gjones Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 [quote name='Bilbo' post='1277301' date='Jun 21 2011, 04:50 PM']its a bit like those drunks you get at parties that bore you senseless with their adolescent meandering and who you only walk home with because you fear that they may collapse in the gutter and choke to death on their own vomit.[/quote] Oh that was you was it? Thanks for that. Sorry about your shoes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bilbo Posted June 21, 2011 Author Share Posted June 21, 2011 [quote name='gjones' post='1277518' date='Jun 21 2011, 07:15 PM']Oh that was you was it? Thanks for that. Sorry about your shoes.[/quote] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cat Burrito Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 I'm confused.... ....there's a *third* chord? You crazy Jazz cats! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacDaddy Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 I have nothing to add to this discussion and am not afraid to say so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Telebass Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 [quote name='silddx' post='1277473' date='Jun 21 2011, 06:39 PM']Not really, punk died a quick death and Rush are still here [/quote] Classic! Bilbo is totally right on. As is everyone else who says all musicians are self-indulgent. Any performance artist must be, to some extent, otherwise they simply would not do what they do... My 0.02c... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beedster Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 [quote name='SteveK' post='1277516' date='Jun 21 2011, 07:14 PM']Poetic justice. Certainly, most of the punk bands themselves "died a quick death". Unfortunately, the attitude and ethos was more enduring.[/quote] I think condemning an entire genre is questionable (especially one as problematic to define as 'punk', let's not forget that early Jazzers were considered punks by their more conventional peers). But hey, pursuing that debate gets us back to matters of taste and to irreconcilable opinions, so it's another question probably best left alone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Academy Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 If you've studied improvisation, then you should solo. Why not? You would expect it in, say, a jazz situation. But I've played in some blues situations where the guitarist thinks it's OK to play long and boring solos. Slow blues = obligatory BB King-type solo = pass me the gun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xilddx Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 [quote name='Beedster' post='1277534' date='Jun 21 2011, 07:22 PM']I think condemning an entire genre is questionable (especially one as problematic to define as 'punk', let's not forget that early Jazzers were considered punks by their more conventional peers). [b]But hey, pursuing that debate gets us back to matters of taste and to irreconcilable opinions, so it's another question probably best left alone [/b][/quote] The DEBATE is where it's at! Basschat would be a very dull (although very useful) wiki if it wasn't for these debates. The provocative views in these debates give me massive pause-for-thought inducement. I remember how argumentative I used to be. I used to jump in on these threads with the first thing that came into my head! Idiot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bilbo Posted June 21, 2011 Author Share Posted June 21, 2011 [quote name='silddx' post='1277559' date='Jun 21 2011, 07:34 PM']I used to jump in on these threads with the first thing that came into my head! Idiot. [/quote] And what's wrong with spontaneity? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xilddx Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 [quote name='Bilbo' post='1277564' date='Jun 21 2011, 07:36 PM']And what's wrong with spontaneity? [/quote] Too self indulgent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marvin Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Bilbo' post='1277564' date='Jun 21 2011, 07:36 PM']And what's wrong with spontaneity? [/quote] It's self indulgent EDIT: Silldx got there first I'm going off to build my self a fish. Edited June 21, 2011 by Marvin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bilbo Posted June 21, 2011 Author Share Posted June 21, 2011 Is there an echo in here here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xilddx Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 [quote name='Bilbo' post='1277576' date='Jun 21 2011, 07:41 PM']Is there an echo in here here?[/quote] There had better not be, such things are for Steve Hackett and Steve Howe, not proper non-self indulgent musicians like Steve Jones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RhysP Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 [quote name='risingson' post='1277408' date='Jun 21 2011, 05:55 PM']Is music just about enjoying yourself, or is it about entertaining an audience?[/quote] Music SHOULD be about being true to yourself & playing what you want to play, regardless of whether anyone else wants to hear it or not. If pleasing an audience comes before that then you shouldn't be a musician IMO - become a clown or a f***ing juggler or one of those c**ts that pretends to be a statue or some other such "entertaining" bollocks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balcro Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Bilbo' post='1277301' date='Jun 21 2011, 04:50 PM']OK, I've got the a*** :lol: I keep hearing the term 'self indulgence' used whenever there is any suggestion that a musician is moving away from the groove and into the area of soloing or collective improvisation. I have heard this term since the heady days of punk when the bands I liked (Yes, Genesis etc) were dismissed by the monkey-booted, donkey-jacket wearing Philistines that surrounded me as irrelevant because of their 'self indulgence'.[/quote] Who first used the term indulgence to describe the likes of Yes? I don't know, but it was probably some journalist in the NME or Melody Maker. It's there for provocation to make the story/article run in the days when popular music lasted no more than 5 minutes. Then came progressive rock! Students liked it even if they didn't understand it musically, 'cos all their mates liked it. Non-students didn't get it so they mocked the "self-indulgers". Improvisation and technique are fine in the right place, but I do think some musicians push it to the limit, because for them it becomes part of their CV and they rise or fall by the regular demonstration of their virtuosity. Take that multi-themed Keith Jarrett video. That's the first piece of Keith Jarrett that I've found enjoyable (although I could have done without the face-pulling). Technically that wasn't a difficult piece but the usual ensemble pieces are on a different planet. You don't go to a Keith Jarrett concert to listen to old standards like "The Nightingale Sang in Berkeley Square" drifting into a film theme followed by "DannyBoy" etc...and on.... Must agree with you there [i]Beedster - "One man's self-indulgence is another man's virtuosity. It's about taste, and people have different tastes; no amount of ranting about it eloquently or otherwise will change those tastes substantially."[/i] The original critics probably had a point. When having to listen to endless repetitions and improvisation for the sake of improvisation, then I think it's fair comment, but just improvising and expanding within the context of the piece and moving towards a conclusion shows both control and the ability to entertain. As [i]Mykesbass said "and jazzers taking improvisation further off piste) where it becomes competitive, and having become competitive they are then doing it for their own personal achievement, not for the benefit of the listening public, thereby becoming self indulgent?"[/i] Balcro. Edited June 21, 2011 by Balcro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conan Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 I like music and I like playing bass. OK, I [i]love[/i] playing bass. If I do something that I like, I am indulging myself. Indeed, it could be said that I was being "self indulgent". However, if at least one person in the band, or, (God-forbid) "audience" likes what I am doing; then am I not also indulging [b]them[/b]? Mutual self indulgence. Can such a concept exist? Or do the two "selfs" (sic) cancel each other out and it simply becomes indulgence? Maybe the answer is for us to only do things that we [i]don't[/i] like. Then we could never be described as self-indulgent. But then we are indulging someone else. Whom, I neither know nor care. I like to think that I have a reasonable taste in music. So if [i]I[/i] like something, chances are that someone else will. Good enough for me! Am I making sense here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conan Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Good thread BTW. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conan Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 [quote name='silddx' post='1277583' date='Jun 21 2011, 07:46 PM']There had better not be, such things are for Steve Hackett and Steve Howe, not proper non-self indulgent musicians like Steve Jones.[/quote] To indulge the non-self. Hmmmmm. I'll have to think about that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conan Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 [quote name='RhysP' post='1277589' date='Jun 21 2011, 07:50 PM']If pleasing an audience comes before that then you shouldn't be a musician IMO - become a clown or a f***ing juggler or one of those c**ts that pretends to be a statue or some other such "entertaining" bollocks.[/quote] Get off that fence and say what you [b]really[/b] mean Rhys!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xilddx Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 [quote name='Conan' post='1277593' date='Jun 21 2011, 07:52 PM']I like music and I like playing bass. OK, I [i]love[/i] playing bass. If I do something that I like, I am indulging myself. Indeed, it could be said that I was being "self indulgent". However, if at least one person in the band, or, (God-forbid) "audience" likes what I am doing; then am I not also indulging [b]them[/b]? Mutual self indulgence. Can such a concept exist? Or do the two "selfs" (sic) cancel each other out and it simply becomes indulgence? Maybe the answer is for us to only do things that we [i]don't[/i] like. Then we could never be described as self-indulgent. [b]But then we are indulging someone else[/b]. Whom, I neither know nor care. I like to think that I have a reasonable taste in music. So if [i]I[/i] like something, chances are that someone else will. Good enough for me! Am I making sense here? [/quote] Non-self indulgence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conan Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 (edited) [quote name='silddx' post='1277603' date='Jun 21 2011, 07:56 PM']Non-self indulgence [/quote] I refer the gentleman to my earlier post. I'm still thinking about it BTW. Edited June 21, 2011 by Conan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RhysP Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Conan' post='1277593' date='Jun 21 2011, 07:52 PM']I like to think that I have a reasonable taste in music. So if [i]I[/i] like something, chances are that someone else will.[/quote] That doesn't necessarily mean you've got reasonable taste - it could mean that someone else has got taste as bad as you. Edited June 21, 2011 by RhysP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conan Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 [quote name='RhysP' post='1277608' date='Jun 21 2011, 07:58 PM']That doesn't necessarily mean you've got reasonable taste - it could mean that someone else has got taste as bad as you. [/quote] Good point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xilddx Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 [quote name='RhysP' post='1277608' date='Jun 21 2011, 07:58 PM']That doesn't necessarily mean you've got reasonable taste - it could mean that someone else has got taste as bad as you. [/quote] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_b Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 [quote name='Balcro' post='1277590' date='Jun 21 2011, 07:50 PM']....Who first used the term indulgence to describe the likes of Yes? I don't know, but it was probably some journalist in the NME or Melody Maker....[/quote] The word "indulgence" is far too long for the NME. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.