When i play i get this feeling of freedom and peace...that´s different from the feeling i get from listen to somebody else music, that´s more like joy and in some cases admiration, what do you guys think?

maybe you´re totally rigth, but the problem is that I the music I play is complete related to the way that I feel...i don´t know is that wrong,
but that´s what i do,...

i gonna try to follow your advise anyway..THANKS.

Originally posted by Ed Fuqua
WHOSHUNS - When i think about the number of quarter notes I've played against the amount of money in my bank account, I get the feeling that I have been VASTLY underpaid....


Start playing more whole notes and half notes, Man. And for God's skake, avoid eights, triplets, and sixteenths at all cost. And don't play any ghost notes, you can't get paid for those!

When things are really happening, I tend to forget about things like nailing a harmonic on the tonic or how close the piano player is getting to me octaves or how the blister on my index finger is throbbing. Things become automatic and I'm left with pure emotion, that is, mine mixed with the other people playing. That's pretty much why I play.

Originally posted by Ed Fuqua
I think that worrying about whether or not you have the "correct" feelings when you play is such a waste of time. If you are conscious of feelings or emotions or thoughts or whatever when you're playing, I would wager that you're not paying enough attention to what you're HEARING.


I couldn't disagree more!

To me, in most cases, the emotion of the music is the paramount concern. Of course, correct notes, rhythm etc. are very important, but I'll take a greatly spririted , emotionally charged performance (even with some technical errors) over a note perfect performance that doesn't say anything emotionally. After all, music is about conveying mood and emotion - it shouldn't be so much about impressing people with your technical prowess. The fact is that "Joe Lunchpail" doesn't notice a fraction of the technical subtleties that you are concerning yourself with - he will notice whether or not the music does something for him on the inside.

How this relates to the original poster's question is a little different. Oceans seems to be only experience the same emotion(s) each time. I encourage you to try to find a greater variety of emotions in the music unless of course you're playing stuff that's all relatively the same!

ED, I would never presume to disagree with you but it seems you are missing a point here. PLaying bass is all about bringing the music and musicians together and the best feeling is when it all hits, the swing is happening, the changes are going on and the soloist is digging in for another chorus and everyone is in the same "space" playing as one. In order for that to happen "hearing" what's going on is a major function. Admittedly I have a different perspective because I play music because I love it, and make a little loose change, I'm not trying to make a living in the competition of the Big Apple. For your sake and sanity I would hope that there is still some enjoyment in plying your craft.

Oceans--you got it bro that's one of the reasons to play music, creating and experiencing those moments are the heart of music. Those moments for yourself, other musicians and the audience are the real jewels of music. No other art form allows several individuals to collectivly create those moments and still allow the audience to join in. Keep playing and keep an open heart

Depends on whether I'm concentrating on sight-reading a part, listening for upcoming changes in an unfamiliar tune... or, just am unconsciously grooving on whatever is flowing.

Electric bass just isn't quite the organic being that the Double Bass is... personally, I *become* the bass. Just jump right into it and we are one.

At least that's when I'm "on" <g>.

Originally posted by Bob Gollihur


....the organic being that the Double Bass is... personally, I *become* the bass. Just jump right into it and we are one.

At least that's when I'm "on" <g>.



Amen. Those are better words than I had for it.

Originally posted by Bob Gollihur
Depends on whether I'm concentrating on sight-reading a part, listening for upcoming changes in an unfamiliar tune... or, just am unconsciously grooving on whatever is flowing.

At least that's when I'm "on" <g>.

This is closer to my personal experience - plus things like - I wish that cowbell wasn't so loud, hope the trumpeter makes that high note, why didn't everybody tune up?, is my G string slightly out of tune?, got to add some variation to that tumbao, isn't the overall volume creeping up?, shall I change the tone controls on my amp for the next tune, what parts do I still need to look at in the next few songs and which can I remember ?, what was that scale to use over that part of the sequence? .....etc etc.

I think Ed's point is that usually there are so many things about the music to think about, there isn't time for other feelings - although you might realise that you had them after the gig, when somebody asks you. My personal view is also that if you aren't thinking about things like this then the music is either so dull or so lacking in any real "challenge" that it's time to move onto something else!

If I understand the direction, if not the letter, of Ed's post, it is a warning not to let feelings, whatever they are, become a goal in themselves.
That is not the same as saying a player should play without emotion. And even there, forced to choose, I'm not going to sacrifice accuracy for interpretation. Positive feelings flow from playing to the best of our abilities.

Originally posted by Ed Fuqua
I think that worrying about whether or not you have the "correct" feelings when you play is such a waste of time. If you are conscious of feelings or emotions or thoughts or whatever when you're playing, I would wager that you're not paying enough attention to what you're HEARING.
If you have such feelings, great. If you don't, great. Just try not to let them get in the way of hearing what the piano player is doing. Seriously, save it for AFTER you play.

Maybe I'm wrong here, but I think the key phrase in Ed's post is "paying attention to what you're hearing", which is in my opinion the most important aspect of playing (in a jazz setting at least; I feel that it's the most important aspect of ALL playing as well, but I don't care to defend that opinion in a semantic discussion with orchestra players...). My two cents, for what it's worth:

The time to "think" is in the woodshed while practicing. Playing is a time for one thing, and one thing only - reacting to what you hear. Not to sound too "new age" about it, but "playing" is a FLOW of sound and ideas, and if you are "thinking" about anything other than becoming a part of the cumulative flow of music happening at any given moment, you are getting in your own way. "Feelings" while playing are fine, but I find that if I am succesfully in the flow of the music, I "feel" good - so good, in fact, that I'm not aware of "feeling" anything specific other than being immersed in the moment with no time to think or feel. If I'm not in the flow, I "feel" like I'm missing the bus, and need to get back into the flow. The flow is all about reacting to the sound on an instinctual intuitive level that is pre-cognitive (some argue that it is post-cognitive, but this is again semantics). You can only play to the level of your ability, which is in large part determined by the amount of things you have mastered through practice up to the time in which you are playing. This being the case, thinking about what isn't right about what you are doing, or what you would like to have done better is a waste of time. That's stuff to assess later, when you listen to (actual or remembered) playback. When you are playing, you can only do what you can do, so just do it and save the judgements for later.

Bruce, I must most emphatically disagree with the statement that if you aren't "thinking about things like... (your volume, varying your rhythm, the tone of your G string, etc...) then the music is not challenging enough". When I am really in the flow, there are no words, no conscious ideas, no sights (I play with my eyes closed when I'm not reading or looking for a cue, which with a tight band rarely needs to be visual in my experience), etc... only sound and time. To that I would add that I've never played a perfect version of "C Jam Blues", and I doubt I ever will, so the challenge of the moment is to make whatever it is you're playing as organic and natural as possible. Later you can worry about whether you need to be playing different or more challenging material.

After all my bitching about semantic arguments, I hope I'm not laying one on you. If so.....my bad. Perhaps the "feeling of peace"cited by the original poster is also simply another way to describe what it's like to be completely in a moment? (Sigh....) Semantics can be a HUGE pain in the *ss sometimes.......

The original question is kind of a naive one. The cat says he feels freedom and peace. That might fly in high school, but then it's a lotta BS. Here's the kind of feelings I have: when I play Body and Soul, I'm feeling Body and Soul; when I'm playing Groovin' High, I'm feeling Groovin' High; if I'm playing the fourth movement of Beethoven's 9th, I'm feeling scared to death, seriously I'm feeling the Ode to Joy. There's no time for freedom and peace, and that's also when mistakes start creeping in; little mistakes like, "sh*t, the rest of the band's in the bridge, where the hell am I?"

I'll also bet that anyone feeling lovey with himself (freedom and peace) is probably not tight with the rest of the band. Be a thinking bassist, be in the moment and aware of everything going on around you, reacting. How can anyone feel freedom and peace with with all that going down?

I don't think I could put into words what I am feeling when I am playing. I know that after playing I am very tired and exhausted, leading me to think that something must have been happening when I was playing. I also know that not playing (like leaving the instrument for months or years) leaves me with a deep spiritual void, a loss of connection with the divine.

Originally posted by David Kaczorowski
Be a thinking bassist, be in the moment and aware of everything going on around you, reacting. How can anyone feel freedom and peace with with all that going down?

Of course, I'm a novice here and probably not qualified to comment on this, but being in the moment, reacting to the other musicians, and /thinking/, to me, seem to be different things.

For me thinking is like, 'Where are my keys? How do I get the chart off the floor and back on to my stand?'

When I'm performing (note: not practicing. This part of my mind is very involved in practice sessions), the thinking section of my mind chills. Of course, its always ready to jump in and help the rest me figure out where the bridge is. When I'm performing, I'm listening to the other people playing, and those other people are affecting what I play. If there's a horn player standing in front of me wailing it doesn't take the key finding, chart retreiving part of my brain to tell me hammer the root on one like there's no tomorrow! It just happens!

When I'm improvising, I'm not worried about making mistakes. Mistakes happen, perhaps to me a lot more than you guys, but they happen to everybody. The great thing about improvising is that when you make a mistake, that mistake is incorporated into what you played. It's there, it isn't leaving, and the best thing you can do is flow with it. So when you're improvising, you have the freedom to mess up. You have the freedom say what you want to say, within reason. Maybe a good rule for this is, 'say what you need to, but let everyone else say what they need to.'

So you are free, and being free to make wonderful music with other people is a peaceful thing. It's wonderful to be able to get with a group of people and not be in conflict with them, isn't it?

I'm not trying to start a flame here. Actually I'm trying to douse one. As michael said, it's impossible to put into words what we feel when we play. So, I don't think the original poster was too far off when he mentioned freedom and peace in association with making music.

If you're free to make mistakes, you're also free to get fired, or at least free to not be asked back.

I don't think thinking is at all at odds with being in the moment and reacting. Here are some examples of the thinking (thinking may be passing thoughts): relative major; turnaround; tonic; here comes the bridge; horn player f*cked up ended his solo at the end of the bridge, this suck-*ss string picker thinks we're at the top; this guy really sucks I should lay back; ooh, check out the way that broad's strokin' her fine sexy legs in those black stockings while talkin' to that schmuck, nice legs, I dig the heals, maybe she'll catch me checkin' her out; the drummer keeps rushing the tempo, I'll drag a little; where are those legs?. Those examples all come just from Friday night's gig while playing Autumn Leaves. Another example of thinking is using taste and discretion, knowing when to drop a fill and when not too. Maybe you hear the sax player's doing a thing, do you compliment it with something or do you opt out because you justs did something before that and you wantt to be tasteful?

Mingus was talking about his drummer, Dannie Richmond, during an interview with Nesuhi Ertegun... (I'm paraphrasing, here)

"Dannie told me he wanted to play like Max Roach. He would try to play something, but his sticks would slip and he'd mess up. So I told him, 'If you make a mistake, it don't matter as long as it swings.' So now he's got Max and mistakes."

....

I make mistakes, and I fix them. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't dwell upon the negative while I am playing.

David, it kind of sounds like you don't like playing with the other people in that particular group very much...

And if I were a bandleader, I wouldn't fire a bass player for missing a change or playing a bad solo on one tune. I would fire them for being more interested in someone in the audience than the music being played.

You know, I have to say, in some ways I don't envy what you Jazz cats have to do at work. It seems you have to spend an awful lot of time thinking about WHAT you are going to play all the time, which has got to take away from the amount of energy you can put toward capturing the emotion of the particular piece of music.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to imply you guys are apt to play with less emotion, I just think you do actually have so many other things to take care of just figuring out what notes to play, it has got to make it harder at times to just sit back and really work on the desired emotion.

In the classical scene, we just play the notes that are in front of us - nothing more, nothing less. Those choices are not an issue, and apart from obvious technical things like intonation, rhythm and general technical accuracy, the rest of our time is more easily devoted to phrasing and interpreting the emotions in the music.

It was said before by someone above, that hopefully we have taken care of most technical concerns in our practice sessions, so by the time we are playing a performance all those other things are second nature and hopefully you can devote the bulk of your energy on the emotional aspects of the music.

If I am having to think too much about technical issues while I am playing, I feel I'm probably not as prepared as I should be. I think that if you are spending the bulk of your time concerning yourself with technical issues, you are doing the music a great diservice. Sure, those things things are extremely important, but IMO they should be a given, so that we are free to spend the bulk of our energy on capturing the emotion of the particular piece of music.

Bruce said "My personal view is also that if you aren't thinking about things like this then the music is either so dull or so lacking in any real "challenge" that it's time to move onto something else!". My view is that by the time you are in a performance setting, ideally you don't have to think about things like this so that you can focus on what's really important - the emotion in the music.

I take my challenges from trying to make every 'little' bass part the best gem of music I can. One of my favourite bits of music is an aria from Puccini's Turandot, "Signor ascolta", which only has maybe two or three notes for the bass in the in the whole aria. They are nothing technically, but what separates the sheep from the goats is how the player approaches these 'little' pizzicati - some guys just say "Oh, that's boring" and just whack them off like they don't mean anything. To me, those few notes are each like little gems that perfectly accent the mood of the whole aria, and I play each one of them with all the feeling I have.


I guess that's why I'm glad I don't have to be an 'on-the-spot' composer like you Jazz guys. I think I'd really miss the time I could afford to spend on the emotional side of things, because I know, I'd be spending way too much time just trying to decide what notes to play in the first place. I really admire the guys that can improvise AND convey so much emotion at the same time. At least in my classical world, a lot of the time I can at least get much of the emotional side in since I've had all of my note decisions made for me.

Originally posted by AlexFeldman

David, it kind of sounds like you don't like playing with the other people in that particular group very much...

And if I were a bandleader, I wouldn't fire a bass player for missing a change or playing a bad solo on one tune. I would fire them for being more interested in someone in the audience than the music being played.

I got a call at about 6:00 Friday night from the cat talking about he needs a bassist for a gig a 9:00. Someone else referred him to me, I never heard of the cat or the other cats in the band. It was cool enough though, I made a quick $75 on what would've otherwise been a night making $0. And there were a lot of hot chicks to oggle at. There's ways to mask checkin' out the chicks while you're playing. Besides, if the bandleader sees me it doesn't make a difference as long as what I'm playing burns. The women probably make me play better anyway. Maybe I'm lucky I'm married.

Maybe you should sell drugs instead of playing the bass. You might get to check out more chicks that way, and you'd make a lot more money.

Originally posted by David
I got a call at about 6:00 Friday night from the cat talking about he needs a bassist for a gig a 9:00. Someone else referred him to me, I never heard of the cat or the other cats in the band. It was cool enough though, I made a quick $75 on what would've otherwise been a night making $0. And there were a lot of hot chicks to oggle at. There's ways to mask checkin' out the chicks while you're playing. Besides, if the bandleader sees me it doesn't make a difference as long as what I'm playing burns. The women probably make me play better anyway. Maybe I'm lucky I'm married.

Originally posted by Rob W
You know, I have to say, in some ways I don't envy what you Jazz cats...


Rob, it's all taking care of in the practice session, there's no figuring out what notes to play involved on the gig. The thing is to know your instrument inside and out, know it well enough so that you can hear something in your head and instantly translate it to the instrument, and know the tunes well enough or be able to sight read changes well enough so that any technical difficulties a tune presents isn't a difficulty at all. What you're left with is the moment/emotion, the tune, what the rest of the band is playing all making you have a sound in your head that you have to get out.

You can listen to hundreds or even thousands of recordings and hear cats don't have any trouble getting the emotion out. Start with my favorite, John Coltrane w/ Johnny Hartman. Or for some bass, the Jimmy Blanton duets with Ellington. Monk's Crepuscle with Nellie has some emotion.

I'm not a professional classical player (yet), but I do play in a volunteer orchestra (which is good enough that folks don't realize were volunteers), I'm studying excerpts, and I'm studying the third Bach cello suite. The only differences I see between jazz and classical is classical has all the notes and emotion marked on the page and jazz doesn't. And like on a classical gig, in jazz, if the musician has to concern himself with technical issues on the gig, he's not prepared.

Originally posted by AlexFeldman
Maybe you should sell drugs instead of playing the bass. You might get to check out more chicks that way, and you'd make a lot more money.

I gave you an honest response for this? You're a real stinkin' d*ckhead and your sarcasm isn't appreciated. Why don't you go back to your bedroom where you play with your high school pals and be as free and peaceful as you want m*therf*cker.

Maybe you would've appreciated my post more if I would've written about the guys in the club Friday night, AlexSmegma.

Originally posted by David Kaczorowski
And like on a classical gig, in jazz, if the musician has to concern himself with technical issues on the gig, he's not prepared.

I think that the disagreements are down to the fact that we are all in very different situations. I have a full-time job and so do all the other people in the bands I play with - we're all learning as we go. The situation's not ideal, but we all want to play and are learning as we go.

The large Latin band I'm in does rehearse every week and has a lot of worked-out arrangements, but the personnel changes and as I said, everybody is doing it for fun and not money. So we are always making mistakes and with so many people around (13 usually!) there are always so many things going on, that you have to keep paying attention with 100% concentration. Sometimes it's like the Titanic going down, but you have to keep playing!

The point is that if something isn't working or we don't enjoy playing it - then we move on to something else or try to get help. But the idea is also to do something challenging, so we all get better.

I could go and play in a band that churns out the same songs with no attempt at playing anything different - I was in pop/rock bands for 20 years! But at this point in my life, I feel the need for something different that also improves my understanding of music - rhythmically and harmonically. So the Latin stuff gives me interesting rhythms that I haven't played before and Jazz challenges me to really understand functional harmony and create improvised lines out of this.

I'm not looking at music as being my "job", but rather as something that helps me get away from my job - but I also want to do something worthwhile and to me, the most worthwhile thing I can do in my "leisure time" is learn more about music and I'm lucky enough to have found quite a few other like-minded individuals who have similar goals.

I see music as "fun" but also with a challenge - like people who go yachting, run marathons etc "for fun"! I am also a great "consumer" of music and will go to concerts and listen to vast amounts of recorded music - trying to play the stuff helps me to appreciate music more and again adds to my enjoyment of music I hear and I'm always finding new stuff to appreciate.

So what I was saying was that - Yes I could be in a rock band that played perfect covers of the same songs and yes, some audiences might love this - but it wouldn;t be teaching me anything and as I don't rely on music for any part of my income (quite the reverse in fact!) there is no point that I can see in doing this and this is why I said that if the music wasn't challenging enough then it's time to move on to something else - this only applies to my personal situation and the people I play with, but I still think it's a valid point of view.

Bruce,

I think I know what you're saying...and you are to be commended for doing what you're doing. It takes a lot of energy and guts to pursue a new style of music at the end of a long workday when your work is about something other than music. That can be very frustrating, since I'm sure that you would rather be dealing with music while you are at work but have to make a living (your status as "talkbass post king" attests to this as well). I wasn't attempting to criticise your statement about "thinking" or "trying something new", but rather to draw a distinction between practicing and playing (or, if you prefer, "performing"). It sounds like in your situation the band is doing a combination of the two, which is not a bad thing - it's just different from a lot of professional situations.

Several people have posted about the difference between "classical" and "jazz" playing. There is a big difference in that yes, in "classical" playing the notes, rhythms, basic dynamics, etc. are already chosen for you, but the bottom line remains the same: when you are "playing" you should be reacting to a sound, whether it be the sound of your instrument alone (as in a solo piece), or as part of a group. It would be easy to confuse this "reacting" with "thinking very very fast" or "adjusting", but if you are having conscious thoughts about "what should I play here", you are still practicing to a certain extent in my opinion...and it's just my opinion, nothing more - no flames please!

About the question of whether jazz musicians enjoy their work, which got a little heated, I would say this. As professional performers, we all find ourselves in different situations all the time, and some of these situations are more enjoyable than others. Sometimes I find myself on a gig from hell, a situation in which there is very little musical joy being had or even attempted by anyone. I think of these situations as "paying dues", as the downside of professional music which balances the other situations where everybody in the band is focused on making the best music they can at that moment. For years I have gone back and forth about whether to fight the situation (i.e. - try to play my best and enjoy it in spite of the fact that no one else seems to be trying to be musical), or go with it (be as cynical as the other guys on the gig and not even try to play to the best of my abilities). 99% of the time I try to ignore the people with the "why should I try to play well - nobody's listening anyway, it's just a gig, why not watch the T.V. over the bar during the sax solo...." attitude and focus on playing the best I can, getting a good sound, keeping good time, etc. It's a compromise, but the most productive one I can come up with. At the end of a night like that, all I can do is be glad that I'm done playing with those guys for the time being, glad that I got paid to have a bass in my hands for (?) hours, and glad to have the freedom of choice to either take the next gig when the callback comes (If I need the money), or find myself mysteriously "already working that night" when the guys I don't enjoy playing with call for the next one.

Eventually the idea is to develop and nurture strong relationships with those people who enjoy making music and do it well, and then work with them as often as possible so you can get on with the business of making music instead of only making money. Whenever you aren't doing that, you're paying dues so that you can afford to pick and choose better in the future.

Last, I wasn't gonna say anything about the flame war because I hate cyber flames, but...Alex, the "why don't you go sell drugs" comment was clearly a provocation, and you should expect to get flamed for something like that (even though I don't care for the nature of the flame itself). David, feel free to deep fry me for this if you want to, but I don't consider "checking out the legs" an integral part of "being in the flow of music", but rather a distraction from same. The time for that (if you're into that scene) is on the breaks, not while trying to make music.

Peace (I hope...)
Chris

Originally posted by Chris Fitzgerald
I wasn't attempting to criticise your statement about "thinking" or "trying something new", but rather to draw a distinction between practicing and playing (or, if you prefer, "performing"). It sounds like in your situation the band is doing a combination of the two, which is not a bad thing - it's just different from a lot of professional situations.

Peace (I hope...)
Chris

Actually we are starting to feel a bit guilty about "practicing on the bandstand" - we are getting some quite big and well-paid gigs, although we haven't tried to make any money - usually we're happy to cover expenses and we play a lot of gigs for charity events - things like flood and famine relief.

But the more gigs you do, the more you seem to get and for example, we have been asked to play at the launch of a local radio station in March, which is going to get quite a lot of publicity and we are starting to think we should practice a bit more and the horn section have actually set up additional practices just for them to get their arrangements tighter!

I suppose the "moral" question here, is whether we are taking work away from professional bands, but so far there doesn't seem to be a conflict - probably becuase a 14-piece professional band would have very little chance of making a living! ;)

I salve my conscience by going to support as much local (as in UK) professional talent as I can and buying their CDs when they sell them at gigs. Actually, I have talked about this sort of issue to a few Jazz pros in the UK and the way they see it, is that the vast majority of their audience is made up of semi-pro/amateur players and the more people try playing Jazz the better, as they prefer an audience that actually appreciates what they are trying to do. I think there is a sense in which only other musicians (or wannabees) actually appreciate Jazz and so the more who get involved the better the chance of Jazz maintaining some sort of audience base.

Originally posted by Bruce Lindfield

Actually, I have talked about this sort of issue to a few Jazz pros in the UK and the way they see it, is that the vast majority of their audience is made up of semi-pro/amateur players and the more people try playing Jazz the better, as they prefer an audience that actually appreciates what they are trying to do. I think there is a sense in which only other musicians (or wannabees) actually appreciate Jazz and so the more who get involved the better the chance of Jazz maintaining some sort of audience base.

Sad, but too often true. If you really want to start a flame war, start a thread about how we, as jazz musicians, should simplify our music so that more laymen can/will appreciate/support it. I've played devil's advocate on both sides of that discussion many times, and nobody ever wins, although everybody gets something to think about....But a lot of times, you're right. Last time I went to the Jazz Kitchen to see Brad Mehldau's trio, the audience was mostly musicians, including a few heavyweights. It was a helluva show even without the large "Joe Lunchpail" contingent, and the place was packed. The upside was that most of the people there could really appreciate the level of what was going on, the downside was that there were few if any "fringe" jazz fans undergoing conversion to the dark side that night if my guess is correct.

All well said Chris. Regarding the legs, distractions happen. Or at least it happened to me at that moment. I never said I was watching her rub her leg the whole time or anything like that.
It was a moment, the thought passed through my head. Perhaps, unfortunately, in the written medium thoughts take longer to express than when they a merely a fleeting thought.

A bad gig is better than no gig, right? If I'm working, I'm playing my best regardless of what I think of the guy I'm working for. Any less reflects poorly on my reputation (not that I have a big one or anything) and you never know who might be listening. And no matter what I'm playing, who I'm playing with, even if it's a lame gig, I'm having fun. Enjoying myself is key, that's why I'm playing in a wedding band or a rock band (no offense intended to those who do). I don't enjoy myself in those situations.

I want to apologize to those for whom my ugly post above was not intended.

I still have to play in one of those bands about 25 gigs a year (out of the usual 140 or so, the rest of which are usually cool DB gigs with about 10 piano gigs thrown in for seasoning). As soon as my #%$@&^#*$ student loans are paid off, I will only play acoustic gigs, but those wedding gigs pay between $150 - $400 a pop, which I send to the loan folks directly. But you're right, the world would be a better place if everybody tried to make music and have fun every time they played. The truth is not so ideal, but the longer you play and the better you build your reputation, the more choosy you can afford to be. :cool:

I do think that Jazz gives you the chance to express feelings, but I think only the best players get to this "level" - it's hard work and I think I will probably always be at the stage where I'm thinking about the technical challenges - at least until I get early retirement and can devote enough time to practising. ;)

Ed's comments made me think about my Jazz tutor at the last SummerSchool I attended. He is quite serious about Jazz and is an alto player a bit like Lee Konitz. He doesn't really like pop music or anything close to this and we've said to him before - how about some Stevie Wonder - to which we got an exasperated expression and a few choice swear words!

However, the Summerschool has a Jazz club every night and on the last night, the tutors put on something special and this time it included a sort of "Stevie Wonder" medley/special and Geoff, this alto player was on stage, much to my suprise.

It came to his turn to solo and we (his students) were wondering what was going to happen, but the solo was a mini-masterpiece of emotions - at first , sort of pissed-off at having to play this sort of "limited" music and quite repetitive - sort of emphasising his feelings towards "popular" music, but gradually, the complexity built up and "transcended" this to make new structures that dragged along the rhythm section into something quite different and got the (large) crowd dancing and cheering - by the end, the whole audience had really felt the emotion.

Afterwards, I asked him if he had changed his mind about about Stevie Wonder's music and he just said that he had decided to "work from the inside" - with an ironic smile!

Originally posted by Ed Fuqua
And ROB W it's so NOT about thinking about what to play.


I thought that's exactly what I was trying to say.

Why do I get the feeling that most of us are actually in agreement and are just not expressing ourselves clearly? :)

Originally posted by Rob W


I thought that's exactly what I was trying to say.

Why do I get the feeling that most of us are actually in agreement and are just not expressing ourselves clearly? :)

I've noticed that seems to happen frequently here. It did however sound like you were saying you don't know how jazz musicians can actually play anything meaningful because they have to figure out what notes to play and how to articulate them, etc.

I think the key is to be inside the music regardless of whether it's written or improvised.

Checking out the legs in that red dress is the reason lots of us started to play music. (At least those who started on guitar or electric bass) When I played those wedding band/rock band gigs for years, the parts were so automatic that we could lock into a groove with half our brains and use the rest to scan the audience (including the legs etc..) so we could pick the next tune to segue into or take our cue for when it was time to do the damn garter/bouquet toss, etc.... Even so, occasionally we would achieve the "flow" discussed above.

Okay so I grew up. I don't play music to meet women anymore. Now when I play jazz (or at least jazzy string band kinda stuff) I'm all ears, thinking and reacting. Does it "feel good," is it "freedom and peace"? I'd say I know when we lock in and the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. If that's what you mean OCEANS person, then that's what I strive for but it's not the first thing on my mind. Playing my best (listening) is paramount. Achieving a "flow state" is a bonus.

Originally posted by David Kaczorowski


It did however sound like you were saying you don't know how jazz musicians can actually play anything meaningful because they have to figure out what notes to play and how to articulate them, etc.



No, I didn't mean that at all. I was simply trying to say that I figured it must be harder for Jazz musicians since they have their attention divided further by having to make note choices.

I realize that there are plenty of Jazz players that play with great expression and are also coming up with great improvised lines. I didn't mean to imply that Jazz players were inherently less musical, I think I was trying to say that I really admire the fact that so many great players ARE able to to play so musically while still having to compose on the spot.

My point about Classical players is that we probably have it a little easier in some ways since we don't have to think about what notes to play. That maybe gives us a bit more time to work on the emotional side of things.

Having said that, there are lots of players Jazz and Classical alike, that play like pigs anyway, while others are extremely musical.

A few of my students are very fine professional Jazz players who are working all the time. While they learn a lot from me about technique (mostly bow technique) they also seem to need a lot of help in learning to phrase and play with certain colours and expressions. I put this down mostly to inexperience with the idiom of Classical music in general.

Conversely, with Jazz, these guys can walk circles around me, and I'm not sure I could improvise much more than 1 bar of solo without getting into trouble. I've never studied Jazz and I know very little about it, but I certainly have a great admiration for the guys that do it well - and there are tons of you.

I think that each side spends different amounts of time focusing on different areas which are more or less important for their idiom. In each idiom however, there are always great players that seem to be able to do it all.

LESSBREAD? uhm...lessee, uh....Lessbread....Rob W? Nope......Lessbread....uh, Bruce? Naw,.....uh....Lessbread.....Kazorowski/Wojohoweicz? Nope,....uh....Lessbread. Lessbread....

Damn, all of a sudden it feels kinda drafty in here. Anybody else feeling a breeze?

Originally posted by Ed Fuqua
But I have to say that it does seem a common misconception amongst younger players that somehow being serious about what you are practicing or trying to deepen your understanding about music makes it "less fun". Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, getting to the point that you can ACTUALLY HEAR what's going on makes playing a much more fulfilling experience. And it just gets deeper...

Yes, it's not the destination, it's the journey. And if all of this wasn't fun (although somehow it transcends fun, fun seems almost stupid in this context), would I practice arco whole notes at 30 beats a minute at 8:00 am? Probably not.

Originally posted by Ed Fuqua
Oh come on, it's not that abstruse.
LESSBREAD = BASSBRAD since his last post to me was of the "don't just be in it fo the money" persuasion.

Ahhh, you're right...now that I get it, the name LESSBREAD seems oddly appropriate - the bread reference is so strong that even HOMEMADEGRANOLABANANANUTSAVEATREEBREAD would have worked as well.

The problem was that I didn't bother looking back on page one (where LESSBREAD posted). I assumed that since you had already posted twice on this page that you were done with page one stuff already. Man, if I keep up like this, I don't deserve to be called "Sherlock" anymore, that's for sure...

Hey Sherlock - I was bored and brain dead at work yesterday. Wandered over to the BG side of the board - She prowls the streets of London again! Goth Barbie lives on in the original "ultimate humiliation for princess georgia" thread which now runs to 13 pages. (in case anyone is so lacking for constructive things to do that they actually give a damn, it's a minimally amusing read)

Lestrade,

Thanks for the vote of confidence - you can call me Sherlock anytime you want. Yeah, I've seen that thread once or twice since our infamous friend visited 221B talkbass street, but all I saw was a bunch of folks acting like lovesick dipsh*ts and pretending to be in romantic pursuit of our little paper tiger while trying to see how many times they could work the word "ickle" into one post, which gets old pretty fast. Apparently they think that Moth Gumby might actually be someone whose screen name used to be "Dopey Biscuit" or something like that. Maybe you saw something I missed, but lately I prefer the comfort of my 7% solution (caffiene, that is) to the BG ickle drivel. Let me know if anything really funny happens, though....

Can we collapse this thread, already?

All I remember from the bit was"eggamuffin".

She's started writing poetry!!! :eek:

It's like a car crash, you don't want to look but you just can't help yourself...

I have new suspicions or "leads". Yesterday I picked up a new hardback book on the strength of the name "Michael Moorcock" who I admire greatly! But I noticed that it was co-written by somebody called Storme Constantine - spelling might not be exact!

From the blurb, I gathered that this is a female personnage who lives in London - but what gave it away was the photo - now this is what I imagine as the visual representation of a "Goth Barbie". If you're in a bookshop - try finding this and tell me I'm wrong! ;)