Jazz for aficionados

****There is no truth on the human level without a marriage of emotion and intellect.****

Talk about "restoring order"! Succinct and entirely correct.

Mapman, thanks; per Schubert's comment.

"Would it not be of infinitely more value to accept the fact that there is creativity taking place in any decade and any style?"

Infinitely.

That's why there are those things called "standards". It gives you a "standard" by which to compare contrast and most likely judge how two different artists perhaps from two totally different musical eras interpret and go about doing their thing differently in whatever way. All they have in common is most likely a popular song that remains popular to some extent because people continue to respond to it for whatever reason.

In case anyone cares. Each generation of listeners will appreciate the artists of their era on their own terms or they will not appreciate them. But playing standards howver one might artistically chose to do it provides the only concrete way to compare diverse talents over the years.

FWIW. It may not be worth anything to many, which is fine, but it is worth something to those who do care.

There are so many ways to enjoy music. that's why so many people take the time to imbibe.

Mapman, no need to qualify your comments, they are well thought out and mostly true. But, it must be remembered that at some point the Standards of an era are supplanted by those of a new era; a new era with a new crop of players with different sensibilities, many of who are carving out new styles and establishing new "standards"; not of specific songs , but standards of the WAY to play the new style. IOW, there are many jazz aficionados who feel that Coltrane playing "In A Sentimental Mood" (one of the greatest "standards") doesn't hold a candle to Paul Gonsalves (Ellington) playing it. Does that make Coltrane "less" of a player? A noise maker?

Alex, I liked your clip of Herbie Mann. I saw him in Chicago in 69, he was dressed immaculately; had on a tan continental suit, light brown highly polished boots, and his performance matched his appearance.

Nina Simone and Miles were on that same billing. Herbie was first, followed by Nina Simone, and Miles was last. Nina was everything and more than you could imagine her to be. Miles was last and late. Every body was talking about Miles new music, when at last "Here they come".

Miles was dressed in a buckskin suede vest with the long fringes hanging down, I don't remember what else he had on; he could have been naked, and I still would not have seen anything but the buckskin vest; "Jokes over, funny Ha Ha, now somebody go and fetch the real Miles".

Enjoy the music.

Frogman, I hope you would not mind me saying this, but perhaps you are the one that simply refuse to comprehend the fact that someone can actually understand what are you talking about, but still not like it. Music wise, I mean, of course. I cant speak in Rok's name, but there is no difference in any other type of art form. I dont belleive that any art lover appreciate equally all styles that emerged through time. In fact, knowledge works both ways, it can help you to like something, but can also confirm someones dislaking about certain subject. Rok is very unique in his expressing, but I dont think that you should take that as offensive or proof of his ignorance. As far as litlle I have read his posts, he had much worst thing to say about some other much more serious stuff than it is art, but still there is lot of self irony in his words, so it should not be held against him. I dont want that anyone gets the impression that I am holding any sides here (not do I think that there are here) but like I said, the music that we spoke recently is not my favourite, and not because I do not understand it or appreciate the creative forces behind its creation, but because it does not correspond with my inner being,no matter if revives and readapts time and space, if it fails to emarge me in its world than I choose to listen something else that it does.