Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
|
Hmm, the content of the last mail disappeared in cyberspace... You're post made me think Rainer.. thanks.. As for "freeing the soloist" it's a very egocentric concept. I Would prefer to think of it as freeing music, sort of. What do I mean.?? not sure :-) BUT, I think we all have felt from time to time that there are things we would like to "say" or express that can't be said in a fixed context of melody, harmony and rhythm. So based on our background some of us try to find "new" (or perhaps just different) means of expression. Looping has made me listen and think in new ways, for me that is. What you call the approach is not important (harmolodic, modal...) I think many musicians just want to EXPRESS themselves. Looping is a way I have found.. Sometimes I wonder how "outside" you can play and still call it music... All the best, Anders My looping experiments: www.soundclick.com/andersbergdahl > Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 01:53:51 +0200 > Subject: Davis' modal stuff > From: moinsound@googlemail.com > To: loopers-delight@loopers-delight.com > > Warning: I lost track of what I wanted to say in the first place > halfway during the following message - feel free to ignore! > > Rainer > > Rick said (in that "book turned 100% feedback" thread): > "Davis embraced modalism because it finally gave the soloist control > over determining harmony as opposed to the comping instruments or the > 'tune'" > > I'll start by stating that for me, "Kind of Blue" is one of the most > overrated works in music (together with the entire catalogue of W.A. > Mozart, the later Richard Strauß operas, anything by Django Reinhart > (sp?) and the majority of Jarret's solo work, to name just a few > things). > Now that I've gotten your attention ;) > > There had been, at that time in jazz, different approaches in trying > to, as Rick puts it, "give the soloist control". ............... |