Jump to content

JETman

Members
  • Posts

    1,946
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Donations

    0.00 USD 

Everything posted by JETman

  1. JETman

    Mike Stern

    How many musicians do you know that use a fashion coordinator?
  2. JETman

    Mike Stern

    I saw them about 10 years ago at the Iridium quite by accident. I was pleasantly surprised. They weren't half bad, and went nowhere near "G" territory. Doesn't mean I went out and bought all their cd's; just means that I recognize them as good musicians.
  3. JETman

    Mike Stern

    Not to mention Mintzer and Ferrante, who can also play. FWIW, I have this album by Stern, which is excellent: http://www.allmusic.com/album/standards-and-other-songs-mw0000088118 FWIW (part 2), I heard years ago that Stern's "other" exploits are what ended up keeping him off the "A" list of modern jazz guitar players. As I said above, for me, his playing with Miles smokes Sco's playing with Miles. Raw, edgy and ballsy - where Sco hasn't been since the Gramavision and Enja albums.
  4. JETman

    Mike Stern

    You're taking a huge leap here. The Yellowjackets aren't as "smooth" as you think.
  5. JETman

    Mike Stern

    Personally, I like 80s Miles more with Stern than with Scofield.
  6. You think Chuck does it for the money!!!!???? I didn't mean that he's getting rich by reissuing jazz recordings. I meant that he's not doing it to get poor. Is everyone here really this naive? Why do I have to explicitly explain everything I say? Read between the lines sometimes. It keeps the mind young! If you feel so superior to "everyone here", what are you still doing on this board? That's funny. You calling me smug!
  7. You think Chuck does it for the money!!!!???? I didn't mean that he's getting rich by reissuing jazz recordings. I meant that he's not doing it to get poor. Is everyone here really this naive? Why do I have to explicitly explain everything I say? Read between the lines sometimes. It keeps the mind young!
  8. In the vernacular of we "'merikans" as you call us, it's "ya get what ya pay for". Sure, enjoy the music. Hell, even feel free to be ecstatic about the low price you paid. But don't think for a minute that you or anyone else is owed a free ride from anyone in any business that endeavors to make a profit, especially ones in the music industry. Even Chuckie's out to make money, and if you think he's entirely in it to "give" to us fans, you are simply fooling yourself. You want a better booklet from Sony, ya gotta be willing to swallow and say 'ahhhhhhhhh'.
  9. My point should be self-evident. My point is that YOU do not get the POINT. "Stop worrying about what you didn't get, and enjoy what you DID get". It could all go away in a flash, and then, WHAT?
  10. All complaints aside, this actually is a pretty decent package considering the price. There's no altruism (on Sony's part) involved here. If they don't make money on these sets, they won't continue the series. I doubt that's what anyone here wants.
  11. I'm disappointed in you guys!: http://www.allmusic.com/album/if-youre-not-part-of-the-problem-mw0000871580
  12. Bullshit No business makes money by putting small bullshit issues to a poll for nerdy little music fans. Don't call bullshit unless you've got a reasonable, cost-effective solution in mind. Otherwise you can refer yourself to one of Joe Henderson's Milestone album titles.
  13. Mets ended up signing Brandon Lyon today, so it looks like you can have Brian Wilson back too.
  14. The poster was a necessary reaction to all who whined about the booklet in volume 1 not having a home. Blame them! Sony could have made a larger, more lavish package which would fit a nice, thick booklet. But then, all y'all would be complaining about the price. It's sort of like those who niggle about the ECM boxed sets or Mosaic Selects not having pictures of the included albums. Can't please everybody all of the time, ya know. Btw, Eicher has now included pics of all 4 album covers included in the new DeJohnette box. But I'm betting there will be those who will whine that they're in black and white!
  15. Don't get me wrong, I think Branford is a hell of tenor saxophonist. Not a huge fan of his soprano playing but then again I havn't listened to nay of the recent recordings. I have no issue with the music itself except that it just doesn't interest me so much as it is always the same or similar formats - quartet with sax, piano, bass and drums - same as I have little interest in the Jarrett trio for the same reasons - just not that interesting to me. I'm sure it would be a good show, but then again the Barry Harris trio is playing down the street from me - and they are great musicians - but they are playing music that is not really of interest to me - so it's a personal choice - I just find it a bit boring to be doing the same thing for 50 years as that trio would be doing - yet Harris is maybe the last bop pianist - and he grew up with the music - so he is no neobopper. But as musicians, his current band is probably terrific as most experienced jazz musicians are terrific musicians. But I know to Branford as the name of his recording indicates, he just plays tunes. And he calls himself a "MF". That surely takes guts!
  16. Well with the 'Aylers, Shepps and Sanders' you have some of the most 'profound' sound or tone to come out of an instrument. Navigating your way through bop or even modal harmony is not the point. I always equate "poseurs" as usually from the Rock side of Modern music. In fact without the 'audience' you get the feeling the Rock Music 'spectacle' wouldn't come to life. Whereas, when you hear Ayler, Shepp or Sanders, it feels like the 'sound' each man makes from his instrument would have came to be, to quote Ornette 'of human feelings' alone. Really? I think you may have just proven my point. that is certainly true when it comes down to legends or non-legends from the 1960's. The great example was always Guiseppie Logan. the first generation of british/european free improvisors started to change that as they came from different traditions but only included the american jazz and free jazz tradition as a part of where they were coming from. They *know* they were not americans and that whatever music they were playing was a different music that many for years wouldn't even consider it jazz or even related to jazz. imagine hearing the Spontaneous Music ensemble circa 1973 with John Stevens, Trevor Watts, Evan Parker, and Derek Bailey with bot saxophonists squealing away on soprano saxophone and thinking jazz?!?!? - I don't think so. but today even as Branford imediatley commented, what Evan Parker does, if not anything else, is *formidable* so for at least 30 years, the technique and abilities of the established first generation or succeeding generations of free improvisors has not been in question. see ICP live with Han, Misha and the rest of those briliant musicians and let me know.... Not even God is formidable if he doesn't touch you. There are no absolutes. Yes there are. And there weren't many poseurs in the Free Jazz world. Just a lot of musicians who had some less than middle class lives and upbringings to deal with. Hopefully they were spared having a conservative and closed minded listener like you as part of their audience. Fwiw, how can you call me closeminded without knowing me or what I listen to? Also, fwiw, if you witnessed Pharoah today, I doubt you'd call him "less than middle class". Third, don't most musicians begin from the same place? All I was trying to say was that attaching a cool label to music (such as avant-garde) doesn't automatically make it genius. But you didn't get that because you remain laser focused on defending the merits of someone, anyone screaming into his instrument or banging wildly on a drum kit or piano keys and being convinced that it's the highest of all artistic expression. If it is in fact the highest of all artistic expression, I can assure you it's not because it's "different". It's because of its ability to touch you. If Branford Marsalis isn't touched, what do you care? Does that make him less valid musically?
  17. Well with the 'Aylers, Shepps and Sanders' you have some of the most 'profound' sound or tone to come out of an instrument. Navigating your way through bop or even modal harmony is not the point. I always equate "poseurs" as usually from the Rock side of Modern music. In fact without the 'audience' you get the feeling the Rock Music 'spectacle' wouldn't come to life. Whereas, when you hear Ayler, Shepp or Sanders, it feels like the 'sound' each man makes from his instrument would have came to be, to quote Ornette 'of human feelings' alone. Really? I think you may have just proven my point. that is certainly true when it comes down to legends or non-legends from the 1960's. The great example was always Guiseppie Logan. the first generation of british/european free improvisors started to change that as they came from different traditions but only included the american jazz and free jazz tradition as a part of where they were coming from. They *know* they were not americans and that whatever music they were playing was a different music that many for years wouldn't even consider it jazz or even related to jazz. imagine hearing the Spontaneous Music ensemble circa 1973 with John Stevens, Trevor Watts, Evan Parker, and Derek Bailey with bot saxophonists squealing away on soprano saxophone and thinking jazz?!?!? - I don't think so. but today even as Branford imediatley commented, what Evan Parker does, if not anything else, is *formidable* so for at least 30 years, the technique and abilities of the established first generation or succeeding generations of free improvisors has not been in question. see ICP live with Han, Misha and the rest of those briliant musicians and let me know.... Not even God is formidable if he doesn't touch you. There are no absolutes.
  18. I know I've been all over you for all your tongue-twisting monolugues and such, but I've gotta give you your props on this one. Very well said!
  19. One thing I've always found interesting about the avant-garde and free jazz spectrums: most people who comment on it equate "lack of understanding" with "genius". To me, one either connects or he doesn't. Simple as that. Frankly, I and many others have often thought of some of the practitioners of these idioms as "poseurs". It would be heresy to mention in these parts, but the Aylers, Shepps and Sanders' of this world are thought of in this way more often than not. I know that I've occasionally been left more than cold by any of the millions (!) of Steve Lacy recordings out there. Of course, nothing's black and white -- it's all about the connection. That being said, let Branford say whatever he wants and look as foolish as he wants. It all doesn't matter -- the man can play, and that's good enough for me.
  20. You guys tore someone a new one about "celebrating" one vice, and now it's ok to talk about another vice?
  21. That may be so, but like I said before, perspective is always different from a distance. And, as you've demonstrated, your perspective on Giuliani is inherently (and unavoidably) slanted by your experiences. The city is, and always has been, what one makes of it. Koch was a character, no doubt, but a true opinion of him could not be formed from the suburban communities of Long Island or Westchester, or the tony/shielded communities of Northern Connecticut. Both of us are at an equal distance from the years we're discussing. It's irrelevant where I live now - I lived through those years in NYC, same as you. My perspective on Giuliani is slanted by my experiences - and yours are not? And by the way, we're both entitled to our opinions. It's not that "it may be so" - it actually is. I'm not going to explain myself any longer. You're mincing a turn of phrase. You know what I meant. However, I don't know what you mean by saying that my perspective on Giuliani is slanted by my experiences. Overall, my experiences have been good with regard to NYC. The quality of my life has NEVER been dependent on who happened to be mayor on any given day. I've made it what I've wanted to make of it, and THAT was completely under my control. My observations are what they are -- take a closer look at Rudy, and you'll see what I mean. He's been glorified and deified beyond belief. People give him all the credit in the world for his actions during 9/11, for instance. He was mayor of the city at that time. Given that, really, what choice did he have in the matter? Any mayor would have done what he did. He was like a Neo-Nazi in the way he carried out most of his actions -- like a petulant child at times, banging his way through doors until they opened up and had his way. His administration was the start of taking the city away from the people and handing it on a silver platter to the upper class. This, in fact, may have been the beginning of the end for the middle class in this country. Add to that all the fake smiles and glad-handing, and what you have is an Italian-American version of W. If you want a "real" opinion of him, pay no attention to me. Look to his children, who hate his guts for what he did to their mother and to them.
  22. That may be so, but like I said before, perspective is always different from a distance. And, as you've demonstrated, your perspective on Giuliani is inherently (and unavoidably) slanted by your experiences. The city is, and always has been, what one makes of it. Koch was a character, no doubt, but a true opinion of him could not be formed from the suburban communities of Long Island or Westchester, or the tony/shielded communities of Northern Connecticut.
  23. Living in "New Jack City" may explain some of your exposure to "victimhood". Gee...what you call "victimhood," I just call "crime and mayhem." And where did you live, pray tell? I didn't mean to marginalize your plight. However, what I always found was that keeping one's eyes and ears open was never a bad thing which helps to minimize one's exposure to "victimhood". This could be true of anyplace in these United States, not just in NYC. I grew up in Queens, and would have never gone to Washington Heights in the 70s, 80s or 90s, no matter how much someone offered to pay me. Of course, now it's as gentrified as the rest of the city. The fact that I still live in NY (and you don't) speaks volumes about my "entitlement" to render an opinion about the goings-on and history here.
  24. The CD contains only previously unreleased tracks taken from reel to reel tapes unearthed from various sources, usually from the musicians themselves. The book is going to be controversial because it doesn't take a neutral stance but a pugnaciously (?) political one. This is obviously the author's prerogative. Personally, if I had written this book, I would have left this out and concentrated on the music and perhaps the history of its development in Britain. But having said that it's better produced than John Wickes' Innovation in British Jazz which, despite its excellent comprehensiveness, suffered from woeful (lack of) sub-editing and production. Duncan Heining knows his stuff too and knows (or knew) many of the musicians personally. But, I find the more books that are written about British Jazz and British jazz musicians, the more there is a tendency for them to be long-winded possibly as compensation for the lack of airtime or publicity these musicians receive in the various mainstream media. For me - and I admit I am somewhat biased here - the definitive British jazz book is Ian Carr's Music Outside which concentrated on the music and musicians and was relatively short. Notwithstanding the above comments I still think Duncan Heining and Mike King should be applauded for their book and CD respectively. It's very brave to write and release books and CDs on an art form which has become increasingly marginalised over recent years - check out the dearth of John Fordham printed reviews in Friday's Guardian, for example. Even in the online version they are few and far between. And let's not get started on Radio 3! Thanks, Roger. I was hoping that would be the case. Here's hoping that Reel decides to release more from those various sources.
  25. JETman

    Lee Morgan

    Lee Morgan with the Benny Golson version of the Messengers on the Club St. Germain recordings is my favorite hands down.
×
×
  • Create New...