I have really enjoyed the commentary. Enjoyed the musical suggestions. May it continue.
Jazz for aficionados
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.
Our first album is "Moanin" by Art Blakey and The Jazz Messengers. We have Lee Morgan , trumpet; Benney Golson, tenor sax; Bobby Timmons, piano; Jymie merrit, bass; Art Blakey, drums.
The title tune "Moanin" is by Bobby Timmons, it conveys the emotion of the title like no other tune I've ever heard, even better than any words could ever convey. This music pictures a person whose down to his last nickel, and all he can do is "moan".
"Along Came Betty" is a tune by Benny Golson, it reminds me of a Betty I once knew. She was gorgeous with a jazzy personality, and she moved smooth and easy, just like this tune. Somebody find me a time machine! Maybe you knew a Betty.
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.
Enjoy the music.
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.
Our first album is "Moanin" by Art Blakey and The Jazz Messengers. We have Lee Morgan , trumpet; Benney Golson, tenor sax; Bobby Timmons, piano; Jymie merrit, bass; Art Blakey, drums.
The title tune "Moanin" is by Bobby Timmons, it conveys the emotion of the title like no other tune I've ever heard, even better than any words could ever convey. This music pictures a person whose down to his last nickel, and all he can do is "moan".
"Along Came Betty" is a tune by Benny Golson, it reminds me of a Betty I once knew. She was gorgeous with a jazzy personality, and she moved smooth and easy, just like this tune. Somebody find me a time machine! Maybe you knew a Betty.
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.
Enjoy the music.
31,711 responses Add your response
Found this LP this weekend in my upstairs stash. Had never even listened to it, or Howard Mcghee. http://youtube.com/watch?v=i5zO8xPK3oo |
Fabulous! Isn't it amazing how the list of great players doesn't seem to end. I first became acquainted with Sahib Shihab from his work on the recordings of the Francy Boland/Kenny Clarke Big Band; probably the greatest of the European big bands and composed of many American players living in Europe. Notice who else is on this recording: Benny Bailey, one of the most exciting trumpet players ever (Less MacCann "Compared To What"). Great stuff and thanks for sharing. |
During a recording session multiple "takes" (a recorded performance beginning to end) of a tune are usually recorded. Sometimes the first performance of the tune is so good that the players (and/or producer) feel there is no need for another and that is what one hears on the final product; and, since there is a certain mystique (due to the spontaneity factor) around "first" takes they will sometimes be labeled as such on the LP/CD. However, even in these cases they will record "alternate" takes as backups in case of later technical issues with the "first" or simply a change of opinion about the musical merit of it. These alternate takes are considered good enough for the final product even of they are not used; although they may be included and labeled as such (usually in later compilations). Recordings (or takes) can get damaged or lost because of the effects of time or human error and viable alternate takes may not exist. What may be left are simply "first" or "second" takes that may or may not have been intended for the final product. The inclusion of a "second" take is more than likely a way to complete the document of that recording session for aficionados who are eager to hear every available bit of the artist's work even if not the very best. |
Jazz Aficionados: I am listening to a CD by Monk entitled "Genius of Modern Music Vol Two" There are 18 tracks. A lot for a Monk record. Four of the tunes are listed twice, with 'Alternate take' in parenthesis by the second listing. We are all familiar with this. One tune, 'Sixteen', is listed twice also, but with the words 'First Take' and 'Second Take' in parenthesis besides them. What is the difference between these 'takes'? Cheers |
*****Speaking of jazz, Rok and Frogman, why have there suddenly been no new posts on that thread?***** I have been busy entering music into my database and trying to find room for CDs in my racks. It's been a while, and they were backing up. Also catching up on my listening. As our OP once said, listening to Jazz is a lot more enjoyable than talking about it. He was right. The other "aficionados" are probably somewhere pouting and sulking and walking around with their mouths stuck out. My most recent purchases: 'The Great Jazz Piano of Phineas Newborn Jr' 'The Best of Max Roach and Clifford Brown' 'Clifford Brown and Max Roach: Vme Series' To what have you been listening? Cheers |
You may find this interesting. One of the icons of the saxophone world plays and talks to young musicians about being a jazz player, the music, the study; and gives insights into his personal life including being married to Charlie Parker's widow. I think Rok will find some of his comments particularly interesting. And what a great player! http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6SJxmCzYpoo |
Just in case my very short comment's meaning wasn't clear, just wanted to congratulate you for being able to identify Morgan. Which relates to some of my earlier comments re players' clear and identifiable personalities; some have it, some don't. Morgan had a certain swagger in his playing that was unique. Regards. |
Learsfool, how true, and I know that scenario well. More and more I show up to a freelance job where, first of all, I look around and ask myself "who are all these people?" (young!!; or perhaps more accurately: I'm getting old!!). There are are so many truly fantastic young players fresh out of conservatory who can play anything with accuracy, great pitch, and even good understanding of the repertoire; but, somehow, they tend to sound more alike than not, and don't have the experience to get them out of a musical "jam". As Rok so astutely said once "music is not about perfection". Unfortunately, given the current state of the BUSINESS of music these young players have to start from a place of perceived "perfection" to stand a chance of getting to the point later in their careers where they can express more individuality. |
Frogman, who would believe two guitars could make so much music. To be honest, I can't tell whether or not Paco or John is playing when I'm listening to CD or LP. I have this LP with Paco, John, and Al Di Meola, and I try to determine who is playing; but since I can't, in the end I give up and just enjoy the incredible music these three masters of the guitar can create. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlaCZ106b5w Enjoy the music. |
O-10, that John McLaughlin/L Shankar clip was fantastic; I loved it. Talk about two players being locked into each other musically; and clearly enjoying it. Thanks for sharing. This is McLaughlin with another favorite guitarist Paco De Lucia: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ls5Zmf4sCmo |
Very nice post, Frogman! I see exactly where you are coming from now, and would agree. We are indeed drawing slightly different lines, and what you said about "clear and unique" stylistic voice makes more sense than anything else I have heard about why some don't dig him as much. He definitely has a more homogenous sound, as do more and more brass players nowadays, in the classical world as well. Regional differences in sound, even on my instrument, are becoming less and less, which is really kind of sad. Everyone is sounding more and more the same. It's a great sound, but there is much less variety. This issue has affected my own career negatively. For those of you who are not musicians reading the above, a brief explanation in layman's terms - I used to sub regularly with one of the very finest orchestras in the country, when my former teacher was the principal. Well, when he took a sabbatical near the end of his career, suddenly the calls for me stopped. The younger guys in the section preferred to use a guy who was not as experienced as me, and who they had to correct more ensemble-type problems with than they did with me, simply because they preferred the horn he played on to mine (he sounded exactly like they did, whereas I had a slightly different sound, even though I was able to blend perfectly well). While the calls started again, once my former teacher came back, I saw the writing on the wall for working there once my teacher retired, but luckily I got the job I have now anyway, so it didn't matter in the end. I have also had the satisfaction of hearing my former teacher publicly criticize his former colleagues for how they operate now in their close minded fashion since his retirement. I'm not going to say anymore about who and where or anything like that - I like to maintain relative anonymity here to feel free to make comments I would otherwise be uncomfortable making. |
I was listening to "Star Eyes" from my computer play list, and thinking that's got to be the best version of that tune I've ever heard. (I'm not even close to the computer when I listen; consequently, I can't read who's playing) Try as I might, I couldn't place who was playing. Although it was led by the tenor man, (I've got a lot of them), "OK, I'll just listen and enjoy the music." The more I heard this tune, the better I liked it; when a tenor sax man can make the words and meaning of a song come out as well as a vocalist, that's saying something. I once knew a "Star Eyes" with the most astounding, sparkling eyes I've ever seen, and her image flashed before me. The piano that followed the tenor fit so perfectly, then the trumpet; "That sounds like Lee Morgan", now back to that singing sax which brings out this tune as well as any vocalist. I discovered this was "Star Eyes" off my Mosaic LP compilation, Mosaic MR4-106, The Complete Blue Note Recordings of The Tina Brooks Quintets; Lee Morgan, trumpet; Sonny Clark, piano; Doug Watkins, bass; Art Blakey, drums, and it was recorded on March 16, 1958. That was the congregation on "Star Eyes"; these various groups Tina assembled consist of the very best jazz musicians of that time between 58 and 61. This compilation of records contains 4 well recorded LP's and two booklets. Rok, while this compilation isn't available on CD, "Star Eyes" is available on "Tina Brooks - Minor Move" CD. Enjoy the music. |
Learsfool, great comments and we have no fundamental disagreement. I love the Picasso/Stravinsky comment; perfect! Don't mean to go round in circles re Wynton; no question that he is an amazing musician. I think the difference of opinion is really a question of degree and where one personally draws the line crossing over to greatness. Again, time will tell if, fifty or one hundred years from now, jazz lovers will buy his recordings alongside those of Clifford and Miles; and if jazz students will be transcribing his solos. Which brings up an aspect of all this that is related to your other great comparison; Wynton/Strauss, and why I think we are drawing that line in different places. As you know (especially being a horn player), Strauss wrote not only some amazing horn parts, but some of the most beautiful, rapturous and almost impossibly gorgeous music. If ever I have a criticism of his music (especially when playing it) is that it is almost too much beauty. This is something that is difficult to put into words and is almost like eating two portions of some incredible dessert; incredible, but after a while you just have to put the fork down. No composer was better at prolonging a harmonic resolution. Because of this my favorite Strauss tends to be the shorter operas (Salome, Elektra) and his tone poems. Still, and in spite of all that beauty much of which, as you point out, is derivative I can hear just a few bars of even unfamiliar Strauss and know that it is Strauss; either because of the shape of the melodies or (usually) those wonderful chord voicings and the sudden and unexpected dissonances. Likewise, it is easy to know, after only a few bars of a solo, when it is Miles, or Morgan, or Hubbard playing; they all had clear and unique voices stylistically. I don't hear as much of that in Wynton's playing; but truth be told he can do a lot of things as a trumpet player that none of those other "greats" can even approach. He really is amazing. |
Something went wrong with my last post, this is "The Bombay Boogie", http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alFuRz6uDpI |
Hi Frogman - agree with you that Marsalis is more "derivative," though that is perhaps a little harsh. However, I would also say that he is one of the greatest jazz trumpeters ever. I guess this is what I meant by the Richard Strauss analogy. He ended up very conservative musically, but should this detract from his sheer ability as a composer? Should he be considered "lesser" because of this? I would say no. Same with Marsalis, for me. Just because he hasn't pushed the boundaries as much as some does not detract from his sheer ability and music making and personality and heart. Right there with you on Stravinsky. He is in my personal top five, right along with Mozart. I had forgotten about that comment of Rok's, LOL! Stravinsky was the Picasso of music, for sure - meaning he was a musical chameleon, could do anything in any style with ridiculous ease. Those two were very close friends as well. By the way Rok, I'm really not picking on you - I have been rightfully accused of the same sort of "attitude" on subjects I didn't know much about, so I kinda regret the attitude comment, but also kinda don't, as I see that which I complained about in myself as well. Attitude is not really the right word here anyway, I suppose, but I'm too tired to come up with a better right now. Peace. |
And BTW, that solo is a model of telling a story in a clear, logical, and concise way. Just a few bars, no excess, and gives a clear sense of direction; we KNOW he's going somewhere without knowing exactly where. It can stand on its own as a melody just as much as the melody of the song itself; and improvised on the spot. How do great jazz players do that?! That's art! And you know what? Does the great Phil Woods shun a pop tune by this young pop artist? No, the genre doesn't matter to a great musician, he recognizes a good tune with a good chord progression and is able to bring his best game even if outside his home turf. Gotta love it! |
O-10, very good advise, and I do accept Rok as he is; that is why I am still here and continue to interact with him. I would only add that the same should apply to all. Rok, "retractions" cannot be demanded. I am not sure what exactly you want me to detract from my "first paragraph"; although I realize some of what I wrote is of a personal nature. Now, and maybe this will give you some insight into (as O-10 said) "who I am", and why your tone (often sarcastic), your rants , belligerence, and your sometimes insulting comments (like the ones directed at Acman3) set a certain tone in these discussions. Additionally, we are discussing subjects that are not simply "fun" (as you once said). I take these subjects very seriously and comments that you have made are every bit as much of a personal nature for me; the reasons why should be obvious. From my vantage point you don't own the comments that you make and are unwilling to see why, in the context of a discussion, saying something like "As usual the Frogman missed the boat" (just one that comes to mind) might, just might, cause ill will. Don't get me wrong, I don't need you approval on music matters; but it should be obvious why some of this can rub someone the wrong way. The truth is that you have a history of creating ill will on many of this forum's threads; not because "there are a lot of bullies out there", but because you don't practice what you preach: "words matter". So, I would encourage to think about your "style" a bit more; or at least be a little more conscious of how it affects those around you. Or not. As before I am willing to move on and go about the business of sharing and talking music; hopefully in a respectful way, disagreements and all. I don't expect, and certainly am not asking, you to change anything; we are all big boys. However, anyone who insists on simply ranting without much editorializing needs to be prepared for a reaction that may not be what one's liking. Peace. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xV8HT0Xb6q0 Without a doubt, one of the greatest saxophone solos on a mainstream-pop hit record. By no one other than the great Phil Woods; even if he is "fat" as Rok is quick to point out to us :-) |
Acman3, try this music for size, and tell me what you think; it's guaranteed to pump your woofers. Lets walk on the wild side, and do the Bombay boogie. [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vE2lYOzqYE>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnrH-7URvpc&list=PLB51B9F03730BB557[\url] Lets walk on the wild side, and do the Bombay boogie. [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vE2lYOzqYE Enjoy the music. |
Recent Listens: Ron Carter & Jim Hall -- TELEPHONE Jimmy Smith -- BACK TO THE CHICKEN SHACK Wynton Marsalis -- THE SPIRITUAL SIDE OF WYNTON MARSALIS Freddie Hubbard -- READY FOR FREDDIE Got Pleasure and Solace from them all. Carter and Hall was the surprise. Didn't think that combination of instruments in duet would work. It did! Cheers |
Great post Learsfool. Except for your comments about my attitude, of course. But who is perfect among us? If you don't know what to say or do, the Lord will always show the way., While watching the tennis matches last night, I was glancing thru the lastest copy of Gramophone. They have an ongoing article where prominent people in the Arts talk about their experiences with music and list music they could not live without. This man is the director of a Museum in Oxford, England. His opening paragraph was this: " In the matter of music, I am a true amateur. I love music, and it is in both the foreground and background of much of my life, but I do not read it(something I have always imagined for my retirement) or play an instrument (ditto). I simply get great pleasure and solace from music, " Well said, and applies to the vast majority of music lovers. Btw, the music he could not live without was: MAHLER: 'Das Lied von der Erde' Vienna / Bruno Walter One of my earliest classical purchases, but by Berlin / Giulini Cheers Frogman, where is the retraction? |
Acman3, you are an "Audiophile", this hobby is an important part of your life, and the music being discussed is also important to you. This might be the only thread where people who like the same music as you, are discussing it. When you go to the record store, who do you go there to please? Eliminate the negative, and accentuate the positive. Enjoy the music. |
A quick follow up to my comments re Wynton's jazz playing, albeit a very personal one subject to one's interpretation and usage of words: he often causes me to think (feel): WOW! Seldom, to say: AAH! (as in: aah! I get it, I hear what you're trying to say). However, when he speaks, and as Learsfool points out. and Rok has been saying, there is probably no better teacher. That does a great deal for the preservation of the art form, and to that extent I will concede, does a lot to promote the evolution of jazz. But, again, as a stylist, he is very derivative; unlike Miles, Shaw, Clifford, Morgan, and other greats. Those are the players that make me want to listen to their stories. But, man, can Wynton play the trumpet; amazing! |
Learsfool, thank you for you comments. I completely agree with everything you have said, and I don't think my comments said otherwise. Remember we were not talking about what Wynton "does for jazz"; I made my feelings clear calling him a great embassador for it, and I certainly made them clear re his trumpet playing skills ("he sounds fabulous"). Although, I would still argue that he has not added much to the evolution of jazz trumpet playing; stylistically, and the opinion of the overwhelming majority of jazz trumpeters I know. The discussion was a simple one, and the comments just as: who would we prefer to listen to? And why? And I also made it clear that he is "definitely worth listening to". On wether he is one of the greatest jazz trumpet players that has ever lived; which (going back to the discussion) is, ultimately, what would make ME choose to pull out one of his records instead of others. If that is what you are saying, I would have to respectfully disagree. As a trumpet player, he is a phenom. And, btw, it is also the majority opinion within the Jazz trumpet playing circles that I know. Still, I think you would agree the subject of Wynton was not the big-picture being discussed, but finding "the good in any genre". As an interested individual, I would much rather have Rok be able to appreciate the folly in his comment that Stravinsky ("20th century classical") is not worthy compared to Mozart (I am paraphrasing) "PERIOD", than my views about Wynton. Thanks as always for the excellent comments and contributions. |
Hello Rok and Frogman - I have been away from this board again for a few days, and just read your recent exchanges with great interest, especially since they concern one of my favorite jazz artists, Wynton. As a fellow professional musician, I agree with all of what Frogman says about Rok's attitude, etc. A long post I made on the subject (imploring someone who loves music so much to please learn more about it) a few weeks ago now was completely ignored, which was a very depressing experience for me. I just don't get how someone who is so passionate about music is so resistant to learning more about it. As Frogman says, Rok, the music will wash over you that much more, and your enjoyment of it will vastly increase if you take the time and effort to learn more about it. However, on the subject of Wynton, while I must say right up front that Frogman has infinitely more authority on jazz than I - I do not pretend to have any knowledge/experience on the same level as he does, as he is truly an artist in both the classical and jazz worlds, and I am only in the classical world professionally - as a listener, I would still respectfully disagree with him on Wynton, and I would go so far as to say that I agree with Rok's comment that Wynton is doing more for jazz than anyone else right now, and it's not even close. I fully understand all of Frogman's "museum" comments (though I would argue that this is very important and necessary work), and I understand that you do not feel that he is as emotional as some other performers. There are many who agree with you on that. Frankly, this has always baffled me and many other fellow musicians, especially other brass players. There is certainly no question that he is a far better trumpet player than any other in the jazz world from a technical standpoint, but that is not really what we are talking about here, I hasten to add. We are talking about musical expression, and Wynton's musical expression is not always overt - it is often of a more subtle, introverted nature. For me this does not make it not as expressive - in fact, one could argue that it is more personal, in a way. It demands more focus and thought from the listener, and I do not consider this a bad thing. He is an experimenter, and not all of his experiments work. I happen to think his interpretations of standards are very relevant, and often as good or better than people before him, and I like much of his original experiments as well. My point, however, is not to argue with you, I know where you are coming from and respect your opinion, but to point out that the subject is arguable and is argued among musicians (your post reads like it implies otherwise). I liken him to Alfred Brendel in the classical piano world, another one of my personal favorites who nevertheless is very polarizing, and is often criticized in many of the same ways Wynton is. I might argue that Wynton is sort of the Richard Strauss of the jazz world, which I can't believe I just typed, but I'll let it stand. I think Frogman will know what I mean by it. I'm too tired, but... The main reason I would argue that Wynton is doing more for jazz than anyone, though, has to do with his teaching ability, whatever our disagreement on his actual playing. I just caught an episode of that show where he is teaching some ARTS competition winners, and he is simply amazing at what he brings out of them, teaching them to listen to each other and play off each other, and give each other what is needed in the moment, never intruding his own opinions/style on them, but teaching them to be themselves, in the way only the best teachers know how to do - he was born to teach. It is guys like him that will keep jazz alive, in every sense of the word. I have very rarely seen something equally good in the classical world as far as a clinic in how to play and make music together with others, whatever you think of the actual ideas being explored at the time. It was a very inspiring program, and the brief clips from the concert were great. Brendel is the same way, by the way - an absolutely amazing and inspiring teacher. OK, I'll go to bed now. Sorry for the rambling late night randomness of some of this. Frogman is definitely a superior writer in these here forums. I'm out for now. |
We had been going back and forth about Fusion and Wynton, so this unwashed brain thought, HEY, with the internet and youtube, we can hear them both, almost side by side, and then we can each say which we liked best. And why? This is not a test, just fun. I thought others might want to weigh in. BTW, You expounded on all the faults of Wynton, but failed to enlighten us on the brilliance of Weather Report. Slight oversight I'm sure. I was hoping our OP and Acman3 and Learsfool would state their preferences. But, no guts no glory. The first paragraph of your post falls under what the shrinks call 'Projection'. Unless you can provide some when, where and who, I expect a retraction. ***** why, at the end of the day, I would much rather listen to others (Louis, Warren Vache) playing that style of music:****** OK. I have no problem with your personal taste or preferences. ****I will not repeat everything that I tried to share before about the pointlessness of that kind of comparison. Nonetheless, some comments about Wynton:**** Well, how about some comments about Weather Report!! ***Wynton sounds fabulous; beautiful warm trumpet sound, nice rhythmic feel, and excellent command of the vocabulary of that kind of jazz. Notice I said "sounds"; that is key.***** I agree with your description. Well, 'sound' is the reason for attending concerts. That's what people come to hear, the sounds. *****Notice how little silence there is in his solo; he has to fill up very beat, and there is a sense that he doesn't know quite know to end his solo; when to stop (sound familiar? :-)***** I have read a billion reviews in my day. From Stereo Review, All Music Guide, Penguim, Gramophone, Audio Critic, BBC Music, Jazz Times, Downbeat, Internet sites like Amazon and every thing else I can get my hands on, some now defunct. And I have NEVER, NEVER, NEVER read where a player did not know how to end a solo. Maybe they blew a little long (coltrane) but this is a first! And I wonder how many of the paying members of that audience left the hall saying, "he didn't seem to know how to end his solos" or "he didn't connect his dots very well"!! These things are important to YOU. The sound is important to most other people. And after all, it's HIS solo! Several months ago, I was reading the reviews on Amazon of a piece of Music Composed by LvB, and played by Berlin / Karajan. One of his Symphonies I think. Everyone ranting and raving. Five stars everywhere. The greatest thing since sliced bread. EXCEPT, one reviewer. He said the recorded sound was great, the playing was great, BUT, "I am docking it one star, because I don't think Karajan really understands Beethoven"!!!! WTF!! I immediately looked at his name, thinking Furtwangler had arisen. Nope, just Joe Blow from Baltimore. That is arrogance! Disagreeing with you, is not. Cheers |
Rok, you are without a doubt (allowing for the vagaries of the printed word composed on line, of course) one of the most arrogant individuals that I have ever come across. Time and time again I show you the respect that you don't show others, by praising your passion for music while at the same time encouraging you ( and showing you how) to expand your horizons. You lash out, you insult and you posture about a subject about which you have, in the scheme of things, very limited and pedestrian knowledge and understanding; with nary even and occasional "hmmm, I don't quite see it that way, but let me think about it". One would think that offered the opinions of someone who has played music since age five, has spent years studying every aspect of it and has done nothing else professionally for forty years that a person would do at least that. Incredibly, you seem unaware of the path that you leave behind you at every turn, not just in this thread; while continuing to blame everyone except yourself for the garbage left behind. As far as this thread goes, you are, and have been looking at the proverbial gift horse in the face. Unfortunately, your admitted "blocks" apparently go well beyond the subjects of "fusion" and music in general. But, alas, musicians are born-teachers; psychologist is above my pay-grade, in spite of what O-10 may think :-) I may be "incorrigible" by your definition of the word, but man, you are out of your league and don't know it; or just like to keep stirring the pot (Mariah Carrey, Boys2men, seriously?) Now the Wynton clip: "like it better than the WR". I am tempted to say: "You're kidding, right?" Obviously, the last several posts have been a complete waste of time; too bad, for you, really. I will not repeat everything that I tried to share before about the pointlessness of that kind of comparison. Nonetheless, some comments about Wynton: Wynton sounds fabulous; beautiful warm trumpet sound, nice rhythmic feel, and excellent command of the vocabulary of that kind of jazz. Notice I said "sounds"; that is key. Now, some insight about (to quote you) "the finer points of jazz" that may elude the "unwashed masses", and why, at the end of the day, I would much rather listen to others (Louis, Warren Vache) playing that style of music: Notice how he plays phrases that are not tied together in a way that "tells a story from beginning to end", he doesn't have a "vision" (O-10) of the whole of his improvised composition. He says this, then this, then that. The great players always gave the listener a sense of the big picture of what they were saying; not in spurts. And when they did play "in spurts" they connected it all with the right SILENCE (this was one of miles' calling cards). Notice how little silence there is in his solo; he has to fill up very beat, and there is a sense that he doesn't know quite know to end his solo; when to stop (sound familiar? :-). Good command of vocabulary does not a great author make. |
I have no idea what a comparison between Weather Report and Wynton Marsalis' retro-jazz demonstrates or proves; but, anyway, re the notion that only music from the 50's and 60's painting a picture: One of the great things about Wynton's LCO is some of the great individual talent in the band. One of the stars of the band is Ted Nash; one of the most talented individuals that I have had the pleasure of knowing and working with. This is his music; and it does precisely the above: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wftP__VvXig |
O-10: You are spot on about it painting a picture. I have the album by the Ray Bryant trio entitled 'Slow Freight', but I cannot find it on CD. I do have Ray on a solo piano CD etitled 'Somewhere in France'. Slow freight is on this CD, but just solo piano. I think this was the first Jazz LP I ever purchased. I still remember the cover art. Nice memory. Cheers |
Aargh! I can try Spanish, but I don't think it would matter. Sorry for the sarcasm, but I don't understand what is unclear about what I am saying. I did not say that we cannot judge art at a time other than the era when it was created. I said that we cannot remove the historical context or backdrop of the era during which it was created when judging it at a later time and that it is that backdrop that allows a superior example of that art. And of course the great artists represented their respective eras; that's the whole point, they always do. If we understand what was going in historically, socially and in other respects of life in a particular era, THEN we can judge wether the artist is doing a good job of reflecting that or not. That is, assuming we understand some basic things about music in general; if we are able to appreciate why Santana is nothing like Headhunters. It is a different social and political climate today, it is inspiring a different message. Anyway, look, you fight the message every step of the way, especially for someone who "considers himself the least informed on this thread". Or was that sarcasm or lip-service? if you still have to ask: ****why pick up Fusion, when Hubbard and Mingus are sitting on the same shelf. Makes sense based on my premise!**** then you really don't understand MY premise. A premise that, as much as I don't like to pull the "I am a musician" card, is shared by the vast majority of musicians; perhaps that may have some significance for you. So, I have tried every which way to explain that the point is that there are good examples of every genre; just as there are bad in every genre. If you really can't understand why I may want to, on any given day, listen to a good example of "fusion" as opposed to Mingus; or why regurgitated backwards-looking jazz may not be as appealing as Mingus on any given day then I don't think there is anywhere further to go with this discussion; for now.... |
******I remember a comment that you made early on in this thread that has always stuck with me; something to the effect that somehow it was inconceivable that someone with a different opinion from yours might "have some insight into music that you don't******* I honestly do not remember ever saying this. Does not seem to be something I would say, because it does not make sense to me now. You may have me confused with some Audiophile. :) In the early days there were some of them on this thread.. But send it if you have it. I would love to see the context. Cheers |