response 50 of 65:

Jun 21 14:16 UTC 2000

oh gawd that was beautiful!

response 52 of 65:

Jun 21 16:54 UTC 2000

I have a LOT of respect for Pat Metheny now.

response 54 of 65:

Jun 28 05:15 UTC 2000

I know nothing about Pat Metheny. Well, except that he plays guitar. Would
any of you Pat metheny fans like to point me towards a good album of his?

I got "Bitches Brew" on CD about a month ago. (which reminds me, I have
to pay them for it before they get peevish and send me something I don't
want...). Anyway, the more I listen to it the more inexplicable I find the
violently negative response that it received from jazz critics of the day.
(One of the books I read for that jazz research paper last year referred to
it as "a sad plea for attention") (getting the cause and effect mixed up, as
"Brew" was the record that started the fusion trend, not an attempt to
keep up with it) The music is incredibly complex and multifaceted; it's no
exaggeration when the blurb on the CD back says something like "by turns 
churning and contemplative, airy and grounded, structured and free..."
And it's much too simplistic to label it "jazz-rock," for that matter,
as it has influences from many different musical forms (including, 
incidentally, some of the best ideas of Coleman's Free jazz, like the 
collective improvisation that replaces sharply differentiated round-robin
solos -- John McLaughlin is particularly adept at this).

That said, I'm starting to agree with Orinoco's comment that most other fusion
isn't so good (in resp #2 or so). Having heard quite a lot more fusion 
recently, I can say that none of it has quite the "oceanic depth" (another
blurb quote) of "Bitches Brew." Most of it is rather one-dimensional...
Mahavishnu Orchestra was quite good, although I'm not too fond of JM's 
extreme use of distortion on some songs, and the long guitar solo on the 
first track from Lost Trident Sessions seemed not to really go anywhere for 
all its speed. (The concluding blues-inflected section of that track was 
lovely, though). Also probably I shouldn't evaluate Mahavishnu on the strength
of a "previously unreleased" album (I have heard the others at someone else's
house but *listened* to them...).

BTW, Orinoco, why do you hate JM's solo records? I heard "My Goal's Beyond"
(reissued on CD, incorrectly as "My Goals Beyond") last week and have
decided I'll have to get it. It's an acoustic record with several Mahavishnu
players on it (Jerry Goodman, Billy Cobham, and one other I think...). The
first side is very Indian-influenced with sitar and tabla backing along with
the bass and drums, the second mostly solo guitar renditions of jazz standards.
Actually the second side has quite a classical "tone color" which I liked a
lot.

response 56 of 65:

Jun 29 18:00 UTC 2000

Well, I have to admit that it's not on very much evidence that I've
decided I don't like John McLaughlin's solo stuff.  I owned "The Heart of
Things,"  a 1997 release of his, for a while, and never really warmed to
it.  I saw him live a few years ago and was blown away by his rhythm
section, but didn't much enjoy his playing.  I've heard a few things of
his on the radio, and thought they were flashy but not very interesting.
Then again, none of this that I've heard comes from around the same time
as the Mahavishnu Orchestra; it's possible that I'd like some of his
earlier solo work, which I haven' theard any of.

(Then again again, "Indian influenced" jazz "with sitar and tabla backing"
sounds to me like a profoundly anoying idea).

I suspect that Bitches-Brew-era Miles Davis and the Mahavishnu Orchestra
were only called by the same label because they were both playing <gasp>
electric music.  "Fusion" as a term doesn't seem to mean much more than
"well, they've got an electric guitarist, so....." -- it's misleading.
Bitches Brew sounds to me like especially tasteful free jazz, and
Mahavishnu sound to me like a side current of prog rock. 

response 58 of 65:

Jul 11 04:00 UTC 2000

Russell lent me his B Sharp Jazz Quartet cd, "Tha Go 'Round." Although I
liked some of it, it grew rather monotonous listening to it straight through.
Their style might be described as hard-bop with a touch of funk.

On an impulse I checked out "Song X" by Ornette Coleman & Pat Metheny,
only to discover that I *still* don't understand Coleman...

response 60 of 65:

Aug 18 13:02 UTC 2000

(A really really good Chick Corea CD is "3 Quartets", which is all acoustic
with sidemen like Steve Gadd and Eddie Gomez.

response 62 of 65:

Sep 7 04:46 UTC 2000

Since entering the resp. in which I mentioned the B sharp quartet, I've heard
some of their other stuff (they have a total of four cds out on a
not-for-profit label called the "MAMA foundation," if anyone's curious...)
and liked it quite a bit better. The other albums were, I thought, more varied
both in song selection and instrumentation (the pianist played a couple of
different kinds of electric keyboard, and I was somewhat surprised to discover
that I actually liked the sound of it...) and I like albums with variety. They
also had one album that opened and closed with the quartet augmented by a
spoken-word performer, great resonant voice, and although it verged on rap
or hip-hop I liked it much more than either - slower tempo, acoustic backing,
and great literate lyrics. 

Anyway I just thought I should enter that in the interests of fairness. I'd
actually like to buy one of their albums now, but they're more expensive
than most as they have to be special ordered.... :(

response 64 of 65:

May 2 20:47 UTC 2001

I got another Miles Davis fusion album, _In a Silent Way_. THis came out in
68 or 69 IIRC, the album just before Bitches Brew. It might be described as
a "lighter" version of _Bitches Brew_. There is only one bassist (Dave
Holland if I recall, playing acoustic) and one drummer (Tony Williams) who
stays in the background almost entirely, so it is both much less aggressive
and more "loose" than on the later album. In a lot of ways the album is like 
_Kind of Blue_ on electric instruments. The solos are even longer and less
"shaped" than on _Kind of Blue_, and annoyed me a bit at first (with the
exception of Wayne Shorter's), but after several listenings they "make
sense."
The second track is both longer (almost 18 minutes) and more interesting
than the first...it opens with some lovely major-key noodling by John
McLaughlin and one of the pianists over a bass drone, after which Shorter
and Miles repeat a lyrical, folky melody. The main section consists of two 
repeated bass lines, one very austere and the other reminiscent of "81" from
_ESP_. The soloists cue the change from the first to the second, like
"Flamenco Sketches" on _Blue_ and whatever the first track on disc 2
of _Bitches Brew_ is. 
Anyway, a good album...calmer and more peaceful than _Bitches Brew_ without
being any less interesting.