Jazz for aficionados
Had brother Gene Harris in the player this morning. He played two of the OP's all time favorites. Thought I'd share. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CG10eGWe30o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqIDSwvVR_c Cheers |
"I think the idea of the "forgotten player" or the player that "didn't get his due" is mainly overstated and often a myth." Frogman, I couldn't agree with you more. Pepper Adams was "DA MAN"; everybody who was somebody selected Pepper Adams as a sideman, remember the guy everybody wanted on their side in softball? Pepper Adams was that guy in jazz. Gonna cut a new record, need a baritone; "Where is Pepper Adams"? "Pre be-bop style sensibilities"; while I never defined music in that manner, my brain automatically did it for me, and called that music "Old fashioned". I went to this clip to demonstrate soprano sax with Trane and became fixated with McCoy Tyner on piano, this is about the time I saw Trane live; McCoy Tyner was just so right at that time, (not too many notes) he was the glue that kept things together when Trane decided to take off for parts unknown. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGck-DRAFyw Enjoy the music. |
"A player who didn't get his due" If you didn't want to play the normal game, move to New York, and tour, you would be unavailable to play when people needed a musician. We would not know who Pepper Adams was, because he was in Alabama. Any time you are "not available ", people think of who is available, and the great player in Alabama is forgotten, except to aficionados. A couple of local legends from the Dallas area, who would fit this criteria would be Big Al Dupree and Marchel Ivery. I would add James Clay but, he missed a lot of time for drug use. Same out of mind situation, but different reason. This is just this one area. I will close my coffee rant with a question. What would have happened to Ornette Coleman if he stayed in Fort Worth? |
A story to support Frogman and O10, When I was younger, I taught myself how to play the tenor sax. Not very good, but I loved to play. I rejected the whole playing in cords idea, because I was free to play what I wanted (BS). I could play all kinds of patterns, because my mind saw math when I played, and it sounded ok, by myself. When I tried to play with anyone else the free idea did not work. I played for my family and friends a few times and they did not get it. I , suddenly lost any desire to play and never played again. My friends and family now talk about how good I was, and with out playing anymore, l get better every year. I think by the time I die, I will be a legend. 😂 |
'The idea of forgotten player' is a thought that comes to me quite often, more so when man digs deep into world of jazz. Aldo Frogmans explanation is quite logical, my personal perspective is somehow different, and I would like to share some thoghts on that matter. One thing that remains unknown to me is a question if somebody was 'the player' during some specific time, and later, during time and with a lack of interest for jazz music in general, faded into oblivion, or maybe one was never at all under the spotlight. For those informations I would appreciate the thoughts of ones whe were the witnesses of that time, like O-10. The obvious fact is that even the 'wellknown' figures led a hard life, and numerous others who perhaps were equally good players, never made it, for one reason or another, and that happend more often than is possible to blame on someones lack of musical expertise. So, I would like to start a discussion about it, and will post few clips, with players who are not so 'popular'. (guess that word popular is oximoron in jazz) Todays start, will begin with few guitar players Thornel Schwartz, recorded many early albums with Jimmy Smith, and with other great organists as well. Made only one album as a leader, as far as I know. https://youtu.be/8tgpOBAZ1hE Ray Crawford, played with Ahmed Jamal trio, with Jimmy Smith as well, and so on, again, only one album as leader https://youtu.be/fka0tp0WGPs How about Dempsey Wright? I think the west coast guys on this record would not keep him company if he is no good. https://youtu.be/Y96sawbRZe0 Skeeter Best? Eddie McFaden? No albums at all, and yet, great players. Imho the list is long. Looking forward to hear some other suggestions |
Accounting for the universal truth that there are exceptions to every rule, what would have happened to Ornette is that he probably would not have become what he did as an artist. Why? Because greatness doesn't happen in a vacuum. A musician needs to be where he is going to get his ass kicked and being a big fish in a small pond is seldom the way. No one is saying that there aren't really good players in smaller towns. We love our local heroes and many are really good players who could probably reach even higher levels of ability if they were in an environment where they weren't the best player in town and where the scene is so vibrant that creativity is inspired. Imo, we tend to romanticize their place in the grand scheme of things. Good players, yes, some of whom could be one of the pool of really good players in scenes like NY, LA, Chicago etc.; but, players like Pepper Adams or Ornette are at the very top of the heap (in very different ways; duh). Players of that caliber usually feel that that HAVE to be in a place where they can grow; it's not an option for them. Imo, that hunger also says something about their potential. IMO. Thanks for the nice personal story. |
Alex, thanks for the clips and for sharing your thoughts. Some more of mine: Context, context, context. Very important when trying to find answers to your interesting questions. Btw, I think it's wonderful for music lovers to look at these issues; puts the work of favorite artists in a better perspective and gives more insight into the music. Something that isn't always given enough scrutiny when looking for answers to these questions is the role of the producer. Every recording lists a producer. He is often the guy that says: "Hey, I know this good, or promising young guitar player. I want to record him. I think I will hire so and so to back him up on the record"; or, even, "Hey, Milt Jackson is really hot right now. Pablo records has him on contract. My label Slick Records doesn't have a vibes player on the roster. Who can I get to fill that slot and capitalize on the current listener interest in the vibraphone?". Given the relatively short supply of jazz vibraphonists, he may end up recording a second tier vibes player. The point is that simply because a player has a record contract or records with top tier players does not automatically mean that he, himself, is a top tier player. I know it takes a bit of the romance out of it, but most of even the top players are "guns for hire". Of course, the great ones will not play for a lame "leader"; but, that leader may sometimes not be on the same level as his sidemen. I cannot think of one single example of a player who was "the one" and then simply disappeared from the jazz scene. Sure, new players and new styles come along and supplant, in general level of popularity, the older player. But, any player who is "the one" will have, by definition, a substantial body of recorded work and that will live on; in the context of general declining interest in the art form. Example: Joe Lovano is probably "the one" right now in the tenor saxophone world. Does that mean that Sonny Rollins (who is still alive and playing) has been forgotten? I don't think so! Re your clips: When you refer to these players as "equally as good" as the high profile players, what higher profile players are you referring to? Thornell Schwartz. My first thought was, here we go again, nice and easy twelve bar blues. Says little about the player's range. Even in that context, and compared to someone like Kenny Burrell, a mediocre player. And that tenor player!? Ouch!! Sorry. https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=dIZQYzQoruc Ray Crawford. Nice player. Still, compared to, say, George Benson or Wes Montgomery? Not quite. https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?list=PL8DB57484F40BBCC3&v=SLG2ssX2oto https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=AbXHRF8D7ag Dempsey Wright. Best of the three by a long shot; albeit in a very different style. Very nice player. Still, compared to Joe Pass or Herb Ellis and, well..... https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=_RPkohp10EQ Speaking of the twelve bar blues: https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=3muZKOxqtGU Debate is a good thing. I'll stick to my contention that, by and large, there is usually a real reason that most players who are forgotten are forgotten and some remain in the limelight (or in record collections). |
Frogman, lets try to put things in some context, and than hopefully we shall make some conclusions. 'the great ones will not play for a lame "leader"; but, that leader may sometimes not be on the same level as his sidemen.' I guess that goes other way too, the 'great ones' probbably would not pick the 'lame' sidemen. My question for you is this, if the couple of the 'great ones' repeatedly choose the same guy for their albums, would not that be the sign that he is 'considered' as 'equal? If Randy Crawford was good enough for A.Jamal and J.Smith, certainly I would give him some credit. The questions is should he be compared to the so called 'best', like Wes or Burrell? (I am not a fan of Benson) If the answer is 'yes' than, I think, we are only narrowing our choices. How many players could be in that 'league' where there is 'no comparations'with others? Not much, I guess. This is not the best analogy, but, should we compare the skills of every artist with ones of Rembrandt? Than, you said 'I cannot think of one single example of a player who was "the one" and then simply disappeared from the jazz scene.' How about these couple clips? Already above mentioned (with Leo Wright) trumpet player Dave Burns https://youtu.be/5ebeHafmsDA Another trumpet player, Howard McGhee,like him a lot https://youtu.be/nilp-xPq0Y0 Herbie Nichols, complex figure https://youtu.be/e2lSBn1egDE Billy Bauer, I have mentioned him here before,played with Konitz, made only one album as leader https://youtu.be/G9x_74wc71c Or maybe Phineas Newborn Jr. Aldo, he is already considered as someone 'famous' at least among musicians. https://youtu.be/mADxQjfxL54 Michael 'Dodo' Marmorosa perhaps? https://youtu.be/cudV3FkT3bY Would like to hear others people opinions on subject. Hope its not a dull topic |
Alex, I mean no disrespect but, as I see it, you are contradicting yourself. First you make the statement that the mentioned "forgotten" players are "equally as good" as the not forgotten, and now you state that they shouldn't be compared to the Rembrandts of musicians. Well, if Rembrandt was the best artist (your suggestion) and if certain other artists are "equally as good", then shouldn't those other artists be compared to Rembrandt? Re "the one" Now I am not quite sure what you mean by " the one". You asked if there has been a player that was considered and be "the one" at some point and then disappeared. Let's see: Lester Young, Bird, Coltrane, Miles, Cannonball, Bill Evans, Lee Morgan, Freddy Hubbard, to name a few, were all considered to be "the one" at some point. None of them have been forgotten. I am sorry, but to my ears none of the players in your first post are in that league, the "Rembrandt league"; and none, to the best of my knowledge, were ever considered to be "the one". As I see it, the fact that they have not remained as famous as the one's I mentioned corroborates my point. BTW, I acknowledged that Randy Crawford is a good player in my comments; only that I dont think he is as good as players like Wes or Burrell; both of whom (certainly Wes) were considered to be "the one". I don't understand why you feel I didnt "give him some credit". Also, with the exception of Dave Burns I consider the players in your last post to be better players than those in your previous post. And I don't consider Herbie Nichols, Marmarosa, Phineas Newborn nor McGhee to be "forgotten" players at all. I don't consider Dave Burns to be in the same league as Miles, Hubbard, Morgan, Navarro, Clifford and many others. You seem to have a broader, more inclusive, range for what you consider "the best" and my range is narrower. Works for you, and mine works for me; there is no problem. BTW, I have no idea why Jimmy Smith hired Randy Crawford other than the fact that Crawford is a pretty good player and probably couldn't afford Wes Montgomery as his sideman :-) https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=VA1FbojzULk BTW, the lead alto in the saxophone section is the great Phil Woods; RIP. |
Who is/was great, and who is/was not great, and why, is an almost impossible question to answer. Too many variables. Some few Possibles: They could not play as well as the greats didn't work well with others They were drug addicts They were not very attractive people did not kiss the right ass pissed the wrong people off did not want to pay the personal price it takes to be great were one hit wonders, But really didn't have anything to say(brubeck) spent long periods of time in jail. had mental problems. Quite a few musicians were nuts. were satisfied to just make a living. no drive or ambition. played for themselves and not their audience where ripped off my the sharks in the business, quit in disgust. lived in the wrong place/time. Three things that will allow you to understand the universe. Including the Jazz/Music business. Notice the word 'business'. (1) Numbers Count.--- How many times something happens, will determine our attitude towards it, and how we react to it, or perceive it. (2) Facts Matter. Facts cannot be ignored. Reasons can be argued and emphasis placed here and there, even excuses, but, Facts cannot be changed. (3) The unwashed Decide. --- In any capitalist system, the tastes of the masses(the folks with the most money collectively) will decide what is for sale. Which is another way of saying, who/what is successful. The answer is in there somewhere. Alex: The subject is not boring, it's fascinating. Instead of the usual, i.e, the Rich and the Famous, we are discussing the Poor and the unknown. Cheers |
Frogman, point I am trying to prove is quite simple. I'll do my best to futher clear my thougts in a hope that we can stop the 'debate' and continue to recommmend good music to each other. So, hope that everyone will forgive me, here it is, one more time... 'I think the idea of the "forgotten player" or the player that "didn't get his due" is mainly overstated and often a myth' 'If we look at players' careers in the context of an evolving art form and changing times it's not difficult to understand why soem players become famous and some do not' 'the BUSINESS of music was making it much more difficult for anyone (and their recordings) other than the very best to stay in the limelight.' With a part of last sentence I would agree, that business is often the factor that has the final word, usually on expanse of art. What I wanted to say, with those few random examples, is that in history of jazz were much,much more players who were 'quite good' or beter, or even 'one of three' like in case of P.Newborn J.R. that actually never made it, and who were recognised late or by too few people. Jazz music of the past, in general, is fading into oblivion, and hardly we can talk about fame or recognition in some wider sense of those words. Comparing the very best (the 'Rembrandts') and known figures to others does not put things into right perspective, because than the book of jazz would have just a couple of pages. Someone might say that Hubbard is good, but not in a same league as Dizzy? That is not the point of 'discussion' that I am trying to make, just the opposite. Like Rok said, lets talk about those less fortunate, who left their mark, no matter how insignificant it seems to be. They were in majority, after all, and I am sure that we shall discover some very fine music indeed.However, one may have a different opinion, and standards, of course, like you said. For sure that will lead to a much smaller collection of music,but like you said, we all have our choices and I certainly respect yours. That's all, folks https://youtu.be/Q3bbsDJWlXQ P.S. Frogman, I cant open your clips, it just leads to you tube... P.P.S. Griffin's 'Studio Jazz party',with D.Burns on trumpet, and Norman Simmons on piano. I have mentioned him on this pages, again, not a well known name https://youtu.be/Wu0qnePU3Os |
I would add a couple of things and emphasize a couple of things that have already been pointed out: The jazz music scene is a small world. Musicians during any era know who the best players are from reputation and seek them out and give them exposure when they tour and this enables those musicians to make contacts, meet producers etc. It is at that point that many of the factors that Rok points out kick in. However, it should also be pointed out that the better a player is (the more he/she has to say), the more that he can overcome his limitations in the social graces department. IOW, if you're good enough, almost short of going around causing bodily harm, you can get away with a lot of bullshit. ****Some few Possibles: They could not play as well as the greats****(ALMOST always the case) didn't work well with others****(Bird would fall sleep on the bandstand and they still wanted him) They were drug addicts****(Coltrane, Pepper and countless others?) They were not very attractive people****( Ella Fitzgerald?) did not kiss the right ass****(If you're good enough you don't have to kiss ass) pissed the wrong people off****(see above) did not want to pay the personal price it takes to be great***(Agree) were one hit wonders, But really didn't have anything to say(brubeck)****(not sure of the relevance) spent long periods of time in jail****(Art Pepper for one) had mental problems. Quite a few musicians were nuts.****(Tom Harrell is a schizophrenic) were satisfied to just make a living. no drive or ambition.****(Agree, but then, what does that say about what they have to say musically?) played for themselves and not their audience****(Miles always turned his back to the audience) where ripped off my the sharks in the business, quit in disgust.****(Agree) lived in the wrong place/time****(Sort of agree) I think there is a danger in being too lose with the term GREAT. If we can all agree that dynamos like Mingus, Trane etc. were great, and if all these others are also great; then what, exactly, is it that distinguishes a Mingus or Ellington? What should we call them instead? If it ia true that, as Rok says, the unwashed decide, well it's pretty obvious who the greats are. As far as who COULD HAVE BEEN great goes, once you take the romance and personal tendencies to make excuses out of the equation, there aren't too many who didn't get what they deserved.... IF THEY HAD WHAT IT TAKES TO BE GREAT TO BEGIN WITH. |
Alex, I wrote my previous post before reading your most recent. Speaking for myself, I don't mind a debate about this or any other topic having to do with a great topic such as this. Having said that, let me remind you that it was you who asked for thoughts and commentary about your premise of the forgotten player and posted examples. While I have acknowledged that most of these players are good players, I don't agree with your premise that they were as good as the best. I simply don't agree. I do agree that some are worth getting to know better. I also agree that, in some ways and for the purpose of this discussion, it serves no purpose to always compare them to the best. But, it was you who wrote that they may have been as good as th best; like Rambrandt. Anyway, your point is taken. Yes, there are many players who were good players that should be explored by listeners; I agree. But, I consider them second and third tier players and in most cases I don't see any great crime committed because they are more "famous"; whatever that means in the context of the jazz world and it's aficionados. That seems to be the main sticking point here. Again, your "top tier" is broader than mine; that's ok. BTW, you misrepresented what I said re the "music buiness". I don't believe that "the business" OFTEN has the last word a the expense of art. Sometimes, yes; often, not so sure. To suggest that is to suggest that the artists that shaped this great music were undeserving and that others were slighted; others who were more deserving of the fame (and influence). WHO? I want to know who could have had the impact of. Bird or Ellington or Trane or Miles and who was also overlooked. Please tell me. The idea of the unrecognized genius is a quaint and attractive one. Usually overstated. The cream usually rises to the top. What i think we strongly agree with is the idea that it is a shame that the music has declined in poplarity to the extent that there isn't a broader appreciation for it in the general public. The end result of this is that the business will not support those who aren't at the very top. As Rok says, cheers, and thanks for the thought provoking posts. |
The Frogman's comments on my list: i.e. (my latest test from The Lord) Talent, and I mean extreme talent, will overcome almost anything. Bird was one of the creators of a new music. Had he the been 637th Be-bop player, instead one of the first, we may be having a different conversation. He would have been on a much shorter leash. Ella had the perfect voice, according to my favorite Opera diva, Beverly Sills. Had there been another singer, just as good as Ella in all aspects(even the thought seems silly), and of the same era, but looked like Lena Horne, We would be saying Ella who? Just how we humans are folks. That's the way it works. Good looks will also get an artist fame that their talent does not support. Mainly females. Another factor was the 'escape' to Europe. Jazz could not be nurtured there. The players who did this lived a comfortable contented life. Got picked up on Tours and had a name locally. But, they gave up the chance to be Great and well known. Drugs: some folks seem to be affected to a different degree by drug use. Some do it during a long and successful career, and others take one hit, and are immediately on skid row. And all degrees in between. Cheers |
Well, Frogman, the answer is quite simple. Ask yourself how many people actually could afford to live beeing just a jazz musician? Imho opinion jazz survived despite music business, not because of it. Certainly, that has lot to do with other social factors as well, but if the 'business'saw the opportunity to make more money with jazz, I am sure that its development and history would have taken another direction. The 'business' will support the ones who will bring the biggest buck, and usually those ones will not be our favourite 'greats'. I guess there is no need to talk about music business, and its flaws or its wrongdoing in terms of culture and education Regarding previous subject, I am not talking about narrow 'top trier,'. It is in fact my 'bottom trier' who is probbably broader than yours.(no offense) You have said that jazz society is a small circle, it may be so, but the opus left behind is absolutely huge, so much great music, I am afraid lifetime is not enough to hear it all. Under those terms, I guess one should have open ears and perspective and than it will be rewarded with more great music. Quite often that happens to me, and if that was not the case, long time ago I could option to have couple hundred 'top' records and maybe great collection of stamps too, instead. |
Alex, a good local musician can make a good living, so I recently discovered. Nothing compared to a touring musician, but good never the less. They had to drag "Grant" out of St. Louis; they couldn't even drag Eddie Fisher out. There are other local musicians who got into drugs. Grant is the only "famous" musician from St. Louis I knew personally. My friend was not from St. Louis, and if I ever mentioned his name, I would be hounded down to fill in missing time and pieces, which I'm not going to do. There is someone else on this forum who might have figured out his name, and we had a squabble about revealing personal stuff, so me friend's personal life will remain personal. I'll never attach a name to negative personal information I know; think about the guys heirs. Wardell Grey died in May 1955, and I discovered him in June 1956; so he was dead when I discovered him. My cousin had a lot of his records, but those records are no longer available, and I don't like most of the records that are available; recording quality didn't matter as much back then. All in all, it doesn't seem to matter a lot; that's because the music we like is not for this generation. Bird survived because not only was he good, but he kept evolving, and he was playing in so many different styles when he was alive; "Bird With Strings", is just as fresh today, as it was the day he made it, and the recording quality is good. Not many people have a bottom tier of records as good as yours, and I want to thank you for sharing them with us. Enjoy the music. |
By definition those whose talent was never heard, and common-sense will tell they are legion, remain unknown . It IS better to be lucky than good . Jazz could be and was nurtured in Europe , MANY great players spent long terms in Europe to escape American racism with no effect on their "greatness" . I've heard well known jazz artists say Ella had the voice but Sassy had the heart and soul and had forgot more about music than Ella knew . |
Rok, it seems you have the most complete list of reasons for not being on the list of greats. I seem to know many of them personally; some even had beautiful wives they didn't want out of their sight for too long, or was that a tennis player who retired after he reached the top, decided to come back in, and didn't make it. After thinking about all of those, would have, should have, could have people; I have a lot more respect for guys like Donald Byrd who changed style so many times, and survived at the the top for the duration of his life. Enjoy the music. |
Alex, I have no interest in arguing. I appreciate your perspective and I can only offer the perspective of someone who has been in the music "business" his entire working life (37 years) and done nothing but play music that entire time in order to earn a living; well, maybe a stock purchase or two :-). I don't disagree with all that you have written, but I think that we have strayed from the original issues and I think that in the future you may want to be more precise with what you pose. You first said that some of these players in question were as good as the best and asked if any of them were "the one". Now, a different standard is being used. Seems to me that anyone who is "the one" belongs in that top and narrow tier which you now say is not what you are talking about; and which Rok now calls "extreme talent". I am confused. I will finish with a couple of thoughts which every lover of the music should find reassuring and is certainly a positive: The music is a far more powerful force than the business of music. Jazz would have done what it did no matter what the "business" does; it has to, just as creative musicians have to create. The ones that have a lot to say will say it; its the nature of the beast. And btw, the business has made a fair bit of change from all that talking :-) Let's make this discussion interesting; if you are game. I am still waiting to hear the name of someone who was "the one" and then was forgotten. And, in addition, let's not just throw ideas out there and claim that there is "proof". Tell me in specific terms, not just "I like" or "I don't like", what it is about some of the players you have mentioned that merits their place as one of the best. I would be glad to back my comments with specifics. If you don't care to go there, and that's ok, I can only add that there is much recorded work by great trumpet players that I consider to be on a higher level than than, for instance, Dave Burns that I (nor my record collection) don't feel deprived in the least. Please don't misunderstand, I am glad that I have heard Dave Burns' work and I'm glad that his playing resonates with you. It doesn't with me. Peace. Btw, what is it about George Benson's playing that you don't like? Honest question and I don't refer to his Pop stuff. I assume you are familiar with his jazz playing. Thanks. |
Now that we have decided who is great and who ain't, the question remains, who do you most enjoy listening to. Not the necessarily the best of all time, but the one you like listening to today. Think about it. All that dedication, practice and sacrifice, and the results can fall on deaf ears. And we be "aficionads" !!! :) Cheers |
Rok, here's one. Alex, here is one of my favorite "unknowns". Well, fairly well recorded and I happen to know he is one of the ones who simply doesn't want the limelight. One of the most amazing and versatile musicians I have ever heard. From Chicago and now a local hero in South Florida where I heard him many times. On trumpet with another lesser known trumpet great, Red Rodney. Ira plays the second trumpet solo (and his hair is not "red"): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aQsEicb4x74 Ira on tenor saxophone (yes, same guy): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ll21UCUHfZ4 Ira on flute with one of the best "unknown" guitar players, Joe Diorio: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MlHOy_9hCyQ His first recording: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QJqQOhRDmJU |
Woke up to this today (thank you WBGO!). Greatness, without a doubt. What a sound!: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=acuR014vnwg |
This is truly "World" music because they borrow sounds from around the Globe. On "Kiko" they begin with Japan, stop in Africa, and then on to Australia. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWGKwNt9NY8 I know I've posted "Yulunga" before, but I find it hypnotic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z42ENG79hTo Dead can dance "Rare Trax", this is more drums. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KdXjFDKVZA Enjoy the music. |
I know you all hate this group and this CD, so spare me your boos, hisses and cries of outrage. I have a question that only The Frogman can answer. It's driving me nuts. At 4:26, just as Marcus Printup finishes his solo, Wynton comes in with one note at 4:26. Is this note just the first note of his solo, or is it a musical thingy/event that has a name? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7eeb1MTkUY Thanks Cheers |
My favorite artist who should have gotten more recognition is "Lorez Alexandria", and this is my favorite version of "Softly As In A Morning Sunrise" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWXimvRssmQ This is the version that resonates with me personally; my only complaint is that it could be longer. Here is another one I like by Lorez. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fH3own5sERU Enjoy the music. |
It seems to me that the musicians that didn't get their due recognition are "West Coast", and musicians I actually met in LA told me they were making a good living out there, and didn't want to hit the road. What they didn't realize is that most musicians are only hot for a short time, and they have to make the most of it because their going to live a lot longer than the short time their hot. Right now their doing benefits for local musicians who have outlived their popularity or are just too old to perform. Here in St. Louis our local jazz station has gotten involved. Enjoy the music. |
Rok, what are friends for; Boo! Boo! Boo!, Hss! Hss! Hss!. Now that I got that out of the way, I'll listen to the clip. "Just throw me back in the alley, and let me roll with the rest of the tin cans". The first time I heard that, I was two miles below "Tupelo". "Nawlins here I come". That's what I call fun music, and I'm going to just have some fun and enjoy it. They certainly had a good time. Enjoy the music. |
Rok, it's the first note of his solo. Nice way to start a solo; economical use of just one note. Think of a solo in terms of speech; hence why it is referred to as telling a story. Listen to the shape of that opening musical comment that starts with just one note. Maybe Wynton is saying: "HEY!.......Rok is NOW calling" 😎 Each player takes two choruses of twelve measures each (twelve bar blues). Wynton's first chorus starts at 4:25; it's his turn to play at that point and he plays his first note, as you point out, at 4:26. If you want to feel the shape or form of the tune (twelve bar blues), find the beat, tap your foot on that beat 1,2,3,4, 1,2,3,4 etc. (each measure or bar has four beats) and start counting at exactly 4:25. You wil find that Wynton plays for 24 (12x2) measures of four beats each (two choruses). Btw, don't hate the band at all. Great feeling and they are having a blast. |
He may have. It's his solo and I'm not inside his head, but it's a predetermined amount of playing space (two choruses) and there is no musical distinction between what I imagined he was saying and what you imagined. It's a solo and that was the first note. You're thinking about it the right way 'though. |
Mapman: *****I'm no expert but I have heard Oscar Peterson many times over the years and I always enjoy his recordings.***** You don't have to be an expert to love Oscar Peterson. I had decided to post asking everyone to state the three players they actually listen to most, by instrument. My Piano list included Oscar Peterson, Gene Harris and Horace Silver. cheers |
Frogman, I am pleased that I can learn something from you, would not loose time in arguing, hope that I do not leave that impression. Regarding the subject, of players who were not appriciated enough. Hope that these words will finaly clear my point of view on that matter. I have suggested that here are numerous players in jazz, who did not get substantial recognition. You, on the other hand, think that everyone who had such destiny, simply deserved it, because was not good enough player, and that the great ones always will come to the top. I belleive that in term 'great' lies the root of our missunderstanding. For me, there are lots of 'great' players, for you, there is only a handfull of 'the great' ones. With that I agree. (THE great) On the other hand, very few men can deliver the things that the 'The graet' ones can, and by messuring everything with that standards in mind, man can only narrow his musical choices. Thats what I ment when I have used the analogy with Rembrandt. Very few men in history of art had his skills, would that mean that their work is not great or impressive? But, let us not go into semantics. You have mentioned 'context' as well. If we look some players and their work in time when they lived, man could be surprised to find, that even Grant Green, for example, was not considered 'the top' player, and was deeply unhappy with his status. So, it was really tough world where they lived and it is no wonder that many lost their way or just remained in obscurity. Of course, I am very courious to find more 'hidden' music and to know more about it in general, and that is all I ever wanted to say. You may have found all music that you thought that is worth listening too, and thats fine. Certainly I will continue to try to look things from your perspective in order to understand better or to learn something new, and for that I am gratefull that you are writing here. As for George Benson, my thoghts are quite subjective, he is a very good player, but he never managed to 'touch' me, always he gave me the 'hollow' feeling, like his skills exsisted just because of them self,not because he was trying to transcedent some feeling with his playing. Kind of Al Di Meola, guy can play, but there is something missing. As for Dave Burns, you clearly are not his fan, maybe you could tell us why? You are quite happy to not have him in your collection, does that mean that you will skip the albums where he played or had some bigger part?Some of very fine Dizzy's, Moody's, Griffin,s Taylor,s and so on, list is long? I like the album, but the cover is great, looks like its have been made with some Edward Hopper's painting in mind https://youtu.be/fCjecP1HT-s https://youtu.be/fCjecP1HT-s |
*****Lorez Alexandria***** Nice enough voice. Born in California and seems to have stayed there. Should have moved to NYC / East Coast if a Jazz career was her goal. The Frogman pretty much nailed it. All the lesser knowns, are lesser known for a reason. Her case falls under my list as, (no drive ambition) and (wrong place/time). not criticisms. I understand she sang in the church. She may have been very happy. She recorded for the KING label. The last KING label I saw was on a 78rpm disc. I wonder what part Record labels play in success or lack thereof. Cheers |
Sorry, this is a clip with the great cover,that I mentioned above https://youtu.be/dG-RLgDabRs The trumpets are played by Clark Terry and Snooky Young.The pair recorded lots of albums playing together, but Young did not make any album as leader untill 70's. |
When you're young, the most important musicians are the one's you can see live. Famous musicians could be in town every weekend, but I couldn't afford to see them. Live beats famous all day long when your only option for the famous is what you have at home to play them on. Although we can't all share the local musicians I saw every weekend, I can tell you about them, and you can tell me about the musicians where you are. Of course Frogman is exempt since he lives in New York. "Leo's 5" was one of my favorite groups, along with the "Trio Trebien", I saw them quite often; this is when I was much younger in the 60's, and that certainly made a difference. "Sam Lazarr" was a local musician I enjoyed. This gives you an idea of what I heard. Nothing compares to being on a live set with friends or a beautiful lady, all dressed elegantly in the fashions of the day. It seems I particularly liked the warm sound of guitar and organ when it was below 0 and snow outside. There's something exhilarating about an organ that can not be duplicated on the set up at home, even when it's "high end". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-tAMbi54-0 "Eddie Fisher" was an artist I saw often, he could work that "Third Cup" in and out so many different ways for an hour, and nobody would be tired of it; that's the mark of a great musician. Everybody knew Eddie Fisher was a great musician except "Eddie Fisher". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuAQFFOuy3c As I'm listening to it, what it means to be on a live is coming to me; easy going soft conversation about the music and musicians, nothing ever loud enough to disturb the music. That warm feeling you get when you're in the company of like minded people. Alex and Frogman, you both came up with so many "truths" in regard to why some people make the grade in regard to great, that you agree on, why don't you let me deal with what you don't agree on. Enjoy the music. |
The first Jazz LP I ever purchased. I think he liked trains. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mfl5AVTrMfE Cheers |
*****Sam Lazarr***** Nice enough, but the sound, mainly due to the organ, sounded muffled and veiled. You don't need the top end of the freq range to play this. The importance of dynamic range in music cannot be overstated. *****Eddie Fisher***** Same as above, but very bad recording. Organ player?? I recommend Joey DeFrancesco. Cheers |
Alex, thank you for the thoughtful post. Please understand, my primary motivation is not to "teach". Like all of us on this thread I share my thoughts and likes and dislikes. If, given my particular background and perspective, anyone finds value in what I have to say, that's great. However, like all of us, I have to be honest with what I think about a topic or player and try to explain why. I too can and do learn from your posts and others'. Rok has sometimes alluded to the issue of "too much knowledge". While I don't agree that there can ever be too much knowledge, I think that there is a lot of value in understanding why certain music or artists may appeal to a listener who has not had any formal training or experience in music or performance. This is not a condescending attitude, but an honest acknowledgment of the value in a perspective that is more emotional and less "encumbered" by "facts". I hesitate to say this because, in the end, facts (objectivism) matter a great deal. The subject of objectivism vs. subjectivism has been the topic of debate many times on this thread. As with most things in life, the truth is somewhere in the middle. I think the main sticking point in our recent disagreement has to do with the degree to which you and I feel we are being limited by where we draw the "greatness" line. I don't agree with your stance that where I am drawing the line (as you see it) limits the listener to just "a handful" of artists; quite the contrary. First of all, I completely agree with you that there are many jazz players that deserved more recognition. I am simply saying that, USUALLY BUT NOT ALWAYS, the less recognition a player received the farther from "top tier" status they usually were; based on ability. I must also say that, since your first post on the subject, your posted examples of players have gotten progressively better, imo; players like Phineas Newborn and Clark Terry are hardly "unknowns" and are fantastic players. So, just how much are we limiting ourselves by "ignoring" some of these least pkayers. Let's stick, for a moment, to trumpet players since Dave Burns relates to all this and was one of your first examples. Let me also say that, for me, the line is drawn, first and foremost, at a player's ability to project an individualistic sound or style; iow, does he have something to say that is unique or his own. For example, I can hear just a few measures of Louis Armstrong, Miles, Freddie, Lee Morgan (!!!), Dizzy, Clark Terry, Clifford, Woody Shaw, Dave Douglas, Kenny Dorham and be able to identify the player. To a lesser degree (takes longer listening and harder to identify): Nat Adderley, Tom Harrell, Randy Brecker, Red Rodney, Fats Navarro, Thad Jones, Donald Byrd. To an even lesser degree: Ira Sullivan, Tim Hagans, and the list goes on and on. When one considers how much many of these players have recorded, no, I don't feel it limits at all; I consider all of these players to be at the top of the heap and to have individualistic styles to one degree or another. In the case of Wynton (Rok, you can ignore this) I can always identify him by the sheer virtuosity and technical perfection in his playing. This all leads to Dave Burns since you asked: I don't hear an individualistic sound. I don't hear from him anything that hasn't been said by many other bop/hard bop players. Moreover, technically I hear a sense that, technically, he is not totally secure. Listen to the end of phrases and he "flubs" or slurs the notes. He can get around the instrument well, but there is the sense that he might lose technical control of the instrument sometimes and miss a note. Miles also conveyed this sense sometimes, but this was an artistic choice. It was part of his musical "attitude"; a kind of "fuck you" attitude and arrogance that went along with his habit of turning his back to the audience. Still, a genius who could play with technical perfection (or close to it) when he felt like it. Anyway, thanks for the dialogue and interesting topic. I think that if we have more agreement than disagreement. |
*****I was only feet away from both players when I heard them; no recording, and no recording equipment can duplicate organ, not even high end.***** I agree. When I lived in Endicott, NY, my favorite Bar, in nearby Binghamton, had a house band based around the organist. Wow!! Live definitely makes a difference. Cheers |
