Liebman Quote on Innovators

[Flarobstix]

I personally don't think of chops and technique, as simply speed. I include touch and sound. Jack has tons of speed. His approach is unorthadox, but technically, he's a master like anyone else. He simply has his own take on it.
After having seen Jack play up close dozens of time, I feel that you can't play drums the way he does unless you have amazing technical ability. To get his sound, and phrase the way he does, you need chops. It's just that his usage is so perfect and so musical that your mind doesn't go there. Watch him next time. It's pretty sick.
I think of ocean waves when I hear Jack.
Also, please tell me how Tony Williams raised the bar technically.
Do you really think everything he played was technically original? Not in my opinion. People in the middle east were playing groupings before Tony was born. People in this country were swingin' and playing rudiments at lightning speed before he was born. What was so original about Tony?? In my opinion, his approach. He didn't have more chops than Buddy or Philly, and technically didn't play anything more difficult. To me it was unorthadox musicality. His drop outs, his phrasing, his sound, his ride cymbal playing. Not his hands or feet.
The reality is that music is what it's all about. These people make amazing music. 2% of all professional drummers are actually musical in my opinion. If it weren't for clinic tours, 50% of the big name choppers would be out of work. It's about the music. Drummers that work in a high level ensemble setting everyday of their lives are the real drummers for me.
When was the last time you Bill Stewart in clinic?

<font color="#a62a2a"><font size="1">[ July 21, 2005 01:02 PM: Message edited by: Flarobstix ]</font></font>

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ July 21, 2005 01:04 PM: Message edited by: Flarobstix ]</font>

[Flarobstix]

Well, that 2% comment is subjective, and just an opinion obviously.
Think about the hundred of thousands of working drummers around the world, and then think about the guys who really play music. For me it's 2%. For you, who knows?
I'm fickle in what I like to hear being played.
Lot's of great posts on my Tony comment. He was the first to my knowledge who brought those groupings to jazz. However, what do groupings have to do with technique? It is all semantics.

[S.P]

yeah, you make a good point hanaytaylor! cool stuff!

this is a real interesting and mentally stimulating thread, really got me thinking about my post and about others said!

Riddim i agree with what u pointed out about tony too.

I mean if he wasnt an innovator then why do we hear the stuff he first played being played by many now such as smith, novak, vinnie, GREGG haha

as with what liebman said, what was once innovation now became the standard, but that doesnt mean that its not amazing any more!

i wonder when and if there will be a limit to innovation on our instrument, obviously it is quite young at only about 100 years old, so i believe there's still plenty to be done...plus the drumset is so versatile i.e some many items can be added and then new combinations of patterns and new techniques used to play them that innovation will almost be happening on the instrument forever!

[got_a_matchgrip]

What i got fr DL is that all he was saying is, that the level of proficiency expected today is one that is naturally a standard one now, one that is higher than that of generations ago. Technique, & even speed AWA SLOW grooovin' w precision & feel in time is expected / the norm now.

And DL if anyone is exactly the type of player who knows WTH he's talking about.

There's nothing wrong w technique-mastery on your chosen instrument, it's but one albeit important facet of musical mastery, no matter what stylistic genre that one is undertaking, & of which also entails many sub-facets under just the heading of "technq" [speed being but one of many, awa groove/time, musicality in accomp accordg to genre, some certain interpretation or "individualities," etc].

Anyone who says a vague expression like "technq is not important" is missing a very important mark IMHO. A degree of technq is absoluitely mandatory, even if w/in a certain chosen genre, otherwise anybody can step up to the plate...Could you see the antithesis of this theory in pro sports? As in, any beginner playg pro ball? NOPE. & there are varying degrees w/in professionalism AW; but a certain level has to be attained [technically AWA intuitively] in order to become "convincing." If needs be, would you hire a lawyer who hadn't yet got his or her degree / passed "the bar?"

& that's not saying that technq is solely represented by "speed" either, & I don't think a player of DL's stature is saying that either. But when speed is called for within this wide spectrum of "technq" or technical mastery of any instr, be sure to do it clean, precise, tasty, at the right crescendatic moment [methinks i may've come up a new word there] musically, & right. "Technq" is but a fundamental that can grow/expand, & be expounded upon by indiv expression & pers interpretation of these learned fund's. It's a means to an end...but still a hard-worked & meticulously wrought labor of love...& to perhaps prove even your worth of "salt". /;-)

Most of this is semantics & opinion on what DL orig said.

Only 2%? God help us all [AWA the other 98%].

Just rem, some or many players' overall abilities are NOT necessarily strictly represented by or synonimous w their present or longstanding popular working gig...

There are many onnovators in every field out there...Elvin, Jack, Buddy...Vince, Weck, Virg, Dennis, Novak...all. & an innovator can still have "quotings" of the greats b4 them & STILL be an innovator & not cliche, even tho one may hear the motifs of another-b4-them in their playing].

Semantics, rhetoric, & opinion. Sometimes a little truth might be sprinkled in there too... [img]wink.gif[/img] [img]tongue.gif[/img] [img]cool.gif[/img]

& now it's time for us to go & "practice these semantics" by playing them on our chosen instr... [img]wink.gif[/img]

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ July 23, 2005 05:39 PM: Message edited by: got_a_match_grip? ]</font>

[XNavyDrummer]

"If you make a mistake while playing, immediately repeat the mistake...they'll call you one of the great innovators of our time."

Stewart Copeland

[got_a_matchgrip]

Ha ha ha AV [img]wink.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/thumbs_up.gif[/img] [img]cool.gif[/img]

...Now let us go forth & "innovate"...[drawing from the masters b4 us...& stop talking about doing it...myself included, just FTR - for the record] [img]graemlins/thinking.gif[/img] /;-p

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ July 22, 2005 03:25 PM: Message edited by: got_a_match_grip? ]</font>

[S.P]

"Louis Armstrong, Bird and Coltrane all did that for sure. Alongside this contribution, they added something musically, not to mention spiritually which became transferable to all instruments and the music itself. That is true innovation."

Dave Liebman i believe stated that the first most noticeable trait of an innovator is their technique, but that someone who is overall innovative as he says adding something musically and spiritually is a true innovator. So in fact tony would be an innovator? or am i wrong?

I believe that innovation is when something new is done or played. I've just run a search on dictionary.com and i got this

in?no?va?tion
1. The act of introducing something new.
2. Something newly introduced.

Of course then this means, by the explanation given by dictionary.com and by my belief and/or perception of what innovation is, tony williams is an innovator for introducing those groupings and being the first to play them on the drum set.

Liebman was the one that said that he thought that only technical innovators were true innovators...so in fact what tony played doesn't have to have anything to do with technique, unless your going by Liebman's definition of what true innovation is.

But then again you could say that playing the drums with your head is innovative which technically it is, but this is where it gets too subjective and the different perceptions or semmantic meanings of the word to different people come along.

Tony was definetely an innovator in my books though.

Again, also saying that only 2% of drummers out there are musical..it depends what your perception of musical is....obviously mike portnoy fans think hes musical or whatever...

anyways again, this is probably true (the 2% thing) to the more seasoned, experienced player who has heard a wide range of music and players.

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ July 22, 2005 12:43 PM: Message edited by: S.P ]</font>

[hanayalator]

Tony was an innovator. No question. And I think I disagree with Liebman because many great innovators weren't known for the 'technique', like Jack or Elvin.

[got_a_matchgrip]

What he [doc] f'n said. [img]wink.gif[/img] [img]cool.gif[/img]

[troutbrooke]

What you (GAMG) said.