Funny How Some Songs Translate

[plangentmusic]

Sure, it's been done a million times, but shows how a good melody translates, even without words, even without accompaniment and even...on a bass? Ha. Well, I think so.

 

 

[SuStudio]

I agree with your premise but that clip is not a good example of something translating well. Personally I think the player butchered a timeless classic by not respecting the music in the first place. It's sophomoric at best and completely gratuitous.

 

Here's a much better example of what a musical translation sounds like:

 

 

 

 

[plangentmusic]

I agree with your premise but that clip is not a good example of something translating well. Personally I think the player butchered a timeless classic by not respecting the music in the first place. It's sophomoric at best and completely gratuitous.

 

Here's a much better example of what a musical translation sounds like:

 

 

 

 

Different takes. I like that one too. Though I'm not sure how a musical performance can be "gratuitious." Did you just learn that word and wanted to use it? lol.

[Griffinator]

I agree with your premise but that clip is not a good example of something translating well. Personally I think the player butchered a timeless classic by not respecting the music in the first place. It's sophomoric at best and completely gratuitous.

 

Here's a much better example of what a musical translation sounds like:

 

 

 

 

Different takes. I like that one too. Though I'm not sure how a musical performance can be "gratuitious." Did you just learn that word and wanted to use it? lol.

 

"gratuitous" as it relates to a musical performance means that there was a lot of excessive playing at the expense of the execution of the theme.

 

When someone is accused of "gratuitous" soloing in a band context, it's usually a function of them either showing off their chops instead of playing more appropriate to the song, or dragging out the solo for far, far longer than it should have so they could maintain the spotlight on themselves at the expense of the performance.

 

Personally, I found you making a mistake you've made on a number of occasions since you began posting these little blurbs, that being the inclusion of techniques you have a difficult time executing cleanly, which degrades the entire performance. I think we had this chat regarding Moonlight, and I commented on how much cleaner Blackbird sounded, because you were playing within your capabilities. Here, you've reached out a little bit farther than maybe you should have on tape (or at least woodshedded the technique a bit longer before committing it to tape), and it shows.

 

Back to the idea of bass carrying the melody, on the other hand, I think it's a highly effective methodology, even in a band context. In fact, I've used that technique in several arrangements I did where either the vocal delivery was atonal or there was no vocal at all. My favorite implementation was a completely tongue-in-cheek death metal version of "Speak Softly Love" I put together a while back, where the entire "rules" of band arrangements were turned on their ear - the two guitars anchor the rhythm in the verse while the bass executes the melody against some ludicrous growling vocals and the drummer is playing a wildly inappropriate and excessive "groove" underneath it all. It's a lot of fun, for those with a sense of humor.

[plangentmusic]

 

"gratuitous" as it relates to a musical performance means that there was a lot of excessive playing at the expense of the execution of the theme.

 

.......................

 

I COULD SEE THAT POINT IF THERE WERE EXCESSIVE FILLS AND WHAT NOT, BUT THAT'S NOT THE CASE AT ALL. BUT...WHATEVER. EVERYBODY HEARS DIFFERENTLY. THEN AGAIN, SOME PEOPLE JUST WANT TO TAKE A SHOT AT SOMEBODY WHO'S DONE SOMETHING THEY HAVEN'T. I GET IT. IT'S COOL.

 

 

.........................

 

When someone is accused of "gratuitous" soloing in a band context, it's usually a function of them either showing off their chops instead of playing more appropriate to the song, or dragging out the solo for far, far longer than it should have so they could maintain the spotlight on themselves at the expense of the performance.

 

..................

 

NOT SURE HOW THAT APPLIES HERE. IT'S NOT A SOLO OVER CHANGES, IT'S A CHORD MELODY RENDITION.

 

 

.................................

 

Personally, I found you making a mistake you've made on a number of occasions since you began posting these little blurbs, that being the inclusion of techniques you have a difficult time executing cleanly, which degrades the entire performance.

 

..................................

 

REALLY? HUH. I'VE BEEN TOLD I ACTUALLY HAVE PRETTY GOOD TECHNIQUE. PERHAPS YOU CAN POST SOME OF YOUR PLAYING AS AN EXAMPLE OF MORE PRECISE EXECUTION.

 

 

.................................

 

 

I think we had this chat regarding Moonlight, and I commented on how much cleaner Blackbird sounded, because you were playing within your capabilities. Here, you've reached out a little bit farther than maybe you should have on tape (or at least woodshedded the technique a bit longer before committing it to tape), and it shows.

 

............................

 

NOPE. THAT'S AS GOOD AS IT GETS. SORRY.

 

 

 

..........................................

l

 

 

: )

[lug]

the player butchered a timeless classic by not respecting the music in the first place. It's sophomoric at best and completely gratuitous.

 

 

 

 

Why did you just quote my last performance review?

[Griffinator]

Ya know, I wasn't going to comment on your suggestion that SuStudio's vocabulary was questionable, but you've gone and done it again.

 

You really, really, really need to either learn how to take criticism gracefully or just ignore it completely, because not everyone is going to love your rendition of a song. This whole lashing out at people because you don't like what they have to say, it's childish, immature, and makes people not want to even bother listening to your work.

[Phil W]

You have to be able to take criticism if you post tracks here. If I posted some music and only got bland approval I'd assume everyone was just being kind and the comments would be of little value.

 

I one posted a solo on My Favourite Things here and one guy said, "Why aren't you guys soloing over all the changes?" - my first though was a smart-ass kind of response, 'Well Coltrane just soloed over the vamps!" but I restrained myself and at a later gig had the guitarist bring in the full chord sequence at a point during my solo. And, you know what, it actually worked way better the guy was completely right. I was wrong.

Yeah, I know that's a bit different, I have had less constructive criticism - but that was the one that came to mind. You can take the criticism, or ignore it assuming it's just a matter of taste - but if you post something here you have to accept the bad with the good.

[Phil W]

Personally I like the tone of the bass a lot but Yesterday is all about the beautiful melody and you disguised it a lot, it didn't really ring through. To me, it's the kind of song where the melody needs to come across a lot stronger.

[jeremy c]

This whole conversation is why I rarely comment when people post clips.

[Phil W]

Word

[Michele C.]

Regarding the specific rendition, I am never moved by a famous song played without tempo, with citations of the melody and a lot of filler digressions on the harmony or whatever else that abandon time completely and leave the listener in a wait condition for the next landmark.

I know it has been done countless times. Singers are especially guilty of this kind of stuff, but I am firm on my idea that a cover should change timbrically, rithmically, armonically with respect to the original, but should still be a song, if you cover a song.

Second, the bass is a very particular instrument with a lot of value, but a confined range and only four strings tuned in fourths, that do not give so much of extension. For this reason, I think it should be treated more as a melodic instrument, even when playing solo. double stops in the right places can go a long way for solo bass, just as they work for cello, but also I would explore the voice of the instrument, that is a baritonal voice with a lot of authority and timbre, used melodicallybut, but not necessarily unaccompanied.

[plangentmusic]

Ya know, I wasn't going to comment on your suggestion that SuStudio's vocabulary was questionable, but you've gone and done it again.

 

You really, really, really need to either learn how to take criticism gracefully or just ignore it completely, because not everyone is going to love your rendition of a song.

 

...................................

That's fine. But you seem intent on criticizing. If I don't like something I either say nothing or try to give a helpful suggestion, but only if it's something I feel I can do better. Saying things like it's sophmoric or it's a degrading performance -- it just seems senseless.

 

..................................

 

 

This whole lashing out at people because you don't like what they have to say, it's childish, immature, and makes people not want to even bother listening to your work.

 

........................

I can say the same to you. If you're justified in your criticism, why can't I be justified in my criticism of what you say? The difference is, I put my work out there. And if you don't want to listen to what I do, that doesn't really change anything, does it? So perhaps you shouldn't.

 

........................

 

 

 

 

......

[plangentmusic]

You have to be able to take criticism if you post tracks here. If I posted some music and only got bland approval I'd assume everyone was just being kind and the comments would be of little value.

 

I one posted a solo on My Favourite Things here and one guy said, "Why aren't you guys soloing over all the changes?" - my first though was a smart-ass kind of response, 'Well Coltrane just soloed over the vamps!" but I restrained myself and at a later gig had the guitarist bring in the full chord sequence at a point during my solo. And, you know what, it actually worked way better the guy was completely right. I was wrong.

Yeah, I know that's a bit different, I have had less constructive criticism - but that was the one that came to mind. You can take the criticism, or ignore it assuming it's just a matter of taste - but if you post something here you have to accept the bad with the good.

 

Agreed. I have no problem with suggestions whatsoever. Unless they're in the vein of "do better." That's just dickish.

[plangentmusic]

Personally I like the tone of the bass a lot but Yesterday is all about the beautiful melody and you disguised it a lot, it didn't really ring through. To me, it's the kind of song where the melody needs to come across a lot stronger.

 

Fair enough. I took some liberties. Whether it works or not is up to the listener.

[Phil W]

Yes, it's your choice to take liberties with the melody although with that melody I think you'd be aiming to make any liberties make the melody stronger - and still fit with the lyrics which everyone hears in their head. I think for me it's a different tune to a jazz standard where you can take a lot more liberty with the tune. To me, that version came away more like ornamentation.

 

Anyway, whatever melody you played I would prefer it to come across stronger and more defined. I think the chordal part might have worked better sparser - more implied than anything so the melody stood apart more.

[plangentmusic]

Yes, it's your choice to take liberties with the melody although with that melody I think you'd be aiming to make any liberties make the melody stronger - and still fit with the lyrics which everyone hears in their head. I think for me it's a different tune to a jazz standard where you can take a lot more liberty with the tune. To me, that version came away more like ornamentation.

 

Anyway, whatever melody you played I would prefer it to come across stronger and more defined. I think the chordal part might have worked better sparser - more implied than anything so the melody stood apart more.

 

Okay, I get you. I'm not sure I agree or would do it differently, but that's cool too. At least you gave an honest assessment.

 

It is funny how the tendency here leans towards being critical to the point of damnation. It's never "real nice...but...how about...?) It's mostly pure negativity. Do I suck that badly? Is everyone here THAT badass that I'm out of my league? lol. One has to wonder.

[hippie wood]

There were absolutely no redeeming qualities in the first clip. The second one was nice, though.

 

You should get that Caps Lock key looked at.

[plangentmusic]

There were absolutely no redeeming qualities in the first clip. The second one was nice, though.

 

You should get that Caps Lock key looked at.

 

You just like being disagreeable, don't you? I could say there's no redeeming quality in that photo.

[The Bear Jew]

Basset Hounds got long ears.

[Russkull]

There were absolutely no redeeming qualities in the first clip.

Ouch!! Really? No redeeming qualities?

 

I'll admit it wasn't my favorite performance, either, but c'mon...

[lug]

I can calm this whole thread down. I'll post an mp3 and them you would ALL feel a damm sight better about your own playing and the playing of everyone else around you. Bonus is that if you have an insect infestation problem, it will cure that too.

[SuStudio]

Different takes. I like that one too. Though I'm not sure how a musical performance can be "gratuitious." Did you just learn that word and wanted to use it? lol.

 

Oh my, somebody has some serious validation issues! Honestly, I did not know that YOU were the performer so I wasn't [knowingly] criticizing you personally. However, after reading your reply, I'd like to share some more words that I "just learned":

 

Irascible and Narcissist.

 

 

 

[plangentmusic]

Different takes. I like that one too. Though I'm not sure how a musical performance can be "gratuitious." Did you just learn that word and wanted to use it? lol.

 

Oh my, somebody has some serious validation issues! Honestly, I did not know that YOU were the performer so I wasn't [knowingly] criticizing you personally. However, after reading your reply, I'd like to share some more words that I "just learned":

 

Irascible and Narcissist.

 

 

 

Nah, my validation doesn't come from message boards. My mistake if I thought the insult was intentional. At any rate, the proper word in the case of your last post is "narcissistic."

 

Some funny posts BTW. I'm not even sure what the basset hound one means but I laughed!

[J. Dan]

Gratuitous Sax and Senseless Violins

 

[butcherNburn]

the player butchered a timeless classic by not respecting the music in the first place. It's sophomoric at best and completely gratuitous.

Why did you just quote my last performance review?

Heck, before I came along, to "butcher" something was a compliment.

[The Bear Jew]

 

Some funny posts BTW. I'm not even sure what the basset hound one means but I laughed!

 

I'm just saying... Basset Hounds. They got long ears. Nobody's gonna argue with me about that. I mean, sure, a few owners might have them cropped for some reason or other, but still... when Basset Hounds are left alone and unaltered, they got long ears. That's the way they are as a breed. Wait... this isn't the Basset Hound forum? My bad.

[jeremy c]

No, it's the basset horn forum.

http://orgs.usd.edu/nmm/Clarinets/BassetHorn/3541Doleischbassethornlongkeyside.jpg

[The Bear Jew]

Oh. Damn. Now, see, I wanna see if someone could do an instrumental version of Fugazi's "Waiting Room" on one of those. Without the long ears. Because Basset Hounds got those, but the horns don't.

[kenfxj]

http://stuff.pyzam.com/funnypics/b/flyzs.jpg

 

Peter Brady is endlessly amazed by his flying Basset Hound.