Jazz for aficionados

Be Bop is not a musical genre that can be understood intellectually, it has to be absorbed by osmosis.

frogman
I appreciate your perspective in poInting out the evolutionary process of jazz from swing to bebop. Nothing happens in a vacuum. I had forgotten about the AFOM strike but now remember reading about it. IF there had been recordings from 1942-1944 perhaps this evolutionary process would have been further documented on record(s). And you did not say that either the 1939 or 1944 Coleman Hawkins recording was THE first bebop recording.
But to try and answer pjw's question (which is not easy) would you go with musician's such as Parker & Gillespie , who had a fully  developed bebop style or the earlier 1944 recording which had elements of bebop but not the full rhythm style as Hawkins was a swing player who, as we discussed previously , never fully broke out of that earlier style ?Tough choice.And I am sure there were other guys working in this new jazz style at that time who did not have the opportunity to get it down on record.

I can't add anything to the discussion of the earliest bebop recording, but I have I believe a related question I'll tag on here.

I'm also a bit of a movie buff so when Robert Altman's "Kansas City" was released I saw it.  The setting was the 1930s in KC and featured a club with a house jazz band in several scenes.  I remember thinking at the time watching the film the music was too modern, some too close to bebop for the '30s.  But that has never been an area of particular exposure or knowledge for me.  I jumped from the Armstrong/Teagarden style to post bop NYC and west coast jazz of the '50s.  Here's a link to the film -

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0116745/?ref_=fn_tt_tt_1

And the soundtrack -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyVNApGCeWE&list=PLA14E2CCB19AEBA3B  

So my question: did Altman get it wrong and place 40's jazz (early bebop) in his setting for the '30s?  Not sure, I might feel different watching it today.

I absolutely do not want to change the subject or alter the conversation, I just want an opinion on a current CD.


                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvB0f5akEoQ

nsp, interesting question and great perspective. Personally, I would have to say that I don’t hear enough bebop in that 1944 recording to call it “bebop”. I don’t think that there is going to be universal agreement on where exactly it was that the style crossed some magical demarcation line into territory that can be called the first full-fledged bebop. The transitional recordings were just that, transitional.

pryso, listened to the soundtrack. I don’t think Altman got it wrong at all; quite the opposite. With the possible exception of “Yeah, Man” with its brisk tempo, I don’t hear bebop in that music. Kansas City, like other important jazz hubs, had its own style and sound and I think that music captures it well. Most of that music is based on simple song structures, mainly simple blues forms, the melodies don’t have the characteristic angular or “spiky” character of bebop tunes; nor the need for the virtuosity that playing bebop required. Some of the writing does sound modern, the way that ‘30’s Ellington can sound modern and especially coming from Armstrong/Teagarden. Great soundtrack. Thanks.

Another thing that crossed my mind is that that the musicians have been playing/hearing post bebop since they were born. They can try to play like swing players, but it ends up sounding like a Texan trying to pull off a Brittish accent. 

Bobby Jaspar

There were also Bop vocalists who were quite interesting; they put words to the instrumental Bop; here's King Pleasure.


        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0XYZNx6854


        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2N8bVpRneQ


        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0c79mN5oNvU

There was also Eddie Jefferson;


        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khyNZ2VVpF8


        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIhZjafVTDs


      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxwIDbdyFgc


      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20ZHeLhsQ14

Be Bop was not evolutionary, it was revolutionary; in regard to the best account of the music, Diz is the most vocal.

Of course it was evolutionary.  So, if it was not evolutionary how did it come to be?  O-10, there is a great deal written on the subject by the players themselves not to mention jazz historians.  Please explain how “osmosis” helps to understand its history.  Thanks.

Frogman, why do you want to rewrite history when Bird is the word.

Be Bop is too complex a music to be simplified in writing; it boils down to either you hear it or you don't; it has been called Chinese music by some.



    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvdQYSWOobc



    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGXFuxKTbfY



    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryNtmkfeJk4



Copied from "Wiki"
         
Through these musicians, a new vocabulary of musical phrases was created. With Parker, Gillespie jammed at famous jazz clubs like Minton's Playhouse and Monroe's Uptown House. Parker's system also held methods of adding chords to existing chord progressions and implying additional chords within the improvised lines



Parker was a highly influential jazz soloist and a leading figure in the development of bebop,[2] a form of jazz characterized by fast tempos, virtuosic technique and advanced harmonies. Parker was a blazingly fast virtuoso, and he introduced revolutionary harmonic ideas including rapid passing chords, new variants of altered chords, and chord substitutions. His tone ranged from clean and penetrating to sweet and somber. Parker acquired the nickname "Yardbird" early in his career.[3] This, and the shortened form "Bird", continued to be used for the rest of his life, inspiring the titles of a number of Parker compositions, such as "Yardbird Suite", "Ornithology", "Bird Gets the Worm", and "Bird of Paradise". Parker was an icon for the hipster subculture and later the Beat Generation, personifying the jazz musician as an uncompromising artist and intellectual rather than just an entertainer.[4]

O-10, as always, I am sorry that a more enlightened discussion is not possible. There are two things going on here as is usual. You want to be right about an incomplete viewpoint that you hold no matter how much evidence is presented that points to the contrary. Then, you make an argument for your viewpoint with assertions that do not contradict the opposing viewpoint, but which are, in fact, part of the whole picture; as if this would make your case.  You don’t see that irony because your viewpoint is incomplete. We tend to see what we want to see. I would simply ask this question: how would it be possible for someone to understand the evolutionary process that led to bebop when that listener, by his own admission, has not listened to very much of, nor is interested in listening to, the music that preceded it? Nice clips, btw.

Frogman, this is not philosophy or psychology, this is music; it is the discussion, not what you say, or what I say. When you say Be Bop, you say "Bird"; there was no Be Bop before "Bird".

Parker was a blazingly fast virtuoso, and he introduced revolutionary harmonic ideas including rapid passing chords, new variants of altered chords, and chord substitutions.

I'm not a musician, I don't really know what that means, but I can hear it; even with "Bird With Strings".



                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmRkZeGFONg



Here I can hear all those "Be Bop" chords over the melody in such a way that nothing is lost in the melody; "Who else can do that"?


There are imitators and duplicators, but when you say "Be Bop" there is only one "Bird".



                        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ug0K62enZ5E



We have but one option, and that is to agree to disagree.

Thanks frogman for the link on the one song from what "some consider" the "first recorded bebop album". I know you do not agree and posted the link so I could hear certain similarities in Hawkins' "improvised chords". However it is nothing like what Bird was doing during the same period. 

You are welcome, pjw.  There are trends in musical styles and often a player develops a certain style that becomes the stylistic seed for a younger player to then take further.  The player who contributed that seed may or may not take it further himself.  This is a key characteristic of any artistic endeavor.  It’s simply the way it works.  In the case of Hawkins, his playing, compared to that of swing players before him was anything but “nothing compared to Bird”. Think of it as a stepping stone between classic swing and bebop.  I believe that was my point. 

I have a challenge for all who don’t believe in the evolutionary process that, in this case, led to bebop.  Much has been written by musicians themselves and jazz historians about Coleman Hawkins’ place in all this.  A simple internet search of Hawkins “Body And Soul” will yield dozens of hits.  There is also much written in support of the idea re Hawkins/bebop.  Produce written commentary that disputes or discredits this well established footnote in jazz history.  One would think that given how much has been written in support that there would be at least a little bit in opposition.  

Frogman, what all the other musicians knew is the same thing I'm telling you; the complexity of Birds Bop is beyond comprehension. What I liked most about Bird was that confident but "humble" smile when he was being interviewed; he knew he had "it", and all of the other musicians knew he had "it".

People can write till the cows come home, but I hear no "Be Bop" in Coleman Hawkins music prior to Bird.

**** the complexity of Birds Bop is beyond comprehension. ****

Not at all. It is quite comprehensible. If you are speaking metaphorically about it’s greatness, fine; otherwise, the fact that so many were able to copy his style shows just how comprehensible it is. The same way that many copied or were influenced by Hawkins’ style; although this was probably on an a lesser scale.

I would like to weigh in on this subject tomorrow when I have time.

frogman quoted " the fact that so many were able to copy his style shows just how comprehensible it is."

There were many who could emulate Parker almost to a T. Sonny Stitt came to the fore immediately when I saw your quote. And one thing is for certain: When Art Pepper played bebop on the alto, as did Bird, he was just as good IMHO. 

Since I'm like Lou Costello and have no idea "Who's On First" regarding origins of bebop I'll pose another question.  Hopefully it will have general interest plus may be helpful to budding aficionados.

Many well known jazz artists have one particular album they are famous for and it is often the first one suggested on a "best buy" list or recommendations for beginners.  One easy example is the Dave Brubeck Quartet's "Take Five".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=veX9dotK_do

However as someone who owns at least 20 Brubeck albums that would not be my choice.  Instead, I'd recommend this one -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFrnCnbEJMQ&list=PL64D93478E0879D5B

Before you respond "that's cheating" because it is a double album, consider this.  It includes the best known numbers from the "Take Five" album but adds a wider variety.  Plus it offers the excitement of a live performance and I feel the audience really inspired the musicians that night.

As a secondary part of this game I'll add naming other albums to experience which are not that well known for anyone who wants to explore that artist/group in more depth.  Staying with Brubeck here are two I love and recommend - 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ieHdRYGCdg&list=PLk5SVLXcQrR5GY-LAcbvh2Of4jwCpSKSy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0Uf2pta4-Y

I'm sure aficionados can suggest many other examples for introductions beyond the tired and true popular albums.

Art Pepper "Cherokee"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTx7xiVcmc8

Art Pepper, played an extremely long version of "Cherokee" on one of the nights at the Village Vanguard comeback sessions in 1977. Before he starts playing he addresses the audience by saying "If you can’t play this tune and play the crap  out of it...don’t blow!!"....then he proceeds to "knock the socks of it" All this when he was in his early 50’s after 30 plus years of drug abuse and long prison stints. He would die a few years later in his late 50’s. The complete sessions are a worthy investment.


https://www.allmusic.com/album/the-complete-village-vanguard-sessions-mw0000124795

Neither Sonny Stitt or Art Pepper would agree about Bird, but if that's what you heard, it works for me.


Pryso, I had a bad night and I'm kind of slow in the head about precisely where you're coming from, but I'll try. "Moods" by The Three Sounds is the album I'm going to pick, and a very special "Love For Sale" is the track.



                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2--UacYXvY

Everything Stitt played was creative  .

Although Sonny Stitt was compared to Bird, I think he wanted to sound like "Sonny Stitt".


        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mp7zS1uoLwo


This is beautiful, and it sounds like "Sonny Stitt".


One of the first albums I ever bought;


        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXZWbr2fFrU

010

I'm not saying they wanted to sound like Bird identically. Thats why I said "almost" to a T. 

After Charlie Parker became "godlike" in the eyes of hundreds of up and coming sax players, they could not help but sound like him as they were using his waxed recordings for practice. Why even Sonny Rollins went through a "Bird Stage" early in his career. I am merely stating that many of the upper echelon sax players of that time and even today could blow off some bebop jams that sound somewhat identical in terms of chord progressions and tone ect.

In his book, Art Pepper stated Bird was a notch above everyone including himself so your right when you stated he would not have said that. Pepper was always modest, to a fault, but he had held a grudge against many black jazz musicians during his early years through to his long incarceration at San Quentin. The cause was all the rumors and backstage whisperings he always heard about " that white boy who tries to sound black on tenor". Yes black racism if you will. Its all in his book. When he was released from prison, and subsequently rehab, meeting his soon to be wife Laurie ( who I have exchanged emails), his career resurged and he played many gigs and also recorded with many great jazz artists regardless of their race. Elvin Jones plays the skins on every recording night at the "Complete Village Vanguard" sessions. and George Cables became his favorite piano player and trusted friend. He states in the book that all was forgiven, and his early distaste of black artists was unjust and bought about by his own insecurities and faults which was the root cause of his addiction.

One of the most interesting stories in all of jazz lore and one which goes to the topic of the evolution of jazz styles has to do with Sonny Stitt. This verified story, however, flies in the face of some of what has been discussed here so far.

The issue of players’ influence on each other’s styles is well established. As pjw suggests there is a big difference between copying an influential player’s style “to a T” and using some of that influential player’s conceptual ideas to inform one’s own playing. The former type of player seldom becomes a major player. The latter type, players like Art Pepper, Phil Woods and Jackie McLean, took some of Bird’s conceptual ideas and added them to their own to create a Bird-influenced, but still personal sound. Bird himself was a big fan of and was very influenced by Jimmy Dorsey (!) and Lester Young. However, there is another force that comes into play in all this that is very interesting, imo.

Some here have at times asked the question “why does jazz have to evolve?” as a argument against the validity of contemporary players’ styles and “new jazz” in general. The answer is simply that it evolves because it has to. It is the nature of the beast. It has evolved from day one and will continue to do so. There is a certain logical inevitability to the evolution of jazz styles. Sonny Stitt is a perfect example:

The story as told by players who were there, players like Kenny Clark and Stitt himself, is that Bird and Stitt lived in different cities and had never had any contact. In fact, because Bird was still new on the scene, Stitt had not even heard recordings by Bird. Yet, when they first met they found that their respective styles were remarkably similar. This is all well documented for anyone who wants to read about it. Stitt had heard other influential players like Hawkins and these influences along with his own voice led him to a similar place as Bird. This is the reason why it is generally and inaccurately believed that Stitt emulated Bird.

Frogman, I consider your thesis quite accurate and valid.

In regard to the evolution of jazz, it also has to sound good. When I ask for opinions on new jazz, I don't get any feedback, that in itself is an answer.

Since it is you in particular who is always pushing "new jazz", why don't you shoot your best shot and give us a sample of what you call "The new evolution" of jazz and we can decide.

O-10, I’m glad that you thought is was valid. But, I’m at a bit of a loss as to how to respond to your post. Most importantly, the issue of evolution is not about “new jazz”, it’s a general idea that applies to any time period in the music and I really would prefer to not get into another debate about the merits of old vs new. I also don’t understand the “since it is you who is always pushing new jazz” comment. That’s not an accurate characterization at all. Some posters here have posted far more new jazz than I have. Moreover, as with my last “survey” 😉, I would say it’s new jazz maybe a quarter of the time for my posted clips. What I do advocate for, although I wouldn’t characterize it as “pushing”, is trying to be more genre-neutral. For me, new jazz does not have to be approached automatically with skepticism about its validity. Lastly, with respect, if after 5 years of this thread with its many posted clips of good “new jazz”, it has to be given a “best shot” once again so others can “decide” then it’s pretty clear to me that the exercise will be pointless.

Now, re the lack of responses to your “new jazz” posts. First, I think it’s an exaggeration to say that no one ever responds. But, speaking only for myself, I simply don’t like most of what you post as “new jazz”. I don’t feel that it is representative of the better, never mind best new jazz out there. I have posted a bit of what consider good “new jazz”; perhaps you didn’t like it. Again, even very recently some here posted very good examples. I will offer some thoughts on your last “new jazz” clip next time around, Regards.

Besides, pryso’s “challenge” has to get first dibs 😊

frogman & orpheus10
Thanks for the cuts and explanation on Sonny Stitt. I have many Stitt recordings and never felt he was a clone of Bird . I had read some things to that effect but always felt it was a bad rap on his musicianship.BTW the cut of "Laura" by Stitt was beautiful , one I was not familiar with.

As to the question of the 1st bebop recording , it seems orpheus10 has changed the question to "who best represents the new  bebop style that came out of that period of time" and as such has nominated Charlie Parker as the one who had the greatest influence and represented this new style of music in his playing . It would be hard to argue with his being chosen as many sources, including many musicians, point to him as being there at the beginning.  So is Parker the best AND the first? I don't know.

 I have found a  Parker interview with Paul Desmond, I believe,
where he is questioned concerning his musicianship. Parker clearly states , as FACT, that he did a lot of study, sometimes 11-14 hours a day.He also says he studied with books and indicates this was a very important part of his development. So it is clear from this statement by Parker that  jazz music can be intellectualized , comprehended and studied . And that WAS  a key factor in his development as a musician.  Jazz music IS evolutionary. Using Parker again as an example  I quote Mark Gridley's "Jazz Styles History and Analysis"2nd addition. He writes "Charlie Parker wrote the song "Ko-Ko" atop the chord changes of "Cherokee" a previously written song and his improvisations were new melodies with "Cherokees" accompaniment. He also wrote that  Parker. as well as other jazz musicians ,wrote new songs using pop tunes standard progressions of the day. So there you have it.
In the interview Parker talks about records he cut in 1942 with Dizzy Gillespie and one of those tunes being "Groovin High". So are their records prior to the 1944 tune cited by pjw that were before the musician union strike which represent bebop?
This was the first time I heard Charlie Parker interviewed. I was taken by how articulate and intelligent he was . And how humble he was concerning his talent , a rare and admirable quality I respect in any artist .

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=T3W8Ff_4oFg

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=prbqc3C6968 

BTW orpheus10 I enjoyed the cut by Oran Etkin you posted. I will look for some more of his music.

o10, possibly I didn’t make myself clear in asking for others to post favorite alternatives to the commonly recommended albums. "I’m kind of slow in the head about precisely where you’re coming from, but I’ll try. "Moods" by The Three Sounds is the album I’m going to pick". Nothing against The Three Sounds but they were not my idea of sufficient popularity to make jazz recommendation lists.

If this helps what I had in mind were starters for other albums besides "Take Five", such as your Messengers’ "Moanin’", Evans’ "Waltz For Debbie", Coltrane’s "A Love Supreme" or "Blue Train", Rollins' "Saxophone Colossus", Cannonball's "Somethin' Else", Silver’s "Song For My Father" and so on. "KOB" may not be a good example since I doubt there is a better introduction to Miles, still, others may feel differently.

My idea was for aficionados to list albums they believe offer as much if not more musical reward than the war horses in common recommendation lists. I thought that might have interest for both us long time listeners as well as any jazz "newbies".

alexatpos
Thanks for all the west coast stuff you posted recently. I was mostly a fan of Shelly Manne so I just knew Richie Kamuca from his band .I will be seeking out some west coast to add to my collection.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vV1E99kIPtQ

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Bqzwnb4bLjU

Ron Carter

Nsp, re Parker, nice post, nothing more should be said about it.

As for West Coast jazz clips, glad you like it ,I do too, posted many albums of ’that side’.
Sometimes I am reluctant to post something again, aldo we are doing it quite often here, as I have tried to post some artists or albums that are not so well known, despite Frogman’s opinion that there is rightful reason for their obscurity (not taking that against him,ha,ha)
.

Here is another sax player from west coast, who played with many famous artist, but perhaps because he left the States early was not so remembered.

Its Herb Geller, here on album ’Stax of sax’

https://youtu.be/G01u7IszpHU
https://youtu.be/2MQnysiQoKc
https://youtu.be/3iWt-oltLmQ

Incidentally, he plays along Victor Feldman, british piano, vibe and drumm player, who played with Shelly Manne (as y have mentined him) on series of his live albums from Black Hawk.

Feldman also played with Cannonball sextet, as well as on his solo albums and some of them are quite good.

I even believe Feldman was not mentioned before. Some of his solo work...

’The arrrival of V.F’ from 1958.with Scott La Faro and Stan Levey

https://youtu.be/bZa13z0vac0
https://youtu.be/LvZQJtaWivY

’Merry olde soul’ from 1960/61.
https://youtu.be/oqX3Fx4Pjz4

Great post, nsp.

Very nice clips, Alex; thanks. Funny, I made that comment once or twice a long time ago about some specific players and that comment has been quoted many times by one of our esteemed posters. As you know, I am not a fan of generalities and I hope the fact that I wasn’t particularly impressed with specific players does not deter you from posting lesser knowns.  I certainly value lesser known players as part of the complete picture. A perfect example of the problem with generalities is your post on Herb Geller; I posted Herb Geller clips several months ago and like his playing very much as I have some others. How is Mary_Jo doing?

Listening to the great organist Joey Defrancesco, man he got some Jimmy Smith and Dr. Lonnie Smith in him. He’s a bad man!

Cheers

@bluesy41 - I love Joey DeFrancesco. Have you hear his album - "Incredible!" w/special guest - Mr. Jimmy Smith? Also, his album "Live at the 5 Spot" is great, with many special guests. My favorite track from that record is "Moonlight in Vermont" featuring Houston Person. I'm a big fan of Mr. Houston Person. Great stuff.....

@reubent - No I haven’t heard “Incredible” but I Live at the 5 Spot is next. Yeah he’s amazing!

Cheers

I haven't played this a few years so here goes some early Joey D. with Marchel Ivery and Clint Strong.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzVSMLHXwas

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2Enp4AfNPI

nsp, I'm glad you enjoyed Oran Etkin; the fact that you reviewed him, will encourage me to post more new jazz.


Straight ahead jazz plus world music on a bass clarinet, sounds like an interesting combination; let me see what I can find.


                        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTBJzGMgRYY



                        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bsnZcamJB0


The more I listen to Oran the better I like him. What I detest is "stereotypical" jazz; that's when someone recreates all of the most typical riffs and phrases they've heard, and it always sounds like something I've heard before. If it's going to be new, make it "new"


An old tune played with a different kind of horn;


          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hql_zpc2OTE

Steely Dan - Aja

bluesy41, you’re right, Joey DeFrancesco is a bad man!  Great clips all.  Some of my favorite work of his is with the great Pat Martino; very complimentary approaches and they burn!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=O15Xmzn6T1Y

pryso, re your “challenge” and to use some of your examples:

Bill Evans. Instead of “Waltz For Debby’ which, although deserving it, gained increased popularity from the relatively new wave of audiophile reissues, my choice for an introduction to Bill Evans would be “Everybody Digs Bill Evans”. A little less “moody” and itrospective than WFD with an overall more upbeat feeling and still with that beautiful suave sophistication.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRh9kGdYB9I

Cannonball Adderley. We discussed “Somethin’ Else” here quite a while ago mostly in comparison to KOB for overall merit. For me there is no contest with KOB being the most important of the two. O-10 and Rok disagreed, feeling that KOB was too much of an “audiophile darling” (?). However, I also argued that I felt that “Somethin’ Else” was really, more than anything, a Miles Davis date. Not to go there again, but for an introduction to Cannonball I would pick his album with a most fitting name, “Presenting Cannonball Adderley”; and not because of the title:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SN7ajvau50E

Miles Davis and speaking of KOB. You’re right, it would be difficult to argue against KOB being the choice, but I’ll play Devil’s Advocate and suggest that a better choice for an introduction would be “Round About Midnight”. Miles’ overall scope of styles is huge and amazing as we know. KOB, with all its greatness is a record that clearly defines a dramatic move to a style (modal) that would help shape just about everything he did afterwards. In some ways what came before might get lost a bit to someone new to Miles.. I would pick the record that hints at the more modern style of KOB and beyond, but is still more obviously rooted in the pre-modal tradition.

https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6FD0274FA2A10567

Interesting topic.

frog, thanks for your contributions (as always).

I think you touched on an important point when you mentioned the new wave of audiophile reissues, with "Waltz For Debby" as a good example.  The availability of those as LPs, CDs, downloads, whatever, may influence newer jazz buyers.  And some, such as "KOB" and "Take Five" have now been audiophile reissues several times over.  But they are at the top for sales of all jazz albums so there have been other influences than simply recommendations by audiophile publications like Stereophile and TAS.  More general readership of newspaper, magazine, or online articles also identify mainly the same war horses.  It's fun to expand things once in awhile.

Wow so much great music posted las

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tvx2cDazifs t night and today it's hard to keep up.
 orpheus10-what a nice mix of rhythms with Oran Etkins clarinet(s). It's more proof that jazz is a world music.
I liked his story about light being spread all over the world and trying to bring it together with music.Maybe music can be used as a healing force in this crazy, mixed up world we live in.
Here's a horn player I feel has something to say  with his trio on an old Lester Young tune:


 

Out of all the tunes I can think of "Delilah" is one of my favorites, and Abdul Malik's version is right at the top of my list.

Delilah was one of the hottest of the desert hotties, she was totally irresistible; just ask Sampson. The name conjures up images of Sahara sand, blankets, tents, plus Delilah's hips.


          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkFSM9Frx3w


          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11BeKD0c7dQ


          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0bnXzm1aVg


This is the first "Delilah" I ever heard;


          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nt_fmhtePoc



Which was the best?