And then there is 'freedom of choice'. You can choose to read or ignore, participate on not participate. Why is it that some people think that if THEY aren't interested in something, everyone else should just shut up about it. If there is no interest in a subject, it will die a natural death, or if it becomes too confrontational, Nigel will kill it. Why is it that some people feel that they have the god-given right to decide (for the rest of us) if something is insignificant or not? I think that we are perfectly capable of making those decisions for ourselves. Don't like a thread? Just move on. It's easy.

chas

I was just agreeing with Uncle Dave who is usually right in his assessments. I guess I'll move on as Chas suggests, this kind of attitude helps no one.

Sure, Dave is often right in his assessments, but I didn't read anything in his posts about this thread "turning nasty".

Ian

Ian sometimes you have to read between the lines. I'm sorry if I offended anyone here.
Lurking was so much easier. Maybe it's just because I'm not part of the upper echelon elite clique, but I dont feel I'm accepted.

[This message has been edited by John DiLeo (edited 04-16-2008).]

Everyone is accepted. It just that sometimes users read too much into the posts. (Not everything has a hidden meaning)
Basically if you want to make a comment, then do so, you’re not going to get shot for it. (The golden rule is to not take comments personally)
Above all enjoy yourself.
Regards

Bill

John, if I offended you...I apologize.

I'm glad to see you posting here...I enjoy your posts and would feel bad if you discontinued.

Ian

PS...read Chas' post below.

[This message has been edited by ianmcnll (edited 04-16-2008).]

First step towards 'acceptance'. Gotta shed that 'victim image'. I can't count the number of times Diki, Ian, chas, Fran, Donny, Tony, and other higher-than-average profile members, have been shredded to bits for something they posted. Since it didn't kill them, I guess it made them stronger . A few, like Rikki, Capt. Russ, DonM, and a few others, have somehow managed to stay above the fray, while still being able to (strongly) express their own opinions (an art we could all benefit from).

If you feel that 'lurking' is the level of participation that is right for you, then that is what you should do. But as long as it's not a personal attack (unacceptable by all), don't let a dissenting opinion make you feel victimized or unaccepted. You want to talk about not being accepted, I'll write a 500 page dissertation for you (starting in 1619). Now wipe those tears away and come on back into the fold.

Your BFF,
chas

Diki, Jamie is doing a multi-week TV show with the Lexington Jazz Arts Foundation here in Lexington. He still plays GREAT live. Kingfrog...very impressive knowledge of significant producers and musicians (Steve Gadd is one of my reall favorites. Jim (Abacus), your is the post in this thread with real substance, in my opinion.

Good, meaningful thread, Chas. Thanks to all for showing thoughtfulness and class on this.


Russ

Jamie Aebersold? I'd LOVE to hear that - I live in a Jazz hole down here. They think smooth jazz IS jazz! Wouldn't want to mess up their botox faces by actually SMILING, I guess!

I thought at first read you meant Jamie Cullum... Have you heard him play? There's an outstanding live DVD of a concert at Blenheim Palace in England out on Verve Records. Watch it if you can... I truly believe none of his CD's has captured more than 50% of what he can do. The boy can smoke!

Kingfrog... yes that certainly IS a who's who of great arrangers and players. BUT... I'm sorry, but those pre-canned styles are merely the SUGGESTION of those great talents. The repetition of tiny loops is NOT a technique that any of them have pursued until today's more hiphop ventures they've tried. You are actually calling up these guys for a (pretty average, IMO) four bar loop, not to arrange a whole song. I had the great pleasure of actually doing a session with Gadd, Gale, and the great Richard Tee, back in the eighties. Trust me... it did NOT sound REMOTELY like an arranger!

God is in the details...

The trouble is, all to many people (not you, necessarily, but SOME) think that, if they bring these so-called 'musicians' to the table, that automatically makes them one too!

I agree, as songwriting tools, arrangers have a VERY special place, allowing you to 'mock up' a song faster than just about anything out there. But you'll NEVER hear one (or at least, the arranger side of it!) on a commercial record. This is where you bring in REAL musicians, at least if you are not doing techno or loop-based music in the first place..!

Let's face it, all the hoopla about the Audya, and audio loop-based arrangers like MS just go to show, for those with discerning ears, there is still a VERY long way to go before any arranger is capable of fooling us that it IS 'real'.

One thing I guarantee. Even as a 'beginner' bass player, you are capable of playing a FAR more 'musical' bass line than ANY arranger... Don't sell yourself short!

For me, the best way to get close to the 'live band' sound in my productions, if I use an arranger at all, is to get the 'mock up' down with the arranger, then go back in to sequence mode, and gradually replace out ALL the machine stuff, or at least edit it so it doesn't repeat each iteration so exactly. Vary EVERY fill, do something to the guitar part each section so it isn't EXACTLY the same as all the others, and first and foremost... CHANGE THAT BASS LINE! Make the bassist anticipate the next chord and move towards it. An arranger has NO WAY of knowing what the next chord is until you play it, a real one knows in advance and shapes his line accordingly.

This might seem more work than you want to do, but trust me... it makes the difference between a 'mock up' and a real song.

Go back, and listen to some Quincy. Try and find two identical sections... Best of luck!