Jazz for aficionados

Ok,

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rCp3qGzkxig

Today's Listen:

Jimmy Smith & Wes Montgomery -- JIMMY & WES THE DYNAMIC DUO

I thought this would be a small group effort, but it turned out to be a big band thingy. Conducted by Oliver Nelson with Jimmy and Wes dueling out front.

A lot of good ones. Night Train, Road Song, Down by the Riverside, baby it's Cold Outside, etc... They all cook. The big band is only there when needed. They do not intrude on Jimmy and Wes as they push each other.

On this CD, both of these guys, are as good as I have ever heard them. They really do feed off each other. With arrangements by Nelson and personnel of the caliber of Clark Terry and Melba Liston, in the band, what's not to like.

Great Stuff.

Cheers

The Frogman / Learsfool:

Thanks for the input on Beethoven. After thinking about it, and I do think sometimes, since I have many 9th's on LP / CD, then the video is the thing I am most interested in. I want to SEE all this magic, that I have been listening to for so long. So video quality and camera work are most important.

The Christian Thielemann performance seems interesting.

The Ideal, would be Bohm-Viener-Domingo-Norman-Fassbaender, but I have not found a DVD of that one yet.
I do have Karajan-Berlin-1963-SACD. I thought that would be the ultimate, or at least the ultimate Karajan.

Thanks.
Now let us quickly return to Jazz, before the OP notices!

Cheers

I have not heard (seen) the Abbado/Berlin, but I have not heard anything by Abbado that I have not liked; he is brilliant.

Two others to consider if the music is of top priority: Karajan/Berlin. There is something about Karajan's treatment of Beethoven that strikes a chord with me. I know some feel that it is stark with too much emphasis on precision; still, it somehow rings true for me. The sound is very good, the video less so with too much emphasis on the conductor. I know I am contradicting myself, given Bernstein's drama and theatricality, but my favorite and the one I own is Bernstein's 1989 performance celebrating the fall of the Berlin Wall. He conducted an orchestra comprised of members of orchestras from around the world and famously substituted the word " Freude" (Joy) with "Freiheit" (Freedom) in the chorale. Normally this kind of thing would piss off the purist in me, but the feeling of the importance and symbolism of the moment is palpable in this performance. I think it is the one to own. Both sound and video are very good. But not as good as what I heard/saw at my neighbor's place when he invited me over to check out his new 5.1 HT setup a few weeks ago. The audio and video on this Bluray release is spectacular, the music (interpretation) of this Christian Thielemann/Vienna DVD does not compare to either the Karajan or Bernstein with tempos that are too fast IMO. I'll take good sound with great music over great sound with good music any day.

Rok, this is as close as I can come.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAQKFNrL-o0

Enjoy the music.

Don't know about first rate audio and video, but a first rate performance is Claudio Abbado's with the Berlin Philharmonic. They did the whole Beethoven cycle on DVD about 10 years ago now. A very good set.

Can anyone recommend a " DVD " of Beethoven's 9th? A performance you have seen on a TV and has first rate audio and video.

Thanks

Cheers

Today's Listen:

Marcus Roberts -- ALONE WITH THREE GIANTS

Marcus Roberts Plays Solo Piano. The Three Giants are, Ellington, Monk and Jelly Roll Morton. All tunes are by these great players.

All 15 tunes are well known standards. Only three by Morton. :( The Ellington and Monk tunes are among their best. No filler here.

Roberts is out of New Orleans and it shows. Players from New Orleans seem to have a unique knowledge and feel for the music. Exquisite piano playing!!

The surprise to me was jelly Roll Morton's 'Crave'. Outstanding tune and playing. In this tune you can hear the shape of the music to come. Not sure if it was Roberts or Morton, but it gets a little Monk-ish! Great song!.

Excellent recording. No Faults. Solo piano can get tedious sometimes, but not here. This music will grab and hold you throughout.

I have notice that the closer we get to the source, New Orleans, the more songs with 'blues' in the title. A little food for thought, for my modernist / Internationalist friends, who never miss a chance to throw The Blues under the bus. :)

As a bonus to a certain Aficionado, the CD includes Monk's 'Pannonica". :)

Cheers

Hi O-10 - I have once again missed a bunch of this thread - I have an album of Willie Ruff's that is very bizarre - he is playing hymn tunes pretty much by himself, some with an organ, in a very boomy church. Could you direct me to which link you are speaking of? I would definitely be interested to hear it!

Rok, there is no way under the Sun that I'll comment on that page.

Enjoy the music.

O-10:

As far as working people:

Back in the day Coleman Hawkins was rehearsing with Monk's group. Hawkins was complaining about the difficulty of the part he had to play in the tune. Monk said,"you supposed to be a saxophone player, ain't ya??? ahhahahahaha priceless.

Allow me to paraphrase: You and The Frogman are supposed to be Aficionados, ain't ya?

You should know all this stuff off the top of your head.

O-10: Page 93. What's up with that????

Cheers

In the book, Charlie Mariano's wish was:

"I wish I had Bird's heart and technique. But who needs the technique? If I had Bird's heart, that would be enough."

Cheers

Frogman, for a minute I actually thought that was Trane, Elvin Jones really made it sound convincing; he was with Trane when I saw them both. I'll have to get that.

Welcome, Justin. Ah, Charlie Mariano! One of my very favorite alto players. Here he is on one of my very favorite records:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bDJ75vcmVKY&feature=plpp&p=ALGLx1orRGw4W8XHYz9KFo_OtzUPthUNch

Rok, you really know how to make a guy work; first, out of all the people in that book, you pick somebody that I've never heard of, and ask me if he's related to somebody else that I've never heard of. The Ali Jackson in the book, was "senior" while his son was the drummer with Dee Dee Bridgewater, now I need a break; it's good Frogman answered the other question because it would take me a couple days to figure that one out.

Enjoy the music.

****Is it that, they can't get what's in their head to come out of the instrument****

Exactly. They don't feel they have the technical mastery of their instrument (yet) to express the musical concepts that they "hear" in their heads; to translate them from the abstract to the concrete. These guys (most musicians) were/are always striving to grow as instrumentalists; it's a never ending process. That's the part of music and musicianship (the "nuts and bolts") that is seldom understood by the public. "Reputable" professions such as doctor, lawyer, etc. are known to require an incredible amount of study and preparation for many years; not only does it require even more than that to be an accomplished musician, it doesn't ever stop.

O-10:

Page 93. WTF? :) Also, on page 96 there is an entry from an 'Ali Jackson'. There is player on my Dee Dee Bridgewater CD 'Live At Yoshi's' named Ali Jackson(d). I wonder if they are kin.

What do they mean when they say "I wish I could play the music in my head"? Is it that, they can't get what's in their head to come out of the instrument, or is it that, what's in their head would not be accepted in that current Jazz enviroment?

After reading a lot of the comments, it has occurred to me that most of these guys were still trying to 'make it' in Jazz. After I understood that, a lot of the Wishes were more understandable.

It appears as if Monk LIVED at the cathouse! Platonically of course! :)

In the same shipment I also received a CD by Cannonball Adderley titled, 'PHENIX' I have never seen or heard this Cannonball! His 'Bitches Brew'???? Will report soon.

Cheers

Frog, Rok, Orpheus, et al - this is by far the most enjoyable thread I've followed on the Gon. I appreciate all your recommendations AND your banter! Great stuff.

Just picked up 4 Roland Kirk LPs plus a Charlie Mariano (in London no less - I consider this an epic shopping day!). They will be cleaned and spun on Saturday morning. Can't wait!

Keep it going, y'all...

Justin

Learsfool, I'm dying to hear your comments on Willie Ruff and Dwike Mitchell; especially the French horn part.

Enjoy the music.

Rok, Nica liked to take pictures when her subjects were sound asleep, and they slept wherever they dozed off; the couch, a chair, even the floor. This was after a late night gig, and her pad was where they came to enjoy the camaraderie of other musicians. She had cats everywhere, and Monk hated cats but he never told Nica. On about page 46, there are two pictures of Monk, sound asleep with a cat sleeping on him. Although these pictures were taken at different times (different clothes) the same cat is sleeping on him. That cat had claimed Monk as his property whether Monk knew it or not.

There's a good picture of a young Lee Morgan, sound asleep. I find it hard to believe someone so young, was a giant among giants. I can only imagine what he would have accomplished, had he lived longer. That picture makes me realize that I always assumed he was much older, without even thinking about it.

Now when you listen to that compilation of the best decade in jazz, you can visualize the musicians at the same time.

Enjoy the music.

Acman3:

Very nice stuff. Interesting both musically and historically. Let's just pray that his technique on horn is up to par. I would hate to see him suffer the wrath of Learsfool!

http://www.youtube.com/listen?v=A4dfV3CPnt0 Cheers

Happy Holidays!

Cheers

Audiogon member Lewm, once shared with me the Mitchell-Ruff Duo.

http://www.youtube.com/listen?v=ZEuO1Eris0E

http://www.youtube.com/listen?v=A4dfV3CPnt0

Thank you all for sharing great Jazz with me.

O-10

Back At'ya!!

Cheers

And Happy Thanksgiving to you too!

O-10:

Got the 'Three Wishes' book yesterday. This is much more than I expected. This is really an eye opener for me.

The comments, the majority of them, seem to open and honest. And the photos are priceless! The Baroness was not much of a photographer and/or did not take care of the photos. But, in a way, that adds to the book. The people and their lives were not picture perfect either.

So far, the biggerst surprise is how often they wished they could play better. Could play what was in their head. Master their instrument. Wished Jazz was respected.

You cannot help but admire these guys. And nobody seemed to be getting rich. At least judging by the photos. In fact money/jobs was often mentioned.

I think this is a gem. Best book on Jazz / players I have so far. Thanks. Will have more to say as I read it.

Cheers

HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO ALL!

Rok, this is the best compilation I've ever acquired, although I got a headache from reading about it; consequently, I'm doing more listening and less reading.

On CD 2, Kenny Dorham's "Afrodesia" was new to me. He failed to get the recognition he deserved. After checking the sidemen, I realized why this tune was so fantastic. Carlos "Potato" Valdes is someone I had forgotten about. All the other sidemen are stars in their own right.

While all the cuts on this CD are outstanding, "The Champ" by Jimmy Smith is another tune that caught my attention, and it was one of the few without well known sidemen.

Although I wasn't too impressed with the tune Carmen sang, I really liked the sound of her voice; since that was in 56, I'm going to get everything she recorded in that year.

Enjoy the music.

O-10:

Just listened again to CD1 of the box set this morning. Speaking of sidemen? On these sets the sidemen are as accomplished as the leaders. It's like a who's who of Jazz.

The music on this disc seems to have less of an edge or attitude than that which would soon follow. I was surprised that Parker sounded so 'normal'? :)

I just love the fact that a very nice informative discussion of each number is included. Listing the members of the group and the LP the tune is taken from. This is a very good buy.

The only thing I don't like is that some of the pages of the booklet are difficult to read due to the background colors of some of the pages. They never seem to consider us old timers, or at least consider our eyes.

I noticed that Django/nuages, was followed by MJQ/Django. Cute. I also liked that the tunes were short. Except for Miles of course. His 'Walkin' was 5 times longer than the average tune. But, he be Miles!

Cheers

Interesting conversation going on since I have looked in - I want to highlight some things that Frogman has said, starting with he is absolutely correct to say that one's reaction to music is subjective. There are many things about music that are not subjective. An analogy might be to food - many people love to eat things that aren't actually very good, and defend it by saying that taste is subjective.

This has to do also with this comment of Frogman's: "THAT, my friend, is why it's not possible to "know too much"; and why knowing a little is a dangerous thing. It's fine to always fall back on the comfort of "subjectivity", but in the broad scheme there is, in fact, a nut-and -bolts way judging any music's merit."

And also this: "Ignorance may be bliss, but it certainly does not lead to insight. Additionally, there is no glory in ignorance and knowledge does not in any way detract from the emotional appreciation of the music. That is a mistake that those content to remain "ignorant" of the nuts and bolts routinely make; that ignoring the facts somehow leads to a better emotional connection with the music. It is precisely the opposite; it leads to a better appreciation. The irony here is that the players that we are talking about, themselves, were/are so steeped in the nuts and bolts of the music and discussions about what made a particular player great or not, that it makes any of our "discussions" seem sophomoric. Listeners tend to over-romanticize the process of music making (including jazz) as a spiritual "calling of the muse". Only after a very deep understanding of the nuts and bolts can a creative artist find his voice; wether the nuts and bolts was learned in a music school or the jam session. Why should it be any different for the listener?"

Rok stated a little later that " I should know that improvisation is taking place, without having to be an expert on nuts and bolts."

While this statement is actually true, nevertheless the fact that you were not able to tell quite frankly says more about your listening ability/general musical knowledge than it does about the performer and/or writer of what you are listening to. A very small amount of work would quickly remedy this, you just have to put in the effort, and if you do, the rewards in understanding and appreciation of the music you love are far greater than the small effort required. I'm not saying you need a theory degree or anything, you just need to learn to listen a little more attentively than you think you are (talking about how to do this will have to wait). Please do not take this personally, it is not at all meant that way - it's late and I am tired, and I tend to come off with a different tone than I intend, and I apologize for that.

Hi guys - sorry, been very busy. Now have a few days off, but will be going to visit my folks for Thanksgiving, so will probably be off the board again.

Orpheus - yes, as I believe Rok said, those are mellophones. By the way, the term Stan Kenton uses in that video is incorrect, he calls them something weird like mellophoniums. Anyway, they are basically large trumpets that have a mellower sound, closer to my instrument in tone quality. Larger than the fluglehorn, which you may be more familiar with, as that is used much more in jazz than the mellophones were, and the sound of a flugle horn is closer to the trumpet sound than the mellophone is. In fact, I think Stan Kenton's band was the only one that used mellophones on anything like a regular basis. They are most commonly used in marching bands. The trumpet players in that video were playing them, however in many marching bands, an extension is put into the lead pipe of the instrument so that a French horn mouthpiece can fit, and then horn players play them. They are truly awful instruments, with no redeeming qualities whatsoever. In recent years, an instrument called the marching French horn has been invented to replace mellophones, so they are not used much at all anymore. They were quite common, though, nothing unusual about them, in fact I think it is unusual that you haven't ever seen one - you probably have in marching bands without realizing it.

In the two years I spent in a high school marching band before I escaped to an arts academy, I had to play the mellophone. Miserable experience. I have played some Stan Kenton charts that had mellophone parts in pops concerts, though we played them on our regular horns. They were screaming high, so were not very pleasant to play. Decent enough charts. That was a very popular band, guys like Maynard Ferguson and other famous trumpet players came out of it. Nothing particularly interesting about it from a purely musical standpoint, frankly, but they did have some good tunes.

O-10:

Both of the Stan Kenton tunes were disappointments. Mainly the sound quality and the arrangements.

We had Mellow-phones in our marching band, but they looked sort of like French horns.

I LOVE Malaguena. I wore out a few '101 Strings' LPs playing that tune.

I also just LOVE Drum and Bugle Corps. Used to be televised down here. Some of the top units used to stop here and practice at the locl High School.

Here is the best of Both worlds!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PECUpJuUeAQ

Cheers

Acman3:

Now, I have experienced two of the worst musical moments in my life!!

Cheers

Frogman, you're right in regard to musicians earning a good living, even those who aren't famous but work steady locally; while those with self destructive traits can't help themselves and become poverty stricken.

Enjoy the music.

And who could pass on this masterpiece….

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-NwsWuARqo

It's actually a pretty funny record. I was a Brave Combo fan and have this for very special occasions.

Rok, you made me think of one of the worst musical moments in my life. Please don't do it anymore.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQylt3TVFrI

The Frogman:

******Our main area of disagreement is in the absolutism of a comment that you have made several times to the effect that the "public decides who is great". If that were true then how do you explain the popularity of so much music that you, yourself, consider not worthy of respect; all the music's with a prefix?*******

Because more members of the public like it, than don't like it. Or, at least, enough buy it to make it PROFITABLE. I am just one member of the public.

*****there is no glory in ignorance and knowledge does not in any way detract from the emotional appreciation of the music. That is a mistake that those content to remain "ignorant" of the nuts and bolts routinely make; that ignoring the facts somehow leads to a better emotional connection with the music.******

I agree. But it's not my point. Ignorance has nothing to do with it. Neither does knowledge. Music either makes a connection with the listener, or it does not. You can't say, this player's nuts and bolts are better, therefore, you should like his music better. Or that it will/should sell better. It just don't work that way.

******If you understood a little more about the nuts and bolts it would be perfectly clear to you that they are improvising. How on earth would that be a negative? You may still not like the music but it would at least bring you one step closer to acknowledging that it is jazz.*****

This may be true. But I should know that improvisation is taking place, without having to be an expert on nuts and bolts. But, this would not even apply to Goodman or James. Their music was not that complex. David Murray maybe. And I see he has changed his ways lately. :)

*****And BTW, the great jazz players would be the first to admit that jazz really is like a "6 lane highway"; it ALL goes into the stew pot.******

Jazz players are the most political correct people on the planet. They are never critical of anything or anybody. At least not on the record. They all talk that stew pot stuff. The people that ask the questions, KNOW what the answer will be.

Another term for 'The Public' could be, 'The Bottom Line'! As in the bottom line of the financial ledger. It's two different ways of saying the same thing.

The 'Public' or the 'Market Place' decides. Nuts and bolt notwithstanding!

Remember VHS vs Beta-Max?? Same principal.

I think you are looking at this from the perspective of a professional musician. Everything you say about music and Jazz, is absolutely true. I never doubt any of it. Who am I to doubt a pro? It's just, that what you are saying, does not survive contact, with the unwashed, ignorant masses. You know, the folks that buy the LPs, CDs, and tickets. You are talking art, I'm talking business. We are both right.

I am currently 'reviewing' my lastest purchase, 'Tiny Tim Plays Monk". Lord, Lord. I am bloodied, but unbowed!!
Keep the faith baby!

Cheers

First, let me apologize for misspelling "Learsfool", some days I misspell my own name.

Rok, my appreciation for these jams on "The 100 Best Tunes Of The 1950's" has grown tenfold since I first heard them. Our discussions about the very musicians we're listening to has heightened my awareness of their individual contributions to the whole of jazz.

Before, I didn't pay much attention to sidemen, but now I'm aware of each individual sideman and what he's contributing to the tune. Jackie McClean was chosen a lot as a sideman, and so was Pepper Adams; they both sound better as side men, than on their own albums that I have in my collection.

Ray Charles is one hell of jazz pianist, but we both knew that. "Milestones" was certainly ground breaking with his introduction of "modal jazz"; while I still don't quite know what that is, I can distinctly remember the first time I heard this tune; it struck me as not only being different, but I thought each individual sideman was as outstanding as Miles. His ability to select the very best sidemen for "his" music is one that he retained until the end.

This wont be my last post on "The 100 Best Tunes of The 1950's".

Enjoy the music.

Rok, we really have NO substantive disagreement, and I admire your passion for the music. Our main area of disagreement is in the absolutism of a comment that you have made several times to the effect that the "public decides who is great". If that were true then how do you explain the popularity of so much music that you, yourself, consider not worthy of respect; all the music's with a prefix? Ignorance may be bliss, but it certainly does not lead to insight. Additionally, there is no glory in ignorance and knowledge does not in any way detract from the emotional appreciation of the music. That is a mistake that those content to remain "ignorant" of the nuts and bolts routinely make; that ignoring the facts somehow leads to a better emotional connection with the music. It is precisely the opposite; it leads to a better appreciation. The irony here is that the players that we are talking about, themselves, were/are so steeped in the nuts and bolts of the music and discussions about what made a particular player great or not, that it makes any of our "discussions" seem sophomoric. Listeners tend to over-romanticize the process of music making (including jazz) as a spiritual "calling of the muse". Only after a very deep understanding of the nuts and bolts can a creative artist find his voice; wether the nuts and bolts was learned in a music school or the jam session. Why should it be any different for the listener?

I will give you a concrete example:

****I am not sure how much improvising they actually did****

If you understood a little more about the nuts and bolts it would be perfectly clear to you that they are improvising. How on earth would that be a negative? You may still not like the music but it would at least bring you one step closer to acknowledging that it is jazz. It may still not fit your definition of jazz, but remember it is only YOUR definition. And BTW, the great jazz players would be the first to admit that jazz really is like a "6 lane highway"; it ALL goes into the stew pot.

****Rok, I can feel that this is going down a treacherous road (for an Internet discussion).*****

Won't happen. I no longer do treacherous roads. I now rely on my irresistible logic!!

******Exactly!! The notion that a player like Lytle deserves to be mentioned more than Goodman is, with all due respect, somewhat absurd.*******

That would be absurd, but, that is not what I said. We were talking of Lytle's clips, and our comments or thoughts on those clips. Goodman was a different thing altogether. Came up in your response to my 'review' of Goodman's CD. If Lytle was a baseball player, he would be a journeyman at best.

*****THAT, my friend, is why it's not possible to "know too much"; and why knowing a little is a dangerous thing. It's fine to always fall back on the comfort of "subjectivity", but in the broad scheme there is, in fact, a nut-and -bolts way judging any music's merit.*****

No one is falling back on anything. There may be a nuts and bolts way to judge music. I am sure they use this in all the major music schools. I am sure all the pros use this method to play and to judge their peers.. BUT, the PUBLIC / AUDIENCE decides who, and what is great. And all they, the public, has to know is, I like it, or, I don't like it. Exasperating, but true.

*****All this music was part of the melting pot, and part of the "continuum"; and it it certainly is "jazz".*****

This may be the root cause of all our 'discussions'. I think you see Jazz as 6 lane super highway running in both directions, with many exit and entry points. I see it as a path being hacked thru an almost impenetrable jungle. The newbies entering at the beginning, and the greats, up front doing the hacking. You are on the path or you are lost.

*****I could not have said it better myself.*****

Then we really have no disagreement.

As always, your posts are informative, spoken from a position of knowledge, and greatly appreciated.

Cheers

Leerfool, and Frogman, did you overlook the post on Stan Kenton; could you comment on the special brass horns especially, and his music in general.

Frogman, this is not an intellectual course in jazz. To make a long story short, in regard to many musician's music who play what's called jazz, "ain't got none, and don't wont none"

Enjoy the music.

Rok, I can feel that this is going down a treacherous road (for an Internet discussion).

****That would be easy to do. There are not that many players that 'must be' mentioned in a history or comprehensivbe discussion of Jazz. A small percentage.****

Exactly!! The notion that a player like Lytle deserves to be mentioned more than Goodman is, with all due respect, somewhat absurd.

****In fact, I am not sure they played Jazz at all. They all took solos, and displayed great skill on their instrument, but I am not sure that much 'improvisation' was going on.****

THAT, my friend, is why it's not possible to "know too much"; and why knowing a little is a dangerous thing. It's fine to always fall back on the comfort of "subjectivity", but in the broad scheme there is, in fact, a nut-and -bolts way judging any music's merit.

All this music was part of the melting pot, and part of the "continuum"; and it it certainly is "jazz".

****A lot of people were accepted as being things, that they were in fact, not!!****

I could not have said it better myself.

Regards.

O-10, thanks for the sentiment; the feeling is mutual.

While I completely agree with you that music is subjective (well, more accurately, one's reaction to music is subjective) I don't know on what you base the comment that jazz is more subjective than any other form of music or that a reaction to a particular player's ability that differs from yours means that there is, necessarily, anything but subjectivity at play (pun intended). There is as much variety of opinion and disagreement about the merits of, say, classical music players and performances than there is of jazz. We all have a tendency to consider our preferred style of music unique, and while every genre clearly has many subjective stylistic (subjective) traits, at their core, all genres share similar values; not every aspect of music and performance is subjective. We have set a very high bar by discussing the very best players of this music and I simply didn't hear anything special in Lytle's playing on the two clips posted. So, to paraphrase you: "what I hear disagrees with what I read about Lytle, so the records go back".

Jazz players and income: Clearly Wynton is an exception. My comments were a reaction to your statement: "When an artist is popular and makes a good living, he can't be playing jazz". As we all know, Bird lived a troubled life and squandered much of his earnings on booze and drugs, but the truth is that "popular" jazz artists did and do make very good livings. Of course, there are many players who scrape by; but, they are not "popular"; and isn't that true of any profession? Louis Armstrong made a good living, so did Coltrane, Rollins, Miles, Shorter, and Benny Goodman. Speaking of Benny, there is so much great stuff by him, these clips also feature the great Lionel Hampton; NOT the world's greatest vibist :-). I would be glad to "enlighten":

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3ptPK7iNweI

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aeg1056UDck

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0U8a-s4bYfY

******* I don't understand how a truly comprehensive discussion on jazz can take place without substantial mention and discussion of players like Goodman, Artie Shaw, Harry James and others from that period.*****

That would be easy to do. There are not that many players that 'must be' mentioned in a history or comprehensivbe discussion of Jazz. A small percentage.

The Label, BLUE NOTE, for instance, is more important to Jazz than any of the people you mentioned. In fact, I am not sure they played Jazz at all. They all took solos, and displayed great skill on their instrument, but I am not sure that much 'improvisation' was going on.

*****The level of artistry, within that style, is fabulous; not to mention their contribution to paving the way for the more modern players.*********

Technically proficient? Without a doubt. But so was Maurice Andre, and any number of players in classical Orchestras. They just don't play Jazz.

To paraphrase a very popular bumper sticker down here in the Bible Belt:

No Blues, No Jazz
Know Blues, Know Jazz

Pretty much sums it up.

And Shaw's 'begin The Beguine' is one of my all time favorite tunes. All these guys made great music. Great Swing and big Band music.

In fact, I had heard a LOT of Harry James and Goodman, before I ever heard ANY Miles or Morgan or Hubbard et al. Maybe that's indicative of the problem. A lot of people were accepted as being things, that they were in fact, not!!

Cheers

Frogman, "I love Benny and that style of music in general. Personally, I don't understand how a truly comprehensive discussion on jazz can take place without substantial mention and discussion of players like Goodman, Artie Shaw, Harry James and others from that period. The level of artistry, within that style, is fabulous; not to mention their contribution to paving the way for the more modern players. I would like to see more of it on this thread."

Would you be so kind as to enlighten us, you have the floor.

Enjoy the music.

Frogman, as always, I appreciate your comments. All music is subjective, and jazz is more subjective than most genres of music. I approach music from a purely subjective point of view; while I read history, I listen to music; consequently, when what I read disagrees with what I hear, the book goes in the library, while the music goes in the record collection.

Johnny Lytle's "St. Louis Blues" comes on slow and easy, like that St. Louis woman with her diamond ring; and I know a lot about them. I believe Rok stated the case for Johnny Lytle quite eloquently.

Charlie Parker and the other giants of jazz that "Nica" supported made a lousy living. Although Wynton makes a fantastic salary, he's an exception.

While I'm quite aware of Benny Goodman, Harry James, and Artie Shaw; as close as my music collection will come is Stan Kenton. His big band is well represented in my collection, and his range of music is as wide as the Pacific Ocean. I know Rok remembers when he was in the Columbia Record Club, and we received those records we didn't order, but you could send them back; well Kenton's records didn't go back.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3EkI3ISz28

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TN9sp6ApX4o

Here are a couple of tunes by Stan, maybe Leersfool could enlighten us on the unusual brass horns.

Enjoy the music.

Johnny Lytle:
Dang!! The Frogman is a hard taskmaster.
Lytle is a 'soul-Jazz' player. The 'groove' is the thing. Almost like instrumental R&B. And, as you yourself have done in the past, to indicate a player's ability: He played with Armstrong, Lionel Hampton, Miles, Nancy Wilson, and Bobby Timmons etc.... And recorded over 30 albums.

The bells on 'Summertime'? I don't know what that was. St Louis Blues? I liked the tempo and the 'groove'. This is not 'Giant Steps' type improvisation. Was not even the intent. Lounge music.

Give Mr Lytle some love! :)

Cheers

A few comments about some recent clips and mentions:

Rok, Benny "At Carnegie Hall" was my very first jazz record. I don't know how obvious it's been based on past posts, but I love Benny and that style of music in general. Personally, I don't understand how a truly comprehensive discussion on jazz can take place without substantial mention and discussion of players like Goodman, Artie Shaw, Harry James and others from that period. The level of artistry, within that style, is fabulous; not to mention their contribution to paving the way for the more modern players. I would like to see more of it on this thread.

I am sure O-10 meant the comment as a generalization, and I certainly don't know what he considers a "good living", but while it is true that many jazz artists didn't get their due, just as many made very good livings. Going back in time, and speaking of Benny, sidemen in his band (and others) made upper-middle-class incomes, and the leaders did very well. Today, someone like Wynton, makes in excess of 2 million a year, and sidemen in his band have incomes in excess of $200k.

Grover is one of the "pop" saxophone players who consistently receives the respect of other musicians; he can really play! His recording of Operatic arias "Aria" is beautiful and shows a sensitivity that so many pop saxists don't have. Highly recommended.

My grandmother used to say: "if you don't have anything positive to say...."

I wish I could share my fellow enthusiasts' enthusiasm for Johnny Lytle. I find his playing rudimentary and lacking in sophistication. There are various reasons why some players fade into obscurity; in this case the reason is obvious IMO. His improvising on "St Louis Blues" is almost like that of a young jazz student in music school; he doesn't make all the changes and resorts to the same blues scale over the changing harmonies. He may have "speed"; but, so what? He uses way too much sustain pedal which makes his playing sound "swimmy". And what is up with those xylaphone (bells) at the end of "Summertime"? Huh?

OK, how do I really feel about .....?

O-10:

I was not aware of Johnny Lytle. The clips were awesome! Esp 'St Louis Blues'. In the manner of Ray Charles, he played it so slow, it made you wanna scream! Both were great.

There is quite a bit of his stuff on Amazon. I will look for the one with St Louis Blues for sure. And since I now know a little history of him, it's a slam dunk for me.

See, there are 'undiscovered' gems right here in the USA!

BTW, as I was reading your post, Lou Rawls, singing 'Saturday Night Fish Fry' was in the player. It features Lionel Hampton!! Love the vibes.

Thanks for the find. I get the Baroness' book tomorrow.

Cheers