[Dixielandjazz] Free Form Music

[Marek Boym]

The "free form" discussion reminds of a letter to the editor of the "Down
Beat," probbly some time in the 1960's: "Free jazz?  Avant garde?  We
played like that thirty years ago, but then we called it 'tuning up!'"
Cheers

On 18 October 2014 20:53, Charles Suhor <csuhor at zebra.net> wrote:

> Your last paragraph says so much, Ken. I do think, though, that free form
> performers are generally less interested in willfully denying structure
> than letting their intuitions flow and, basically, seeing what structures
> might emerge if they aren't grounded in traditional forms. Jazz players,
> even when they don't make use of a song structure, make use of the contours
> of jazz improvisation, jazz and blues inflections, and other jazz
> components. Non-jazz free form music usually sounds comparatively bare and
> to me, most of it gets boring pretty fast on recordings. A film should
> carry more of a sense of the act-of-creating, but I've found that what
> keeps me with the moment is a live performance where one's being there is
> an act of respect and commitment to the human beings who are breathing the
> same air as they try their luck at inventing...something. That can be
> communal and exciting, even when their efforts don't add up to interesting
> listening.
>
> I've long enjoyed modern jazz when the group starts out with a standard
> tune, then the soloists gradually stretch out, keeping a "sense" of the
> song source while the chords and bars move into the badlands. Again, live
> is better for me. In the 80s I heard McCoy Tyner's trio in Chicago taking
> "I Got Rhythm" into almost mystically lovely places. In New York, a group
> led by a fine bassist/vocalist (forgot his name) with Marvin Stamm on
> trumpet and Terry Clark on drums was moving into layers and more layers of
> complex rhythms. Finally the bassist hollered, "WHERE'S ONE?" I fell out
> laughing--in delight, not scorn. There was something about their being
> "lost" that was liberating, and when they moved back into good old 4/4, the
> resolution was very satisfying.
>
> Charlie
>
> On Oct 16, 2014, at 6:34 PM, Ken Mathieson wrote:
>
> > Hi Folks,
> >
> > I was once asked by BBC to contribute a review to an Arts radio
> programme of a gallery exhibition featuring a movie of free-form jazz by a
> group led by trombonist (not clarinettist) George Lewis. The experience in
> the gallery was interesting: The film of the band performance had been shot
> from both behind and in front and the two films were projected
> simultaneously on to opposite sides of a screen which was suspended from
> the ceiling in the middle of the space. The viewers could walk round the
> screen and see the front and rear views while listening to the soundtrack.
> >
> > The music was also pretty interesting: There was no thematic material
> and solos and ensembles were completely random with little or no melodic or
> harmonic reference. Pieces just began randomly and development, while
> organic, was entirely unstructured. I like to listen to music of all kinds,
> but I found it pretty boring. There appeared to be only two tempos:
> becalmed and frantic 300mph. The most interesting thing for me were the
> drum solos. here was a guy playing a percussion instrument with
> non-specific pitches and he was the only one to play melodically. Overall I
> was unimpressed by the music and felt that, in the pursuit of musical
> freedom, the horn players and bassist had painted themselves into a corner
> where melody, harmony and rhythm didn't exist in any coherent or sustained
> way. The drummer seemed to be the only player with coherent musical ideas.
> >
> > I have to say that the music in the film was much less accessible and
> structured than the music of the early Ornette Coleman, which I liked when
> it first came on the scene. It struck me back then that Ornette's music had
> similarities to New Orleans jazz, with its cheerful, if unpredictable,
> themes, its collective improvisation, its jaunty rhythms (thanks to Billy
> Higgins and Ed Blackwell for that) and above all for its joyous optimism.
> Maybe, as an arranger I'm biased, but I find well-structured music more
> satisfying than anything else. In jazz, it's not just the great arrangers
> who define these structures; the great soloists throughout jazz history
> have all had a highly developed and often intuitive sense of structure
> which was deployed in building solos. On the other hand, the wilful denial
> of structure in most "free-form" jazz seems pointless and self-defeating.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Ken
> > _______________________________________________
> > To unsubscribe or change your e-mail preferences for the Dixieland Jazz
> Mailing list, or to find the online archives, please visit:
> >
> > http://ml.islandnet.com/mailman/listinfo/dixielandjazz
> >
> >
> >
> > Dixielandjazz mailing list
> > Dixielandjazz at ml.islandnet.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> To unsubscribe or change your e-mail preferences for the Dixieland Jazz
> Mailing list, or to find the online archives, please visit:
>
> http://ml.islandnet.com/mailman/listinfo/dixielandjazz
>
>
>
> Dixielandjazz mailing list
> Dixielandjazz at ml.islandnet.com
>