Jazz for aficionados
Thad Jones / Mel Lewis: This is one of my most recent buys. Two CD set and an outstanding booklet. This time we have Hank Jones on Piano. Sir Roland and the Sax section were awesome on The clip by The Frogman. When I hear saxophones playing together like that, I always think of Ellington. They didn't sound like his band, but the Duke had an awesome reed section. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHDX4Ds5Kp0 BTW, listening to music like this, Jazz-Jazz, can be addictive to Fusion Followers. Next thing you know, you'll be calling folks 'noise makers'. Just a friendly warning. The Frogman: great clip. I have found a way to open your stuff. Cheers |
Wales, in The United kingdom https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hc3mc0igHzU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JultKcPcKjk Cheers |
In celebration, I think I hit the Muscatel a little too hard. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UH01FhqMdc8 Cheers |
*****
that's the music Wynton Marsalis and Rok want to hear until the end of time.***** Along with the rest of the world. I would bet "Kind of Blue" still out sells the 'New Jazz' that has been inflicted on us recently. And that was released in 1959. That's 57 years ago!!!! That's what is known as 'the proof is in the pudding'. We should make a new rule for this thread. When singing the praises of certain types of music, you should be required to state how many Lp / CDs of it do you own. The Duke nailed it with the good and bad thing. People will be listening to Miles and Mozart and folks like that, forever. The soundtracks of movies and TV is a good place to find out what music is ingrained in this country's history. It ain't the Jazz Pistols!! Cheers |
*****
+++ My dear sir, there is no such distinction as you suppose between Italian, German and French music; there are only two kinds of music, good and bad. +++ ***** The good and bad part might be true, the rest is not. I think any competent Classical musician can see and hear differences between French, German and Italian Music. Of course we don't know the 'distinctions' to which he was referring. Cheers |
*****
If we want to use record sales as an indication of "good" ***** I was making the point that the old Jazz is still more popular than modern noise. KOB is no where near my favorite music. Not even within Miles' output. Any list where Metheny outranks Ella and Coltrane is obviously useless in demonstrating anything other than the sad state of Jazz and the people who listen to it today. I think Wynton summed up Metheny very nicely. Cheer |
*****
Moreover, I don't read any particularly insightful comments or explanations as to why old jazz is always "better" other than "I say it is". "new jazz is noise", or "Wynton says it is"***** Wynton said that The stuff Miles and Metheny was playing, was NOT JAZZ. Had nothing to do with new or old Jazz. It was not Jazz of any type. He was / is right. Do you think New Jazz is always better? Do you think it is equal to the original? Do you think there is no difference is artistic quality? I say one era is light years ahead of the other in both quality and quantity. Others may disagree. I do think, that if there was not a constant attempt to keep real Jazz in the conversation, it would NEVER be talked about on this thread. Cheers |
BTW, by old and new, I do not refer to the date it was played, written or recorded, but to the type of 'Jazz' it is. A lot of great Jazz being played today. A few examples are, Dee Dee, JALC, Branford, Gregory porter, Christian MacBride, and a host of folks from the New Orleans scene. There are many other recent greats, but I am not sure they are still with us. It seems like never a day goes by that we don't lose someone. Cheers |
"My favorite comment of hers was when she was interviewed about Amy Winehouse recording with the Daptone house band. She said something like "Some people study the blues and then try to sing it. While I open my mouth the blues just pours out". " I copied this from another thread talking about the recent death of Blues singer Sharon Jones. Substitute the word 'Blues' with 'Jazz'. By Jove, I think she nailed it. Makes a good point for this thread. Cheers |
***** I think we are probably due for the twentieth posting of Ravel's "Bolero"; or perhaps more Billy Ocean or Luther Vandross. Now, THOSE will really get my feet and fingers tapping on two and four ****** No one can say I ever posted the same tune 20 times. 19, maybe, but never 20. Anyone who says different, speaks with forked tongue. But I always want to see feet tapping and fingers popping so: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0XMn0U9b2Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uc8wmLul3uw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fV8vB1BB2qc Not Jazz, but these days, what is. Cheers |
*****
The main problem with that assertion is that the implication is that when there is any critical analysis there is less love for the music; that the "critic" is somehow automatically LESS of a music lover and that the listener who won’t or is incapable of being analytical is somehow a more "pure" lover of the music and is more in touch with or receptive to the emotional content in music; a ridiculous and self-serving stance. ***** Good Lord.!! I had no idea I had said all that. They don't call you, Frogman the Straw-man, for nothing. What a load of Malarkey!! Cheers |
Swinging for Benny: That whole clip was 'strange'. First of all, the man was wearing a suit and tie and looked like a serious Jazz musician. This type music sounds vaguely familiar. Then it hit me. This is Real Jazz being played by a real Jazz Musician. Wow!! I like this a lot better than the latest "jazz" sensation from Uzbekistan. Good work OP. It takes a brave man to post Jazz, on 'Jazz for Aficionados' these days. Cheers |
*****
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.***** Of course 'elegant' is in the ear of the listener, and 'economical' could stem from the fact old Tommy did not have much to say. I guess we could be thankful for that. Cheers |
*****
On the other hand, to me, he seems to have a clearly recognizable style ...very economical and tasteful; elegant even. ***** Sounds like a critic /academic to me. I would never buy a CD because someone said it was 'economical' or 'elegant'. ***** ’They don’t understand that musicians have to be constantly challenged or you lose them. . . . I’m on the side of those who like newer things.’ ” ***** By 1995 We had already lost most of the ones that really counted. Lost to that thing called death. You should be on the side of great music, recent or vintage. Cheers |
Elegant: Of a high grade or quality. Merriam-Webster Given that definition, every Jazz player of any reputation at all, could be considered 'elegant'. In Flanagan's case, They probably meant he played in an unobtrusive manner. Didn't disrupt their conversations, as they sipped their cocktails As Fats Waller said, "They like Jazz, but in small doses". He was speaking of the good folks of the NYC 'elites'. You be one??? Let me know if you need me to 'explain' anything else for you. Cheers |
Killer Joe: I first heard this on the 'Walking in Space' LP by Quincy Jones. I always thought it was his tune. Reminds me of the time when I didn't know the word Jazz, but I heard artist such as Sarah Vaughan, Cannonball Adderley, Jimmie Smith, Quincy Jones, Dinah Washington and Ramsey Lewis etc..... on the Jukebox in the local bar. Loved the pictures of the musical instruments on 'Along Came Betty'. What's more beautiful than a closeup of a new Tenor sax. The Jazztet sure dressed 'funny'. I guess they didn't have time to get their cutout jeans and tank tops out of the cleaners. Great Clips. Cheers |
We are not talking about Flanagan. We are talking about the meaning of the word 'elegant' as used to describe a musician's style of playing. The word as it would be used in a music review. I bet no one ever 'accused' Art Tatum of being 'elegant'. Mingus? But I'm sure you will find a NYT's article from 1940s that does just that. Please try to stay focused and stop it with the Straw man stuff. I speak English. If I want to say something, I will say it in plain English. No? Cheers |
I am not now, nor have I ever been, a 'protector' of Jazz. Impossible task and very presumptuous. The music has passed me by. I accept that. Thank God for LPs and CDs. Although all the players are long gone, most anyway, I can still enjoy their music. When one of my Aunts passed away several years ago, she was in her 90s, she wanted me to have her music player because she knew I liked music. It was one of those big consoles with built in single speaker with Radio and a 78rpm record player under the top lid. As much furniture as anything. When I opened the top, there, on the platter, was a 78rpm record by Duke Ellington. I just smiled. The music passed her by also. Her music was Ellington, Basie, Cab Calloway, Fats Waller, The International Sweethearts of Rhythm etc........ I have many pictures of her and my mother at dances while Big Band groups played. Everyone dressed to the nines. Probably was not even aware that people like Coltrane and Miles existed. My point in all this? She stayed with the stuff she was exposed to during her young days. I do the same. We all do. There is nothing to protect. The young can no more relate to my music than I can to theirs. Cheers |
Objective / Subjective: Think of the most god-awful piece of noise/trash you have ever heard, then consider this: Some one wrote it, some one played it, some one recorded it. All professionals. All more knowledgeable than us, save The Frogman. All took time and money. And all concerned must have thought it was pretty good stuff. So, instead of this objective / subjective, old / new debate, let's just say, there is no accounting for taste, and be done. Cheers |
*****
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;***** I don't understand what an analysis of music is suppose to achieve. Show of hands: How many of you fellow posters have ever heard music that you hated, that is, until The Frogman 'explained it', and now it's your favorite music to listen to. Write in with chapter and verse. And of course the opposite also: Music you loved until The Frogman explained it to you, now you hate it. What effect does analysis have on your love of music? None I say. I was listening to, and enjoying music before I could even spell music. The Frogman just wants to strut his stuff, so to speak. It's Interesting and informative, and I really believe everything he says because he's a pro, but it does not change musical taste. Cheers |
*****
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***** Old Jazz is Jazz, and that is not in dispute. The definition of the current music is in dispute. Surely you don't expect a person to come on board saying something like, "I like Jazz except for that noise made by Ellington, Armstrong, Mingus, Miles, Monk, Adderley, Silver, Morgan and folks of that ilk". Do you? Cheers |
*****
kindly explain why your personal anecdotes and Rok's comments about his Aunt should be relevant to anyone except yourselves? ****** This shows you have no appreciation of Jazz at all. You learned Jazz history in a school house. And, I could make the same statement about almost every word you have uttered on this thread. Cheers |
*****
I don’t understand what an analysis of music is suppose[d] to achieve." That strikes me as a remarkably ignorant statement***** Well instead of name calling, why not take this opportunity to answer the question, You could enlighten us all. I will assume I have to remind you that no one is saying there is anything wrong with musical analysis, it has it's place. However, the question is, should that analysis influence what we think of the Jazz performance in question. Cheers |
Billy Vaughn: Windmills of your mind. Great tune, but undistinguished version by Vaughn. Neil Diamond and/or Johnny Mathis are much better according to my analysis. No? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OohatUzO-gQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgNkK-P_Ea4 Cheers |
*****
He portraits loneliness, isolation, solitude and silence, all things that aching soul might express with jazz music too.***** His painting certainly do. I don't think Jazz does. Loneliness and Isolation are the antithesis of Jazz. At least in my humble uninformed opinion. There, I saved The Frogman some energy. No? The music was by Carl Davis. He did the soundtrack of 'The World At War'. Great Composer. Cheers |
New to me. Heard it on the local FM station, called in to get the artist and tracked it down. I love this version of '12 days of Christmas'. On order. I hope you curmudgeons can get in the Christmas spirit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIDoNopD5RI Cheers |
OP, Since you are into streaming, try these to check out your system. Of course I don’t own anything he mentioned. These guys can’t hear the music for the notes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JBiBEQW-Go Cheers |
