Jump to content
Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

jamming vs. improv


Recommended Posts

I been debating my roommate about this subject and I need a fresh perspective. While listening to the new Pat Metheny Group CD "Speaking of Now", I wondered if anyone besides me would consider them to be a jam band? In the vein of Phish or Leftover Salmon. Perhaps not in the "traditional" sense but they could play bills with these guys right? been talking on other boards with people who say that PMG is improv and not really "jamming"...but I'm not much of a musician so I dunno if I'm just being naive... I like it all , maybe that's my problem... thanks [img]http://www2.fanscape.com/patmethenygroup/bannerredirect.asp[/img]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 3
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I think PMG is a little too structured to be called a jam band. There are definitely solos and sections for solos but around it all are tightly structured arrangements and parts musicians are responsible for playing. I think jam bands are much more loosely structured and have a lot of rock'n roll as their framework. Jazz can be largely defined by it's improvisation and PGM has it's lineage in jazz. What is termed "jam band" does not necessarily follow the same line. But I MAY be wrong here. I think there was a bifurcation from Greatful Dead/Garcia and other more jazz oriented groups/musicians. 90% of all jam bands *I've* heard have played around few chords and a groove. Jazz tends to play around complex chords and chord progressions, although this too is a generality that doesn't hold true all the time. Late 50s/early 60s Miles Davis, Mingus and Coltrane especially experimented and others went on to codify, modal improvisation, which in early experiments meant playing on one chord for an extended period. I thnk there are similarities but I wouldn't call the Pat Metheny Group a "jam band".

All the best,

 

Henry Robinett

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most jam bands don't have changes, or they don't solo over changes. Phish does and the Dead did, but for the most part it's only one part or it's more or less a pop song with long solo sections. There's still improvising I presume, at least in that the soloist is improvising (to an extent). That's not the same thing as in jazz, where everyone (theoretically) is taking liberties with their parts. Like I've said, I've heard Phish stretch out as a band on occasion, and the Dead basically played "jazz" with a bluegrass/rock vibe, but most of the new "jam bands" are just soloing over static progressions. Actually, for the most part, I don't really consider what most of them do "jamming" because when *I've* "jammed" with people, everyone is going off at the same time doing different things - *the door is open for something different to happen*, whereas it's not with a lot of jam bands. STILL, I think it's a good phenomenon....

Guitar Lessons in Augusta Georgia: www.chipmcdonald.com

Eccentric blog: https://chipmcdonaldblog.blogspot.com/

 

/ "big ass windbag" - Bruce Swedien

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me you listen differently when you are jamming than when you are improvising. Jamming creatively one may try alter the rhythmic structure, harmonic structure, and other "foundational" elements. So you assume less. Improvising in a jazz context assumes more of a spotlight on the solo element. So the creativity is within the structure. You can assume more, but the assumptions are there to support something more interesting in the solo. When Pat goes crazy (rare) he sometimes takes the band with him. But thats only in his simply orchestrated songs like "Are you going with me?" usually. I like both jamming and improvisation. Medeski Martin and Wood appear to cross the line between the two for me. Being a three piece, shifting the foundations is an easier task. Jerry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...