Donald Byrd:
5 CDs. Amazon. Returns are super easy.
Cheers
5 CDs. Amazon. Returns are super easy.
Cheers
Jazz for aficionados
Jazz for aficionados
I'm going to review records in my collection, and you'll be able to decide if they're worthy of your collection. These records are what I consider "must haves" for any jazz aficionado, and would be found in their collections. I wont review any record that's not on CD, nor will I review any record if the CD is markedly inferior. Fortunately, I only found 1 case where the CD was markedly inferior to the record.
Our first album is "Moanin" by Art Blakey and The Jazz Messengers. We have Lee Morgan , trumpet; Benney Golson, tenor sax; Bobby Timmons, piano; Jymie merrit, bass; Art Blakey, drums.
The title tune "Moanin" is by Bobby Timmons, it conveys the emotion of the title like no other tune I've ever heard, even better than any words could ever convey. This music pictures a person whose down to his last nickel, and all he can do is "moan".
"Along Came Betty" is a tune by Benny Golson, it reminds me of a Betty I once knew. She was gorgeous with a jazzy personality, and she moved smooth and easy, just like this tune. Somebody find me a time machine! Maybe you knew a Betty.
While the rest of the music is just fine, those are my favorite tunes. Why don't you share your, "must have" jazz albums with us.
Enjoy the music.
I'm going to review records in my collection, and you'll be able to decide if they're worthy of your collection. These records are what I consider "must haves" for any jazz aficionado, and would be found in their collections. I wont review any record that's not on CD, nor will I review any record if the CD is markedly inferior. Fortunately, I only found 1 case where the CD was markedly inferior to the record.
Our first album is "Moanin" by Art Blakey and The Jazz Messengers. We have Lee Morgan , trumpet; Benney Golson, tenor sax; Bobby Timmons, piano; Jymie merrit, bass; Art Blakey, drums.
The title tune "Moanin" is by Bobby Timmons, it conveys the emotion of the title like no other tune I've ever heard, even better than any words could ever convey. This music pictures a person whose down to his last nickel, and all he can do is "moan".
"Along Came Betty" is a tune by Benny Golson, it reminds me of a Betty I once knew. She was gorgeous with a jazzy personality, and she moved smooth and easy, just like this tune. Somebody find me a time machine! Maybe you knew a Betty.
While the rest of the music is just fine, those are my favorite tunes. Why don't you share your, "must have" jazz albums with us.
Enjoy the music.
31,560 responses Add your response
Orpheus - No problem that you didn’t care for the MMW. I am a bit surprised but can handle differences in taste AND always appreciate getting a politely delivered alternative point of view. I don’t listen to hip hop on any regular basis. If that groove on Track 1 of MMW’s Friday Afternoon is typical of hip hop, maybe I need to start listening more! From your exchange with Rok it sounds like you and he are more traditionalists with respect to your jazz music preferences. As a general rule I have to agree with your assessment of contemporary music/jazz and would extend that to a LOT of modern art. I don’t we are evolving. I think we are DEvolving. Good stuff is the exception to the crap that seems the norm these days BUT exceptional good stuff is out there. Jafant - saw your one liner re Medeski, Martin Wood. New to you? or familiar with their stuff?? Very good musicians I think, even though some of their compositions can be a challenge listening-wise. Salve all. |
I'm listening to John Coltrane and my present references are to "Kulu Se Mama". Juno Lewis is doing African vocals, and percussion; it's on the Impulse label. Although this is pretty far out, it's within musical bounds (according to me, and my definition of "musical bounds") This was recorded October 14, 1965, two years after I saw him live. I make this point in time to establish a couple of things; although I heard what can best be described as "free jazz" after he played "My Favorite Things" as far as it would go, so far he has not recorded this "free jazz". "Kulu Se Mama" gets 4 stars, I like it. There's another point I want to make; Elvin Jones and McCoy Tyner are with him. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryMLO7Ed4d8 Now we go into a time when Elvin Jones and McCoy Tyner are not with John Coltrane. In 63, when Trane went so far out, that McCoy Tyner looked at Elvin Jones, who was already looking at him, as if to say "What now"? and McCoy Tyner looked down at his piano, as if to say "just follow me". What I'm doing right now is duplicating that moment in time without McCoy Tyner and Elvin Jones. I'm also saying something that's never been said, great musicians of the stature of McCoy Tyner and Elvin Jones don't like to be left in mid air in front of a live audience, and evidently what I saw in 63 was happening quite often; they looked silly for an instant, and the audience was looking at them with a quizzical look because they were not with Trane musically. This is from "Infinity" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3jaJDr8zKA Frogman, can you be musically and politically correct? The reason I make this statement is because you always choose to be "politically" correct. What is your assessment when comparing "free jazz" to what I consider is within musical bounds. This is definitely out of what I consider "Musical bounds", what say you frogman? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjDrkTmqxQk Enjoy the music |
Ghosthouse, it takes a long list of very good recordings over a period of years for an artist to be considered a good jazz musician, but if an artist is not even being considered, yet has two good recordings, I want those two good recordings. Case in point "Sugarcane Harris", I never heard his name before, but I'm presently enjoying his music, thanks to you. Enjoy the music. |
Acman, "Free Jazz", should be free; I'm sure I wouldn't think that way if I was on the set feeling all the vibes, but since I'm not..... Chicago Underground, was interesting; easy to listen to, I like the combination of instruments. I'll have to hear more in order to form an opinion, but they're off to a good start. Enjoy the music. |
****Frogman's leading this parade**** I am? I thought O-10 was, since he brought up the topic. Lead? Too scary, given recent history here 😬. But, hey, somebody has to do it. I already expressed my opinion that a chronological perspective is key; that will be the focus of my "lead". Why? Again, because if we are going to get "in depth", I believe it's necessary in order to get a handle on what exactly "fusion" is and to avoid blurring the lines between it and what is doen mistakenly referred to as fusion, but is actually the sub-genre "smooth-jazz" which in my humble opinion is mostly a bunch of insipid dreck. If we are just going to post a bunch of examples of fusion that we each like with no "method", then I will have to surrender the mantle of leader to Rok 😉. "Fusion", in the loosest sense, is the combining of any two or more genres. However, we should stick to fusion that has its roots in jazz, otherwise this discussion will be all over the place. Example: Chick Corea's "Return To Forever" is a great example of fusion; Santana's "Abraxas" is not, it is a rock recording with Latin flavor as part of the recipe. The hallmarks of good jazz, very high level of craft, emphasis on improvisation, and strong compositional values are not there; these are the things that define good fusion. It is no coincidence that many of the trailblazers of the fusion movement were Miles Davis alumni; yet another example of why Miles is considered one of the greatest artists that ever lived. Acman3 already posted a clip of Tony Williams' "Lifetime". Tony Williams is a monster drummer and his playing on Miles' classic 60s quintet recordings which didn't have any obvious "fusion" leanings give hints of where his head was at and where he would eventually go as a player. His album recording of the music that Aman3 posted was recorded just a few months before Miles' "Bitches Brew": https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxeiY5kXz8Y In 1971, guitarist John McLaughlin who played on "Bitches a Brew" and in Tony Williams' "Lifetime" would record this along with drummer Billy Cobham on drums who would go on to record his own classic Fusion recors as a leader: https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLGwOiqHPWpWbhNB5g-OEcyrXy3voSP8ya&v=boOu0L45M44 That same year the great Wayne Shorter and Joe Zawinal would co-lead and release Weather Report's debut album and turn the Jazz world on its head. Probably the most important band in the genre: https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLiXS2f7h4Agp1atJsGwIoPIZ4Sf0LYfbd&v=lve3au9opGM |
I just read some of the most recent posts. I had not read them before posting my most recent. A couple of thoughts: While I certainly have no issue with discussing any and all genres while any one genre is being discussed "in depth" (not!), I must say that my concerns are being borne out. Iow, are we going to discuss fusion "in depth" or not? There's an awful lot to listen to and discuss. Are we moving on (back) to Coltrane and are we going to just "skim over" fusion. O-10, you never cease to amaze me; or, should I say?....confuse me. After all the recent comments that I have made about my distaste for political correctness you state that I am "always politically correct"? I could be "politically correct" and be patient with that comment or I could ask what I would normally ask which is "what planet do you live on?". I will give your questions re "musical bounds" an honest answer when I have some time. In the meantime, how about 1972 in Fusion? |
I have no clue what you are saying O-10, please clarify. But, before you go about making any rash decisions (😱) please take a closer look at the most recent exchange and see who it was that first made a comment that turned things personal. I will help you with better understanding all this, but if you are looking for an argument please look elsewhere. 1972 was a very very good year 😃. |
That's actually very funny! Heard this on WBGO today and thought I would post it in case you might be too distressed with the recent topic. Good segue to your funny: https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PL15243F255ACDA1EC&v=DZjcLUK5px4 Btw, hang in there, you might be surprised. Lots of M Brecker around the corner. |
Read it and weep. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jazz_fusion As any evil-doer will tell you, to destroy any culture, first, destroy the language. Words then have no meaning, or, any meaning. Cheers |
Not sure why I should be weeping from reading the Wiki; but, I agree with your statement about language and culture (you can add borders to the mix). The problem is, and we've been having this argument for quite some time, that as concerns art (music), you've got it backwards. Art reflects the culture. Think about it: is it any surprise that a culture that moves more and more towards the elimination of borders and away from individuality and self-reliance should see more and more "fusion" in art? Whether the fusion is good art or not is dependent on other things. |
1972: Miles ups the ante with "On The Corner". One of my favorites from this period. Love the grooves. Some of the nastiest guitar sounds ever and Dave Liebman kills on saxophone: https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLA0077F372BB485C8&v=Ps0ka1tY5yg Herbie Hancock (Miles alum) releases this in what is an obvious hint of what is to come with the following year's seminal "Headhunters" album: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YyUvKfacrX0 And, of course, Chick Corea's "Light As A Feather". Classic record with who, imo, was the greatest jazz flutist to ever live (great saxophonist as well), the great Joe Farrell: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=a_OEJ0wqt2g |
frogman, on this date and time 05-10-2016 8:09pm I asked you a question that you never answered. If I ask you where you're going, you tell me where you have been. If I ask you where you have been, you tell me where you're going, but whatever the question, you never answer, but go into one of your long diatribes. Today is 05/17/2016, that means that question was asked 7 days ago. I reworded that same question on 05/16/2016 5:43PM. on 05/16/2016 8:17 PM you pop up, back leading the parade (where have you been) since you're back leading the parade, I let you know I'm glad you're back "Leading the parade". What do you do? you go "back" to a post written at 5:43PM, and you still don't respond to the post, but go into a rant about "political correctness". I'm the person who brought up Santana "Abraxas", not as an illustration of fusion. On 05/15/2016 at 1:55 PM I brought up Santana to set up the time frame, and I also brought up "The Beatles" did you think that I was using them for an example of fusion as well? I can not imagine anyone stupid enough to think Santana "Abraxas" was fusion. Why did you think that I was stupid enough to think "Abraxas" was fusion? "I never cease to amaze you" that's funny because you don't amaze me "It's the same old Frogman" never reading anyone's post all the way through, getting whatever meaning he chooses to get out of every post, and never answering any questions directly. I've mentioned this thing about Coltrane more times than I can count, and you have yet to respond to it. All you have to do is listen to the music and tell me what you think. You have already listened to the music that I used as an example of the same music he played when I saw him live in 63, and you don't know how to answer. Enjoy the music. |
****Frogman, can you be musically and politically correct?**** Are you asking whether I can be, or are you asking whether ONE can be? Also, what do you mean by "musically correct"? ****What is your assessment when comparing "free jazz" to what I consider is within musical bounds.**** Couldnt even begin to answer that question. Your musical bounds are yours. I may feel that your "bounds" are too restrictive, but they are your comfort zone, not mine. I find value in some free jazz as long as it's not bs masquerading as jazz. I've said it before, imo the listener should always have a certain degree of humility when trying to make an assessment like this. What I mean is, I may not "like" a particular musical choice by an artist; however, when we're talking about an artist who is an acknowledged musical giant, as Coltrane was, to declare it "going too far" strikes me as arrogant. I prefer to, at least for the time being, respect that artist's musical vision and leave the door open to perhaps growing to understand and maybe even like it some day. After all, who the hell am I (or you) compared to a giant like Coltrane. Personally, I would put my money on his judgment not mine. Of course, not all artists merit that level of respect. |
O-10, I realize that there is no hope of you ever cutting out the crap, because it’s obvious that you feel threatened by my presence on this thread. As I said before, if you’re looking for an argument please look elsewhere. I wasn’t aware that anyone here was obligated to answer every question asked of them, especially when the comments that you direct at me are often laced with sarcasm and your questions have proven to sometimes be no more that baiting. I realize that you are incapable of seeing, never mind acknowledging this, but my posts are clear, succinct and (usually) extremely well written. I don’t give a darn whether you can acknowledge that or not, but, man!, can you try a person’s patience. Try, for once, taking responsibilty for what you write and how you write it; it is often confusing and muddled. Let’s see, we were talking about fusion; and "in depth" as you requested. Then, you write this: ****Santana and "Abraxas" took over the world of music in 1970; this music could be heard everywhere I went; jazz, rock, blues establishments, no matter what the dominant genre of music in that particular lounge, something from "Abraxas" was on the jukebox. (never went to a hillbilly lounge) Rok, you have to go back to what was happening at that time in order to re-discover fusion; I’m sure you bought at least 2 or 3 fusion albums.**** Is it that far fetched that I should think that you were using that as an example? Especially when it IS fusion; of a different kind. And if I did misconstue what you meant...so what? Why all the indignation? Get over it man!! Why don’t you try making a significant contribution to the topic YOU brought up instead of all this bs? We’re to 1973 now and I’m still waiting 😁 ****I can not imagine anyone stupid enough to think Santana "Abraxas" was fusion.**** I can. |
Frogman, it crossed my mind, that you had mentioned we had not gone into fusion in depth. (idea) Go into fusion, and let Frogman "Lead the Parade" You posted on page 127; 5-15-2016 10:31 AM and you did not post again until 5-16-2016 at 8:17 PM, that's over 24 hours, and you were supposed to be leading the parade in fusion. After your first post, I responded with a positive post. What do you do; instead of going on into fusion, you go into one of your negative diatribes as usual. Rok, does not like fusion, I liked fusion when it came out, but when Rok mentioned it did not pass the CD test, I knew exactly what he was talking about; I spent money on one of those HD down loads, and never even play the thing, I forgot about it; that says what I care about fusion. If anything can be "F"ed up you're the man to do it. We didn't have to be here, but we are. Enjoy the music. |
A picture is worth a thousand words. From this http://sentireascoltare.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/sentireascoltare_miles-davis_around-midnight.... To this http://www.promo-team.de/cds/september-07/miles-davis-box-2-gross.htm Cheers |
My problem with Fusion is this: (Of course this is from the perspective of the Great Unwashed.) It's not good Jazz, not Good Rock, or Good Soul or good whatever the fused element is supposed to be. To my ear, more like experiments in sound. Google the music that was being made in 1972, which was not a good year, but still, if you wanna hear rock, play the stones. In biology we would say this was a dead end branch of the evolutionary tree of Jazz. It didn't go anywhere. Didn't lead to future greatest. So, why did it exist? Follow the money. And the fame. And being accepted by the hip and the young. Those are powerful lures. Like a second lease on life. I do not blame them. I blame the folks who decided it should be called JAZZ. Cheers |
Can’t generalize. Well, maybe you can; I can’t. ****It didn’t go anywhere**** Dead wrong. And, as I said, the reason that a chronological approach is key. 1973: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hNlm-W3m1qc Not better than The Stones as far as basic musical values and craft? Seriously? Not good jazz as far as level of improvisation and interplay between the players? Seriously? And btw, we haven’t even gotten to the really good stuff. |
Honest question: just what is SO offensive about calling it jazz? First of all it's usually called fusion jazz; but let's not split hairs. Classic jazz stands on its own as the great music it was and is. Why do you think that such a powerful and important art form can't withstand the POSSIBLE misuse of the name by a newer genre? How, exactly, is it being hurt by the appropriation of the name? Who or what suffers by this? |
Today's Listen (and disinfectant) So much strange stuff floating around this thread, I felt it was necessary to remind ourselves of what this is supposed to be all about. Hence this! My kind of Fusion. Notice how he blends the elements of Jazz with other elements of Jazz to produce Jazz-Jazz. Charles Mingus -- BLUES AND ROOTS https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyOlc8BaR0A It might sound 'funny' at first, sort of like the air in the National Parks smells 'funny' to city folks. Cheers |
*****
How, exactly, is it being hurt by the appropriation of the name? Who or what suffers by this?***** All Jazz players and fans, past, present and future. It degrades the music. I just don't understand why we need hybrid or hyphenated music. You wouldn't mention Einstein's name in the same sentence with some quack from the middle ages who thought he could turn lead into Gold. As Wynton Marsalis said, "Miles used to play Jazz". That nails it. Cheers |
To be honest, I don't care WHAT you (or anyone) call it. If it's good music that's all that matters. You don't like fusion; that's fine. And, yes, if I HAD to choose between the two (a silly notion, but hey!) I would choose classic jazz (jazz-jazz); but, don't think for one moment (and I'm not saying you do) that because someone likes good fusion (or whatever) that it means that they like jazz-jazz (!) any less than you do, or that you have a deeper appreciation of it because you don't. |
Frogman, almost all genres of music relate to something that's common to a lot of people in some segment of this population; blues, "My women done left me"; jazz, hip city streets; hillbilly, rural life, mostly in the south; country and western; horses, cowboys, rodeo life; you get the picture, and you can go on and on with the different segments of the population. "Jazz fusion"; look at the covers on the albums, and the titles; "Hymn to The Seventh Galaxy", with electronic space music; there's no way that music could stand the test of time. Music doesn't exist in a vacuum, it has to relate to something that relates to human beings in order to withstand the test of time. Since you were enthused with "Fusion", I was certain that you could lead us to whatever we missed, and that I might be able to add something new from that genre of music. Now that the interest is below 0, I think we should let Rok take us into whatever direction he chooses. Enjoy the music. |
'The late Soviet Union was not renowned for its contributions to jazz,
but it did produce at least one notable group, for in the '70s and '80s the Ganelin Trio was arguably the world's greatest free jazz ensemble. Comprised of pianist Vyacheslav Ganelin, saxophonist Vladimir Chekasin, and drummer Vladimir Tarasov,
the trio's mostly improvised music was as emotionally intense as
anything being created in the U.S. -- or anywhere else -- at the time.
The three members were extraordinarily skilled, possessed abundant chops
and imagination.' https://youtu.be/n6kOpdtwSzY This next clip is also interesting, in regard to that theory that fusion was a dead end ( I am not a fan of it) but still one should ask himself how its possible that on two opposite sides (in many senses) of world, man can find many similar things in art? https://youtu.be/WGYDPFJMT0g |
Free Jazz "Keith Johnson of AllMusic describes a "Modern Creative" genre, in which "musicians may incorporate free playing into structured modes -- or play just about anything." Hell, I can do that. Anyone can do that. But then, that's the purpose of this so-called music. Soviet Free Jazz: Any music that could gain the approval of the commissars and bureaucrats in the Kremlin, did not have anything we would recognize as 'emotionally intense'. But, the Soviet Union was the perfect place for 'Free Jazz' to strive. They are both soulless and meaningless. Cheers |
frogman, You said, " Art reflects the culture. Think about it: is it any surprise that a culture that moves more and more towards the elimination of borders and away from individuality and self-reliance should see more and more "fusion" in art? Whether the fusion is good art or not is dependent on other things." I couldn't agree more. Our world has changed greatly in the last 20 years, or 25 or 30. We are really living in "one world and one planet" and the awareness and the wonderfulness of the diversity of cultures are, at least for me, beyond excellent. From the music, to the food, dance and literature, and the blending of all of them to discover new ways to express them is perhaps my greatest joy. Rok, The Invictus Choir; thank you for posting that. I watched the entire thing and cried at the end. -- Bob |