florsescence of cecil taylor???

[Guest akanalog]

just picked this one up used.

was this supposed to be his commercial breakthrough or anything?

friendly happy photos, poetry intros to every song...

sort of reminds me of don pullen's blue note stuff in this way-glossy but still wild.

what do people think of this?

i don't listen to so much taylor but i figured this had to be worth it and if i didn't like it someone else might.

it's nice to hear this kind of nice production applied to a cecil taylor trio.

for those that don't know this one-it is taylor and william parker and greg bendian (gregg?)

but i am curious how this one was recieved when it came out in the late 80s or 1990 i guess...

i will say i like it because it is sort of commerical in the sense that it isn't one long 30 minute blast but smaller individual "songs" that are easier to digest.

[Guest akanalog]

i notice no one is responding.

has no one heard this one?

i had no idea but i am not big into cecil taylor though i like the candid material a lot from some what...30 years or so before???

[ep1str0phy]

I have no idea about the initial reception, but I have listened to the album a number of times. It's easily one of the more "accessible" Taylor dates of recent years--if CT is accessible at all. I think it has something to do with the brevity of the tracks, because the playing (itself) is as dense as ever. I don't particularly think that the short format does Taylor too much good--he's always at his best when he gets a chance to stretch out--but it's certainly nice to hear him in this context (which is about as easy as it gets past the Candid sides). On another note--if this album was meant to be a commercial breakthough, then it really didn't do a very good job. I'd say that the RVG of "Conquistador" did more to endear him to the (adventurous) public.

Edited November 22, 2005 by ep1str0phy

[Chuck Nessa]

I thought your response was silly so I ignored it. Excuse me.

Not you ep1str0phy I was talking to the thread originator.

Edited November 22, 2005 by Chuck Nessa

[Guest akanalog]

well it was nice of you to join in to insult me! thanks chuck!

[7/4]

So...like man...he glows in the dark?

[Guest akanalog]

on the back of the liner notes photo he is wearing sunglasses so perhaps he was glowing so brightly it was hurting his own eyes.

[Aggie87]

So...like man...he glows in the dark?

←

The Brewing is Luminous, not Taylor himself...

[Chuck Nessa]

well it was nice of you to join in to insult me!  thanks chuck!

←

Not a big problem.

Why do you think this was a "commercial" date? Do you really think CT "dumbs down" stuff for certain audiences?

[Guest akanalog]

because the songs are rather short and also because of the typography and overall design of the album-such as the photos. it has a commercial and friendly and glossy look. not to mention because it is on a larger label. and the songs mostly have friendly poetic introductions.

i am sure taylor doesn't dumb down his own music, but it is possible a&m would try to package it in an easier to digest form for a larger audience, isn't it?

[Chuck Nessa]

because the songs are rather short and also because of the typography and overall design of the album-such as the photos.  it has a commercial and friendly and glossy look.  not to mention because it is on a larger label.  and the songs mostly have friendly poetic introductions.

i am sure taylor doesn't dumb down his own music, but it is possible a&m would try to package it in an easier to digest form for a larger audience, isn't it?

←

So this is a packaging/marketing question, not a musical one?

Not my area of expertise.

[Guest akanalog]

well also by packaging i mean the production-as another poster pointed out and so did i-the songs are pretty short. i don't think this was generally taylor's MO. maybe it was at this time?

if you have an opinion on this you could state it rather than getting into semantical arguments with me. you probably know a lot more than me.

[Spontooneous]

because the songs are rather short and also because of the typography and overall design of the album-such as the photos.  it has a commercial and friendly and glossy look.  not to mention because it is on a larger label.  and the songs mostly have friendly poetic introductions.

i am sure taylor doesn't dumb down his own music, but it is possible a&m would try to package it in an easier to digest form for a larger audience, isn't it?

←

The packaging is consistent with the packaging of other A&Ms from the moment (Cherry's "Multikulti" and "Art Deco," Blakey's "One for All," Sun Ra's "Purple Night"). The whole short-lived series had a "look."

[Guest akanalog]

well i definitely felt cherry's "multikulti" was a pretty commercial release (kind of cheesy).

i guess i would imagine this might be a natural and non-forced progression of an older musician creating "world" kind of music in the late 80s into early 90s (see most of bill laswelll's work...)

[Chuck Nessa]

Well then I guess Cecil's later recordings follow the same pattern?

[Guest akanalog]

no.

but perhaps this lends credence to this a&m series being a commercial series and succesful or not, this disc is an attempt to package taylor in a more fan friendly way.

i believe cherry returned to ECM after these a&m discs and that ECM album is definitely more old-school cherry style.

but who knows if taylor had stayed with a&m, which i guess wasn't the point. and he seems like his own man anyway. so probably any attempt to make him more palatable wouldn't work anyways.

so this album might be considered something of a curiosity. perhaps like the coltrane/taylor album from back in what? 1957 or so?

[king ubu]

Taylor did other short stuff... for instance on his MPS/Pausa album "Fly! Fly! Fly! Fly! Fly!" from 1980.

Also tday he doesn't always play long pieces... or he follows one long piece by several short ones that you may or may not consider "encores" (see the fabulous "Willisau Concert" released on Intakt Records).

[Д.Д.]

Taylor did other short stuff... for instance on his MPS/Pausa album "Fly! Fly! Fly! Fly! Fly!" from 1980.

Also tday he doesn't always play long pieces... or he follows one long piece by several short ones that you may or may not consider "encores" (see the fabulous "Willisau Concert" released on Intakt Records).

His solo For Olim has one 20-minute piece, and sever short pieces.

[Guest akanalog]

didn't mention bendian because i am not a fan of his. he's fine. i wish it was someone else on here.

it is nice to hear such a large percussion palate close-up with this nice production, though.

ok so it sounds like this was a well-meaning and valuable series of albums a&m put out.

kudos to them.

[rostasi]

I know what Adam's talking about here.

I was a bit surprised by the look of this series

when they arrived at our store.

Not sure what the thought was behind it,

but it may have encouraged some visually-stimulated buying.

The series didn't last long (a shame really),

but it did get some folks in our store to become a little more adventurous -

mostly after they became cut-outs.

Why the series didn't continue, don't know...

It was probably the Song X Syndrome.

This is when you buy a recording under a prejudiced expectation

(artwork or sound-based...) and return the item after it turns out to be wildly different

(in a negative way) than you had ever expected.

[AllenLowe]

funny this should come up as I remember the A&M LP with those short pieces and I loved them - something about the format made Taylor really work and concetrate in a particular way (not to say he did not otherwise) - but this format really allowed a closer look at this methods - good stuff, in my opinion, and very valuable music - not "commercial" at all, though I can forgive the naked photo on the sleeve -

Edited November 22, 2005 by AllenLowe

[rostasi]

funny this should come up as I remember the A&M LP with thoise short pieces and I loved them - something about the format made Taylor really work and concetrate in a particular way (not to say he did not otherwise) - but this format really allowed a closer look at this methods - good stuff, in my opinion, and very valuable music - not "commercial" at all, though I can forgive the naked photo on the sleeve -

aaaah, yes! I remember the LPs now. Good looking those were!

Still have them around here somewhere.

[Joe]

This A&M jazz "series" was nothing if not interesting, and there are more than a few worthy recordings that came about as a result of whatever corporate experimentation was going on at the time: Don Cherry's ART DECO (w/ James Clay!), Sun Ra's PURPLE NIGHT, Gerry Mulligan's LONESOME BOULEVARD. Was John Snyder the producer on all of these? Was this a Quincy Jones brainchild? I for one would like to know more about how these releases came together...

IN FLORESCENCE I've not listened to in a long long time. Recall it being very bright (no pun intended, honestly; partly due to the recording quality itself) and occasionally more lyrical that I expected. I don't remember the spoken word / poetry bits at all.

However, after Clem, the thing I most remember about it was that it was one of the few widely avaialble Taylor records available at the time when I was just developing a taste for his work ('91 or so). Only recently have I located a used copy. Was thrown again by the image of Taylor on the CD cover wearing one of those COSBY SHOW sweaters and the Ray Bans.

[rostasi]

These were John "Artist's House" Snyder productions weren't they?

I guess kudos to him for bringing the "Feel Trio" to Herb Alpert's label.

[Guest akanalog]

i think it isn't a cosby sweater on the front, but rather a fleece jacket pullover thing.

cosby colors, though, yes.

i too am enjoying this-it seems to be a good gateway into taylor's world.

i think what people are saying confirms my thoughts this, however succesful or not, was an attempt to sort of make taylor a bit more appealing to the masses.

there is something nice about the condensation of ideas presented here.