Clean/sloppy playing in modern popular music: a provocative argument

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2024-12-31 12:57 p.m.

One of the big philosophical divides between legit trombone players and jazz trombone players has to do with the cleanliness of playing. I'll start with some general observations (stereotypes?) that have a good bit of truth to them.

Classical players work hard to make their playing sound perfect. Perfection in tone, intonation, dynamics, articulations, releases, posture, breathing, etc. Every note they play has to be perfectly clean and played with conscious intent. They study arcane minutiae from hundreds of years ago in a quest to remain loyal to what they believe is long dead composers' original intent. They look down their noses at jazz players for their sloppy playing and poor tone (but to be fair, legit players look down their noses at everyone ;) ).

Jazz players care little for technical perfection, and prize creativity, emotion, passion, and musical ideas and development. Their playing is immediate, improvisational, and impassioned, sacrificing technical perfection for instantaneous musical adventures. New ideas, uniqueness, and moving the music forward prevails over the notion of faithfully reproducing earlier works. Indeed, playing something the way it was played 50-100 years ago is to be avoided. Been there, done that. Newness, progress, and individualism are prized. They think classical players sound wooden, sterile, staid, stuck up, and lack facility.

For some reason, trombone culture generally dictates that we land in one of those two camps. This is an argument for blending the classical ethic into the jazz/pop/rock/commercial realm.

I think the acceptance of sloppy playing in jazz tromboning is nothing more than an abject surrender to the difficulty of the instrument. It's "too hard" to play intricate, technical, and improvised passages cleanly, so trombonists have simply given up and claimed their lack of ability to play cleanly as unimportant or, even worse, detrimental to their musical expression. Sloppiness is claimed as a feature, not a bug.

I maintain that 99% of those who excuse sloppiness in jazz/commercial playing would play cleanly if they could, but they can't. So in the same way KFC markets their greasy-ass chicken as "finger-licking good!" to turn a detriment into a perceived advantage, jazz trombonists market their sloppy-ass jazz playing as a feature of the idiom, not a lack in their ability.

Much of what makes trombone jazz essentially unlistenable to both other musicians and the general public, alike -- and the reason why you don't have trombones fronting jazz groups (though trombonists seem to think this is a mystery) -- is the rampant sloppiness. To me, it doesn't matter how awesome your ideas are if you can't play them well. Stumbling through them does not improve them, and listeners hear the whole, not just the part you want them to, and your lack of proficiency on your instrument destroys the listenability for them.

Let me dismiss the inevitable excuses: Yes, intentional and mindful imperfections can enhance jazz expression if used sparingly and for a discrete purpose or effect, but 99.9999% of the time it's neither intentional nor mindful, it's just sloppy. Yes, occasionally a mistake actually makes a solo better, but that is never predictable and it's like catching lightning in a bottle it's so rare. Yes, perfection can be boring and sterile, but only when it is mere technique, alone, without musicality, which again is sacrificing one aspect for another when both are needed.

If I could wave a magic wand, I'd send all jazz trombonists into the practice room and lock the door for five years, and make them learn to play like classical trombonists. But jazz players need to go further. They need to develop their technique and facility to the point where they can play all those great improvisational licks cleanly and musically, and not let slop and garbage detract from what would otherwise be great playing. In essence, jazz players should develop the classical ethic and skills required for good, clean playing of the instrument, and then push that forward into the kind of technique and facility required to play jazz ideas that are routinely played with great clarity by sax players, pianists, trumpeters, guitarists, and the rest of the jazz world.

Keep going with acceptance of all the slop and garbage in jazz tromboning and you'll render the instrument extinct in jazz. It's almost there, already. No one wants to listen to the crap in your sound, they want to hear good, clean music.

If you don't have great facility, simplify your jazz ideas to not exceed your technical ability. Develop your technique to the point where you can play intricate and lightning fast licks cleanly and with the precision of a valved or keyed instrument. Make the overall sound of what you're playing the top priority, and refuse to sacrifice either cleanliness or passion. Make glisses, slop, clipped notes and clams the rare and intentional exception to a vast ocean of clean playing.

And quit trying to convince people that your sloppy-ass technique and crap sound are a feature. You're only fooling yourselves.

Okay, that's my opinion. You may now commence firing. :)

AndrewMeronek · by **AndrewMeronek** » 2024-12-31 1:17 p.m.

Many of my favorite jazz trombonists are technically masterful, not sloppy. Many of them (in fact) have absolutely no problem with jumping into a symphonic context and kicking butt.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2024-12-31 1:20 p.m.

[quote="AndrewMeronek"]Many of my favorite jazz trombonists are technically masterful, not sloppy. Many of them (in fact) have absolutely no problem with jumping into a symphonic context and kicking butt.[/quote]

As it should be.

If only that were the general rule rather than the exception.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2024-12-31 1:23 p.m.

And if you don't think it can be done, listen to this.

<FACEBOOK id="1119344373065894">https://www.facebook.com/reel/1119344373065894</FACEBOOK>

EriKon · by **EriKon** » 2024-12-31 1:23 p.m.

Curious to hear what spark set off that rant xD

I personally never would excuse unprecise or sloppiness in my own playing and I agree fully with the sentiment that jazz trombone doesn't mean it has to be sloppy. That's bullshit for sure.

Something that goes against that is that I personally prefer to listen to players who are not the most clean like Rosolino, just as one example but there are others of course. I still enjoy listening to super clean playing by Urbie Green or other players, but Rosolino is just more thrilling to listen to.

I would like to ask how you would define sloppiness? Let's say someone plays an incredible jazz solo, great lines, great storytelling, at times virtuousic and then cracks one note towards the end. I would still consider this to be clean playing. Other instruments do miss notes as well. So there's some sort of an area to what's clean and what's sloppy, at least to me.

I can understand many of your points, but I think it's just not as drastic as you draw the picture. But most definitely agree with the fact sloppiness ≠ jazz trombone.

SamBTbrn · by **SamBTbrn** » 2024-12-31 1:26 p.m.

"good enough for jazz" is one of my most disliked sayings in music. The best jazz musicians are tight as hell when they need/want to be, the looseness is just a musical interpretation they choose. Some choose it more wildly then others, but then that's personal artistry.

EriKon · by **EriKon** » 2024-12-31 1:38 p.m.

And I would like to add that I always strive to be a more clean in my playing. Especially in the jazz style, but as I'm playing pretty much every musical genre and classical music as well, in every area. And I'm definitely much cleaner when I play classical music. So definitely something I work on every day.

hyperbolica · by **hyperbolica** » 2024-12-31 2:07 p.m.

[quote="EriKon"]Curious to hear what spark set off that rant xD[/quote]

Aw, geez, I have a feeling it was an offhand comment that I didn't intend to trigger anyone. I just thought that good slide/sound control was good musicianship no matter what style you play. Being able to control what sound you get sounds important to me. My teacher that kind of pushed me this way wasn't even known as a strictly legit player - he bent the rules a lot and wasn't content to play Tchaikovsky and Saint-Seans. Even jazzers don't want to sound like beginners, I assume.

My comment wasn't aimed at anyone. Maybe at myself, and things I'm always maybe overly conscious of as I play.

Did you ever hear a first year player playing scales and there's all this whhhaaawhhhhaaaawwwwwhhhhhhaaaaaaa in between notes? That's what I was referring to. Some times even experienced players don't time our arm and tongue together and it gets a little sloppy. A lot of times you get some slide between notes and its intentional, a legitimate effect. Singers do it and get away with it, and sometimes trombone imitates singers.

I didn't mean this as a legit vs jazzer thing.

SamBTbrn · by **SamBTbrn** » 2024-12-31 2:09 p.m.

[quote="tbdana"]And if you don't think it can be done, listen to this.

<FACEBOOK id="1119344373065894">https://www.facebook.com/reel/1119344373065894</FACEBOOK>[/quote]

I would argue this is not "jazz" but a jazz influenced classical show piece.

WGWTR180 · by **WGWTR180** » 2024-12-31 2:15 p.m.

I'm trying to control my laughter. I know sloppy classical players and superbly clean jazz players. In the end it's up to the actual player as to how they sound. Players of all types pay attention to details on wildly different levels. Not sure how provocative this really is. HNY!

BGuttman · by **BGuttman** » 2024-12-31 2:37 p.m.

I think the key is to know your limitations. As a more-or-less classical player with lousy improvisational skills, I tend to concentrate on ballad-like solos and any up-tempo stuff I tend to play minor variations on the melody. I admire the folks who can do elaborate improvisation.

I also tend to play cleanly in Jazz Band whether playing lead, 2nd, 3rd, or bass. I don't buy sloppiness. I agree that just because it's called "Jazz" it's no excuse to be sloppy.

Now there are a couple of instances where "sloppy" is called for. You shouldn't play Spike Jones too straight. Nor should you play PDQ Bach too sloppy, in spite of the intent to sound "off".

Savio · by **Savio** » 2024-12-31 3:13 p.m.

[quote="tbdana"]One of the big philosophical divides between legit trombone players and jazz trombone players has to do with the cleanliness of playing. I'll start with some general observations (stereotypes?) that have a good bit of truth to them.

Classical players work hard to make their playing sound perfect. Perfection in tone, intonation, dynamics, articulations, releases, posture, breathing, etc. Every note they play has to be perfectly clean and played with conscious intent. They study arcane minutiae from hundreds of years ago in a quest to remain loyal to what they believe is long dead composers' original intent. They look down their noses at jazz players for their sloppy playing and poor tone (but to be fair, legit players look down their noses at everyone ;) ).

Jazz players care little for technical perfection, and prize creativity, emotion, passion, and musical ideas and development. Their playing is immediate, improvisational, and impassioned, sacrificing technical perfection for instantaneous musical adventures. New ideas, uniqueness, and moving the music forward prevails over the notion of faithfully reproducing earlier works. Indeed, playing something the way it was played 50-100 years ago is to be avoided. Been there, done that. Newness, progress, and individualism are prized. They think classical players sound wooden, sterile, staid, stuck up, and lack facility.

For some reason, trombone culture generally dictates that we land in one of those two camps. This is an argument for blending the classical ethic into the jazz/pop/rock/commercial realm.

I think the acceptance of sloppy playing in jazz tromboning is nothing more than an abject surrender to the difficulty of the instrument. It's "too hard" to play intricate, technical, and improvised passages cleanly, so trombonists have simply given up and claimed their lack of ability to play cleanly as unimportant or, even worse, detrimental to their musical expression. Sloppiness is claimed as a feature, not a bug.

I maintain that 99% of those who excuse sloppiness in jazz/commercial playing would play cleanly if they could, but they can't. So in the same way KFC markets their greasy-ass chicken as "finger-licking good!" to turn a detriment into a perceived advantage, jazz trombonists market their sloppy-ass jazz playing as a feature of the idiom, not a lack in their ability.

Much of what makes trombone jazz essentially unlistenable to both other musicians and the general public, alike -- and the reason why you don't have trombones fronting jazz groups (though trombonists seem to think this is a mystery) -- is the rampant sloppiness. To me, it doesn't matter how awesome your ideas are if you can't play them well. Stumbling through them does not improve them, and listeners hear the whole, not just the part you want them to, and your lack of proficiency on your instrument destroys the listenability for them.

Let me dismiss the inevitable excuses: Yes, intentional and mindful imperfections can enhance jazz expression if used sparingly and for a discrete purpose or effect, but 99.9999% of the time it's neither intentional nor mindful, it's just sloppy. Yes, occasionally a mistake actually makes a solo better, but that is never predictable and it's like catching lightning in a bottle it's so rare. Yes, perfection can be boring and sterile, but only when it is mere technique, alone, without musicality, which again is sacrificing one aspect for another when both are needed.

If I could wave a magic wand, I'd send all jazz trombonists into the practice room and lock the door for five years, and make them learn to play like classical trombonists. But jazz players need to go further. They need to develop their technique and facility to the point where they can play all those great improvisational licks cleanly and musically, and not let slop and garbage detract from what would otherwise be great playing. In essence, jazz players should develop the classical ethic and skills required for good, clean playing of the instrument, and then push that forward into the kind of technique and facility required to play jazz ideas that are routinely played with great clarity by sax players, pianists, trumpeters, guitarists, and the rest of the jazz world.

Keep going with acceptance of all the slop and garbage in jazz tromboning and you'll render the instrument extinct in jazz. It's almost there, already. No one wants to listen to the crap in your sound, they want to hear good, clean music.

If you don't have great facility, simplify your jazz ideas to not exceed your technical ability. Develop your technique to the point where you can play intricate and lightning fast licks cleanly and with the precision of a valved or keyed instrument. Make the overall sound of what you're playing the top priority, and refuse to sacrifice either cleanliness or passion. Make glisses, slop, clipped notes and clams the rare and intentional exception to a vast ocean of clean playing.

And quit trying to convince people that your sloppy-ass technique and crap sound are a feature. You're only fooling yourselves.

Okay, that's my opinion. You may now commence firing. :)[/quote]

This is very interesting! Don't have so much to say since I don't feel classical, jazz or commercial. Just struggling with my slide. But there was a famous jazz player here in the forum; Sabutin or Sam Burtis. He was very classical in his thoughts how to play trombone. In fact very strict on all basic trombone aspects. Marshall Gilkes is also a trombone player that probably do everything. Joe Alessi also played jazz before.

You have some good points Dana, and I think we all will follow this topic! This will be a good discussion. Because we all have something to learn from each other! Hope I can learn improvising but think it's to late.

Leif

tim · by **tim** » 2024-12-31 6:12 p.m.

Possibly the best advice we could give to young players, thanks Dana.

"If you don't have great facility, simplify your jazz ideas to not exceed your technical ability. Develop your technique to the point where you can play intricate and lightning fast licks cleanly and with the precision of a valved or keyed instrument. Make the overall sound of what you're playing the top priority, and refuse to sacrifice either cleanliness or passion. Make glisses, slop, clipped notes and clams the rare and intentional exception to a vast ocean of clean playing."

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2024-12-31 7:39 p.m.

A: if the solo is transcribed properly, after it is recorded, then the recording shows a technical execution of 100%

B: I think it would be cool to hear sloppy classical playing. Oh wait. No.

<EMOJI seq="1f602" tseq="1f602">😂</EMOJI>

baileyman · by **baileyman** » 2024-12-31 8:07 p.m.

I've wondered why it is that classical players play the strict way they do. Has anyone looked into the feedback effect of old written music when there is no one alive who heard it new? What might've been a classical lilt or swing gets pounded down to a strict performance practice regimen? In a big band a thing that looks like an unadorned quarter note can sound many different ways, and should! But my impression in the classical world, a quarter goes exactly like "this", no exception. Though it does seem you could ask French or opera players and get some different classical interpretation.

Jazz tromboners often reach beyond their capability or the horn's envelope. For some this may sound emotive or passionate--for others, lost in the weeds. It is very helpful to simplify the imagination so that it generates things to play that can actually be played. And this approach will lead to a startlingly different practice routine of exploring the possible.

nelson31 · by **nelson31** » 2024-12-31 9:03 p.m.

This is some pretty clean jazz playing!

<YOUTUBE id="C8A4Euc2W1w"><LINK_TEXT text="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8A4Euc ... nnel=peach">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8A4Euc2W1w&ab_channel=peach</LINK_TEXT></YOUTUBE>

Burgerbob · by **Burgerbob** » 2024-12-31 9:16 p.m.

Classical playing (which is a massive, massive net being thrown) is being called "clean" here in a strangely derogatory way. I don't think any jazz or commercial player would play any less clean in a big band or horn section.

You're darn tootin' I want the players on either side of me to play what's on the page with a good sound and style.

ngrinder · by **ngrinder** » 2025-01-01 4:23 p.m.

This is incredibly misinformed.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-01-01 4:45 p.m.

[quote="Burgerbob"]Classical playing (which is a massive, massive net being thrown) is being called "clean" here in a strangely derogatory way. I don't think any jazz or commercial player would play any less clean in a big band or horn section.

You're darn tootin' I want the players on either side of me to play what's on the page with a good sound and style.[/quote]

Interesting, the unintended interpretations. There was certainly nothing derogatory in the word clean. Just descriptive shorthand.

Also my observations are more about improvisation, not section playing.

WilliamLang · by **WilliamLang** » 2025-01-01 4:47 p.m.

The Fumeaux recordings, exciting as they were at the time, are far from clean. Still a good and fun time though.

brassmedic · 2025-01-01 5:39 p.m.

[quote="baileyman"]I've wondered why it is that classical players play the strict way they do. Has anyone looked into the feedback effect of old written music when there is no one alive who heard it new? What might've been a classical lilt or swing gets pounded down to a strict performance practice regimen? In a big band a thing that looks like an unadorned quarter note can sound many different ways, and should! But my impression in the classical world, a quarter goes exactly like "this", no exception.[/quote]
I think your impression is wrong. Maybe the classical players you are hearing are not very good? We spend our whole lives studying the music, understanding the styles, and knowing when a ff is not a ff, or the difference between a Mozart sforzando and a Stravinsky sforzando, or when notes should be shorter or longer than what is notated. I have done many gigs with jazz or commercial players who have NEVER studied or even heard classical music, yet somehow think they are qualified to do the job. Those are the ones who are likely either robotically playing exactly what's on the page, or even worse, changing it in a wildly inappropriate way.

And you don't necessarily need recordings to understand styles. Literature exists from all time periods that explain performance practice at the time. Some of it is still guesswork, but they are informed guesses. And period instruments exist, so we know what they sounded like and how they would probably fit into an ensemble.

brassmedic · by **brassmedic** » 2025-01-01 5:42 p.m.

By the way, I read all the comments here, and I will add myself to the list of people who believe great jazz players are just as "clean" as great classical players.

LeTromboniste · 2025-01-01 6:14 p.m.

This:
[quote="tbdana"]Classical players work hard to make their playing sound perfect. Perfection in tone, intonation, dynamics, articulations, releases, posture, breathing, etc. Every note they play has to be perfectly clean[/quote]
yeah, sure,

this however:
[quote="tbdana"]They study arcane minutiae from hundreds of years ago in a quest to remain loyal to what they believe is long dead composers' original intent.[/quote]
very much no. Or when they think they do, it's usually very superficially the case.

The modern classical trombone aesthetics are almost entirely based on the performance practice, equipment evolution and recording canon of the last 60-70 years at most, coalesced into a very strictly and narrowly codified way of playing, with too often an enormous focus on absolute evenness ("bricks!") pushed to the extreme where anything that is the slightest bit uneven (even if it were on purpose) is seen as sloppy and lacking consistency. But that's certainly not the result of studying the practice or intentions of hundreds of years ago.

Otherwise I generally agree with the sentiment. We should all expand our horizons and push the boundaries, and not be content with merely meeting the expectations of the job. We can all develop both better technique AND more facility, creativity and spontaneity, because there is no reason these should be antithetical.

One word of caution about classical technique being something that should be acquired by all. There are elements for which I would say, sure absolutely. But some other, sometimes central, concept of classical technique are to me incompatible and completely opposed with what you express. An example: a while back Sasha Romero posted on Facebook about the problems with the obsession for "cloned" notes that is omnipresent in the classical trombone world. Some of the responses expressed a feeling I've very often heard elsewhere, that one needs to first develop the control needed to perfectly and consistently clone notes in order to be able to do anything else. I take serious issue with that because although it might make some (albeit very incomplete) sense as a pedagogical tool, it way too often winds up being elevated to the level of aesthetic ideal, and leading to the very misguided impression that from this ability to play everything the same will naturally flow the ability to play things not the same. I often wonder if I'd be further along my path to acquire the skills and subtlety I'm trying to play with had I not spent so many years trying to develop that absolute evenness, and instead learned and practiced from the start to play with as much (intentional and controlled) variety and flexibility as possible. I'm pretty sure the answer is yes.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-01-01 6:30 p.m.

Very interesting and informative post, Max. I learned. Thank you. :)

baileyman · by **baileyman** » 2025-01-01 7:34 p.m.

[quote="brassmedic"]<QUOTE author="baileyman" post_id="262876" time="1735693635" user_id="160">
I've wondered why it is that classical players play the strict way they do. Has anyone looked into the feedback effect of old written music when there is no one alive who heard it new? What might've been a classical lilt or swing gets pounded down to a strict performance practice regimen? In a big band a thing that looks like an unadorned quarter note can sound many different ways, and should! But my impression in the classical world, a quarter goes exactly like "this", no exception.[/quote]
I think your impression is wrong. Maybe the classical players you are hearing are not very good? We spend our whole lives studying the music, understanding the styles, and knowing when a ff is not a ff, or the difference between a Mozart sforzando and a Stravinsky sforzando, or when notes should be shorter or longer than what is notated. I have done many gigs with jazz or commercial players who have NEVER studied or even heard classical music, yet somehow think they are qualified to do the job. Those are the ones who are likely either robotically playing exactly what's on the page, or even worse, changing it in a wildly inappropriate way.

And you don't necessarily need recordings to understand styles. Literature exists from all time periods that explain performance practice at the time. Some of it is still guesswork, but they are informed guesses. And period instruments exist, so we know what they sounded like and how they would probably fit into an ensemble.
</QUOTE>

Interesting and worthwhile, so I will listen more closely to hear the difference. Interesting also what LeTromboniste then says, which I think is what I hear.

[quote="LeTromboniste"]...

The modern classical trombone aesthetics are almost entirely based on the performance practice, equipment evolution and recording canon of the last 60-70 years at most, coalesced into a very strictly and narrowly codified way of playing, with too often an enormous focus on absolute evenness ("bricks!") pushed to the extreme where anything that is the slightest bit uneven (even if it were on purpose) is seen as sloppy and lacking consistency.

...[/quote]

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2025-01-01 9:32 p.m.

[quote="baileyman"]<QUOTE author="brassmedic" post_id="262947" time="1735771149" user_id="4102">

I think your impression is wrong. Maybe the classical players you are hearing are not very good? We spend our whole lives studying the music, understanding the styles, and knowing when a ff is not a ff, or the difference between a Mozart sforzando and a Stravinsky sforzando, or when notes should be shorter or longer than what is notated. I have done many gigs with jazz or commercial players who have NEVER studied or even heard classical music, yet somehow think they are qualified to do the job. Those are the ones who are likely either robotically playing exactly what's on the page, or even worse, changing it in a wildly inappropriate way.

And you don't necessarily need recordings to understand styles. Literature exists from all time periods that explain performance practice at the time. Some of it is still guesswork, but they are informed guesses. And period instruments exist, so we know what they sounded like and how they would probably fit into an ensemble.[/quote]

Interesting and worthwhile, so I will listen more closely to hear the difference. Interesting also what LeTromboniste then says, which I think is what I hear.

[quote="LeTromboniste"]...

The modern classical trombone aesthetics are almost entirely based on the performance practice, equipment evolution and recording canon of the last 60-70 years at most, coalesced into a very strictly and narrowly codified way of playing, with too often an enormous focus on absolute evenness ("bricks!") pushed to the extreme where anything that is the slightest bit uneven (even if it were on purpose) is seen as sloppy and lacking consistency.

...[/quote]
</QUOTE>

The two are not mutually exclusive. Classical players play Mozart different than they'll play Mahler. A mf 8th note is not the same length, weight or dynamic in every context. But there is definitely a tendency within any given context to aim for a lot of evenness, and generally very square-shaped notes.

brassmedic · by **brassmedic** » 2025-01-02 1:45 a.m.

[quote="LeTromboniste"]The two are not mutually exclusive. Classical players play Mozart different than they'll play Mahler. A mf 8th note is not the same length, weight or dynamic in every context. But there is definitely a tendency within any given context to aim for a lot of evenness, and generally very square-shaped notes.[/quote]
Perhaps because it's a sign of an inexperienced player to start a note with a sloppy attack and have the tone color "bloom" halfway through the note, because the embouchure was not set correctly at the start? I even worked with a professional player who had this tone color and volume shift on literally every note. Maybe they thought they were being "expressive", but it was not pleasant to listen to. I bet a lot of teachers try to dissuade their students from doing this, perhaps going too far with it and ending up with these "bricks", as you call them.

Doug_Elliott · by **Doug_Elliott** » 2025-01-02 2:28 a.m.

In any idiom, varied articulation and tone, portamentos, glisses, etc are fine with me if they are done intentionally and for expression and a musical purpose - not out of habit or general sloppiness.

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2025-01-02 5:41 a.m.

[quote="Doug Elliott"]In any idiom, varied articulation and tone, portamentos, glisses, etc are fine with me if they are done intentionally and for expression and a musical purpose - not out of habit or general sloppiness.[/quote]

Exactly this.

[quote="brassmedic"]Perhaps because it's a sign of an inexperienced player to start a note with a sloppy attack and have the tone color "bloom" halfway through the note, because the embouchure was not set correctly at the start? I even worked with a professional player who had this tone color and volume shift on literally every note. Maybe they thought they were being "expressive", but it was not pleasant to listen to. I bet a lot of teachers try to dissuade their students from doing this, perhaps going too far with it and ending up with these "bricks", as you call them.[/quote]

I would think that having access to, and control of, a wider palette of articulations, note shapes, sound colours, dynamics, etc., and that being able to give relief and shading to phrases, are absolutely essential tools to making music, and not merely signs of inexperience. Otherwise we're painters focused on drawing the most evenly-shaped, consistent and straight-lined stick figures with a black sharpie thinking that's going to result in us being able to paint the next Joconde...

SamBTbrn · by **SamBTbrn** » 2025-01-02 6:10 a.m.

[quote="LeTromboniste"]<QUOTE author="Doug Elliott" post_id="262971" time="1735802935" user_id="51">
In any idiom, varied articulation and tone, portamentos, glisses, etc are fine with me if they are done intentionally and for expression and a musical purpose - not out of habit or general sloppiness.[/quote]

Exactly this.

[quote="brassmedic"]Perhaps because it's a sign of an inexperienced player to start a note with a sloppy attack and have the tone color "bloom" halfway through the note, because the embouchure was not set correctly at the start? I even worked with a professional player who had this tone color and volume shift on literally every note. Maybe they thought they were being "expressive", but it was not pleasant to listen to. I bet a lot of teachers try to dissuade their students from doing this, perhaps going too far with it and ending up with these "bricks", as you call them.[/quote]

I would think that having access to, and control of, a wider palette of articulations, note shapes, sound colours, dynamics, etc., and that being able to give relief and shading to phrases, are absolutely essential tools to making music, and not merely signs of inexperience. Otherwise we're painters focused on drawing the most evenly-shaped, consistent and straight-lined stick figures with a black sharpie thinking that's going to result in us being able to paint the next Joconde...
</QUOTE>

What I think Max is getting at is the trend over the last 20 - 30 years of "classical" trombone playing that teaches everything should be sustained with full sound the whole lengths of the note right untill the next note which should be a continuation of the sustain of the previous note, with no "shape" in the note. Aka playing everything like a Bruckner Symphony. Its easy to hear at the conservatoriums for example, students playing the Lebedev and the Bozza with exactly the same style and approach. Which is not really appropriate for either

Doug_Elliott · by **Doug_Elliott** » 2025-01-02 8:43 a.m.

But it's necessary to be able to do that, and it's definitely a worthwhile exercise for someone who can't.

imsevimse · by **imsevimse** » 2025-01-02 9:00 a.m.

I recognize what Dana says from what was going on in the 1970-ies and early1980-ies when I studied at the Royal Accademy of music in Stockholm and when jazz was still looked down on by the education system here. It wasn't fully recognized but had just started to change. It was about the time I got there when the school started the first program where you could study jazz. The problem wasn't so much the actual musicians and teachers who were teaching but the culture of the school and more from a theoretical point.There were assumptions based on bias and that had created groups against jazz (mostly), and bad knowledge had led to less respect for jazz as an artform. This was someghing I felt later on when I started to teach and met with colleagues who had studied before me. For short: the ones who were teaching who could not swing!!!

Today I do not think this exists there at all. Music education has changed. And I do not believe this has been a problem between actual skilled players and musicians, they have always as I remember appreciated both jazz and classical skills.

Now why sloppy classical playing or stiff jazz performances?

I think the ones who only play jazz should be forced to get more into classical trombone training and vice versa at college level. They should study both because I think anyone, openminded or not would be helpt by that. I think it will benefit their playing.

Jazzers should play the classical repertoire to learn that kind of perspective, and classical musicians should start to improvise more and learn how to swing. The classically interested could start to improvise in the baroque ideom if that makes more sense and later on they might try to improvise in other ideoms. Jazzers should learn how to play disciplined and to be conscious of what they do. To add a glissando anywere isn't jazzy it is just bad taste.

If we talk about professionals there are some classical pros who publicly perform jazz solos. Unfortunately it becomes obvious just after a few bars that they "loose" something in their performance. They might not be aware of it (apparently) but they do not swing. However they do execute the music perfectly. I do not know what to say. Maybe they should get criticized more for this? I'm sure there are other more classical solists who can do both but they are then less known as classical soloists.

I've only heard one jazzer most know as a jazzer who has done the opposite and that's Nils Landgren and that was a remarkable performance together with a choir, but he is classically trained and his jazz skills was infact used to add to the performance of what was a "classical piece" (what I think).

Maybe we should just stop talking about jazz versus classical or sloppy versus clean and just label everything as music performed with good or bad taste.

/Tom

Fidbone · by **Fidbone** » 2025-01-02 10:25 a.m.

In my experience freelance professionals and or Studio musicians are adept at both!

I guess what you are talking about here are either amateurs/semi-pros or maybe even professionals that get a full time position in a certain idiom and therefore neglect other styles of playing <EMOJI seq="1fae3" tseq="1fae3">🫣</EMOJI>

Wilktone · by **Wilktone** » 2025-01-02 11:11 a.m.

[quote="imsevimse"]I recognize what Dana says from what was going on in the 1970-ies and early1980-ies when I studied at the Royal Accademy of music in Stockholm and when jazz was still looked down on by the education system here.[/quote]

In the U.S. jazz education started to become more established and respected in the 1960s, I believe. Stan Kenton started his clinics in 1959, which went a long way towards making jazz education more respected and popular.

[quote="tbdana"]One of the big philosophical divides between legit trombone players and jazz trombone players has to do with the cleanliness of playing. I'll start with some general observations (stereotypes?) that have a good bit of truth to them.[/quote]

Have we established that there is really any truth to these observations? Maybe back in the day, when colleges and universities weren't teaching jazz would some classical players accuse jazz musicians of playing with sloppy technique, but I don't think that criticism was valid back then either. It might have had more to do with racism or institutional stagnation than any real acceptance of sloppiness among jazz trombonists.

Are there any particular examples of sloppy jazz trombone recordings that anyone can think of that is well respected and considered important or influential?

Dave

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-01-02 11:39 a.m.

[quote="Wilktone"]<QUOTE author="tbdana" post_id="262826" time="1735667868" user_id="16498">
One of the big philosophical divides between legit trombone players and jazz trombone players has to do with the cleanliness of playing. I'll start with some general observations (stereotypes?) that have a good bit of truth to them.[/quote]

Have we established that there is really any truth to these observations? Maybe back in the day, when colleges and universities weren't teaching jazz would some classical players accuse jazz musicians of playing with sloppy technique, but I don't think that criticism was valid back then either. It might have had more to do with racism or institutional stagnation than any real acceptance of sloppiness among jazz trombonists.

Are there any particular examples of sloppy jazz trombone recordings that anyone can think of that is well respected and considered important or influential?

Dave
</QUOTE>

I thought about providing an example or two of the kind of playing I was talking about, and quickly ditched that idea. I would never hold up anyone's playing but my own as an example of something I'm critical of. But not too long ago I did post one I could have used as an example, though I didn't say anything about it at the time.

To be clear, I don't think it is universally true. I don't think the best players do it. But I do think a lot of players do, and it runs the gamut: amateurs, students, semi-pro, and pro. I've been perplexed that others here say they've never heard such a thing, but rather than being stupid and offensive by starting to give examples I decided just to let it go.

Besides, if all the jazz players you hear are playing clear, clean, nicely shaped notes where you can recognize their pitch, you're listening to the right music. But it's out there, and I strongly believe for that and many other reasons that we should all be learning classical technique and ethos to improve our overall jazz playing.

I'll also confess that this has a bit of the "reformed smoker" in it for me, in that at one point I had to work very hard to undo bad habits and learn to play cleaner -- which I think I do pretty well these days, but not I'm not perfect at it and one of the videos of my own playing that I posted contains some parts that make me cringe when I hear it -- and like former cigarette smokers can be uber sensitive about those who still smoke, this stuff really jumps out at me when I hear it.

One more thing and then I'll shut up: if this thread bothers you, wait until I make a post about what classical players should learn from jazzers. LOL! :D

Burgerbob · by **Burgerbob** » 2025-01-02 11:42 a.m.

[quote="Fidbone"]In my experience freelance professionals and or Studio musicians are adept at both!

I guess what you are talking about here are either amateurs/semi-pros or maybe even professionals that get a full time position in a certain idiom and therefore neglect other styles of playing <EMOJI seq="1fae3" tseq="1fae3">🫣</EMOJI>[/quote]

:clever:

Cmillar · by **Cmillar** » 2025-01-02 11:44 a.m.

[quote="LeTromboniste"]<QUOTE author="Doug Elliott" post_id="262971" time="1735802935" user_id="51">
In any idiom, varied articulation and tone, portamentos, glisses, etc are fine with me if they are done intentionally and for expression and a musical purpose - not out of habit or general sloppiness.[/quote]

Exactly this.

[quote="brassmedic"]Perhaps because it's a sign of an inexperienced player to start a note with a sloppy attack and have the tone color "bloom" halfway through the note, because the embouchure was not set correctly at the start? I even worked with a professional player who had this tone color and volume shift on literally every note. Maybe they thought they were being "expressive", but it was not pleasant to listen to. I bet a lot of teachers try to dissuade their students from doing this, perhaps going too far with it and ending up with these "bricks", as you call them.[/quote]

I would think that having access to, and control of, a wider palette of articulations, note shapes, sound colours, dynamics, etc., and that being able to give relief and shading to phrases, are absolutely essential tools to making music, and not merely signs of inexperience. Otherwise we're painters focused on drawing the most evenly-shaped, consistent and straight-lined stick figures with a black sharpie thinking that's going to result in us being able to paint the next Joconde...
</QUOTE>

Yes to all the above words!

Which is why it is best for wanna-be professional musicians on any instrument to find teachers and mentors who have actual professional experience in as many musical genres as possible.

Especially these days, seeing as there are a lot of music ‘teachers’ who don’t actually have any professional experience at all…only a degree of some kind and some ‘pedagogical training’.

brassmedic · by **brassmedic** » 2025-01-02 12:11 p.m.

[quote="LeTromboniste"]

I would think that having access to, and control of, a wider palette of articulations, note shapes, sound colours, dynamics, etc., and that being able to give relief and shading to phrases, are absolutely essential tools to making music, and not merely signs of inexperience. Otherwise we're painters focused on drawing the most evenly-shaped, consistent and straight-lined stick figures with a black sharpie thinking that's going to result in us being able to paint the next Joconde...[/quote]
Sure, if you have control of it. I'm talking about players who have no control of the timbre or articulation. That is absolutely a sign of inexperience. Or incompetence.

TomInME · by **TomInME** » 2025-01-02 12:28 p.m.

Interesting that almost nobody has mentioned the downside of all that "perfection" poured into classical performances: the lack of energy and expression that often accompanies it.

I want the players next to me to do what's on the page and do it well, but also more. If there's no fire in what comes out, I don't blame the audience for walking away - as many orchestral concertgoers have.

I for one am afraid of what will happen to jazz if the pursuit of technical perfection supersedes the pursuit of expression.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-01-02 12:44 p.m.

[quote="TomInME"]Interesting that almost nobody has mentioned the downside of all that "perfection" poured into classical performances: the lack of energy and expression that often accompanies it.

I want the players next to me to do what's on the page and do it well, but also more. If there's no fire in what comes out, I don't blame the audience for walking away - as many orchestral concertgoers have.

I for one am afraid of what will happen to jazz if the pursuit of technical perfection supersedes the pursuit of expression.[/quote]

A false dichotomy. It isn’t a choice between one or the other. It’s both. Both are necessary. The whole reason I mentioned this is because I’m so weary of hearing people try to play beyond their ability and excusing it by using the fake excuse that playing better will make their jazz worse. Nonsense.

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2025-01-02 12:59 p.m.

[quote="brassmedic"]<QUOTE author="LeTromboniste" post_id="262974" time="1735814482" user_id="3038">

I would think that having access to, and control of, a wider palette of articulations, note shapes, sound colours, dynamics, etc., and that being able to give relief and shading to phrases, are absolutely essential tools to making music, and not merely signs of inexperience. Otherwise we're painters focused on drawing the most evenly-shaped, consistent and straight-lined stick figures with a black sharpie thinking that's going to result in us being able to paint the next Joconde...[/quote]
Sure, if you have control of it. I'm talking about players who have no control of the timbre or articulation. That is absolutely a sign of inexperience. Or incompetence.
</QUOTE>

Yeah but my point is that modern classical brass pedagogy, instead of teaching to develop this control on variety and unevenness, tends to beat the variety out of the player.

The ability to play everything consistently even with identical square-shaped notes does not lead to the ability to play with intentional variety and therefore can't be equated with "control".

Burgerbob · by **Burgerbob** » 2025-01-02 1:29 p.m.

To be fair... I think the "brick" approach is largely based out of one school and one teacher. I honestly haven't run into a lot of it here on the west coast, and we have cats from all over.

VJOFan · by **VJOFan** » 2025-01-02 1:35 p.m.

Ray Anderson. Jimmy Knepper.

Are they sloppy or clean? I’m not sure, but they create captivating music that touches me each time listen. Players who aren’t musically convincing probably won’t get much of an audience clean or sloppy.

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2025-01-02 3:32 p.m.

[quote="Burgerbob"]To be fair... I think the "brick" approach is largely based out of one school and one teacher. I honestly haven't run into a lot of it here on the west coast, and we have cats from all over.[/quote]

I've seen some extent of it pretty much everywhere I've lived and worked, even when people think they don't subscribe to it. It's very pervasive. By far the biggest portion of my teaching anytime I teach historical performance practice to modern players, whether at my school, in masterclasses or at workshops, is getting them to realise how narrow a portion of the spectrum they use, and how much untapped musical potential resides in the rest of the spectrum. And many of them are good musicians with good instincts. It just doesn't occur to them to go for these ideas because it's simply not a part of the paradigm and they're not exposed to it.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-01-02 3:56 p.m.

[quote="VJOFan"]Ray Anderson. Jimmy Knepper.

Are they sloppy or clean? I’m not sure, but they create captivating music that touches me each time listen. Players who aren’t musically convincing probably won’t get much of an audience clean or sloppy.[/quote]

I think Ray Anderson just likes to make funny noises on the trombone, which is not my cup of tea. I definitely don't find it "captivating," except in the driving past the scene of an accident sense. But it's also not the same as playing licks in earnest and not being able to play them cleanly.

I don't have many memories of Jimmy Knepper, but I remember him as a pretty articulate, clean player. So I dunno. I'd have to listen.

brassmedic · by **brassmedic** » 2025-01-02 4:36 p.m.

[quote="TomInME"]Interesting that almost nobody has mentioned the downside of all that "perfection" poured into classical performances: the lack of energy and expression that often accompanies it.

I want the players next to me to do what's on the page and do it well, but also more. If there's no fire in what comes out, I don't blame the audience for walking away - as many orchestral concertgoers have.

I for one am afraid of what will happen to jazz if the pursuit of technical perfection supersedes the pursuit of expression.[/quote]
Wow. I absolutely don't hear that in major symphony orchestras today. To my ear, the performances are very exciting and captivating. I don't see how being less proficient on your instrument would make you more musical. :idk:

If symphony orchestras are losing audience members, it's because the younger generation would rather stare at Tiktok all day, and the older generation are simply dying off.

EriKon · by **EriKon** » 2025-01-02 5:52 p.m.

[quote="Wilktone"]<QUOTE author="tbdana" post_id="262826" time="1735667868" user_id="16498">
One of the big philosophical divides between legit trombone players and jazz trombone players has to do with the cleanliness of playing. I'll start with some general observations (stereotypes?) that have a good bit of truth to them.[/quote]

Have we established that there is really any truth to these observations? Maybe back in the day, when colleges and universities weren't teaching jazz would some classical players accuse jazz musicians of playing with sloppy technique, but I don't think that criticism was valid back then either. It might have had more to do with racism or institutional stagnation than any real acceptance of sloppiness among jazz trombonists.

Are there any particular examples of sloppy jazz trombone recordings that anyone can think of that is well respected and considered important or influential?

Dave
</QUOTE>

This is still not really answered and I'm also missing a clear definition of sloppy playing. What are we talking about? Do we talk about cracking three notes in a 5 minute jazz solo? Do we talk about poor slide-tongue coordination and poor intonation? Do we talk about some notes not being played dead-center? Do we talk about one chord not being in tune on a classic choral? What is the definition of sloppy playing that is the foundation for this discussion? As long as there is no established base of discussion everyone has different pictures of sloppy and clean playing in mind and there's no way to discuss this properly with the discussion leading somewhere.

Richard3rd · by **Richard3rd** » 2025-01-02 6:01 p.m.

Or is this a comment on the jazz players not playing what is written on the page? I often have players who are primarily classical players struggle playing along with experienced jazz players. The classical guys often don't know the conventions of jazz playing and expect the written music to be rigidly adhered to, so they come in late or early or articulate inappropriately for the jazz style.

tbdana · 2025-01-02 6:02 p.m.

[quote="EriKon"]This is still not really answered and I'm also missing a clear definition of sloppy playing. What are we talking about?[/quote]

Erik, I'm just not sure it's susceptible to precise definition, and it can be a million different things. Do we know bad playing when we hear it?

Do we talk about cracking three notes in a 5 minute jazz solo?

No. But in fairness there is some point -- sorry, can't define it with a precise number for you -- where the nature and number of clams in a solo takes away from the musicality to the point that I would included it here as a yes.

(I use the word "clams" as meaning mistakes, missed notes, clipped notes, notes that fall off the pitch in the middle, split tone notes, and other impurities in a note that make a musical difference.)

Do we talk about poor slide-tongue coordination and poor intonation?

Yes.

Do we talk about some notes not being played dead-center?

Depends. Playing some notes ("blue" notes) on the low side is just right. Playing sharper as you play higher is bad. Too many variables for precise definition.

Do we talk about one chord not being in tune on a classic choral?

No. And this thread is about jazz players playing improvised solos.

What is the definition of sloppy playing that is the foundation for this discussion? As long as there is no established base of discussion everyone has different pictures of sloppy and clean playing in mind and there's no way to discuss this properly with the discussion leading somewhere.

Well, then, maybe it won't lead anywhere. I'm just not pedantic in the way I think about or discuss this. Bad playing is like porn. You know it when you hear it.

[quote="Richard3rd"]Or is this a comment on the jazz players not playing what is written on the page? I often have players who are primarily classical players struggle playing along with experienced jazz players. The classical guys often don't know the conventions of jazz playing and expect the written music to be rigidly adhered to, so they come in late or early or articulate inappropriately for the jazz style.[/quote]

Well, that's all true, but that isn't what I meant. When I used the term "playing jazz" or "jazz playing," I didn't mean in the sense of the idiom or genre. I meant in the sense of improvised solos. "Jazz" is also a slang term meanings improvising, as in, "Who's gonna play the jazz on this tune tonight?"

Since I said I would only use my own work as examples of poor playing, here are two excerpts from a solo I played. It's pretty fast, which is where I often come across sloppy playing, and of which I am guilty here. One very common source of slop in jazz playing is trying to play faster than you are able to play cleanly. In these two clips I'd say the first one is unacceptably sloppy. The second one is imperfect, too, but IMHO is acceptably clean. But if I played generally like the first clip, I'd say I was playing beyond my ability and should either get better before trying that again, or just simplify what I choose to play.

This is very sloppy and is the kind of slop I'm talking about. It's a fail IMHO: <LINK_TEXT text="https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/82r061tm ... cd24d&dl=0">https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/82r061tmynhph5ua4ccj5/Sloppy-playing.mp3?rlkey=tbl2pwx6fid1n2bppwn0a5wk6&st=3k5cd24d&dl=0</LINK_TEXT>

This is better. Not perfect but at least you can hear the notes so I'll give it a pass: <LINK_TEXT text="https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/075xr27h ... xds28&dl=0">https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/075xr27hkupxfjpqu3u3t/Acceptable-playing-at-speed.mp3?rlkey=nkizpmsx852hppnjpghg5vh67&st=3goxds28&dl=0</LINK_TEXT>

I hope that's helpful, but I suspect this is one of those topics where people would argue about the minutiae of the color of the sky.

brassmedic · by **brassmedic** » 2025-01-02 7:20 p.m.

[quote="Richard3rd"]Or is this a comment on the jazz players not playing what is written on the page? I often have players who are primarily classical players struggle playing along with experienced jazz players. The classical guys often don't know the conventions of jazz playing and expect the written music to be rigidly adhered to, so they come in late or early or articulate inappropriately for the jazz style.[/quote]
I totally agree with this, but it's an interesting comment because several people here have implied that classical players are slaves to convention and only play within a a rigid set of established rules. Yet I often hear comments from jazz players about people not knowing how to swing properly, what type of articulation to use, what note lengths are appropriate, etc. Are they any less rigid than classical players?

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-01-02 7:23 p.m.

[quote="brassmedic"]I totally agree with this, but it's an interesting comment because several people here have implied that classical players are slaves to convention and only play within a a rigid set of established rules. Yet I often hear comments from jazz players about people not knowing how to swing properly, what type of articulation to use, what note lengths are appropriate, etc. Are they any less rigid than classical players?[/quote]

Yeah, they are.

TomInME · by **TomInME** » 2025-01-02 8:21 p.m.

[quote="tbdana"]A false dichotomy. It isn’t a choice between one or the other. It’s both. Both are necessary. The whole reason I mentioned this is because I’m so weary of hearing people try to play beyond their ability and excusing it by using the fake excuse that playing better will make their jazz worse. Nonsense.[/quote]

It is both, but when "flawlessness" is prioritized at the expense of expression, music dies.

I'm not denying your point that when the execution is bad enough, music doesn't live in the first place.

My point is that execution must serve expression, and not be an end unto itself.

TomInME · 2025-01-02 8:26 p.m.

[quote="brassmedic"]I don't see how being less proficient on your instrument would make you more musical. :idk:[/quote]
That's not even close to what I said.

Some modern orchestras may be capable of flawless execution AND an emotional performance, but I've heard more than a few technically precise but dry and tasteless performances.

I'm not saying a sloppy but energetic performance is any better (it isn't), but it's not any worse.

Posaunus · by **Posaunus** » 2025-01-02 8:29 p.m.

[quote="Burgerbob"]To be fair... I think the "brick" approach is largely based out of one school and one teacher. I honestly haven't run into a lot of it here on the west coast, and we have cats from all over.[/quote]

I'm not sure who is the proponent of the "brick" approach - apparently someone prominent in musical academia. :idk: I have certainly heard a lot of musical playing, with nicely shaped notes, coming from orchestral players in prominent ensembles, and have watched conductors urge such musicality from their players.

I have been thinking about John Marcellus, who has just passed away. "Doc" was the trombone professor at the Eastman School of Music for 36 years (until 2014) and continued playing and loving life for another 10 years. He was obviously a great influence on the careers of many successful trombonists. I doubt that he advocated the "brick" approach (whatever that is). He was a rounded musician, and - for those who never heard him - he was a fine jazz improviser. Doc could swing! May he rest in peace.

TomInME · by **TomInME** » 2025-01-02 8:46 p.m.

[quote="tbdana"]I’m so weary of hearing people try to play beyond their ability and excusing it by using the fake excuse that playing better will make their jazz worse. Nonsense.[/quote]

Has anyone ever become a great improviser by avoiding mistakes?

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-01-02 9:33 p.m.

[quote="TomInME"]<QUOTE author="tbdana" post_id="263001" time="1735839860" user_id="16498">I’m so weary of hearing people try to play beyond their ability and excusing it by using the fake excuse that playing better will make their jazz worse. Nonsense.[/quote]

Has anyone ever become a great improviser by avoiding mistakes?
</QUOTE>

Tom, you’re laboring under a serious misconception. I never said people need to play perfectly. And I never advocated for prioritizing perfection over musicality. I don’t know how you got that in your head but you can let that go. I don’t think anyone has even implied that. Indeed I was very specific that we need BOTH proficiency AND musicality.

I’ve also said that I personally try to practice at the edges of my skill set, but perform from the middle of it. To me, it’s disrespectful to my audience and the other musicians to be trying to go places I’m not capable of going.

brassmedic · by **brassmedic** » 2025-01-02 9:37 p.m.

[quote="tbdana"]<QUOTE author="brassmedic" post_id="263061" time="1735863659" user_id="4102">
I totally agree with this, but it's an interesting comment because several people here have implied that classical players are slaves to convention and only play within a a rigid set of established rules. Yet I often hear comments from jazz players about people not knowing how to swing properly, what type of articulation to use, what note lengths are appropriate, etc. Are they any less rigid than classical players?[/quote]

Yeah, they are.
</QUOTE>
I was hoping for a more detailed response, but whatever...

brassmedic · by **brassmedic** » 2025-01-02 9:40 p.m.

[quote="TomInME"]I've heard more than a few technically precise but dry and tasteless performances.[/quote]
I'd be very interested to hear an example of this from an acclaimed orchestra.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-01-02 10:54 p.m.

[quote="brassmedic"]<QUOTE author="tbdana" post_id="263062" time="1735863794" user_id="16498">

Yeah, they are.[/quote]
I was hoping for a more detailed response, but whatever...
</QUOTE>

Sorry I’m out for dinner and jazz. Not sure where to go with this. Jazz players prize individualism, creativity, emotion, and spontaneity. All these things call for individual interpretation and flexibility. So it’s kind of the antithesis of the classical approach and allows for huge landscapes for group and individual exploration. But they do want players to know the idiom.

Cmillar · by **Cmillar** » 2025-01-03 10:11 a.m.

Yes...I keep coming back to the need for serious music students to study with people who are actually professionally experienced in more than one idiom; or attend a college/university/conservatory where they can get lessons from experienced pros in more than one idiom.

Too many of our colleges/universities (in the US anyways) are full of teachers who may have a Doctorate in Trombone but have never had any actual playing experience outside of what they've done for the last so many years in university. (...we know that's a fact...)

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-01-03 10:45 a.m.

[quote="Cmillar"]Too many of our colleges/universities (in the US anyways) are full of teachers who may have a Doctorate in Trombone but have never had any actual playing experience outside of what they've done for the last so many years in university. (...we know that's a fact...)[/quote]

When I took up playing trombone again 18 months ago I was surprised to see how many music students were going into teaching rather than being performers, even if they were getting performance degrees. It wasn't like this 30 years ago. And I started wondering if maybe this is the result of there being fewer gigs now, and having a career as a player is much more difficult now than it used to be. Do you think this is true?

And if so, is this generation that has become teachers/professors rather than performers going to simply train the next generation of students to become teachers/professors instead of performers? And if so, what happens to performers and performing careers?

TomInME · by **TomInME** » 2025-01-03 10:52 a.m.

[quote="brassmedic"]<QUOTE author="TomInME" post_id="263074" time="1735867597" user_id="17474">
I've heard more than a few technically precise but dry and tasteless performances.[/quote]
I'd be very interested to hear an example of this from an acclaimed orchestra.
</QUOTE>

They wouldn't be acclaimed if they couldn't do both.

TomInME · by **TomInME** » 2025-01-03 12:22 p.m.

[quote="tbdana"]<QUOTE author="TomInME" post_id="263079" time="1735868762" user_id="17474">

Has anyone ever become a great improviser by avoiding mistakes?[/quote]

Tom, you’re laboring under a serious misconception. I never said people need to play perfectly. And I never advocated for prioritizing perfection over musicality. I don’t know how you got that in your head but you can let that go. I don’t think anyone has even implied that. Indeed I was very specific that we need BOTH proficiency AND musicality.

I’ve also said that I personally try to practice at the edges of my skill set, but perform from the middle of it. To me, it’s disrespectful to my audience and the other musicians to be trying to go places I’m not capable of going.
</QUOTE>

You wanted to be "provocative", I'm simply responding in kind.

Your last bit about performing from the middle of your skillset sounds all well and good, but it's also a recipe for "playing safe" which runs the risk of boring the audience. There's no free lunch. There's a middle ground between taking too many risks and playing too safe, but this thread has been pretty heavily on the "playing safe" side.

But specifically from an improv perspective, I (as a listener) think that players need to stretch to develop, and that it can't just be in the practice room. I'd rather hear someone try for something interesting and fail than to never make the attempt. (and of course it's best when they succeed) I think your issue is with one particular person who stretches way too far all the time and always comes up empty, which shouldn't be generalized to everyone who takes any chances.

I am extremely concerned that the vitality of jazz will be diminished as it becomes more and more professionalized, with fewer clubs and more concert halls, and a lot more playing from the middle. That's not where it came from, but I fear that's its future.

Posaunus · by **Posaunus** » 2025-01-03 12:24 p.m.

[quote="tbdana"]<QUOTE author="Cmillar" post_id="263112" time="1735917090" user_id="3134">
Too many of our colleges/universities (in the US anyways) are full of teachers who may have a Doctorate in Trombone but have never had any actual playing experience outside of what they've done for the last so many years in university. (...we know that's a fact...)[/quote]

When I took up playing trombone again 18 months ago I was surprised to see how many music students were going into teaching rather than being performers, even if they were getting performance degrees. It wasn't like this 30 years ago. And I started wondering if maybe this is the result of there being fewer gigs now, and having a career as a player is much more difficult now than it used to be. Do you think this is true?

And if so, is this generation that has become teachers/professors rather than performers going to simply train the next generation of students to become teachers/professors instead of performers? And if so, what happens to performers and performing careers?
</QUOTE>

Econ 101 - Supply and Demand.

Supply: Many more students graduate with performance degrees (not only trombone) than was the case 30-40 years ago.

Just about every college/university now has a "trombone studio." That was not the case in the old days, when such education was largely confined to a few major "conservatories."

Demand: There are not additional professional performance opportunities to absorb the new entrants to that career path -

big bands are no longer flourishing; symphony orchestras (& opera and ballet companies) are struggling financially and laying off performers.

Once you have the credential (a college degree) and you need to make a living, what can you do with very limited (and low paid) performance opportunities? How about ... teaching?

Wilktone · by **Wilktone** » 2025-01-03 12:26 p.m.

[quote="tbdana"]Since I said I would only use my own work as examples of poor playing, here are two excerpts from a solo I played.[/quote]

Well, when I listen to the "sloppy" excerpt I thought it sounded pretty good. Yes, I hear what you're talking about, especially compared to the second excerpt which is cleaner.

Do you think that the consistency of technique is easier when playing something that is prewritten and practiced? Is it a bit unfair to call out jazz improvisers on a little sloppiness if they happen to be going for something they're feeling, but haven't worked out in advance?

Don't get me wrong, I agree that playing as cleanly as possible is best, regardless of genre. But the jazz aesthetic, as was pointed out earlier, emphasizes spontaneity and originality. That often results in things going into unexpected directions. I recall a documentary on Miles Davis (maybe I'm remembering wrong) where Tony Williams mentioned that they loved getting lost in the form while performing because it was so exciting to figure out how they were going to get out of it.

I've heard some musicians state they would rather hear someone "going for it" and play a little sloppy than to "play it safe." Some of this may be personal preference.

[quote="brassmedic"]I totally agree with this, but it's an interesting comment because several people here have implied that classical players are slaves to convention and only play within a a rigid set of established rules. Yet I often hear comments from jazz players about people not knowing how to swing properly, what type of articulation to use, what note lengths are appropriate, etc. Are they any less rigid than classical players?[/quote]

A ballet pit orchestra nearby had a performance recently and their percussionist fell and broke his wrist on the way into the theater. The only substitute they could find was the local jazz drummer hotshot. After the first half the conductor was livid and shouted, "We'll do the second half without percussion!" The drummer looked around at the rest of the orchestra and said, "What's she so upset about? I caught all the hits!"

*rim shot*

Having studied and performed classical and jazz throughout my career, I think there's a lot of bias and misinterpretation that gets thrown around when this topic gets raised. When I was a graduate student in a jazz studies program I continued to work on my classical playing and learned how unstylistic my articulations, phrasing, vibrato, etc. was for playing classical. It was sort of the flip side to the complaint from the jazz side about how poorly classical musicians swing, etc.

So yes, brassmedic, I tend to agree that jazz musicians can be just as rigid as classical, and vice versa. Jazz musicians are slaves to our own convention too.

[quote="Cmillar"]Too many of our colleges/universities (in the US anyways) are full of teachers who may have a Doctorate in Trombone but have never had any actual playing experience outside of what they've done for the last so many years in university. (...we know that's a fact...)[/quote]

That's not my experience, but with some caveats.

My first full time teaching job was in a rural area in the Southwest US. I was first call trombonist. I was also the first call jazz horn player in the area. That wasn't because of my skills and experience, but because I was the ONLY trombonist and jazz musician in the area. I had very few playing opportunities outside of performing faculty recitals. The closest city where I could play with other musicians and get more playing experience was 3-4 hours away. If I had stayed there I guess I would fall into your description as someone with a doctorate, but little playing experience outside of what I did where I taught.

Many colleges and universities are in more isolated areas, where having the chance to continue to perform with great musicians means having to drive long distances. For some, the late nights and long commutes is too much, so they may end up not performing as much as they like. This is true for both students and teachers at these schools.

But by and large, I find that most of my college and university teaching friends and colleagues continue to perform as part of the expected professional development. If they're fortunate enough to live in an area where they get to play with excellent musicians they usually take advantage of those opportunities.

Of course, some of these teachers end up coasting, sometimes due to their circumstances and sometimes out of a change of interest or the needs of the school (e.g., we need someone to cover Music Appreciation).

[quote="tbdana"]When I took up playing trombone again 18 months ago I was surprised to see how many music students were going into teaching rather than being performers, even if they were getting performance degrees. It wasn't like this 30 years ago. And I started wondering if maybe this is the result of there being fewer gigs now, and having a career as a player is much more difficult now than it used to be. Do you think this is true?[/quote]

Yes, it is.

[quote="tbdana"]And if so, is this generation that has become teachers/professors rather than performers going to simply train the next generation of students to become teachers/professors instead of performers? And if so, what happens to performers and performing careers?[/quote]

They will need to change, as they already are. For example, the days when a professional performer could make a decent living playing a single style of music is pretty much gone. Sometimes I feel that as a freelance trombonist I'm more of a jack of all trades and master of none. But I get to do a lot of musical projects, including composing, arranging, and conducting as well as playing a wide variety of styles on trombone.

These days a lot of "content creators" rely on a different model of some type to make a living. It's not typical for musicians to be able to make their own music and follow their muse exclusively, they often do other things (musical and nonmusical). The next generation of professional musicians are likely going to learn how to teach, make videos, self-produce recordings, be social media influencers, etc. They will need to be proficient in a lot of different technologies (musical and nonmusical).

I guess all this moves away from the original topic. From my perspective, the differences I see in how trombonists approach their music is more stylistic rather than acceptance of sloppy playing. Perhaps my personal preferences in jazz trombonists mean that I just don't hear sloppy playing? I still don't feel that this is a thing, to be honest.

Dave

Cmillar · by **Cmillar** » 2025-01-03 12:47 p.m.

[quote="Posaunus"]Once you have the credential (a college degree) and you need to make a living, what can you do with very limited (and low paid) performance opportunities? How about ... teaching?[/quote]

Teaching full time at a college/university/conservatory is certainly a great gig in itself and very admirable profession.

But in order to maintain musical standards throughout all idioms, the art of music is best served by those teachers who have a lot of 'real-world' experience in orchestras, big bands, studios, shows, society gigs, etc. etc.

There are many great higher ed institutions that are aware of this predicament, and they're also aware that they are turning out many great musicians who are 'all dressed up with nowhere to go'.

So, many of the top higher ed conservatories/etc. are hiring well rounded faculty to address the present and prepare students for the future.

Unfortunately, many other institutions are not in sync with the demands of the real world these days, and many of them just hire various teachers with Doctorate degrees because that's the policy of the institution.

There are some 'out of the way' teaching opportunities that would take professional musicians away from larger centers of musical activity. So, many people just coming out of school with a fresh Doctorate jump at the chance to teach there. But, that opportunity unfortunately takes them away from any possibilities of actually getting some real-world performing experience in various idioms.

Many busy professional musicians (who would love to teach full time) don't want to move somewhere that doesn't have a real music scene. Can't blame them for that choice.

So, yeah.... many upcoming trombone players (or other student instrumentalists) get some warped musical ideas on what 'jazz is' and how it's to be played, or even some dubious classical training... when coming from a teacher who's only ever played in student ensembles and hasn't had the chance to rub shoulders with very experienced professional musicians in any idiom.

The good old 'apprenticeship-system' is really best for keeping up musical standards and integrity. Young prospective pros (and especially prospective higher-ed teachers) need to get out and get 'at it'. Meet the local pros...hang out with them... maybe move to a big city for a few years.... see the wide variety of musical approaches and styles in all musical idioms.

imsevimse · 2025-01-03 1:00 p.m.

[quote="tbdana"]<QUOTE author="Cmillar" post_id="263112" time="1735917090" user_id="3134">
Too many of our colleges/universities (in the US anyways) are full of teachers who may have a Doctorate in Trombone but have never had any actual playing experience outside of what they've done for the last so many years in university. (...we know that's a fact...)[/quote]

When I took up playing trombone again 18 months ago I was surprised to see how many music students were going into teaching rather than being performers, even if they were getting performance degrees. It wasn't like this 30 years ago. And I started wondering if maybe this is the result of there being fewer gigs now, and having a career as a player is much more difficult now than it used to be. Do you think this is true?

And if so, is this generation that has become teachers/professors rather than performers going to simply train the next generation of students to become teachers/professors instead of performers? And if so, what happens to performers and performing careers?
</QUOTE>

In Sweden there are definitely less jobs as a performer AND the jobs that do exist don't pay enough to pay bills. I know many of the retired pros who were first calls before 1995, that's about 30 years ago. They are now over 70 years old. When they speak about their early old days they had multiple sessions a day. Recordings, tv-shows, dance evenings, radio broadcasts and concerts. If I compare that to what I see today there is almost nothing, and very little that pays well, and the audience around for both classical music and jazz is old.

I was a semi-pro for 13 years and combined that with teaching but changed my career for a lot of reasons. I decided I had to do something else. You can make a living as a performance artist here if you get employed in one of the institutions and they are few. Most of the freelancers I know have other jobs too that pay the bills or they live on their spouse. Many are teachers in music.

There is a line between the few that manage to be full time musicians (1), without having to do anything else than play. These musicians have worked hard and are now privileged. They belong to the inner cirkle and do not let others in. Why should they?

Then there are semi-pros of two categories.

The ones who partly teach music and combine that with a few jobs as performers (2) and the ones that have jobs outside music and still combine this with a few jobs as performers (3).

The first category very rarely meet with the second and third categories. The second category can be satisfied to be teachers/musicians but many deep down often want to belong either to the first category to fulfill their dream and be a fully engaged musician or move to the third category and get a job that pays well and combine that with music at a - for them - satisfying level. I know many who struggle with this dilemma. To be a performer only, is possible for just a few over here. To be a music teacher/musician can be possible but it doesn't pay much. I made the choice to transfer myself to category three from category two, to be an amateur musician with better paid job outside music. I have worked really hard to make that true and I had to do it because it wasn't possible to fight my way into category one.

There aren't enough jobs around in music here.

/Tom

Savio · by **Savio** » 2025-01-03 1:07 p.m.

I'm not the right person to make a reply here but I tell some of what I think. Firstly I think the musicians level is just getting higher and higher in all genres. And I believe there is fewer gigs allover. Especially in jazz and commercial genres. I remember when I was young, there was a lot of jazz clubs around. They are gone. Seems to be fewer gigs among movie, TV shows and studio environment? Big orchestras always survive but many struggling to survive?

And so many young musicians with higher education and level are growing up. Can't be easy? But as I see it there is so much good musicianship going out there among the professionals. In fact among amateurs too.

My experience with clean/sloopy playing has changed over the years. In big bands like Toshiko Akiyoshi in LA and symphony orchestras all over there might never been any room for sloppiness? Not exactly sure what the word means but...In these jazz clubs from the 80s there was a little bit of suspect things going on.

My own experience with jazz is only from big bands and there I felt it was (and is) as strict on how you play and read music as it is in symphony orchestras. Can't say I have big experience in any camps though. Studio musicians have to cover a lot of styles and some styles can maybe feels sloppy but should maybe be so?

Anyway i feel the music and musicians are just getting better and better. And I think trombone players are among the instrument groups that are very clever to do a big variety of styles. Mostly?

Leif

About improvising there should be room for everything.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-01-03 1:12 p.m.

When I started this fun little provocative rant I did not know there would be so many thoughtful, excellent replies and posts on the subject and its curtilage. I love all the perspectives in this group. Great place. :)

[quote="Savio"]...In these jazz clubs from the 80s there was a little bit of suspect things going on.[/quote]

Heh! You have no idea. :mrgreen:

Richard3rd · by **Richard3rd** » 2025-01-03 1:22 p.m.

Dana, I found both solos acceptable. I think you are being too hard on yourself.

Brassmedic, I see your point about jazz players being rigid. Within jazz there are conventions too and we often look down on those that don't know the "proper" way to play. Perhaps we are too rigid also.

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2025-01-03 1:43 p.m.

About the teaching paradigm discussed here, I'm not sure to what extent it's actually true, and if yes I wonder if that's mostly an American phenomenon? Generally speaking having solid credentials as a performer is an important prerequisite for getting a teaching job. And DMA's aren't really that prevalent (or required) outside the US.

I'll also say that I'd be more inclined to recommend a teacher who's a freelancer and does many different things (including other stuff than just playing trombone) than someone who's only ever played auditions and then had a steady orchestra job, and therefore has likely no idea about how to become a professional outside that very narrow path, and is really only fluent in one style and one way to play the instrument.

Burgerbob · by **Burgerbob** » 2025-01-03 2:01 p.m.

Yes, even junior colleges in the US are requiring doctorates more and more.

Wilktone · by **Wilktone** » 2025-01-03 2:20 p.m.

By and large, a huge number of faculty hired these days to teach studio lessons are adjunct. Professional performers in an area where they both get opportunities to play with excellent musicians and also teach even part time are difficult to find.

As far as full time jobs, in the U.S. at least, the job of a trombone professor is a lot more than teaching studio lessons and professional development (i.e., performing). There are students to advise on their coursework, committees to serve on, faculty governance, designing and developing curriculum for the entire music department and more. For many full time teaching positions you are also required to cover additional classes. In my teaching career I ended up teaching lessons to all the brass majors, coaching brass quintet, directing the jazz ensemble, conducting the concert band, coordinated the applied music lessons and weekly student recitals. I also taught a few classroom courses, music theory, music appreciation, jazz history, world music, rock history, and music theory. I even covered a semester of class piano.

Junior colleges are a great example of what I'm talking about. I once interviewed for a full time position at a junior college. The duties, as I recall, were teaching private lessons (when there happened to be students who wanted them, not a huge studio), music theory, conducting the concert band (which would need heavy recruiting to fill). But the main duty was to chair the music department - as the only full time member of that department. (I wasn't offered the job, by the way.)

If I had only focused on say, orchestral trombone playing, while getting my doctorate I would not have had the diversity of interests and background to be able to do my teaching jobs. Theoretically, getting a graduate degree in music not only prepares you for your very narrow interests, but also forces you to get a solid grounding in those other details. One of the best classes I took during my doctoral studies was Band Administration. There also was a required course called The Role of Music In Higher Education that also helped prepare me for full time college teaching.

To a certain extent, I agree with the criticism that too many music teachers in higher education too often don't continue to develop as performers. However, some of those teachers chose to sacrifice that area in order to better serve the needs of their students (who might not all be working towards being professional performers) and their university (who need to get courses covered by qualified instructors).

I was "good enough" at trumpet, tuba, and horn to teach the music ed students I had, and some of them became pretty good performers afterwards (I didn't screw them up too badly). So I have to believe that sometimes a teacher can be "good enough" to help his or her students without continuing to perform professionally. But yes, there were times where I had to tell my students that they would be better served with a teacher who performed on their particular instrument. Then again, I've also told some trombone students that they were ready to move on to another teacher who could better help them.

Again, I dunno what this says about supposed differences in the standards between jazz and orchestral trombonists. Maybe just that I don't think the education system we're stuck with is necessarily to blame for sloppy or clean technique.

Dave

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-01-03 2:25 p.m.

Dave, it's just typical thread drift. I don't know what the connection is, either. :)

In my little backwater area, most of the university music faculty actively play local gigs, and the middle school and high school band teachers all play in community bands and orchestras.

imsevimse · by **imsevimse** » 2025-01-03 3:32 p.m.

[quote="tbdana"]Dave, it's just typical thread drift. I don't know what the connection is, either. :)

In my little backwater area, most of the university music faculty actively play local gigs, and the middle school and high school band teachers all play in community bands and orchestras.[/quote]

The connection is that "sloppy" playing and "not clean" playing from professional jazz musicians in jazz solos can mean the performers aren't as good now as professionals once were because the new teachers now do not teach the same, or the environment where musicians develop has changed. Maybe the ones who play "sloppy" only hear other sloppy players. The possibility to hear real masters that can be raw models who never would play (publicly) beyond their limits are now more rare. Maybe the most talented today in music do not chooe to play trombone? Maybe they do something else than music because they look at the music industry and chose to be a pop star or influencer or something else where fame and money is. Why choose trombone today with all that stimuli around. Why not sports or media if you are an extrovert, why trombone today if you are a little kid? I think all this is connected to "sloppy" jazz improvisations like anything else that also happens and is 'sloppy" in todays performances or even in other businesses in the world. It can may be they play sloppy just because it doesn't matter to them, because they think that is sufficient. Sloppyness is everywhere.

There aren't to many situations you can meet with the best and sit in and learn from them today. I see a lot of the old experienced ones go now without beeing able to lead the new generation. The new generation leads itself which is very strange. The chain of continuity is broken. There aren't enough good raw models left to lead in close up. It's not the same to listen to someone who is really good on YouTube as sitting next to them. You need to meet to be able to learn, you need to get advice and pick up things from the best. If they are not around you will not learn from them. You will not hear from them you need to get rid of the "sloppy" playing.

This is how I see the situation here in Sweden i do not know about situation in U.S.

/Tom

brassmedic · by **brassmedic** » 2025-01-03 4:26 p.m.

[quote="Savio"]My own experience with jazz is only from big bands and there I felt it was (and is) as strict on how you play and read music as it is in symphony orchestras. Can't say I have big experience in any camps though. Studio musicians have to cover a lot of styles and some styles can maybe feels sloppy but should maybe be so?[/quote]

[quote="Richard3rd"]Brassmedic, I see your point about jazz players being rigid. Within jazz there are conventions too and we often look down on those that don't know the "proper" way to play. Perhaps we are too rigid also.[/quote]

Thanks, guys. That was exactly my point. I've done a lot of big bang gigs in my day, and there were a very narrow set of parameters for how you play that stuff, if you want to ever be hired again. And I don't think that's a bad thing. If you aren't playing it right, you stick out like a sore thumb. Listeners really value a band that's "tight", and it can't be tight if the players aren't following the same conventions.

jacobgarchik · by **jacobgarchik** » 2025-01-03 4:38 p.m.

Ray Anderson has some sick precision when he wants to

check out "the warm-up" at 14:03

<YOUTUBE id="yZsr_0orMaA" t="843">https://youtu.be/yZsr_0orMaA?si=9ppFeWlNY9WuCzTw&t=843</YOUTUBE>

or the head to this one...uh, how often does he miss the high F# out of nowhere?

<YOUTUBE id="HusagKLGcu4">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HusagKLGcu4</YOUTUBE>

he doesn't attack notes with a typical organ-like onset of the note like joe schmo in the practice room...but neither does Teagarden, Higgenbotham, Dickie Wells, Dickenson - that is all a grand tradition, and an expressive tradition, and Ray Anderson is nailing *that* technique. In that sense he is perfectly "clean".

to me this is perfect execution. "Tah" attack? no, to me it sounds like a "mmmah" attack!

<YOUTUBE id="RGNcoUq5YYQ">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGNcoUq5YYQ</YOUTUBE>

BTW Classical players used to have a lot more mojo going on with attacks and sustains and expressive transformation of tone and pitch too - have you seen Joe Alessi's podcast with the archivist of the Nyphil where he is astonished at the techniques of trombonists in vintage recordings of the phil with Armond Ruta et al? (about half way through) slide vibrato! hairpin attacks! As Alessi says many times in the podcast, tastes and techniques have changed.

https://archives.nyphil.org/index.php/podcast/alessi

brassmedic · by **brassmedic** » 2025-01-03 7:47 p.m.

[quote="TomInME"]<QUOTE author="brassmedic" post_id="263087" time="1735872050" user_id="4102">

I'd be very interested to hear an example of this from an acclaimed orchestra.[/quote]

They wouldn't be acclaimed if they couldn't do both.
</QUOTE>
So what you're saying is, you've heard groups that aren't very good. Haven't there always been groups that aren't very good? I'm not saying this was your point necessarily, but I definitely got a vibe from several posts in this thread that somehow classical musicians have become slaves to precision at the expense of musicality and/or individuality, and I just don't hear that.

BGuttman · by **BGuttman** » 2025-01-03 8:08 p.m.

I was at a New England Brass Conference and one of the presenters was Jim Pugh. He had a quintet with him including Marcus Rojas on tuba (don't remember the other players). Jim is a consummate jazzer. First thing the group played was a nice classical work (Gabrieli?) and they played it note perfect. These guys could play "straight" as well as "jazzy".

For that matter, Berklee had 3 trombone profs: Phil Wilson, Tony Lada, and Tom Plsek. I've heard Lada and Plsek play cleanly and accurately even though the school they were associated was more jazz oriented. I'm sure Wilson could play "legit" as well, although I never heard him.

Wilktone · by **Wilktone** » 2025-01-05 11:41 a.m.

[quote="imsevimse"]This is how I see the situation here in Sweden i do not know about situation in U.S.[/quote]

That's interesting, Tom. In the U.S., at least, I get the impression that instrumental technique is generally better than earlier. There are some seriously great trombonists out there performing very cleanly, and it seems to be that there are more of them. One somewhat common "complaint" that sometimes gets raised is that schools are churning out players who can really get around their instrument, but perhaps aren't as expressive or original as in years past. I dunno that this is true either, and my impressions may not be accurate.

To be honest, when I first read some of this discussion I assumed that the sloppy jazz players that folks are complaining about were maybe some of the earlier players, who might have been self taught. Certainly in early New Orleans styles and early swing period we could point to recordings that might be considered "sloppy" by today's standards.

As an aside, Kid Ory might be considered "sloppy," but I've played a lot of his music with a repertory band and his lines and solos are quite hard to play (at least for me).

[quote="jacobgarchik"]Ray Anderson has some sick precision when he wants to

check out "the warm-up" at 14:03[/quote]

I had forgotten about this album, I had it on cassette tape back when it was first released.

Here's another great performance that I think is very clean and worth sharing. :)

<YOUTUBE id="eB_sJlF7b1g">~~[media]~~https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eB_sJlF7b1g</YOUTUBE>

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-01-05 11:46 a.m.

Okay, I never ask equipment questions, but what the heck kind of horn is he playing that appears to have no braces on the bell?

imsevimse · by **imsevimse** » 2025-01-05 1:14 p.m.

[quote="Wilktone"]<QUOTE author="imsevimse" post_id="263170" time="1735936355" user_id="3173">
This is how I see the situation here in Sweden i do not know about situation in U.S.[/quote]

That's interesting, Tom. In the U.S., at least, I get the impression that instrumental technique is generally better than earlier. There are some seriously great trombonists out there performing very cleanly, and it seems to be that there are more of them. One somewhat common "complaint" that sometimes gets raised is that schools are churning out players who can really get around their instrument, but perhaps aren't as expressive or original as in years past. I dunno that this is true either, and my impressions may not bei accurate.

- - -
</QUOTE>
The peak of Swedish Big Band was in the late 50ies, with the Harry Arnold Band. I know U.S A is the country where jazz is born and that it isn't the same. To be clear there are phenomenal Swedish jazz musicians today too but climate for jazz is not the same. No scenes, no places to meet and few gigs. Why then invest in jazz? Still some do and become good, but what I think not in class with the best from the erlier years. On trombone we have Nils Landgren and a few more rather unknown to the world who really are good but no Åke Persson or Eje Thelin.

In the sixties many musicians moved to Stockholm from US and that made a difference. They had a great influence on our jazz here and very exciting projects took place.

There were also a lot of american musicians here to do clinics/recordings in collaboration with Swedish musicians and of course also concerts. I saw Bill Watrous in Stockholm in the 80ies. Many famous bands came over because we had an audience. That's all gone. There are many trombonists who can play fast now here but that's not what I want to hear, and I think the younger (pro) players are a bit "sloppy", and I think they don't mind because it's "jazzy" or ligit for jazz (just as I think also is what Dana meant), and none of the respected guys is around to tell them because they are gone.

/Tom

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2025-01-05 5:03 p.m.

[quote="tbdana"]Okay, I never ask equipment questions, but what the heck kind of horn is he playing that appears to have no braces on the bell?[/quote]

Well, there is one brace. But yeah just one. Could be something customized, but also lots of antique instruments have only one bell brace, especially if there's no tuning slide in the bell section, so this might be something early. It also looks like the neckpipe is aligned straight with the lower slide tube instead of having a curve or angle, which also is more common on vintage instruments.

jacobgarchik · by **jacobgarchik** » 2025-01-06 9:19 p.m.

[quote="Wilktone"]

Here's another great performance that I think is very clean and worth sharing. :)
[/quote]

Hey, thanks a lot!

it's a Conn 82h

as it happens i posted another track today, unreleased take from my album Assembly, recorded in 2021.

I guess I like those changes.

<SOUNDCLOUD id="acobarchik/1-all-2-the-3-things-4-you-5-are" track_id="2002281579"><LINK_TEXT text="https://soundcloud.com/acobarchik/1-all ... Q6cb7qMBIA">https://soundcloud.com/acobarchik/1-all-2-the-3-things-4-you-5-are?fbclid=IwY2xjawHpbn1leHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHXR3MhN3W118dEg-oMcZh7FjsEFuF6evP8U1M9877AHhrZce_-zs2Ni6jQ_aem_WpBNub8ihJZdQ6cb7qMBIA</LINK_TEXT></SOUNDCLOUD>

mikerspencer · by **mikerspencer** » 2025-01-10 10:18 a.m.

This discussion reminds me of what someone once said to me "when you listen to Paul Desmond, you know he meant exactly that note, exactly where it was". And that's always something I think about when someone is great (irrespective of style). They meant it, everything about it, just the way it was.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-02-06 6:30 p.m.

This is a decade old so you may be familiar with it, but it popped up in my YouTube feed today, and I thought I'd post it as a wonderful example of beautifully clean jazz playing, even at speed, by Bob McChesney. I love this.

<YOUTUBE id="_DjTR0o4Mzg">https://youtu.be/_DjTR0o4Mzg?si=lSzabYCCoBouTVCa</YOUTUBE>

And I'm a huge fan of Dave Slonaker's writing. I believe I did some TinyTunes sessions for him back in the day. Writes for trombone really well.

JTeagarden · by **JTeagarden** » 2025-03-03 12:45 p.m.

There are so many extremely precise jazz trombonists out there, who articulate notes exactly the way they intend to, I would only say that orchestral players are more unform in their articulations, get 10 together, and they are likely to articulate in largely the same way.

Jazz players simply have a broader ranger of choices, but get really good ones together, and listen to how quickly they reach an agreement on phrasing, articulations, etc. If this weren't the case, big band trombone sections wouldn't sound very tight, and the good ones definitely do.

JTeagarden · by **JTeagarden** » 2025-03-03 12:49 p.m.

I feel like the heyday of musicians "splitting the difference" between these two extremes were the holywood studio orchestras, I watched "American in Paris" last night, what an orchestra (not sure who the lead trumpet was, but wow...), just a great mixture of jazz and orchestral elements, done very intentionally.

captain · by **captain** » 2025-04-10 9:04 a.m.

[quote="SamBTbrn"]<QUOTE author="tbdana" post_id="262838" time="1735669408" user_id="16498">
And if you don't think it can be done, listen to this.

<FACEBOOK id="1119344373065894">https://www.facebook.com/reel/1119344373065894</FACEBOOK>[/quote]

I would argue this is not "jazz" but a jazz influenced classical show piece.
</QUOTE>

The video is already gone. Got a working link, or at least a description of what it was?

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-04-10 11:21 a.m.

Wow, sorry, I have absolutely no idea what that video was. Sam described it as a jazz influenced classical show piece, and the only piece that comes to mind that fits that description is the Chick Corea trombone concerto. But that's just a guess.

SamBTbrn · by **SamBTbrn** » 2025-04-12 1:36 a.m.

If I remember correctly it was Fly or Die for Basstrombone.

The Amazing recording by Lionel Fumeaux.

My comment still stands though <EMOJI seq="1f609" tseq="1f609">😉</EMOJI>

VJOFan · by **VJOFan** » 2025-04-13 10:33 a.m.

Maybe the first “crossover” piece for trombone was the Shilkret Concerto written for Tommy Dorsey. I learned of the piece when a non-trombonists neighbour lent me a Christian Lindbergh recording of it. I am partial to Dorsey’s interpretation. For my money maybe the best musician ever to play our instrument- not the best trombonist to play music on the trombone, but the most musical voice to use trombone as the medium of expression.

<YOUTUBE id="pjfXaXJuEFo">https://youtu.be/pjfXaXJuEFo?si=xawrN1U_RTVjIbbe</YOUTUBE>

Quick Links

Instruments

Marketplace

Clean/sloppy playing in modern popular music: a provocative argument