...I didn't call Reed sexist: I said that what he wrote was an ugly sexist
cliche. And it is. Who needs that stuff? We all have stuff to learn! If it
had been a racist cliche, would you have minded?
>
>> anyone wishing to discuss this or any other jazz related matter is invited
>> to contact me directly. i don't know how much we can get to by e-mail [in
>> person is the ideal, of course], but I'm wilin to try.
>>
>> It's too bad that Reed can't address what I say directly. But I'm not out
>> to 'change his mind'; this scene can be done and has been done for decades.
>>
>Again, this seems odd to me. Why can't Richard just go on and talk
>substantively about the details and just drop the attacks.
...I dont' see an attack. Reed has not addressed directly my last few
posts, which is fine. But pointing that out is certainly no personal
attack. He and I did get into some 'head to head' confrontation about
issues relating to this subject. It did get a bit heated. That's
understandable; we obviously both care passionately about the subject. But
I actually felt like he first came after me! I addressed some issues and he
seemed to stop addressing my points directly.
I question why his saying that a scene that has gone on for decades is "an
old wives tale' doesn't get you attention?
But I'm not out to change anyones mind about it, anymore than I would
debate the Flat Earth Society.
>I don't see
>why we have to go offline for the actual content.
...Because everyone is an individual and deserves privacy. Besides, it
would be tough enough trying to do something by e-mail one to one, forget
everyone else getting into the act.
Teaching is a 'tailor-made', one to one scene for every individual, in my
opinion.
>
>> Ask Lee Konitz...
>
>Appeals to celebrity or authority are not really relevant. Almost any
>point of view can be buttressed by appeal to a famous person or great
>player. That doesn't really support anything.
...Well, why don't you get on the case of all the others online here who
did it? Anyway, Lee is unique in the sense that he is a great innovator in
jazz [came up with an orignal sound, line and feeling on alto during the
'reign' of Bird. No mean feat!] and one of LT's early students and a band
member. Certainly, that is a lot more than just a celebrity endorsement.
>
>[Second message content]
>>
>
>>
>> ...see, this is a 'version', as you said, a point on the graph, but not the
>> pure thing. without a teacher who is really into the scene, it is difficult
>> for a person to really focus on it in a pure way or to allow the time it
>> may take to happen...
>>
>Now here is an interesting point. Richard frequently supports a point by
>telling us we need a great teacher, or need to consult him personally. I
>sure wish I had a great teacher, but in Wilmore Kentucky there jest
>ain't none.
There is nothing I can do about that; it's not my fault! Well, I said I was
willing to try to help by e-mail. There just is no way around it for me:
meeting and studying with Connie Crothers [the greatest teacher I have ever
known!] was the beginning of my life as an artist, and i was already a
professional musician [bio on web site]. If you'd like to see how many
other teachers I've studied with, check out my web site....
Reed told us how the teacher he had when he tried to learn a solo by ear
showed him how it was a waste of time in some way. A different teacher
could have helped him get to it, in my experience.
>
>But, I can use Reed's method of transcription without a great teacher.
>Without spending any money.
Sure, and it's fun to do. But there is more, if you want it. Sometimes in
life, help is really valuable.
>As I listen note for note, striving to get
>the pitch, the time, the phrasing notated correctly, I suddenly realize
>that I haven't been hearing or singing very accurately. Inner filters
>and habits of hearing and singing, not to mention playing, have kept me
>from hearing it all. What I thought was a simple slide on the guitar
>turns out, slowed down and notated scrupulously, a very delicate,
>layered phrase.
It is true that things show up at half speed. In Lester Leaps In, I found a
note that no one plays, but it's there! That is not a function of method,
but technology [half speed] and focus.
>
>I just don't have a great teacher, nor the money to spend on it; but I
>have some patience, which is free.
...as i said, i offered to help for free...
>Also, I haven't got a great memory.
>But playing a phrase back several times, stepping through it a note at
>the time, then translating that into notation, seats it into my memory.
>I get an integration of how it sounded on the recording, how it looks on
>the notation, and how I now play it.
re: memory-don't sell yourself short; you don't know what you can get to!
..several times? Imagine getting into a solo *until* it was a part of you!
A week, a month, a year, whatever it takes!..there is so much more to get
out of it. The only reason I say all this is because i have really tried
both ways. Others on the list claim to, but I don't see that anyone really
got it LT's scene [except maybe the student of Sal Mosca's] and therefore
can judge it. I just feel that it would make you really happy if you were
open to it.
do what you like, i make no demands, I have merely been going out of my way
to share something that changed my life as an improvisor with anyone
interested...
>
>Whenever I can learn without spending more money or having to find a zen
>master, I get pretty happy.
...Sure. me too. And if something can change my life as an improvisor, i
find out about it, no matter what the scene is...
>>
>> ...First, this was Tristano's innovation; not mine. Secondly, it's
>> impossible to know what it is like without ginving it a chance in its real,
>> pure way.
>>
>Again, a limit on the method Richard is advocating seems to be that
>nobody does it right.
...no, i just observed that people are on a different place in the 'continuum'.
>The requirement of "purity" almost sounds
>religious.
...as i said, how can anyone know really what something is until they've
*really* tried it, not almost tried it? re: purity...--> does pure air or
pure water sound religious? I just mean, I've tried note=by-note, and I've
tired 'almost' and it just ain't the same. This isn't a cult, it's a focus.
If you don't feel that you want it, fine.
>On the other hand, just plugging along note for note, writing
>it down, checking and double checking, playing over it, letting others
>try it--it just doesn't seem such a fragile,
>corruption-and-misunderstanding prone approach. I like my tools to be
>rugged, to work even when I don't "do it exactly right." Reed's approach
>works for me even though (GASP!) I transcribe on the guitar, my
>instrument, and not a pitch pipe. I want to try the pitch pipe because
>its small and I can transcribe anywhere I have my tape player and pitch
>pipe. But even this "violation" of the method hasn't stopped me from
>transcribing.
Have a great time. If you ever feel that there might be more, you have an
alternative as well.
>
>> I would say it like this: The note-to-note transcrip method focuses on a
>> brain-analytical approach. The solo does not become a part of you in the
>> way the LT's scene allows the solo to become a part of the artist, and
>> allows the artist to really get past the notes, to the feeling there...
>>
>I have to disagree. Listening to a single measure repeatedly, then
>slowed down, and carefully recording it, taking care to notate not what
>I think it is, but what it actually seems to be, goes a long way to make
>it soak in. Human feelings may be accessed and activated in many ways.
>The analytical is not opposed to the appreciative. You have TWO brain
>hemispheres, connected by the greatest network on earth. You can do
>both.
...Well, you may disagree but you don't really know, do you? I've tried
both and they are very different. ...
>
>> Looking at a menu or analyzing water will not quench your thirst, so to
>>speak...
>>
>This isn't what notation is. Notation is a process of presenting a
>visual metaphor for the music.
One that can never communicate the totality of the music, unfortunately.
>
>It seems to me that the whole debate actually turns on the value of
>notation. Reed insists on it, without denying that singing the solo
>could help as well. Richard insists on the singing and learning by
>heart, but seems reserved about the notation for some reason.
As I said in a post [please read them!], it is the final and optional part.
Heck I'm offereing a lot of stuff...information, help, where to find my
cd's.. for free. Why do I do it? It gave me so much, i just wish to share
it...I have seen the differnce it made in my own playing.
>
>I think that, by listening and singing, etc. I can augment Reed's method
>if I want to. Richard seems concerned to get us into a "scene" that
>almost sounds cultic at points-necessity of a guru, purity of approach,
>etc.
Geez, I didn't realize I'd pushed so many buttons. I ultimately am
unconcerned and unaffected by whatever you do or don't do! As I said, it
just made such a dimensional difference for me, i wanted to share it. I
just hoped someone might wish to try it [some have contacted me] and that I
could be of help. Call it cult, guru, or whatever if you want; but that
isn't true and I just don't see the problem really.
>
>Maybe we ordinary people who just love music
...i really don't know why you have to say it like that; i've done nothing
to deserve your sarcasm. In my opinion, all your attacks and worries about
me are groundless and unsubstansiated.
> should ponder whether we
>will get and give more pleasure in music by getting to work
>transcribing, learning, and passing on the good things that we learn.
I wqas merely trying to ' pass[ing] on the good things that we learn. "
>We
>can only learn feeling by getting up and playing what's in our hearts
>and ears.
That is part of it; a big part. But please don't say what something can or
can't do unless you know from firsthand experince.
>Transcription is about putting some good things in there to
>say.
...huh?
>
>Back to my first efforts on this front-the most fun I've had in music
>for a long time.
>
>Lawson Stone
Best wishes for a happy life in a peaceful world.
Sincerely,
Richard Tabnik, Jazz Alto Saxophonist
e-mail: <rctabnik@inch.com>
WWW Page: <http://www.inch.com/~rctabnik>
"The jazz musician's function is to feel." -Lennie Tristano