At my jazz concert last night, the bass player asked, "If Wynton Marsalis is such a great trumpet player, why is he not as popular as Chet Baker who wasn't a great trumpet player?" That was a great question! Chet was a master at creating melodies in his solos. Chet has over 3M monthly listeners on Spotify. Wynton has less than 500K. (My quintet has 75 :) In my observation, Wynton is both more original and has more facility on the instrument, but his solos can be very long and more "outside" the chord structure. I know that is a subjective opinion, but for Chet to have 6X's the listeners as Wynton, Chet's gift of creating melodies (and singing ability) is the main reason he is so popular.
Being original in a composition can be both incredible or awful. There are plenty of original compositions that will be never be played because they can't relate to an audience. Then there are the works of John Williams who writes original melodies everyone relates to. Whether you are composing an opera in the 21st Century (difficult proposition) or latin jazz piece, the more original you are within the bounds of the structure you are composing in may be the key to how successful you are.
Hi again! I can't comment on the Wynton/Chet Spotify question because I know so little about jazz. I'm not sure I agree with your last sentence, but I guess it depends on what the "bounds of structure" means, for at least to me that can mean a lot of different things. And in terms of relating to an audience, I guess I think of the idea that if we relate to what people want we would still be riding horses. But there are so many sides to the argument. So I think for me it depends on the quality of the individual piece, which of course is totally subjective.
As Glenn Gould wrote in his amusing little ditty " So you Want to Write a Fugue?" many years ago,
"Never be clever for the sake of being clever". For years I was afraid to compose, because of the fear of being imitative or "unoriginal". Then one day, in my 50s, I finally said F*** it! I'm just going to write what my nature feels and tells me, and let the chips fall. I'm no great composer, but I have had some very satifying and fulfilling experiences and a lot of things published. Best of all, I feel good about having been true to myself.
Thanks so much for this. In my first interview with Jake Heggie I asked him about this, and his answer was great. If you are interested in hearing his thoughts, go towards the end of Part 2. Keep writing!!
At my jazz concert last night, the bass player asked, "If Wynton Marsalis is such a great trumpet player, why is he not as popular as Chet Baker who wasn't a great trumpet player?" That was a great question! Chet was a master at creating melodies in his solos. Chet has over 3M monthly listeners on Spotify. Wynton has less than 500K. (My quintet has 75 :) In my observation, Wynton is both more original and has more facility on the instrument, but his solos can be very long and more "outside" the chord structure. I know that is a subjective opinion, but for Chet to have 6X's the listeners as Wynton, Chet's gift of creating melodies (and singing ability) is the main reason he is so popular.
Being original in a composition can be both incredible or awful. There are plenty of original compositions that will be never be played because they can't relate to an audience. Then there are the works of John Williams who writes original melodies everyone relates to. Whether you are composing an opera in the 21st Century (difficult proposition) or latin jazz piece, the more original you are within the bounds of the structure you are composing in may be the key to how successful you are.
Hi again! I can't comment on the Wynton/Chet Spotify question because I know so little about jazz. I'm not sure I agree with your last sentence, but I guess it depends on what the "bounds of structure" means, for at least to me that can mean a lot of different things. And in terms of relating to an audience, I guess I think of the idea that if we relate to what people want we would still be riding horses. But there are so many sides to the argument. So I think for me it depends on the quality of the individual piece, which of course is totally subjective.
As Glenn Gould wrote in his amusing little ditty " So you Want to Write a Fugue?" many years ago,
"Never be clever for the sake of being clever". For years I was afraid to compose, because of the fear of being imitative or "unoriginal". Then one day, in my 50s, I finally said F*** it! I'm just going to write what my nature feels and tells me, and let the chips fall. I'm no great composer, but I have had some very satifying and fulfilling experiences and a lot of things published. Best of all, I feel good about having been true to myself.
Thanks so much for this. In my first interview with Jake Heggie I asked him about this, and his answer was great. If you are interested in hearing his thoughts, go towards the end of Part 2. Keep writing!!