 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Sean.Perrin
Date: 2006-03-17 23:15
I am just interested to know what other people think of Jazz.
To be honest I never have played it, never will play it, and can't stand watching it live or listening to it. I know that a lot of composers have been influenced by Jazz and it's distinctive style but I still can't stand it.
Is somethign wrong with me? A lot of people have been telling me that I'm being closed minded but theres just somethign about it I just can't stand.
Maybe I am being closed minded if I dont' have a good reason, though? Does anyone have any input/suggestions that could "open my mind" to the world of Jazz ive never cared to explore, or any ideas on this topic?
Founder and host of the Clarineat Podcast: http://www.clarineat.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2006-03-17 23:23
Sean.Perrin wrote:
> I am just interested to know what other people think of Jazz.
Considering the scope of the genré of "jazz", that's like asking "what do you think about colors?".
> To be honest I never have played it, never will play it, and
> can't stand watching it live or listening to it. I know that a
> lot of composers have been influenced by Jazz and it's
> distinctive style but I still can't stand it.
styles
> Is somethign wrong with me?
Yes. ...  ...
> A lot of people have been telling
> me that I'm being closed minded but theres just somethign about
> it I just can't stand.
The "it" is my problem with your statement. There's no "it".
> Maybe I am being closed minded if I dont' have a good reason,
> though? Does anyone have any input/suggestions that could "open
> my mind" to the world of Jazz ive never cared to explore, or
> any ideas on this topic?
If you don't care to explore then there's nothing that can help - but if you can find some jazz afficionados in your area, ones with a good and varied collection of music, then there's a chance you might find that you like some of it. I don't know anyone who likes all the different genrés ... but there are so many styles to choose from.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2006-03-17 23:26
My beef with most contemporary jazz is that it is just an excuse to play riffs over chord changes irrespective of the "tune" that it is supposed to represent. HOWEVER, there is good jazz out there.
Perhaps just back ending it may help. Stravinsky's Ebony Concerto or Bernstein's score to Westside Story could get you to listen to other things. Of course there are so many different styles and masters of each such as Louis Armstrong from the 20's, Benny Goodman of the 30s, Glenn Miller of the 40's, Sinatra of the 50's, Dave Brubeck of the 60s......others can help with more names etc.
Jazz, like anything else is just a blanket term for so many things, with so much garbage in the mix. Save yourself the trouble and just listen to the cream of the crop.
..............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sean.Perrin
Date: 2006-03-17 23:42
I'm not trying to be rude Mark... but in all fairness, if people can generally classify hundreds of years worth of western music as "classical" then it is completely acceptable in my opinion to say "Jazz".
I am more looking for, say, the essentials... If I you were going to lend a friend who was asking about this same thing 5 CD's, which "cream of the crop" "Jazz" in varying/contrasting styles/years what would you lend them?
Founder and host of the Clarineat Podcast: http://www.clarineat.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2006-03-17 23:54
> what would you lend them?
That's probably just as difficult as selecting the five "essential" classic pieces.
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2006-03-18 00:14
Sean.Perrin wrote:
> I'm not trying to be rude Mark... but in all fairness, if
> people can generally classify hundreds of years worth of
> western music as "classical" then it is completely acceptable
> in my opinion to say "Jazz".
The numerous very distinct types of jazz which were generated in a very short period of time makes the comparison a stretch; what is considered classical music has a very specific set of forms which allow it to be called "classical"; jazz does not have a single set of forms.
If you want the 5 representative CDs and ask 100 people you'll get a set of 500 CDs with less overlap than you'd imagine. 5 or 6 CDs might be representative of one style.
It used to be that you could listen to a radio station that has a knowledgeable crew and learn something after listening for a few months. Not so many of those left ... but sometimes radio stations will devote part of their broadcast time to jazz. That's just about the best place to start if you can.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ned
Date: 2006-03-18 00:30
Why not read up on jazz first? I'm reading one at the moment, it's by Frank Tirro ''Jazz: A History'' 2e/1993 - Norton 0-393-96368-3.
There are hundreds of histories and biographies out there, but this one covers all jazz from the roots throught to bebop and free jazz and includes blues and ragtime. It's a good technical read, with scores of major influential numbers. The author is a jazz clarinet player, which is useful for us and it appears to be edited as a textbook for a course.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: george
Date: 2006-03-18 01:51
Sean, you say you're interested in what other people think of jazz. That's easy: some people like it and some people don't like it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Merlin
Date: 2006-03-18 01:52
I might suggest trying to cultivate an appreciation of jazz by listening to something other than clarinet players. Many classically oriented clarinet players I know tend to cringe at the very sound of some jazz clarinet players, and back away from enjoying the music.
Start with something melodic and approachable. You'd be hard pressed to find a Paul Desmond recording that was difficult to enjoy.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Carol Dutcher
Date: 2006-03-18 01:54
Sean, maybe if you go to Amazon.com and then go through their jazz CDs and listen to lots of different songs on your computer, you can find some that you might like. I wouldn't know what to suggest to you since I have been listening to "Traditional Jazz" for so many years, and before that many other types of music, other than jazz. Can't really think of any music that I don't like. other than Rap. I was brought up in a musical family so guess that is the reason.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Alexis
Date: 2006-03-18 03:44
Perhaps you should watch the Ken Burns documentary about jazz...
At least some of the historical context should be interesting and shed more light on the music.
But then I don't really understand where you are coming from at all....
As far as listening to something I would pick "Kind of Blue" with Miles Davis.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Phillips
Date: 2006-03-18 04:11
Alexis,
Great idea!
I tend to agree that adlibbing on a chord progression is not as creative as, say, playing variations on the underlying melody. While standing up and taking a solo along a chord progression and adding passing tones (to cover up an imperfect playing withing the "rules," is tough, creative and, perhaps, distinctive. I think that loosing contact with the theme makes "bad jazz."
That's also why I'd suggest that a clarinet/jazz curious explorer should listen to Stoltzman's Bye Bye Black Bird and Amazing Grace.
Bob Phillips
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dano
Date: 2006-03-18 04:18
I don't like rap music. I don't see the point in having someone convince me that I should like it. I don't care how much someone else likes rap. I don't even want to know which artists are somones favorites. I have listened to it and decided that I don't get it. Maybe you should do something as simple as that. If you are not attracted to the music, don't force yourself to listen. Everyone can tell you what great piece or musician reaches them but if you don't like jazz, you won't like their suggestions. What music do you like? Knowing what you like makes it easier to understand what you might like that is "jazz". Jazz is a big word.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2006-03-18 04:32
"I'm not trying to be rude Mark... but in all fairness, if people can generally classify hundreds of years worth of western music as "classical" then it is completely acceptable in my opinion to say "Jazz"."
If you notice everything developed MUCH faster in the last century. Not only music, but also technology. Jazz developed so much faster than classical music (in the wide meaning of the word), that you simply can't say jazz like you say classical, romantic, etc.
"My beef with most contemporary jazz is that it is just an excuse to play riffs over chord changes irrespective of the "tune" that it is supposed to represent."
This is simply because everyone knows more music in their time than past music. Every period probably had mostly (or at least a lot of) bad music. They are forgotten by now so we only remember the good ones. The bad contemporary jazz players will probably be forgetten too in later years.
Anyway, I have a lot of modern jazz CDs and they are nothing like you describe and are very good!
Sean, I would be interested to hear what you don't like about what you call "jazz"?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: seafaris
Date: 2006-03-18 04:35
I agree with Dano. I personally love jazz. At first I started to listen to smooth jazz, and wasn't to fond of Miles and Coltrane. As I learned more, and listened a lot more.... I got it. Once you get it you are hooked.
...Jim
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ghuba
Date: 2006-03-18 12:13
Sean.Perrin wrote:
> I am just interested to know what other people think of Jazz.
>
> Maybe I am being closed minded if I dont' have a good reason,
> though? Does anyone have any input/suggestions that could "open
> my mind" to the world of Jazz ive never cared to explore, or
> any ideas on this topic?
>
If you want to start to "understand" jazz, go to the Apple iTunes store, or an equivalent, and download 30 or more versions of the same jazz standard by different artists. Jazz is about self expression within a standard set of chord changes and being unique at the same time as being structured (that is, hitting the chord changes but in an unique way that sounds like you). For this reason, many songs are recorded by many different artists of different eras, in different styles, at different speeds, with different kinds of musical groups (big bands, solo recordings, trios with and with pianos, quartets, etc.). Also download multiple recordings of the same song by the same artist -- different takes over the years can be quite different.
The four tunes I would start with -- very relevant for clarinet and saxophone -- are: Sweet Georgia Brown (the clarinet signature song for many jazz musicians); Giant Steps (Coltrane's movement into large chord changes at a high speed that requires huge self control in fingering and thinking); The Way You Look Tonight (a deceptively simple Jerome Kern song that lends itself to hundreds of styles and some very fast and complex runs); and the big killer song, How High the Moon/Ornithology (the two songs are the same chord changes -- Charlie Parker wrote Ornithology using the chords of How High the Moon and they are often performed interchangeably).
Pick up a Fake Book that contains the chord changes for these four songs (and 1200 others); "jazz fake books" are available from several publishers. If you can play 20 perfectly improvised choruses of Sweet Georgia Brown, Giant Steps, The Way You Look Tonight, and Ornithology you will understand jazz (and maybe even like it).
George
P.S. [Semi-seriously] I have always wondered why people like music where you try to play the same notes every time rather than launching into 50% improvisation.
Post Edited (2006-03-18 13:05)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Avie
Date: 2006-03-18 12:58
Sean,
Jazz has been forever changing since inception and continues to change as musicians improvise in there own styles. Jazz allows musicians to stray from the written page and to allow the improvisor to play what THEY like to hear. I like some, but if it is too progressive it doesnt seem to satisfy or go anywhere.
( to be more specific......Miles Davis)
Post Edited (2006-03-19 13:20)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: hans
Date: 2006-03-18 13:36
Sean.Perrin,
There is nothing wrong with you.
I am very much in agreement with Dano (above), and would like to add that, since the word jazz includes a wide range of music styles (my dictionary describes it merely as syncopated music), it is possible that you have not heard enough representative samples of the genre to be able to say for certain that you dislike all jazz or to find one that you like.
Considering that jazz includes distinguishable subsets like ragtime, dixieland, swing, bebop, etc., it is clear that the definition is inadequate or too general. Many people (myself included) like one subset but not some other(s). You may find that you feel the same way after listening to more of the different subsets. But if you don't, don't let it worry you.
Regards,
Hans (who dislikes rap and bebop)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Stephane
Date: 2006-03-18 14:46
If you want to try listening to jazz, instead of going out to buy something you may not like, try listening to internet radio. One of my favorite stations is http://www.live365.com/stations/hotjazzcritic, which is a mix of jazz, latin jazz, and classical.
"I don't like rap music. I don't see the point in having someone convince me that I should like it." Kudos
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Roger Aldridge
Date: 2006-03-18 14:53
One of the things I love about Jazz is it includes so many different styles, periods, and personalities. Thus, it includes music as radically different from one another as Paul Whiteman and John Coltrane....just to pull two names out of the air. Even though I was disappointed by some of the significant musicians who were not mentioned in the Ken Burns' Jazz series, it's my opinion that the series is an excellent way to get an overview of the history of jazz and, importantly, view it within the context of the times. Hopefully, you'll be able to find some jazz musicians who's style speaks to you. Then, you can begin to explore their music in greater detail. It's all about DISCOVERY.
Also, I highly recommend finding out where local jazz groups are playing in your community and go out to hear them. Experiencing jazz being created in-person is so much more exciting than listening to the music on a recording.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob A
Date: 2006-03-18 14:55
I've thought about this thru a sleepless night. I'd say yes--there is something wrong with you. Any person who allows themselves to devote such negative feelings toward a subject they claim to dislike intensly, reportedly, and pointedly have no interest in , needs clinical help.
One recommendation would be to spend 59 hours helping GBK review Spike Jones and Kenny G arraingments to "Stranger on the Shore", looking for that illusive phrasing which contributes to the ringing of cash registers.
Bob A
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2006-03-18 15:41
Ghuba wrote:
"Jazz is about self expression within a standard set of chord changes and being unique at the same time as being structured (that is, hitting the chord changes but in an unique way that sounds like you)."
Then how do you explain that a lot of jazz is not like this? What you describe is a small part of jazz.
I personally think jazz is just as much about how you play something as what you play.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Hiroshi
Date: 2006-03-18 16:06
I like Bill Evans trio's performance especially with the late basist Scot Lafaro and Miles Davis before his drug addiction.
As to its theory, George Russel's 'Lydian Chromatic Concept of Tonal Organization' seems very interesting. The second edition has been published.
http://www.georgerussell.com/
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2006-03-18 17:00
It's a good bet that there is something wrong with each of us but I'm inclined to think that just because you have a closed mind about jazz doesn't mean that THAT is wrong. When I was younger I couldn't tolerate the Bebop genre of jazz, now I can tolerate it but I don't necessarily seek it out for listening. Recently Miles Davis was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame (I believe I did read that somewhere) and many people don't agree that his induction was appropriate. But many people do. In general humans(and maybe all animals) don't like what they are not familiar with. Ever hear of "acquired taste"? Recently I viewed a dvd featuring Miles Davis and his group at the 1970 Isle of Wight Festival "Miles Electric" and was hypnotized by it(well, not really). I strongly suggest you watch the entire dvd with commentaries by a number of knowledgeable musicians. You just might learn something. I also agree with the above suggestion to watch Ken Burns Jazz video. As Mark points out there are many faces of jazz.
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ghuba
Date: 2006-03-18 18:01
I do not disagree with your statement at all. I believe you and I are saying the same thing although we may have a different base language or cultural referrent.
Of course, exactly where the boundaries of jazz are that separate it from other improvisational forms, popular music, free-form music, or ethnic forms, is perhaps another issue. Books and countless articles have been written about what is and what is not jazz. I do not want to get into that debate. I was trying to use a fairly general definition but if you prefer a broader one that includes freerer forms of music or highly structured but "jazzy pop", that is fine with me.
George
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bassie
Date: 2006-03-18 18:40
Sean -
There' jazz, and there's jazz. Same as there's classical, and then there's classical. In each case I like some and feel luke-warm about much of the rest.
For the purposes of this board, go listen to anything by Benny Goodman.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2006-03-18 19:29
Bassie wrote:
> For the purposes of this board, go listen to anything by Benny
> Goodman.
Or Eddie Daniels. Or Buddy DeFranco. Or Artie Shaw. Or Tim Laughlin. Or Andy Firth. Or Eric Dolphy. Or Giora Fiedman. Or ...
(personally, I could live without Benny Goodman).
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarinetwife
Date: 2006-03-18 20:27
My father's youth saw the general movement of jazz performance out of the dance hall and into the club, and there is much jazz from after that time period that he does not find tuneful, so he does not enjoy listening to it. I am my father's daughter in this regard. My students also seem to be able to understand and appreciate the great swing tunes as a first introduction to jazz. Having just played some Irish tunes, some doleful, some cookin', at a St. Patty's Day fish fry last night, I am thinking about dance and traditional today. I can say that in the classical realm I also appreciate music, whatever the era, that has some grounding in dance and traditional. Yes there is a place for music that expedts you to approach it at an intellectual level, as some jazz music does, but I like music that touches the heart and the feet as well as the brain.
Barb
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ghuba
Date: 2006-03-19 00:01
Mark Charette wrote:
> Bassie wrote:
>
> > For the purposes of this board, go listen to anything by
> Benny
> > Goodman.
>
> Or Eddie Daniels. Or Buddy DeFranco. Or Artie Shaw. Or Tim
> Laughlin. Or Andy Firth. Or Eric Dolphy. Or Giora Fiedman. Or
> ...
>
Or [in no particular order] Russell Procope, Jimmy Hamilton, George Lewis, Dr. Michael White, Barney Bigard, George Lewis, Ben Redwine, Ken Peplowski, Don Byron, Sidney Bechet, the clarinet section of the Don Ellis Orchestra (as an ensemble), the clarinet section of the Duke Ellington Orchestra (as an ensemble), Harry Carney (on bass clarinet), Jimmy Giuffre, Tony Scott, Kenny Davern, Benny Maupin (on bass clarinet who gave Bitches Brew its "brew" and ushered in fusion jazz with Miles Davis), Phil Bodner, Bill Smith, Larry Combs (recordings with Eddie Danniels and Daniel Barenboim), Woody Herman, Herbie Mann (bass clarinet), Phil Woods, or ... Brilliant technicians and musicians all, virtually all styles of jazz represented. [And this list does not even include the Klezmer clarinetists who are arguably also playing jazz.]
> (personally, I could live without Benny Goodman).
I would not put it quite that strongly, but a lot can be learned by hearing the modern recordings of Ken Peplowski, especially when he uses Fletcher Henderson scores and Eddie Daniels when teamed with Gary Burton on vibes. Peplowski is the living historian of Goodman's style and music.
George
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: larryb
Date: 2006-03-19 00:17
"Does anyone have any input/suggestions that could "open my mind" to the world of Jazz..."
Sorry, the "world of Jazz" doesn't want you; go some place else. Maybe the "world of gamelon" will let you in.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: stevesklar
Date: 2006-03-19 00:19
As mentioned, Jazz is so variable.
But I was turned on to "jazz" a long time ago (well, about 25+ years ago) while listening to a recording of Gershwin - Rhapsody in Blue.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sean.Perrin
Date: 2006-03-19 01:51
Thanks everyone... this topic seems to have cause a fair bit of controversy, interestingly enough.
I will look into some of the reccomendations and see how it goes!
Founder and host of the Clarineat Podcast: http://www.clarineat.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ned
Date: 2006-03-19 04:39
''For the purposes of this board, go listen to anything by Benny
> Goodman.
Or Eddie Daniels. Or Buddy DeFranco. Or Artie Shaw. Or Tim Laughlin. Or Andy Firth. Or Eric Dolphy. Or Giora Fiedman. Or ...''
Or any of the black musicians who came out of New Orleans.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: johnsonfromwisconsin
Date: 2006-03-19 04:42
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not trying to be rude Mark... but in all fairness, if people can generally classify hundreds of years worth of western music as "classical" then it is completely acceptable in my opinion to say "Jazz".
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet we all know that the term "Classical" as it is applied across those many centuries is innacurate, right?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe I am being closed minded if I dont' have a good reason, though? Does anyone have any input/suggestions that could "open my mind" to the world of Jazz ive never cared to explore, or any ideas on this topic?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, what have you heard? No one can expect you to like what you just don't like. But as it's been said, Jazz was a very rapidly evolving concept. Music of the 20th/21st century seems to change rather radically every five to ten years. Listening to, say, David Sanborn and not liking him doesn't mean jazz holds nothing for you. Personally, I don't care for much of anything new in Jazz, prefering old Swing/BigBand stuff much better.
-JfW
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: stevesklar
Date: 2006-03-19 04:47
ned,
funny you mention Benny Goodman. I bought a clarinet after hearing Benny Goodman live back in .... 1978ish?
Steve
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2006-03-19 09:20
"Peplowski is the living historian of Goodman's style and music. "
Obviously, "out of the mouths of babes" and just another personal opinion.
"I can live without B.G.".....that's a good one, Mark. We are all living without him and are only left with his music.
I am constantly amazed every day as I read about the world of music from some who know so much more about it than I do. The input from those who know less is delightfully entertaining.
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2006-03-19 11:50
BobD wrote:
> "I can live without B.G.".....that's a good one, Mark. We are
> all living without him and are only left with his music.
To be more specific, since there was no joke intended or perhaps you're not familiar with that use of idiomatic English:
I don't especially care for Benny Goodman's music or playing. Which is my opinion and has nothing to do with his technical, musical, composing, or arranging skills. Just to clear things up.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Donn
Date: 2006-03-19 16:35
I can't agree that "Rhapsody in Blue" is jazz, but as Louis once said (or words to that effect), "If you don't understand jazz, don't mess with it".
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2006-03-19 16:40
"I don't especially care for Benny Goodman's music or playing. Which is my opinion and has nothing to do with his technical, musical, composing, or arranging skills. Just to clear things up."
Then what don't you like about his music?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bassie
Date: 2006-03-19 17:21
Wow! I mention Benny Goodman and the sky falls in.
And to think I almost suggested Jacques Loussier as an interesting diversion.
:-)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: larryb
Date: 2006-03-19 17:26
Really, there's not THAT much difference between Shaw and Goodman. People who claim that they like one and not the other (particularly Shaw enthusiasts) are being dishonestly tribal. It's hip to say "I don't like Goodman; I much prefer Shaw."
C'mon - they're both swing clarinetists/band leaders. Shaw may have been a more interesting character, but their playing is pretty much in the same ballpark.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2006-03-19 18:04
larryb wrote:
> Really, there's not THAT much difference between Shaw and
> Goodman. People who claim that they like one and not the other
> (particularly Shaw enthusiasts) are being dishonestly tribal.
> It's hip to say "I don't like Goodman; I much prefer Shaw."
Who said that here, anyway?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2006-03-19 18:08
clarnibass wrote:
> "I don't especially care for Benny Goodman's music or playing.
> Which is my opinion and has nothing to do with his technical,
> musical, composing, or arranging skills. Just to clear things
> up."
>
> Then what don't you like about his music?
Type of music, tone, styling. Not necessarily in that order. But I switch channels if Benny comes on the radio. yes, I have plenty of his music in my collection. Grew to dislike it after awhile. Some people go the other way. Maybe I'll enjoy it again in the future, but I don't like it now.
I like Buddy deFranco. I'm sure some people would say exactly the same things about what they don't like about him.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ghuba
Date: 2006-03-19 18:51
BobD wrote:
> "Peplowski is the living historian of Goodman's style and
> music. "
>
> Obviously, "out of the mouths of babes" and just another
> personal opinion.
Am I missing something, or is not any judgment like this a personal opinion? Judgment are not facts, although the judgments of some may be better than those of others. After 40 years of listening critically to many schools of jazz for many hours per week in both recorded and live forms, I believe that while you can disagree with my judgments and opinons (even though they are apparently held by many other reviewers) -- as expressed in the above quote of a comment I made about Ken Peplowski's deep understanding of Goodman's style -- characterizing these judgments as "out of the mouths of babes" is not an especially accurate judgment on your part although you are certainly welcome to hold any opinion you wish.
>
> I am constantly amazed every day as I read about the world of
> music from some who know so much more about it than I do. The
> input from those who know less is delightfully entertaining.
I am glad that those of us who cannot enlighten you at least entertain you. When we stop entertaining you, you can always just skip reading the posts of those whom you judge to know less than you do.
As a senior PhD level knowledge worker I often find that many of the posts, memos, scientific articles, and editorials in my own field of expertise are written by those who have far less experience than I do [after all, I have had a doctorate for 30 years, or more than half of my entire life]. Nonethless, I find that I learn much from those younger and much less experienced individuals because they see things differently than I do and sometimes cause me to re-evaluate things I thought that I knew perfectly for years. Some of the more profound recent learning experiences I have had are from talking to staff in our company who are 23 years old and at the begiining of their careers and whose "really dumb" questions or insights actually cause me to question much of what I thought was established fact.
So, here is a "personal opinion" formed from listening to every recording by Ken Peplowski, Benny Goodman, and other jazz clarinetist that I have been able to acquire and play (frequently dozens of times) by someone who is not a musicologist, does not play music professionally, and struggles to have enough time to practice playing while having a complicated career and life. Mr. Peplowski does not attempt -- as he probably could at any time he wanted to -- to copy the solos or note selection or phrasing of Mr. Goodman on everything he plays. Nonethless, in my judgment, Peplowski's phrasing and joy of playing Goodman's catalog of songs and arrangements indicates an incredibly deep and thoughtful understanding of Goodman's work that seems unsurpassed among jazz clarinetists currently recording for major labels. If you believe my opinion is that of a "babe" tell me what is wrong with it rather than simply dismissing it. I am here to learn from those wiser than I.
George
>
Post Edited (2006-03-19 19:02)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Avie
Date: 2006-03-19 19:30
It is difficult to explain how Shaw moves you with the clarinet that Goodman doesnt but I think it has to do with Soul.![[cool]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/cool.gif)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2006-03-19 22:19
Dear George....My comments were made at 4am and were rather insensitive in retrospect. I'm truly sorry if I offended you, that was not my intent. I'm just a crusty old geezer who went to school before they taught politically correct. I'm 76 years of age ,started playing clarinet in 1939 and consider myself an intermediate level player. Your statement about Ken Peplowski sounded like it was a fact rather than an opinion that's why I jumped on it. I've listened to Ken and every other clarinet player on record and he doesn't do anything special for me and I don't consider him as being
the living historian of B.G.'s music. My email address is listed in my profile. I'd be happy to discuss the subject off the BB with you if you wish as musical tastes is a very opinionated subject.
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ghuba
Date: 2006-03-20 00:44
Bob,
No apologies are necessary. I assumed that statements of musical preference are always opinions. In the old days of the Internet [say about six years ago], people used to preference every opinion statement with IMHO; we seem to no longer do that, but since my profession involves selling opinions, I probably erroneously stated an opinion as more factual than appropriate.
It is interesting that the topic of Benny Goodman totally polarizes people on this list and even people who love jazz in all of its flavors. Now that you have told us your age, I surmise that you may have been a fan of his at the time that he was the first mega-superstar in American music. I was born 22 years after you and by the time I started listening to jazz seriously in the mid 1960s, Mr. Goodman was not relevant in the way that John Coltrane (shortly to die) and Miles Davis and Ornette Coleman and Charles Mingus were. It is only later in life that I have come to appreciate Swing Jazz and its discipline as well as understanding that it was the loud popular music of young people at a time before electric guitars (and Led Zeppelin). I found it interesting to read in a biography of Goodman that is considered one of the major ones that his lifestyle in his 20s sounds like that of a modern rock star (albeit substituting alcohol for other psychoactive substances) both in terms of the money he made and his life on the road. As for his recordings, I find them alternately brilliant and sometimes not at all. What I am sure about is that when I listen to Goodman it is more of an intellectual exercise -- either to understand history or technique -- than one that I emotionally want to repeat over and over. I could listen to Don Byron or Ken Peplowski or Dr. Michael White or Ben Redwine over and over all day; can't do that with Benny Goodman even though I appreciate his genius.
George
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Steve Epstein
Date: 2006-03-20 02:46
Here's another take on Benny (and Artie):
When I was growing up and learning to play clarinet in the '60's and '70's, clarinet was way uncool, and saxaphone was barely any better. It was the height of rock at the time, when rock had become a "movement". You were not cool unless you played guitar, electric bass, or drums.
To be compared to Benny (and kids knew who he was) was a put-down; Benny was of our parents' generation. It wasn't until the bands Chicago and Blood, Sweat and Tears came along that horns (well, at least some of them) became cool again.
Steve Epstein
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2006-03-20 03:32
Am I the only one who doesn't care about music genres? I can't think of any type of music that I will not like just because it is of a certain type.
The comment about Goodman vs. Shaw - I have to completely disagree. It will not surprise me at all if people will like one but not the other, for the exact same reason I just explained.
For the person who said Goodman's music is lacking "soul" compared with Shaw's music - Regardless of what I think of Goodman's music, I don't think all music needs to have "soul". Some music is about different ideas than emotions.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dori
Date: 2006-03-20 05:12
Would someone please explain why one is allowed to dislike Rap, for example, but if you don't like Jazz then "there is something wrong with you" and "you need clinical help" as some posters insisted. Whatever happened to personal opinion?
In a recent Master Class with Branford Marsalis, he listened to just one piece played by Jazz ensemble then said it was obvious to him that they don't listen enough to different types of music - and he didn't mean just different types of Jazz. He had the same comment for the next group also. The idea was not to restrict yourself to a narrow band of styles, not even just within the genre of Jazz.
Like Sean.Perrin, I do not like Jazz. However, I HAVE listened to both live and recorded pieces, and I HAVE played it, but I just don't care for this type of music. A piece will end and I feel like I've missed the point, somehow I didn't understand it, I just didn't get it. This is unsettling to me and I almost always leave a Jazz concert in a bad mood. Please notice that I did NOT say the music was bad, just that I didn't like it.
You may not like the kinds of things I enjoy, but you don't hear me saying that you have to. So why this idea that Jazz must be enjoyed by everyone?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ned
Date: 2006-03-20 06:56
''I do not like Jazz. However, I HAVE listened to both live and recorded pieces, and I HAVE played it, but I just don't care for this type of music. A piece will end and I feel like I've missed the point, somehow I didn't understand it, I just didn't get it. ''
I guess you just weren't playing jazz then, if you say you didn't understand what you were doing.
''So why this idea that Jazz must be enjoyed by everyone?''
Without scrolling back through all of the 50 odd posts, I would probably be correct in saying that this is not the main point of most of the them - certainly not mine anyway.
If you don't like jazz then, don't indulge in the first instance, there's no point in makng a martyr of yourself.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2006-03-20 13:41
Sean began this thing by asking what "we" think of jazz etc etc. Perhaps to like any particular music one has to relate it to something one has already experienced. Have you ever met a new person and instantly liked him/her....because they reminded you of someone you already knew and liked. I think music is something like that. Over time as you are exposed to music of all kinds your brain generates a database of feelings....yes feelings...about music. As a teenager I didnt' care for any jazz.....now I do.
I'll mention again the Miles Davis dvd in its entirety as perhaps a mind opener as regards music one might think one doesn't like. (My wife didn't especially like it!!)
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sean.Perrin
Date: 2006-03-22 01:20
So,
after reading all these posts I have come to two conclusions: I'm not going to be able to discover jazz overnight, and it's not going to come to me, I'm going to have to find it.
The solution? I'm registering in the summer semester Jazz history course at the University Of Calgary, where I am currently taking my BMUS (Performance). Not only will this compliment my degree niceley, it will submerge me into the world of jazz for two months and allow me to have an excellent sampling of music and events from each era of Jazz. What better way to get a great, thourogh sampling of jazz than that!
This way I can make an educated decision about jazz, and not worry if I don't like it, at least I'll have an undertanding of it, and how it fits into music history.
Thanks eveyone!
Founder and host of the Clarineat Podcast: http://www.clarineat.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Mills
Date: 2006-03-23 23:55
Sean.Perrin; Leonard Berstein did a record around 1960 called What is Jazz? It is great news for little kids that Twinkle Twinkle Little Star has been recorded! He did it on the piano with successive versions that got more complicated, a la the Carnival of Venice, to illustrate jazz. Here is the vehicle to get kids started in music and learn how it is composed. Any kid wants to --and can-- start with this tune's beginning. It is the principle of jazz, the virtuoso is nurtured.
I hate jazz vocals, "Stormy Monday", and Tuesday was just as bad, etc. On the other hand, since it is hard to find on the radio, somebody (above) should have emphasized the benefit of the natural arts applied by musical instruments, and how advanced musicians can dig into the harmony which can tear my head into shreds. So can classical music. Add some horsepower and you get Lalo Shiffrin and Jazz Meets the Symphony. Not suitable for snivelling, simpering, simps who object to phenomena in nature just because of some bad weather earlier that week.
Ken
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob A
Date: 2006-03-24 15:51
Jazz, as has been pointed out, is in the mind and in the bones. If you can get the beat of a song and your mind then jumps to the lyrics, you are partway there.
For example:
A jazz musician, mostly old school, is seated on a bench at a bus-stop at 2:30 A.M. after a gig. An out-of-breath gent comes running up and asks, "Cross-town buses run all night?" And the musician looks up at him and responds: "Doo Da, Doo Da".
Have fun with your studies.
Bob A
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Mills
Date: 2006-03-24 21:59
LarryB; Benny Goodman was the King of Swing while Artie Shaw was the King of the Clarinet. Shaw was more forward looking, I bekieve. Ask Mark about my submission earlier today of my jazz harmony as I judge those two guys. It could be useful for Perrin too as it was written not to be a burden to read: just the basics of a skilled trade. Journey Person, Ken
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
