I think that ECM is a curious label and probably enjoys the kind of "self identity" only really shared by Blue Note. The label was something of a revelation to me when i discovered it around 1985 and , for about 10 years, I was obsessed by ECM. I have a good friend who introduced me to a lot of modern jazz when I was a teenager and i got him into ECM to the extent that he became addicted to the label. I do not think he would agree with your comments even though he has catholic tastes which range from 1920s to contemporary. I find that it is very easy to be seduced by ECM. What is interesting is the breadth of the music the label has covered which includes jazz, piano trios, Nu Jazz, Free improvisation, medieval music, folk musics and about 800 year's worth of Classical music. Quite how Eicher manages to retain a "house style" is pretty remarkable across such a wide range. Depsite this, I still find him to be a bit of a marmite character.
I have to say that I can be pursued either way with regards to the merits of the label. There is output which I think much be classed as some of the greatest jazz recorded in the last 50 years. By the same token, I strongly feel than Eicher has had a deadening effect on a lot of the output with the studio / production being as much of a factor on the recordings as the musicians themselves. Thirty years ago I would have contested the notion about "deference" and the "cathedral like" sound recording which is at a level beyond most of the label's rivals. That said, hearing the musicians perform live can be a fascinating experience as the studio-quality production cannot be replicated on stage and the restraint necessitated by Eicher is often jettisoned. There are a number of ECM artists whose work I could not be without ( Abercrombie, Towner, Rypdal, Jarrett, Bley Wheeler, Surman, etc ) yet , by contrast, I think the label is far more inconsistent than fans would tend to let on. On the other hand , I personally feel that the polished production values often mask some really bland and ordinary records. A significant proportion of their output has a tendency to seem a bit pointless with the music on the fringes of jazz being guilty of being very much like New Age. There is also an issue where some of the records have aged really poorly or that perceptions tend to change markedly so that some records come across much better than they originally did.
It is tempting to write the label off due to Eicher's rather narrow-minded view of improvised music , especially in respect of dynamics where the exciting is discouraged in favour of the contemplative and the fact that id does take itself a bit too seriously. That said, musicians like Enrico Rava seem tailor made to this approach towards jazz. Where it goes wrong is when American artists moved over to the label and somehow seem a bit eviscerated by it. For a label which was created to feature the European avant garde scene of the late 60s and early 70s, ECM has done remarkably well and there are some absolute gems there. The problem for future generations will be that the pervading air of melancholy and the polished production values may no longer to considered quite so favourably. In simmary, I am no longer an ECM obsessive but there is still much to enjoy even if a lot of the more recent output may appear to be a bit monchrome.
Sorry, Bruce, I have to say the appeal of Mark Turner alludes me. I can see the connections with Warne Marsh yet at the same time understand why his music has been berated so much by more avant-leaning musicians lke Jaimie Branch whose assessent was pretty withering - albeit I think she later apologised.
I have to say that I can be pursued either way with regards to the merits of the label. There is output which I think much be classed as some of the greatest jazz recorded in the last 50 years. By the same token, I strongly feel than Eicher has had a deadening effect on a lot of the output with the studio / production being as much of a factor on the recordings as the musicians themselves. Thirty years ago I would have contested the notion about "deference" and the "cathedral like" sound recording which is at a level beyond most of the label's rivals. That said, hearing the musicians perform live can be a fascinating experience as the studio-quality production cannot be replicated on stage and the restraint necessitated by Eicher is often jettisoned. There are a number of ECM artists whose work I could not be without ( Abercrombie, Towner, Rypdal, Jarrett, Bley Wheeler, Surman, etc ) yet , by contrast, I think the label is far more inconsistent than fans would tend to let on. On the other hand , I personally feel that the polished production values often mask some really bland and ordinary records. A significant proportion of their output has a tendency to seem a bit pointless with the music on the fringes of jazz being guilty of being very much like New Age. There is also an issue where some of the records have aged really poorly or that perceptions tend to change markedly so that some records come across much better than they originally did.
It is tempting to write the label off due to Eicher's rather narrow-minded view of improvised music , especially in respect of dynamics where the exciting is discouraged in favour of the contemplative and the fact that id does take itself a bit too seriously. That said, musicians like Enrico Rava seem tailor made to this approach towards jazz. Where it goes wrong is when American artists moved over to the label and somehow seem a bit eviscerated by it. For a label which was created to feature the European avant garde scene of the late 60s and early 70s, ECM has done remarkably well and there are some absolute gems there. The problem for future generations will be that the pervading air of melancholy and the polished production values may no longer to considered quite so favourably. In simmary, I am no longer an ECM obsessive but there is still much to enjoy even if a lot of the more recent output may appear to be a bit monchrome.
Sorry, Bruce, I have to say the appeal of Mark Turner alludes me. I can see the connections with Warne Marsh yet at the same time understand why his music has been berated so much by more avant-leaning musicians lke Jaimie Branch whose assessent was pretty withering - albeit I think she later apologised.
Comment