Clean/sloppy playing in modern popular music: a provocative argument

[tbdana]

I totally agree with this, but it's an interesting comment because several people here have implied that classical players are slaves to convention and only play within a a rigid set of established rules. Yet I often hear comments from jazz players about people not knowing how to swing properly, what type of articulation to use, what note lengths are appropriate, etc. Are they any less rigid than classical players?

Yeah, they are.

[TomInME]

A false dichotomy. It isn’t a choice between one or the other. It’s both. Both are necessary. The whole reason I mentioned this is because I’m so weary of hearing people try to play beyond their ability and excusing it by using the fake excuse that playing better will make their jazz worse. Nonsense.

It is both, but when "flawlessness" is prioritized at the expense of expression, music dies.
I'm not denying your point that when the execution is bad enough, music doesn't live in the first place.

My point is that execution must serve expression, and not be an end unto itself.

[TomInME]

I don't see how being less proficient on your instrument would make you more musical.

That's not even close to what I said.

Some modern orchestras may be capable of flawless execution AND an emotional performance, but I've heard more than a few technically precise but dry and tasteless performances.

I'm not saying a sloppy but energetic performance is any better (it isn't), but it's not any worse.

[Posaunus]

To be fair... I think the "brick" approach is largely based out of one school and one teacher. I honestly haven't run into a lot of it here on the west coast, and we have cats from all over.

I'm not sure who is the proponent of the "brick" approach - apparently someone prominent in musical academia. I have certainly heard a lot of musical playing, with nicely shaped notes, coming from orchestral players in prominent ensembles, and have watched conductors urge such musicality from their players.

I have been thinking about John Marcellus, who has just passed away. "Doc" was the trombone professor at the Eastman School of Music for 36 years (until 2014) and continued playing and loving life for another 10 years. He was obviously a great influence on the careers of many successful trombonists. I doubt that he advocated the "brick" approach (whatever that is). He was a rounded musician, and - for those who never heard him - he was a fine jazz improviser. Doc could swing! May he rest in peace.

[TomInME]

I’m so weary of hearing people try to play beyond their ability and excusing it by using the fake excuse that playing better will make their jazz worse. Nonsense.

Has anyone ever become a great improviser by avoiding mistakes?

[tbdana]

I’m so weary of hearing people try to play beyond their ability and excusing it by using the fake excuse that playing better will make their jazz worse. Nonsense.

Has anyone ever become a great improviser by avoiding mistakes?

Tom, you’re laboring under a serious misconception. I never said people need to play perfectly. And I never advocated for prioritizing perfection over musicality. I don’t know how you got that in your head but you can let that go. I don’t think anyone has even implied that. Indeed I was very specific that we need BOTH proficiency AND musicality.

I’ve also said that I personally try to practice at the edges of my skill set, but perform from the middle of it. To me, it’s disrespectful to my audience and the other musicians to be trying to go places I’m not capable of going.

[brassmedic]

I totally agree with this, but it's an interesting comment because several people here have implied that classical players are slaves to convention and only play within a a rigid set of established rules. Yet I often hear comments from jazz players about people not knowing how to swing properly, what type of articulation to use, what note lengths are appropriate, etc. Are they any less rigid than classical players?

Yeah, they are.

I was hoping for a more detailed response, but whatever...

[brassmedic]

I've heard more than a few technically precise but dry and tasteless performances.

I'd be very interested to hear an example of this from an acclaimed orchestra.

[tbdana]

Yeah, they are.

I was hoping for a more detailed response, but whatever...

Sorry I’m out for dinner and jazz. Not sure where to go with this. Jazz players prize individualism, creativity, emotion, and spontaneity. All these things call for individual interpretation and flexibility. So it’s kind of the antithesis of the classical approach and allows for huge landscapes for group and individual exploration. But they do want players to know the idiom.

[Cmillar]

Yes...I keep coming back to the need for serious music students to study with people who are actually professionally experienced in more than one idiom; or attend a college/university/conservatory where they can get lessons from experienced pros in more than one idiom.

Too many of our colleges/universities (in the US anyways) are full of teachers who may have a Doctorate in Trombone but have never had any actual playing experience outside of what they've done for the last so many years in university. (...we know that's a fact...)

[tbdana]

Too many of our colleges/universities (in the US anyways) are full of teachers who may have a Doctorate in Trombone but have never had any actual playing experience outside of what they've done for the last so many years in university. (...we know that's a fact...)

When I took up playing trombone again 18 months ago I was surprised to see how many music students were going into teaching rather than being performers, even if they were getting performance degrees. It wasn't like this 30 years ago. And I started wondering if maybe this is the result of there being fewer gigs now, and having a career as a player is much more difficult now than it used to be. Do you think this is true?

And if so, is this generation that has become teachers/professors rather than performers going to simply train the next generation of students to become teachers/professors instead of performers? And if so, what happens to performers and performing careers?

[TomInME]

I've heard more than a few technically precise but dry and tasteless performances.

I'd be very interested to hear an example of this from an acclaimed orchestra.

They wouldn't be acclaimed if they couldn't do both.

[TomInME]

Has anyone ever become a great improviser by avoiding mistakes?

Tom, you’re laboring under a serious misconception. I never said people need to play perfectly. And I never advocated for prioritizing perfection over musicality. I don’t know how you got that in your head but you can let that go. I don’t think anyone has even implied that. Indeed I was very specific that we need BOTH proficiency AND musicality.

I’ve also said that I personally try to practice at the edges of my skill set, but perform from the middle of it. To me, it’s disrespectful to my audience and the other musicians to be trying to go places I’m not capable of going.

You wanted to be "provocative", I'm simply responding in kind.

Your last bit about performing from the middle of your skillset sounds all well and good, but it's also a recipe for "playing safe" which runs the risk of boring the audience. There's no free lunch. There's a middle ground between taking too many risks and playing too safe, but this thread has been pretty heavily on the "playing safe" side.

But specifically from an improv perspective, I (as a listener) think that players need to stretch to develop, and that it can't just be in the practice room. I'd rather hear someone try for something interesting and fail than to never make the attempt. (and of course it's best when they succeed) I think your issue is with one particular person who stretches way too far all the time and always comes up empty, which shouldn't be generalized to everyone who takes any chances.

I am extremely concerned that the vitality of jazz will be diminished as it becomes more and more professionalized, with fewer clubs and more concert halls, and a lot more playing from the middle. That's not where it came from, but I fear that's its future.

[Posaunus]

Too many of our colleges/universities (in the US anyways) are full of teachers who may have a Doctorate in Trombone but have never had any actual playing experience outside of what they've done for the last so many years in university. (...we know that's a fact...)

When I took up playing trombone again 18 months ago I was surprised to see how many music students were going into teaching rather than being performers, even if they were getting performance degrees. It wasn't like this 30 years ago. And I started wondering if maybe this is the result of there being fewer gigs now, and having a career as a player is much more difficult now than it used to be. Do you think this is true?

And if so, is this generation that has become teachers/professors rather than performers going to simply train the next generation of students to become teachers/professors instead of performers? And if so, what happens to performers and performing careers?

Econ 101 - Supply and Demand.

• Supply: Many more students graduate with performance degrees (not only trombone) than was the case 30-40 years ago.
  Just about every college/university now has a "trombone studio." That was not the case in the old days, when such education was largely confined to a few major "conservatories."

• Demand: There are not additional professional performance opportunities to absorb the new entrants to that career path -
  big bands are no longer flourishing; symphony orchestras (& opera and ballet companies) are struggling financially and laying off performers.

Once you have the credential (a college degree) and you need to make a living, what can you do with very limited (and low paid) performance opportunities? How about ... teaching?

[Wilktone]

Since I said I would only use my own work as examples of poor playing, here are two excerpts from a solo I played.

Well, when I listen to the "sloppy" excerpt I thought it sounded pretty good. Yes, I hear what you're talking about, especially compared to the second excerpt which is cleaner.

Do you think that the consistency of technique is easier when playing something that is prewritten and practiced? Is it a bit unfair to call out jazz improvisers on a little sloppiness if they happen to be going for something they're feeling, but haven't worked out in advance?

Don't get me wrong, I agree that playing as cleanly as possible is best, regardless of genre. But the jazz aesthetic, as was pointed out earlier, emphasizes spontaneity and originality. That often results in things going into unexpected directions. I recall a documentary on Miles Davis (maybe I'm remembering wrong) where Tony Williams mentioned that they loved getting lost in the form while performing because it was so exciting to figure out how they were going to get out of it.

I've heard some musicians state they would rather hear someone "going for it" and play a little sloppy than to "play it safe." Some of this may be personal preference.

I totally agree with this, but it's an interesting comment because several people here have implied that classical players are slaves to convention and only play within a a rigid set of established rules. Yet I often hear comments from jazz players about people not knowing how to swing properly, what type of articulation to use, what note lengths are appropriate, etc. Are they any less rigid than classical players?

A ballet pit orchestra nearby had a performance recently and their percussionist fell and broke his wrist on the way into the theater. The only substitute they could find was the local jazz drummer hotshot. After the first half the conductor was livid and shouted, "We'll do the second half without percussion!" The drummer looked around at the rest of the orchestra and said, "What's she so upset about? I caught all the hits!"

*rim shot*

Having studied and performed classical and jazz throughout my career, I think there's a lot of bias and misinterpretation that gets thrown around when this topic gets raised. When I was a graduate student in a jazz studies program I continued to work on my classical playing and learned how unstylistic my articulations, phrasing, vibrato, etc. was for playing classical. It was sort of the flip side to the complaint from the jazz side about how poorly classical musicians swing, etc.

So yes, brassmedic, I tend to agree that jazz musicians can be just as rigid as classical, and vice versa. Jazz musicians are slaves to our own convention too.

Too many of our colleges/universities (in the US anyways) are full of teachers who may have a Doctorate in Trombone but have never had any actual playing experience outside of what they've done for the last so many years in university. (...we know that's a fact...)

That's not my experience, but with some caveats.

My first full time teaching job was in a rural area in the Southwest US. I was first call trombonist. I was also the first call jazz horn player in the area. That wasn't because of my skills and experience, but because I was the ONLY trombonist and jazz musician in the area. I had very few playing opportunities outside of performing faculty recitals. The closest city where I could play with other musicians and get more playing experience was 3-4 hours away. If I had stayed there I guess I would fall into your description as someone with a doctorate, but little playing experience outside of what I did where I taught.

Many colleges and universities are in more isolated areas, where having the chance to continue to perform with great musicians means having to drive long distances. For some, the late nights and long commutes is too much, so they may end up not performing as much as they like. This is true for both students and teachers at these schools.

But by and large, I find that most of my college and university teaching friends and colleagues continue to perform as part of the expected professional development. If they're fortunate enough to live in an area where they get to play with excellent musicians they usually take advantage of those opportunities.

Of course, some of these teachers end up coasting, sometimes due to their circumstances and sometimes out of a change of interest or the needs of the school (e.g., we need someone to cover Music Appreciation).

When I took up playing trombone again 18 months ago I was surprised to see how many music students were going into teaching rather than being performers, even if they were getting performance degrees. It wasn't like this 30 years ago. And I started wondering if maybe this is the result of there being fewer gigs now, and having a career as a player is much more difficult now than it used to be. Do you think this is true?

Yes, it is.

And if so, is this generation that has become teachers/professors rather than performers going to simply train the next generation of students to become teachers/professors instead of performers? And if so, what happens to performers and performing careers?

They will need to change, as they already are. For example, the days when a professional performer could make a decent living playing a single style of music is pretty much gone. Sometimes I feel that as a freelance trombonist I'm more of a jack of all trades and master of none. But I get to do a lot of musical projects, including composing, arranging, and conducting as well as playing a wide variety of styles on trombone.

These days a lot of "content creators" rely on a different model of some type to make a living. It's not typical for musicians to be able to make their own music and follow their muse exclusively, they often do other things (musical and nonmusical). The next generation of professional musicians are likely going to learn how to teach, make videos, self-produce recordings, be social media influencers, etc. They will need to be proficient in a lot of different technologies (musical and nonmusical).

I guess all this moves away from the original topic. From my perspective, the differences I see in how trombonists approach their music is more stylistic rather than acceptance of sloppy playing. Perhaps my personal preferences in jazz trombonists mean that I just don't hear sloppy playing? I still don't feel that this is a thing, to be honest.

Dave

[Cmillar]

Once you have the credential (a college degree) and you need to make a living, what can you do with very limited (and low paid) performance opportunities? How about ... teaching?

Teaching full time at a college/university/conservatory is certainly a great gig in itself and very admirable profession.

But in order to maintain musical standards throughout all idioms, the art of music is best served by those teachers who have a lot of 'real-world' experience in orchestras, big bands, studios, shows, society gigs, etc. etc.

There are many great higher ed institutions that are aware of this predicament, and they're also aware that they are turning out many great musicians who are 'all dressed up with nowhere to go'.

So, many of the top higher ed conservatories/etc. are hiring well rounded faculty to address the present and prepare students for the future.

Unfortunately, many other institutions are not in sync with the demands of the real world these days, and many of them just hire various teachers with Doctorate degrees because that's the policy of the institution.

There are some 'out of the way' teaching opportunities that would take professional musicians away from larger centers of musical activity. So, many people just coming out of school with a fresh Doctorate jump at the chance to teach there. But, that opportunity unfortunately takes them away from any possibilities of actually getting some real-world performing experience in various idioms.

Many busy professional musicians (who would love to teach full time) don't want to move somewhere that doesn't have a real music scene. Can't blame them for that choice.

So, yeah.... many upcoming trombone players (or other student instrumentalists) get some warped musical ideas on what 'jazz is' and how it's to be played, or even some dubious classical training... when coming from a teacher who's only ever played in student ensembles and hasn't had the chance to rub shoulders with very experienced professional musicians in any idiom.

The good old 'apprenticeship-system' is really best for keeping up musical standards and integrity. Young prospective pros (and especially prospective higher-ed teachers) need to get out and get 'at it'. Meet the local pros...hang out with them... maybe move to a big city for a few years.... see the wide variety of musical approaches and styles in all musical idioms.

[imsevimse]

Too many of our colleges/universities (in the US anyways) are full of teachers who may have a Doctorate in Trombone but have never had any actual playing experience outside of what they've done for the last so many years in university. (...we know that's a fact...)

When I took up playing trombone again 18 months ago I was surprised to see how many music students were going into teaching rather than being performers, even if they were getting performance degrees. It wasn't like this 30 years ago. And I started wondering if maybe this is the result of there being fewer gigs now, and having a career as a player is much more difficult now than it used to be. Do you think this is true?

And if so, is this generation that has become teachers/professors rather than performers going to simply train the next generation of students to become teachers/professors instead of performers? And if so, what happens to performers and performing careers?

In Sweden there are definitely less jobs as a performer AND the jobs that do exist don't pay enough to pay bills. I know many of the retired pros who were first calls before 1995, that's about 30 years ago. They are now over 70 years old. When they speak about their early old days they had multiple sessions a day. Recordings, tv-shows, dance evenings, radio broadcasts and concerts. If I compare that to what I see today there is almost nothing, and very little that pays well, and the audience around for both classical music and jazz is old.

I was a semi-pro for 13 years and combined that with teaching but changed my career for a lot of reasons. I decided I had to do something else. You can make a living as a performance artist here if you get employed in one of the institutions and they are few. Most of the freelancers I know have other jobs too that pay the bills or they live on their spouse. Many are teachers in music.

There is a line between the few that manage to be full time musicians (1), without having to do anything else than play. These musicians have worked hard and are now privileged. They belong to the inner cirkle and do not let others in. Why should they?

Then there are semi-pros of two categories.
The ones who partly teach music and combine that with a few jobs as performers (2) and the ones that have jobs outside music and still combine this with a few jobs as performers (3).

The first category very rarely meet with the second and third categories. The second category can be satisfied to be teachers/musicians but many deep down often want to belong either to the first category to fulfill their dream and be a fully engaged musician or move to the third category and get a job that pays well and combine that with music at a - for them - satisfying level. I know many who struggle with this dilemma. To be a performer only, is possible for just a few over here. To be a music teacher/musician can be possible but it doesn't pay much. I made the choice to transfer myself to category three from category two, to be an amateur musician with better paid job outside music. I have worked really hard to make that true and I had to do it because it wasn't possible to fight my way into category one.

There aren't enough jobs around in music here.

/Tom

[Savio]

I'm not the right person to make a reply here but I tell some of what I think. Firstly I think the musicians level is just getting higher and higher in all genres. And I believe there is fewer gigs allover. Especially in jazz and commercial genres. I remember when I was young, there was a lot of jazz clubs around. They are gone. Seems to be fewer gigs among movie, TV shows and studio environment? Big orchestras always survive but many struggling to survive?

And so many young musicians with higher education and level are growing up. Can't be easy? But as I see it there is so much good musicianship going out there among the professionals. In fact among amateurs too.

My experience with clean/sloopy playing has changed over the years. In big bands like Toshiko Akiyoshi in LA and symphony orchestras all over there might never been any room for sloppiness? Not exactly sure what the word means but...In these jazz clubs from the 80s there was a little bit of suspect things going on.

My own experience with jazz is only from big bands and there I felt it was (and is) as strict on how you play and read music as it is in symphony orchestras. Can't say I have big experience in any camps though. Studio musicians have to cover a lot of styles and some styles can maybe feels sloppy but should maybe be so?

Anyway i feel the music and musicians are just getting better and better. And I think trombone players are among the instrument groups that are very clever to do a big variety of styles. Mostly?

Leif

About improvising there should be room for everything.

[tbdana]

When I started this fun little provocative rant I did not know there would be so many thoughtful, excellent replies and posts on the subject and its curtilage. I love all the perspectives in this group. Great place.

...In these jazz clubs from the 80s there was a little bit of suspect things going on.

Heh! You have no idea.

[Richard3rd]

Dana, I found both solos acceptable. I think you are being too hard on yourself.

Brassmedic, I see your point about jazz players being rigid. Within jazz there are conventions too and we often look down on those that don't know the "proper" way to play. Perhaps we are too rigid also.

[LeTromboniste]

About the teaching paradigm discussed here, I'm not sure to what extent it's actually true, and if yes I wonder if that's mostly an American phenomenon? Generally speaking having solid credentials as a performer is an important prerequisite for getting a teaching job. And DMA's aren't really that prevalent (or required) outside the US.

I'll also say that I'd be more inclined to recommend a teacher who's a freelancer and does many different things (including other stuff than just playing trombone) than someone who's only ever played auditions and then had a steady orchestra job, and therefore has likely no idea about how to become a professional outside that very narrow path, and is really only fluent in one style and one way to play the instrument.

[Burgerbob]

Yes, even junior colleges in the US are requiring doctorates more and more.

[Wilktone]

By and large, a huge number of faculty hired these days to teach studio lessons are adjunct. Professional performers in an area where they both get opportunities to play with excellent musicians and also teach even part time are difficult to find.

As far as full time jobs, in the U.S. at least, the job of a trombone professor is a lot more than teaching studio lessons and professional development (i.e., performing). There are students to advise on their coursework, committees to serve on, faculty governance, designing and developing curriculum for the entire music department and more. For many full time teaching positions you are also required to cover additional classes. In my teaching career I ended up teaching lessons to all the brass majors, coaching brass quintet, directing the jazz ensemble, conducting the concert band, coordinated the applied music lessons and weekly student recitals. I also taught a few classroom courses, music theory, music appreciation, jazz history, world music, rock history, and music theory. I even covered a semester of class piano.

Junior colleges are a great example of what I'm talking about. I once interviewed for a full time position at a junior college. The duties, as I recall, were teaching private lessons (when there happened to be students who wanted them, not a huge studio), music theory, conducting the concert band (which would need heavy recruiting to fill). But the main duty was to chair the music department - as the only full time member of that department. (I wasn't offered the job, by the way.)

If I had only focused on say, orchestral trombone playing, while getting my doctorate I would not have had the diversity of interests and background to be able to do my teaching jobs. Theoretically, getting a graduate degree in music not only prepares you for your very narrow interests, but also forces you to get a solid grounding in those other details. One of the best classes I took during my doctoral studies was Band Administration. There also was a required course called The Role of Music In Higher Education that also helped prepare me for full time college teaching.

To a certain extent, I agree with the criticism that too many music teachers in higher education too often don't continue to develop as performers. However, some of those teachers chose to sacrifice that area in order to better serve the needs of their students (who might not all be working towards being professional performers) and their university (who need to get courses covered by qualified instructors).

I was "good enough" at trumpet, tuba, and horn to teach the music ed students I had, and some of them became pretty good performers afterwards (I didn't screw them up too badly). So I have to believe that sometimes a teacher can be "good enough" to help his or her students without continuing to perform professionally. But yes, there were times where I had to tell my students that they would be better served with a teacher who performed on their particular instrument. Then again, I've also told some trombone students that they were ready to move on to another teacher who could better help them.

Again, I dunno what this says about supposed differences in the standards between jazz and orchestral trombonists. Maybe just that I don't think the education system we're stuck with is necessarily to blame for sloppy or clean technique.

Dave

[tbdana]

Dave, it's just typical thread drift. I don't know what the connection is, either.

In my little backwater area, most of the university music faculty actively play local gigs, and the middle school and high school band teachers all play in community bands and orchestras.

[imsevimse]

Dave, it's just typical thread drift. I don't know what the connection is, either.

In my little backwater area, most of the university music faculty actively play local gigs, and the middle school and high school band teachers all play in community bands and orchestras.

The connection is that "sloppy" playing and "not clean" playing from professional jazz musicians in jazz solos can mean the performers aren't as good now as professionals once were because the new teachers now do not teach the same, or the environment where musicians develop has changed. Maybe the ones who play "sloppy" only hear other sloppy players. The possibility to hear real masters that can be raw models who never would play (publicly) beyond their limits are now more rare. Maybe the most talented today in music do not chooe to play trombone? Maybe they do something else than music because they look at the music industry and chose to be a pop star or influencer or something else where fame and money is. Why choose trombone today with all that stimuli around. Why not sports or media if you are an extrovert, why trombone today if you are a little kid? I think all this is connected to "sloppy" jazz improvisations like anything else that also happens and is 'sloppy" in todays performances or even in other businesses in the world. It can may be they play sloppy just because it doesn't matter to them, because they think that is sufficient. Sloppyness is everywhere.
There aren't to many situations you can meet with the best and sit in and learn from them today. I see a lot of the old experienced ones go now without beeing able to lead the new generation. The new generation leads itself which is very strange. The chain of continuity is broken. There aren't enough good raw models left to lead in close up. It's not the same to listen to someone who is really good on YouTube as sitting next to them. You need to meet to be able to learn, you need to get advice and pick up things from the best. If they are not around you will not learn from them. You will not hear from them you need to get rid of the "sloppy" playing.

This is how I see the situation here in Sweden i do not know about situation in U.S.

/Tom

[brassmedic]

My own experience with jazz is only from big bands and there I felt it was (and is) as strict on how you play and read music as it is in symphony orchestras. Can't say I have big experience in any camps though. Studio musicians have to cover a lot of styles and some styles can maybe feels sloppy but should maybe be so?

Brassmedic, I see your point about jazz players being rigid. Within jazz there are conventions too and we often look down on those that don't know the "proper" way to play. Perhaps we are too rigid also.

Thanks, guys. That was exactly my point. I've done a lot of big bang gigs in my day, and there were a very narrow set of parameters for how you play that stuff, if you want to ever be hired again. And I don't think that's a bad thing. If you aren't playing it right, you stick out like a sore thumb. Listeners really value a band that's "tight", and it can't be tight if the players aren't following the same conventions.

[jacobgarchik]

Ray Anderson has some sick precision when he wants to
check out "the warm-up" at 14:03


or the head to this one...uh, how often does he miss the high F# out of nowhere?


he doesn't attack notes with a typical organ-like onset of the note like joe schmo in the practice room...but neither does Teagarden, Higgenbotham, Dickie Wells, Dickenson - that is all a grand tradition, and an expressive tradition, and Ray Anderson is nailing *that* technique. In that sense he is perfectly "clean".

to me this is perfect execution. "Tah" attack? no, to me it sounds like a "mmmah" attack!


BTW Classical players used to have a lot more mojo going on with attacks and sustains and expressive transformation of tone and pitch too - have you seen Joe Alessi's podcast with the archivist of the Nyphil where he is astonished at the techniques of trombonists in vintage recordings of the phil with Armond Ruta et al? (about half way through) slide vibrato! hairpin attacks! As Alessi says many times in the podcast, tastes and techniques have changed.

https://archives.nyphil.org/index.php/podcast/alessi

[brassmedic]

I'd be very interested to hear an example of this from an acclaimed orchestra.

They wouldn't be acclaimed if they couldn't do both.

So what you're saying is, you've heard groups that aren't very good. Haven't there always been groups that aren't very good? I'm not saying this was your point necessarily, but I definitely got a vibe from several posts in this thread that somehow classical musicians have become slaves to precision at the expense of musicality and/or individuality, and I just don't hear that.

[BGuttman]

I was at a New England Brass Conference and one of the presenters was Jim Pugh. He had a quintet with him including Marcus Rojas on tuba (don't remember the other players). Jim is a consummate jazzer. First thing the group played was a nice classical work (Gabrieli?) and they played it note perfect. These guys could play "straight" as well as "jazzy".

For that matter, Berklee had 3 trombone profs: Phil Wilson, Tony Lada, and Tom Plsek. I've heard Lada and Plsek play cleanly and accurately even though the school they were associated was more jazz oriented. I'm sure Wilson could play "legit" as well, although I never heard him.

[Wilktone]

This is how I see the situation here in Sweden i do not know about situation in U.S.

That's interesting, Tom. In the U.S., at least, I get the impression that instrumental technique is generally better than earlier. There are some seriously great trombonists out there performing very cleanly, and it seems to be that there are more of them. One somewhat common "complaint" that sometimes gets raised is that schools are churning out players who can really get around their instrument, but perhaps aren't as expressive or original as in years past. I dunno that this is true either, and my impressions may not be accurate.

To be honest, when I first read some of this discussion I assumed that the sloppy jazz players that folks are complaining about were maybe some of the earlier players, who might have been self taught. Certainly in early New Orleans styles and early swing period we could point to recordings that might be considered "sloppy" by today's standards.

As an aside, Kid Ory might be considered "sloppy," but I've played a lot of his music with a repertory band and his lines and solos are quite hard to play (at least for me).

Ray Anderson has some sick precision when he wants to
check out "the warm-up" at 14:03

I had forgotten about this album, I had it on cassette tape back when it was first released.

Here's another great performance that I think is very clean and worth sharing.

[tbdana]

Okay, I never ask equipment questions, but what the heck kind of horn is he playing that appears to have no braces on the bell?

[imsevimse]

This is how I see the situation here in Sweden i do not know about situation in U.S.

That's interesting, Tom. In the U.S., at least, I get the impression that instrumental technique is generally better than earlier. There are some seriously great trombonists out there performing very cleanly, and it seems to be that there are more of them. One somewhat common "complaint" that sometimes gets raised is that schools are churning out players who can really get around their instrument, but perhaps aren't as expressive or original as in years past. I dunno that this is true either, and my impressions may not bei accurate.
- - -

The peak of Swedish Big Band was in the late 50ies, with the Harry Arnold Band. I know U.S A is the country where jazz is born and that it isn't the same. To be clear there are phenomenal Swedish jazz musicians today too but climate for jazz is not the same. No scenes, no places to meet and few gigs. Why then invest in jazz? Still some do and become good, but what I think not in class with the best from the erlier years. On trombone we have Nils Landgren and a few more rather unknown to the world who really are good but no Åke Persson or Eje Thelin.
In the sixties many musicians moved to Stockholm from US and that made a difference. They had a great influence on our jazz here and very exciting projects took place.
There were also a lot of american musicians here to do clinics/recordings in collaboration with Swedish musicians and of course also concerts. I saw Bill Watrous in Stockholm in the 80ies. Many famous bands came over because we had an audience. That's all gone. There are many trombonists who can play fast now here but that's not what I want to hear, and I think the younger (pro) players are a bit "sloppy", and I think they don't mind because it's "jazzy" or ligit for jazz (just as I think also is what Dana meant), and none of the respected guys is around to tell them because they are gone.

/Tom

[LeTromboniste]

Okay, I never ask equipment questions, but what the heck kind of horn is he playing that appears to have no braces on the bell?

Well, there is one brace. But yeah just one. Could be something customized, but also lots of antique instruments have only one bell brace, especially if there's no tuning slide in the bell section, so this might be something early. It also looks like the neckpipe is aligned straight with the lower slide tube instead of having a curve or angle, which also is more common on vintage instruments.

[jacobgarchik]

Here's another great performance that I think is very clean and worth sharing.

Hey, thanks a lot!

it's a Conn 82h

as it happens i posted another track today, unreleased take from my album Assembly, recorded in 2021.
I guess I like those changes.

[mikerspencer]

This discussion reminds me of what someone once said to me "when you listen to Paul Desmond, you know he meant exactly that note, exactly where it was". And that's always something I think about when someone is great (irrespective of style). They meant it, everything about it, just the way it was.

[tbdana]

This is a decade old so you may be familiar with it, but it popped up in my YouTube feed today, and I thought I'd post it as a wonderful example of beautifully clean jazz playing, even at speed, by Bob McChesney. I love this.



And I'm a huge fan of Dave Slonaker's writing. I believe I did some TinyTunes sessions for him back in the day. Writes for trombone really well.

[JTeagarden]

There are so many extremely precise jazz trombonists out there, who articulate notes exactly the way they intend to, I would only say that orchestral players are more unform in their articulations, get 10 together, and they are likely to articulate in largely the same way.

Jazz players simply have a broader ranger of choices, but get really good ones together, and listen to how quickly they reach an agreement on phrasing, articulations, etc. If this weren't the case, big band trombone sections wouldn't sound very tight, and the good ones definitely do.

[JTeagarden]

I feel like the heyday of musicians "splitting the difference" between these two extremes were the holywood studio orchestras, I watched "American in Paris" last night, what an orchestra (not sure who the lead trumpet was, but wow...), just a great mixture of jazz and orchestral elements, done very intentionally.

[captain]

And if you don't think it can be done, listen to this.

I would argue this is not "jazz" but a jazz influenced classical show piece.

The video is already gone. Got a working link, or at least a description of what it was?

[tbdana]

Wow, sorry, I have absolutely no idea what that video was. Sam described it as a jazz influenced classical show piece, and the only piece that comes to mind that fits that description is the Chick Corea trombone concerto. But that's just a guess.

[SamBTbrn]

If I remember correctly it was Fly or Die for Basstrombone.
The Amazing recording by Lionel Fumeaux.

My comment still stands though

[VJOFan]

Maybe the first “crossover” piece for trombone was the Shilkret Concerto written for Tommy Dorsey. I learned of the piece when a non-trombonists neighbour lent me a Christian Lindbergh recording of it. I am partial to Dorsey’s interpretation. For my money maybe the best musician ever to play our instrument- not the best trombonist to play music on the trombone, but the most musical voice to use trombone as the medium of expression.