Jazz for aficionados

Rok, you have dug your heels in as you often do and are not hearing the message. That's fine. For anyone else who cares about the truth : No, jazz musicians are not "better". BTW, I read nothing in Pimentel's article that contradicts anything I said.

**** All the so-called highly proficient player has to do, is play what's on the paper. ****

This is so simplistic that it borders on the embarrassing; you really should aim for something higher than that.

Cheers.

I read it Rok, whoever this Pimentel dude is he should be nominated for the fool of the year award , give Rush L. some competition.

Not being contrary just for the sake of it. I will try one more time.

We are talking about Professional players in both genres. Players at the top of their game. I will assume that the Classical players went thru some sort of selection process, that determined that the player was good enough to play in a top tier orchestra.

When they prepare for a performance of, say LvB's 5th, all the players have seen the score before, and have played the music before, at every stage of their career. The conductor does not have to teach or show the players how to play the music.

He will go thru the music and point out the points in the score where he wants certain things. This is his interpretation. The players then make notes on the score. He Assumes they can read the music and play it.

All they have to do is play whats on the paper, taking in consideration the conductor's wishes.

If they can't do that, they are not going to part of an orchestra in the first place.

So, they have been playing forever, he has had teachers at every step of his development, they have been playing the same music (the standard repertoire) that's been around for hundreds of years, the conductors guides them as what he wants in certain passages, and there are over 99 other people playing with him/her. Those 100+ players make wonderful music.

The Jazz Player? I am speaking of small group, not big band.
His entire career and his degree of success depends solely on how the public, the audience, sees and hears him. He must connect. No conductor to guide him or suggest how to play certain passages. No 100+ players to shield him. Can't make it playing just 'standards'. When he solos, he is out there alone. Does not receive a salary, no union, no public financial support, He creates the music as he plays it. He does not create, he does not eat.

Those two to Five players, small group, make music that is downright amazing given the number of players involved. Amazing!! My latest CD is proof of that. Kenny Barron and Dave Holland. Just Two players, making magic.

And if all that weren't enough, the genre is under attack by media and critic backed noise makers.

In my universe, that makes the Jazz players better. It is truly, a survival of fittest situation.

Cheers

BTW, both gurus said that the horn players in the French group (water/fireworks thingy) at The BBC Proms, were out of tune!! Huh??? How can that be?

I have read several reviews where the Berliners and Karajan were accused of being out of tune!! WTF!!!

Maybe these folks are not as "Highly Proficient" and "Masters of their instruments" as one might think.

I soldier on, because I know I am being tested.

Cheers

Some sort of selection process ??
A classical player who wishes to be a soloist or a player in a top orchestra, goes through a "selection process" that lasts for years and years under pressure that causes many fine players to whither under.

It's like you got into med school, completed it and your internship, and then had to compete with a dozen other docs
in a hour oral exam where that decided which ONE of you
gets to practice medicine.

Frogman, I must admit, that never practicing on the first post was misleading.

Enjoy the music.