Double Bass Free Jazz

[Nick Ara]

Ed who?

I have this weird attitude about Free Jazz playing. It's not my age this time either. In order for me to enjoy playing "out" with someone, they have to prove to me that they can play "In". I guess it's a "Right of Passage" to me. You've got to present your "Standards Credentials" to me in the form of being able to find your way around the "Standard American Jazz Vocabulary" before I can really take you seriously as a Free Player! Pretty weird huh? Just one of my quirks I guess.

As a former Fine Arts major back in "those" daze, I'd have to agree with Paul. The craft itself (draftsmanship, compostion, and "big eyes") needs to be in place, first. For example, Pablo Picasso was a superb realistic painter years before Cubism. Most abstract expressionists that followed were, as well.

 

[Nick Ara]

There was a great program on WNYC recently about "Why Classically Music Has Become More Abstract Through the 20th Century" and there were interviews with people like Milton Babbitt who had some pretty insightful things to say. Mostly like - popular music has become so much simpler and legit music has become so complex that it is harder for a listener who has had no exposure (much less training) to contemporary avant garde classical (CAGC for short from now on, OK?) to actually HEAR what's going on. If you have no construct for what you are listening to, then it becomes a product of how much you hear can be "forced" into the boxes of what you CAN hear.

The stretch from Bird to SHAPE OF JAZZ is not that big, really. Especially when you look at some of what Dolphy was doing over standard harmonies and form. But FREE JAZZ isn't based on that model at all. So you got to dig into it (if you feel like it, like SAM'L says, no music police coming around to take your axe away) almost as if you were playing, how does the big aural picture look/sound, be a little academic til your ear starts to catch up.

I'm wit Paul though, kind of an in/out guy. Anytime I play in a free situation, I've got the same set of ears on the side of my head (well, sides of my head) that I do when I'm playing standards. So what you play should in participation with the aural environment you are in.

Personally, being an in/out kind of guy, I really enjoy the possibilities opened by cats with non standard approaches, cause as soon as I get'em in my ear, I can use'm playing whatever I want.

Ditto. Welcome back, Ed!

 

[godoze]

I also agree with Paul. As a matter of fact one of the first things I learned from my longtime teacher was that I had to know how to play"in" before i could play "out."

No truer statement ever spoken.

 

[Bruce Lindfield]

As a former Fine Arts major back in "those" daze, I'd have to agree with Paul. The craft itself (draftsmanship, compostion, and "big eyes") needs to be in place, first. For example, Pablo Picasso was a superb realistic painter years before Cubism. Most abstract expressionists that followed were, as well.

Interesting you should say that, as my impression is that he was the last of that ilk - so could you say the same about Andy Warhol, Jackson Pollock or any of those artists who followed? So each year in Britain we have this debate about the "Turner Art Prize" - where for many year there have been no winners or even nominees, with any skills as painters of draughtsmen etc.

 

[olivier]

snip... I have this weird attitude about Free Jazz playing. It's not my age this time either. In order for me to enjoy playing "out" with someone, they have to prove to me that they can play "In". I guess it's a "Right of Passage" to me. You've got to present your "Standards Credentials" to me in the form of being able to find your way around the "Standard American Jazz Vocabulary" before I can really take you seriously as a Free Player! Pretty weird huh? Just one of my quirks I guess.

Classically trained teachers in the French conservatoires used to say the same thing about Jazz: First learn your notes, then you'll play whatever you like. The problem being that none of them really knew chord and notation used in jazz. Now they're in the mood to hire Jazz teachers... who are classically trained AND self taught in jazz!
I believe that a little free improv' wouldn't hurt and should be practiced here and there, just like it is advised to practice improvisation in your daily routine. I see it done in my kid's percussion class, aside from individual practice. But I have a hard time seeing myself saying to our big band conductor: let's go far out in a free improv session today! It's clearly his gig and he' is really not open to suggestions: Doing Basie's Thing is his thing. I am not sure we're that proficient to to anything else, but we could try !

 

[Nick Ara]

Interesting you should say that, as my impression is that he was the last of that ilk - so could you say the same about Andy Warhol, Jackson Pollock or any of those artists who followed? So each year in Britain we have this debate about the "Turner Art Prize" - where for many year there have been no winners or even nominees, with any skills as painters of draughtsmen etc.

I think most, if not all, abstract expressionists are well grounded in the fundamentals. I believe that holds true for both visual and performing arts. Trust me, Warhol and Pollack could draw their tails off, in the traditional sense.

As an art student back then, I spent hours upon hours doing figure drawing, filling sketch book after sketch book with drawings of nude rotund models (they needed to be "volumetric", you know) until I finally got it right. Sort of.

Better learn to draw if I expected to paint, or sculpt, or do printmaking, or take great photographs. They practically beat it into me, but I did learn an important lesson that applies to bassmanship: you really can't ignore theory, and you'd be better off trying to master it.

Theoretically speaking, that is.

The same could be said of studying music theory, in my view. Big eyes and big ears, its the same thing.

 

[Bruce Lindfield]

Well I know for certain that contemporary British Artists - like Damien Hirst, Tracy Emin etc. have made a big thing of the fact that they can't paint or draw - but that it doesn't matter, as what is important is their idea or concept - so there is the famous "unmade bed", the sharks split in two, the plaster casts of houses etc. etc.

For more details :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turner_Prize

 

[Ed Fuqua]

I think most, if not all, abstract expressionists are well grounded in the fundamentals. I believe that holds true for both visual and performing arts. Trust me, Warhol and Pollack could draw their tails off, in the traditional sense.

As an art student back then, I spent hours upon hours doing figure drawing, filling sketch book after sketch book with drawings of nude rotund models (they needed to be "volumetric", you know) until I finally got it right. Sort of.

Better learn to draw if I expected to paint, or sculpt, or do printmaking, or take great photographs. They practically beat it into me, but I did learn an important lesson that applies to bassmanship: you really can't ignore theory, and you'd be better off trying to master it.

Theoretically speaking, that is.

The same could be said of studying music theory, in my view. Big eyes and big ears, its the same thing.

For the most part Nick, but I gotta take exception when it comes to Pollock. To my eyes the guy barely knew which end of the pencil to put to paper. There's a 3 or 4 volume collection of Pollock drawings that bears evidence to his "barely workmanlike" abilities with drawing from life. In one of the most recently published biographies, there are any number of quotes from other students and even Thomas Hart Benton (his instructor).
Not to take away from his impact as a painter - one of the wonderful thing about being here is the opportunity to stand in front of a lot of his canvasses. It's not hype, it's not being a critic's darling, there is something real and true and honest and affecting in Pollock's work.

 

[Bruce Lindfield]

For the most part Nick, but I gotta take exception when it comes to Pollock. To my eyes the guy barely knew which end of the pencil to put to paper. There's a 3 or 4 volume collection of Pollock drawings that bears evidence to his "barely workmanlike" abilities with drawing from life. In one of the most recently published biographies, there are any number of quotes from other students and even Thomas Hart Benton (his instructor).
Not to take away from his impact as a painter - one of the wonderful thing about being here is the opportunity to stand in front of a lot of his canvasses. It's not hype, it's not being a critic's darling, there is something real and true and honest and affecting in Pollock's work.

So - who is the "Jackson Pollock" (or Damien Hurst) of Free Jazz!!??

 

[Howard K]

Tracy Eminor... I think she's utterly talentless and is just showing foolish rich people for what they are. Which is actually quite artistic in itself.. damned talking myself in circles again.

...and yeah, I agree.. anyone can play out with little or no direction. The context is what makes it good.. as far I can tell?!

Welcome back Ed

 

[Nick Ara]

For the most part Nick, but I gotta take exception when it comes to Pollock. To my eyes the guy barely knew which end of the pencil to put to paper. There's a 3 or 4 volume collection of Pollock drawings that bears evidence to his "barely workmanlike" abilities with drawing from life. In one of the most recently published biographies, there are any number of quotes from other students and even Thomas Hart Benton (his instructor).
Not to take away from his impact as a painter - one of the wonderful thing about being here is the opportunity to stand in front of a lot of his canvasses. It's not hype, it's not being a critic's darling, there is something real and true and honest and affecting in Pollock's work.

Busted, again! I stand corrected regarding Pollack, and almost forgot about your involvement in the musuem! Just goes to show I need to keep my innovative bassists and painters straight. Next thing you know, I might throw out the little known fact that Oscar Pettiford was making intaglio prints in his spare time.

 

[arto alho]

Miles painted, too. And not bad, IMO.

R2

 

[Bruce Lindfield]

Don Van Vliet - or Captain Beefheart, gave up music for painting!! Some of his music is what I had in mind as "untutored" Free Jazz!!

Well really, their's is fairly free, improvised music that is not based on Jazz harmony, or played by Jazz musicians with long experience.

I remember seeing the Captain and his magic band in my home town and this was strange music that was very interesting - but it was obvious they were completely out of their heads - I was with some friends and we went backstage after and they could not hold a conversation, they were so out of it - but they played music and improvised together.

I suppose it's not surprising as a lot of the best Jazz players were junkies...?


But anyway - these were pretty good musicians, coming from a rock/blues background, who spent a lot of time together playing and rehearsing. So, when they played "Free", improvised music - how was it different from what Jazz musicians played?

So - the question is - what makes Free Jazz, "Jazz" at all - rather than just free, improvised music?

 

[oliebrice]

interesting thread...
I agree that learning technique, theory, tradition etc... is really valuable as a free musician, I play mostly free stuff but am spending hours a day working on straight playing and theory, and also play in a bebop band to improve as a musician.
But to say that you HAVE to know that stuff to be an interesting improviser cuts off some great music. A lot of free improvisers these days come from an electronica/rock background, and the great american songbook isn't neccesarily relevant to what they hear.
The free stuff i love best (dolpy/coleman/evan parker/berne etc..) is rooted in jazz, but it would be a poorer musical world without stuff that isn't.

 

[Jeff Bollbach]

It isn't just jazz anymore, that's plain to see. But the music made it's first apparent appearence in the jazz medium and was popularized there. The first recording of "free" jazz was made by Lennie Tristano[verified by Miles] BTW. This was mid-forties I believe.

 

[Jeff Bollbach]

But to say that you HAVE to know that stuff to be an interesting improviser cuts off some great music. .

You bet! Those absolutes never hold all the water. Lotsa great art has been made by folk that didn't know their *** from a hole in the ground. Just as plenty of soulless pap's been proffered by the "schooled to a T" crowd. But I guess in general it's still a good idea to know what you are doing!

 

[Paul Warburton]

I was with some friends and we went backstage after and they could not hold a conversation, they were so out of it - but they played music and improvised together.
I suppose it's not surprising as a lot of the best Jazz players were junkies...?

[COLOR=DarkRed Bruce, the above statement is very strange to me![/COLOR]

So - the question is - what makes Free Jazz, "Jazz" at all - rather than just free, improvised music?

The above here, is the old "label" syndrome in all it's glory. People seem to need labels for everything, especially the arts. People get confused, it seems, unless there is a Label and pidgeon hole for everything!
People like Miles, Jim Hall and John Lewis were great players who believed that our culture needs to labelize and pidgeon hole everything before it can stand on it's own. this is a bunch of Bull****

I tried to put the first quote in red so you could tell what the hell I was saying. Hope it's understandable..........

 

[Bruce Lindfield]

Well - I think people have an idea that "Free Jazz" means something and that it is not just a label for Marketers - does anybody market Free Jazz!! ??



So - OK , "Smooth Jazz" is not Jazz at all and is just a label devised by Marketing people, but I have the feeling that "Free Jazz" is something that either strikes terror into the hearts of those of a nervous disposition or is the "real thing" for players and fans of truly improvised music....

But is it Jazz?

I'm sure we all think we know what we mean by Jazz - surely we can therefore say whether Free Jazz is included in that?

This question struck me, when I was reading Tamsin Little's programme notes for a perfromance of Ligeti's Violin concerto - so she explained how the instruction was to end the perfromance with a freely improvised cadenza that summed up the preceeding movements. And she said it was like a Jazz performer hearing something and then responding to it ......

 

[Paul Warburton]

It feels to me that we're edging in on that " What is Jazz" subject which I have no interest in even approaching. There are probably a handfull of people here on this forum that would agree with me on my own sensibilities of what jazz really is and these guys, like me, are professional jazz musicians.

 

[JazznFunk]

Ok, I can see how it would be a lot more fun to watch or play that kind of music. I'm glad everybody agrees with me. Now I don't feel like I'm deaf or something...

A great Ornette recording that is now FINALLY available on CD is "ORNETTE!" with Ed Blackwell, Ornette, Don Cherry, and Scott LaFaro. Quite possibly some of the best, most energetic LaFaro playing I've ever heard. It's been in my CD player constantly since I bought it.