Share thoughts on Keith Jarrett

I agree with Foster_9. It's possible I haven't heard enough by Keith. What I have heard didn't impress me.

Great post, Frogman. Good reading!

The poignancy of Bill Evans' best recordings, combined with the outrageous virtuosity of his harmonic reworkings of materials, and his famous touch, plus his compositions, far outdistance Jarrett for me too.

That said, I've really appreciated many Jarrett records, almost always when playing with others. I'm one of those oddballs who really doesn't like KOLN CONCERT much at all. Those "gospel-ish" arpeggios and the high-pitched drama are really off-putting to me. But the 70s band with Motian, Redman, et al: that's some goood stuff. And the standards trio of the 1980s as well. And then the very recent standards albums (one of duets with Haden) and the other solo (but not long-form improv) are strikingly good and approach the impact of Evans' best.

Perhaps some wiser head could educate me as to how best to listen to Jarrett's solo sets. I'm not allergic to solo improv (with no "head") on piano, though it is a hard-sell: I love Cecil Taylor and Muhal Richard Abrams and Misha Mengelberg, for example. But they are in a different strain of post-bop jazz than the Jarrett/Evans/Mehldau strain, I would say.

Thanks Paanders, and thanks for opening the door for further discussion beyond the "He's great"/"He sucks" realm. With some welcomed exceptions, more in-depth discussion/analysis of music and artists is sorely missing in these discussions; IMO. I know some listeners feel that analysis somehow leads to dimished visceral enjoyment. I could not agree less. I suppose it does for some. That is too bad, because analysis can lead to an even deeper understanding and enjoyment.

***I've really appreciated many Jarrett records, almost always when playing with others. I'm one of those oddballs who really doesn't like KOLN CONCERT much at all. Those "gospel-ish" arpeggios and the high-pitched drama are really off-putting to me. But the 70s band with Motian, Redman, et al: that's some goood stuff. And the standards trio of the 1980s as well. And then the very recent standards albums (one of duets with Haden) and the other solo (but not long-form improv) are strikingly good and approach the impact of Evans' best.***

I agree with every point you make.

To those who IMO are critical of Jarrett without putting the criticism in proper perspective, I quote Xiekitchen:

***In the same category as Miles? hmmm... there were times, for me, when Miles wasn't in the same category of Miles.. :)***

one of the basic tenets ... but can one still folllow the tune

I respectfully disagree with this statement. I think it is perfectly acceptable to stretch out far beyond the tune, even to completely obliterate it, as long as one does come back to it either on occasion or at the end. Otherwise, I'd hate to listen to My Favorite Things or Surrey With the Fringe on Top - two silly, sappy songs otherwise IMO. It is the stretch beyond the tune which often defines jazz for me. It gets me excited and grips my interest, hearing how inventive players can be with ANY old tune. In no other genre does this occur. That, to me, is what makes jazz so special and transcends all other music genres.

Addendum - In place of following the "tune", I do prefer jazz which at least follows a groove. I do not enjoy "free jazz", music with no structure at all, when there is nothing to follow.