Jazz for aficionados
Frogman, I consider your thesis quite accurate and valid. In regard to the evolution of jazz, it also has to sound good. When I ask for opinions on new jazz, I don't get any feedback, that in itself is an answer. Since it is you in particular who is always pushing "new jazz", why don't you shoot your best shot and give us a sample of what you call "The new evolution" of jazz and we can decide. |
O-10, I’m glad that you thought is was valid. But, I’m at a bit of a loss as to how to respond to your post. Most importantly, the issue of evolution is not about “new jazz”, it’s a general idea that applies to any time period in the music and I really would prefer to not get into another debate about the merits of old vs new. I also don’t understand the “since it is you who is always pushing new jazz” comment. That’s not an accurate characterization at all. Some posters here have posted far more new jazz than I have. Moreover, as with my last “survey” 😉, I would say it’s new jazz maybe a quarter of the time for my posted clips. What I do advocate for, although I wouldn’t characterize it as “pushing”, is trying to be more genre-neutral. For me, new jazz does not have to be approached automatically with skepticism about its validity. Lastly, with respect, if after 5 years of this thread with its many posted clips of good “new jazz”, it has to be given a “best shot” once again so others can “decide” then it’s pretty clear to me that the exercise will be pointless. Now, re the lack of responses to your “new jazz” posts. First, I think it’s an exaggeration to say that no one ever responds. But, speaking only for myself, I simply don’t like most of what you post as “new jazz”. I don’t feel that it is representative of the better, never mind best new jazz out there. I have posted a bit of what consider good “new jazz”; perhaps you didn’t like it. Again, even very recently some here posted very good examples. I will offer some thoughts on your last “new jazz” clip next time around, Regards. Besides, pryso’s “challenge” has to get first dibs 😊 |
frogman & orpheus10 Thanks for the cuts and explanation on Sonny Stitt. I have many Stitt recordings and never felt he was a clone of Bird . I had read some things to that effect but always felt it was a bad rap on his musicianship.BTW the cut of "Laura" by Stitt was beautiful , one I was not familiar with. As to the question of the 1st bebop recording , it seems orpheus10 has changed the question to "who best represents the new bebop style that came out of that period of time" and as such has nominated Charlie Parker as the one who had the greatest influence and represented this new style of music in his playing . It would be hard to argue with his being chosen as many sources, including many musicians, point to him as being there at the beginning. So is Parker the best AND the first? I don't know. I have found a Parker interview with Paul Desmond, I believe, where he is questioned concerning his musicianship. Parker clearly states , as FACT, that he did a lot of study, sometimes 11-14 hours a day.He also says he studied with books and indicates this was a very important part of his development. So it is clear from this statement by Parker that jazz music can be intellectualized , comprehended and studied . And that WAS a key factor in his development as a musician. Jazz music IS evolutionary. Using Parker again as an example I quote Mark Gridley's "Jazz Styles History and Analysis"2nd addition. He writes "Charlie Parker wrote the song "Ko-Ko" atop the chord changes of "Cherokee" a previously written song and his improvisations were new melodies with "Cherokees" accompaniment. He also wrote that Parker. as well as other jazz musicians ,wrote new songs using pop tunes standard progressions of the day. So there you have it. In the interview Parker talks about records he cut in 1942 with Dizzy Gillespie and one of those tunes being "Groovin High". So are their records prior to the 1944 tune cited by pjw that were before the musician union strike which represent bebop? This was the first time I heard Charlie Parker interviewed. I was taken by how articulate and intelligent he was . And how humble he was concerning his talent , a rare and admirable quality I respect in any artist . http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=T3W8Ff_4oFg http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=prbqc3C6968 BTW orpheus10 I enjoyed the cut by Oran Etkin you posted. I will look for some more of his music. |
o10, possibly I didn’t make myself clear in asking for others to post favorite alternatives to the commonly recommended albums. "I’m kind of slow in the head about precisely where you’re coming from, but I’ll try. "Moods" by The Three Sounds is the album I’m going to pick". Nothing against The Three Sounds but they were not my idea of sufficient popularity to make jazz recommendation lists. If this helps what I had in mind were starters for other albums besides "Take Five", such as your Messengers’ "Moanin’", Evans’ "Waltz For Debbie", Coltrane’s "A Love Supreme" or "Blue Train", Rollins' "Saxophone Colossus", Cannonball's "Somethin' Else", Silver’s "Song For My Father" and so on. "KOB" may not be a good example since I doubt there is a better introduction to Miles, still, others may feel differently. My idea was for aficionados to list albums they believe offer as much if not more musical reward than the war horses in common recommendation lists. I thought that might have interest for both us long time listeners as well as any jazz "newbies". |
alexatpos Thanks for all the west coast stuff you posted recently. I was mostly a fan of Shelly Manne so I just knew Richie Kamuca from his band .I will be seeking out some west coast to add to my collection. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vV1E99kIPtQ http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Bqzwnb4bLjU |
