Who played in Kenny G live?

[DWBass]

"Nobody" gives a rat's patootie about the lyrics. It's Armstrong's work that PM holds dear, and I think you knew that.

I personally don't give a rat's 'patootie' about PM's opinion nor do I respect him for bashing a fellow musician. Other people have performed the same song. So does he dislike them too? Just sounds like he has a personal vendetta against KG to me.

Geez, if PM never said a word about this no one in this thread would have anything to say other than they don't like his music!

 

[Sneckumhaw]

Other people have performed the same song. So does he dislike them too?

They didn't mess with Louis' performance.

 

[DWBass]

They didn't mess with Louis' performance.

Sorry! It's still a weak argument at best!

 

[RHFusillo]

How did all the die hard Jaco fans react when Marcus Miller slapped Teen Town? I remember some negativity.

Most importantly however. How would the Norah Jones fans react if Jeff Berlin were to overdub himself over one of her tracks?

Marcus' biggest crime was dubbing a drum machine on top of a Tony Williams track. I have never understood that!

And I am a little bothered by what Jeff Berlin did, although I think I understand the point he is trying to make.

 

[Alan Vorse]

Still waiting for Vail Johnson to weigh in on all of this.

 

[Sneckumhaw]

Sorry! It's still a weak argument at best!

How so? Because you don't agree with it? We Kenny non-fans have addressed any issue there might be with the argument. You are not required at all to be convinced, but I don't see any holes in our argument.

Covering the composition It's a Wonderful World is nothing like tampering with Louis' recording of said song.

 

[DWBass]

How so? Because you don't agree with it? We Kenny non-fans have addressed any issue there might be with the argument. You are not required at all to be convinced, but I don't see any holes in our argument.

Covering the composition It's a Wonderful World is nothing like tampering with Louis' recording of said song.

The argument should be directed at the owners of the original tracks and not Kenny G (if there is an argument at all)! Someone had to give permission for his vocal track to be used. The problem is Kenny G is being used as a scapegoat to a senseless and unnecessary argument! No one tampered with anything! Like I said.........weak (senseless and immature) argument!

 

[MR PC]

And as such would not need to be a businessman. So why assume he is one?

From Mr. Gorman's website. A little news clip. He's an great salesman.

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

 

[KeithPas]

From Mr. Gorman's website. A little news clip. He's an great salesman.

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

So the guy has a website in which he tries to get people to purchase his CD's, I don;t see what is so unique about that. A million other musicians are doing the same thing on myspace.

 

[MR PC]

So the guy has a website in which he tries to get people to purchase his CD's, I don;t see what is so unique about that. A million other musicians are doing the same thing on myspace.

Well, Brad Johnson questioned my assumption that Kenny G is a salesman. I think the news clip illustrates clearly that Mr. Gorman is indeed a fine salesman.

I'm here for the long haul fellas!

 

[KeithPas]

Well, Brad Johnson questioned my assumption that Kenny G is a salesman. I think the news clip illustrates clearly that Mr. Gorman is indeed a fine salesman.

I'm here for the long haul fellas!

and every other aspiring musical artist that has a myspace page is a salesman too. I'm not going to go back to investigate the exact context but I think that Brad was referring to something other than what every other person does.

of course I could be wrong

 

[MR PC]

and every other aspiring musical artist that has a myspace page is a salesman too. I'm not going to go back to investigate the exact context but I think that Brad was referring to something other than what every other person does.

of course I could be wrong

OK, then it could be agreed that my statement that Kenny G is a salesman is NOT an an assumption, or "archaic arrogance or presumption." He, like many other musicians is selling his product.

assumption |əˈsəm(p) sh ən|
noun
1 a thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof : they made certain assumptions about the market | [with clause ] we're working on the assumption that the time of death was after midnight.
2 the action of taking or beginning to take power or responsibility : the assumption of an active role in regional settlements.
3 ( Assumption) the reception of the Virgin Mary bodily into heaven. This was formally declared a doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church in 1950. See also Dormition .
• the feast in honor of this, celebrated on August 15.
4 archaic arrogance or presumption.
ORIGIN Middle English (sense 3) : from Old French asompsion or Latin assumptio(n-), from the verb assumere (see assume ).



This thread certainly has an interesting filibuster quality about it! IMHO


filibuster
noun
many hours in committee are characterized by filibuster stonewalling, delaying tactics, procrastination, obstruction, temporizing.
verb
the opposition are filibustering waste time, stall, play for time, stonewall, sandbag, procrastinate, buy time, employ delaying tactics.

 

[KeithPas]

OK, then it could be agreed that my statement that Kenny G is a salesman is NOT an an assumption, or "archaic arrogance or presumption." He, like many other musicians is selling his product.
This thread certainly has an interesting filibuster quality about it! IMHO

.

If what you are saying is that Kenny G attempts to sell his music, just like pretty much everyone else, then, strangely, we are on the same page.

 

[Sneckumhaw]

The argument should be directed at the owners of the original tracks and not Kenny G (if there is an argument at all)! Someone had to give permission for his vocal track to be used. The problem is Kenny G is being used as a scapegoat to a senseless and unnecessary argument! No one tampered with anything! Like I said.........weak (senseless and immature) argument!

I don't see it that way at all. He is the main culprit, not a scapegoat. He's not exactly an innocent bystander. The worse offender is not he who gives permission for tasteless and questionable acts, but he who actually commits the tasteless and questionable acts.

You don't have to buy the premise that Kenny's version of the song (including, and thus to many, cheapening, Louis' vocal) is tasteless or questionable, but that's just a basic fundamental difference. We disagree on the very premise of this argument, and I think that's coloring your dismissal of it as "weak" and "senseless", while that's not quite fair. We haven't wavered in our position and have supplied cogent replies to each objection. Disagreement does not justify treatment of the other party as not having considered their point well. Our inability to waver the opinion of diehard Kenny G fans is not a function of "weak" arguing.

 

[DWBass]

I don't see it that way at all. He is the main culprit, not a scapegoat. He's not exactly an innocent bystander. The worse offender is not he who gives permission for tasteless and questionable acts, but he who actually commits the tasteless and questionable acts.

You don't have to buy the premise that Kenny's version of the song (including, and thus to many, cheapening, Louis' vocal) is tasteless or questionable, but that's just a basic fundamental difference. We disagree on the very premise of this argument, and I think that's coloring your dismissal of it as "weak" and "senseless", while that's not quite fair. We haven't wavered in our position and have supplied cogent replies to each objection. Disagreement does not justify treatment of the other party as not having considered their point well. Our inability to waver the opinion of diehard Kenny G fans is not a function of "weak" arguing.

Okay. So the man is to be vilified forever for a single act that happened 10 years ago! I still don't see the big deal! And why not afford those who gave permission (song owners/writers, record company) the same ire? Like I said, if PM had never said a word, I doubt anyone would be even mentioning it!

Anyone else??

 

[Brad Johnson]

Well, Brad Johnson questioned my assumption that Kenny G is a salesman. I think the news clip illustrates clearly that Mr. Gorman is indeed a fine salesman.

I'm here for the long haul fellas!

Good... so maybe for the short haul you can show where I did that?

I didn't.


You're making two assumptions:
1. I questioned your assumption that he was a businessman, not salesman. There's a difference. For all we know he had some serious MI businessmen like, oh, I don't know, Clive Davis behind him.

2. You assume the webpage is his idea and his doing. As if webmasters don't exist. And businessmen.

 

[Brad Johnson]

and every other aspiring musical artist that has a myspace page is a salesman too. I'm not going to go back to investigate the exact context but I think that Brad was referring to something other than what every other person does.

of course I could be wrong

If he read what I actually wrote...

 

[IB3K]

<cut>
Our inability to waver the opinion of diehard Kenny G fans is not a function of "weak" arguing.

Well I'm definitely not saying the argument is weak, just silly, and not particularly healthy.

For better or worse I don't own any of Kenny G's work. Incidently if Kenny G were doing a South Park type of parody of Armstrong with all kinds of sound effects, or calling him Uncle F-er, or something, then that's clearly a different story, but the argument is that G is barely enough of a virtuoso to be called a jazz musician and definitely not enough to cover a great jazz artist's work (though not even knowing what the artist himself would think about the cover) is itself not a good idea for jazz.

I understand that virtuosity is important especially for jazz, but it's not, nor has it ever been, the driving force behind jazz. So framing virtuosity as the prime mover in jazz really is the wrong argument and potentially a very dangerous argument to try and make. The reason is relevance. Rightly or wrongly jazz has always gained its relevance because of popular music and popular culture, not in spite of popular culture or popular music and certainly not on its own virtuosity (cough- Jeff Berlin). That may be a painful realization for some, but it's the truth.

Whatever you may think about popular culture, and I think there are some pretty disgusting things going on in PC today, for example an entire army of small businesses here in LA built upon following Brittany Spears around town, it still remains the single most powerful vehicle jazz artists can use to communicate in their art-form. Sure there are lots of other things in the bus, but one big thing is contemporary life, and without engaging contemporary life you put a noose around your neck (talk to a classical musician).

The only gauges that musicians have at the moment to see if they are connecting with contemporary life are record sales and/or concerts. If people are buying the music then you know that you are connecting with something inside popular culture on some level, and you remain relevant. But when you reject that, you stop being relevant, and a few things happen, none of them are good. If you are not relevant, sure you will have built an audience to that point who by definition will be aging, but it's going to be a lot harder to try and convince your audience that the work you do is meaningful. The result is that the financial ability to carry the art forward starts to slip. Two big problems.

But lying just behind these two immediate problems- the aging audience and a tightening financial noose&#8212;are two much more basic, much longer term but more crucial problems. First you get a drift away from jazz in the culture all around us, BUT Metheny's argument compounds that from within the jazz world itself which results in something very like stagnation, because he has built an artificial barrier to engaging contemporary life. Metheny in fact professes an absolute refusal to engage the outside world unless this barrier is met, for fear of "dumbing down" or contaminating the art-form. That's what makes this a line of thought a silly idea.

Obviously the two&#8212;both of them very long-term trends&#8212;are tied to each other. If people lose interest in jazz music because it's not relevant to them, and the jazz world refuses to engage with them because they are not "smart enough", then of course they lose interest even more, and the jazz world finds contempt for them even more and it's even harder to engage. And so it goes. Metheny is all too willing to provide us with half of the equation, and I don't see how that's healthy for jazz. Kenny G is engaging the world, having an impact, and carrying jazz into contemporary life. If you don't like that impact then you need to make a bigger impact on contemorary life which will be carried back into jazz, and not try and do it artifically the other way around.

 

[MR PC]

Good... so maybe for the short haul you can show where I did that?

I didn't.


You're making two assumptions:
1. I questioned your assumption that he was a businessman, not salesman. There's a difference. For all we know he had some serious MI businessmen like, oh, I don't know, Clive Davis behind him.

2. You assume the webpage is his idea and his doing. As if webmasters don't exist. And businessmen.

Of course, you could be wrong! So go ahead and show me where you didn't do that, if you really need to keep filibustering, that is.

I think Kenny G is a brilliant pop music artist, BTW.

 

[KeithPas]

Well I'm definitely not saying the argument is weak, just silly, and not particularly healthy.

For better or worse I don't own any of Kenny G's work. Incidently if Kenny G were doing a South Park type of parody of Armstrong with all kinds of sound effects, or calling him Uncle F-er, or something, then that's clearly a different story, but the argument is that G is barely enough of a virtuoso to be called a jazz musician and definitely not enough to cover a great jazz artist's work (though not even knowing what the artist himself would think about the cover) is itself not a good idea for jazz.

I understand that virtuosity is important especially for jazz, but it's not, nor has it ever been, the driving force behind jazz. So framing virtuosity as the prime mover in jazz really is the wrong argument and potentially a very dangerous argument to try and make. The reason is relevance. Rightly or wrongly jazz has always gained its relevance because of popular music and popular culture, not in spite of popular culture or popular music and certainly not on its own virtuosity (cough- Jeff Berlin). That may be a painful realization for some, but it's the truth.

Whatever you may think about popular culture, and I think there are some pretty disgusting things going on in PC today, for example an entire army of small businesses here in LA built upon following Brittany Spears around town, it still remains the single most powerful vehicle jazz artists can use to communicate in their art-form. Sure there are lots of other things in the bus, but one big thing is contemporary life, and without engaging contemporary life you put a noose around your neck (talk to a classical musician).

The only gauges that musicians have at the moment to see if they are connecting with contemporary life are record sales and/or concerts. If people are buying the music then you know that you are connecting with something inside popular culture on some level, and you remain relevant. But when you reject that, you stop being relevant, and a few things happen, none of them are good. If you are not relevant, sure you will have built an audience to that point who by definition will be aging, but it's going to be a lot harder to try and convince your audience that the work you do is meaningful. The result is that the financial ability to carry the art forward starts to slip. Two big problems.

But lying just behind these two immediate problems- the aging audience and a tightening financial noose—are two much more basic, much longer term but more crucial problems. First you get a drift away from jazz in the culture all around us, BUT Metheny's argument compounds that from within the jazz world itself which results in something very like stagnation, because he has built an artificial barrier to engaging contemporary life. Metheny in fact professes an absolute refusal to engage the outside world unless this barrier is met, for fear of "dumbing down" or contaminating the art-form. That's what makes this a line of thought a silly idea.

Obviously the two—both of them very long-term trends—are tied to each other. If people lose interest in jazz music because it's not relevant to them, and the jazz world refuses to engage with them because they are not "smart enough", then of course they lose interest even more, and the jazz world finds contempt for them even more and it's even harder to engage. And so it goes. Metheny is all too willing to provide us with half of the equation, and I don't see how that's healthy for jazz. Kenny G is engaging the world, having an impact, and carrying jazz into contemporary life. If you don't like that impact then you need to make a bigger impact on contemorary life which will be carried back into jazz, and not try and do it artifically the other way around.

Yeah!!! What he said!!!