Aditya Kapil wrote, [on 12/5/2008 11:52 AM]: > Actually this may not be true... Jazz players try never to play the same > number the same way. If you intend for *similar* to mean another rendition > of the *same* song, then that's missing the point... Two versions of > Coltrane's "Love Supreme", for example, can sound very different (albeit in > the same melodic context).
That's not what I meant by "similar". Like Madhu said, I was also referring to the somewhat fuzzy notion of the *spirit* of the player. Also to things like style. If I recommend a jazz guitarist (say) to someone, I would talk about things like the picking style and the overall feel of the playing, which won't change from performance to performance. This is not inconsistent with what you say below. > Jazz regulars (listeners) hanker for "dissimilarities" between performances > of the same number: either by the same player or by different players. The > reason Jazz has so many more "standards", is that it provides common ground > for players to show "dissimilarities" through very personal > "improvisational skills". For the listener, standards provide "comfortably > known confines", so that they don't have worry about a new theme and can > concentrate on what's exciting... the improvisation. (I am not trying to > take away from original comps.. but that's a digression from this > conversation.). -- ((Udhay Shankar N)) ((udhay @ pobox.com)) ((www.digeratus.com))
