Pat Metheny, leader and sideman

[Rooster_Ties]

I do think Metheny's heart is probably in it, but as a listener -- I constantly find my heart strings being tugged at by his music, but I am also constantly aware of those heart-strings too. And for me, the "heart-strings" are as much a part of the music, as the music itself. And this drives me up a wall!!! (OK, I'm really not "angry" about Metheny's music, but much of it really does annoy me.)

• Note: this criticism doesn't apply so much to the Metheny recordings that I do love (Q&A, Song X, and his other recent trio stuff, etc... -- though maybe it still applies somewhat, but only to a MUCH lesser degree.)
  

The majority of Metheny that I've heard -- and especially the PMG stuff -- hits my ears me the same way most of the music of Chopin does (especially Chopin's solo-piano works). I know this is probably a really weird comparison, but stay with me on this...

I almost always feel manipulated by Metheny's music, as I do with Chopin's music, as if I am supposed to feel lots of tension and release as a listener, almost in a very systematic way. FOR ME, the experience of listening to Chopin and/or Metheny, is akin to the experience of feeling " emotionally manipulated", musically speaking.

Their music, and it's corresponding intended emotional response, seems so calculated -- that I literally "feel" offended by the fact that I perceive that the person behind the music wants me to feel all that emotion.

This response on my part is, in fact, my own emotional response to the music. Yes, there probably is an intellectual (and an "intelectualized") component to this, but seriously folks --- I FEEL the music is corny -- and it literally gives me "the willies" and "makes my skin crawl".

So any "intellectual" criticism I have for Metheny, is probably trumped by the way the music makes me "feel" when I listen to it - again, my physical reaction. THAT, in a nutshell, is my main problem with most of Metheny's music.

The man has incredible technique, and sometimes he seems able to channel that energy into music that doesn't make my skin crawl (Q&A is the best example). But most of the time, I can't listen to more than a couple tunes before I literally NEED to put something else on (at least if I'm listening closely -- cuz as background music, it's probably fine).

It really all comes down to the emotional response I have to his music. It tugs at my heart with these huge, thick chains --- and I am literally offended (emotionally speaking), by the weight of those chains, and by the size of the grappling hooks that connect those chains to my heart.

That's really the only way I can explain it - in emotional terms. And nothing else makes me quite the same way -- except Chopin.

Does anybody else here know what I'm talking about??

• Note: I have tried to post something like this, in this very thread, about four times (and failed each time). The first time was literally moments after this thread started, when I thought I could get my criticism in as the 2nd post in the thread. But every time I've given up, because each time I tried to write an intellectual critique of Metheny's music.
  

Edited December 28, 2004 by Rooster_Ties

[CJ Shearn]

actually the "trumpet" sound of the guitar synth is the Roland guitar synth, the GR300 not the Synclavier. Despite the Synclavier being put into a Roland guitar, Pat uses a saxophone sample on it. still does occassionally, but with a different device. I agree with Joe, Pat is a highly accessible guitarist, I do not like shredders like Dimeola, Holdsworth, Frank Zappa, etc.......

[Jim Alfredson]

Chopin?!? CHOPIN?!? C'mon man! That stuff is absolutely beautiful!

Sometimes I honestly think being a jazz fan gets in the way of enjoying music in general (and I include myself in this generalization... I'm guilty of it sometimes, too).

Just think about that for a minute.

[king ubu]

Well, sorry for me using the "kitsch"-word - I half regretted it a moment after I had posted, but it was simply the first word that came to mind. I know what you mean, Dr. J., but I guess with that, I'm on Rooster's side again. It's just that I really never got into Metheny too much, and never liked the Metheny Group. Maybe the loss is mine, but there's so much music out there, and Metheny is just not the musician that really grabs my attention. I'll spin Q&A again, though, as soon as I find the time.

Oh, and I like some Zappa (though I don't essentially think of him as a guitarist), but have no use whatsoever for di Meola (walked out of a concert I could attend for free after ten or fifteen minutes... rarely ever heard such horribly polished elevator music...)

ubu

[Alon Marcus]

Does anybody else here know what I'm talking about??

Yes I know. Though I don't feel this way about Metheny.

There are other artists that make me feel that way.

[Rooster_Ties]

Chopin?!?  CHOPIN?!?  C'mon man!   That stuff is absolutely beautiful!

I didn't say it wasn't beautiful. We probably don't disagree much about its beauty, in literal terms.

I was just about to type this: "It just doesn't connect with me emotionally." But THAT isn't the problem. It DOES connect with me emotionally (on a very visceral level), but I have an entirely different emotional reaction than the one intended by the composer.

And in response to your "beautiful" comment, Jim, I was just about to type this: "At the very least, it certainly is 'pretty'." But THAT isn't the problem either. It's way beyond "pretty". Hell, it's probably beyond "beautiful".

And maybe THAT IS the problem.

Chopin - and Metheny too - are so "BEAUTIFUL" (really too "beautiful") -- on top of being technically "incredible" (no matter how you look at it), that it's really too much for me to take in. It's like I get on sensory overload -- and as a result, I become hyper-aware of the emotional aspects of the music, which I reject - for whatever reason.

Edited December 21, 2004 by Rooster_Ties

[Rooster_Ties]

Sometimes I honestly think being a jazz fan gets in the way of enjoying music in general (and I include myself in this generalization... I'm guilty of it sometimes, too).

My reaction to Chopin has been consistent from the very beginning, since I first heard him in my Classical Music 101 class back in my college days (which was about the time I was first discovering jazz). It annoyed the shit out of me from the first listen. (His music was always the easiest for me to identify the on blind listening quizzes, cuz my reaction was always the same. )

And I'm pretty sure my first reaction to Metheny was pretty similar too, if I remember right. "Q&A" was one of the very first Metheny things I ever heard (and I really liked it), and this was within my first year of discovering jazz. But I sampled a number of his other albums from the college radio station, all of which left me cold -- or rather -- I found them annoying on some level I couldn't really explain. A roommate of mine had "Secret Story" too, which bugged me whenever he put it on.

I don't think it's "being a jazz fan" that gets me in trouble. If someone had played either some Chopin or Metheny for me, prior to my exposure to jazz or much classical music (like when I was back in high school), I suspect my reaction would have probably been the same.

Edited December 21, 2004 by Rooster_Ties

[DrJ]

Rooster, I understand what you mean - don't personally agree but totally understand, it's cool.

I bet you hate Rachmaninoff too...Chopin, Rachmaninoff, Metheny, and of course many other artists are Romantics with a capital "R" - and for many people it's a turn off. My own take is this - when its done well, seldom is there any art more beautiful, but when it doesn't quite come off it can sound pretty sappy.

But I'm not sure how this is any different than other approaches - for example, the less overtly emotional, somewhat intellectualized approach that is popular with many jazz fans is great to me too when it comes off well, but when it doesn't it can sound shallow, downright meanspirited, or just dull and emotionless.

Every "school" or style has its blind spots.

[Rooster_Ties]

I bet you hate Rachmaninoff too...Chopin, Rachmaninoff, Metheny, and of course many other artists are Romantics with a capital "R" - and for many people it's a turn off.

Yup, you're exactly right. Rachmaninoff does nothing for me, especially his piano concertos. (His symphonies are a bit better, but I'm luke-warm on them too, at best).

But as far as Brahms, Beethoven, and Barber (a neo-Romantic) go -- gimme all you got!!! I really do like most Romantic-era classical music (though it took me a few years to get into it -- which I did mostly because my wife really loves Romantic era classical music.). I especially love the thornier "late-Romantic/neo-Romantic" era.

But not the "hyper-Romantics", like Chopin and Rachmaninoff. They drive me up a wall.

Ooooohhh.... quick.... get back on-topic....

like Metheny!!!

Edited December 21, 2004 by Rooster_Ties

[Joe G]

I bet you hate Rachmaninoff too...Chopin, Rachmaninoff, Metheny, and of course many other artists are Romantics with a capital "R" - and for many people it's a turn off. My own take is this - when its done well, seldom is there any art more beautiful, but when it doesn't quite come off it can sound pretty sappy.

Well said. Actually, it can all be a bit much for me too, sometimes. All things in moderation.

[Jim Alfredson]

FCUK THAT, YOUR ALL FUCKIN IDIOTS!!!

[RDK]

I don't know 'bout the rest of you, but I'm dying to hear what Rooster thinks of Kenny G.

[Rooster_Ties]

I don't know 'bout the rest of you, but I'm dying to hear what Rooster thinks of Kenny G. 

Same reaction as with Metheny, Chopin, and Rachmaninoff -- and heck, Celin Dion too, while we're at it. (And also 'pop' Country Music ballads from the last 10 or 20 years.)

...except with Kenny G. and Celin Dion, and the Country ballads -- I also want to throw up.

Edited December 21, 2004 by Rooster_Ties

[DrJ]

Yes, we docs no longer recommend syrup of Ipecac as a way to induce vomiting in kids who swallow stuff like household cleaners - nasty problem with cardiotoxicity - but maybe we should start recommending an emergency listen to Gorelick's "duetting" with Pops on "Wonderful World" instead...no wait, forget that, we're trying to SAVE the kids...

[JazzRules]

I think he is an important jazz guitarist. Another link in the long chain that include Christian, Django, Wes, Jim Hall etc.

I would say that my favorite Metheny albums are the ones where he plays and improvises a lot, like his trios, the duet with Hall and his sideman contributions to records with Kenny Garrett, Michael Brecker, Ornette Coleman and Joshua Redman.

His group is nice too mostly for terific compositions and interesting small group arrangements, but he really stretches out less with the group.

What do you think about this guy?

What are your favorite Metheny albums?

Do you think he is overrated or underrarted when talking about his contribution to jazz guitar and composition?

Did you hear his weird projects, among them the double album with Derek Baily?

I used to like him, haven't liked much since the mid 1990s. Most of the Pat Metheny Group tunes sound like film score music now, not like the harddriving Brazilian beats of yesteryear.

His Trio CD of a few years back demonstrated some fantastic chops, but the music didn't "move" me, I'm not wild about trios anyway.

I'm not always wild with Metheny's attempts at playing pure straight ahead jazz. It always sounds like him playing that way, not how a "typical" jazz guitarist might go about things.

Well, here's to hoping Metheny will make a return to making some hopping jazz-fusion, like he and Lyle Mays used to. The world could use some good music about now.

Think I heard sometime today Britney Spears will be named "artist of the year". Well, I'm glad they won't be annointing her "singer of the year" :}

[7/4]

I'm not always wild with Metheny's attempts at playing pure straight ahead jazz. It always sounds like him playing that way, not how a "typical" jazz guitarist might go about things.

Part of what makes him great. He sounds like himself!

[Jim Alfredson]

Indeed.

[Joe G]

(i have no comment on Metheny; not in my top 500 all-time guitarists of folk, blues, hillbilly, jazz, flamenco, rock & i didn't like everyone ELSE on 80/81 enough to keep that either. life is way too short to bother tho' i can appreciate what some musicians get outta it & hopefully process in their own weird, WOOLIER, ways: "tastey" licks, tone count for just about zilch w/o context HERE.)

I'm not suprised by that at all, though I am curious who your top 5 jazz guitarists would be...

[Jim Alfredson]

Um, Clem... beautiful can be both light and dark. It's a very open word.

[Joe G]

Nothing wrong with that list. I've never really been attracted to the straight blues cats myself. Maybe I just haven't had the proper exposure to the right stuff.

No Joe Morris?

Joe-- while one can't reasonably indict Metheny on musicianship-- tho' it's fun to try & watch your local Berklee/Jazz-Prog-Vai/chopshead FREAK OUT!!--

here's the thing: for someone who grew up on blues hillbilly DOLPHY the session dude on all the Bobby "Blue" Bland records etc etc jazz guitar has always been a dangerous thing, as the quest for THEE tone, perfect comping & so forth does not compel as do other instruments that-- in the jazz context, however broadly defined-- are afforded more flexibility.

Correct me if I'm wrong; are you saying it's a bit of the old square-peg-round-hole-type thing? I would agree that bebop doesn't lay that well on the fretboard.

[7/4]

No Joe Morris?

He's cool. I heard him at the Knit around the time of A Cloud of Black Birds, very interesting sound.

[JazzRules]

I'm not always wild with Metheny's attempts at playing pure straight ahead jazz. It always sounds like him playing that way, not how a "typical" jazz guitarist might go about things.

Part of what makes him great. He sounds like himself!

I USED to think that way, but not anymore.

I've been listening to Metheny since 1975. I've seen him several times in concert during those 30 years. He used to be at the forefront of modern jazz. His significance has taken a rather large downfall over the last 10 years or so.

There's a reason why true straight ahead players like Kenny Burrell, Jimmy Bruno, Peter Bernstein, Jack Wilkens, Bucky Pizzarelli, Howard Alden, (damn lazy pop-star) George Benson....... sound so good. Because they are straight ahead jazz guitarists.

BTW, "fusion" genius Kurt Rosenwinkel is a fabulous straight ahead jazz guitarIST, as heard on his CD "Intuit". Implicit in the reference is that I believe him to be a far superior straight ahead player than "fusion" genius Pat Metheny.

[Jim Alfredson]

I'm not always wild with Metheny's attempts at playing pure straight ahead jazz. It always sounds like him playing that way, not how a "typical" jazz guitarist might go about things.

Part of what makes him great. He sounds like himself!

I USED to think that way, but not anymore.

I've been listening to Metheny since 1975. I've seen him several times in concert during those 30 years. He used to be at the forefront of modern jazz. His significance has taken a rather large downfall over the last 10 years or so.

There's a reason why true straight ahead players like Kenny Burrell, Jimmy Bruno, Peter Bernstein, Jack Wilkens, Bucky Pizzarelli, Howard Alden, (damn lazy pop-star) George Benson....... sound so good. Because they are straight ahead jazz guitarists.

BTW, "fusion" genius Kurt Rosenwinkel is a fabulous straight ahead jazz guitarIST, as heard on his CD "Intuit". Implicit in the reference is that I believe him to be a far superior straight ahead player than "fusion" genius Pat Metheny.

This post makes no sense. Metheny "used" to be at the forefront of modern jazz but now that he's not (in your opinion) he is irrelevant? One could easily say the same thing about that list of yours... all those cats, with the exception of Benson who rarely plays straight ahead anymore, are all stylistically similair and that style is one that was formed 50 years ago or more. Talk about being irrelevant.

Not to say those players aren't good players or to say I don't enjoy listening to them (I love Peter Bernstein) but it seems like you're contradicting yourself.

[Joe G]

Wow Clem - you *are* being nice!

I readily acknowledge the downsides to Pat's approach, like the slickness of the PMG records, etc. My interest and inspiration about it are very much connected to his "vision" and overall philosophy, as you mentioned.

Maybe this counts for something - I went through a HEAVY bluegrass phase in my younger days. Probably wouldn't suprise you that I liked the flashy chops players like Mark O'Conner, et al. But I also dug the trad guys, too. Especially Bill Monroe. Might be my "in" for the acoustic blues you recommended.

[Alon Marcus]

Is it true that Maria Schneider said she was influenced by Metheny's composing style? What do you guys have to say about that?