Why not consistent? Same theme.. dissimilar execution. On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 12:39 PM, Udhay Shankar N <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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)) > >
