It seems to me that we are step away from a disscusion about aestethics in music, and that is time to stop using subjective vs objective terms, because the theme asks for much broader explanations. In doing so we should talk about history of music (jazz at least) and about of evolution of personal, cultural and social values that one needs to comprehend before can give a worthy opinion about the subject. In this case the subject or the question would be to understand what is considered as the 'quality or beauty' of some performerd piece of music, and why do we think or feel so and second, what we consider as 'quality or skill' when we talk about some performing artist. My question to you guys is are you intersted in trying to find consensus on this matter, or shall we just conclude with that latin 'de gustibus non est dispuntadum?
If the answer is positive, let me just start with a qoute that some of you may find appropriate...'Thanks therefore, to what is harmonicus in us, we perceive harmonius composition of sounds, and we delight in them for we understand that we are made in their likeness.Similarity is pleasing, therefore, whereas dissimilarity is odius'.Boethius (480-526) De Musica |
Just one of the reasons people go gaga over Miles. Check out "My Funny Valentine". He lets you know what tune he's going to play in his first two statements, and from there he just hints at the original melody without ever straying so far that you lose track of it. It all works and is brilliant. And talk about setting a mood with that muted trumpet sound; the guy was a genius. Before anyone gets worked into a tizzy, one of many geniuses in this music; but he was one of them without a doubt. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OcIiu1kQMx0 |
Let's go around the world, this is fun. Rok, when we saw that dancing in Cuba, I told you and Frogman it was structured; those drumbeats are connected to movements in dance. The dancing that accompanies this music is as structured as any European dance; they have certain movements on the beat, they have to practice. I saw dancers in the Kathryn Dunham school of dance where they are taught dances she learned in Africa. Descendants of slaves all over the Caribbean, and in Brazil still dance to these drums. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_e8bUyC55ccEnjoy the music. |
|
Rok, Emmy not Grammy; different criteria. |
Frogman, there is no universal reality; each individual should cling to his or her reality for all it's worth, because ultimately, that is the only reality.
|
Hiroshima Live EMMY WINNING VIDEO
In what 'category' did they win this Grammy?
Cheers |
Rok, thanks for your valiant effort as peacekeeper. Those are good definitions. But the issue is not the validity of subjectivity. Inherent in its definition is the idea that personal feelings are part of it. It makes my point. I have no issue with O-10 feeling that this or that is better FOR HIM. My point is simply that there ARE aspects of music that can be judged objectively. But first one must be willing to learn and understand the language of objectivity that relates to music; those pesky nuts and bolts.
O-10, I am not harping on anything. I believe it is you who is harping on the subject of objectivity. I don't know who your friend was nor know anything about his success (or not) in music. I don't mean to be so blunt, but concerning this issue I am afraid that you don't know what you're talking about. Of course, every musician can go through periods of little or no practicing; but, I assure you that eventually it catches up with him and it starts to show in his playing. And, no, Louis was not talking about his formative years. Bird practiced incessantly, so did Trane and on and on. In fact, as a humorous footnote; it is the bane of every hotel when a touring jazz band would/does come to town with the endless complaints from guests about the practicing in the rooms. Yes, the creative process happens in a player's head, but the chops need to be exercised and ideas developed and translated from the abstract to the physical and executed. C'mon O-10, you seem to have created this bubble with your own personal reality of what it's all about. I respectfully encourage you consider that your reality needs a little tweaking if it's going to be presented as anything but just your own. Regards. |
Here it is, all the way live HIROSHIMA! I am 100% into this including the Tibetan aspect at the beginning. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxImZTT1AEYI wanted you to see the beautiful June Kuramoto on Koto. I'm sure you can find a better picture if you like what you hear and the audio is not the best; that gal can git down on that Koto when she wants to. I saw them in the 80's at a free concert in the Botanical Gardens, and they played like I've never heard them on any records; they were feeling it, and there was a large responsive audience; that can put high energy into any group. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jme2Z0HIzQU (she was more beautiful in 1980, it don't last forever) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wU3oPGanY3IThere is nothing on you tube that will provide an example of that evening, they were feeling good and just jamming. Enjoy the music. |
|
Frogman, Improvise means to create and perform spontaneously or without preparation. Improvise comes from the Latin word improvisus, meaning "unforeseen, unexpected." Think about when something unexpected happens to you — you have no choice but to react in the moment, or improvise.
I'm sure he, (meaning my musician friend), practiced so much that he could visualize his instrument in his sleep during his formative years. Why do so many musicians play with their eyes closed? That's because they don't need to even see the thing their playing, even when it's as complex as a "Koto". I saw June Kuramoto play the Koto most of the night with her eyes closed; she was playing improvisational jazz better than on any records I have of "Hiroshima"; with her eyes closed, I even have pictures.
You see classical musicians practicing morning noon and night; I'm sure it must be necessary; but if you are going to be improvising, playing new music that you have in your head, what are you going to practice? When improvising, each note you play, depends on the note someone else played before you; that's why good jazz musicians sound so good, because if you play a wrong note, someone else can play a note that will make it sound good, and it all comes out sounding beautiful.
Although you keep harping on the "fact" that my friend did not practice when he was performing at least three nights a week; the elephant here is "improvisation"; that's the ability to create "spontaneously"; either you got or you don't, but no amount of practice will enable you to do this.
Enjoy the music.
|
Posting this for the benefit of the Great Unwashed, so we can follow this 'ruckus'.
sub·jec·tive1/səbˈjektiv/ adjective- based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions: Contrasted with objective.
synonyms:personal, individual, emotional, instinctive, intuitive
ob·jec·tive1/əbˈjektiv/ adjective- (of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts: Contrasted with subjective.
synonyms:impartial, unbiased, unprejudiced, nonpartisan; More
Don't see why there should be any disagreement. Each point of view is valid. Cheers |
O-10, we've been down this road way too often and I don't know how or why you got on the subject of practicing; it has little to do with the subject of objectivity and would be applicable to musicians in any genre, not just jazz. With all due respect you are simply mistaken in making connections that don't exist, and it demonstrates why some of these discussions become so strained. I won't beat a dead horse and can only suggest that you not be so quick to pull those hairs out. But, since you brought up the subject of practicing:
"If I don’t practice for a day, I know it. If I don’t practice for two days, the critics know it. And if I don’t practice for three days, the public knows it." - Louis Armstrong |
Frogman, I am subjective to the Nth degree when it comes to selecting and listening to jazz music. If I detect 1 objective hair on my body, I will pull it out.
My musician friend who lived with me that Summer, never practiced (that Summer). What was an improvising, performing jazz musician going to practice? He didn't just start playing jazz yesterday.
Although I had been a fan of his eight years before he moved into my apartment, I had never heard the music he was currently playing. I was truly mesmerized at each performance, never the same music. We never talked music before or after the performance. He enjoyed telling me about his life as a professional jazz musician, and I enjoyed listening.
That was 40 years ago. When I reflect back to that time, I know there was something intensely personal between him and his "new" music. When he was on stage, he went to that place where jazz musicians go; that's where it's at, either you got it or you don't; he just let his fingers fly trusting his inner muse, there was nothing "objective" about that.
I recall that he played center stage at that big 4th of July extravaganza we have under the arch every year here in St. Louis, and got rave reviews. I didn't attend, I can't stand being in the midst of a bazillion people.
The only thing I've got to personally compare, is when I went out on the tennis court and hit perfect backhands and forehands. I wasn't thinking about anything, I just kept my eye on the ball. Of course I had spent years playing and practicing before this occurred, but it would not have occurred if I had been "objectively" conscious of what I was doing.
I witnessed on TV, the best game Isaih Thomas (Detroit Pistons) ever played in his life. When he got so tired that he barely got across the half court line, he threw the ball up, and nothing but net; he couldn't miss.
After the game news people were all over him; he said everything was like in slow motion and he was in what they call, the zone.
Here is where I'm coming from, if you're going to be a star jazz musician, you have got to quit thinking "objectively" about what you're doing; either you got it or you don't, but you can not get it by practicing (when you're a performing musician) That might be just the thing for a "classical" musician, but not an improvising jazz musician.
Of course if you're not performing, you have to practice; but an improvising jazz musicians performance has to be instantaneous; otherwise it sounds "stilted", and that's not good in jazz.
Enjoy the music.
|
O-10, I continue to feel that judgment by using only the subjective standard is a flawed concept and a ruse. Using that approach I would feel justified in simply saying "O-10, you are simply wrong, THIS other music is better". I see that as pointless and unproductive and choose to focus on that fact that you simply like a certain style of music more than others.
Honest judgment can only occur with a combination of the subjective and the objective and contrary to your assertion that "there is nothing objective about music", there is much about music that can be judged objectively. You, yourself, in posting the KOB doc, admitted that there was much commentary about music in it that went over your head. THOSE are the things that are primarily in the objective realm. You choose to not concern yourself with those things; but, that doesn't mean that they are not there. Simple example: a jazz pianist's job (besides soloing) is to provide the harmonic underpinnings of the music. If that piano player is prone to playing wrong notes in the chords that he plays and a given listener is able to recognize the fact that those are wrong notes then he is judging objectively. A wrong note is a wrong note; a drummer losing time is losing time.
I have previously commented that the truly smart music lover needs to never lose a certain amount of humility; humility about the inevitable fact that there is always much to learn about art, and I won't repeat my previous comments about the arrogance of describing some of the commentary about KOB as absurd. I will say, however, that in my universe of musicians of all genres ((including jazz) and many very avid and passionate listeners, anyone who can rightfully be considered a "hardcore fan" does not dismiss "swing" (and earlier), "big band", "post bop" (Nefertiti) and other styles. Jazz is not only "after Bird"; it's all valid and part of the big picture. Some is good and some not so good regardless of style. I have no issue with anyone wanting the label of "hardcore fan", but if it is used to somehow buttress one's point of view when there is disagreement, and suggest that the disagreeing person is not a "hardcore fan", then there's a problem. Anyway, spirited discussion is a good thing; Rok, seems to think so.
Jafant said it very succinctly ****All jazz is good jazz**** and then he goes on to state which styles he likes best. Can't argue with that.
|
Acman, The very first record I wore out was "Clifford Brown, and Max Roach", he was my favorite drummer for ages.
Enjoy the music.
|
You guys aren't exchanging salvos, you're exchanging Tomes!!
Keep'em coming. :)
Cheers |
|
Frogman, calling this better than that, amplifies the subjectivity of this music. "Better" is a bad choice of words. Although the difference between Bill Evans, and Bobby Timmons is as wide as the Pacific Ocean, "better" is a word that could be left out of the discussion. Bobby Timmons music projects a philosophical, and sociological point of view, that is probably foreign to Bill Evans, and vice versa. The fact that both of these individuals can strike a piano key, and say more than a short story is incredible; however, just as frequency is all important, whenever music is sent and received by transmitter and receiver; so it is by musician and audience; they both have to be on the same wavelenth. No one has sent messages that have encompassed the depth and volume of Bobby Timmons music. People who can neither read nor write, understand Bobby Timmons musical messages. Bill Evans music is beautiful and eloquent, and comparing the two is apples and oranges. Those eloquent discussions in that documentary were an attempt to come to some "objective" conclusion in the "subjective" world of music. They would have had to include the music of "Charles Mingus" in order to bring it closer to the truth. " Fables Of Faubus" is every bit as dynamite, as the tune "Kind Of Blue" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48eAYnfgrAoAs a matter of fact, the inclusion of "Mingus Ah Um Charles Mingus" would have made the discussion more objective, and less like a "Miles Davis fan club" Enjoy the music. |
O-10, thanks for your response. I don’t find your stance unique at all. However, I do find it to be rather narrow and, with all due respect, somewhat arrogant; sorry. I really mean no disrespect. I think I will invoke the title of that tune re this recurring debate: "So Tired". What I mean by my comments is simply that I don’t see the value in comparing two players or recordings of universally recognized greatness and very different styles, and trying to establish one as "better than another, by a mile". A pointless exercise, subjectivity and all. Horace Silver "better" than Bill Evans? Really? C"mon! It’s like saying a great orange is better than a great pear. I think the difference between our perspectives is that I feel no need to call one or the other "better". I like them both and appreciate their differences. I also listen to them both. Sometimes I am in the mood to listen to "Nica’s Dream" and sometimes I am in the mood to listen to "Nefertiti". Moreover, when I say arrogant, what I mean is that when brilliant musicians like those in your documentary tout the greatness of a recording such as KOB to refer to those comments as simply another example of the "absurd" things they say is simply,,,,, well, I’ll leave it to others to fill in the blank. From my vantage point, the more productive and positive attitude would be to respect those comments and to recognize that there is always much more to understand. Lastly, and most frustrating to me, is that no explanation or details are offered as to why your "better" players are better than the others. Now THAT would make for interesting discussion. I’m game; speaking of games. Fundamental difference in taste of jazz? I suppose. I don’t think I like "Nica’s Dream" any less than you do. But, I like "Nefertiti" and you don"t. Is it a matter of difference or a matter of scope? Noah was asked to build an arc and to bring two of everything. I think your arc is a little smaller than mine; that's all 😊 Regards.
|
Frogman, as you know, I have been prone to exageration ; but not much, especially when we put a short time frame on this, and end it at 1965. There is a very good reason for the time span; after that we began to get into what is, and what is not jazz; example, I saw Miles in Chicago with a buckskin vest that even had fringes on it. The music was a rehearsal for "Bitches Brew"; since there was a fellow from New York with us, and as everyone knows New Yorkers know everything, so I asked him. "What the...."?
"That's Miles new thing, group, music and all", was his response.
That was in the late 60's, after that, jazz changed forever, but it often left me on the sidelines.
"Nerfertiti" does not float my boat, but since there is no one else in my boat but me, that might not be highly relevant in the larger scheme of things. I think we should compare the two discography's between 55 and 65; that will specify the universe of where I'm coming from.
"Bobby Timmons" and "Horace Silver" were better than anybody Miles ever had on piano. Although Bobby Timmons didn't live long enough, his compositions withstood the test of time; "Moanin, Dis here, Dat Dere, and So Tired" have been used over and over by many others. The same could be said for Horace Silver; I don't have enough room for his compositions.
Lee Morgan was better than Miles on trumpet, he just didn't live long enough. Curtis Fuller on trombone was (is) fantastic; thank God he's still around, age 81.
Taking "Nefertiti" over "Nica's Dream" means you lose by a knock out; we'll have to let others decide that, but according to me, it's not even a contest.
As important as KOB was, there is no way it was "that important"; to put KOB up against all the fantastic albums that have been made since that time is absurd; "they" say a lot of absurd things.
"Moanin" by Blakey, has the same status as KOB with hard core jazz fans, and we don't claim to speak for nobody but us.
Frogman, we have fundamental different tastes in jazz; it's a "subjective" difference, there is nothing "objective" about music, because my normal reaction to Classical is "Huh", but since you're a classical musician, and many jazz musicians can go back and forth plus, Nina Simone was a classical pianist before she was a jazz vocalist, I'm sure you will find my stance unique, but that's the nature of "subjective" differences.
Enjoy the music.
|
If one believes that jazz (or any art form) should stand still and that change in jazz is something that is "perpetrated" on the music, rather than being the natural and inevitable process that is the product of a truly creative mind, then it becomes very difficult to appreciate something that may not be in our comfort zone . I love the way that sometimes seemingly unconnected themes in these discussions connect. Recently the subjects of the role of drummers vs frontline and the relative importance of Miles have come up. I mentioned "Nefertiti"; Miles' last all-acoustic record. The tune "Nefertiti" nicely connects a lot of dots. Here is a tune in which the frontline simply plays the haunting melody; the horns don't solo. The tune is all about the drums; it's almost like a jazz concerto for drums. And what drums they are! Tony Williams sounds fantastic and solos throughout the tune as a horn player would traditionally do. THAT is but one of the reasons that people go gaga over Miles. He had an incredibly creative mind and tremendous vision for new sounds and ideas. One may not like all those new sounds and ideas; but, for whatever it may be worth, check out the KOB documentary again and listen to what some of those guys have to say. https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLdhGk7gKuZxbOipdilbqLR0ck2GseBAEg&v=Qzib_oUoyrw |
Any Jazz is good Jazz. I rather enjoy Bop, Hard Bop and Modal the best.
Then, there are greats like Pharoah Sanders, Sun Ra...etc., that take an extra exploration on the Jazz theme. |
Btw, I could make a joke about the title of the first Jazz Messengers clip, but it really wouldn't be fair; it's great stuff. |
****I can't see why everyone is so "ga ga" over Miles, when Blakey's Jazz Messengers had the best music and musicians by far.****
O-10, that's the kind of statement that, especially on the heels of you posting that great documentary about KOB, will certainly raise some eyebrows. Any one jazz fan may like the music of The Jazz Messengers more than that of Miles, but to declare that they had "the best music and musicians by far"? Really?!
We could dissect that statement and look at the musicians: "better" than Coltrane, Cannonball, Bill Evans, Philly Joe, Wynton Kelly, Paul Chambers, Ron Carter, Tony Williams, Herbie Hancock, George Coleman, Dave Liebman, Chick Corea, and on and on..... and, "by far"? I think that assertion merits some sort of explanation.
The music:
Your documentary and the comments by all those jazz giants do a great job of explaining how just one single recording by Miles both defined and changed the face of jazz more than any other. As I have suggested before, there just might be something to what all those great jazz musicians have to say on the matter....just maybe 😉 . There has been so much written and documented about how Miles was one of the great guiding forces in the evolution and history of jazz than just about any other musician that it frankly seems silly to get into it here; a quick search will bring up more info than one can absorb in one siting. A better way to perhaps answer your question is to consider that if one listen to The Jazz Messengers from their inception all the way to when Wynton was in the band, you'll find very little difference in the music; hard bop. Great hard bop, but fairly traditional hard bop at that. Now, listen to Miles' various quintets; all different, and all great.
Dont get me wrong, Blakey was great even if he was not my favorite drummer; I prefer drumming with a lighter touch. He was also undeniably a great "school" for a lot of great players; and so was Miles, if perhaps and arguably not to the same extent. However, imo, to compare Blakey playing "Nica's Dream" to Miles' "Nefertiti" is kinda pointless; apples and oranges. The playing, within the respective styles of the music is on an equally high level; and, on "Nefertiti" more complex harmonically, making it more interesting to listeners with a certain sensibility. But, if play the game I must, I'll take "Nefertiti" any day.
Regards. |
|
According to Wynton, Metheny and Miles were not playing Jazz.
Not trying to start anything, just saying.
Of course this was the Sinbad era.
Cheers |
I decided to play a game called; Miles Davis vs The Jazz Messengers. I can't see why everyone is so "ga ga" over Miles, when Blakey's Jazz Messengers had the best music and musicians by far.
Let's investigate; Jazz Messengers were an influential jazz combo that existed for over thirty-five years beginning in the early 1950s as a collective, and ending when long-time leader and founding drummer Art Blakey died in 1990. Blakey led or co-led the group from the outset. "Art Blakey" and "Jazz Messengers" became synonymous over the years, though Blakey did lead non-Messenger recording sessions and played as a sideman for other groups throughout his career.
Yes sir, I'm gonna to stay with the youngsters. When these get too old, I'm gonna get some younger ones. Keeps the mind active.
Art Blakey, A Night at Birdland, Vol.2 (CD),
The group evolved into a proving ground for young jazz talent. While veterans occasionally re-appeared in the group, by and large, each iteration of the Messengers included a lineup of new young players. Having the Messengers on one's resume was a rite of passage in the jazz world, and conveyed immediate bona fides.
Many Messenger alumni went on to become jazz stars in their own right, such as: Lee Morgan, Benny Golson, Wayne Shorter, Freddie Hubbard, Bobby Timmons, Curtis Fuller, Cedar Walton, Chuck Mangione, Keith Jarrett, Joanne Brackeen, Woody Shaw, Wynton Marsalis, Branford Marsalis, Terence Blanchard, Donald Harrison and Mulgrew Miller.
Miles Davis's quintets: Miles Davis Quintet was an American jazz band from 1955 to early 1969 led by Miles Davis. The quintet underwent frequent personnel changes toward its metamorphosis into a different ensemble in 1969. Most references pertain to two distinct and relatively stable bands: the First Great Quintet from 1955 to 1958; and the Second Great Quintet from late 1964 to early 1969, Davis being the only constant throughout.
1 First Great Quintet/Sextet (1955-58)
2 Second Great Quintet (1964-68)
3.1 First great quintet (1955-58)
3.2 Second great quintet (1964-69)
In the summer of 1955, Davis performed a noted set at the Newport Jazz Festival, and had been approached by Columbia Records executive George Avakian, offering a contract with the label if he could form a regular band. Davis assembled his first regular quintet to meet a commitment at the Café Bohemia in July with Sonny Rollins on tenor saxophone, Red Garland on piano, Paul Chambers on bass, and Philly Joe Jones on drums. By the autumn, Rollins had left to deal with his heroin addiction, and later in the year joined the hard bop quintet led by Clifford Brown and Max Roach.
At the recommendation of drummer Jones, Davis replaced Rollins with John Coltrane, beginning a partnership that would last five years and finalizing the Quintet's first line-up. Expanded to a sextet with the addition of Cannonball Adderley on alto saxophone in 1958, the First Great Quintet was one of the definitive hard bop groups along with the Brown-Roach Quintet and the Jazz Messengers, recording the Columbia albums Round About Midnight, Milestones, and the marathon sessions for Prestige Records resulting in five albums collected on The Legendary Prestige Quintet Sessions.
In mid-1958, Bill Evans replaced Garland on piano and Jimmy Cobb replaced Jones on drums, but Evans only lasted about six months, in turn replaced by Wynton Kelly as 1958 turned into 1959. This group backing Davis, Coltrane, and Adderley, with Evans returning for the recording sessions, recorded Kind of Blue, considered "one of the most important, influential and popular albums in jazz". Adderley left the band in September 1959 to pursue his own career, returning the line-up to a quintet. Coltrane departed in the spring of 1960, and after interim replacements Jimmy Heath and Sonny Stitt, Davis plus Kelly, Chambers, and Cobb continued through 1961 and 1962 with Hank Mobley on tenor sax.
Second Great Quintet (1964-68)
Mobley, Kelly, Chambers, and Cobb all left Davis by the end of 1962, and during 1963 he struggled to maintain a steady line-up. By the late spring, he had hired the core of the Second Quintet with Herbie Hancock on piano, Ron Carter on bass, and wunderkind Tony Williams on drums. Initially with George Coleman or Sam Rivers on tenor sax, the final piece of the puzzle would arrive in late 1964 with saxophonist Wayne Shorter.
The performance style of the Second Great Quintet was often referred to by Davis as "time, no changes", incorporating elements of free jazz without completely surrendering to the approach, allowing the five men to contribute to the group as equals rather than as a leader and sidemen peeling off unrelated solos. This band recorded the albums E.S.P., Miles Smiles, Sorcerer, Nefertiti, Miles in the Sky, and Filles de Kilimanjaro, and the live set considered by The Penguin Guide to Jazz to be their crowning achievement, The Complete Live at the Plugged Nickel 1965.
Discography is where the rubber meets the road, or the sound reaches the ear; or any other euphemism you can invent for evaluating which one is the best.
Let's compare 55-58 "Jazz Messengers"; Art Blakey and the Jazz Messengers - At the Cafe Bohemia, Vol. 2 (11/23/55)
Horace Silver - Horace Silver and the Jazz Messengers (11/13/54, 2/6/55)
Horace Silver and Art Blakey / Sabu (10/9/52, 11/23/53) Art Blakey - A Night at Birdland, Vol. 1 (2/21/54)
Art Blakey - A Night at Birdland, Vol. 2 Art Blakey - Orgy in Rhythm, Volume 1 (3/7/57) Art Blakey - Orgy in Rhythm, Volume 2 (3/7/57)
Now we'll go to Miles 55-58
First great quintet (1955-58)
Miles Davis — trumpet
John Coltrane — tenor saxophone
Red Garland — piano
Paul Chambers — bass
Philly Joe Jones — drums
increased to Sextet in 1958 with Cannonball Adderly — alto saxophone
Now that I've thrown my 50 cents worth, you can throw in your 2 cents worth.
Enjoy the music
|
Frogman, I really appreciated the comments on your last post. Pepper Adams is my favorite baritone sax man, and I had to play those cuts twice. Your bass player has eluded me in the past, consequently, I don't have anything meaningful to say about him.
My collection is full of Pat Metheny; he hit's the ball out of the park one time, and then fouls out the next time; but all in all I like Pat Metheny.
Next we'll be comparing Miles quintets to Art Blakey's jazz messengers.
Enjoy the music.
|
O–10, the KOB documentary should be required viewing for every jazz fan. I seem to recall a debate here about the relative merit of KOB. If the comments by the various jazz giants in that documentary don't dispel any notions that KOB is "audiophile candy" and nothing more, then I don't know what will. It is a monumental recording in jazz, and the fact that it has been adopted by the audiophile community as a fave should be applauded. Imagine if the closest that audiophile favorites got to jazz were Diana Krall! It's a fascinating video offering many interesting insights. The comments about music are actually pretty basic and, imo, every serious music lover should strive to understand, at minimum, what is talked about in the documentary; I think it would be a great goal. Thanks for posting it. Alex, nice clips featuring Horace Parlan; very good player and probably underrated although he is highly regarded by musicians. Have always loved Stanley Turrentine with his distinctive sound and vibrato. One of the players who "went commercial" but whose work always had a lot of integrity; hard not to love the way he played a pop ballad. I agree completely with Acman3 about the importance and role of bassists and drummers; and love the football analogy. I would even say he is being a bit gentle with his dissent. While the contribution of a bassist or drummer MAY be more subtle than that of the player in the frontline, it may be as important or even more important. I can't imagine Mile's 60's band with any other drummer than Tony Williams and his unique synergy with Ron Carter, or Trane's "A Love Supreme" without Elvin, or the Thad Jones big band with any other drummer besides Mel Lewis? All added, in their way, just as much to the sound of the band as the headliner did. Speaking of Scott LaFaro, what would the whole concept of the modern jazz trio be without his huge contribution in developing the "conversational" style of playing (as opposed to mostly "time keeper") that became the sound of the Bill Evans trio and would influence just about every other jazz bassist that followed? Listen to Herbie Hancock talk about that single cymbal crash in the intro to "So What" on KOB. Great clips of Blanton with Ellington, and while they show how far jazz bass players have come in the virtuosity and conceptual departments, there's not much one can say when the playing is simply "right" for the music at hand; simple, tasteful and great sound. Great stuff. On the other hand Abdul Malik just doesn't do it for me. Very rudimentary player who in my opinion is riding the "lets do something different" wave; probably with a bit of political correctness to support his efforts. Some of the improvisation on those clips is almost embarrasing. It's not the choice of instrument (oud) that's a problem; it's the command of the jazz language that is. Quaint, in a way, for its marriage of jazz and a Middle Eastern vibe, but its not good jazz nor good Middle Eastern. Speaking of marriages, Rok, that of Johnny Hodges and Lawrence Welk is indeed a strange one. I have that record and when I first bought it, I had high hopes for it in spite of the Lawrence Welk presence. Don't get me wrong, I think Welk's band could sound great for what they do, but this just doesn't work. Simply a little too much grease in Hodges' playing for that band's vibe. As much as I hate to say it, I think the problem is Hodges and not Welk. On the other hand, I have always felt you shortchange Metheny. He is a great musician with a very wide range and his partnering with Ornette is really not that much of a stretch. Landing in ten minutes, so want to post one of my favorite bass players (as a sideman): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=y8PjvxET91Uhttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zgmUWTAhsa8 |
Folks...try Bosko Petrovic Quartet - Tiffany Girl...you wont be sorry...you will hear how Croatian jazz band play world class session....and good sound too....
|
Jimmy Blanton was an influential American jazz double bassist. Blanton is credited with being the originator of more complex pizzicato and arco bass solos in a jazz context than previous bassists. Born in Chattanooga, Tennessee, Blanton originally learned to play the violin, but took up the bass while at Tennessee State University, performing with the Tennessee State Collegians from 1936 to 1937, and during the vacations with Fate Marable. After leaving university to play full-time in St Louis with the Jeter-Pillars Orchestra (with whom he made his first recordings), he joined Duke Ellington's band in 1939. Though he stayed with Ellington for only two years, Blanton made an incalculable contribution in changing the way the double bass was used in jazz. Previously the double bass was rarely used to play anything but quarter notes in ensemble or solos but by soloing on the bass more in a 'horn like' fashion, Blanton began sliding into eighth- and sixteenth-note runs, introducing melodic and harmonic ideas that were totally new to jazz bass playing. His virtuosity put him in a different class from his predecessors, making him the first true master of the jazz bass and demonstrating the instrument's unsuspected potential as a solo instrument. Ellington put Blanton front-and-center on the bandstand nightly, unheard of for a bassist at the time. Such was his importance to Ellington's band at the time, together with the tenor saxophonist Ben Webster, that it became known as the Blanton–Webster band. Blanton also recorded a series of bass and piano duets with Ellington and played in the "small group" sessions led by Barney Bigard, Rex Stewart, Johnny Hodges, and Cootie Williams in 1940-41. In 1941, Blanton was diagnosed with tuberculosis, cutting short his tenure with Ellington. His last recording session was cut on September 26, 1941 in Hollywood. Blanton died the following year after retiring to a sanatorium in California, aged 23. Jimmy Blanton is a bassist I've been hearing about since I can remember, but he was before my time; meaning jazz time when I started collecting records. Since I only collected AB records (AB stands for "After Bird") I don't know if I have him in my collection, but that can be remedied. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrvHckvHj90 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPB7hBU6oj0Here are two cuts by Mr. Blanton, You be the judge. Enjoy the music |
Hi Acman, just saw your post. It really should be no surprise to anyone that Jaap is going to New York (there are many New York critics with short memories acting surprised/disappointed). They wanted him very badly eight or ten years ago, when Dallas beat them to his signature, and they were very upset about it. Now they are finally getting the guy they wanted back then. He is a great musician and a great fundraiser - as Frogman said, it should be a good marriage, at least for a little while. |
|
@acman3
Normally I would be amazed at a combination of Pat Metheny and Ornette Coleman, but just yesterday I ran across a CD of Johnny Hodges and Lawrence Welk. They say it worked!
Like you said, just not my sort of thing. I used to try to like DeJohnette, in my early years, but he just didn't play my type of stuff. Just like Keith Jarrett. Just too 'cerebral' for me.
Cheers |
|
Jeri Brown and Leon Thomas:
Nice enough, but she can't hold a candle to Dee Dee Bridgewater. No sense even mentioning Ella. Leon seems to be stuck in the same narrow range all the time. Does he ever go any lower?
The good ones sound like an instrument when they scat.
Cheers |
|
Rok, i agree on a surface level that you are correct, but if you listen to what a Bassist and drummer are playing behind the frontline, and how they add much more than foundation and beat, and are just as important as lead players. And when all the players are listening to each other; Awesome! The playing of Haden, on bass, and Dejohnette , on drums, is a revelation, on the Metheny/ Coleman recording of Song X. I know this is not a style for you, but I listened to the rhythm section, over and over in the 80's, so this is the only thing that I thought of as a perfect example. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d66Ytt2g7ns At first it is like watching the offensive line open a hole in American football, but before long you start to see the beauty of the interior line play. ;) |
Funny story about Monk and Miles; Monk didn't take no crap off of anybody under any circumstances, him and Miles had some kind of minor dispute. (having a dispute with Miles wasn't the hardest thing to do). On the record "Bag's Groove", there is a cut where I make the same mistake every time, I say to myself,"That's Monk on piano", wrong, it's Horace Silver. The reason I make this mistake is because Miles told Horace to "Play like Monk right here", and Horace did so well that I still make the same mistake.
But the story get's even funnier, because Miles said he didn't want Monk's "Plinkin and plunkin", and evidently changed his mind before the day was out, because Horace imitates Monk's "Plinkin and plunkin".
I know you got this record; pick out who's playing piano on each cut.
Enjoy the music.
|
Bassists and Drummers. Not exactly fertile ground for finding interesting and great Jazz players. Even if they are very good, they would not stand out.(solos excepted) Not their job.
Mingus knew this, that's why he is known as one of the greatest Jazz composers ever.
Cheers |
|
Jafant, as I recall, checking out the bassist was your idea, and we're still waiting on your "first" investigation of a basist. It was suggested that you give us a report on Jimmy Blanton.
After getting a description from "Wikipedia", next you go to "you tube", select the music you want us to hear, copy and past; it's just that simple.
By spreading these investigations around to everyone who shares in the rewards of new music, no one is overworked.
Thank you.
Enjoy the music.
|
|
Acman3, I had the pleasure of performing Britten's "Sinfonia Da Requiem" with Van Sweden a few weeks ago here in NY. He was well liked by the orchestra. He was very personable, clear techniqe, very energetic, and no "vibe"; very straight forward guy. Should be a good marriage. Whether it will be a good long term match remains to be seen.
|
|
Since Bassmen are primarily sidemen, except for OP and Mingus, their best work can be found on records headed by others. For example Milt Hintons best work, in my opinion, is on "Heavy Soul" with Ike Quebec. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1cTgZDUsScThey made this record when Ike was dying and they knew it, hence the title "Heavy Soul". Milt Hinton's bass contributes so very much to this cut; but all of them played their hearts out on this album. According to Frogman, Duke Ellington's bassist, Jimmy Blanton was very influential. Also Ray Brown, Paul Chambers, Milt Hinton, Charles Mingus, Wilbur Ware and, Oscar Pettiford. LaFaro was a pivotal figure in the bass world but hardly the first important bass player. Jafant, perhaps you can find Jimmy Blanton's best work. Wilbur Ware is another bassist I don't think we've explored. Enjoy the music. |
Speaking of Conductors, What do our two esteemed classical musicians, Frogman and Learsfool, think of Jaap Van Sweden leaving the Dallas Symphony for New York Philharmonic ?
I thought it would be a good thing for New York, because he is very good in my novice opinion, but noticed some apprehension in an article. I guess change is hard on both sides when someone leaves a post.
|
|
Around the Bassist discussions, check out; Helen Gillet Jason Adasiewsz |
