Playing Fast

MikkoKarhula

RobMacKillop wrote: »

Which is why I like your interpretation of Autumn Leaves so much @MikkoKarhula - lots of ear-tingling ideas, and, yes, bursts of speed when needed.

Thank you Rob! That keeps me warm here in "cold" Finland.:)

Bones

This is actually a really interesting topic but in a way I don't like to think too much about it (even though I do) since the actual act of thinking about it and putting labels and definitions seems sort of confining and restrictive to me.

For example, I think that the line between being purely melodic (or whatever it is called) versus playing 'licks' or exercises is not always black and white. The instances of this are literally all over the place in the recordings.

Take for example Djangos solo in Appel Direct. Generally, I would say that the first 'slower' portion is more 'melodic' if one wants to call it that (although it is sort of outside) and the last half is obviously a repeating picking pattern that is flashy and creates a nice bit of tension and climax for the ending. (Note, even the original 'melody' is just a pattern and 'outside' of the harmonic structure).

Or how about the triplet passage from 1937 Minor Swing that is being discussed in a different thread. That's just a chromatic pattern (a modification of this is one 'lick' that many contemporary players use). Not exactly 'melodic' or spontaneous but sounds cool and adds excitement. Doesn't strictly follow the 'changes' but has validity within itself and ends up in the 'right' spot.

Conversely, how about the B and C parts of the melody of Tico Tico. The part over the 2-beat changes IV, #IVdim, I, VI7, II7, V7, I. Pretty much just a straight eighth note tonic major scale with a bit of chromatics thrown in. Not really 'melodic' per se and doesn't necessarily outline the changes but sounds cool and ends up in the right place.

So anyway, when it comes right down to it, what makes it spontaneous melody versus licks versus whatever? When you break it down and analyze it (or over-analyze it) it's kind of hard to say and there isn't really a definite boundary.

I think that Duke said something like 'if it sounds good, it is good'.

Just my 2 cents.

Buco

Depends a lot of the space you create. That's what Django was so good at.
Playing fast and sounding like a machine gun; boring.
Playing slow and sounding like a slow fall rain; boring.
There has to be dynamic in overall volume and space in either to make it interesting.

Denis is on when he says what the player sounds like is the expression of their own personalities. True and I agree but there's growing musically and and sometimes the guys are compelled to bring it.
Example; there's an album with Andreas, Yorgui and Ritari. Nothing but trying to outdo the other guy. Listened to it several times, fun at first but ultimately left me cold each time.
Then there's an album by Yourgui, Bouncin' Around. One of the best albums I've ever heard in this genre or in general. Just can't get enough of it. The compositions, the playing, the atmosphere, listening to it takes you someplace else.

The big stars are in the same boat as us small players. They have to be mindful of their audiences. I'd guess that eventually you have to self regulate based on your album sales, concert attendance or booking frequency. In the perfect world what you have to bring as your personal expression is well received by the audience and no one needs to compromise. Otherwise one side needs to adjust and if no one does you'll stop listening to that artist. If it happens enough times they'll get the message. If they don't they'll go by wayside. Gypsy jazz being niche within a niche, you don't wanna be a marginal player in that world if you want to keep doing it for a living.

Jazzaferri

I look on it this way....

If what the music is saying is "I can play faster than the rest of these guys on stage". Or "look at how good I am" I get bored with that pretty quickly.

If the music is saying "I feel really (fill in descriptor) when I hear the melody to this tune and this is my way of describing what it does to me". I generally enjoy the music.

There's a great story of Bird playing a country song over and over on a juke box and one of his band mates comes up and asks him why he is playing that ****

Bird turns and says to him, listen to the story man.

DragonPL

Buco wrote: »

Example; there's an album with Andreas, Yorgui and Ritari. Nothing but trying to outdo the other guy. Listened to it several times, fun at first but ultimately left me cold each time.

I think you're referring to: http://www.allmusic.com/album/andreas-rotary-yorgui-mw0000642498

To me that's a fantastic album, in heavy rotation in my player, that's inspirational, interesting and played well. (Also with a great version of "Blue Drag" that does not put one to sleep) I think that's a perfect exemple of 'having it' by the fellas and not holding back. That's 'emotion' for me.....

Teddy Dupont

The obsession with speed and technical prowess has taken the soul out of much present day Gypsy Jazz.

DragonPL

Teddy Dupont wrote: »

The obsession with speed and technical prowess has taken the soul out of much present day Gypsy Jazz.

I would just call it evolution, or natural progress. I think we've reached the Romantic era of Gypsy Jazz

Bones

Like Jimmy said, if you can play it fast, you can play it slow (but not necessarily the other way around if you don't have the technique). Or something to that effect.

Jazzaferri

Speed is part of technique.

Artistry is part of the creative process

Technique and artistry are two quite different things.

However one needs a certain amount of technique in order for the artistry to express itself. It doesn't matter if you play fast or slow...if you have something to say....you say it as best you can......if you don't have anything to say.....then all that comes out is technique.

Sometimes players just end up saying ...meme.memememe...meme.me. Some people can listen to that for a long time others can't.....

One thing that has been observed by many in the music world across all genres is that an intense focus on bravura technique can have a negative effect on artistic expression. For every one that develops immense technique and who's artistry survives the process, many do not achieve that lofty goal and fall into the trap of facile performance that while flawless in technique becomes emotionally sterile.

Charles Meadows

I spent a lot of time in my earlier years trying to play fast. I got decently good at it in heavy metal and bluegrass - but am not there in GJ! In many cases it turns out that the hardest parts to master are not the rows and rows of 16th notes, but rather some of the quirky angular phrases that are unique to the artist's style. Angelo and Stochelo have monster technique. But neither of them comes across as "sterile" or anything like that. Just the opposite! They are some of the most intense "feel players" in the genre. And their technical abilities facilitate them being able to convey a wife range of emotions in their playing.

I must admit though that I have a harder time appreciating a player who sounds like their lack of technique is limiting what they can say.