Skip to main content

To this day, I still love Led Zeppelin, Paul McCartney, The Stones, The Doors, Janis Joplin, Jimi Hendrix... and of course The Beatles… and many other pop bands. I love them just as much as I do any music. They all played perfectly (to me). And today with my ears having decades of learning, listening and educating, I find this music to be even more astonishing.

However, I tend to only have this feeling and love for the ones that are real creations; not some "boy band" or manufactured corporate entity created for the purpose of selling product but those that were created in the garages and minds of the performers themselves. There are people like Eminem who I find extremely interesting. Though the message may be a bit dark and the artists' motives might be questionable, his art is very creative. Heck, if you just take away the words and play what he's wrapping on a conga drum, you've got a groove that's enormous! I guess I look at the creativeness more than the technical extent or message of the music. How about Tool? Have you ever transcribed a drum solo from that "Cat"? He's pretty darn interesting. (I attached one here just for fun. I transcribed it years ago for one of my students - I may not have all the notes transcribed perfectly but it's pretty close and this stuff is extremely interesting both artistically and mathematically). As a matter of fact, I've heard great music in lots of different genres and have come to the conclusion that musicians' likes and dislikes based on entire styles of music is a type of prejudice not preference.

Not all "country" music is bad and not all "pop" music is bad. If you think in categories or styles too much, you're setting yourself up for limitations. In addition, similar prejudices are also very strong within styles of music too. For instance, within the style of "Country Music", there are attitudes of dislike for the "pop country" or country that doesn't incorporate the "right" kind of back beat. Within the genre of Jazz there are also prejudices that are limited to a certain "swing" or type of sound that incorporates a group of notes that create historically recognizable licks and another sector that might look at those same licks as uncreative rehashing of what has already been said. Yet, both are incorrect and small-minded in my opinion.

I believe there is a legitimate art and language to both and all forms of music in which an honest effort has been put forth to create it. All we have to do as listeners and performers is learn to enjoy the essence of what has been created.

I wrote something a while back about Evelyn Glennie and how she has found a very unique bridge of expression between her (not able to hear) and us (able to hear). I believe there is something in the pattern, feel and rhythm of music that exists within the overall art of music that transcends and overcomes individual components such as hearing, notes, rhythm and harmony. So, for music to be "good" or "great", it doesn't have to have the harmonic richness of Bill Evans or the rhythmic feel of Elvin Jones. Maybe it just needs to be heard with open-minded ears until it's beauty is located. That doesn't mean that everything created is good either. It just means that we shouldn't decide what is and what isn't good based on predetermined judgments due to style or preset criteria of any kind.

Does that make any since to anyone? Just had to get it out.

Supporting Files

Comments

Marie-Noëlle Thu, 11/06/2008 - 16:28

I’ve also grown up with very different types of music, coming from my parents' dinning room (church music, classical, French song writers…) or from the bedroom door of my brother (pop-rock, progressive rock, jazz rock, heavy metal…).

Yes, I do believe in all of them you’ll find “easy” stuffs, and in some truly creative and inspiring music… and even sometimes in one same artist’s life.

Church music looks simple for everyone to sing, but some tunes are truly thoughtful, in harmonic and lyrics. Classical music is such a huge and ancient reservoir of master pieces! Song writers (from any country) also have fade examples as well as true poets and interpreters (Jacques Brel, Georges Brassens…)

I started listening to rock with a French band named Telephone (my first gig at 12!). Today I believe their first albums had true meaning, deep sense of music, but that with years they had lost their soul.

Progessive rock has taken a very important part in my musical education, mainly with the group Genesis I’m a huge fan of. And there again, you’ll find supporters of the early years with Peter Gabriel, and younger addicted to the Phil Collins period. I believe there are great stuffs out of each, with better written songs than others in each period. It’s through this music that I started listening to more complex tunes, eg. stuffs with 7 beats. My bro, as drummer would of course play an important role!

I had my heavy metal period (!). Well, don’t they all look like stupid long heard youngsters? But in such provocative bands as Iron Maiden you’ll discover very complex and greatly played tunes.

Jazz-rock was of course the transition to jazz for me. Bands like Uzeb (Canada) were a link with jazz violinist Didier Lockwood, himself a link with other jazz musicians, etc…

Someone counting in my musical life had understood what you mean John: vibist Norbert Lucarain. When he first took his father’s vibes around 14, he had never listened to Bobby, Gary, Milt, or any other vibes players. He dug his music and inspiration in the best of all the musics he had been listening, and listened in all these years. Hence his very independent and specific playing. A great example of mind opening for me too!

Well, wasn’t it a long reaction… to a long post of yours John? :o)

Who’s next?

mikepinto Thu, 11/06/2008 - 16:29

I think it might come down to the performer being honest about what they are performing. If its really what they hear and feel and they the ability to express that well through an instrument then it will probably speak well to a lot of listeners. maybe?

-www.mikepinto.net

jamesshipp Fri, 11/07/2008 - 09:42

I really believe you can tell when music is of high quality, in just about any style, and that's what I'm a fan of. I like stuff done well... show me the best sewer in the world, or the most artful drug dealer... it's always interesting.

I may have my predilections when it comes to styles, instrumentations, etc, but they're much less important to me as a listener now than when I was younger. As for folks who say things like "I don't care for jazz" or "I think country music is bad"... this, to me, is not much different than saying "I don't like Puerto Ricans," or "I don't think Danes are as worth checking out as Finns." I think it speaks to the same exact kind of ignorance and insecurity.

Of course it's not as loaded and doesn't have the same potential to hurt and cause trouble in society, but the idea is the same; here's this thing that's evolved over a very long period of time to just BE what it is, a musical style or a race/culture of people. It just IS, it's not to be liked or disliked. If your ears are open, you WILL find a country band you like, and there'll be some you don't think are that good. In the same way, you'll meet some Danes who are the salt of the earth, and occasionally, you'll meet one who's a jerk. (Though I can't say I have in the case of Danes.)

It's just that simple. Styles are what they are, and I don't think one can be of inherently higher quality than another. They are not good or bad.

As for not liking the SOUNDS in a musical genre, that's a taste you can always acquire. Imagine you don't really dig Indian food, but you get a gig over there for a year. Is it really possible that you'll return equally put off by spicy curries, sour tamarind, etc? If you did, would it be because there's something wrong with that nation's ancient culinary style, or with you? Same thing's true of English punk rock and Japanese gagaku music. Eventually, your ears adapt to the unfamiliar sounds... eventually it starts to like them. Every time.

JAmes

Access

Lesson Category