"Authenticity and originality are both weak tropes because, on their own, they can only account for weak players. True originality, and thus true creativity, never takes place in a historical vacuum; it is always rooted to something that has gone before. I remember observing the phenomenon of rootless “creativity” in my high school jazz band growing up. There were those of us who were listening to jazz and would go on to try to be musicians. Our fledgling attempts at soloing reflected whatever we had absorbed at that point - a little Bird, McCoy Tyner, Michael Brecker, what have you. Then there were kids in the band who were not going to pursue jazz for their life, had only a passing interest in playing music, and had hardly listened to jazz at all. They would also get a solo feature now and then. What did they play? It was sort of like playing scales up and down the horn. What was striking was that they all sounded the same: One would think that with all the freedom that an improvised context could have, they might all play something different. But collectively, the kids who weren’t really listening to jazz actually encompassed a style of sorts, and that style was dictated by their limitation. The limitation was due to the fact that they hadn’t absorbed anything; they hadn’t begun to even mimic like we were. There is a rule here, to gloss on Tolstoy: Rootless players are all alike, but every rooted player is rooted in his or her own way. Yes, there are tons of rooted players who are not original, but as a listener, give me the unoriginal player who has listened to a lot of great music and absorbed it any day to the player who hasn’t absorbed much of anything. This brings us back to the importance of input again: Without input, we have no model for our own style; without learning a language, we have no model to create our own. There is indeed an international style of rootless jazz playing. In the name of creativity, it expresses banality. In its lazy quest for the original, it finds only unoriginality. The champions of authenticity can take some poetic justice from that phenomenon. All their hard work, all their striving to do justice and pay homage to their forefathers, places them above the lazy, rootless denizens who never engage deeply in the music, who treat jazz like a subsidized vacation and not as a serious discipline. Through their loyal devotion to their influences, the authenticity-seekers have mastered a language; the rootless players merely babble with each other like babies on the bandstand. To be sure, there is justice for someone who devotes himself to the past in jazz: He has the comfort of his craft and the reassurance of deep knowledge. Still, knowledge alone makes him only a craftsman and not a creator." (Brad Mehldau)
I'm suddenly having a little crisis, hopefully my journey through jazz music will land me in a position to call myself an authentic musician. I have the sense and fear that maybe I'm just like any other of those babblers Brad is talking about since I identify many of the aforementioned problems in my playing and hearing habits, though I'm somewhat confident in the fact that I learned a lot of theory and language to come up with my own vocabulary. Maybe I'm just in the valley of Dunning Kruger effect's curve and have just the necessary to appreciate the difference between babbling and authentic yet rooted soloing. Anyways, thanks so much for uploading, this video was something else.
He was demonstrating beginner playing. Unoriginal playing can still be pretty impressive, like if you mastered playing in the style of Charlie Parker or whomever. I think jazz education teaches people to be educated, but actually being original is something relatively few accomplish.
i see your point. but he's not demonstrating beginner playing either. young brad doing his oscar peterson thing was a beginner too. brad is distinguishing two types of beginners: those who imitate and develop true originality in the process, and those who don't imitate anything and remain unoriginal.
well, it's really worth it to at least to a summary dive into the past of jazz. i was one of those rootless players who only listened to allan holdsworth. talk about lacking some important harmonic information, which i learned from rick beato videos. as much as i love allan's endless chord progressions, i never had any idea that something as cool as My Foolish Heart existed , and that it was ANCIENT, and full of really cool chords that REsolve. allan avoided resolution like the plague, perhaps to his detriment...
Allan wrote his track 'the dominant plague' to make fun of the type of jazz he steered clear from, in that he didn't like the sound of dominant 7th chords. I would have liked a few more harmonically traditional tunes from him, as he could play over functional progressions just fine, but I actually find his harmonic style contains lots of satisfying resolutions. The main fun thing lacking in his harmony is circle of 5ths type sounds, and he still hints at those very occasionally. I do agree though that trad jazz is a very different musical language, and one that is extremely fun and useful yet fusion players often neglect it. The thing with Allan's music is that it's just so difficult to become rooted in, even if you get the tone, his type of lines and his chord voicings. Guthrie Govan actually specifically talked about how it's dangerous when a relative beginner discovers players like Holdsworth and Gambale, precisely because of what Mehldau talks about
"Authenticity and originality are both weak tropes because, on their own, they can only account for weak players. True originality, and thus true creativity, never takes place in a historical vacuum; it is always rooted to something that has gone before. I remember observing the phenomenon of rootless “creativity” in my high school jazz band growing up. There were those of us who were listening to jazz and would go on to try to be musicians. Our fledgling attempts at soloing reflected whatever we had absorbed at that point - a little Bird, McCoy Tyner, Michael Brecker, what have you. Then there were kids in the band who were not going to pursue jazz for their life, had only a passing interest in playing music, and had hardly listened to jazz at all. They would also get a solo feature now and then.
What did they play? It was sort of like playing scales up and down the horn. What was striking was that they all sounded the same: One would think that with all the freedom that an improvised context could have, they might all play something different. But collectively, the kids who weren’t really listening to jazz actually encompassed a style of sorts, and that style was dictated by their limitation. The limitation was due to the fact that they hadn’t absorbed anything; they hadn’t begun to even mimic like we were. There is a rule here, to gloss on Tolstoy: Rootless players are all alike, but every rooted player is rooted in his or her own way. Yes, there are tons of rooted players who are not original, but as a listener, give me the unoriginal player who has listened to a lot of great music and absorbed it any day to the player who hasn’t absorbed much of anything. This brings us back to the importance of input again: Without input, we have no model for our own style; without learning a language, we have no model to create our own. There is indeed an international style of rootless jazz playing. In the name of creativity, it expresses banality. In its lazy quest for the original, it finds only unoriginality.
The champions of authenticity can take some poetic justice from that phenomenon. All their hard work, all their striving to do justice and pay homage to their forefathers, places them above the lazy, rootless denizens who never engage deeply in the music, who treat jazz like a subsidized vacation and not as a serious discipline. Through their loyal devotion to their influences, the authenticity-seekers have mastered a language; the rootless players merely babble with each other like babies on the bandstand. To be sure, there is justice for someone who devotes himself to the past in jazz: He has the comfort of his craft and the reassurance of deep knowledge. Still, knowledge alone makes him only a craftsman and not a creator."
(Brad Mehldau)
Where does that quote comes from ?
@@sovstrochnis www.bradmehldaumusic.com/new-page
@@EverythingBrahms deep stuff, thanks a lot !
Amazing
I'm suddenly having a little crisis, hopefully my journey through jazz music will land me in a position to call myself an authentic musician. I have the sense and fear that maybe I'm just like any other of those babblers Brad is talking about since I identify many of the aforementioned problems in my playing and hearing habits, though I'm somewhat confident in the fact that I learned a lot of theory and language to come up with my own vocabulary. Maybe I'm just in the valley of Dunning Kruger effect's curve and have just the necessary to appreciate the difference between babbling and authentic yet rooted soloing. Anyways, thanks so much for uploading, this video was something else.
He was demonstrating beginner playing. Unoriginal playing can still be pretty impressive, like if you mastered playing in the style of Charlie Parker or whomever. I think jazz education teaches people to be educated, but actually being original is something relatively few accomplish.
i see your point. but he's not demonstrating beginner playing either. young brad doing his oscar peterson thing was a beginner too. brad is distinguishing two types of beginners: those who imitate and develop true originality in the process, and those who don't imitate anything and remain unoriginal.
0:28 the distortion goes with this well tbh, very hip
interesting comment
This quote applies to jazz but I believe this is basically true of every genre.
Oh man, this is so true!
well, it's really worth it to at least to a summary dive into the past of jazz. i was one of those rootless players who only listened to allan holdsworth. talk about lacking some important harmonic information, which i learned from rick beato videos. as much as i love allan's endless chord progressions, i never had any idea that something as cool as My Foolish Heart existed , and that it was ANCIENT, and full of really cool chords that REsolve. allan avoided resolution like the plague, perhaps to his detriment...
Allan wrote his track 'the dominant plague' to make fun of the type of jazz he steered clear from, in that he didn't like the sound of dominant 7th chords. I would have liked a few more harmonically traditional tunes from him, as he could play over functional progressions just fine, but I actually find his harmonic style contains lots of satisfying resolutions. The main fun thing lacking in his harmony is circle of 5ths type sounds, and he still hints at those very occasionally. I do agree though that trad jazz is a very different musical language, and one that is extremely fun and useful yet fusion players often neglect it. The thing with Allan's music is that it's just so difficult to become rooted in, even if you get the tone, his type of lines and his chord voicings. Guthrie Govan actually specifically talked about how it's dangerous when a relative beginner discovers players like Holdsworth and Gambale, precisely because of what Mehldau talks about
Wow!
Unoriginal ?
Sound more like imitating a 4yo...