Great Musicians - How Do You Define Them?

Joined : 11 Sep 2006 Posts : 137

Please post your ideas.

I like a crispness in playing. I like musicians that are sharp in their playing, though they may be playing on smooth feathers. I'd say that Steve on Sax and Luther Vandross are in some ways the same artist. Of course, Steve has a completely different approach to music, but Coleman and Luther seem to be a good comparison as to quality. Coleman seems to view each note as important, if not critical even though these notes can be and often are improvised. Luther was an absolute master of timing and feeling in voice, thus making every note critical but in a different way.

I feel that I am able to hear confidence in playing/singing. There is no one that plays quite like Coleman and there is no male vocalist that sang quite like Vandross. There is a quality in these two that I believe that separates these musicians from the rest.

I am a student to the five of us "regulars" at this site, so I'd really like to hear what you all have to say.

Respect,

Free

Joined : 03 Apr 2006 Posts : 278 Localisation : Paris

Ill answer my own way :

A great musicians is someone who gives me "chills" Laughing

I have no other definition.
_________________
www.stevecolemanarchives.com

Hi Scott!

I think that is a very difficult question.

I don’t have the same approach as you. I can’t see the connections between Luther Vandross and Coleman which are important for you. Already earlier I couldn’t really understand you when you spoke about Bob Dylan. But I think that all our musical experiences are very individual. Ultimately the personal experience is the crucial thing – I guess. So it is hardly possible to reach to a common conclusion about this topic. Nevertheless such conclusions were reached in Jazz history: about Louis Armstrong, Parker etc.. What is necessary to reach such a conclusion? I think: primarily a collective which approximately agree in respect of criteria – a circle of musicians who are fascinated by the creations of a fellow, a circle of writers who transport what was found out …
Today the Jazz scene is maybe too much fragmented, too much commercialized to reach conclusions.

The most important reason why I appreciate Coleman so much: From my point of view his music contains a new kind of rhythmic stream and he dances extremely skilfully, inventively, and ‘gracefully’ (I couldn’t find a better vocable in the dictionary) about this stream. For years this view of Jazz as a ritual of drumming and dancing of soloists is very important for me. Thus it is a great pleasure for me to read the above mentioned text by Vijay Iyer (embodiment, ‘ring shout’ etc.).

Smile

Joined : 11 Sep 2006 Posts : 137

Joined : 11 Sep 2006 Posts : 137

Joined : 11 Sep 2006 Posts : 137

Hi Scott!

Now I see: I misunderstood you. I think I can understand you now.

To answer the question of this topic:

1) I have a preference for a certain kind of sound which maybe isn’t far from yours … not hard but firm etc.. The sounds of the Coleman-Band are exactly in this way.

2) I like a strong rhythmic stream which produces Groove – I like for example James Brown:
http://www.amazon.com/Payback-James-Brown/dp/B000001DZU/sr=8-1/qid=1160389698/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-8436754-2950426?ie=UTF8&s=music
Afro-Cuban Rumba:
http://www.amazon.com/Rumba-Caliente-Los-Mu%f1equitos-Matanzas/dp/B0000020RQ/sr=8-7/qid=1160389471/ref=sr_1_7/002-8436754-2950426?ie=UTF8&s=music
Youssou N’Dour – TRACK 3! (bad sound-quality):
http://www.amazon.de/Ba-Tay-Youssou-NDour/dp/B000068VJ0/sr=8-1/qid=1160389871/ref=sr_1_1/028-8070336-0187731?ie=UTF8&s=music
Steve Coleman has a new kind of a very exciting, complex rhythmic stream in his music!

3) I regard Jazz soloists as a kind of dancers. The crucial point for me is: How I feel the melody-lines as motions? For example the first track of the second CD (Blues Minor):
http://www.amazon.com/Complete-Africa-Brass-Sessions/dp/B000003N7U/sr=8-2/qid=1160390354/ref=sr_1_2/002-8436754-2950426?ie=UTF8&s=music
This is one of my favourite-solos: very exciting curves in a huge space.

Steve Coleman “dances” extremely skilfully, inventively, and ‘gracefully’ (I couldn’t find a better vocable in the dictionary) above the great rhythmic streams of his music. Coleman’s lines produce the best “dance-feeling” in my nervous system.

These are the most important aspects of my preference.

Joined : 11 Sep 2006 Posts : 137

Hello Manfred,

Another great post!

James Brown was a great one for creating a groove, I agree with that. Unfortunately, he didn’t seem to develop them. It seems like he’d stay on the same groove as if he was satisfied with his latest creation. Later, when other funk groups like Tower of Power started cropping up, he realized that his new art was being taken over. In fact, he desperately wanted to be the new lead singer of TOP. Obviously, that didn’t happen. But yes, Brown is a huge, and I mean a huge influence on music. My ears tell me that no one has ever been copied more than JB. I may be wrong on that, but that is my experience with JB. Actually, one or two of my own pieces of work has been influenced by Brown. I wrote a piece called “Electrified” that was probably the direct result of Brown in terms of guitar funk. I directly related it to the funky nature of David Gilmore, but Gilmore may have been influenced by the guitarist of Brown, thus the credit might be given to JB. (The amazing thing about Electrified is that I’d always wanted to present this musical idea to Steve as a possible track for him to play with….its pretty cool. Steve could take the theme and could have turned it into a masterpiece eight or ten years ago.)

James Brown….what an influence upon music!

Manfred, when you talk about music and how it dances, I think I’m beginning to understand what you mean. The dance is within your heart and soul as you hear the music….right? This dance is one of pure joy as the music reaches your most inner being. In the end, this is really all that matters. You know, we all feel this same “thing”. We all love music that causes this “dancing” within our souls. The difference between great music and music that is “not so great” is that we continue to have that dancing feeling for decades, which is what the music of Coleman promises. Until you and I die, we will never get tired of Coleman’s music….its just that rich and deep.

Once again, I couldn’t agree more about your perspective of Coleman. You express the words that so beautifully describe Coleman’s music. To say that, “Coleman’s lines produce the best “dance-feeling in my nervous system” is a rather intense and intuitive statement. Steve’s music isn’t just static, but it is dynamic, as it lives within our beings and souls as if a living creation. Steve’s music isn’t something that we listen to, but it is something that we experience and become a part of….it has become a personal gift to me.

Manfred, may you have the best of days!

Respectfully,

Scott

Joined : 11 Sep 2006 Posts : 137

Sir,

I neglected to mention the drummer that I recently discovered.

http://drummerworld.com/Videos/nattownsleymd1.html

I think that this drummer might give you the groove that we are both looking for.

Nathaniel Townsley is a very "naturaural" drummer that is confident within his own level of skills and abilities. Behind a great drummer is a great band! Nat is very confident, and that's what I look for in any musician!

Manfred, I look forward to your resonse.

Respectfully,

Free

Hi Scott!

The idea of „dancing lines“ may be a bit crazy but it is just the way I experience it – in a rather concrete way: like the flight of a bird is drawing curves in the sky. These curves produce a strong feeling of motion if I watch them. It is the same when I watch Michael Jordan in a huge jump throwing the ball. When Coltrane let fall down his lines in “Blues Minor” and brakes in a sharp curve it feels a bit like in a roller coaster. So I regard this kind of improvisations as a game playing with once sense of motion – I feel the motions of a dance even though I’m not dancing. It’s a dance in the head with a resonance in my body.

I like the music of James Brown since I know it. But I could not understand why many Jazz musicians appreciate it so much because there is not much happening except groove. Recently I read Vijay Ijer’s text and now I understand: I have to move my body to understand it – to really “hear” James Brown.

When I listen to a CD of Afro-Cuban “Los Munequitos” I hear the rhythms and the chants but I can see the dancers which are actually important because this music is a kind of “dance-drumming”. When I listen to Louis Armstrong with Hot Seven I think: How simple the rhythms are here in comparison with the Cuban music! But there is something else: Once I watched a video where Nicolas Payton is talking about the funerals in New Orleans: He plays a sad spiritual on trumpet (unaccompanied). And then the cheerful way back: He imitates the bass drum – boom, boom – and then he plays a nice swinging melody on trumpet (in the kind of Armstrong). Instantly I could imagine the people dancing in the streets. Suddenly the following thought came to my mind: There are no drums, there is only a trumpet but there is dance – the dance is in the melody-line! So I began listening to solos more in this way.

To say it simply: When I want to have a bit fun by moving my body I listen to James Brown (for example). When I want to participate in really great feelings of motion I listen to the great Jazz masters.

That’s only one aspect but a very important aspect for me.

Thank’s for the hint at Townsley – I like his playing!

I’m glad about your precious activity here.

Smile

Joined : 11 Sep 2006 Posts : 137

What amazing expressions of thought.

Dancing is a great analogy to explain music, in fact, it might be the best one for both you and I. If I may, let me add to what you are saying, and again, this is how we define great musicians.

With two people dancing, there is an interaction between two people. There are movements between the two and a great pair of dancers must always work together, not independently. Their movements must be precise, together and without blemish for them to be great. Music is the same way (for me).

I love how musicians are able to interact with each other, responding and reacting to something that they’ve just heard. And what’s so amazing is that they are able to respond in the exact moment that the response or reaction is needed. How incredible is that?

Take a look at Dejohnette and Gary Peacock in the first video (much thanks to Charles and Zeruyo for waking me up to Dejohnette). These dancing exchanges between Peacock and Dejohnette are amazing. In this setting you have dances within dances. First, there are exchanges between Peacock and Dejohnette, but there are also exchanging movements within Dejohnettes limbs alone. The dancing is all throughout Dejohnettes body….the right hand on ride, the left hand on snare and right foot on drum. Dejohnette is a master of creating dancing exchanges between limbs.

http://drummerworld.com/drummers/Jack_DeJohnette.html

But check out the exchanges between the right and left hand of Dejohnette in the third video. This is some amazing work and in fact is my favorite of the three available videos.

Back to Bob Dylan. Bob and Steve are probably two of my favorite musicians as of today. Shocking? Yes, I’m sure you are, but I think that your dancing analogy is perfect to describe what is happening with the best of Dylan’s music and music in general. Wait, let me take a step backwards…When I speak of Dylan and his music, I’m not talking about the folk singer, or the blues player, or the rock musician, rather, I’m talking about the Dylan from the late 70’s and early 80’s. These would be classified as his “Christian” years. So as I speak of Dylan, you’ve got to understand that I refer to a specific set of music that you’ve probably never heard. The traditional Dylan songs that we all know are songs that I don’t particularly enjoy. I like the music that he wrote that the world generally doesn’t know about…that’s where the hidden gems are found.

Ok, Dylan. He wrote some pieces that are quite simply incredible. There are what seem to be subliminal messages, or arrangements that rest within the background of the main sound of his music. So you have to listen carefully, and when you do, all of a sudden you hear an amazing arrangement as a whole where each musician is interacting and intertwining themselves with the rest of the musicians. All of a sudden, the Hammond B3 organ becomes part of his musical dance. The guitar track in the left channel suddenly becomes an important part of the arrangement…and it all moves forward from there. It’s a dance, music is clearly a mental and emotional dance where beats, rhythms and pitch resonates throughout our minds. How notes are put together hits something deep within us as individuals and we either respond with a positive frame of mind or we react with disdain. This is why all music is subjective, as music is received as something personal, for we will either accept it or reject it at our own intellectual level. And this is why I ask the question, “How do YOU define a great musician”. Or, we could also ask ourselves, how do we define great music…it’s the same thing.

Off to work friend. Have a great day, wherever you are!

I’m not a musician and not a neurologist but I’m a bit interested in the question how music works in my perception. I think: There is no special sense of music in my nervous system. Music uses several senses: For example: the sense of human voices (to feel what a voice emotionally means even before I can understand the words is important in nature!), the sense of togetherness (group feeling – we only could survive in groups in nature), the sense of good motions (the only chance to survive), the sense of rhythms (which make timing possible), the sense of structures (which makes reality understandable and gives us the enormous amount of possibilities of acting and reacting that made the human beings so successful … maybe one part of it is the sense of numbers) …

… all these fundamental senses are combined with feeling of pleasure: the pleasure of good sounds (of a voice or of voices sounding together), the pleasure of moving (oneself or watching others, for example the flight of birds), the pleasure of rhythms (closely connected with motions), the pleasure of discovering structures (constantly we are trying to find them in daily life and we like to find them … for example in my thoughts right now … another example: I have noticed: when I’m writing in German I often tend to use 3 adjectives – 2 seem to be incomplete – “magic” of numbers) …

One special example: Once I watched a deer running very fast through the wood across a steep slope. I was fascinated by its motions and its skilfulness. Steve Coleman came to my mind: how he whizzes through the complex rhythms … I guess that musical perception is really connected with such natural things – and these things are connected with pleasures.

I guess that music plays with these pleasures. Jazz does it in a very natural and very extensive way. I think there is a strong ritual in it: acting together “in time” (improvising) above a strong rhythmic stream, showing once skills in acting in real time with style. In Vijay Ijer’s text I read the term “ring shout”: That’s it but I think it is more a “ring dance” (sometimes Jazz tend more to the “shout” - hot intonation, “Free Jazz”, sometimes more to the “dance” - Coleman). In this ritual many of the above mentioned elements of music come together in a very concentrated way. It is like “Congo Square” (I know Jazz didn’t come from there directly). When I watch the “Fnac”-recording (2006) I experience a sort of “Congo Square”: the strong rhythms, the good voices, the togetherness, the heating up, the solo performances in real time … the spirit of increased liveliness (creativity). – Naturally there are also other important aspects in Coleman’s music but that ritual is a very strong thing for me – “ancient to the future” (Art Ensemble Of Chicago).

One aspect: A great Jazz musician can organize a “Congo Square” and can act in the ring in a way that aficionados of this ritual are fascinated and shout: yeah, that’s really great! No other thing in music (great compositions etc.) can substitute these pieces of real life – because life is the strongest thing! So I think.

Joined : 11 Sep 2006 Posts : 137

Manfred, you are a deep thinker...really deep. Its a bit too late for me to even try to respond to what you said. I'll have to pour over what you've written and try to undestand better what you are saying. Don't get me wrong, you wrote very clearly. You're just what I would call a musical intellectualist.

This has turned out to be a deeper thread than I had ever considered it might. You're really helping me to learn more about music, as you all have, which is why I am here. I am a humble student in many ways.

More later, sir!

Have a good day...

It is only a game with thoughts and words. I need any activity relating to music. I can not be only a receptor. I am not a musician and I have no musical knowledge. Hence thinking in my way is the only thing I can do ... maybe my thoughts are sometimes a bit right but they are always wrong too … Crying or Very sad