|
Dirty-South Blues Harp forum: wail on! >
Arragance Jazz over blues Mr Satans warning
Arragance Jazz over blues Mr Satans warning
Page:
1
sopwithcamels266
199 posts
Aug 30, 2009
3:01 PM
|
I read a recent thread where Kudzurunner mentions the warnings given to him by Mr Satan regarding the arragance a lot of jazzers have over blues players or how they look down on them and things like that.
Well they were very wise words.I my self many years ago went through that king of thing.I remember when I got heavily into modern jazz big time there was a time when I saw blues that way.Ha in fact I saw all other music that way.
I realise that was very wrong and to this day I don't really understand why I did.(Well I do but the story is too long)
I spend alot of time around Jazz musos and you know something most of them deep down look down on the blues player.It's funny because a lot of great jazzers I know can't play blues, blues. They think they can.Yet some will devote many many hours developing the Brecker, Coltraine, Henderson,Begonzi cycle and chord extension.
Improvising at what some see as the ultimate level.
I have come across manny jazzers who take on blues gigs at the drop of a hat sometimes big payers for touring artists and to me sounds dreadful.
They have little or no concept of how to approach an out and out blues band.Now is it technique that is getting in the way?
No not really they should be aware of the confines of the blues muso and adapt.
They should be able to tell as good a story in blues as in
post bop mod jazz but they can't.Why?
After all most jazzers do pro work sessions and stuff you would think there wouldn't be a problem right.
To me music is primarily all about Rhythm. In different forms of music musos become one of two things at the top of their game. A harmony or rhythm specialist.
In a few cases rare, both.
It's strange jazz comes from blues like lots of styles of music and yet many jazzers by pass it on the way to what they see as more complex things.
It's about how you tell the story not the story by it's self.To me the greatast artists say more with less.
I am a jazz player but Good blues is equal to good jazz one is not better than the other.
Last Edited by on Aug 30, 2009 3:04 PM
|
bluzlvr
238 posts
Aug 30, 2009
4:20 PM
|
I love jazz, in fact my car radio rarely leaves KKJZ, but jazz arrogance really pisses me off.
Don't these people know that without blues, jazz as we know it would not exist?
I'm reminded of the time I was enjoying a jazz performance at UCLA one afternoon.
The guy announced "We're going to do a blues tune now, but it has SOME adult chords in it."
Pure arrogance.
|
Philosofy
264 posts
Aug 30, 2009
6:53 PM
|
Jazz is pretentious wanker music. :)
|
oldwailer
875 posts
Aug 30, 2009
8:40 PM
|
From Wikipedia:
Jazz is a musical art form which originated at the beginning of the 20th century in African American communities in the Southern United States from a confluence of African and European music traditions. The style's West African pedigree is evident in its use of blue notes, improvisation, polyrhythms, syncopation, and the swung note.[1]
When I was studying at the U of Utah--the music department there had a whole department that was called "Jazz Music." In that department, you could actually study Blues, Ragtime, Dixieland--etc. They thought that Blues derived from Jazz! Of course, the a*sholes also named a fuc*king basketball team "THE Jazz," so you kinda have to wonder about the depth of the gene pool there. . .
|
Zhin
336 posts
Aug 30, 2009
9:09 PM
|
Jazz is one of the most organic modern forms of music I have ever encountered. More so than the limiting and very mechanical (but entrancing) blues rhythms.
I don't get this whole thing where people separate blues and jazz anymore... Besides, both make for very effective components for rock musicians too.
I think blues is just as much as "pretentious wanker music" as jazz could possibly be. Repeating the same licks and riffs in a 24 bar solo is pretentious wanking by my book. In fact, there are more of those types on Youtube (including myself) that commit that sin everytime. Point being, it's all the same to me. A pretentious wanker is going to be a pretentious wanker.
Leave the music out of it if you're gonna make generalizations.
----------
http://www.youtube.com/harmonicazhin
|
harmonicanick
356 posts
Aug 31, 2009
1:35 AM
|
Humility as a musician is more inspiring to young people than arrogance.
|
sopwithcamels266
200 posts
Aug 31, 2009
2:02 AM
|
Harmonicanick:Excellent quote
Zhin:Yea I hear you man but within what you say sometimes I think you have to detach yourself down a track at the expense of been seen by others that way.
What I'm saying is sometimes it is not intentional.
Oldwailer:Make a very interesting point of how the so called recognised establishment see things.A possible new topic hear on why they do see it like that.
Philosofy:That statement by it's self means nothing to me.It is an opinion I would suggest based on total ignorance.
Funny really if you read my post properly and the point I am making.As Iv'e said before the Jazz muso themselves are the most unpretentious characters you will ever come across.
You are obviously unaware of the amount of dedication involved simply to play,for no other reason
then self satisfaction.(No fame or money in jazz)
It is that style of comment that simply helps create arrogance in the jazz muso.
Your comment should I suggest be turned on more commercial forms of music which lack creativity.
Last Edited by on Aug 31, 2009 2:04 AM
|
Andrew
554 posts
Aug 31, 2009
2:34 AM
|
It can reach the heights of arrogance, but I have a friend who abandoned blues and rock in 1970 for jazz because he felt that it was more demanding, more challenging; he's not arrogant about it.
I listen to a little jazz but not a lot.
Mainly I like (some) Miles Davis, Sun Ra, Thelonius Monk. There's an English soprano sax player called Lol Coxhill whom I like a lot when he uses his sense of humour, but when he gets too serious he bores me.
I get very arrogant about jazz because I have a classical background - I think a lot of jazz musicians are over-rated technical incompetents. I am aware that I could be very wrong (because there's a lot of arrogance in my attitude and also maybe I just don't understand the musical language well enough), but I've always had an antipathy towards Charlie Parker (and/or possibly John Coltrane - I can't really tell them apart because I haven't listened to them as much as a fan would). But yesterday I was listening to my iPod on random and Archie Shepp came up. I liked him. I'll listen to more jazz as I get the time, but I have more important things to do.
Last Edited by on Aug 31, 2009 3:06 AM
|
phogi
8 posts
Aug 31, 2009
3:31 AM
|
I was thinking this over, and how true it rang. In fact, I was going to post something but never got around to it. I've seen the arrogance of many musicians, in every genre. I've heard a guy (a professional composer) who was also a rock/blue/prog rock guitar player deride a band who was playing live once. He said "Stupid pentatonics, takes no talent to play that kind of stuff." Ten years later, when I listen to his stuff, that is the same kind of stuff he is playing.
In my (humble) opinion, Jazz arrogance comes from what you have to do to go after the style. 1) You have to like jazz, which puts you in something of a minority, 2) You have to play an instrument often enough to get good at (smaller minority yet), 3) You have study extended harmony and modes (smaller group yet), and 4) You have to be have the presence of mind to improvise over complex changes.
I think it would be hard to go trough all that without feeling like you were really something special.
I have to say its part of the reason I don't like jazz. I hang out with enough arrogant bastards at work. I'm not going to spend time with them in me free time.
|
sopwithcamels266
201 posts
Aug 31, 2009
4:03 AM
|
Andrew:make some good points your first openning sentance about your friend is so very true.
Phogi: Yea I hear what your saying again interesting take on it.I find myself nodding and agreeing with your second paragraph.
I suspect that all of us to some degree will have to have a minimal level of arragance in order to deliver correctly.
When I go fly a glider or a plane it is done simply for self satisfaction the same way I get off on playing jazz or blues for that matter.
The psychological approach to flying or playing an instrument creativity( impro) for me is the same.Self belief is everything which dare I say inclues a level of arragance which cements confidence and relaxation.
Without this you can't deliver.I think it is this that is key.
Last Edited by on Aug 31, 2009 4:04 AM
|
GermanHarpist
579 posts
Aug 31, 2009
4:55 AM
|
Philosofy: " Jazz is pretentious wanker music. " lol. I heard THAT before... ;)
->Maybe better put it in quotes..
I prefer the early jazz to the highly developed jazz of Coltrane & co. The other thing I really like is Gypsy Jazz. But I don't really know where the distinction there is. (when gypsy jazz is called 'gypsy jazz', shouldn't the other jazz be called 'blues jazz'?)
At the end, as I see it, jazz is simply a certain musical approach which can be applied to all different kind of musical "heritages". An approach that is not afraid to be creative and innovative (and be a subject of change) in all different aspects of musical creation.
When people don't like Coltrane-kind-of jazz, I understand that, as it underlied many years of rapid change (going into musical complexity, that is not easy to swallow at once). I think it's sad though, that people only think of that kind of jazz when they talk about 'jazz'.
Zhin: " I don't get this whole thing where people separate blues and jazz anymore.. "
Same here, I have lots of problems of putting music in boxes. Just never seems to be a correct description.
sopwith: Yeah, insecurity is a very big hurdle for this very intuitve/unconcious flow of musical expression. Happily as musicians by playing music itself we can overcome that insecurity and let the expression flow.... groove, baby!
EDIT: btw. sopwith, takes a man to admit when one was wrong and we respect that. Makes all us bluesguys feel a little better and dare I say it... a little more entitled to some good ol musical arrogance! :)
----------
germanharpist, harpfriends on Youtube
Last Edited by on Aug 31, 2009 5:03 AM
|
sgsax
5 posts
Aug 31, 2009
11:28 AM
|
Being an erstwhile sax player (and former jazz player) myself, I thought I'd drop my two cents in on this. Most of my jazz playing was in big bands (I guess you might call them dance bands, also) way back when in college and even wayer back in high school. I did a short stint in a smaller combo for a while, but mostly I was in the big bands.
Now, as a sax player, I'm supposed to like Bird and Trane, and guys like that. Nah, I'll pass on the hard boppers. In fact, I'll pass on most alto players. Tenor is *the* jazz sax as far as I'm concerned. I prefer the classic tenor players: Dexter Gordon, Ben Webster, Coleman Hawkins, Ornette Coleman, Lester Young. And the guys who emulated them: Stan Getz, Scott Hamilton. I really like Sonny Rollin's more melodic stuff, but when he gets too far out, I start tuning out. Most new players, I can do without.
My point is, "modern jazz" seems to mee to be more of a you-know-what measuring contest. I'm sure that technically there's some impressive stuff going on there, but when I listen to or play music, I want it to move me. I remember playing some great charts in my big band days, and I remember playing stuff that seemed to me to have no soul. Most "new" jazz is simply self-absorbed and pedantic crap, as far as I'm concerned. On the other hand, you show me a player who has the technical chops and can then put the soul behind it, I'm right there, screaming like a little girl at a Beatles concert.
Harp content: when I improvise on harmonica, I always lean on my sax playing experience. The lines I go for are more along those lines than those of the classic harp players. I don't study the classic harp players, I just listen to lots of music (blues, jazz, rock, folk) and try to take anything I can away from it, no matter where it comes from. It just has to move my soul.
Seth
|
ChrisA
64 posts
Aug 31, 2009
2:25 PM
|
For the fans of tasty bluesy jazz, i recommend Blue Note's 4 cd box set called The Blue Box.
|
Mgimino
76 posts
Aug 31, 2009
5:49 PM
|
I don't know, I've never met an arrogant Dixieland jazz or traditional jazz musician in general. It seems to be more of a product of the later bebop area, Coltrane Davis etc.
----------
Michael
|
walterharp
39 posts
Aug 31, 2009
7:15 PM
|
Seems like all types of music have their snobs... like the response of many harmonica players when a certain blues rock harp player gets mentioned on the boards :-) Basically, many people think whatever they listen too is the best and are pretty rigid. So we have 70's rock stations that play the same songs again and again for decades.
Jazz, in its codified form now might have more than its share. Wynton Marsalis was bad about it for a while and reportedly said some things about Branford playing more popular rock, but he was young cocky and had the chops. Now Wynton has been playing with Willie Nelson and has relaxed a bit. From what I remember in the Miles Davis biography, he was not too hung up on labels and being a snob and did not hold it against the young hot guys in his band who got hired away to play for high-dollar touring rock performers. Probably much music arrogance is based in insecurity.
|
sopwithcamels266
202 posts
Sep 01, 2009
1:37 AM
|
Walterharp:I find my self agreeing with your last paragraph.I think that is very true.
Mgimino:Yes your right: As a sax player not harp player
many years ago ss a bop and post bop player I was inflicted with that arragance at one time.
You make a very interesting point that the traditional guys in jazz etc don't seem to suffer from it.
For me as a jazz player and blues player I don't think my attitude changed so much with age,it was more a realisation and understanding of music.
Once I climbed out of myself to look in on everything that seemed to sort it all out.
What is most frustrating for modern Jazz players or any art pushed into various levels is the higher you go it can be more difficult to cement the listener.
More often than not folk arn't interested to start listening in the first instant.
That is life,That is not me being arragant now I think that is just how it is.
Blues is music that if played well can actually spring board folk into listening to forms of music such as jazz.
All music is relative I remember many years ago spending two whole years of my life studying Coltraine and found myself in love with the music of Beethoven. Earlier I'd spent years studying Bird (Charlie Parker) Then I got into JS Bach particularly the organ works.
Now that is coming from someone who was into Stevie Wonder Marvin Gaye Ray Charles etc.
Once you can hear it everything makes sense but it can take a long time, with alot of ignorance and arragance on the way.
The irritation the me is hearing Blues or mod jazz played badly and the ones playing it think it's good and most of the listeners haven't a clue whether it is or not.
So there opinion is based on what others tell them usually promotor or band members.
The end result is audiences don't develop.
Last Edited by on Sep 01, 2009 1:48 AM
|
Post a Message
|
