Stuff You Tried To Love


I know we talk a lot about confirmation bias- we buy something and then convince ourselves we like it. Or something like that. But did you ever buy something you wanted to love and just couldn’t make it work? For me, Esoteric X-05 SACD/CD player. Bought from a local who was upgrading to the X-03. Big, beautiful piece of gear, but I couldn’t get used to the sound after 6 months of trying. Sold it to another local- I insisted he listen before he bought and I believe he sold it soon after as well. Totem Forest and Hawk. I loved the whole concept. Slim, easy to live with. Couldn’t get them to work in my room. The Model Ones were much better. I had a couple of other pieces, but this is long enough. BTW, these were bought used without audition.

chayro

Showing 8 responses by sokogear

I listen to jazz probably 40% of the time (otherwise classic rock - only classical is that part of Days of Future Passed), mainly late fifties to mid 60's with a little progressive stuff in there from the 80's and beyond.

Of course Coltrane is heavily in the mix. I just can't stand A Love Supreme and it is always rated highly among his records. Same goes for a few other very highly rated jazz choices that are I guess a little too "out there" for my taste like Eric Dolphy and Wayne Shorter's The All Seeing Eye.. 

If you don't like Miles you don't like jazz, and that's OK. Kind of Blue is a masterpiece, highly influenced by the great Bill Evans. This is the only album of Miles' he plays on. BTW, I only like Miles' records from the late 50's to early 60's, and I know Bitches Brew is always named among his best, but that is also in the Love Supreme category. I just don't get it. 

@knock1 - I guess I should have said if you don't like Kind of Blue, you don't enjoy listening to jazz. You are equating not liking it to disliking it. There is a difference.

hey @stuartk  - you like progressive jazz , which is what I initially liked when it was current when I was in college. My taste evolved when I got older and started listening to "real" jazz (Sirius' designation, not mine). I still mix some of the progressive stuff in - Pat Metheny, Earl Klugh, George Benson, Lee Ritneour, Grover, Bob James, and even a little Spyro Gyra when the mood strikes). It's OK if your taste never evolved....

Me too @stuartk (as far as my jazz preferences-tilted toward blues). I guess I was thinking progressive as jazz fusion or jazz funk, really 70's-80's stuff. @knock1  - I'm not talking about audiophile labeling at all. Not sure why you mentioned me about punching someone's audiophile card.

Music preferences do not define audiophiles. And audiophile doesn't compose any specific music preferences. Any type of music along with an audiophile designation represent 2 overlapping circles in a Venn diagram. Or "audiophile" can be a large circle in the middle with each type of music having a circle overlapping it to some degree in the diagram. Some overlap more than others....

My only point was that any jazz enthusiast ALMOST always is a fan of Kind of Blue. It is recognized as the most popular and accessible jazz album of all time to even the non-jazz listener. It is unique in the makeup of the band in all of Miles' records and sounds unique among them. At least @stuartk you admit to owning it. It's very possible you are tired of it or it isn't enjoyable to you so you don't regularly play it. Anyone else out there consider themselves a jazz fan and not like KoB? If so, what are your favorite jazz albums?

Surprisingly, I find Cannonball's Somethin' Else more similar to it than most if not any of Miles' other records. And not surprisingly I guess, it's my second favorite jazz album. 

And BTW @stuartk, I would bet any "greatest jazz recording" would be highly rated by Penguin.

@stuartk - I guess I do miss your point. Penguin Jazz guide rates most very popular titles highly, and some I don't like because they are unlistenable to me (Love Supreme, Eric Dolphy, etc.) but they don't exactly overlap. I like what I like - although not specific to one narrow type of jazz. Mostly late fifties to mid 60's slanted toward smaller (sextet or less typically) groups. I guess the way Sirius XM divides them is how listeners categorize them, and real jazz has most of what I prefer and watercolors has some.  It would be nice if they had a progressive (maybe modern?) jazz (or experimental or whatever you want to call it) but I guess the demand isn't there.