Jazz for aficionados

We are, and have been, in complete agreement.  I would only add that what we are discussing is at the heart of the often mentioned quote:  “There are only two kinds of music…..good music and the other kind”.  This from one of the greatest Jazz musicians.  Point is, Classical music (and all others) can “roll”.

I think Bach is the greatest composer because he wote the music who resist the more and the better to "unrolling" interpretation...

😁😊

I Love Bach for many reasons , not the least is only God himself could count the

numbers of musicians who Bach made play better and singers sing than they ever thought thy could .

Very true....

My best to you....

Have a great 4th!

mahqister, I feel compelled to show this to you, A total never heard that EVER !

Great video! Thanks....

One of my french Canadian favorite musician , a taxi driver who played with Yehudi Menuhin , and here we say Quebeker....

Irish and other Scottish freedom musical blood and french Rabelaisian anarchism in the feet ....Look and listen the feet...

This was an other kind of Jazz centuries ago...

You were 7 months premature??!!

Surely you meant 7 weeks...

P.S . I love Upstate NY at least much as Canada .

And as much of Texas as lovely Alberta .

Too late.  I have already informed the guys at the CIA.  Sorry.

If you want a Jazz man do  time and improv at the same time you need only to hear Sonny Stitt !

Hard to think  of  a better time than Michel Legrand and  Phill Woods at the Montreal Fest .

Some thoughts in the spirit of the thread. Where is our OP, btw?

We all have favorites. They are favorites for a variety of reasons; mostly subjective and not objective The playing style of a favorite resonates with our own aesthetic sense and it is important to remember that this preference often says just as much (maybe more) about oneself than it does about the artist; and, is not some indication that our favorite is the “best” based on any objective set of standards. Of course, the tricky part is that there are, in fact, some basic standards of excellence that have to be met to even consider an artist for being ONE of the best.

I have always disliked “best” designations. Jazz, probably more so than any other genre puts a premium on individuality and, as such, makes the notion of who was “the best” kind of pointless. I think that it can be safely said that if one must indulge in “best” designations that one unavoidable consideration is the question of whether the artist was one of the handful that truly changed the direction of the music in a significant way and made more than relatively minor contributions along the path of its evolution. I think we all know who those have been: Pops, Duke, Prez, Bird, Miles, Trane and a handful of others. So, what to do if one loves bebop, but doesn’t like hard bop and beyond; or, swing and what came before (as much?). Can the “best” bebopper be the best jazz player? I don’t think so.

Sonny Stitt was a fantastic bebopper; certainly one of the very best. Was he THE best? If so, what then does one do with Charlie Parker’s legacy? Parker was a genius bebopper and a game changer. Unless we are going to rewrite all that has been written about the history (evolution) of this music there is little question about this.

We may, but Jazz doesn’t like boxes.

As the self appointed spokesman for that group that is the final arbiter of all things in the public domain, The Great Unwashed, let me say that time / staying power decides who is great and who ain't.  Listened to Bach yesterday.  The man has been dead for 272 years!!  If that ain't great, what is?

Modern day players may be considered great among those with the knowledge to know greatness, among their peers, with fans of a certain genre, but the Great Unwashed have the final word.

Besides, The Frogman covered this in his First Law.

Cheers

I know what you mean Frogman and Totally agree.

On here I assume everyone says what they feel like. Unless they are musicians.

Just makes me feel better . Below, Man and Music .

Rok, I think you missed the point. You may be arguing a point that has nothing to do with what I wrote. I could dispute your notion of “the great unwashed decide….” , but it is not relevant to my point. It is not about who is great, but rather, is it possible to deem one individual “the greatest”. It’s at best, a silly notion, if one is to honor all that Jazz is. Who are the great unwashed, anyway? Are you referring to the average guy walking down the street who considers himself a “music lover” and may even own a couple of Jazz CD’s? OK, ask him if he knows who John Coltrane was; never mind Sonny Stitt. Now, ask him who Kenny G is. Moreover, are you not, yourself, a “fan of certain genre(s)” (to quote your definition of “TGW”)?

Of course a player needs to stand the test of time to be considered one of the greats. Many players have stood the test of time and can rightfully be considered great. But, “THE GREATEST”? That question was the basis of what I wrote. And, why even consider the issue of “modern day players”? There has not been enough time passed to be able to consider whether they will pass the test of time. Obviously. We shall see (hear).

**** On here I assume everyone says what they feel like…..

Of course.  Completely agree with that, and as it should be.  A great forum to express ideas and feelings about those ideas; even when there may be some qualification or disagreement. 
 

**** ……Unless they are musicians. ****

Don’t follow the logic.  What I wrote is exactly what I feel.  
 

Never mind.

One of the rare occasions when I answered the wrong question. As always, my answer was correct, I just have to wait until the correct question is asked.

I will punish myself by reading 6 reviews on directional fuses.

Cheers

That’s pretty funny.  Btw, as hard as you may try, you sir are NOT part of the great unwashed 😊

Fabulous Schubert/Schiff!  Thank you.  
 

What do you think of this? :

Of course you did, was being a top musician not part of how you  feel ?

Oh , going to Oprea ,  what I would fight for there  is Bjorling and Victoria de los Angles in Butterfly . They moved me more than anything in music I ever heard!

Two Greats, Bjorling sang in perfection of her voice , impossible but he did it, He did it, sure effected in other parts of my life .

perfection 

Well, Frogman--to start the Schiff clip was the best I’ve seen on You Tube .

Big deal when you see fingers like that and eyes are come into the game .

I mus have 30 Perahia CD’s of Schubert , great Schubert man for sure .

BUT , I don’t know if that clip is before or after the heroic fight with his illness.

BUT , just what I hear is not making the super highlights  of Schiff either up or down,LIKE A STREAM, !!         

Still Perahia is better than most.

WithSchiff. When I thought what is he doing,in a mili-second I found out OMG style!

BUT , again Perahia would have to get the same clip. I have nothing but respect for him, Ears and Heart .

We may, but Jazz doesn’t like boxes.

Frogman you are very right about Jazz.... There is no best...Only our favorite for a specific musical jazz "idiom"...The more i learned about jazz the more my preference have evolved too...

It is also true about classical interpretations, here too our "best" is less an expression of "the" best there is than a reflection about ourself...

But when all that is said, in a written musical idiom like classical language , some creators emerge out of the crowd...

For me my favorite is Bach( the best 😁😊) and in a less evident way for the rest of the people, i favor Scriabin i put on par with all others geniuses i loved too ....

I was very moved when i learned that one of the greatest and purest interpreter of classical Indian music on the sarod, Ali Akbar Khan, own a Bach portrait and admire him dearly...

There is no best, save Bach, even Chopin thought so and he borrow a lot from Bach in his music.... 😁😊

I apologize for my Bach cult bordering on completely subjective preference, but i am not alone by far....

In jazz i have to many favorite now to enumerate them...

For example i like Bill Evans very dearly but what About the great Oscar Peterson and many others ?

I think i am able to love all jazz musicians for what they are: pure musician in a quest for their own freedom....

Jazz is not inferior to classical neither to Indian music neither to any musical style....

Jazz is spiritual freedom too....

It liberate me from my prejudices and ignorance about music....

Music cannot be superior to his musicians... This is a jazz lesson....

In a way Bach is not superior to Bill Evans...Why?

Because Evans will teach something to Bach himself....

Bach learned from all great composers of his time, he admired Vivaldi and Corelli or Buxtehude and copy them by hand with devotion....

He was humble, even if he know his own trade to the minute, like great mathematicians and craftsman are because they worked all day without rest...Like are jazzman like Sun Ra who played 7 /7 almost 24/24 all his life...I admire him too... But his albums collections is too vast to be listened to for me right now (100 albums officially).... 😁😊

Thanks for your thoughts on the Perahia/Schubert.  
 

Schiff’s performance is truly remarkable.  I posted the Perahia recording because I own it and know the sonatas fairly well and  because I have always loved Perahia’s playing.  You wrote that you admire Schiff’s style.  I do also and would be tempted to characterize  what I hear as, not lacking, but devoid of “STYLE”.  Not sure I can put what I mean into words.  Incredibly dignified playing in every positive sense of the word.  As much as I hate to say it, makes Perahia sound “young”:’ too much made of crescendos and makes obvious his phasing twists and turns.  Schifff’s peaks after the crescendos don’t sound LOUD; as do Perahia’s.even though there is as much actual volume.  Lovely playing.

phasing=phrasing

I was amazed that anyone could keep the peaks sounding the same all the way.

My first afterword was I hoped Schubert had heard him , and I meant that

I go(or Did}to every D960 that comes to town, most have sheets .

Perahia is great to the Bach - French suites.and much more, I’ll never get rid of any thing of his .

P.S. was yours before or after his illness. " He has to play a bit difference .  Happy 7K, I only have a little bit.......

DG gives a shot only.

In life Perahia is VERY smart and Schiff is VERY funny ,,

And ! better get out of this channel .

For the frogs 7,000 before I go .   You will see the man has the heart of a Lion !

You wrote that you admire Schiff’s style. I do also and would be tempted to characterize what I hear as, not lacking, but devoid of “STYLE”. Not sure I can put what I mean into words. Incredibly dignified playing in every positive sense of the word.

I am amazed by your choice of words...

Andras Schiff is a genius who gave to his second version of Bach well tempered klavier exactly  the  playing transcendent quality  you describe concretely ...

I an glad someone put  precise words on my impression and admiration for Schiff Bach...

This pianist matured so much, it is astounding...

Happy 7,000! Maybe the greatest.  😉

Schiff  has a good  laugh of live .

I heard him streaming from Austria interview, almost fell of my chair .

Nice to have  rich friend who has streaming worldwide .

That's my boy !!!

I kept asking myself, “7000”? “7000? What the hell are these guys talking about?”Took me a while to realize. 7000 posts! Has it been that many? Has it really been more than twenty years that I’ve been here? How time flies!

Anyway, thank you guys for your comments and for the shared music. It’s a pleasure to exchange ideas about the gift of music with true music lovers. Best to all!

'James Clay only led two record sessions before settling in obscurity in Texas, where he would not be rediscovered until the late '80s. Cannonball Adderley helped present him on Riverside in 1960, so it seemed fair that Clay utilized several of Adderley's sidemen on this session (cornetist Nat Adderley or vibraphonist Victor Feldman, bassist Sam Jones, and drummer Louis Hayes) along with a young Gene Harris on piano. Clay splits his time between his lyrical flute and tough tenor, proving to be an excellent bop-based improviser.'

Schiff forever , said the same I said 65 years ago, Rock etc, etc, etc are NOT music

I’m no genius or anything , ! But when I bought a few Schubert records in the 60’s

at 99 cents in U of M bookstore , I knew nothing about Schubert other than a lady in store said he was great .

I went home and played on AR turntable , no one else there ..

The first thing I heard was the"Winterreise" with Fischer-Dieskau , I really belive that God knew that was the best for a Vietnam vet ,at least this one..

How else could  I know Schubert was so Human .

There is zero comparison between jazz and classical. They are worlds away from each other. Start a Classical for Afficianado’s thread. 
 

The birth of jazz is rooted in the blues, which was rooted in slavery. That’s not Classical. When you’re immersed in Beethoven you’re not thinking about Stan Getz or Ray Brown. 
 

I appreciate Classical as much as anyone. But Jazz stands on it’s own. 

which was rooted in slavery.

 

I disagree. I have never ever heard a blues tune make even the slightest reference to Slavery. The Blues is about Women, Whisky, sex and hard times. Topics that are all universal in their appeal. Anyone can and do have the Blues at some point.

Classical and Jazz are both considered Serious Music.  Pop / Rock /Rap  / Metal etc... are all throwaway genres.

Folks hear, Black folks, The South, and they always think slavery. There is more to it than that. Next thing you know, using this silly commonplace logic, the music of Ellington, Monk, Mingus et al. actually came from Africa. That’s called the BIG LIE.

Cheers

Well, I could preface my response with “With all due respect…”, but I have to ask myself just how much respect someone who comes in like a bull in a China closet to preach in an insensitive and ill informed way deserves. But, I digress….so, I will instead try and educate you…a little.

You could not be more mistaken. First, there IS a “Classical music for Aficionados” thread already, in which many of the contributors here also participate. Now, more importantly, your premise is mistaken and shows an immature understanding and attitude toward the music which is the focus of THIS thread and music in general. It is not true that there is “no comparison” to be made between Jazz and Classical. There are, in fact, many comparisons to be made between the two. The most obvious being that harmonic concepts in Jazz are rooted in Western Classical music. That is a basic and important fact that anyone who would dare to identify via his moniker with the name of one of the giants of Jazz should understand. I would also point out that if you truly understood what Coltrane was all about you would know that Coltrane himself would be the first to point out what I just wrote.

Much more to say related to the above, but I won’t waste any more time unless I know there will be receptive ears. Given the attitude demonstrated so far I would not bet on it. I would say that Jazz and Classical and all that comprises their respective compositional and performance practices have a fair amount in common. I would also say that while they may be neighborhoods apart, they certainly are not “worlds apart”.

Stick around, here and also Classical MFA. Some very insightful folks lurk about.

And, let’s not forget that improvisation is not unique to Jazz. Less so today than in Beethoven’s time (since he was mentioned) when it was more common, but Classical music has a long tradition of improvisation. Many Classical works (concertos) include a cadenza which is to be improvised in the style of the written music. Just as in Jazz where players follow a set of chord “changes” as the basis for improvisation, some of Bach’s keyboard works include a prelude in which elaborations of chord progressions are to be used for improvisation.

I think music is, ultimately and from the start, a musician language and all musicians are able to TRANSLATE one idiom to another one ...

Human culture in spite of his manifested differences is universal....Consciousness is one...

Then jazz, classical, or Indian or Chinese music are understandable by any musician on earth and by any listener...The greatest discovery of the last century was the inter-translation and influence between all specific cultures and revealing that in essence  there is only one with many communicating  facets...Then so much precious is the center of any tradition to be what it is, so much precious are the area of contact between them...

The musical interplay between playing a tune or a symphony , or improvising and creating a new one is a musician matter...

Music is musicians heart affair and there is no absolute frontier between lovers...

I think both Jazz and Classical are worthy and deserve respect.

That said , Classical was about God from around 1200 and was still that to the days of Bach, Mozart and Schubert and Brahms and many, many thousands more .on the way.

I love Coltrane {and his wife)but if he never told what his music was you not know what it was. Religious .

All I saying is Classical has thousand times more music than jazz ,

And until WW1 had more to do with society than other music or "music"

Seems irrelevant when I read both Jazz and Classical are 5% of music sold together.

My rich friend says the last Classical Concert will be Beethoven 9 in 2056 in Tokyo .

I say we’ll all be cooked by then . Excuse my bad writing ,

P.S. The Lutheran National Choir is very good as is a hundred others in the Twin Cities . No joke .