DownBeat February 1991 [antikvár]

on the beat IDIOT-SYNCRASIES by John Ephland The recent Hap over fonner-Grammy winners Milli Vanilli is a case of one too many raids on the cookie jar. The cookie jar, in this instance, is the public's willingness to accept what is done in the name of music. For those who've been off the planet for a few months, popsters Milli Vanilli won a Grammy last year for "Best New Artists," only to give it up due to revelations by their producer that their album was performed by three other singers. For those following the trends in music over the last 30 to 40 years, the Vanilli example is nothing new. Everybody, from Audrey Hepburn lip-synching her way through My Fair Lady to Madonna paying equal lip service to her own voice in concert, has been doing it—or so it seems. Record industry ethics aside, for today's —Enter Now!— DOWfi BEAT'S 1991 Student Music Awards Applications are now being accepted for the Fourteenth Annual DOWNBEAT Student Music Awards Competition. I EUGiBHITY: Any 10- to 20-minule performance by U.S. or Canadian Jr. High School. High School or College Students recorded after February 28, 1990 and before February 1.1991. All students must be enrolled in the same institution. I AWARDS & PRIZES: Berklee College of Music Scholarships (other cash scholarships may be added), plus DOWN BEAT plaques, pins and certificates. Winners to be announced in June '91 DOWN BEAT. I DEADLINE: All entries must be in DOWN BEAT'S Elmhurst office by Feb 15. '91. I HOW TO ENTER: Send for DOWN BEAT Student l\4usic Awards brochure and Official Application using the coupon below. The 1991 DOWN BEAT Student Music Awards are offered in three divisions: Jr. High, High School and College, in each of 17 categories: BEST JAZZ INSTRUMENTALISTS 1. Soloists 2. Groups (2-9 pieces) 3. Big Bands (10+) 4. Sludio Orcfjeslras BEST JAZZ VOCALISTS 5. Soloists 6. Groups (2-9 members) 7. Ct\oirs(IQ-^) BEST CLASSICAL INSTRUMENTALISTS 8. Soloists 9 Cttamtxr li^usic Groups 10. Symphonic Bands II. Orctiestras BEST BLUES/POP/ROCK INSTRUMENTALISTS 12 Soloists 13. Groups 14. BEST ORIGINAL COMPOSITION 15. BEST JAZZ ARRANGEMENT 16. BEST ENGINEERED LIVE RECORDING 17. BEST ENGINEERED STUDIO RECORDING DOWN BEAT STUDENT MUSIC AWARDS 180 W. Park Ave Elmhurst, IL 60126 Send me_copies ol Ihe 1991 DOWN BBAT SludenI Music Awards brochure and Of tidal Application. Name- Address. Oily_ Your SctiooL City_ Slate/Zip. 2«1 Your Ivlusic Dealer. Address- • W H M M ¦¦ M äl generation raised on MTV, it's perfection and living up to the standards of a well-produced video that count. Live shows are about fulfilling unrealistic expectations. To keep the customer satisfied, certain artists are beatinga hasty path to mimic themselves (or others) with the help of any and aU available devices. Behind it all there exists, in columnist Ellen Goodman's words, "a pressure to create something larger than life, better than best, an ever-improved version." It seems like a collusion between artist and audience to throw a veil over the imperfections of being human; a little sugarcoating to smooth out the rough edges. That "pressure" to produce high-tech, high-gloss music isn't limited to pop music: you can see it turning the jingle and studio scene upside down. Advanced digital synthesizers have musicians well-acquainted with the studio looking for work in the club, orchestra pit, on the concert stage, if not the subway station. That uniqueness found in an individual musician's approach and sound is on its way to being standardized by a machine. But before we throw Milli Vanilli and music technology into the same basket, generalizing and oversimplifying in the name of "purity," "justice," and "art," let's consider a few more implications. First off, it's entirely possible that those musicians used to the cozy confines of the studio may find real delight in landing that live gig. For trombonist Jim Pugh, "There's the feeling that you're back to doing what you originally got into it for." Perhaps more importantly, the applications made by musicians of the new technology—fti^m drum machines to keyboard synthesizers to MIDI and EWI—can suggest new freedoms of expression. Sabian drwi clinician Dom Famularo likens it to "the value of sound," and who's in charge. "I kind of compare it to tennis," says Dom. "My nephew has computer tennis on his TV. He's good, but the true challenge comes when he goes out and plays it live. It's about technique in the service of expression." "Technique in the service of expression" is not what MTV or Milli Vanilli. and probably not Madonna, are about. An audience's appetite for perfection flies in the face of what studio and performance musicians represent. Style, finding and developing a "voice," haNong a musical personality—these aspects of an artist's career are not necessarily huidered by devices, electronic or other\s'ise. NVhat^ at stake, or so it seems, is the changing face of audience perceptions of what constitutes good and great music, and an inability (or unwillingness) to revel in the beauty of human idiosyncrasies and human iniporfection. After all, in reality, no t\vo cookies are alike. DR 6 DOV^N BEAT FEBRUARY 1991