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/170105/3
Page: 1 2 3 4
Garbageman007 - Posted - 02/17/2010: 22:26:24
just to make the 100th post, i want to say that i was KIDDING about the kenny g thing if it wasnt obvious..
Banjocoltrane - Posted - 02/17/2010: 22:33:58
Personally I think Kenny G could take Pat Metheny...........it's all about who is played on the weather channel more :)
martycutler - Posted - 02/17/2010: 22:48:12
quote:
Originally posted by Garbageman007
just to make the 100th post, i want to say that i was KIDDING about the kenny g thing if it wasnt obvious..
That reminds of waiting in line in the Jazz department at the long-defunct Tower records in NYC. Kenny G's beaming visage was all over the racks, and a reasonably well known jazz musician (whose name I won't reveal) picked a copy up, stared at it and said "Breathless... that just about describes his tone." Of course, he wasn't kidding.
MC
NYCJazz - Posted - 02/18/2010: 04:15:38
perfect!
Tuneager - Posted - 03/05/2010: 04:26:00
Let's see the banjo is very familiar to a guitar, the 4th string is a D, the 3rd a G, the 2nd a B, and the 1st a D, just one step down from the guitar's E note, otherwise the banjo is exactly like a guitar just missing 2 lower strings, so why don't we add 2 more strings or better yet utilize having the addition of a higher octave G drone note which most seem to ignore these days. Very easy to transpose the guitar to banjo, and easier as it's only 4-strings and a simple transposition of the first string. Never mind that 5th string which you can fret with your thumb, or other fingers, leading you into other combinations if you choose to step out of playing the instrument like a guitar. While others have claimed to be the first to come up with modes and scales in single string style on the banjo, all I have to say to that is grab one of a thousand guitar scale books and it's already there with a simple modification of the 1st string. The uniqueness of the banjo is that it is a different instrument, with some very unique techniques developed for it from Earl Scruggs 3-finger style, to Carroll Best/Bill Keith/Bobby Thompson/Larry McNeely/Carl Jackson/Vic Jordan/Courtney Johnson/Butch Robins/Bill Knopf/Jack Hicks/Pat Cloud, ad infinitum. Explorations into the banjo realm and not simply banjoistic versions of guitar techniques, these were true innovations. When I want to play guitar I play guitar, it sounds a hell of a lot better than playing the same scales on a staccato drum head 5-string instrument. I've resorted to single-strng style banjo playing when I had no other choice, but I didn't fool myself into thinking that I was playing anythng but guitar considering the tuning. It speaks to the fact that we need another Earl Scruggs revolution in banjo thinking, if you want to play it like a guitar go ahead, but you'll probably never get any better than some of the experts on 4-string dixieland jazz of which many actually know how to read musical charts. Of course you don't have to know how to read music to play 5-string banjo, everything is written in tablature, and I prefer that method as it is more straight-ahead for me, but if you want to really know theory, I think it really needs to be developed for the potential of the 5-string banjo which has really never been done before considering it's uniqueness. I don't think that requires being able to read musical notation, with all it's variations all over the neck, but a method in tablature is sure to come one day. Until then, remember that ignorance is defined as contempt prior to investigation. Don't get me wrong I love great single-string players, from Don Reno, Eddiie Adcock, and Ryan Canvanaugh, I always have, but that's not all there is or ever shall be. We have yet to have a Allan Holdsworth, Al Di Meola, Daryll Dobson, Bill Connors, Pat Metheny, John Scofield, Scott Henderson, Wes Montgomery, Larry Coryell, Phillip Catherine, Mike Stern, Tal Farlow, Pat Martino, John Abercrombie, Paco De Lucia, David Torn, Robert Fripp, Bill Frisell, Joe Pass, Bucky Pizzarelli, Strunz and Farah, Russell Malone, etc. Maybe they're out there, but with a few rare excerpts, I haven't heard them or seen them yet.
Edited by - Tuneager on 03/05/2010 04:37:00
Banjophobic - Posted - 03/05/2010: 06:31:40
"so why don't we add 2 more strings or better yet utilize having the addition of a higher octave G drone note "
Uh, we already have this..its called a "banjitar". Not something I like buts its been around awhile
"When I want to play guitar I play guitar, it sounds a hell of a lot better than playing the same scales on a staccato drum head 5-string instrument. I've resorted to single-string style banjo playing when I had no other choice, but I didn't fool myself into thinking that I was playing anythng but guitar considering the tuning"
You make it sound like scales are the property of jazz guitarists. Scales belong to any instrument capable of playing them. I am not anymore 'offended' by hearing scale patterns played on banjo than I am piano. If you think you were playing guitar, then you need to quit thinking 'guitar' when you play banjo. You continue to to bash ....."it sounds a hell of a lot better than playing the same scales on a staccato drum head 5-string instrument". Well, if you dont like the sound of this instrument, go grab your guitar and play "guitar' scales on that.
"but if you want to really know theory, I think it really needs to be developed for the potential of the 5-string banjo which has really never been done before considering it's uniqueness. "
Considering that the banjo , in terms of the instrument we know today , has only been around 100 or so years, Im amazed at the complexity of styles it has been adapted to. Has everything been discoverd..heck no. Has the guitar been 'mastered' completely and everything discovered yet..heck no. But in terms of "theoretical knowledge applied to an instrument", then banjo has players over the years who've made immense strides in this field. There are players on the scene that can hold their own with anyone, musically speaking. So, you need to look around a bit more before you make absolute statements like this one.
We have yet to have a Allan Holdsworth, Al Di Meola, Daryll Dobson, Bill Connors, Pat Metheny, John Scofield, Scott Henderson, Wes Montgomery, Larry Coryell, Phillip Catherine, Mike Stern, Tal Farlow, Pat Martino, John Abercrombie, Paco De Lucia, David Torn, Robert Fripp, Bill Frisell, Joe Pass, Bucky Pizzarelli, Strunz and Farah, Russell Malone, etc. Maybe they're out there, but with a few rare excerpts, I haven't heard them or seen them yet.
[/quote]
Are we talking about a list of 'jazz' banjoists? The list is long....
Im having a hard time really understanding what you're trying to say in these posts. The banjo can be tuned myriads of ways, so we dont just use the 4 strings on a banjo 'like a guitar' becouse we seek to mimic it continually. We tune the banjo in standard "G" tuning, as 5 string players, but thats only one tuning used, and not even the most prevalent. Why do guitarists tune in EADGBE, and is that the only tuning used- of course its not. Regardless of the tuning, we we all use the same scale tones-guitar or banjo, so what does it matter? The only thing that matters is making expressive msuic with the scale note. The banjo is just as expressive, in the right hands,with the same scales, as guitarists.
What, in a nutshell, are you trying to say in these posts?
Edited by - Banjophobic on 03/05/2010 06:36:40
Ira Gitlin - Posted - 03/05/2010: 08:07:40
"Until then, remember that ignorance is defined as contempt prior to investigation."
Actually, it's defined as lack of knowledge.
stormoveroklahoma - Posted - 03/05/2010: 08:11:49
quote:
What, in a nutshell, are you trying to say in these posts?
tune just seems to be speculating and it seems he just prefers to type rather than practice..... an aspiring banjo-writer?
It took five pages to get this far. Marty had some funny comments, John tried to keep it on track.
storm
Edited by - stormoveroklahoma on 03/05/2010 08:12:47
Klondike Waldo - Posted - 03/05/2010: 08:25:21
[quote]Originally posted by phillygtr
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.
[/quote}
I Met Joe Venuti once and shook his hand after a set at Sandy's Jazz Revival back when I was playing Trad Jazz. HE was playing Jazz violin back when Louis was playing with King Oliver I believe.- that's as early as it gets.
Tuneager - Posted - 03/05/2010: 09:13:32
Playing scales on a banjo in a single-string style is certainly the right of anyone who wants to do that. My only point is that it ignores the true potential of the 5-string banjo which with the utilization of the 5th string and a differently tuned 1st string opens up a totally new way of playing for those who wish to pursue it. I can't help wondering what everyone is so defensive about?
Edited by - Tuneager on 03/05/2010 09:15:15
Banjophobic - Posted - 03/05/2010: 09:46:46
quote:
Originally posted by Tuneager
Playing scales on a banjo in a single-string style is certainly the right of anyone who wants to do that. My only point is that it ignores the true potential of the 5-string banjo which with the utilization of the 5th string and a differently tuned 1st string opens up a totally new way of playing for those who wish to pursue it. I can't help wondering what everyone is so defensive about?
Ok, that clarifies it alot. If you would have said..
"My only point is that it ignores the true potential of the 5-string banjo which with the utilization of the 5th string and a differently tuned 1st string opens up a totally new way of playing"
It would have cleared it up immediately and saved paragraphs of typing-
. So, what is it about playing the 'fifth string' that is lacking, and how would tuning the 1st string differently change our approach to jazz' on banjo?
martycutler - Posted - 03/05/2010: 09:48:52
quote:
Originally posted by Tuneager
Playing scales on a banjo in a single-string style is certainly the right of anyone who wants to do that. My only point is that it ignores the true potential of the 5-string banjo which with the utilization of the 5th string and a differently tuned 1st string opens up a totally new way of playing for those who wish to pursue it. I can't help wondering what everyone is so defensive about?
Personally, I'm more interested in banjoists exploring the rhythmic aspects of Scruggs style banjo in a jazz context... more like a melodic drummer/percussionist. I hear lots of banjoists coming to grips with that idea. That doesn't invalidate research into scales, of course, you just integrate it in a different way. What got me into playing banjo to begin with was the beautiful, rhythmic non-linearity of bluegrass banjo, and there's no reason why those concepts and techniques are exclusive of jazz.
pearcemusic - Posted - 03/05/2010: 10:23:19
quote:
Originally posted by martycutler
Personally, I'm more interested in banjoists exploring the rhythmic aspects of Scruggs style banjo in a jazz context... more like a melodic drummer/percussionist. I hear lots of banjoists coming to grips with that idea. That doesn't invalidate research into scales, of course, you just integrate it in a different way. What got me into playing banjo to begin with was the beautiful, rhythmic non-linearity of bluegrass banjo, and there's no reason why those concepts and techniques are exclusive of jazz.
yes ... me too .... linear scalar jazz is a thing of beauty in the hands of an accomplished player ... as the years go by, I find myself drifting farther and farther from that goal.
BUT ... jazzy scales that are harmonized can be things of beauty in a scruggsy style or mode.
Of course, the 5th string can be incorporated in those harmonic voicings, and the style wouldn't be called "melodic" by most players.
Banjocoltrane - Posted - 03/05/2010: 13:56:43
To Tuneager:
1)Most seem to ignore the fifth string? Who have you been listening to? I hear people use the fifth string everytime I hear someone play the banjo. I've heard someone play Cherokee using "Scruggs-style" rolls and it worked.
2)Transposing guitar to banjo isn't as easy as you make it out to be. Very often it falls outside the range of the instrument...or worse the high D string on the banjo makes the lines more difficult to play. Sometimes it makes the lines easier, but not always. I know, because there are jazz things I play on the guitar, that I cannot do on the banjo....nor will I ever be able to do. The attack on the instruments is different as well, it's not a walk in the park to switch over and make it sound good on both.
3)Jazz banjo is an endeavor than most people don't take up...In fact, in the grand scheme of things banjo isn't an extremely popular instrument...couple that with something like "bebop" which isn't popular either and you get an extremely small pool of people that have any aspirations of playing jazz banjo. Hence why there is no long list of great 5-string jazz banjoists.
4)If you don't hear people playing like Pat Cloud, Bobby Thompson, etc...it's probably simply because folks on a large scale don't want to.
Most banjoists have heard melodics, know how it sounds...if there is a shortage of people playing in that style it's due to a lack of desire.
How many times you hit the fifth string shouldn't indicate whether something is "authentic" or good....either it sounds good or it doesn't.
5)Concentrating so much on technique discussion won't open anyone's ideals to your own. However, music can change peoples minds quickly. When I hear someone play I either like it or I don't...I don't care if they are wearing the picks Backwards. If I like it, I'll see if I can take some of that and make it my own.
I'll say it again like I said it in another thread. If you limit yourself to an all or nothing position with banjo technique, then you are gonna miss out. If one wants to spend their whole life playing the banjo in "single-string" style then that's fair game...or if they wanna play melodics then they can....but acting like one style is greater than another is pointless. In the end, it's whether it sounds good to that individual.
Edited by - Banjocoltrane on 03/05/2010 14:02:37
salvatone - Posted - 03/05/2010: 14:03:28
Tuneager:
I can't even understand what you are talking about at this point.
steve davis - Posted - 03/05/2010: 14:23:18
I sometimes alter or substitute chords when it feels right or do something with
the timing as in a Reggae "drag" beat.
Are these things "jazz" in any way?
Tuneager - Posted - 03/05/2010: 15:53:49
To Banjocoltrane:
Your username implies that you probably do know more about jazz than the rest of us and whatever technique someone uses to play Coltrane is definitely to be commended.
Of course most banjo players use the 5th string when playing, my point was that the current trend of soloing purely in a single-string style takes the banjo into more of a guitarist direction (easily done 4, 3, 2 strings tuned exactly same, 1st string only one step down), and that's people's choice. It's not a point of one style being better than another, some on both sides of various fences do things much better than others. it just seems to be a shortcut (or a limiting of technique in itself) to finding those same notes all over the neck in different patterns utilizing the unique nature of the way a 5-string banjo is set up. When you hear someone solo in a single-string style, for the most part, the 5th string might as well not even be there. It is about what sounds good to the individual and for my own taste the endless slew of single-string style clones becomes a little monotonous and a little less banjoistic. It's just opinions and/or thoughts, although sometimes it seems like playing tug of war with tree stumps.
Edited by - Tuneager on 03/05/2010 15:56:22
NYCJazz - Posted - 03/05/2010: 16:58:59
quote:
[i]
Personally, I'm more interested in banjoists exploring the rhythmic aspects of Scruggs style banjo in a jazz context... more like a melodic drummer/percussionist. I hear lots of banjoists coming to grips with that idea.
One of the basic reasons I've always found mainstream 5-string banjo unlistenable past 1 or 2 songs has been the lack of rhythmic adventure. It seems like it should be obvious, but I guess it isn't. Three finger picking just screams for exploration, but all I hear is on the beat arpeggios. It's like Reggae... It's great music, but drives me nuts really quickly.
I don't understand how the fifth string would be useful or helpful in a jazz context, but I chalk that up to my own ignorance of the instrument.
I'd love to hear some adventurous 5-string banjo. Point me in the right direction.
steve davis - Posted - 03/05/2010: 17:09:21
I feel adventurous every time I play.
Klondike Waldo - Posted - 03/05/2010: 17:17:47
quote:
Originally posted by steve davis
I feel adventurous every time I play.
Be careful there, Steve, one definition of "adventure" is "an outing which went wrong".
NYCJazz - Posted - 03/05/2010: 17:49:51
quote:
Originally posted by Klondike Waldo
quote:
Originally posted by steve davis
I feel adventurous every time I play.
Be careful there, Steve, one definition of "adventure" is "an outing which went wrong".
Wasn't there a movie about that, back in the 70's? I seem to remember a 5-string in it.
steve davis - Posted - 03/05/2010: 17:52:17
I've often gone wrong,Bob,but I've never let that little fact get in the way of my fun. 
steve davis - Posted - 03/05/2010: 17:54:58
Those rivers aren't much of an adventure compared to the ocean under a
Donzi Sweet 16.
martycutler - Posted - 03/05/2010: 18:34:25
quote:
Originally posted by NYCJazz
quote:
[i]
Personally, I'm more interested in banjoists exploring the rhythmic aspects of Scruggs style banjo in a jazz context... more like a melodic drummer/percussionist. I hear lots of banjoists coming to grips with that idea.
One of the basic reasons I've always found mainstream 5-string banjo unlistenable past 1 or 2 songs has been the lack of rhythmic adventure. It seems like it should be obvious, but I guess it isn't. Three finger picking just screams for exploration, but all I hear is on the beat arpeggios. It's like Reggae... It's great music, but drives me nuts really quickly.
I don't understand how the fifth string would be useful or helpful in a jazz context, but I chalk that up to my own ignorance of the instrument.
I'd love to hear some adventurous 5-string banjo. Point me in the right direction.
Honestly, I haven't been listening to much banjo lately. But certainly, Bela's Africa Sessions stuff is quite adventurous, if not Jazz (you asked for adventurous-right?). I like it particularly because the music calls out to Bela's more rhythmic playing. A few of Tony Trischka's pieces on Territory are very compelling and innovative rhythmically and harmonically. Ryan Cavanaugh has a great record which manages to pull off a nice balance of flash, along with strong writing and powerful improvisation. I love Greg Liszt's playing; it's very rhythmic. There's more.
That said, there's plenty of mainstream 3-finger style playing that makes for compelling listening. Charlie Cushman's playing in particular comes to mind, so does Pete Schwimmer, but Scruggs playing—especially around the Foggy Mt. Banjo period—is rhythmically subtle and very syncopated.
The absence or presence of the 5th string in a solo as you've probably guessed, has little intrinsically to do with musicality, innovation or Jazz. It's there; it's a resource, just like scales, modes, tone clusters, melodic style, single-string, rhythm, timbre... what have you. You're either making music or not.
Me-I studiously avoid the third string at the fourth fret-is that wrong?
Cheers,
Marty
martycutler - Posted - 03/05/2010: 18:43:38
quote:
Originally posted by martycutler
[quote]Originally posted by NYCJazz
[quote][i]
That said, there's plenty of mainstream 3-finger style playing that makes for compelling listening. Charlie Cushman's playing in particular comes to mind, so does Pete Schwimmer, but Scruggs playing—especially around the Foggy Mt. Banjo period—is rhythmically subtle and very syncopated.
Pete Schwimmer's capabilities carry him well beyond the mainstream, but I've heard very few banjoists who can turn the traditional Scruggs rhythms inside out like Pete.
Garbageman007 - Posted - 03/06/2010: 00:12:35
In response to tuneager -
Dont play single string on banjo then. Stop trying to preach to us why not using the 5th string for EVERYTHING is unbanjoistic and offensive to our instrument, thats just ridiculous. We ALL play scruggs and melodic here as well. Were not trying to transform the banjo into a guitar, but those of us who know and use and are proficient at the 3 finger single string techniques, and jazz theory, and the overall universe of music understand that jazz goes JUST a little deeper than a "bebop" lick and we know the benefits of single string style. There. Ive said it before, jazz is a way of thinking, not a music - the philosophy of it come first, then the theory, then music!
youve gotta become open minded to the inexhaustible properties of music . you seem like your stuck in licks still like "this pat cloud lick is playable in both melodic and single string styles, but I like melodic better", If you wanna play jazz banjo, youve gotta get outside of "banjo" thinking into true music. No more "scruggs style" no more "melodic style", no more "single string style". Its JUST music, music is the interpretation of sound energy by your brain and nothing else, its the filter of our ego that over rationalizes everything, created labels, whatever else. Sound is sound - sound is music. A perfect example of what im talking about is this - go listen to coltranes 1967 album "interstellar space" and report back on it. When you really dig jazz and music as a endless soul search and an artform, that album will suddenly make sense because the EGO has shut itself off. I hated that music at first, I used to hate coltrane, id skip through his solos. Then I properly listened to one and read some books about musical philosophy. I practice sometimes just playing ONE note as powerfully as possibly, trying to appreciate its full resonance, just how amazing it really is. Once I get there I practice stuff from the thesaurus until I find its meaning, until I find the music in otherwise 'random, contrived passages". As far as Im concerned, the only way to truly get music, especially jazz, is to find out the power of it, why its like that, and learn to do that - not learn to play "sweet licks" and then argue about whether its "banjoistic" because the 5th string is or isnt being used.
I realize this goes beyond the scope of "pat cloud and bela fleck" but then again, so does jazz. SO DOES MUSIC!
go out and buy "the thesaurus of scales and melodic patterns" for a preview of just some things to practice once you get the proper mindset.
schwimbo - Posted - 03/06/2010: 03:06:03
The following is a repost copied and pasted from another thread where it didn't belong ("the origins of melodic style"), to this one (to which it probably should have been limited):
I should apologize for the following post's inclusion under the topic heading "origins of melodic style" since it has nothing to do with the subject. However, since some other posters have opened up the floodgates to digression, I want to add my opinions about what has been brought up here.
I think Tuneager is saying that for something to be "real banjo music", it needs to be roll based (Scruggs or melodic style) as opposed to single string style (which he thinks is just modified guitar flatpicking). I agree that Scruggs and melodic style is relatively unique to the banjo (though people like Jerry Reed did play some melodic style fingerpicking on the guitar), and is definitely not modified guitar playing. There are lots of instruction books about how to play banjo music in these "real banjo styles" (Scruggs and melodic), because roll based technique lends itself fo banjo music (which includes bluegrass and other styles which don't require the need for instantly being able to create varied melodic lines over many different chord types in different keys). Roll based technique really has defined most of non-old-time banjo music. A good melodic style banjo player can improvise well (using rolls) over "less demanding" chord sequences and probably can play sequences of notes that may not have even been played previously, but will have more problems using the style to play over more complicated chord changes such as those present in jazz. I'm not knocking the style, and I use it a lot myself, but I realize that it is just harder to stick to it and get good results if you are trying to play "good" jazz lines for instance. There is more advance preparation required and lots more memorization of different hand positions, rolls, string combinations, etc. than would be needed in the single string style. This might be why there are less method books about improvising in melodic style on banjo than there are books about playing melody lines on more "logical" instruments like horns, keyboard, or guitar. It is not that people couldn't write books on the subject, but to master playing in this style would require brainpower and hand dexterity that would be beyond the reach of almost all mortals. I don't think that anybody playing in this style has reached close to the level of improvisational facility that Tuneagers' list of guitar players have, and that is not because of lack of ability, but because of the difficulty inherent in the style.
I think that banjo techniques (Scruggs and melodic style playing) are great for playing banjo music, but if you want to play jazz, start looking for a more logical way of playing notes (and melodic style is not very logical when compared to single string or guitar style playing).
I don't know if Tuneager has acknowledged the musicality of the really excellent jazz banjoist Tom Slavicek (who was an excellent melodic style bluegrass player), but Slavicek shows what can be done in the single string style when one is playing in the traditional / modern jazz idiom (bebop or hardbop).
Again, this post is off topic, and should probably be moved to the "jazz banjo / Pat Cloud" threads, but since Tuneager is posting in a few locations, I'll jump and the bandwagon and maybe copy and paste my post to that location too.
P.S. Thanks Marty for the nice words (deserved or not).
salvatone - Posted - 03/06/2010: 04:36:10
Michael Lawrence is making a film called "The Bach Project." Among the segments is one of Bela Fleck ( youtube.com/watch?v=2GNsqw3Jun...e=related ) and there are several shots that show his technique very clearly. I wouldn't say that he is not using his fifth string, but I am very impressed with how flowing his single string work is and how much he uses rolls without the fifth string. His comments are interesting as well, and at the end he describes himself as "just a folk musician who got a little out of control."
@schwimbo Any links to Slavicek? I can't seem to find anything.
schwimbo - Posted - 03/06/2010: 04:56:25
You can find some clips of Tom Slavicek's playing at Andrew Conde's music page. Here is the link:
banjohangout.org/myhangout/mus...p?ID=9908
I think Slavicek does a fine job of playing tasteful bop / hardbop style jazz. It isn't extremely flashy, but to me it is logical, musical - nice idiomatic lines, he makes all the changes, has good tone and timing, etc. He does use an added low A string (so it has an extra string between the low D and the high G string, this according to Andrew Conde, who took some lessons from Tom). It is too bad that he hasn't recorded more or gotten more exposure,
salvatone - Posted - 03/06/2010: 05:18:16
Thanks schwimbo. (You're up early today.) He is really good. I am not far from Montreal, it would be fun to go up and have some instruction.
martycutler - Posted - 03/06/2010: 10:45:36
quote:
Originally posted by schwimbo
The following is a repost copied and pasted from another thread where it didn't belong ("the origins of melodic style"), to this one (to which it probably should have been limited):
I should apologize for the following post's inclusion under the topic heading "origins of melodic style" since it has nothing to do with the subject. However, since some other posters have opened up the floodgates to digression, I want to add my opinions about what has been brought up here.
I think Tuneager is saying that for something to be "real banjo music", it needs to be roll based (Scruggs or melodic style) as opposed to single string style (which he thinks is just modified guitar flatpicking). I agree that Scruggs and melodic style is relatively unique to the banjo (though people like Jerry Reed did play some melodic style fingerpicking on the guitar), and is definitely not modified guitar playing. There are lots of instruction books about how to play banjo music in these "real banjo styles" (Scruggs and melodic), because roll based technique lends itself fo banjo music (which includes bluegrass and other styles which don't require the need for instantly being able to create varied melodic lines over many different chord types in different keys). Roll based technique really has defined most of non-old-time banjo music. A good melodic style banjo player can improvise well (using rolls) over "less demanding" chord sequences and probably can play sequences of notes that may not have even been played previously, but will have more problems using the style to play over more complicated chord changes such as those present in jazz. I'm not knocking the style, and I use it a lot myself, but I realize that it is just harder to stick to it and get good results if you are trying to play "good" jazz lines for instance. There is more advance preparation required and lots more memorization of different hand positions, rolls, string combinations, etc. than would be needed in the single string style. This might be why there are less method books about improvising in melodic style on banjo than there are books about playing melody lines on more "logical" instruments like horns, keyboard, or guitar. It is not that people couldn't write books on the subject, but to master playing in this style would require brainpower and hand dexterity that would be beyond the reach of almost all mortals. I don't think that anybody playing in this style has reached close to the level of improvisational facility that Tuneagers' list of guitar players have, and that is not because of lack of ability, but because of the difficulty inherent in the style.
I think that banjo techniques (Scruggs and melodic style playing) are great for playing banjo music, but if you want to play jazz, start looking for a more logical way of playing notes (and melodic style is not very logical when compared to single string or guitar style playing).
I don't know if Tuneager has acknowledged the musicality of the really excellent jazz banjoist Tom Slavicek (who was an excellent melodic style bluegrass player), but Slavicek shows what can be done in the single string style when one is playing in the traditional / modern jazz idiom (bebop or hardbop).
Again, this post is off topic, and should probably be moved to the "jazz banjo / Pat Cloud" threads, but since Tuneager is posting in a few locations, I'll jump and the bandwagon and maybe copy and paste my post to that location too.
P.S. Thanks Marty for the nice words (deserved or not).
I have several problems with "melodic" style banjo as an exclusive technique for playing: the technique has little or no control over the envelope of each note--particularly, the release time--unlike single-string playing, in which you have a guitarist's control over the contours of each and every note. ringing strings become especially problematic with neighboring tones so common to bop, post bop, fusion, etc.
In a bluegrass context (other than instrumentals) I prefer to mix and match styles as needed. Relying too heavily on melodic style on vocal numbers (and I was guilty of that practice in my younger days) often felt weird to me—almost like being a drummer who had stop in the middle of a groove to play a flute solo.
When I tackle jazz tunes, I try to bring the whole instrument into the picture: syncopated arpeggios derived from Scruggsy wisdom, melodic passages, chordal motion, and single-string. Single string style doesn't have to sound choppy and staccato in the old Reno tradition; you CAN play that style legato. Avoid picking each and every note; developing a strong fretting hand and articulating some of the notes with it goes a long, long way toward making the style graceful and flowing.
But again, this is all about technique, and marginally about jazz.
Now, where were we?
Marty
Tonecaster - Posted - 03/06/2010: 13:06:33
Edited by - Tonecaster on 03/07/2010 13:19:13
NYCJazz - Posted - 03/06/2010: 14:42:01
quote:
Originally posted by martycutler
Pete Schwimmer's capabilities carry him well beyond the mainstream, but I've heard very few banjoists who can turn the traditional Scruggs rhythms inside out like Pete.
Thanks, Marty.
I've got some homework to do!
salvatone - Posted - 03/06/2010: 14:47:20
Pete Schwimmer has some great sound files posted on his Hangout sound page. In case you don't know, he calls himself schwimbo.
schwimbo - Posted - 03/06/2010: 16:01:02
Marty said:
When I tackle jazz tunes, I try to bring the whole instrument into the picture: syncopated arpeggios derived from Scruggsy wisdom, melodic passages, chordal motion, and single-string.
I like Marty's approach to using what tools he needs to use to get the sounds he is after. I think that possibly some might think that my definition of single string playing is narrower than I intended it to be.
I guess that in my definition of playing single string style, arpeggios with successive notes on adjacent strings could still be considered within the style. For instance if I played the ascending series of notes: G,A,C,F, and then down to D using the following strings/frets: 4/5,4/7,3/5,2/6,3/7, then all the notes except the first note would technically be in a melodic style, but I would consider these notes to be something that are also part of the single string approach to playing as the notes are ordered in the same way that a guitarist might flatpick them. Even where some notes are played on non-adjacent strings, for instance the ascending notes G,D,G played as follows: 4/5,2/3,1/5 would fit in my definition of single string style playing though technically they would also be part of a melodic style approach. Although a guitarist would have to change the fret on the 1st string to 3 (if the guitar was in standard tuning), since they might approach the series of notes with their flatpick hitting the same strings as in the banjo example, I'd consider it to be OK to call it single string playing (though the guitarist might also consider it to be "crosspicking", as they also might in the previous example). I think "single string style playing" doesn't mean that you have to play all the notes on the same string (I guess that is obvious). You have to be able to change strings (for ease of playing) as the melody ascends or descends, and sometimes you might need to play just one note on a string before changing strings. Would this be considered melodic style playing. Perhaps it would be melodic style playing for these few notes, but the difference is that in single string style playing, I think that you would be allowed to play 2 or more notes consecutively on the same string, though you could also jump strings if you wanted to. With melodic style, I think the accepted definition is that you would not be allowed to play 2 or more notes consecutively on a string.
martycutler - Posted - 03/07/2010: 23:05:12
quote:
Originally posted by schwimbo
Marty said:
When I tackle jazz tunes, I try to bring the whole instrument into the picture: syncopated arpeggios derived from Scruggsy wisdom, melodic passages, chordal motion, and single-string.
I like Marty's approach to using what tools he needs to use to get the sounds he is after.
Thanks, Pete. I think my approach comes from having very few stylistic filters: a benefit or a tragic flaw, depending on your point of view.
:)
Marty
Texasbanjo - Posted - 03/08/2010: 15:36:04
Okay, folks, let's calm down and not flame. Each of you has a right to their own opinion, but don't have a right to berate someone else for their opinion or denigrate them for their playing ability or lack thereof. Please, let's play nice.
schwimbo - Posted - 03/08/2010: 15:55:09
Where is the "flaming"? It seems like a calm enough discussion here now. Maybe you were trying to reply to another similar thread where there could have been some of that going on (or it could be that some "flaming" has been deleted from this thread by the moderator - I think that could be what happened). In any event, it seems calm enough now.
NYCJazz - Posted - 03/08/2010: 16:48:56
This thread got moved?
I guess you can't use the "J" word in the BG section!
martycutler - Posted - 03/08/2010: 17:34:17
I believe that everyone has a right to my own opinion.
Marty
tubaphone - Posted - 03/08/2010: 19:34:40
I don't for one moment consider myself a "jazz banjo player", but I AM a banjo player with fifty years of professional experience behind me. My thoughts on this whole foofaraw boil down to this: Tuneager strikes me as someone with little experience as an instrumentalist. He might stop and consider that any technique used to express one's musicality on any instrument is a valid technique. His stance that single-string on a five-string banjo is not an "approved" technique for playing the banjo is baseless. This same mindset would have us saying that percussive two-hand tapping is not a legitimate guitar or electric bass technique (tell that to Michael Hedges [RIP] or Victor Wooten), or that pizzicato on the violin-family instruments is verboten. The truth is that any technique one employs to play one's instrument is a legitimate technique. It seems a bit narrow-minded to take a stance that places limits on artistic expression, and a reasonable person would not take such a stance with the vehemence that Tuneager exhibits. He (or she, as the case may be) should (again) think, THEN post... and try learn from those with more wisdom and experience.
salvatone - Posted - 03/09/2010: 10:09:27
I have learned a lot from this topic. There are some great players, who know what they are talking about posting here, even if they are from NYC and are easily annoyed. :~) So please Texasbanjo, let us keep playing.
I don't think anyone is getting hurt. Tuneager could have let this post die on Feb. 23, but he waited until March 5th and resurected it. He must be enjoying this as well.
Tom Hanway - Posted - 03/09/2010: 13:16:33
quote:
Originally posted by tubaphone
I don't for one moment consider myself a "jazz banjo player", but I AM a banjo player with fifty years of professional experience behind me. My thoughts on this whole foofaraw boil down to this: Tuneager strikes me as someone with little experience as an instrumentalist. He might stop and consider that any technique used to express one's musicality on any instrument is a valid technique. His stance that single-string on a five-string banjo is not an "approved" technique for playing the banjo is baseless. This same mindset would have us saying that percussive two-hand tapping is not a legitimate guitar or electric bass technique (tell that to Michael Hedges [RIP] or Victor Wooten), or that pizzicato on the violin-family instruments is verboten. The truth is that any technique one employs to play one's instrument is a legitimate technique. It seems a bit narrow-minded to take a stance that places limits on artistic expression, and a reasonable person would not take such a stance with the vehemence that Tuneager exhibits. He (or she, as the case may be) should (again) think, THEN post... and try learn from those with more wisdom and experience.
Welcome to Banjo Hangout Marc Horowitz! I look forward to reading your insights about the banjo, that I know will go well beyond the fleeting "shadows on the wall" in the Hangout cyber-cave (think Plato's Allegory of the Cave). Thanks Marc for telling it like it is and for your banjo lore and expertise.
It's great to see you and Marty Cutler posting on the same thread.
I'm finding many of the replies here very illuminating (Pete's in particular) and on the mark. I won't respond to the ones I find obtuse or impossibly jaded or like so much trolling.
I find the following extremely germane to a lot of banjo music, not limited to jazz banjo, but to a healthy banjo style:
Marty Cutler wrote: "When I tackle jazz tunes, I try to bring the whole instrument into the picture: syncopated arpeggios derived from Scruggsy wisdom, melodic passages, chordal motion, and single-string. Single string style doesn't have to sound choppy and staccato in the old Reno tradition; you CAN play that style legato. Avoid picking each and every note; developing a strong fretting hand and articulating some of the notes with it goes a long, long way toward making the style graceful and flowing."
It dawns on me that Marty's time-tested approach also makes sense for a lot of banjo, for rock banjo and, to a lesser extent, Celtic fingerstyle banjo (on the 5-string), which is about playing melody (in happy unison) and less about homophony. All of this holds true for actualized personal styles where the technique serves the music. That's control and it's manifested as "chops" - being able to move energy and people in a way that draws them into the music. That's the goal. We're not trying to push people away or alienate them (or each other).
Making the technique serve the music is part and parcel to powerful artistic expression and creative license. Of course it's better to have a wider musical palette and technique than to be rigid in one's thinking and to stop learning and growing personally. I hear you Marc, loud and clear.
Lastly, I believe that EVERYONE has a right to Marty Cutler's opinion, as well as your own.
Edited by - Tom Hanway on 03/09/2010 17:09:36
Garbageman007 - Posted - 03/09/2010: 22:27:09
Heres some info from my banjo book im currently writing "mickey reeves explains jazz banjo in simple, idiot proof language"
Below are Ogg Vorbis files demonstrating the difference between just intonation and equal temperament. You may need to play the samples several times before you can pick the difference.
Two sine waves played consecutively - this sample has half-step at 550 Hz (C# in the just intonation scale), followed by a half-step at 554.37 Hz (C# in the equal temperament scale).
Same two notes, set against an A440 pedal - this sample consists of a "dyad". The lower note is a constant A (440 Hz in either scale), the upper note is a C# in the equal-tempered scale for the first 1", and a C# in the just intonation scale for the last 1". Phase differences make it easier to pick the transition than in the previous sample.
xpanding on the methods of musical set theory, many theorists have used abstract algebra to analyze music. For example, the notes in an equal temperament octave form an abelian group with 12 elements. It is possible to describe just intonation in terms of a free abelian group.
Transformational theory is a branch of music theory developed by David Lewin. The theory allows for great generality because it emphasizes transformations between musical objects, rather than the musical objects themselves.
Theorists have also proposed musical applications of more sophisticated algebraic concepts. Mathematician Guerino Mazzola has applied topos theory to music[citation needed], though the result has been controversial.
The chromatic scale has a free and transitive action of , with the action being defined via transposition of notes. So the chromatic scale can be thought of as a torsor for the group .
Pythagorean tuning is tuning based only on the perfect consonances, the (perfect) octave, perfect fifth, and perfect fourth. Thus the major third is considered not a third but a ditone, literally "two tones", and is 81:64 = (9:8)², rather than the independent and harmonic just 5:4, directly below. A whole tone is a secondary interval, being derived from two perfect fifths, (3:2)²/2 = 9:8.
The just major third, 5:4 and minor third, 6:5, are a syntonic comma, 81:80, apart from their Pythagorean equivalents 81:64 and 32:27 respectively. According to Carl Dahlhaus (1990, p.187), "the dependent third conforms to the Pythagorean, the independent third to the harmonic tuning of intervals."
Western common practice music usually cannot be played in just intonation but requires a systematically tempered scale. The tempering can involve either the irregularities of well temperament or be constructed as a regular temperament, either some form of equal temperament or some other regular meantone, but in all cases will involve the fundamental features of meantone temperament. For example, the root of chord ii, if tuned to a fifth above the dominant, would be a major whole tone (9:8) above the tonic. If tuned a just minor third (6:5) below a just subdominant degree of 4:3, however, the interval from the tonic would equal a minor whole tone (10:9) Meantone temperament reduces the difference between 9:8 and 10:9. Their ratio, (9:8)/(10:9) = 81:80, is treated as a unison. The interval 81:80, called the syntonic comma or comma of Didymus, is the key comma of meantone temperament.
In equal temperament, the octave is divided into twelve equal parts, each semitone (half step) is an interval of the twelfth root of two so that twelve of these equal half steps add up to exactly an octave. With fretted instruments it is very useful to use an equal tempering so that the frets align evenly across the strings. In the European music tradition, equal tempering was used for lute and guitar music far earlier than for other instruments.
Equally-tempered scales have been used and instruments built using various other numbers of equal intervals. The 19 equal temperament, first proposed and used by Guillaume Costeley in the sixteenth century, uses 19 equally spaced tones, offering better major thirds and far better minor thirds than normal 12-semitone equal temperament at the cost of a flatter fifth. The overall effect is one of greater consonance. 24 equal temperament, with 24 equally spaced tones, is widespread in Arabic music.
The following graph reveals how accurately various equal tempered scales approximate three important harmonic identities: the major third (5th harmonic), the perfect fifth (3rd harmonic), and the "harmonic seventh" (7th harmonic). [Note: the numbers above the bars designate the equal tempered scale (I.e., "12" designates the 12-tone equal tempered scale, etc)
The frequencies of the harmonic series, being integer multiples of the fundamental frequency, are naturally related to each other by whole-numbered ratios and small whole-numbered ratios are likely the basis of the consonance of musical intervals. For example, a perfect fifth, say 200 and 300 Hz (cycles per second), produces a combination tone of 100 Hz (the difference between 300 Hz and 200 Hz); that is, an octave below the lower (actual sounding) note. This 100 Hz first order combination tone then interacts with both notes of the interval to produce second order combination tones of 200 (300-100) and 100 (200-100) Hz and, of course, all further nth order combination tones are all the same, being formed from various subtraction of 100, 200, and 300. When we contrast this with a dissonant interval such as a tritone (not tempered) with a frequency ratio of 7:5 we get, for example, 700-500=200 (1st order combination tone)and 500-200=300 (2nd order). The rest of the combination tones are octaves of 100 Hz so the 7:5 interval actually contains 4 notes: 100 Hz (and its octaves), 300 Hz, 500 Hz and 700 Hz. It will be noted that the lowest combination tone (100 Hz) is a 17th (2 octaves and a major third) below the lower (actual sounding) note of the tritone. All the intervals succumb to similar analysis as has been demonstrated by Paul Hindemith in his book, The Craft of Musical Composition.
et X = (X1, ..., Xn) be a continuous stochastic process on a probability space (#937;, #931;, P) taking values in Rn. Then the following are equivalent:
X is a Brownian motion with respect to P, i.e. the law of X with respect to P is the same as the law of an n-dimensional Brownian motion, i.e. the push-forward measure X#8727;(P) is classical Wiener measure on C0([0, +#8734;); Rn).
both
X is a martingale with respect to P (and its own natural filtration); and
for all 1 #8804; i, j #8804; n, Xi(t)Xj(t) #8722;#948;ijt is a martingale with respect to P (and its own natural filtration), where #948;ij denotes the Kronecker delta
The infinitesimal generator (and hence characteristic operator) of a Brownian motion on Rn is easily calculated to be ½#916;, where #916; denotes the Laplace operator. This observation is useful in defining Brownian motion on an m-dimensional Riemannian manifold (M, g): a Brownian motion on M is defined to be a diffusion on M whose characteristic operator in local coordinates xi, 1 #8804; i #8804; m, is given by ½#916;LB, where #916;LB is the Laplace–Beltrami operator given in local coordinates by 
where [gij] = [gij]#8722;1 in the sense of the inverse of a square matrix.
Hey, were complicating it enough anyways! whats the difference?
schwimbo - Posted - 03/09/2010: 23:57:24
But what kind of picks and strings does Earl use?
schwimbo - Posted - 03/10/2010: 00:01:04
Oops, I forgot about the title to your upcoming book "mickey reeves explains jazz banjo in simple, idiot proof language". Now that explains it. :-) Good job!
Tom Hanway - Posted - 03/10/2010: 19:26:04
You must surrender whatever preconceptions you have about music if you're really interested in it.
Cecil Taylor
tposgate - Posted - 03/11/2010: 05:49:13
Folks, I just read pretty much this whole thread (last night and this morning) and really enjoyed it. Lots of names I hadn't heard before and some new ideas.
I found it interesting that it all started from a newspaper quote. I thought I would add one regarding my latest CD Banjo Hockey that may or may not show how much we should take music criticism with a grain of salt.
"Tim Posgate has cracked the code to a new form of jazz, one that’s wildly creative but that also has plenty of populist appeal." -Georgia Straight (Vancouver Entertainment Weekly)
I try not to pay much attention to the press (although I read them all) but this one certainly made me smile.
Also, after a trip to Chicago this past weekend to watch the amazing Punch Brothers perform two concerts I am amazed that more people in the jazz world don't seem to catch on to them.
tim
guildwoodrecords.com
Page: 1 2 3 4
And I took jazz and 
