Todays' Listen: Charles Mingus -- TOWN HALL CONCERT Only two tracks, 'So Long Eric' and 'Praying With Eric'. Total playing Time 45 minutes. Mingus is one of the few artists that can maintain a listeners interest in tunes of 27 and 17 minutes in duration. Both were great. Dolphy's Flute and Bass Clarinet playing was just awesome on 'praying with eric'. Some consider Mingus' music to be 'out there', but the rhythm section is never 'out there'. They always keep it all coherent. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JP2XFKGKlAwThe liner notes consist of a scathing attack, by Mingus, on greed and corruption in the music recording business. Mingus does not minch words. Very angry young man. I wonder if any of these guys ever made the money they should have made. This is one of the CDs in the Mingus Mosaic box set. Yeah, it's worth $119. Got my New speakers today. :) Cheers |
Rok, are you going to let "Ramondo" AKA "Frogman" affect your play list review?
If it was good enough for your audience during the life of this thread, why should you care what Ramondo, Ramonron, or anyone else thinks? I missed it today.
Enjoy the music.
|
Although I would very much enjoy a live performance by the "Dregs", new fusion is not something I'm currently adding. I appreciate your unique contributions, they're always interesting, keep em coming.
Enjoy the music.
|
O-10:
The only question I would have would be the sound quality. All live performances, in 1964-65. But, Mosaic does have a reputation for excellence. It will be as good as it can be.
I am not sure you can still get all the individual concerts on seperate CDs. Of the ones listed as part of the set, I only have 'Town Hall'. If you just brought all his 5 star stuff, you could still go broke!! But when you consider the packaging, and the booklets, with the photos, I think it's worth the money. It's more of an 'investment' than any piece of audio gear.
I never quibble about cost when it comes to buying music. Now gear, that's another question.
I was looking at this very offer the other day, when I found the Beethoveen Sonata article. I have always wanted to buy something from Mosaic, but in most cases I did have most of the material on seperate CDs, but not in this case. And this is MINGUS! I listened to the samples on the Mosaic site. I think I will get it.
I will rationalize this way: I have a lot more than $119 tied up in CDs that I hate, and never listen to. Convinces me every time! :)
Cheers |
|
FYI:
The Polk 50% off sale ends tonight at midnight Pacific Time. Not a bad deal, esp on the LSIM705 / 707.
If you tell them you are an Audiophile, they will keep your purchase confidential. Ship in plain brown box.
Cheers |
Ramonron:
Nice clips. I don't consider 1972 to be 'New-Jazz'. These clips fit right into the mainstream of what's normally posted on this thread. I was looking forward to your commentary. You didn't say anything.
After all that build-up about intellectual levels, I expected more insight. Here I was, sitting here, almost overcome with anticipation, stenographer's pad and pencil at the ready, and what do we get? Nothing. What's up with that?
Cheers |
O-10:
Dead Can Dance:
AWESOME! Some of these things work better than others. Wonderful music. The visuals were outstanding, and with such vivid colors!! A really good match of sounds and visuals. Is there a name for this type of art?
BTW, your opinion of Jacky Terrasson seems to be the prevailing opinion on several online sites. I guess he goes back on the shelf, right next to the Bey sisters. :(
Cheers |
Rok, while perusing a "Mosaic" catalog, I discovered something worth considering, "Charles Mingus - The Jazz Workshop Concerts 1964 -65"; this is considered an epic masterpiece. While you may have it in bits and pieces, I don't think I have it. This includes Town Hall, Amsterdam, Monterey 64, Monterey 65, and Minneapolis; 7 CD's $119.
In Mingus's Jazz Workshop the exploration never stopped. Rehearsals could go for days. His music looked back to all the history of jazz. The music ranges from his interpretations of Ellington, to tributes to his musicians, ("Praying With Eric).
The musicians: Jaki Byard, Piano; Johnny Coles, trumpet; Lonnie Hillyer, trumpet; Eric Dolphy, alto, plus bass clarinet and flute; Charles McPherson, alto; and last but not least "Dannie Richmond", drums. A man of style and precision, immaculately dressed, he perfected the art of folding and packing his flawless wardrobe inside a small suitcase. He died in 1988 in a hotel in New York en route to join the Mingus Dynasty band in Europe. He was 56 years old, the same age at which Mingus died.
You probably know more about these particular concerts than I do; do you buy the complete edition for $119, or get bits and pieces for less, that is the question? It depends on whether or not you got $119 as loose change. One thing is for certain, no one got more out of musicians than Mingus, even the one's you weren't too particular about sounded good.
Enjoy the music.
|
****You guys kill me.****
If only this were true.
****I have followed this thread with interest for some time **
Then, stop following it.. Problem solved.
**In my opinion, Frogman's posts have been a model of clarity ***
Is this opinion based on facts?
**nstead of the confused jumping around with opinions that have little basis in fact done by Rok2id and Orpheus***
Are you accusing the OP of a thread of being 'confused', as to it's direction?
**You guys think new jazz is not worth talking about and now you move on to New Age!?***
We think new Jazz is not worth talking about, and the OP can move on to whatever he wishes. What's your point?
**I don't think the reason for the arguments is just a difference of opinion about music but a difference in level of intellect.***
Believe me when I say, you don't have a clue as to what the arguments on this thread are really about. However, feel free to raise the intellectual level with posts of your own. We won't hold your first one against you.
**Rok2id, your sarcasm and ridiculous attempts at "reviews" and playlists are almost embarrasing to read. **
Then, don't read them. BTW, I don't pretend to 'review' anything. 'Today's listen' means, I have this CD, and I listened to it today. I always say a few words and provide a clip of the music so others can judge for themselves. This is the INTENT of this thread.
***You mention Levinson and Cello as if it's a new discovery that you are trying to enlighten with without realizing that it's common knowledge.***
I mentioned the Levison thingy because it took up so much space in the notes. I said I have never heard of it. How do you conclude that, I think I am reporting 'breaking news'? I think the recording date was 1995. Another 'strawman' specialist? Your 'audiophile' traits are showing. :)
***I completely understand Frogman's frustration and think that it's a shame if he stops posting because his posts have been some of the best reading on this forum. ****
Is this an opinion or a fact? I, along with all music/Jazz lovers, look forward to reading YOUR contributions on Frogman's thread.
***This thread could have been something special instead some of you guys keep it at just music masturbation.****
WTF is music masturbation?? hahahhaha You so witty.
Lastly, In my 'opinion', the OP has forgotten more about Jazz, than The Frogman will ever know. I am Speaking of Jazz-Jazz, not noise-Jazz.
I look forward to your contributions. I know they will be of an Intellect-Raising quality.
Cheers
Just a thought: Could this be The Frogman posting under a different name???
hahahahahaha
|
Ramonron, long time jazz lover who never posted on this jazz thread, but now you voice a complaint echoing Frogman's complaint. You two guys are a match made in heaven, I'm eagerly awaiting your new thread; but if you didn't post on this one for over two years, I really don't think you have much to offer.
Maybe Frogman wont be so frustrated after you and he specify precisely what this new thread is going to be about; could it be "Watch another thread for over two years, and then complain when they don't write what you want". Frogman and Ramonron, that sounds like a dance team, I'm sure you'll make a good couple.
Enjoy your new thread.
|
|
Ramonron, why don't you and Frogman have a conversation to start things off.
|
|
Rok, although the sound quality was excellent, there are so many better options, that I would pass on Jacky.
Getting back to the real deal, I've been focusing on the instrumentalist backing Dinah; Clark Terry and Clifford got in a trumpet duel of sorts without missing a beat and backing Dinah at the same time. I bought that album primarily to hear stuff like this and I didn't get cheated; every note is a winner.
Enjoy the music.
|
You guys kill me. Being a long time jazz lover I have followed this thread with interest for some time and the recent exchanges between Frogman and Rok2id and Orpheus prompted me to make my first post on a thread. It's really amazing how small minded some people can be. In my opinion, Frogman's posts have been a model of clarity and honest attempt to bring some credibility to the thread instead of the confused jumping around with opinions that have little basis in fact done by Rok2id and Orpheus all the while hiding behind "subjective opinion". You guys think new jazz is not worth talking about and now you move on to New Age!? Are you kidding me! I don't think the reason for the arguments is just a difference of opinion about music but a difference in level of intellect. Rok2id, your sarcasm and ridiculous attempts at "reviews" and playlists are almost embarrasing to read. Your most recent post says it all and just like many of your comments about music. You mention Levinson and Cello as if it's a new discovery that you are trying to enlighten with without realizing that it's common knowledge. I completely understand Frogman's frustration and think that it's a shame if he stops posting because his posts have been some of the best reading on this forum. This thread could have been something special instead some of you guys keep it at just music masturbation. |
Although I've had "Down To The Moon" since it came out, seeing it performed took me back in time; I can even remember the shirt I had on when we went to see Andreas.
One pair of binoculars fit in my wife's purse (they do come in handy from time to time) and I carried the big one's around my neck; I was prepared to capture every moment, I saw what you saw. While listening to the music is nice, it doesn't compare to watching the musicians produce the music while you're listening.
During those 39 minutes I was transported back to a virtual reality when I was considerably younger. Frogman, that's another "Reality" you can add to those we've accumulated so far; it's called "Virtual Reality".
Enjoy the music.
|
Today's Listen: Jacky Terrasson -- REACH Great hype surrounded Terrasson when he first appeared on the scene. I will have to check out his latest efforts. Lots of live youtubes available. He 'pulverizes' the keyboard, sort of like Chucho. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eK0VS7mFJwo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btDHv7hI_Cs Interesting notes by Mark Levinson concerning the recording techniques used to record this album. Blue Note Cello-recorded series. Levinson is President of Cello LTD. First I have heard of it. The recorded sound is excellent. Cheers |
O-10:
Andreas Vollenweider:
Both tunes nice and catchy. Both could have been played on regular Jazz instruments. I guess the ideal was to be other worldly. Nothing as common and earthly as a Tenor Sax. I liked his harp playing, in spite of myself. :)
Worth noting that their first performance was at a 'Jazz' festival. When they can't classify it, they throw it in with the Jazz music.
Your list of player credits, failed to give credit to the guy on Water!!
Nice atmospheric stuff. I consider it purposely manufactured. Since they call it "New Age", I can't complain about folks calling it Jazz.
Cheers |
"New Age", now there's a genre we have not touched on at all. I stumbled on this when I began buying music without knowing or caring what the genre was; that's after I got fed up with all the "fusion". Andreas Vollenweider caught my attention in a big way; he looked so "Cherubic", behind that big harp, and he even sounded it. After catching him live, I was really hooked on his music. He was at a big opera house that was seated to capacity, which was an indication I wasn't the only person hooked on Andreas's music. We had a mezzanine seat that put us right in the middle; it was like being in the middle of a gigantic speaker. I had two pair of binoculars so I could see the whole group or focus on any one musician; the percussionist for example had more chimes, gongs, and ancient drums than I could name. Andreas even had two harps and a koto (that's a Japanese harp that lays flat). Every musician in the band had more than one instrument. Here are the musicians: Andreas Vollenweider: Harp Christoph Stiefel: Keyboards, Synthesizers Pedro Haldemann: Bells Walter Keiser: Drums Jon Otis: Percussion Max Laesser: Strings (Arranged the Silver Symphony Orchestra and Choir) Matthias Ziegler: Woodwinds Here is "Dancing With The Lion" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEtu9ZJtE0M&list=RDFEtu9ZJtE0M#t=115"Down To The Moon" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=me6aASTOglEEnjoy the music. |
O-10:
Shadowfax:
Excellent!! Enjoyed them both. I vaguely remember the name, but I don't own any of their stuff on CD.
This is legitimate music. If these cuts are representative of the entire CDs, I will look them up on Amazon.
I still don't understand the apparent need for visuals. These tunes stand on their own merit.
Re your Kenny G collection: What size U-Haul truck will I need?
Thanks for the Shadowfax clips.
Cheers |
Rok, I may never stop laughing over your win of all my "Kenny G." collection.
|
Rok, in the process of looking for my favorite recordings on the "Windham Hill" label, I discovered that "Shadowfax" disbanded in 1995. The group formed in 1972 and disbanded after 1995 when Lyricon player and leader Chuck Greenberg died of a heart attack. Having lost their signature sound, Shadowfax's members went on to other projects. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lv1YtAjgKzo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQY0rA5W574I have both of these albums. I must have acquired them about the time I began to diverge from exclusively buying albums that fell under the "jazz" genre. When it comes to current music I disregard genre altogether, meaning I just listen and let it happen. If the music resonates with my inner self, I buy it, if not, I leave it lay. I think that's about as "subjective" as I can get. Frogman, could you explain how, and in what way: Mapman, Acman and Chazro are at a disadvantage? Enjoy the music. |
Yiippeee!!! I won the "how long will he stay away" betting pool. I selected less than 24 hours!! My prize? I won all, and I mean ALL, of the OP's Kenny G collection.
A suggestion to The Frogman, if I may be so bold.
You should submit music that you like, tell us why you like it. Daily. In English. From a pro's perspective. Examples of, sort ot thing. You seldom do this. Mostly, you react to, and comment on what others post. If you did this, communication would be greatly improved.
Keeping in mind, telling us that a piece is great or not great, does not mean we will agree. I am still pissed over the short shrift given the Bey sisters. An absolute outrage!
Welcome Back.
Cheers |
Please consider this an addendum to my "last" post. My comments about not continuing to post about the music stand, but I feel that some other recent comments should be addressed in order to help clarify my position. Moreover, my vacillation between "leave well enough alone" and "go ahead and try and clarify" was decided by Acman3's most recent post, which points to what, for me, is one of the main issues.
I have suggested on several occasions that we should "dig deeper" in our views about the music and not base so much purely on "subjective" reaction, but try to have more of a balance between the subjective and the objective. This, as a way to help keep a more open mind about jazz, any music, and art in general; and, as a way to understand something that is key and is one of the things at the core of what the practitioners of any art form value: a more inclusive, open-minded view of art and the principle that art doesn't stand still and that, like it or not, there is good art at any point in history. While it may strike some as grandiose or even self-serving to keep trying to drive that point home, the irony of the chasm (as concerns this point) between the mindset of many listeners and practically all practitioners is too great to ignore. As Alexatpos points out, sometimes the realization comes slowly. As has also been pointed out there are times when it's best to leave well enough alone, because to continue to drive certain points home can serve to only sink matters deeper into resistance to the idea.
What I meant by alluding to Acman3's post is this; and I hope that, if anything, this is the "take-away" of this most recent exchange of comments which will hopefully serve to help participants have better and more focused "conversations" without so much diversion into arguments:
One of the main obstacles in these discussions has been a lack of focus clarity in the way that ideas are presented. I realize that this format is limiting and everyone has different writing styles; but, I just don't feel that enough effort is put into being clear and succinct with commentary and not enough "follow-through" with ideas proposed. I think this causes a certain confusion. Examples:
O-10, if there has been any "misinterpretation" of your comments by me (I don't believe there has been), where has the clarification been? I have asked specific questions, wether it be about the supposed "filler" on current recordings or about your comments about the supposed lack of relationship between European Classical and Jazz and there has been no response. Additionally, in your most recent post you make a comment that suggests that you based your comment about "filler" on one (!!) recent record purchase. If that is the case (I suspect not), is that really reason enough to make a general comment about new artists' recordings? Rok would call my need for clarification as creating a "strawman"; I don't think so. I think that there is a tendency to let the less than open-minded attitude to creep into the style of the discussions as well as our views of the music. Comments are made that buttress one's point of view and are then held as a type of gospel without being willing to "follow-through" and explain, or really discuss. As I said, Acman3's post was what prompted me to make this "addendum" because it is a great example of what I mean and I had the same reaction as he did:
Concensus? Really?? Seems to me that on this thread there is anything but a concensus about the relevance of "old vs new" music; certainly not, if one does the math re the number of participants who hold each point of view. I would say it's pretty much split down the middle. I will admit that now, in my absence, Acman3, Chazro, Mapman, and others may be at a "disadvantage" as concerns the numbers :-) I make light of it, but it should not be about advantage or disadvantage. Rok often points to the "intent" expressed in the OP. Fair enough, but it should be remembered that the OP also intends to "review" and, as such, comments purporting to be authoritative should be accompanied by substantiation; or, in its absence, a willingness to be open to, and truly consider, the comments of those offering subtantiation. I truly do hope the thread thrives and I hope my comments, which will inevitably be construed as self-serving or arrogant by some, are meant to encourage a better platform for the sharing and discussion of the greatness of the music. In my view, this thread, as interesting as it has been so far, has only scratched the surface of that greatness and all that there is to know and love about it.
Best to all and good listening. |
Rok, I have many "Windham Hill" recordings and they are all of excellent audio quality. "Shadofax" is my favorite group on that label. Tuck and Patti were quite popular when they came on the scene. I'll see what I can find by them in my collection. Thanks for a nice contribution, I liked it.
Enjoy the music
|
Today's Listen: Tuck & Patti -- TEARS OF JOY Recorded in 1988 This is a lot better than I remember it being. Played it last night in the dark. Nice. Patti can sing, and Tuck knows his way around the guitar. Just a duo, but they sound like a larger group. All the tunes are good. No filler here. Brought back many memories. The track 'Better than Anything', was like a time capsule, esp when she sings "better than an Emile Griffith fight". I just smiled at that one. Windham Hill recording. Excellent sound. The Time after Time clip shows how long they have been together. Not quite the Fox she once was, but the talent is still there. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIVjCJ3jNDw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkOMDFNA5zoCheers |
Acman, "Old" is better than "New" is a judgmental statement; while I made many statements that "implied" this, I never made that statement.
I compare this to the colors of the rainbow, I like blue, others like red, and there are those who like the remaining colors. Is one color better than another? No, it's simply a matter of preference.
Currently, the record of the month in "Stereophile" is Sasha Matson; "Cooperstown: Jazz Opera In Nine Innings". Maybe you or others could review it, and give your opinion of this most current record.
Enjoy the music.
|
O-10, Old vs New….
For me, the only consensus is that for old people, like us, the past was always better! It's not good or bad so please don't over react, it just seems to be.
Enjoy the music! |
To all Aficionados, I consider Frogman a highly educated and intelligent person, who has made great contributions to this thread; however, quite recently I seem to be speaking French and he only understands English, or vice versa.
If he is dissatisfied that I didn't follow through on exploring the 80's and continuing on into the present, I already told him that he could follow through, and I would support him. Let me give you my background on this in real time.
That was when I began buying records based on magazine reviews and wound up with many records on the ECM label that haven't been played for years. Recently, when I heard a tune on the radio, and bought the album, that was the only cut worth anything. There is no way I'm going to follow through on music I could very well live without; however, if he chooses to follow through I'll support him and give my "honest" opinion on artists and music.
Since we've already been through that "old" versus "new" music, and I made the discovery personally that I could live without most new music, and that seems to be the consensus on this thread, maybe a new thread that would attract younger readers might be the answer to his dilemma. Whatever the answer I'm willing to help him find it so that he can have peace of mind.
Enjoy the music.
|
Schubert, fate of enlightener is often ungreatful, but noble. You can call me naive or maybe romantic, but the sprit of this thread seemed to be positive,to me, not only because of thoughts and ideas that were shared, but also because behind of each 'nick' stood a person who actualy tried to share something that holds dear, to a bunch of complete strangers, somewhere in the virtual world, and many, many times that was succesful, to a equal pleasure of ones who had recomended something,and the ones who had learned something new. Sometimes process of education may be slow and hard, to both parties, but here I do not see the betrayal of principles, as the tread has grown and advanced, but maybe just a dispute about terms or maybe even some childlish stubbornness.I certainly do not see a reason to use such a 'hard' words if one wish to describe any participant on this thread. Despite the differences present, I had an ilusion that all participants share my previous thoghts, because they all continued to write, and such words are kind of surprise to me. I can understand Frogman, and all I can say is that I realy appreciate reading his posts, even if I did not liked some music that he has refered to. Hope he will continue to participate. |
Everyone put on some jazz + chill. 😎 |
****Frogman been misinterpreting every thing I say, but he's been rewriting my posts, and coming up with something completely different from what I said originally.*****
He is a Master of the Strawman.
Just ordered CDs by Morgan, Dinah, Ellington and Timmons. Will report when I get them.
Cheers |
Alexatpos, the term "invincible ignorance" is a theological one.
It exists because at some point you continuing effort to show an ignorant person the light simply drives them ever deeper into ignorance at which point you duty is to simply cease and desist. |
Rok, am I glad you're back; not only has Frogman been misinterpreting every thing I say, but he's been rewriting my posts, and coming up with something completely different from what I said originally.
If "present day jazz" is neither definable or clearly identifiable, then it has to be some kind of "mutation". It's often been stated that current musicians should simply drop the "jazz" title and come up with a new name, also they could specify; is it: Soul Jazz, Free Jazz, Acid Jazz, Kenny G. Jazz, Rock Jazz, Blue Grass Jazz, Latin Jazz, Brazilian Jazz, or jazz mixed with classical music, not to be confused with "Classic Jazz", which is Jazz Jazz.
Frogman, while I've enjoyed and appreciated your very informative posts, I think you should start a new thread specifying precisely what it is you're looking for. Not only would I post on it, but I would even research whatever it is you're looking for and trying to get across.
While I have appreciated your expertise as a professional musician, I have absolutely 100% no intentions of becoming one myself, and for Learsfool who seems to chime in on my refusal to learn the technical aspects of music, "I consider this ignorance BLISS", and I hope this closes that door permanently.
When you start your new Thread that spells out precisely what you're looking for, I will be the first to post on it.
Enjoy the music.
|
I'm glad you will stop posting on this thread, Frogman.
It was painful to see you butting you head against willful
and invincible ignorance.
May God Bless you during this Easter Season and beyond, you are a example of courage to all. |
Frogman, I wish that you reconsider your decision. Try not to take it so serious, lots of stuff that is said here is actually 'lost in translation', because of a form of this forum. Things are never written in 'real time', and there is a constant delay, plus, there is always a chance that 'tone'of some post could be missunderstood.On the other side, people from different sides of the world, 'talking' to each other, despite all above mentioned obstacles, about things that they love, that is almost a small wonder. Few times I thought how nice it would be to see you guys, all siting at the same table. I dont know nothing personaly about any of you, but I am certain that you would enjoy each others company 'in flesh'.So, please, once more, dont take it so hard. I am sure that the 'discussion' has its low points, but many more great ones. |
{A person cannot make a 'contribution' to Jazz, with something that you cannot define as Jazz.}
****We are talking about what led to the birth of what would be one known as jazz; and, as such, the contribution of the European classical tradition to jazz is huge.****
You seem to write a lot better than you can comprehend. I was responding to O-10's statements about how 'contributions' have changed the music beyond recognition. Today! Current music scene! Was not talking about the origin of the music.
[But I did not 'hear' the boogie woogie.]
***Jeremy Denk heard it. I heard it; loud and clear. Once again, how does the fact that a person can't hear it invalidate the fact that many others can? What is the most likely scenario: that the many that can are delusional; or, that the one that can't, simply....well....can't?***
I said I could not hear it. How did you jump to the conclusion that I thought that Invalidates any other person's opinion or ability? You have toooo much 'audiophile' in you.
You always jump to conclusions to satisfy your preconceived notions of other people. Ask 1000 people if they can hear boogie woogie, how many would answer, "yes, I can hear it"? Think about it. It's a Beethoven Sonata!!
You need to read the OP's original post. The purpose / intent of the thread.
Cheers |
Gentlemen, I have mentioned a few times now that I feel that this thread is at a crossroad; I had hoped, as I also said, that it would be more of a milestone. Well, it is a crossroad for me.
O-10, you are to be commended for starting this thread. It has often been enjoyable to share favorite recordings and discuss and share points of view. My participation has been an attempt to offer a certain perspective on the subjects being discussed that is, not only a personal and a musician's perspective, but one shared and espoused by practically all individuals who write about, teach, and perform the music itself. Unfortunately, the constant resistance to these points of view and insistence on opposing points of view that have no basis in the reality of all that comprises musicology strikes me as not only arrogant, but an exercise in simple petulance; particularly when all of it can be easily researched and better understood. Instead, personal "opinions" become the end-all without a healthy amount of questioning of the obvious: how can someone who has not studied and lived music, so easily, and with such a sense of authority, dismiss the opinions of those who have? Subjectivity may apply to liking or not liking a particular music or performance, but it does not apply to musicological or pedagogical considerations.
Why does it matter? Because music matters and deserves more respect via inquisitiveness and a higher level of interest in learning about it; or, at the very least, more open-mindedness.
It is for these reasons that I feel my participation has run its course and I will not be posting any longer; I don't see the point. Not that I should be so presumptuous to think that anyone should care wether I post or not; but, rather than disappear from the thread, I felt I owed all the participants an explanation. Sharing favorite recordings is fantastic; interesting and a great opportunity to add good music to one's collection. However, when things veer into the area of commentary, the commentary too often does not sustain the credibility and standards that I feel the music deserves.
I am sure we will cross paths again on some other thread and I wish everyone good listening. |
****I find it quite difficult to believe there can be any relationship between jazz and classical; other than they're both genres of music****
O-10, kindly explain where, then, the concepts of harmony used in jazz came from if not the European Classical music tradition. African music has practically no tradition of complex harmony to speak of; it's contribution to jazz is in the realm of rhythm.
****A person cannot make a 'contribution' to Jazz, with something that you cannot define as Jazz.****
We are talking about what led to the birth of what would be one known as jazz; and, as such, the contribution of the European classical tradition to jazz is huge.
****But I did not 'hear' the boogie woogie. ****
Jeremy Denk heard it. I heard it; loud and clear. Once again, how does the fact that a person can't hear it invalidate the fact that many others can? What is the most likely scenario: that the many that can are delusional; or, that the one that can't, simply....well....can't? |
BTW, the article came from the 'Mosaic Records' site.
cheers |
Sometimes the 'connections' or 'influences' we make are extremely tenuous. You can reach a point where we can say all music was influenced by the first human that ever hummed a sound. He/she created notes and phrases., without having any possible concept of music.
O-10's point of view, seems to me, to be the most correct one, with a few exceptions. Such as:
****Presently, after so many contributions, it's lost definition (according to me).*****
We will agree to disagree on all this 'contributions' stuff. A person cannot make a 'contribution' to Jazz, with something that you cannot define as Jazz. Let's be generous, and just say, they made a contribution to 'music'.
BTW, I had no opinion on the piece I posted. Just thought it would create discussion. But I did not 'hear' the boogie woogie. I was listening for 'Pine Top' :). And, after all, the piece did not come from Mt Horeb.
Good points by all.
Cheers |
Rok, Jeremy Denk, and other contemporary pianists, have never heard of "parallel thinking" or "coincidence"; two pieces of music can sound similar in spots and have absolutely no relationship.
Just like people, music has a birth and people who caused it to be born; this means it also has a history. "African Americans" brought jazz into existence; I hope we can agree on that. While presently people from all over the globe contribute to that existence, it's birth and history can not be denied.
In regard to music in general, the same can be said for it; meaning that it has parents who represent that particular genre of music. There are songs that you can not hear unless you have sang them; I said that in reference to the "blues", no I'm not referring to the "Delta Blues" which is quite specific, but the Blues in general. I made that statement so you can relate to where I'm coming from; the same applies all around the globe; unless you are from where the music is from, you can't hear it to the depth and degree of someone who is.
Jazz is a highly "subjective" and abstract art form that was closely related to gospel and blues during it's early years. Presently, after so many contributions, it's lost definition (according to me). Presently, the music I like, I choose not to define if it's current, meaning in the last decade or so; it just falls under two classes; like and don't like.
Since music is related to the people who brought it into existence, I find it quite difficult to believe there can be any relationship between jazz and classical; other than they're both genres of music; after all, classical was born in Europe, and we know where jazz was born. When you go back to birth and existence, there can not possibly be two more unrelated genres of music; consequently, there can be no such thing as "proto-jazz" in reference to classical music.
Enjoy the music.
|
****Beethoven’s Last Piano Sonata: Does it Anticipate Jazz?****
In a matter of speaking; probably. More importantly, and important to this thread, a better way of looking at this is, as always, perspective. The facts have a way of always rising to the top; even if slowly:
Consider all the drama and resistance that was put up early in the life of this thread to the idea that jazz is NOT a "purely American" creation; that music, like all art, does not happen in a vacuum and is constantly evolving while being influenced and shaped by what came before it. Jazz is a melting pot of many different influences from different cultures and anyone interested can easily research this well established fact; or go back and read early posts here.
What does one suppose some boogie-woogie pianists played when learning to play the piano? Probably, and among other things, Beethoven sonatas. So, is it so far-fetched to think that a young future boogie woogie piano player, after playing and studying the second movement of the C Minor might think: "Hmmm, I wonder.....let me try this....!"
Welcome back, Rok. |
O-10:
You are right about all the 'Filler' on current day CDs. The increased time is difficult for a lot of players to fill with quality music.
Lee morgan? I thought I had all of his 'must-have' stuff, but "The Procrastinator" is currently in my CART, Along with the recommended, Dinah Washington's "DINAH JAMS". Thanks.
Cheers |
Comments Anyone? Beethoven’s Last Piano Sonata: Does it Anticipate Jazz? This epic Piano Sonata in C Minor, Opus 111, isn’t the last piano work Beethoven published (his staggering Diabelli Variations, Opus 120, arrived a bit later), but it’s his last piano work in the sonata form,........Jeremy Denk, among other contemporary pianists, has described elements of the second movement as “proto-jazz” and “boogie woogie.” Okay, point taken, but there’s so much more. -Nick Moy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ljq4MwzAboSpeaking os Sonatas, listened today to: Mozart -- THE VIOLIN SONATAS with Perlman and Barenboim. Ain't got it, git it. Cheers |
Of course, I meant "here she is PLAYING one of....." |
|
Why do you think Jane Ira Bloom is not a big name in Jazz? I have a couple of her recordings and they are very good. Great tone and I personally like her ideas. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TqHyTdDGGYFrogman, you know I love Kurt Elling. I do need to keep up with his work better. Thanks! |
O-10, as I said recently, I sense that this thread is at a milestone of sorts; perhaps, and more accurately, a crossroad (for me, at least). I preface my comments out of respect for you and the interesting and positive contribution you have made as OP, and so that my opposing view does not come across as gratuitous or disingenuous; it is not and is sincere. As always, comments in a thread such as this are obviously subject to and invite opposing as well as supporting views. Having said all that, it is I who would be disingenuous if I didn't respond to this: ****Before, when I tried to stay current, it turned out to be a big waste; current musicians seem to capable of only onte very good cut per album; this meant the rest of the album was a waste.**** Please clarify: Are you saying that "before" (previous search?), you didn't find any current recordings that had more than one good cut, but now you do? Or, are you saying that you just don't find (now or before) any current recordings with more than one good cut? If the latter, it is precisely comments like that, that I hoped that this thread could move beyond. Clearly, we are all entitled to our opinions and to express them; but, for me, the seemingly endless cycle of talk about jazz from the past as the end-all, to proposals to explore more modern jazz (sometimes by the decade) without real follow-through, to the inevitable return to negativity about current jazz gets really old. My view, if it isn't clear already, is that if important comments like that are made they should be accompanied by something more substantive than a simple statement of opinion or gut feeling as an explanation for it so as to keep a kind of focus to the proceedings here; perhaps specific examples, and better yet, with specific commentary. Here's one, just off the top of my head; not a bad cut on the record: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-rv_AU_URkk&list=PL55B2954EFC5BB029¶ms=OAFIAVgC&mode=NORMALJust one man's opinion, and a humble attempt to keep the thread at a level befitting the seriousness of the music. As always, I welcome yor thoughts. Regards. |
