On Being "Tasteful"

[bassybill]

I'm just curious about why he incorrectly used the word "whom" in the third paragraph, especially as he apparently added "ahem" in parentheses straight after it. Was he trying to imply that the difference between "whom" and "who" is a matter of taste, do you think?

[One Drop]

Originally Posted by bassybill

I'm just curious about why he incorrectly used the word "whom" in the third paragraph, especially as he apparently added "ahem" in parentheses straight after it. Was he trying to imply that the difference between "whom" and "who" is a matter of taste, do you think?

It rather appears he is trying to bring attention to what he must think is the correct usage in this case. How embarrassing in an article about written language use.

I think he has a point, but it's a niggling one. The real issue is poor journalism and writing skills.

[jeffbonny]

I don't know why he used whom instead of who. Why don't you email him and ask? He's always replied to me.

What I am curious about is how many people actually know who Ronan Guilfoyle is? Even if you don't care about the list of jazz greats he's played with you owe it to yourself to check out his youtube videos on counting odd meter. This isn't just some schmuck with a bass and a computer he's a master musician and great educator. That question aside though I have yet to hear anyone rebutting him here with anything other than petty BS.

If you don't play music for a living take a moment to consider how personally you might take someone publicly reviewing your work whatever it is. Really think about that one because that's all he's doing here.

[One Drop]

Originally Posted by jeffbonny

I don't know why he used whom instead of who. Why don't you email him and ask? He's always replied to me.

What I am curious about is how many people actually know who Ronan Guilfoyle is? Even if you don't care about the list of jazz greats he's played with you owe it to yourself to check out his youtube videos on counting odd meter. This isn't just some schmuck with a bass and a computer he's a master musician and great educator. That question aside though I have yet to hear anyone rebutting him here with anything other than petty BS.

If you don't play music for a living take a moment to consider how personally you might take someone publicly reviewing your work whatever it is. Really think about that one because that's all he's doing here.

I did think about it, but IME most music journalists writing in the popular domain are lousy writers who deal in clichés and have limited ability to make music more comprehensible to the public or to illuminate the given works of any artist. They usually are more interested in polishing their own credibility in a scene or are exhibiting their own knowledge, relevant ot not. That to me is the real issue, of which his rant touches on a part.

Finally, anyone who takes reviews of their work seriously is in for a very hard time.

[bassybill]

My comment about the who or whom thing wasn't intended to be snarky at all. It was just expressing genuine curiosity about why he'd written it that way - it does seem to be intentional.

On the actual topic, I think his comments about the possibly lazy use of the word "tasteful" in some cases may be justified, but I don't think it's something to get too worked up about. Obviously he thinks it's more irritating than I do.

I have to admit I've never heard of this guy before but I will check his YouTube stuff out, thanks for the tip - always good to hear someone different.

[AuntieBeeb]

Originally Posted by stratovani

It kind of makes you wonder what "tasteless" would be?

The guy I saw at the last blues jam I went to, who decided he was going to do a slap-bass solo over a slow, mellow 12-bar.

[Winemule]

Originally Posted by One Drop

Finally, anyone who takes reviews of their work seriously is in for a very hard time.

+1

[Pilgrim]

Originally Posted by Luke19Boarder

I don't agree. It seems that he has a personal negative connotation with the word.

I agree. He's deliberately looking for negative connotations for the term.

Maybe he has a wild hair about the term, but I don't. I have often heard rhythm sections playing tastefully, and I consider it a great compliment.

Not everyone can be in the front of the music all the time. When you're in the background supporting, you NEED to be tasteful, whether you're the bass, keyboards, guitar, drums, whatever.

I think the column is DEAD WRONG.

[HolmeBass]

Originally Posted by jeffbonny

As is the case with most of Ronan's blog posts this one is quite thought provoking. "Tasteful" is like "nice" in that it doesn't describe anything other than an all too vague potential positive. For a for a professional wordsmith to be using it is a terrible cop-out and insultingly dismissive. Did you mean subtle? Attentive? Understated? Stylistically appropriate unadventurous shyte?

I agree with this and with the originally quoted excerpt. It is lazy on the writer's part at best.

Originally Posted by HaMMerHeD

Why not "plays well without sticking obtrusively out of the song"?

Seems easy enough to understand, no?

Why people want to assign what they see as clever, educated metaphors to simple concepts is beyond me.

Why would you want to do that? Sounds bland to me, like "tasteful" is actually not a compliment at all. Of all the music played, shouldn't jazz be the most adventurous, the most spontaneous, sophisticated, and unpredictable? It should be the music of virtuosos, and personally for me that means picking the right places to stick out, to stick way out, and be damned cool while you're doing it. Just like Ron Carter. That is my opinion.

[ntenny]

("plays well without sticking obtrusively out of the song")

Originally Posted by HolmeBass

Why would you want to do that? Sounds bland to me, like "tasteful" is actually not a compliment at all. Of all the music played, shouldn't jazz be the most adventurous, the most spontaneous, sophisticated, and unpredictable? It should be the music of virtuosos, and personally for me that means picking the right places to stick out, to stick way out, and be damned cool while you're doing it. Just like Ron Carter. That is my opinion.

But surely Ron Carter of all people never does it *obtrusively*. I agree with what you wrote, mostly, but what's the difference between "picking the right places to stick out" and "sticking out but not obtrusively"?

I'm actually not sure I agree that jazz "should be the music of virtuosos". Consider Carla Bley---terrific composer, very effective bandleader, but certainly not a virtuoso as a pianist; if you want to kick her out of the genre over that, I object!

-NT

[wingmanborge]

Originally Posted by jeffbonny

I don't know why he used whom instead of who. Why don't you email him and ask? He's always replied to me.

What I am curious about is how many people actually know who Ronan Guilfoyle is? Even if you don't care about the list of jazz greats he's played with you owe it to yourself to check out his youtube videos on counting odd meter. This isn't just some schmuck with a bass and a computer he's a master musician and great educator. That question aside though I have yet to hear anyone rebutting him here with anything other than petty BS.

If you don't play music for a living take a moment to consider how personally you might take someone publicly reviewing your work whatever it is. Really think about that one because that's all he's doing here.

Spot on!

[guitardefector]

What's more tasteful: a good Clint Eastwood film or a bad Roger Ebert review of that film? I'd go with the first choice.

[MarkMgibson]

I once had reviewer call my guitar style "economical". I didn't take offence at all - the fact that he thought I had a particular style was good enough for me. Mind you, this was an article in a little local music rag. I was young at the time, and was just relieved he didn't say "the guitarist sucked beyond belief".

[phillybass101]

Tasteful means to me having taste to a greater degree. implying a greater knowledge of what , when and where to play and not play. I have seen players who have been tasteless.