-
I’m a big fan of Soundslice and have a number of transcriptions up there, often done with a view to revisiting and really digging into at a later date… yet seldom happens
Anyway, I’ve always loved this performance of All The Things You Are by Larry Carlton, sitting in with Les Paul and the house band. Spontaneity, great feel, just a lovely vibe all round.
Larry Carlton - All The Things You Are | Soundslice
-
12-24-2023 06:13 AM
-
Guys last month on here were saying Larry was not a jazz guitarist which made me laugh.Thanks for posting this.
-
Originally Posted by nyc chaz
-
Originally Posted by BradGuitar
PS: I just listened to this fine interpretation of ATTYA. When I first read the top post, I was surprised Larry was playing a Les Paul. Now I understand that Larry was playing WITH Les Paul!
-
Originally Posted by jameslovestal
-
Originally Posted by BradGuitar
He could play the "book" if he wanted to ,, the material he plays is his choice and his talent is turbocharged when he plays what he likes.
His playing has influenced mine and I'm thankful he shares his talent with us.
-
Originally Posted by nyc chaz
It’s a professional thing, Larry was a session rock player with something of a jazz and charts background. Not a common skill set during that era. This made him extremely useful even when he wasn’t playing such as MDing for Steely Dan and so on.
I also do not really care. If people want to call Larry a jazz guitarist go ahead.Last edited by Christian Miller; 12-24-2023 at 06:43 PM.
-
Originally Posted by BradGuitar
-
Originally Posted by BradGuitar
The common response was that most of the music he made a living at wasn't "jazz"; e.g. the work with Stealy Dan, the fusion "jazz" etc... Other fine guitarist like Wes, Howard Roberts, and George Bension were mentioned in a similar light. (which leads to the sell-out rabbit hole).
The old age topic of being a musician and making a good living and being so called 'true' to music (like jazz), as an art form.
-
Originally Posted by nyc chaz
Of course, this gets into another common overly binary discussion at this forum: what is jazz music? Ah, the rabbit hole never ends.
-
Does Larry consider himself to be a "Jazz guitarist"? I mean, first and foremost?
-
Originally Posted by princeplanet
-
Well, quite the debate for sharing a transcription… :-)
Originally Posted by wolflen
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
Originally Posted by jameslovestal
I wonder if, after (and during) his LA session era he spent the rest of his career with an archtop playing like the vid in the OP, would he then be seen as a jazz guitarist to those that beg to differ? Seemed to work for Jimmy Bruno who did the LA session scene too, albeit nowhere near as high profile… perhaps there is a subconscious perception of a slight lack of authenticity in what jazz offerings there are from Carlton?
I saw him live in 2018 (I think) and what was interesting was hearing him talk about not only his direct influences (the jazzers) but how the people that he said didn’t influence him (ie the rockers) impacted his development in his formative years. Going off what he said, it seems to me, his grounding and development is steeped in jazz. Somewhere along the way he diversified and perhaps that diluted it in people’s eyes?
I guess my take is that ultimately he is a Jazz guitarist that branched out (quite effortlessly) into the rock, fusion, whatever pays the bills world. As opposed to a Blues/Rock guy that had a capability to blag jazz to most people most of the time (eg someone like Guthrie Govan).
All of this from a guy who grew up playing rock/metal, so take my opinion with a hefty pinch of salt
Besides, I’m beginning to sound like a staunch defender of Larry Carlton… and I really couldn’t care less. I just shared a transcription of a vid I liked
As you were…
-
Originally Posted by nyc chaz
Allan is also quite weird …
Holdsworth turned his back on the Level 42 gig after all.
I think they wanted someone more funk oriented although to my ears Allan did a good job on the rhythm parts. High standards I guess.
Perhaps if he hadn’t, and diversified his playing (I dare say “sold out”) we wouldn’t hold him in quite the same regard? Is that where Carlton suffers?
secondly I think very many people hold Carlton in the highest regard, and I certainly admire his playing.
Having now read that thread, and opinions here, I’ve got a better feel for where folk from both sides of the debate are coming from.
I wonder if, after (and during) his LA session era he spent the rest of his career with an archtop playing like the vid in the OP, would he then be seen as a jazz guitarist to those that beg to differ? Seemed to work for Jimmy Bruno who did the LA session scene too, albeit nowhere near as high profile… perhaps there is a subconscious perception of a slight lack of authenticity in what jazz offerings there are from Carlton?
I saw him live in 2018 (I think) and what was interesting was hearing him talk about not only his direct influences (the jazzers) but how the people that he said didn’t influence him (ie the rockers) impacted his development in his formative years. Going off what he said, it seems to me, his grounding and development is steeped in jazz. Somewhere along the way he diversified and perhaps that diluted it in people’s eyes?
I guess my take is that ultimately he is a Jazz guitarist that branched out (quite effortlessly) into the rock, fusion, whatever pays the bills world. As opposed to a Blues/Rock guy that had a capability to blag jazz to most people most of the time (eg someone like Guthrie Govan).
George Benson otoh spent his early career beasting it on straightahead jazz dates. His playing in the era as good as that type of thing gets…
-
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
I think it’s safe to say it’s not in doubt that everyone admires Carlton’s playing… just maybe not always the vehicles for it.
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
-
Originally Posted by BradGuitar
For me it’s more about the music than the players skilllset. Satriani studied with Tristano, but I don’t think anyone would call him a jazz player.
but this is a distinction that comes in with teaching too. A lot of proggy and shreddy players want to learn ‘jazz’. To me jazz is a kind of music with a long and storied tradition, to them it’s capability and knowledge.
I think part of this is the tacit assumption people some people seem to have that the skillset required to play jazz is inherently different from other types of music. But in jazz you have guitar players who can play great but couldn’t MD a band or write arrangements like Larry did. Benson springs to mind. To play jazz you need to use your ears to learn the music and apply on your instrument just like anything else (apart from maybe classical.)
A good musician is a good musician. Rock may be easier to ‘fake’ than jazz but good rock playing isn’t fakery. Skills are transferrable in music, and I suppose jazzers tend to be more schooled, but it comes down to the same thing.
otoh the boundaries between genres are porous. We can all agree Steve Vai is a rock musician and Dexter Gordon is a jazz musician. But what about Mike Brecker when he was recording with Dire Straits? If not, did he suddenly morph into a jazzer when playing with a jazz quintet? It seems absurd.
Perhaps it doesn’t really matter. But you get booked for what people know you for, and that has a knock on effect one ones playing. If you play only straightahead jazz gigs people aren’t going to book you for fusion gigs by and large, no matter how well you can play that stuff. If you get busy with it, that stuff might get rusty while your straightahead playing gets gig hardened and better and better.
Don’t ask me about Wayne Krantz in Steely Dan haha. I have NFI.Last edited by Christian Miller; 12-26-2023 at 06:55 AM.
-
Originally Posted by BradGuitar
-
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
I think there can be a tendency (understandably) to paint a lot of proggy/shreddy folk with the same brush. I agree that will probably approach jazz as a way of just puffing out their chest, as a “thing to wrestle into submission” so to speak. But I think a lot also want to explore the concept of what makes jazz, even if it’s in what might be deemed a superficial way and there will be some that immerse themselves completely. But I guess we’re veering away from whether Carlton can legitimately be called a jazz guitarist to something a bit different…
Brecker? Of course not, and it is absurd to us, because we are “in the know”. But what about the average Dire Straits fan that only knows of Brecker in that context? Or the wider public that only knows Benson as a soul/pop/smooth/RnB singer and not one the greatest guitarists to ever strike a string irrespective of genre? The fact that Brecker could turn his hand to a brilliant pop solo, doesn’t diminish his standing as a modern jazz great to us does it? If all we’d consumed was Brecker’s pop/studio work, then, suddenly wrapped our ears around Pilgrimage, would be going “nah not having that, he’s a pop guy really. Sure he could turn his hand to standards and play the book but is he a really a jazzer?”
Of course not, because we know better (or differently at least). How do we know that Carlton wasn’t cutting his teeth “beasting it on straight ahead jazz dates” like Benson did? Because of his style on what we have heard on his recorded and live output? I agree it’s certainly fair to say that one’s regular playing becomes one’s strength (to a point) and perhaps, Carlton’s straight ahead playing could very well have suffered because of it. Personally, I think Larry’s performance of ATTYA, whilst stylistically different from a Benson version (which for me, cultural and environmental considerations are a big part), certainly give credence to the argument of him being classed as a jazz guitarist. A jazz guitarist that was able to branch out into other spheres, possibly (probably) to the detriment of his straight ahead playing depending on what the listener likes to hear in such playing.
Krantz in Steely Dan? Yep, we’ll have to visit that another time! haha
-
Originally Posted by rlrhett
-
I tend to think our definitions of a genre can be very restrictive.
I Carltons case..he was a top studio musician..playing different styles on demand..so to speak..
He left that phase of his playing joined established groups The Crusaders..Fourplay and more
He has played with some of the top jazz names..
so the perception that he is not a jazz guitarist by some seems short sighted
He can be when he chooses to be or when the situation calls for him to be
Benson..I liked his playing when he was playing on CTI dates..raw and smokin'
when Broadway hit the air..the thrill was gone
-
Originally Posted by wolflen
In other words, the debate here, wasn't about one guitarist, but instead the definition of jazz-guitarist.
Pat Martino & Jaco inspired - outside playing...
Today, 09:17 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos