I should probably be trying to promote myself exclusively here, but once in a while I stumble across something that just has to be shared.
James Conway is a Chicagoan. He plays Celtic music and Blues. One of the instruments that he's incredibly proficient with is the harmonica, which is how I stumbled on his YouTube videos. In this video he just goes so far outside the box ('which box?' ANY box!) that it really captured my interest. You'll hear harmonica, some incredible 'jaw harp', Tuvan Throat Singing and some more harmonica. Wow.
James' website is at www.jamesconway.net
UPDATE: 1/1 I just received 'Mouth Box', James Conway's CD. Wow, there's some incredible music on this disc, masterfully performed. I think it's fair to say that James Conway is every bit as good as (if not better than) any Irish Trad player I've ever heard, and an incredibly good harmonica player. This is really advanced musicianship, and beautiful music; I highly recommend it.
Dec 23, 2007
Dec 5, 2007
Perspective
I visited Eugene Ryan's site recently, and before I could really dig into his site (which has been substantially updated since my last visit), I impulsively followed a link to this site about Jazz theory. I'm no music scholar, and while a lot of what I read in the sample chapter was interesting, much of it eluded me.
The concept that I really dug was in the section about Copyright law. The author says:
The legal position of the jazz artist’s work is nothing short of astounding. Put briefly, jazz does not exist. All that exists in music copyright are ‘compositions’.
Other art forms exist in Western culture, and are understood. The series of paintings of the west face of Rouen cathedral that Monet made from his draughty open window above a lingerie shop between 1892 and 1894, for instance. Each of these is understood by everyone to be a unique work, and of course, a work by Monet. In jazz terms, though, the unique work would be said to be the cathedral, and the royalties for each painting would go to the architect. If they were reproduced in a book, the printer would get a royalty too. In all cases, Monet would get nothing. This is because legally the song is a composition, a set text, and if a jazz musician performs the song, then in law, a composition is being played. If there is any recognition of the uniqueness of what the jazz player does, it is in the performance being called an ‘arrangement’ of the composition. If someone transcribes the solo though, it is the transcriber who gets the copyright, not the musician. That is what I mean when I say that the jazz musician’s art does not exist in law.
Powerful thinking. What if all of us (improvisational musicians) were recognized for the uniqueness of our contributions, rather than bound by copyright law as it is today?
The concept that I really dug was in the section about Copyright law. The author says:
The legal position of the jazz artist’s work is nothing short of astounding. Put briefly, jazz does not exist. All that exists in music copyright are ‘compositions’.
Other art forms exist in Western culture, and are understood. The series of paintings of the west face of Rouen cathedral that Monet made from his draughty open window above a lingerie shop between 1892 and 1894, for instance. Each of these is understood by everyone to be a unique work, and of course, a work by Monet. In jazz terms, though, the unique work would be said to be the cathedral, and the royalties for each painting would go to the architect. If they were reproduced in a book, the printer would get a royalty too. In all cases, Monet would get nothing. This is because legally the song is a composition, a set text, and if a jazz musician performs the song, then in law, a composition is being played. If there is any recognition of the uniqueness of what the jazz player does, it is in the performance being called an ‘arrangement’ of the composition. If someone transcribes the solo though, it is the transcriber who gets the copyright, not the musician. That is what I mean when I say that the jazz musician’s art does not exist in law.
Powerful thinking. What if all of us (improvisational musicians) were recognized for the uniqueness of our contributions, rather than bound by copyright law as it is today?
Dec 4, 2007
Rhythm
I've had occasion over the last couple of months to play with a number of different drummers. Funny how profoundly that rhythm can affect the sound & feel of the music. Ask 3 drummers to play a shuffle, a rumba, or a flat-tire, and you'll get 9 distinctly different feels, I guarantee. I suppose that's as it should be, really - if it wasn't, we'd all be more comfortable just playing with a drum machine (not something I want to do).
And there's no reason to expect drummers to be any different from any other musician - a guitar player, or harmonica player, for instance - with their own individual feel. Still, it's remarkable how much it changes the whole feel of the band to play with a different drummer. For instance, when I play with Jack City Band, I want to play horn lines. It's not because of the guitar, vocals, or bass. It's something about the way Terry plays (and my role in that band) just makes me want to play big strong punches, octave splits, and simple phrases, and try to make them sound like a sax or 'bone. I play more Low Octave harmonicas with them than any other situation I play in. There's a quality to his 'swing' that just makes me feel "Big Band" - very cool.
Some musicians I've heard that impress me most with their use of rhythm don't even have drummers. I'm referring to the wild, careening syncopation of Satan & Adam, Eric Noden's relentless pounding left foot, and Nathan James' thumping suitcase kick-drum (hey, check-out Ben's cool washtub bass!). These guys have affected me so much I have even started making percussion instruments from scraps & found objects myself to try to integrate into my own performances at some point.
I've also found myself obsessed with trying to find a drummer willing to strip his kit down to nothing, like the drummer that plays with Bharath and his Rhythm Four. Check this guy out - he doesn't even use a hi-hat! Bharath's band plays authentic Chicago blues, with a primitive, elemental flavor that is very unique in the 21st century - really some primal, deep stuff.
And there's no reason to expect drummers to be any different from any other musician - a guitar player, or harmonica player, for instance - with their own individual feel. Still, it's remarkable how much it changes the whole feel of the band to play with a different drummer. For instance, when I play with Jack City Band, I want to play horn lines. It's not because of the guitar, vocals, or bass. It's something about the way Terry plays (and my role in that band) just makes me want to play big strong punches, octave splits, and simple phrases, and try to make them sound like a sax or 'bone. I play more Low Octave harmonicas with them than any other situation I play in. There's a quality to his 'swing' that just makes me feel "Big Band" - very cool.
Some musicians I've heard that impress me most with their use of rhythm don't even have drummers. I'm referring to the wild, careening syncopation of Satan & Adam, Eric Noden's relentless pounding left foot, and Nathan James' thumping suitcase kick-drum (hey, check-out Ben's cool washtub bass!). These guys have affected me so much I have even started making percussion instruments from scraps & found objects myself to try to integrate into my own performances at some point.
I've also found myself obsessed with trying to find a drummer willing to strip his kit down to nothing, like the drummer that plays with Bharath and his Rhythm Four. Check this guy out - he doesn't even use a hi-hat! Bharath's band plays authentic Chicago blues, with a primitive, elemental flavor that is very unique in the 21st century - really some primal, deep stuff.
Wonder
This morning I followed a link to this article in the News Observer, entitled Harmonica of Wonder to read an interesting, although not entirely accurate article about Stevie Wonder & the chromatic harmonica (funny how reporters almost never get it all exactly right).
The comments offered by Rick Estrin at the end of the article are most profound.
The comments offered by Rick Estrin at the end of the article are most profound.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
