frogman
Responses from frogman
| Jazz for aficionados Don’t worry, I am well aware that CC was fiction. Besides, your statement contains other far more important fiction to comment on. I’m staying out of this one for now, so please leave me out of it. For the time being, I’d much rather post about fu... | |
| Jazz for aficionados Czarivey, glad you enjoyed those clips. ECM is a fantastic label with some of the best production standards. Amazing catalogue of well recorded and very interesting music. More to come. | |
| Jazz for aficionados ****Strange comments from a Classical player. Remember it the next time you play Mozart, or Beethoven, or Bach, or............ well you get the drift.****Actually, Rok, it’s not a strange comment at all. It’s a comment heard often among players an... | |
| Jazz for aficionados Ghosthouse and jzzmusician, thanks for the clips. I enjoyed the Andy Summers clips and I always enjoyed his work with The Police. I look forward to more clips from you.jzzmusician, I love that Herbie Hancock clip. I posted that very clip about ... | |
| Jazz for aficionados 1974:The genre is really hitting its stride about now. Dave Liebman and Lookout Farm release what is one of the greatest records in the genre. Liebman is probably the most soulful of all the post-Coltrane tenor players. Miles alum as well as of... | |
| Jazz for aficionados It's not fusion; I was yanking your chain. But, you still don't know fusion when you hear it; obviously. So, you didn't pan Taylor, does this mean you actually like it? There might be hope yet 😕 | |
| Jazz for aficionados Duke's piano:Thanks for the heads up. I think I'll pass; I already have Basie's and my wife would kill me since I'm holding out for Cecil Taylor's. I think you'll like this:Cecil Taylor in 1973:https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RSv0uR-uupU | |
| Jazz for aficionados Acman3, great clips all; thanks. I've been a fan of Makowics for some time; very interesting player. Larry Young; monster player. This has been one of my all time favorite records; amazing lineup:https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLOL4BdmfT02hjS... | |
| Jazz for aficionados Alex, thank you for the introduction to Ganelin Trio. I agree with your description; impressive musicians. I previously commented that "free jazz" sometimes is no more than bs masquerading as jazz; these players definitely do not fall into that ca... | |
| Jazz for aficionados O-10, you are without a doubt one of the most disingenous individuals that I have ever had interaction with; it boggles the mind. No, I don't think the interest is below zero and I will post as I see fit; thank you very much. | |
| Jazz for aficionados I have no problem with not referring to it as fusion-jazz. Honestly, it simplifies matters. From now on we'll refer to it as simply fusion and I actually think that's pretty much how it's been so far. I don't think the other way degrades anythin... | |
| Jazz for aficionados To be honest, I don't care WHAT you (or anyone) call it. If it's good music that's all that matters. You don't like fusion; that's fine. And, yes, if I HAD to choose between the two (a silly notion, but hey!) I would choose classic jazz (jazz-j... | |
| Jazz for aficionados Honest question: just what is SO offensive about calling it jazz? First of all it's usually called fusion jazz; but let's not split hairs. Classic jazz stands on its own as the great music it was and is. Why do you think that such a powerful an... | |
| Jazz for aficionados Can’t generalize. Well, maybe you can; I can’t. ****It didn’t go anywhere****Dead wrong. And, as I said, the reason that a chronological approach is key.1973:https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hNlm-W3m1qcNot better than The Stones as far as basic music... | |
| Jazz for aficionados Rok, I understand totally the point you are making. But says nothing about the relevance of the art IN ITS TIME. We’ve been here a thousand times before. |