Jazz for aficionados

I completely understand. I'm not exactly constantly running for my Dolphy records when I can listen to so many others. But, man, that solo in that Mingus clip is so out and bizarre that I can't help but love it; or his solo on Nelson's "Blues And The Abstract Truth". What would life be without Rocky Mountain oysters? :-)

Learsfool, I am glad you chimed in about that. I was going to after first reading the comment about Juilliard, but frankly I was almost in a state of disbelief at the comment and all I could muster was my "retort" about Wynton having also attended Juilliard. I certainly agree with your comments.

This topic has come up before in this thread and I am mystified at the apparent insistence that somehow jazz players don't require or, at least benefit greatly from, the kind of study and dedication to music theory, instrumental rudiments, purposeful honing of rhythm via intense practice, and many other ingredients of good musicianship (the nuts and bolts) the way that classical players do; that somehow the authenticity of jazz is diminished if the player does that. Obviously, that is simply not true and points to a very sophomoric understanding of what making music is about. The great jazz players were relentless practicers and voracious students of all aspects of music.

****Frogman, that's an interesting comparison between "East of Suez" and "Night in Tunisia"; one is well known, while the other is almost unknown.****

Check out the solo "break" by Kai Winding (trombone) at 1:01 on "East Of Suez". He quotes part of the melody of "Night In Tunisia", the seven note melodic fragment at the end of the repeated eight measure first phrase of NIT. Obviously, that comparison was made a long time ago. That same little melodic fragment is first heard at :25 in the clip below.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KxibMBV3nFo

Further proof that the evolution of jazz is linear; the past influences the present and future.

Thanks for the clips, Acman3. What a loss, and what a beautiful player he was! One of my very favorites with a very individualistic approach to the role of the bass player. The clip with Gary Foster was a revelation for me; thanks for that. Foster has always been one of my favorite West Coast alto players and I had never heard him on tenor. Great on tenor as well and to say that he has listened to a lot of Stan Getz would be an understatement; striking similarity.

Regards.

****Musicians who don't understand the story behind the classics, should stay away from them and write their own music; that's my firm opinion.****

Couldn't agree more. Many of the great players made a point of not playing a tune until they knew the lyrics to the song. Of note, Dexter Gordon was known for "reciting" part of the lyrics as an intro to the tune.

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

O-10, Charlie Ventura was indeed an amazing musician; one of the many who have almost been forgotten.

**** "East of Suez" sounded like some place I might want to go, it sounded exotic and I liked the music.****

Notice the resemblance to "A Night In Tunisia"; a tune that has a similar exotic flavor and was written five years earlier.

Thanks for the clip.

Acman3, that is a killer cut. Love Jamal! Riley and Veal also sound amazing. And for the audiophiles, it's an outstanding sounding record. Jazz Village is the jazz sister-label of Harmonia Mundi. Thanks.

"All my inspiration comes from Ahmad Jamal" - Miles

****Then the Music professor said "that is the most perfect three minutes of music I have ever heard". Notice, he said perfect MUSIC, not JAZZ. Interesting.****

Interesting, indeed. Having known and spoken to more music professors than I can remember, I can say with confidence that this is a testament to the simple fact that they tend to listen to and consider music in a way that has no boundaries. They approach it with a sense of universality. At the core, the most fundamental values of music (dare I say it? the ....naah) , the most important components, are essentially the same for all genres. To refer to it as MUSIC instead of as JAZZ is the highest praise possible.

The comment is also interesting because that comment is also sometimes attributed to Giddins himself; and, in fact, he has said as much without mention of "the professor". Additionally, the tune "West End Blues" is sometimes described, perhaps as a result of that anecdote, as having "perfect architecture". Bottom line, Louis Armstrong is the subject of all this; a testament to his greatness.

****I don't understand why everyone is going Gaga over Ventura, and no one had anything good to say about Andy Bey and the Sisters. A huge step up, in my, less advanced opinion.****

**** Frogman will have to answer your question in regard to Charlie compared to Andy Bey and the Sisters, he has a way with words.****

Well, that's a tough one. A way with words is no guarantee that the message will ring true to any given listener. As we have demonstrated many times here the easy and perhaps cynical answer is that "there is no accounting for taste", the better and more insightful answer is that the very things that make music so great are what makes one's reaction to it so personal.

A comparison between Charlie Ventura and The Bey Sisters is particularly difficult because they are obviously two entirely different types of artists: one is an instrumentalist, the other a vocal group. The music of this instrumentalist has a much stronger improvisatory element than that of this vocal group. So, one could stop right there for an explanation of why a particular listener might prefer one over the other. I don't think that is the case here since our discussions here have a generally fairly wide scope. For the most part and for me personally, as has been discussed previously, singers who scat are automatically held to a very high standard that is seldom met; that of instrumentalists.

Charlie Ventura was a very fine swing player during a time when bebop was taking shape. He was steeped in the swing tradition and came to bebop peripherally and, one could say, after the fact. His playing always had an obvious element of the swing tradition in it even when "bopping". Some of the giants of bebop may have started as swing players, and were certainly influenced by swing, but went in the direction of bebop much sooner in their careers and with more decisiveness. When one listens to Charlie Parker or even Phil Woods it is not obvious at all what their "swing" influences were; so strong is their bebop language and style. I too like Ventura's voice and think he was a very good player; I particularly like his ballad playing on tenor, in part because I love that style of tenor playing in general. I would not, however, say that I am "gaga" over his playing. He was a player that is worthy of adding to one's collection and also a player that is important to the understanding of the evolution of the music from a historical perspective. He was only a few years younger than players like Bird and Miles, but in the context of the incredibly vibrant and quickly evolving jazz scene at the time, it should not be surprising how those few years can have a large effect on the stylistic development of a player. This is not unlike how my sister who is only five years older than I speaks perfect English, but with a heavy accent while I have no accent; this in spite of immigrating to America at the same time. She had spent more years steeped in the native language than I; and, being older, more resistant to the new language in spite of the same level of desire to assimilate.

So, how does one compare two totally different kinds of artists as far as ultimate artistic value? Both Ventura and the Bey Sisters have merit, and I agree that, as O-10 says they "are a joyous sound". Personally, I would not make such a comparison and just as I am not "gaga" over Ventura, I don't understand why anyone would "go gaga" over the Beys; and certainly not a "huge step up" in artistic merit (in absolute terms) if the comparison must be made. I like their sound, but FOR ME that type of vocal ensemble singing requires a certain level of finesse in the areas of tightness, intonation and sophistication of the vocal arrangements that I just don't hear in their singing compared to groups like "Lambert, Hendricks and Ross" and certainly "The Manhattan Transfer". They are fun and clearly good entertainers, but in absolute terms, a little rough around the edges and rather simplistic as far as the arrangements. Perhaps that is precisely why their sound appeals so much to some.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sql9PvsuT10

Thanks for the "Hustlin ...." clip, Acman3. Steely Dan meets Manhattan Transfer. Fun.

Very nice clip! I love the sound of tenor and trombone fronting the band. First solo is definitely "Jug" (Gene Ammons). He's got that big robust sound and that distinctive slightly nasal quality (in a good sense) in the upper register of the horn. I am not very familiar with Billy Root's playing.
Players sometimes like to "quote" other tunes in their solos. This cracked me up: at 1:05 Jug quotes, of all things, "The Flight Of The Bumblebee". Gotta love it.

Yes he did!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=AL94UKMTqg-9D7Hne7WOgl8AdAJRXcSj2g&v=Jv5j_Lx2R4g

Typo alert!!! It is at 3:05 that Jug quotes "Flight Of The Bumblebee", not 1:05. Sorry.

O-10, The Crusaders was going to be my next mention. They came to mind when I mentioned the trombone/tenor front line on the Bennie Green clip. I was very into that group back in college; a time when jazz was being bastardized by some and by the influence of rock and electric music. They were always able to incorporate the "new " sound and not stray too far from the spirit of jazz. I love their sound, and boy does it bring back memories!

(Still waiting). Cannonball Adderly Sextet Live In Switzerland:

Unbelievable! Without a doubt one of the best things a have heard in a while. The group was so "in the zone" that night that's its almost scary. Listened to "Jessica's Birthday" three times in a row. The groove is amazing and all the horn players were on that night. Biggest surprise for me was Yusef Lateef who hasn't always killed me; swinging his ass off, and what a great tenor sound! This one goes in the archives. Thanks for the clip!

Jeff Beck is incredible. If you like that, check this out:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Gw_zQIFAI4U

Amazing guitar solo; simple, tasty; and no pick, for that great singing sound.

Well, I was looking forward to doing my civic duty; but, they don't want me. Maybe it was the suit and tie.

Have some thoughts about McCoy for later.

****I think Tyner was the glue that kept the latter Quartet from the abyss.****

Interesting comment. How so? Thanks.

****I also Have Pictures played on piano by Evgeny Kissin. Didn't think I would like it, but I love it.****

I am sure you know the piece was composed for piano and then orchestratrated by, among others, Ravel. As O-10 often points out, it's hard to beat the original; although, it has been pointed out and speculated that Mussorgsky always intended to orchestrate it and just never got around to it. Kissin's is great. Also try this one by Horowitz; he was born in Kiev after all:

https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=jXfJAup8W9w

One man's opinions:

-"Old lion with the young pups!". Josh Evans. Good young players. Frank Lacy? Ouch!

-Freddie Hubbard "Skydive". Nice clip. Never heard anything by Freddie that wasn't at least good. Great playing, but with a little of a "tenth stop on the tour" vibe. Kenny Garret is definitely someone deserving more attention on this thread.

-Oliver Nelson "Screaming The Blues". Love Oliver Nelson. His composing/arranging is so good that his playing didn't always get the recognition it deserves. The choice of Dolphy is not only "courageous" but smart; the way a great arranger is smart, capitalizing on the contrast of styles. Nelson's playing is soulful but always orderly and disciplined; Dolphy's is abstract and upredictable. Good stuff!

-McFerrin. I like McFerrin. Amazing talent, but I like his solo efforts best.

-Sister Dee Dee. Great singing; great tune. She sounds amazing singing the tune. But, singers are always walking in dangerous territory when they scat. Few do it well and she does it better than most; and, there is always an element of excitement or the simple reason that the singer is being courageous doing it. However, for me, and to paraphrase a very poignant moment in a trial scene from a movie that I saw recently: "Now, close your eyes and imagine that she is a horn player?". Personally, I don't think it would hold up.

-Abbie Lincoln. Love her and her unique style. Great stuff. Thanks for the clips!

-Clark Terry "Quicksand". Smoking! Love his style of trumpet playing. Light touch and immediately recognizable articulation and sense swing. Eddie "Cleanhead" Vinson (not credited) sounds great.

"Diddling". Jazz players always say that playing a slow tempo is THE test of wether the guy can play or not. Terry plays just the trumpet mouthpiece at the beginning; gotta love it.

****I listen to Tyner, I hear Coltrane, even when Coltrane is not there****

Interesting comment and very appropriate. Both Tyner and especially Trane were key figures in the development of the pentatonic harmonic style of improvisation which defined much of the direction that jazz took in the '60's. This style uses as a building block for improvisation the first, second, third and fifth notes of any scale or tonality and is responsible in great part for the "angular" sound of much of the improvisation from that era to the present. I love it in Trane's playing, but as much as I love McCoy's playing I find that style somewhat tiresome in piano playing; I think because, with piano, the somewhat formulaic sound of this style is not offset by the flexibility of tone possible with a horn. You may find this interesting:

https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=M66jmp4F8I8

Strange, works at my end. Here they are again:

Horowitz "Pictures":

https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=jXfJAup8W9w

McCoy pentatonics:

https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=M66jmp4F8I8

Schubert, pathetic isn't it? I guess that is what is meant by "jury of one's peers".

Soulful player. Hart can definitely play. He has also spent a lot of time listening to this; the best version ever:

https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=Af1gkPGbZTY&list=PL09w5s2Eb6V-_a6gcLR5ELdj-UKg4TPm7

BTW, I'm surprised you didn't object to the electric bass :-)

Tubegroover, thanks for posting the Trane documentary. Fantastic stuff and should be required viewing. What an amazing force in music he was!

Interesting comments all; and, in keeping with the incredible depth, scope and inclusiveness of Trane's music, I think that there is truth in all of them.

While it is true that bringing new players in compounded the "problem", I am not sure that the inevitable can be seen as a problem. Trane's music was like a train moving forward; with a direction that was unstoppable, if not a runaway train. True, McCoy was the glue, but Trane didn't always want glue; notice how he often had the piano simply lay out and not play ("stroll"). His excursions were then with just drums; his music was very drum-centric. There was a lot of experimentation going on and it would be naive to think that it was all a love-fest. As Acman says, at times there was disagreement and displeasure with the choices that Trane made and the direction of his music. From "Chasin' The Trane" (highly appropriate title for this discussion and highly recommended book):

"When I knew them, Trane and Eric were listening to tribal recordings of South African pygmies. Trane was really into African Rhythms. He told me that each drummer has a certain rhythm to play and doesn't try to play all the rhythms at once. What he heard was several drummers playing polyrhythms" - Leon Thomas

And yet....

"Ain't playin' shit! Trane's got this jerk on drums with me and he's got me goin' for hours on one tune, wearin' me out. Still ain't playin' shit!" - Elvin (on Rashid)

"McCoy left John Coltrane in Dec 1965 to form his own group. He had been thinking of leaving for some time; not because Trane's solo space was stretching out in inverse proportion to his, but because he wanted to follow his own musical direction. However, the fact that Alice Coltrane was also a pianist may have contributed to his decision.

Tyner once said, *A musician such as John shouldn't have to depend on the piano all the time. Sometimes it's better to work without it because the piano, as an orchestral instrument, can get in the way of the soloist, especially a horn player. John and I would decide on which tunes I would play and on which ones I would lay out*

But now McCoy was taking a permanent stroll. And Alice Coltrane walked in as McCoy Tyner walked out" - J.C. Thomas (the author)

****Coltrane's LEO: The CIA uses that tune at Gitmo.****

Trane-boarding! :-)

****if spirituals, blues and jazz have an African connection, we should have those equivalents in Haiti, Cuba, and Salvador Brazil****

O-10, do you mean music styles in those other countries that also have an African connection?

Rok, Ella is actually out"playing" the horn players on that clip; she really was amazing, and I've never seen a case big enough for her. But, Trane; man, I'm not quite ready to come back to earth yet.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PL7D089D2C50E97018&v=KncD3ya0B1s

Acman3, thanks for the Sonny Rollins clip. I too love that record. It's really amazing how two icons of the tenor saxophone can both be so influential and yet so different. If I was forced to pick my favorite desert-island tenor player, Sonny would probably be it. I find this record particularly interesting because there are many times when I wonder if, because of his choice of rhythm section, he always felt like he was a little bit in Trane's shadow and tried to play like him. I don't think that playing free or "out" came as naturally to him as it did to Trane, but he sounds fantastic as always; and no glue (piano)!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gActLqZZX68

Exactly right; at 2:30. Excellent!

:-)

Rahsaan WAS amazing! One of a kind. I think McCoy (and Rahsaan) were definitely channeling Trane in that performance. McCoy with chord voicings reminiscent of his work with Trane's Qt., and Rahsaan with......Well, let's have some fun. Now that you are noticing connecting phrases in solos (Morgan/Golson), can you tell what tune Rahsaan quotes in his solo that is the dead giveaway that he is thinking "Trane!"?

Hint: the tune Rahsaan is playing is in 4/4 time, the one that he quotes is in 3/4 time (waltz); which makes the quote that much more interesting.

In fun only.

Local:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KG9htI6yzSs

Express:

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

A terrible shame. And to think that he died because the doctors at the hospital where he was taken thought that the diabetic coma that he was suffering was a reaction to substance abuse since he was, after all, a jazz musician; they then waited for the drugs to "wear off".

Like a strange new cuisine; strange flavors and too hot, but after a few bites you understand and appreciate it:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CmdhSq5Hp6w&list=PLE59E566FD18327CA

O-10, Afro Cuban All Stars is a great place to start; I will let you take the lead with that. Their great sound is, overall, more traditional than this band, NG La Banda, who were responsible for literally creating "timba", the hottest musical style in Cuba right now being a mix of the sounds of traditional, salsa, rumba, American R&B and even hip-hop. They were formed by ex-members of the very influential band Iraquere. Smoking hot rhythm section (their drummer is incredible) and very interesting and prominent horn section writing. (It should be noted that "salsa" is really not a native Cuban creation, but a style created by the ex-patriate Cuban community in the US along with the Puerto Rican and Dominican communities, with traditional Cuban music and dance forms as the main ingredient):

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ditQMDiW8gw

Rok, you completed missed the thrust of what I was saying re the influence of the native music on the "Hollywoodization" of it on soundtracks. Also, interesting that you suggest we "do the math" since math is an important element in the building blocks of any music and is so at a level that goes to the key point you missed. What distinguishes most a native music from a commercialized (Hollywood) version is not wether the music is played on native instruments vs Western orchestral instruments; instead, it is WHAT is played by any of those instruments. In the example I gave it is the use of (among other things) minor pentatonic scales like the Native Americans used. THAT is what gives the music it's unique flavor kore than anything; that's the influence. Similar relationship in the case of jazz. Anyway....

Great post, Chazro. Thanks!

O-10, I agree with much of what you wrote about Cuba; although, in at least one case, for possibly different reasons.

After many years of being a supporter of the embargo I came to support to support the lifting of the embargo several years ago; here's why: The idea that the average Cuban would benefit greatly from the lifting of the embargo is partly a myth. There is no question that there would be some benefit to the average Cuban; but; it is, in fact and as is usually the case in Communist countries, the elite that see the real benefit. Look at the present situation where Cuba has trade relationships with much of the world (except the US) and Cubans still have an incredibly low standard of living. They experience a great deal of hardship, not to mention political oppression. Even medical care is, in spite of the hype, very limited; but, very limited for everyone, unless you have the money (elite). The reason that I came to support the lifting of the embargo is that the move would take away one of the last (possibly the last) excuse that the regime has for why that system does not work; IOW, it would no longer be the US's fault.

There is no question that change will come to Cuba. However, we have been waiting for a change for more years than anyone imagined. Sadly there are many people in power there with a vested interest in the status quo, and a system in place that will make change very difficult and probably not a reality for many years to come.

Sabor!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=M5-3Tl8_prs

That's not what I heard!

Oh..."fardeau"...; sorry. :-)

****They don't exist there now, because odds are,they never did. Music in the West created and played by people of African decent, does not mean the orgin is African. Just like in the U.S. People are forever trying to connect the Blues, Jazz and Gospel with Africa. There is no connection. It's all indigenous to the US.****

Rok, if what you say is true then just about every authority on the subject, historian or musicologist, is incorrect; that's quite a claim.

Are you kidding me?:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VT2J1Ot9N5c

Who do we believe? Rok; or jazz master Randy Weston?:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=S3L-lG_qmo8

Yours is certainly a provocative stance; and, worthy of consideration. Here's the problem for me, and many others: The African influence in Caribbean music (since we are focusing on Cuban music right now I will put the subject of jazz aside) is there to be heard; it couldn't be more obvious. Did you listen to the clip I just submitted of Liberian drumming? The similarity to rumba and salsa could not be more obvious. I agree that when it comes to race everyone has an agenda; including, in some cases, a purported lack of agenda. The purported lack of agenda becomes even more relevant when there is a natural resistance to analyze the subject matter; in this case, music. It's that pesky N&B thing again; no matter how hard we try, we can't get away from it if we are going to do anything more than listen to and enjoy music without commentary trying to be be factual.

****The best percussion I have ever heard comes from Cuba and other latin American countries.****

No one is disputing that. The point is that we are talking about INFLUENCES; the African influence. You are correct in that it's ludicrous to say "Cuban music came from Africa"; it's also ludicrous to say that "Cuban music" would sound anything like it does today had there been no African influence.

****Did Real Indians really play that music in their villages?****

Of course they did. Well documented and lots of sources to read about it. No disrespect intended, but do you, at least, read the available literature on this stuff? There is no question that Hollywood and other commercial powers often inflate and distort what we are talking about; but that doesn't change the reality of the influence factor. I find it hard to believe that you have never heard anything like this, but check this out and tell me that it is not plausible, and likely, that the silly "Indian" themes that we hear in the old Westerns were greatly INFLUENCED by native music like this (notice the use of the minor pentatonic scale; THAT is what gives the music it's melodic character and it's "Hollywood" sound)

[URL]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yec542aOIzM[URL]

Cheers.

****What is the correct custom for applause at a Jazz performance? Do players expect applause after their solos? ****

Always nice to get applause after a solo. Expected? If the solo is good, sure; but a knowledgable audience knows to not "step on the following solo", so the applause may be brief or absent. The player knows that and would not mind if the applause for his solo is brief or absent in that case. Also, it's a drag when some in the audience can't follow the form of the tune during a solo and applaud before the chorus is over, thinking that the solo is over when it's really just a pause in the action.

****An interesting point is that while it may be called communism, in truth, it's nothing but a dictatorship****

Interesting indeed; a very important distinction and absolutely correct. The term "Communism" sometimes conjures up, in the minds of those without first hand experience or deep knowledge of it, very romanticized notions of what it is really like. The injustice and brutality of it hides behind the theoretical idea of what it can be or is supposed to be; something that it never turns out to be, if history is any indication.

How both ironic and fitting, in the context of this thread, to be discussing Cuban music and politics when jazz was (and is still to a degree) outlawed in Cuba. One of the greatest Cuban bands in recent times, "Iraquere", came to be as a facade supported by the Cuban government to show the world that it did not, in fact, suppress artistic expression. The government "allowed" jazz to be played; but, only a little. Some of its members (Paquito D'Rivera, Chucho Valdez, Arturo Sandoval) left the group or defected to the US because they wanted to play more jazz, but were not allowed. Here are a young Paquito, Arturo and Chucho while still in the band:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=X1TvtB0GoQ0

In 1959, at the height of his career, Sonny took three years off performing and recording to (are you ready for this?) .......practice the saxophone because he felt he had a lot more to learn. This goes back to an early discussion on this thread during which the mistaken idea was posed that jazz musicians don't practice and don't study the N&B's. The image of Sonny practicing on the Williamsburg Bridge (where he went daily for hours and connects Manhattan and Brooklyn) is established in jazz lore. At age 83, Sonny still practices 3 hours every day.

****Since The Frogman says the regime frowns on Jazz, there might not be that much NEW, to discover. Except the expatriates.****

To put it in perspective: it is illegal in Cuba to listen to American radio stations. Cubans can tune in to Miami based radio stations a mere 90 miles away, but they have to do it in secret and risk repercussions if caught. Now, rest assured, there is some jazz (real jazz, not Latin jazz) being played in Cuba, but you won't find it in the clubs and certainly not on youtube; big no-no. As far as Latin-jazz goes there is plenty of it there of the type that we hear here and has been posted; but, that is not the problem. Some of the expatriates left Cuba because they wanted to play JAZZ; not Latin-jazz and not Latin-jazz that was "sanctioned" by the government. Note that the tune being played and sung by the bar band in your clip (yes, that is in Cuba) is a Bossa-nova; I doubt that "It Don't Mean A Thing If....." is on their song list.

****SE = brilliant. KOB = brilliantly ethereal.****

I like that; and I agree. "Somethin Else" was discussed early in this thread's life and in trying to find my earlier comments about it (to no avail) I came a across a thread which asked what albums resemble KOB; SE was mentioned. IMO, it is nothing like KOB except for the shared presence of Miles and Cannon who, being such distinctive voices, can give the two records a deceptive similarity.

KOB is a concept album with its emphasis on modality and "tunes" which began as mere sketches handed to the players at the studio. Only "Freddie Freeloader" is a traditional tune being a basic twelve bar blues. I have always felt that the inclusion of that tune was a deliberate "inside" message by Miles; as if to say: "This is NOT what KOB is about".

SE is another great record; but, I am not prepared to say that it is, overall, a "better" record. The tunes are mostly standards; so, from that standpoint it is comparing apples to oranges. The playing is terrific. Miles' opening four notes in "Autumn Leaves" is a thing of beauty. Same four notes every other player who has played the tune has played. But, man, there was only one Miles; the feeling is incredible. However, to my ears,and conceptual issues aside, where KOB beats SE (handily) is in the area of cohesion: KOB sounds like a band; a band that has played together a lot. There is a very high level of player intuition; they know each other's playing in a way that helps each of them interact in a way and at a level that SE doesn't quite reach. Subtle things like at the end of Miles' solo and lead-in into Trane's solo in "So What"; the way that Jimmy Cobb, with a couple of simple hits, signals "and now, Trane!". I confess that Art Blakey has never been my favorite drummer. I find his playing a little sloppy and not propelling of the soloists enough while Cobb's is lighter and at the same time more concise and forward moving. Blakey sounds like he is on automatic pilot at times; a result of not knowing, as Cobb does, where the soloist was going next. Hank Jones, one of my favorites, is too far back in the mix and is not as much of a presence as Bill Evans is on KOB; this, in spite of the fact that Evans's playing is the epitome of "ethereal" (thanks Rockadanny). I find my attention wandering when the soloists "stretch out"; and I blame the rhythm section for that, they don't supply as much "points of interest" as does the KOB rhythm section. The reason is simple: they were assembled for the session and are not a BAND.

As always, commentary has to be put in context. These are both great records and, undoubtedly, two of the greatest. The criticisms are necessarily about subtleties that would be meaningless compared to inferior recordings. For someone who doesn't think that the concept of KOB is that strong, SE probably has more to offer with it's more traditional slant. For someone who prefers the more traditional the, arguably, superior ensemble playing on KOB is probably not enough to tip the scale. As someone once said: "God (Jazz?) is in the details". (I suspect the big guy up above won't mind that comment).

O-10, "The Offering" will not be available until the end of Nov; 9/24, I believe, his 88th birthday. I may accept that nomination; maybe :-). It will be available on vinyl.

Today's surprise:

****Today's Surprise!!
World Saxophone Quartet -- DANCES AND BALLARDS****

First Stravinsky, now WSQ. See what happens when you hang out with the wrong crowd? :-)

Seriously, not the most avante-garde "avante-garde" music by a long shot, but pretty adventurous stuff. That particular clip starts out pretty "inside" and then takes off. I am very partial to the sound of a saxophone quartet. It can be a thing of beauty particularly playing Bach where it can sound remarkably like an organ.

I don't know if I can stand all this agreement:

Kleiber. Clearly a subjective matter to a great extent, but without a doubt one of the very best. Perhaps the best. His Beethoven 5th is unparalleled.

Corea. Beautiful record from a player with a very distinctive sound and sense of swing.

"Ceora". One of my favorite tunes and one with sentimental value. One of the very first I learned after starting to play the saxophone as a kid; after first starting to play classical clarinet. So, in reality, while I never left jazz nor classical, a more accurate description is that I went back to classical.

Previn. What can one add to what has already been said about him? Amazing musician and true giant; up there with the likes of Leonard Bernstein as an example of great versatility at an extremely high level. I agree with all that has been said about his playing; I particularly like the "less bombastic Oscar" comment. There have been a few, somewhat lower profile musicians who have "left jazz" to focus on classical. Two that come to mind are: Larry Combs, recently retired principal clarinetist with the Chicago Symphony who is (was) also a fine jazz saxophonist and former member of Chuck Mangione's jazz quintet; and Ron Reuben, recently retired bass clarinetist with the Philadelphia Orchestra.

For the geeks:

The opening clarinet solo in "Rhapsody" is, without a doubt, one of the classic "tests" of any serious clarinet player's mettle; right up there with a jazz player's ability to play over the changes to Trane's "Giant Steps". To be able to play the famous "s(h)mear" with great style and still sound controlled and not like one is about to "fall off the tracks" is incredibly difficult. Here is my favorite performance of that solo by the aforementioned Larry Combs in possibly the best recorded version of this great piece (in its original "jazz-band" version). Is it a coincidence that it's a great version of the solo and that Combs is also a jazz player?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KPL19IgsEHc&list=PLIoTSU58PJgr7GVXju5V-hr9RgHWX9Uve

Some thoughts about recent commentary:

I could not agree more with the comment that the thread loses focus and is not as enjoyable if the commentary jumps around too much; I think the reasons why are obvious. However, I think that this distinction needs to be made:

I don't think that the act of jumping around, unto itself, is a bad thing or a distraction. It is possible and potentially interesting to touch upon and show examples of, for instance, a player from the '40's who influenced a player active in the '60's. The "influence lineage" is something that has been missing here IMO; and, there has been active resistance to it as well as active resistance to the music of certain eras such as 20's, 30's and even early 40's; specifically early swing, swing and big-band eras. The issue that I have with that approach is that not enough time is spent on any one topic (or artist) to really do it justice. I have felt this way almost from the beginning of the thread. A recent example is, in fact, the recent "new Cuban music" topic.

O-10, I must say that I was surprised that after you proposed the topic and mentioned The Afro-Cuban All-Stars, that you did not post a single example of either that group or any other group; and, there was scant commentary about any of the postings until the subject was deemed exhausted a short time later. That is a great example of a topic that is abandoned way too soon (and I said so), especially given the huge numbers of musical examples available of that very rich musical heritage.

I think that it's going to be a worthwhile challenge (but certainly not impossible, and certainly potentially rewarding) to take a more pedagogical approach to the discussions as opposed to the one that was the stated one at the thread's inception: that of discussing simply one's favorite artists. I certainly welcome (should not be surprising) a more comprehensive look at the various subjects and a more in-depth analysis (yup, that IS what is being proposed; like it or not). One can't have it both ways. In order to dig deeper into any one subject we have to (to a degree) put aside our dislike of certain genres and certain styles of playing for the sake of gaining a deeper understanding of how it all ties together; and it all certainly does.

Another issue worth noting, and one that would become much more clear if the above approach is taken, is that I don't think enough distinction is made between great artists and important artists. This is not to suggest that the "merely great" artists should not be covered; obviously they deserve to be and "ties it all together". What I mean is that artists like Previn, Snow and Scott are great artists; however, IMO they are not important artists in the sense that they were not particularly influential artists. Determining wether they are important or "merely great", and the reasons why, can be one of the most enjoyable aspects of a thread such as this; personal "like" is a different matter. What makes an artist an important artist?

Scott was an important artist from the standpoint of her contributions to civil rights (and what a beauty she was!), but as far a her contribution to music one has to be pragmatic and acknowledge that she was great, but she was no Art Tatum; her mentor and a truly important artist. IMO, the notion of the either undiscovered or under-appreciated artist is overly-romanticized and generally exaggerated. Of course there have been artists that for whatever personal (or otherwise) reason did not get his/her due; but, the art world has a way of "separating the wheat from the chaff". The truly important artists will (almost without exception) be noticed; sometimes in spite of themselves. Again, we're not talking about merely good/great artists, but the important ones. I think that this perspective can be a very good and useful backdrop for these discussions.

****So in Jazz, we have Jazz, and then something or someone comes along and changes the way that pre-existing Jazz is played. That's 'influence'.****

Rok, you have it exactly backwards; or, at least, only partially (a small part) correct. Yes, someone like Bird comes along and changes the direction of jazz, but the impetus for that change is everything that came before Bird; THAT is the influence (on Bird). And the process continues: Bird was one of Trane's main influences (by Trane's own admission). Of course each player brings new and unique things to the table; but, of there had been no Bird, there would not have been a a Coltrane. And that is the reason that there is always worthwhile jazz including presently; it is an extension of what came before it.

Actually, there have been many who, even if not revolutionizing jazz in a sweeping way the way that Bird and Trane did, certainly influenced the change in the overall direction of jazz; it is a matter of degree.

****The answer to this lies with the unwashed masses. So, as you stated it, a player can be great and not important, and important, but not great. And of course, both and neither.****

We have been here before and the answer is the same: nonesense. I have asked for a more in depth explanation of your stance previously and I have never gotten one. Perhaps that is why you like to consider part of the unwashed masses. Hate to break it to you, you are not part of the unwashed masses. The unwashed don't listen to Mingus nor Beethoven :-) As I have said before, by your definition the best art is The Beatles (I like them btw), Michael Jackson, Kenny G, Madonna etc.

You also misread my comment re important/great. To clarify: an important artist is always great (even if one doesn't like his art), a great artist is not always important.

Cheers

****What makes an artist an important artist? ****

I thought I answered that question in the paragraph that followed. Put simply, it's an artist who was influential in shaping the direction of the art. I think that the Tatum/Scott example is a good one. Scott was an extremely accomplished player and worth listening to. Tatum was a master who influenced not only Scott, but the direction of piano playing style as a whole; he's an important artist.

Rok, you shouldn't short change yourself too readily. I'm not quite sure what a "true aficionado" is, but you clearly love the music.

Pretty good call with one glaring omission: Lennie Tristano. I would
add JJ Johnson as important for putting the trombone on the bebop map.

"Gershwin's World": one of my favorite records and mentioned on this thread many moons ago.

Joni Mitchell: you need to get more often :-)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=q_9QfYIaoTQ&list=PLK8zUi_KAKDhwrgat_gUB5MvtX23okSpV