Originally posted by Joseph K
View Post
What Jazz are you listening to now?
Collapse
X
-
-
-
Originally posted by Serial_Apologist View PostIndeed, for me that whole, naturally evolving final section... apart of course from the deep voiceover intoning drivel about masculinity towards the end - he should perhaps have instead said "And there are fairies at the bottom of the garden coming to draw you in"?! The way the onstage mics then defer to what sounds like an amateur effort bootlegged from the rear of the room, the bass pushed down to dub levels, the drum judder muffled, as Miles proceeds to mine his deepest blues, always manages to raise MY goosbumps!
Comment
-
-
I may be wrong but I don't remember The altoist Jimmy Lyons appearing on this thread other than probably with Cecil Taylor. An original with lovely sound, he came up jamming with Bud, Monk and Elmo before moving onto Cecil, a great pedigree.
Here is Jimmy with John Lindbergh and Sunny Murray playing "Tortuga"
elmo
Comment
-
-
Louis Armstrong " King of the Zulu's" - Magnificent trumpet and tomfoolery, I just love the way Armstrong combined High Art and Vaudeville in a completely guileless way. Louis playing on this raises the hair on the back of the neck and Trummy's nutty vocal interlude is great even though it breaks up louis solo.
elmo
Comment
-
-
Jazzrook
I find that record to be a disappointment given that I love Dameron's writing and Coltrane's playing. Part of the issue for me is that we know with hindsight that although Coltrane's playing on this record is excellent, it is very early in his career. By contrast, I just feel that Tadd Dameron's best work stemmed from the 1940s and that be was slightly behind the curve. Whenever I have heard tracks, I have always felt that there is better by both artists elsewhere, even if the writing of Dameron will always have it's own appeal. The later Dameron disc with the big band is perhaps even sadder insofar that his incarceration meant me was very much behind the curve when he made that recordng. I was listening to Monk's "Underground" today and that has the same feeling with Charlie Rouse almost sounding disinterested. The "new" material on the disc was not too much to get excited over wit the exception of "Ugly Beauty." Monk in 1947 or 1957 is essential but by 1967 the music seems really mainstream.
It is interesting how records age and how recordings are judged depending upon the point in an artist's career when they are recorded. Sometimes perceive wisdom is incorrect such as later Ellington which I feel is underrated. Other albums like Bob Brookmeyer's "Traditionalism Revisited" now seem very much more contemporary as you can clearly draw a line with more modern artists like Bill Frisell in this brilliant album. Other musicians like Dave Brubeck strike me as sounding better with age. Dolphy strikes me as being more "adventurous" than so many other avant garde players of the 60s even though you can still see the link back to Parker. The Monk "Underground" album is a disappointment but no unusual for many Bop-orientated musicians whose better work was over by the second half of the 60s. Similarly, I must admit that I find the approach of musicians like Gene Ammons to be a little lazy with regard to the choice of material and countless blues and the casual, jam session kind of approach to recording sessions have not really stood the test of time where the compositions are more finely crafted. For me, this accounts for musicians like Herbie Nichols and Andrew Hill effectively sounding better and more interesitng as time passes. There is also the instance of players like Woody Shaw, Cedar Walton, Bobby Hutcherson , etc whose careers took off in the midlate sixties but were subseuently "unfashionable " in the 1970s yet whose work sounds far more relevent now that it might have been at the time.
I suppose the question is, my much is our impression of music dictated by when it was recorded ?
Comment
-
Comment