Tremens, you seem to have a penchant for "older" sound. Is that your basis of what constitutes "meaningful?"

not at all, nothing against modern jazz (Makowicz is very much modern player) but please include some melody/message in your playing not just scales and passages.

I tend to agree with that statement.

But Delirium, you are so inconsistent. Macowicz is not playing anything unique. He's playing a fixed ostinato on the LH and RH is playing what most Jazz players play. Notes that fit the chord. In this case a simple blues.

You make statements about "scales and passages". Are you implying that Michel Petrucciani plays scales and passages? What exactly was Michel playing that didn't fit your mold here? I'm not clear.

Now we've had this discussion long ago and you pointed to this same guy Makowicz. He may have the technique but I don't see him breaking new ground. So he's some European version of Oscar Peterson? Even Peterson plays tons of licks and runs (your scale passages?).

So where are we? I'm really confused.

We all have our favorites and most of my favorites are "Many notes" guys: Keith, Herbie, Chick, Bill. So tell me specifically where they are playing the wrong notes for you. I just want to define this because it is so unclear.

Long ago you said you preferred this Makowicz to Jarrett. Well Makowicz is playing MORE NOTES than what Jarret usually plays. Jarrett is all about melody and each note is perfectly chosen. You don't believe me? Slow down the recordings. They sound as good in slow motion as at tempo.

Jazzwee, let's not be so literal here - you should know that "too many notes" was the joke from Amadeus movie, besides you know me, I appreciate technique as well as musicality.
But again - give me melody, something to remember, something unique and you can play as many notes as you will. Guys you have mentioned do that WITH licks, scales etc and they are popular - same as Corea, Matheny, Holland. But we have only few jazzers like these comparing to rock/pop, why?
BTW Jazz sax players made me hate this instrument....
Michel Petrucciani played in that c jam blues similar patterns all over again, again nothing against him but to me it was more like etude.

Regarding Makowicz and Jarrett - I was just saying Adam's technique is FAR better then Keith - Adam's mastery been compared to Art Tatum and Oscar Peterson, so you can say Makowicz is kinda Oscar from Europe.

P.S
I love that interpretation of God Bless the Child by Jarrett, you're right he plays melody nicely:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Al2MDJL7oY

That's why he is popular - because he didn't forget that music is all about melody and story and he has something to say (although he's a jerk).

Well Delirium, I know you more so I'm used to your rants but you're getting everyone riled up (as usual ). But I know you're more extreme in your statements than you really are.

BTW - I hate to say this but I'm not that big on Oscar (notice he's not on my top list). He's a monster player and technically at the top of the short list. But I can recognize his licks a mile away unfortunately. And they're good licks but I like a little more unpredictability and sometimes, less notes too.

I'm surprised though that someone who claims to be big on melody is not into Jarrett or Mehldau. These two are the antithesis of "patterns". I happen to be big on melody but I don't know if you're serious about it since melodies can occur when playing fast or slow.

I'm also conscious of rhythmic originality which I find more in Herbie and Mehldau.

I really like the idea of comparing improvised music (or just music in general) to literature. There are something structurally intricate and beautiful, like a Petrarchan sonnet. And there are something more open and seemingly less structured, like one of Allen Ginsberg's poems. Is either one more valid than the other?

Similar critiques of the free verse "prose" poems also exist. But when you write a poem of, say, 10 pages long, you are not going to care matching every word to its highest aptitude. Often such poems are more into depicting a large landscape than mere semantic erudition.

For me, I take emotions over any standard of word length, or in terms of music, note counts. I agree that if your music has no emotions or doesn't tell a story, it is devoid of meaning, note counts notwithstanding. One thing that I revere about John Coltrane is how much he poured into his music. I can listen to his My Favorite Things solo over and over again into eternity, because his emotions are so pulpable and concrete. But did he play a lot of notes? Yes. But he did so to convey his fervor and passion.

Nicely said Othello.

I understand criticisms of Oscar Peterson's style and many opinions about his predictable use of same licks, patterns, motifs heard in his music. I am a big Oscar P fan, actually more so than Tatum, because Oscar was the better player with other musicians, Art better as a solo pianist. I also liked the way Oscar could swing.

Then you hear another side that said Oscar was so much the better player compared to Bill Evans because Bill didn't throw in fast double octave lines or licks like Oscar was known for. But actually Oscar said he spent a lot of time listening to Bill and enjoyed his music and learned things from the style/

It gets to the point that it is very difficult to make comparisons between who is greater than or better technically among, Bill, Oscar, Chick, Keith J, etc. Each pianist has their own unique voice and variances in technical ability.

katt

My first post ( I think ) in the jass forum and I find the youtube very nice, although I don't *exactly* fancy jazz.

To my almost naive ears to jazz (since I don't listen to it and own no jazz cd, as opposed to other idioms to which I could say I'm "profissient" somewhat) this sounds very fine. Not too many notes at all. I can hear melodies here and there, some may be a tad "fast" but nothing too bad. The LH is following the right with chords (broken or not) and changes to other paces after the middle. It almost seems that there is little impro and more "playing again what I played last night, but slightly different".

And to make sure I don't get beaten up with my last comment, I don't mind that at all and loved the music in this youtube video! I just seemed a little stunned at the idea that he played all that and then next morning he might played it "completely" different. I'm assuming that the piece will resemble this one... :-/ (since it's based on the same theme anyways...)

katt, not to take away from OP's talent, I was more referring to "influences". Meaning I'm not particularly learning to sound like OP, while I would really love to emulate the others on my list (even though they all sound different from each other).

I don't think Bill considered himself particularly talented naturally. He says he worked extra-hard on it. But Bill is the innovator. He changed Jazz forever and influenced everyone's playing that came after him. OP was a stylist in comparison and I would have no doubt would be the technical king (arguably with Tatum, etc.).

But please take my comments in context. I'm influenced by modern jazz (my definition/non-Bebop). My teacher is noted for Modern Jazz.

I can perfectly understand you because I'm not his fan or even Art Tatum either for the same reason. Bill Evans is still number one for me.

Jazz, I understand perfectly. Oscar is more "old school", blues/bop based, Bill, more modern harmonically and modal. The players who are studying jazz piano now are more influenced by Keith J, Bill of course, Brad M, Chick, several other leaders. Personally I am also more into checking out modern concepts on today's new generation jazz pianists.

Here is very modern sounding jazz pianist I'm following and listening to,
Lynne Arriale Trio, Seven Steps To Heaven
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZEVIIHSetY
Her site http://www.lynnearriale.com/

She teaches, I would like some lessons from her, really like her sound. See what you think

katt

I like that idea too, in fact I often compare music to painting as I see music anyway in my head so literature would work the same. Images in once head. Of course it's not the question whether once is valid or not but if once carry any message or no IMO.

Bill is really painting...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6CS8h_JSk4&feature=related

She sounds great. I've never heard of her before but I classify her under the "pianist" jazzers category, those who have the technique to get that extra quality from the piano.

Reminded me a little of Joanne Brackeen. Maybe it's the outfit

This is the type of playing I'm drawn to. Similarly, I like John Taylor, Paul Bley, Fred Hersch, Alan Pascua, Kenny Werner. Lots of Bill's influence but taken to another level.

Fortunately there's enough variety in Jazz to fit everyone's style.

A little critique of Lynne - it seems she plays a little too gently when she burns. The top line modern jazz players are probably more assertive...

Now we're talking

Yea I agree with Othello, I think the whole thing about playing too many/little notes, playing melody is just pedantic.. Oscar Peterson may be playing the same licks, but noo ne can swing hard on the piano like he does, and make you want to get up and dance. And I've heard him play very simple melodic solos too on ballads. And he does pour his heart out when he plays.

I mean people like BB King have been playing the same old blues licks and stuff all his life, but he is still great, because his music feels good, and it tells a story. It's unfortunate, because sometimes what we thing music 'should or ought to be' can really get in the way of enjoying music for what it is.

I didn't like Makowitz clip at all.. it sounds like he took a LH bass pattern from a chopin prelude and played blues licks over it. His feel in general feels 'square'.Oscar Peterson can play something much more virtuossic and really make it swing. The feel really kills it for me.

I know I am being very picky but when you hear great players like Oscar or Bill, or Petrucciani play, their timing is almost impeccable.. sure they do rush, but you hear the time/pulse all the way through the music even on solo piano.. but on the clip I felt like there were moments where the time was just not there at all.

I am confused too, because Makowitz seems to play a good number of stock licks like Pettrucianni or chick corea or anyone else I know. And he seems a lot of Art Tatum-isms in his playing,

Musically, I prefer something like this over Makowitz.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0OdpeDvs7g

It's amazing how he can create something that harmonically interesting on the spot.. and how he can control instrument like an orchestra.. he has 2-4 independent voices going on as he improvise. This for me, is an example of "playing by ear"

yeah, this kinda amazes me since I'd expect more sense of humor and imagination from musicians. In old days they're supposed to be artists too...

etc., do you do that two-handed stuff like in that youtube you posted? That was very interesting. I've been looking for every two-handed improvisation I can find. I've been working on this and slowly making progress. Leaning towards the Brad Mehldau method at the moment which is more rhythmically varied.

Well you do come out more serious with your "the sky is falling" statements. But let's face it, there are 4 threads here talking about TOO MANY NOTES...LOL. So if you can handle the heat, stay in the kitchen

In the other forum, the "artist" comment would have started (restarted?) new arguments again

I don't want to start a can of worms here. I admire OP and agree with you about his swing and technical capability. My comments on OP are just for myself. He's not one of my influences. There are many players that are not my influences. Add Tatum to the list.

By the same token, many people hate the players I am influenced by, like Brad Mehldau.

That's cool. I'm accused of being non-swingy and classical sounding because I lean to modern style playing with straight eighths. So it shouldn't be a surprise that I'm not trying to sound like OP, Wynton, Garland, Monty, etc. Love 'em all though and I have their records. I can swing hard too but don't prefer it.

yeah, Dave Horne would be calling me on the phone LOL

Here is somebody who could technically play many notes, but mainly plays the essential. ;-)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cp2UgfaQwTc

Miles used to send his pianoplayers listening to him.

His speciality: playing rests.

and that's what I'm talking about! fun, rhythm, spirit and melody, cool tune.

Yes and no, it's something I've been working on, and I can't do it as fluently as those guys. Fred Hersch does stuff like that too, its more about 2-3 counterpoint than just playing stuff over a LH ostinato. I've came up with polyphonic exercises where I'll try to get 2-3 voices going on a Bb7sus chord or something.. You kind of start thinking like you are playing Bach's sinfonia or fugures.. althought not as thematic and deliberate.

btw I transcribed part of tony's solo, just pm me and I can give you a copy if you want.

I've been practicing this every day and my LH is becoming more fluent now. I'm really learning to build on this style. But this guy is not utilizing the rhythmic aspect as much. Also he exhibits the same difficulty I'm having: keeping good time while being distracted by 2 hands. I was hoping that this Tony guy would have at least solved that. But I guess it's not easy (trust me I know). Sometimes I play it and it sounds good time wise and I record it (with a metronome) and I can see my LH waver.

jazzwee,

I don't know what you mean by rhythmic aspect, but there are plenty of rhythmic stuff going on with triplet displacements and what not.

I didn't hear major noticable errors in his time.. Makowitz clip on the other hand, there were noticiable time problem. You can hear the LH fluctuating. I don't think its about keeping metronomic time in solo piano, Bill Evans rushes like crazy on his solo piano stuff, but the music flows

Tony Tixier is great.