Bilbo

Originally from Cwmbran, I did my first few hundred jazz gigs in Cardiff (Four Bars Inn and Sandringham Hotel, amongst others). Welcome.

Seems to me a matter of perception. If something is Art, it can also be entertaining. It can be good art and bad entertainment, or bad Art and good entertainment. At best, it is good Art and good entertainment. It can communicate successfully to one person or to millions. It can have a utilitarian purpose (e.g. pottery) or not (e.g. origami?). If it has a commercial purpose, it may still be Art or it may not. In art college terms, is it Graphic Art or Fine Art? One is craft whilst the other Art. Both are creative. An artwork can be Fine Art but, if used as a chocolate box lid, becomes something else. Music is no different. Some music is Art (say Bjork, Evan Parker, Stravinsky, Coltrane) some arguably isn't (say Stock, Aitken and Waterman). Some is probably both (Kate Bush? Talking Heads? King Crimson? Kenny Wheeler?). Either way, its not my decision. At best, it is about consensus - if more than one person thinks its Art, then it must be. Or not. Who said a pile of bricks is Art? I suspect it was a minority view. What about action Art? Performance Art? Good Art or bad? It has to be subjective (and culturally defined?). Whenever someone tries to draw a circle around what defines Art, someone else will step onto the line and over it. Is music Art? Some of it is.

[quote name='Pete Academy' post='1086029' date='Jan 11 2011, 08:28 PM']How about you record and post your version, and I'll post mine? [/quote] I'll see what I can do with Cubase and a drum machine. And the drummer in the function band has a Zoom thing so can record the tune on the next gig (its not until April tho'). Should be interesting!! A Chic duel

Me neither and I still can't afford £50 (plus travel) for a lesson

Just got an email for a wedding gig - we will be doing Good Times

[quote name='LawrenceH' post='1085754' date='Jan 11 2011, 05:24 PM']By the way and in the politest possible way I think your analysis of the line misses the point entirely. My wife (many years of ballet/jazz/modern/fusion dancing) thinks it's a brilliant line justifying that with a totally different set of criteria related to how the rhythmic interplay between instruments creates contrast, space and emphasis for moving the body. In contrast she has no time for things like Coltrane because that element of jazz has been subsumed! It's much easier to do analyses based on harmony/scales but quite often they're just not relevant.[/quote] You are not seriously suggesting that Coltrane and Chic have a different target audience, are you? God forbid . My dig a Good Times is simply a wry dig at the deification of certain bands/certain songs and lines as 'the best' or as 'definitive etc when it is so, err, unremarkable. I know perfectly well that Good Times will fill a dance floor and A Love Supreme would clear it but, if you want to fill a dance floor I recommend I Will Survive, Summer Loving, Come On Eileen or any one of 1,000,000 songs. All you need is a backbeat and familiarity. Good Times is perfectly adequate for the purpose described but 'the greatest'? Hard for me to see why that over any one of 100 other disco hits. (Actually, my Brazillian band always turns heads when we do a bossa version of 'How Deep Is Your Love' by the Bee Gees - they're disco, aren't they?)

I know what you think I mean but you are wrong

[quote name='dlloyd' post='1085552' date='Jan 11 2011, 02:43 PM']Having fun is where it's at.[/quote] Fun is overated. I think it should be something you have when you are doing something satisfying and of value and not just an end in itself. Fun, on its own, can be pretty boring and aimless. I never watch comedies because they don't seem to have much point

Its an inevitable consequence of repetition. Music is a mixture of tensions and release and getting the right mix of tension and release is what defines a good piece of music. Most people would say 'Twinkle, Twinke' lacked harmonic, melodic and rhythmic interest but most people would also balk at Even Parker's The Snake Decides (20 minutes of circular breathing on sopranon saxophone with no conventional harmonic or melodic content). Everyone has their own 'levels' which determines what they prefer to listen to and like. But these 'levels' are always changing and more so in musicians who play and listen more than the average punter. So, if we play a cover often, it will usually pale after a while due to the fact that our needs change whilst the tune doesn't. That's why I like jazz. It makes the journey with you. The further out you need to go, the further it will allow you. Doing covers 'accurately' is more of a static thing and fails to move with you into new listening territory.

I also think Fish and Chips is completely overrated = If Good Times is great dance music, great dance music is an oxymoron Pretentious? Moi?

High on everything except emotional connection.

My view on Good Times? Its the classic problem with dance orientated music. 'Great' line (is it?) but the tune is actually bubble gum. [i]Good times, These are the good times, Leave your cares behind, These are the good times Good times, These are the good times, Our new state of mind, These are the good times Happy days are here again, The time is right, For makin' friends ,Let's get together, How 'bout a quarter to ten, Come tomorrow, Let's all do it again Boys will be boys, Better let them have their toys, Girls will be girls, Cute pony tails and curls Must put an end, To this stress and strife, I think I want to live the sporting life A rumor has it that, It's getting late, Time marches on, Just can't wait The clock keeps turning, Why hesitate, You silly fool, You can't change your fate Let's cut a rug, A little jive and jitterbug, We want the best, We won't settle for less Don't be a drag, Participate, Clams on the half shell, And roller-skates , Roller-skates[/i] Is it just me or is it junior school level poetry? I particularly liek the rhyming of boys and toys, girls and curls, late and wait.... Every rhyme is entirely predictable (the first thing that would come into most people's heads) and forced. It isn't Mark Twain, is it? At least Joni Mitchell doesn't have to worry about losing a grammy to Chic. I always think that the best songs are made up of great music and great lyrics. Good Times is essentially two riffs which are 4 bars long, both rifs are against the same two diatonic chords a perfect fourth apart. Probably the first chord change anyone with a guitar ever learns? The only thing that is even credible is the bass line and that, whilst it is iconic, is three notes on the beat followed by what is essentially a dorian minor scale (EF#GABC#DE) followed, in turn, by a slightly more interest lick on the A using the sixth and dominant seventh. The singers are [i]really[/i] lightweight (would never have made boot campm on X Factor) and the whole thing is just not very interesting. For me, and I stress again that this is and can only ever be subjective, Good Times evidence what I consider to be one of the maladys of musicians; we like the part so the whole tune must be good. Its a great bass line on a crap song. Like a lot of Jamerson, Marcus Miller, Pino etc - great players playing great lines on crap songs. Sax players like songs that make the sax player look good, as do guitarists, drummers and everyone else. Bass players are no different. Is that specific enough, Pete? I understand that people like it but they also like Mustang Sally and Moondance. This is as bad.

[quote name='fatback' post='1084252' date='Jan 10 2011, 02:29 PM']Interesting point about not going back. I'm inclined to keep going back until I can get everything right, but it's hugely time consuming. Probably memory comes into play too much as well.[/quote] You are learning to [i]read[/i] not to [i]play[/i]. If you are on a gig, you don't get a second chance but what you do get is to get used to the process of transferring what you see to what you do with yoiur hands. If you keep stopping and going back, you are focussing on the [i]content [/i]and not the [i]process[/i] of reading. Best reading lesson I ever had, with a guy called Dan Quinton from Otis Grand and the Dance Kings, was him putting new stuff in front of me one after the other without any breaks for half an hour. If I stalled, he took the chart away and put another one up, no comment. Completeley exhausting but a massive learning experience.

It depends on a whole lot and especially the gig. I once got called for a one off £120 gig playing 32 cover tunes, 90% of which I had never played and the rest rarely. I settled for 'good enough' because, a, it was a one off gig and I was not going to need these tunes again, b, I didn't have the time to learn that many tunes that well and, c, the audience would not actually have been listening to that level of detail (a wedding). Other gigs require a greater investment. Its like all walks fo life. If I am speaking to a room full of people, the amount pf preparation will depend on the context, the people, what's at stake etc. I guess, if you are in a tribute band (:vomit:), you will need to nail the details but if, like me, you primarily play jazz, 'learning' the bass lines is anathema. Covers are a grey area as some are about replication whilst others are about interpretation. Personally, I would love to get to a point where I never play anyones lines but my own but that's nirvana I am never likely to reach. I guess it matters a lot sometimes and matters less at others. The only driver should be 'is the music the best it can be'. As for whether or not Bernard Edwards line on Good Times is perfect and cannot be improved? It isn't and it could. This is art not science. Good times is, subjectively, a shallow, nothing little tune (listen to the lyrics, ffs) that all of us could quite easily live without. And, yes, I play it on every wedding gig.

A little and often, I say. Just get anything in bass clef and bang through it. Its familiarity with the written form that allows you to improve. Print off anything that is transcribed here (its all free) and go for it, one after the other - don't go back and rectify your mistakes as you go, just keep reading, reading, reading and not learning the pieces. At this point, accuracy is not as important as keeping going!!! It will come but it takes time and practice - no short cuts here.

Its a tough one, isn't it? I get the 'they spend it on other things' argument but I also know that some of these 'other things' are necessary in different ways (we, as a society, have a complex relationship with smoking and alcohol, for instance). I also wanted to stress that I agree that the fees charged by teachers are generally legit in that £25 - £50 is a lot less than I would expect to pay a mechanic/plumber/solicitor/private tutor of any other subject etc but I also know that many people would try to fix their own car/do their own plumbing/apply got legal aid or just go without and watch their cars/homes etc fall apart slowly. I also agree that weekly lessons are not always necessary, particularly for adult learners. I also like Jake's skill swapping idea (any gardeners want bass lessons? ). Keep the perspectives/ideas coming

As some will know, I have recently taken up the double bass and the issue of lessons has reared its ugly head. I am a staunch advocate of getting lessons and see the value of a teacher for increasing the efficiency of your learning. Trouble is, its too expensive (£25, £ 30 or even £50 an hour for an expert teacher). This is not a criticism of the cost of lessons, they compare with other professional 'tradespeople'; its just a reflection of what I see as a class divide in the education of musicians. If you are fortunate enoough to have wealthy parents or to be wealthy yourself, you can get a teacher easily enough. If, however, like me, you can't afford it, what do you do. I can afford a lesson for £30 or so; maybe two a year but I certainly could not justify spending £120 a month on weekly lessons that would define a classical musician or even £30 a month (some months would be ok, others not). One intermittent lesson has value but what could we achieve if it was every week? It feels like music tuition is for the middle classes and not for everyone. This is not a poor me thread, however. In my jazz research, I have come across a number of US based initiatives to provide free musical education to young players (Jazzmobile is only one of the most famous - top professionals like Jimmy Heath teaching kids to play etc). My socialist values lead me to want to offer free tuition to anyone who can't afford it. I am, however, concerned that, a, I do not take business away from people who are trying to make a living and, b, I do not want to be taken advantage of by people who can afford it but want a freebee (I don't teach students for money, BTW). I have thought about 'leisure learning' through a local college ( a 'music theory for rock musicians' course or 'bass players for beginners etc')but they also charge fees that, IMO, disadvantaged kids could in no way afford (£60 a term). What do people think? Can anyone see a way to make this happen without compromising anyone, including me? I am seeking serious thoughts on this, guys, and want to know what people think; teachers and students alike.

Buy a copy of Jazzwise or Jazztimes, follow the reviews/articles/adverts/websites and get onto Spotify to put some names in. Miles Davis: Kind of Blue, Workin', Steamin', Cookin', Relaxin', Miles Ahead, Birth Of The Cool, Nerfertiti, Miles Smiles, Sketches of Spain, Porgy & Bess John Coltrane: Blue Train, A Love Supreme, Giant Steps Sonny Rollins: Saxophone Collosus, Tenor Madness Duke Ellington: almost anything Count Basie: The Atomic Mr. Basie Wynton Marsalis: Standard Time, Live At Blues Alley, Citi Movement Chris Potter: Gratitude Joe Lovano: Landmarks Dave Holland: Anything Marc Johnson: Bass Desires Chick Corea: Trio Music That'll keep you entertained for a few days

[quote name='Earbrass' post='1079955' date='Jan 6 2011, 03:10 PM']Hi Bilbo, When you say "the region I work in", are you speaking geographically or musically? Just curious! E[/quote] Geographically. Suffolk/East Anglia has almost no 'local' jazz scene to speak of (there are visiting acts but they are often the same old same old). The jazz gigs people around here do tend to be more standards/function band orientated. There are players here but not many (barely any) gigs that allow for anything 'radical'. There are early indications of a change but only time will tell if it changes for the better.

Shameless plug for an old friend This month I downloaded the Osian Roberts/Steve Fishwick CD 'With Cedar Walton'. I knew Osian in Cardiff when he was about 14/15 and he was great then (he played at my wedding) but he has gone on to become a great UK based tenor saxophonist. I think he won some sort of Daily Telegraph Young Jazz Musician award but can't be sure (it doesn't matter anyway). This Cd was recorded with Walton and Peter Washington (bass) and has a great 50s hard bop feel to it. Great writing and great playing. Check it out if you get a chance.

[quote name='blamelouis' post='1079193' date='Jan 5 2011, 09:25 PM']Thats a great track Bilbo i'll have to get that off Itunes .[/quote] Its off his 'The Proper Angle' cd.

[quote name='lowdown' post='1079059' date='Jan 5 2011, 07:40 PM']Just seen this...[Wrong spelling in the post title by the way ] R.I.P[/quote] Thanks for that, Garry. I used to live near Farnborough and called him Charles Farnborough for years before I 'noticed' my error. Fixed.

Nobody got anything to say? Disappointing

At first it was Chris Squire, Geddy Lee, Steve Harris and Jack Bruce. As fusion started to reveal its treasures to me, it was Jaco, Jeff Berlin, Percy Jones and Jimmy Johnson Then it was Marc Johnson, Dave Holland, Miroslav Vitous & Steve Swallow Now? Reginald Veal, Milt Hinton, Steve Rodby, Israel Cachao Lopez, Charlie Haden and Paul Chambers. Also Edgar Meyer. I have come to learn, after 30 years of playing, that flash playing is not necessarily where the music is. It is in the relationship between the bass and all the other voices at play. There is section of Porgy and Bess called 'Buzzard Song' where Paul Chambers plays a unison part alongside tuba player Bill Barber (2.24 - 4.00). It is not hard to play, in a contemporary sense, but the pairing of Chambers and Barber for this line is wonderfully musical choice by arranger Gil Evans. When I listen to it, I hear the notes not the bass/tuba. The rest of teh Gil Evans/Miles Davis canon shows Chambers exceptional musicality without featuring him in a single solo/grandstanding setting. Same with Steve Rodby. Lots of Pat Metheny stuff woudl not work without him but he never solos. That is what I have come to love in the bass; its ability to contribute essential elements to the best music the world has ever heard without anyone ever actually noticing.

Having a record out is no indicator of quality. If these guys are so hot, why are they spending their time at open mic nights? If I may say so, and I do so with absolute respect, your self talk is atrocious You are talking yourself into believing everyone else is wonderfully talented and you are s***. If your singer songwriter friend is as good as you say he is, why would he work with you if you couldn't cut it? You need to trust that he knows what he wants from you and that, as he doesn't kick you into touch, you must be delivering at at least an acceptable level. Give yourself a break. Its not paranoia; its low self esteem. Trust me; they are MANY guys out there that can't play for toffee who are making a living at it. Don't keep beating yourself up.