Jazz for aficionados
One of the most common criteria used by jazz players when commenting about each other's playing is whether the player is "saying something" and not simply captivating the listener with impressive musical cheapshots. For me, few have been able to "tell a story" with the clarity that Stanley Turrentine could. https://youtu.be/FNK6tvh1xUQ |
Coleman Hawkins ("Bean"); fantastic player. His 1939 solo on "Body And Soul" is considered pivotal in jazz and one which took improvisation in an entirely new direction away from the comfortable linear style of the swing era to a more modern angular style that just about every modern player would be influenced by. Btw, the album title "Beanbags" is a combination of Hawkins' moniker "Bean" with that of co-leader Milt Jackson's "Bags". https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zUFg6HvljDE |
"Jug" would, of course, be Gene Ammons. Distinctive player out of the "Texas tenor" tradition. Very assertive style and HUGE sound. The issue if jazz nicknames is a fascinating one. O-10, there is some truth in what you say and thanks for bringing up the topic which is one of the most fun details of this music. However, I think that as written your comment exaggerates the connection to "arriving" on the jazz scene. What about all the great players who do NOT have a moniker? Does that mean that they have not arrived? There have been many. The danger in generalities I think. In fact, an interesting extension on this is that how a musician is addressed by colleagues sometimes comes around full circle. In other words, sometimes the ultimate sign of respect becomes NOT the use of the always used moniker when addressing the esteemed player, but the use of the formal first name. Example, in "musician speak", a player might have, for instance, referred to "Duke" as Edward (his real name) as the ultimate sign of respect. A subtle and very inside thing. Interesting comments on the topic: http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2015/04/jazz-musicians-nicknames/ |
Being very familiar (unfortunately) with this kind of recent silly and pointless arguing I would like to, "for what it’s worth" (a comment that I will return to), offer some thoughts. While I realize some may question why I make an issue of this and jump into the fray, all I can say is that I honestly believe that if we could avoid that kind of silliness and instead try and understand what the other poster is saying or why he has a particular reaction to an artist we would all be better music listeners. Instead, posters argue and get indignant, throw around "opinions" with little basis in reality, puff their chests and eventually things calm down only to have the exact same thing happen again. This thread is about music and with all the expressed feelings about the claimed sacrosanct "subjectivity" of music it seems to me that there should be some respect shown for why someone may or may not like an artist. Respect, in as much as remaining open to understanding the dissenting opinion. The catch, of course, is there has to be a willingness to, at least, try and explain that opinion; either in musical terms or in terms of personal emotional reaction. In other words, knowledge of the technical aspects of music is not absolutely necessary for this. The cynic and strict subjectivist may believe that knowledge is actually a disadvantage; nonsense, of course. I happen to like Gene Ammons. I also can understand why some don’t like his style. A player with a tremendous amount of exuberance, huge robust sound, unique tone and hard swinging. He was actually a "gateway" player to the r&b tenor saxophone sound that was heard come out of every jukebox during the early rock and roll period. On the other hand his playing was rough around the edges, lacked refinement and he could not hold a candle to some one like Sonny Stitt in terms of command of harmony when playing harmonically complicated tunes; and his ballad playing lacked tenderness, imo. So, isn’t easy to see how someone might really like him and someone else might not? Not meaning to "take sides", but for what it’s worth and as I see it: Schubert made a comment with the important qualifier "for what it’s worth" and expressed that he could listen to three particular artists all day. O-10, then states that Schubert’s list is incomplete and should include Ammons. So, now we have four artists that are worthy of being listened to all day.....I see. Schubert responds, acknowledges that Ammons had a lot of talent, but just doesn’t like him (much?). Oh no, we can’t have that! "I love Ammons, he is a giant, you are wrong in not liking him and, moreover, I couldn’t care less that you don’t like him.....so there!!!!" Aargh! Imo, THAT is when things took the unfortunate wrong turn and the silliness began. Personally, I saw nothing wrong with Schubert’s response. We all purport to love music so much, but it seems to me are not always willing to pay it the respect that it deserves. It is an amazing art form and is serious business. Instead, it becomes a personal playground for patting ourselves on the back for how much we think we know or appreciate about it while only scratching the surface of its amazing depth and complexity. All this without enough sense of inquisitiveness, awe and humility about it all; it becomes about personal ego. Not digging deep enough, imo. Not meaning to offend and, if it does, apologies to anyone concerned; but, I simply can’t let a couple of the "highlights" go by without some kind of response so as to make my above points. All, of course, imo: **** I don’t listen to Classical music and yet.. I know when classical musician plays as it should be played. **** Aaah, sure..... **** Vaness Mae....she is Classical **** Huh?! Regards to all and here’s 🍷 to having thicker skins and digging a little deeper. |
Following in jafant's footstep and to respond to the "Caravan" posts: Ella: Sublime. It just doesn't get better than that; different yes, but not better. Arguably the best female jazz singer ever and shows why she was called, and speaking of "royalty" titles, "Queen Of Jazz". Amazing musician in every sense of the word. Pitch like few other singers, swung like hell and one of maybe a half dozen singers of either gender that doesn't make me want to turn the music off after more than just a few seconds of scatting. From the very first note of the clip it is obvious that it is Duke's (Edward's 😎) band. The sound of the saxophone section is, in many ways, led from the bottom up by the great Harry Carney's big and rich baritone sound. Fantastic clip. Hugh Masekela: Hard to listen to this after Ella. Kind of like going from the sublime to the ridiculous. Imo, one of the most overrated musicians in all of "jazz". I put jazz in quotes because a lot of what he played was not jazz at all. A lot of it was pleasant enough with its "African" flavor, but I just don't feel that a lot of his music is on a high level of skill or artistry. And his singing is worse than the already mediocre flugelhorn playing that he is known for. Not my cup of tea. Vanessa Mae: Not my cup of tea either. Pleasant enough, but for me it's musical fluff that gets on and capitalizes fom the "World Music" bandwagon. Music that relies heavily on production values geared toward unabashed accessibility and does not shy away from also capitalizing on the soloist's good looks as part of the "package". Art Blakey: Classic. Fabulous band playing Freddie Hubbard's fabulous arrangement of the tune. Great and tasty use of dissonance in the horn writing to make three horns sound like a larger group. Freddie's soloing is on fire as usual. Blakey sounds great and is in his prime. His playing got looser and more relaxed as he aged and wasn't always as incisive as on earlier records like this one. Great stuff! A couple of other favorite versions of the tune; coincidentally all piano trio versions: The tune fits his rhythmic quirkiness perfectly; probably my favorite version: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QLOlMnNVkwA An even more modern approach: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SSOdZJSIP3Q Nothing like the composer (actually, co-composer with Juan Tizol, trombonist in Duke's band) himself playing the tune; great record! https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yNoLbP5s-68 |
Great clips, Alex. Thanks. Since our OP doesn't want to change direction: What makes any kind of "fusion" music special is ultimately a kind of limitation as well. The tune "Caravan" is really a Latin tune more than anything. Co-penned by a Latin trombonist that idea should not be surprising. The co-composer was a jazz giant so when the two personalities combined you got Latin-Jazz fusion. We usually hear the tune performed by jazz artists and, as we know, we have some pretty fantastic versions of the tune. While clearly influenced by the Latin, because they are jazz players, the feel of the music will still be mostly grounded in the feel of jazz. It is interesting to hear how a group (especially the rhythm section) of Latin musicians play the tune and how they bring a completely different feel to it. My point about how all this could be a limitation of sorts is that, ultimately, neither the jazz element nor the Latin element get expressed as completely. I think this version gets closest to home in many ways: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gPex4QuaQwU |
One more: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=d8Vw5r7-vgs One from the 1%. From the great Bob Mintzer, tenor/arrangement, by way of Stuttgard: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=APWUZDfuKwM |
I have read a lot about Artie also. He was an absolutely brilliant man in many respects. He was a wonderful musician. He was also uncompromising and many would say, an A-hole. **** do one needs to be (ab)normal if (s)he aims to do ab(normal) staff? **** I would make a distinction between “abnormal” and “extraordinary”. I do think one has to be abnormal to do abnormal things. However, I don’t think that it is necessary to be abnormal or “stand out” in one’s personal life in order to do extraordinary things professionally; certainly not in as much as being a weirdo or an A-hole. It is true that many great artists were also dysfunctional and were major weirdos; but some of the best artists are/were modest and gentle. I suppose that one’s chosen profession dictates how much of ourselves one can afford to reveal in our professional life. In the arts, the key is simply to be yourself, as your inner self will be revealed through your art. I think it is easy to imagine how a dinner date with Bill Evans’ might differ from one with Thelonious Monk. Just listen to their music. |
I agree about arranger credits; common and unfortunate oversight (?). Case in point: the Blakey clip that pryso recently posted features a fantastic arrangement by Freddie Hubbard. I don’t think that this is credited on the LP at all. Another example: perhaps a result, in part, of a bygone era when the orchestra leader was often also the de facto arranger, but was credited on the album cover as simply and for example: "Frank Sinatra With Billy May And His Orchestra". As you say the arranger is a major element in the recording; sometimes the major element. Very astute comment re Kenny Drew Jr. Son of the Kenny Drew he began as a Classical pianist and has indeed performed quite a bit of Bach. Not exactly definitive but as you point out he certainly understands Bach: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=28JU935pF7E |
O-10, perhaps your camels just need a rest. I know you are not a fan of "Classical", but do like evocative flute playing with an Eastern flavor. This might get your caravan going again. Sunrise on the Sahara? : https://youtu.be/llulYG4OWDI |
Nice fantasy, O-10 and thanks for sharing. We all have them, but I'm not quite ready to post mine 😉. Man, saxophone music by the campfire in the Sahara! That is one hip caravan! A little less hip: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5414InafIUk https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yZSTMOcRqPY |
Schubert, great question. The answer is, not surprisingly I’m sure, "all of the above". That level of musical intuition is a combination of innate ability ("great ears") and musical maturity gained by learning the importance of knowing when to support a musical colleague and when, and how much, to make it about one’s ego; all for the good of the music. Aside from whatever level of innate ability a musician was blessed with (or not) those are things that can be worked on and developed. While that work is a kind of "shedding" it mostly requires playing with others. To the point that I think you implied re "shed time": a musician can be blessed with the highest level of innate musical intuition possible, but ultimately he has to be in total control of the physical mechanism of playing or singing (achieved by putting in a lot of "shed time") otherwise the body cannot translate the musical messages that the brain/heart sends in a way that is physically controlled enough to allow the kind of musical cohesion that you are hearing in that clip. To your second question: if one considers what the very best examples there have been throughout the history of the music I would rate that a solid 8. Acknowledging a certain amount of inevitable subjectivity, for me, Miles’ classic quintet from the 60’s with Wayne Shorter, Herbie Hancock, Ron Carter and Tony Williams set the standard for that kind of ensemble musical intuition as did the Bill Evans trio with Scott Lafaro and Paul Motian. |
Impossible to call a "best", but here's a couple that would definitely be contenders: When jazz bass players solo, oftentimes I'm left thinking "pretty good....for a bass player". Not with this guy: https://youtu.be/hX-xB6FNyAE Classic: https://youtu.be/-0NNA6w8Zk4 Classic(al): https://youtu.be/QcXQcsAOx0I |
O-10, not looking for positive comments at all, but thanks for your concern 😇. Thoughtful commentary would be nice however. Three performances in three different genres that came to mind immediately. Like I said in my post, the whole idea of a "best" is kind of pointless, imo. Frankly, I am not surprised by your reaction since it is no secret that you and I often listen for and react to very different things in music; after all, you think Billy Bang is a good player. Btw, I don’t think there is anything "wrong with (your) evaluation"; I don’t go there. There are so many reasons why those are notable performances, starting with Pedersen’s finesse and impeccable pitch (for a bass player). I would welcome from you an example of a jazz bass solo that you feel betters it as far as command of the changes of a tune and is at the level of what a good horn, guitar or piano player can do; a rarity. Btw, you said "best" not "impressive"; two different things. Kenny G holding a note for several minutes is "impressive". Cheers. |
Sure, but we're still waiting for yours or one that is more "impressive" than Pedersen playing with Pass. Btw, intrigued by your comment re your use of Classical violin to "judge the timbre of your system". Honest question: How does that work since you don't like nor listen to Classical music? How do you judge what "the best classical violin" is? |
O-10, thanks for your response. Like I said before, and it’s even more obvious now, we listen for different things in music and in sound. I don’t want this to become a pi$$ing contest, but hopefully just an explanation of those differences. Re the violin: I think it’s great that you use a reference to judge the sound of your system, but I would reconsider your choice of recorded reference. The violin is not only not "simple" it is a very complex instrument that produces a very harmonically complex sound which is extremely difficult to record, perhaps the most difficult. No one should ever suggest that someone else’s preferred tonal balance (or other audiophillic considerations) is not right for anyone except himself. However, the fact still remains that there is, in fact, a true reference as concerns "accuracy" (or, at least, the quest for it) in reproduced music; and as suggested by pryso and Schubert the live music standard is it. Some may argue this or that, but imo it always comes back to that. Moreover, exposure to the live standard is the only way to be a good judge of this. Again, absolutely nothing "wrong" with any other preferred kind of sound for any given listener if that is what they want or like; but, if only as a subject of discussion, it should be pointed out that there is a lot of sonic beauty that sometimes gets missed. For what it is worth, both of those clips deviate quite a bit from what is possible with "violin sound". The second one especially is pretty heavily processed; not to mention that they use electric violins (!); deal breaker right off the bat. I can’t find in YouTube the exact recordigns that I might use as a violin reference, but these are in the ballpark. They (especially the first) may not impress at first because of the absence of hyped up and digitized violin sound that I hear in your clips, but if one gives up those expectations and recalibrates the ears there is so much more beauty, nuance and complexity in this other kind of sound. The music is some of the greatest ever written: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-U3TsUw8TK0 For a recorded sound a little closer to what is generally considered more current, but that still honors what is possible in live: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iScgtiQUvjE I enjoyed the Oscar Pettiford clip, thanks. He was undeniably a great player and very important in the history of jazz bass playing. Jazz is a relatively new art form and the truth is that some instruments (trombone another) have traditionally lagged behind other instruments as far as reaching what is technically possible on the instrument in that music. Putting issues of stylistic preferences on the part of the listener aside, the truth is that Pedersen plays the bass at a much higher level of proficiency than Pettiford did. Go back in time and compare bass players that preceded Pettiford and what he was doing and you can say the same thing. They got better and better as far a clean technique, intonation, facility etc. Now, that may or not mean its great music making, but that is another story. In Pedersen’s case I think it certainly does. Regards. |
Agree about Bromberg and thanks for the clip, pryso; nice player. Another favorite bass player, George Mraz with the great Pepper Adams on one of my favorite records: https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLhtZgrwg2fFMK4KEmlcLJVWzYnZJ-MqRm&v=PiWgLMTxigs And thanks for the tip re Krall, Dave. I may check that out. I frankly have not felt any desire to buy her recordings; not my cup of tea. |
Bill Evans always had great bass players. Starting with the trio that included Scott LaFaro he would redefine the sound of the piano trio with the bass taking on a much more active role than was usual previously and with "conversational" musical interaction between piano and bass. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gZ_rZZusz90 With Chuck Israels: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1wVcJNKEd_Y With Eddie Gomez: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ShZwXqr0e78 |
If you don’t buy it, I will: http://m.ebay.com/itm/Hampton-Hawes-1977-A-Little-Copenhagen-Night-Music-Piano-Jazz-NM-Vinyl-/292192... |
Ghosthouse, I like your attitude; keeping an open mind to the possibility that there might be something there that we just don’t get yet, before making final judgment . For me, that’s true respect for the music. Loved the Bruford clip with Tim Garland on bass clarinet. Thanks for that! Garland sounds great on bass clarinet; very good tenor player also. |
I think the important thing is whether music is "difficult", "dissonant" or even "ugly" and music that is "bullsh?t" (as defined by absence of skill or sincerity). No apologies necessary if any music doesn’t touch anyone of us. There is room for "ugly" in art. Early jazz was deemed ugly by the society crowd. Swing players deemed bebop ugly. Cotrane’s "sheets of sound" were deemed ugly and on and on. Will I be listening to "Hudson" much or even buy it? Probably not, but that’s not the point. It puts the work of these artists and the state of modern music in better context/perspective for me; and it is certainly not bs. As much as I like the Connors recording it is lighter and without nearly as much grit as "Hudson" which falls more to the Rock side of the "fusion" idea in attitude. I like ghosthouse’s spice analogy. I love going to my local Indian restaurant and marvel at the way that Indian diners at other tables wolf down dishes that to me taste strange and unbearably spicy. Do they taste "bad"? Great record, "Soul Brothers", btw. Couldn't Iive on soul food only, 'though. |
Nothing wrong with wanting the music we choose to listen to to appeal to our particular ears and sensibilities right away. On the other hand, it is a fact that for many listeners being open to letting the music challenge those sensibities can yield big rewards; or, at least, make for one-time interesting listening. Consider this: "Hudson" was created by musicians who are giants in modern music; especially DeJohnette who has musical cred about as good as anyone. Personally, I would be inclined to first say to myself something like: "I don’t quite get it yet, but these are artists with a tremendous amount of musical integrity so let me try and find out what I might be missing". Doesn’t work all the time and certainly not for everyone. I find "Hudson" to be highly original and very interesting. As has been pointed out some of it is not easy listening. The musical concept may not appeal to some, but I don’t see how the superb quality of the playing can be denied. DeJohnette is always amazing and I love the practically melodic quality of his playing. I have always been a fan of Scofield and he sounds inspired on this record always surprising with where he takes he solos. The record shouldn’t be judged only from the posted clip with its shades of Miles’ "Bitches Brew". In fact I think that cut serves as a good "intro" to the rest of the record which contains some fascinating and unusual takes on these Woodstock-generation anthems. For instance: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bna2WHqU81A https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UI5wBgjTq84 |
Dave, I revisited "Stepping Out". Revisited because I actually have that record and to give you an idea of how much I like Diana Krall, I had forgotten the title of it and almost that I had it at all. It wasn’t until you later mentioned that it was her first that I realized that it was the one Krall record that I have. I think you’re right...this is probably her best. Still... I wasn’t going to respond further so as not to get into "Krall bashing", but heard this on WBGO today and it made me think about the Krall record again; and, to ask myself, again, why anyone would want to listen to Krall when one can listen to something like this: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4HMsEX-Zuk Or: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DZq9mocJkDQ Or: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MnUqorTHj74 |
Few singers can draw the listener in with such a tremendous sense of conviction to the story in the lyric combined with absence of pretense. I can forgive Tony Bennett’s dalliances with contemporary pop "stars" who aren’t worthy of shining his shoes because in his prime he was simply amazing. One of the most inspired singer/accompanist pairings on record, this song is from their second recording together. Bill Evans’ playing on this can only be described as genius, imo: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7lYIoYENbjI Speaking of Bill Evans and those pop "stars", heard this on WBGO yesterday. This is one of Evans’ most beautiful compositions sung by someone who should be a star...there truly are some. I’d like to hear any of the current pop divas even attempt a song like this which has such an unusual melodic shape and difficult note intervals; never mind with musical purpose: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oM8aXmIzAVY |
Some interesting (hopefully) commentary re the Bennett/Evans projects: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9MselAkjXbM And another great new jazz singer: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4jiI4wm7bJE https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lbN5ZPRfV6Q |
Pryso, very nice Joe Morello live clips. I like your description of his playing as steady and nuanced. Very little flash but always a strong sense that the rhythm is simmering. He was definitely one of the greats and a perfect choice for Brubeck’s Quartet. Notable is the fact that he had the ability to play in the unusual time signatures (odd-meter) that Brubeck’s group was known for and pioneered in jazz. Your first clip "Castilian Drums" is in 5/4 (five beats to the measure) same as Brubeck’s well known "Take Five". It’s one thing to be able to play rhythm in odd-meter within the context and framework of a melody. It’s all the more impressive to be able to solo in odd-meter with the ease and musical logic that Morello could play with. Great drummer and great quartet. And then there’s Paul Desmond with that wonderful tone which he wanted to sound "like a dry martini". This time in 9/8 time: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KAlVasHbipo https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=j9GgmGLPbWU (For anyone interested: In "Blue Rondo a la Turk" the 9/8 meter is organized as a repeated cycle of three measures of 2+2+2+3 followed by one measure of 3+3+3. For a fun exercise/challenge listen to the melody and think (fast): ONE-two, ONE-two, ONE-two, ONE-two-three ONE-two, ONE-two, ONE-two, ONE-two-three ONE-two, ONE-two, ONE-two, ONE-two-three ONE-two-three, ONE-two-three, ONE-two-three) |
I agree that they were one of the top groups in jazz; and very influential . In general, musicians associated with the West Coast sound or Cool Jazz were not given their due relative to prominent East Coast jazz musicians. I know that this will be considered controversial by some, especially in an age of political correctness, but there was a kind of bias towards jazz musicians whose music was not as obviously (blatantly?) steeped in the blues; they were sometimes considered less "serious". Theirs was a style and rhythmic feeling that even some musicians considered to be "too white" and without a deep enough swing feel. Very unfortunate bias. Desmond as you point out was able to rise above much of that. I love Desmond’s playing. Very inventive player with an absolutely gorgeous, unique and relaxed tone. When asked how he was able to produce that beautiful tone he famously replied that his goal was "to sound like a dry martini": https://youtu.be/U15YSAyfmnU |
Thanks for that, Ghosthouse; nice. I know I posted this not all that long ago (or, at least something from this great record), but was listening to it again today and thought I should post it again. For me, one of the very best examples of this great music. Andrew Hill (sideman here) is a piano player that doesn’t get discussed much anywhere; although he was, to my ears, one of the most unique and interesting piano players ever. There were times when first listening to him that I just didn’t "get" him and felt his playing was downright weird and unpolished; and other times it was pure genius. I think I get him now. Lee Morgan sounds simply unbelievable. He had an unusually expressive and natural way of using note inflections (those little note bends that give the tone a wonderful vocal quality). https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=koov4dDz5nI https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=u57C4lot-go https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=i47n7dby-ZI I’ll be turning 60 in a couple of weeks and as I suppose is natural when nearing age milestones I have been thinking about "stuff". It occurs to me that one of the things that I dread most is the idea of ever getting to a point when I shut down to learning about things I care about and instead seek validation and identity by trying to take down others who I would let make me feel threatened; instead of recognizing the opportunity to learn something about that which I am always patting myself on the back for. Sad. If one thinks that driving on the wrong side of the street is fun, let’s try doing it while driving backwards. Shall we? For those genuinely interested in an interesting previously discussed (and disputed) little footnote in the story of this music and for those not interested in simply spewing bs: - From a PBS interview with Stanley Crouch: ++++ SMITH: You were born in California, you grew up there. As you were growing up uh, how big was West Coast Jazz for you and how big was the San Francisco group, Dave Brubeck? CROUCH: At that time I was coming up, everybody knew that there was a West Coast sound and it was supposed to be this cerebral, cool glass of water, if you will, version of jazz. And at the same time, though, there was this movement in New York that was rejecting that. It was called ’the hard bop group.’ So you had these guys with these light tones playing at the Pacific Ocean, then, at the Atlantic Ocean, you had these guys who were playing this hard, powerful kind of stuff. So in some sense, one group thought of the East Coast sound as a masculine sound and the West Coast sound as a feminine sound. The guys from the East Coast, they also thought of it as a white way of doing it ++++ ( http://www.pbs.org/brubeck/theMusic/westCoastJazz.htm ) - ++++ Brubeck was a major exponent of West Coast or "cool" jazz, a style that was (and is) often accused of being a whitewashed version of jazz, played by and for white guys, a lite-swing alternative to the knottier and greasier styles being practiced by hard-bop musicians like Dizzy Gillespie, Horace Silver, and Miles Davis on the East Coast. ++++ ( https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2012/12/the-excellent-paradox-of-dave-brubeck/2659... ) - https://books.google.com/books?id=iCvmBwAAQBAJ&pg=PT154&lpg=PT154&dq=west+coast+jazz+too... - Wiki: Some observers looked down upon West Coast jazz because many of its musicians were white, which some listeners, critics, and historians perceived as resulting in music that was too cerebral, effete, or effeminate, or that lacked swing.[12][13][14] - http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/mydocs/culture/white_jazz.htm |
Terrible news! I love Chick’s playing and body of work. Not his most important work, IMO, which I will post some of later, but still great and probably his most popular: https://youtu.be/sEhQTjgoTdU |
It IS that obvious and just to be clear (I know you are) the differences are not about "better" or "worse". The discussion here re West Coast style started as a criticism of precisely the attitude expressed in some of the commentary I posted. It is unfortunate that the style as a whole was perceived that way by some. As far as I’m concerned Paul Desmond, as Pryso said, could swing as much as anybody. To extend the food analogy, anyone who tells you Italian cooking is "better" than Indian is being foolish, imo. Give "Out To Lunch" a whirl sometime. |
Thanks for that live clip, Ghosthouse; new to me . Yes, EXACTLY like that! Without a doubt the weirdest rendition of "Here’s That Rainy Day" that I have ever heard...and it kept me engaged the entire time. What a strange sense of rhythm in that performance; as if always delaying the next beat just a tiny bit. Thelonious Monk had a little bit of that quality in his rhythmic feel, but not nearly to the same degree. To borrow a word from Mobley’s record’s title, a little "square" (in a good and interesting way) compared to the more typical relaxed flow of most other players. In that clip he seems to always keep you waiting a tiny bit for the next beat, but without interrupting his own brand of forward flow. Don’t know if you’re familiar with the music of Classical composer Charles Ives; it occurs to me that Hill’s overall concept pushes some of the same buttons for me. The audience in that clip seems dumbfounded. "Point Of Departure" is a great record which I bought on a friend’s recommendation many moons ago after hearing Dolphy’s "Out To Lunch" and having a "wtf?" moment. As you say, "THIS is not boring"! And you’re right, that is Dolphy at the 3:00 mark. Amazing player. For a long time his playing was, for me, a little like going to an ethnic restaurant for food that was strange and unusual to my palette and that I wasn’t entirely sure about; but it kept bringing back. Thanks for the clips. |
Mary_jo, thank you for the article on masks; very interesting and confirms my feeling about the illogic of the suggestion that they do not help. At a time like this we all can use a little inspiration for dealing with adversity. A little known singer with a very unusual voice and a beautiful way with a musical phrase was Jimmy Scott. Known as “Little Jimmy Scott”, he was born with a genetic disorder that prevented him from reaching puberty and normal physical stature resulting in an unusually high (for a male) contralto vocal range. There’s something in the way he delivered a song that always gets me. I particularly like his way with a ballad: https://youtu.be/lYScFwuijLc https://youtu.be/Z6Yo9qnEsF4 Apropos recent talk of the bass clarinet, nice bass clarinet obligatto on this one: https://youtu.be/q9RKqF67-tQ After some early success he sank into obscurity in the 60s and made a comeback in the 90’s. I heard him at a small club in NYC in 1994; wonderful performance even if his voice was showing a bit of age: https://youtu.be/2f3bg_O95Fg https://youtu.be/2sXdS4By-OU |
Glad you’re glad, ghosthouse. O-10 has been trying to run me off this thread for some time now and point-blank asked me to leave and start my own on several occasions; sometimes realty checks are a little tough to handle I suppose 😊. No worries, I'm still here with no plans to leave. Personally, I would much prefer to not have this type of dynamic creeping into the discussions and instead be able to have disagreements and expression of different perspectives without drama; and, yes, occasional reality checks. Regards. |
Nice post, tablejockey. When I was in college I roomed with a jazz quitarist whose two quitar idols were Howard Roberts (discussed here many moons ago) and Royce Campbell. I remember Campbell’s "The Art Of Chord Solo Guitar" playing incessantly in our dorm room. Royce Campbell is an excellent player who has had a very successful career in the studios and as touring guitatrist for major acts and has remained, as you say, "under the radar" for a lot of jazz fans. Your description of his style is spot on: Barney Kessel meets Wes Montgomery; I would add Joe Pass to the mix of influences. Not surprisingly he recorded a Wes Montgomery "tribute" album. What may be surprising to many listeners is that they have probably heard his playing many times without realizing it. As a longtime member of Henry Mancini’s orchestra he recorded much of the popular Pink Panther music including the famous theme. Gorgeous Julie London "Laura"; thanks for that. Coincidentally (?) its Barney Kessel on guitar on the beautiful minimalist arrangement of this Johnny Mercer classic. The opposite of minimalist I love this arrangement of the tune by the great Nelson Riddle for another favorite rendition of the tune: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TMUsrY-ED0A |
Best wishes for a quick recovery, O-10. Hope you're back soon; the thread is always best when there is a lot of activity and even debate. Just back from a few weeks of work travel with a lot of great music and catching up here; will have a little more time to post. Something made me think of this 😉; one of the giants of jazz piano: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ETivbNeY5p4 |
I think that there is a natural tendency to want music (any art) to come to us as opposed to being comfortable or at least willing to go to it. Clearly, there is much more to jazz than nice, groovy drum CHIN-ka-CHIN’s and beautiful, bluesy melodies inside cozy and familiar structures. Moreover, I think that much of the more adventurous, obtuse and ultimately most interesting jazz got (and gets) a bad name because of the association to some of the "free" or "out" jazz which is arguably just bu//s$t. Obviously, there was and is a lot of great music on record that can still be put in those categories. This is one of those records. Definitely not "free" as it is still very structured, but decidedly "out" in its shape and harmonic language. As a player Wayne Shorter is one of the true giants of jazz and one of its most interesting improvisers and composers. Speaking of associations, I think that because of his foray into fusion with Weather Report a lot of his earlier work gets overlooked by listeners new to jazz. Don’t get me wrong a lot of his fusion stuff is fantastic and shows a very interesting shift as a player to a kind of minimalist improvisation style that I like a lot in that genre. Still, for me, his stuff from the ’60’s both as a leader and with Miles is his best. I love this record, amazing lineup playing some of the most interesting and creative jazz on record, imo. Probably not the record I would play when I get on the treadmill, it takes a kind of surrendering on the part of the listener to its unique and sometimes twisted harmonic and conceptual palette; but a pretty amazing amount of beauty and sheer brilliance overall. Listened to beginning to end, it's a pretty wild ride: https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL21CEE4FB0F07EED5 |
Glad you found some things to like. And very astute with the Schoenberg connection; I agree. Like you, I think Hancock is incredible on this record and Hubbard is on fire. The big surprise (not really) for me is James Spaulding. Don't hear too much about him, but what a great alto player! Get back with further impressions. |
Ghosthouse, after the bass solo, if one listens closely, Wayne Shorter softly creeps in and starts his solo at precisely 3:22. Definitely tenor and, as you say, it flies. The transition to Freddie’s solo is interesting. If I’m not mistaken, the first thing one hears after the tenor solo sounds to me like a single note by Moncur on muted trombone (the exact same note that Shorter ends his solo with). After that single inflected note by Moncur, as if to say "you take it, Freddie", Hubbard starts his solo. Unusual sequence, but interesting. Freddie on trumpet not flugelhorn, btw. Great stuff! And great listening on your part. Re Zappa/Varese: no doubt those guys were listening to a lot of the same music. Most prominent jazz players took classical music very seriously and listened to all the great composers; especially the modern composers. Bird loved Stravinsky, and one of his signature "Birdsms" (some might call it a Bird "cliche") is a quote, or melodic nugget, from Stravinsky’s "The Firebird". http://www.npr.org/sections/deceptivecadence/2013/05/26/186486269/why-jazz-musicians-love-the-rite-o... |
If you mean "Genesis" Part 1 it is Wayne Shorter on tenor. If Part 2 it is the end of Freddie’s solo. On "Chaos" at :30 its James Spaulding on alto; and killing! No question re the connection to modern classical. Shorter was a student of the modern composers and I recently read an interview in which he cites Stravinsky as a major influence. Varese! One of my faves. Then again I’m biased, he liked to write for the contrabass clarinet. Zappa idolized him, so how bad can he be? 😉 |
I take it you didn't care for Shorter's "TASE"? Personally, I don't like to eat dessert all the time and only dessert 😎 Great clips, Alex; thanks! Fantastic lineup on that Turrentine record. "Hold the line"? I'm still working on my main course. Whereas one knows from the very first notes of "TASE" that it's going to be something very different (and it stays that way), I find Andrew Hill's music to be unique in that it often feels like a constant tease. It always seems to straddle that line where it feels fairly conventional and familiar, but manages to always stay on the other side of it. He had a unique and odd time feel that creates a lot of tension but always has musical logic. Similar to the way Monk played rhythm, but on steroids: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-LBOOWnpNXc https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mDWlZPlSdOA |
