|
Love Eddie Harris. Unique tenor sound and stylist. Always understated volume-wise with a warm sound that is not what one usually hears in a funky groove. Beautiful tune with a GREAT title. The composer of that tune, Charles Stepney, was one of the most prominent producers of some of the funk/soul acts of the 70s including Earth Wind And Fire's". |
Oh, what the heck; what's one more? 😏 |
O-10, we will have to agree to disagree re Hermeto’s music and his genius; although some of it is clearly way out there.
I wish we could, somehow, put this objective/subjective business to rest; or, at least, try and bring some clarity to it.
I, nor anyone else here, has ever said "music is objective". The lack of clarity in this supposed premise is often used here (usually by you) as a bit of a red herring and to substitute for substantive commentary. I am well aware of your stance that "music is subjective". Now, think about this for a moment: just what does "music is subjective (or objective)" actually mean? It means nothing. What I have always said is that "music is not subjective, our reaction to it is". That is a very important distinction. Moreover, as far as objectivity goes, I have said that "there are aspects of music (and music making) that are objective". For example: out of tune is out of tune, bad rhythm is bad rhythm, etc.. Of course, if someone cannot discern those it does not mean it is not so. Finally, if someone happens to like music that has a poor level of craft (intonation, rhythm, etc.), that’s fine; but, this does not mean that another listemer who values a higher level of craft is not justified in deeming it poor music.
Regards. |
|
A friend sent me this last night. Interesting inside look at one of the giants of the tenor saxophone. Interesting on a few counts. There is a saying that poses that a musician plays the way he is in his private life. It's fascinating to me how seamless the transition is between Joe's demeanor during the interview and his performance (beautiful). Also interesting and new to me is John Scofield on acoustic guitar. http://youtu.be/v6X4RIAolsY |
****you're splitting hairs in regard to how technically "good" music affects other people adversely; the difference between whether or not that person considers good music to be bad, or bad music to be good, are irrelevant, unless you are a music teacher, or musician.****
Couldn't disagree more.
Simon & Gardunkel "Scarborough Fair". Good music? Of course. Beautiful melody and nice singing. What's not to like? Would I go out of my way to listen to it or buy it? No; not my thing.
As I said, "music is not subjective; our reaction to it is". Recent posts make the case perfectly:
Nigel Kennedy "S F": very nice orchestral arrangement. Violin playing is not quite as good as I expected. But, overall, much better than:
Billy Ocean: Yikes! Probably my least favorite style of music. She does look good, 'though.
Sergio Mendes: Only slightly better than Billy Ocean. I'll take Simon & Garfunkel any day.
Caterina Valente: now we're talking! Very exciting arrangement. Beautiful singing.
Paul Desmond: he could do no wrong in my book. That sound! THAT'S the best.
Thanks all for the clips.
|
Let me ask you something O-10. That you don’t care what I think about any given music is fine and I don’t expect anyone to care. I have always said that everyone has their own likes and dislikes and are entitled to them. However, why then are you so quick to tell us what music YOU like and don’t like; and do so without reservation. Why should anyone care? I guess a different way of wording the question is: why is your disagreement or your reaction to MY disagreement (not others’) always laced with unpleasantness. I've got a pretty good idea why; but, wondered what you thought. My Math skills are just fine, thank you.
|
Had me worried there for a second, Rok; I should have known. Hope all is well. |
O-10, thank you for the recent even-handed and reasonable posts/responses. There's really little I can disagree with in your recent posts directed at me. Our "lovey-dovey" (to quote Ghosthouse) loses a bit of steam in your last post (to Ghosthouse) however. It is not that I am "so persistent" re objectivity in music. From my vantage point, the truth is that you are so persistent re subjectivity in music. Both subjectivity and objectivity can have a place in how music is perceived. I bring up the subject of objectivity (in CERTAIN ASPECTS of music), almost without exception in response to your claim of subjectivity.
BTW, I think you give me too much credit. I have read many comments here that point to a good understanding of some of the "technical" aspects of music. Still, I think we are moving toward a better understanding of each other's point of view. Can't argue with that. Regards.
|
And THAT, ladies and gentlemen, is one of the most refreshing posts I have read here. I have said the same thing (perhaps different words) several times. Our growth as listeners is a never ending process. My hat is off to you, Ghosthouse. |
Ghosthouse, congratulations! Your indoctrination into the "Hall Of Aficionados" is now complete ("hazing" in some quarters) 😊.
(Great post, btw.)
Rok, glad to see all is well (normal). I need not worry any longer. |
George Benson’s "White Rabbit" is one of my favorite CTI records. "Little Train" is one of the best "Jazz" adaptations of a Classical work that I have ever heard. Besides Benson the lineup is stellar (Herbie Hancock sounds his usual fantastic self), and the arrangement is by the great Don Sebesky. BTW, it occurs to me that the subject of arrangers/orchestrators might be a great theme to pursue here. Great record and I would say it shows great taste. Another of my favorite "Bachianas" (no.5): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=woN47pZJsEIWith guitar instead of orchestra: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFCR6kUmZMcBtw, the "orchestra", and original, version is scored for cellos only. |
****Great record and I would say it shows great taste (on the part of O-10)**** |
|
I may have to take back my "great taste" comment ☺️. Kathleen Battle, screeching? Wow!
Btw, that's not opera. |
I have always been fascinated by words and their origin. The connection between the meaning "strawberry" and this other definition is interesting indeed. I love starwberries 😋
+++++Jagoda
The name Jagoda has its origin in 1657 when a lot of polish drunken people were sitting together and had a little Mad Dogs party. They were thinking desperately about a name which would perfectly fit to a girl who can drink more vodka than any other human being and is still able to ride a bycicle made for a five year old.
Jagodas are known for how crazy they are. These Polish girls will ROCK YOUR WORLD.
They drink like European men, vodka being their drink of choice. You may not realize it, but they are usually drinking all throughout the day. Jagoda can drink you under the table, any day of the week, they walk the walk.
Jagodas are forces of nature in bed. Carnal like animals, constant sexual appetite. If you manage to get one, hold on for dear life! You won't find another girl like this and you can never go back.+++++
|
Mel Lewis, one of the greatest big-band drummers with a unique ride-cymbal sound and feel. One of my favorite records. Hubbard, Brecker (unbelievable solo!); what could wrong? Not a big band: https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLeDkO1et6hFxVGTL0j8Hkr_syHZXVS440&v=0N_xYLVAQXoLove the Pointer Sisters. Bought that record back in college and pretty sure I posted a couple from it four (!) years ago. Great clip! Thanks. |
Ghosthouse, enjoyed the Christoph Oeding clips; interesting player. Thanks. Immediately brought to mind one of my favorite guitar players, Bill Frisell. Not as "dreamy" as Frisell, but similar sound. O-10, that's a great blowing session with Hubbard and Morgan. Great vibe on that record; they are having a great time! Thanks for that clip. Here's another favorite from Freddie's CTI period, with Junior Cook sounding remarkably like Joe Henderson: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eCLZHtv_j3c |
Ghosthouse, you hit the head of the objective/subjective nail. That Frisell is an excellent guitarist is undeniable as you say; that's objective. That his style doesn't move you is subjective. That, of course, does not mean his style won't move other listeners who have a different sensibility than you do; or any of us. We all have musical sensibilities based on our personalities and life experiences. Personally, I sometimes enjoy artists whose craft I appreciate and whose sensibilites challenge my own. I like Frisell's unique, cool and somewhat intellectual style informed by everything from country to classical. I also like Steve Steven's very visceral style; in some ways the antithesis of Frisell. A comparison of the two strikes me as an apples vs oranges comparison. Stevens comes from the Rock and Roll side of things while Frisell comes more from the Jazz side of things. There would be musical settings where Stevens couldn't touch Frisell and vise versa. I like them both and both move me depending on what I am looking for at any given time (MY mood). I can't imagine Frisell wearing these shoes, just as I couldn't imagine Stevens crafting a great introspective solo over complex and obtuse harmonic changes: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yUi_S6YWjZwWhat a shame and waste of talent (Jackson). |
Ghosthouse, no offense taken at all. I posted that MJ clip only as an example of, as you pointed out, the wide range of Stevens’ creds. I don’t exactly run out and buy MJ records (or listen to his music), but do appreciate his talent....within the pop music world. Like you and O-10, "not my bag". But, I always appreciate a very high level of craft; and, stereotypes and all, there is a high level of craft in that video from a (pop) production standpoint and even from a playing standpoint....again, within that genre. Speaking of unintended comparison/contrast: that MJ clip makes, in my mind, a good contrast between it and the recently posted Billy Ocean clip which some might put in the same general category of pop music. Moreover, I think it serves to explain what I mean with these comments. Like the style or not, from an objective point of view the band in that video rocks, MJ dances and sings his a-- off, and all stereotypes aside, Stevens shows he can thrash as well a anybody. The Billy Ocean tune, for me, has a mediocre disco beat, is a lame tune, and the featured saxophone playing sucks. This makes the MJ clip good and the BO clip bad. I like all genres as long as core musical values are high. Would I choose to listen to the MJ clip instead of countless other things? Of course not. Does appreciating what it does do right inform my appreciation of music in general? I believe so. Probably the only area in life where I am not becoming more and more conservative. Regards. |
Catching up on the last couple of days' worth of posts. Thanks to all for the great music. O-10, I liked John Handy's "Naima"; a lot. I really liked the sense of freedom in not having a traditional ballad pulse, but rather slowly harmonies without an obvious beat. And love the way they ended the tune. I have always liked John Handy's playing. There is a sense of honesty and lack of pretense in his playing; or, at least, that's the feeling it evokes in me. He doesn't scream loudly through the horn and is generally understated with a pretty alto sound. I liked "Where Go The Boats" as a composition, but didn't think the playing on the non-traditional instruments was particularly good and thought the synth sound was a little cheesy. Liked the tune, though. Ghosthouse, listened to the Bozzio and Ginger Baker clips; thanks for those. Stevens is a great player as are Bozzio and Levin . I really liked the tune which borrows a little from Nouveau Flamenco to add to that nice folky, if not New Agey, vibe. I love that acoustic guitar driven sound. I have a couple of issues with the performance however. As good as it is, there is a "cautious" feeling to it and things feel a bit too "organized". I would bet that they played it to a click track. One can usually tell when players are playing to a click track; there is a "safe" quality to the feeling. The focus becomes being with the click instead of entirely with each other; potential imperfections and all. The overdubbed guitar is fine, but not the synth strings sound; luckily is was pretty subtle volume wise. That tune was begging for a small string section instead of synth. Really nice guitar solo. Again, probably one of several takes. Nothing inherently wrong with this production approach, but it does take a little of the energy away. Still, really nice tune and I really enjoyed it. Something in a different genre that pushes similar buttons for me, but has a little more abandon might be: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eU2IpZoTMdEThe Ginger Baker clip I didn't like; sorry. Thank god for Charlie Haden! He was the rock in that trio and sounds fabulous. Baker is unquestionably more than just a great rock drummer; but, he's no jazz drummer. He does ok, but he just doesn't have the chops and comfort in that language to really contribute on the level of the great jazz drummers and seems to be tagging along Haden's amazing pulse. Speaking of great jazz drummers, some of my favorite Frisell was with Paul Motian: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6jFZ3X9CFuALove Lovano on this: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YaY1GVeHqKwAnother great drummer. What do you think of this?: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=H-wtZhpxtVEAlex, I loved those Rene Thomas clips. And J.R. Montrose! What a nice player. Swinging and intelligent playing. Thanks for those. Getz? What can one say? Genius. |
|
|
Beautiful Frisell, thanks! |
Frisell: real brass all the way. Alto saxophone, trumpet and trombone. What’s really cool about the way he used the brass is that he voiced the brass chords in a similar way as a guitar player would play those chords on a guitar. Notice how similar the sonorities of those brass chords are to those of the strummed guitar chords. Don’t know for a fact, but I would bet that it was Frisell who wrote the horn arrangement. |
|
****Might be the person I admire most in any number of musical endeavors: THE ARRANGER. So often they are the ones that bring the magic.**** So true, I recently made the comment that this might be a good subject to explore on this thread. When this subject comes up, the first recording that comes to mind is always Miles' "Sketches Of Spain" and to a somewhat lesser degree "The Birth Of The Cool"; both , recordings which, at the end of the day, are arranger Gil Evans' records, eventhough Miles gets the attention. Could Miles have been replaced by someone else? Arguably, yes. Could Gil Evans have been? No way! BTW, I listened to "Black Light Syndrome" in its entirety; the first couple of cuts twice. Thanks for the recommendation. Tough record to comment on. I think it's a great record. A great record by the standards of a particular musical sensibility. Rock and roll sensitivity all the way; with a bit of "glam" thrown in (and more than a bit of Flamenco in one spot). Steve Stevens is a very impressive guitar player. The recording is really about him and his amazing virtuosic guitar playing; and, it is also, over the top. Only because of the hype, I am less impressed with Bozzio and wonder what the band could do with someone like Dave Weckl. Stevens has a very wide tonal palette with his use of distortion and effects; but, for instance, his use of the Whammy bar is way over the top and sounds tasteless more than anything to me. A more contained and disciplined range would be more musically effective imo. On the other hand, a "take no prisoners", "let it all hang out" attitude is part of the R&R ethos; hence the quandary. I realize this may seem like a contradiction of my comments re the first Bozzio and co. clip, but still....For me, when I want those particular buttons pushed I would prefer something like these; which strike me as having a little more grit and a little less "look at me!" glam: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YHqXhwtsLxkhttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oN0qYUeV0KQBtw, I really like and admire your inquisitiveness and open-mindedness. Regards. |
I had a feeling that being a guitarphile you would like Martino. Probably my favorite guitarist ever; any genre. Keep in mind that those clips are from his "fusion" period. Martino is a bebopper (post-bop) all the way and hence the melodic sense you heard in those clips. Considered "God" by many jazz guitarists he has a very extensive and diverse discography; check it out. I posted this recently; astounding!: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cyqJwJzGB0gI must say, I think this is the first time I have heard The Dregs referred to as a little boring. Might explain why I consider some of Stevens' playing over the top. Here's a couple more: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IrL4R9x9A14https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MfwsR1shno8Btw, I had a feeling that the subject of Zappa would come up. Colaiuta is a monster drummer who leans more to the fusion side of things. |
Sorry, not the way it was or is, O-10; and, certainly not for recordings. When hired sidemen show up to a recording session they have to rehearse and learn either new material (if the record will be of new original music), or new arrangements of standards. The rehersal takes place in the studio before they do a "take". Even if the recording is by a working band they usually rehearse before a recording session so as to be very sharp and not waste studio time. The sometimes maligned "alternate takes" were often nothing more than rehearsals.
btw, that clip was kind of interesting. |
This (and the dope issue) has been touched upon ad nauseum here; unfortunately I don’t believe that there has been substantive actual discussion. On the issue of "practicing": for starters, there simply isn’t enough commonality in commentators’ understanding of what "practicing" actually is for any discussion to be significant. It would be nice if there were more openness to a point of view based on facts; instead there is staunch adherence to certain misconceptions based on the romance of the tortured artistic savant. Re drug use: while it is undeniable that some jazz musicians, like every other segment of the population, will be driven to drug use because of personal problems, it is a well documented fact that many started using simply because they wanted to emulate everything that their musical heroes (Bird) did; including, and sadly, drug use. Given all this, I think it’s probably best if the topics are dropped. Just one man’s opinion. https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PL08wkpFF-0UWOIRiIj0OiUdM30HlnvzVM&v=Jq7H2E4q83cCoincidentally, I listened to this great record today. First the important stuff: the subject of drummers has been discussed recently. Jack DeJohnette is a genius and one of the most innovative and influential drummers in jazz. As an aside, while I may have been a bit tough on Ginger Baker, my comments were based on my sense that the sophistication in his playing is nowhere near that of a Jack DeJohnette. Keith Jarrett, the leader of the date, is a rather polarizing figure in jazz. I think the issue is that he has a very unique sense of what the rhythmic feeling of jazz is "supposed" to be for some. I love his playing; after I make the adjustment to that other rhythmic sensibility which is not "swingy" in the usual way. Fantastic ensemble playing with tremendous synergy. Why coincidence? The not so important stuff: Listen at the end of this great performance of "Stella". At 7:34 we hear Jarrett say "I hope they taped that". Why is he hoping? Aren’t they there to record? Yes, but that was not supposed to be a take; they were rehearsing/practicing. It is not uncommon for recording engineers to have the tape rolling during rehearsals and sound checks so as not to miss a potentially great performance. This was a perfomance of a standard tune with no unusual arrangement. Imagine if Jarrett had brought a brand new composition that the other players were seeing (on the printed page) for the first time. They practice. (Oops, I guess I didn't drop it 😉) |
|
O-10, c'mon now, there was nothing "sneaky" about it; I think I was pretty direct about it. It is the gross over-simplification of these topics that I think makes it pointless to discuss; that, and, as I said, the staunch adherence to certain misconceptions. To use Bird as an example of these "special musicians" (which he of course was) and then dismiss Bird's own assertions about the relevance of "schooling" strikes me as highly ironic. Beyond that, I don't disagree with your comments "back to the subject of music", I just don't understand what any of that has to do with your initial comment about practicing/rehearsing, your initial comment; it doesn't. This is what, for me, makes it pretty pointless to discuss; hence my comment. Personally, I would prefer to comment on the Jarrett clip, the great drumming, or the "fly on the wall" moment that I pointed out.
|
Better? Hard to say. "Meets TRS" has the magic of the excitement of the unexpected meeting of those players; not to mention it's one of the greatest rhythm sections ever. On the other hand, in spite of his great playing, Pepper does sound a little out of shape and his playing is a little rough overall. Great record; and, the story behind it is hard to beat. One of my favorites; one that shows his playing in really good shape and has some really nice writing for small big band by Marty Paich is: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Uf2O9b9d5FQhttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qtxjaVAl2LEThis, his comeback record, is amazing. I have trouble looking at pictures of Pepper at this point in his life; he looks like the walking dead with that familiar drug-ravaged look in his eyes. His playing also fits that description; highly emotional, like he is in pain. Unusual rhythm section of Hampton Hawes, Charlie Haden and Shelly Manne. Almost hard to listen to: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lhg0vK1cqWwhttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XH-6Yc2sCro |
****Who cares about what an entertainer does as long as they entertain?****
Bill Cosby, Woody Allen, (the list goes on).......??????? |
****but I do not believe that Cosby and Allen should be in the same sentence****
Given the subject at hand, why? |
|
|
Oh.....why not?
As I get older and as I watch what is happening in the politics landscape at this very moment, what becomes more and more obvious is how easily many of us can turn a blind eye to dishonesty and corruption by "our side" as long as it serves to delegitimize "the other side". The idea that communism can be seen as a false "boogieman" is a perfect example. It was and is the worst boogieman of all. If only for this reason, when one considers the two pathetic choices that are being offered the American people at this moment in political history the best choice, as usual, is that which will keep us as far away from that ideology as possible and not move us toward it. The truth is that Fox News is no more biased toward "the right" than most others news outlets are biased toward "the left"; and probably a lot less. As much as Rok and I have disagreed about many things, I find his recent comments to be spot on. |
****the only place communism exists is in Cuba, and the poor people are doing better in Cuba than they are here. **** O-10, sorry, but you could not be more mistaken; I would have thought that you would be more aware of what is going on around the world in countries which either still adhere to a Communist ideology or still have leanings in that direction due to their past. Now, some will get hung up on the issue of "at what point does socialism become full-fledged Communism"; personally, I don’t believe that as concerns the move away from the philosophy that made this country (US) the most important force for good on the planet, that the distinction matters. http://www.pri.org/stories/2013-12-10/can-you-name-five-remaining-communist-countries-worldYou really should educate yourself about what is really going on in Cuba. As a Cuban emigre with immediate family still in Cuba I can comfortably say that your statement is dead wrong. Life for the poor in this country is infinitely better than that of the average Cuban. The corruption of that regime is mind boggling. If you would like to learn more and in more detail about what the returning tourists don’t get to see (not allowed) and what the romance of the beauty of the island hides, please contact me privately and I would be glad to offer some facts based on direct experience. Some things are too important to not discuss, imo; especially at this point in time and even on a music thread. Although it would not surprise me if some of these posts mysteriously disappear. |
Alex, I am traveling today so will not be able to respond until tomorrow; but I will. |
Alex, I am well aware of the ideological differences between "socialism" and "communism"; I am also aware, as I know you are, that although the terms are mistakenly used interchangeably, there are similarities that go to what is, for me, the main issue relevant to what inspired this discussion in the first place. My comments were made with the situation in Cuba as the backdrop, in reaction to the comments by O-10. That may make me biased due to a "personal motiv", but my "bias" does not change the reality ("truth") of what the situation is in Cuba; and, there is a great deal of misinformation and inaccuracies presented about that situation. Most people are shocked when I tell them about the incredible shortages of the most basic goods and medicines that all, except the elite, in Cuba face. How a young attorney in Cuba earns the equivalent of $30 (yes, you read that correctly) a month, an experienced and established doctor (my brother) $300 a month. How, only if someone in the family is ill, are you allowed a meager ration of meat or yogurt; unless, of course, you have funds sent to you from overseas; funds which the govenrment proceeds to take a percentage of. How, if one applies to leave the country, you will be ostricized and even your employment is jeoperdized. Oh, yes, medical "care" is free to all. Problem is, many of the most common meds are not available. The situation in Cuba is a disaster and, incredibly, getting worse in spite of recent changes in relations with the US. This, sadly supporting my contention that the best reason for "improving" relations between the two countries would be the elimination, once and for all, of the last excuse that the Cuban regime has had for why their system of government is a disaster.
I am not sure what "incorrect generalizations" in what I wrote you are referring to, or how it is "far from truth". If you are referring to my comments about Cuba, I assure you that my comments are absolutely correct; "dissident perspective" and all. As I said to O-10, if you would like more details about what life in Cuba is like for the average Cuban I would be glad to offer more information. If, on the other hand, you are referring to my comments about the role of the U.S., that can certainly be debated. However, if you think your own perspective is not biased I think you would be mistaken; all our perspectives are for a variety of reasons. From my perspective, that the U.S. is, on balance, the greatest "force for good" is undeniable. I would simply (?!) point to things like the question of what the world would be like had it not been for US involvement in WW2, largest humanitarian aid donor, most advances in research and innovation in medicine; the list goes on. Problems? Mistakes? Many. However, the notion that that the export of Communism can be equated with the export of Democracy strikes me as highly cynical. I would agree that the notion of "exporting" of ideology is highly questionable; however, as usual, and as complex and difficult as these topics are, we the "very educated" have a tendency to get mired in the theoretical details and overlook some of the most basic and mundane indications of a possible answer to our heady questions. What country do more foreigners want to go to than any other?
Thanks for the thoughtful comments and challenge. |
Inna, try Ghosthouse's recent recommendation of Tony Williams' "Lifetime" as well as Larry Coryell's "Eleventh House", Chick Corea's "Return To Forever", and of course some of Miles' post Bitches Brew recordings like "In A Silent Way". |
Alex, one thing you are correct about, "critic thoughts about politics is not the best way to make friends"; as demonstrated by a tenor in your post that comes across as decidedly unfriendly. One doesn’t "choose" a perspective (at least I don’t); one’s perspective is borne out of one’s experiences and, hopefully, an honest interest in seeking truth? Moreover, my personal motivation (comfort) were I, in fact, "choosing" a perspective is something that I assure you would have no basis for judging from such a limited exchange as this. Perhaps it is the difficulty inherent in trying to discuss complicated issues within the limitations of a forum like this, but from my perspective you are not doing a very good job of understanding my perspective or I am not doing a very good job of explaining it; but you certainly seem to be very judgmental. I, likewise, ask that you do not take my comments "ad hominem".
I believe that my perspective would be exactly the same had I not had the "Cuba experience". Why do I feel that way? In part roughly half the population of this country shares those feelings without having had the "Cuba experience". I ask you: what country do YOU feel is and has been a greater force for good ON BALANCE? Again, from my perspective, I see a kind of absolutism in your perspective that is consistent: while I acknowledge the "problems and mistakes" in and made by this country, you seem to suggest that this somehow automatically disqualifies this country from the title "greatest force for good"; just as, in the context of a discussion about entertainers’ behavior (and nothing more) you felt that the names Allen and Cosby could not be uttered in the same sentence. I would suggest that it is you who are "choosing" a perspective.
I am intrigued by your comment about my "opposite perspective" of music. Opposite to what? Yours? If there is a parallel between our respective feelings about music and politics, it seems to me that our respective feelings about the two contradict each other. I welcome your thoughts about this.
I consider you a very thoughtful person and have always acknowledged that. However, thoughtfulness does not always equal truth and, as you point out, being from different continents will color our respective perspectives; for all of us. |
|
****There is no way some people will let facts stand in the way of their illusions. I wouldn't care one iota, if I were not affected by their stupidity; ****
Funny, the same feeling I have frequently had for almost four years now 😉
|
Thanks for the heads up about the bad link, Ghosthouse. |
Ghosthouse, thanks for your thoughtful comments. I agree with your sentiments completely. And you are a better man than I for missing (overlooking?) the sarcasm in my comment that, while completely relevant to the subject of your sentiments, was directed at something else. Best that I leave my explanation at that. Regards. |
Parody all the way; and a bit of a dig directed at Santana. Zappa was a genius; and, a very opinionated one. He was also a very serious composer and student of the music of Edgar Varese and Stravinsky. He was a very deep musician whose music has a depth, complexity and level of craft that is leagues beyond Santana's. Santana's strength is that great and instantly recognizable tone with a really strong sense of sincerity and very deep "from the heart" quality in his playing. Most guitar players would say that Zappa was an infinitely better guitar player; just as most composers would say that Zappa was infinitely more accomplished. Which one touches any given listener's heart more is, as always, subjective and dependent on what that listener is looking for in music. |
Agreed, both have artistic merit. In its context, I love Santana's playing. I can do without some of his more recent "star studded" efforts; but, still....
The parody runs deeper than meets the eye. There is more than a passing resemblance to "Evil Ways". Zappa's parody is in the same key (G minor) and the "chord orogreasion" is nothing more than a vamp between two chords (Gm and C) for the entire tune; just like Evil Ways. Hardly a "chord progression; and, that's the point of the parody.
|
