No "teaching points" offered, Rok; just trying to offer a perspective that I feel will enhance the listening experience. You see, from my perspective, the problem is that you and others want to be able to make proclamations about what is "the best", "the worst", "empty", "not jazz" etc. based only on personal likes and dislikes, and then when there is disagreement and the comment is challenged no substantive argument is made for why the original proclamation should stand. Every single time (well, probably not EVERY, but close) that I have disagreed or agreed with the merit of a particular artist or recording I have offered specific and detailed reasons why, with specific examples that are not rooted in opinion and emotional reaction only. Example: if a player is not making the changes of a tune, there is really very little room for disagreement. Why you or anyone else should feel more offended, provoked, or whatever you want to call it than someone who disagrees with a proclamation of "this is the best" is beyond me. But, you are right, I don't just talk. That's the problem; there's too much that is simply talk with little purpose other than self gratification. I don't consider that a discussion.
****I guess it boils down to which is more important to the consumer. Since most of us wouldn't know 'nuts & bolts' if they fell on us. :)
In my field, we would call it being schooled in the military arts. Just having a lot of men and weapons is not enough. You must know when and how to deploy them.****
As usual, you make my point; in more ways than one. You can't have it both ways. There IS a tendency to dismiss the importance of the nuts and bolts (man, am I starting to regret using that term a while back!), and that IS usually accompanied with the implication that because someone does "have a lot of men and weapons" that person "doesn't know when and how to deploy them". That attitude becomes a simple excuse and justification born out of some insecurity, for not "having enough men and weapons". It's very easy to always fall back on "well, it's what I like, so that's enough". But, enough for what? What's the point of your "reviews" if your comments can't be backed up with more than just opinion and expressions of what you happen to like? Tell me then, at what point is it OK to point out that the alto saxophone referred to in a posted clip is not an alto at all, but a tenor? That by any reasonable standard, when judging the merit of a performance, the fact that the tempo of a tune slows down dramatically beginning to end, it should be pointed out? That any jazz "aficionado" should know when a tune's chorus ends, and strive to be more than one of those clueless listeners in jazz clubs who start applauding before the player finishes his solo?
The irony here is that these attitudes go completely counter to what the very players that you idolize hold dear; especially the commitment to always want to learn more and more about the music they love and that the best way to do so is to play with players that can challenge them? Anyway, I suspected that at some point these discussions would start to get a little too personal and tense for comfort. That is unfortunate
****I guess it boils down to which is more important to the consumer. Since most of us wouldn't know 'nuts & bolts' if they fell on us. :)
In my field, we would call it being schooled in the military arts. Just having a lot of men and weapons is not enough. You must know when and how to deploy them.****
As usual, you make my point; in more ways than one. You can't have it both ways. There IS a tendency to dismiss the importance of the nuts and bolts (man, am I starting to regret using that term a while back!), and that IS usually accompanied with the implication that because someone does "have a lot of men and weapons" that person "doesn't know when and how to deploy them". That attitude becomes a simple excuse and justification born out of some insecurity, for not "having enough men and weapons". It's very easy to always fall back on "well, it's what I like, so that's enough". But, enough for what? What's the point of your "reviews" if your comments can't be backed up with more than just opinion and expressions of what you happen to like? Tell me then, at what point is it OK to point out that the alto saxophone referred to in a posted clip is not an alto at all, but a tenor? That by any reasonable standard, when judging the merit of a performance, the fact that the tempo of a tune slows down dramatically beginning to end, it should be pointed out? That any jazz "aficionado" should know when a tune's chorus ends, and strive to be more than one of those clueless listeners in jazz clubs who start applauding before the player finishes his solo?
The irony here is that these attitudes go completely counter to what the very players that you idolize hold dear; especially the commitment to always want to learn more and more about the music they love and that the best way to do so is to play with players that can challenge them? Anyway, I suspected that at some point these discussions would start to get a little too personal and tense for comfort. That is unfortunate