O-10:
When I first became aware of Cecile, I was sort of put off by the album cover, I sort of dismissed her as some hip-hop type person. mainly because of the glasses. That shows the fallacy of assumptions!! I was wrong.
After listening to the youtubes, I see what you mean when you said she was giving my 'Old Jazz' a reprieve. I think she shows great promise.
HOWEVER, since she has been 'accused' of sounding like, not just Sarah, not just Billie, not just, (be still my racing heart), ELLA!!, but all three of them at the same time!!!! WOW!!
Apparently she is more awesome than I ever imagined.
I ordered her CD. We have to support the young folks who are trying to keep the flame alive. The flame of the true art.
I am not sure, to which African youtubes you are referring.
Cheers |
Professional Jazz Musicians Audiophiles ???
I remember when 'Stereo Review' used to run a monthly thing called 'System of the Month,' and another series on the systems of well known Professional Musicians. The difference was amazing.
The "System of the month" systems were very expensive and elaborate, and I am sure they sounded wonderful. By contrast, the systems of the Pros, weren't any 'better' than mine. I am speaking in terms of cost.
When Herbie Hancock does the ads for BOSE, it's possible he is being very honest in his pitch.
Cheers |
Rok, for the records: I never met a professional jazz musician who was an audiophile. I remember when professional jazz musicians were into "DAT" tape recorders; that's as close as they came to audiophile. During the three months time my friend, the professional jazz musician lived with me, I don't recall us ever sitting around listening to music; if we were at the apartment, we were engaged in lively conversation, or sleeping. Why would anyone sit around listening to recorded music, when there was always live music playing somewhere, to be heard; do you think Miles sat around listening to recorded music? and of course the difference between a young man (then), and an old man (now) is night and day.
Enjoy the music.
|
Lest we forget:
The OP's original intent:
Jazz for aficionados
"I'm going to review records in my collection, and you'll be able to decide if they're worthy of your collection. These records are what I consider "must haves" for any jazz aficionado, and would be found in their collections. I wont review any record that's not on CD, nor will I review any record if the CD is markedly inferior. Fortunately, I only found 1 case where the CD was markedly inferior to the record........While the rest of the music is just fine, those are my favorite tunes. Why don't you share your, "must have" jazz albums with us."
If you are going in a different direction, then a new thread is in order. Because, "Jazz for Aficionados" is more a 'conversation' than an 'Audiophile' type Thread. This is like guys in the barber shop.:)
Cheers |
As you can see, my posts are out of sequence in regard to miles and miles of Miles before my odometer runs out.
Rok, I'm switching between "Cecile" and those African cuts on "you tube". While Cecile is better without pictures, those African cuts can't stand alone, they have to have pictures.
Cecile just gets better and better all the time; although chicken is chicken, I've had chicken dishes that were awesome and unforgettable. While Cecile isn't brand new, she's like that unforgettable chicken dish, I didn't know what they put in it, but I just couldn't get enough of it.
She makes songs I've heard a million times sound brand new; Cecile is putting her secret spice "essence of Cecile" into each and every song, that's what makes them new.
Enjoy the music.
|
|
I hope that this thread can be more than a popularity contest in the sense that disagreement can be respected and, ideally, used as an opportunity to understand different points of view and, in the process, perhaps expand one's point of reference. I think that the thread has, at times, fallen woefully short in that respect with vigorous and positive dialogue happening only when there IS agreement. Personally, I am not looking for agreement; how long can the appeal of that last. I am looking to be challenged in a substantive way. Emotions and emotional attachment to an artist or recording can sometimes hinder the, at least partial, objectivity that can justify proclamations of "best" or "worst" without the appropriate qualifier of "for me". Having said all that, I will practice what I just preached re Salvant. I don't quite get the furor. I will plagiarize the first "comment" to the clip: **** anthony jackson 4 weeks ago  · Shared publicly  There  is nothing remotely original about her style. It seems to be a pastiche of Sarah Vaughn, Billie Holliday and Ella Fitzgerald . All in the same song . Not that its a bad thing at all, just distracting .**** Why, when one can have this: https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=qNi6M_A9AzUJust one @&£man's opinion. |
Cecile: Wow! http://www.npr.org/2013/06/05/188941161/c-cile-mclorin-salvant-making-old-songs-new-againCheck out the names. Fats Waller, Bessie Smith and even Valaidia Snow. I like her style!! I just hope there is a sufficient audience in this country to ensure her success. If not, she could still be big in Europe, esp if she can sing in French. It's amazing how many clips of her are on youtube. Esp considering how short a time she has been performing. Cheers |
Music does not come to you.You have to come to it and you'll walk away with something you didn't have before.
Wynton Marsalis |
Miles and miles of Miles is enough Miles; I'm going back to Cecile McLorin Salvant before my odometer runs out. While I can switch the sound to the big rig, which gives me superior sound without picture; in Salvant's case, that works to her advantage, but when the big bucks come rolling in, a make over is in order, plus a few trips to the gym, and that gal will be a stone fox. Here she is on "Yesterdays", which is a little reminiscent of Carmen. Salvant can scat too, nice and easy without overdoing it, and her pianist is boss. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgOghmYGsSYEnjoy the music. |
Solomon was correct.
Chet Baker, maybe the public understood him and just didn't like his stuff. OMG!!! Maybe he was so cool he was frozen. Maybe he put folks to sleep. Maybe he spent more time getting high than playing high notes.
If you are an artist and you crave success, then you have to do whatever it takes to grab the audience (public). At least in order to then lead them your way. If you think its all about YOU, and they can take you or leave you, then shut up!!
Seems as if brother Baker played in a style that even he said, 98% of the public, did not like or understand. Strange Logic. I guess he was true to himself. I'll take Pops, with his fast, high note, loud, playing self. I'll put on Baker when I'm trying to get some sleep. At least I would if I owned any of his stuff.
Cheers |
Great comments Acman3; and so true. Actually, I would put that figure even lower; unfortunately. I commend you for, in becoming "more experienced", gaining a higher level of understanding (hearing). It's unfortunate that so many, even very active listeners, have so little interest in learning to hear. |
It seems to me most people are impressed by just 3 things: how fast you play, how high you can play, and how loud you can play. I find this a little exasperating, but I'm a lot more experienced now, and I understand that probably less tan 2% of the public can really hear. When I say hear , I mean follow a horn players through his ideas, And be able to understand those ideas in relation to the changes, if the changes are completely modern.
Chet Baker
"Nothing is new under the sun"
Solomon |
Now, in the interest of civility, I am done. As our wise OP once said, you and I speak different languages.
Cheers |
"I pointed out that KOB has probably introduced. more audiophiles to jazz than anything else. You then take that comment as an opportunity to bash audiophiles. Gee, I thought it was a positive that audiophiles might be exposed to jazz."
I disagree with this. I have no proof, but I do read the threads on this forum. I have seen countless posts about the lastest 'audiophile' recordings and downloads of folks like the Beatles, Miles ,mainly KOB.
I have never seen audiophiles going gaga over recordings of Mingus, Hubbard, Rollins, MJQ .... I can't name everyone, but you get the drift.
KOB has introduced 'Audiophiles' to KOB. It does seem to have gone any further. Not a criticism, just my observation. Maybe not even factual, but I would bet my Tiny Tim box set on it being true.
Bashing 'Audiophiles'?? Can you think of a group more deserving of being bashed? Mind you, I did not say music lovers.
Cheers |
The Frogman Says:
"As I have pointed out there is a lot of nuance involved in all this and to undertand it makes one a better judge of not only the music, but of ulterior motives one may have for insisting on keeping oneself in one "camp" or another."
Rok Says:
Being aware of 'nuances' is not going to make me change my likes and dislikes when it comes to music. Music does not work like that.
You know all this stuff, and seem to think that if only we knew it as well, we would like different music. No, we would not!!
What reaches your ears, and the impact it makes on the listener, is all there is. The rest is just nice to know information.
Cheers |
The Frogman said:
"As has already been pointed out this all began (this time round) with the Kaplan article. I expressed my disagreement with some of the points he made (one in particular) and you went on to bash the guy and call him a farce without a single specific substantive point of disagreement and only blanket condemnation"
I say:
I introduced the Kaplan article. Said it was interesting. Suggested we all read it. Then, after a little Wiki, found out he was in the Les Aspin Sec Defense. Do a little research on the incident known as "Blackhawk Down". That's Les in action. Never mentioned anything negative about Kaplan in relation to KOB or any other music. Suggested he might be another Tony Cordesman. My comments were off topic, but not about KOB or music.
Damn!! I think we have a problem right here is "Aficionado" City!!
Cheers |
First, Rok said this:
"Millions of people saying "I like it better", is why it's the best selling Jazz album of all time!!! It does cut it!!"
Then The Frogman said:
"Importantly, in all the subsequent audiophile-bashing in this discussion, not once was the other reason that KOB has become an audiophile fave mentioned: it sounds so darn good (as well as being fairly accessible and good jazz)."
Oooops!!! There he goes again!!
Cheers |
"Really, what is the point of making a case for why one really good apple is better than a really good pear?"
"Then the attempts at comparing KOB to SE began; a good and potentially interesting exercise."
Each of the above statements were made by either Rok or The Frogman. Who made which statement? Get it right and you win all my Kenny G cassettes, and a NM DVD of LULU!! No peeping!!
Hint: It seems inconceivable that both could be made by the same person.
Cheers |
Rok, in the interest of civility, I will end the nonsense in this discussion by leaving you with this (arrogant) little nugget which will hopefully highlight the differences in attitude and approach to all this. From my vantage point, one is positive and forward looking while the other is negative, cynical and adds little of substance:
As has already been pointed out this all began (this time round) with the Kaplan article. I expressed my disagreement with some of the points he made (one in particular) and you went on to bash the guy and call him a farce without a single specific substantive point of disagreement and only blanket condemnation. I pointed out that KOB has probably introduced. more audiophiles to jazz than anything else. You then take that comment as an opportunity to bash audiophiles. Gee, I thought it was a positive that audiophiles might be exposed to jazz. Importantly, in all the subsequent audiophile-bashing in this discussion, not once was the other reason that KOB has become an audiophile fave mentioned: it sounds so darn good (as well as being fairly accessible and good jazz).
Then the attempts at comparing KOB to SE began; a good and potentially interesting exercise. I made it very clear that I consider BOTH records to be excellent and described with some (believe me, there is far far more) detail why, in some ways, I consider one to be better than the other. What could possibly be more evenhanded than that? You disagreed with some of my specific disagreements; fine, no problem. However, all you can offer is more audiophile bashing and simple "I like it better". That's fine too, but in the process you dismiss logic and the irrefutable. As I have pointed out there is a lot of nuance involved in all this and to undertand it makes one a better judge of not only the music, but of ulterior motives one may have for insisting on keeping oneself in one "camp" or another.
Cheers, and my fee is always negotiable :-) |
|
Jazz is all about eliciting emotions. I first heard "Somethin Else" in 1959, and played it over many times. Today, 5 October 14, that same album is affecting me more emotionally than it did in 59. Based on that fact alone, I pronounce "Somethin Else" as the best jazz album ever.
Enjoy the music.
|
O-10, from the same period and if someone forced me at gunpoint to pick my favorite Miles record this would be it. Amazing rhythm section; Tony Williams kills and Wayne Shorter is on fire. As far as I am concerned this is some of the very best jazz on record. Highly recommended/ https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7vWdTXy80Lk&list=PLCB9AD592FDC73455 |
I,ME, MYSELF, preferred the Tunes and the solos on SE. Case closed. End of discussion. Nothing you can say will change that. That's called a fact of life. You cannot determine and dictate what other people like.
***"I like it better" doesn't cut it*****
Millions of people saying "I like it better", is why it's the best selling Jazz album of all time!!! It does cut it!!
Netflix time. More later.
Cheers |
You may try, and I commend you for trying; but, you often come across as being all over the place. Are we talking about music or are we talking about audiophiles? In the context of this discussion, who cares about audiophiles. Remember, this all started as a result of an article claiming to explain why KOB was so great and so popular. Not, popular among audiophiles, but simply popular. Are you telling us that the millions of owners of a copy of KOB own $240K systems? It's popular to that degree because it was an important and very good recording. It may not be the best but it is undeniably a great one all things considered. Now, enough of the nonsense; let's talk music. I presented specific musical examples of why KOB and SE both have merit and downsides. "I like it better" doesn't cut it. Tell me, with specific examples, why what I said is not true. Both KOB and SE are excellent records. Tell me why that is not true. Dig a little deeper. |
****Please reread my posts with a more open mind; you might learn something*****
Your arrogance is breathtaking!! I have learned that!
I noticed you just 'ignored' all the points I made, that shot your diatribe to pieces. Typical.
Cheers |
****To suggest that a meaningful conclusion can be drawn from asking "what the best fruit is" other than one person'a opinion is simply shallow thinking when there is so much to consider.*****
You posed the metaphor, I just gave examples of when the comparisons between unlike things would be appropriate. I thought that would be evident. Guess not. "Shallow Thinking?? hahahha I think the shrinks call that "projection".
And the only thing to 'consider' is which CD you liked best. That's all there is. Your reasons for liking one over the other is interesting, but does not trump other opinions. Of course you have never been known to use 20 words when 2000 will do. |
***** To relegate KOB to simply audiophile fodder is absurd and serves only to deny yourself a more in-depth and insightful understanding of the subtleties being discussed and presented. ******
Do you do this on purpose? I did not 'relegate' KOB to anything. I offered an opinion as to why it's so popular among so-called "audiophiles". IOW, the folks on this forum. Don't put words in my mouth. I try to be very concise. |
Well, I am actually glad that you decided to not "ignore" my posts; I knew you wouldn't be able to since quality and logic are difficult to ignore :-). Now, as is often the case your analysis is mired in reactive and fairly shallow thinking which, unfortunately, misses the point. To relegate KOB to simply audiophile fodder is absurd and serves only to deny yourself a more in-depth and insightful understanding of the subtleties being discussed and presented.
To suggest that a meaningful conclusion can be drawn from asking "what the best fruit is" other than one person'a opinion is simply shallow thinking when there is so much to consider. The need to take sides and fall into one camp or another, likewise, belies shallow thinking. Please reread my posts with a more open mind; you might learn something.
Cheers. |
O-10:
Allow me.
****Really, what is the point of making a case for why one really good apple is better than a really good pear****
how about:
(1)someone declares that the apple is the best fruit.
(2) someone declares that the pear is the best fruit.
(3) someone asks, which is the best fruit?
Of course, in this case, the statement is not even on point, because we were asked to compare two music albums. Both firmly in the Jazz genre. The comparison is valid.
I think KOB, is the end all, be all, for that certain class of "Audiophiles" with $200,000 systems and six LPs / CDs. They like it primarily because they have not heard much else.
Just one Frenchman's Opinion.
Cheers |
There's no doubt I over reacted because I couldn't find words to express my emotions, when you said "standards", which was factually accurate, but they took those standards where they have never been before, and although I hear this every time I play that album, I can't find words to express it; evidently I'm too close emotionally to this album.
I feel so much more comfortable responding to this Miles cut; I'm not sure if I've heard it before, but I like it. I see why I don't have it; it was released in 67, and that was when I was into "The Age of Aquarius", that "hippy thing"; but so was Miles; it may not have been reflected in his music, but it was certainly reflected in his dress and lifestyle. I can lay back, chill and really get into this album, especially since I haven't heard it before.
Thanks for the heads-up, I'm going to put it on my play-list.
Enjoy the music.
|
O-I0, I am surprised at how strongly you reacted to my comments and I think you missed some of what I was trying to say. I have previously made my comments re KOB clear: I don't consider it the greatest nor the greatest of Miles' records. Moreover, I didn't say I prefer it to SE. In a nutshell , I simply said that I find the playing on a somewhat higher level on KOB , but that "conceptually", I have problems with KOB. "Standards" a "putdown"? Huh? NOT AT ALL. In the context of my comments it's a simple fact. Those tunes are standards; that's how they are categorized and what Miles himself would have called them. If anything, my comments about the "tunes" on KOB are the putdown. And no I m not going from memory since I listen to SE pretty regularly; I think it's a great record with some great playing. The best ever? Not for me. That's all I was saying and I pointed out, per your request, what I consider to be the differences and similarities and they are subtle, but audible nonetheless. I do think that Blakey sounds, as usual, a little lazy and sloppy. That's his style and not my cup of tea. He is obviously a great drummer. Anyway, I could go on point for point, but the important points are ( and you didn't address them directly): Cohesion is the type and level of musical interaction that a group of musicians ( a band, orchestra, chamber group) develops by playing together a lot and is simply not possible with a "pick-up" group regardless of ability. Obviously, inferior players can play together for years and still the band will sound mediocre; obviously, that's not the case with either SE or KOB. The cohesion on KOB is exemplary. That's not to say that on SE it's bad or less than excellent; simply that it's not quite on the same exalted level. The other point that I think is getting lost is that KOB, for better or worse, is a concept album. That alone puts it in a different category; doesn't make it better or worse, but makes a comparison almost pointless. IMO, better (more meaningful) comparisons would have been: " how does KOB compare to "Milestones" for instance which are both more closely related. Really, what is the point of making a case for why one really good apple is better than a really good pear? I encourage you to redead my comments in a different light as you will find that we really don't disagree nearly as much as it may seem at first. BTW, this is MY favorite of all Miles' bands (Shorter, Hancock, Carter, Williams): https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLB9B9936580F9EE94&v=cet79P4LN4s |
Frogman, while most of the time we agree, I consider your last post as a challenge; title this, "The Musician" vs "The Aficionado".
In regard to "modality" or "no modality", KOB lacks the intense emotion of SE; maybe that's the ethereal quality of KOB. Miles music dominates this album to such an extent, that he can be heard within each solo, making the artist secondary to the music; could that be the cohesion you refer to?
Without a doubt this maybe "MIles Davis" greatest album, but when placed up against the artists Rok referred to, and their best albums, KOB begins to slide down the totem pole. Oddly enough, those who are obsessed with KOB, would not be aware of those albums; and consequently, would not be considered jazz aficionados. While KOB is "one" of the greatest, it most certainly is not "The Greatest".
In regard to SE, "The tunes are mostly standards", while three of the tunes are standards, I consider that a putdown. Hank Jones intro on "Autumn Leaves" is so dramatic, you don't know what he's going to go into, but you know you like it because it sounds so good. This is followed by incredible solos, from Miles and Cannonball; after Miles plays the melody, Hank comes back in and gets into the heart and soul of the tune with each note on his piano. "The tunes are mostly standards" sounds like such a put down that I'm left speechless.
As I sit here trying to respond to your post, I get more and more "discombobulated"; "Art Blakey", a sloppy drummer". I can only suggest you give SE another listen, I don't know why I get the feeling you're responding to this from memory, as opposed to putting the CD on and listening to each cut, and each note as I am at the moment. While all music is subjective, I'm finding it hard to believe we're so far apart, far beyond your preference to KOB over SE, which is not hard to understand.
Enjoy the music.
|
****SE = brilliant. KOB = brilliantly ethereal.****
I like that; and I agree. "Somethin Else" was discussed early in this thread's life and in trying to find my earlier comments about it (to no avail) I came a across a thread which asked what albums resemble KOB; SE was mentioned. IMO, it is nothing like KOB except for the shared presence of Miles and Cannon who, being such distinctive voices, can give the two records a deceptive similarity.
KOB is a concept album with its emphasis on modality and "tunes" which began as mere sketches handed to the players at the studio. Only "Freddie Freeloader" is a traditional tune being a basic twelve bar blues. I have always felt that the inclusion of that tune was a deliberate "inside" message by Miles; as if to say: "This is NOT what KOB is about".
SE is another great record; but, I am not prepared to say that it is, overall, a "better" record. The tunes are mostly standards; so, from that standpoint it is comparing apples to oranges. The playing is terrific. Miles' opening four notes in "Autumn Leaves" is a thing of beauty. Same four notes every other player who has played the tune has played. But, man, there was only one Miles; the feeling is incredible. However, to my ears,and conceptual issues aside, where KOB beats SE (handily) is in the area of cohesion: KOB sounds like a band; a band that has played together a lot. There is a very high level of player intuition; they know each other's playing in a way that helps each of them interact in a way and at a level that SE doesn't quite reach. Subtle things like at the end of Miles' solo and lead-in into Trane's solo in "So What"; the way that Jimmy Cobb, with a couple of simple hits, signals "and now, Trane!". I confess that Art Blakey has never been my favorite drummer. I find his playing a little sloppy and not propelling of the soloists enough while Cobb's is lighter and at the same time more concise and forward moving. Blakey sounds like he is on automatic pilot at times; a result of not knowing, as Cobb does, where the soloist was going next. Hank Jones, one of my favorites, is too far back in the mix and is not as much of a presence as Bill Evans is on KOB; this, in spite of the fact that Evans's playing is the epitome of "ethereal" (thanks Rockadanny). I find my attention wandering when the soloists "stretch out"; and I blame the rhythm section for that, they don't supply as much "points of interest" as does the KOB rhythm section. The reason is simple: they were assembled for the session and are not a BAND.
As always, commentary has to be put in context. These are both great records and, undoubtedly, two of the greatest. The criticisms are necessarily about subtleties that would be meaningless compared to inferior recordings. For someone who doesn't think that the concept of KOB is that strong, SE probably has more to offer with it's more traditional slant. For someone who prefers the more traditional the, arguably, superior ensemble playing on KOB is probably not enough to tip the scale. As someone once said: "God (Jazz?) is in the details". (I suspect the big guy up above won't mind that comment). |
Rok, like you say, the gal need a make over; but when dem fat royalty checks start rolling in, dat's completely doable.
|
|
SE = brilliant. KOB = brilliantly ethereal. |
Ditching the glasses would be a big improvement.
Cheers |
|
Rok, the answer can be found in the fact that "Jazz Aficionados" have never said it was so; I don't think even Miles thought it was so; and we are in 100% agreement about your other comments in regard to those other albums.
While a second album would reinforce her standings, there is no doubt about this album. Only time will tell how good Ms. Salvant is, when compared to those Divas you mentioned.
Enjoy the music.
|
"KOB" vs "Somethin' Else":
Following the OP's instructions, I listened intently. Used my CDs thru my system.
Somethin' Else: I was riveted throughout the entire CD. Staying focused was easy. I heard every note. I can see why someone would consider this to be maybe the best Jazz album. The playing was just awesome. Loved the way the solos went from Miles to Cannoball, back to miles then to Jones. They all did their individual thing, but you always knew they were playing the same tune. I also liked the Tune selection. The whole performance was flawless.
KOB: Great players, and great playing. I did not like the Tune selection as much as "Somethin' Else". I had to TRY and stay focused on the music. Mind would wander. The solos just were not up to the standard set in "Somethin' Else". Overall, it did not impress me nearly as much as "Somethin' Else". I don't know why anyone would consider this the best Jazz album ever. I realize, it is the best selling album. But there are many on my shelf that I consider more enjoyable to listen to. Like efforts from Silver, Morgan, Cannonball and even "Swiss Movement". I consider "Blues and the Abstract Truth" to be much better than KOB.
I suspect 'Audiophile' hype is at work here.
Just one Frenchman's Opinion.
Cheers |
Cecile McLorin Salvant-- she has been in my 'CART' on amazon for quite a while, but when I place an order, she always seems to get bumped back to the 'save for later' list.
Tonight after reading the latest posts here, I checked back at Amazon. Several of the reviewers there are comparing her to Ella, Sarah and Billie. One even suggested she was beyond those divas. This of course, causes my BS alarm to quiver.
Sometimes it best to wait for the second album, so as to see if the artist is still a genius. But, our OP swears by her, so that's good enough for me. Next order, she will be on the list.
OLD Jazz is not dead, anymore than old Classical music is dead. Greatness always stands the test of time. Today, Octber 2014, we are talkking about the greatest Jazz album. I guess we should be disccusing the latest sound waves and irritating noises from young folks. But, we are not. We are talking about two albums recorded decades ago, by players, all of whom, or at least the vast majority of whom, are dead.
OLD Jazz is not dead. It is as alive as Mozart and Beethoven and Bach...... As long as we have the CDs and Records, they live!!!
Have you noticed how we ALL speak of these people in the present tense?? Says it all. |
Hew, Cecile McLorin Salvant is fantastic, Rok, she's given your old jazz a reprieve; I had pronounced it dead. As many times as I've heard "I Didn't Know What Time It Was", she made it brand new all over again, and the pianist was great on "Woman Child", the CD, got to have it.
Enjoy the music.
|
Before we go on, I would like for you guys to compare the albums "Somethin Else" and KOB in detail, and tell me what you think. They can be found on my 09-30-14 post.
Enjoy the music
|
Love Aster Aweke. Here are three of my current favorites and worthy of some serious attention:
Buika - El Ultimo Trago (with Chucho Valdes on piano), La Noche Mas Larga
Cecile Mclorin Salvant - Womanchild
Lila Downs - Una Sangre, Border |
Aster Aweke - I have her CD titled KABU. Love it.
Cheers |
Rok, I've got that same CD. I envy Ry's working with his son, that's gotta be cool; his son is sitting on the floor next to him on the cover. You ain't had the blues until you git them Ethiopian Blues, that's what this gal got. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvJbYKSF5UwEnjoy the music. |
|
Read and heed. Anathema to sound wave generators everywhere.
"I think the audience for Jazz can be widened if we strengthen our work with structure. If there is more of a reason for what is going on, there'll be more over-all sense and therefore, more interest for the listener....The improvised and written sections should not take on too much complexity---the total effect must be within the mind's ability to appreciate through the ear. Also the music will have to swing, but remember that all music must do this, must have a meaningful rhythmic sense.." John Lewis, MJQ
From the notes of, MJQ: THE EUROPEAN CONCERT. Got it yesterday. Excellent. Seems as if the Good Lord will always send the right stuff at the right time. :)
Cheers |
****Frogman, I'm going to explain one of "your" problems, and never repeat or comment on it.****
Well, that is a patently unfair stance. However, the OP is always entitled to a concession or two; a special privilege :-)
****"You can take the horse to the water, but you can't make him drink". This can be applied a thousand and one way's in various situations; however, no one ever ran across a "Roking Horse" before, and "Roking horses" don't get thirsty.****
I'm not so sure. Maybe not drinking yet; but definitely tasting it.... slowly. There are far wore "problems".
Harold Land: beautiful player; unusual tone. Agree! |
