[Dixielandjazz] Copying; learning; improvising - and some other comments...

[jazzchops at isp.com]

(Note: I've been having some trouble getting messages to the DJML, and if
this has gone through twice, I apologize. Also, this is a revised edition
of the earlier one.)


I would like to clarify my stance on copying solos and re-creations, since
some people might have gotten the wrong idea about how I feel about this
subject.

When used as a educational tool, learning some famous player's solo is a
great way to understand the improvisational process. As a matter of fact,
most jazz education courses these days require that students not only
learn to memorize great solos but are encouraged to write them out - to
LEARN how a great musician works. Operative word here is "learn," which is
the word Oscar Peterson used in the quote about other musician's solos.
"The funny thing about it: I don't have any inhibition about saying I
learned such-and-such-a-person's solo." Yes, Oscar had great ears and
could pick things up easily. But using the word "learn" implies study;
it's different from saying "I can play so-and-so's chorus from this tune."

As a former instructor at the San Diego Jazz Camp, one of the things I
stressed was listening to great players and listening to the "classics" of
jazz. I also encouraged the students to learn solos, as a way to improve
their improvising, to understand and learn how it works. Wanting to learn
how to improvise was the most common request of the students. However,
it's another thing entirely just reading a transcribed solo, which is why
I tried to steer the students away from trying to learn that way, because
by learning it from the record, the student is using his/her ear, and,
hopefully improving their "ear" for improvising. Those transcribed solos
are only an approximation of what was played, anyway - the original
player's tone and nuances can't be notated. Perhaps when used with the
original recording, it may prove a useful tool. Speaking personally,
however, I'd rather hear someone copy a solo if they don't have the
ability to play a decent improvised solo.

I play a lot of jazz festivals both in the US and abroad, and I just don't
hear any of these supposedly re-creation musicians or bands that are being
referred to in posts on the DJML. Where are these players that are
supposedly recreating Bunny Berigan and Benny Goodman? I haven't heard
them - because I certainly would remember. I'd pay good money to hear
someone playing like Bunny Berigan; and I'm not talking about a rote copy
of  "I Can't Get Started;" I'm talking about really playing like him, with
the ideas, the tone, the range - the whole nine yards. If it's done in a
totally creative way, rather than just copying solos off of records, I
don't see a problem with it. I once heard Swedish trumpet playing Bent
Persson playing with a similar sound to Louis Armstrong - not necessarily
copying what Louis did, but playing in the style. Bent's multi-chorus solo
on "Cakewalkin' Babies" was one of the most exciting things I've ever
heard in person. Perhaps as close as I'll come in my lifetime to hearing
1920s Armstrong in person. Was it original? I say "yes" because it wasn't
a slavish copy of Armstrong, it was an interpretation of Armstrong but
with Bent Persson's concept.

I can always tell the players that have put in the time listening,
studying and learning. Their playing has great substance, feeling,
maturity. Any jazz player who eschews the educational process is bland -
at least to my ears.

Every time I hear a little phrase of some jazz great in another musician's
performance, I think "yeah, he's been listening." The Armstrong phrases in
Bergian's playing, the Jimmie Noone in Jimmy Dorsey and Benny Goodman's
solos, things by Lester Young in the playing of Zoot Sims, Stan Getz or Al
Cohn, Roy Eldridge in Dizzy's work...I could go on and on. Yet those
players all had their own voice.

There are bands out there on the circuit that play things much like the
original recordings. But for me, that's better than a band that plays
every tune with one ensemble chorus, individual solos, and one ensemble
chorus out. To me, that is totally uncreative and, frankly, a big bore. At
least when a band is playing an arrangement similar to something recorded
by King Oliver or Jelly Roll Morton, they're  utilizing the great
creativity those people brought to their performances. After listening to
Morton's Peppers recordings for 40 years, I'm continually impressed with
the variety and creativity there. Great arrangements, great solos and
breaks. I also continue to be impressed by the fabulous interplay on King
Oliver's Creole Jazz Band recordings, the amazing way the four-piece front
line works together without getting in each other's way. Each musician
knows EXACTLY the right thing to play. Ditto the recordings of Bud
Freeman's Summa Cum Laude band. Amazing interplay with a four-piece front
line that could easily degenerate into a garbled mess if the individuals
weren't playing parts that fit together in a musical, rather than
ego-based, way.

I've done a lot of recordings that might be considered by some to be
recreations, and I'm not ashamed of having done them. In doing that, I
feel I'm paying tribute to those great musicians that have come before,
and perhaps introducing a modern audience to the works of these past
masters. So, when I did my King Oliver tribute maybe I copied a few things
from the originals. Big deal. Those people that are bugged by that don't
have to listen. But I didn't slavishly copy the original recordings; I
utilized some aspects of them, and inserted things I felt were
stylistically appropriate. I believe it's paid off. One track from my Bunk
Johnson tribute was used on the first installment of Ken Burns' Jazz, and
another CD of mine "New Orleans Wiggle," was given the highest rating by
the Penguin Guide to Jazz on CD - the ONLY contemporary traditional jazz
recording to be given that honor.

Although this is switching to another subject, the other point I'd like to
address is the supposed "dying off" of the audience. First, I think that
is a totally negative statement, and it's also insulting to those who
might be in the over 65 demographic that are consistently being referred
to. Yes, there are some festivals that have tanked. But I believe there
are more factors involved with the loss of audience than just the
cheap-shot answer of the audience dying out, and I've played quite a few
of those festivals that have gone under. Recently we all read about
Sisters, Oregon giving up the ghost, with the festival director
attributing it to loss of the over 65 age group. Yet in the same article
he mentioned that when the festival brought in more modern "smooth" jazz
groups, attendance didn't appreciably increase. Geographically speaking,
Sisters is located in an inconvenient part of Oregon to travel to. It's a
long drive from any major metro area with an airport. There's the obvious
transportation difficulties involved, flying to Portland or Eugene,
renting a car, etc. Also by looking at the band line-up, the festival did
hire popular bands, but if someone heard that particular band a week or
two previous at another festival, it's doubtful they would take the
trouble to hear them again so soon.

I've encountered a lot of jazz fans who relate they have cut down on
festival attendance only because of financial reasons. It can be
expensive: badges, hotel, transportation, meals. There are some retired
people who can afford that, but then there are others who can't. Ditto for
younger people, too. And then there's the problems inherent with air
travel these days. Personally I get really tired of having my carry-on
searched by some dopey TSA agent that thinks a bass drum pedal is part of
nuclear device ;-) (But those stories are for a different time.)

Unfortunately many festivals have small budgets for advertising, hence
locals often aren't aware of what's going on. I can't speak about the
inside workings of festival organizations, but maybe there needs to be
more year-long activities to help support the local audience base, things
like free concerts (paid for the musicians, please), concerts in schools,
etc.

There's also this attitude among some DJML contributors that "to get the
younger audience we need to play more music they know." I totally
disagree. I've played for high school groups with totally dyed-in-the-wool
trad groups playing music of the 1920s and 30s, and the kids loved it - in
EVERY case. But here again, to grab that audience segment, festivals need
to work to bring that music to them. I think the best way to do that would
be working hand-in-hand with local music programs.

To conclude, I like to see more positive commentary on the DJML; keep your
negativity to yourself. Many of us are very tired of it. Let's be more
proactive to keep our music alive.


Regards,
Chris Tyle

-----------------------------------------
Join ISP.COM today - $9.95 internet , less than 1/2 the cost of AOL Try us
out, http://www.isp.com/





-----------------------------------------
Join ISP.COM today - $9.95 internet , less than 1/2 the cost of AOL
Try us out, http://www.isp.com/