Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
RE: modern vs traditional (in reply to mark indigo)
quote:
i think modern is traditional, i just think it is the tradition today, rather than the tradition as it was yesterday....
Exactly.
But nowadays you'd better watch out in case your 'flamenco' is mistaken for mere 'contemporary music' and a nutter in the audience calls the police on you:
thinking about what you are saying about comparing stuff that was new in the 80's to stuff that's new right now.... and comparing that to the 50's....
i think we're talking about some different things in this thread, and maybe muddling them up a bit,
one of them is what things sound like, and part of that is technology,
another is the theory that we can use to analyse music
quote:
how riciculous to state that just playing over standard major chords is no harder or easier than playing over extended chord inversions and chord substitutions based on modal tonality? Nonsense.
not quite sure what your actually referring to here Stoney, maybe you have some examples? i personally don't really think about flamenco guitar in terms of playing over a chord sequence, only in things like Entre Dos Aguas, but not in most palos and playing accompaniment and solo etc.
i can say though, that sometimes it can be technically easier to play, say, a minor 7th chord (B-7 at second fret with barre, root on 5th string) than a "basic" minor chord, when the "basic" minor requires more fingers to hold it down! likewise it can be easier to play a major 7th with a barre (root on 5th string) than the "basic" major chord 'cos the fingering is easier....
and if you think about playing por medio we often use a C9 chord and it's often easier to get to (say from Bb) for the hands than a basic C or C7. So "extended" chords are not necessarily technically harder to play, and use of them doesn't necessarily imply advanced theory....
i'm wondering who you are referring to with this?
quote:
What I'm saying and have been saying is that some other not so innovative folk have copied that without the necessity of going through the whole learning curve.
again, maybe some examples would make things come clear?
in fact i'm a bit confused about who is arguing what and with who in this thread, there's some interesting points that i think are worth talking about, but i'm not sure if everyone is understanding what everyone else is saying, so just.... um.... stay calm everyone
i think modern is traditional, i just think it is the tradition today, rather than the tradition as it was yesterday.... Exactly.
But nowadays you'd better watch out in case your 'flamenco' is mistaken for mere 'contemporary music' and a nutter in the audience calls the police on you:
sheesh!
i'm just wondering actually if i'm a "modernist" or a "traditionalist"???
and you know what? i just don't want either of those labels, because as i understand them on this thread, each is exclusive of the other, and if i've been arguing for anything at all, it is to break down the barrier/s between the two, because really i don't think they have a lot to do with the actual music, they are just mindsets that get in the way of the music....
RE: modern vs traditional (in reply to mark indigo)
quote:
i'm just wondering actually if i'm a "modernist" or a "traditionalist"???
Maybe you're just a musician, after all?
quote:
and you know what? i just don't want either of those labels, because as i understand them on this thread, each is exclusive of the other, and if i've been arguing for anything at all, it is to break down the barrier/s between the two, because really i don't think they have a lot to do with the actual music, they are just mindsets that get in the way of the music....
"It's all in the mind, you know!"
Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px
RE: modern vs traditional (in reply to mark indigo)
quote:
ORIGINAL: mark indigo
quote:
Yeah its a bit subjective
it's incredibly subjective!
thinking about what you are saying about comparing stuff that was new in the 80's to stuff that's new right now.... and comparing that to the 50's....
i think we're talking about some different things in this thread, and maybe muddling them up a bit,
one of them is what things sound like, and part of that is technology,
another is the theory that we can use to analyse music
No i just wanted to put my view on what could have been the most important influences that flamenco has changed today. I'll leave the analysis to guys like Ricardo et al on what the changes exactly are. I just pick the music according to my taste and no analysis will change that (nor anybody else's taste). Hence my comparison was more to underly my assumption with technology, wealth surroundings, which werent great in the 50s. I mean, music is always the expression of the mood you are in, right?
In any case, i think you dont have to feel offended by the labels. All i can say is that they do not get in MY way on appreciating this art. I dont understand the excitement that is created when people label this or that as trad/modern. I have no problem with that, it shows peoples views. And when i say the "80s Paco" is so present everywhere that i consider him (that) a classic, or traditional, that shows something about my view.
i think you dont have to feel offended by the labels
hi Deniz, i'm not offended by the labels, i just don't find them helpful, they only seem helpful for fighting, not for playing!
i also wasn't saying i think you were muddling different ideas, i just mean between all of us we are maybe not always talking about the same things.
also another point to make, i'm not sure how this fits in to what anyone else is saying about theory and analysis etc. (and maybe i've misunderstood what other people are saying here) but to me if an "old school" player plays
D-, C, Bb, A
and a "new school" player plays
D-7#6, C-7#6, Bb-7#6, A
then in (what i understand to be) jazz theory terms the latter is way more complex, but in (again, what i understand to be) flamenco terms it's the same thing, just going down the last 4 notes of the Phrygian scale....
They are different sounding for sure (and that sort of thing is maybe why some people think that using those chords sounds like "jazz"), so there is difference, but the latter is not technically more difficult (just play an "A-shape" D- chord at 5th fret with bar and move your pinky to the top string 7th fret, and then slide the whole shape down for the C-7#6)
I'm really, really glad that this thread was revived. Right now I'm slowly working through the harmonic lessons you and the others provided three years ago, and am learning a lot.
Also, many would probably appreciate a few words on how the different "schools" (you mention Jerezano and Diego) are different. I know I would. Thanks in advance.
....harmonic lessons you and the others provided three years ago....
Do you have an updated link?
...many would probably appreciate a few words on how the different "schools" (you mention Jerezano and Diego) are different.
that all sounds really interesting, me too, that's the kind of thing i'm here for, sharing information and learning stuff.... i don't always understand everything, and sometimes it might seem like i am disagreeing when i question something, but it is often because i don't understand something, or am being a bit slow getting my head around a new idea, rather than because i disagree with it....
There are no lessons per se. What I'm trying to do is understand Ricardo's comments about the Spanish phrygian in his posts of April 26-27 2006, when this thread first came out (they're on the first page of this thread).
The harmonic discussion really gets going after Romerito's post on November 3, 2006, flatted fifths and tritone substitutions and so on. I guess I'm just trying to see if any of this means anything in terms of my own listening/playing. Probably not. But Ricardo's claim that the main difference between traditional and modern flamenco is in the rhythmic accents is really interesting. I only wish there were a "canon" one could listen to in sequence in order to hear it as it evolves.
I really don't want to revitalize this thread cause it seemed on the verge of getting ugly and honestly, everyone is entitled to their opinion.
But since we are moving on to the element of Harmony -
quote:
quote:
how riciculous to state that just playing over standard major chords is no harder or easier than playing over extended chord inversions and chord substitutions based on modal tonality? .
not quite sure what your actually referring to here Stoney, maybe you have some examples? i personally don't really think about flamenco guitar in terms of playing over a chord sequence, only in things like Entre Dos Aguas, but not in most palos and playing accompaniment and solo etc.
Wouldn't the harmony be the same playing over, through, between or whatever however you want to look at it? Chords are chords, the more complex the inversion or extention and the more chords you have to work with, the greater the level of difficulty to bridge between said chords? (general statement here)
Chords are chords, the more complex the inversion or extention and the more chords you have to work with, the greater the level of difficulty to bridge between said chords?
well, you would think so, wouldn't you? in terms of the theory involved, yes, in terms of classical and/or jazz theory inversions and extensions are "more complex" than triads and sevenths....
....but then so-called "old school" flamenco starts out pretty complex with A7b9 and Bb6#11 (or A add b9 and Bb#11) as the "basic" 2 chords por medio(actually ALL flamenco por medio, whether it's labelled old or new starts out with these as the basic) - except they are not really complex, they are just A and Bb.... like F#7b9/11 as the tonic chord of Tarantas is just F#...
this is what i was trying to get at with this;
quote:
if an "old school" player plays
D-, C, Bb, A
and a "new school" player plays
D-7#6, C-7#6, Bb-7#6, A
then in (what i understand to be) jazz theory terms the latter is way more complex, but in (again, what i understand to be) flamenco terms it's the same thing, just going down the last 4 notes of the Phrygian scale....
They are different sounding for sure (and that sort of thing is maybe why some people think that using those chords sounds like "jazz"), so there is difference, but the latter is not technically more difficult (just play an "A-shape" D- chord at 5th fret with bar and move your pinky to the top string 7th fret, and then slide the whole shape down for the C-7#6)
I'm really, really glad that this thread was revived. Right now I'm slowly working through the harmonic lessons you and the others provided three years ago, and am learning a lot.
Also, many would probably appreciate a few words on how the different "schools" (you mention Jerezano and Diego) are different. I know I would. Thanks in advance.
Would be nice to talk about this stuff, but in another topic thread. I dont' like the specific music theory stuff mixed into to this "trad vs modern" BS. (It is sort of like posting physic equations in a discussion about evolution vs creationism).
The vid you request was here, the short bit I talk about is :43-:50. Not the greatest example, but at the time back then it was something I had on hand.
So if you want to hunt for some old music theory threads regarding flamenco guitar, or ask a new specific question, I recommend starting it up so we can talk about it separate from this discussion.
(It is sort of like posting physic equations in a discussion about evolution vs creationism).
oh oh.... we are now entering a new level in this discussion.......
I stayed out of this, just reading. My point is, all flamenco CAN be boring. From Diego el Gastor to Cañizares. Big chords, small chords, etc. pretty boring. It can also be pretty good and inspiring especially if there´s someone singing.
RE: modern vs traditional (in reply to mark indigo)
quote:
just another thing, i learnt some tarantas ages ago that came from Sabicas, and there was a G7flat5 chord in it, which on it's own just looked and sounded (ie the shape and voicing) like a jazz chord to me, in fact i had no idea what the hell it was 'til i found it in a book of jazz chord shapes. but it fitted in the falseta perfectly so as you wouldn't have really noticed (at least to my ears at the time).
2nd finger plays note of G, 3rd fret, 6th string;
damp 5th string;
3rd finger plays note of F, 3rd fret, 4th string;
4th finger plays note of B, 4th fret, 3rd string;
1st finger plays note of Db (or C#, but that would be a sharpened 4th ), 2nd fret, 2nd string;
damp 1st string;
brilliant!
so i don't think borrowing from jazz is particularly new, in fact it starts to look like there's actually a tradition of it
Nice chord! As you seem to suggest, context is important. In jazz, it sounds like a jazz chord; in flamenco, it sounds flamenco. It can come about quite naturally in standard traditional tarantas falsetas approaching a cadence; all the notes - G in the bass, E#, B and C# (along with F# and G) in the melodic lines - are in the typical phrases, and if you put them together, there's that chord.
That chord (known as a 'French sixth') is very common in 19th century music. It's not usual in 19th century music to voice it with the sharp fourth (C# in this case) in the top voice, but Chopin (for example) did it in 1841. So there's nothing inherently 'jazzy' or 'modern' about the chord itself (or lots of other chords), it all depends on the context.
quote:
but neither does it make the resultant musical phrase or falseta "jazz" because it uses a chord also used by jazz musicians,
- any more than the jazz is 'classical' by the same analogy -
And this supports what Ricardo said above about flamenco evolving on its own without necessarily borrowing from other types of music. Yes, it certainly borrows (and sometimes indulges in daylight robbery - e.g. opening of 'Solo quiero caminar' or 'Ziryab'), but something that, taken out of context, may appear to be from somewhere else (like Sabicas's chord) may have arisen completely within the flamenco context without reference to any other kind of music.
quote:
any more than using tremelo or arpegio borrowed from classical guitar makes a falseta "classical"
I just re-read the above post and relized what an arshe I must be making of myself.
This is from the comments section of the above video:
En España, en los años 60, se comenzó a experimentar con la mezcla entre jazz y flamenco de la mano de Pedro Iturralde. Un saxofonista de jazz que se familiarizó con el flamenco escuchando en la radio al guitarrista pamplonés Sabicas. Lo que empezó como una primera experimentación, terminó por concretarse años depués en Berlín, cuando Joachim E. Berendt convocó a Pedro Iturralde junco con un jovencísimo Paco de Lucía grabando en julio de 1967 el disco Jazz Flamenco, en el que por primera vez aparece esta fusión en España.
My point is, all flamenco CAN be boring. From Diego el Gastor to Cañizares. Big chords, small chords, etc. pretty boring.
Glad some one confirmed my thought. For me flamenco was only in the background until I heard Amigo. His bending of the strings introduces a microtonalism found in flamenco voice and with his musical imagination, lifts his art above the rest and out of the boring category for me. I have just started on his Ventanas Al Alma and the intro is as lovely as one could want.
I have a hard time getting into any of the modern guys, including Paco de Lucia. I'm not snobby or anything, I just tend to like the dirt old music aesthetic.
Who's good these days that hasn't gone the fusion route? I'm up for giving it a chance.
I have a hard time getting into any of the modern guys, including Paco de Lucia. I'm not snobby or anything, I just tend to like the dirt old music aesthetic.
Who's good these days that hasn't gone the fusion route? I'm up for giving it a chance.
The nearest to traditional on the circuit these days is Paco Pena. And he is very good.
Cheers,
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white, With the name of the late deceased, And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here, Who tried to hustle the East."
I have a hard time getting into any of the modern guys, including Paco de Lucia. I'm not snobby or anything, I just tend to like the dirt old music aesthetic.
Who's good these days that hasn't gone the fusion route? I'm up for giving it a chance.
A few observations:
The thread was started in 2006 and was already a zombie in 2009.
Not everything Paco (de Lucía) plays is avant-garde. In addition to his completely new ideas, he has always rephrased traditional ideas and I expect he'll continue doing that.
When you say "these days" I assume you're referring to the age and activeness of the guitarist as a professional. In Spain, there are plenty who play traditional. In Jerez, two are Domingo Rubichi and Manuel Valencia. Others like Alfredo Lagos or Juan Diego also play more modern but can play traditional as well as anyone (accompanying, for example).
RE: modern vs traditional (in reply to NormanKliman)
quote:
I have a hard time getting into any of the modern guys, including Paco de Lucia. I'm not snobby or anything, I just tend to like the dirt old music aesthetic.
Who's good these days that hasn't gone the fusion route? I'm up for giving it a chance.
Perhaps try the VORS Jerez al cante album made in 2012 e.g. Diego del morao
As for PDL, I think I just need to hear the right recordings. When I start to get the sense that it's all about speed I just lose interest, I'm just more into lyrical playing.
Oh, I would love to get opinions on the compas of cante and guitar relation on that from some experts...but I guess that's a long dead horse.
What Compas???
Enlighten us.
Just had a lesson today with a cantaor from Sevilla. I accompanied some solea de Triana. When he sang the tercios to match the compas I had no problem. Typical stuff for baile. But sometimes his tercios included the A and B lines in a compas and a couple of beats. Hard ot fit the Am resolution and G-C resolution in 5 beats.
I agree that this is cante from a bygone era when cante was not so molded to the dance. Valencia lets Agujetas do his thing and it sounds great.
Anyway it's the whole by gone era not molded to baile thing that gets me. Baile screwed up the beauty of cante by "molding" it, and then the art of accompanying it also suffered. I say, it needs to return....or at least those type of cantaores should not be criticized as out of compas or bad singers.
quote:
As for PDL, I think I just need to hear the right recordings. When I start to get the sense that it's all about speed I just lose interest, I'm just more into lyrical playing.
Printable Version
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread