Jazz musicians are significantly overrated.

[onosson]

That's why these threads always end up being so pointless. The metal guys try to woo the jazz guys with all the technical aspects of the genre and vice-versa, but neither one of the sides will ever see the other's point that way. Why not try and move towards appreciating more genres by introducing people through the simpler side of the music first?

That being said, what do you all think of that theory? Can anyone recommend me some good, groovy jazz stuff that a rock/metal guy would be able to listen to and appreciate a bit easier?

You make a good point.

I was into rock, blues, and old funk but knew nothing of jazz. I got some early 70s Miles Davis albums, Pangaea and Agharta specifically, and started getting more and more of his catalog, especially the 60s period but also 50s. Then I started checking out albums by the guys in his bands - Herbie Hancock, Coltrane, Tony Williams, John McLaughlin etc. etc. Speaking of McLaughlin, you might like some Mahavishnu Orchestra, too.

 

[onosson]

Actually, my previous recommendations aren't really "the simpler side" necessarily, but check them out anyways. Early Mingus albums might be good, some Thelonious Monk, too. Go all the way back to Charlie Parker, and for vocals I'd say you can't go wrong with Billie Holiday.

 

[Spectrum]

If you're into rock and are interested in some groovy jazz, what worked for me was Dave Brubeck's "Take Five". Joe Morello's drum solo in this is very cool.

Take Five - The Dave Brubeck Quartet (1959) - YouTube

If you dig it you'll start chasing things down and wind up listening to Miles and Coltrane and all kinds of edgy stuff. Coltrane's "A Love Supreme" is where I wound up. I love prog and old school hard rock, but there are doors to a whole other world of cool music to be opened.

 

[Chris Fitzgerald]

Can anyone recommend me some good, groovy jazz stuff that a rock/metal guy would be able to listen to and appreciate a bit easier?

Yes! Try some Avishai Cohen. Try this one:

Avishai Cohen - Nu Nu - YouTube

And then if that gets you, search for one called "Feediop". I think it's a good midpoint/

 

[5StringBlues]

If you're into rock and are interested in some groovy jazz, what worked for me was Dave Brubeck's "Take Five". Joe Morello's drum solo in this is very cool.

Take Five - The Dave Brubeck Quartet (1959) - YouTube

And if you dig that,you gotta check this: Dave Brubeck Quartet 05 Far More Drums - YouTube

More Morello yummy drummy goodness in 5/4 time!

 

[Spectrum]

And if you dig that,you gotta check this: Dave Brubeck Quartet 05 Far More Drums - YouTube

More Morello yummy drummy goodness in 5/4 time!

Yes.

And after that, check out the Brubeck Quartet's take on an old standard, Take the A Train, and check out how at the end of Dave's piano solo he and Morello trade 4s and change up the tempo and feel. The level of coolness is off the scale.

Dave Brubeck - Take The 'A' Train - 1966 - YouTube

And BTW, Joe Morello's dark glasses aren't to look cool, they're because he was nearly blind when this was filmed. Not bad for a guy who can barely see his drum kit.

 

[lucas vigor]

You make a good point.

I was into rock, blues, and old funk but knew nothing of jazz. I got some early 70s Miles Davis albums, Pangaea and Agharta specifically, and started getting more and more of his catalog, especially the 60s period but also 50s. Then I started checking out albums by the guys in his bands - Herbie Hancock, Coltrane, Tony Williams, John McLaughlin etc. etc. Speaking of McLaughlin, you might like some Mahavishnu Orchestra, too.

Yes! Plus 1000 on the Mahavisnu orchestra...inner mounting flame is a good one. I can't help but think rockers would like it. Also, as I mentioned 3-4 pages ago, Al Dimeola, Mike Stern, Brian Bromberg (metal) and John Schofield...any of those "jazz" guitarists who used distortion in their sound..also, Alan Holdsworth, and I like a lot of the stuff he did with Bill Bruford. It's basically metal tone, but playing jazz.

 

[5StringBlues]

Yes.

And after that, check out the Brubeck Quartet's take on an old standard, Take the A Train, and check out how at the end of Dave's piano solo he and Morello trade 4s and change up the tempo and feel. The level of coolness is off the scale.

Dave Brubeck - Take The 'A' Train - 1966 - YouTube

And BTW, Joe Morello's dark glasses aren't to look cool, they're because he was nearly blind when this was filmed. Not bad for a guy who can barely see his drum kit.

Wow,thanks for the link!

 

[Nick Dilley]

Actually, I would disagree...although I was referring to more then just the use of drums or guitar effects...that's the carrot and peas, but the steak is everything else. Perhaps I should have said "almost everything in prog rock came from classical"....and if you look at the original prog rock bands (Crimson, Yes, ELP, etc..) one of the first things they did was throw out the blues, and substitute western classical influences..and if not for those 70's pioneering bands, your prog metal would not exist either...metal would have likely stayed in the purely hard, blues' based sound...like AC/DC. It's entirely possible, you know?

As far as the timbral aspects...there are still a lot of similarities...use of a chorus box? Classical musicians just double parts and get a natural chorus effect.
Distortion? Have you ever realized how "distorted" bowed instruments can sound? There is almost a natural distortion and the use of the bow gives sustain naturally.

And as far as the sense of "doom" and "heaviness" prevalent in modern metal...look no further then wagner.

There is classical music out there so frightening and heavy it makes a lot of metal music seem like camp fire songs in comparison...only the music is not artificially heavy as is a lot of metal. In metal, I think they try too hard to be bad-ass.

But listen to "the scythian suite" sometime if you want to be frightened. Then move on to Xenaxis, Lygeti and Elliott Carter...if you truly want to be frightened. And I should warn you, it wont have any of those "cookie monster meets UFC" vocals needed by metal to imply scariness.

Lucas, I have to apologize. I originally thought you only kind of knew what you were talking about. I really respect what you've said here. I haven't read anything after this post, so I'll be off to do that in a second. Now I respectfully disagree with what you've said about my jazz suggestions to Tupac. At first, I was miffed, but now I can see you are a thinker, too. We probably disagree on minutia, but come from similar mindsets. Rock on, man. I hope Tupac can appreciate what you said here.

LOL Cookie monster meets UFC. Har Har!

 

[Nick Dilley]

I've always wondered about this - wouldn't knowledge of theory benefit the classical musician just as much, even if the notes are written out? I've never been a classical player, but my ex girlfriend is a cellist and she studied a lot of theory - but it was quite different than what I've seen of jazz theory.

Yes, it would benefit anyone. Theory is theory. There is no magic style of theory for one genre that doesn't apply to others. That's like saying there are different sizes of batteries, and they all follow different principles.

The principles are the same, even if, say, 7th chords are utilized more often in jazz styles than in others.

And, also, what's with all this generalizing of "Classical" music like it's some sort of divine stronghold for smart music?? Just like the poster who said "jazz" encompasses many styles, "classical" too describes more than just "Music played with an orchestra".....sheesh.

 

[onosson]

Yes, it would benefit anyone. Theory is theory. There is no magic style of theory for one genre that doesn't apply to others. That's like saying there are different sizes of batteries, and they all follow different principles.

The principles are the same, even if, say, 7th chords are utilized more often in jazz styles than in others.

And, also, what's with all this generalizing of "Classical" music like it's some sort of divine stronghold for smart music?? Just like the poster who said "jazz" encompasses many styles, "classical" too describes more than just "Music played with an orchestra".....sheesh.

Well, I did find that the terminology seemed to be somewhat different when it came to classical - not to mention rules for writing fugues etc. I don't know enough about it to say much more than that.

And of course classical is huge and diverse. I don't think it is a "divine stronghold", but it has such a long history that many many things have been done within it. And many geniuses have worked in it, not to discount geniuses in other areas. I'm more of a jazz fan myself, but there are many amazing things that I have found in classical and I'm very appreciative of that!

 

[Roy Vogt]

So, right on cue, I got the new Bass Player magazine in my mail tonight and there's a cover story on Alex Webster of Cannibal Corpse and some of these new Speed Metal guys. I have to say Alex sounds intelligent with a great work ethic. Even though I'm coming from the Jazz, Jazz Fusion and Studio World there's nothing he says that bugs me in the least and the exercises and excerpts to go with the article look to be extremely challenging. I've hung out enough with Bryan Beller to realize how challenging it is to play his kind of Rock gigs (Vai, Dethklok, The Aristocrats) so this looks like more hi-test material of that ilk. Go figure-sometimes stuff shows up just when it needs to.

 

[fdeck]

I think it's possible to say, without being politically incorrect, that each genre has unique aspects. Classical music has:

* Composition and performance are often carried out as separate arts, in isolation from one another, by different people -- to a degree rarely found in other genres. Of course composition will reach a high level of refinement and sophistication, simply because there are people who study and engage in composition for its own sake.

* A vast literature, spanning centuries and continents. I can try out music that I have no hope of coming up with on my own.

* A fairly uniform training system that includes teaching methods geared towards small kids.

Jazz has:

* Improvisation, to a degree rarely found in other genres.

* A shared body of standard repertoire, allowing bands to come together and perform with no rehearsal. This makes jazz spontaneous and unpredictable.

Popular music has:

* I like the emotional simplicity, quick learning curve, and lack of formal entry barriers, leading to a sense of endless youth and vitality.

Those are just how the genres affect me. You may have your own thoughts and reasons for enjoying different genres.

 

[El Slap]

After playing in jazz band for three years in college I gotta say, I still don't like big band jazz. As much as metal sounds like "noise", jazz can be much the same. "Yeah yeah, you can play a different mode each measure, but I can't even tap my foot to this stuff." HOWEVER, adding a jazz lead player - IME with with flutists, trumpets, 'bones, sax - to some funk/rock/RnB/etc is MAGIC!

What I think the original poster is referring to, although he may not have enough experience to know this first hand, is the highly polished, large piece of brass many jazz musicians have up their asses. But, then again, there are stuck up people in every genre.

 

[Nick Dilley]

Well, I did find that the terminology seemed to be somewhat different when it came to classical - not to mention rules for writing fugues etc. I don't know enough about it to say much more than that.

And of course classical is huge and diverse. I don't think it is a "divine stronghold", but it has such a long history that many many things have been done within it. And many geniuses have worked in it, not to discount geniuses in other areas. I'm more of a jazz fan myself, but there are many amazing things that I have found in classical and I'm very appreciative of that!

Totally, man. But you have to know that rules for writing a fugue aren't a variation in music theory. They're a variation in a style of song structure. A g note is always going to be a minor third high than an e. There is a difference there. And if you want to say that various definitions of song structures are a part of music theory, fine. But structures imposed onto music are different from the way one note relates to another. Music theory is more about relation and harmony. Song structure is related, but also seeps out of the range of music theory, in my opinion. But, if you want to say they are one and the same, I get that.

 

[bass12]

That's why these threads always end up being so pointless. The metal guys try to woo the jazz guys with all the technical aspects of the genre and vice-versa, but neither one of the sides will ever see the other's point that way. Why not try and move towards appreciating more genres by introducing people through the simpler side of the music first?

That being said, what do you all think of that theory? Can anyone recommend me some good, groovy jazz stuff that a rock/metal guy would be able to listen to and appreciate a bit easier?

Not necessarily simpler, but something the listener can relate to more easily. I've never been a huge jazz fan (especially when it comes to bebop) but, as time has gone by, certain artists and pieces have led me down different avenues and I've come to appreciate a lot more music from the jazz sphere. As for stuff that won't shock your ear too much (dim the lights for maximum effect ):

Charles Mingus - Goodbye Pork Pie Hat - YouTube

Wes Montgomery - Round Midnight - YouTube

John Coltrane - My One and Only Love - YouTube

Duke Ellington - Isfahan - YouTube

 

[Brad Johnson]

Stanley Clarke, who is a classically trained bassist, has no trouble moving from jazz to rock to funk to classical. He's not hampered by a genre boundary. Likewise Marcus, Victor, Anthony Jackson John Patitucci and Alphonso Johnson are very versatile.

A Groove is a Terrible Thing to Waste!

Most of these folks sound like themselves... that's not necessarily the mark of versatility IMO.

 

[onosson]

Song structure is related, but also seeps out of the range of music theory, in my opinion. But, if you want to say they are one and the same, I get that.

Well it's not about me, but I had understood (perhaps wrongly!) that they are looked at as part of theory in classical music studies. Anyways, as I said I don't know enough personally to say for sure.

 

[Roy Vogt]

Well it's not about me, but I had understood (perhaps wrongly!) that they are looked at as part of theory in classical music studies. Anyways, as I said I don't know enough personally to say for sure.

They are indeed-forms like Sonata Allegro, Rondo, etc. are part of the Classical Music Tradition. Most Music programs have a Styles and Analysis Class at least where these are outlined. When you study Counterpoint (as in Bach) there are certain harmonic rules that are followed in the composition as well as certain norms of form.

 

[Clef_de_fa]

I think it's possible to say, without being politically incorrect, that each genre has unique aspects. Classical music has:

* Composition and performance are often carried out as separate arts, in isolation from one another, by different people -- to a degree rarely found in other genres. Of course composition will reach a high level of refinement and sophistication, simply because there are people who study and engage in composition for its own sake.

* A vast literature, spanning centuries and continents. I can try out music that I have no hope of coming up with on my own.

* A fairly uniform training system that includes teaching methods geared towards small kids.

Jazz has:

* Improvisation, to a degree rarely found in other genres.

* A shared body of standard repertoire, allowing bands to come together and perform with no rehearsal. This makes jazz spontaneous and unpredictable.

Popular music has:

* I like the emotional simplicity, quick learning curve, and lack of formal entry barriers, leading to a sense of endless youth and vitality.

Those are just how the genres affect me. You may have your own thoughts and reasons for enjoying different genres.

I like that, somewhat how I think