Quote:
Originally Posted by TBman
Useful notes with filler notes that make sense. If you listen to some of Pierre Bensusan and Steve Baughman's arrangements you'll find some examples of arrangements with too many filler notes, imo. I think too many filler notes can obscure the melody. You could call it their "phrasing," but too much of a good thing is not that great.
I think clear melody, with background filler notes and accompanying bass that accentuates the melody sounds best in a recording.
|
I suspect Pierre does not think of anything he's playing as "filler notes" :-)
One person's "filler" is another's enhancement. People have different tolerances and understanding of complexity. John Lennon apparently said he didn't like classical music because there was too much going on. Who was right about this? John or Beethoven? And of course there's Chuck Berry's lyrics about "modern jazz", which he disses as "sounding like a symphony", as if that's a bad thing! always thought that was a funny criticism.
In most music, from rock/pop to orchestras, there are lots of parts. Moving lines, harmonies, countermelodies, rhythms. Ideally, every element contributes to the whole. If you can label a part or certain notes as "filler", that's a judgement that the part isn't really contributing, which the composer/arranger, or even other listeners may not agree with.
For me, the process of arranging usually involves decisions like that - is that note really important? what does it contribute? would the tune be better without it? Or does the tune need something else added in? Hopefully the end result doesn't contain anything I think of as "filler".