O-10, liked the Jean Luc clip. I have always liked some of his stuff. It's always well crafted from a compositional standpoint and very good playing WITHIN THAT FUSION STYLE. I disagree with Rok's take on the improvisation. Very atmospheric and pleasant. The disco clips? Well, I'm tempted to say you're joking, and I won't bother commenting on the bane of 70s music.
Leads me to something that I think happens often. There is some blurring between liking something because one likes the style, regardless of the level of the execution, and liking something, even if it's not ones favorite style, because the level of execution is extremely high. If the playing is on an extremely high level, I always find much to like; regardless of style. If the playing is poor or average, I don't care if it's my favorite style; no thanks.
Alex, I really liked the Buster Williams clip. Beautiful play ing on a very high level all the way around from pedigreed jazz players; and a wonderful composition. Thanks for that. The Sudao Wada clips may be blues which is, style wise, as we all like it, but the playing is simply not very good by the standards of the great jazz players. There is usually (not always) a reason that one can't find much info on certain players. The playing simply doesn't swing on the level that the music demands and the improvisation is no better than is heard in many a practice room in jazz schools. The interaction between the bass player and drummer is almost a mess at times. I guess I didn't like it; and I like the blues.
Rok, Blues In The Closet has been recorded by many jazz greats; I guess one could say it's a "standard", although the term is usually reserved for a more developed composition not simply a jazz "head". |
Well, while I have not been innocent myself, I think that infrequent comments on a thread (out of context) should be kept a impersonal as possible. Having said that, there is truth to what Chazro says; there IS a misunderstanding about modern jazz. I and others have, one way or another, tried to point this out. That is the reason that the most productive and interesting approach to discussion should be more from the standpoint that I tried to outline a few posts earlier: more from an attempt to uplift the standard of awareness of what makes good music and good musicianship, and less from the "if it feels good, it must be good" mentality; and, PLEASE, before the barbs start flying, notice I said LESS of, not devoid of. As Schubert correctly pointed out (and to paraphrase), excellence is reached through a marriage of emotion and intellect.
Chazro, if you're still out there, I would like it if you would stick around and contribute. I do feel that this thread could use more diverse input to make it less of what is, at times, mostly the type of discussion that is no more than a conversation between two people. I mentioned previously that it seemed to me the thread was at a milestone of sorts; I hope I am not mistaken. |
O-10, no need for con-fusion; while a marriage of any two styles can be called a fusion, its probably wise to keep the term to mean jazz-rock fusion which is as most understand it. There is little by Horace Silver that I don't like. BTW, the tenor player on that cut is the "some guy" that some guy said some of us "went gaga over" a few posts ago. Loved the Hutcherson clip, thanks. |
|
|
|
O-10, I remember the 80's well; a lot of great music from that decade. I have always liked the Yellowjackets. I particularly like their work since the great Bob Mintzer replaced Mark Russo. Bob is one of the most talented individuals on the scene today; fantastic saxophone/multi reed player and composer/arranger who leads his own big band. I am still curious as to what you consider the music of Steps Ahead to be, if not fusion? What would you call the music of the Yellowjackets; also considered a fusion group? Here's an interesting comparison which points to the great influence that Steps Ahead had on the fusion scene. Here's your clip of the Yellow Jackets (with Mintzer) and recorded in 1987: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aiVk-SDy8cA2 1/2 years earlier (1984) Steps Ahead had recorded this: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sF9kW-8NPqsA little influence; maybe? :-) |
Great post, Chazro; I agree with every word that you wrote. I especially like your last sentence; that is precisely the reason why I make a point of striving for clarity in the discussions. I also agree that describing fusion as simply a combination of jazz and rock is an oversimplification; unfortunately, for the sake being able to have any kind of reasonable discussion on this thread, simplification is precisely what is needed. My comment re what fusion is, and in the context of the discussion that was taking place at the time, was something like: "let's define it as a combination of jazz and rock, which is AS MOST PEOPLE KNOW IT". I believe that is an accurate, if unfortunate, fact.
Michael Brecker was a giant as the various clips posted show, while not even scratching the surface of his greatness. A great loss when he passed recently. Please continue to post. |
O-10, these conversations are obviously limited by the nature of an on-line forum. Sometimes comments can come across as overly opinionated or even judgmental. To my way of thinking, participation in a forum like this presumes confidence on the part of participants in their own reality. You demonstrate that and I respect that fact. But, what does a dissenting voice do with the conflict created by their own and different reality? I hope we can all agree that as long as respect is shown, the voicing of that different opinion is appropriate.
I must say, that the posture that a different reality is irrelevant to any given participant creates, imo, the kind of conflict that renders participation itself moot and irrelevant. To my way of thinking, if dialogue is not the goal, then what is.... aside from learning what others' like? Iow, I don't think that the goal should be for each of us to just show what good taste in music we each have, or to be told what good taste in music we all have. If we are not all prepared to hear about others' different reality or opinion what then is the point of all this. Your goal in starting this thread as stated in your OP was to "review" recordings, and presumably offer opinions of agreement and disagreement. My main issue with the discussions is when I express a point of view about a player (positive or negative) and offer precise reasons why I feel the way I do, and the disagreeing voice simply says "you're wrong" or "I disagree" or something along the lines of "well, it's just how I feel" and nothing more. I don't call that a discussion or dialogue.
On the issue of objective/subjective reality we will simply have to agree to disagree. There are, in fact, many objective aspects of music making that determine for me and many others wether the music or the playing is good or not. Of course subjectivity plays a major role, but it is not the only factor. There is nothing "wrong" with not wanting objectivity to enter into our sphere of knowledge, but just as the other approach may render those opinions irrelevant to you, the subjective approach renders those opinions irrelevant; an unfortunate reality all the way around. |
Wayne Shorter is one of the very greatest jazz musicians to have ever lived.; up there with the likes of Bird, Coltrane amd Miles in stature. Like Coltrane, Miles (an probably Bird, had he lived) his music was constantly evolving and moving in a new and different direction which reflected the times. He is undoubtedly one of the greatest jazz composers with compositions that are especially sophisticated and often complex; but never for the sake of complexity. One of the most fascinating aspects of his playing for me was how it became more and more economical through each successive stage. He has gone from a player that could burn it up with the best of them in a hard bop fast tempo, to one who (by choice) can say what he has to say with just a couple of well inflected and poignant notes. In the early 80s, after his time with and as co-founder of Weather a Report, he started his own "fusion" (there's that word again) band. "Atlantis" from that period is one of my favorite records from the 80s. To my ear he crafted tunes that struck a rare balance between sophistication via the use of counterpoint and complex meter changes, and being tuneful and catchy in an almost "pop" way. Excellent sounding also and a real audiophile sleeper. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=H9z6-qehv4whttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=z3qXILIfPuw |
O-10, I would have much preferred to engage in dialogue about Wayne Shorter and his music, but.....
I THINK I understand what you are saying. Some thoughts:
I have never sat an "average person" down in front of my system who didn't, at least, say "Wow, that sounds great"; that was after my asking them to choose the music.
My system, while of a fairly high pedigree, is far from "perfectly" set up (by the standards of what is possible); I would rather put my energies elsewhere. It does sound pretty good, with the goal being for it to sound as much as possible like the way live music sounds with priorities being rhythm and timbre. Actually, soundstaging is probably it's main shortcoming with "space" that is actually smaller than real; but I get your point (dig). As far as the "subjective audiophile reality" goes: you are absolutely correct, but I have to say: so what and who cares? Most audiophile systems that I have heard don't sound the way that live music sounds to me; most, not even close; and many audiophiles don't have that as a goal, wanting their system to simply sound good to them. I have no problem with that. However, when an audiophile wants to make a case for why his system sounds "like live" or "accurate" or more "accurate" (like live music) than mine, AND can also tell me that he is a regular and frequent concert goer; THEN we can talk.
Btw, what did you think of the Brecker/Ogerman "City Scapes" clip? Thought it might be right up your alley.
Regards. |
****Frogman, our problem in regard to the way we perceive "jazz" is becoming clear; to me, composition is every thing, to you it's how well the musician blows his horn. For example, Michael Brecker blows a beautiful horn, but I didn't care for the composition. In the case of Wayne Shorter, I don't like short clipped phrases ****
No, no, no! O-10, with all due respect, either you don't read my posts in their entirety or the chasm between our realities is even greater than thought. No one has commented more on the compositional aspects of the music, and their importance, than I have. I think that at the root of the disagreement is the tendency to be absolutist about these issues. Iow, because I mention that "how well the musician blows the horn" is important, then that is perceived as the only consideration if it fits the agenda. That is a very simplistic, not to mention inaccurate stance.
****Frogman, on the issue of "Subjective Reality" I insist that we not agree to disagree, but come to a definitive conclusion****
I must say that I find a conspicuous irony in all of this; and which, a cynic might say, is nothing more than disingenuousness. What I mean is this:
The adherent to the subjective reality idea claims to want an all-inclusive view of reality; iow, everyone's reality is equally valid. Putting aside the folly of the insistence on the dismissal of long-held standards by which performance quality is judged, a person would think that this more "liberal" stance would be tolerant of other viewpoints (realities). Moreover, the subjectivist puts up far more rigid preconditions for liking or not liking something; for instance, "composition is everything", "I don't like short clipped phrases", etc. By contrast, the advocate of the more "conservative" objective reality idea is not only willing to "agree to disagree", and has acknowledged that the subjectivist finds value in his chosen approach, he encourages the appreciation of ALL styles of music and playing. However, the subjectivist cannot allow room for the other reality and insists on "coming to a definitive conclusion". For me, the contradiction is obvious.
O-10, I am not quite sure how you propose we come to "a definitive conclusion". It may come as a surprise to you, but I have little interest in coming to a definitive conclusion; and, not because it is obvious that it won't be possible. More importantly, I acknowledge your reality and my only interest is in pointing out that there is a different reality that some may or may not find is the path to deeper appreciation of the music. I will say it again, with respect, we will have to agree to disagree. Well, I will.
Regards. |
Chazro, you are, of course, correct about the use of the term "Fusion". Notice I didn't capitalize "fusion" along with Latin-Jazz and used the term to mean "marriage". I know exactly what you mean and agree it's best to not use the term loosely. One of the things that I have always found interesting about Poncho's records is that the horn players are guys who come mainly out of the jazz tradition. Gary Foster, one of my favorite LA reed players is often featured. Not a criticism at all, and a generalization to be sure, but the horn sections on his records tend to have a less aggressive sound than Latino horn sections, and the blowing tends to have a more fluid feel. I think this works very well with the band's rhythmic vibe. This is not a criticism of either Latino or non-Latino horn players, just an acknowledgment of a generally different approach to playing that gives the music a different feeling or flavor and is one of the many subtle musical choices a band leader makes that makes listeners react one way or another to certain music without the listener necessarily being consciously aware of it. |
****Beethoven’s Last Piano Sonata: Does it Anticipate Jazz?****
In a matter of speaking; probably. More importantly, and important to this thread, a better way of looking at this is, as always, perspective. The facts have a way of always rising to the top; even if slowly:
Consider all the drama and resistance that was put up early in the life of this thread to the idea that jazz is NOT a "purely American" creation; that music, like all art, does not happen in a vacuum and is constantly evolving while being influenced and shaped by what came before it. Jazz is a melting pot of many different influences from different cultures and anyone interested can easily research this well established fact; or go back and read early posts here.
What does one suppose some boogie-woogie pianists played when learning to play the piano? Probably, and among other things, Beethoven sonatas. So, is it so far-fetched to think that a young future boogie woogie piano player, after playing and studying the second movement of the C Minor might think: "Hmmm, I wonder.....let me try this....!"
Welcome back, Rok. |
Gentlemen, I have mentioned a few times now that I feel that this thread is at a crossroad; I had hoped, as I also said, that it would be more of a milestone. Well, it is a crossroad for me.
O-10, you are to be commended for starting this thread. It has often been enjoyable to share favorite recordings and discuss and share points of view. My participation has been an attempt to offer a certain perspective on the subjects being discussed that is, not only a personal and a musician's perspective, but one shared and espoused by practically all individuals who write about, teach, and perform the music itself. Unfortunately, the constant resistance to these points of view and insistence on opposing points of view that have no basis in the reality of all that comprises musicology strikes me as not only arrogant, but an exercise in simple petulance; particularly when all of it can be easily researched and better understood. Instead, personal "opinions" become the end-all without a healthy amount of questioning of the obvious: how can someone who has not studied and lived music, so easily, and with such a sense of authority, dismiss the opinions of those who have? Subjectivity may apply to liking or not liking a particular music or performance, but it does not apply to musicological or pedagogical considerations.
Why does it matter? Because music matters and deserves more respect via inquisitiveness and a higher level of interest in learning about it; or, at the very least, more open-mindedness.
It is for these reasons that I feel my participation has run its course and I will not be posting any longer; I don't see the point. Not that I should be so presumptuous to think that anyone should care wether I post or not; but, rather than disappear from the thread, I felt I owed all the participants an explanation. Sharing favorite recordings is fantastic; interesting and a great opportunity to add good music to one's collection. However, when things veer into the area of commentary, the commentary too often does not sustain the credibility and standards that I feel the music deserves.
I am sure we will cross paths again on some other thread and I wish everyone good listening. |
Will have more to say shortly, but with little time now. But, did anyone recognize the tenor soloist on the George Russell clip (no cheating!); and how that might relate to the general topic? |
|
The importance of Russell's Lydian concept cannot be overestimated. What I alluded to earlier re the presence of Coltrane at the recording session of "Manhattan" has to do with the influence that this concept had on the shaping of the playing styles of giants like Trane and Miles. 1959 has sometimes been called the most creative year in recorded jazz, and while it's probably not possible to pinpoint one actual year, there is no doubt that during the late 50's there was a creative hurricane going on. Russell's Lydian concept would influence players like Trane and Miles, but I also have no doubt that Russell chose Trane for the session because of where his playing was going independent of anything else; kindred spirits of sorts. It is certainly no coincidence that Trane was chosen for the session (Stan Getz was also very hot during that time, but he was not chosen, nor would have been appropriate for the session). Modal jazz was one of the products of this creative revolution and the impact on the direction of jazz is huge. In answer to Rok's question "Where is modal jazz in today's scene?", the answer is: EVERYWHERE. First of all, the influence of Trane's playing style, a direct product of or use of modal theory, can be heard in the playing of just about every contemporary player today; especially, and obviously, in the playing of saxophone players; not necessarily in the playing styles of the "retro" players (LCJO guys) so much. Second of all, for whatever it may be worth to some, jazz–rock practically owes its existence to modal jazz. This is one of the best and easiest to understand explanations of modes and modal jazz: http://www.scena.org/lsm/sm8-3/Modal_Jazz.htmRussell's "Manhattan": First of all! WHAT A BAND! The personnel list is amazing. Not only is Trane's presence interesting, but notice how he tamed his normally much more aggressive and brighter tone (even in the 50's) to better fit the musical vibe of the session. I hear the influence of Ellington in how Russell uses the different instrumental sections of the band; but, with a more modern harmonic sensibility in the chord voicings. The feeling that Russell's approach (modal) evokes is one of the music being "suspended" harmonically with less obviously forward movement (harmonically) and less obvious need to resolve harmonically. To my ears this is a characteristic of modal music in general and creates a "cooler" feeling. For a very simplistic example of this feeling sing: "Happy birthday to you, happy birthday to you, happy birthday dear O-10"; then, start the song again without finishing it with the last (and harmonically resolving) "happy birthday to you". Some very interesting reading that relates to George Russell, the academic setting that was an integral part of the modal jazz movement, and one of this thread's favorite topics: the unsung hero: http://indianapublicmedia.org/nightlights/tenor-saxophonist-david-young-rip/http://indianapublicmedia.org/nightlights/when-russell-met-baker/One of my favorite modal tunes. Dorian mode and as is typical in modal music, few chord changes (four chords in AABA form): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hwmRQ0PBtXU |
****The question is, what is it about about the music that says it African?? The same question could be asked about Spainj and other Countries.****
What is it about the blues that says it's the blues (American)? |
## *****What is it about the blues that says it's the blues (American)?*****
My question exactly. ##
Well, for the answer, and one which is applicable to the music of any country, a good place to start is the spoken language of that country. The relationship between the language and the music of any culture is well researched and documented. The music of many cultures closely follows the rhythm, patterns and both rhythmic and melodic contours of the language. In the case of the blues, not only are things like the harmony and form the direct descendants of European musical tradition, but the use of what defines the Blues melodically, the minor third and minor seventh, are found in the speech of most African countries. Coincidence? I doubt it. |
My radio alarm went off just as this tune was starting. Scared me to death. Jazz 88.3 WBGO does it again. Donald Harrison and Dr. John; genius pairing: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1J3MWiToJ9cDidn't know about this record nor this band. Great stuff and yet another example of how much great music comes out of, as Rok would say, N'awlins. This cut kills. Great playing from Harrison; intense and swinging without screaming into the horn, like Paul Desmond getting the blues: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rn7zAaIERWI |
Don't forget the sweet plantains 😛 |
Don't forget the sweet plantains 😛 |
Did I say don't forget the sweet plantains? ☺️ |
Like hitting one's head against the wall; feels so good when we stop? 😅 |
Honestly? Awful! Just about the worst thing I have heard posted on this thread. Sorry. If that was a joke, O-10, my apology. |
Phew! Parody. After mistaking Donald Harrison (on alto!) for Trane, you had me worried for a moment 😉 |
O-10, you need to take a chill pill. The only place that I was "going" was an attempt at humor which you obviously misunderstood. Humor (parody) which you feel free to dole out and obviously can't take. I offer this explanation out of courtesy; courtesy which you don't deserve given your ridiculous and offensive reaction.
You have been claiming to have heard Trane live since this thread's inception. Now we learn, as I always suspected, that it was, as you say, an "overstatement" (lie). Bottom line: wether he had heard Trane live or not, any true "aficionado" would have been able to tell it was not Trane in the video for a variety of reasons: alto not tenor, rhythm personell, electric guitar player (?!), video quality (way too modern); oh yeah, and a minor detail, the saxophone playing itself is clearly not Trane's. As far as your comment about being "hip", please don't embarrass yourself any more than you already have.
I truly don't know where your tirade came from; it certainly was not deserved. I will simply assume that you got up on the wrong side of the bed or perhaps had too much to drink last night. I am sorry that my leaving your thread caused you distress; so, in spite of your hostility, I will be sure to not leave you to fend for yourself again. So, continue in your pursuit of trying to be hip (or should I say "boss"?); I wish you well.
Btw, the name is Elvin not Alvin as you have written several times. |
Thank you Acman3 and Rok, very timely both. Humor is a good thing eventhough it goes over some folks' heads. You know, doctors say that it is very healthy to laugh; even when it is not sincere and one simply goes through the motions. O-10, I am befuddled and not sure where all your anger is coming from. Re Trane, I am reacting to your words. What, then, was the "overstatement" by you if not about having seen Trane live? Anyway, I am willing to move on and forget this idiotic exchange. As ususal, and as I recently said in one of the other threads where I "don't fit in": "Usually, the smeller's the feller" 😉 |
Ha! It just came to me. I knew the silly comment reminded me of something. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SKc4jipdqn4What a sound! One of my very favorite tenor players. Love the way he could say so much with just one sustained note and the shape and inflection of it. Funkiest tenor sound ever. |
Fabulous! Your comment re Clifford/Wynton is spot on. Boggles the mind to think what someone like him, or Bird, or Lee Morgan, or George Gershwin, or Otis Redding, or.... would have accomplished had they lived more than thirty five years or so. |
I know you're not fond of the "with strings" thing, but I have always had a soft spot for this record. One of my very favorites and features what I think is some of the greatest trumpet playing on record and possibly the greatest ballad playing by a trumpet player ever. Fireplace, some nice wine, your honey, this record, and ..... https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLi8BquRmKA_n4umKPYQFIWlVzineIM9b2 |
Don't know that it's de rigeuer for trumpet ballad playing, but probably de rigeuer for that style of ballad from the American songbook regardless of interpreter. Exception being players like Coltrane who used very little vibrato in his ballad playing and who was getting away from that aesthetic. Perhaps O-10 has some thoughts about this. Brownie's ballads and your question brought this other clip to mind. For me, this is the perfect interpretation of this ballad . She absolutely kills me on this clip and I could listen to this one hundred times; and is she gorgeous or what? Like I said before, fireplace, nice wine, this record and....Nancy.....damn! https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QBmrDS2Zhaw |
Great clips; thanks. Want to put in another plug for Phil Schaap on WKCR 89.9 FM and his unbelievable resprospectives on jazz artists. His "Bird Flight" programs are a must hear for any fan of this music; unbelievably interesting and thorough. Today he focused (with Bird as the backdrop) on how and why artists (especially singers) choose the material that they perform. Amazing stuff! Phil Schaap is a national treasure. You can check it out on line: http://tunein.com/radio/WKCR-FM-899-s30119/ |
There is a certain beauty and logic in the shape of jazz. By shape, I mean jazz in the historical sense; its evolution. We all have favorite eras in jazz and we have a tendency to declare one or the other "the best". Even acknowledging that there were certain eras (the 50's) when jazz seemed to be exploding with creativity, a tremendous number of classic records were recorded and one could even call it the music's "peak", this peak is determined and perceived not just by the music's worth and integrity, but also by how the music fits into the changing social climate. In a way, the evolution of jazz as a whole is like a great jazz solo (in any era): it often starts simply and builds and becomes more and more complex and far reaching. This rant was inspired by a recording that I heard yesterday of a group that reminded me of what I imagine my favorite (not necessarily what I consider the best) jazz group of all time, the Miles Davis Quintet from the 60's (Hancock,Shorter, Williams, Carter) might sound like today; a real band interacting and creating on a high level and not just a group of great musicians playing familiar material within a more traditional framework and a greater number of "rules". To the traditionalist some of this music may seem like noise (not!); in the context of the shape of jazz it's pretty amazing stuff and shows, once again, that jazz is alive and well. Thoughts? https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4QZ5chS_by8 |
Good catch Rok, they do indeed (I think you meant "quote" not "sample") quote A Love Supreme a couple of times. First time is at 2:47 by the tenor player. |
Schubert, Sherman Irby is his name; terrific player. |
????? *****Although I've never been to New York, they seem to think what ever originates there has or should set the standard; "It ain't necessarily so."****
I agree that the NYC arts community seems to be of this point of view, but this is probably true of all major cities in all countries. They are full of themselves. :) I remember seeing a program on TV about the NYPO playing in North Korea. They can take their asses to that nut job country, but I bet they have never played in Mississippi or Kansas etc....... Too hip I guess. ?????
To quote someone we all know: "Lawdy, lawdy, my burden is great" (or something like that)😀 And knowing that you gentlemen value truth and reality above else, allow me to tell you how the NY arts community really feels; as much as one can generalize about these things. There is as much truth to those assertions as there is to the notion that prejudices like that are borne out of insecurity or inferiority complex; well, probably a lot less. First of all, and particularly since by your own admission you have never been to NY, on what do you base that notion on? Where do you guys get this stuff? Not really important, but just curious. Of importance:
The truth is that in major metropolitan areas one finds the greatest number of artists, and for that reason, as well as others, one also generally finds the best artists; with notable exceptions, of course. They want to be where "the action is" and be challenged. This is particularly true of jazz at the present time. That is not to say that there aren't great artists in smaller cities; there are. The attitude of artists in the major metropolitan areas like NY is not what you describe. Jazz players have historically respected and sometimes revered the playing traditions of smaller cities like St. Louis, Chicago, Phlladelphia, Kansas City and many others. They even have names for the styles born in some of the places; "Texas tenor" is just one. Re the NY Philharmonic:
The NY Philharmonic didn't choose to go to Korea, they were invited to perform there and it was seen as an opportunity to improve relations between the two countries. If the Philharmonic has not performed in Miss. or Kansas, why haven't those two cities invited them? Why hasn't the leadership and arts community in those cities sponsored them? I assure you that if the interest, financial and otherwise, were there in these cities, the orchestra would be there. Why put such a negative and distorted spin on this issue? |
Eliane Elias: have always been a fan. I really like her mix of Brazilian and jazz. I agree, she is hot. Btw, the trumpet player on the first clip is Randy Brecker who she was married to; brother of the great Michael Brecker. Nice clips, thanks.
Trio Tres Bien: not my cup of tea; sorry. I just don't feel the playing is on a particularly high level. That drummer has bad rhythm! Listen to his solo, the time falls apart at around 1:40 and is not steady the rest of the time; rushes and slows down. And the piano player bangs on the keys too much. I think they have a good concept in mind and simply don't have the tools to execute well. IMO. |
****It's hard for us peasants in 'fly-over territory' to resist taking shots at you folks 'way up there' in New York.****
That's alright; we're used to it. However, as usual, it's important, for the sake of the art, to set the record straight. I have news for you: contrary to the often used fall-back position, you're a jazz fan. You obviously know that; but, wait for it.... here it comes....you are NOT part of the "great unwashed". Maybe not as squeaky clean as is possible, but definitely not unwashed 😆. Your burden IS great.
****The Bolshoi.......****
Fantastic! I would bet you that it's cheaper to get the Bolshoi there from Russia than to get the NYP there from NYC. But that's a whole other discussion.
****Trio Tres Bien.......local guys..... Peterson Trio.****
Ya think?! 😉
From the Prodigal Son to The World's Greatest Authority: keep up the good fight. Keep bathing 'though, will ya. |
I won't comment on the Miles at the Blackhawk post since it has been deemed a "closed case"; other than to say that one of my favorite movies is "Ratatouille" 😉 |
This music made me laugh; a good thing. Not only is it not the music of the native people of Australia, it is like saying that because something uses a saxophone it is jazz. Kind of humorous in a way 'though. What's up with the barking? |
I think there is an important difference between a listener tiring of a certain style of music and an artist "tiring" of it because, as an artist, he/she needs to move forward and continue growing and evolving. Now, a case can easily be made for why that should also be the case for fans of a music, but the listener always has the luxury of being complacent; no great burden being a listener. Miles was the quintessential artist as far as this goes; always reaching and searching. Even when the listener does continue to stay lockstep with an artist's growth and evolution, the artist's previous work never stops being relevant. This was, IMO, possibly the greatest jazz band that ever was and is music that never stops being hip: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kJq3j4rA0o0 |
O-10, I admire your interest and passion for native art forms and how you bring it into these discussions; I too appreciate and enjoy much of it. However, and with all due respect, to suggest that Santeria dance is as structured as, say, George Balanchine's choreography seems a bit of a stretch. Rok, while I suspect that while we probably draw the dividing line between "like" and "no like" as concerns Miles and Trane growth at different points in the chronology, I basically agree with your sentiments. I like all of Miles' music from the standpoint of the fascinating development of him as an artist. I "like" much of his later stuff inasmuch as I respect it because I hear and appreciate that development and the natural progression of his musical persona and the whole inevitability of it. I can listen to mid-late 60s Miles all day; I love it. His later stuff is a different story. Once in a while I will sit and listen to something like Bitches Brew like it sometimes and other times I appreciate it primarily from the vantage point of: "it's so obvious that this is where he was headed" or, "it's so obvious that because of this (Bitches Brew) we now have X,Y or Z". Do I like it always; no way. The same goes for Trane. I think the Miles "sweet spot", for me, is that 60s band with Shorter, Hancock etc. Perfect balance between the more traditional bop thing and the more intellectual and sophisticated harmonic language; not to mention the sheer virtuosity. This clip kills me everytime; to think that Tony Williams was 17 years old!!!: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=x_whk6m67VE |
Nice clips O-10, that music is classic. Thanks. |
One of best examples of the reasons that this country (America), with all its problems, is so great: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ETT6n1GluwQIf you only listen to one cut, listen to this one. Coltrane's sound is like a ray of sunshine: searching, hopeful; quintessentially American and, in some ways a product of the very mistakes that were made. Forgive the political slant, but with everything that is going on in the world, in my opinion it's important to remember the good and why we should preserve its values. Rather appropriate title as well, I would say. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HNnM2iRwHLE |
O-10, hyperbole about the merits of Santeria dance is fairly innocuous and easily overlooked; hyperbole about issues that are relevant and crucial to a way of life so many in this country take for granted needs to be called out. Big Brother (whoever that is) can listen all he wants. As I get older I find I need to call out comments like "(we have) nothing for the poor". Imperfect and fraught with problems, yes; but, this country still offers more and more opportunity for the poor than just about any other. The real problem in this country is that so many view the wealth of some as what they don't have, instead of as what they could have; if wealth is a goal. As someone who has experienced and lived both sides of the coin, all I can say is "try the other side for a while, and then get back to me"
Happy Thanksgiving to all. |
O-10, I am not about to engage in a protracted discussion of these issues on this thread. All I can say at this point about those clips is that propaganda takes many forms and that Bernie Sanders is a fool (which I already knew). Now, let's take a look at why this discussion got even this far. From someone who you have previously accused of "spreading discontent":
I make what I would consider a positive, optimistic comment about this country while acknowledging that there are still many problems and that mistakes have been made. Still, I consider it a great country in spite of those negatives. I also point to my feeling that Jazz (Coltrane's "Blue Trane" in particular) is one of its contributions and one of the reasons that it is a great country. You had three choices at that point: 1. You could have ignored my comment. 2. You could have acknowledged that, particularly now, during the Thanksgiving season, there is always room for a bit of positive outlook on just about any issue; or, 3. You could "disagree 300%" and take the issue into the realm of "injustice" and the condemnation of the "college educated". Obviously, you are free to take anyone of those choices; but, let's be clear: who is it that is spreading discontent? More importantly: where, exactly, is the disagreement?
I think it's fair to say that we would both agree that there are problems and that this country has made mistakes. I also think it's fair to say that Jazz, the subject of this thread, is one of this country's greatest artistic contributions. So, what is left? The idea that this is a great country. With all due respect, anyone who can't recognize that this country is, in spite of all its problems and ample room for improvement, a great country is, just like Bernie Sanders, foolish.
It is unfortunate that some will not have a Happy Thanksgiving as you suggest. Unfortunate, because there is always something to be thankful for.
Happy Thanksgiving. |
Sonny Rollins: fabulous!! And yes surprisingly neglected here. One of the few musicians who could pull off playing in a piano-less setting. Such is the command of the harmony and there is so much logic and clarity to the improvisation that it makes it easy to follow the harmonic progression of the tune without the piano to spell it out. His rhythmic authority is fantastic. Some musicians have the ability to play so "in the pocket" that the rhythm section plays to their rhythmic pull and not the other way around. Louis Armstrong had it, Ray Charles had it and Sonny Rollins has it. |
Btw, you made an interesting commnent in a recent post about how you feel drum or bass solos " interrupt the flow of the music". It is often true. Not because it's drums or bass per se, but because the players of those instruments have traditionally been almost exclusively in the role of time keeper and simply haven't developed as melodists. That has changed a lot in recent times as bass players became more facile and technically and harmonically more advanced. Remember the days when all a bass player could do was play a "walking bass" solo? Basically the same thing that they would do while keeping time for a horn norm piano player. Then they graduated to attempts at melodic solos and the results were often a lot of out of tune and even wrong notes; often painful to listen to. Btw, you made an interesting commnent in a recent post about how you feel drum or bass solos " interrupt the flow of the music". It is often true. Not because it's drums or bass per se, but because the players of those those instruments have traditionally been almost exclusively in the role of time keeper and simply haven't developed as melodists. That has changed a lot in recent times as bass players became more facile and technically and harmonically more advanced. Remember the days when all a bass player could do was play a "walking bass" solo; basically the same thing that would do while keeping time for a horn norm piano player. Then they graduated to attempts at melodic solos and the results were often a lot of out of tune and even wrong notes; often painful to listen to. Now we have virtuosic bass players who can improvise with the same technical facility as horn players. Same thing for drummers, but even more of a challenge since the drums are not a melody instrument. Btw, also why, as you pointed out, they were seldom band leaders. A band leader needs to have knowledge and command of the melody and harmony side of things and not just of rhythm in order to be effective as a leader. A restaurant which has a great chef is doomed if that chef, who can't add and subtract, tries to also be the book keeper. Some drummers (Max Roach) will actually tune their drums to specific pitches in order to bring melody to the drum solo. Speaking of musical flow, notice ,how the drum solo on your Rollins clip does not interrupt the flow; Pete La Roca was a fabulous drummer. Some favorite Sonny: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gActLqZZX68Check out the bass solo! https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=v4DTR0I7xhA |
