2. music
  3. 1395073248

Glaring Omissions

.
By all accounts, I'm a certified jazz lover and fanatic.

However, there are several jazz greats that one should have in his collection, if one calls himself an aficionado. So, at the risk of being kicked out of this forum, I will list the greats that one might think essential to a jazz collection....that are missing from my collection. I have over 4,000 albums, the vast majority of which is jazz.

I was introduced to jazz while in college in 1971. I was dependent on my friends and the local jazz station for my exposure to new music. If the station didn't play it, I had no access. So, a lot of the guys on my list didn't get any airplay, consequently I wasn't exposed to them.

Nat King Cole.......(I do have several Freddy Cole albums)

Billie Holiday......(Her voice makes my skin crawl & too much melancholy in her music.)

*Stan Getz...........I just never got around to it.

Duke Ellington......I've just never heard any of his recordings that I cared to buy.

Louis Armstrong......Just not my cuppa tea.

*Chet Baker...........Just never got around to it.

Charlie Parker.......I couldn't get past the poor audio quality of the recordings that I've heard.

Charles Mingus... I've never heard a Mingus recording in my life.

*Lester Young.....They never played him on the radio.

*Coleman Hawkins...They never played him on the radio.

*Gerry Mulligan....Just never got around to it.

I do plan to make an effort to familiarize myself with those that have an asterisk (*) before their name above.

I already own more music than I have time to listen to. That, and an addiction to Pandora, doesn't leave much room for new stuff.

Do you have any glaring omissions?
.
128x128mitch4t
rok2id's avatar
rok2id
7,857 posts
 
We all have at least one glaring omission. Mine is 'Fats Nararro'. I am in the process of correcting that omission.

Your comment on the technical aspect of Parker's recordings has some merit, but, unless you are in the Kind of Blue and Krall crowd, that is not a valid reason. If you are into 'audiophile' recordings of Jazz, you will always have glaring omissions.

Lastly, you seem to have a problem with a lot of the seminal figures in Jazz. Are you sure you are a Jazz lover?

Cheers

mapman's avatar
mapman
22,033 posts
 
Its a glaring omission to focus on on the more revolutionary Monk/Miles/Coltrane era Jazz and newer solely and omit all the great more traditional jazz and big band recordings that pre-ceeded those , especially when digitally remastered as needed.

Just a personal finding/opinion.
czarivey
5,875 posts
 
1. Diana Krall and Norah Jones. Jazz is about uniqueness and innovations. Please dig on meaning of jazz. Their janre is Cocktail music and it's not certainly my bown of soup. It's the same thing as calling Frankie Carle or Carmen Cavallaro jazz pianists.
2. David Sanborn especially his later stuff is siimply annoying
3. If I'd listen to KOB live, I'd probably get asleep soon.
4. Almost any dixieland jazz is bunch of musicians that play trivial scales with primitive improvisation often out of sync with rest of band. Sorry can't call it a music at all!

My jazz collection is somewhat similar size of Mitch mostly containing avantgard, electronic jazz(or acid), jazz rock, fusion. Mainstream jazz or "legendary jazz" or "jazz icons" I can count on fingers: Maybe few Wes Montgomery(forgot which shelf they are:-()), Stan Getz(collected only UK issues), Cannobal Auderley/Nat Auderley(they're transition to fusion period and still still very interesting to me), The original performance of Brubeck "Take 5" 45rpm single had seen needle landed quite a few times and starting getting already grey:-)
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,033 posts
 
"Jazz is about uniqueness and innovations."

Not always. Nothing wrong with music that is just plain fun or gets your toes a tappin. DSFDF.

I have a mentally challenging job. Sometimes, I just want to hear music that does not make me have to think very much.
mitch4t's avatar
mitch4t OP
1,603 posts
 
.
Casey...ouch! Stop busting my chops ;-)

Rok2id...I was into jazz eons before I became an audiophile. So no, I'm not limited to audiophile recordings...as a matter of fact every recording that I own, LP and cd is the off-the-shelf variety that any ordinary Joe bought from the record stores. I have no problem with the seminal figures go, I like what I like....and I just don't care for their music. Now this may really get me kicked off of this forum, but I like Diana Ross's interpretations of Billie Holiday's songs better than Billie's original version.

At 60 years of age, with a ton of existing recordings in my collection that I like...and the great stuff that I'm discovering on Pandora, I feel no obligation to own any records by the seminal figures in jazz if I don't like their music. I only have so much time to devote to listening to music, and when I do, you'd better kick ass and its got to be enjoyable. I'll be damned if I'm going to listen to Armstrong or Ellington when I prefer Freddie Hubbard or Kenny Barron. Historical significance be damned, I listen to what I like.

I'm still open to discovering music by jazz icons of the past. For a lot of them, I simply just have not gotten around to them. When I find a musician that I like, I tend to collect everything they ever did...and play it. Do that a few times over, and you simply run out of time to include every one. Someone's going to get left out.
.
More to discover