Share thoughts on Keith Jarrett


Last night, I saw Keith Jarrett performing solo at the Symphony Center. Tremendously emotional concert with four encores. Now, this is why I'm posting: The person who I was supposed to attend the concert with, informed me, on Tuesday night, that she couldn't go. "No problem", I thought: "Who wouldn't jump at the chance to see Keith Jarrett live", a performer who I consider to be right up there with the likes of Davis, Monk, and Coltrane, all jazz elite and all household names. It took me two full days to find someone who even heard of this guy. I'll continue to hold him in place of high esteem regardless of the comments I get here, but I'm curious: Am I incorrect to place him so highly, or are their others who find his relative anonymity amazing?
phaelon
There is a lot of K. Jarrett I enjoy listening to, but there is also quite a bit I can't because of his annoying orgasmic vocalizations, or whatever you want to call it. Köln Concerts is certainly one of the great albums of all time, but I don't consider Jarrett one of the giants of jazz with the likes of Thelonious Monk, Bud Powell, Bill Evans, et al. His influence certainly isn't off their stature.
To me, The Koln Concert to this day is ONE, if not THE most hypnotizingly beautiful pieces of recorded music I own. Inspired by the Koln Concert I started a long journey discovery his music and between the 25+ Jarrett CDs I own I find myself coming back to his European Quartet recordings ("My Song", "Belonging" and in particular "Personal Mountains") and his improvised / orginal recordings with the trio ("changeless", "changes"). The "standards" recordings with the trio never stood out to me as overly original or innovative, and none of the other solo concerts touched me as the Koln concert. I recently downloaded "Paris/London testament in 96/24" and there is some real good stuff there. However, nothing will ever hit me as first hearing the Koln Concert on my crappy record player as a melancholic 20 year old.
Just to keep the conversation going, I wonder if those of us who are fans could try to list some of the things about Jarrett's playing, writing, and bandleading that are distinctive.

Or make references to essays, links, books, that do this especially well.

In other words, how is his playing different from, say, Bill Evans and Brad Mehldau? The typical jazz textbook surveys, like those by Gioia (who loves pianists) and DeVeaux/Giddins (who are more horn-oriented than Gioia), and the little JAZZ 101 by Szwed, are appreciative of Jarrett in terms of impressionism, neo-romanticism, and mixing gospel and rock styles with improv-heavy open arrangements, but we could we also talk about the nature of his touch, use of space, harmony, phrasing?

As a particularly big fan of jazz ballads, I kind of see Jarrett as the linking figure between Evans (someone I'm utterly convinced was a giant of piano improvisation and trio conception, and an inevitable influence on Jarrett's acoustic style) and Mehldau (who strikes me as close to Jarrett in many ways, notably in his rockish ways, use of simple vamps, and tendency toward long single-note runs in right hand, compared with Evans more two-handed chord-shifting style).

And I kind find favorite Jarrett records from each of his phases, but I always like him better when playing with others.
Oh and I neglected to mention Paul Bley above. I was just listening to him today and thought, wow, now there's someone who really pared back the pianistic language and led to a post-Ornette highly melodic, less chordal style.
Keith Jarrett is a great artist. I have always had a love/hate relationship with his music. Any criticism of his playing will surely come accross as stronger than warranted. But comparison to giants like Bill Evans is going to be tough (on Jarrett). It is hard not to love and appreciate a player with so much passion, and understanding of the language of jazz. But...(there is often a "but" when I listen to him), for me, there is a feeling that his playing shouts: "listen to this, listen to how I well I understand this language!"

Clearly, this is a subjective thing. Even the most tender moments in his playing sometime have a premeditated quality; as opposed to the more organic, purely spontaneous, poetic quality in Bill Evans' playing. There is no question that Jarrett has a lot to say, and he says it very well. But, I sometimes get the feeling that the reason his improvisations are so long is that he doesn't know how to stop.

Jarrett plays with a certain earnestness that is sometimes offputting for me. Evans played with a deep sense of melancholy, and a more subtle sense of swing. Technically speaking, Jarrett produces a more percussive, brilliant tone on the piano, as opposed to the more covered, mellower tone that Evans produced. There is very little ambiguity in Jarrett's technique; every note is distinct. Evans' pianistic approach was more subtle, and he liked to play upbeats as "ghost notes"; notes barely heard before the stronger downbeat; but there is far less musical ambiguity. As far as the logic of their respective improvisational styles goes, listen to the examples in the links below, and listen to each of the two players' improvised choruses, and ask yourself which of the two improvisations more easily lets the listener follow the melody of the song while it is being improvised upon. That is one of the basic tenets of improvised jazz: stretch out as much as you want, but can one still folllow the tune?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=io1o1Hwpo8Y

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MV4-j8eLl10&feature=related