[Dixielandjazz] Making the clarinet sound like Tony Scott, Artie Shaw and Lester Young

[Steve barbone]

on 7/9/05 1:21 AM, artwoo at aol.com at artwoo at aol.com wrote:

 Hi Steve and DJMLers: The quote at the bottom of your post to the DJML,
Steve, reminds me of Tony Scott. Would you agree that he has been searching
for his "inner voice" since leaving the New York jazz scene many years ago?

Though I don't know too much about either artist it seems that Tony Scott
has become what Artie Shaw may have become if Artie kept on playing...

The similarity between the 2 is the idea that the clarinet (or any musical
instrument for that matter) is a way to express the inner voice whether it
be a shout, whisper or moan. Just playing the notes so they bounce off the
walls is stupid and self-defeating.

I think the point of this is that many musicians view playing as a
contest...he who plays loudest and penetrates above the rest is the winner.
If you're a sideman in a band like that, it is impossible to make music.

Did you ever listen to the Lester Young interviews? He makes the same point;
he'd rather play soft with a rhythm section than be in a band with
screaching trumpets. I think every musician should listen to Lester Young's
remarks and try to recall the joy of playing with a group rather than
against a group. 


Dear Art & Listmates:

Tony Scott? (nee Anthony Sciacca -  hooray for those Italians). Man you
mentioned my all time favorite clarinet player. He and Thelonious Monk are
my lifestyle heroes because they ignored all the critics and other noise
around them and played what they wanted to play. They did it "their way".
What in life can any of us do, that is better than that? And Shaw did what
he did, his way. Hooray for his success too.
Yes, maybe Scott became what Shaw would have had he continued in mujsic.

Loud? Soft? IMO not much difference. It depends upon the venue, the crowd,
the energy which one wishes to impart, the control over the crowd response,
what you are trying to communicate, the song, etc.

I think all music is communication and sometimes it is ff and sometimes it
is pp. The trick, I think, is knowing when to f and when to p.

However, unless the f or p can be heard by all of the audience, it doesn't
make a damn bit of difference. Kind of like a tree falling in the forest
1000 miles from anyplace. Did it make a sound?

So playing to the back wall would seem to be a given. And depending upon how
far away that wall is would seem to control how loudly or softly one should
play.

Each of us has ideas of what is right concerning volume. Lester's fit him,
and Cecil Taylor's fits him, etc. But I think we need to realize that it is
what fits you, or me, or whomever, that is correct. It is relative.

The other stuff via what Pres or Monk or Diz or Louis say is just dogma. Not
all of it will fit every given situation.

Cheers,
Steve Barbone