Yep, I have learned that in a Analysis class. You learn the rules of a Sonata, Rondo, Counterpoint, Fugue and others rules like no octave or 5th movement ( it is harder that it sound because nowaday we are so used to have octave and 5th run ... ). Also stuff like II7, V7, I7 or others harmonic mouvement are studied but in classical world those mouvement are at the end not the harmonic background like in other music style.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Jazz musicians are significantly overrated.
- Thread starter Tupac
- Start date
Yep, I have learned that in a Analysis class. You learn the rules of a Sonata, Rondo, Counterpoint, Fugue and others rules like no octave or 5th movement ( it is harder that it sound because nowaday we are so used to have octave and 5th run ... ). Also stuff like II7, V7, I7 or others harmonic mouvement are studied but in classical world those mouvement are at the end not the harmonic background like in other music style.
If, after 60 years or so have passed, musicians of the future refer to Blotted Science, Cannibal Corpse, and Symphony X as influential to their musical development in the same way as today's artists refer to Davis, Monk, Brubek, Parker, etc. then the OP will have been vindicated.
I can actually imagine Symphony X having some lasting impact on metal in the future. The other two? Not so much. I feel like Symphony X has this perfect hybrid of technical wizardry and parts where you can just feel the music. It all just keep you there, in the music.
OK, let's all meet back here in 2072 and then we can finally end this thread!
Then it won't be a zombie thread... it will be a mommified thread!
P.S. I still LOL hard about the OP's ragequit. Win.
I have to agree with you, to a point. If you mean a competent jazz musician you are right anyone who practices for six or eight thousand hours can be a competent jazz musician...
If, by jazz musician, you mean someone who attempts to play jazz properly, I disagree. They play an important role in showing others how not to sound.
If, by jazz musician, you mean someone who attempts to play jazz properly, I disagree. They play an important role in showing others how not to sound.
"To the limit???" Music isn't an athletic event..lol....and you clearly have NO clue about jazz.
Tupac, ***?
The bottom line is this. Jazz harmony, as well as all the other aspects of the medium, requires a base level of understanding necessary to listen, accompany, and improvise in a conversational manner within the idiom. This is a lifelong pursuit. It's no wonder why many of the masters are eligible for Social Security, and they are still learning and pushing the envelope. They are pioneers leading the way and expanding the vocabulary. We are standing on the shoulders of giants here. If you don't even speak the language in the first place, of what value is your "overrated" assessment of its practitioners?
Like a dull knife just ain't cuttin'....................
I listened to the Symphony X track linked by the OP. What struck me was the lack of melody, or at least, of a prominent melody figuring into the song. That made me think of a couple of analogies. One is the Bach cello suites, many of which were pure harmony, like the Prelude to the first suite. The other was the "riff based" tunes of 1930's swing bands, where each section of the tune revolved around a short riff.
Differences in style and instrumentation aside, I suggest listening to early recordings of "One O'Clock Jump," and "Sing Sing Sing."
Note that the term "riff" sometimes carries a negative connotation, but I don't intend that here. This is a purely technical look at some different musical styles.
Most of these folks sound like themselves... that's not necessarily the mark of versatility IMO.
We can agree to disagree. Just because those bassists sound like themselves (a bad thing?) doesn't negate that fact that they can play convincingly while crossing genres.
A Groove is a Terrible Thing to Waste!
We can agree to disagree. Just because those bassists sound like themselves (a bad thing?) doesn't negate that fact that they can play convincingly while crossing genres.
A Groove is a Terrible Thing to Waste!
They didn't sound convincing to me. That was my point... they sounded like themself "on top" of another genre. Change the backing track, put the same thing on top of it, new genre?
Nope. And I won't get into specifics.
Not the least bit convincing to me so yes, we can agree to disagree.
Just started reading this thread. Jeez, emotive!
I think the original question is well put. It IS funny how jazz musicians are so highly regarded, much more so generally than other musical styles. You may think this is unfair, but (from my experience) this is generally true.
I dont think this a reflection on the skill/talent of any musician (jazz or otherwise) but a reflection on the audience of that artist. Jazz 'tends' to be listened to older folks (no offence) more attuned to intricacies, whereas rock, metal, pop 'tends' to be listened to the younger amongst us who 'tend' to only be concerned with "can I dance to it". I'm not saying one is better than the other, it's just how I see it. A music-phile will be more likely to identify and praise a talented musician, than a kid who doesn't pick out a sublime bass riff.
What I'm saying is: we are to blame, not the artist.
Me done
I think the original question is well put. It IS funny how jazz musicians are so highly regarded, much more so generally than other musical styles. You may think this is unfair, but (from my experience) this is generally true.
I dont think this a reflection on the skill/talent of any musician (jazz or otherwise) but a reflection on the audience of that artist. Jazz 'tends' to be listened to older folks (no offence) more attuned to intricacies, whereas rock, metal, pop 'tends' to be listened to the younger amongst us who 'tend' to only be concerned with "can I dance to it". I'm not saying one is better than the other, it's just how I see it. A music-phile will be more likely to identify and praise a talented musician, than a kid who doesn't pick out a sublime bass riff.
What I'm saying is: we are to blame, not the artist.
Me done
Just started reading this thread. Jeez, emotive!
I think the original question is well put. It IS funny how jazz musicians are so highly regarded, much more so generally than other musical styles. You may think this is unfair, but (from my experience) this is generally true.
I dont think this a reflection on the skill/talent of any musician (jazz or otherwise) but a reflection on the audience of that artist. Jazz 'tends' to be listened to older folks (no offence) more attuned to intricacies, whereas rock, metal, pop 'tends' to be listened to the younger amongst us who 'tend' to only be concerned with "can I dance to it". I'm not saying one is better than the other, it's just how I see it. A music-phile will be more likely to identify and praise a talented musician, than a kid who doesn't pick out a sublime bass riff.
What I'm saying is: we are to blame, not the artist.
Me done
I don't think age as anything to do with it. Just here there is a lot of 50+ who only play in cover band to make women dance or to keep rock alive.
Me ? I'm 29 and I've been listening to Jazz and Classical since I'm 18/19 a little before I went to college to earn a degree in music.
Jazz take a lot of dedication to master the language and speak it fluancy on the go. And this dedication shows off in their technical abilities on the instrument ( many use floating thumb, no thumb over the neck, intricate freting finger mouvement etc ). You don't see that level in other style of music beside Classical. especialy for EB player where the rock attitude is more a dominant aspect. You know the :"I'll learn by myself", "I'll play the way I want, it is my unique style". I also think electric bass, electric guitar and drum are tied to Rock and the rejection of authority or conventionnal way of doing thing.
Didn't want to post, but I will. Sorry for not thumbing through all 12 pages...
Good music is good music, regardless. With that said, I am a jazz upright bassist and 95% of my music making is jazz (or jazz related). I used to be a huge heavy metal and prog fan, so I understand both sides of the spectrum. Anyone who is at the top of their game, whether it's John Petrucci or Christian McBride is going to be an excellent musician and an excellent role model for that particular genre. To say that jazz is overrated is an ignorant thing to say, because, well, you can't seriously say that music with 100 years+ of tradition is overrated. Have you checked out Dexter Gordon? Phineas Newborn? Wes Montgomery? Miles Davis's stuff? You realize Alex Skolnick was influenced by him, right? I'm assuming you also know that jazz that becoming more progressive (Miles's second quintet) and fusion undoubtedly had a huge influence on the complex music that is heard today?
It'd be like saying "I love jazz, but classical is way overrated..." So much jazz stems from classical music (think Ravel, Debussy, plus endless others). How can I deny lineage of my OWN music due to thoughtless ignorance?
Good music is good music, regardless. With that said, I am a jazz upright bassist and 95% of my music making is jazz (or jazz related). I used to be a huge heavy metal and prog fan, so I understand both sides of the spectrum. Anyone who is at the top of their game, whether it's John Petrucci or Christian McBride is going to be an excellent musician and an excellent role model for that particular genre. To say that jazz is overrated is an ignorant thing to say, because, well, you can't seriously say that music with 100 years+ of tradition is overrated. Have you checked out Dexter Gordon? Phineas Newborn? Wes Montgomery? Miles Davis's stuff? You realize Alex Skolnick was influenced by him, right? I'm assuming you also know that jazz that becoming more progressive (Miles's second quintet) and fusion undoubtedly had a huge influence on the complex music that is heard today?
It'd be like saying "I love jazz, but classical is way overrated..." So much jazz stems from classical music (think Ravel, Debussy, plus endless others). How can I deny lineage of my OWN music due to thoughtless ignorance?
Going on a bit of a tangent here, I totally agree with your position on this. So few people are so eager to do things their own way that they don't realize that, by knowing all there is to know about conventional techniques, you can experiment with adding eccentricities, and tweek aspects of it to better fit what you want to accomplish. This way your technique can have the effectiveness of tried and true conventional technique, along with whatever flare you so desire to add.
Reminds me of when I was 15. I saw a video of someone playing with an E-bow and decided "I'm gonna be a unique guitar player that only uses an E-bow," despite the fact I knew very little about conventional guitar technique (or bass technique for that matter). Needless to say, I didn't go to far with it.
Sorry if this is getting a little off-topic...
