Jazz for aficionados
Some thoughts about electric instruments: one may prefer the sound of acoustic instruments, but players choose to use electric or acoustic piano and bass not because one kind is intrinsically superior to the other. They are different animals altogether with not only different sounds but different response and feel which place different demands on the player; which, in turn, opens different avenues of expression. The player makes a judgment call as to which is more appropriate for the style of music. It's not a coincidence that Herbie Hancock. Chick Corea, Deodato and many others chose the Fender Rhodes piano. That sound in a way defined the 70's and I disagree that the music would be better served with an acoustic piano. It's almost like saying "I prefer the sound of the bass clarinet to that of the tenor saxophone, why didn't Coltrane use the bass clarinet instead?" ; after all, they are both single reed woodwinds in Bb and have the same range. O-10 mentioned Weather Report one of the greatest bands from this period. Joe Zawinul was a founder and key member, and later formed his "Syndicate". Check out the electric bass sound on this clip; can't do this on the acoustic bass. The rhythm section is on fire. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=q6SbaYPU2LA |
The Frogman: Chick Corea -- LIGHT AS A FEATHER The album from which your clip of 'Spain' was taken. Corea is a lot of things, but noise maker is not one of them. We are in agreement already. And I hope we can agree that the singer should be banned from ever recording again. 'Spain' is for sure the best track on the CD. I just don't get the need for the electronic stuff. It takes some getting used to, and I don't see the improvement or advantage over the acoustic stuff. Farrell was a welcomed presence. Visualize for a moment: All the well known great piano players in the history of Jazz. Now, visualze them sitting in front of some electonic thing with several keyboards in front of them. The Duke? Bud Powell? Now visualize all the great Bass players. Now try to see them with a bass guitar around their necks! Mingus? Really! The very thought of such a thing is absurd! But Corea is a great musician. After all, I bought this one, and several more. The main problem with electronic instruments is that you can get close and actually cross the line between music and 'sound effects'. Note the 'wah-wah' at the end of 'Spain', and in the title track also. Good album. Would have been better with Steinway and upright acoustic bass. Cheers |
O-10: Pithecanthropus Erectus: With a title like that, and coming from our OP, I thought it best to define terms!:) Walking upright. Got it! For those of you that want to listen to modern, progressive and cutting edge Jazz, you need go no further than Mingus. He can go to the far reaches, and NEVER LEAVE JAZZ. To me, that is his greatest. No hypen needed or required. The liner notes on this CD are great. Again the music and it's intentions are explained by Mingus himself. Nat Hentoff gives his thoughts also, but who better than Mingus himself to expalin his music. The title track is my favorite. There is something about it that rises above the usual Jazz tune. I wish I had the words to explain it, but I am glad I have the ears to hear it. I recall the CD 'Art Pepper meets the Rhythm section'. A great set. Pepper playing with the Miles Davis rhythm section. They never rehearsed! Met for the first time the day they cut the record. You just know that would not and could not, ever happen with a Mingus set. He demanded more than just blowing, and he got more. I remember when I was in college, a friend, who introduced me to Mingus' music, made a comment about the strict and high standards he set for his players. How true. That is the hallmark of his records, Playing at the highest level. No blowing sessions. Calling him a Jazz player, is like calling Einstein a Physicist. It's true, but totally inadequate. O-10 thanks for reminding us. Cheers |
Now that we have thoroughly covered the 50's and 60's, it's time to move into the 70's. Miles ushered in the 70's with "Bitches Brew". I saw him live with that same group before the album came out, and fortunately I was with some guys from New York (they seem to know everything about new music) because the experience was the same as turning up a bottle of whiskey, and tasting wine; this was not the Miles I expected to hear. Head Hunters, and Weather Report were two groups that impressed me with this new music. Although we try to communicate music with words, it's impossible; the only thing that can be communicated is how this music affected or impressed "you", and that's the only person you can speak with any authority for. "Sextant" was the Herbie Hancock album that impressed me, it really blew me away; I even liked the cover art. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pk0L3RXYxS0 Weather Report, "I Sing The Body Electric" was the first album I acquired by that group, it took me to another world; the music was not of this universe, it took me someplace I've never been before, and I liked it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBMLhDw1xOw Frogman, both "Oregon" and Chick Corea are well represented in my collection. Enjoy the music. |
One of my favorite noise makers from the '70's; brilliant keyboardist and composer. http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=plpp&v=KOFs40ekTV0&list=PL198F268D6B1CBC21 |
The Frogman: ahahahahahahah I have to laugh out loud. This is getting to be ridiculous. I will try again. We were having a conversation in which you offered a definition of Jazz. A definition that I have absolutely no problem with!! Before you stated the definition, you made a comment about people saying things like, "I know it when I hear it", and Implied that that was too easy. Sort of like a cop-out. In respoding to your post, I attempted to show that a piece of music could meet your written definition of Jazz, and NOT BE JAZZ! That's what I meant, when I stated that, hearing it being of the upmost importance. (know it when you hear it). The point of the bluegrass piece was to show that this was an example of such a piece of music. I play it often and have always felt it had a lot of Jazz elements in it. I said it COULD meet your definition. You said it does have improvisation, but does not meet the definition due to the lack of complexity and sophistication of the music, and interaction between the players. I said that these qualities could be a matter of degree or opinion. i.e. maybe the bluegrass players consider their music fairly complex etc.... I did not say, or mean to imply that the bluegrass piece was Jazz, just to show, that a written definition, no matter how well constructed, cannot be the final answer. The music must be HEARD! Or maybe in the case of a pro, looked at on paper. The Hancock piece. I listened to it again. At least 12 minutes of it. 12 minutes I will never get back. The dynamic range thingy. Don't stoop to 'gotcha' audiophile techniques. You knew what I meant. I think I didn't like it because of the electronic keyboards and the electric bass. And that mind-numbing repetition of the rhythm section. It does not sound muffled, bad word, it sounded like what I said, Booker T. No disrepect to Booker T. Memphis Soul. Stax. I love music, but I got tired of listening to it. Maybe it got better later on. I will concede that possibility. I am sure his shoes were appropiate to the music being played. Maybe some horns joined later. Music genres with hypenated names is used to create new catagories or new genres of established music genres, so that the noise makers can play. And get awards. And make money. We really have no disagreement. I will now go into Chief Joseph Mode, and fight no more, forever. Cheers |
O-10, another group from the '70's that I was into is Oregon. Wonderful instrumentalists; particularly Paul McAndless on multiple reeds including oboe. If you are not familiar with their work here are some examples; I have a feeling you will like it. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TGRwX5lh74E http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UMEgf9VGqUk http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=noCkc-0cY0c |
Rok, I'm trying, really trying. ****You cannot state 'your' definition of Jazz, and then have a discussion with others, using 'your' definition as a given fact. What you found lacking in the bluegrass piece, even by 'your' definition, was a matter of degree, judgement or opinion.**** Sigh! OK, here we go again. I'll explain point by point: First of all, point out to me, please, where I used my definition "as a given fact?. Now, you posted a Bluegrass clip and stated: ****I think this clip could meet your definition.**** YOU alluded to MY definition, and made an assumption based on YOUR interpretation of MY definition. I disagreed with the premise of that assumption; you misunderstood my definition or don't understand the relevance of it to the clip you posted. Moreover, I graciously qualified the use of my own definition in my comments about the clip by stating: "My definition (FOR WHATEVER THAT IS WORTH)". Again, kindly explain how any of this constitutes claiming that my definition is "a given fact". ****What you found lacking in the bluegrass piece.....**** OK, do I really need to spell this one out? Fine. Not only did I say that I love Bluegrass, I clearly stated: ++++This is not a criticism; simply the nature of the music.++++ I found nothing lacking in the Bluegrass piece, and made it clear. It is Bluegrass; it is not a rhythmically nor harmonically sophisticated music. It is not supposed to be, and to try to make it so would make it lose part of what makes it good; I hope you can understand that. ****even by 'your' definition, was a matter of degree, judgement or opinion.**** OK, I already pointed out that I found nothing lacking. Nonetheless, let's look at the points that I made in the comparisons of Bluegrass to more rhythmically and harmonically advanced musics. "A matter of judgement or opinion"? Nope, not so. Here is where the subjectivist's argument falls apart. If you understand harmony and rhythm (from more than just a rudimentary standpoint) it's easy to understand this distinction. This is not a matter of opinion. We've been here before, and why there is such an aversion to accepting this is beyond me. OK, you thought that Herbie's music had no dynamic range. OK, fine. So what? Is that the only thing you can say about it? Do you honestly mean to tell me that the amazing grooves and fabulous solos (especially Herbie's) don't deserve acknowledgement? ****The music was muffled because it had no dynamic range. The difference between the highest and lowest notes.**** Huh?! Please explain what on earth the "difference between the highest and lowest notes" have to do with dynamic range. Herbie Mann?!? I like Herbie Mann, but as a comparison to The Headhunters? I am speechless.... ****Whenever I see the name of a so-called genre with a hypen, I always ask, why is that needed?**** Why not? Isn't this talking-point getting a little old. Of course there are countless examples of music with hyphenated genre names; so what? There are plenty of examples of great music in these hyphenated genres; just as there are plenty of examples of lame music with non-hyphenated names (the steak analogy). I urge you to understand the irony in your insistence on this stance. You love a music that is, first and foremost, about spontaneity, change, forward-looking attitudes, open-mindedness, and much more. The real question should be: why does one need to be so protective of "the name". To quote O-10: "Rok, I've got more than one concept. Enjoy the music." |
You cannot state 'your' definition of Jazz, and then have a discussion with others, using 'your' definition as a given fact. What you found lacking in the bluegrass piece, even by 'your' definition, was a matter of degree, judgement or opinion. The Herbie Hancock piece was not 'muffled' due to the quality of the recording. The music was muffled because it had no dynamic range. The difference between the highest and lowest notes. Booker T and the MG's come to mind. Maybe Herbie Mann? That type stuff. Memphis Soul. Not James Brown as you mentioned. The music landscape is littered with musicians who possessed the following attitudes: 'understanding' their music or 'getting it' was solely the job and responsibilty of the listener. "take it or leave it". "You don't understand what I'm saying? Well that is just a reflection of your lack of musical understanding" etc...... I would name them, but they are unknown.:) Bet you can find them on every street corner in NYC. If the artist does not connect with the audience, HE/SHE has a problem! Just a variation of 'the customer is always right'! Whenever I see the name of a so-called genre with a hypen, I always ask, why is that needed? Other than these small and insignificate differences, we are in total agreement. Cheers |
****but a person has to be able to know it when they hear it. Think about it. **** Only if the person cares about attaching a definition of genre to the music as opposed to caring mainly about wether the music speaks to him/her as being good music or bad; that was the whole point of my post. It is not the music's responsibility to scream at the listener what it is. Growth as a listener (if that is a goal to the particular listener) happens when there is a willingness to learn more and more about the art so as to become a more discerning listener. I love Bluegrass! It is fun, and can groove and even swing. Thanks for the clip. ****I think this clip could meet your definition.**** Not at all. Good Bluegrass has only one of the ingredients in my definition (for whatever THAT is worth): improvisation. But, "a high level of interaction between the players, and a high level of rhythmic and harmonic sophistication in that interaction" ? No way! The rhythmic interplay is simplistic with a simple "1,2,3,4" feel, and harmonically very "inside" with very basic harmony. This is not a criticism; simply the nature of the music. I agree that the recording quality of the Herbie Hancock clip leaves something to be desired; there is some audible distortion but I certainly wouldn't call it muffled. Regardless, I find it more than acceptable and I am not concerned with the quality of the recorded sound (as long as it is acceptable) as much as the quality of the music and in that regard it absolutely burns. ****I think they are better examples of the this type music.**** I would love to hear them. Please share. Thanks for the comments. |
The Frogman: I understand your comments, but a person has to be able to know it when they hear it. Think about it. I think this clip could meet your definition. BTW, I love this stuff. I have the CD and the DVD. Highly recommended! Recorded at Fisk University in Nashville. Is it Jazz? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRi6yhqmuxU Cheers |
O-10: The Bush symphony was interesting. I call this 'video' music. It has no connection to the people in the images. It's designed to make the common seem sublime. Same for the other piece. When I hear this type stuff, I think, Made up. Based on nothing. Requires a little weed to make a person think they appreciate it. I will listen to 'Pithecanthropus Erectus' today to get refreshed. Report later. Cheers |
Ok, so what IS jazz? Someone famous once said that if you have to ask you'll never know. Someone else said that he doesn't know, but knows it when he hears it. Cop outs; and too easy! What this thread, now approaching 2000 posts, proves is that it is unlikely that there will be agreement about the definition. So what? Is not what really matters wether it is good music or not? We can get so hung up on the definition that we miss the forest for the trees. To use an analogy: I think that one thing that most can agree on is that a premium aged sirloin steak is superior to even the best hamburger. But, not every steak is superior to a good burger; you can have a pretty crappy steak which makes a good burger a much better, and delicious, choice. Sometimes music lovers fall into a comfort zone based on genre and dismiss other genres to the extent that they are tolerant of inferior music making simply because it happens to be in their preferred genre; while, at the same time, dismissing great music making simply because it is in a genre deemed inferior. O-10 has made two posts recently that IMHO are particularly important to the evolution of this thread. In one was a comment about not yet exploring the '70's; the other was the Deodato clips. Not because I think those clips are particularly worthy, but because they introduce a genre that merits much more attention. Funk-jazz, electric-jazz, fusion-jazz; whatever one wants to call it. Again, what exactly IS jazz? To me, and hard to dispute, jazz is music in which key elements are improvisation, a high level of interaction between the players, and a high level of rhythmic and harmonic sophistication in that interaction. For me, classical music does not meet ALL those criteria, neither does rock; pop certainly doesn't. So ..... This meets all those criteria, and laid the ground work for Deodato and countless others. Herbie Hancock's Headhunters was an amazing band; funky grooves on a par with those laid down by James Brown's band at their best combined with instrumental virtuosity and very advanced improvisational sophistication. It may not be like his work with Miles and Shorter, but every bit as hip. Mike Clark kills on drums (not bad for a white dude in this kind of company), Benny Maupin is the antithesis of Michael Brecker, few notes but funky as hell; and Herbie, amazing. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mMcQfyuHVk8 |
Well Rok, since you started a conversation about someone who's worthy of a serious conversation, I'll continue. When I bought the LP "Pithecanthropus Erectus", I had no idea what the title meant or anything, other than the fact that it was a "Mingus" album. At that time, I was working side by side with an anthropologist, we both were employed as aircraft electricians. (he took this temporary job while waiting for a dig). You can google "Pithecanthropus Erectus" if you would like to go into the detail my anthropologist co-worker took me through that afternoon. I mention this to give you an indication of just how deep a thinker Charles Mingus was. If you want to hear Jackie McLean like you've never heard him before, this album is a must have. Mingus's creativity brings out things in other musicians they didn't even know they had. I bought every album I saw by Mingus, and I was never disappointed; each one was so unique, that they were simply different facets of the diamond we all know as "Charles Mingus". Enjoy the music. |
Rok, this is my concept when I want to go to a "corroboree", or just hang with the boys in the bush; I wonder if Monk ever tried any of them steps. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZpXPwmbQvc This is when I want to go into the 6th dimension. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pE500PSe0BM Enjoy the music. |
Sign of the Times! They forgot to invite the Dixie Chicks and the Berlin philharmonic and a few Divas from the MET. This would be a great venue to perform 'LULU'. And what about our Bluegrass friends? And once all these folks were on board, and there was still room, hell, then they might as well consider a few Jazz players!! Can the End be far off!!! http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/clapton-springsteen-and-santana-top-2014-jazz-fest-lineup-20140114 Cheers |
Rok, you are participating in, and enjoying the best possible way to add to your collection; for example, I never even heard of "Niel Larsen", but now he will get added to my collection, thanks to Frogman. The very worst records and CD's I have are the result of "Stereophile"; they definitely know good equipment, but good music is a horse of another color. When I told a record store owner I was an "Audiophile", he said "Oh yea, you're one of those guys who plays the same record over and over". Little did I know how true that was in regard to some Audiophiles. The better the equipment, the worse the collection. Although this certainly doesn't hold true for all Audiophiles, you get my drift. Enjoy the music. |
O-10: I have seen Monk dance WHILE playing the piano! :) I guess we can never own everything, but Mingus is one of those pl;ayers that makes you think you are missing something if you don't own everything he has done. BTW, how do/did you decide which CD / LPs to buy? When it comes to music reviews, I really miss Stereo Review. Their reviews have stood the test of time. Cheers |
Rok, I don't have Mingus at the Bohemia, but I do have "Jump Monk" from that album on a compilation. Mingus tried to simulate Monk's dance movements on his bass, which was impossible because if you ever saw Monk dance, you would know that he was moving to a beat that's never been heard. Although Monk's dancing could stand a lot of room for improvement, I liked Mingus's bass. That was a highly significant album. Enjoy the music. |
Man, O-10, you just sent me back forty years (ouch!) with those Deodato clips. Nothing beats the sound of a Fender Rhodes piano on that kind of groove. I was a kid in high school when that was on the radio constantly; love it! I believe it was the great John Tropea on guitar on those cuts. Made me think of another player who I was into back then who you might like if you like that kind of sound. The first clip "Last Tango In Paris" features a young Michael Brecker on tenor with one of my favorite recorded solos of his, and probably the reason that I started to play the saxophone after having started on clarinet a few years earlier. Thanks for the trip down memory lane. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5OCBt4TMRl4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4E92y1wr2Gs |
Today's listen: Charles Mingus -- MINGUS AT THE BOHEMIA Some of the most unique compositions ever, AND, they are explained in the liner notes, written by Mal Waldron, who also plays piano on the set. On this set Mingus plays two songs at once. He does this twice. First on 'septemberly' and The second time on 'all the things you C-sharp' he even includes a little 'clair de lune'. The music is up to Mingus' usual high standards. But the liner notes, written by one of the players, are priceless! Sort of like taking a language class. They say something in the language you are trying to master(the music), and then you read the translation in your native tongue(the liner notes). I think these guys(any Mingus group), rehearse a lot! Great stuff! This morning's first performance in the 'Battle of the Nutcrackers' on Ovation, was a disappointment. Too 'modern'. The costumes were a distraction and added nothing to the ballet. Maybe tomorrow's performance will be better. Cheers |
Rok, when Dinah died, she was married to "Night Train" Lane, a professional football player. I'm just putting the pieces together: "Her deep longing for something she had not obtained", "Honey if I told you, you'd faint", and her last marriage to an athlete who broke records for interceptions, which means he was long winded, and had a strong heart; maybe she fulfilled her last wish, but didn't live long enough to enjoy it; just speculating, what do you think? Enjoy the music. |
Frogmen, that was a very good summation. Here's an artist we haven't covered, "Eumir Deodato", he was born in Brazil, but his music is all over the place. These are the tunes that I liked: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJKsp9_L24Q https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBZY6urezxQ Enjoy the music. |
O-10, we have no disagreement. You are correct that Cugat's version stays closer to the Tropical element in the tune; Shaw's is much closer to the classic big band sound of that period. My point was simply that I associate the tune (and I think most would also) with Artie Shaw; not a question of right or wrong. I must have played Shaw's version a hundred times while "paying my dues" as a youngster working what was left of the "big band circuit" in NYC years ago. Now, what makes a version a "classic"? The one that was a big hit and propelled Shaw to stardom, or the one that came later and subjectively has more of the Latin flavor that the tune suggests? I don't know, and probably has most to do with our individual definition of "classic". Ultimately not important, but always good to know the real origins of tunes. Regards. |
Frogman, for my entire life I thought this was Latin American in origin. Music to me is what it convey's; When they begin the beguine it brings back the sound of music so tender it brings back a night of tropical splendor it brings back a memory of green I'm with you once more under the stars and down by the shore an orchestras playing and even the palms seem to be swaying when they begin the beguine to live it again is past all endeavor except when that tune clutches my heart and there we are swearing to love forever and promising never never to part a moments divine what rapture serene to clouds came along to disperse the joys we had tasted and now when I hear people curse the chance that was wasted I know but too well what they mean so dont let them begin the beguine let the love that was once a fire remain an ember let it sleep like the dead desire I only remember when they begin the beguine oh yes let them begin the beguine make them play til the stars that were there before return above you till you whisper to me once more darling I love you and we suddenly know what heaven we're in when they begin the beguine These lyrics, plus the music convey Latin America. According to the creole of the Caribbean, especially in Martinique and Guadeloupe, the term "Beguine" applied to a style of music and dance, and in particular a slow, close couples' dance. This combination of French ballroom dance and Latin folk dance became popular in Paris. Xavier Cougat's version convey's this better than Artie Shaw's version. Technically, you are right because Artie Shaw popularized it. My point beyond determining who's right or wrong, is to establish what music convey's to individuals; this is why music is always "subjective". Enjoy the music. |
Frogman, for my entire life I thought this was Latin American in origin. Music to me is what it convey's; When they begin the beguine it brings back the sound of music so tender it brings back a night of tropical splendor it brings back a memory of green I'm with you once more under the stars and down by the shore an orchestras playing and even the palms seem to be swaying when they begin the beguine to live it again is past all endeavor except when that tune clutches my heart and there we are swearing to love forever and promising never never to part a moments divine what rapture serene to clouds came along to disperse the joys we had tasted and now when I hear people curse the chance that was wasted I know but too well what they mean so dont let them begin the beguine let the love that was once a fire remain an ember let it sleep like the dead desire I only remember when they begin the beguine oh yes let them begin the beguine make them play til the stars that were there before return above you till you whisper to me once more darling I love you and we suddenly know what heaven we're in when they begin the beguine These lyrics, plus the music convey Latin America. According to the creole of the Caribbean, especially in Martinique and Guadeloupe, the term "Beguine" applied to a style of music and dance, and in particular a slow, close couples' dance. This combination of French ballroom dance and Latin folk dance became popular in Paris. Xavier Cougat's version convey's this better than Artie Shaw's version. Technically, you are right because Artie Shaw popularized it. My point beyond determining who's right or wrong, is to establish what music convey's to individuals; this is why music is always "subjective". Enjoy the music. |
The Frogman: The charlie rose interview is the most informative and interesting I have ever seen. Great stuff! Thanks. The second clip was basically the Rose interview again, BUT, the short clip of the rehearsal with the singers, was priceless!! Same with the short clip of the LvB 5th rehearsal. I would rather see the rehearsal than to see the actual performance. Crazy but true. He mentioned doing 'Flastaff". I have that on LP box set, Vienna / Karajan. One of the most beautiful and captivating LP cover photos ever! Since Levine spoke so highly of it, I will have to get it on DVD now. He was very open and honest about the help he received along the way. And to have the career he has had, while in constant pain for a large period of that time, just adds to his greatest. I found his comments about singers, esp females, looking the part, to be very interesting. And sadly true. It never hurts to be beautiful. Thanks for a really interesting post. Cheers |
Rok, Levine has had to make adjustments to his conducting because he is confined to a wheel chair. His ability to convey to the players what he wants has not diminished. Aside from actual conducting technique he has an uncanny ability to put into words what he wants and what the player should aim for that adds a certain clarity to the process. Levine conducted the run of "Falstaff" a couple of months ago and is scheduled to conduct Berg's "Wozzeck" beginning next month. You may find these video's interesting; he addresses some of those issues: http://www.bloomberg.com/video/james-levine-returns-to-met-charlie-rose-10-21-IhodjYjSSh2VrNdXj2rHeg.html http://www.metoperafamily.org/video/2013-2014/falstaff/watch/james-levine-rehearses-falstaff/2866059273001 |
@Acman - did not mean to imply at all that it was a stupid question! I just wasn't sure what you meant, and I wanted to explain that I would actually consider Van Sweden to be MORE qualified, not less, than many others, because of his extensive orchestral performing experience. He knows what gestures the musicians really need, and which ones they don't, and that sort of conductor in general also knows what sorts of gestures he can make for the audience's benefit and understanding that do not disrupt what the musicians are doing. Frogman's post is an excellent elaboration of mine. Rok, last I heard Levine is unable to conduct at all right now. My understanding is that it is uncertain whether he ever will again, but Frogman may know more? I will just add that conducting is more physically demanding than it appears to be - Levine is currently unable to make it through a concert physically. His musical ability of course remains. Orpheus, I would disagree that one must have a megabucks rig for classical. What I would say is that classical music makes more demands on a system. For me and for many musicians, old school systems are better for classical - very efficient speakers, driven by low powered electronics. Horns and tubes are my personal favorite, and such a system can be put together relatively inexpensively compared to the rest of high end audio (which is good, otherwise musicians like me would be priced out of it!). But I don't want this thread to turn in to that type of discussion, that has been done over and over elsewhere on this site. By the way, just about all movie theaters still use horn speaker systems. |
I was about to ask Learsfool to explain what he meant about the situation in Minnesota, but I read an article today, in the Nov 2013 issue of Gramophone that explains it all. Check it out. Also mentions the New York City Opera, the'Peoples Opera', in NYC, going into bankruptcy. Rough time for the arts. For all Time Warner Cable customers: Ovation will air the 'Battle of the Nutcrackers' starting on Monday, 13 Jan 2014. Late, due to the 'troubles'. Cheers |
Funny, I always associate Begin The Beguine with Artie Shaw. I believe it was in the late 30's or so and the first popular version after the Broadway musical it was from (like most of the popular tunes of the time) and became a hit for Shaw. Great tune with very unusual form. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zNcPnEc99UE |
