Jazz for aficionados

Rok, one thing l'll say for you.  You are the model of consistency; consistently inconsistent 🎷

This is specially for you Frogman, since you're equating "soul" in mathematical terms, I'm going to give you some "super soul". In order to capture the nuance on this one cut "Blue Funk", I first had to get to the "high end of the high end"; 45 RPM vinyl, Sota Saphire, modified Rega Tonearm, Grado Sonata cartridge. Grado is sneered on here because they wouldn't recognize soul if it bit em in the ass.

Tube pre and amp is a must. Any speakers that have good solid midrange and bass are sufficient; soul is source critical. This is not about having the deepest pockets, but about selecting the best components for the job.

This is the LP;



        [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUnID70IU-g&list=RDzUnID70IU-g#t=563[/url]


I'll get back to you next year when you have the mathematical calculation.




Enjoy the music.

Cecile savant second album. Not the latest but the one before is the best female vocal full album I've heard in jazz in the last 5 years. Woman child is the name of the album!

@rok2id, at the risk of being too much of a "fanboy" for The Sound Of Jazz," I have the BluRay version ripped to my music server in two flavors:  one is a 2.5 gig MKV and one is a 22 gig BDMV file.  It has more stuff than was on the Sound of Jazz LP, but I have to say that the sound quality is absolutely phenomenal.  I also think that I successfully ripped just the audio track out in 24/96.  If you want either one, PM me and I can send you a link to download it directly from my server . . . :)

@orpheus10 , you mentioned Jimmy Smith.  I love his music. What about "Back at the Chicken Shack" in SACD? A great recording and great quality too! Has anyone mentioned Bill Evans Trio Live at the Village Vanguard in XRCD?  There is just so much great jazz out there, this thread is causing me to go back through my collection and listen to some of the less "famous" choices, which is fantastic!  And that is not even getting to the '70's!

The Frogman declared them noise makers.   The OP Howled and foamed at the mouth.  But, The Great Unwashed would not be denied.

Back by popular demand:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=en6kmiX0SDc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jDDtUFUgbM

Cheers

@moto_man , Thanks for your offer, but when it comes to computers and downloads  etc..., I am as lost there, as The Frogman is when it comes to spotting new talent.

@calvinj , +1 on Salvant.  I have the Woman child CD.  She also appears on the latest Christmas recording from Wynton Marsalis and the JALCO (big band holidays).  If we could only do something about those glasses.

@orpheus10 , Ray and Milt.   Could be your best ever recommendation.  I bought it, and listen to it often.  Great CD.

@The Frogman,  Sticks and Stones may break my bones, but snide remarks from The Frogman will never hurt me.

Cheers

Rok, with Rachelle Ferrell I had to quit looking at her over the top facial expressions, and scratch the fact she was singing "Autumn Leaves" and "scatin". When I turned away from the computer and listened to her voice as a musical instrument, she got A+; but I had to go through a lot of changes.

With the "Bey Sisters"; can you say "stereotypical", I knew you could. That means to use something that's been used too many times before; it was not original. It reminded me of an entirely different song;


              [url]http://www.weather.com/weather/hourbyhour/graph/63031[/url]


Andy Bey by himself did a lot better; he's singing a standard like a standard is supposed to be sung by bringing out the meaning and emotion that goes with the song; and as my teacher used to say; "This is the last time I'm gonna tell you this',


            [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXwcazvrnko[/url]


Enjoy the music.

Moto_Man, I have that album, and a number of others by Jimmy Smith. This is one of my favorite tunes by him "Walk On The Wild Side"


              [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dy8dZEpEYrA[/url]



How about "When Johnny Comes Marching Home";



                [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FaTH6VbFK7I[/url]







Enjoy the music.

Any one have the new Bill Frissell CD ?

Jafant, No I have not heard the new Bill Frissell, but I will!

Also, I forgot to thank you on the Matthew Shipp recommendation a while back. I have been a fan, since the incredible David S. Ware recordings in the 90's, but lost track. He puts out so much work.

Jafant, I received the new Frisell CD just last week.  He's one of those players whose recordings I buy unheard.  As far as I am concerned he is a genius.  I have always loved his music and am particularly fond of his work with Haden and Lovano.  His latest is a beautiful CD and features the vocals of Hade's daughter, Petra.  

Of course, we all know how rare good new music is 😉

Rok, I have never used the term "noise maker" to  describe any artist.  That is your phrase; and, not only would I never dream of appropriating one of your descriptions, but it would not be appropriate use of the term.  You tend to use it to describe music that you don't like or understand; regardless of the level of craft involved.  A noise maker is someone who not only is not very good, but is insincere in his/her musical efforts.  Your examples are of artists who are probably sincere, I just happen to think their efforts are not at a particularly high level. Misappropriation is just as bad as misrepresentation. 

@moto_man ,  'The Sound of Jazz' has been in my player since you posted it.  This is great stuff.  I did not give it it's just due in my first response.  Part of the reason was the sound quality of the you-tube.   The CD is light years better.

'The Train and The River' by The Jimmy Giuffre Trio, for some reason reminds me of Stravinsky's 'The Soldier's Tale'.

I guess with that lineup, how could the results be anything other than exceptional.

Cheers

Regarding 'the dispute' that is going on...'the very controversial jazz movement on the west coast in the 1950's was a beautiful one in certain musical ways and yet it failed for probably one reason. And that was that there was too litlle of the heart and spirit of the men in their music'....'they were too involved in musical device gleaned from their classical teachers, device that they tried to adapt to the jazz idiom in an attepmpt to somehow extend its parameter in a wholly mechanical, methodological fashion. In their intellectual exuberance they were so intent on doing something different that they overlooked the possibility, that just being themselves would have produced the difference they sought. The whole value to jazz and to themselves would have been much greater and lasting'....these are the words written in 1962.....It seems to me that the same dispute is going on for decades now, from same positions, and that only the name of protagonists have changed.....any comments?

 As far as I am concern I realy enjoy listening and finding some long forgotten music, very much like the one that once was considered as 'soulless', but I am sure that that cant be said about it now...example

Above mentioned Jimmy Giuffre, with Modern Jazz Quartet, from 1956.


[url]https://youtu.be/KQ0cNilXb2U[/url]

[url]https://youtu.be/d-hPtUrDric[/url]

@rok2id , Glad I could help. But I have to say that the BluRay audio is light years better that even the CD in terms of sound quality.  I'm actually not sure how they cleaned it up so well, but it is pretty impressive.  When I get the BluRay audio properly tagged, I'll walk you through the very simple process of downloading it from my server.  It'll be a whole new world!

@orpheus10 , two great suggestions.  I am again amazed at what YouTube has up for old video.  So great seeing some of these great performers!

On the playlist for today:  Oscar Peterson Plays Count Basie!

Alex, you have demonstrated the versatility of Milt Jackson; he was the best, especially when you consider how he switched from the "clinical" MJQ to the soulful side of Ray Charles. There is also a "Bags and Trane" album that gives us yet another facet of "Bags", as he was affectionately known.



Enjoy the music.

@alexatpos ,   Comments?  You said it as well as it can be said.

*******'they were too involved in musical device gleaned from their classical teachers, device that they tried to adapt to the jazz idiom in an attempt to somehow extend its parameter in a wholly mechanical, methodological fashion.*******

That is the HOW, now, the question is, WHY?    Why the obsession with making Jazz something, other than what it was?

The WHY will be the most interesting part of all.

Great post as usual from a very insightful observer of Jazz and it's history.

Thanks

Cheers

You think Jazz is a was, when Jazz is an is! 

That is why we seem to always be at this point, no matter how many times I think we have worked past it.

Sometimes things go so well together that you can't have one without the other: peanut butter and jelly; ham and eggs; beans and cornbread; well anyway you get my drift. There are jazz musicians who go together in this fashion: Donald Byrd and Pepper Adams; Jimmy Smith and Kenny Burrell.

Now I'm going to give you "Motorin Along" with Mr. Smith and Kenny Burrell;




                      [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUVDk0BCYxs[/url]






Enjoy the music.

Acman, you're absolutely correct; I know because I is listening to it right now; therefore it is an is, just like you say.

***** You think Jazz is a was, when Jazz is an is! ******


Just barely, once you take away the recordings of the players that are dead.

If you are a Jazz lover, just like the Classical lover, be prepared to listen to music by players / composers long dead.

Cheers

O-10, I will not be accepting your "challenge"; sorry. Allow me explain why (although Acman3 pretty much summed it up):

This thread is going on three years and after countless posts of "new music" that the various posters obviously feel are also good music, for you make that challenge can only mean one of three things: 1. The challenge is gratuitous provocation. 2. You have not been paying close enough attention to the posts in your own thread. 3. Your musical palette is so entrenched in the music of the past that nothing will sway you. Ergo, and as I said before: futility.

Please don’t misunderstand, we are all, obviously, free to like or dislike any particular style of music, but this all points to the important backdrop to this "dispute" (as Alexatpos describes it). I will try and describe it once more:

There exist two different mindsets:. One mindset uses one’s favorite style of music as a type of comfort zone. This is music or a genre that is deemed "the best" by a particular listener because he simply likes it or can relate to it for any of a variety of reasons. The other mindset believes in the adage "there are only two kinds of music, good and bad". This adage is genre blind and points out, as moto_man pointed out recently, that we all like certain styles of jazz, that no one style is better than the other, and that the only consideration that is subject to intellectual analysis is the skill level of the performer; THAT is what determines what is good music or bad. My only point of disagreement with moto_man’s excellent observation is in the assumption that everyone can discern skill level. For that there needs to be, at least, an openness of mind to the reality that in order to discern skill level one has to rely on a little more than simply visceral reaction. I am not talking about taking music theory courses, for instance, but simply an openness to the aforementioned idea. Rok recently commented: "the visceral always trumps the intellectual". That is simply not true, and as usual, we want simple answers. Perfect example: Kenny G; wildly successful instrumentalist that evokes a very strong visceral reaction in unsophisticated listeners for doing things like being able to sustain a high note for a long time. The unsophisticated listener thinks that this bit of instrumental trickery must mean that he is a great musician. Obviously, all the participants in this thread are more sophisticated than that, but there are many levels of this sophomoric syndrome.

Personally, I find it ironic, and more than a little pathetic, just how much resistance there is to the idea that at ANY point in time there is, in fact, good music being made; that what determines whether it is good or bad is how well the music reflects the time of its creation along with the skill level of the performer. We should be able to separate our personal generational or social biases and be more open to this idea. No one is saying that we should not have a favorite era in this music, but to be so rigid with our merit-hierarchy is a disservice to the music. I say this is ironic because I don’t know a single musician in any genre that does not feel this same way or is not of the more open-minded attitude.

Rok asked the question: "I don’t understand why you guys think that jazz always has to change". Again, ironic. Ironic that someone who leans so much on the "history" of the music doesn’t see the obvious: Jazz has been evolving since its birth and it will continue to do so whether we like it or not (I think that was what Acman3 meant with his comment about jazz being what is not what was). Again, not to suggest that anyone person should not have a favorite era or even believe that there were high points in the music’s evolution; but, to be blunt, a listener that is not even aware (there’s that intellectual thing again) that the overwhelming majority of music that he refers to or posts as examples is simply twelve bar blues has no basis for making grandiose comments about the superiority of one era over another.

Along with the close minded mindset we often find a tacit implication that the listener who appreciates music that some perceive as leaning toward the "intellectual" (sometimes described as "noisemakers") are not as capable of appreciating music that is more obviously, or more traditionally, "soulful" or visceral. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is the close minded individual who is missing the boat. Alexatpos addresses this issue in his recent, and interesting, post. Rok, in his search for affirmation, missed the thrust of Alex’s comment. As I interpret Alex’s post:

First of all, those were not Alex’s words. He was quoting someone else’s comments and then proceeded to make the point that even music that AT ONE TIME was considered "soulless" can be experienced differently at a later time and that he, himself, enjoys music that was considered "soulless" at one time. Alex, please correct me if I misinterpret your post.

Personally, I think that this thread would be far more interesting and positive if there was more openmindedness and more willingness to explore ways to assess skill level. I also find it ironic (more irony 😳) and more than a little silly that some posters feel free to deem this or that music as unworthy because of stylistic considerations and comment that it is "soulless" or not "boss" ("boss"? really?); but, yet, when someone points out that the skill level is not up to par all hell breaks loose. I hope we can do better going forward. Actually, I think we ARE doing better. Who would have thought, three years ago, after all the rants about what a noise maker Stravinsky was, that Rok would refer to "L’Histoire" in one of his comments? There’s hope yet 😊

O-10, re Ray Charles/Bags. Great record. Have had that record since college.  I know that you have a monopoly on being able to recognize soul, but that record bit me in the ass many years ago 😉. And, BTW, I will be posting some "new" music soon, but please don’t take that as a response to your challenge. Or, go ahead and do.

Best to all.

GOOD GRIEF!!   AAUGH!!!!!

I know The Lord would not put more on me, than he knows I can bear. (no pun)

Rok, if the good Lord put that load on you, you can bear it; I got faith in you, just remember Job in the Bible, he was rewarded.

You can carry on, just don't forget to enjoy the music while going through these trials and tribulations.

Fact certain, you can listen to music composed by living classical composers 24/7 and I believe same goes for Jazz.

I listen to classical 6-7 hours a day every day and for the last 4-5 years about 1/3 of the time I make it a rule to hear composers still breathing .
Of course classical has Naxos ,all you have to do is look at  their offerings
 and  choose anybody you never heard of , Naxos only sells good music.
The founder,Klaus Heymann, deserves every Medal, gold or otherwise there is .
 

While I write my response to The Frogman's diatribe, why don't you Gentlemen READ this.

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/07/31/arts/music-what-jazz-is-and-isn-t.html

Cheers

O-10:

Thanks for your support.

Rok, as usual, you miss the point. You can’t understand just how much agreement there is between Wynton’s "diatribe" and my own; you seem to see only what you want to see. Wynton, in fact, corroborates much of what am saying; I know nuance is difficult. Lastly, don’t forget that Wynton has made an empire from the "preservation of the art"; self interests and all.  

And here is another big part of the problem.  Had someone played this for you and not told you who was playing, I would bet you would relegate them to noise-maker status.  But, this is one of Wynton's heroes as he admits in his diatribe.  How do you feel about the music with this knowledge in mind?  Surprise me.

[URL]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7aFKG2c6RIY[/URL]

Schubert, you listen to classical as much as I listen to jazz. Taste in music is primarily a result of the culture you were exposed to.

Your comment in regard to rap, hit the nail dead on the head; they asked for it and you gave it to them. Talking to "MOE-RONS" is a waste of time; racism has manipulated them into putting a noose around the "serf" classes neck, since they only understand black and white, they wouldn't understand that. At any rate, it's game over for the "serf" class.





Enjoy the music.

When a person writes a long, seemingly well thought out post, that you disagree with totally, the most likely reason is:

(1) He is right and you are wrong

(2)  His premise is wrong.

The Frogman's premises are wrong.

The incorrect premise is to a logical argument,  what cheap unreinforced concrete is to a building's foundation.  It won't hold up.

First:
***** There exist two different mindsets:*****

When it comes to music and all art, there are almost as many mindsets as their are people.  You are trying to define / limit the parameters to fit your point of view.   The foundation of your argument is in error.

...............More in a minute   have to change to music before Shepp drives me nuts!

 *****that we all like certain styles of jazz, that no one style is better than the other, and that the only consideration that is subject to intellectual analysis is the skill level of the performer; THAT is what determines what is good music or bad. ***

If this were true, we would all have thousands of CDs / LPs  full of music we hated, or did not like, but bought because of the skill level of the performer.  Just like right this minute, I am sure you can analyze Shepp and point out a hundred things he is doing correctly.   To me it is just so much sound.  Incoherent sound.   Noise?
So YOU may think this is GOOD music.  If you do, I can assure you , you are in a very tiny minority.

BTW, both are capable of playing good music, this just ain't it.   Esp for Roach.

O-10   I listen to jazz as well , maybe 6 hours a week.

I don't know about musical taste always being a product of the culture you're in ,though that is usually the case .I never heard a note of classical
music till I was almost 30, in truth I never even knew there was such a thing. By sheer chance I heard the Great Swedish tenor Jussi Bjoerling sing a Beethoven lied on German radio and was overwhelmed by beauty and that was that .

rok, your efforts to think "outside the box" are admirable , the sad truth though is you are the box .

***** Rok recently commented: "the visceral always trumps the intellectual". That is simply not true******

For the listener, it is absolutely true.   In Jazz and esp in Classical.  Listen to very early Blues, R&B and Rock & Roll.   Music that changed the world.  Where is the intellectual?  At Julie-Art. :)

***** For that there needs to be, at least, an openness of mind to the reality that in order to discern skill level one has to rely on a little more than simply visceral reaction *****

Who buys music based solely on 'skill level'?  If that were true, the only Jazz Trumpet you would need would be Wynton.
 And as much as I love the guy, I can't see that.  Now we assume if the guy has a CD he can play his instrument{intellectual}, what we wanna know is, what is he saying when he plays(visceral)

***** Personally, I find it ironic, and more than a little pathetic, just how much resistance there is to the idea that at ANY point in time there is, in fact, good music being made; that what determines whether it is good or bad is how well the music reflects the time of its creation along with the skill level of the performer.******

The best to find out how much good music  you think is being played today, is to take a look at the stuff on your shelf.  The stuff you paid good money for.   If you have no Armstrong, a few by Miles, maybe one Coltrane,  but tons of stuff from current day players, then you are true to your 'beliefs', and I can only respect that.

Rok, believe it or not, I was reading your post"..............More in a minute have to change to music before Shepp drives me nuts!" And that's when I discovered what that noise in the background was; what's Frogman trying to do to us?

*****Rok asked the question: "I don’t understand why you guys think that jazz always has to change". Again, ironic. Ironic that someone who leans so much on the "history" of the music doesn’t see the obvious: Jazz has been evolving since its birth and it will continue to do so whether we like it or not******

The important  words here are "Always Has To Change".  Natural progression / evolution is one thing, that it MUST or HAS TO change is something else.   That is not what has happened.   What has happened is, the Music has been changed/distorted/redefined to the point  that Anyone and Everyone can now play "Jazz".   And although the Great unwashed decide, they can only choose from the people the critics and power brokers put forward.

*****  but, to be blunt, a listener that is not even aware (there’s that intellectual thing again) that the overwhelming majority of music that he refers to or posts as examples is simply twelve bar blues has no basis for making grandiose comments about the superiority of one era over another. ******

"SIMPLY Twelve Bar Blues!!!   Surely you jest.  What do you think Jazz is.  Is there no place in your Jazz for 12 bar blues?  Your school house training is showing.  It's gotta be complex? Incomprehensible?  

 I have every right to make any comment, 'grandiose' or otherwise about what I like.  BTW, I only post what I own, or put another way, I only post what I spend my real money for.
No Blues, No Jazz
Know Blues, Know Jazz

***** Personally, I think that this thread would be far more interesting and positive if there was more openmindedness and more willingness to explore ways to assess skill level. *****

You are going to be known as the Grinch that took all the fun out of Jazz.   Skill level can only be discussed in a serious manner by some Jazz players or a Jazz instructor.   That would be The Frogman.
We are not at Julie-Art, we are in the club / barber shop. :)

I'm wore out.  Later

Cheers

***** And that's when I discovered what that noise in the background was; what's Frogman trying to do to us?*****

I think he got his hands on the CIA's playlist from Gitmo.

We could say that Roach's drumming was Jazz drumming in search of a Jazz tune.

Cheers

Rok, you crack me up.  As usual, you see (read) what you want to see and interpret it the way you want to interpret it.  I know full well that you will always want the last word; some things will never change.  No problem and no hard feelings.  Now, wait for it.....this is actually a compliment now.... I believe you will get it one day.  Right now, you don't.  As far as taking the fun out of it goes, let's see.... who is really taking the fun out of it (and this is the only "premise" that this is all about)?  The person who says: "There's great music happening as we speak (write)?" Or, the person who says: "The only good music was made by dead people?"

It's hard to follow all the nonsense but as far as I can see the root cause of the differences being expressed are in fundamental value systems set in concrete before the brain was fully developed.
To whit, frogman attended an institution of higher-learning where  intellection
 was/is highly valued , rok one where it was not .

"Jazz speaks for life. The Blues tell the story of life's difficulties, and if you think for a moment, you will realize that they take the hardest realities of life and put them into music, only to come out with some new hope or sense of triumph.

This is triumphant music.

Modern jazz has continued in this tradition, singing the songs of a more complicated urban existence. When life itself offers no order and meaning, the musician creates an order and meaning from the sounds of the earth which flow through his instrument. "

Martin Luther King

Chazro, I am humbled.  Beautifully concise, to the point and timely. Thank you for that.

I can hardly await the next great Jazz CD of 2016.

MLK's comments were made to say that Jazz serves the same purpose for urban black folks as the Blues did for Blacks in the rural South.

What did he mean by 'modern Jazz'?   MLK died in 1968.   Just to name a few of the many guys playing then, would include:
Miles,Monk,Coltrane,Rollins,Mingus,Hubbard,Morgan,Cannonball, Basie, Ellington and too many more to mention.

Now the question is, was he speaking of folks like these, or the grads of Julie-art.   Think people, Think.    

@jafant ,  Me too.

Cheers

Miles Davis, Juilliard graduate.

Freddie Hubbard, studied at the Arthur Jordan Conservatory of Music (now the Jordan College of the Arts at Butler University) with Max Woodbury, the principal trumpeter of the Indianapolis Symphony Orchestra.

John Coltrane, studied music at the Granoff Studios as well as the Ornstein School of Music.

Cannonball Adderly, grad in music, Florida A&M University. Held position of band director at Dillard HS. Afterwards moved to NY originally to seek graduate studies at NYC music conservatories.

Sonny Rollins, "So then I had a saxophone teacher, and went to little music schools and stuff like that, not private teachers. But I never had sort of the formal education that my older brother and sister had, so I always felt inferior to them."- SR

Charles Mingus, studied with Herman Reinshagen, principal bassist of the New York Philharmonic, and compositional techniques with Lloyd Reese.

Just a few of the ones you mentioned.  Think, Rok, think! 🙃

Lord my Burden is Great.

The question was, who was MLK referring to when he used the term 'modern Jazz'.  He was referring to all the guys you just listed.   So Miles attended Julie-art.  So what.   So the others went to a music school.   So what.

When I say , the Julie-art people, you know who I mean.  And it's not the people you just named.   I mean the people who are destroying Jazz.

Nice try

Cheers

Tell you what, Rok.  I am so convinced that it is the negativity and anger in attitudes like yours that are doing more harm to the music than anything else that I invite you to come to NY and I will take you to places like Juilliard and jazz clubs in the city, as my guest, so you can see, first hand, just how much good music is happening today.  This way you don't have to simply imagine what is, or is not, going on.  I could even arrange for you to meet your hero Wynton.  If you promise to keep the rants to a minimum I may even offer to put you up (futon bed ok?). 😊 I'm dead serious.