Here's my idea.

If you already know a good bit of music theory and know your way around your instrument, get all the volumes of the Real Book and forget all other printed material for the time being.

Then, get every Buddy Emmons jazz record ever made and learn the heads and solos of the tunes that appeal to you. Try to hear the changes by ear and if you get stuck refer to your Real Books for the changes to most standards (sometimes the recordings and the Real Book changes will not be the same but it is a good starting place).

Next, find all the other recorded steel guitar jazz material you can and learn it too. My recommendations for this are Paul Franklin's "Just Pickin'", and all of Doug Jernigan's vinyl albums (note: the Paul Franklin and Doug Jernigan albums are not exclusively jazz albums but all have some jazz cuts) plus the "Jazz on 10" which I think is on tape and CD. There are lots of other good jazz steel players like Maurice Anderson, etc. so you should never have a shortage of material. Any players you choose to learn from will be helpful but I think it is essential to study Buddy Emmons.

Next, go buy some Charlie Parker records and maybe a Charlie Parker Omni book. Now learn as many Parker heads as possible. Some are extremely easy and some are so difficult I will never be able to play them. Most are somewhere in between and while challenging, are suitable for a standard C6th tuning.

Now, go buy some records of other jazz players -- as many different ones as you can find. The more you listen, the more you should absorb. My recommendation for players whose styles easily translate to steel are Chet Baker, Clifford Brown, Cannonball Adderly, Oscar Peterson, Barney Kessel and Hank Garland. Notice that trumpet, sax, piano and guitar are represented.

I'm not recommending against Miles Davis, Dizzy Gillespie, John Coletrane, etc. You want to learn from them too. Especially their tunes that have become standards.

It's just that the players from the first list tend to play melodically, and in a more linear fashion.

At this point, printed material might be used as a supplement to help you understand what you are playing but I don't think
jazz -- or any other music -- can be learned from books.

Learn with you ears and not with your eyes!

Best wishes,

quote:

---

get every Buddy Emmons jazz record ever made and learn the heads and solos

---

------------------
The "Master of Acceptable Tone"
www.jimcohen.com

How about playing solos to "Giant Steps" at a Coletrane tempo off the top of your head?

I'm going to master that tonight and then tomorrow it's on to "Steel Guitar Rag"!

Best,

Cheers,

quote:

---

I have had to forgo any practicing for the last 2 years or so because of the radio show I do and my jazz playing has suffered terribly

---

Jim, I heard your set in Dallas last year. If you were two-years' rusty for that show, I'd be afraid to hear you when you're in "top form". It was an awesome set, pal.

------------------
The "Master of Acceptable Tone"
www.jimcohen.com

------------------
The "Master of Acceptable Tone"
www.jimcohen.com

Each of us who listen to, study and play jazz, recognize and have a great appreciation for the complexity of the art form, and the level of talent it takes to be a great player.

I am of the opinion, the best way to study and learn jazz is by studying the works of legends of jazz, both by close examination of written material and by listening to recordings. When doing so, the jazz perspective presents a musical direction while planting the seeds of personal interpretation and creativity.

While studying and listening we as steel players might encounter the following:

First the problem of transcribing available jazz and relating it to positioning on the steel guitar relative to playing pockets, both from a single string and a pedals and knee levers configuration.

Secondly, and most importantly to me, is how to decide on where to play, while playing into the strength of the tonal characteristics of the steel guitar. I learned long ago that precisely emulating jazz legends on their instruments while applying it to steel guitar lacked the same luster and musical impact, and in some instances great solos laid so easy on the 6th tuning, that playing them appeared to be “trite”. The reason being, (in my opinion) the inherent characteristics of the steel guitar.

Due in part to the wide range of string gauges, as well as the 3rd and 6th tones being compensated for intonation, steel guitar encounters characteristics not found in a large degree on other instruments. For instance, play your highest string at a low fret and duplicate the same note on the next lower string while continuing the same procedure up the neck. In so doing one will notice each string, although providing the same note, has a different sound, and that sound moves even further away from the original tone as you move up the neck.

I verified (in my mind anyway) the consistency of tonality of other instruments by experimenting with my MIDI, which as we know can emulate any instrument through actual sampling.

I found when playing violin that when I started getting lower, the exact same sound went into that of a viola and then down to that of a bass. This same characteristic was present from trumpet down to trombone and the same for reed instruments. This is an indication (as least to me) that the characteristic and consistency of sound relative to other instruments of the same family, never varies while continuing through different octave ranges. This again proves the masters of music achieved the amazing feat of perpetuating the color of tone through different octaves that made beautiful musical blends.

This prompts two questions. Is there an answer to what I consider to be something that should be addressed relative to steel guitar, and do others perceive this as a situation that requires attention? To me it does!

Andy V.,
I think you have to apply things at least partially according to the instrument's capabiltiies, and not totally generically. For example, even though Emily didn't mention using a diminished scale, I use it all the time. On C6, there is probably no easier scale to use since all you have to do is press pedals 5,6, and riff around the fret. On other instruments, I don't think it's as easy to play diminished lines. So, the idea of learning alot of philosophies is sound, but then when applying them, I think we should orient our playing at least to some degree based on the inherent attributes of the steel, such as picking patterns, pedals, etc. etc.

quote:

---

when I try to press pedals 5 & 6 down on my Bakelite Rick or Gibson EH-150 I just step on thin air. I haven't heard a diminshed sound yet. Please advise.

---

Another thing to consider is that there are guys playing steel with the big boys on Blue Note and with actual current jazz stars using the E9 neck. Often its the unique sound and phrasing ability of the steel that people want to use the steel for in jazz .

I might be wrong about this but it seems like what the steel community thinks of as jazz doesn't have very much to do with what guys are playing in the clubs in NYC.

quote:

---

Another thing to consider is that there are guys playing steel with the big boys on Blue Note and with actual current jazz stars using the E9 neck.

---

------------------
The "Master of Acceptable Tone"
www.jimcohen.com

There is some great stuff in this thread.
All I'm trying to say is that the world of jazz is very big and has room for all sorts of sounds and combinations of notes.

Bob

here is a little thing
From todays NY Times:
January 23, 2002

MUSIC REVIEW | NY GUITAR FESTIVAL

A Marathon Displays the Many Ways to Trick a Guitar

By JON PARELES

quote:

---

.....Yet one of the concert's most striking sets was anything but pointillistic. Bill Frisell on electric guitar and Greg Leisz on lap steel guitar played duets with all edges dissolved. Using electronics to make loops of sound well up around him, Mr. Frisell ambled through melodies (among them Marvin Gaye's "What's Going On") as if questioning every note before letting it waft into the air. Meanwhile Mr. Leisz surrounded his lines with a penumbra of echoes and harmonizing afterthoughts.

---

Reece, as for your point about the tonality of the steel, perhaps this is the reason, as far back as the 50's, that Jerry Byrd tried identical gauges on his first three strings.

Leaving aside jazz theory & technique for a moment, in listening for truly profound jazz playing, personally, I think there's is a reason why string players in general(and even pianists) may have a harder row to hoe in playing jazz than horns, reeds or even harmonica players. The closer the instrument is to the human voice - and more specifically - to breathing, the easier it is to inflect each note with a fundamental quality of humanity. Flutes are IMHO the most obvious example. String players, by producing their tones with their hands and picks or bows are just one step removed from a more organic process. That's why Louis Armstrong's trumpet inflections, slurs, etc. may hit listeners harder than a Buddy Emmons blue note bend. But of all the string "family", violins & steel guitars have it easier than standard guitars and pianists in my estimation. This isn't a hard and fast rule, just my general observation. As a naturally microtonal instrument, the steel has the best chance of the strings for inflecting this "human" or "vocal" quality.

Certainly beautiful jazz playing can happen on the steel and I think it's easier to swing on steel than on guitar. Why do folks think haven't we heard more jazz of all types played on the instrument?

Boy, you got that right. I dunno about New York City, but I was in New Orleans over Xmas and a friend told me I should check out Dave Easley's jazz band. I was all pumped up expecting to hear some Emmons or Jernigan type be-bop, but I don't mind admitting that I just didn't "get" what these guys were doing, it seemed both tuneless and souless to me, real serious "head" music.

The whole thing about Jazz is, there are so many different variety's, and I think we do tend to think in terms of swing and sometimes be-bop when we think of jazz on the steel. That is why I was so suprised by Dave Easleys band I guess. They were certainly a jazz band, but not my kind of jazz.

Great thread this. one of the best in ages

[This message was edited by Steve England on 25 January 2002 at 12:04 PM.]

quote:

---

an eight minute improvisational solo by Wes Montgomery or Stan Getz or Barney Kessel or George Shearing, etc, accompanied by base, drums and piano IS jazz!

---

------------------
The "Master of Acceptable Tone"
www.jimcohen.com

In the 1940-50s era where my definition came from, there was a clear understanding among musicians of what was known as "progressive jazz". I concede that other definitions of jazz have evolved over the past 40 years, but I still view the genre of jazz within a very narrow window.

A flawless reproduction from written music or memory, of one of the greatest jazz solo's ever played by one of the greats, is just that ....a reproduction. It may be pleasing to hear and display the skill of an accomplished musician but it is devoid of the fundamental element of jazz.....creative interpretation.

I guess it's true that........

"A mind changed against it's will, is of the same opinion still".

Respectfully......Gene

[This message was edited by Gene Jones on 26 January 2002 at 07:57 AM.]