next »

[Torobone]

This interview is quite interesting, as there have been discussions here on classical versus jazz. He states that classical is much more demanding for him.

Branford is playing with the Toronto Symphony this evening, Nov 24.

http://www.cbc.ca/video/news/audioplayer.html?clipid=2170471363

[bds9992]

Oooh, I shouldn't have said that.

It's up for all to see, and I said it and that's the end of it. But I don't really believe that.

Do forgive me. Was not in the right state of mind at the time.

[D Gibson]

This is not my opinion. The Marsalises have RUINED jazz. The classical world can HAVE them.

The primary understanding you have presented here is that classical and jazz music have something to do with each other as they are in their most pure forms, which is FALSE. I'm truly exhausted by the scores of classical musicians who mock us. You can't die playing classical music, which pre-empts my next statement:

I believe classical music to be CORNY.

We have much to discuss.

DG

[Torobone]

I find Branford to be quite critical sometimes, but with well formed comments. For a musician well known first in jazz, and now in classical music, he finds classical music more challenging.

I find it interesting that in both styles, he talks of having a conversation, and that it is harder when the notes are written out in classical music and everybody has an expectation of how it should be played.

In that some threads have called improvisation "creative", and classical music "re-creative", I find his view quite thought provoking. He mentions it being harder to create a conversation when the notes are on the page.

[GetzenBassPlayer]

I wonder if symphonic players who have gone the other direction, such as Joe Alessi and Ko-Ichiro feel the opposite? Maybe it is more of a case of being out of ones comfort zone than it is a case of either genre being more, or less, expressive.

[BGuttman]

The interview was broadcast last night on NPR on a program called "Q" with Jian Ghomeshi.  It's a CBC program that goes into the NPR feed (like another program called "As It Happens").  I heard about half of it.

He's going on about how we have great virtuosity today and no sense of music.  5 guys on a stage each playing his own "song".  Where's the discussion in the improv?

[Torobone]

Yes, Q is the program. It gets rather good guests, and it was somewhat famous for a time when Billy Bob Thornton did a caustic interview about Canadians followed by a poor performance with his band that evening. Jian Ghomeshi performed with a nationally popular group through the 90s, so he creates a good environment for interviews.

I was referring back to some TTF threads regarding jazz versus classical, where someone used the terms I mentioned in my post. Perhaps I misremember.

In my background, I played a lot with people in classical music who pursued the perfection required in classical music, but they did not work enough on individual expression within the framework of the music. They just seemed unhappy.

In listening to some of Branford's comments, it gave me reflection on how it can be different.

[BGuttman]

This is part of the reason why successful "crossover" artists are so rare.  Joe Alessi's performance in jazz is not that great, and Bill Watrous's performance in classical is also not that great.  But they are certainly wonderful in their regular genres.

I can think of only a few artists who worked well in both Jazz and Classical.  Benny Goodman recorded the Mozart and Weber clarinet concerti.  Wynton Marsalis playing the Haydn Concerto for Trumpet.  Yes, there are others.

I had a real treat when I was Artist Coordinator for the New England Brass Conference watching a quintet featuring Jim Pugh and Marcus Rojas (tuba) play both classical and jazz and make both convincing.

[D Gibson]

music, imho, is ALWAYS a conversation.  recently, i was asked to perform in an experimental theater piece wherein one of the two actors had to be able to play trombone.  the similarities to music were evident to me throughout the experience, which is what kept me from completely freaking out. 

during the play, the struggle was timing and inflection.  how do i act and react in ways that are sincere to the moment?  when the character's actions are predetermined, it's more difficult to inject that honesty/sincerity into the moment.  one must seem as though they're struggling to cope with a reality that has been rehearsed.  the key was listening...timing...understanding the motivation of my character.  i was anxious throughout the process because it was an unfamiliar venue for me, but i relied on the same instincts i've developed as a musician to get through the experience.  it required me to trust the actor with whom i was working. 

2 days following the performance of this play, i was working with my organ band and becoming aware of the same level of trust, timing and conversation.  i don't ever have to fill up all the space with my improvisations any more than i should fill all the space in a conversation.  there needs to be space for the other musicians/characters to respond and react.  i don't have to do it ALL myself.  it isn't all about me.  it's about the musical conversation. 

when i perform written music, the idea of the conversation is there again, but it's more like the play.  one's musical lines are scripted and the challenge is to sound sincere/honest.  listening...timing...the exchange of kinetic energy from one character to another. 

the truth is that BM and i have had many of the conversations over the years and i ALWAYS find his observations to be enlightening...even when i disagree.  i admire that his definitive positions are the product of his curiosity and research...and that if challenged effectively he would reconsider his perspective.  the problem with challenging Branford is that he KNOWS what he believes and is VERY good at articulating his thoughts. 

as to whether Wynton and Branford have "ruined" jazz, i believe that's a visceral response that is perhaps a little personal.  ruined jazz how?  i still hear a variety of genres and dialects being performed at a high level.  a diversity of opinion about anything is good as it challenges us ALL to better understand our own perspective and either adapt or dig in deeper.  the result is more committed performance.  we all benefit. 

DG

[BGuttman]

Quite true, Dave.

When somebody talks about someone else "ruining" anything I have to disagree.  I may not like what they are doing, but people have been "ruining" music since the days of Guido d'Arezzo and they haven't succeeded yet.  But they have pushed us in new directions, which is usually a good thing.  Even though I personally may not appreciate this new genre, maybe somebody else will.  Who knows what will be popular 50 or 100 years from now -- maybe it's one of those genres that we are all excoriating.

[Torobone]

music, imho, is ALWAYS a conversation.  recently, i was asked to perform in an experimental theater piece wherein one of the two actors had to be able to play trombone.  the similarities to music were evident to me throughout the experience, which is what kept me from completely freaking out. 
...
the truth is that BM and i have had many of the conversations over the years and i ALWAYS find his observations to enlightening...even when i disagree.  i admire that his definitive positions are the product of his curiosity and research...and that if challenged effectively he would reconsider his perspective.  the problem with challenging Branford is that he KNOWS what he believes and is VERY good at articulating his thoughts. 
...
DG

This is exactly what I had in mind when I started this thread. I think BM presented some ideas that are worthy of reflection, and I'm sure his views are constantly changing. He made me think, and for that I'm grateful. That he is passionate about his beliefs is a great thing, particularly after 30 years in the business. Articulation of those beliefs comes from practice in sharing them, and willing to take the risk in do so.

I hear the term conversation being applied to music regularly in the jazz community. It was the first time I heard somebody use this term for classical music.

In sharing this topic, it helped me further with my thoughts. Thanks.

[D Gibson]

Articulation of those beliefs comes from practice in sharing them, and willing to take the risk in do so.

well said, maestro.

risk=trust


DG

[D Gibson]

Oooh, I shouldn't have said that.

It's up for all to see, and I said it and that's the end of it. But I don't really believe that.

Do forgive me. Was not in the right state of mind at the time.

when forgiveness is requested, it is freely given, bds.  takes a strong person to reconsider their perspective. 

DG

[ctingle]

Good thread y'all.  Thanks!

As someone with a "past life" in presenting and brokering concerts and tours by Branford, Wynton, and others from this "period" in jazz, I have a few thoughts, and I'll look forward to more dialog here about such big picture kinds of issues.  I love when this forum takes on such meaty stuff, both as a bone player and as some kind of cultural sociologist.

I'm intentionally writing before listening to the clip, as Branford seems to always have a way of getting me to respond in some usually unforeseen way.  As Wynton used to say, "Be interested, and be INTEREST-ING".  They both know how to use any given interview or exchange for maximum impact, and they've honed their PR craft over many, many years of such exchanges.

For me, the Marsalises are the leaders of a macro movement in jazz which has in many ways played out as far as it possibly can.  Their "Neo-classical" approach reached incredible peaks in the '80's and '90's, especially peaks of mass public attention that have brought many new ears and eyes to the music.

For better or worse, I think their approach has lost energy, again viewing from the macro-cultural picture.  How many times can you recreate Ellington and Basie (and others) with the LCJO and continue to make it a compelling experience for theater/festival sized audiences and mp3 consumers, much as I personally love this stuff like so many of you do?

How many times can Branford's quartet in many ways recreate Coltrane and Shorter bands (among others).....again, in a way that continues to make it a compelling experience for theater/festival sized audiences and mp3 consumers? Again, I personally love this music....but I'm stepping just outside the "love" perspective for a looksie here.

For me, they could again dramatically affect and alter the direction of the music, and how audiences perceive the music, by taking some grand risk of a grand change in direction, whatever it might be.  They belong to a very short list of artists with the various attributes that give such potential power, including mass appeal, credibility, chops, track record, etc....

I happen to agree with those who've said that jazz has stalled, or slowed down, in its quests.  I wonder what Miles, Coltrane, Monk, Ellington.....and living masters like Shorter, Hancock, Corea, Jarrett, Tyner....would have to say about the macro issues and directions taken.

I'll go view the clip now, but as I go there, I'm already thinking that one reason Branford is doing this interview, and doing this classical set, is that this is one of the few ways left for him to reach this large an audience in concert.  He, like so many others in jazz, has seen his box office drop off substantially to the point when guest shots with an orchestra may actually be some kind of career stabilizing move.  It's rough out there for even the elite in jazz to put butts in seats.

[D Gibson]

For me, the Marsalises are the leaders of a macro movement in jazz which has in many ways played out as far as it possibly can.  Their "Neo-classical" approach reached incredible peaks in the '80's and '90's, especially peaks of mass public attention that have brought many new ears and eyes to the music.

For better or worse, I think their approach has lost energy, again viewing from the macro-cultural picture.  How many times can you recreate Ellington and Basie (and others) with the LCJO and continue to make it a compelling experience for theater/festival sized audiences and mp3 consumers, much as I personally love this stuff like so many of you do?

How many times can Branford's quartet in many ways recreate Coltrane and Shorter bands (among others).....again, in a way that continues to make it a compelling experience for theater/festival sized audiences and mp3 consumers? Again, I personally love this music....but I'm stepping just outside the "love" perspective for a looksie here.

i don't think i would call Branford's quartet neo-classical jazz.  i hear much more experimenting going on there.  the music sounds alive to me.  i've seen the group several times and there is always a conversation.  it never feels like the musicians have on creative hand-cuffs.  Wynton's bands seem much more locked into a past era, to me. 

[Exzaclee]

I happen to agree with those who've said that jazz has stalled, or slowed down, in its quests.  I wonder what Miles, Coltrane, Monk, Ellington.....and living masters like Shorter, Hancock, Corea, Jarrett, Tyner....would have to say about the macro issues and directions taken.

I've been lurking on this thread to see where it goes... as a true child of the 70's/80's my ears perk up everytime a Marsalis is mentioned.  I can't really knock the career arc either one of them took - it was necessary that someone do this at the time; the innovations of the masters just haven't been fully explored... I'm sorry, but we've not even scratched the surface.   Just as there is still much to learn from Mozart, there is still plenty... and I mean plenty to learn from Ellington, Coltrane, et al....

While I prefer guys going their own direction with these things, what Wynton did was valid and necessary, just like what is happening in the "downtown scene" is valid and necessary even though it's often seen as being 180 degrees from "mainstream jazz", whatever that is.

Stalled?  Slowed down?  I just can't come to that conclusion when i hear the music that DG, Josh Roseman, Wycliffe, Jacob Garchik, and plenty of others are making: and that's just the trambone!  Dave Douglas, Tony Malaby, The MBASE cats, Sex Mob, Darcy J Argue, Angie Sanchez, Mariah Schneider, Kurt Rosenwinkle, Brad Mehldau, and hundreds of others are creating a new path - in some cases far divergent from the norm but jazz none the less. 

The audience may have grown smaller and more fractured... i like to think we are distilling the cultural essence down to it's purest form. 

The original artform.

Gotta run, I gotta go play some "early american improvisational story-telling music" for some yuppies.  Yuppies get a bad rap, but they are paying my bills so I'm more than happy to give them some music.

[GetzenBassPlayer]

He, like so many others in jazz, has seen his box office drop off substantially to the point when guest shots with an orchestra may actually be some kind of career stabilizing move.  It's rough out there for even the elite in jazz to put butts in seats.

Herbie Hancock is in Seattle this (or Last) weekend playing with the Seattle Symphony. Rhapsody In Blue, I think.

[ctingle]

With the holidays, I'm just now getting to listen to this interview with Branford, and I have to say it feels good to remember so many reasons why I love him and his music!

He's so grounded, so balanced, so comfortable in his own skin that he can address his own weaknesses, nerves, challenges, family, etc....in a way that I can truly connect on a personal and musical level.  I'm not comparing myself with his level of accomplishment, but there is such a lack of attitude and pretense, it's as if you're listening to your own colleagues/friends talk about their own gigs....and how many players on Branford's level make you feel that way?

I especially dug his point near the end, saying players are so "wonkish", actually better on their instruments than past masters......but they aren't better MUSICIANS.  "Put on the records", is the simple and profound advice he gives to young musicians as a way to attack the bigger problem at hand.  Maybe this is where I was envisioning the discussion going when I commented above on any slowing or stalling in jazz.

Personally, I'd love to see/hear Branford have real exchanges with many, many other musicians in a way that casts him as a Deniro level actor, joining his next high level movie.  Branford w Wayne Shorter....w/ Keith Jarrett/Peacock/J DeJohnette trio.....w/ Herbie/Holland/DeJohnette......w/ Mehldau Trio.....playing over a Danny Elfman or John Williams score.....I could keep brainstorming like the fan that I am....

Thanks again for sharing this clip!

With my former promoter/agent hat on......the classical guest shot is also a good career move for Branford, as it takes the heat off of him a bit for selling tickets for his quartet....shares it with the orchestras, uses their subscription machine....and gives him another marketable face to add to his jazz, Sting, TV.....faces/images.

Go Branford!

[Torobone]

Chip,
To your comments, I've met a few talented musicians and trombonists who truly love music, know what they do, and on a pedagogical level know why and how. That he can articulate clearly his thoughts on jazz and other musical forms is great for us all.

From the clips I've heard of Branford with an orchestra, I would say that he is making it work, and work well.

It's about the music. Is there anything else?