Sign up Calendar Latest Topics Chat

  Author   Comment   Page 2 of 2      Prev   1   2

Posts: 12
Reply with quote  #16 
hi all,
nice thoughts. i think everybody has there positive-negeative thoughts. one thing i want to know is that since indian classical music is basied on melody and westren music basied on harmony. i want to know that how jazz music can blend so well with indian classical music. since shakti has gone well then lot of other album also .. i can find only one factor commen is improvisation. both the gener has the freedom of improvisation with there rules.. i want to knw the other factors too.

Posts: 513
Reply with quote  #17 
I think the timbre of Indian instruments has a lot to do with this. That exotic sound, which every Indian instrument possesses when put into a western setting, plays very well into the aesthetic of experimental jazz.

Posts: 26
Reply with quote  #18 
Has anyone heard Rays and Forays with Chitravina Ravikiran, Jovino Santos Neto, Xia He Qiu, Harishankar & Poovalur Srinivasan? This is a really interesting mix of Carnatic, traditional chinese and Latin Jazz.

Someone also recently recommended Dreams by Kyabaat Aka Ranajit Sengupta and Daniel Ludke. I haven't heard it yet.

There's also a rumor of a John McLaughlin/Debashish Bhattacharya collaboration!

The balance of composition and improvisation, mathematical precision and poetry, and rhythmic exploration are common features in Indian music and Jazz. I guess where it can go wrong for me is that the combination can turn into a self-indulgent note-fest.

What I'd really like to hear is a successful combination of early American modal folk genres with the bhava and gamikas of Indian music.

Posts: 98
Reply with quote  #19 
I think the merging of different musical esthetics is a great, and inevitable process. After all, hindustani music took its shape as a result Indian and Middle-Eastern cultures fusing together. Jazz became a new art form as a mix of western and African and Afro-American esthetics.

Of course there's always going to be some bad, forced music as a result of such experimentation. Like most of the new-agey 'Indian instruments with bland synthesizer chords' stuff. But it doesn't mean great things can't happen, and already there's plenty of great music out there. Shakti and various Laswell projects are among my favorites, from what already has been mentioned. I also like Trilok Gurtu's solo albums, and I consider L. Shankar to be basically a fusion musician of highest caliber.

The influence can be very subtle, and very successful, like John Coltrane's use of drones, or Philip Glass' focus on rhythmic patterns which gave way to 20 century minimalism.

I have heard the new Debashish album, which I thought was a very successful venture into various esthetics. Btw, I don't know about any plans of a new collaboration with McLaughlin, but he was a member of one of the incarnations of Remember Shakti.

Tomek (no cheese)

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Posts: 2,233
Reply with quote  #20 
Most fusion sucks, but it is not the fusion that is the problem.
It is just that most fusion falls short of true vision.
And a lot of fusion puts the musicians from either side into a situation that is not natural for either.
Neither is in their element so each is hampered somewhat.
Usually they fail to truly "Fuse"

Some fusion is awesome. Just depends on the musicians, and the music they choose to play.
I am not afraid of fusion. It can be fun.
It does not detract from Classical forms. it is just different.
In fact it may have the positive effect of drawing new converts to the serious classical forms.

I know that I was introduced to Indian music through John Mclaughlin and Shakti.
I was hooked by L. Shankar's fantastic violin.

Posts: 5
Reply with quote  #21 
i think it doesn't matter what type of music your are listen to .its depend what taste you like.some like the Weston music some like classical .
Learn Playing Guitar
Ipod Movies Download

Posts: 12
Reply with quote  #22 
hi friends,
realy great reply frm all of u. i m realy greatfull to all. there r so many factor which influians classical and jazz. also i found that not evry fusion is fusion. coz the gave name but they cant servive in the defination. the defination on fusion is blending of two gener. mixing two things. at a same time u have to see to it that it sould b blend in sach a way that will look only one compo. and also it dose nt loos its naturality. i think if canthink in this way we will fine lots of good fusion to hear.

Posts: 130
Reply with quote  #23 
As usual, Martin, you are absolutely correct - as long as they are both modal it can be done with stunning results. As far as past "fusion" projects, I once read a critic say "Easter and and Western fusion is usually nothing more than a Western Musician 'jamming' on Eastern melodies (or the same Western Modalities)" What this writer was specifically referring to was the duets with Flute and Violin that Pt. Shankar did in the 70's (Jean Pierre Rampal on Flute and Yehudhi Menuhin on Violin - respectively) Wonderful collaborations - but the point is that sometimes "fusion" is not really fusion, but is more like a Jugal-Bandhi - This is sometimes seen is even Shakti's best works in which they "take turns" running with the melodic forms they are playing around on.

Posts: 55
Reply with quote  #24 
I am a big fan of all the John McLaughlin projects and Bill Laswell's work with Zakir Hussain. The 60s psychedelic & the newage stuff makes me cringe.

Terry Riley is the only Western classical composer who I know who has successfully mixed the two genres.

Hindistani music itself is a 12 century fusion of Indian traditions with Persian and other middle eastern musics. The word sitar itself has a Persian root
Previous Topic | Next Topic

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.