Jump to content

Andrew Hill Select "talk about THE MUSIC" thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 92
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 1 month later...

I burnt the set into strict chronological/session order (5 discs to keep from having split sessions) and have been listening that way. By far and away the 10-31-67 session is the sloppiest, the raggediest, the least fulfilling. Sounds like nobody had half a clue about what was going on in terms of the tunes. Maybe not even Andrew. DEFINITELY not Herbie Lewis. Some strong solos, but even most of them sound like the cats just said "fuck it" and BLEW, if you know what I mean. As close to a Train Wreck as Cuscuna is ever liable to let out of the vaults, I'm guessing.

The rest, though, is a marvellously intriguing collection of sessions that are not without problems. But most of the problems are relatively minor - strained ensembles here, botched solo entrances there, occasional moments of unfocus from the rhythm section, etc. At the time, that might have been a big deal as far as BN releasing any of this stuff, but today, more than 30 years later, hey, it's history now, so big whoop.

Reissue of the year, afaic, even if it's not a reissue.  :blink:

Been on vacation this week and decided to revisit this set. I also created 5 separate sessions for listening on iTunes - it seemed to help me make sense of all this wonderful music. I have been through each session 2-3 times so far.

This really is a charming listen. I find each session to be both interesting and rewarding. Really a major series of work - it is like having 5 brand new Hill albums to digest and enjoy :excited: . I like the fact that the sessions have different moods and levels of accessability.

One of the nicer moments for me - the two tracks that Carlos Garnett plays on (the "with strings" sessions). Little discoveries like that remind me why I love jazz so much :)

Edited by Eric
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

Not sure, if the set isn't "self recommending" to you, if you would be happy. Many folks here, including me, find it endlessly fascinating but don't know your appreciation of Andrew and don't know what else you do/don't have.

'self-recommending' is a good term--I enjoy Hill's music ( I have many of the Blue Notes, including the last one) and I imagine I'll like this a lot; I guess I was just wondering if, over time, this set holds up with the body of Hill's work or if it is viewed as more of a curio

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Disc #3. It's a mess. A big, fat, nasty, glorious mess. :rlol

Going on three years later, I still think Disc #3 is uber fantastic. Warts and all. Woody's playing on that first date slays me every time.

Absolutely serious, disc #3 is one of my personal "all time top 20" favorite BN discs EVER, and that's really saying something.

What are people's thoughts on this set? -- three years after many of us have had the chance to take it all in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 3 years later...

I'm 5 years late to the party and have listened to only #3 so far, but have to say it has exceeded my expectations. I realize the Oct 67 session is a bit of a mess but the musicians involved are so good it fails only in comparison to what could have been. Honestly, I like it better than "Change" (but may eventually re-evaluate.

Guy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...
  • 2 years later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...