Lazz

You are not alone. For me too, it's the 'sound' which captures me and draws me in. Eventually - lyrics, and maybe some sideways sense of their meaning, will beging to percolate through. But I am listening to the sound first and foremost. What makes a song lasting and memorable is melody. The words had just better not let it down is all. I always figured everyone else was the same, heard music the same way really. And I try to write with that in mind.

You're right, it does. And in less wimpy self-obsessed style too - much more attractive. And very country. I sure like those quotes you append to your postings. Good stuff. But, you know, when thinking about that question at the beginning - "Does the song I just wrote actually say anything?" - I realised that I've got quite a few where I'd have to say "No - this crap is pretty low level meaningless mumble" - but somehow it manages to pass muster (barely) I think because the idiom allows the sounds of the words and the shape of their melody to somehow be enough.

Take care of your embouchure, grandson.

Hold on John. Mud said he'd been invited to join a co-operative company as a director. Although we don't know exactly which style of company formation has been adopted, it all comes down to company law and the particular constitution and articles of association that have been written. It may be, for eg, that it is a 'company limited by guarantee', and so directors' personal liability can be limited to one single squiddly. (Though I doubt that would be the case because it seriously restricts borrowing) Mud - pragmatically, I find this a potentially fascinating business model and conundrum but - with respect - what I find significantly disturbing here is your misplaced expectation that you are going to find constructive input from any forum such as this. It suggests to me that maybe this might not be for you. Have you no counsel closer to home ? No university resources ? Why here ?

Hello Mud. That sounds exciting and frightening in equal measure. Good luck with your considerations and mulling and measuring. I think it's about time you subscribed to Bob Lefsetz's Newsletter - which appears at irregular intervals in my inbox - sometimes thrice daily. He is an annoying and opinionated bastard at times - but he has been around, a long-time industry insider, knows everybody, is obstinately beholden to none of them, and in amongst his spiel there are regular nuggets of insider business intelligence which could very usefully inform the way you are able to evaluate the potential of this opportunity. Good luck with it.

Alright. Three neighbourhood guys have been recommended to me. Look to your PM for details. Good luck.

Right then. I am being e-mailed a couple of recommendations. I will send them along as soon as I get 'em. Should be decent - hope one of them is appropriate for what you nedd.

OK - I've sent a note but no responses yet. I didn't actually learn 'em - not all those patterns - the articulation I found a tad impractical on my instrument - voice, yes. But I managed my own approximations of several reasonably successfully. For me (as well as most others, I think) the main benefit lies in the CDs: if you can't simply call up a rhythm section for playtime yet you really need to practice for tunes, then the Aebersold series gives you that opportunity. The rhythm section may not actually always the grooviest thing around, feel-wise, but they serve a good and useful purpose. Vol 3 gives you standard Major and minor turnarounds in all keys plus a couple of blues and a bebop tune - and you can just play-a-long to your heart's content. Vol 42 similarly lets you mess around on blues in every key, Handy practice tools. These old standbys have largely been replaced by Band-In-A-Box nowadays, though - more expensive (of course) but it would let you input any changes for the particular song you want to work on and practice over the top from there. I'm saving up for mine. I did a class with Baker years back. Aebersold, too. They're real good at making sense of what other players are getting up to on a less conscious basis and helping to understand. I'll bet Clegg used their stuff.

Thanks for the explication, DD. There are formulae and patterns which others recommend for practice and vocabulary. Tempted to recommend Jamey Aebersold - Volume 3 and Volume 42 might be useful to you. David Baker, too. Should also be possible to borrow them from the library, photocopy the exercises you want and burn a copy of the CD. But it's really hard to say - I think I really mean that they proved useful to me - so might not be for you at all. This is one of those times when I would definitely recommend a teacher. Someone who can actually tell and know where you are at, who you can tell where you want get to, and will help you on your way. The right teacher can help where thread postings and web-sites can't. And one good lesson should last you at least three months. I can think of no-one in your neighbourhood immediately. But I have friends who know and can find out if you want.

That's terrific. I have always wanted a wooden computer and dreamed of doing the same some day. Look forward to the photos.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha Just wigged out on Conan Blues I see someone else found you via a Neil Innes page That makes a lot of sense But.... 79 years old ? That could make you older than me ! Hardly credible, what ?

Wow !!

One guy who just suddenly leapt to mind as "self taught master in his field with influence, distinctive sound, innovation".... is Erroll Garner. He was a real wierdo - in an extremely good way - but definitely not normal. Started playing piano at age 3 and grew up in the shadow of his elder piano-playing brother, Linton. (I only know this stuff through my friendship with brother Linton). Erroll was completely ambidextrous, for a start - could sign autographs with both hands and you couldn't tell the difference - could face the keyboard backwards and reach behind himself to play - perfectly - was also known to reach over the piano from behind it (had to climb on top of something to do this, cos he was quite short) and play it that way - also perfectly. And he had phenomenal powers of memory - he used to go along to classical concerts and then come home and play huge chunks of the repertoire he'd heard and filed away uncannily in brain cells..... That sort of wierdo. But they still never let him in the union for many years because he didn't read music. (eventually they relented) Still don't know quite how far to take the idea of being completely self-taught though.... Music was around in the family, just as it was aall round in the Pittsburgh neighbourhood.... among his schoolmates there was Billy Strayhorn, for instance, who was work-horse muse for Duke Ellington, and also Ahmad Jamal, who was a major influence on Miles Davis.... and most of the Miles rhythm sections were local and would hang at the house.... so he definitely grew within the established muso community.... so, while not necessarily being a formal education, that sort of thing, increasingly rare these days, is surely an education of an immeasurably special and irreplaceable kind. Wes Montgomery didn't read music either - but he, too, had music constantly in the family - the Montgomery brothers were all great. George Benson didn't know how to read either - though he probably does a bit better now. Would they be self-taught ? They all definitely studied hard. If you can get lessons - take 'em, I say. But it's up to you to study hard. As Linton said, "You have to practice everyday..... and you have to do a lot of washing-up!"

Hi Donna. I'm not sure I fully understand the question. Are you talking skins or strings ? How general/specific ? I like Nick's suggestion. Singing is fundamental to improvisation - which is what we expect in a solo, don't we ? I can't count the number of great player who insist that if you can't sing it, you shouldn't be playing it. Makes a lot of sense to me. And yes, it MUST be related to the tune. Otherwise - why is it happening ? Is there a specific song you are preparing for ? Or is it about general approaches ?

It was loose talk, I guess - ignorant of what might be our shared taken for granted assumptions of understanding. Ambiguity rules. On their own, in limbo. sans context, I have no idea what decision I would make about giving either of those two groups of three notes a name. So you wouldn't be alone there. But it wasn't actually claiming that either were an FMaj7. Merely offering two examples for fourth voicings I might choose as backgrounds played by three horns while an FMaj7 chord was going by. (Backgrounds that I refer to as 'pads' - and that could be completely wrong - dunno for sure what other people call them.) Illustrations of an arranging technique I use which has a particular sound I enjoy. Their successful and effective happening assumes and rests upon FMaj7 being taken care of by bass and chord axe(s). And those notes are all regular pukkah FMaj7 scale-tones. So they thicken up the Major chord nicely for me rather than make tension. That's just the way I look at it. Maybe there is tension. But I am intrigued also by the way you looked at these notes, though. Gives me other stuff to think about. You know, I have never taken the time to properly get to grips with the concepts revolving around 'bitonality' - like the Brecker Brothers' approach, f'rinstance - but, from what I vaguely recall, I suspect there is a lot of useful mileage can be squeezed from thinking in terms like G9/FMaj7, or Em11/FMaj7..... stuff like that. Interesting food for thought. Thanks.

1. It is very very easy to spend money on advertising and promotion 2. It is very very hard to make advertising and promotion effective 3. The one and only single guaranteed effective promo strategy we have is performance

Well. Glad it makes more sense. But no. that's not exactly what I meant. The fourths are one things : the inversions something else.

I apologise for the ambiguity and confusion. First, I was talking about two different techniques which I have had fun with. 1. Fourths They are 'flexible fourths' for a start - whichever one that fits: perfect, lowered, or raised. And I was referring (implicitly) only to chordal pads as backings. Meaning that I might voice an F Major chord as follows: G (the 9th) for the trumpet D (the 6th) for the sax A (the 3rd) for the bone or.... D (the 6th) for the trumpet A (the 3rd) for the sax E (the 7th) for the bone Does that make sense ? I use 4ths this way in the pads of It Really Doesn't Matter. But they can work harmonising melodies also. 2. 'Significant' Chords What I do here is choose, say, the IV and the V as characteristic sounds of the key. Then, all I do is line up the 3 inversions of the IV triad next to the 3 inversions of the V triad and also pick a close and handy solution for the odd note out, and that defines my palette for harmonising melody. We always harmonise downwards, by the way - if you harmonise upwards it means you are in effect making a new melody note - the highest note becomes what we hear as melody note - so harmonies are built downwards. In the key of F Major, as example, my two significant chosen chords could be Bb (IV) and C (V). So, harmonising melody notes in the key of F Major, one at a time: F in melody is harmonised as root position Bb triad G in melody is harmonised as root position C triad A in the melody doesn't exist in our two triads so we need a solution of either treating it as a 6th substituting for the 5th of the V chord, or as the Maj 7th substituting for the root of the IV - whatever sounds best. Bb in the melody is harmonised as 1st inversion Bb triad C in the melody is harmonised as 1st inversion C triad D in the melody is harmonised as 2nd inversion Bb triad E in the melody is harmonised as 2nd inversion C triad Any other non-diatonic accidentals - idiomatically unlikely - can be resolved like the above A. The result being that each harmonisation is a clear sonic statement of either IV or V. A eureka moment for me. The horn figures in the Cohen example linked two posts above in this thread were written using this technique. No big deal really - but it works for me. *** If I'm going to use parallels, I'll generally stick to 3rds and 6ths which is a really smooth siken sound. There's an old band called Supersax which orchestrated Charlie Parker solos this way. So it's great on fast moving lines. *** I'm still only a beginner. I depend largely for arranging on books by David Baker and by Dick Groves. **** Dunno if that helps - but I hope so - it took a bloody long time to type !!!

"Screw them all" does come pretty close, I agree

Great idea. Could be very valuable. Let us know. Thanks

Thought I would post a link to an example. My re-arrangement of a well-known ditty written by Leonard 'music-to-slash-your-wrists-by' Cohen,

I am very fond of political parroty - and this is a welcome addition, Joe. Thanks.

Not quite. Stéphane's dad gave him his first lessons along with his first violin when he was 13 years old. Three years later he entered the Paris Conservatory. Just like Zander, he made startling progress because he loved it, because he was hard-working and focussed, and not least because he had people around to show him the way.

Because they aren't actually, really and truly, musicians. (sorry - it just slipped out)

Oh - there you are. I didn't check all those details on site, Steve - I just made a huge assumption that leapt through notions of mix, master, over the internet, price, market-niche, process.... and just automatically came up with MP3 format. My poor brain automatically refused to compute this business model with huge files and FTP. It didn't make sense that way. Maybe it should have. Exactly. But what else would we reasonably expect ? No we couldn't - waste of time - our experience is just different, that's all. Mine contains none of the direct hands-on desk stuff that yours does. I am consumer of those professional services, however.