What Jazz are you listening to now?

[Serial_Apologist]

Wynton Marsalis & the LCJO "Handful of keys"

Got to say that anyone who has maligned the LCJO in the past might wish to reconsider with this album that pays tribute to a number of pianists from the past. The range of invited pianists goes from 13 y.o. Joey Alexander through to Dick Hyman who must be in his 90's although you would not guess from his playing on James P Johnson's "Jingles." Some like Isiah Thompson , Dan Nimmer and Helen Sung are total unknown to me and it is clear from Myra Melford's liner notes that the disc only offers a proportion of the music performed. On the CD, there are compositions associated / written by Bill Evans, McCoy Tyner, Fats Waller, and Oscar Peterson. Tributes to Andrew Hill, Cecil Taylor and Don Pullen performed at the gig did not make it to the disc but I would love there to be a volume 2.

Several tracks stand out. I am a sucker for finger-busting stride piano and "Jingles" really hits the spot. Benny Carter's arrangement of "All of me" is as good as you would expect from the maestro but Wynton Kelly's "Temperance" closes the disc on a blistering note and it one of the two highlights. Good to see Kelly honoured as, for my money, he was the best band pianist in the 50's / early 60's and consistently excellent. The best track is Ted Nash's arrangement of "The Strawberry" which features the leader's piano. Avant garde pianist Melford seems an unlikely choice to work with Marsalis and sceptics will be surprised to hear the trumpet player revelling in the mayhem that ensues with some wonderful Taylor-esque clusters from the Melford in her solo. Taylor is an add pianist as I hugely admire him although he is a player whose music is sometimes difficult to love. Melford is clearly influenced by him but like so many of her contemporaries, other elements of her own personality shine through in her music which makes it very "outside" yet far more approachable that Taylor. The closing gospel-like element of her solo would never happen with Taylor even if the part of her solo I liked the most was the scrunchy free for all she unleashed above the drive from the big band.

All in all a strange compendium of music which reflects the history of jazz piano yet shines a light in some unexpected areas. The only miscalculation was Evans' "Very Early" which has always seemed a bit twee. If tributes to Hill, Pullen and Taylor are not included, it makes you wonder who else was missed.

I'm surprised by what you report, Ian: Wynton Marsalis has in the past been very disparaging about the 1960s, treating it like an aberration in the genesis of the music - maybe he's opening out a bit in his middle years!

[burning dog]

I'm surprised by what you report, Ian: Wynton Marsalis has in the past been very disparaging about the 1960s, treating it like an aberration in the genesis of the music - maybe he's opening out a bit in his middle years!

Before he became even more conservative he used to be very keen on the sixties post bop, but anti
the "fire music" movement

[Serial_Apologist]

Before he became even more conservative he used to be very keen on the sixties post bop, but anti
the "fire music" movement

Indeed, and he had Miles's mid-sixties musicians (minus Shorter, but with Bro in the role) to help him start out from that area, playing a clinically decontaminated Miles. I liked Wynton back then - the "soul" would come eventually once youthful hubris was knocked off, one thought, but instead came academicism.

[Ian Thumwood]

I'm surprised by what you report, Ian: Wynton Marsalis has in the past been very disparaging about the 1960s, treating it like an aberration in the genesis of the music - maybe he's opening out a bit in his middle years!

SA

I have heard quite a lot of the LCJO recordings over the years because it was a band that my Dad liked a lot, both on record and in concert. I can understand the emphasis of his detractors using phrases like "conservative" to describe his music but think it demonstrates a lack of familiarity with what this band is actually about. The Lincoln Centre does put on gigs by more outside artists (I think there was a Henry Threadgill retrospective last year) and the idea that it is somehow putting jazz in aspic is totally incorrect. The piano album could be argued to be retrospective yet "The Strawberry" is actually from Melford's most recent album from two years ago so this counters the performance of Johnson's "Jungles" which was recorded in 1927.

With regard to Marsalis' taste, I feel that it certainly extends beyond the sixties whilst excluding "fire music" and fusion. It is fun to imagine what kind of musicians he might like and those that he would be negative about and then compare them with his collaborations with people like Willie Nelson or Eric Clapton and find your preconceptions blown out of the water. There is a suspicion of the modish certainly yet I am sure Marsalis would be favourable of more adventurous musicians that are demonstrably jazz. Personally, the interesting thing is that since the 2000's and the lauding of movement like Nu Jazz which came and went, the more fashionable names or styles have not really done anything to take jazz forward. As explained before, the best "new " jazz in the last 10-15 years has been the stuff which is demonstrably jazz and doesn't borrow heavily from other musics. Looking at things from this perspective makes me understand Marsalis more , even if I would suggest he is not as significant as his promoters might have had us believe 20-35 years ago or as irrelevant as you might suggest.

To be honest, the LCJO is much better than most critics suggest whilst not really being in the same calibre as the Mingus Big Band or as original as someone like Maria Schneider. Having listened to four big band albums that were released in 2017 over the last two weeks, it is curious to rate them and I feel the Marsalis disc is probably only second to the Alan Ferber record. The Christian Mc Bride album is a nice listen but probably far more "mainstream" than the Marsalis disc - I don't hear people slagging McBride off for producing this kind of record which could have been made in , say, 1956. The big disappointment in the Anat Cohen tentet - a mixture of world music and sub-Benny Goodman.

[Stanfordian]

‘The Hawk Relaxes’
Coleman Hawkins with Ronnell Bright, Kenney Burrell, Ron Carter & Andrew Cyrille
Moodsville (1961)

[Serial_Apologist]

With regard to Marsalis' taste, I feel that it certainly extends beyond the sixties whilst excluding "fire music" and fusion. It is fun to imagine what kind of musicians he might like and those that he would be negative about and then compare them with his collaborations with people like Willie Nelson or Eric Clapton and find your preconceptions blown out of the water. There is a suspicion of the modish certainly yet I am sure Marsalis would be favourable of more adventurous musicians that are demonstrably jazz.

The suggestion is that Wynton Marsalis's taste is roughly where Miles's was before himself moving in the directions he took post '68. Would you say that the later Miles was tarnished by a certain populism? Lester Bowie didn't seem to think so. I think the problem comes (as always) with where to draw the line.

[Ian Thumwood]

The suggestion is that Wynton Marsalis's taste is roughly where Miles's was before himself moving in the directions he took post '68. Would you say that the later Miles was tarnished by a certain populism? Lester Bowie didn't seem to think so. I think the problem comes (as always) with where to draw the line.

SA

What I was trying to say was that it is worthwhile noting that the "unlikely" albums Marsalis recorded with Nelson and Clapton means that he is difficult to pre-judge where his tastes might lie. The whole point of his increased "openness" to other musicians means that it is unfair to judge him from the position he took in the 1980's.

The whole Miles v Wynton debate is surely irrelevant in 2017. I wonder when Bowie made his comment because you could argue that Miles' first quintet was commercial as was his work with Gil Evans. These records sold really well. No problems with either body of work in my opinion as this represents some of his best work. If you want to stretch the "commercial" argument, the work in the later 60's is interesting but generated increasingly limited returns. As far as his 1980's output is concerned, it was pretty hit and miss and his reputation was tarnished in his last decade. With the possible exception of "Aura," would anyone still argue that Miles 1980's still sounds as good as the music he made twenty years earlier. The original Marsalis quintet from the mid 1980s probably sounds better now than is the case with Miles' output from the same decade. Ever listened to hear how dated "Tutu" sounds these days? Are you still playing your copy of "You're under arrest?" The emergence of groups like Martin, Medeski and Wood also served to make Mile's 1980's output seem like pop candy with the trios ability to mix funky grooves with free jazz in a fashion that was far hipper than anything Miles did after the mid 1970's.

It is interesting to consider Wynton's output since the 2000's. In the rush towards the Millennium he produced an 8-voume set of albums which covered all bases from Jelly Roll Morton covers through to extended works for big band. There have been albums such as the Cuban big band double CD which are right on the money as well as the Abyssinian Mass record which picks up from Ellington's Sacred Concert works. I don't agree that Marsalis is on some "righteous path" towards jazz purity yet familiarity with his recent recorded output reflects interest in a far broader context of music than he would have in say 1984 and certainly beyond many younger upstarts today who are more keen to reject any link with jazz. You just have to listen to the interviews given by some of the younger generation of musicians on a programme like Jazz Line Up. As I said in my initial comments, the latest record includes works from James J Johnson, McCoy Tyner, Oscar Peterson, Wynton Kelly and Myra Melford. I have far for admiration for a musician who can make these kinds of connections in jazz and understand the links between all these musicians than I have for someone who is the flavour of the month and will spout some nonsense about being inspired by Bjork, EDM or the culture of Manchester - all mentioned in JLU in the last 12 months.

I concur that you could class Marsalis as a "conservative" and the recent session by Christian Scott was demonstrative that jazz can remain "populist" and potent in 2017 without losing it's relevance. It was worth noting Scott's respect for the heritage in the "Jazz now" interview and whilst this can manifest itself in a multitude of possibilities in jazz. Thirty years ago, Marsalis' position would have marked him out for criticism because so much was happening within the music in the 1980's. It was certainly the most creative decade in jazz since the 1960's and possibly since the 1940's. I can appreciate this. However, by 2017 his position has changed whilst at the same time jazz is stuck in a battle to retain it's identity which can see serious column inches in the broadsheets given to suggesting Go-Go Penguin are "the most important group in jazz at the moment." For me, it is increasingly hard to find exciting new jazz in 2018 and therefore I just feel that Marsalis' position is no longer one of being an arch-conservative but about someone who is passionate with regards to the integrity of the music as it comes under assault from lounge singers, endless "tribute" bands and music laden with electronic gadgets.

In summary, I think it is probably fair to cut Wynton some slack. Granted, a lot of his writing is deeply influenced by Ellington but the LCJO increasingly performs arrangements by other band members as well as rescuing earlier arrangements from obscurity. Ellington may seem like another era but that approach to writing is so embedded in the DNA of the music, it is a bit like saying Bach is out of date. I would find it difficult to criticise anyone influenced by Ellington whether it is David Murray, Stan Tracey or Jason Roebke - all of whom have tipped their hats to the Duke. Don't see why we should not treat Marsalis with any less respect especially if yu are judging your comments against albums made more than thirty years ago.

[Serial_Apologist]

Fair comments in general, Ian, though I wouldn't write off as much of the 1980s Miles as yourself. That said, having been put off for reasons I've given in the past, I've been loath to pay much attention to Marsalis, though, like his brother, he undoubtedly still has the capability for being interesting and forward-looking, when he wants to be! Lots of people are at last questioning their 1980s scepticism towards anything smacking of "radicalism" - for which read breaking with commercially-imposed stylistic restrictions accused of leading the music into a self-imposed ghetto - now that the selfsame capitalism that made Wynton and the new revivalists the respectable faces of the *new realism* consensually promulgated among commentators in all fields, economic, political and artistic in the 1980s, is deeply being questioned. My guess would be that, with funding secured, he can afford to be selective!

[Ian Thumwood]

SA

Not sure why you put Branford in the same pot as his brother. You wouldn't be quite so negative about other tenor players such as David Murray, J D Allen or James Carter. For me, Branford is one of the best tenor players to have emerged since the 1980s and his records tend to be pretty unabashed post-bop. Worthwhile noting that it was through Branford's guidance that David S Ware was signed to Columbia. There is also an interesting documentary about the then current jazz scene in the early 2000s that was presented by Branford where he gave a thumbs up the likes of Ware and Ken Vandermark whilst sceptical of some current Norwegian improvisers who he did not consider to be jazz. The films also included Bill Frisell.

Not sure I agree with your comments about Wynton. He was sceptical and sometime hostile regarding 1970's fusion. I don't have a problem with that because a lot of fusion was pretty terrible and it does seem a cop out in comparison to the post-bop of the 1980's. There was no real "self-imposed" ghetto in the 1980s as jazz was far more diverse back then and more popular than it is now. When you think that the 1980's could cater for jazz by the likes of David Murray, Paul Motian's trio. John Scofield, MJQ, Woody Herman, AEoC, Billy Bang, Keith Jarrett, the "better" ECM artists, Andrew Hill, Gil Evans, John Carter, Horace Tapscott, Pat Metheny, Benny Goodman, Benny Carter, Scott Hamilton, Ruby Braff, Benny Waters, you realise just how rich the jazz scene was in this decade. You could hear "new" bands creating original music but also hear musicians like Sippie Wallace who had performed in the 1920s. You need to put Wynton in that context. All this kind of jazz was still being written about and promoted by agents.

Switch forward to 2018, the generation of musicians active up until the 1950s have nearly all passed on and it is those musicians who emerged in the 70's and 80's who are seen as the great masters. Rather than be sceptical about Lincoln Centre, it is increasingly important that there is an enterprise out there fighting jazz's corner. If jazz is in "danger" from capitalism, it is those market forces which promotes the endless Ella-tributes, the proliferation of singers and acts who really have no relationship with jazz traditions which I feel offer the threat. That someone like Marsalis is able to counter this and offer programmes which promote latin jazz, religious works or retrieve Benny Carter arrangements from the early 1930's which must be applauded. Don't forget that the Lincoln entre also promote other bands and have allowed giants like Jimmy Heath and Cecil Taylor to perform their music.

As I have said before, jazz is somewhat cursed by Sonny Rollin's comment that it is the sound of surprise to the extent that there is often a need to throw the baby out with the bath water for the sake of appearing modish. Interested to read the publicity for Yazz Ahmed who is soon to perform in Southampton with SYJO in Gil Evans' "Sketches of Spain." There was a suggestion on website that she redefining what jazz is all about and part of a generation of new artists like Kamasi Washington who were reinvigorating the music. I have not herd her music but found the comment a bit absurd . I sometimes think that jazz doesn't really need changing as there is enough within the music itself for it to always seem fresh and original. Been listening to the Aki Takase / David Murray duo which shows that top-flight jazz is all about the "music itself" and any modish marketing is irrelevant when the music is as creative as this. This certainly does not sound like a music that it on it's knees and need reinvigorating.

[Serial_Apologist]

I should have put a "but" in before completing the sentence "...when he wants to be!" so as not to include Branford in my Wynton criticisms. Both Marsalises I have nonetheless heard promulgating a line that only in America has jazz any right to progress; and it was this very attitude that sowed self-inflicted inferiority complexes among non-Americans, especially in this country, right up to before free jazz came along and just threw all the cards in the air. Actually I don't much like David Murray; I really don't think he's very good. But apart from that, I just think we have a very different view of the times - both of the 1980s and today - and of how jazz fits into it the scheme of things. The balance of power has shifted. I think jazz had become institutionalised, here and in America, and it "allows" the likes of Cecil Taylor to appear under aegises they wouldn't have countenanced back in the heyday when creativity came out of co-operation and solidarity outwith the mainstream means of dissemination today reflecting the power of institutions and their ingrained capacity for co-opting, re-contextualising and neutering any radicalism in the message by just posing it as one option among many.

[Ian Thumwood]

I think that institutions like Lincoln Centre are necessary simply because of the commercial pressure that abound today which make any form of creative musical process difficult to sell to an increasingly disinterested public. Talking with Kevin Appleby at the Turner SIms a few months back, he was saying how difficult it is to promote jazz and part of the problem is that you cannot guarantee what will draw punters in through the door and what repels them. It is an intriguing subject because jazz has become even more specialised to the extent that the things you and I might value are not the same for younger people coming to the music for whom Miles Davis, Sonny Rollins and John Coltrane are as relevant as say Elvis Presley. If the likes of Wynton and LC can encourage jazz that is not compromised and remains honest to itself, they I welcome their involvement. It is good that the Centre promotes musicians such as Taylor and Heath. Looking at their website, there will be concerts by the likes of Dave Holland / Zakir Hussain, Dianne Reeves, Jeremey Pelt, Lee Konitz, Chick Corea, DIVA Jazz orchestra, Bobby Sanabria, Charles McPherson, Azar Lawrence, Tim Reis, Dave Douglas' tribute to Dizzy Gillespie, Rhoda Scott Lady Quartet ( a French band), Azar Lawrence and Nicholas Peyton in the first four months of this year. Tribute evenings pay homage to such diverse characters as Count Basie, Benny Goodman, Jaki Byard, Ornette Coleman , Jobim and Mary Lou Williams. If this is making jazz "institutionalised", I have no objection!

I don't really go along with the "contextualising and neutering of radicalism" argument regarding the LC although I do agree if you made this statement regarding Vienne, for example. There are artists such as Ella, Miles, Billie, Nina, etc whose names will put bums on seats. Can't quite see Mary Lou William's music having the same effect and think it is a good thing for there to be a platform for her music in 2018. The issue with venues not countenancing artists like Cecil Taylor back in the 1960's is easy to deflect because it takes years for music this radical to get understood and appreciated. You get the same thing with the rediscovery of Herbie Nichols in the 1990's and Andrew Hill's late career blossoming. It is certainly not a case of the music being taken out of a "revolutionary" context, more that it takes audiences a while to get to grips with music this challenging.

I would concede that David Murray can be hit and miss but when he is good, he is really good indeed. Just the kind of playing that keeps the traditions of jazz relevant. If you want "radical / revolutionary" music, there are moments on the duo album with Takase where they really pull the music apart. This is the kind of "revolutionary" music I see as being under threat in 2018 and , whilst I agree it is entirely due to market forces, the issue is unimaginative programming by people booking artists.

Jazz may have enjoyed a period of Left Wing / Revolutionary consciousness in the 1960s and this totally befitted the times. However, it was only for 10-20 years of Jazz's lifetime at most and jazz has had a recorded history of 100 years during which time artists like Armstrong, Ellington, Goodman and Gillespie were all involved in US government sponsored tours. If you like, some of jazz's heavy hitters, have been "establishment."

I must admit that I get a tremendous amount of pleasure discussing music with you, SA and along with Bluesnik and Jazzrook, I always take note of your observations. I am not too sure that our opinions are actually too different as you share my enthusiasm for music to be adventurous. If there is a difference, it is because I like to think of these tenets in much broader terms. The sadness for me with the current jazz scene is that it is not so varied. Unlike yourself, I am as enthused by recordings from the 1920s as I am by contemporary stuff. I don't honestly feel that there is actually much difference between , say, Freddie Keppard and Art Ensemble of Chicago. I would be really happy hearing those musicians at LC and would appreciate most of those gigs as they are squarely within the mainstream. Basically, you would be going to hear musicians with a story to tell as opposed to hearing some whippersnapper sharing a stage with a load of IT hardware and a book of compositions which seem like student exercises.

[Old Grumpy]

Andy Sheppard et al. Surrounded by Sea, another fine ECM release

[Jazzrook]

A marvellous 80-minute CD combining 2 LPs from 1976/77 by tenor saxophonist/flautist Hadley Caliman(FRESH SOUND FSR-CD 896).
Here's Caliman's 'Gala' from the 1977 album 'Celebration' with Hotep Cecil Barnard(piano); David Williams(bass) & Elvin Jones(drums):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_uAyMHQ9Ro

JR

[Stanfordian]

‘Let Me Tell You 'Bout It’
Leo Parker with Dave Burns, Bill Swindell, Yusef Salim, Stan Conover & Purnell Rice
Blue Note (1961)

[Stanfordian]

‘Sonny Rollins on Impulse!’
Sonny Rollins, Ray Bryant, Walter Booker & Mickey Roker
Impulse (1965)