jazz in the area and playing with
>musicians that are vastly superior to me. I am perfectly happy to leave the
>artistic Jazz guitar path to others but I refuse to be patronized by them
>and certainly not in the way Mr. Kleinhaut thought appropriate.
>
>I find it all too striking that an accomplished artist such as Jimmy Bruno
>never participates in this kind of unpleasant and patronizing snobbery.
>
He is probably off practicing instead of arguing on here like we
are! LOL
I don't find anything "snobbish" about having personal opinions about
what constitutes good jazz. Don't we all do that?
But it cuts both ways- People do have the "right" as it were, to
believe Kenny G is good jazz. People also have the right to say his
playing sucks and is not good jazz.
Mark Kleinhaut
at7...@nospamHotmail.com (Winston Castro) wrote:
>
>>
>>I hope to become a reasonable copycat bebop player one day and that's all
I
>>ask. For the rest I am enjoying myself tremendously at the Crow organizing
>>jam sessions and promoting amateur Jazz in the area and playing with
>>musicians that are vastly superior to me. I am perfectly happy to leave
the
>>artistic Jazz guitar path to others but I refuse to be patronized by them
>>and certainly not in the way Mr. Kleinhaut thought appropriate.
>>
>>I find it all too striking that an accomplished artist such as Jimmy Bruno
>>never participates in this kind of unpleasant and patronizing snobbery.
>>
>
>
> He is probably off practicing instead of arguing on here like we
>are! LOL
Actually, Jimmy was in the center of a huge flamewar about a year ago. It
must have generated over 200 posts, nearly a record for this NG. The end
result was Jimmy leaving this group for a while, which was extremely unfortunate...but
anytime any of post before we think, we run the risk of damaging our credibility
and reputations. As you know, I've got some first hand experience at that
lately:)
>I don't find anything "snobbish" about having personal opinions about
>what constitutes good jazz. Don't we all do that?
I don't think the snobery comes so much with WHAT you say, as much as in
HOW you say it. It's the condescending attitute of elitism that is offensive
to people and, in the end, defeats the purpose of the point(s) that one was
trying to get accross in the first place.
>But it cuts both ways- People do have the "right" as it were, to
>believe Kenny G is good jazz. People also have the right to say his
>playing sucks and is not good jazz.
>
We all have a right to free speach, but the aggression is really where things
break down. Once we start to condemn others, and aggresion-defense cycle
sets in quickly. Flame wars start just like any other war- in the interest
of defending something.
Richard
> at7...@nospamHotmail.com (Winston Castro) wrote:
> >I don't find anything "snobbish" about having personal opinions about
> >what constitutes good jazz. Don't we all do that?
>
> I don't think the snobery comes so much with WHAT you say, as much as in
> HOW you say it. It's the condescending attitute of elitism that is offensive
> to people and, in the end, defeats the purpose of the point(s) that one was
> trying to get accross in the first place.
I think that jazz snobbery is the same as blues snobbery is the same as
rock snobbery--and is largely the same as ethnic/racial snobbery and
religious snobbery. It's a mindset of identifying completely and totally
with one's small point in the world, instead of seeing your point in the
world as inherently relative.
I don't think you find that a <music-type> snob embraces relativism in
other aspects of their life, either. It's a stance of psychological
certainty, where there simply isn't a question that one's take on things
is The Correct One.
The underlying motive for it, I think, is fear. The vastness of life and
existence simply scares the hell out of some of us, and rather than deal
with the fear of our relativeness a person "hunkers down" and clings
very, very hard to what one knows. We're adrift in a sea of unlimited
possibilities--and our beliefs, our likes and dislikes, and so on become
like life preservers that we feel we'll drown without.
I remember once going to the top of the World Trade Center (the tourist
tour), and looking out over everything. That's a pretty tall view, and
it hit me for some reason that if every person alive on the earth right
now were at this one spot with me, the sea of humanity would stretch out
to the horizon in all directions. That's a whole lot of people, and if
you look at it that way the notion of any one's personal preferences
being "the right ones" among all these other similar but different
preferences seems very, very silly.
Yeah, we can all believe what we like about Kenny G. It just doesn't
count for much, one way or the other--and there's fundamentally no real
grounds for arguments along those lines. It's like arguing over what
what things psych-test inkblots "really" look like.
--
That which passes, passes like clouds.
This post simply contains some of my personal opinions.
ObURL: http://home.earthlink.net/~huddler
Dick Onstenk
Mark Kleinhaut <markkl...@hotmail.com> schreef in berichtnieuws
3a9a8418$1...@spamkiller.newsfeeds.com...
> anytime any of post before we think, we run the risk of damaging our
credibility
> and reputations. As you know, I've got some first hand experience at that
> lately:)
>
> I don't think the snobery comes so much with WHAT you say, as much as in
> HOW you say it. It's the condescending attitute of elitism that is
offensive
> to people and, in the end, defeats the purpose of the point(s) that one
was
> trying to get accross in the first place.
Quite so.
> We all have a right to free speach, but the aggression is really where
things
> break down. Once we start to condemn others, and aggresion-defense cycle
> sets in quickly. Flame wars start just like any other war- in the
interest
Mark, this is an excellent analysis ... this is exactly what happened!
Dick
William Barkin
-Bill
--------------------------
William Barkin - Fine Artist
Online Portfolio
http://www.bcn.net/~wbarkin
"Joe Finn" <ttc1...@taconic.net> wrote in message
news:3A973A53...@taconic.net...
Stan Gosnell
<3a9a8418$1...@spamkiller.newsfeeds.com>:
>I don't think the snobery comes so much with WHAT you say, as much as in
>HOW you say it.
True, & that's the rub. It is much more difficult to distinguish how
someone is saying something by reading text than in person. So much of our
information comes from seeing body language, facial expressions, etc. It's
easy to jump to conclusions about what you think someone means in a post,
but it's more difficult to see what was really meant.
Bob Russell
sgos...@bigfoot.com wrote on 2/26/01 8:07 PM:
>> I don't think the snobery comes so much with WHAT you say, as much as in
>> HOW you say it.
>
> True, & that's the rub. It is much more difficult to distinguish how
> someone is saying something by reading text than in person. So much of our
> information comes from seeing body language, facial expressions, etc. It's
> easy to jump to conclusions about what you think someone means in a post,
> but it's more difficult to see what was really meant.
Yes. Not everyone expresses themselves well in print; sometimes a little
"between the lines" reading is in order. And those "smileys", etc. may be
seen by some as cutesy, but they do help prevent misunderstandings once in a
while. I think it's also true that some of the more aggressive stuff we see
in here is stuff that people feel safer in saying because they aren't
face-to-face with the recipient. (I also realize that some people would be
just as obnoxious in person.)
Stan Gosnell
<B6C07336.3C44%bobrus...@hotmail.com>:
snip
> I think it's also true that some of the more aggressive
>stuff we see in here is stuff that people feel safer in saying because
>they aren't face-to-face with the recipient. (I also realize that some
>people would be just as obnoxious in person.)
Unfortunately, this is also true. It's a lot easier to call someone names
long distance via text than it is face to face.
Lawson Stone
d.on...@chello.nl wrote on 02/25/2001 6:01 PM:
> This case is closed.
>
> Dick
>
>
Indeed it is, closed by Mr. Kleinhaut's very fine CD that demonstrates that
whatever his "status" is--amateur or professional--he is definitely one very
fine, talented, creative, and satisfying guitarist to listen to.
It doesn't matter how you make a living if you've got the chops.
So yep, case closed. Kleinhaut can really play, and you can really talk
trash.
*****************************************************
"Go sleep it off Ike; you talk too much for a fighting man"--Wyatt Earp
Lawson Stone-Professor of Old Testament, Asbury Theological Seminary
Jazz Guitar, Cowboy Action Shooting, Leathercraft, Horses, Old West
crib
<< ...you can really talk trash. >>
if you're responding to what i think you're responding to, i've got a tip you
should really consider, mr. stone.
the next time you decide to respond to a post -- ESPECIALLY a flame -- check
the date on it.
crib
Bob Russell
lawson...@verizon.net wrote on 4/19/01 3:58 PM:
Lawson:
This thread is ancient history; the concerned parties already settled the
matter amicably. Did you read the whole thread? (Or check the date?)
Lawson Stone
bobrus...@hotmail.com wrote on 04/19/2001 6:09 PM:
> This thread is ancient history; the concerned parties already settled the
> matter amicably. Did you read the whole thread? (Or check the date?)
(blushing, red-faced, digging toes into the ground)
Uh, yes, and I have posted an apology to a couple of spots where I hope Mr.
Onstenk and others will see it.
We all step in it sometimes, and I did it big time.
Lawson Stone
crib...@aol.com.go.away wrote on 04/19/2001 5:00 PM:
> if you're responding to what i think you're responding to, i've got a tip you
> should really consider, mr. stone.
>
> the next time you decide to respond to a post -- ESPECIALLY a flame -- check
> the date on it.
Crib, and others,
You are so right. I have done some stupid and inconsiderate things in my
life, and my reply there was certainly among them. I was crabby, rude and
out of line and regret it deeply. I really hadn't checked that it was Dick
Onstenk, from whom I've learned a lot and whom I appreciate a great deal, to
whom I replied. It was purely knee-jerk, based on my appreciation for Mark.
To all, I express my deep regret and apology for poisoning the air. To Dick,
please accept my direct and heart-felt apology.
crib
<< I have done some stupid and inconsiderate things in my life, and my reply
there was certainly among them. >>
if that's true, you've led an exemplary life.
i'll say the same thing to you that i recently said to mr. proper: i think
you're overreacting. you've posted something like seven different apologies so
far.
relax. everyone here has read a great many informative, constructive posts from
you, and no one thinks you're out to poison the group with abject negativity.
so, you made a dumb mistake by not looking at the date of a post after having
been away for awhile. this ranks among the inconsiderate things you've done in
your life? i nearly killed someone in a wheelchair once because i was driving
rather recklessly down a city street. that's *one* example. there's no way in
hell i would *ever* compare *anything* i could possibly scrawl on this little
piece of cyber-graffiti to the stupid and inconsiderate things i've done in the
real world.
and look at it this way: you managed, in a roundabout way, to compliment mr.
kleinhaut, by defending him with such staunchness.
so chill. it was a mistake. it wasn't your first, it won't be your last, and
you sure as hell aren't alone there. if this was your worst, i figure you can
look forward to a damn short delay in purgatory before skipping up on 'twixt
the pearly gates; and if it wasn't, there's probably another more deserving of
your regret. so "welcome back," and let's all move on.
crib
Bob Russell
lawson...@verizon.net wrote on 4/20/01 1:31 PM:
Lawson:
You are without a doubt one of the nicest guys on this NG. We all goof up
once in a while, no biggie.
Personally, I'm glad to see you in here again; I've always considered you to
be a major civilizing influence in RMMGJ.
Winston Castro
<lawson...@verizon.net> wrote:
>in article 20010419170027...@ng-cu1.aol.com, crib at
>crib...@aol.com.go.away wrote on 04/19/2001 5:00 PM:
>
>> if you're responding to what i think you're responding to, i've got a tip you
>> should really consider, mr. stone.
>>
>> the next time you decide to respond to a post -- ESPECIALLY a flame -- check
>> the date on it.
>
>Crib, and others,
>
>You are so right. I have done some stupid and inconsiderate things in my
>life, and my reply there was certainly among them. I was crabby, rude and
>out of line and regret it deeply.
If you're Catholic a few Hail Marys will do.
If you're Protestant a donation to Jimmy Swaggert Ministries is in
order.
If you're Jewish, eating only unleavened bread for 3 days will be your
prescribed penance.
That should assuage your guilt complex some. ;-)