Cette page permet juste de répondre au posts publiés sur le Forum.
I understand your arguments.
you transcribe to get the idea behind the music( hopefully) Not the phrase or whatever the heck some feeble minded musician do.
I understand that. It ’s a way of doing things.
But if Michael Brecker or Coltrane or Miles become the source for gathering knowledge for u. Then where do those guys get there knowledge ? do u really think that they transcribe others for ideas ? do u really think that ?
I mean transcription is good but it must not be the primary source for knowledge.
I don’t beleive that those guys learn phrases and r committed to memory when they perform, they work on ideas , and u must really be justifiably confident with the ideas to apply them. How can u be justifiably confident with an idea if it is not yours buddy ?
Don’t u think there is something much greater than just transcribing others. Chopping the music, the chords, the scales etc. Don’t u think that some musician like Coltrane and others of the same caliber do more than just transcribing they create things in music, they bring something new, they make things happen.
Think it like writing a dissertation some guys r more intelligent than others and will analyse and comment things and come with ideas that are profound, new and true. some others will just do some googling and copy paste the work done by others. who is the best essayist then ?
The end result may be the same but they may both get an A + but there is a great deal of difference between the two don’t u think ?
I am truly sorry for being an annoying Bart Simpson here sir, but i understand everything of Brecker playing i mean understand the idea behind the music not the music itself ( that would be too easy). I don’t know u i don’t judge but if this is route you have taken it is a difficult one.