11-19-2012, 05:34 PM
| || |
Join Date: Dec 2011
Originally Posted by Spin Doctor
I get where you are coming from and agree. To an extent.
Of course you can read the head and changes to good effect. But jazz isn't about just playing heads. The essence and soul of the music is in the improvisation.
Personally, If I hear any "jazz" that is being played as though it were from an instruction manual, I'm pretty sure there would not be much going on that I'd really want to hear.
But In my humble experience, worrying about specific notes is the best way to completely suck the life out of jazz. And sheet music is 100% about notes. And as a bass player, the authenticity of a walking line comes from the vibe and the pulse. Of course music being music, there are exceptions to the guidelines, like when you have some kind of altered chord, you may want to lean on those alterations so it sounds like you know what you're doing...
But, you do realize that long before (and long after) notes on paper came along, music was passed along and communicated by listening...
So, it's all an interesting debate. And I do agree reading is pretty important. But when learning jazz, listening is so much more important and has been espoused by so many different jazz greats that any other argument to the contrary is moot. You just can't argue with the success of people like Branford Marsalis, Victor Wooten, John Pattituci. It's ludicrous to do so.
I was listening to a clinic where Patticucci was talking to some guy who wanted to learn jazz and he specifically asked him what he'd been listening to, and the guy told him the names of some rock bands, And John just kinda laughted and said that's not gonna work... You have to listen to this music to get it.
But the great thing about music is that you get to do what you want...
I agree and understand. But writting music came because prior to it, it was like the game of the telephone ... the original was very distorted because the player couldn,t remember exacly how it went.
but I get it
Does not compute