Please note this is an archived topic, so it is locked and unable to be replied to. You may, however, start a new topic and refer to this topic with a link: http://www.banjohangout.org/archive/170105/2
Page: 1 2 3 4
martycutler - Posted - 02/08/2010: 09:08:21
quote:
Originally posted by Ira Gitlin
quote:
Originally posted by salvatone
There were many great five string banjo players playing jazz in Scruggs and melodic styles from the beginning. Certainly, Don Reno was one. I remember Roger Sprung playing Bye Bye Blues when I was first learning also. Eddie Adcock was another.
I think we need to make a distinction here between playing jazz per se--as Bela and Pat do--and playing repertoire derived from jazz--as Don, Eddie, and Roger have done--within a bluegrass context.
Ira hits the nail on the head. For the sake of argument, I'll restrict myself to 5-string players. There have been quite a few players who have negotiated the melodies and chord changes of jazz tunes standards (Allen Shelton is another who comes to mind); whether or not they were playing Jazz or just an arranged show piece is another distinction.
Here's the tricky part: some of you may consider only a linear, pianistic or guitaristic technique (for example) a true prerequisite for jazz. Saxophonist David Sanborn is famous for saying that he can't play Giant Steps in 12 keys; whether Sanborn fits your definition of a Jazz player is your call, of course, but he can improvise at a very high level, and most importantly, I can pick his sound out of a hall full of saxophonists.
Plenty of banjoists fall into this latter category who don't necessarily consider themselves Jazz musicians. Tony Trischka is a great example. Whether you consider any of his work as Jazz is another question—and one I won't attempt to answer. Nonetheless—like Sanborn—Tony has achieved his own voice on the instrument and his improvisational skills are at an extremely high level.
I think you can almost always distill these questions down to the "What is Jazz, anyway?" question. For me, it's all good, but personal identity as a player trumps category every time. It's an exciting time for the 5-string.
Best,
Marty
NYCJazz - Posted - 02/08/2010: 09:30:04
I consider Tony Trishka and Bela Fleck both jazz musicians of the highest order.
Here's Tony playing with three of the best 4-string jazz banjoists around in Budapest back in 1992. Eddy Davis, Cynthia Sayer and Buddy Wachter:
youtube.com/watch?v=RuvqbImu1PU
Banjocoltrane - Posted - 02/08/2010: 09:37:54
Improvisation isn't a prerequisite to call something jazz. There was/is lots of jazz that's not improvised. Sometimes really great players will play the same solo on a song.
What is jazz would be extremely difficult to put into words. However, I think that is best discovered by listening.
Everything from Jelly Roll Morton, Louis Armstrong, Charlie Parker, John Coltrane, Michael Brecker, and Chick Corea....oh yeah, let's not forget Ornette Coleman and Sun Ra :)
Without getting into it much, there is lots of music considered to be jazz by banjoists that I don't really consider to be jazz. I'm guessing this is because most of the ones I've met are of a bluegrass mind. Anything foreign to them with a maj7th is "jazz."
Jazz has certain rhythmic nuances, as well as certain articulations that I don't hear in most "banjo jazz."
You can play "All the Things you are" on the banjo but if it doesn't contain these elements then I'd have a hard time calling it jazz.
For example, Allen Shelton is perhaps my favorite bluegrass banjoist. He was simply playing jazz/show tunes in a bluegrass style, he wasn't a jazz musician. This doesn't in any way take away from what he was doing, it's simply a distinction.
I think if you are looking for the "origins" of jazz banjo, you would need to start with some of the great 4 string plectrum/tenor players. Of course there were folks like Van Eps playing ragtime, but that wasn't "jazz."
As far as 5-string banjo jazz specifically? Personally, I have a hard time believing there wasn't some guy we've never heard of playing jazz on the banjo before people like Bela, Pat Cloud, Bill Keith, etc....and most likely playing sax lines, piano voicings, etc.
salvatone - Posted - 02/08/2010: 10:08:43
martycutler and Banjocoltrane
I think you may be closing too many doors here. I play some jazz, but not very well, and I'm not just being modest. I would hate to think that I'm not really playing jazz because I'm not playing at a high enough level or because my playing is not nuanced or articulated in a certain way. We all have to start where we are, we have no choice.
I was thinking, as well, could Foggy Mountain Special be called a jazz tune? It is an improvised 12 bar blues with a rhythm that could accomodate a swing guitar chop behind it.
Edited by - salvatone on 02/08/2010 12:44:35
Ira Gitlin - Posted - 02/08/2010: 10:31:00
"I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description ["jazz"]; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I hear it."
— Justice Potter Stewart, concurring opinion in Reno v. Fleck
salvatone - Posted - 02/08/2010: 10:35:21
Ira Gitlin
I was thinking about this exact quote. Perfect.
Ira Gitlin - Posted - 02/08/2010: 10:38:50
For "hear", substitute "see"; for "jazz", substitute "hardcore pornography".
For "Reno v. Fleck"--oh heck, never mind....
salvatone - Posted - 02/08/2010: 11:12:37
I happen to like both jazz and porn, but I am not looking to take this topic into yet another realm.
Edited by - salvatone on 02/08/2010 11:13:52
NYCJazz - Posted - 02/08/2010: 12:17:04
The word "jazz" (or jass) was New Orleans slang for sex back at the turn of the century.
I thing you guys are on the right track.
martycutler - Posted - 02/08/2010: 12:31:34
quote:
Originally posted by salvatone
martycutler and Banjocoltrane
I think you may be closing too many doors here. I play some jazz, but not very well, and I'm not just being modest. I would hate to think that I'm not really playing jazz because I'm not playing at a high enough level or because my playing is not nuanced or articulated in a certain way. We all have to start where we are, we no choice.
I hope I'm not trying to close doors here; I think that the more approaches we bring to the instrument, the richer the gene pool. I think that's also true with Jazz, and as BanjoColtrane points out, classifying jazz as strictly an improviser's art may not work, although personally, I am biased toward some mix of improvisation and arrangement.
I don't want to get too deep into the "What is Jazz" portion of this discussion, but I'll just toss a few names out: Duke Ellington, King Oliver, Count Basie, Slim Gaillard, Charlie Parker, Lester Young, Ornette Coleman, Thelonious Monk, Ralph Towner, Scott Henderson, Jimmy Raney, Freddie Green, John McLaughlin, Herbie Hancock, Joe Zawinul, Teddy Wilson, Scott Joplin, Scott Kinsey, Jaco Pastorius, Paul Chambers, Ron Carter, Ray Brown, Louis Armstrong, Miles Davis, Freddie Hubbard, Wynton Marsalis... enough. Even some of these guys argued that some of these other guys weren't jazz.
Marty
salvatone - Posted - 02/11/2010: 07:16:37
Tuneager
I have always thought that this rant by Pat Metheny was somewhat gratuitous, even though I agree with him.
The Kenny G Syndrome (that's pretty catchy, no?) is is a problem that jazz music has had forever. Many years ago a friend told me how difficult it was to go to hear Chuck Mangione at a club in Montreal, when the opening act was the Bill Evans (the pianist) Trio.
Incidentally, I have a version of What a Wonderful World posted on my Hangout sound page. I hope Metheny doesn't listen to it.
banjohangout.org/myhangout/med...archived=
Edited by - salvatone on 02/11/2010 11:44:27
Banjophobic - Posted - 02/11/2010: 08:13:16
This 'what is/what isnt' debate is pretty much universal to all genres of music. The debate of "that isnt county", "that isnt bluegrass" or "that isnt jazz",etc,etc rages eternally. I can see the merits in those arguments up to a point. Each genre has 'giants' who are the foundation of it. Coltrane ,Ellington and Armstrong are analogous to Scruggs, Reno and Osborne. If one is serious about playing in these styles of music , you cannot really bypass them or their influences, and be considered 'competant'. But there's alot more to 'jazz' and 'bluegrass' on banjo than just those great players. Heck, if the guys who play the stuff themselves cant agree on what a proper definition is, then why worry about it,haha. Besides, if folks worried about keeping everything so 'pure', we wouldnt have Flecks, Trishkas, Hancocks and Methenys. 
Edited by - Banjophobic on 02/11/2010 08:15:21
NYCJazz - Posted - 02/11/2010: 08:53:53
Jazz doesn't have to be obtuse to be good. Jazz doesn't have to be bad to be popular.
Louis Armstrong had hit records in every decade from the twenties to the sixties yet his impact, both vocal and instrumental is incalculable. He just had the ability to connect with a mass audience. Plus he played from the heart, not the head.
BTW No one has commented on the video I posted with Tony Trishka playing jazz 3-finger style in a jazz band setting.
Also no one commented on the awesome red glasses he's sportin"!
salvatone - Posted - 02/11/2010: 09:16:02
NYCJazz-I listened to it. That's a lot of banjos. I heard Tony play a Scruggs run in there, but I wished I could have heard him better.
As long as people have started dropping names, I wanted to say: Sonny Rollins.
Klondike Waldo - Posted - 02/11/2010: 10:23:02
Funny no one mentioned Jelly Roll Morton or King Oliver (both of whom had tenor banjoists in their bands BTW. Morton claimed to have "invented Jazz", but what he could legitimately have claimed to have done was to worked out a way to write out jazz arrangements. If Morton and Ellington used written arrangements for their bands, does that make them not Jazz giants. I think not.
Sorry I missed the mentions of Oliver and Morton in earlier posts- mea culpa
Edited by - Klondike Waldo on 03/05/2010 08:27:03
Banjocoltrane - Posted - 02/11/2010: 11:49:42
quote:
Originally posted by Banjocoltrane
Everything from JELLY ROLL MORTON, Louis Armstrong, Charlie Parker, John Coltrane
That's why I mentioned who I did. They had written out arrangements and it was STILL jazz. Improvisation isn't the only defining characteristic of "jazz."
NYCJazz - Posted - 02/11/2010: 12:22:31
quote:
Originally posted by Klondike Waldo
Funny no one mentioned Jelly Roll Morton or King Oliver (both of whom had tenor banjoists in their bands BTW.
Bob
Look up the King Oliver song "Everybody Does It in Hawaii"... The steel guitar in it was performed by none other than my teacher, Roy Smeck in 1930.
It's pretty mind-boggling to me that there's one degree of separation between me and King Oliver!
tubaphone - Posted - 02/15/2010: 20:56:31
Oh, and my great-uncle Vladimir was a pianist (perhaps the greatest of the twentieth century) NOT a violinist...
Think first, check your facts second, THEN post.
Marc Horowitz
martycutler - Posted - 02/15/2010: 22:09:27
quote:
Originally posted by tubaphone
Oh, and my great-uncle Vladimir was a pianist (perhaps the greatest of the twentieth century) NOT a violinist...
Think first, check your facts second, THEN post.
Marc Horowitz
Your great-uncle was Vladimir Tubaphone?
Marty
Tuneager - Posted - 02/16/2010: 07:30:56
quote:
Originally posted by tubaphone
Oh, and my great-uncle Vladimir was a pianist (perhaps the greatest of the twentieth century) NOT a violinist...
Think first, check your facts second, THEN post.
Marc Horowitz
Yes, of course, you're correct and you'll see in my first response to my reading Horowitz incorrectly that I replied pianist Vladimir Horowitz, so I re-posted with a slip of the tongue, have anger about these things if you wish. There's a lot of "greatest" analogies thrown around in here, that's something to think about as well.
Tuneager - Posted - 02/16/2010: 07:33:00
quote:
Originally posted by martycutler
quote:
Originally posted by tubaphone
Oh, and my great-uncle Vladimir was a pianist (perhaps the greatest of the twentieth century) NOT a violinist...
Think first, check your facts second, THEN post.
Marc Horowitz
Your great-uncle was Vladimir Tubaphone?
Marty
No, Vladimir Tubaphone was the first "Jazz" musician, I think he said so in an interview in the NY Times.
Garbageman007 - Posted - 02/16/2010: 09:23:12
I could go on for a decade about "real jazz" and "bluegrass jazz", in the end its all about how each school of thought thinks about music, how far there ears are willing to stretch and how much of the music is truly about expression and not "fast rolls in the key of B" or recycled Scruggs licks. Thats what separates the two.
TRUE jazz is really all about expression and nothing else, a good example is coltrane, who eventually killed the idea of chord progressions and all that other "nonsense" that gets in the way of him fully expressing himself. Thats why hes so highly regarded in the jazz world, he always broke rules and did whatever it took to really express himself. He took alot of s*** from alot of people for it too.. thats jazz.
Tuneager - Posted - 02/16/2010: 11:24:27
What's more, bluegrassers have their own style categories linking right-hand technique to famous players, i.e., "Scruggs Style," "Reno Style" and "Keith Style." Personality linked technique is somehow revealing because nobody really has a market on common string technique. Banjo instruction utilizing accepted music basics such as music theory, sight-reading (as opposed to tablature), and the practice of scales and arpeggios, is virtually nonexistent. These accepted instruction methods are common methods on all other instruments and are the tools and foundations of personal style - not personalities or technique. It's why it could be argued that in terms of instruction, five-string banjo is still at a "folk" instrument level of development and is the reason it is relegated to the "miscellaneous" category of musical instruments.
phillygtr - Posted - 02/16/2010: 16:07:00
Jumpin' in here...
If Bela said "I was trying to learn how to play jazz, and there was no method for playing jazz on the banjo because it hadn't been done before.", could he have meant that in the same way Jean Luc Ponty innovated jazz on violin even though the Grappelli's of the world were doing jazz decades before? Though there were a lot of jazz violinists around, I don't really think they were doing it in the same way Jean Luc was. In the general sense Ponty didn't invent jazz violin, but he took it in a bold (almost horn like) direction. The roots of Ponty are more about Coltrane than Grappelli.
edit: I know in the prior posts everyone's quotes were placed in the proper context. I'm just thinking about Bela's contribution/jazz lineage.
Edited by - phillygtr on 02/16/2010 16:21:17
martycutler - Posted - 02/16/2010: 16:18:33
quote:
Originally posted by Tuneager
What's more, bluegrassers have their own style categories linking right-hand technique to famous players, i.e., "Scruggs Style," "Reno Style" and "Keith Style." Personality linked technique is somehow revealing because nobody really has a market on common string technique. Banjo instruction utilizing accepted music basics such as music theory, sight-reading (as opposed to tablature), and the practice of scales and arpeggios, is virtually nonexistent. These accepted instruction methods are common methods on all other instruments and are the tools and foundations of personal style - not personalities or technique. It's why it could be argued that in terms of instruction, five-string banjo is still at a "folk" instrument level of development and is the reason it is relegated to the "miscellaneous" category of musical instruments.
Sorry, but that's not quite right. The styles are so named because there is something compelling about that individual's approach to the instrument. Sure, lots of people have absorbed "Scruggs Style" but it would be disingenuous to insist that the personal voice someone like Scruggs or Bill Keith found on his instrument didn't have a huge influence on so many players. Most serious players I know of took up the style specifically because of the personality of his approach.
I'm sure there are very few musicians who didn't take up an instrument because some other musician's style affected them. One of the greatest challenges a musician can undertake is to find their own voice int their music. In that light, if bluegrass, jazz or for that matter, any music doesn't have a "personality", I'm not interested in hearing it.
Secondly, your assertions seem a little confused. What is a "folk" instrument level of development? Is that supposed to be a pejorative thing? Why?
>the practice of scales and arpeggios, is virtually nonexistent. These accepted instruction methods are common methods on all other instruments and are the tools and foundations of personal style - not personalities or technique.<
Since when is the practice of scales and arpeggios not technique? There's nothing wrong with formal musical skills, of course, but to weigh them against the incredibly rich body of musicianship that developed from the folk process is ridiculous. It's not a contest.
Best,
Marty
martycutler - Posted - 02/16/2010: 16:24:42
quote:
Originally posted by martycutler
[quote]Originally posted by Tuneager
Most serious players I know of took up the style specifically because of the personality of his approach.
Sorry, that should have read: "Most serious players I know of took up the style specifically because of the personality of their approaches.
Garbageman007 - Posted - 02/16/2010: 18:14:21
what do you think rolling over a chord is? its a arpeggio.. a pattern, whatever roll your using.. and melodic licks are scales.. technically scruggs style is based on patterns of arpeggios, although looking at it in that sense they are used in a extremely boring way. And melodic style is based on scales. So, both are practiced alot on banjo whether you realize it or not, however, they are not practiced like jazz musicians practice them and use them - not even close. (most of the time, anyways). Again, its how the two schools use the techniques and how creatively you think that makes you one style or the other
Banjocoltrane - Posted - 02/16/2010: 19:10:36
quote:
Originally posted by phillygtr
If Bela said "I was trying to learn how to play jazz, and there was no method for playing jazz on the banjo because it hadn't been done before.", could he have meant that in the same way Jean Luc Ponty innovated jazz on violin even though the Grappelli's of the world were doing jazz decades before? Though there were a lot of jazz violinists around, I don't really think they were doing it in the same way Jean Luc was. In the general sense Ponty didn't invent jazz violin, but he took it in a bold (almost horn like) direction. The roots of Ponty are more about Coltrane than Grappelli.
There was no method to play jazz on the banjo?....there are THOUSANDS of records,
THERE is your method. That's how jazz is mostly learned.
Not to mention, it is highly derivative of jazz guitar, which has existed for quite some time.
None of these people were exactly Louis Armstrong trying to create a genre and their own harmonic language.
Edited by - Banjocoltrane on 02/16/2010 19:14:54
martycutler - Posted - 02/16/2010: 19:39:58
quote:
Originally posted by Banjocoltrane
quote:
Originally posted by phillygtr
If Bela said "I was trying to learn how to play jazz, and there was no method for playing jazz on the banjo because it hadn't been done before.", could he have meant that in the same way Jean Luc Ponty innovated jazz on violin even though the Grappelli's of the world were doing jazz decades before? Though there were a lot of jazz violinists around, I don't really think they were doing it in the same way Jean Luc was. In the general sense Ponty didn't invent jazz violin, but he took it in a bold (almost horn like) direction. The roots of Ponty are more about Coltrane than Grappelli.
There was no method to play jazz on the banjo?....there are THOUSANDS of records,
THERE is your method. That's how jazz is mostly learned.
Not to mention, it is highly derivative of jazz guitar, which has existed for quite some time.
None of these people were exactly Louis Armstrong trying to create a genre and their own harmonic language.
Remember, I spoke with Bela after this whole kerfuffle blew up; at the time, there was no formal pedagogy for learning jazz improvisation on the five-string, so he wanted to study with someone with a more formal knowledge to impart. That's really all there is.
Marty
Tuneager - Posted - 02/17/2010: 10:00:40
Perhaps showing the letter in question will help clear up the confusion...
New York Times
Arts
JAZZ BANJOISTS
JAZZ BANJOISTS; Plucking A Tender Chord
Published: June 28, 1992
To the Editor:
John Milward's article "Rich and Famous? Take a Lesson Anyway" [ June 7 ] offered an informative look at the need for professionals to continue their own artistic development. But I am troubled by a statement attributed to Bela Fleck.
Mr. Milward quotes Mr. Fleck as saying, "I was trying to learn how to play jazz, and there was no method for playing jazz on the banjo because it hadn't been done before." This statement does a disservice to many of us who play jazz on the five-string banjo. There has long been a culture of bluegrass-based musicians who were absorbing the work of jazz musicians, from King Oliver to Herbie Hancock to Ornette Coleman. While there is no standard method for learning to play jazz on the five-string banjo, banjoists were certainly exploring the jazz idiom as well, and many have continued to study jazz throughout their careers.
I find it hard to believe these words came from someone who was aware of the music of Pat Cloud, Bill Keith and Peter Schwimmer and especially that of his teacher, Tony Trischka, who had recorded several albums long before Bela took up the formal study of jazz improvisation. MARTIN CUTLER Brooklyn
A version of this letter appeared in print on June 28, 1992, on page 24 of the New York edition.
martycutler - Posted - 02/17/2010: 13:02:47
quote:
Originally posted by Tuneager
Perhaps showing the letter in question will help clear up the confusion...
Really? Reposting an inaccurately edited, distorted, and somewhat inflammatory version
of my actual email is intended to clear things up? Did you not read my previous posts on this? What's your real motive here?
Marty
Edited by - martycutler on 02/17/2010 13:07:51
salvatone - Posted - 02/17/2010: 13:16:54
[/quote]
Remember, I spoke with Bela after this whole kerfuffle blew up; at the time, there was no formal pedagogy for learning jazz improvisation on the five-string, so he wanted to study with someone with a more formal knowledge to impart. That's really all there is.
Marty
[/quote]
@Marty-Was that teacher Tony T, or did he find someone, perhaps on another instrument who was more traditionally a jazz musician? Do you know with whom he studied?
Tuneager - Posted - 02/17/2010: 14:38:19
quote:
Originally posted by martycutler
quote:
Originally posted by Tuneager
Perhaps showing the letter in question will help clear up the confusion...
Really? Reposting an inaccurately edited, distorted, and somewhat inflammatory version of my actual email is intended to clear things up? Did you not read my previous posts on this? What's your real motive here?
Marty
quote:
Originally posted by martycutler
Well, my letter was not edited to be "contrary" to what I wrote; My motivations were not all that different from those you state here. Like you, I was upset about the probability that so many great players would be marginalized in the mainstream press for want of a little fact-checking.
snip...
Best,
Marty
Edited by - Tuneager on 02/17/2010 14:43:33
martycutler - Posted - 02/17/2010: 14:44:05
quote:
Originally posted by Tuneager
quote:
Originally posted by martycutler
quote:
Originally posted by Tuneager
Perhaps showing the letter in question will help clear up the confusion...
Really? Reposting an inaccurately edited, distorted, and somewhat inflammatory version of my actual email is intended to clear things up? Did you not read my previous posts on this? What's your real motive here?
Marty
quote:
Originally posted by martycutler
quote:
Well, my letter was not edited to be "contrary" to what I wrote; My motivations were not all that different from those you state here. Like you, I was upset about the probability that so many great players would be marginalized in the mainstream press for want of a little fact-checking.
snip...
Best,
Marty
I'll ask once more: What's *your* real motive here? I know what I wrote, thanks.
Marty
Tuneager - Posted - 02/17/2010: 14:51:14
Like you, I was upset about the probability that so many great players would be marginalized in the mainstream press for want of a little fact-checking.
Banjophobic - Posted - 02/17/2010: 16:43:54
quote:
Originally posted by Tuneager
What's more, bluegrassers have their own style categories linking right-hand technique to famous players, i.e., "Scruggs Style," "Reno Style" and "Keith Style." Personality linked technique is somehow revealing because nobody really has a market on common string technique. Banjo instruction utilizing accepted music basics such as music theory, sight-reading (as opposed to tablature), and the practice of scales and arpeggios, is virtually nonexistent. These accepted instruction methods are common methods on all other instruments and are the tools and foundations of personal style - not personalities or technique. It's why it could be argued that in terms of instruction, five-string banjo is still at a "folk" instrument level of development and is the reason it is relegated to the "miscellaneous" category of musical instruments.
Umm, the reason we call it "Scruggs style","Reno Style" or "keith Style" is out of respect and recognition of their genius and amazing technique on the instrument. Most the other comments you make about this are out of some elitist mentality, as I read it. Your other comment about "folk" level is also a demeaning and seems to say that folks who dont have formal musical training are somehow devoid of talent or that they cant measure up to formally trained, sight reading players. Bluegrass players use arpeggios, scales and are very good at it. Each player decided how far they want to take scale study. If your goal is to play traditional tunes in common keys, then its not a requirement for those folks to know more exotic scales or modes.
Overall ,this paragrah has as many inaccuracies and or misinformation ,and as much of a snobbish feel ,as any Ive read on a forum. As far as the "miscellaneous" categegoy of instruments, comment.....folks who think that are uniformed ignoramous', in my opinion.
These 'folky','untrained' players are some of the most gifted musicians on the planet. Ive heard just as many ,if not more, 'trained players' who can sight read ,who are only marginaly competant players It has nothing to do with training as much as ability to play 'music' with the notes one learns.
Sorry to get riled up, but this kind of attitude really gets to me. Maybe you should bail on this thread before you show much more of your rear end.....
Edited by - Banjophobic on 02/17/2010 16:48:09
Tuneager - Posted - 02/17/2010: 17:18:10
There is no disrespect whatsoever meant towards Scruggs, Keith, Reno, or any of the other great banjoists, all of which I love and admire. The point is when it comes to Jazz, or even other instruments, you don't hear them discussed in these same ways linked to personalities. You don't hear Wes Montgomery-style or Pat Metheny-style when it comes to guitar, or Oscar Peterson-style or Bill Evans-style when it comes to piano, or Charlie Parker-style or John Coltrane-style when it comes to saxophone. That is why banjo still seems to be in infancy in it's development especially when it comes to Jazz. It is a far reach to call something Jazz on the banjo, when it lacks that tradition, yet the term Jazz banjo seems to be thrown around quite a bit nebulously these days and often ignores efforts made by others in the past. There's been some great Jazz tunes played by many players in the past, but Jazz improvisation is another thing entirely. You can study virtually any instrument at major music colleges with long histories of sight-reading musical notation, and true many classically trained musicians may not even be able to improvise, but music theory goes a long way in making some phenomenal Jazz improvisation. Tablature is the standard method for banjo and a lot of bluegrass guitar. There's some great improvisation with these instruments as well. It's not an elitist attitude, it's just the way it is. I started the thread simply out of my own interest in many players who made attempts at playing Jazz tunes, though they may have lacked the improvisational skills of a Coltrane, etc., yet many of those players seem to be ignored in this modern era.
Maybe this video will explain it better:
banjohangout.org/myhangout/vid...=&id=4148
martycutler - Posted - 02/17/2010: 17:23:39
quote:
Originally posted by Tuneager
You don't hear Wes Montgomery-style or Pat Metheny-style when it comes to guitar, or Oscar Peterson-style or Bill Evans-style when it comes to piano, or Charlie Parker-style or John Coltrane-style when it comes to saxophone.
Say what???
Marty
Tuneager - Posted - 02/17/2010: 17:39:11
Maybe this video segment describes it better:
banjohangout.org/myhangout/vid...=&id=4148
Short segment where Bela Fleck describes how when he came on the scene there was basically 3 ways of playing the banjo. He tells how he was the first 5-string banjo player to develop modes all up and down the neck in every key explaining, "so what nobody had really done was learn to just scratch out the modes, just like anyone would really learn on another instrument but nobody had approached that". He plays Don Reno's Follow the Leader as an example that led him to that breakthrough of developing modes in all keys saying, "and that was the sort of leap that I made in the 70's, is figuring out how to do that on a bluegrass banjo".
This segment is located at 1:22:22 in an interview from Dec. 20, 2008 which can be seen in it's entirety here: youtube.com/watch?v=S42ZXE...
Tuneager - Posted - 02/17/2010: 17:49:04
quote:
Originally posted by martycutler
quote:
Originally posted by Tuneager
You don't hear Wes Montgomery-style or Pat Metheny-style when it comes to guitar, or Oscar Peterson-style or Bill Evans-style when it comes to piano, or Charlie Parker-style or John Coltrane-style when it comes to saxophone.
Say what???
Marty
Wes Montgomery, Pat Metheny, Oscar Peterson, Bill Evans, John Coltrane, Charlie Parker, etc., played Jazz. Earl Scruggs is not the only one to play Scruggs-style, Keith is not the only one to play Keith-style, and Don Reno is not the only one to play Reno style. They were all phenomenal innovators, but music linked to personalities having the corner on a certain technique seems rather limiting and narrow in it's focus.
Garbageman007 - Posted - 02/17/2010: 18:25:25
they essentially invented those styles though... and that sound is linked to the guy who figured it out and popularized it because they were the first to do it, unfortunately all Bela did was come along and use those techniques differently than everybody else. What in the hell are you guys even arguing about anymore?
Banjophobic - Posted - 02/17/2010: 18:31:00
[/quote]
Wes Montgomery, Pat Metheny, Oscar Peterson, Bill Evans, John Coltrane, Charlie Parker, etc., played Jazz. Earl Scruggs is not the only one to play Scruggs-style, Keith is not the only one to play Keith-style, and Don Reno is not the only one to play Reno style. They were all phenomenal innovators, but music linked to personalities having the corner on a certain technique seems rather limiting and narrow in it's focus.
[/quote]
So, what your saying is that none of the Jazz greats you mentioned were influenced in anyway by the players who came before them, and that their 'personalities' had no bearing upon the music? Someone saying " I play 'keith Style'" doesnt mean that they cannot innovate and branch out , while still using his ideas as a springboard. No one has a 'corner' on anything, but we have to recognize when someone has a unique approach or technique and learn from it. There's nothing "narrow in its focus" about mimicing great players in any genre and then using it as a means to develop your own style. There hasnt been a musician thats ever lived, that Im aware of, who wasnt influenced by other players before them and then innovated beyond it. Thats how music works, isnt it
Edited by - Banjophobic on 02/17/2010 18:32:04
martycutler - Posted - 02/17/2010: 18:38:24
quote:
Originally posted by Tuneager
quote:
Originally posted by martycutler
quote:
Originally posted by Tuneager
You don't hear Wes Montgomery-style or Pat Metheny-style when it comes to guitar, or Oscar Peterson-style or Bill Evans-style when it comes to piano, or Charlie Parker-style or John Coltrane-style when it comes to saxophone.
Say what???
Marty
Wes Montgomery, Pat Metheny, Oscar Peterson, Bill Evans, John Coltrane, Charlie Parker, etc., played Jazz. Earl Scruggs is not the only one to play Scruggs-style, Keith is not the only one to play Keith-style, and Don Reno is not the only one to play Reno style. They were all phenomenal innovators, but music linked to personalities having the corner on a certain technique seems rather limiting and narrow in it's focus.
You've never heard anyone refer to Wes Montgomery-style playing or a Metheny-style approach or a Lester Young or Charlie Parker-style solo? Reeeeeeally?
A review of my record in Jazziz magazine referred to" Metheny-style overtones" in my version of Blackberry Blossom (Although I was actually more influenced by a Steve Khan record there). I wouldn't quantify that recording as "Jazz", but it underscores my point that there is plenty of that kind of identification by personality outside of the world of bluegrass and banjo. There are lots of people in the jazz world that acknowledge the identity of a player by their personal technique. The point is, these players are *known* for the individual personality of their approach. It's not solely about theory or technique, and that's equally as true for folk and jazz musicians
As you point out, Earl Scruggs is not the only one to play Scruggs style, but I can pick his playing out of a city block of banjo players while blindfolded. That's the same for Wes Montgomery, Metheny, or Charlie Parker. Some might even argue that the limitations of their own technique defined their style. Learning theory and technique is fine; theory and technique devoid of personality is robotics.
Marty
Tuneager - Posted - 02/17/2010: 20:34:24
The ultimate accomplishment of a musician is to develop a unique voice. If we're talking Jazz, we would have to categorize literally thousands of this-style, that style, etc., and Jazz doesn't seem to do that quite the same by lumping all the players into 3 schools of thought based on 3 particular musicians. What I'm saying in 5-string banjo music is it's rather limiting that it's been narrowed to 3 styles, Scruggs-style, Reno-style, and Keith-style. Yes, I too can pick out any of those 3 players from their unique voice, but do they own the concept of a particular string technique? It makes for a great marketing tool, just like someone saying they were the 1st at anything, thereby eclipsing others who may have been doing the same if not better beforehand and that's my point, everyone has been influenced by others, and some pay homage to other musicians better than others as well. Like you Marty, I too was upset about the probability that so many great players would be marginalized in the mainstream press for want of a little fact-checking.
And Marty.....you had a review of a record of yours in a Jazz magazine? Well, I would consider that a fairly great accomplishment.
stormoveroklahoma - Posted - 02/17/2010: 20:59:09
Tune,
That's quite the list of musicians on your hangout homepage.....
Of course as we discussed Gordon Stone is a local Vermont legend and friend and hero of mine. Pat Cloud is too far away from Vermont for me to hang out with. I did notice Marty Cutler on your list but neither Bela or Ryan Cavanaugh were on it. any reason for these omissions?
Many aspects of my Jazz vocabulary were previously developed by Pat Cloud and Bela's three fingered single string techniques. Thanks Pat and Bela for the ingenious ground work. And Trane, Bird, Miles and Monk of course.
Just Curious
Storm
Edited by - stormoveroklahoma on 02/17/2010 21:00:43
Garbageman007 - Posted - 02/17/2010: 21:26:49
Ok guys, if we havent heard of someone, tell us about them, and leave it at that. Dont jealously say "well what about this guy, whys all the fuss about this other guy, what about poor old this guy?". the music biz is a s***ty business that doesnt even favour some of the best musicians, i know of more than a few banjo players that deserve MUCH more than the recognition they get, and the ones I do know that get recognition, like bela, and bill keith, and ryan cavanaugh are the people who seem to care the least about recognition. I even told ryan cavanaugh, face to face, at IBMA, that im gonna rip off every one of his licks until I understand his right hand technique, and he told me "great, use that technique and make it your own sound" and thats exactly what ive done. I dont quote him, copy him, or whatever else you wanna call it, I learned from him and thats all. None of the good musicians care about this stuff you guys are squawking about, who came first, whos better or whatever else. They wanna see the music advance and thats all. who really cares if other people were playing jazz before bela, or pat cloud, or ryan, or bill keith - those guys are too humble to care if anyone did anyways, its not a competition for them, which is why ryan was so cool with me, he gets it, unlike most.
Could you imagine the atomic bomb it would set off if anyone ever found out that someone played scruggs style before earl!? if someones got a problem with bela getting all the recognition for jazz banjo, to bad, thats how its viewed by most people - its a virus thats not ever going to go away. Its no different than when people yell "YEE HAW" when your busking playing a bach piece, its an association with our round, white instrument and it WONT change.
most peoples (the public, non banjo players) views - Bluegrass Banjo = Hick, Earl Scruggs. Jazz Banjo = Bela Fleck Melodic Banjo = Bill Keith
Banjocoltrane - Posted - 02/17/2010: 22:14:26
nevermind, these threads take too much time :)
Garbageman007 - Posted - 02/17/2010: 22:22:29
ya, I agree, im done with this one too. Its all about kenny G anyways.. hahahaha!
Page: 1 2 3 4
