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.
Overall, I just prefer to be humble and say I know nothing about Flamenco. Then at least if I do have a moment, it's humble. Again, I'd rather master Sabicas than mangle Tomatito.
I understand your point, and you are correct it helps to be humble to learn. But there you are thinking sabicas is so much easier to master than tomatito, you already have an idea about it. I am telling you it is not that way cuz i play some of both. Toddk will back me on this, there are many things of sabicas technically much harder to master than tomate. If you like the sound better I understand why one would focus on one player or style, but as a teacher I emphasize learning small pieces, falsetas and rhythm patterns, of players from any time period. Rather than complete pieces.
Nothing wrong with mixing Tomatito stuff w sabicas and a lot of folks dont get that. They think first they need to learn everynote on "Flamenco Puro" album before jumping into any modern or seeming advanced music. Not many can play the stuff on Flamenco Puro, and it is not necessary to be a good flamenco player. Anyone who can truely master a Sabicas falseta can also master a Tomatito falseta IMO.
To Doit, someday my friend I will take you to a GOOD juerga, I promise.
As a final note from me on this thread, please folks spend sometime at Norman's site. Especially where he has things like the evolution over time of a falseta or technique. He clearly shows how flamenco has evolved over time on it's own. In General that is how it is, in steps, not necessarily because of outside influence. Evolution can happen from within. Sure there have been collaborations and inspiriations from outside, but to me, generally speak modern flamenco has simply evolved one player to another over time to what it is, from the INSIDE. To me manolo sanlucar is just as modern as any new thing from Vicente or Paco etc, but he clearly uses no Jazz or other outside influence in his composing style. And yet it does not sound like Niño Ricardo either.
I thought I remember reading on the notes of one of Paco de lucia's albums something about the meaning of "Entre dos aguas": it was written as a fusion between flamenco and bossa nova (or perhaps other latin American music),.
It's been years since I read it, so my memory fails me. *_*
but I think when people say modern flamenco is "jazzy", what they really mean is it has elements of Brazilian bossa nova, not really American jazz., particularly some of the harmonies and syncopated rhythms.
there are many things of sabicas technically much harder to master than tomate.
amazing, i thought traditional is a little bit easier to play, at least rythmically because there is more "on-beat" feeling, that's why i begun with this stuff, but i'm worrying 'bout loosing the "off-beat" feeling in my playing, which is characteristic of more modern stuff.
you are thinking sabicas is so much easier to master than tomatito....
.... there are many things of sabicas technically much harder to master than tomate. ....
Anyone who can truely master a Sabicas falseta can also master a Tomatito falseta IMO.
this seems to me a really, really interesting point, mainly because it is not one often heard, in fact i have never heard anyone say this.
I have often heard the opposite, that "old" flamenco is easier than "new" flamenco, that you should start by learning old stuff like Montoya, Ricardo and Sabicas, and progress to new stuff like Tomate, Paco, Manolo (and i'd just accepted it 'cos the old guys sound simpler, and never really questioned it), but i have never heard anyone say that they are equally challenging....
this seems like a big thing to think about and take in.... let's have more blab from you on this topic please Ricardo!
Posts: 4495
Joined: Aug. 9 2006
From: Iran (living in Germany)
RE: modern vs traditional (in reply to mark indigo)
quote:
ORIGINAL: mark indigo
quote:
you are thinking sabicas is so much easier to master than tomatito....
.... there are many things of sabicas technically much harder to master than tomate. ....
Anyone who can truely master a Sabicas falseta can also master a Tomatito falseta IMO.
this seems to me a really, really interesting point, mainly because it is not one often heard, in fact i have never heard anyone say this.
I have often heard the opposite, that "old" flamenco is easier than "new" flamenco, that you should start by learning old stuff like Montoya, Ricardo and Sabicas, and progress to new stuff like Tomate, Paco, Manolo (and i'd just accepted it 'cos the old guys sound simpler, and never really questioned it), but i have never heard anyone say that they are equally challenging....
this seems like a big thing to think about and take in.... let's have more blab from you on this topic please Ricardo!
try to play moraito , like moraito !
first you would think that the falsetas are easier to play than many other modern falsetas, but i think if you really want to sound like moraito with the same feel and vibe, you will be surprised. it is as hard (hard, in a different way) as more modern falsetas which are played at much higher speeds.
ok , moraito is not so traditional like sabicas or the other old maestros, but still much more traditional than many others right now.
Well try to play Viejin like Viejin Honestly i DO think that modern is harder. If i consider my learning curve, learning a Sabicas bulerias would take me 6-12 months, and anything from Viejin and similar, at least 5-10 years. But its all in average of course. Some falsetas take several hours and some several months to learn.
What is the difference between modern and traditional than? Is a traditional camii rasgeado different from a camii modern rasgeado? Is pulgar technique different? Are picado's different? Or is it just the voicings and speed?
Is faster necessarly better? What is the difference?
I prefer emotion above all wheter it be traditional or modern.
oh, and technically, i don't think that it is that easy to play like this:
just check out the
1) thumb work 2) speed 3) clean fast picados
etc....
i think the only difference is that the compositions are more traditional + type of rasgueados which are ..well "shramm, shramm, shramm shramm" and not "da da da damm"
so, this is not easy at all. if you master this (plus add some more modern rasgueados techniques), you could probably play tomatito or other falsetas too
the only difference is that the compositions are more traditional + type of rasgueados
apart from a couple of moves to 2nd and 3rd position, the saba vid is nearly all in first/open position, apart from those couple of shifts there are hardly any barre's, and no stretches.... all of which are potential challenges....
Posts: 4495
Joined: Aug. 9 2006
From: Iran (living in Germany)
RE: modern vs traditional (in reply to mark indigo)
quote:
ORIGINAL: mark indigo
apart from a couple of moves to 2nd and 3rd position, the saba vid is nearly all in first/open position, apart from those couple of shifts there are hardly any barre's, and no stretches.... all of which are potential challenges....
sure.
much more difficult chords, barres, etc, all over the fretboard nowadays... left hand has much more to do now...
but i think the most difficult thing in flamenco is right hand, and right hand technique of sabicas is as good as many modern players (despite from the differences which mentioned already)
But there you are thinking sabicas is so much easier to master than tomatito, you already have an idea about it.
I was using that as an example and or generalization, not necesarily a statement of fact. I could just have easily said Juan Maritn or Paco Pena or whoever. Maybe the "easier" part is the theory behind Traditional vs. that of Modern.
Bottom line for me is that "Modern Flamenco" is still in it's infancy and is an experimental form. Some experiments work, others don't.
quote:
A lot of people don't have the patience.
As per the comment about "Llamadas" until recently a lot of people didn't have the resources. Hearing something and knowing the name for it are 2 distinct different things. And even with the resources available on the internet I've yet to find a definitive page to break down every style by compas - relationships to other styles and parts ie; llamada, estribillo, silencio etc. (all this info may be around here somewhere but I've yet to find it) And again, just cause it's on the internet doesn't make it correct.
much more difficult chords, barres, etc, all over the fretboard nowadays... left hand has much more to do now...
So perhaps it looks more difficult, but it isn't. Its just lack of not fully mastering the chords than. So get to practice you guys, it should be basic!
What I mean is that it is hard to compare on technique because that all can be learned, so there must be something else which makes the difference, if there is so.
What is the difference between modern and traditional than?
virtually impossible to say absolutely what the difference is.... partly 'cos there is no clear dividing line between them, and also 'cos i think modern is traditional, i just think it is the tradition today, rather than the tradition as it was yesterday....
but one thing is the speed thing. i think i'm right in saying that Paco De Lucia was the first to record triplet alzapua in bulerias, and that that hadn't been done before.... so that then becomes the standard
i think maybe the same goes for triplet picado in bulerias?
and semiquavers/sixteenths/4-to-a-beat picado and alzapua in things like tangos and fandango (de huelva) and maybe in soleá por bulerías too?
and also playing things like those above palos, and also cantiñas and alegrías a-tempo with palmas accompaniment?
maybe there are some example which "prove" this either way?
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
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 using tremelo or arpegio borrowed from classical guitar makes a falseta "classical"
It should be called traditional vs modern and not modern vs traditional because as you can see... the modern guys are also open for traditional stuff but most of the traditional lovers keep their ears closed for modern stuff.
Posts: 4495
Joined: Aug. 9 2006
From: Iran (living in Germany)
RE: modern vs traditional (in reply to mark indigo)
quote:
ORIGINAL: mark indigo
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 using tremelo or arpegio borrowed from classical guitar makes a falseta "classical"
It should be called traditional vs modern and not modern vs traditional because as you can see... the modern guys are also open for traditional stuff but most of the traditional lovers keep their ears closed for modern stuff.
i mean, i could sit together with my father and watch the "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" movie or "Gone with the wind" with my mother, and we would all enjoy it and have a nice evening (incl. me)
but i guess if i would want to watch Matrix or Lord of the rings with them, they would leave the room immediately after the first 5 minutes.
I shall be corrected, but my observation is that modern guys can play traditional stuff thoroughly on a KICK ASS level...
but i have never seen a trad guy pulling off modern. That said, traditional stuff has its place and there is no "better" among the two poles. (theres not alway a clear distinction anyway...)
Maybe the "easier" part is the theory behind Traditional vs. that of Modern.
it is part of people's misconception from my point of view. As are technique details and chord shapes etc. I am tired of restating it now.
quote:
Bottom line for me is that "Modern Flamenco" is still in it's infancy and is an experimental form.
Young? not really anymore, been almost 30 years since solo quiero caminar. And it is not experimental, it simply has evolved to its present form accepted by most current living artists, and continues to do so.
again, examin the technique evolution on normans site, you guys thinking about alzapua and stuff being a division.
I shall be corrected, but my observation is that modern guys can play traditional stuff thoroughly on a KICK ASS level...
but i have never seen a trad guy pulling off modern. That said, traditional stuff has its place and there is no "better" among the two poles. (theres not alway a clear distinction anyway...)
yes, but this video is not really a good example. i mean antonio is not really playing traditional in it
examin the technique evolution on normans site, you guys thinking about alzapua and stuff being a division.
i already did... many times...
from the alzapua page; "Today's players have taken the alzapúa technique to new heights"
from the development of a soleares falseta page; "Paco steps up Sabicas' triplet arpeggiation to sixteenth-notes"
it doesn't make it a division, but it does make it a development, no?
it doesn't make it a different genre, but it does make it the current interpretation of a tradition, no?
if there is no clear cut dividing line where one generational or time-period style "ends" and another "begins", does that mean that there aren't some broad and general differences between the more extreme ends of the spectrum?
personally i'm not interested in pitting so-called "trad" against so-called "modern" but i am interested in how technically difficult different players' falsetas/pieces etc. are, and i have often heard people say that older is easier, so i'm interested to hear more about why that might not be so.
also, i'm interested when particular evolutions or changes have ocurred thoughout the history, things like Montoya being credited with developing arpegios and tremelo's etc. and inventing the guitar Rondeña and Minera styles, Sabicas using chord shapes he might have borrowed from a jazz guitarist (at least one in my limited experience - and making it sound totally flamenco, not "jazzy" at all), through Paco playing triplet alzapua in bulerias, and the first recorded use of different keys to play the palos (i thought things like tangos, bulerias, fandangos in F#, B, G#, C#, D#/Eb was a development of the late '70's/'80's but Norman pointed out use of different keys to accompany cantes libres back in i think the '20's or '30's) - i just find it interesting, especially that it seems that for many of the so-called "modern" innovations there seem to be historical precedents, ie. that there is even a "tradition" of these things.... to me that just makes the "modern" even more a part of the "tradition"
I guess the only thing which one (as a modern player) should not touch and experiment with, is compas.
As long as the compositions and falsetas are based on proper compas of the different palos, and as long as some distintive characteristics and the basis of that particular flamenco palo is kept in the modern compositions, you can call it flamenco without having bad conscience.
you don't have to call it experimental or jazz or anything like that.
i mean take this for example:
some people would call this jazz or jazz with flamenco elements.
i call it flamenco (bulerias), with some nice jazz influences and saxophon, etc.
---
however, something different.......do you guys realize that recently it is getting more and more difficult to compose innovative in such a way, which one could compare with the paco time and which really surprises you?
is it because paco covered almost all the possible pathes already and that one can only follow him in to those pathes (with some minor variances) ?
i mean, of course every new CD has new ideas and compositions, but somehow you heard something similar in the past from the same player or from other players.
cositas buenas and some tracks on aguadulce from tomatito were (for me) somehow a totally new "way", which really surprised me and to which i even had to get used to, when fist heard them in my CD player.
but other than that, i see a "trend" which is basically to reduce the complexity of compositions and focus on the different "ways of expression" of the fewer notes.
is it just me who has this "observation" or do you understand what i mean?
yes, but this video is not really a good example. i mean antonio is not really playing traditional in it
Yeah its a bit subjective. I find Pacos 80s materials generally are "classics". If it would be called modern, i would be confused by how to call the stuff thats being played nowadays, which i cannot relate to that Paco stuff (like the Paquete video you posted).
To your last post, i dont know the trend, but i can only guess that guitarrist of today are far more influenced than back in the days. You have international touring groups, internet,... im not sure how people would have looked at you if you played them that Paquete bulerias in the time of the 50s or 60s.
Young? not really anymore, been almost 30 years since solo quiero caminar. And it is not experimental, it simply has evolved to its present form accepted by most current living artists, and continues to do so.
30 years compared to melodies that you can trace back to the middle east and beyond from before the time of Christ and it's not in it's infancy? OK, now we're getting ridiculous!
Flamenco is not a single celled animal crawling out of the ooze. It has been modernized through experimentation by some very innovative players. Great. 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. I am not pointing my fingers at anyone on the site, have barely had a single private convo with anyone and have only heard a few really great recordings in the audio section - so when folks come out swinging I'd say that's rather telling, no?
Again, 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. Then why do Pop songs by the Jonas Brothers generally only have 3 Maj chords? So what, the pentatonic scale is just as hard as the Phrygian mode? Do you smoke it or take it in the arm?
My arguement hasn't changed all my life. Case in point - two very good friends who just happen to be gifted blues players. One copied Stevie Ray Vaughn's style (as did millions) and went on to have a fairly successful career in music at the local level, released 6 cds, toured Europe and Australia, occasionally gets to play in the US.
The other player developed her own style. She has released 10 albums, has toured the entire world, has an International career, got signed to Anton Records out of San Antonio before she was 20, has played with hundreds of big names etc. etc. and even recorded with Stevie Ray Vaughn's band after his death. She didn't cut any corners or stand on anyone's shoulders.
Case in point - Paco De Lucia (and Stevie Ray Vaughn for that matter)learned everything there was to know about their particular art forms and then went on to innovate. They didn't just learn what was "cool" at that particular moment.
It's not the traditionalists denying the value of Modern. It's the other way around.
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