What makes a musician innovative?

Boy meets Horn · Posted: Sun Aug 08, 2004 10:35 am Post subject:

In Webster's dictionary, the term "innovate" is defined as to introduce (something new). If this is the case, how can one truly make a judgement on whether or not someone is innovative.
Personally, i feel as if every knew voice is an innovation, bc its someone introducing their way of playing, hearing, and doing things. Just curious, leave your opinions on it.

EddieLewis · Posted: Sun Aug 08, 2004 9:01 pm Post subject:

No, I dissagree. Not everything new is automatically inovative. I believe inovation is measured by the influence the artist has on other artists. You can be as new and as original as you want, but if no one ever picks up on it and places any value on it, then there is no inovation taking place.

The best example I have of what I'm talking about is Charlie Parker. He was doing something new at the time that later became common practice. That's innovation. But if no one had ever placed any value in his music and into those new things - enough so as to emulate it and assimilate it inot their own playing, then nothing CP had done would be considered innovation.

That's why was say players like Louis Armstrong, Roy Eldridge, Dizzy, Miles, Clifford, etc......all of these guys were innovative because they brought something to the music that wasn't there before.....something that everyone after them picked up on and used for themselves.

TrumpetEnthusiast1 · Posted: Sun Aug 08, 2004 9:47 pm Post subject:

I agree with Mr. Lewis. My definition of a musical innovator would go something like this- A musician with unique ideas or an original style of playing that people consider worth listening to or even studying.

Greg

_Don Herman · Posted: Mon Aug 09, 2004 4:34 am Post subject:

Hmmm... Well, for the first time so far as I can recall, I disagree with Eddie (is that you, Tiger?) Coming from a slightly different perspective, I feel the dictionary definition is fine. Not all inventions are good, nor all innovators great. I can invent something original, in engineering or music, and it won't work (or sound bad). Doesn't mean there was no innovation, but it wasn't "great". I think what distinguishes the players Eddie mentioned isn't merely innovation, it's that they did good, nay great innovations!

Now I suppose we can discuss the difference between "innovativeness" and "creativity"...

My 0.000001 cents. Play on! - Don
_________________
Don Herman/Monument, CO
"After silence, that which best expresses the inexpressible, is music." - Aldous Huxley

Boy meets Horn · Posted: Mon Aug 09, 2004 12:53 pm Post subject:

Don said,"Hmmm... Well, for the first time so far as I can recall, I disagree with Eddie (is that you, Tiger?) Coming from a slightly different perspective, I feel the dictionary definition is fine. Not all inventions are good, nor all innovators great. I can invent something original, in engineering or music, and it won't work (or sound bad). Doesn't mean there was no innovation, but it wasn't "great". I think what distinguishes the players Eddie mentioned isn't merely innovation, it's that they did good, nay great innovations!

Now I suppose we can discuss the difference between "innovativeness" and "creativity"...

My 0.000001 cents. Play on! - Don "

Thats what i was trying to get at.
_________________
Everyone wants to be the hero but no one wants to slay the dragon (practice).

-Wynton Marsalis