It must be absolutely brilliant to have no trauma in your life, or no shitty experiences to have to recover from. Perhaps you are capable of bouncing back with no repercussions from general shit in your life, whether that is having to find money to pay the leccy bill or dealing with learned pathological behaviour. Bully for you. For other people, listening to calming music is very empowering. Don't piss on their chips if they find listening to soothing music, even if that is jass, a way to find some kind of peace of mind.
-
all words are trains for moving past what really has no name -
There seems to be confusion in the minds of the producers of this programme as to what consitutes meditation. NAO is a very long way away from the music of Alice Coltrane, which is influenced by meditation as practiced in Eastern Religions.
The word meditation covers a multitude of mental processes. While I can't dispute NAO's view of it, and that she found it beneficial during difficult periods of her life, well, I guess I've been meditating in that way since being a young teenager, on slow romantic music, the type of music that can be found on many internet sites.
Some good tracks, Shabaka Hutchins, Don Cherry. Did it promote mental health awareness? I guess so, but as a jazz programme,
Comment
-
....there is this week, a very good edition of Late Junction and Verity that does huge good stuff to my poor poor poor mental health "sixpence for some mind soup folk"....it's a ex cell ent edition....defo worth a Sunday afternoon spin https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001lpdj....
....excuse me, that's my mate Sysiphus at the front door....bong chingComment
-
By contrary I wouldn't consider romantic or Romantic music as suitable for purposes of meditation, couched as so much of it is in predictable musical gestures which entrench rather than challenge listener expectation - more for escape. Jazz offers the possibilites for conviviality, itself therapeutic inasmuch as consciousness-unifying in circumstances of voluntary togetherness, although some will argue so do football matches and fascist rallies, both dependent on "othering", which could also be said of jazz unfortunately for some who sport their superiority in matters of aesthetic taste! And yet the putative ascription of "the sound of surprise" to jazz can apply in particular to some areas of modern avant-garde music which by design (as opposed to free jazz and free improv's present-centreing open-ended principles) eschew directional narrative goal-centredness: I'm thinking mainly of post-tonal idioms which centre on drawing the listener's attention to minutiae at the expense of direction to hold the listener's attention, the way Roberto Gerhard decribed in an essay as his prime objective. Here we are talking in terms of the capacity of plainchant, Mediaeval and Renaissance sacred music to draw the listener of a very different age and circumstances more brutish and exploitative but more closely engaged with the rhythms of nature into the ongoing present: early Steve Reich could do it - his problem in reverting to vernacular (and other Minimalists') lay in today's imperative to commodify.Originally posted by Quarky View PostThere seems to be confusion in the minds of the producers of this programme as to what consitutes meditation. NAO is a very long way away from the music of Alice Coltrane, which is influenced by meditation as practiced in Eastern Religions.
The word meditation covers a multitude of mental processes. While I can't dispute NAO's view of it, and that she found it beneficial during difficult periods of her life, well, I guess I've been meditating in that way since being a young teenager, on slow romantic music, the type of music that can be found on many internet sites.
Some good tracks, Shabaka Hutchins, Don Cherry. Did it promote mental health awareness? I guess so, but as a jazz programme,Last edited by Serial_Apologist; 21-05-23, 15:16. Reason: Insertion of "listener expectation" in line 1.Comment
-
I don't think it can be said that there are particular kinds of music that bring about a meditative state of mind, musics that encourage the listener away from a mundane experience of the passage of time (vague formulation there, I know) might be more appropriate, through stasis and/or repetitiveness, although in my experience a sense of "timelessness" can be brought about by music which is the opposite of static and/or repetitive.Comment
-
BruceOriginally posted by Tenor Freak View Post
Good evening
I am not sure who that comment was aimed at albeit i recognise that I was being a bit flippant. I did not want to cause offence as this was not the intention - like most people, I have experienced issues where I have had issues such as anxiety attacks. I was discussing this with a mate on Friday night when I went out for a beer and think that it is the norm rather than the exception. It is quite odd how people feel ok to chat about this stuff these days whereas in the past it was not considered acceptable. In my profession, I think a lot of people get really messed up because the pressure to land projects to a profitable conclusion is massive, especially when there are so many variables on construction projects which take things out of your control. I have been surprised just how many close family and work colleagues have had counselling and the people are not always the ones you would expect.
For me, the J-Z programme was a waste of time and demonstrative of the kind of lightweight approach favoured by JLU. It is a shame that these kinds of programmes have diminished a lot of jazz coverage in Radio 3 to a kind of jazz equivalent of the "One Show." (Not that I ever much watch TV.) I felt the programe yesterday felt lightweight and trivial. The days of Jazz File which featured regular documentaries on a range of jazz topics and took things to a level of detail which did not insult the intelligence of people. I still feel that the best ever jazz programme in the Jazz File series was where jazz scores were taken apart an analysed by the late, great Steve Gray. That was so informative and struck me at the best example of a radio programme illustrating how jazz "worked." I never understand why this idea was never expanded beyond the initial brief to look at big band orchestration and could not have been expanded to deal with all kinds of jazz in the manner of Gunther schuller's books through to contemporary stuff.
I think that this kind of "magazine" approach in media is pretty widespread. I also like history and find the same thing happening there with documentaries yet music coverage seems to be increasingly being organised by younger people whose appreciation of what is "good" is wildly different from their audience. There is an article on line today about Classic FM (never listened) which has shed loads of listeners as it switches from a sensible of deeply conservative and restricted range of classical music to programes designed to sooth pets during Bonfore Night. Alot of the "creative people" producing programe now seem to be doing so without appreciating their target audience. Someone posted a link to a 17 y.o. work experience bloke posting a blog about working on J-Z a few years ago and it was clear he was pretty new to jazz yet these are the people who will ultimately commission the risable output of the programmes like J-Z or JLU in the past.
I sometimes wonder if a programme like JRR could be used as a barometer to sample the kind of jazz people like to listen to as opposed to the rather lightweight stuff that often gets played on J-Z. Not a fan of the presentation of J-Z either. I think JRR seems to demonstrate that most "jazz fans" are less appreciative of stuff on the fringes of jazz. I just get the impression that JJR listeners are probably more "hardcore." Even more interesting are the various websites, many of which have a "house style" and can also be biased towards or against particular styles. I would rather listen to J-Z where the presenters were not quite so gushing in their delivery and maybe more knowledgable in what they presented. Personally, I find that J-Z is prone to loose focus too often with programmes like the one of mindfulness and too keen to present a narrow and conservative view of jazz. What I caught of the programme last night seemed tenuous and superificial - the piano trio by the Belgian pianist very much striking me as the kind of stuff that used to get slaughtered by critics in the 1980s and edged towards Test Card music. The only reason to listen to J-Z these days is to avoid the post-match assessment regarding Southampton - albeit after this season I should have appreciated yesterday's programme even more!Comment
-
Originally posted by Serial_Apologist View Post
SA
Thanks for posting this. I was thinking exactly the same when I was doing my ironing.
Comment
-
Despite being "jazz jadded", I enjoyed the Terrance Blanchard "I thought about you" on JRR, so much so that I checked out the album -"Wandering Moon" on Sony. Here's another track from it, more uptempo..."If I could I would"
Might even buy this ... Blimey!
Comment
-
Originally posted by BLUESNIK'S REVOX View Post
Bluensik
I thought that track was terrific. I have one TB album in y collection which I always felt was very conservative but that clip has alot of bite.
SA
Picking up on your earlier comments, I was wondering what you thought of Scarlatti? Years ago i picked up a couple of AB copies of the Scarlatti sonatas as I thought they would be good for sight reading. I set them aside for over twenty years and picked them up again last year after hearing Chick Corea play one of the sonatas on a double CD of sol piano which I felt was one of the best albums that was released during the Lockdown. . I think that there are few composers as fun as Scarlatti to sight read and because I enjoyed them so much, I then bought the Schirmer vols 1 & 2. The music is more difficult than I imagined but I have become fascinated by this composer. They are enjoyable to sight read but I also think that the Naxos Complete sonatas have been a revelation too. I believe that there are 20-odd discs in the series.
You can pick these Naxos discs up second hand for a couple of quid and it is fascinating hearing how they should sound like when played properly! I have to say that the Naxos discs sound all the better for being played on a modern piano and I have about 9 of the discs now . They are really addictive , not only because I have the music for many of them but also because they are perfect to have along in the car and whilst working. The music is really calming and the sober and the clear nature of the music is extremely appealing. Taken away from the rather dry sound of a harpsichord, the piano renditions make the sonatas seem more "musical." I am not so fussed by authenticity these days and the Naxos discs recorded by a roster of different pianists make the music seem more relevant.
I am not too aware of any other jazz musician other that Corea referenciing Scarlatti . Even Loussier only fleetingly covered his works. For me, Scarlatti is probably the best music of a "soothing nature" if I am working on my laptop at home and it is a unfortunate that he seems to be over-shadowed by Bach who I would concede is superior. Not convinced that Scarlatti gets enough kudos in jazz circles. Loads of jazz fans and musicians seem to express an enthusiasm for Bach yet I have only ever heard Corea perform his music and cannot even recall reading anyone on the "Jass Bored" expressing an interest.Comment
-
Ian, I am somewhat cagey (no pun intended this time) about "jazzing up the classics". In a few instances it can work, but if we are to go outside present-day idioms my gambling is more on non-Western musical cultures, since, to me, jazz "authenticity" has much to do with recovering connections severed by slavery by way of 20th century western compositional means adapted on jazz's own terms, not earlier pre-jazz epochs whose composers would not have understood jazz and its ethos. I don't go with those who claim Bach, for instance, would have dug jazz. As to the Scarlattis (there were two, father and son), the music is enlivening, I would think, rather than calming for meditative purposes in the Yoga/Zen meaning of he term intended here, I think; but I have to say I prefer their sonatas performed on harpsichords, the instruments composers of the time heard in their heads and would have conceived their music for. Wanda Landowsky's recorded performances in her garden retreat the moment the German army was invading Paris are, for me, some of the greatest performances of any music I have heard. Like Fats Waller said on being complimented at a rent party gathering, "But God is in the room tonight" - he was referring to Art Tatum.Originally posted by Ian Thumwood View PostComment
-
This is a point often made by Anthony Braxton in connection with the influence on his work of 20th century compositional techniques and ideas.Originally posted by Serial_Apologist View Post
I'm sure that many jazz pianists are quite familiar with Scarlatti, but having a deep respect for someone else's music doesn't necessarily have to express itself in the form of imitation. Same goes for contemporary composers. One might find Scarlatti an inexhaustible source of musical inspiration (enlivening or meditative) but the shape that inspiration eventually sublimates into might be undetectable in the resulting music to anyone but the composer themself.*
If Domenico Scarlatti's music is overshadowed by Bach that's probably because almost all of it is written for an instrument which for a long time was regarded as obsolete, and it's much more intimately connected with the instrumental sound of his time than Bach's keyboard music, besides which Bach also wrote for organ, instrumental and vocal ensembles, solo violin and cello and so on, and his musical range in terms of expression, texture and form is far wider than Scarlatti's. But if Bach wouldn't have dug jazz, he would certainly have appreciated Scarlatti's pungent harmonies. (Scarlatti could write a fugue with the best of them also.)
I once took a course in TM which was quite enlightening, not because I do it regularly, which I don't, but in indicating to me the similarity between it and states of mind I'd been used to bringing about through other means. (TM doesn't claim to be an exclusive pathway to meditation, but is a learnable technique adapted to Western ways of thinking.) The idea of having music playing while meditating was never mentioned; in fact one of the most important starting points was to find a quiet place where one wouldn't be disturbed for a sufficient time. The idea of a "meditative groove" might be regarded as a contradiction in terms: I presume the idea is to have some mantra-like sound that will draw the mind away from the external world, but training in meditation is actually strongly oriented towards achieving this without such stimuli, which of course are part of the external world too.
edit: and, in response to Tenor Freak, this is in no way to denigrate the way "soothing" music might be used. I was reminded of this lyric from Purcell's Ode to St Cecilia (I know this is a jazz thread but ognore it if you like):
'Tis Natures voice, thro' all the moving wood,
of creatures understood:
the universal tongue, to none
of all her num'rous race unknown.
From her it learnt the mighty art,
to court the ear, or strike the heart;
at once the passions to express and move;
we hear, and straight we grieve or hate; rejoice or love.
In unseen chains it does the fancy bind,
at once it charms the sense and captivates the mind.
(* I was told not to use this word in an academic publication recently so I'm going to use it as often as I can in other contexts)Last edited by RichardB; 22-05-23, 09:42.Comment
-
This argument is always going to be a matter of conjecture but it does not stop if being a fun thing to consider. The first time I heard this mentioned was in an old interview with pianist Jess Stacey who had commented that Bach swung and made the connection that Bach would have been a jazz pianist is born about 220 years later. It is an amusing argument because jazz has moved on massively since that quotation which I am guessing was probably made int he 50s/60's. Nowadays we would argue what kind of jazz would Bach have dug and, if I liked betting, I would suggest he would have probably have been a Bud Powell fan.Originally posted by Serial_Apologist View Post
It is a good game to play but as the interview with the late Tony Coe that was posted here recently revealed, the tastes of musicians might not necessarily be what we might expect. Reading your post it did cross my mind just how so few classical composers who have expressed an interest / the influence of jazz have been really specific about their tastes. If you set aside contemporary composers like Gavin Bryars and Mark Anthony Turnage who have worked with a varying range of jazz musicians, the only examples I am aware of are Steve Reich's acknowledgment of the indebtedness to John Coltrane and the reference Constance Lambert made regarding Ellington sounding like Delius. All other favourable "comments" always seem to be generic. Even if you take the example of Darius Milhaud who taught numerous jazz musicians and was an avid collector of jazz records, I cannot recall reading anything to suggest what jazz musicians or style of jazz he appreciated other than the that "Le beouf sur la toit" was inspired by hearing jazz bands in the early 1920s which were markedly different to jazz post-Armstrong. Delving into Milhaud's jazz reord collection would have made an interesing Jazz File. (I have looked this up on line and could not find an answer.) I am guessing that many of those mid-century composers who cited jazz as an influence would probably be referring to jazz recorded no later than 1940. The Shostacovich clip is a good example as I am not convinced that a wide range of jazz would have filtered it's way back into Soviet Russia and that a lot of the music he considered to be jazz was actually no such thing - just 1920s Dance bands churning out Tin Pan Alley material.
I do sometimes wonder what some classical composers would have made of particular jazz musicians. This was initially prompted by hearing someone play Beethoven's Diabelli Variations on the radio which made me think whether he would have been bored, dismissive , intimidated or inspired by more expansive improvisors like John Coltrane, Keith Jarrett or Cecil Taylor. Would Debussy have been an avid fan of Miles / Gil ? The argument is made interesting because not all composers who were around when jazz was at the height if it's popularity were necessarily admirers. Messaien is a massive influence of arrangers such as Pete Hurt and Mike Gibbs as well as contemporary players like Steve Swell but he hated jazz. As you imply, suggesting that Bach might have been in to jazz is pure conjecture and the question is just a bit if nonsence that cannot be answered.
I understand the perspective of historical accuracy and as an avid reader if history, I totally appreciate this. When I first listened to classical music in the late 1980s, the period instrument movement was very much on the ascendancy but the whole argument is somewhat undone because people would have interpreted the music differently even back then. Granted that a harpsichord would be the vehicle through which Scarlatti would have heard his music , it is not possible to ask him whether he would have preferred to have heard it played on a modern piano. ( I am assuming he would have passed if offered the chance of hearing it on a fortepiano !)Comment
-
I'm not sure which argument you imagine is "undone", but the HIPP movement has gained greatly in subtlety and sophistication since the 1980s, attempting for example to take account of regional differences in playing style (although the modern concept of "interpretation" wouldn't really have been understood in the early 18th century). Of course one of the central arguments is that using instruments the composer would have recognised is a first step to coming to an understanding how early music sounded, and this is surely uncontroversial by now.Originally posted by Ian Thumwood View Post
Whether Scarlatti would have preferred a "modern" piano is not a relevant question since he never heard one. On the other hand he certainly did hear fortepianos, and Eva Badura-Skoda makes a convincing case that he was actually thinking of this instrument rather than the harpsichord in a number of his sonatas (The Eighteenth-Century Fortepiano Grand and its Patrons, from Scarlatti to Beethoven, 2017) - his patron, the Spanish queen Maria Barbara, owned several fortepianos - and there have been quite a few persuasive recordings of his sonatas on such instruments.Comment
-
RichardOriginally posted by RichardB View Post
Good evening
I acknowledge the argument partly but there would have been no one way of performing a piece of music in 1750 any more than there would have been today. We have no way of knowing how different the music sounded with 100% confidence but I think there would be a range of interpretations depending on the conductor, musicians, ability, regions, etc, etc. The regional differences argument is interesting, though. The whole argument of authenticity falls down as there would have been a wide range of interpretations, all of which would have been authentic. There is no way of knowing whether a composer would have reviewed his interpretation over time either. Period intepretations are no longer controversial but, by the same token, I do not see it as something to be hung up about - especially as there will always be an element of speculation as to what is "authentic." It is an interesting concept but would be wary of it being too anal .Comment
-
Back then there would have been considerably more regional variation in all parameters than there is now, since most people didn't travel very much. Acknowledging this is one aspect of the increase in subtlety and sophistication I was talking about. "Authenticity" isn't a word used very much in HIPP-related literature these days - Richard Taruskin pointed out already in 1995 (Text and Act) that HIPP is as much a late 20th century phenomenon as anything else. While nobody would claim that a given HIPP rendition is going to sound exactly like a realisation of the score in its own time would have, it is possible on the other hand to establish a range within which it might have sounded, and to exclude the ways in which it definitely didn't sound (for example Bach never had what we would now call a choir to perform his "choral" music).Originally posted by Ian Thumwood View PostComment
Comment