All the sudden, everybody's PHISH!

[LastMohican]

Just got back from ROMP.

As it was last year; fantastically run and the organizers deserve congratulations.

Question: why is there now this overbearing trend by which bands that are rightly known for their virtuosity have decided to be more of a "jam band" other than just play songs!

I've wanted to see Greensky Bluegrass for a couple years and was really looking forward to it. Don't get me wrong, these cats are all great musicians. But, basically their ENTIRE set was nothing but these drawn out "jam"pieces, a la Phish. GSBG has a bunch of great "songs" that I, and the others that attended with me, truly love (Old Barns, Tuesday Letter, Bottle Dry, etc.)...they didn't do a single one of them; not one!

Punch Brothers-same song, second verse: the entire 1st half of their set were these utterly non-melodic, dissonant technical exercises. Don't get me wrong-when they did do the couple of traditional BG pieces, there were INSANE. But, I was disappointed.

The better balance was actually The Deadly Gentlemen. They did a good job a creating a balance between showing casing their unvarnished musicianship while still playing songs.

To be fair, I've never been the guy that could sit around and listen to Davis or Coltrane "push the boundaries" for hours on end.

I enjoy short showcases that are intended to highlight the unbelievable skill these guys have but, first and foremost, I come to hear songs! Am I wrong?

[Brett Byers]

I'm in the opposite camp. I would prefer to hear bands explore new musical territory than play a three minute song the same way every time. The musicians you listed are all world-class musicians, and they are at their best when they are creating, not just regurgitating. For me, live performances have always been about pushing the boundaries and taking risks in the hope of creating something extraordinary. The albums are for showcasing songs. Just my $.02. Everyone has different expectations when going to see a concert.

[Marty Henrickson]

Balance is nice.

[Ivan Kelsall]

Most likely because they can get away with it. I agree with Brett to an extent,but most non-players want to see/hear a band play set songs,like they used to do !.Personally,i love to watch a band like The Infamous Stringdusters (whom i've only ever seen on YouTube) 'Jam',but sometimes it does go a bit OTT even for me & i want 'normal service' resumed ASAP.
Quote - "...first and foremost, I come to hear songs! Am I wrong ?" - NOPE !. Too much of that sort of stuff is sheer self indulgence by the band (IMHO). A couple of 'extended' tunes might be ok,but a full set - not for me,
Ivan

[Jeff Budz]

Im surprised at your comments on Punch Brothers, when I saw them a few months ago they mostly played songs off the new album,not stretching out much at all. Also, very few solos, certainly none that went on and on.... Perhaps they are trying some new stuff.

[lukmanohnz]

I suspect that when musicians reach a level of mastery and transcendence over existing musical boundaries, they need to stretch beyond them in order to keep from stagnating or getting bored. I think that was an underlying motivator in the creation of bebop, and we are witnessing it now with the music of The Punch Brothers and other innovators using traditional instruments and bluegrass music as their springboard. As audience members and (speaking for myself) dabblers for whom the classic bluegrass canon is an ongoing challenge, we may find ourselves disoriented or less emotionally engaged by the innovators' excursions into uncharted territory. It's still fascinating to watch and hear the technical mastery and artistry of truly great musicians searching out new, higher plateaus from which to survey the landscape.

[Steve-o]

I suspect another reason for the jam band scene is the fact that it's an outdoor festival where people can get up and dance and wander around, so musicians cater to that atmosphere. An indoor concert hall is a totally different venue.

[Pete Martin]

Jazz players play thousands of chords in front of 3 people and rock and roll players play 3 chords in front of thousands of people.

We all like different things and we vote with our wallets. Go see who you like. If you don't like them don't buy recordings and don't go see them.

[lukmanohnz]

Jazz players play thousands of chords in front of 3 people and rock and roll players play 3 chords in front of thousands of people.

Truly profound. I might need to quote this obsessively for the next few weeks...

[Ivan Kelsall]

Maybe if the Jazz players cut down on the quantity & thought more of the quality,they'd make as much money as the rock 'n rollers.
As somebody once said of 'Be Bop' - ''the eternal search for the right note !!''. For the last 3 days,in the large park over the road from me,the rock band 'The Stone Roses' have been playing to audiences of between 75 & 100,000 people each day - i guess they know where their next Rolls Royces are coming from,3 chords or not,
Ivan

[LastMohican]

I appreciate the input. And, as I said, I truly want some of the jam content.

But, I also look forward to that moment of emotional connection where a song you love is performed live.

I think balance is the key; at least for me.

The Punch Brothers were truly off the hook. In terms of just raw musicianship they simply goes places others can't. At least that's been my experience through 2 live performances.

[Joe Mendel]

I think balance and quality of music is the key. We all like different things, and it would get boring very quickly if we didn't. I understand musicians wanting to stretch out, it's fun, even though I'll never achieve the musical chops those guys have. I think some pros forget that the audience is paying them, and play stuff because they can, rather than because it's good, or because it's what the audience wants to hear.

[Marty Henrickson]

After about 25 years of listening to the Grateful Dead, one of my favorite parts of any their lengthy psychedelic jams, is the moment when Jerry and the boys would re-enter earth's atmosphere and I can once again recognize the song that they were playing.

[LastMohican]

After about 25 years of listening to the Grateful Dead, one of my favorite parts of any their lengthy psychedelic jams, is the moment when Jerry and the boys would re-enter earth's atmosphere and I can once again recognize the song that they were playing.

Touchdown!

[Ted Eschliman]

I think. Therefore I jam.

[Dale Ludewig]

There ya go.

[JeffD]

I like a good mix of old expected tunes and new tunes when I see a favorite band at a concert.

I am not a big fan of jam bands or watching anyone jam. Give me a well crafted and practiced tune over a spontaneous composition any time.

[Markus]

Give me a well crafted and practiced tune over a spontaneous composition any time.

If you ask me, Coltrane playing My Favorite Things is both a well crafted/practiced tune and spontaneous composition.

There is jamming vs. aimless-jamming. To your average person's ear, Coltrane sounds like aimless spontaneousness - but to a jazz ear, there's all sorts of patterns being played there that coalesce into a whole. There is emotional content, feeling in the music.

Often (to my ear) acoustic jam-band music tends to turn into finger gymnastics, note and picking patterns, with little deep melodic or emotive content to the music. While the Grateful Dead could fall into long aimless-jamming portions, they did use that form on the tunes that `worked' for beautiful melodic explorations and for some powerful emotive ballads. Too often when I hear someone on acoustic go for a longer `jam' type solo it lacks any such content.

I saw the Stringdusters a few months ago, and saw Phish this last weekend. While the Stringdusters put on a very accomplished show ... it was Phish who had me wanting to yell for joy like a good old time tune does [during 46 days], who played the 1:45 every-note-scripted tune that was nailed to the note, and who used the jams to explore melodic variations, work tension/release, play chord melody - and use it to craft a powerful melody or make the audience dance/smile/laugh/cry/feel.

Let's be straight, the number of jambands that perform at such a high standard, with that complexity/depth, is a handful [even setting the bar at festival-size and up]. Giving some sort of `payoff' that connects to the audience with a couple minute solo is not something easy to do [just ask a jazz player].

Yet, at it's highest level, I believe improvised music can be well crafted and practiced.

If you ask me, there's quite a bit spontaneous composition when I hear a great old-time fiddler in a group. A whole heap of craft and practice, but if those guys aren't spontaneously varying their bow patterns or aren't composing minor melodic variations then I don't know what it is I'm hearing I guess.

[Jeffff]

This is a case of the market determining the "product". A promoter can see who heads to the restrooms and who stays during any act. If enough people like something, it gets booked. If not it doesn't.

I see a lot of jazz where I live. I like it. Me and roughly 200 other people.

[JeffD]

There is jamming vs. aimless-jamming.

While the Grateful Dead could fall into long aimless-jamming portions, they did use that form on the tunes that `worked' for beautiful melodic explorations and for some powerful emotive ballads. Too often when I hear someone on acoustic go for a longer `jam' type solo it lacks any such content.

I guess I haven't heard enough non-aimless jamming. I have had quite enough of the aimless kind, where I look around at a sea of sublime smiles and closed eyes, and think perhaps I would understand what is happening better if I weren't so sober.

If you ask me, there's quite a bit spontaneous composition when I hear a great old-time fiddler in a group. A whole heap of craft and practice, but if those guys aren't spontaneously varying their bow patterns or aren't composing minor melodic variations then I don't know what it is I'm hearing I guess.

I quite agree. To my ear, that kind of variation is distinguisted from the jamming I dislike in that it is in service of the tune itself. Finding ways of better expressing what the tune is about, or extending or highlighting the drama of the tune. So much of the kind of jamming I don't care for is (or seems to be) self indulgent noodling in search of a reason, or moments of punctuated virtuosity (stop listening to the tune and listen to me).

It might be a taste thing as well, or perhaps I just haven't heard enough of the non-aimless jamming to which you refer. I guess that is why I am not much of a jazz fan.

[Jeffff]

In my mind, non aimless jamming has resolution. A musical idea is stated and then expanded upon with varying degrees of success and then resolved to most everyones satisfaction.

Aimless jamming always reminds me of Free Jazz in the style of Ornette Coleman which, right or wrong, I have never cared for.

[dcoventry]

I think. Therefore I jam.

I'm pink, therefore I'm SPAM.

Cognito ergo sum.

[dcoventry]

In my mind, non aimless jamming has resolution. A musical idea is stated and then expanded upon with varying degrees of success and then resolved to most everyones satisfaction.

Aimless jamming always reminds me of Free Jazz in the style of Ornette Coleman which, right or wrong, I have never cared for.

One of my funniest memories is this:

Fred Frith was playing a gig at Kimball's in Emoryville with a piano dude. they are soundchecking and Frith starts up a "song" with chains, a glass etc. The piano guy is plonking along with dense chord clusters et al. Frith STOPS AND YELLS, "If you are going to play the song, play the song!!!"

Who could tell?

It was a transcendent show, FWIW.

[greg_tsam]

...perhaps I would understand what is happening better if I weren't so sober.

I think you just identified your problem.

[LastMohican]

I guess I haven't heard enough non-aimless jamming. I have had quite enough of the aimless kind, where I look around at a sea of sublime smiles and closed eyes, and think perhaps I would understand what is happening better if I weren't so sober.



I quite agree. To my ear, that kind of variation is distinguisted from the jamming I dislike in that it is in service of the tune itself. Finding ways of better expressing what the tune is about, or extending or highlighting the drama of the tune. So much of the kind of jamming I don't care for is (or seems to be) self indulgent noodling in search of a reason, or moments of punctuated virtuosity (stop listening to the tune and listen to me).

It might be a taste thing as well, or perhaps I just haven't heard enough of the non-aimless jamming to which you refer. I guess that is why I am not much of a jazz fan.

Hit! I am, in no way, referring to any musical improvisation that occurs in support of a specific piece of music. What happened at this show, particularly with Greensky Bluegrass, was as is described in an earlier post: they did four or five pieces where a theme was established and then kind of rotated through the instrumentation and let each cat in the band play with the established theme. As I've said, there was a lot that was good about it. But I would have enjoyed the set much more if this type of experience was book-ended by them just playing a few of their songs. That's just my take. I know others would like it more just the way the did it.

"...and think perhaps I would understand what is happening better if I weren't so sober."

I think you just identified your problem.

And mine as well!