Jazz for aficionados

Hi O-10:  what is "wack," to use your phrase, is this comment of yours:  "The only thing you can practice is a written piece of music, or you can practice familiarity with your musical instrument."  This is so wrong I am not even sure where to start - it shows your almost total lack of knowledge of what you are trying to speak of.  

Your next sentences:  "This is what it is about; to have a musical idea in your head, and to make your instrument audibly produce that sound exactly as you hear it in your head. That means your brain extends through your hands into the musical instrument and the precise sound you want to hear comes out. The more I talk about this the clearer it becomes. Simply because others don't believe what I'm saying, only means they can't do it."  

Honestly, O-10, any good student musician, and certainly all professionals, can do what you are talking about here, no matter what type of music they play.  Your last sentence above is truly absurd for this reason.    

Frogman is bothered by your arrogance.  That is not what bothers me - what bothers me is your anti-intellectualism.  Your "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."  You clearly love music very much, and you have two professionals trying to explain to you things about it that you clearly have no idea about, and you just don't care.  That's very depressing to me.  Now you will probably want me to go away from your thread again.  

@learsfool 

***** Honestly, O-10, any good student musician, and certainly all professionals, can do what you are talking about here, no matter what type of music they play.  Your last sentence above is truly absurd for this reason.*****

You need to read Nica's book.   Quite a few of the Jazz musicians in her book, and we are speaking of some of the best, said being able to play what was in their head was  their most wished for ability.

When if come to arrogance, you are without peer on this thread. Calling a person 'arrogant', just for disagreeing with you, is in itself, the height of arrogance.

Cheers

Learsfool, I don't want you to leave this thread, but if you and Frogman make an absurd statement in unison, the fact that you both are accomplished musicians, will make it no less absurd.

You can not practice "improvisation"; how can you answer a question that has not even been asked? And you are saying that you can practice answering questions that have not been asked. If that's not absurd, I would like to know what is. "Improvisation" is spontaneously playing music, the right music, that fits in after the soloist before you. Now explain to me, how you can practice that?

You go on to state,
"Honestly, O-10, any good student musician, and certainly all professionals, can do what you are talking about here, no matter what type of music they play. Your last sentence above is truly absurd for this reason."

That statement was too "wack" for words. You are saying any student musician can do what Oscar Peterson, Sonny Rollins, and J. J. Johnson wished they could do; they wished they could transfer their thoughts to their musical instrument.

That last paragraph is almost comical: You are bothered by my "anti- intellectualism", and Frogman is bothered by my arrogance. As they used to say in USAF, My heart pumps purple panther piss for the both of you.


Enjoy the music.

Hi O-10 and Rok - in the sentences I quoted, it seemed obvious that O-10 was speaking of sound, not thoughts.  Any good musician can re-create the sound that is in his/her head.  We all do it all the time, with every note that we play, whether it is written down or not (and by the way, all musicians play many, many notes every day that are not written down, as part of their daily practice routines - making up their own variations of technical exercises is just one example).  This is a separate thing from whatever music/notes they are actually playing, though the two are of course directly related.  So it seems that I misunderstood you somewhat.  I am not familiar with the quotes you are speaking of from these musicians - I will say that your interpretation of them I suspect is incorrect, as it doesn't make much sense the way you state it.  On many levels, of course everyone can translate their thoughts to the instrument, otherwise they wouldn't be able to play it.   What I think they may mean, based on what little you have said about it, is that they have more musical thoughts in their head in the moment than they can translate directly to the solo they are playing in that moment.  That would make sense, if that is what they mean (which, by the way, is yet another way of saying they need more practice with improvisation).   Another thing that they may mean, again without knowing the context, is that one simply cannot play two different things at once, and that they wish they could.  Many jazz players try to solve that problem nowadays by experimenting with loops, so they can overlay all of their ideas about a particular tune at once.  The drawback is that this takes time, and can sound very repetitive to the audience.  One of my best friends, an incredible bass player, has made some really cool experiments in performance with loops.   Notice - he is experimenting - practicing!!   Is either or both of these thoughts more along the lines of what you meant?  

I find nothing arrogant in Learsfool's comments, and his very appropriate comment about "anti-intellectualism" could be considered (speaking for myself) as a gentler comment about simple lack of intellect.  To those who may be offended by that comment and who consider them arrogant I can only say that there are limits to everything.  Acknowledging the limitations inherent in getting to know someone only through a forum such as this and because of the importance on simple respect, I can honestly say that I hope I am mistaken in that last determination.

O-10, you are wrong and it is obvious that either I am correct in that last determination or you are simply paying lip service when you refer to the Ted Rosenthal link as a "good link"; had you really read it and understood, at least part of it, you would not continue to be so stubborn about these views.  

My challenge to you continues to be for you to please address the issues of what all the quoted musicians have had to say on this matter; not with simple "they say absurd things", "they're wrong", "my friend didn't practice", etc..retorts, but with substantive explanations and examples.  Hiding behind the subjectivity bullshit doesn't hold water.  If you don't feel you know how to speak the language of music well enough to do so, I assure you that it quite possible to do so via musical examples.  

It's very common in human nature for individuals to become so invested in a personal reality that adds validity and credibility to their sense of self that they shut down to the idea that they may have been mistaken about something for a very long time.  Not being exactly a spring chicken myself and having lost an elderly parent very recently I understand how that concept becomes more and more of a challenge as we age.  One of the things that may be more subtle to grasp and which is inherent in all of this, and something that every musician who strives for musical improvement holds on to, is the life-long idea that there is always more to learn and understand about an art form.  

I suspect that, at least on some level, O-10, you and perhaps others as well wish that Learsfool and I would just go away.  Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on one's point of view) there is too much at stake when some are promulgating ideas about music that simply aren't true.  Sure, it's very tiresome and frustrating, but sorry guys I'll be lurking around to at least try to set the record straight; and, I assure that I only try and pick my battles when it comes to this stuff.