[Dixielandjazz] What constitutes a competent musician?

[Steve Barbone]

<jobriant at sunrisetelecom.com> wrote (polite snip)
 

>However, the question here is whether someone plays their instrument at
>a beginning level or an advanced level, with regard to tone,
>articulation, technique, etc.  Is the player a competent musician on his
>chosen instrument, or not?  Can he produce a tone that sounds like (in
>this case) a clarinet is supposed to sound?  Can he articulate and
>release notes so that they begin and end as they should?  Does he have
>his scales and arpeggios "under his fingers" to the extent necessary to
>play the licks he wants to play? And if he can, did he perform up to
>this level for his paying customers?

>All of this is far less a question of opinion than of fact.


That brings up a whole new can of worms.

How does one define "competent" in jazz? We probably all know many very
competent instrumentalists who can't play a lick of jazz.

What is a jazz clarinet supposed to sound like? Pee Wee Russell had very
different ideas about that as compared to Benny Goodman. Tony Scott differs
from Buddy DeFranco, Ed Hall from Johnny Dodds, etc.

Where should the notes in jazz begin and end? Willie Humphries or Barney
Bigard were very different than Kenny Davern in that regard. Monk was very
different from Oscar Peterson, etc.

Are scales and arpeggios of primary concern over harmonic balance?

Perhaps an important ingredient was overlooked? Did the music SWING?

I agree about the paying customers. If a musician satisfies most of them, he
will prosper. By the same token, no musician will ever satisfy all of them.
The trick is figuring out which ones count, will pay to see you, and
therefore enable you to play whatever you want in venues of your choosing.
They are all important. like grease for an axle, that keeps the genre alive
and moving.

Cheers,
Steve Barbone