Jazz for aficionados

Ok, Rok, I'll play; for a little while anyway.  Please set the record straight, then, and explain what you mean by the distinction and why you make it?  Of course, all this against the backdrop of your well known and frequently expressed disdain for music critics.  

Very funny, Acman3.  Btw, very nice clips with Chris Potter; been meaning to comment.   Monster player and carrier of the tenor torch at the moment I think.  Listened to this today; what a great loss when he passed not long ago.  State of the art "new jazz", imo:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLKnVe9VCtNOkzCNcePTCjUa1w2ZsCz-Cd&v=iruMwrn0PIQ

****In regard to the "music critic" type of response; it might be appropriate in a music school or class, but comes off as condescending here,****

With all due respect, O-10, I think you left out two key words at the end of that statement....."to me".  There is no condescension in expressing truth and points of interest expressed without condescension in the context of a discussion about music; condescension of the type as in the "dissect it like a frog" comment.  

Hey, speaking of condescension:

****I'm sure those of us who simply listen without analyzing, enjoy the music more than the analytical critic****

Absolutely not true; but, if you need to feel that you enjoy music more than I do, please, by all means do so its cool with me.  

As far as commentary that not only is unsubstantiated, but that is more suitable for a classroom:

****"Enigma" is the most creative musical group to come along in decades; they have presented a new form of artistic expression with mystic and experimental components which enabled them to sell 700 million records world wide.

Their music fits all the various definitions of the word in regard to "genre"; therefor it is music of the world without any specific definition, or genre, although we demand that all things be classified.****

Ahem! 

Alex, you are without a doubt, the best friend of the under appreciated musician.  What a nice player Lenny Hambro was.  One of those guys who truly could have been a "star" but for whatever reasons never became one.  He was a star among his peers as he is a NYC legend among players..  Beautiful singing quality in his playing and beautiful tone as you point out; surprisingly bright tone for a player of his generation.  Great clips!  Thanks. 

Ghosthouse, John Hassel, different approach to the trumpet indeed.  I actually liked the Brian Eno/Hassel "Fourth World" record quite a bit.  Some of the best conceptually strong "ambient" music that I have heard.  Not something that I would like to listen to all the time, but definitely interesting compositionally and conceptually and worthy of a listen.  Thanks for those.

Interesting word, "malarkey".   Can also be spelled without the "e"; "malarky".  Of unknown origin, it is one of our vice-president's (soon to be gone) favorite words.  So much so, that one speech of his is known as "the Malarkey speech". Rok, you are in good company 😊☺️😉

Tsk, tsk. tsk, O-10; try and take a closer look at where you’re starting to take the dialogue. It should be pointed out that you didn’t have to go there at all, but you chose to continue to stir the pot. You could not be more mistaken in your analysis; but, as before, no problem as far as I’m concerned. As I have said many times, I would like nothing more than civil dialogue; but, as usual. there seems to be a total difference of perspectives at these times beginning with the notion that I may want to "change" you or anyone. You flatter yourself, and I would suggest that for a clue about the root cause of this never-ending antagonism one need look no further than at the simple fact that you have now pointed out, complained, objected to, whatever you want to call it, THREE TIMES to the fact that no one responded to your Ammons clips.

I would like to suggest that we institute a "gentleman’s rule" for the thread. This, on the assumption that after almost four years these silly little "dramas" will continue. I would like to suggest that whenever there is contentious dialogue which, as we know, has a tendency to spiral out of control with more and more personal comments and innuendo, that as soon as a poster (in this most recent case. Alex 12/3) posts music or makes a comment entirely about music (the supposed subject of this thread) with NO reference to the "drama", that the drama and its particulars be COMPLETELY dropped by all concerned and we move on to the subject of music: an automatic diffuser of the tension. A little poetic as well as pragmatic, no? Works for me.

😉

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8xNbqG9PtyE

Alex, my apology to you for not making my comments more clear.  My reference to your post was made only in the most positive light.  Your comment was the opposite of personal and why I referenced it.  Since O-10 and I were headed for, yet again, an unpleasant argument with little chance of a resolution, I suggested to O-10, as a way to prevent the recurring cycle of unproductive arguments, that as a "safety valve" of sorts, all on this thread establish a rule that says that whenever a post is made that is strictly about music as yours was (12/3) that whoever is arguing should consider that a "white flag" of sorts and cease the arguing and drop the subject so that we can all return to the subject of music.  I hoped that O-10 and I could reach such a "gentleman's agreement" and not let the arguing spiral out of control as in the past.  Btw, I do have some thoughts about those clips; fantastic stuff.

O-10, I'm sorry, but I have no idea what you're talking about.  

How unfortunate.  Sorry, O-10, I don't play those games and consider that approach to be childish and small minded; so, I will continue to address you if I feel the need to and you are then free to ignore me if you wish.  As always, hoping for better vibes.

Ghosthouse, the piano player is Tommy Flanagan. There are actually three tenor players on the date: Jug, Frank Wess and Frank Foster. The two Franks were the two tenor players in Basie’s band during that period. While the two of them had very similar styles (especially during that period; Foster moved more to a contemporary sound later on than Wess), you are correct, the tenor solo at 5:40 is by Frank Foster and he would definitely be the one most likely to invoke Trane. All three "trade fours" during the last couple of minutes. The solo order of the three tenors at the beginning of the tune is: Jug, Wess @ 2:00, Foster @ 4:05. Very swinging session.

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

Ghosthouse, me too.  I think we got our wires crossed a bit, though; my bad.  When you referenced the reviewer on Amazon who pointed out that the record was reissued as "Juggin Around" my brain went to the title cut of that record.  The personell is, of course, the same but the solo order that I mentioned is for the tune "Juggin Around" from that session:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JR0WWhRgzrg

On "Swinging With Benny", Frank Wess plays flute and only two tenors play, as you pointed out, Jug and Foster.  Yes, "trading fours" means trading four measure solos.  Btw, "elegant" and "economical"  is the perfect description of Tommy Flanagan's style; very appropriate.  And good for you for recognizing Tommy Flanagan's style.

Nice! Yup, elegant and economical. Thanks for the great clip, Acman3.

Tommy Flanagan's obituary in NY Times:

"Tommy Flanagan, elegant jazz pianist, is dead at 71"

Alex, really liked the Dick Garcia clips; thanks for that.  Very nice player that is new to me; you did it again.  Biggest surprise for me was Bill Evans playing in a very harmonically "inside" and swingy style.  Much of his recorded work has shown a harmonically complex vocabulary in his improvised lines and harmonies, surely and in part a result of his affinity for the Impressionist composers (Ravel, Debussy) as you pointed out a while ago.  On this clip he keeps things much more simple harmonically and even the very swingy feel here has his usual sense of understatement.  

Great to hear Tony Scott on clarinet on "Have You Met Miss Jones"..  Like Hambro, one of those guys who was a hero to the players but never gained much public recognition.  The clarinet doesn't get too much love on this thread unfortunately.  The greatest bebopper on the clarinet:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ntzKLE9BwVs

Ok, Rok, if you insist:

From the obit:

**** Tommy Flanagan, a jazz pianist who with a classic trio set a high standard for elegance in mainstream postwar jazz, ****

Obit, The Guardian:

**** Inventive and elegant jazz pianist as fluent as the stars he accompanied ****

From Wiki:

**** After leaving Fitzgerald again, Flanagan attracted praise for the elegance of his playing ****

Jazzhouse.org:

**** Tommy Flanagan was as lucid, refined and swinging a pianist as any in the history of jazz and emerged as one of the most elegant and fully rounded interpreters in jazz . ****

Concord Music Group:

**** and, perhaps above all, an impeccable, imperturbable, and unerringly elegant sense of ...****

Let me know if you need more.

It boggles the mind how someone who professes to be such a "protector" of jazz is blind to the fact that he lets his own need to be "right", not only abandon all logic and reason, but lets that need undermine the very thing that he claims to love so much. To dismiss or, at minimum, downplay the accolades directed at one of the greatest practitioners of the art form (Flanagan) in order to somehow gain some personal validation is pathetic. Not to mention the harm that is done when interacting in this way, instead of keeping things positive and forward looking, with other listeners and especially with eager and thoughtful new explorers of the music. I am sorry to say that, as far as I am concerned, the only "protecting" that jazz needs is from "fans" like you, Rok.

Cheers, indeed.

Rok, your comments over time speak for themselves. Your stances are duplicitous and disingenuous and made to fit whatever agenda you feel is necessary at the time. You have often professed to being the "protector" of jazz as just one example. There are two overriding issues here and always have been: 1. You are intolerant of other’s views on what constitutes real jazz; as if you had enough credibility on the subject to dictate that for anyone besides yourself. 2. In the absence of the ability to say much on the subject that goes much beyond the most basic or beyond "what you grew up with", you recoil and attack when others who can do.

On the subject of "elegant" and how you undermine: you obviously have no idea just how frequently musicians use the term "elegant" to describe another player’s style of playing when it suits. That’s the pity in all this, you have now dug your heels in on the subject and keep yourself from learning a small nugget of information. It’s ok if you are not interested in that kind information and always has been. However, when time and time again your constant attack on others’ definition of the music and the way that they express themselves about it (especially when these same people do not attack YOU for your musical preferences) does nothing more than bring negativity and derailment to the proceedings here,  suggests to me that there is more than "fun" at work here and there is indeed some "malice". Sad.

****She stayed with the stuff she was exposed to during her young days. I do the same. We all do.****

I’ve got news for you, no, we don’t all do that.

Alex, fantastic post featuring the clarinet!  That Tatum/DeFranco record has been one of my desert island records for a long time.  Incredible level of artistry and style with a kind of musical innosence and elegance that was partly lost as jazz became more "serious" and "edgy".  Love that style of playing.  The Tony Scott/Bill Evans was new to me.  Very nice.  Very appropriate to bring up Barney Bigard; a good chronological place to start when looking at jazz clarinet.  Classic Barney Bigard:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FS92-mCewJ4

The great Jimmy Hamilton replaced Bigard in Duke's band with a more developed clarinet tone.  My favorite of the clarinet players from that era:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PL1gmh6xxFkfg63G__TZ8efK4CVpgeOc3r&v=_0OLAvrIOdI

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PL1gmh6xxFkfg63G__TZ8efK4CVpgeOc3r&params=EAEYATgBSAFYJGILXzBPT...

If the clarinet is sadly not always considered the "hippest" instrument in jazz, how about clarinet with accordion 😊.  Love this record for its "fun" factor:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IEXqtpzQ9bk

My favorite current clarinetist playing in a more traditional style.  Fantastic clarinet player with a gorgeous clarinet tone:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Elafx3b6GK0

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rnf14fuZ9L0

fourwnds, I agree with the comments that what matters is whether you like Spyrogyra or not. Personally, I would be even a bit more generous in my assessment of "Morning Dance". While I can’t claim to be up to date on Spyrogyra’s total or recent "oeuvre", I remember that record fondly from college days and I believe I still have it. I would put that record in the same general category of "smooth jazz", "fusion jazz", whatever, as some of the music of Chuck Mangione. The title that works best for me is simply "pop-jazz"; of the better kind. As with much of Chuck Mangione’s music it is tuneful with strong compositional and production values and very good instrumental playing with a "pop" music sensibility. Saxophonist Jay Beckenstein can really play and he plays with a very pretty tone not the cliched and obnoxious, fast vibrato-laden, Dave Sanborn-wannabe kind of tone heard in most saxophone based "smooth jazz". I wouldn’t focus too much on whether it is "real jazz" or not for validation, but rather on whether it is good music or not. Yeah, it’s probably "better" than some current jazz, but I could make a case for why it’s also better than some old (real?) jazz that can be found on record. It’s not the genre that determines whether it’s good or not. While some can make a case for why steak is necessarily "better" than hamburger, sometimes there’s nothing like a great burger and I have had some pretty bad steaks in my time.

What I would reconsider is the suggestion that this record is on a par with Steely Dan’s work (especially "Aja"). Clearly a personal call, but SD is, generally, on a considerably higher level of musical craft if not as immediately accessible and tuneful as Spyrogyra. Welcome to the thread!

Excellent comments, Ghosthouse; you are exactly right. Re the objective/subjective issue:

As I see it, the main sticking point in the debate is what often seems to be the assumption by some that when objective criteria are used to judge some or all aspects of a particular music, that this automatically means that the evaluation is devoid of subjectivity or simple emotional reaction; or, that the person who sometimes analyses ALWAYS analyses when listening. Nothing could be further from the truth. As you point out, not only is there "no need for one to be at the expense of the other", objective analysis can actually help the listener appreciate MORE of what might otherwise fall under the heading of subjectivity. All this, of course, then plays into issues of the personality of a listener. I can understand why some need to keep analysis out of the equation and don’t want to be "hampered" by it and want to keep the listening experience as "simple" as possible and not be "challenged" as a listener; its a personal call. However, like you, I don’t understand the aversion to knowledge. Moreover, one of the key unanswered questions in this never-ending debate is why the "subjectivists" have no problem having strong opinions and even putting down certain music liked by others. In other words, if "subjectivity" alone is to be considered the best approach, should not the subjectivity of all listeners be respected while rendering ANY criticism moot? Why should the criteria used by subjectivists, whatever those may be, be more credible than that of those who bring SOME analysis to the equation? The pure subjectivists’ criteria are, by definition, personal; objective criteria are not.

One of the most curious aspects of all this as concerns subjectivity/objectivity and as it relates to the old jazz/new jazz debate is the simple fact that it is the staunch old jazz devotee(s?) who seem to like ONLY old jazz while I don’t think there has been a single fan of new jazz to post here that has not posted or expressed liking old jazz as well. So, to my simple minded way of thinking, just what is the problem? As you yourself have pointed out, there ARE universally accepted (well, almost 😉) basic criteria for judging SOME aspects of art. That is a hard pill for some to swallow for some reason.

Related in a very roundabout way, if arguably related at all, but came across this quote and thought it was worth sharing ☺️:

"Some days you get up and put the horn to your chops and it sounds pretty good and you win. Some days you try and nothing works and the horn wins. This goes on and on and then you die and the horn wins" - Dizzy Gillespie

**** The Frogman just wants to strut his stuff ****

As is often the case when we come to this impasse, Rok, you would be dead wrong.  Rok, you simply don't get it; so, rant away.  Now, if you were to have an honest interest about any real motivation, be open to the truth, and you can find it within yourself to communicate that and any follow up commentary in a respectful, civilized and reasonably logical way then I would, once again, try and explain it to you.  Otherwise, I think my comments have been perfectly clear.  

**** "I do not want to learn squat in regard to making music".****

O-10, I'll make you a deal.  You (and Rok) pledge to never say anything negative about a music, or make unsubstantiated and hyperbolic-to-the-point-of-humor proclamations about music (like your "Enigma" comments) and I will never again say anything that could remotely be considered "about making music".  Obviously, if you "don't want to learn squat about music", why should anyone care what you have to say about it?  Otherwise, kindly explain why your personal anecdotes and Rok's comments about his Aunt should be relevant to anyone except yourselves?  Why do you guys feel so threatened by others' (and I am far from alone) interest in what, as Ghosthouse says, makes it all tick, and by the ability and desire to express it?  If you are not interested in it, then simply look the other way.  I know why, but I'll leave it for you to figure out.  You want to control the way that others express themselves about music and what it means to them. Instead of appreciating the opportunity to glean some knowledge or, at least, understand that there are different perspectives, you want to shut it down; a kind of music fascism.  Pretty pathetic if you ask me; and mostly because all one has to do is look at what the end result is.  

There’s really not much that can be added that isn’t obvious to anyone with a reasonable level of intellect; and therein lies the fundamental problem here. This would normally (and ideally) not be an issue at all if it weren’t accompanied by an equally low level of basic decorum and civility in the way that the interaction takes place. I do find fascinating and highly appropriate the "looking in the mirror" analogy; remarkable how we can fool ourselves into seeing what we want to see (instead of the truth) in order to build ourselves up.

Early on in the history of this thread I made the comment that I felt that one of the most important aspects of being a good music listener is to never lose one’s sense of humility. Iow, the music is always greater than personal ego and there is danger in identifying with it in a way that is overly self-serving and doesn’t honor the grandeur of the music. No matter one’s level or type of experience in or with the music there is always much more to learn. The danger in not respecting this reality is the stunning level of irrationality and hypocracy demonstrated here by those who cannot bear to consider the possibility that someone else may have a different way of approaching the listening experience; or, God forbid!, some level of insight that eludes them.

Alex (and others), here's a rarity, Art Pepper on clarinet.  Not exactly the most accomplished clarinetist, but always with that fantastic sense of swing that he had in spades which, for a nice relaxed tune like this,  renders moot any limitations on the instrument.  Two different takes of the same tune from one of my favorite records:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLc1mfuf6zTgipDQ_MPPkbVgugTVUH2w8i&v=FpDcFkdATbI

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLc1mfuf6zTgipDQ_MPPkbVgugTVUH2w8i&v=cZSKf8s8NfY

The current reigning king of the clarinet.  Eddie Daniels is an amazing virtuoso on multiple woodwinds who has focused on the clarinet in recent years and can play in any genre from Classical to  Jazz to fusion.  Beautiful player and, like Michael Brecker on the tenor, and putting stylistic preferences aside,  possibly the greatest virtuoso to ever play jazz clarinet.  I admit that I don't always like his very "noty" style, but I post it to show what is possible on the instrument:

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

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

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Jj3wSASuSp0

Very interesting comments, Alex, and I agree completely; the origins of "taste" can indeed be very elusive.  I love ethnic music from that part of the world as well as most ethnic musics.  The subject of "soul" comes up frequently here and I think it's important to appreciate that "soul" is not unique to music with roots in the Afro-American experience.  I first fully understood this the first time that I travelled to Japan.  After years of finding Japanese ethnic music unlistenable, being extremely grating and abrasive to everything that was part of my musical frame of reference, learning a bit about Japanese culture showed me just how soulful that ethnic music is.  I feel the same way about music from the Balkans and find much of it very soulful.  As far as the feeling of sadness that the clarinet/accordion invokes in you, a couple of thoughts; but, first, I would like to give anyone who will be offended by a bit of "analysis" time to leave the room😔................
..........................................................................................................
........... is the coast clear? ............................................................OK:

On the assumption that you have heard a fair amount of ethnic music from the Balkans (hence your familiarity with Milosevic) it should be pointed out that much of it features the clarinet, so I am sure that you are considering the very natural feeling of nostalgia that it may invoke in you, just as Cuban folk music does for me.  Beyond that, and this is key (pun intended).............. last chance .........................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................OK,
most ethnic music from the Balkans is in a minor key; the "sadness" key, as opposed to a major key, the "happy" key.  Music in a minor key is recognized as invoking a feeling of sadness.  Almost all blues is in a minor key.  Perhaps this contributes to your feeling.

Very good clarinetist Milosevik.  I am well aware of his son Milan Milosevik, also a very accomplished and highly respected clarinetist who works in North America (mainly Canada).  I knew his father was also a musician, but knew nothing more.  Thank you for those clips.  He's a fine clarinetist; very expressive.  It is interesting to compare his playing  to his son's who is more a product of the "internationalization" of the different styles of clarinet playing; a twentieth century phenomenon.  Less overtly "ethnic" and individualistic, but more refined and, arguably, even more soulful:

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

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bjv2nAhIbiQ (he plays Tarogato at the end of this)

The possible layers of "analysis" are pracrically endless. Should I have? Possibly, depending on how deep one wants to dig; I wasn’t going there. Roma or Gypsies; fascinating history and some truth to what you say. Feel free to elaborate.

Alex, my favorite "The Far Side" cartoon:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Accordion/comments/3pvqb7/the_far_side/

Please, try and control the tears ☺️:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0WCMzRLov58

If that fails, try this (is this jazz-jazz?):

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PL0D56CCF56E7DF4C8&v=IrQGcIIwwR0

Wonderful clips, Alex.  Beautiful!

O-10, no time now, but will get back re Dolphy.

I liked it very much. There is a very strong choral music tradition in The Balkans and Eastern Europe as a whole which often incorporates folk songs. I’ve always found something very attractive about the music of that part of world. One of the distinctive qualities is the use of unique minor scales (there are different kinds) that cause the melodies to not have the usual tendencies to resolve or move the way that Western ears are accustomed to. This can give the melodies a sense of staying suspended and not resolving. One can hear the influence of early Christian music as well as folk music and, indeed, acapella singing has its roots in Christian, Jewish and Muslim religious music from a time when the use of instruments in religious services was considered inappropriate. It would not be surprising if some of that tradition found its way to the kitchen table.  Not exactly from The Balkans, one of my very favorite records is of choral works by Hungarian composer Zoltan Kodaly for girls chorus and mixed chorus. A beautiful and at times haunting sound.. That record is not on YouTube, but this is some of the music:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7_PFwnbPOn4

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=denTCk20Ahw

I agree. Great tune and great feeling of serenity as suggested by Ghosthouse. Not meaning to be presumptuous, but supposing that he listened to some of the Kodaly clips, a perfect choice for a transition back to jazz. One of my favorite Freddie H solos.

Few piano players could invoke a feeling of serenity like Bill Evans could:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Nv2GgV34qIg

As with some poster(s)’ knee jerk reaction to new jazz, usually followed by silliness and ugliness, there is often more energy spent (posts) on objecting to, qualifying and bickering about dialog concerning the "making of music" than actually "listening to and evaluating Jazz music". I would venture a guess that only about 10% (at most) of the music clips posted here have been "new" Jazz. However, more times than not there is some ugly derision directed at the new music clips and/or the person posting them. This, while also and often ignoring the jazz-jazz clips. Why? Doesn’t this strike the objectors as a little bizarre and counterproductive? My point, and humble and friendly suggestion, is that since by now we all know where each of us stands (and it’s not going to change), with all due respect, proclamations like the above are not only unnecessary, but serve no purpose other than to disrupt the serenity. I would, however, like to ask the question: Since the thread is, as you suggest, about "evaluating Jazz music", kindly explain how a listener for who the "making of music" is inextricably intertwined with the "evaluation of music" (and it is for many many listeners; probably most, to some degree) is supposed to do that? Please consider yourself NOT included 😊

**** but do you think any of the "movie makers" want to learn anything about how to make music? ****

You better believe it! There are many aspects of the music making process that movie makers concern themselves with; starting with the choice of composers for the score based on understanding that only certain composers use certain instrumental (and vocal) textures and colors in such a way that serves the movie maker/producer’s vision of the role of the music in the overall product.

O-10, I was not aware that there was a "teacher" and "students" here, but simply sharing of ideas and thoughts; much more positive and less contentious way to look at it if you ask me.  Serenity is good thing.  Great clip with Toots; love that record.  And if that record doesn't shatter preconceived notions about certain things,  I don't know what does.  Who woulda thunk that the harmonica could sound so elegant and masterful?  Great stuff.

Thanks for the link. Alex.   Very interesting stuff.

I disagree.  First of all, I don't remember anyone ever suggesting that if you left the thread "it would thrive".  Since the last time this comment about "this thread has all the people it's going to get"   was made (not that long ago) there have been at least two or three new contributors and at least one of those is a regular.  The related comment that I and others have made is that it would serve the thread well if the elememt of elitism, intolerance, clickishness and simply bad manners that is sometimes introduced drives potential posters away; imo.

****  (no need to say, "Or her") ****

How do you know? 😄

randy-11, its right here; doors wide open:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jjq6rcEZ-J4

Used to be at this address, but one of its priests (Brecker) sadly passed recently:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VKI-vE7KmvU

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XkFYS2NWo9U

Ravi Coltrane, son of John and Alice Colrane.  His dad passed away when he was two years old.  One could make a case for why the church is at this address; you be the judge:

 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HCFYuVrUpq4

Son:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jI7RbAf4Dks

Father:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JG9ygPjWdj0

Billy Vaughn, **** Although not "jazz jazz" I like the music, and I was wondering; "What do you think"? ****

Not my cup of tea, O-10.  When you said it's "not jazz-jazz" I assumed it would have some semblance to jazz.  Doesn't do it for me.  Pretty tuneful stuff, but very hokey; although, nothing like a good melody.  Still, the kind of stuff that reminds me of the music scores from early 70s TV shows like "That Girl" and "The Flying Nun".  Touted as a "multi-instrumentslist", I think that Billy Vaughn was more of a "Easy Listening" orchestra leader.  As an instrumentalist (sax, flute) he was pretty bad.  I would put this music along side Lawrence Welk conceptually, but on a lower level of craft; Lawrence Welk's orchestra was GREAT.

O-10, I agree, great tunes. 

Two great versions.  Mathis is great; very classy singer.  

Here's a different idea on what to do with the tune. Joe Lovano on tenor sounds great; every bit as unusual and original as Abbey Lincoln.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qsPwQcWqxw8

Imo. one of the best things posted here.  Thanks for that.

I like the premise, Alex.  Beautiful collection of Pollak's works.  I am also a fan.  My wife, an amateur seamstress, has a reproduction of this on the wall of her crafts room:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girl_at_Sewing_Machine#/media/File%3AEdward_Hopper_-_Girl_at_a_Sewin...

Interesting  go that you should bring up film scores; the music accompanying the Hopper clip is from the film "The French Lieutenant's Woman".  Beautiful music and, per your comments, made me think of this which I can easily see substituting for the Carl Davis score in your clip:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fb3Gdtu0LS0

Stunningly soulful:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_of_a_Woman_(Leonardo)#/media/File%3ALascapigliata.jpg

Alex, I tend to agree with you that his music is, first of all, beautiful; but, as with that of Bill Evans, Stan Getz (and obviously others also) there is, for me, always a pervasive feeling of melancholy in what they project musically. In Baker’s case, it’s very easy to understand why this is the case, he led a very troubled life. I am sure you know about Baker’s life outside music, but you may find this interesting:

http://www.jerryjazzmusician.com/2002/06/james-gavin-author-of-deep-in-a-dream-the-long-night-of-che...

Today is the great McCoy Tyner's birthday.  I think the term "great" is a bit overused, but in this case I think there are few musicians more deserving.  His solo work has been fairly well covered here as well as his associations with other truly great players, most notably as part of one of, perhaps THE, greatest rhythm sections ever: that of Coltrane's classic '60's quartet.  An incredibly powerful player with a huge sound on the piano he also had a gentler side and his influence on other piano players and cannot be overestimated:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LDYkdd1FkaA

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sBwuwZh6G6g

**** jazz is almost like a religion ****

This is true; for some. I would then ask that we consider all the single-mindedness, upheaval, hatred and violence that a strict and rigid interpretation of religion has wrought on humanity. With the exception of the violence and hatred (I hope), I think that the parallels to some of our discussions (?) about music are pretty obvious.

I don’t agree that besides having to be musical there is any ONE valid way to play any ONE tune; even a standard like "Moanin". My reaction to the "Eldar" clips is similar as O-10’s; but for different reasons and we may be saying the same thing. One need only look at the dramatically different from the original ways that jazz tunes have been played by musicians while still being valid and musical: "Giant Steps" with a Latin feel, "Stella" as a bossa, some slower, some faster, etc.. The problem with the "Eldar" clips for me is not one of style, but simply that I am left with the feeling of "where’s the music?". This young piano player has amazing technical ability and the notes pour out of him without any effort, but it all sounds to me a bit like a machine making the sounds.

Not really fair to compare a young piano player to McCoy, but here’s McCoy again. Keep the fire extinguisher handy, but this time we may, in fact, need it to put out the fire instead of hitting him over the head with it:

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

**** I feel music, when you see notes on a piece of paper ****

Wrong, O-10, please don’t be so quick to turn things contentious. In my opinion that is the kind of unnecessary divisive and judgmental comment that gets us in trouble. If you think that you have a monopoly on feeling the emotion in music you would be very mistaken. There is always room for clarification, expansion, and even disagreement about specifics. I could easily make a similarly negative statement and say (when looking at a bouquet): "I see roses, petunias and lillys, you see flowers". Please read my comments again and note:

**** and we may be saying the same thing.****

Your follow up post, aside from the snide comment, was much more clear as to the meaning of what it seems you meant to say the first time around. Perhaps endeavoring to be as clear as possible would serve all well.

I guess that we are now, as one of our more wisely disciplined contributors once stated, adding to the "charm" of this thread.  

O-10, it IS contentious, and it most certainly is not a statement of fact.  You apparently missed the point that I was making.  That point related to your comparison of jazz to a religion; THAT comparison is a statement of fact.  The nuances of what you meant were not clear (they were made clearer in your follow up post) and it is also a fact that you used terms like "sacrilege", "defile" and "sacred"; so, .......

Now, the contentious part.  One thing that I think everyone here can agree on is that the most important aspect of any art form is that it can elicit an emotional response; that is why everyone listens to music.  The degree to which it succeeds obviously depends on the listener's likes and biases and quality of the music.  To suggest, in the context of a discussion about music and in a generalizing way, that a listener is incapable of "feeling the emotion in music" is judgmental and contentious.  To be able to "see the notes" does not erase the emotional connection; au contraire.  

Striving for clarity 😊

O-10, I have never mentioned unwritten rules in jazz.  Please enlighten me; inquiring minds want to know and this would shed important light on things.