Other web Sites
Harmonica Blues  Harmonica Amps
Harmonica Links Harmonica Pages
• Archives Home
• Years
 · 1992
 · 1993
 · 1994
 · 1995
 · 1996
 · 1997 		 · 1998
 · 1999
 · 2000
 · 2001
 · 2002
 · 2003
 
Web HarpL
Ebay Searches:
Amps:
Microphones:
Effects:
Harmonicas and Gear:
Harmonica Music and Instruction:

 

 

Harp-L Archives

[Previous Message] [Next Message]
[Previous in Thread]
[Start of Thread] [End of Thread]

From: "Barry B. Bean"
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 96 08:40:32 -0500
Subject: RE: Wim and Jazz Chromatic

On Thu, 05 Sep 96 22:36:19 GMT, dijk~orldaccess.nl wrote:

>Concerning this subject, I wrote: Ofcourse Toots is not interested in another
>tuning system. His way of improvising is for 40% based on harmonica specific
>playing. I don't say that his playing is not interesting, but his note choice
>is very much influenced by the tuning system of the chromatic harmonica.

I'm still having a hard time figuring out why you feel it necessary
to make this point. ALL musicians' playing is influenced by the
tunings system of their instrument. Likewise, ANY tuning system is
going to affect note choice, including the one you advocate.

>and: A couple of weeks ago, I played with Jens Bunge at a session in Munich,
>and he also is a harmonica player coming from the 'Toots school of jazz sound'.
>We played a medium fast Rhythm Changes based song, and all of his fast runs
>were based on the tuning system of the chromatic harmonica..

Perhaps you'd prefer that he play fast runs based on the tuning
system of the C-melody saxophone?

>I am 25 years old. Very interested in contemporary classical music and in jazz
>music from the period starting at the end of the bebop era up till now-a-days.
>Toots Thielemans is the only jazz harmonica player who is admired by both non
>harmonica playing jazz listeners&musicians and harmonica players. The problem I
>discover by listening to other jazz harmonica players, is that it seems like
>they create a jazz harmonica SCHOOL which is not based on the historical
>development of jazz and its different styles but is based on the playing of
>Toots Thielemans.

I think you're off base here. Larry Adler, Hendrik Meurkens, and
Howard Levy (the examples that come to mind) have each carved out
substantial followings among non-harmonica players, and each has a
different sound than Toots. Each is also well rooted in a different
aspect of their entire musical tradition, and not simply the music of
Thielmans.

>Lets have a little look at the starting point of the history of the tenor
>saxophone.

Yes, let's!

>Therefore the two blacks who came to dominate the instrument, Coleman Hawkins
>and Lester Young, built the saxophone tradition on a white concept of jazz
>playing.

A "white" concept of jazz playing? Jazz has, from its very inception,
been such a mix of influences that any argument that includes white
playing and black playing as major factors is doomed to be an
over-simplification.

>Most legendary saxophone players in the jazz field can be divided ito the two
>different shcolls of Lester Young and Coleman Hawkins.

This is an ENORMOUS simplification. Besides the fact that Young and
Hawkins worked and recorded together, and influenced each other, no
player lives in a vacuum and claims solely one influence. Any great
player with a sense of history (redundant, I know) borrows a great
dfeal from both Prez and Bean.

> Lester Young was the
>undisputed headmaster of one school and Coleman Hawkins founded the other, but
>naturally both were influenced by their predecessors.
>Nevertheless they were unmistakable individualists, making such an impression
>on the post-war jazz generation, that one came to speak of two different
>lineages. On one hand there was the powerful playing of Coleman Hawkins, whose
>coarse tones and sweeping lines, built on the fullest possible exploration of
>the chord changes, was a direct influence on legendary Charlie Parker.

Bird borowed a great deal from Hawkins, but is more appropriately
considered a Young devotee, according to his own study and practice.
Charlie Parker spent a year memorizing the recorded output of Lester
Young and incorporated a huge number of quotes and idiosyncracies
into his own playing. Indeed, if slowed down, many bird solos can be
traced note-for-note to Young solos.

>Hawkins
>therefore was the godfather of Sonny Rollins, who in his turn inspired the
>great John Coltrane. On the other hand there was the light, simplified, but
>highly sophisticated playing of Lester Young that generated a style in which
>players like Wardell Gray, Stan Getz, Lee Konitz, Zoot Sims and Warne Marsh
>found their ideal means of expression. It is sad to discover that only a small
>portion of the public knows the name of Lester Young. (I did not invent this.
>This is written in books about the history of jazz).

For the record, the difference between Young and Hawkins is typically
summed up in more concrete terms. Lester Young was a very
melody-based player, and in many ways represented the ultimate
acheivement of the pre-bop jazz world. His improvisations weave
seamlessly in and out of the melody line.

Hawkins, on the other hand, put an unprecedented emphasis on the
chord structure and scales of the song. His scalar runs and arpeggios
defined a new approach to improvisation that changed the way we
approach nearly all improvisation today.

Clearly, its impossible to be a great player and ignore either the
melody or the scales. Any player venbturing beyond the printed page
must borrow from both, and attempts to divide the jazz world into
Bean-heads and Prez followers will miss a great deal.


BBB


- -
B.B. Bean - Have horn. Will travel.
http://www.cris.com/~Bbbean