Googling brings up many video clips, but I don’t know which to trust as representative of bebop.
If it’s not I Got Rhythm, but while it’s playing, you can sing I Got Rhythm to it, it’s bebop.
The style as played on sax is best exemplified by Charlie Parker; on piano, by Bud Powell. Lots of fast, long solo runs, but within an overall song structure that is more like the late-50s-early-60s “classic” era of Coltrane et al. than it is to the Big Band (swing) era which preceded be-bop.
(Yes, I know bebop can be slow, too…lots of Monk, for example.)
Your typical bebop song contains long solos from various instruments, one at a time, that aren’t very fun to listen to unless you’re a jazz musician. And even then, not every jazz musician enjoys bebop. I played some in my last 2 years of high school jazz band, and I think bebop is boooo-ring.
A badass song, to be sure. But even though it’s the theme of Cowboy Bebop, it’s not a bebop song. It’s too much of a crowd-pleaser, for one. Bebop songs are *much *longer than a minute and a half, and the genre frankly has very limited appeal to anybody except jazz musicians. Tank! is not esoteric enough to be bebop. The only element it shares with bebop is the screechy high trumpet at the end and the sax solo (and long soloes are but one facet of a bebop song, and the solo in Tank! is not very long anyway).
According to Wikipedia, Tank! is:
For a rundown of how bebop developed, you might find this link helpful. The problem is, it’s hard to point at a piece, adjust your monocle, and say “that piece of music is definitely a member of the bebop genre!” You’ll know it when you hear it, but to know it you just have to listen to a *lot *of jazz, and learn how each style is differentiated. There are no hard rules, and even if there were, successful musicians break them all the time anyway.
I think a good example is the be bop version of Danny Boy. Sorry, no link but I know it can be googled.
NO, its appeal is NOT limited to jazz musicians. That’s like saying cupcakes can only be enjoyed by bakers.
The majority of people that enjoy bebop, jazz, or any form of music, are non-musicians.
For a lot of people, bebop is an acquired taste. It is complex and may take some work to understand and enjoy.
Bebop sounds like a dangerous adventure.
Bebop sounds like someone enthusiastically telling you about the best thing that ever happened to them, only using an instrument instead of words.
Bebop sounds like what the traffic on a busy city street looks like.
Bebop sounds like a grooveless groove grooving all over the place.
That’s what bebop sounds like.
I said the appeal to non-musicians was very limited. I stand by my statement. You’re one of a very small number who enjoy bebop. It is absolutely an acquired taste, and one that I never acquired despite playing it myself. Different strokes, and so on. But you can’t like bebop without admitting that it’s not for everybody, or even most people.
And this might make me sound elitist, but the difficulty level of bebop cannot be fully appreciated by a non-musician. That’s not to say that non-musicians cannot enjoy it, at all. Just that most non-musicians won’t see why it’s worthy of appreciation in the first place. It’s difficult merely for the sake of difficulty.
Beeps and bops, thus the name.
Nice!
And I would say that someone without much musical training could still be impressed by the self-evident mastery of complex, difficult solo runs by a bebop musician…and yet that person might not LIKE the music.
I love this.
I was going to say that good bebop sounds like good Robin Williams sounded when he was fresh back in the day - manic energy exploding into a cascade of riffs, with side bars for little vocal quotes.
If you relax and let it be, it’s silly, manic, strutty-technical fun - listen to Salt Peanutsand think about the soundtrack to a Bugs Bunny cartoon…
This is correct. Parker and Dizzy Gillespie basically invented the genre together. Listen to anything with the two of them playing together (like Koko): Parker and Diz were able to imitate each other’s instruments and it was difficult to tell that there were even two different instruments playing when they were doing those lightning fast riffs. The music was hugely unpopular with people who complained that one couldn’t dance to it. Bird and Diz maintained that their music was not for dancing, but for listening, and that it was deliberately played so that dancing was not possible.
Edit window.
Try Salt Peanuts for a good example of the two of them playing as one instrument. When you realize that there is really no comparable fingering between the two instruments, it’s remarkable to listen to them execute it.
A slight hijack… But I was taught (in an old jazz history class some 15+ years ago) that the reason Miles Davis started the “Cool Jazz” movement was because he wasn’t a good enough trumpet player to keep up with bebop. Because Miles started playing at an intense level when he was very young, his embouchure didn’t develop properly (which is why it’s a bad idea for kids to learn wind instruments before the age of 10 or so) and he wasn’t able to play very high or very fast, thus… Cool jazz.
Hey! I just linked to Salt Peanuts in the post above yours! ;)
It sounds like your user name.
With all due respect (I really do like you, rachellelogram), I have to say this strikes me as strange. I think it’s definitely true of free jazz, but I wouldn’t say it of bebop. (Except in the way that I might say “most people” aren’t really into jazz in general, at least jazz in the pre-Kenny G sense of the word.)
Getting back to the OP, I think a fundamental characteristic of bebop is that the musician’s improvisation uses not just the notes of the underlying chord, but also notes of chords related to that chord. So there’ll be a lot of jumping around, but not totally random like you get in free jazz; there’s still an underlying tonality.