Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiefshrink
Sure we do. Just depends on how you define greatness. Apples to apples. No doubt classical is the hardest to play BUT can these classical geniuses put the 'Funk, R&B, R&R, Jazz feel into these type of genres as good as a Jerry Lee, Leon Russell, Hancock,Monk, Preston, Dr. John,etc.... who knows ? As it is said about paintings and can be said about music as well, "Beauty is in the eye/ear of the beholder".  |
Jazz is a genre unto itself. I wouldn't claim any of them can play jazz as well as Thelonius Monk. Most of that, however, is due to Monk's improvisation ability. Style replication? If Marc Andre Hamelin sets his mind to it, he could absolutely replicate style. Just look at what Keith Jarrett accomplished when he "switched" to jazz midway through his career having zero experience with the genre previously. It's all about habits and intent.
And Jerry Lee Lewis? You're going to tell me a classically trained pianist couldn't replicate what Lewis did on the piano down to the tiniest style detail? Please.
"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" refers to preferences. What I'm talking about is greatness of expression.
And no, it's not just about classical vs. pop, either. Ben Folds could easily have been a classical recording artist. He's not as good as Hamelin or Wang, but he's undeniably great.
Being classically trained doesn't mean you can only play old dead guys. It means you possess the technique and the knowledge of potential ability to play almost anything written on a grand staff. And yes, those players CAN improvise as well. They're not exclusively dependent on sheet music to play.