Jazz for aficionados

Thanks for the good wishes O-10; ditto.

****Does this mean he has to play more? He was playing almost non-stop.****

Not necessarily. It is possible to achieve the same thing with very economical use of notes. It's about choosing the right notes in an extremely logical and creative way to create a solo that is, at once, melodic and outlines the harmony of of the tune. That's the art and genius of players like Sonny. I'm sure he could do it with few notes, but the guy obviously has a lot to say 😎

"Segue" - (in music) to proceed without pause from one musical theme or
number to another.
- A smooth transition.

Given recent commentary and the main topic of this thread, the Cachao "Master Sessions" clip is probably as perfect a segue as is possible.

Cachao (Israel Lopez), along with Lecuona, Brauer, More, D'Rivera to name a few, is one of the names that one thinks of when one thinks about Cuban music. Of the same stature in that music as Gershwin, Parker, etc. are in American music. A brilliant classically trained bassist from a family of bassists (!), he was also a composer of over 3000 pieces in the traditional Cuban "danzon" style which is the style most represented in this recording "Master Sessions Vol. 1". Importantly, he was responsible for the creation of the popular "mambo" style; similar to danzon, but at a slower tempo. The importance of Cachao in Cuban music is huge.

I don't mean to bring up the subject of politics again, and apologies for doing so, but Rok's perfect segue makes it almost impossible to not point out that Cachao left Cuba for the USA in order to escape the oppression of an ideology that is, in many respects, the ultimate expression of the opposite of the debated "greatness" of the USA. He is an outspoken critic of that ideology which while professing to want to help the poor, completely controls their lives, denies freedom of speech (and much worse), and keeps them in an equal (ity), but decidedly needy and deprived state; certainly as compared to what the "poor" experience in this country. Enough of that and back to music.

"Master Sessions Vol. 1". Love that record and have owned it since its release and its award of a Grammy. It not only covers many of the traditional styles of Cuban music, especially "danzon", which shaped what modern Cuban music (salsa, timba) is today, but is a great example of the breadth of Cachao's musical persona with elements of the traditional, of Classical music (intro to "Lluvia"), a bit of the modern, and features some fabulous playing. Is it Jazz? Not in the usual sense. If the question must be asked, I would say the answer is in another question: Is Ragtime jazz? If we can call modern Cuban music "Latin Jazz" then I think the Ragtime question applies. From a chronological standpoint and looking at all the styles that shaped what we now can agree is (American) "Jazz", then yes it's Latin Jazz. There is certainly a lot of improvisation in the instrumental solos and in the vocal call-and-response. Ultimately, the label doesn't matter; great music it is. For an interesting, subtle, but very telling example of how jazz and the tradition of this music come together listen to the horn solos on "Mi Guajira". The trumpet and trombone players are clearly more steeped in the traditional Cuban style of phrasing, less "swing" (in the usual sense) and an almost conversational style, while the tenor player's style, from his tone to the bending of notes suggests a leaning toward the Jazz side of things.

Great clip. Thanks!

Catching up on some musical offerings.

Dizzy Gillespie "Duets": Nice! Dizzy and two of my favorite tenor players; Stitt and Rollins. What could possibly go wrong? Just for fun and not a criticism at all since its a pretty common thing: I would bet my copy of Miles "Kind of....." Wait! I already have that set aside for previous bets 😉. How about Oliver Nelson "Blues ATAT"? My original Impulse copy to bet that the inclusion of "Haut Bon" cut for Dizzy's "Duets" record went something like this: Nearing the end of the session and the producer says: "We're a little short of material; how about a blues". Ray Bryant starts tinkling that repeated little theme on the piano in the key of G and the other players join in. Tape is rolling. Basically a jam for filler. Great stuff 'though. For even more fun: the picture of the record cover is a little misleading. The title of the record is "Duets" yet the picture shows Dizzy playing with both Sonny's. Can anyone tell which of the Sonny's plays on the clip?

Cuban music clips: Great! I love this stuff. Close to home and most of it on those clips is the real deal.

Shankar: Not my cup of tea. She sure is pretty and she is definitely capitalizing on that fact in her performance. Not a fan of this type of watered down ethnic music. In this case it's neither Flamenco nor Indian Classical. Not that I don't like fusion; I do. I just don't think this is very good. Certainly pleasant, but not very good. I think it's fair to say that of the two female Shankar siblings, Norah is the talent. How many times can she play the same lick on the sitar? Jeez!

🤔

There was a time when the pop tunes of the day were either in a jazz style or were taken by jazz players and turned into jazz standards. Here is a modern pop tune done as a jazz instrumental. It is a staple of WBGO's playlist. Wonderful time feel and always puts a smile on my face. Love it!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WqEweV0eScg

Actually, I would call it self indulgent and passive aggressive. To announce one's self censorship of an acknowledged disagreement is the same as being outspoken about it; and, in fact, even more provocative. So, O-10, by all means, let it rip. How'd you like the Nancy Wilson clip?

Thanks Chazro. Cachao is truly an icon and his plight one of the many stories about the tragedy of the Cuba story.

Consider what kind of talent, fortitude and sense of self inspires a sixteen year old, black, gay young man, in 1933, to compose a song like this. Today is Billy Strayhorn's birthday and I can't think of a more beautiful and inspired song than this. If this is not yet more proof that this music (jazz) is just as serious as any other, I don't what is:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7d6_LUDa_Zw

A favorite version with fantastic orchestral arrangement:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hGRKWG6Y08w

Consider what kind of talent, fortitude and sense of self inspires a sixteen year old, black, gay young man, in 1933, to compose a song like this. Today is Billy Strayhorn's birthday and I can't think of a more beautiful and inspired song than this. If this is not yet more proof that this music (jazz) is just as serious as any other, I don't what is:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7d6_LUDa_Zw

A favorite version with fantastic orchestral arrangement:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hGRKWG6Y08w

Oops!

****How much of Ellington was Strayhorn****

One of the perennial and most interesting questions among jazz lovers. For the answer, I suppose one need look no further than the simple fact that Ellington's signature tune "Take The A Train" was composed by Strayhorn. In fact it's more complicated than that. Ellington considered Strayhorn his "right arm" and, while he did publicly give give him credit, he also took credit that rightly belonged to Strayhorn. Ellington was the leader and had the vision for the band and the music; Strayhorn contributed a lot of the composing and arranging skill.

****He looks like his name should be, be bop****

Definitely!😎

Rok, that Benny Carter recording is fabulous.  I was not aware of its existence and features some of my favorite players.  Benny Carter was an amazing musician.  Not only was he a great alto stylist, he was also a terrific trumpet player and arranger.  Thanks for that.  

Rok, re Gershwiin: you mention Rhapsody In Blue.  The original version is referred to as the "original Jazz band version".  Written for the Paul Whiteman band which was considered a jazz band at the time; although there was not much improvisation in that band. 

O-10, if by "waste of time" you mean converting me to your point of view then you're probably correct.  However, if, as I had hoped, you mean having respectful, mature and intelligent discourse and exchange of ideas even if there is disagreement, then it would not be.  You insist on distorting what the thrust of my initial statement on the subject was.  I am visiting this issue once again because you don't seem to be able to let it go and continue to insinuate what many that share your point of view often do; that they have a monopoly on compassion .  Nothing could be further from the truth.  The only disagreement is in what the best course of action for a viable solution might be; nothing more.  I will try it one more time:

I agree with you that some people need the social safety nets that, by your own admission, already exist.  Wether more can or should be done can be debated and I do think that better and smarter use of resources can be done.  However, history shows that simply throwing more tax payer money at the problem is seldom the way at a solution.  As in music, relying solely on an "emotional reaction" instead of a more pragmatic understanding will seldom yield good results.  My initial and optimistic comment was simply that this country is, in spite of its problems and shortcomings, is a great country.  To not be able to acknowledge the largess of this country and the fact that opportunity exists for those willing to work hard is what is, in fact, "having the blinders on".  Ironically, the very clips you posted demonstrate how blinded by ideology someone can be.  It is almost laughable to use the testimony of an out of work aspiring beauty queen wearing expensive jewelry and a $300 haircut to try to make your point and in another clip the very person who is asked how he found himself in that predicament admits "probably because of all the mistakes that I made".  Should there be no consequences for bad choices and mistakes?  

While I admire your passion for this issue, I am not sure you understand just how provocative and skewed you come across in some of your commentary on this topic.  I ask that if I ever contact you privately about a matter that you don't take the liberty of posting my opinions on a public forum in order to buttress your point of view.

A "Goner".

BTW, re "Con Alma": there are probably dozens of big band versions of the tune.  The clip you posted is a big band version of the tune; not THE big band version.  

Today is the great Jaco Pastorius' birthday; another amazing musician who passed way too soon.  We recently commented on bass players and how far they have come in their ability to improvise on the same level as horn or piano players.  By the time Jaco came on the scene the level of bass playing virtuosity had already reached new heights, but it was Jaco who blew it wide open for electric bass players; and, he did it with the fretless electric bass which contributed to his unique sound while posing an even greater technical challenge than the fretted  bass.  He had the ability to create amazing grooves and rhythmic propulsion.  Check this out and how the rhythm section simmers with groove.  And how often does one hear jazz on the piccolo? Hubert Laws is amazing:

[URL]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hvrFXJncjOk[/URL]

Nice post, Chazro.  Will check out the clips and get back later.  It's 1-2, 1-2-3 for me tonight.  Thanks for the words re clave.

Wahrscheinlich graben einige aborigeni Musik.

Here I am; and lets keep things interesting 😃

****December issue includes the 80th Readers Poll. :( Of the approx 30 entries under 'Jazz Album', I only own one. "The Art of Conversation" by Kenny Barron and Dave Holland. Amazing!

I can only conclude that my music is disappearing fast.****

Why do you come to that conclusion based on the fact that you onky own one?  Have you heard the other 29?  Start buying!  😛. It is true, however, that most of our favorites are dead.

****I understand better why Woods was not on my radar for such a long time.****

Please explain; genuinely interested.

****Some promising news concerned the current crop of young up and coming Jazz musicians in New Orleans. "They play with their hearts and their heads" hmmmmmmmmmmm I hope that means something good.****

Sorta contradicts first comment, no?

****Tom Harrell's latest album "First Impressions", received a 5-star rating. The reviewer states that 6 of the 8 tracks were credited to Maurice Ravel or Claude Debussy!! WTF!?! This is, a Jazz publication??****

Two words: Ellington "Nutcracker".

Halten den guten kampf!

And you thought Diana Krall was bad....there oughta be a law!:

[URL]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WzvgV4lILSc[/URL]

Antidote:

[URL]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=S-lHrDPjGfQ[/URL]

Phil Woods was an icon for saxophone players; the consummate player.  This is the third time I have posted this and don't know if anyone has watched it.  A great peek into his life, the jazz life, his personality and some very interesting and funny accounts about everything from the business of jazz to being married to Chan, Bird's widow; priceless stuff:

[URL]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6SJxmCzYpoo[/URL]

Early Phil as a leader:

[URL]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5xaEXLh213w[/URL]

[URL]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1UyUTP_IucQ[/URL]

Later:

[URL]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FnsycHk8VBw[/URL]

Agree about the album covers.  Funny how a producer's vision may be so different from the player's; but some artists don't want to be bothered with things like cover art.  But a cute white dog.....?!

One of the best things in that whole clip (besides the playing) is the comment he makes when talking about which pop records he agreed to play on, and is such a great testament to his integrity as an artist.  He could have taken every (very lucrative) solo recording gig offered or taken the attitude that he wouldn't play on ANY "pop" recordings; but instead chose to play on the ones that he "could contribute to".  

With Quincy's band in the 60's.  A little "inside" info:  in spite of how incredible he sounds, one can tell he's not happy with his reed (he talks about reeds in the masterclass clip).  Notice how he wipes the reed at one point during the solo and as he takes his bow.  He was a perfectionist and is pissed that the reed is "chirping".  But, still sounds amazing.  He improvised like the composer that he was.  He had an uncanny ability to take a little melodic nugget and develop it and alter it in a very logical way while fitting the harmony of the tune beautifully to create a solo that could stand on its own as a composition, not just a bunch of notes.  Beautiful stuff!

[URL]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PRyP5tIMR_E[/URL]

This one's for O-10:

[URL]https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLyHn3f7-9IUKfAC42v36Z5j0Nfodfe-LX&v=Zp3Nv33IHZ0[/URL]

Rok, this was to be a post before yours re O-10's return (I was not able to post it because I was somewhere without Internet connection):

"Rok, nicely done; it worked 😉"

Great post.  That's the whole idea; some music is challenging but very worthwhile and takes time to "get". 

****And to think, at one time I considered this awesome great, a semi-noise maker.****

Heh, heh, heh! ☺️

245:

Actually, 2,4,5; and, even more accurately, II, IV, V in music nomenclature.  It refers to a common chord progression in jazz.  For example, in the key of C major the scale consists of C, D, E, F, G, A, B.  C is 1, D is 2, E is 3, etc.  The chord progression 245 is a chord progression consisting of a D (2) chord, an F (4) chord and a G (5) chord.   Great record, btw.

Hubbard was a truly a great loss; as was Dolphy.  If I had to pick one trumpet solo as the greatest ever (a silly notion, but still...) it would have to be his solo on Oliver Nelson's "Stolen Moments" from "The Blues And The Abstract Truth".  Coincidentally, (maybe not coincidentally) Dolphy is on this recording as well.

[URL]https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLcJnGPHSdzd9HgCBYpZ7TAHQZg4v2Z9rX&v=I777BcgQL9o[/URL]

Great stuff!

****No brooding introspection here****

Funny, that's the very subject that has come up recently in conversation a few times with other music nuts.  Specifically, how Cannonball, ironically and arguably, was a bad fit for Miles' "KOB".  Cannonball is probably my favorite alto player in great part because of the "happy vibe" in his playing.  There's a wonderful bouncy almost jovial vibe to everything that he played and in the context of "KOB"'s brooding introspection it seems a little out of place.  IMO.

"Jug":. What a tenor sound; love it!  One of the interesting things I have noticed about his recordings is how he was almost always recorded with a pretty healthy amount of reverb on his sound.  Would be interesting to find out wether that was his choice or the producers'.  The pairing with Sonny Stitt is fabulous.  Stitt recorded on both alto and tenor; but I think that in his "heart of hearts" he was an alto player.  He plays on both instruments on that clip; first alto, followed by Jug on tenor, and then at 9:14 he plays again on tenor.  Notice how he stays mostly in the upper registers of the tenor and has a lightness to his tone compared to Jug's more robust tenor sound.  He plays the tenor like an alto player.  Not a criticism at all, just an observation.

Just this morning I heard this on WBGO and thought about the subject of "brooding introspection" and how, as much as like modern jazz, it is true that one element often missing in modern jazz and that we often hear in jazz from back in the day is that "happy vibe" that Cannonball had:

[URL]https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLIvacmZCzEbC0G73i08xDbwXycf-895uI&v=2eYEY1xm60M[/URL]

****It does not seem as if he has lived up to the initial hype****

That pretty much sums it up for me re Carter.  A VERY accomplished multireedist who, in spite of his forays "off the reservation" plays with a decidedly "retro" sensibility, especially on tenor.  A very exuberant player with tons of energy.  However, he is one of those players who's playing always makes me say "take it easy, take it easy", and leaves me feeling "so what?".  I respect his ability a great deal, but don't much care for the music.  But, that's just me.  

Interesting topic.  But, just when I think that there is a more open minded (and correct) understanding of the topic, the apparent "progress" gets shot in the foot by the tendency to be absolutist about things.

Acman3, good observations and questions about the topic of seriousness vs. fun in music.  To be clear: I did not mean to imply that all modern music, or all music, is or should be "fun"; simply that I think modern music could stand a little more of it.  I think you are correct in that more complexity tends to steer things into the "serious" camp; but not always and not necessarily.  First example that came to mind is not generally considered Jazz at all but is both very serious and very fun: the music of a Frank Zappa.  I think that Rok is correct when he says that music can be serious and fun.  My agreement with Rok's comments on the subject ends there, however, and this is what I mean by the tendency to be absolutist and  to make blanket statements.   

****Modern Jazz is Boring.****

A blanket statement to be sure and a more incorrect one is probably not possible.

****Musicians think that if they can play an instrument, they can play Jazz. An extension of "Jazz is anything I say it is". ****

With all due respect, a pretty ridiculous comment.  I know more musicians (and very accomplished ones at that) that will be the first ones to admit that they can't play jazz,  than musicians I know who DO know how to play Jazz.  

****The idea that you can learn to play Jazz in Music school. You may improve your skills as a player, may learn theory of improvised playing, but you can't learn the feel for the music.****

Are we going to go there again?  Jeez!

****The commonly held belief that art must change with time, and that change is synonymous with better / improvement.****

Who is it that holds that belief?! This is something that some on this thread keep bringing up.  There is no such held belief!!! The issue is simply that some, myself included, don't believe that new art is necessarily worse or that old art is necessarily better.  That is not the same as saying that it is better or an improvement.  A red herring and a totally useless stance!

****The belief that all improvised music is Jazz by definition. All Jazz may be improvised, but all improvised music is not Jazz.****

Dont know who it is that holds that belief, but I agree with the premise.  One out of five ain't bad, I guess.

****The lack of an authority to define what is and what is not Jazz. That would be considered politically incorrect. If it's instrumental, and not R&R, then throw it in the Jazz bin.****

Huh?

****BTW, I have been pushing this point of view since this thread began. But who listens to me****

Hah!  Now we're getting somewhere.  I am not much into political correctness (as I think you know) so feel free to declare yourself the "authority" 😊 on this subject; but, I am not looking for an authority, thank you very much.  

Speaking for myself, I'm going back to having fun now.

Fun (and pretty serious):

[URL]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2lZrPnN46Qk[/URL]

[URL]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0hpcWPxBzpI[/URL]

Btw, re my comment ****Dont know who it is that holds that belief, but I agree with the premise. One out of five ain't bad, I guess.****

I meant I agree with Rok's premise, not that all improvised music is jazz.  Like I said, one out of five ain't bad (I think).  ☺️

NY Jazz Qt: great stuff.  Frank Wess' tone on tenor is probably my favorite of all time; velvet with just a hint of the modern.

C'mon Rok, first of all it was said in jest (mostly).  Now, look at your post again.  You decry the "absence" of an authority, then you follow it by saying that your point of view has not been listened to.  Can't have it both ways. 

****If we were arguing this question is court, as opposing attorneys, YOUR Zappa clip would be MY 'exhibt #1". A 'smoking gun' if ever there was one. After playing it, the People would rest****

Segue time again (even if unintentional): Smoking gun perhaps, but that gun would probably blow up and fire backwards.  The people do indeed rest.  Did you know that Frank Zappa was invited to testify in Congress and express his objection to censorship and the importance of freedom in the arts?  That alone makes him a pretty serious guy.  Now, let's try to not get mired (again) in the silliness:  I countered some your assertions and asked for facts; let's hear some substantive and provable rebuttals.

Let's play (says the defense attorney 😠):

****Today's message from Jazz Heaven.

Eric Dolphy -- OUTWARD BOUND

  And to think, at one time I considered this awesome great, a semi-noise maker. Stereo Review disagreed, so I bought him anyway. Another one I grew into. Looking back, I sometimes cringe at myself. I put his LPs right next to Burroughs' book, "Naked Lunch", on a Shelf labeled, 'Try again in a few years'. :)****

....... hmmm, can't really add anything; it's really all there.

James Carter:  "modern" jazz by any standard.  First question: if it's "boring" why post it? 

****But, this is a very good performance**** - Rok 

Huh?

"Your honor, please direct to witness to answer yes or no, and yes or no only!"

****Learsfool, Acman3 and the OP all out of hibernation on one day. Must be Global warming.****

That's actually very funny; as long as we can keep finding humor in all this, I think we'll be alright.

****I suggest we forget the 'reality' stuff, and stick with 'opinion'. I think that would be more appropriate for our discussions.****

Not possible; certainly not all of the time.  Allow me to explain why:

This business of subjective vs objective keeps coming up and continues to be misunderstood and misused.  Misused, because it is used as a fallback position when there is disagreement that is backed up by a provable reality.   To use O-10's example:

One can have the opinion that Lee Morgan was the world's greatest trumpet player.  Someone else can disagree, but there is no way that person could disagree that he was great.  Why?  Because the key point in this argument is always missed: that when judging the relative merit of art one needs to use both objective AND subjective criteria.  I may not agree that Morgan was the greatest because I may prefer the style of some other trumpet player or feel that someone else is a better technician, but if one has a fairly complete understanding of what it takes to do what Morgan did with a trumpet, both technically and stylistically, there is no way to dispute his greatness.  Put a different way:

Listener A can post a clip of a jazz trio and proclaim it great.  Listener B disagrees because he can point to provable and demonstrable problems with the playing such as out of tune playing, bad rhythm and amateurish improvisation.  This is not simply opinion, these (especially the first two) are demonstrable via the use of recognized standards within the art world.  Out of tune is out of tune, if someone is playing with bad rhythm, simply because any given listener doesn't have the capabillity to discern it or does not understand those standards does not make it less of a reality.  Still, lets really stretch and be very "politically correct" (aargh) and not judge any listener's discernment or lack thereof:  If listener B can discern these problems, describes the problems and deems them "deal breakers" for him, this is not simply opinion.  So, fine, anyone can choose to keep someone else's disagreement in the realm of opinion, but why isn't the dissenting voice entitled to consider it fact? 

The biggest shame in this endless debate is that what gets missed is the idea that there is always much to learn and more and more layers to understand; no matter what level of understanding anyone already has. 

****You are confusing recently recorded with Modern. No one is saying every single note, or tune is boring, just the weight of the material.****

i dont think so.  As you have pointed out, words matter.  Your comment was "Modern jazz is boring".  Why, then, not say: "some (or most) modern jazz is boring".  There is that absolutism mucking up the works again.

****I have no problem with Zappa or his music. The Arts should be a safe haven for eccentrics, weirdos, and all such marchers to a different tune. I just don't understand why they call it Jazz.****

****BTW, how would you classify Mingus' 'hog calling blues'. My all time favorite. ****

Agree with the first commnet.  I will tell you that I have heard/read Zappa reffered to as a rock musician far more than as a jazz musician, so who is it that calls it jazz?

Mingus:  I would call it great music.  I don't much care to classify it.  What does that prove really, if one thinks about it? I think all this goes back to what is really important and what I tried explain in my previous post: it's really knowing how to identify really good music making that matters most.  We all tend to have favorite styles and genres.  Time and time again I have seen music posted on this thread that fits into a poster's favorite style and it seems that simply by that virtue alone that posted music gets automatically bumped up to "good" in that poster's mind when it is simply mediocre or worse.  It really is true:  "there are only two kinds of music, good and bad".  

What the sage person who made that famous comment implied and, for the sake of this thread 😏, should have added in order to make it absolutely clear is: "there are......, regardless of genre".

Learsfool, excellent post!

Rok, I think you need to put the spiked eggnog away now 😜.

[URL]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Dw9M6cNHO9g[/URL]

O-10, this one's for Mutt:

[URL]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Lo8EvrzsUL8[/URL]

And tell him that I'm glad at least someone at the O-cienda has some sense.

Don't mean to answer Schubert's question to Learsfool, so I will leave the issue of string players to him.  I will say, however, that I have been on tour to Korea twice; in 1997 and one year ago in 2014.  The positive change in the country during those 17 years has been extraordinary.  Living standard appears to have improved dramatically.  There is a level of order, efficiency and attention to detail in just about every aspect of life that is amazing.  Tech savviness of the general population puts even this country to shame and there is a sense that the country as a whole is on a mission.

Learsfool's excellent comments leave little to add.  Re:

****If this music was written out, do you think the classical musicians could play it, and make the music sound as though it wasn't faked?****

I think the confusion is due to the misuse of the term "fake".  "Faking" is a term in the jazz vernacular that applies mainly to "club date" settings (parties, weddings etc.) where musicians play tunes in an ensemble setting in a way that sounds as if they are playing charts or formal arrangements of those tunes.  It could be said that they are "improvising" these arrangements, but this is not improvising in the way that is heard on most on the clips posted on this thread.  While most of the players that are good "fakers" are also good jazz players, not all good jazz players are good fakers.  It is a unique skill that requires great knowledge of harmony and the ability to think like and speak (play) the language of an arranger.  It is probably impossible to describe just how difficult it is to, for example, credibly play 4th tenor saxophone parts in the context of a classic five man saxophone section in a big band of musicians that have no written music in front of them.   It is virtually a lost art that was fairly common at one time.  I think that O-10 meant to say:

****If this music was written out, do you think the classical musicians could play it, and make the music sound as though it WAS IMPROVISED****

Learsfool did an excellent job of addressing this issue.  I particularly liked his emphasis on the idea that just because the playing is fast and with a lot of notes doesn't necessarily mean it is difficult to play.  In fact, in jazz the hardest thing to do is to say the most with the fewest notes.  Re doubling:

"Phantom" is not a particularly good example of doubling on Broadway shows; only one of the reed books require doubling on instruments from more than one family of instruments.  By contrast, in "West Side Story", Reed 3 is required to play flute, clarinet, bass clarinet, oboe, English horn, tenor saxophone and baritone saxophone.  It is a daunting task to learn to play so many different instruments well and to stay in shape on them;  not to mention instrument maintenance and the preparation of reeds.  The doubler is also expected to be able to play credibly in many different styles and in some cases to also improvise.  In fairness it should be pointed out that it is rare (not impossible) the doubler who can play each of those instruments at the same TECHNICAL level as a top single instrument or "straight" player.  It might be of interest to note that doubling is required in some works in the Classical repertoire.  Of note: 

Alban Berg "Violin Concerto"- 3rd clarinet/alto saxophone
Bernstein "On The Town"- 2nd clarinet/alto saxophone
Vaughn Williams "Symphony No.6"- tenor saxophone/bass clarinet

Rok, the reasons for an institution to have an "artist in residence" can range from the magnanimous desire to provide a worthy artist with an environment conducive to the creation of his/her art with no other preconditions,  to having a contractual agreement whereby the artist will teach, give lectures or, in the case of a "composer in residence", produce a work that may be premiered by the institution if that institution happens to be an (usually prominent) orchestra.  In fairness, it should be noted that even in the first scenario in which the institution's motives are purely magnanimous, an institution can derive a great deal of "cache" and attention by having a prominent artist as "artist in residence".  This being the case, there can be  many benefits ranging from attracting top students to helping in securing funding and grants.

O-10, believe it or not, there is an on-line resource for finding out what you ask.  Note that, as is often the case, there are two versions of the orchestration for that show.  One is for a smaller orchestra which uses one woodwind doubler; the other version for larger orchestra using four doublers.  It is interesting that the production you saw used a doubler that played oboe as neither of the original rentable orchestrations include oboe.  It is not unheard of for the score to be re-orchestrated for regional productions of musicals.  It is also possible that the doubler hired for that particular production happened to play oboe and it was decided to 

http://shows.bretpimentel.com/

Welcome to the thread, jzzmusician.  And thanks for the great clip.  I wasn't familiar with this recording; great to hear Cannonball in 7.

Rok, a recording studio can be a performance venue just like any other.  Some studios present concerts with small audiences and radio station "studios" might broadcast performances taking place in-house.  Additionally, a performance may be recorded in a studio (with or without an audience) with no processing or editing involved and with all the musicians in the same space as opposed to being separated in different booths for purposes of isolation.  From those standpoints a performance may be said to be "live" in studio. 

****Bird's" patent on Bop is encoded in the music, and he took it to the grave with him. **** - O-10

O-10, I hope you are not suggesting that no one played bebop after Bird passed 😎.

Rok, three excellent clips!  While I have never questioned your taste in music, nor ever thought they needed to "improve" as O-10 suggests they have, I certainly think they have expanded; a perhaps subtle but important distinction.  If liking that baritone solo in "Let There Be Swing" is not proof of this, I don't know what is 😎.  

I particularly liked the Mabern "Afro-blue".  Porter sounds fantastic; and, rarity of rarities, a tasteful horn-like scat solo kept short and with no wrong notes!  Eric Alexander!  Man, that guy can play; amazing tenor solo.  Thanks for the great clips.

BTW, as you yourself pointed out the "Que Viva Harlem" band is a band of students.  In many ways, given the changes in the place of jazz in our culture, the schools are the "street" of the past.  There is a lot of really great stuff going on in some of today's Jazz schools and this shouldn't be dismissed.  Two of the best, North Texas State and University of Miami (my alma mater):

[URL]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kUitSU5-8mQ[/URL]

[URL]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_PtxehQPK3g[/URL]

Is Larry Willis a "big deal" in jazz?  Too broad a question.  If Willis is a big deal, then what was Bill Evans, Bud Powell, Wynton Kelly, Hank Jones; and what is Herbie Hancock, Chick Corea, Kenny Barron?  If we are prepared to call them huge deals, then maybe.  Willis was an excellent pianist, highly respected by his peers; and, yes, a very elegant player.  Not quite at the very top of the list of great players, but very versatile (he played in the band "Blood Sweat And Tears" for several years).  Bottom line: any pianist chosen by Cannonball, Lee Morgan, Art Blakey and other greats as sideman has got to be pretty darn good.  Classic record from the jazz-funk era:

[URL]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OCQtHEUJTmg[/URL]

He sure does look different; but who's the dude in the suit and tie?

I hope everyone is having a happy and musical Holiday Season.  Some thoughts on recent topics:

Acman3, "First Song" is a beautiful tune.  Time, as is always the case, will determine whether it becomes a standard or not.  I think it deserves to be so, but probably too early to tell.

Rok, I haven't forgotten your question re rehearsals.

The topic of the unsung hero is a recurring one here, and while there has been disagreement sometimes about the relative merits of these unsung players I am with Alexatpos this time.  I, too, have never thought of Chet Baker as an "unknown"; quite the contrary.  Certainly not with the very highest profile (Miles) for the casual music lover, but definitely on the list of the very top players; and certainly as a unique voice and stylist known to most jazz buffs.  One of those players that could create a mood with one note; aka, true artistry.  Loved the clip "Almost Blue"; thanks, jzzmusician.

Lou Mecca I had heard only by name but never by music.  I disagree with Rok on his assessment of this player.  First of all, to me, the idea that somehow the absence of reeds or piano makes it more difficult to play credible jazz doesn't quite hold water.  I've known players who can make great music with a set of trash cans and a whistle; this ability is genre-blind.  In fact, by that line of thought one could make the case that by playing a more "conventional" instrument the reed player or band with piano has an automatic leg up in the quality department; a silly proposition.  BTW, the piano-less trio has been discussed here as a particular challenge for players, but the challenge is not the absence of piano per se, but the absence of a harmony instrument; in Mecca's case the guitar takes on the role of the piano, as do the vibes.  Lou Mecca is a great player with a bit of a "cool" sensibility and an interesting harmonic sense.  Of all the "unknowns" posted so far he's probably my favorite.  Thanks, Alex for the introduction.

On the other hand, Roy Hargrove is clearly a good player, but to answer Rok's question, I think his career recognition is exactly where it deserves to be.  He is good, but in the scheme of top players past and present he is no Kenny Dorham (nice Dorham clip btw).  Nice flugelhorn playing.  Beautiful tone and as jzzmusician says, he shows lots of restraint; a good thing.  However, for perspective's sake (my perspective, anyway) I consider Lou Mecca (to have been) a better jazz player.  He demonstrates a better ability to handle the changes in a logical way that creates lines that have a melodic direction with little needless repetition.  On the first clip Hargrove has lots of energy and excitement in a "in your face" kind of way that to me rings hollow with pauses in the solo that are not silences as part of a phrase, but pauses to figure out what he's going to play next.  Same with the rest of his band (in that clip).  Listen to the alto player: lots of speed and lots of notes; but, jeez!, how many times is he going to start each phrase the same way, with the same lick? I find the overall vibe over the top and bombastic; almost angry.  Sure, the drummer deserves extra pay for working so hard; but, that is precisely the problem, he's working too hard and not a particularly good Latin feel at that.  Liked the piano player 'though.  

Jazz is different things to different folks.  Some like lots of energy.  Sometimes that is a good thing; but, as always, the feel and the logic of the improvisation are paramount.  I know that "feel" and "logic" may seem like contradictions, but they're not.  The best players had/have a certain logic in their improvisations: taking a motif (musical nugget) and developing it within the context of the harmony of a tune in a way that gives it direction and meaning; a sense that it is going somewhere.  That is the reason why it is sometimes referred to as spontaneous composition.  That is what separates the men from the boys.  

Great posts, thanks all.

Jzzmusician, thanks for the fair and evenhanded response.  Brad Mehldau "My Favorite Things": 

Wow!  Astounding.  I've been a Mehldau fan for years and had never heard this; thank you.  His use of the right hand ostinati is simply amazing.  An incredible player with an amazingly expressive touch and, to me, one of the few players that manages to unabashedly express his many different influences (classical, pop, rock) while being very much a jazz player first and foremost.  One of my favorite Mehldau recordings and one of the most beautiful and poignant songs that I have ever heard:

[URL]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=U-o4it_WWec[/URL]

And my favorite vocal version of the tune:

[URL]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pIwuoHRRTGA[/URL]

???????