I noticed there's not a jazz itejm on here. . .if you're into having one, here it is! Jazz of every variety, from ragtime to Miles to Thomas Chapin to you-name-it!115 responses total.
Wow this is a broad yummy topic. :-) My favorites are probably Ornette Coleman, John Coltrane (yes including late stuff OM etc), John Zorn, and *early* Herbie Hancock. I think the most interesting things happening in jazz are things that may not be acknowlodged by the jazz community as jazz like the acid jazz of Groove Collective, world music jazz fusion ala Fela Kunti, Ivo Papasov, Shankar's improv violin work, etc. After all the heart and soul of jazz is improv and the fusion of different musical styles, for example Dixeland jazz grew out of a fusion of military brass band music with African rhythm and improvisation.
I agree that the jazz community isn't acknowlaging as much cool stuff as it ought to. . .Ivo Papasov and Shankar are both so amazing and astounding. . .I think there's been a really SAD purist movement of late, headed up by Wynton Marsallis and the like. . .iut's too bad, because he's this incredible, astounding player. . . I just got that compilation of Late Coltrane, the two disc set with Om and some other works, it's pretty amazing. I have millions of favorites, I guess I worship Miles Davis, especially. . .well, esspecially pretty much everything he did. Since I'm violinist, I'm listening to them, too. . .Stuff Smith was a genious, Tracy Silverman and MArk Summer are super-Human, and of course I already mentioned Shakti. . .I'm way into the Bill Evans solo recordingsa, and bill frisell, and just all kinds of thikngs. .. I don't know fela cunti at all, what kind of stuff is it?
Fela Kunti is sort of jazzy afro-pop, sort of like King Sunny Ade with with Sax solos, and brass, and very political lyrics.
I'm a moldy fig. My interest in jazz started with Duke Ellington, particularly the work from the late 30's and the 1940's. More contemporary performers who I get interested in tend to be Ellington revivalists, a bit: Abdullah Ibrahim and Toshiko Akioshi. I've made a few forays into the 1950s and the earliest 1960s with Miles Davis and John Coltrane, and Charles Mingus, but in general after 1960 I get lost. I wish I had the time to learn a lot about jazz; in general I end up settling for buying whatever is playing in Schoolkids when it sounds interesting.
I'm not into jazz much. Mostly because it seems to be rather lame lately. Sun Ra is one I like a lot, though.
re # 5 Yaaaaaaahhhhhhh Sun Ra, may he rest in peace (on Saturn). My favorite recent jazz/acid jazz CD is Groove Collective, check out their CD "We the People," it's sort of Sly & the Family stone meets afro-cu-bop hip-hop. They put on a amazing show at the Blind Pig earlier this year, dancable music with chromatic scales, if they come to an area near you, they are not to be missed.
hey, Carla Bley just came out with a new album!!! IT'S cool, not as crazy as the stuff she was into in the seventies and early eightoies, but it's cool as hell. . .it's kinda melencholy, like the stuff on Social Studies. . . Scott-have you checked out Orange then Light Blue, or Thoma Chapin(especially with the brass band)?
I may not be up to date on jazz recordings, but I will leave a short note-- I respect and admire jazz musicians. They have to know their music inside and out, since they use improv so much more than the classical ones, and more scales, to boot.
oof. Yes, definitely. I took a year of jazz at Commie High with Mike Grace, and what turned me off, and eventually made me leave, was the sheer number of scales and chords that I 'had' to know. Now I'm coming back to jazz from the other end, having heard more free jazz and already knowing the scales so I can just focus on *playing* and not on 'now what key am I in again?...' I definitely respect those who can play more 'tonal' jazz, though. Re the whole 'purists' thing--the problem is, there's this whole distinction between 'jazz' and 'other music where the musicians happen to be improvising'. Most people wouldn't call Indian classical music, or free improv, or Stockhausen's free-er stuff 'jazz', but the line is becoming more and more blurred from both ends. On the one hand, jazz is opening up to outside influences, and on the other hand, things like "Blood on the Fields" are making the improvisation part of it secondary.
Jazz music is absoultely WONDERFUL!! IMHO, it is also the hardest type of music to play..just because it has to do with just letting go..and being yourself...tath is why it is so hard for most people to ilisten to and play..becasue you HAVE to let go..and be real with people. I love classical..but that is a completely different ballpark..with jazz, you have the freedom to make the music uniquely yours.... the only problem with jazz nowadays..is that it has become too text book dependant..and thats beside the point..you can teach a person the scales..but you can not teach someone how to groove..yo uhave to feel it..I grew up in Memphis Tn..the jazz scene there is so alive..i half expect to see Mose Vinson or Furry Lewis on Beale street. i really like funk jazz band called "Madesque Martin and Wood" it's jazz bass, piano, and percussion..you guys should check em out..theres no way you can sit still in your seat when listening to thses guys../.and that's another thing..if you hear jazz..and you feel like dancing..get up and DANCE!!!!
orinoco-when did you go to Commie High? I graduated in '92 Yeah, there has been a sorry movement to try and standardize jazz of late. Especialy frolm Wynton Marsalis. Which is sad. I thinm the most exiting, amazing thing about it is that it's been new and developing. I had two teachers this year, one who taught from ghe standpoint of a standardized language and one who taught from the standpoint of free improv and third stream music. . .and I realized that we need a wynton marsalis as much as a roscoe mitchell, because they're both beautiful and the both define one aother. The one branch can grow from the other. . .I just wish people wouldn't attack each other over it.
When did I go? I still do. Just a lowly sophomore, actually. :) Did you ever take any of Mike's classes while you were there, katt?
yeah, I was in the intermediate jazz band when I first started playing jazz ever, with some other string players. And when I got tendonitous my senior year and couldn't plkay the violi, he set me up with the vibraphone, and he and me and this cellist all were a four o' clock band. . .and then I went over to U of M to take Creative Arts. The string players from the intermediate band and me formed a band of our own called Blue Sun, too, mostly free improv and a little bit of arranging. . . HE always turns out amaing players, man. . .I mean, a significant percentage of the department at U of M is comprised of Commie High folks. .. I tink it's probably waaaay different there now than it was when I was there. . .there wasn't really a line to get in when I was there. . .
I think I heard about that Vibraphone/Bass/Cello band. Did you know someone named Gates while you were there...I think his first name was Mo? I deeply disliked his class, actually. His approach to 'improvisation' now runs something like this--here's some good licks, here's what chords they sound good over. Now play them. It wansn't really improvising at all, just absorbing and regurgitating these patterns. I wish I was in the position to start my own band, or do something of that sort, so that I could remain involved with jazz but escape Mike's approach to it. The problem is I really have very little skill at it other than just spitting out patterns. Perhaps you, being more into free improv and such, could answer for me a question that I brought up while I was taking jazz, and which I never have heard a satisfactory answer to: Clearly 'real' jazz musicians aren't just spitting out these patterns that they've memorized ahead of time. Even listening to the advanced bands at CHS play, it is obvious that they are doing something other than what Mike is teaching the beginning bands to do. But nobody can explain what it is. Yes, there is no such thing as a 'wrong note', but some notes clearly sound better than others in certain situations. So when you are soloing what is it that you are doing? If this is something nobody can explain, or even understand, how is it that anyone does it?
My improv teacher explained this really well. Jazz music, as opposed to classical music, isn't bound by what the composer wrote. The musicians are free to make as many musical interpretations as they like. Usually, classical music is expected to be played as written. If a jazz player approaches the same music, he doesn't have to be perfect-- if he flubs up, he'll make the 'mistake' sound good. Improvisation isn't necessarily all intentional. About licks: Rock musicians sometimes learn licks by rote, too. Not everyone is talented enough to play what they hear and then experiment upon it. So some teachers provide some suggested patterns, to give you a few ideas. If it helps you to read it on the page, they'll provide written patterns. But most _good_ teachers will have you listen to recordings of the pros to give you ideas. I mean, you can experiment on their ideas without fear of being sued for stealing musical motifs and such, as is usually the case in the rest of the industry. No real concept of plaigarism in jazz. I guess the reason why some teachers fall short is because they get stuck in the classical way of thinking, and I refer to the Classical era when I say classical. During the baroque period, it was quite fashionable to improvise upon a song-- this is where trills, mordents, turns, and such came from. The theme and variations form was immensely popular-- Beethoven got his start by making variations upon a popular composition of the time. But the spirit of improvisation seemed to fade away when the Classical era arrived-- composers disdained the frills and experimentation of the earlier time. They gradually simplified themes. Scholars, harkening back to the music of the Renaissance, gave the music of the prior era its name-- baroque means 'imperfect pearl'. To this day, I sincerely believe most classically trained teachers really don't fully understand improvisation, or they genuinely understand that you are creating music as you go along, instead of fiddling with it on paper. Improv requires tremendous skill. Consider this analogy: it's like giving an impromptu speech. It's just as difficult, and it's harder to be as eloquent as you could be if you drafted the material several times on paper. You only get one shot to do it, and then it's heard.
And it's interesting to note further that most of the master "clasical" musicians were them selevs improvisers; Beethoven was supposedly one of the greatest improvisers who ever livd. AS far as patterns go-it's a means to an end. It's a pain to do it, but if you pratice licks over and over, the tonal language you're dealing with in those licks somehow works it's way into your fingers. It's kind of a mystical process. . .hmm. Music is etherial in alot of ways, you know? I mean, you hear this amazikng thikng in your head that you want to play, but it's not concretye enough to just make it come out of your instrument, patterns help you have the facility to come a litle closer. Different people have different "ins" into playing. . .
I do know what you're talking about with the music in your head vs. the music in your fingers. For me, the patterns haven't helped much with that, though.
Re classical music and improvisation: Slavish attention to the notes was a 19th century attitude, I believe. Before that, improvisation and embellishment were the norm. In performing a sonata, e.g. by Mozart, the player was *expected* to improvise, add ornaments, etc. As Katt points out, Beethoven was a great improvisor. So was Mozart, by all reports.
Would I be correct, then, in assuming that the writing out of cadenzas is a modern 'improvement'?
I think so. In the classical era, a concerto cadenza was often composed by the performer, and I imagine sometimes improvised on the spot.
Let's not get too jazz-elitist about classical music: With the proliferation of people and music and instruments to a wider world, and making the musical experience something a lot more people could afford and enjoy, there became a lot larger populace of non-expert music-makers. Not all (many?) of them could be expected to be skilled in improvisation, let alone in knowing the tunes. Thus a need for more & more *printed* music. Eventually the printers began including a written form of cadenzas as conceived by composers or master performers, so the inexperienced students would have *something* to go on when learning the concertos. All the same, I think it would be a good idea for all instumental students to get improvisation instruction in school. It couldn't help but make you a better player. I know I feel "disadvantaged" that I never got any improvisation instruction, and our school system didn't have a jazz band [program]. I don't think the whole responsibility for improvisation instruction should be dumped on the jazz band leaders.
Interesting. At what point did the printed scores change from guidelines to sacred gospel, I wonder, and why did it change? I imagine that there were additional causes besides simply the wider availability of printed scores.
Again, I think that it was the changing body of musicians: ameteurs need(ed) more to go on in the music than just "ad lib". I know that most jazz arrangements we play in our adult "concert" band have written out licks for the soloists. That doesn't necessarily mean that an accomplished improviser couldn't substitute his own interpretation over what's written, but the vast majority of users at that performing level don't have the ability or inclination to do so.
It was also that compositions started to have larger and more complex forms and imlications in the nineteenth century. . .preformers went from improvising their cadenzas to playing more and more through composed ones. . .and among those, certain became favorites. Most of the cadenzas for violin concertos at least were written by violinists. . .it and occasionaly performers will still write their own. It's just less common. As the forms and ensembles and the like got huger and more complex, the plaing of it had to become more and more dependant on it's tabulature sheets. In the present, exact reproduction of the score has, sadly, all but replaced creativity except on the subtlest level, and less and less newer scores are performed. I do not, however, think this is a problem intrinsic to written music as opposed to improvised music, but a problem with people's viewpoint and attitudes towards the best way to perform what's written on a page. I think one of the coolest things I've heard done with written music of late is the Pakrovsky Ensemble's performance of Stravinsky's "Les Noces". It is *gorgeuos*, even though it is not something I think Stravinsky would have envisioned in a million years-and through the fusion of two very old and set forms is the creation of something very new. I actualy had a violin teacher the last few years who would have his students write their own cadezas to concertos as a matter of course. I hope that this illustrates a trend. . .I hope to be proficient enough one day to improvise such cadenzas. . .
For those of us who haven't been paying attention, what did the Pakrovsky Ensemble do with/to "Les Noces" that is so interesting?
They're all trained classical singers *and* do traditional russion folk siknging. Stravinsky claimed throughout his life that the piece had nothing to do with Russian folk music whatsoever, and the only material taken from such sources was the text; this is not true at all, but at the time STalin was on a kick to get Russian composers to "use the music of the masses", and he didn't want to admit to doing anything that might even vaugely impress stalin. . . The pakrovsky ensemble do all the singing as written in the score, exept instead of doing it in concert music style voices, they sing it in the style of Russion folk music which is very different. It's gorheous, I hiughly recommend it. . . I just listened to Marty Erlich's "New York Child". Solme of the tracks were really amazing, and some were kind of stale and too "smooth", which suprised me. . .anyone know any really lick-butt Marty Erlich albums?
Wow, cool. Thanks for starting the jazz topic, Katt. I was just thinking that something important was missing from the music conference, and now it isn't... I suppose I'm a little late getting into jazz, so I've got a long way to go, but I think I've made a lot of progress. I never used to like jazz, at all. It struck me as too schizophrenic. Now that I've heard more, I realize that I was merely guilty of stereotyping (as we're often apt to do with the unfamiliar), and I've since heard things that I enjoy a great deal. Luckily, I've been pointed in good directions by a few people whose advice I've sought. Some of the random experiences so far on my jazz journey... _Blues and the Abstract Truth_, with Oliver Nelson and company, is really a current favorite. This one was recommended to me as a classic. I've played it for friends who were not into jazz and they enjoyed it very much. I'm currently hoping to run across _The Charlie Parker Story_ on Savoy, although I hear that new Rhino _Yardbird Suite_ compilation is pretty nice. I enjoyed what I heard while watching Clint Eastwood's _Bird_ a short time ago. Of course, Bennie Goodman and Dave Brubeck... Sun Ra has struck me as interesting from only a few listenings. I've started my obligatory John Coltrane collection... One of the more interesting finds was Bheki Mseleku, which blends my interest in international music and jazz. A good friend of mine introduced me to Bill Frisell. I dig Bill...(and my friend...) I got into John Zorn via my interest in experimental music, and a friend of the aforementioned friend. _News For Lulu_ was one of my more recent exciting finds. I've also picked up _The Classic Guide to Strategy_. Fascinating stuff. Well, that's about it, so far...
Bill Frisell--I think I heard something about him on the radio a little while back. Some of the music I loved, some of it I couldn't stand. Care to reccomend an album?>
Thanks, katt-- you've articulated so many points I only vaguely understood before.
I really like The Bill Frisell Quartet's self-titled album from 1996 on Elektra/Nonesuch. It feels a lot like Phillip Glass's _Koyaanisqatsi_ soundtrack, but a little more avant-garde. Or, even more interesting is _News For Lulu_, which features John Zorn, Bill Frisell, and George Lewis. This one's more solid jazz, but with two interesting twists: the material is lesser-known pieces from well-known composers, and it's put throught the brilliantly cracked lenses of these musicians.
Well, being as I fell asleep twice during Koyaanisqatsi, maybe I'll go for the second :)
_News for Lulu_ is a little hard to find, but still available. It's currently in print on Hat Hut Records, out of Switzerland, as hat art cd 6005. Great album!
Just heard both _The Charlie Parker Story_ on Savoy and Rhino's _Yardbird Suite_ collection. Very nice. Rhino's collection is definitely the definitive introduction to Parker's works, as it spans multiple labels, and is graced with fascinating liner notes.
Saw some cool jazz posters over at Stairway to Heaven. Coltrane's _Blue Train_, and a few others...
Mark: You need to check out the Posters that have in Borders as well... I forgot to tell you about the really kewl blues and jazz player posters..... oh well...
I hadn't thought of looking there, actually. Good tip!
re #21: Good point, Kevin. I hope to return to my improvisational studies when I go back to school this fall (if not immediately, sometime in the future). Sadly, I don't see much effort from the classical establishment. I don't know how colleges and universities are in your area, but the only place I could find that taught classical improvisation was Evergreen College (Which is near the Seattle area). Improvisational skills need to be learned in classical music before a student moves on to jazz. I learned myself that to do so otherwise is a monumental and difficult task. Jazz adds so many new chords and scales that it is best to start from a classical base first. Anyone-- keep me posted on what you have found was the best way to learn improv.
What do you mean, exactly, by 'classical' improv, as opposed to 'jazz' improv. Is it a matter of style, or of technique, or what?
re # 38 I would assume this would mean the improv that is allowed in some baroque and classical era pieces such as ornaments and cadenzas.
Oh. Right. <administers the flying ninja forhead slap to himself>
Exactly. But I'm sure that includes learning the theme and variations form (and if I remember correctly, this is how Beethoven got his big break-- and I don't think he had it written down first? the variations, I mean?) In general, I don't think classical and baroque musicians were as extensive in their improv as jazz musicians are and were. Ornaments, cadenzas, and variations on a theme have been mentioned. I can't think of anything else, besides the comparision of jazz's bigger chords.
Ah, found another good Zorn to recommend that's easy to find and listen to: _The Big Gundown: John Zorn Plays the Music of Ennio Morricone_. This album is a blast...
re #9: At the risk of sounding blasphemous, what about Scatman John? His last big hit was "Scatman," a scat song with dance music instrumentals. I'm sure some people think it's weird as hell, but it's really interesting. The Third-Level Mix is especially well done. I also didn't realize this man was a white guy until I walked into a Radio Shack playing one of his new vids. He looks a little like Leon Redbone-- long-nosed, with a big bushy moustache on his face. The vid was pretty cool-- the engineers had pasted a clip of Louis Armstrong on a billboard so it looked like Scatman John was talking to him. Speaking of scat, I understand it was created by Dizzy Gillespie after WWII. Audiotape was precious then, so musicians usually had only one take to record. Gillespie went into the recording studio and found one of the valves on his trumpet stuck. Instead of bagging the recording or waiting until the valve unstuck, he decided to go in and sing his part. It caught on. I've listened to some recordings of him singing scat and he really does sound like a jazz trumpet, except that he doesn't imitate the timbre exactly. Bobby McFerrin is another example of voice imitation of instruments, but I'll save it for now.
Anybody going to catch the Detroit jazz festival, this weekend? Anybody been to one? Anybody want to tell some more about it?
Well, this year was another near-miss with the Detroit jazz festival. My car broke down, yet again...
Any interest in the Ann Arbor Blues & Jazz Festival? One could walk to it, at least... :)
Maybe I'll check it out, this year. I think I actually have a day off during the festival.
If I can, I know I'll be going Saturday, when Medeski Martin & Wood is playing. (And with my luck, I've spelled all three of their names wrong)
OK,tell us about why Medeski Martin & Wood are appealing.
I've heard wonderful things about them from friends, mostly, who are big fans, and it'd be nice to see what the fuss is about.
Well, get your friends to log in to the music conference! :)
I'm trying, I'm trying. I've still got a few non-geek holdouts, though, that I'm working on.
What? Nobody made the Detroit Jazz festival? Nobody made the Ann Arbor one?
'Fraid not, Mark. I would have loved to, but...
My boss spent her weekend at the Detroit one, but I'd rather be skinned alive than hear most jazz (well, maybe not skinned alive, but I certainly do dislike it immensely). I' m always bummed that WDET plays that concert on laborday weekend, since my favorite shows (Folk Like Us, Thistle andShamrock when they had it) are always pre-empted, and it's my birthday weekend darnit!
If ya don't like jazz, why bother reading this item? I wonder if people are turned off by jazz for its nebulous expression, especially considering freeform is all the rage now..or maybe it's because of the purist movement. Twila, do you dislike Jamiraqui (sp?)?
Gosh, happy belated birthday, Twila!
Thanks, Mark! Seriously, I read this itme because I like *hearing* and learning about music, and I always hope I'll find a clue to someone that I would like. I don't know who Jamiraqui is -- could you tell me more? Most of what I dislike about jazz has to do with my impatience with long extended instrumental passages -- I am seriously biased in favor of voice in my musical tastes although I have learned to enjoy classical music and some soundtrack-type recordings. But they seem to have a structure to them that Idon't hear in jazz...Or is that another prejudice?
Well, it's true that in much jazz music the only structure beyond "head - horn solo - bass solo - drum solo - head" is pretty vague, that's not always the case. My preferences tend to lean towards music - Miles Davis, for instance - that have structure in the form of gradual building or subsiding energy, and other slow changes over the whole piece, rather than bebop which tends to zip around too rapidly for me.
My main problem with jazz is that though it was invented in the same century as, say, rock and roll, it's being shoved down my throat as more legitimate and "educated" to listen to, while rock is some sort of passing fancy. Still. Why can't I be musically deepened by listening to rock?
My main problem with "jazz" is that I find the term almost useless -- it tries to encompass far too much.. Terms like bebop, swing, etc.. are far more useful as descriptive tools -- saying "jazz" doesn't convey a whole lot more to me than saying "music." (btw, isn't it Jamiroquai?)
Orinoco, I have similar prefrences. A wonderful example would be Miles' _Kind of Blue_. I have mixed feelings about bebop. I have an utmost respect for the form and the artists, such as Parker and Gillespie, but its too quick and frantic to move me the same way free jazz or modial jazz does(check out Herbie Hancock's _Maiden Voyage_), although because of my love for jazz guitar, I could listen to Charlie Christian for hours at a time. I guess the main way I guage my interest in any style of jazz is how much I enjoy jamming along with it. This pretty much includes any typ of jazz from the cool era on. I enjoy tremendously fusion jazz (for example Mahavishnu Orchestra's _Inner Mounting Flame_ or Herbie Hancock's _Mwandishi_), latin jazz, some avant garde (Sun Ra), and free (Coleman, Coletrane). Sadly, I'm not too familiar with many latin jazz artists. Could anyone suggest any?
Yeah, I find jazz guitar different too - and also blues, which I can listen to endlessly no matter how formless.
Dave-- you mention a lot of jazz styles that are influenced by other genres, save freeform. Have you ever tried fusion, or rock that is influenced by jazz (say, Chicago), Twila? Thank you, Mike-- even a spelling freak like me has to be corrected sometimes. I knew it wasn't right. Jamiroquai is a jazzy pop group that has been on the British club scene for years, but has only now been given exposure in the U.S., according to MTV news. The group's video for "Virtual Insanity" was nominated for "Best New Group" at the MTV Music Video Awards. Indeed, jazz encompasses many well-defined sub-genres, but to most people, what is termed "classical" includes chorale music, baroque, classical, Romantic, Impressionist (Debussy's music-- he was an anomaly), neoclassical (whichis a misnomer-- neo*baroque* is more accurate), Modern, and post-Modern. Thus Eurocentric music genres have tended to be lumped together as well. I think latin jazz includes salsa and meringue. I haven't heard Willie Bobo, but he falls into the salsa category. Beyond that, I really haven't a clue. You'll enjoy salsa-- it shares some of the influences carribean music does, sparkling with the sound effects of percussion 'goodies' and smaller drums.
Re: jazz and no vocals, you need to listen to some good jazz singers with scat singing improvs. Pretty cool stuff...
Jon, yes, I love fusion. That is, if we can agree on a definite meaning for the term. I consider Miles Davis' style around the _Bitches Brew_ _Tribute to Jack Johnson_ period to be fusion. I consider Weather Report around the _I sing the Body Electric_ period to be fusion. I consider Herbie Hancock's work on the _Mwandishi_ and _Headhunters_ albums to be fusion. I would say the Mahvishnu Orchestra's stuff is almost *all* fusion. But then again, I consider Blood Sweat and Tears' first album to be fusion. And I could really stretch and say that Steely Dan's and Chicago's first few albums were fusion. In any case, all the music I just mentioned, I truly LOVE. So, if indeed, these examples are accepted forms of fusion, then I guess I DO love fusion. I think that latin jazz also includes Bosso Nova. I was reading something that Carlos Jobim said before he died. He said (paraphrasing) that that if one was bosso at something, they were extremely good. So a bosso guitar player, he said, was a virtuoso. I really wish I knew more about latin jazz (Brazillian and Cuban, in particular).
No doubt-- but bossa nova music was in the elevators before SpiroGyra was.
I don't know what's good, and what's fluff, but it seemed to be a minor rage
in the 70's.
You are probably right that bossa nova is latin jazz, if Fernwood is correct
that you might hear it 'in an elevator in Brazil' ("Am I in Miami?")
The Carribean, in general, retained elements of African music in a purer form
than the U.S. did. But the Carribean is of such mixed ethnicity that I can't
guess all the influences there.
Actually, at the end of the 1800's, Carribean music was a significant contribution to the music of New Orleans that eventually became jazz. It is not at all surprising that New Orleans was the main City where jazz developed. Not only was the actual population of the city extremely diverse, it was also the main major seaport in the south U.S. Ships from all over the world came into New Orleans ports, a large number of them from the Carribean and other parts of Latin America.
Yesterday was John Coltrane's birthday. I've enjoyed listening to his material in the past few years. Arwulf, a local DJ, was doing a salute to the man, this evening on WCBN, 88.3 FM. Played some nice stuff...
I've recently, over the past 2 or three years, started buying Coltrane. Most of his stuff (that I've heard) I love. I've also heard some of his really free, unstructured, Ornette Coleman type stuff that I can't seem to get into. I really miss the Community radio station down in Tampa (WMNF 88.5). They have the most incredible lineup of ANY radio station I've ever heard. Here in Gainesville, the local public radio station plays amazing music as well, but only from midnight until 5 a.m. The rest of the time, they play "classical" music, which is okay at times, but a bit weary if you're driving around all day (unless you have your recorder in your car with you, and you catch a groovy fugue by Bach to jam along with).
I've heard _My Favorite Things_, _Soultrane_, and _A Love Supreme_, all of which came pretty highly recommended. I haven't heard too much of the more experimental stuff, yet.
Mark, check out _Stellar Regions_ and more importantly, _Giant Steps_. The changes on giant steps are pure genuis. Supposedly, he sat in his apartment for a year practicing the title track from this album, before he would play it for anyone (much less record it), according to the professor who just taught the jazz history course I was in over the summer.
Yeah, _Giant Steps_ is next on my list to check out, actually...
If you want a cool twist to _A Love Supreme_, there's an album that Carlos Santana and John McLaughlin did called _Love, Devotion, Surrender_, that has the tune _A Love Supreme_ . I can't remember off the top of my head if they do another Coltrane tune on this album, but I gotta tell you, these two guys together are incredible!
How many words can you get out of the name Thelonious Monk: tone, sonnet, thin, moon, loon, stool, hint, knot, shot, slim, melt, ...
RE #75 How about "monk?"
milk, smut, loom, think, slit... If you allow Thelonious Sphere Monk, you can get monikers, kneeler, and pontoons...
Oh geez..
I'm finding that I really don't like jazz that much. Things in favor of jazz: 1. Harmonically very complex 2. Many ways to interperet songs, with interesting results. Things I don't like: 1. Rythmically very limited. Sure, there's Brubeck's "Take 5", but that is one tune out of how many? And it is amazing how many solos are just strings of 1/8th notes. 2. Emotionally very limited. The sound, to me, seems to be filtered through the "cool" filter that makes it sound "jazzy". So it all seems to be in the context of a performance by people heavily concerned with image as well as music... entertainers, in a very nightclub sense. And what I find really weird is the rock and jazz combinations. Despite the common roots, the two forms seem very incompatible to me. Rock music, to me, has a very wide range of emotion, from anger to joy to things in between.
re #79 Perhaps you have only listened to be-bop jazz ala Miles Davis. Jazz has an incredible range of styles from the John Cage influnced disonance of Sun Ra, to the Latin funk influenced post hip-hop acid jazz of Groove Collective. I do not know how to count out measures so i can't tell you whether either of these muscians breaks a 4/4 time signature but you might try talking to someone who knows about jazz (maybe Schoolkids records) to find jazz with more unususal meters.
What raven said. If you've heard me ranting against Mike Grace earlier in the item, that would be why - he's absolutely fixated on bebop. Recently, actually, I've been listening to some New Orleans brass band stuff - the Dirty Dozen Brass Band being my favorite. It's probably as far removed from bebop as jazz gets, but still recognizable as jass, and very listenable.
So with such a wide range covered under one term, how do you know what's "Jazz" and what isn't? I really dislike the question "do you like jazz?" since it seems almost meaningless to me. How does one respond when the word "jazz" is comprehensive enough to include everything from Billie Holiday to Sun Ra to Kenny G (aieeee!) ?
Well, when you think about it "Classical" - meaning anything from Stravinski to Gregorian Chant - or "Alternative" - meaning either ska, punk, rock, folk, or anything else - are equally vague.
As much as we may dislike labels, they are an essential component of the ability to grasp the unknown, or, at least, the unfamiliar. We group things together to make things more accessible. By aggregating items with common traits, we make something more familiar, and can begin to concentrate on other details, without the distraction of examing everything at once. Pattern recognition is a very significant aspect of assimilating a large body of unfamiliar information. Understanding its limitations, grouping need not be seen so distastefully...
I sometimes wonder if we should label music... music should be labled "like" and "dislike" via persons personal opinion
I don't dislike labels, I just like them to be useful and descriptive. To me "jazz" is the musical equivalent of "stuff" in that it is too over-encompassing to be very useul in drawing conclusions about the work to which it is applied.
I agree, Mikebut no matter how specific you get in your labeling, it is always possible to get more specific, until you have narrowed your grouping down to a single group (or artist). So when I say that I like jazz, I would hope that you wouldn't jump to any conclusions (like, say, that I like Kenny G), but that you would enquire further as to what kinds of jazz I enjoy. If you tell me you like to fly, I might ask you if mean as a passenger on a commercial airline, or as a pilot on a private plane. That's one of the beauties of language: it ambiguity. ;->
I'm just getting onto Louis Armstrong. Thought I'd listen to an introductory collection, then jump into more. The Oscar Peterson/Louis Armstrong album looked like a good additional choice, now that I've enjoyed some common favorites.
Ok, that should "into", not "onto"...
(Interesting mental image, that)
I just got a great Louis Armstrong/Ella Fitzgerald cd...theres a bunch of REALLY great songs that the two of them do together, and there are a few cd's of them....I like Louis alot by himself, but the two of them as a duet....YUM! :)
Yeah, I think I saw that one! I love Ella Fitzgerald, too.
There are more then just one....I had to decide between three cd's that looked good, and a couple that didn't...
I have a Satchmo/Dutchess album, which I thouroghly enjoy, espectially thier renditions of "Summertime", and "It Ain't Nessessarily So". The only thing I regret about that album is that it doesn't include "Baby it's Cold Outside". Oh, well, I suppose you can't have everything...
One of the ones that I almost bought was a 2 or three disk set....but of course, all the disks were sepperate.....I might still get them all, anyway...:)
I'm almost done reading Louis Armstrong`s autobiography: _Satchmo_. It's a fun read. You get a good sense of how his good upbringing, affable nature, and dedication carried him through some rough times, growing up. I learned a little bit about early 1900`s New Orleans, too...
sounds neat. I should go look for it sometime.
The whole story of the birth of jazz, and what was going on in New Orleans at the turn of the century is facinating.
Arwulf was reading some excerpts from _We Called it Music_ the other day on his WEMU jazz show regarding Fats Waller. The book is apparently a collection of anecdotes by a jazz insider, and looks to be some fairly interesting reading. The astute Da Capo publishers put this one out...
I'm partway through Sun Ra's biography "Space is the Place: The life and Times of Sun Ra" This is one fascinating man.
Managed to snag a copy of _We Called it Music: a Generation of Jazz_, the book of anecdotes from Eddie Condon that Arwulf mentioned a few shows ago. This apparently came out in 1947, originally.
New bio on Louis Armstrong is out, by the way. Looks fairly well-received...
Interested in catching some live jazz this weekend? Hop on over to Cross Street Station this Friday, January 15, at 10:30P. You'll be treated to the vibrant sound of Detroit's hip-hop inflected Jazodity (that's pronounced /jazz oddity/). Good stuff! There's a small cover, $3-$4 -- a small price to pay for some superior talent.
So in preparation for a crass, commercial observance of Duke Ellington's 100th birthday today, I picked up three of the reissues which have been flooding the market. Ellington's collaboration with Count Basie, FIRST TIME: THE COUNT MEETS THE DUKE, was a safe choice, since I've had the vinyl for 20 years. The two bands play together to form a Really Big Band, playing mostly really accessible stuff. Lots of loud playing in the opening track, and in the inevitable "Take The A Train." This is from 1961. The bonus tracks are mostly interesting if you want to explore the early stages of the collaborative process; all but one or two are just first drafts, as it were. So far, the SOUL CALL album is a disappointment. It's a live date in France from the mid-1960s, from part of a series Ellington did with Ella Fitzgerald, though Ella does not appear on this disc. The original album is heavy on jamming which just doesn't seem to go anywhere for me. I haven't gotten to the bonus tracks yet; they are short versions of standards, so perhaps they will stop me from reselling the album.
I started a Duke Ellington Centennial item, which is cross-linked between Agora and Music.
I went to the record show/sale last weekend in A2, and picked up a couple of Dizzy Gillespie records. Moe Koffman Quintet w/ Dizzy playing a great version of OOP-POP-A-DA, and of course, Night In Tunisia, and something claiming to be "The Greatest Jazz Concert Ever". Well, it is! Recorded in May, 1953, it unites (begrudgingly) Charlie Parker and Dizzy, and has Bud Powell, Charles Mingus and Max Roach. Wow, this thing cooks!
For local folks, the new Ann Arbor jazz club The Firefly Club opens next weekend on Friday, May 12, 2000. It's located at the location of the old Bird of Paradise: 207 S. Ashley between Liberty and Washington.
!! What happened to the Bird of Paradise?
It moved to the space under The Ark on Main Street.
<sigh of relief> Thought it had vanished and nobody told me or something.
As did I, glad its still around. I should get over there more often.
I've not yet been to the Firefly, but I've not heard rave reviews. I might make it there some day. The night that I went to the new Ark, they had a $25 cover, and since I thought that it was alittle excessive, I decided not to go that route. But I've been meaning to get back there one of these nights.
I might be going to the Firefly tonight. Louis Smith, my old jazz band teacher, is playing (a pretty rare event these days). Smith, despite being a local teacher, is actually a very impressive trumpet player and has made a few records.
Your old Jazz band teacher? I had him too. How keen. He's a great gu.
$25 dollars whas probably mroe like a 'ticket price' for a premium player rahter than a cover charge.
You have several choices: