Re: Standardizing Skills Levels

[Joel Fritz <jfritz666@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Keith Freeman wrote:

>>I think there's room on the planet for the tutored AND the
>>home-grown, the scholarly and the rough and ready. 
>>    
>>
>I heartily agree! In my own field, jazz, the music colleges are churning out vast 
>quantities of highly competent musicians, and yet the number out there playing who are 
>really worth listening to, who have something to say, is no greater than in the 1950s, 
>when jazz was not a recognized subject.
>
>There's no reason why home-grown players shouldn't be as scholarly as the 
>professionals, all it takes is curiosity and willingness to study.
>
>-Keith
>
>--
>Harp-l is sponsored by SPAH, http://www.spah.org
>Hosted by ValuePricehosting.com, http://www.valuepricehosting.com
>
>.
>
>  
>
In jazz going, back to the nineteenth century New Orleans brass bands, 
there have always been a lot of players with standard formal training.  
Jelly Roll Morton only hired players who could read well because his 
groups played written arrangements.  The rough sound was something the 
players and the audience liked.  A lot of the old New Orleans players 
were equally at home with with music for tea dances.  The bebop 
revolution came from people who knew music theory well enough to fool 
around with harmony.  By the twenties people like Bix Beiderbecke, who 
read poorly, were the exception. Since most of the paying jobs were with 
dance bands, formal training was darned near mandatory.

- -- 
Hear Barrelhouse Solly--that's me--on the web.
http://www.soundclick.com/barrelhousesolly