****Why should they? Nothing new about this. The soloist always gets top billing. Miles did the playing. Evenas arranged and conducted the orchestra. He did not conduct Miles!
Think of Anne-Sophie Mutter playing with the Berliners. Who gets top billing? Not the conductor nor the orchestra. The person the public is paying to hear. ****
Not a relevant comparison; and I think you miss the point of my comment. I would argue that the reason that "The Birth Of The Cool" is important is the arranging and overall concept, not Miles' playing; Mulligan plays his ass off as well on those sessions, btw. Those sessions were seminal in the evolution of jazz. When Mutter puts out yet one more version of the Beethoven concerto, it does nothing to shape the direction of the music nor of the place of that concerto in the history of classical music; that place is already well established.
Besides, how is this relevant to the bigger issue of Miles' constant search and change? That's the more important point I was making.
And BTW, clearly, I was not there, but I would bet you my copy of that LP that Evans DID "conduct Miles" quite a bit. |
|
Frogman,
I do not disagree with your assessment. I did not intend to imply that outside forces are the only or even key reasons for success. Agree that Miles "constantly forward-looking attitude" is a character trait that contributed to his greatness. A lot of musicians did not have that attitude and it wouldn't have mattered what outside resources were available to them. |
Latest Acquisitions:
Horace Silver -- Paris Blues
Includes: Tokyo Blues - Filthy McNasty - Sayonara Blues
all tracks over 10 minutes long. Exquistie playing By Silver on Sayonara Blues. The extra track lengths gives all the players time to really develope their solos.
Live in Paris, but the sound is first rate! Blue Mitchell on trumpet.
Thelonious Monk -- The Unique Thelonious Monk
Monk playing standards. The liner notes says, this was done to try and widen his audience, instead of his 'frightening' originals. hahahaha As Fats Waller said, they like Jazz, but in small doses. He, waller, was speaking of uptown or downtown NYC. I guess the part where Harlem ain't! Blakey and pettiford appear.
Charles Mingus -- Mingus In Europe
Recorded while on tour in Europe in 1968. I think this is a complilation of several concerts on that tour. Released by his estate. A few glitches with the sound, but not a constant thing. Great playing. Eric Dolphy is on board. They go crazy on the tune 'So Long Eric'
Roland Kirk -- The Inflated Tea
Please do not think of this player as some sort of show off or clown. This guy can play! If you don't have any of his stuff, better hurry. A lot of it is already in the hands of 'these sellers'. A unique talent.
Most of the music I talk about here was recorded almost 50 years ago. O-10 touched on this, and I agree. There is so much genuine Jazz out there that I have not heard. Why worry about the latest 'genuis' out of Bangladesh!
Cheers
Check out Roland Kirk !! |
From WIKI --
Ian Ernest Gilmore "Gil" Evans (né Green) (May 13, 1912 – March 20, 1988) was a jazz pianist, arranger, composer and bandleader, active in the United States. He played an important role in the development of COOL JAZZ, MODAL jazz, FREE jazz and jazz FUSION, and collaborated extensively with Miles Davis.[1]
Good Grief!!! This man helped murder Jazz!!! I think he benefited more from the collaboration with Miles, than did Miles! IMO.
Cheers |
"When was the last time anyone of us heard any of those records referred to as "the Gil Evans record ....."? Davis was the higher profile individual (to the public) as the rising star of the jazz trumpet world."
Why should they? Nothing new about this. The soloist always gets top billing. Miles did the playing. Evenas arranged and conducted the orchestra. He did not conduct Miles!
Think of Anne-Sophie Mutter playing with the Berliners. Who gets top billing? Not the conductor nor the orchestra. The person the public is paying to hear.
I have 25+ CDs by Miles, not counting his stuff on LP. Take away the Spain / birth of cool / Porgy Bess, CDs, and there is a LOT of stuff left. Before, during and after Evans.
And my little collection is puny compared to his total output. He was just great. Evans was just a minor stop on the way.
Cheers |
I don't think there's even an issue about jazz being dead, but by definition the best music is in the the past. For any mature artform that is always the case. For instance, a linear synopsis of jazz could be Armstrong, Ellington, Monk/Parker, Miles, Coltrane... and it's just not clear who comes after Coltrane. I think only time will tell. I'm most interested in who would get nominated. |
"Trio Tre Bien", this is a group that I just re-discovered. Although I heard this group some time ago, they slipped through the cracks of my memory and got lost. Now they're on my top play list. This CD "Coming Together" by the Trio Tre Bien is flawless, and I've only given this high praise to one other album. Every cut on this CD is tops. The musicians are: Jeter Thompson on keyboards, Harold Thompson, bass; Howard Thompson, drums. While none of the names are well known, the music is world class.
For me, this music is like the breath of fresh air I so desperately needed. Although my collection consists of the best of the best in jazz, hearing the same music for the umpteenth time can get old. The music on "Coming Together" flowed from one cut to the next in a manner that never lost my attention, and the sonics were spectacular. Recently, although the music is fine, "sonics" are sadly lacking on my new acquisitions of old music. This music is on par with my old music, but it's not old music, that explains the spectacular sonics; I'll describe them.
Vibes were ringing out of the center channel, with drums thumping on the left, while a solid bass pounded on the right; and all the while there was a holographic integrity to the music as a whole, this was all the way live. "Sonics", plus the music I love, is so rare. It went from wildly exotic and exhilarating, to deeply personal and introspective. That's when it connected to some long ago forgotten corner of my mind.
Rok has often mentioned gospel's connection to jazz; whether or not you have ever heard a gospel record in your life, or even know what Gospel is, you can feel it's presence in some of this music; it has a very moving emotional impact. These musicians, through their music, communicate who they are.
As much as I listen to music, and as much music as I've listened to, it's not easy for a group of musicians to keep me entertained for 73 minutes without losing my attention. That's how long this CD was and I truly enjoyed every last minute. The music on this CD is so far above anything I found on "You tube" by them in the past, I decided not to post a "You tube". This CD is Trio Tres Bien, "Coming Together".
Enjoy the music.
|
I am mixed about the subject of the "unsung hero". I agree that there have been, and are, many examples of musicians deserving of greater recognition than they got (get); but, personally, I would be careful about attributing too much of the reason for this to forces outside of the musician himself. Musicians can be (and often are) complicated and difficult individuals who sometimes make choices that are not conducive to "success"; some don't even want it. In general, the best players get the attention. This conversation between jazz greats Billy Taylor and Frank Wess addresses some of this: http://www.prx.org/pieces/20223-billy-taylor-unsung-jazz-players-1-of-2This subject, with the focus on Miles Davis, is particularly interesting because it (inadvertently?) touches upon, and causes one to question, one of the running themes in this thread: the idea held by some of us that the best jazz has already been played, or that a particular period in jazz has the most merit. The two records cited (Porgy and Bess and Sketches of Spain) could not be better subjects for this particular discussion. These two records, and especially the earlier "Birth Of The Cool" sessions (which were the first collaborations between Davis and Gil Evans) are records for which Miles Davis got top billing when it could easily be argued that Gil Evans was the primary force behind these projects. Yet, these are always considered Miles Davis sessions. When was the last time anyone of us heard any of those records referred to as "the Gil Evans record ....."? Davis was the higher profile individual (to the public) as the rising star of the jazz trumpet world. But, the real interesting point (and irony) in all this, and how it relates to our reverence for Miles and certain specific periods in jazz is seen when we look at what it was that made Miles the success that he was. The collaboration between Miles and Evans was a direct result of their dissatisfaction with, and a concerted effort to move away from, what they perceived to be the dominance, and limitations of be-bop. As we all know, miles was one of the creators of be-bop. That kind of constantly forward-looking attitude, with an openness to change, is what made Miles great. Is it not ironic that we revere an artist who achieved great success, in great part, by always moving away from his artistic past; yet, some of us resist a similar open-mindedness? |
Pnmeyer, Miles was lucky, smart, and bold. He also had something many other African Americans didn't have, he had a relatively rich background. His father was a well respected dentist in a small town, this gave Miles "Chutzpah". |
Rok, I thought the following comment you made was thought-provoking and very true:
"I am sure Miles et al. knew guys who deserved to be as great as they were, and I am sure they thought of them on their way to the bank. It's always been that way and it always will."
This is not mean as a criticism of Miles--he was a Jazz great. But there probably were other Jazz musicians of his time who might have been revered on the same level if they had just received the backing and freedom provided to them by a major record label like Miles was. A lot of these guys recorded for minor labels for peanuts and if they would have proposed projects like "Porgy and Bess" or "Sketches of Spain," the record companies would have laughed at them. Miles certainly deserves the praise he receives, but who knows who else might have similarly flourished with the resources he had. |
"The curse and gift of Jazz is that it can be the greatest thing and it can be the most mundane thing,both survive, and can only be limited by the intelligence of the listener" - Jazzcourier
This is a true statement. However, if applies to all music genres and art forms.
Cheers |
" I would expect that if someone where to have an intelligent conversation about a musician, i.e. Charlie Parker (which is what I assumed from the members here), that they would have a certain knowledge about music itself in order to support and clarify their comments."
I Disagree. A person can make any comment he wishes about any musician. No special knowledge is required, other than, hopefully, he has listened to that musician's music.
The 1000 lb gorilla in the room is this, musicians are whatever the PUBLIC, says they are. Not what their peers think of them.
I am sure Miles et al. knew guys who deserved to be as great as they were, and I am sure they thought of them on their way to the bank. It's always been that way and it always will.
Someone decides who will be great. Back in the days of classical music it was the local Patron paying the musican's livelhood. In other words, a few decided. Now millions decide. It's a tougher room.
I think Goofyfoot and The Frogman could be in advanced music / improvisation theory, but, have wandered into Jazz Appreciation 101. Here, we just comment and share what we hear and how it moves us. And all are qualified to do that! Of course, all others are welcomed. A person can never have too much knowledge, and The Frogman is our local guru when it comes to the finer points of music.
Fighting and being argumentive? Well, it's better than being boring! Boredom kills threads! And if The Frogman and I can live together in peacefull coexistence, then anyone can!
Cheers |
Frogman, as always, you make thought provoking comments. Since "all" music is subjective, I have no problem with someone's proclamation that this musician or that is superior. As someone stated, "My religion, is the only true religion"; fortunately no wars have been fought over disagreements about jazz.
An objective analysis of jazz can only occur when many aficionados concur. Currently, I don't know of any aficionados who concur with my opinion that the best jazz is no longer being made in America. Youn Sun Nah was made in Korea, and Sharmila Guha was made in India. I have no explanation for the reasons regarding this abnormality, but my ears seem to prefer jazz made in other parts of the world over domestic jazz. Don't blame me, blame my unpatriotic ears. Fortunately, there is so much jazz from the past that I have yet to hear, my unpatriotic ears wont be a problem.
Enjoy the music.
|
Frogman, much of what you said is consistent with comments that I've made. For the most part concerning a clear explanation of music in order to support a preference for a particular work and/or artist. Another suggestion that I made and I'll rephrase it here, is that pronouncements over how music should be labeled for point of comparison is ambiguous and will typically lead to arguments. I've never suggested that we converse like musical Spoc's as though we are regurgitating data. For some reason, other members are either looking to argue and have a habit of misinterpreting what others say. I base this on the fact that nearly 5 pages of this forum consists of arguments with members targeting one another. Anyway, I would expect that if someone where to have an intelligent conversation about a musician, i.e. Charlie Parker (which is what I assumed from the members here), that they would have a certain knowledge about music itself in order to support and clarify their comments. I don't see why this is too provocative or unreasonable as it seems to have been the standard on other forums. However, there is a great deal of resistance to what I've just suggested and since I don't like to argue, I will reserve my comments. |
We can't have it both ways.
I think that a thread such as this is a breath of fresh air on this forum (Agon). What could be better than an opportunity to discover and share new music? Personal opinion and commentary are an inevitable part of the process; after all, we are supposed to be sharing favorites and "must haves". But, I think the trick to keeping the discussion relevant is to keep an open mind re others' opinions while at the same time being careful about our own proclamations of the superiority of this artist or that. If we make a claim about artist X being the best, or performance Y being superior to Z, we should be able to back it up with some thoughtful and insightful analysis. If we want to keep the discussion to "this is my favorite" and leave it at that, that's fine; but, personally I find it very limiting. Likewise, comments about the music in general can come across as proclamations of truth without substance (analysis) to back them up.
As Jazzcourier points out historical and biographical perspective (combined with relevant, and ACCESSIBLE musical analysis) is hugely important. The mistake that the listener often makes is an ironic one. The listener develops a passion for a certain music and favorite artists, and music being the incredible force that it is causes the listener to be very protective of favorite artists or personal "new discoveries" without keeping this "view" in a more humble place. There is always a huge amount more to learn about this amazing art form. IMO, the best place to approach the process of learning from is from a place of "judicious self-assurance"; while remembering that there will always be someone who has a deeper understanding than ourselves. That is what the great artists themselves do: quick to dismiss the bull-shitters, but reluctant to put themselves on a pedestal because of the knowledge that if they are not open to getting their butts kicked, they will not reach their full potential.
****The curse and gift of Jazz is that it can be the greatest thing and it can be the most mundane thing,both survive, and can only be limited by the intelligence of the listener**** - Jazzcourier
IMO, one of the best comments that I have read on this forum. |
They are getting ready to kick me out of the library here in Bakersfield,so i won't be able to use the computer anymore.I have my Volkswagon parked over there behind the walmart and i am getting ready to curl up in the back seat with a pony bottle of I.W. Harper.I got me a little radio here and i am going to see if i can find me some nice music and get me a little sleep zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. |
Goofyfoot, he speaks for me. lets talk about music. not music theory. |
Jazzcourier, so you believe that your speaking on behalf of everyone else? |
I have no axe,or resentful weapons at all.I just wish you would make a SPECIFIC point that would benefit the listeners and readers.I think there are many here that would enjoy the challenge of Bley's music (a myriad of music created over 55 years) and his musical journey in the world of Jazz and improvisation.As far as i am concerned you can get all theoretical and start waving artistic aesthetics around, but frankly, you are boring us,and Paul Bley ain't boring. |
Jazzcourier, you're apparently resentful about my having mentioned that I would opt to describe particular works by Paul Bley by using an aesthetic and theoretical vocabulary. This is common practice by the way in all music programs beyond grade school and it generally applies to all music that is based on the western harmonies. I use Paul Bley as an example in order to make a point but I can discuss theory and aesthetics concerning music in general despite the composer or performer and despite whether someone wants to call it jazz, post modern, or anything else. None of my statements apply to recounting Paul Bley's life within a biographical context or lecturing on the history of western music and his place in it. I'm sorry that you have a ax to grind but your claims are presumptuous at best. |
I am very much looking forward to goofyfoot's monograph on Paul Bley.I would love for all of us to see a biographical and historical perspective.Musical analysis of his sytlistic evolution and of course what led to his "effortless command over the piano".Recommended recordings would be a plus.
The last time i heard effortless command over the piano was Roger Williams playing "Born Free". |
Thank you Rok, I already have the music you recommended, and I concur. The music you pronounced OK will be on order.
Enjoy the music. |
My (unsolicited) advice to all is this: Don't get to analytical. The important thing is, do you like it, or don't like it. Tell us which and why. Comment on the sound quality. Maybe we will discover new music, which is what this forum is about.
Speaking of new music:
Today I was going to add about 50 cds to my hard drive and put them in the proper rack. I thought I would need a little background music while I did this, so I put Aster Aweke, in the player. 30 seconds into the first track, I had to stop and listen. Those Cds are still waiting to be cataloged.
Aster Aweke -- Kabu
I have had this Cd for around 20 years. When I bought it I listened to a track or two and then put it in the 'try again later' shelf.
WOW! What a difference 20 years makes in a person's musical taste and maturity. This is why I never throw away CDs I don't like initially. Great voice, great songs and Outstanding recording. Translation of the vocals in the CD liner.
You ain't got it? Git It!!
In a similar vein:
Zap Mama -- Adventures In Afropea 1
This is a fun disc. Five women of African and European decent. Just the human voice. No Clutter!:) These women are having fun and it comes thru. Some of the tunes have a 'Sweet Honey In The Rock' flavor. Great Stuff!
Ain't got it? Git it, right after you git AWEKE!
O-10:
I hereby pronounce the Three Sounds 'Eight Classic Albums', outstanding music, outstanding recordindgs and an outstanding bargain!! Nat Adderly and Stanley Turrentine appear. Gene Harris is in fine form.
Cheers |
I'm not here to argue but I am adding commentary. A lot of these comparisons are ambiguous as most comparisons are prone to be. I have always believed it to be most constructive to talk about music in terms of things like harmony, counterpoint, arranging, composition, orchestration, tempo. I realize that this is too much to expect on a forum however these categorical labels are just trash pale terminologies. For example, I could listen to a Paul Bley record and explain in musical and aesthetic terms, his approach to composition and his effortless command over the piano but if I were to rely on terms like 'cutting edge' or 'retro' or whatever else, then that is where things begin to get murky. The only categorical term that I could come up with for honestly describing Paul Bley's music currently might be 'real time composition' but this wouldn't be true all of the time and it wouldn't help since most people lack knowledge about what 'real time composition' is. The point being that much of this forum looks like an insular argument because of its ambiguity. |
"If they act too hip, you know they can't play shit" - Miles Davis |
A few comments on some recent posts....Clarinet-Kenny Davern,fill in the blanks of superlatives because they all apply,plus a determination to excell beyond his usual musical orbit and create in each solo,not only a history of Jazz, but to convey it in the most personal way.
Frank Vignola...Fine player,but listen to Howard Alden.
Eric Alexander...behemoth player,like the "Thanksgiving" of all the living big toned Tenor Saxophonists,he always seems to fill you up and satisfy you musically and emotionally.His latest effort,among many,"Touching" on Highnote tends to magnify his "sound" over content and some of the tunes are of a more recent vintage that don't capture my interest.I have to give him props for trying to extend the circle of compositions for improvisations.I am anxious to hear him over the next few years.
Dave Liebman and the re-formed "Quest" (with Richie Beirach,Ron McLure and Billy Hart) are back at it on "circular" on Enja.This is a program of 60's compositions associated with Miles Davis.This is a delightful session of mature players,comfortable together and pushing forwards in a sideways move,nothing earthshaking,yet forging a collective quilt of music that draws you in.Billy Hart is a gifted drummer who can see beyond the music while creating the pulse of it.
David Liebman....prolific and sublime,as a listener he instills an air of confidence that he is giving his ultimate expression,this is a direct influence of John Coltrane who re-newed high standards in a post Charlie Parker Jazz world.
Some interesting younger players to watch Jonas Kullhammer and Jon Irabegon (sp on both? sorry)
The curse and gift of Jazz is that it can be the greatest thing and it can be the most mundane thing,both survive, and can only be limited by the intelligence of the listener.I have ALWAYS found that the best music has the least audience and musicians that "promote" themselves usually do so because they don't have the dedication to put it into their instrument.The least talented always have the most time to hype themselves. |
|
Goofyfoot, why do I feel we need to argue, when there is no argument at all? You are reading into my comments things that I am not suggesting at all. Where do I say anything suggesting that the "hipper" players are not deserving of their popularity? I don't disagree with anything you wrote (I LOVE Wayne Krantz, BTW) with the possible exception of your comments re funding for the arts. That's a discussion about the politics of all this, and I think it wise to stay away from that one; or, at least, save it for another thread.
Vignola and Krantz are completely different players, and I suspect they would be the first to say it. When I say "hipper", I mean "in a more contemporary style", and not in a style that is a kind of throw-back to a what can fairly be considered a bygone era (swing). In the case of my comment, "hip" is a nod to popular vernacular. The truth is that in musicians' vernacular hipness can be found in ALL styles, retro or not. It is a statement about a player's mastery of an idiom, and ability to be inventive within that idiom; wether that idiom was popular 70 years ago, or on the cutting edge of the present.
****The niche players will often maintain a higher level of artistic integrity but they're also more susceptible to burdening financial woes.****
Often, but not always. Yes, susceptible to financial woes. But, many outside the music industry would be surprised at the level of financial success that players like Vignola enjoy. It is all relative. Is it the kind of success that the Kenny G's of the world enjoy? Of course not; not even close. I prefer to consider the Kenny G's of the music scene to be anomalies. These kinds of anomalies have always existed in the arts, and are pretty irrelevant as far as what defines the true merits of any art form; they are to be simply ignored. |
I said Soho, I should have said Chelsea. |
Frogman, I'd certainly consider Wayne Krantz to be one of the 'hipper' players, so maybe he lives in Soho but I don't consider him as un-deserving of his popularity. Yes, popularity doesn't account for musicianship, artistry or technique but it doesn't refute a musicians capabilities either. 'Money can't produce good poetry'. I suppose fame could erode integrity but ultimately an artist has a choice. The sad reality with all of the arts in this country is that it is underfunded and seen as insignificant unless it's able to sustain itself financially. The niche players will often maintain a higher level of artistic integrity but they're also more susceptible to burdening financial woes. |
Rok, in NYC (and I am sure, in every major city) there are different scenes within the larger jazz scene and community of musicians. You have the be-boppers, the fusion guys, the "out" guys and, believe it or not, a vibrant retro swing scene; with guys like Peplowski and Vignola who specialize in the traditional swing repertoire. Of course, some of the players "cross-over" with various levels of success. FYI, Vignola is considered THE swing guitarist on the scene right now. He has his niche (as does Peplowski) and is most certainly a jazz player who is hugely respected by his peers.
I think one of the tricky issues with these discussions is that we tend to judge a player's ability, at least in part, by the player's visibility to the general music-loving public. Of course, a genre (swing) that is not the most popular at any given time reduces greatly that visibility of these players. That unfortunate reality does not, in any way, diminish their clout as players. Many of these guys are extremely dedicated to a particular style of jazz, no matter how unpopular or superseded by other styles it may be; and their command and understanding of the style and it's musical vocabulary is far superior than it often is to higher-profile players who may be considered "hipper" by the general public. Of special note is the fact that it is these "hip (per?)" musicians themselves who most respect and sometimes revere the niche players. |
Rok, the west coast jazz by Chico was flat, and I'm not an extreme audiophile. At the beginning, I stated there was a CD I wouldn't review, and it had some of the very best jazz in my collection, but the CD was lacking "nuance", that was essential to this music, plus the record is no longer available; consequently there was no point in even mentioning this music.
I won't buy any of the music you're ordering until I get your report.
Enjoy the music.
|
Frogman:
Frank Vignola is a guitar virtusos!! The guy is like the Maurice Andre of the guitar. I looked him up on Wikipedia to see his background. It ain't Jazz. As I suspected, he is a great master of the instrument and apparently teaches and publishes how to books on guitar playing. He is good enough to do that.
I listened to more of his youtube stuff to sort of get a context in which to put him. He has clips playing, Scheherezade, Beethoven's Fifth, and several Jazz Standards. Almost as if he is an exhibitionist. He is shown with some other guitarist at something called the Long Beach Jazz Fest. Not very impressive.
The bottom line is this, IMO, he is, as I said a virtuoso. He can play anything. Is he a Jazz guitartist? He has the skills for sure, the question is, does he have an affinity for the music?
Sweet Georgia Brown (SGB)
Could you subconsciously be under the influence of Django and people of his ilk. For instance, When I hear SGB, I think, Stephane and Django. I don't know why. After all, no one does it, or can do it, like Ella. It's that 'bounce' of the guitar. Makes me think that's the way SGB is 'supposed' to sound. Le Hot Club? But that's not correct. It can sound anyway the artist wants it to sound. I liked his solo and I liked the Quintet just as much.
Tiger Rag:
His playing on Tiger Rag was good. I listened to it again and appreciate it more now. I still think a duo of guitar and clarinet does not have the 'weight' to do Jazz justice. His solo on SGB was better due to the backing of Carlos Henriquez on bass.
The most I see him doing in Jazz is having a nice career in Europe or carve a niche for himself here in the USA as a player / teacher. Sort of like Grappelli.
As always, IMO.
Cheers |
Rok, thank you for the reasoned response. To be clear, I am not saying that the Marsalis cut is not jazz, how could I? Only that in the context of that particular idiom and what should be appropriate vocabulary for a tune in that style, I think the Peplowski is more convincing. For instance, all is pretty good until the drums, and later, trumpet and sax come in. The feel is appropriate and "bouncy" (why so many of the tunes from that era had the word "Bounce" in the title); then, when the drums come in, things jump forward a couple of decades (an eternity in the evolution of jazz) with decidedly much more modern swing feel. The horn soloists, likewise, can't resist not staying strictly "inside" the harmony and jump even further ahead with their use of extended harmony (outside the traditional harmony). An over-analysis to be sure, and I am not saying that it is bad at all, or that it is not appropriate to play any tune in any style (Coltrane's "My Favorite Things" !!!), only that the ingredients in that recipe, for me, don't come together as well as in the other one. |
Frogman:
I think this exchange is very important, at least to me it is. I now have a 'concrete example' to play over and over again. And your reasoning to read over and over again. I think after this, I will understand your concept of Jazz.
I will listen to 'Tiger Rag' many times, and try and hear what you hear. And also listen for the 'clutter' in Sweet Georgia Brown.
Thanks for the post.
Cheers |
Rok, we all have different tastes; that is stating the obvious. Having said that, I couldn't disagree with you more concerning your comparison of the Peplowski and Marsalis cuts. Like I said, we all have different tastes and I am not about to try to change your mind, but will explain why I think the Peplowski cut, as a representation of that style of jazz, is infinitely superior.
You missed the whole point of my choice. First of all it was tied to featuring the clarinet along with the Buddy DeFranco cut.You are correct, there is something missing in the Peplowski cut: clutter. That is precisely the point. The way that guitar and clarinet only can generate that much drive and swing WITHOUT drums and bass and other horns is the point. Call it chamber jazz, if you will. Lastly and most importantly, in the Marsalis cut, while Vignola excels again, the other soloists are not on the same level as Peplowski. O'connor's solo is stiff, Marsalis is his usual impressive but "not quite right" brand of swing; and Blanding, while delivering the best solo (besides Vignola) is, like Marsalis, simply not idiomatic and not entirely convincing, with deviations into inappropriate and much more contemporary musical vocabulary. IMO.
Regards. |
Rok, "The Three Sounds". Chico Hamiltons West Coast CD's were lacking in the sonic department, they weren't as good as the "You tube's". That's why I asked. |
Frogman et al.
I listened to the Buddy DeFranco youtube. It was what I expected. Good stuff. Buddy is a big time player. No surprises.
The Frank Viguola youtube was very interesting. As I listened to it, I was impressed with his skill on guitar. But, I felt something was missing. I thought it needed a different instrumentation. A rhythm section and horns?? A guitar and clarinet just didn't seem enough to do that type music justice. I thought to myself that this is happy music, up there, or down there,If you ask O-10, with Sweet Georgia Brown.
As it happened, my eyes wander over to the right side of the screen and there was a clip of Viguola playing Sweet Georgia Brown with the Wynton Marsalis quiintet. I played it.
If you ever want a demostration of my argument, these two youtubes are it!! Great musicians on both tapes. Music of the same degree of difficulty. DAY & NIGHT in overall effect!! Check it out!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELXtZmFpvPk
Cheers
O-10: I didn't get what music you were speaking of: The Three Sounds or the Lee Morgan set? The one you will buy if the sound is good. |
|
|
Anyone who thinks jazz is dead just needs to get out more often. Listen to these guys swing their a&%#s off. Heard here is Scott Robinson, a genius of this music. Sessions like these are commonplace in small clubs around NYC. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=716XrlpuSbM |
Joseph Beuys?? No kidding!
Those Germans go from one extreme to the other. No half-way measures with them!
Cheers |
Certainly, and If I were to say that I appreciated everything in the classical raisonne, I'd either be an idiot or a liar. One thing that I do sympathize with is opposition to this notion that anything can be great, or creative or easily labeled and then placed in a drawer with something else. I had professors who would make comments like 'everyone is an artist' because that is what Joseph Beuys said and I have always considered that claim to be at the top of my B.S. list. You know, we don't want to come off as being elitists or insensitive in any way. Creating incomparable comparisons like 'is King Oliver in the same class as Bud Powel'; might amount to doing something to pass the time, like memorizing baseball statistics, but it really won't address art, music or aesthetics. |
"but I listen to jazz because there is some of it that I find interesting or entertaining and that's about the only reason".
Well, that's about the only reason for listening to any music. I can't think of any genre in which I like it all. As Duke Ellington once said, there is good music, and there is bad music.
I have no problem cherry picking any genre for the good stuff. Sort of like listening to just the 'good parts' of an Opera. I guess that's why they make 'highlights' discs. Some of it just has to be seen to be appreciated. Or the 'warhorses' of the classical repertoire.
Cheers |
I found Eric Alexander years ago and the band All for One. If you like what you hear,goto CrissCross record's website and give a listen. From what I've read so far a lot of you guys will like what Criss Cross has to offer. You will have heard of a lot of the artist there, and the ones you don't know... there good as well. Also check out Whirlwind Recordings ltd. What there doing in Europe with jazz will keep you listening for a while. I have a lot of the old recordings mentioned here and my turntable still gets a real workout. But these new cats are putting something down, and worth a listen. |
Rok2id, there's still a lot of great music being made but there needs to be a willingness and an open mindedness in order to invest in it. Jazz is more of an art form than most other popular styles of music and so it takes a little work but it's well worth the trouble. I still plan to buy a 78 turntable however so that I can listen to a friends donated Charlie Parker recordings. Personally, I have more trouble with listening to music that is outside of the realm of legitimate or what we call in the vernacular, 'classical' but I listen to jazz because there is some of it that I find interesting or entertaining and that's about the only reason. |
Acman3
I took the Lee Morgan thingy the way you meant it.
The tragedy that has befallen Jazz, is not limited to Jazz. You can substitute Jazz, with Rock & Roll or R&B or POP or Country or folk / protest or Gospel.
They have all suffered. The problem is, no one sees or hears the decline, except the people who are familiar with and / or grew up with the previous stuff. This is true of most things in society.
Think about it, Lee Morgan died over 41 years ago!!. I find myself waiting for his next Cd. We just said he was 19 a few posts ago, didn't we?
Jazz has the added problem or being an improvised music. That creates major problems.
How does a current player, play the great Jazz music? A current classical player can play Mozart today because it's written down on paper. How do you play Charlie Parker?
The next big problem is that because it is not a written down on paper music, and it is improvised, ANYONE, can play ANYTHING, and call it Jazz. And, I guess it is. Today.
So, the soloution is this. As a fan, or aficionado, You pick your stop on the railroad and get off. Just like the classical people did. you say, when this era,(fill in the blank) ended, that was the end of MY Jazz. The same goes for all the other genres. I will henceforth, live off compilations, reissues and remasters. And the odd surprise or discovery.
So there should not be any argument. Music does change. The public changes. Just pick the stuff you like and live with it. Just like the people that watch Verdi and Mozart operas year after year after year.
The Jazz stuff that I like most, was coming to an end, almost before I became aware of it's existence. Wow!!
Cheers |
Pnmyer, I listened to some Roy Hargrove recordings a few years back. He had a bright future , but had IMHO not matured as a musician at that time. I will certainly check him out. I will also check out Eric Alexander as I have, not to my knowledge, actually heard him play.
Charles Lloyd has turned into one of my favorites. His music with BoBo Stenson was magical. If you like Enrico Rava you might like Tomas Stanko. Both are very good.
Thanks, |
As with most, not so well thought out rants, the point gets lost on the side issues.
Rok, the usage of Lee Morgan's " Live at the Lighthouse" was only used as an example of how he and his music had changed, not a recommendation for the music. Also, I only have a double album, and not the CD which has more music added as usual, so YMMV.
Orpheus10, I have mainly commented in the past through a lens of what you were trying to say/learn on this thread. I lost that perspective on my last post, which was written only to say Jazz is in good hands, although different. I agree with your wise earlier statement that once we start arguing ''What is Jazz',' the thread will disintegrate into chaos and I don't want any part of that.
I do not feel qualified to lead any comment on newer jazz styles, as I like most of you, listen mostly to older music, especially since going mostly vinyl about 5 years back. Some of my newer Jazz favorites are now 10 years old, and the musician's are not young anymore. Also for the same reason you have chosen not to identify your mystery musician friend, I will respectfully have to keep some good, but controversial musicians off any list. It is easy to tear down.
I listen while I travel around town to the local college station KNTU, and hear great straight ahead music all day. Some new, some old. I will get some names for you if I think they have possibilities.
Ken Schaphorst- anything, but "Over the Rainbow " is an overlooked GEM.
William Parker- A virtuoso bass player known more for his group interplay and writing than his bass playing. ( sound like any one you know) Some of his music is harder to get, but most is surprisingly accessible. Never boring.
Earl Harvin- "Live at the Gypsy Tea Room" has been a regular on my system since around 2000. Earl plays a lot of styles and plays in Jazz to Funk to Rock bands. A monster on the drums. UNT professor Fred Hamilton on bass and guitar, and Dave Palmer on electric piano.
Benny Green
Kurt Elling
Kurt Rosenwinkle
Marchel Ivery
Dennis Gonzalez- Great trumpet player, getting a little more Avant-garde, but worth hearing.
What about John Abercrombie? I have left off about 1,000. |
