Village Vanguard session with Bill Evans

Thanks Ghosthouse. Happy new year to you. - Jim

I think the village vanguard recordings are fantastic. Why ? Well it's not because of the number of notes played or " needed". What a curious concept. I have no idea how many notes are needed to express ones self in any given situation but if there were some arbitrary limit then Trane would have exceeded it by a country mile in his "sheets of sound" days. This is how HE expressed HIS 'zen-ness' and , I think, his spirituality by reciting almost every possible musical permutation in his journey to the bottom of that particular rabbit hole. Evans expresses his soul differently. I like the recording because I see the beauty in it. I don't think someone elses reasons should sway your opinion however. As for kinda blue it's iconic and of the highest quality but I don't love it as much as I do several other miles titles. BTW I am surprised by newbees comment about the recording quality of 50's - 60's jazz. Other than almost always undermiking piano I view this period as a golden age of great quality. After 1970 recording quality for me dropped way off. 1958-1965 was peak with 1961 being the best IMHO. I have no idea why this is so. I might be a bit prejudiced by the great performances of the time. - Jim

Ghosthouse, I think the use of space can be very moving and sometimes less is indeed more. Some people like Count Basie made a living out of it. Others (Pops) used the implication of notes ( not playing them but playing in a way where one expects to hear certain notes ) and then used these 'implied notes' as part of the melody he was playing. This use of space and compactness of playing, this level of virtuosity may indeed be objectively said to be of the highest level. What I found "curious' was to take only one aspect of expression ( space or perhaps compactness- often a Milesian attribute) and try to use it as a some sort of standard upon which to objectively judge the quality of another recording. What makes great music IMHO is it's ability to go beyond the here and now and to offer a transcendent experience to the listener. Each of us has a unique experience we bring with us each time we listen to music or view great art. That's why something might be so obviously magical to me but not to you and vice versa. I don't get a lot of modern art when I go to an art museum but the guy next to me might be in tears. His view and the view of the painters align so that he sees 'through' the painting to its greater meaning which alludes me. Is it great art or great music ? I say yes if it allows a way, if we can but see/hear it, to a deeper meaning which is ordinarily unavailable to us. - Jim

Ghosthouse, I don't know to what extent subjectivism is important. It's probably pretty rare when something resonates with everyones conscienceness at the same and in the some way. I don't believe that art is purely objective and that all we need to do is refine our tastes. There are many truths and many pathways which will be apparent to some but not to others as a function of their state of being and not necessarily their taste. This is subjective to the extent that certain vision requires certain life insight which may not be taught in art/music school. - Jim