Jazz for aficionados

You are welcome. I would only add that I think humor and "in jest" are two different things. I suspect Bowie was deadly serious about what he played in that clip.

Curly: Hey Moe, I can't see, I can't see!

Moe: What's the matter porcupine, what's the matter?!

Curly: I got my eyes closed! Ynuk, ynuk.

Interesting and good comments from everyone - this is definitely the best thread this site has ever had.

Acman - you mention Bowie's humor, which is undeniable, and speak of him quoting the tradition, as well as playing outside of it. I guess what I am saying is that I do not hear him as ACTUALLY being outside of it at all, based on what I have heard here - he is merely using humor to pretend to be outside, which to me makes him very hypocritical if he is criticizing folks like Wynton. But this isn't about Wynton.

Frogman, again I agree with almost all of your post, especially the statement that rhythmic feeling is fundamental to all music. I agree this is unarguable. I also agree that Bowie does have this great sense of it, as do the other trumpeters discussed in your post.

I also agree that Bowie is humorous, unpredictable, and theatrical, based on the clips here. Here is where I disagree: for me, this humor and theatricality is as far as he goes. He is a performer putting on an act, much like many pop artists do - his playing/music making ON ITS OWN would not be enough to make it in his case, despite his good timing. I would disagree that he is actually furthering the art of jazz music, hence my earlier comment that he is hypocritical to criticize others for not being so. He may tell a good story, but so do many others. It is fun and entertaining on the surface, but for me it remains surface (and by the way, I would NOT argue that music must be serious to have substance, this is not what I mean at all). And I still fail to see how any of these clips show he is "outside the tradition". A great many other jazz musicians used humor, including Armstrong and Wynton (though in his case almost always without the irreverence). I don't think there is anything particularly novel in what he is doing in these clips, unless I am missing something. I think this is a case of style masquerading as substance.

Excellent comments, Learsfool; although it may seem otherwise, we have no substantive disagreement. This seeming dichotomy is further highlighted by a couple of interesting things that inadvertently go to the core of the issue. I am literally of two minds about all this, and that is the reason why I think it can be fairly said that we have no disagreement. Being someone who is steeped in the more traditional aspects of being a musician, I admit to an inner conflict concerning my reaction to the non-traditional; in this case, the avant-garde (in general, not just music). That's one mind. The other mind has (slowly) moved away from what at times was (and still is) an unnecessarily rigid view of art to a more accepting attitude that takes into account a changing world with changing attitudes and norms, and a changing view of what is "substance". That changing view of what substance is causes the most conflict for me. Not meaning to digress too much, but please bear with me:

Rap music. I WANT to hate rap. It violates so much of what I have spent so many years studying, respecting, learning and trying to hone. Yet, how does one completely dismiss a movement in music (?) that has had such a huge impact. I seriously dislike it and don't respect it. But, I don't hate it because it had to be; it reflects our culture. We can hate our culture (and in some ways I do) and we can decry the decline of standards in our culture (and art) 'till we are blue in the face, but it won't change the direction of the art (?) that reflects it. Worst of all, we can be so rapped :-) up in hating it that we may miss those rare moments when I do find myself saying: "oh, ok, I get it". How good a job it does of reflecting the culture is what defines its quality; its level of substance. Interestingly, and on a personal note, it has been my twenty year old son, a gifted young film maker and a true artist, who has shown me the value of not so readily dismissing what may not conform to MY standards. I am not talking about an abandonment of standards, but simply being more accepting of a different view of standards. I really believe that is the respect for traditional standards combined with an open mind for the new that creates the healthiest environment for really great art to happen.

The avante-guard in the arts (and I did not mean to suggest that rap is part of the avante-guard) seeks to break-down traditional standards and within this break-down a new set of standards takes shape that define it's "substance". That is not to say that one has to take on a "anything goes" or "it's all equally good" attitude. Not at all; there's still a lot of bullshit out there that tries to pass for art. As far as Bowie goes:

As I said before, truth is that as I don't know nearly enough of his work; but, what I heard in Acman3's first clip, and some of what is on the two records of his that I own, held my interest and made me want to listen to it. That's a lot more than I can say for a lot of what's out there. Does the music of a player who has a perfectly developed tone and schooled technique but sounds like so many before him have more substance? I'm not so sure. I have many recordings of accomplished traditionalists that simply don't hold my attention. Additionally, when someone like Acman3, someone who has clearly shown to have a sophisticated appreciation of music and is not part of "the masses", says "I love Bowie" (or whoever) I have to, at least, stop and consider what it is that is grabbing his attention. I think I heard it in that first clip.

Anyway, didn't mean to get preachy about this . Thanks for the great contributions.

Hi Frogman (and others following this) - wow, we are really getting down to it now! This last post of yours is very thought provoking indeed.

First, I agree that there is no substantive disagreement, and really didn't think there was in the first place. Your changing view of "substance" is something I glanced at when I mentioned aesthetics a couple of posts back. You choose an excellent example in discussing rap. What I find fascinating about rap is that what gives it substance, I think you will agree, has absolutely nothing to do with music. It is the words being spoken, and the message they contain. Rap is much closer to poetry than music. Of course the argument about whether the music or the lyrics of a song are more important is hundreds of years old now - clearly rap chooses the latter. As a performing musician (non-vocalist!), I used to be very puzzled by people who clearly only listened to certain groups/artists because they liked the lyrics of their songs, and in fact did not actually care much for the music. But they would listen over and over and over anyway because they liked "the message." I have always felt conflicted when talking with such people about music (and listening to the argument that such and such a song is good BECAUSE of the lyrics).

Speaking of the avant-garde and whether or not an artist or an institution is furthering the art form, another conflict I have that is relevant to this discussion is about the whole museum-piece thing. As in, are orchestras (this discussion can be applied to jazz equally well, of course) museum pieces (is jazz dead)? Many want orchestras to be forward thinking and come up with new ideas, etc. Same in jazz, as has been discussed in this thread. However, with the deplorable state of music education especially here in the US now, if orchestras are NOT talking about composers to young kids, if they never hear the names Mozart and Beethoven from us - who the hell are they going to hear them from? I wonder about this more and more, as orchestras move towards more multi-media presentations and play more film music, even in education concerts, where not a single composers name is mentioned....

Bear with me now as I quote one of my teachers, Greg Hustis, the former principal horn of the Dallas Symphony. Again, they would apply equally to the jazz world. These comments were made in the liner notes of one of his recordings (Lyrical Gems For The Horn, on the Crystal label): "The works on this CD were chosen simply because they are beautiful music...There is no unifying musical or stylistic "theme"...pieces were selected without regard to marketing strategies...well-intentioned promoters seem obsessed with the notion that only "new" or "different" gimmicks will aid the ailing recording industry. All too often we see the production of substandard works by obscure, untalented composers, arrangements of arrangements, bizarre orchestrations, and a rush of "crossover" recordings, usually lame attempts to give classical musicians the glitzy luster of pop stars...maybe we should work harder to present music that more listeners might enjoy. We cannot completely understand why great music stirs the soul. Nevertheless, perhaps by emphasizing the beauty, not the marketing of classical music will lead more of us to experience its mysterious and powerful force."

What does everyone think about this? Of course feel free to respond in terms of the jazz world, as this is ultimately a jazz thread. The same topics apply. Frogman is of course uniquely qualified to speak about both worlds, so? One comment I might throw out for discussion is that in the jazz world, Wynton seems to be trying BOTH approaches.

Learsfool:

*****based on what I have heard here - he is merely using humor to pretend to be outside, which to me makes him very hypocritical if he is criticizing folks like Wynton. But this isn't about Wynton.*****

Well stated. Hypocritie is the perfect word. But this is not about Bowie or Marsalis. It's about what they each represent. I am sure he would have given anything to have had Wynton's career, playing the music Wynton plays.

*****this humor and theatricality is as far as he goes. He is a performer putting on an act, much like many pop artists do - his playing/music making ON ITS OWN would not be enough to make it in his case, despite his good timing. I would disagree that he is actually furthering the art of jazz music, hence my earlier comment that he is hypocritical to criticize others for not being so.******

He found a 'niche' where he could be more, than he would be, going up against, the Hubbards and Morgans of the music world. If you are a musician, you had better find a place, or change profession. Tiny Tim found his. So did Bowie.

****I think this is a case of style masquerading as substance.*****

True, but to be more exact, I would say it's trying to pass noise off as music. In fact, I see no reason to consider this music at all. And why is Jazz the dumping ground for these people? They could just as easily called it 'FOLK'.

Cheers

The Frogman:

*****I suspect Bowie was deadly serious about what he played in that clip*****

OMG!!

Bowie: Read my post to Learsfool.

As far as the conflict between Wynton and other Jazz players, I think the wiki page did mention something about 833,000 dollars per, U.S., for the Lincoln Center gig. That's called cutting to the chase. All else is moot.

Cheers

Lets all be careful when using the word "Cluture". Rap does not reflect American cluture, if that even exists. Rap reflects the depravity and spiritual poverty of inner city America. Whenever it is played / heard, it creates an aura of great sadness.

Cheers

Todays playlist:

Roscoe Mithcell -- SOUND
(Lester Bowie on Trumpet)

I listened to this, more as an assignment or homework, than for any other reason.

Normally when I listen to music, sometimes my wife will shout from the living room, one of two things, "play such and such"(usually Brubeck) or "Turn it up".

Today she came into the room with a puzzled look on her face and asked "what's wrong?" She thought maybe the FM station was on the blink, or the CD player had malfunctioned. I said nope, that's the future of Jazz.

This is not to be critical of Bowie. It's not him, it's the 'music' they choose to play. I tried hard to 'get it'. I will concede that maybe it's just me. Perhaps it's all going over my head. If so, I will try to be content with my be-bopers.

I had to listen to Mingus and McCann afterwards, just to get all that pollution outta my head. Could not believe that I was still in the same 'genre'.

This is NOT a must have. This is NOT even an ought to have. When you see the statement 'not for everyone' in reviews, take heed and beware. But it is aptly named! That's what you get, sound!

Cheers

Roscoe Mitchell

sorry.

I personally never held Bowie's music up against other trumpeters. He didn't seem that interested in playing like other trumpeters, even the ones he quotes. The musicians he plays with seemed to enjoy playing with him, He was very well respected by most musicians, and a lot of people got something out of what he did do.

The trumpeter Malachi Thompson says in his liner notes to one of his cd's that he was warned by Bowie, Joe Henderson , and Freddie Hubbard not to be a copy cat. He then tells of a time after a solo on Killer Joe, Quincy Jones asked, " Whose the kid? He sounds like Freddie Hubbard.....after taxes!" Everybody laughed, but later the other trumpet players in the band, Cat Anderson, Nat Adderley, and Donald Byrd encouraged him to keep developing his sound.

It was expected to move the music forward, to not sound like others. Is this not still true today?

As far as RAP. It seems to be all rhythm and lacks harmony. I am unable to understand it, but I don't think I'm supposed to.:)

Free Jazz also lacks a certain basic music devise, tension and release. It mostly builds tension and becomes difficult to listen to, until you learn to enjoy constant tension. Most give up.

****I will have to do a lot more listening to Bowie, before I can do anymore talking about him. I think I might like this guy. I dismissed the first clip sent by Acman3. It was not representative and obviously done in jest. ****

Does this mean you did a lot more listening and still don't like him? :-)

****But this is not about Bowie or Marsalis. It's about what they each represent. ****

Correct!

****I am sure he would have given anything to have had Wynton's career, playing the music Wynton plays.****

****I think the wiki page did mention something about 833,000 dollars per, U.S., for the Lincoln Center gig. That's called cutting to the chase. All else is moot.****

Wrong! First of all, as I have said, I don't consider Bowie to be a favorite player by any stretch. But, to your comment: with all due respect you just don't understand they mindset of musicians like Bowie. In fairness, there is no way that you could. I have known and worked with musicians steeped in this and similar genres (avant garde, "downtown", free, etc.), and I assure you that your take on their motivation and their view of their own place within the art world is way off. Most of these guys have an elitist counter-establishment, counter-culture mindset that genuinely eschews the kind of "success" that you refer to. They are incredibly committed to their "message". Like their music, their attitude about some of this is intended to turn traditional values and expectations upside down. I think that your tendency to always go to the issue of "jealousy" of this kind says more about your mindset than theirs, and may be part of the reason that you react to the non-traditional the way that you do.

****Rap does not reflect American cluture, if that even exists. Rap reflects the depravity and spiritual poverty of inner city America. Whenever it is played / heard, it creates an aura of great sadness.****

It most certainly does; although I agree about "depravity and spiritual poverty". Depravity and spiritual poverty that has blinded an entire generation in the inner city to some of the real reasons for the economic poverty. Sadly, these rap "artists" have become their artistic heroes instead of so many real heroes which we have discussed in this thread. What a waste! Additionally, the embrace of the rap/hip hop culture outside of the inner city reflects so much about our culture ("society"; if you prefer). A culture that wants simplistic art that requires little involvement other than feeling the beat. In which attitude has become more important than substance (as Learsfool points out) and which has been trained to be obsessed with the issue of race to the extent that it is terrified of criticizing the gratuitous ugliness of the music for fear of being labeled racist. And btw, that influence extends well beyond our country. I just returned from a three week tour of Asia (NY Phil) and I was astounded at the pervasive influence of the hip hop culture in China, Japan and especially Korea. It is everywhere; the pop music, television and it's commercials and the attire of young people. Rap in Korean is something to experience :-).

Lastly, thanks for pointing out to me that I like noise. Who knew? :-)

I don't think we will be able to reconcile our differences in this matter, people have been arguing over it for 50 years. I like Frogman have 2 minds on free jazz, but if I had spent my life learning music, and practicing to sound RIGHT on my instrument, I might not be very tolerant of people like Bowie.

I ran across the first Lester Bowie video and laughed so hard I wanted to share with someone.
I was not intending to start a rucuss, but all the comments have been educational. Thanks!

Seems as if I misspelled 'culture'. Sorry.

Cheers

No ruckus, Acman3; just healthy debate. Besides, what's wrong with a good healthy ruckus? :-) Otherwise we would be stuck talking about nothing but Bird, Monk and Wynton and those between. Keep it coming!

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=27QVenKmDBI&feature=plpp&list=PL64F164D56D514451

****Does this mean you did a lot more listening and still don't like him? :-)****

Yes.

****But, to your comment: with all due respect you just don't understand they mindset of musicians like Bowie. In fairness, there is no way that you could. I have known and worked with musicians steeped in this and similar genres (avant garde, "downtown", free, etc.), and I assure you that your take on their motivation and their view of their own place within the art world is way off.******

I, like most people, have a pretty good understanding of human nature. And all musicians want acceptance of their music, and financial and artistic success. This 'free jazz' stuff could be 'plan B'.

*****A culture that wants simplistic art that requires little involvement other than feeling the beat. In which attitude has become more important than substance (as Learsfool points out) and which has been trained to be obsessed with the issue of race to the extent that it is terrified of criticizing the gratuitous ugliness of the music for fear of being labeled racist.******

When things just don't make sense, remember the words of that great American, 'Deep-throat', "follow the money". Once you know where the money ends up, you will know why Rap is still with us. BTW, Rap could be more popular with the white community than the black. Its a generational thing.

**** I just returned from a three week tour of Asia (NY Phil) and I was astounded at the pervasive influence of the hip hop culture in China, Japan and especially Korea. It is everywhere; the pop music, television and it's commercials and the attire of young people. Rap in Korean is something to experience :-).*****

I would suggest that most of what you saw is just an example of young asians fascination with American pop culture. It's just skin deep. Just young folks having fun acting and looking like Rappers, Rockers and Bikers. The similarity ends there. They grow out of it eventually. They have nothing in common with the thugs in the USA.

*****Lastly, thanks for pointing out to me that I like noise. Who knew?*****

Don't mention it. After all, it's the duty of Jazz Aficionados. Who knew? Well, you have championed noise makers in the past, so there was talk.

Cheers

Acman3:

A person can say 'good morning' and set off a Ruckus on this thread. And that's in spite of my efforts to have non-confrontational and polite discourse.

Cheers

****I, like most people, have a pretty good understanding of human nature****

****And that's in spite of my efforts to have non-confrontational and polite discourse.****

I am speechless.

which has been trained to be obsessed with the issue of race

Who within our society trained us to be obsessed with the issue of race?

The media, politicians; to name two.

Oh, and let's not forget our educational system. But, you know what?.. I really don't want to go any further down this road. Mea culpa for taking that detour; it was pertinent (in my mind) about the discussion about the music. This is a thread about music and this topic is most definitely a provocative one. So please consider this a retraction of my comment. But, if you must...fire away.

There are some rap/hip hop artists and tunes that I enjoy as much as anything else these days, at least in limited doses.

A musical trend is a musical trend. The only difference is the magnitude/extent and the perspective from which you observe it, which has a lot to do with ones personal life experience.

Music can be a great unifier. I find it all to be of interest.

Disregard any specific genre completely and run the risk of missing perhaps an important part of the big picture. Or missing out on a good learning opportunity at a minimum.

I find I enjoy music the most these days when I just listen and pay no attention to genre labels attached.

Then there is culture and various levels of culture, including high culture. They all have something to say musically. That's part of what makes music so fascinating, at least for me.

Great post, Mapman. I salute you, sir. I especially liked:

****Disregard any specific genre completely and run the risk of missing perhaps an important part of the big picture. Or missing out on a good learning opportunity at a minimum.****

Frogman, thank you for withdrawing your comment. Knowing what to say, when to say it and when not to say something is a sign of a cultured person. Although truth be told Louis Armstrong, Duke Ellington, Billie Holiday, Miles Davis, Charles Mingus, John Coltrane & Wynton Marsalis are nearly always talking about race in America with their music. It's a quality that rap/hip-hop shares.

OK, after the distractions, are there any comments on my previous post?

Absolutely, Learsfool; later this evening. Very thought provoking comments. Everyone have a great day.

The Frogman & Learsfool:

I find Rehearsal as fascinating as the actual performance.

I have seen clips on TV where the Orchestra plays a segment, then the conductor communicates his desires and they make notations etc... and then they play some more and then stop and so on and on.

My questions are:

When a symphony Orchestra is in rehearsal for an upcoming performance, do they, at any time during preparation, play the entire program straight through without stopping? Esp the elaborate stuff like LvB's Ninth.

Opera: Does a dress rehearsal mean, that they perform the entire Opera exactly as they will on opening night?

Doing a symphonic performance, how often does the orchestra fail to meet the Conductor's desires and expectations, that he made clear he wanted, during rehearsal? Consequences?

How do Jazz groups rehearse? How would a typical Jazz (small group) rehearsal be conducted? Does the leader influence what the members of the group play? Is anything ever written down?

Can you guys talk about this?

Thanks
Cheers

Hi Rok - answers to your questions will vary widely according to the conductor involved. They control what happens in rehearsals. Ideally, a dress rehearsal of an opera is indeed a complete run-through, though depending on how close to the performance it is, the lead singers may be "marking," in other words, not singing full out. This depends on the rehearsal and performance schedules, and the individual singers.

Ideally, a dress rehearsal of a symphonic performance is also a complete run-through, though if it is on the same day as the first performance, as it so often is, the brass section in particular will not be playing full out. I personally hate dress rehearsals on performance days, but that is almost always when they are. This is actually normally due to the soloist's schedule. Usually they don't come in until the day before, for the second to last rehearsal, then there is the dress the morning of the first show.

As for the orchestra not meeting expectations, again this depends on the conductor and the ensemble. No one is perfect - many mistakes are made in almost every performance, though the vast majority of them will go completely unnoticed by almost the entire audience. One of my teachers said once - batting .300 is great for baseball, but doesn't cut it in music, which is hilarious. But absolutely no one is note perfect all the time. In my opinion, far too much emphasis today is placed on not making any mistakes, rather than really making music. This is due to a couple of different factors - the greatly increasing technical proficiency of young musicians coming out of school - already far, far higher than when I came out of school in the late 80's - and also the availability of so many recordings now where mistakes have been digitally edited out. This has increased pressure on live performers greatly, again leading to players just trying not to make any mistakes rather than really getting into the music.

Often the very first rehearsal of a symphony will be a complete run-through, too, by the way. The players usually like this very much, as they see the conductor's tempi, etc. right off the bat, and get a feel for how the piece is going to go. Not all conductors will do this, however, again every one is different. Some have great time management but are not musically very good, others have horrible time management in rehearsals, which usually leads to sections of the music feeling very uncomfortable in the first performance. Very rarely are great musicianship and great time management present in the same conductor. As far as a conductor's expectations, it is their job to show this as much as possible with their conducting (which is all they can do in a performance), though of course they stop and talk a lot in rehearsals, too. Again, the quality and effectiveness of what they have to offer varies quite a bit. Some conductors have much better ears and are better at fixing certain kinds of issues than others, etc. Bad conductors will also often try to micro-manage everything, instead of letting us do what we do. Young conductors often fall into this trap, even though most of the orchestra knows the pieces way better than they do. Other times many conductors think they have to re-invent the wheel in an often played work, and will do stupid things that don't make much sense. Or they might make a horrible mistake themselves in a performance. In almost every case, the orchestra will save their butts, unless they really don't like the guy. There is a very famous story about the Boston Symphony letting a performance of Ein Heldenleben come to a screeching halt because they really hated the conductor, who was sky high on coke on the night, as he often was. The conductor in question is a VERY big name, and is indeed a good musician, though. Bottom line is - don't assume the conductor always knows what they are doing. Another kind, by the way, is one who may know exactly how they want something to sound - perhaps they are a great rehearsal pianist, for instance, but they can't actually conduct to save their lives. They have no physical ability to communicate to a large ensemble what they actually want to happen musically (or even time-wise, in the worst cases). There are many ballet and opera conductors like this out there.

I believe some time ago in this same thread we discussed job security issues - all union orchestras have a peer-review board type of system in place, so conductors can't just fire someone for no real reason, much like lawyers and doctors have. Normally, though, the process doesn't actually get that far - something is usually worked out to where the musician "retires" early. There is also a tenure process in all orchestras, usually one, sometimes two years in length. If at the end of that period the recently hired musician is deemed not up to snuff, they are not tenured in the first place.

Hope this answers your questions reasonably.

Excellent and thorough comments by Learsfool. I would add or expound on a couple of points:

During the dress rehearsal it is usually the INTENTION to play a work from beginning to end without interruption. That is not always what happens as the conductor may still decide that a particular passage requires additional work. It is not necessarily a "let's play the whole thing no matter what" approach. Another thing that happens during a dress rehearsal is that it is often the first and only time that all the pieces on the program will be rehearsed in "concert order". This is very important since up to that point the works will probably have been rehearsed in a different order than what the audience will hear for time-management reasons and to make concessions to the soloist's schedule.

Learsfool makes some important comments about conducting and rehearsal techniques and the different abilities of various conductors. The conductor/orchestra relationship is just that; a relationship. In fairness (to conductors), it should be pointed out that certain orchestras are notorious for and have reputations for being difficult for conductors to work with and do little to create an amicable working relationship with conductors. It is the job of a professional musician to work with a conductor, no matter his/her ability, in a way that will result in good music making. That doesn't always happen. Of course, as Learsfool correctly points out, some conductors make it difficult to impossible to do that and they reap what they sow. Young conductors, due to insecurity or otherwise, don't always respect or appreciate the incredible amount of experience that some of the older players in some orchestras have and don't understand the futility of trying to rule (conduct) with an iron fist. Still, as in any type of relationship, the best results are usually achieved by "taking the high road".

Fundamentally, the way that a jazz group rehearses is not terribly different from that of an orchestra. If it is an established ensemble the players know each other's playing intimately and time-management is not an issue. If it was, for instance, Miles' rhythm section rehearsing for Dizzy's birthday party there was probably little to no rehearsal time put in other than a discussion of what tunes they would play with the possible exception of a special arrangement of "Happy Birthday" that one of them came up with while in the car on the way there. If the tunes to be played were "standards" (in the broad sense or "standard" for that group) there really is no need to rehearse since they all know the tunes and will probably follow the usual format of "play the head (melody), improvised solo's (order to be decided before hand or even while playing the tune, melody and out". If the rehearsals are for, say, a recording or live performance of new (or unfamiliar) material it will be written down as a formal "chart" since it could be a difficult and complex tune with unusual chord changes. Eventually, however, most groups will have the tune (and chord changes) memorized. It should be pointed out that as complex as some of these jazz tunes are, they are all relatively short compared to symphonic music (duh!) and they lend themselves much more readily to memorization. The language of jazz has certain "rules" about its performance that very experienced player understands. These are part of the tradition and makes it possible for players that don't play together on a regular basis to perform at a credible level.

Learsfool / The Frogman:

Thanks for your detailed and comprehensive answers. I am just amazed and awed by it all. You guys have the perfect job.

Thanks

Cheers

A patron walked up to a famous pianist and stated," I would give my life to play piano like you," to which he answered, " I already did."

The Frogman:
******The Beethoven Rehearsal*****
He was almost as slow as Bohm.

Wunderbar! Vielen Dank.

Cheers

The Frogman:

*****The Rite of Spring******

Fascinating! I think Lenny, as always, never forgot he was on camera. I wonder if the young Germans had ever seen the likes of him?

Very good insights into how an Orchestra prepares. I think the flute player was still under stress as they walked out for the performance. :)

I think this music almost requires a visual component. I looked, and I have no Stravinsky on CD. :( Several on LP. Any recomendations on Rite of Spring performances?

Thanks for the clips. Very educational.

Cheers

**** I have no Stravinsky on CD. :( Several on LP. Any recomendations on Rite of Spring performances?****

I knew I would eventually break you (down) :-)

****I think this music almost requires a visual component****

Hah! While it can certainly stand on its own, it was originally composed as music for a ballet. While the music is often credited for being the reason for the near-riot at the premier, it was the avant garde and very sexually suggestive (Lenny's comments) choreography that was mostly responsible.

For recordings:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?gmusi&1369359822&read&keyw&zzrite=of=spring

Like many who glance at this never ending dialogue, I enjoy the commentary. I am concerned though that the original poster Orpheus10 has not posted in over two months, I hope his health is ok.

I share your concern; I hope O-10 is OK. Glad you enjoy the dialogue.

Rok, you may find this interesting:

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

"Sacre" as the composer intended:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fsl3AGgHzGU

The Frogman:

The documentary on Stravinski was very interesting. My overall, and lasting impression, was one of sadness. Europe Sucks! Think of how his life would have been different if he had been born here.

One of the the biggest advantages the Masters, (mozart, beethoven, etc....), have over 20th century composers, is that, we will never see, or hear them. They will remain idealized in our minds forever. We will only 'know' them thru their music.

He did not come across as the most sympathetic of persons in the documentary. But, he did like Johnnie Walker!!

I have the 'The Rite of Spring' on LP, by Colin Davis conducting the Concertgebouw Orchestra. That's the one with the naked, spray painted folks on the cover.

Thanks for the clips.

Cheers

*****I hope his health is ok.*****

So do I. His last posts did not indicate he was having any problems. He did leave during a 'ruckus' period, so he may just be sick of me! :)

Cheers

****My overall, and lasting impression, was one of sadness****

Indeed! Can you imagine having to leave your country for artistic freedom?! Actually, I know all about having to leave one's country for freedom; but, that has nothing to do with jazz and is way too personal for this thread. Europe during the early part of the twentieth century was indeed a very sad place with a great deal of social and political turmoil that makes much (not all) of our American "turmoil" seem petty by comparison. One silver lining was that the sadness inspired some incredible, if difficult and dark, music. In typical American fashion we tend to forget how blessed we are in this country; problems and all.

Today's Playlist:

Bebop & Beyond -- PLAYS THELONIOUS MONK
It's Monk's Music! Nuff said.

Jazz Futures -- LIVE IN CONCERT

Good to see and hear 'Young lions' in action and playing real Jazz.
Players include: Roy Hargrove, Antonio Hart, Christian McBride, Mark Whitfield, BENNY green, Marion Jordan, Tim Warfield and Carl Allen.

Various Artists -- THE BEST OF KEN BURNS JAZZ

This just one single CD. Takes us from Armstrong and Jelly Roll Morton up through Miles, Coltrane and the Lincoln Center Jazz Orchestra. Great selection of tunes.

Cheers

I read today that Stravinsky's, 'The Soldier's Tale', has Jazz elements or influence. Has anyone heard it, or have any comments?

Cheers

Fantastic piece! It is really a theatrical work with music scored for seven instruments, and is essentially the story of Faust (in this case, a deserting soldier) and his pact with the devil. To understand the "jazz influence", and as always, it's all about context.

When the work was composed (1918?) jazz was just beginning to take shape in America. Stravinsky had never actually heard any jazz but was given some written scores of "jazz" music brought from America by his friend Ernest Ansermet who also conducted the premier of "L'Histoire". Like most serious composers in any genre open to influences from unexpected sources he was intrigued by some of what he "saw" in the written scores without really fully understanding what it actually sounded like. What I am talking about is different from, for instance, the idea of Beethoven being able to "hear" in his head what his music would sound like even though he was deaf. In this case I refer to one of THE biggest challenges for composers and orchestrators and one which continues to the present time: how to notate the FEELING of jazz syncopation. Truth is, it really can't be done. The classic swing feel of jazz can only be approximated when notating jazz and is ultimately left up to the performer to realize it in a credible way. For the geeks, this is what it's about; all others skip to the end :-) :

-Imagine simple, slow tempo (one beat per second), four beats to the measure music: "one, two, three, four" "one, two, three, four" (repeat several times while tapping your foot to that beat).

-Now, while tapping that same beat, subdivide each beat into four equal subdivisions: "ONE (two, three, four), TWO (two, three, four), THREE (two, three, four), FOUR (two, three, four)". Repeat several times.

-Now the fun part: do the same thing, but emphasize FOUR:
"one (two, three, FOUR), two (two, three, FOUR), three (two, three, FOUR), four (two, three, FOUR)"

That emphasized FOUR is the most basic way to describe classic jazz syncopation. The problem for composers trying to notate this is that "FOUR" is too close to the next beat, and if notated this way would sound very "square" (white dude on the dance floor square :-) )

-Now, think Frank Sinatra (same tempo as before) :

"shoo BY doo BY doo (four, one) EX chang ING glan CE s stran GERS in THE night". Note that the emphasized subdivision has a different feeling than the previous example. In this case it is closer to when each beat is subdivided into threes (triplets) with the emphasis on the third subdivision:

"one (two, THREE), two (two, THREE), three (two, THREE), four (two, THREE).

Closer, but still not right; now the emphasis is a little too far from the next downbeat. That's the dilemma; you need something in between the two examples. So, most smart jazz composers often don't bother at all and notate the music with a simple duplet (in twos) subdivision and leave it up to the performer to find the correct feeling. Back to Stravinsky:

In "L'Histoire" there are three "Dances", one of which Stravinsky titled "Ragtime". Ragtime, as we all know, was one of the earliest forms of "jazz". Listen to Stravinsky's "Ragtime" and you will note, besides the constantly changing time signatures (odd meter) and syncopation, a recurring musical figure like the above example of subdivision in fours, but this time in a much faster tempo:

"da TA da TA da"

First heard in the bassoon about thirty seconds into the "Ragtime". I guess one could say that was Stravinsky's idea of swinging his ass off :-)

-

I will be sure to have your post in front of me when I listen to 'The Soldier's Tale'. I noticed that there is a lot of narration in the piece.

The folks on Amazon have their favorite 'narrator'. hahahahaha Gilda Radner was right, 'There is always something'!

One of the CDs avalible has the Stravinsky, along with pieces by Schoenberg and Berg. Yikes!! This one is narrated by Sir John Gielgud.

Cheers

Cheers

Rok, I think you may find that you have indeed heard the Soldier's Tale before. Many people have, without realizing it was Stravinsky they were listening to. It is a fantastic little work. Very difficult trumpet and violin parts in particular.

An interesting version of the Soldiers Tale is narrated by Sting. I have that copy and the one with John Gielgud.

Both are excellent.

Thomas Wolfe was wrong. You can go home agian. I went yesterday.

Albert Collins, Robert Cray, Johnny Copeland -- SHOWDOWN

Ray Charles, Milt Jackson -- SOUL BROTHERS SOUL MEETING

Great to be back down home.

From The BBC Music Magazine

"Karajan was conducting a Mozart Concerto and leaned over to ask Dennis Brain something. He looked at his music stand, and of course he didn't have the score -it was a motoring magazine! That was quite a moment."

Great English understatement!!

The Orchestra was The London Philharmonica. The interview subject was Neville Marriner. He is 90 now. I gather Karajan was a part of the effort to get the English Orchestras up to 'continental' (German) standards.

Anyone know what this means?
"The example of Beethoven would suffice to convince us that, of all the elements of music, melody is the most accessible to the ear and the least capable of acquisition. Here we have one of the greatest creators of music who spent his whole life imploring the aid of this gift which he lacked."
Igor Stravinsky.

The disscussion was about 'Melody'

Also a great piece on Russian composers and plasyers. Who did, and who did not compose to satisfy the regime. Names a informant for the security police who was part of a famous string quartet.

Interesting stuff.

Cheers

Beethoven, in spite of all the brilliance, was a composer for who composing was a tedious process. It is well known and documented that he would often make revision after revision of a work or passage, and the sketches for a work would sometimes be three times as long as the final product. It can be fairly said that it was not an easy process for him; unlike a composer like Mozart for who composing was a seemingly effortless process and who would write down final drafts after conceiving the work (often very quickly) in his head. The difference in their respective outputs is probably further proof of this. I believe that is what Stravinsky meant with that comment.

****Too many pieces of music finish too long after the end.****

Igor Stravinsky

Albertporter:

Thanks for your recommendations.

I ordered the Soldier's Tale with John Gielgud, also a DG 'twofer' with Rite, Firebird and Petrushka.
The DG CD is conducted by Abbado,. who passed away recently.

Cheers