Jazz for aficionados
Had been a while since I listened to this favorite record. Tony Bennett was so much more than just a “crooner”. In his prime he was an amazing singer who projected an incredible amount of joy of singing. Even if this genre is not one’s thing, the great artistry is impossible to miss. Awesome orchestra. https://youtu.be/dzyCeul1Hvk?si=yON315vAvPUWS93R https://youtu.be/YJtbT10GN48?si=MrJanQ6CCeZqVEhX https://youtu.be/vrcBo2RE5lU?si=CTgl1WQJyteptv2D Same song with a rested voice: https://youtu.be/5dCcGorrT0Q?si=BHd3w4YzRbJcRoMl
|
I hope you are not suggesting that there is something wrong with “operatic”? IMO, the song does not work as well with “jazzy” inflections. Sheila Jordan’s version has an element of sultriness that I feel is completely inappropriate for the story behind the song. Moreover, the rendition sounds belabored. It’s hardest to sing (and play) really slow tempi. I do like Jordan, but not this song choice. |
I understand it’s not your cup of tea, Stuart. The song “Lost In The Stars” was, in fact, written by the great Kurt Weill for a Broadway musical. One of the beauties of music is that it affects us all differently. Personally, while I certainly enjoy certain genres more than others, there is no genre at all that I “dislike”. This is why I wrote: “Even if this genre is not one’s thing, the great artistry is impossible to miss.”. For me, Bennett’s artistry and expressivity are pretty amazing. As you say, much of this is subjective, but I would not characterize those arrangements as grandiose at all, but lush and tasteful……for the genre. I feel that there is great value as music lovers to not put up boundaries based on genre, but rather always stay open, at least to some degree, to sheer musical excellence; independent of genre and even what our “tastes” are at any particular point. As was discussed between you and mahgister a few posts prior this is something that changes and evolves. Cheers. Another version that some might call sublime (I still prefer Bennett’s): https://youtu.be/_Gt9TUOMhUs?si=NlNw-I3tvImu2UgX And one that makes me wonder “what was he thinking?! “. Very interesting string writing/arrangement and horrible vocals: https://youtu.be/orMCgDSfxQs?si=esX_qmGQRJwFlfch
|
Great stuff, Alex. What a nice feel that Trio had! For me, there’s always two things that set Roy Haynes apart from a lot of drummers. He had the ability to solo in such a way that one could always “feel/ hear” the pulse of the music; as if the bass player were still playing behind his solo.. His solos always fit the composition. Many drummers solo and one very quickly gets the feeling that they are going into a different musical zone away from that of the tune. Roy Haynes also had the amazing ability to play in a variety of styles very convincingly. In Alex’s great clip he shows his Swing background and with that great feel. https://youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_kVRzddQFvRgfEQvoNfBxbn1xN_RUpCJf8&si=Wcb2klEcxruglfIk Chick Corea - piano Miroslav Vitous - bass Roy Haynes - drums |
Thanks, @tyray ! Don’t be a stranger. |
Re the interesting topic discussed by jaym759 and stuartk and not meaning to disappoint listeners’ expectations or put too fine a point on things, but while I agree with most of what I think jaym759 is trying to say this comment is not accurate: ” I would strongly suggest that for a musician their ultimate goal is to truly move the audience.” The ultimate, first and foremost goal of musicians is to move, and by doing so, gain the respect and admiration of the peers/colleagues that they are playing with. By doing so, the performance achieves the highest level possible. There is no disrespect intended to the listener; quite the contrary.
|
Not a chance. If, by “resurgence” you mean the level of popularity that Jazz was enjoying when that pic was taken. Jazz had already started to wane in popularity by then. During the decades preceding the date of that pic, Jazz was THE Pop music of the time. R&R and related Pop genres changed everything. The culture changed, the music changed. Having said all that, the “demise” of Jazz has been exaggerated in more recent times. Jazz has been alive and well, but as a (much?) smaller percentage of the total music consumption by the general public and certainly different in many cases. |
@msbel , interesting comments. Not sure I understand your disagreement with “……some feel contributed to heralding in the early "new thing" among other musician extending at the time”. I’m not familiar with what Booker had to say about this notion. What was the disagreement or objection to others feeling that his music was, in fact, heralding in a new thing? Intended or not, in many ways that was precisely what his recordings from that period were doing. |
HAPPY NEW YEAR ALL! Thank you, pryso. Best wishes! I think I may be able to shed bit of light on the reason for Tom Moon’s comment. Hopefully without getting too personal. I know Tom Moon from when we were both students in music conservatory. Tom was (is) a talented, pretty good Jazz saxophone player with a remarkably enthusiastic, wide-eyed love of music, no matter the genre…..like his book (great title!). He also has very specific opinions about what is good and what is not, but with no genre boundaries. Rhythmic feel and nuance, level of Swing are important to him on a very nuanced and subtle level. As concerns Brubeck, I understand where he is coming from, even if I don’t agree with the ultimate relevance of it all! I would not refer to Brubeck as a “musical clod”. Brubeck has a sense of swing that is, generally speaking, not as relaxed, or “swingy” in an easy way as some expect from a high profile Jazz player. That is only one aspect of a musician’s musical personality, but for some (musicians and listeners) it can diminish their overall assessment of a musician in spite of other excellences. I like Brubeck’s playing and I like his compositions a lot even though, for me, his feel can come dangerously close to feeling a bit “square”. In this interview, at the 24:50 mark you can hear Tom address this very issue: https://www.npr.org/2008/11/03/96544112/more-recordings-to-hear-before-you-die The tunes Take Five and Take Ten both have a 5 feel. Very similar tunes. Not easy to play in 5. As Tom discusses in the interview, if one listens to the comping of Brubeck vs that of Jim Hall one can hear the difference in level of ease and relaxed feeling. Take Five: https://youtu.be/ryA6eHZNnXY?si=sJFffWfDfgBEKnIR Take Ten: https://youtu.be/rI7hArFCiR8?si=KBHyyv1hWFkK8yS6
|
@tyray , if you’re new to Pat Martino you may like this. I’ve posted it previously, https://youtu.be/2o0AoEqSlB0?si=wvoQQ9f2OhoqI8ga Another with “a little Spanish tinge”…..at least in title. |
Great stuff, acman3 and stuartk! Remler sounds great, but I’m a little confused about the title of the tune. “Cisco” is credited to Pat Martino, but his “Cisco” is a different tune. A brand old guitar recording that is really good! 😊: https://youtu.be/IqLyOs_JlaI?si=NQSEwZ-LEXqT4I-b
|
@tyray , glad you liked it. Pat Martino was a badass! Very interesting and at times sad personal story. |
Contrasts indeed! Well, let’s contrast 😊 First, one should look at the song’s lyrics. For me: melancholy, tenderness, feeling of the blues (obviously, “You don’t know what love is/Until you’ve learned the meaning of the blues”). Should be played as if spoken. Is the player telling the story of the song? Sonny: Love Sonny. Love that sultry, velvety tone and it mostly works for me, but gets a bit notee (notey?). Pharoah: Great! Incredibly expressive owing a lot to Trane’s approach to that melody and Trane’s tone. He doesn’t improvise and sticks to playing the melody. Said it all with just the melody. Love that. Phil: I normally love Phil Woods, but this is not my cup of tea. Way too many notes (notey?) and no tenderness at all. Yuck! In fairness, the tune is one of those tunes with a chord progression that is really satisfying for players to improvise over. Sometimes leads to over playing. Booker: I like it, but not nearly as much as Sonny’s version while having similar tone concepts. My favorite and the classic. Beginning to end, like someone speaking about a lost lover. Pretty amazing. Trane really was a genius: https://youtu.be/YHAKe26KqG4?si=R3DSVNrAprv_G6h0 You don’t know what love is You don’t know how lips hurt Do you know how a lost heart fears You don’t know how hearts burn You don’t know how hearts burn
|
Interesting. Detached or aloof are probably the last two characteristics I would think of. I find his playing to be very direct and committed. The beauty of music in that it can cause different reactions. (Btw, one of the few players who can improvise without piano or guitar and the harmony of the tune remains always clear). |
There has been quite a bit of M Brecker posted by me and others. This is the last Brecker I posted. Perhaps this is it: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_l85qqhvqGAA36q_ctKF3ZoE3cqpktgknc Check this out as well. His last. Both are great: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLBWjcVWYw1waf3zkCkkNGNAWVR4109BLh&si=7ExrySWN3xPhBleX
|
Thanks for sharing, Alex and Stuart . Times change. Jazz changes. Sometimes for the good. Sometimes not. Sometimes a reboot seems appropriate: https://youtu.be/IBpaSIkmNPU?si=-yfUFhzsNIgrPzeC Where is Rok2id anyway?
|
@stuartk , no, it’s Marcel Daniels, not credited on the clip’s personnel list. |
I get it. The MJQ’s style is of a particular aesthetic. A particular sense of swing and emphasis on a compositional style evoking Baroque Classical music. For me it pushes some of the same buttons as some West Coast Jazz does, Brubeck, Mulligan, for example. Not for every listener. But…..I like to try and not be too dismissive of any music when the musicians making it are of the caliber of those of MJQ. I try and give their effort the benefit of the doubt when I don’t quite get it….yet and give it at least a couple of listens “There must be something I’m missing”. Just me. Tough crowd! 😊 |
Jim Hall was one of the true giants. Very nuanced player. https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLut9KQdIHDDrVrYIPlZ7l4bWbsqs7Y5G7&si=STboAZeklAmcGv67 https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLriPIg0RpIgweZ9bD1lA3F6aoxySomwSC&si=oiHqKRo1tB8WwPLq
|
Paul Desmond with Jim Hall. https://youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_kylc5w0323sEFkvmGUZWyghKi3ZKGpktQ&si=kqa4DNyZj0FMxohg |
Some thoughts on this interesting discussion. @audio-b-dog , welcome to the thread! I greatly appreciate it when someone shows great passion for this great art form. One of its beauties is how it (any art) can touch each of us differently and in unique ways. This goes straight to why, with all respect, I disagree with some of what you wrote. This is a personal matter and not a criticism. I think it is very important to remember that one’s reaction to the amount of “emotionality” that a musician is perceived to express is very often as much a reflection of the listener as it is of the musician in question. It is very easy (and unfair) to label a musician as “lacking emotionality”, “intellectual”, or, conversely, “soulful” outside the context of our own unique sensibilities as listeners. I think that one should be very careful to not judge too quickly and instead be more respectful of what, instead, might be a very nuanced and personal way with emotionality. That’s not to say that we shouldn’t have preferences, but sometimes we are influenced by things that have little to do with musicality. **** men show their swagger by the way they move their shoulders when they walk. Women show their swagger by the way they move their hips**** Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate a woman’s hips as much as any man, but I don’t see what that has to do with expression of swagger (or anything else) in their playing. I don’t understand why the distinction is made between “female singers” and “musicians”. Female (and male, obviously) singers ARE musicians. Some singers are every bit the musician that the greatest instrumentalists are. Personally, I don’t get the preoccupation with “the feminine”. Stereotypes can be a dangerous thing when judging art. Re the history of the music. While it is very true that the “swing” and “call and response” elements of Jazz has its roots in African culture, European concepts of melody and harmony were equally important in its development. And, yes, the greats WORK at their craft. Work very hard. The greats practice incessantly and it isn’t always a fun endeavor. Sometimes it is painstaking and frustrating, but, yes, rewarding in the end. Since you admire female Jazz artists so, have you checked out Mary Lou Williams? Very important figure in Jazz. Again, welcome to the thread. |
Glad you like them, @tyray . Two of my favorite saxophone players. Different as could be and both great. |
“Swagger” IN MUSIC is just another way of saying that the music “swings”, “rolls”, or, “has good pocket”. It is a feeling of great rhythmic integrity in the service of that particular music’s style. All are terms that are applicable to music of any genre including Classical. Yes, Classical music can swing…..in its own way. I don’t believe that the presence of swagger in music is dependent on the gender of the artist. Some might argue that there is some unique quality to the MUSICAL “swagger” of a female musician as compared to a male musician. I don’t buy it. Perhaps in their respective bodily “attitude” there is, but there are so many examples of artists of one gender whose work possess qualities that some might attribute to the other gender that makes the notion moot. Has there been a more “feminine” (in the stereotypical sense) Jazz pianist than Bill Evans? Or, conversely, a more “masculine” (in the stereotypical sense) Jazz pianist than, say, Hiromi? I think there is a preoccupation with “classification” or categorization of traits of performers. Not necessarily a bad thing, but the problem is that it is often done at the expense of a deeper analysis/understanding of fundamental musical attributes which are universal and cross gender barriers. @audio-b-dog , I appreciate your passion for music, but I must say and with all due respect that I don’t agree with some of what you write about it. Moreover, it seems you contradict yourself at times: **** I don’t think their art/music has to do with their personalities. **** **** Wynton Marsalis said that jazz was about the musician showing their "personality." **** Which is it? Herbie Hancock eschewed on this thread?! Hardly. **** Although some jazz players, most of whom I think would be eschewed in this thread, like Herbie Hancock **** On the subject of “soul” in music: **** John Klemmer who was influenced by Trane was just copying the man, but had no soul.**** There is hardly a tenor player active from the late ‘50’s and beyond who was not influenced by Coltrane. But to say that John Klemmer “was just copying” Trane and “had no soul” is a pretty bold and, frankly, unfair statement. I am not particularly fond of Klemmer’s music, but I simply can’t agree with that. Moreover, to suggest that the perceived absence of “soul” is why his music is considered “commercial” is mystifying to me. “Commercial” music can indeed be very soulful. From my perspective the above is why fixation on categorization of music in terms of strict genre (and gender) definitions and personal ideas of what constitutes soulfulness (and other attributes) can be a dangerous thing. Dangerous in the sense that it locks the listener into very narrow notions about the intrinsic value of the art. Never a good thing. **** I think we should separate music with a spiritual impulse from "chamber" music. To me, some jazz resembles chamber music in that it does not have that spiritual component informing its musical gestures. **** Huh?! Are you suggesting that chamber music, as a whole, does not have a “spiritual component”? If you haven’t yet, please familiarize yourself with Beethoven’s string quartets. Some of the most gloriously soulful and spiritual (chamber) music ever composed. That is, unless one has the mistaken view that to be “soulful” music has to be imbued with obvious references to the blues. —————————- What is a “gesture” in music? It is helpful to think of music, whether a Classical chamber work, or a Jazz performance as story telling with music. Jazz musicians often judge an improvised solo in terms of whether the musician is “telling a story” and not simply playing “licks” that while potentially “impressive” don’t add up to much as far as having musical coherence and a certain logic from beginning to end. Just like a good spoken word story teller tells a story. In music, a gesture is a motif or musical statement that while discreet is a logical piece of the whole. I wish I could claim to have written the following definition of “musical gesture”, but I saved it a while back after coming across it in a periodical: ++++ Gesture is often more or less synonymous with motive, meaning a germ-like idea or device that participates in musical rhetoric. But the word gesture draws a specific and obvious association with movement: a musical gesture is something whose communicative intent and power are analogous to those of a physical gesture, like a strong cadence or an especially compelling rhythmic figure. Consider the well-known opening of Mozart’s Symphony No. 40: A and b are closely related but opposing gestures; a unfolds and extends the arm, so to speak, while b draws it back in. Really this sense of gesture is entirely metaphorical, but it points to a kinesthetic conception and perception of sound that can be very useful in crafting compelling music, and in analyzing the impact of musical rhetoric on the listener. +++ Audio example of above: https://youtu.be/0sGqkMU-mGQ?si=_PGzvo3w6tL7oCJ Another example which is closer to home for this thread, the ground breaking “Giant Steps” by Coltrane. The first five notes of the tune is a “musical gesture”, followed by a seven note gesture which can be considered, as in the Mozart example, an opposing gesture. https://youtu.be/KwIC6B_dvW4?si=49WEFsDNaCA3NMUt Anyway, apology for the length of this post. I’m glad to see spirited discussion of music. There will always be disagreement at least to some extent. This is the result of how music (art) can move us all in different and personal ways. Disagreement should not be taken personally or as an affront, but as a way to grow as listeners by considering different perspectives. A music lover loves music much more than being a music lover. |
Thanks for your response(s), @audio-b-dog. re Rattle: Q: How can one tell that the floor of the stage is level? A: The viola players are drooling out of both sides of their mouths. 😊 |
To be fair to violists, it should be pointed out that there exists an old and unjustified stereotype about violists that assumes that violists are musicians who cannot compete as violinists, so they take up the viola in order to get orchestral jobs. While it is true that the viola does not have the caché that the violin does and not nearly as many important works written for it, it is an essential voice in the orchestra. There are also many fantastic violists who choose to play the instrument because of its unique characteristics and place in the orchestra palette. Having said all that: Q: What is the difference between a violin and a viola? A: The viola burns longer. 😊
|
Funny, I’ve heard that one but don’t remember the punchline either. Here’s another: A violist is driving on the way to a concert and decides to make a quick stop at a bank. Knowing it would only be a few minutes he leaves his viola on the back seat of his car. He runs into the bank and as he approaches his car on the way back he sees that the rear window has been smashed. Distraught and expecting the worst he looks in the car and in the back seat……two violas. |
