[Dixielandjazz] Horizontal - Vertical - etc. The Gunter Queries

[Steve barbone]

Bill Gunter asked the below questions and here is my simplistic 2 Cents

> 1. What is "horizontal" jazz?

That which Titan Hot 7 plays while rolling around on the floor. :-) VBG.
Just kidding. Horizontal jazz lines are those which follow an orderly
procession of notes and silences (keeping time) through the song pattern.
Someone mentioned Paul Desmond who IMO is a perfect example. Davern too.


> 2. What is "vertical" jazz for that matter (if there is "horizontal" jazz
> there ought to be vertical, and perhaps even "slanted" and/or "diagonal"
> jazz)?

That which explores the chords. e.g. Harmony is vertical. Vertical jazz is
when the orderly procession of notes (time) is interrupted to explore up and
down structure of the chord. Bebop went in this direction, changing the
rhythm to explore the chord structures, as did John Coltrane early on. Then
Coltrane went even more complex vertically by exploring the up and down
structure of the various scales to produce his "sheets of sound".

> 3. When someone says to me the music is "melodic" what am I to make of this?

Depends upon how musically educated the speaker is. Basically it probably
means that person can hear a melody in the music. Melodic improvisation is
the creation of a "new" tune during the improv. In effect the player becomes
an on the spot composer. Kind of like when Bill Bailey chords are used to
play Wash & Lee Swing, Bourbon St Parade, Tiger Rag etc. After whichever was
first, the rest become melodic compositions/improvs on the original chords.
Very possibly ALL music is melodic depending upon the listener and how
he/she "hears" melody.

One device to tie melody together for the listener is to play a chordal note
on the first and third beat of each measure. Even Charlie Parker did this
almost all the time and so for some listeners, especially other musicians,
it is easy to hear melody within his music, while for others, whose ears are
not tuned in that manner, not at all possible.

> 4. Is being "challenged" the preferable state for musical enjoyment?  What
> does this mean?

Only if the listener enjoys being challenged. It depends upon how the person
listens to music. e.g. If you do not understand the vertical "sheets of
sound" music of John Coltrane, but wish to learn about it and possibly
develop a taste for it, then "being challenged" is your thing. If you don't
give a rap about it, and do not wish to be challenged, that that is your
thing too. Who can fault you for either? Some, who enjoy challenged
listening, listen for improv ideas, and will analyze how the player gets
from A to B, etc. Others just listen for a pleasing melody they recognize,
or good tone, etc.

> 5. If I don't appreciate certain forms of music am I stupid?

Of course not. What type of music you do, or do not appreciate has nothing
to do with stupidity. Each to his/her own.  BUT, IMO, the caveat is that;
putting down a form of music, or a musician who plays it, or deriding those
who enjoy it . . . as being stupid, is often a beacon pointing squarely at
the ignorance of the person(s) casting the aspersions.

Cheers,
Steve