Jazz for aficionados

I love Barry White too; but, on a safari? 🐘🐃🐘🐅🐆🐘
Yeah, the choo choo thing was a bit much.

1

"Orpheus complex". 😍 Oh, yes; just what I always wanted to be. The "one and only". It’s ok, O-10, no hard feelings. Any comments about the substance of the music?
And to hopefully put this ridiculous issue to rest, just go back over your posts and count how many times you mention me in your posts.  Complex?  Why, O-10, I'm flattered.

Rok (and all other aficionados), for starters:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_56S3T2VGOQ

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-_xNqp0K84Q

http://youtu.be/ync_G0qLTkM

So, because he only plays flugel that makes him better? Huh? I don’t think so. More popular entertainer? I suppose you’re right. I will concede that point, but I thought we were talking about brass playing? So, Chuck Mangione is a better flugel player than FH or TH? There probably isn’t a single brass player on the planet that would agree. I do kinda like his fluffy stuff though. But, wait! Now I get it ..... the dancing. I saw a couple of Wynton’s moves in that last clip....not bad.

But wait #2!!!! So, now you’re saying TH is a "top trumpet player"; not a noisemaker......Seriously, the guy is really great; especially for a diagnosed schizophrenic. Phil Woods thought so too 😎

Have tto go shower now.  That coal dust is a bitch. 🚂

1977:

The Brecker Brothers release the timely (for this thread) titled "Don't Stop The Music".  Michael Brecker plays another of his impossibly virtuosic funk solos:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=geV8ExTfORc

Pat Metheny's second solo record "Watercolors" is very impressionistic in overall vibe.  New Age with musical substance and meaning?:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-qIfGZCDpUw

Just as Metheny's music and beautifully delicate guitar sound was a harbinger of the soon to come, insipid and dreadful (how do I really feel?) New Age Music wave (but without the substance), Dave Sanborn's sound would change the way that countless young saxophone players would play the alto saxophone in the new (and mostly dreadful) Smooth Jazz wave; but, without the grease and soulfulness that Sanborn brings to the table:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8ci3cQo986k

Steve Grossman, another Miles alum, releases "Terra Firma"; very intense post-Coltrane tenor playing in some of the most aggressive jazz-rock fusion of the period.  Acman3, this has your name on it:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0BHmRfE0P9Q

Poland is not the first place one thinks of as a place for interesting fusion.  Urszula Dudziak is a very interesting and virtuosic singer who often worked with electric violinist Michal Urbaniak.  An acquired taste; but very interesting:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nS0a_yc2aUU

So where did all the grease and soulfulness in that unique tone that Sanborn has come from?  Before he was the megastar that he would become this is where he paid his dues.  A victim of polio, he lost one of his lungs and his doctor told him that he should pick up a wind instrument to strengthen the remaining lung:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=B4GNci5koi8

Came back from a long weekend to some great clips posted by Acman3.  Nice work!  

As big a fan of Pat Martino as I am, I'm almost embarrased that I am not very familiar with his fusion work.  Great clip.  What a player he is!  One of those players whose ideas seem to flow out in an almost matter of fact way his technique is so effortless.  
 
And Orsted Pederson!  One of my favorite bass players.  I became familiar with him from his work with Dexter Gordon.  Beautiful player.

Something else going on during this period: the return of the great Art Pepper after a hiatus.  He returns with a more aggressive, less cool, sensibility:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ian7n2QjsU

One of my favorite jazz-jazz (☺️) records from this period:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_OdVhZC_dF0

Lest anyone get the wrong idea, 1978 in fusion coming up (and more jazz-jazz).

Thanks, Acman3.

Nice clips, Alexatpos; as usual.  Love Chico O'Farrill and his orchestra; as you say, classic "fusion" of Latin and Jazz.  Fantastic arranger who had a background in classical music composition, which I think shows in the discipline and "tightness" of his arrangements.  Clark Terry is fabulous as always. Timeless stuff, while having a definite 50's flavor.

Herb Geller came up before (with Clifford Brown?).  Wonderful player; as you say, very swinging player.  However, to my ears, he and this ensemble show signs of the "cool" style.  His style and that of the other band members, as well as the writing, is definitely "West Coast"; if not especially "cool".  What I mean is this: if Parker (and Jackie McLean, Phil Woods etc.) are beboppers who swing hard, and Paul Desmond (and Bud Shank etc.) are "cool" players with their lighter tone and less incisive sense of swing, then Geller (like Art Pepper) occupies a kind of middle stylistic middle ground.  "Warm"?  Wonderful Conte Candoli..

Some thoughts about this "fusion" thing:

First of all, there is obviousy, and as demonstrated by the last several posts, that there is no reason that the genre (and any other) cannot be posted and discussed ALONG WITH the more traditional styles which, as you say, the "purists" may prefer.  Even more importantly (I think), the ambiguity of the term and disagreement of what exactly it is points to what, for me, is always the key issue: the label doesn't matter; is it good music or not?  Of course, not everyone likes certain styles; but it highlights the value in trying to understand what it is that makes certain music appeal to some and not others.  Integrity of the music and level of craft are things that are not always given enough attention in favor of a purely knee jerk emotional reaction to it.  You have always expressed your willingness to "leave the door open" to the possibility of appreciating other styles.  Personally, I think that is what it's all about.  You may like this:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OC5rB-IwqZk

Alex, as always, a thoughtful post. We have absolutely no disagreement. I have no issue with your attraction to the tone of a player and I completely understand not liking the sound of electric instruments. The reason that I enjoy dialoguing with you is that not only do you "leave the door open" for yourself, you do not insist that someone else’s door be shut. While I would encourage you to keep that door open, I assure you that I would have no issue if you were to decide to close it. The difference, of course, is whether there is respect for the other viewpoint. That process is what has caused discord on this thread unfortunately.

Tone and its importance in the scheme of things is such an interesting thing. I mentioned in my previous post Jackie McLean; brilliant jazz player. However, perhaps because I play the same instrument, I hate his "tone"; it is rough, ragged and not very refined. However, I love his jazz playing. The often mentioned Wynton Marsalis has a tone on the trumpet that is amazing; to die for. Yet, I don’t like his playing. A very personal thing; as it should be.  As you say, no reason that there cannot be a healthy exchange of ideas.

Patience? I’m still here. Regards.

Some one very interesting comments, Alex; and, one very provocative one.  

****As for me, I have noticed that more and more I listen or serch music from West coast, but there are lot of reasons to be considered why.****

That is really not surprising given the emphasis that you put on tone.  GENERALLY speaking, West Coast players, particularly those of the "cool" school, play(ed) with a kind of tone that is...lets say, gentler, softer in texture, less hard.  But, I think that it's important to remember that this is not necessariy considered, in absolute terms, a "better" tone, but simply different.  After all, how can one argue against the tone produced by, for instance, Phil Woods who many consider to have had one of the greatest and most "developed" alto saxophone tones ever; albeit, far more aggressive and "harder" than most West Coast players.  The music itself is also, generally speaking, "softer", more relaxed and not as hard driving as other styles.  However, and as always, there is much more to it than this.  The "tone" of a player, as important as that is, does not determine the QUALITY OF THE MUSIC that he makes.  To make matters even more interesting, you have players like the great Joe Henderson who play in a hard-bop style with a tone that is "softer" and without the edge that most hard-bop tenor players have.  Analogy: a person who is soft spoken and never raises his voice, but can be very sarcastic and disagreeable with the CONTENT of what he says.  I think that, ultimately, it is the content of what the person says that is most important.  We are obviously speaking in generalities and I also think that a distinction needs to be made between individual instrumental tone and the general sound of, for instance, electric instruments.  But, broadly speaking, all this gives insights into and partly explains a person's likes and dislikes.  

****I believe that 'taste' of music shows more about one's essence of personal existence than it can be simply described with few words.Somehow expirience teach me that often one's estechical choice determine his ethical.( there are exceptions, of course, on both sides)****

That is a very interesting and provocative comment.  I would like more details about what you mean by the connection between aesthetic choice and ethics.  

Thanks for some very interesting topics of discussion.

****A ladder goes up and down****

A simple observation and comment, yet extremely significant, I think.  Inherent in the implied meaning of the dual purpose of a ladder is the suggestion that it is meant for movement in both directions and not meant for standing still.  It goes to the questions of what is jazz and to the issue of aesthetics and even ethics; they are a moving target.  

Those who have followed and/or participated in this thread know all too well how much discord there has been over the issue of what jazz is (and also political issues that have to do with ethics).  I personally feel that to try to define what jazz is in a narrow way is pointless.  Not because it can't be done (it can't), but because one has to ask oneself the question "why?"; what purpose, really, does it serve?  The idea that somehow the integrity of "Jazz" is degraded by not defining it narrowly is silly and ultimately self-serving.  I also find it curious that when even our most revered jazz artists proclaim that "there are only two kinds of music...good music and bad ("the other kind"), this simple "rule" is often ignored.  I prefer to think of it in terms of the "traditional" and the "non-traditional".

Very good and interesting comments on these topics recently and I think that the Lyle Mays recording is a perfect platform for looking at the issue of what jazz is or isn't.  I think that jzzmusician's description is a good one.  For me, while it is definitely a kind of "fusion", it is ultimately jazz.  Why?  Because it meets my requirements for what jazz is: improvisation is a key element within a compositional and harmonic framework that is sophisticated in a way that makes it an obvious extension of traditional jazz.  We can analyze it further for the sake of more clarity, but ironically it may only serve to make matters even more vague and confusing.  For many, "jazz" has to have the typical swing feel and have an obvious "bluesiness" to it.  If one looks at how jazz has evolved all the way from Dixieland, to swing, to bebop, hard bop, and onward, one hears a continued move to a less obvious rhythmic "swing", and to a more "straight" rhythmic feel (like in rock).  Harmonically, jazz became more and more sophisticated and "extended" from simpler core harmonies while still having roots in the blues.  Mays' recording is a great example of this.  Yeah, it's "fusion", but it is also "jazz".  Most importantly, it's good music.  

I'm still trying to get a handle on how the issue of ethics relates to aesthetic choices (tone?).  THAT should be an interesting discussion.  I suspect that, as always, there will be no clear answers.  

I heard the most recent recording from Etienne Charles yesterday; not available on YouTube yet.  This is earlier material.  Love the relaxed feel of this guy's music and playing; a "fusion" of jazz and his roots in Caribbean Island music (Trinidad):

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=e6rfAnQ9DDA

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YmhajnlB9Og

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ad3uG7-2tVs

Correction: On the Al and Zoot recording, I meant to write : Al (not Zoot) solos first.

Thanks, Alex. I love Al Cohn; thanks for those clips. I have always really liked his playing and his tone is definitely in the style that you (and I) like so much; a tone that leans back to that of the swing and West Coast tenor players. Maybe "splitting hairs" a bit, but his particular tone has not been my favorite as I find it a little dry and "reedy"; but his playing is wonderful. One of my very favorites with that general tone style; this guy kills me:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DKC7I26pA38

And, of course:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5OVxQ3VVwUA

Wonderful pairing in this classic quintet. Beautiful and subtle (?) tone differences in a similar general style (Zoot solos first @ 1:35):

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0YBBhKkT-RU

Little known player who played with that tone style:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dUDJ8FlQP0M

A current player who is, as Rok likes to say, keeping that (tone) flame alive:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dQpQzBP7QeM

I will say that of all those players, Al Cohn and Stan Getz are, for me, the most interesting soloists from the standpoint of having the most interesting harmonic vocabularies; more modern than the others. Tell me what you think of these tones.

If this doesn’t prove that beauty is in the eye (ear) of the beholder......

ALL beautiful tones in their own unique ways; and, importantly, in the service of the style of the music. We all obviously have our preferences. I haven’t heard any tone in the last few posts that I would call anything less than attractive and certainly not ugly. What all this shows is that one USUALLY can’t separate the style of tone from the style of the music. What I mean is, I can’t imagine a player with Paul Gonsalves’ tone playing funk like Chris Potter; or Ike Quebec playing Coltrane’s "Giant Steps". Potter has one of the greatest tones of the current tenor players and he is a wonderful contemporary player.

Alex, Ralph Morgan: Nice! Wonderful player and beautiful alto sound. I am defintely getting a sense on your preferred tone style and it goes hand in hand with the style of jazz I think you prefer.

One of the prettiest alto sounds ever from a lesser known great alto player. I think you will like this player (and music):

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8bC5kYno7e4

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wEw4IOtQKrs

A more contemporary player with one of my favorite alto sounds; contemporary and aggressive but not too much so (for me). The great and underrated Charlie Mariano. One of my favorite records in my collection:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLA7eg2fAs_CzCiZZy6km4YwrO3OKReYlV&params=OAFIAVgF&v=Bjdb7a...

Acman3, as you know, some of the best Gonsalves is with the Ellington band. Amazing Gonsalves:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GkElnIiE4U4

Since we are on the subject of tone:  kind of strange to follow the velvet of Gonsalves with the torn denim of this player, but 1978 saw the release of Blythe's debut recording.  One of the most unusual and strange alto sounds I've ever heard; but interesting in its own way:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kwcKm-5Qsy4

Very nice posts, Alex and jzzmusician; thanks.

Interesting rendition of that classic ballad by Bill Harris. Here is an uptempo version of the same tune by an amazing player with one of the prettiest trombone tones ever:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PL1hBuC-dSCS1ZAFpnyxBGYZ8K5x-B4cIu&v=4iAofqYvB4E

Have always loved Bob Brookmeyer. It should be pointed out that he plays the valve trombone which plays like a trumpet but an octave lower.

Beautiful tenor tone by Scott Hamilton. This is my all time favorite (vocal) version of "Estate" from one of my favorite records in my collection.  Gorgeous music  and beautiful tones all around; a must have record, imo

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

I knew Ella would do it 😊.  Welcome back.

jzzmusician, Willis Jackson:. as you so eloquently said recently: DAMN!!

What a sound; from the gut! Thanks.

Speaking of great flugelhorn players (Farmer), Clark Terry was one of the pioneers on the instrument; one of the very first jazz trumpet players to play it.  Carson was a class act; he loved his band.

Rok's cat; cat scat:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vb3OyIz4I-s

Clark Terry was an amazing talent.  It is often said about a player that he has a "voice" on his instrument.  Clark's playing is a perfect example of how a great player plays what he hears in his head; his "mumbles" vocal scatting sounds just like his playing.  Clark Terry broke the color barrier on network TV and when Johnny Carson retired was a sad day for music on television; the sound of a big band would not be heard again as a regular part of a TV show.  And what a band!  Clark Terry, Conte Condole, Frank Rosolino, Pete Christlieb, Snooky Young, Herb Ellis, the list goes on.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3AvImcsbt1U

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oor9PHh9flQ

And here, ladies and gentlemen, we have, in the previous two posts, a perfect example of the "Mars and Venus" concept.

The irony is that Shorter and Morton are saying the exact same thing. The truth is that the "style" of jazz that Morton knew and played was a far cry from what Horace Silver, or Coltrane, or....would play decades later. So, Silver and Coltrane didn’t play "jazz"....I get it now. Unfortunately, as usual, some tend to see what they want to see in order to buttress a personal point of view. Generally speaking, points of view which can be summarized as 1. Inclusive, open minded, true to the spirit of boundless creativity in the music , or 2. Non-inclusive, closed minded, dogmatic, restrictive of that creative spirit. We can debate the relative merits of each viewpoint till we’re blue in the face; however, let’s take a look at some facts related to this thread:

Over the last several days there has been spirited and appreciative discussion and posting of jazz spanning a wide range of styles from the traditional to the non-traditional, including fusion Some has been liked by others (mostly) and some not so much.  Importantly, there has been respect and appreciation shown towards others’ preferences and opinions. It is obvious that many here like and value "fusion" or whatever some of these styles anyone of us chooses to call certain music. My question is simple:

What positive purpose is served by calling the music that some of us clearly appreciate "noise"? None, I think; and, probably, negative ones. We are all free to be passionate about our preferences and express it any way we want, but by going down that road the chances of productive dialogue about a pretty deep topic are pretty slim. I would respectfully point out that in overlooking your own musical bias and trying to be profound yourself, you are missing the profundity in Shorter’s comment (and Morton’s, for that matter).

Nah! This argument is as tired as stories about Grant Green; sorry.  No straw man at all and I'm not looking for arguments.  How's about we try a different approach?  You can dismiss what I'm suggesting as pure bs, or you can consider everything that (I think) you know about me and other posters and give the matter some thought.  

Alex, as usual, a thoughtful post which raises some interesting questions.

****often what is considerd beautiful was at the same time considered as 'Good'.****

That may be true; often, but not always.  Beautiful as far as what? is the question that needs to be asked.  We have looked at players with beautiful tones, but tone is only one component of what may constitute good, or beautiful music.  For me personally, while I very much appreciate beautiful tone, it is not necessary for me to consider music "good".  Moreover, sometimes music which is beautiful in tonality can be not so beautiful and even ugly in other ways; sometimes the music calls for and needs tonality that is abrasive, even ugly to serve the musical intent or personality of the compiser or performer. Tone, by itself, says little about the music.  Expression in music (the most important component) has much more to do with things that happen in the areas of rhythm. 

****concept of beauty can not be separated from context of time, historical periods and cultures.****

Excellent comment and very true, and shows why, for any one listener, what determines whether music is "good" often has much to do with that listener's biases.  The other key determinant is judgment of the level of craft of the composer or performer.  While this judgment still has a subjective component, there are objective criteria that need to be met if music making can be considered "good".  Just one example: How can the music of a player who possesses a great tone be considered "good" if his sense of rhythm is poor?  

****am wondering are we trying to distinguish what exactly is jazz music, or what is Beautiful music****

Personally, I don't see much value in trying to distinguish what exactly jazz is.  What, exactly, is that going to accomplish? I think that given the wide range of styles that have evolved from ROOTS in traditional jazz it is much more productive to distinguish what is beautiful music (not just in tonality).  It is obvious that each "aficionado" draws a line for himself at which some evolved style stops being jazz.  So why not, instead, focus on distinguishing good (beautiful) music from bad?  Most of what is posted on this thread is unquestionably Jazz; some of it is not jazz for some.  How anyone can claim to have that magic line for everyone else is beyond me; unless the aim is simply to prove everyone else "wrong", a pretty shallow objective, imo.  

****Does that means that all jazz music is 'Good' music?****

No way!  

****next time when somebody writes a critic thought, would be nice to say why somebody likes or dislikes something****

Precisely!  

Thanks for a great post.

Rok (and all aficionados), not an argument; just discussion by way of example:

Is this "jazz" (from the "inventor" of jazz)?:

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

How about this?:

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

And how about this, from one of my favorite "fusion" records (whatever that is)?:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLwhRKJUIQxKA5Do_m8Q5gvkvcMR-ZYSYu&params=OAFIAVgC&v=bYjfHv...

I realize that one needs to accept the idea that jazz is a constantly evolving art form for this exercise to have some meaning; but, hopefully it can lay the groundwork for some discussion.

I don’t think that there are many who would say that Miles’ "Nefertiti" is NOT jazz. Now, I hear a clear music "roots" connection between it and Wayne Shorter’s "The Three Marias". So, the question becomes: is Shorter’s music closer in "feeling" (like Jelly Roll said) to "Nefertiti" or more removed from it; as compared to the difference in feeling between Morton’s "The Crave" and "Nefertiti"?

For me, there is a gulf of difference in the "feeling" between "The Crave" and "Nefertitti"; not nearly as great between "Nefertitti" and "The Three Marias".

Just some food for thought.

****If you can explain it, you are trying too hard****

I don't think so.  One could just as easily say "if you can't explain it ON SOME LEVEL you're not trying hard enough".  However, I wouldn't say that and put that judgmental slant on it.  And THAT goes to a lot of the disagreement here.  As with jazz, there are a lot of different styles of expression.

Needless to say, I don't agree at all with the idea that it is forced.  Many creative artists (not all) are always looking for new ways to express themselves, and as has been said countless times, art always reflects the time of its creation.  I believe you have exactly backwards; it would be "forced" if the creative spirit were held back to reflect only the past.  That doesn't mean that there isn't valid and great music being played currently that does reflect the past (Wynton).  There is obviously also a lot of contemporary non-fusion jazz being created.

****If all Jazz players retired when they felt they were out of ideas, there would be no fusion****

A very strange comment.  The move towards "fusion" (or whatever; remember, it doesn't have to be electric to be fusion) IS the new idea in a broad sense.  Shorter's "The Three Marias" is unquestionably fusion; not electric, but rhythmically closer to a rock groove than the typical swing rhythm.  

Anyway, simply more proof that trying to put a label on it simply takes away from the focus on whether it is good music or not.  You like "The Crave"; so do I.  I like "Nefertiti" too, and I feel no need to deem one better than the other.  "The Crave" is infinitely more accessible; "easier" to take in with its tunefulness and simple rhythm.  "Nefertiti" is far more abstract with far more sophisticated harmonies.  Is one "better" than the other?  Not in my book.  Here in Brooklyn we have Brooklyn style pizza: old-school stick to your ribs, to the point, cheesy, pepperoni pizza.  We also have brick oven baked, thin crust, fresh mozzarella and pancetta pizza.  Which do I eat?  Depends on my mood that day.  Which is "better"?  Hell if I know; or care.

Isn’t it curious that in spite of there being little (if any) "fusion" posted recently, it is the listener who doesn’t like it who keeps bringing up the topic. Why it also has to be done with derision is also curious, but a different topic altogether. Equally curious is that what is posted instead are the same clips that have been posted several times previously. Clips of Wynton and Clapton are as tired as those of that other guitar player.....what was his name? ☺️ I think "hard-headed" is accurate; as far as the "good taste" part goes......let’s just say that there are different flavors of Kool-aid.

The first time I saw the Wynton/Clapton clips my reaction was, and to quote that same listener, WTF! Clapton is an iconic aging rocker and Brit blues player who, for some reason, has lost the fire in his playing. Talk about pandering to the "great unwashed" with his presence there! In the company of good (mostly, and more on that later) jazz players playing the blues, he sounds mediocre at best. Ironically, the two headliners are the weakest soloists in that band. This makes a good segue to the subject of Nat Adderly:

I have always been a fan of Nat Adderly. As suggested by Alex, I WILL (😉) explain why I like his playing. Adderly was a player with a great rhythmic feeling and sense of swing; that was his calling card. He was great within his comfort zone of the relaxed, bluesy tunes, ballads and funky tunes with uncomplicated harmonic changes and medium tempos. In that respect it can be said that his playing was limited compared to players with much more advanced and expansive harmonic vocabularies like Miles, Morgan and Hubbard; but, great feeling! What Adderly had in spades is precisely what Wynton doesn’t have; and, vise versa.

Adderly was great at telling a story in his soloing or even just playing the melody of a ballad, but had problems as an instrumentalist; he was very inconsistent as a trumpet player, especially later in his career. Wynton is a monster trumpet player who doesn’t play with a convincing feeling. Of course it needs to be remembered that this is all in comparison to the best players in the music. Adderly’s problems with his "chops" are well known among jazz brass players. These were the result of bad playing habits and/or bad teachers and which can result in things like callouses on the lips; problems that resulted in "blowing his chops out". Look at this clip and notice the tense embouchure (lips) and posture with the raised shoulders, and the pointing down of the horn while seeming to be squeezing out the high notes; all a recipe for chop problems:

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

Contrast this with Clark Terry in the previously posted clip; a model of relaxed embouchure and posture even when playing in the upper register. This relaxed quality also allowed him to use "circular breathing" for incredibly long phrases without having to breathe:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3AvImcsbt1U

This has been posted previously. Some favorite Nat Adderly from one of my very favorite records (notice the Miles influence in the muted trumpet playing); great feel!:

https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLYUN_lOOl3TXtUiOmKhMHgHy0YR4o3F6M

Lastly, I think that the only "antidote" that is really needed in this endless debate about the merits of the traditional vs the untraditional in jazz is to continue to point this out:

There is no argument, and never has been, with the idea that we all have our preferred styles of music and that there is no reason that anyone HAS to like anything other than what they do like; simple as that. However, most curious of all to me is how someone who can’t even take a stab at explaining why something is liked or not can have the huevos to completely dismiss in a judgmental way the musical direction that musical giants like Herbie Hancock and Miles chose for themselves as artists and, in the process, stripping them of the sense of integrity toward the music that they so rightly deserve. Curious indeed.

C'mon Rok, now you're really being silly.  What on earth does any of what you just posted have to do with what I wrote.  I am well aware of the types of "fusion" that you were referring to.  The problem (as if you didn't know) is the general disrespect shown by you towards those who find value in fusion and other musics that you don't like and the artists who play it.  You insist on going down that negative road and then you don't want to be called out on it.  Re "education" and old folks in MS: best not to go there. I have some interesting jazz-jazz to post soon (and some fusion).  Cheers.

****Critical analysis does not change how it affects a person,****

Absolutely not true; and certainly not true for everyone.  Depends on the individual.  The important distinction is that some individuals have an innate aversion to critical analysis.  This fact in no way means that it is the case for everyone; and critical thinking and analysis can, in fact, have a profound impact on an individual's emotional reaction to art (and many other things).  Some individuals are fearful of and feel threatened by the idea that there are things that they don't know or understand, and feel comfort and security in the idea that what they do know and understand is the only thing of value; like the old folks in MS.

Some excellent posts and commentary recently; thanks everyone.  Acman3, that Weather Report live clip is amazing;  I had not heard that previously.  Probably my favorite lineup in that band with Jaco and Peter Erskine (who sounds amazing).  Fusion that for me captures the spirit and feeling of jazz without having to apologize for not being jazz-jazz.  You beat me to the punch with the Dixie Dregs clip; they were going to be part of my 1978 list.  I like your description of them as a possible "gateway band" to jazz.  For anyone who cares about this sort of thing and to show the influences that come into play, that band was started by jazz students at the University Of Miami School Of Music (my alma mater) and was first called the U of M Rock Ensemble. Speaking of Ro(c)k:

Rok, not intended as further argument, but simply dialogue about some interesting topics and related to comments that you made and in no way intended to try and change your mind about anything:

****It has no impact what so ever. Music is an emotional thingy, just like all Art. Critical analysis does not change how it affects a person, it's just nice to know information, good for academic study, or conversation over drinks. Nothing more.****

I've already expressed my feelings about this topic, allow me to use an example to make my point:

You are absolutely correct, it is an emotional thingy; however, I recall commenting on and sharing music by the great Paul Desmond and pointing out to you something in the music that you had not noticed before.  In the arrangement of a particular ballad there was a point when Desmond, while soloing, reacts  to the orchestration and "answers" the musical line that the woodwinds in the orchestra play with the same musical figure, but now incorporated in his improvised solo.  I also recall that your reaction was "I burst out laughing when I heard that!"  Now, if that is not an emotional reaction as a result of critical analysis then I don't know what is.  I'll take it a step further:

We have also discussed "quotes" in improvisations; something that, as far as I can tell, was also something that you had not noticed previously.  Well, much later and after first discussing this, I noticed comments by you re clips that you posted about musical "quotes" in those clips.  Are you trying to say that the recognition of these quotes have no impact on your emotional reaction to this music; that your experience with the music is not enhanced by that recognition?

Cheers

Not meaning to argue and just looking for clarity in order to avoid argument, but I'm confused.  Making a judgment without explaining is simple opinion; no?  Seems to me that critical analysis, what you say has no value as far as the enjoyment, or not, of something is explaining the reasons why and how that judgment was made.  What am I missing? 

****just never knew they were intentional or accepted as a part of Jazz. I thought of it as plagiarism.****

How is quoting "Mona Lisa" in the context of an improvised solo NOT intentional?

1978:  if I absolutely had to pick one, probably my favorite tenor player.  He quotes "Mona Lisa" @ 1:12.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Kd1GIN83fNw

1979:  Live concert of the reunion of the classic Miles band from the 60's with Freddie Hubbard taking the place of Miles.  The audience reaction is remarkable.  Amazing musicians:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLUSRfoOcUe4a_x1oeCQ7bBDAXjUcuGCta&params=EAEYATgBSAFYAmILbUh4e...

Well gee, Rok, thank you for the reasoned and intelligent response. I realize that the concept may be completely foreign to you, but I really have no interest in arguing with you; simply trying to make sense of the non-sensical.

****I think it’s possible, in the middle of playing improvised music, to play a few notes that have been played before in the same order in another popular tune. Intention would depend on the length of the passage played. A few notes might be an unintentional, subconscious ’quote’, too many notes, and you are playing Mona Lisa.****

Sorry, way off base.  If you care to have reasonable and intelligent dialogue about this subject let me know.

VSOP Live made me think of this; one of my favorite live jazz recordings.  One of the most gorgeous and evocative jazz tenor tones ever.  Stan Getz paired with Bill Evans makes sense in many ways; introspective, soft tone and emphasis on creating beautiful melodies when improvising.  Great record:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4Xh3IMWzF_s

I knew you’d be back, O-10, and belueve it or not, I was hoping you would be; I’m only sorry that you didn’t come back with a more reasonable and positive attitude. If you, like Rok, are looking for another fight, please look elsewhere. I stand by my comments. As usual, the desperate see (and hear) what they want to see. Like Rok, you are responding, not in a reasoned way, but in a way that you feel somehow proves that you are correct and I am incorrect; and nothing more. What you and Rok don’t understand about this subject is that NOTHING that players like Bird played was unintentional; and, certainly not musical quotes.  The idea that it might be unintentional is way off base; and, frankly......well, I'll stop there.  Welcome back; I think.

Speaking of live albums, 1980 saw the release of this live set recorded in Japan by (probably) my very favorite fusion band of all time, "Steps".  Their recording "Smokin In The Pit" is one of the best examples of the genre.  An amazing lineup of players with impeccable jazz creds who have also been key players in other genres playing very interesting compositions which go far beyond simple twelve bar blues harmonic frameworks.  Virtuosic and incredibly tight ensemble playing and soloing with very advanced and far reaching harmonic vocabularies.  State of the art playing in a fusion setting that leans to the Jazz side of things while bringing to the table the rhythmic "accuracy" that characterizes good Rock.  Steve Gadd is a great example of a drummer who is incredibly rhythmically "accurate" while still having a great feel; very difficult balance to strike.  Brecker is....Brecker!   Great band:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLtcApAVo7q1KfNaC2BrUh2EkCkHwHWwkN&v=CBZTuSS0JiQ

The youtube clip data incorrectly says that this is a 1988 release.  And, btw, has anyone noticed how how many great live recordings have come from Japan?  

jzzmusician, thanks for that Cannonball clip.

****Equal parts traditional jazz and fusion, a cup of blues and a whole lot of groove. ****

Perfect description!  Cannonball was a monster player.  His playing has always had for me that hard to describe quality that players like Louis Armstrong had; no matter the groove that Cannonball was in, funky, bluesy, whatever, even when he was screaming through his horn there was an "up" quality about it all.  I always hear a smile in the playing.  Nat is in fine form.  I love the way Zawinal mimics the "twangy" sound of a sitar by playing the keyboard while putting his fingers on the piano strings to add to the Eastern flavor of the tune.  Speaking of Eastern flavor, odd-meter time signatures are common in Eastern music and in case anyone wonders about the title "74 Miles Away", this is a clever choice of title; the tune is in 7/4 time with seven beats to the measure.  

Thanks for a great and very interesting clip.

That was very funny, jzzmusician; thanks.  On a somewhat related note (pun), this is Frank Zappa's parody of the studio musician scene; a scene which, outside of LA, hardly exists anymore.  Hysterical and a pretty accurate picture of the darker side of that scene during its heyday:

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

btw, your description of what rehearsing is about is right on; depends on the situation.

Oops, thanks for the heads up. Here’s what I meant to post:

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

Great story!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8L4gITE3nUc

Clyde Stubblefield; bad dude!

Ilikemiles, welcome to the thread. Glad you mentioned Billy Taylor; hasn’t been mentioned much on this thread and he deserves to be. He is an iconic figure in the world of jazz; not just as a player, but as educator and broadcaster as well.

Martial Solal is one of my favorite unsung piano players. This record, "Four Keys", from 1979 features one of the most interesting and rather strange lineups of any of my records. Solal, the great Lee Konitz, Orsted Pederson and John Scofield (known mainly as a fusion player but showing some impressive straight ahead chops here). Very interesting record with unusual tunes based on interesting harmonies and oblique melodies; and some free improvisation:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ziRheolgl58

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hq42bTEklPg

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=434Z3pK85fQ

btw, I like Miles too; a lot.

Bad a*s indeed!

Speaking of bad a*s and drumming, for me, no other drummer better exemplifies the attitude that "there are only two kinds of music...." (you know the rest) than Jack DeJohnette. He has recorded in just about every jazz and -jazz genre. One of the greatest jazz drummers ever with a TONE very much his own on an instrument not usually thought of in terms of tone. Prettiest cymbal sound I’ve ever heard (Tony Williams is up there), and the rare ability to be melodic (!) when he solos (@4:53). Masterful drumming on another of my favorite live recordings. Great lineup and beautiful tune:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CnYoFF8DHu0

That is incorrect: the recording that plays when you play the YouTube link that you provided is from a different recording than shown by that album cover. This was a mistake by the poster of that link; and you.  That album cover is for a recording titled "Spectacular" Featuring Buddy Collette. "Forest Flower" doesn’t even appear on that record. Most importantly, two seconds in and one can tell that it’s not Buddy Collette playing, but Lloyd instead.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chico_Hamilton_Quintet_featuring_Buddy_Collette

The recording in that YouTube link that you provided (with the wrong album cover) is from a recording titled "Man From Two Worlds".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_from_Two_Worlds

Can we stop now, O-10?

O-10, I take no pleasure from having to preface my comments like this. Given the history of ridiculous arguing and nonsense, I will stay clear of any request for dialogue that, in any way, smacks of sarcasm or baiting. As always, I welcome reasonable and (hopefully) intelligent dialogue and exchange of ideas. So, if there’s any chance that this feeling is mutual, all I can say is: try again.

In the meantime, a good place to start would be for you to get the personell on the "Forest Flower" that you posted correct. The personell that you posted are incorrect and from a different record. The personell, which could not be more obvious nor easier to identify, are: Hamilton, the composer himself Charles Lloyd, Gabor Szabo, and Albert Stinson. Lloyd could not sound more different from Buddy Collette, nor Szabo more different from Hall. Cello?!?! As far my thoughts on the music go, try again if you would like.

jazzmusician and Acman3, thanks for the Glasper clips.  Great drumming all around.  Marc Colenberg is ridiculous; drum machine with a feel!  I have to say, I'm not sure about Glasper yet; had not heard any of his stuff previously so need to hear more. I like his stuff CONCEPTUALLY; just not sure about his playing yet.  Impressive in some ways; but......don't know what it is yet.  Need to hear more.  Thanks again.

Pulled this off the shelf today; hadn’t listened to it yet. This record gets relatively little attention when talking about Freddie Hubbard. Possibly my favorite jazz trumpet player, here he is teamed with the brilliant Kenny Barron. The big surprise for me was the huge contribution by Buster Williams to the overall feel of this record. The bass player is obviously always a contributor, but on this record the bass playing defines the overall vibe to a greater extent than is usual. He kills me on this record with a amazingly propulsive groove and swagger on the bass and some great, attention sustaining, melodic soloing; not always the case with bass players. Great use of the bow also. Check out the tune "Loss".

Freddie Hubbard was one of those players who conveyed a very strong sense of direction in the soloing. You always get the feeling that his solo has a shape to it; that it’s going somewhere. Lesser players can give a sense of the music being "static"; the sense that the player plays phrases that don’t relate to what they played before nor give a sense that it will relate to what is coming next. Interesting compositions and great playing. Beautiful flugel on "You Don’t Know What Live Is".

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLVqJNXvnGnSzaXhOKbYUmtMAXulPp-YIN&params=OAFIAVgF&v=bX6kTD...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLVqJNXvnGnSzaXhOKbYUmtMAXulPp-YIN&params=OAFIAVgC&v=-gthQn...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLVqJNXvnGnSzaXhOKbYUmtMAXulPp-YIN&params=OAFIAVgE&v=MpTdxO...

Alex, you probably know this, if not, check this out.  Stan Getz was known for having been a very complex and difficult individual.  Often, that complexity is expressed by deeply interesting and emotional playing that tells a story that doesn't necessarily have a happy ending:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mkrzDFCSuP8

Always interested, Alex.  Have been trying to keep the focus on the music, but.....well, it's all pretty obvious.

Ok, those two clips with Jimmy Forrest are without a doubt some of my favorites ever posted on this thread.  What a tenor sound!  Rich, suave, with just the right amount of grease.  I had the pleasure of hearing him live at The Village Vanguard back in the mid-70s.  Great player who, like another of my favorites, Dexter Gordon, always "told a story" with his improvisations.  Similar rhythmic feel, but with a very different use of vibrato.  Not sure how he would sound playing "Giant Steps", but in that style it really doesn't get better than that.

I like Calvin Newborn; new one to me.  I like his phrasing and feeling a lot.  I also like his electric guitar sound which is a bit "raw" and un-finessed.  I also find it very interesting (especially on "Tin Tin Deo") how his phrasing is very much like a piano player would phrase.  Growing up with a piano player in the family?  Great clips.  Thanks.