World's Greatest Tenors

Charles, all good points.

Michael Brecker had an ability to overcome the technical obstacles posed
by the instrument that put him in a league of his own. I know some will be
surprised by this comment, but not even Coltrane had such a flawless
facility and ability to play in any register, at any speed, with flawless
intonation and utter control; he was a freak of nature. His ability to play in
the the"altissimo" register of the instrument is a case in point.
This is an extremely difficult technique used more and more by modern
players, and involves playing above the natural range of the instrument by
manipulation of the harmonics created by the notes in the natural range.
This allows the player to play in the range of the alto and soprano (much
higher). He was able to do this in an effortless way and as if it were the
natural range of the horn and not just an "effect". Stylistic
considerations are a different matter and subjective. There is only so much
that I can take of his post-Coltane/with-a-little-funk-thrown-in style. Still
credit should be given where credit is due.

Brecker: v=m5l1OTkNGFk>http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=m5l1OTkNGFk

Coltrane: v=03juO5oS2gg>http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=03juO5oS2gg

I find it interesting that after listening to Brecker's version, Coltrane's seems
almost polite; slower, less fire. Until one feels the slow simmer in
Coltrane's; the incredible building of tension. Brecker can fly down the
highway because he has driven it many times before and was given
directions by Coltrane. Coltrane is driving down the road for the first time,
looking for the address and exploring. That's what made him the genius he
was, and his version is, ultimately, better music; IMO. Still, as far as
playing the instrument Brecker was like no one else; but, a little bit like a
great ss amp that does every thing "perfectly": amazing clarity, incredible
bass, staging, etc. and still.....something missing.

v=fJt3qeuPdns>http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fJt3qeuPdns

Regards.

Charles, we are, as they say, in violent agreement; and I think my last post
shows that. My point is simply that there is more than one perspective and
consideration when appreciating and judging (if we must) what any given
player brings to the table. Understanding "both sides of the
coin" enhances our appreciation of each; and it certainly doesn't have
to detract from our appreciation. In a nutshell, the point is: a technical
virtuoso is not necessarily an artist, and an artist is not necessarily a
technical virtuoso. Regards.

Agreed! Oscar Peterson has never been a favorite. Ask piano players, however, and Peterson will be preferred in more cases. Interesting you should mention Jimmy Dorsey and Charlie Parker. It is well documented in the various Bird biographies that Dorsey was one of Bird's favorite alto players. Another fascinating account is that Bird died in his hospital bed while watching the Dorsey Brother's TV show.

It's a fascinating subject, that of personal preferences. My feeling, which obviously doesn't have to be everyone's recipe for musical enjoyment and appreciation, is that the growth and development of our musical acumen (wether one is a listener or a musician) is an important goal and only helps us to enjoy our preferred genres and artists even more. When I read that Bird loved Jimmy Dorsey I want to try and understand why that was. BTW, it was mutual admiration between Parker and Dorsey. Once, when Dorsey went to hear Parker play he gave Parker one of his saxophones as a gift. Bird proceeded to pawn it :-)

"Bird proceeded to pawn it" Sad but not surprising given Parker's unfortunate addictions.
It's really interesting that a jazz colossus such as Miles was in absolute awe and near worship of Bird. Miles says even the very best musicians(regardless of instruments played) of that era simply deferred to Parker's genius and playing ability, so great was his influence. So your insightful story about Dorsey and Bird makes perfect sense.
Charles,