|
Post by gregorythefish on Jun 29, 2015 13:31:00 GMT
could be, alun. could be. back in my early days of listening to jazz, i didn't like bitches brew. i also didn't like much 50's hard bop. oh how the times have changed! so who knows?
|
|
|
Post by Rich on Jun 29, 2015 16:59:56 GMT
So many interesting points you made, digin! 1. I totally understand regarding Giant Steps, but for some reason I was into that album right away. As for A Love Supreme, it sounded complex and intense to me from the jump but just like you, I was into it from the beginning. ALS is not one of my favorite jazz albums let alone one of my favorite Coltrane albums but I do like it a lot. 2. Congrats on the original mono score on Out to Lunch! I'd love to hear that record...start a blog and post a needle drop. You guys are making me want to revisit this album. 3. I 1,000% agree with you on being a sucker for album art. I've discovered a lot of my favorite jazz albums simply because an album's cover art appealed to me. Just like groove wear, I feel like this is another taboo topic in jazz record collecting. I have a theory that great album art can drive the value of a particular record way up. Take, for example, Horace Parlan, Us Three. Awesome, awesome album art, but are people really paying $2,000 for the music? I'm not super familiar with that album but I personally find other Parlan dates more interesting. 4. Somethin' Else -- yes!! I forgot that one! It actually took a while for "Autumn Leaves" to grow on me. Next was "Love for Sale", then "Somethin' Else". 5. Ready for Freddie: The atmosphere/ambience on this album blows my mind...Van Gelder was on that day. It's a gorgeous, spacious sound. "Aretis" is a huge favorite of mine, another favorite is "Crisis". 6. Search for the New Land: I fell in love with "Melancholee" right away, it's easily in my top five favorite jazz compositions ever. The rest of the album has a fun, bouncy feel to me, I always liked it! I admit to not having, and not knowing, any Horace Parlan records (I don't think I've ever even seen one here). I can also safely say that, barring Weimar Republic-era rates of inflation hitting your dollar, I will never, ever spend $2,000 on a record. But just for the sake of conversation, if I were to get a $2,000 eBay voucher that I had to spend on just one jazz record, it would not be a piano trio date. I love piano trios as much as the next jazz fan, but for that kind of money I'd be looking for a lot more bang for my bucks. I'd want at least two horns, if not three. I'd probably go for A Blowin' Session (now that is bang for buck), The Magnificent Thad Jones (what an incredible record), Peckin' Time, Sonny's Crib, Cool Struttin', or any one of Lee Morgan's City Lights, Vol. 2, Vol. 3 or Candy (of Morgan's premium Blue Notes, Indeed doesn't do it for me the way the others do). Obvious choices all, I know. I have decent pressings of all of them already, which, ironically, makes me crave an original even more, fantasising as I do about just how good they would sound if the reissues are this good. Anyway, all of that is way off the point you were making about covers. Looking at how dealers price valuable jazz records, I've always been baffled by how big a drop in price one grade lower for the sleeve causes. Here's an example, albeit an extreme one, perhaps, from a dealer on Discgos who is selling two copies of Freddie Redd's The Connection: Media: VG+; sleeve: VG; price: £175 Media: VG+; sleeve: VG+; price: £275 In both cases, the record is simply described "Disc is clean". (The seller has almost 1,000 feedbacks, all positive bar one, so I'm assuming his grading is fairly spot on.) Now, call me weird, but there's no way in hell I'd fork out an extra hundred pounds (POUNDS!) for a slightly better cover. In fact, I'd happily buy the records on their own for a hugely reduced price and stick them in South Park covers. LJC's story about scoring an original copy of The Opener on the cheap because some arsehole made off with the cover is the stuff of dreams (despite the unfortunate loss for the seller). I love the album art, I love the quality of the original Blue Note covers, but when I fork out for an original, I'm doing it for an explosive-sounding record, not its cover, however beautiful. Am I alone in not ( really) caring about sleeve condition, once the record is good? Regarding Ready For Freddie, yes, I know now how wrong I was. When in doubt, blame the pressing - in this case, an ill-fit-for-purpose MP3. I got to like even that, though, and scored a Liberty copy with all desirable trimmings not too long ago. Van Gelder really, really was on that day (listening as I type); it's a stereo copy but the presentation is superb. It'd be a 5-star album even as a quintet, but Bernard McKinney's presence nudges it into the stratosphere for me. I love a third horn on any date, especially if it's one from outside the ruling triumvirate of trumpet, alto and tenor. It's so often the dealbreaker when deciding whether to buy a record I don't know. That's quite the shout for Melancholee! Care to share a few more of your favourites? My personal favourite on that date is the title track for its sheer originality. Melancholee second. It's cued up now to go on after Ready. Nice one! 1. You guys keep talking about Magnificent Thad Jones, I gotta check that out... 2. I usually find that if a record is in pretty good shape, the cover is too. But if it weren't for some reason and the price was right, sure, I'd wanna hear that record regardless of the cover's condition! 3. Stereo Ready for Freddie is A-OK with me! I'd love to score a Liberty, even a UA stereo Van Gelder copy. Right now I'm considering splurging on the Music Matters 2x45. Because this recording is so gorgeous, I like the idea of hearing it as accurately as possible, and I think the truth is, as much as I love originals, the MM issues are probably the closest we laymen can get to the original master tapes (provided the tapes haven't degraded). This recording is so clean I like the idea of hearing is as accurately as possible. 4. On SFTNL I like every song but the title track and "Morgan the Pirate" are probably my other favorites. I have gone through about five or six original mono pressings of this over the last few years (since it's at the lower end of the cost spectrum, this is obviously much easier to do). I now have an original mono pressing that was a reasonable price that is close enough to near mint for me to be very happy with!
|
|
Evan
Junior Member
Posts: 99
|
Post by Evan on Jul 2, 2015 5:36:18 GMT
You guys keep talking about Magnificent Thad Jones, I gotta check that out... On SFTNL I like every song but the title track and "Morgan the Pirate" are probably my other favorites. I have gone through about five or six original mono pressings of this over the last few years (since it's at the lower end of the cost spectrum, this is obviously much easier to do). I now have an original mono pressing that was a reasonable price that is close enough to near mint for me to be very happy with! The Magnificent Thad Jones is easily in my top 20 jazz albums, if not top 10. 'If I Love Again' is one of my favourite standards (I can take or - preferably - leave the song), and Thad's version on this date is my joint-favourite take (the other being Lou Donaldson's (very different) one on Quartet / Quintet / Sextet). There isn't a weak moment on the album, let alone track. It's just perfect, another example of an album that reveals more and more with each listen, though you will, without a doubt, fall for it first time. It is a joy for the way it opens alone, and the way it lures you in... it's so seductive, and yet understated. I am putting this on the moment I get home this evening. I recommend seeking out the UA mono pressing of this (absent a $2,000 eBay voucher). I have a lot of those pressings but this tops them all for sound quality. I was actually wondering about some of your other favourite compositions, not just on Search. I'm always interested in hearing what others think are standout pieces, in case I have overlooked or not paid enough attantion to them Wow, though - five or six?! That's dedication, and a lot of bad luck too by the sound of it. I struck lucky first time with this one, an original mono, NM. Rarely have I been so lucky.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Jul 3, 2015 20:21:04 GMT
believe me, rich: outing myself as not a fan of KOB took some thought. it is so well-loved. I have NM stereo and mono originals, and listen to both from time to time. however, i constantly find myself thinking one of the following things: 1) other than the solos by trane and sometimes cannonball, the whole thing has a chamber feel to it to me, which i strongly dislike. 2) this is related to #1, but there is SO MUCH reverb. more than RVG ever put on anything. more than modern pop even has on the vocals! just so much! 3) the horn playing, even with trane in the mix, feels so light and half-hearted on the themes (heads). as much as i like dynamic control, i can hardly stand to listen to stan getz, for example, who constantly seems to be just not blowing hard enough. i know that's his style, and that's fine, but it feels too whispy and reserved. no soul. and miles really tows that line here, and, i would imagine, encourages his fellow blowers to do the same. i don't really enjoy the result. 4) to my ears, bill evans sticks out like a sore thumb as the inexperienced member of the group. he sounds much less sure of himself than everyone else does, probably because he didn't play with the group as much. i like my piano players to fade into the landscape with their comping, the way mccoy tyner does so well on coltrane's classic recordings. evans reminds me that he is there constantly during the solos of others, which is not my style. 5) shallow, i know, but i hate the cover. it just doesn't look like miles to me. so there you go. i like most of the tunes, and tend to really groove on them when they are performed in different contexts, but this classic album never did it for me. others? most other declared classics are squarely on my list of favorites. but not this one. Regarding 2) I agree that it's a healthy dose of 'verb, but from what I've seen of Columbia's 30th Street studio it seems like the reverb on the record is doing a good job of reproducing the ambience of the studio. Plus I can't deny how much I personally love how it sounds. Interesting comments about Bill Evans. I guess I would say I trust Miles' judgment to bring him in under the circumstances by which he did. Coincidentally, Wynton Kelly's solo on "Freddie Freeloader" is the most memorable of all the piano solos on the record for me. What about that tune? Yes, the cover is lame. I find that a lot of great jazz albums have lame cover art. The best labels I find are Blue Note, Prestige/New Jazz (obviously), Impulse, and Bethlehem. I have a friend who works for a record label and he points out verbatim all the points you just made as why he does not like this album so much. He respects it but has no love for it. He goes to great length to point out to me that Kind Of Blue attained such instant crossover popularity in 1959 America because it does not have the soulfulness that marked black music at the time. My friend insist that the white American audiences of the time embraced it cause it was more white than black. On Bill Evans he is very much in agreement with you referring to him as the most un-swinging jazz pianist. Winton Kelly's cameo on Freddie the Freeloader is so refreshing for the reasons you point out. As for the chamber feel, Miles is on the record in his autobiography stating that he was going for that kind of feel, however, he mentions that he fell short of his goals on the album. As a matter of fact his entire tone in the book when discussing KOB is one of disappointment with the outcome. The sound of Columbia 30th St Studio is in no small part due to the fact that the building was originally a church. Yes, the cover is for sure "lame" but the miracle is that Miles was even featured on it to begin with. At the time major record labels were squeamish about putting black musicians on the cover. Only the indies like Blue Note practiced such marketing with frequency, but even they had to tone the images down a bit. Ever wonder why many Blue Note covers have a tint to them? Believe me all that tinting on those jacket covers had a lot to do with American social prejudices of the time. Lion and Wolff had no choice and had to bow to the social forces at work .
|
|
|
Post by Rich on Jul 4, 2015 0:26:57 GMT
Regarding 2) I agree that it's a healthy dose of 'verb, but from what I've seen of Columbia's 30th Street studio it seems like the reverb on the record is doing a good job of reproducing the ambience of the studio. Plus I can't deny how much I personally love how it sounds. Interesting comments about Bill Evans. I guess I would say I trust Miles' judgment to bring him in under the circumstances by which he did. Coincidentally, Wynton Kelly's solo on "Freddie Freeloader" is the most memorable of all the piano solos on the record for me. What about that tune? Yes, the cover is lame. I find that a lot of great jazz albums have lame cover art. The best labels I find are Blue Note, Prestige/New Jazz (obviously), Impulse, and Bethlehem. I have a friend who works for a record label and he points out verbatim all the points you just made as why he does not like this album so much. He respects it but has no love for it. He goes to great length to point out to me that Kind Of Blue attained such instant crossover popularity in 1959 America because it does not have the soulfulness that marked black music at the time. My friend insist that the white American audiences of the time embraced it cause it was more white than black. On Bill Evans he is very much in agreement with you referring to him as the most un-swinging jazz pianist. Winton Kelly's cameo on Freddie the Freeloader is so refreshing for the reasons you point out. As for the chamber feel, Miles is on the record in his autobiography stating that he was going for that kind of feel, however, he mentions that he fell short of his goals on the album. As a matter of fact his entire tone in the book when discussing KOB is one of disappointment with the outcome. The sound of Columbia 30th St Studio is in no small part due to the fact that the building was originally a church. Yes, the cover is for sure "lame" but the miracle is that Miles was even featured on it to begin with. At the time major record labels were squeamish about putting black musicians on the cover. Only the indies like Blue Note practiced such marketing with frequency, but even they had to tone the images down a bit. Ever wonder why many Blue Note covers have a tint to them? Believe me all that tinting on those jacket covers had a lot to do with American social prejudices of the time. Lion and Wolff had no choice and had to bow to the social forces at work . Welcome back, Spencer. I find Kind of Blue 'accessible' regardless of the culture or community consuming it. There certainly was something evasive about bebop when it came to pop culture's potential appreciation of it, but maybe there was something similar going on with hard bop as well despite it's return to the blues and gospel and more accessible influences and underlying structures. Speaking of which, let's not forget that Kind of Blue has blues themes, and that Evans' intro to So What is in my opinion one of the most gorgeous thirty-second stretches of music ever recorded...has Miles ever said he regretted asking Evans to do the record? Just curious. Regarding album art, it's interesting to note that many (most?) Prestige covers from that era did not have the musicians on them. However, I'm pretty sure Francis Wolff was shooting mostly with black and white film at that time, so maybe jazzing up (NPI) the covers with tints was Reid Miles' idea...I always got that impression anyway, that he set several trends followed by other jazz album designers. Kind of off-topic but I have always gotten the impression that Reid Miles was a major force helping usher in the modern era of graphic design (just look at the Blue Note covers from the mid-fifties not done by him and notice how 'dated' they look in comparison).
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Jul 4, 2015 3:35:45 GMT
I have a friend who works for a record label and he points out verbatim all the points you just made as why he does not like this album so much. He respects it but has no love for it. He goes to great length to point out to me that Kind Of Blue attained such instant crossover popularity in 1959 America because it does not have the soulfulness that marked black music at the time. My friend insist that the white American audiences of the time embraced it cause it was more white than black. On Bill Evans he is very much in agreement with you referring to him as the most un-swinging jazz pianist. Winton Kelly's cameo on Freddie the Freeloader is so refreshing for the reasons you point out. As for the chamber feel, Miles is on the record in his autobiography stating that he was going for that kind of feel, however, he mentions that he fell short of his goals on the album. As a matter of fact his entire tone in the book when discussing KOB is one of disappointment with the outcome. The sound of Columbia 30th St Studio is in no small part due to the fact that the building was originally a church. Yes, the cover is for sure "lame" but the miracle is that Miles was even featured on it to begin with. At the time major record labels were squeamish about putting black musicians on the cover. Only the indies like Blue Note practiced such marketing with frequency, but even they had to tone the images down a bit. Ever wonder why many Blue Note covers have a tint to them? Believe me all that tinting on those jacket covers had a lot to do with American social prejudices of the time. Lion and Wolff had no choice and had to bow to the social forces at work . Welcome back, Spencer. I find Kind of Blue 'accessible' regardless of the culture or community consuming it. There certainly was something evasive about bebop when it came to pop culture's potential appreciation of it, but maybe there was something similar going on with hard bop as well despite it's return to the blues and gospel and more accessible influences and underlying structures. Speaking of which, let's not forget that Kind of Blue has blues themes, and that Evans' intro to So What is in my opinion one of the most gorgeous thirty-second stretches of music ever recorded...has Miles ever said he regretted asking Evans to do the record? Just curious. Regarding album art, it's interesting to note that many (most?) Prestige covers from that era did not have the musicians on them. However, I'm pretty sure Francis Wolff was shooting mostly with black and white film at that time, so maybe jazzing up (NPI) the covers with tints was Reid Miles' idea...I always got that impression anyway, that he set several trends followed by other jazz album designers. Kind of off-topic but I have always gotten the impression that Reid Miles was a major force helping usher in the modern era of graphic design (just look at the Blue Note covers from the mid-fifties not done by him and notice how 'dated' they look in comparison). In the biography he praises Evans' contribution to the album, he took affront to any suggestion that Evans was the author of any one of those five songs as some try to suggest after it became clear what a game changer the album was. The Prestige covers were more in line with music industry practices of the day to be honest. On Reid Miles, his influence as a graphic designer is unquestionable. There are two American graphic designers whose work have had everlasting impact on pop culture, Reid Miles is one. The other one is Saul Bass.
|
|
|
Post by dottorjazz on Jul 4, 2015 10:22:49 GMT
It is to jazz what, say, the Beethoven late string quartets are to classical chamber music: its place is proven; it's a cornerstone of the jazz canon. don't wanna get into the KOB question: as I said, anyone can judge/like a record, or a painting, or a book, or simply dislike it. that's his problem, not mine and whatever judgement it won't change my point of view. now Alun: it seems you are interested in Classical as well as Jazz. me too, but I miss only the time to dedicate to it. I've almost finished a new "scientific" listening to my whole Jazz collection. what to do after? beginning again or move over? I have some thousands classical cd's, mostly unlistened yet and I would like to give 'em a try. I'm a little frightened by the theoretical time needed to listen to all of them. will I still be alive? the string quartet is one of the best ensembles in classical, and Beethoven's are the best among all. I like music from all eras, from the Middle Ages to contemporary, with no preferences. Samuel Barber: Adagio for Strings was written after a movement of the String Quartet op. 11. I'm very fond of Schubert's Death and the Maiden, as well as his unfinished symphony. other authors that come to mind, apart the giants, are: Orlando di Lasso, Giya Kancheli, Arvo Part, Tomas Luis de Victoria, Gustav Mahler's Lieder. I'm not a Mozart's fan.
|
|
|
Post by alunsevern on Jul 4, 2015 19:48:18 GMT
Dott, I am best described as a periodic enthusiast of classical music. I listen to it only periodically and oddly when I do it tends to displace almost all other listening. For example, during much of the 1980s classical music was what I listened to mainly. Then I stopped. For some reason that I don't quite understand, I can't combine classical and jazz I listen to one or the other. This happened again a few years back. my listening became almost exclusively classical for two years or so. I know far less about classical music than I do jazz, and am much more widely listened in jazz than I am in classical. I prefer chamber music to orchestral music, baroque music to romantic music, and - sometimes - baroque keyboard music above all else. Bach, Scarlatti, Rameau, Couperin.... For many years Glenn Gould has been a kind of hero figure to the point where I am as happy reading about him as I am hearing him.
But as you say, the crucial thing is time. With so much classical music readily available, and so much of it so long and requiring such great attention and personal investment, what is one to do - listen to it glancingly, dip in, listen in an ill-informed way? All of these seem to be selling the music short. I shall return to classical music at some point in the future, I imagine - or at least, to my own little niche within it.
Perhaps your next project should be a thorough investigation of a form of music you are unfamiliar with or that demands fresh research, new understanding, 'new ears'? Choral music, or free improv, or European abstraction, or contemporary classical, or baroque music, or solo keyboard music...or....or....or...
|
|
|
Post by dottorjazz on Jul 5, 2015 6:20:05 GMT
the same happened to me! classical periods (shorter) when I couldn't listen to jazz OR jazz periods, longer. now I'm in a a four or five year of jazz. a couple of years ago I reorganized my CD's library, moving all Jazz to my office where I am 9 to 5. classical at home BUT, jazz LP's too. maybe in a short time, as soon as I finish my organic jazz listening, I'll go back to classical.there are treasures of listening pleasures in and, above all, a lot I know nothing about yet. I remember that, when I was a boy and spent all my time listening, my mother insisted I had to listen to classical too and presented me with some records I still have. I wasn't into classical at all. many years after, my musical curiosity brought me in a totally unknown field, a field that Jazz couldn't fill. the Voice. as many here, I don't like jazz singing, apart few exceptions. so I went into choral first, and a new world opened. the first record I bought was Orff's Carmina Burana, quite popular in the 80's. then sacred music of the 15th and 16th century, then Bach. I love Arabian music from spanish domination, I love Jordi Savall and Eduardo Paniagua, the Hilliard Ensemble. God of Time, please, gimme some more time to listen and I'll give you my soul.
|
|
|
Post by alunsevern on Jul 5, 2015 10:19:23 GMT
God of Time, please, gimme some more time to listen and I'll give you my soul. May he, she or it grant you your wish, Dott. As you know, we share an aversion to jazz singing (I go further, perhaps: if it sings, it ain't jazz), but over the years I have gradually purged my listening of _all_ vocal records of any kind. Oddly, however, the one exception is baroque vocal music. For some reason - not that I parricularly understand them - I find the conventions of baroque singing fascinating and some of it extraordinarily sensual, even sexy.
|
|
|
Post by gregorythefish on Jul 6, 2015 0:14:05 GMT
Spencer, please tell your friend that I feel very validated. I know of no other serious jazz listener that feels the way I do about KOB.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Jul 8, 2015 19:23:53 GMT
Spencer, please tell your friend that I feel very validated. I know of no other serious jazz listener that feels the way I do about KOB. Look, the things you point out about KOB are all true; however, I must say I enjoy it as a musical document, though not not as much as my "swinging" Blue Note favorites. One other thing my friend says is that had Lee Morgan and Clifford Brown not had their lives tragically cut short they would have overshadowed Miles. But I must say I disagree on this last point. True, Miles was not the most technically gifted trumpeter but his strength will alway be his abilities as an innovator and that is something I never saw as the hallmark of Morgan and Brown. It took guts to bring up the points you mentioned. I commend you for it. Trust me, I know how hard it is to go against the grain
|
|
|
Post by gregorythefish on Jul 9, 2015 17:14:32 GMT
fine to enjoy it. i just don't enjoy it as much as most, it seems. and thanks!
the brown/morgan miles statement to me is uninteresting and meaningless. they DID die early, so we will not know. and it would have profoundly altered the american musical landscape in other ways too. so we'll never know. miles was a forceful leader and innovator. maybe they would have followed him forward, the way freddie hubbard tried to do.
in the face of what we view as "corruption" of jazz from electric and pop influences, it is easy to imagine those who left us too soon, such as brownie and morgan, or coltrane or ayler, would have carried on a proud tradition of radical and fabulous acoustic jazz, but this is a fairy tale. they would have heard it and been influenced like everyone else. so who knows what we would have gotten. i'm grateful for what we did get!
|
|
|
Post by alunsevern on Jul 9, 2015 21:38:28 GMT
The fact is, Coltrane, Ayler, Miles and just about any other jazz artist you can think of would have played whatever they could get paid for in the 70s, 80s ans 90s. This would almost certainly have been as true of Lee Morgan and Clifford Brown as it was of most very other jazz artist you can think of, Miles included.
The great Stan Tracey, who as resident pianist at Ronnie Scott's played with everyone, almost became a postman in the 1970s. We tend to forget that by the 1970s the jazz generation we have grown to revere were playing music they couldn't even give away - assuming they lived long enough to see that, of course. Yes, of course there were exceptions, but these were almost happy accidents as much anything else. Monk's beautiful, playful, elegiac London sets from 1971 recorded by Alan Bates for his Black Lion label, for instance, are to be treasured precisely for the fact that it was in some respects a miracle tag they happened at all.
It was a very small number of jazz musicians indeed who carried on mKing first class acoustic jazz into the 70s, and then typically not in the U.S. Or the UK, but in Europe and for small European labels - Steeplechase, Soul Note, Enja, and so on. Small European labels kept ' lassical' and a av ante garde jazz alive throughout the 70s and 80s. And in the UK it wasn't until the later 1980s jazz and jazz-dance boom that labels started to re-sign jazz artists and to 'discover' the latest rising jazz stars (most inevitably with chiselled good looks).
What we should be thankful for is two things. First, that there is such a lot of great 'classical' jazz on record, and second that there is such a lot great new jazz still being made.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Jul 20, 2015 13:27:05 GMT
The fact is, Coltrane, Ayler, Miles and just about any other jazz artist you can think of would have played whatever they could get paid for in the 70s, 80s ans 90s. This would almost certainly have been as true of Lee Morgan and Clifford Brown as it was of most very other jazz artist you can think of, Miles included. The great Stan Tracey, who as resident pianist at Ronnie Scott's played with everyone, almost became a postman in the 1970s. We tend to forget that by the 1970s the jazz generation we have grown to revere were playing music they couldn't even give away - assuming they lived long enough to see that, of course. Yes, of course there were exceptions, but these were almost happy accidents as much anything else. Monk's beautiful, playful, elegiac London sets from 1971 recorded by Alan Bates for his Black Lion label, for instance, are to be treasured precisely for the fact that it was in some respects a miracle tag they happened at all. It was a very small number of jazz musicians indeed who carried on mKing first class acoustic jazz into the 70s, and then typically not in the U.S. Or the UK, but in Europe and for small European labels - Steeplechase, Soul Note, Enja, and so on. Small European labels kept ' lassical' and a av ante garde jazz alive throughout the 70s and 80s. And in the UK it wasn't until the later 1980s jazz and jazz-dance boom that labels started to re-sign jazz artists and to 'discover' the latest rising jazz stars (most inevitably with chiselled good looks). What we should be thankful for is two things. First, that there is such a lot of great 'classical' jazz on record, and second that there is such a lot great new jazz still being made. You are so right on this. I've given it some thought; it can be argued that Kind of Blue and many of the greatest jazz records we've come to cherish were aimed at white audiences in America and Europe. One of the least understood aspect of Jazz in America is that most people take it for granted that once Jazz moved beyond the dancehall phase it stopped holding any fascination for majority of black audiences who started to view the music as being "uppity". It stands to reason that Miles and others would play the music that would get them work. Europe in some ways sustained Jazz more than America. It maybe an American art form but European fanfare kept it going. Hence, it's no surprise that Jazz started to incorporate more aspects of European music into its vernacular
|
|