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.
O-10, why do you do this? Why do you ask for opinions and then pick fights when you don’t like the answers? You often seem desperate to be “right” when it’s not a matter of being right or wrong; especially curious coming from someone who does a lot of “wiggling” (your term) by invoking the “subjectivity clause”. You think your clip is “better”, whatever that means. That’s great! I already said I like them both and gave detailed reasons for why I like the other a little better overall. Just what is the problem? You think the music on your clip is better. I disagree that overall it’s better; it’s different.
Btw, re the plastic saxophone. Talk about “superfluous”!!! Actually, it was made of acrylic; the “Grafton” saxophone. If you would like to know why to a player like Bird it would make no difference let me know and I would be glad to explain it to you. In the meantime, you may find this interesting. Be sure to check out the video link of the comparison/demonstration of a brass saxophone (Buesher) and the Grafton acrylic saxophone; the very kind Bird used at Massey Hall:
Frogman, I don't believe you gave the music a critical listen; consequently you gave a "wrong" answer, and now you're locked into your wrong answer. Yes, subjective opinion can make a difference, but sometimes there is "objective" reality.
Anybody else, I would let it slide, because they are not capable of making an "objective" evaluation of the music, but you are.
You even stated why the "Town Hall" is better;
" On the other hand, the solos by both Bird and Dizzy on the version with Al Haig are incredible. Bird’s solo break is a wonder. Tough choice, aren’t we lucky?"
What could be more important than those two solos?
frog, many thanks for that sax demo. Even as a non-musician and through my iMac speakers I could hear differences.
I found the Buesher to have a little more body (dimensionality, air passing through a cylindrical tube) and slightly mellower tonality. The Grafton sounded brighter and "flatter". However, to me they were not big differences and I wouldn’t say I could always identify one versus the other on a given recording (with no back-and-forth for comparison).
O-10, you couldn’t be more mistakenI certainly gave the music a critical listen; otherwise I would not have made the comments that I made. I have no interest in “winning”. More importantly, I can’t accept your hollow “concession”; concession that I am not looking for nor interested in. It is not I that is “locked in a wrong answer”, it is you. I don’t have a problem with your answer, why do you have a problem with mine? Like I said, it’s not a matter of better or worse; it’s about preferences based on what one considers the most important criteria in a performance. You think that the quality of the solos is the most important thing in a performance. I, and musicians in general, would strongly disagree with that concept and would consider that outlook uninformed and rather sophomoric. Sorry to be so blunt, but you take these discussions to an unpleasant place.
**** What could be more important than those two solos? ****
A “performance” is comprised of many elements; the soloing is just one of them. I already stated that the solos in your clip, particularly Bird’s, are extraordinary. But, that’s not to say the solos on the Massey Hall version are not excellent as well. Moreover, there is a certain logic in the continuity of the soloing in the Massey version that serves the overall performance better than the other version; and on balance, I think the Massey performance is a more balanced one. Better feel from the rhythm section not to mention better and more balanced recorded sound; as well as excellent, if arguably not as fiery soloing. Those things make it a better performance for me.
**** Anybody else, I would let it slide, because they are not capable of making an "objective" evaluation of the music, ****
I beg to differ on that one too and I would be careful about underestimating other posters’ ability to judge for themselves.
pryso, excellent observations re the two saxophones; I concur with your observations. I think the even larger point is that in the hands of a player with the ability of Charlie Parker the differences would be insignificant and not a significant impediment to full expression. In answer to your question re Ornette, like most players they used different instruments at various points in their career and Ornette did, in fact, also use the Grafton white acrylic saxophone as well as more conventional metal instruments. Since we are concerning ourselves with players’ equipment it is important to note that more important than the instrument (assuming that the instruments are all of high quality) is the mouthpiece. The differences in sound between mouthpieces, and the sound that they allow the player to “shape”, is hugely greater than between saxophones of different brands or material used in their construction.
btw, as just one of the many paralells to audiophilia, the mouthpiece is closest to “the source”, and just like the quality or inherent sound of a CD player, phono cartridge or turntable, it will have the biggest impact on the final sound.
Can anyone recommend any of the latest and greatest Computer speakers? I have Logitech Z623. Price no object. :)
Cheers
Don't jump on the OP too hard. Every account of that white Saxophone, in all the Jazz publications I have ever read, refer to it as a 'plastic' or 'toy Plastic' horn. And ridicule him for playing it. All written by pros.
Check out the various AudioEngine models. I have a pair of A5s in bamboo. Not sure if they qualify as "latest and greatest" but they are good sounding and good looking. Affordable too.
If Mingus hadn't recorded it (though his own bass part was inaudible and had to be dubbed in later) the gig might have ended up as little more than a jazz footnote. But the show was released later as The Quintet - Jazz At Massey Hall, one of the great recorded live shows in the history of the genre.
Mingus's bass was inaudible, and had to be dubbed in, but according to some one, that was more important than Diz and Bird's solos.
"Massey Hall concert, even though that hyped event had Bud Powell and Mingus backing the horn titans. Massey Hall to me sounds like Bird and Diz were at one another's throats. This one, (The Town Hall Concert) has them sounding like lovers locked in giddy embrace."
Any time I read "Massey Hall", I think hype.
The worst thing about this debate is that you hear all the flaws, yet you insist that Massey Hall was the best.
This thread is "Jazz For Aficionados" and any one who is supposed to be a real "aficionado", can be challenged.
pryso, thank you for this recommendation, I remember your post mentioning the concert in San Diego...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGsVqF-URXc The ’content’ (if you allow yourself to be imaginative) on this one is actually similar to the one of J.J. Cale in his Tijuana https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ub1SGEVP6oA "Just below San Diego Tijuana, land of broken dreams Senoritas dancing in the moonlight Flashing Spanish dark eyes to everyone, it seems They say "Hey, gringo Can you take us across the border Just tell them I’m your daughter Of a local."
It is just the way of how the musicians express themselves through the music styles, that differs.
Mingus adds on this one the flavor of Spanish flamenco perpetuating Ysabel’s table dance which in a way brings these two songs together if you look upon the lyrics in the work of Cale.
I have been thinking about the audioengine stuff for a while. I think I will need their sub if I get them. I am surprise there is not a more varied selection given how audio and computers seem to be merging more and more.
@rok2id You are very welcome. Here’s a link to them on Audio Advisor under the "powered speaker" heading. Other brand options shown too. Buying from AA you would be able to return them if you did not like them. Don’t know anything about your intended use but unless you get some kind of great package deal you might hold off on the sub until you get to hear the speakers. I have my A5s on top of a roll top desk in an alcove in the loft. Plenty of bass. But I don’t use them for critical listening...more for background etc. while doing paperwork. That isn’t necessarily a comment about sound quality, however. In any case, they are way better than garden variety mini-computer speakers. They can play plenty loud to be well heard in most of the living area on the ground floor if desired. Also, the Kevlar speaker material takes a while to "loosen up". Early on they will sound closed in and not that great. Just be aware, these aren’t up to the standards of some of our audiophile colleagues that grace this A’gon forum with their wisdom.
orpheus, have not heard for the particular piece (ain’t that a surprise ;) ), enjoyed very much listening and was intrigued by the title that made me wonder about this 27th Man.
Thank you for posting it.
Another one from Horace, remarkable music if I may say: Horace Silver - Señor Blues (Horace Silver, Blue Mitchell & Junior Cook) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8jFGFwOm7k Horace Silver - piano Blue Mitchell - trumpet Junior Cook - tenor sax Gene Taylor - bass Louis Hayes - drums
This is the reference in regard to "Night In Tunisia". It was recorded before "Bird's" health deteriorated, it was when the king (Bird) reigned supreme, with "Diz" just a notch behind. All the players on this recording perform as one to project Dizzy Gillespie's concept of a "Night In Tunisia" into music.
"The Reference" in jazz is unlike the reference in other things. It doesn't mean someone else has to imitate or duplicate to have a very good version of this tune. Nor does it mean that you aren't free to like another version better, or even consider it the best; it just means what I stated in the first paragraph.
This recording projects the very soul of Dizz's concept, and that's what makes it "The Reference"
Mary_jo, that's my favorite, but I don't think that's available on CD or record; the biggest difference is Horace's long piano solo; not only is it long, but it's different, he really jams it.
Irascible uncle (code name E.T.), knows something that the rest of us do not know...posted 'War is coming'. Off I go to buy some groceries just to secure myself up.
Thanks o10, I am a fan of Silver and have several albums with him, as a leader and with the Jazz Messengers. But that one was new to me. rok2id, for me "'Round Midnight" is such a classic tune, perfect for jazz interpretations, that every version I've heard seems to have something worth listening to.
Regarding War, I have a couple of their rock albums, so need to listed to that entire link later when I have more time.
"It always seemed curious to me how Parker got a hold of a plastic saxophone, I kind of pictured it as a cheap toy meant for pre-teens or something, bought at the last minute out of desperation. The only information I ever saw on it was that it was plastic (nothing on what type of plastic was used) and that Parker had pawned his own sax, hence the need for another one."
Steve Hoffman thought this. I wonder why and how? He is a pro writer on music and gear. Shouldn't he have known better? If he didn't, why should us fans.
"This record, as much as any other from the period, makes the case for Parker one last, brilliant time. Then you think about Parker arriving without his own horn, and having to borrow a Grafton saxophone — this dinky plastic alto with metal keys. It was just one more reason why this concert should have never happened, should have been a disaster. Should have never seen the light of day."
Don’t know about hindsight, never mind 20/20 (and not sure what you mean by that); but I can tell you this:
Parker was under contract to play only a certain brand of saxophone when outside the USA. He had hocked his horn to buy heroin so he needed a horn. He was offered the Grafton by a salesman for the Italian company. I never suggested that “fans should know better”. Hoffman, who is neither a saxophone player nor professional musician, is an audio gear head and audiophile who always thinks it’s all about the gear. He made the same mistake that fans would make assuming that a “plastic” saxophone would be a “dinky” toy and nothing more. The subject of the plastic horn is the stuff of legend among players and the general concensus is that while it may not be the best horn in the world, it’s not bad at all. Far more important is the mistake that Hoffman and some fans make of not understanding that, as acman3 points out, in the hands of a talent like Bird it wouldn’t matter that much. Bottom line: listen to the end result of the quality of Bird’s playing and/or clips I posted of the saxophone being played. The author of that review is correct: makes a great case for the brilliance of Bird.
Excellent!!!! You are supposed to sprinkle snake dust all over your floor, and hang two chicken feet over the front door, before listening to this stuff. Otherwise, My Cousin and Miles' mama might call on you.
Rok, Miles don't play that; you liable to get a visitation tonight. That was his Aunt Corrine, not his Mama.
"Aunt Corrine had her office right next to my father's. There was a sign out front saying "Dr. Corrine, Reader, Healer" with an open palm facing the viewer. She told people's fortunes. She'd be in her office lighting candles and smoking them cigarettes behind clouds of smoke talking weird stuff. She must have thought I was weird, because as soon as I walked in her office she started lighting candles and smoking cigarettes. Ain't that a bitch; she thought I was weird."
A few days ago, I read an interesting interview with Goran Tomljenovic, Croatian designer of ultra-high-end loudspeakers and I found in the article some interesting facts that are in some way related to your debate about how different materials affect the sound quality of the saxophone. Goran’s speakers are interesting because they are in principle a horn loudspeaker which as main element uses an acoustic horn, as well as many brass and woodwind musical instruments (link: https://www.facebook.com/Ring-Audio-159138464215165/ ) Those speakers (Ring Audio’s Master Horn Jazz - MH Jazz to acquaintances) are very nice, but also very expensive and cost around 20 thousand US dollars.
Asked if the material was important for sound quality, Goran was very clear. He said that their horn loudspeakers are made of different materials - wood, composite materials, ceramics, ... but it does not matter to the sound quality at all.
Moreover, he emphasized that it is only important that the material from which the horn is made must be, so to speak, “ACOUSTICALLY DEAD”, i.e. for the material itself it is crucial that its resonant frequency is BELOW THE AUDIBLE LEVEL. Also, the material from which the horn is made, must not affect the resonance of the air INSIDE the horn channel.
The only thing that matters to acoustic horn is channel shape, high measuring accuracy, and great precision craftsmanship. This is quite opposite to the many other musical instrument. Usually, the instrument box (body of the instrument) must resonate so that we can hear something at all.
For example, the guitar string causes the soundboard (upper and lower plate) and sound box to vibrate, and they strengthen the vibrations of the strings and amplify sound. With the acoustic guitar, the choice of materials is crucial for the sound quality. For saxophone, the material is not important for the sound quality, this is more important for durability, playability, wear resistance, corrosion resistance, etc. And of course, for seller marketing tricks. Here I must quote Stephen Howard who wisely commented on another forum where there is a similar discussion of whether the material affects the sound quality of sax:
“After decades of comparing otherwise identical horns - the only difference being the body material - I’ve come to the conclusion that the answer to this thorny question is - Yes...but only if you’ve paid more for it". Same as with wine. If the price on the wine bottle is higher, people like it more. Even when all the bottles that they have tested, contain exactly the same wine.
Excellent and very informative post, mary_jo; thank you for that. As is usual with these issues I think that it’s important to remember that there are no absolutes and that the tendency is to go to extremes with the conclusions. This is what I mean, and for instance:
**** For saxophone, the material is not important for the sound quality, this is more important for durability, playability, wear resistance, corrosion resistance, etc. And of course, for seller marketing tricks. ****
That statement is true as concerns the impact that the material may have on the instrument’s ability to allow the player to express himself. An instrument that is well designed, as you point out, will allow that regardless of material used. The statement is not entirely true because there are, in fact, subtle sonic nuances that will manifest themselves as a result of the different materials used and these may be more or less important to a particular player. However, ultimately it is the execution of the design that matters most. Some pertinent examples:
Some of the most highly regarded flutes are the vintage Louis Lot flutes, many of which were made of nickel as opposed to silver or gold which has a lot more cache or “bling”. Beautifully executed design which yielded gorgeous tone.
On a saxophone the material used for the “ligature” which is the little mechanical device that holds the vibrating reed on the mouthpiece can have a significant effect on the response and sound of the instrument. Again, it is “close to the source” so it will have a significant effect. However, I doubt that when a player (Parker) is looking for money for his next fix that he is worried about the material used for his ligature. He would use tape or a shoestring if he had to.
For those of you who enjoy the contributions (playing/arranging/writing) by Charles Mingus, I just found this local video of a panel discussion on him, presented the day before the Mingus Dynasty concert I mentioned previously. I enjoy the insights brought up in discussions such as this, so hope you may as well.
pryso, wonderful clip; I enjoyed that very much. Fantastic and very interesting commentary by an extremely well informed and articulate panel. Aside from the insights into Mingus, they directly or indirectly touched on so many of the broader topics that have been brought up and argued on this thread. Great to hear that kind of insightful commentary on such a deep subject that is this great music and it’s great personalities. Thanks!
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
