Why I hate Miles

[kh1958]

Miles is great. He's a great trumpeter; his tone is beautiful; he plays with wonderful technique (so he's not as good as Dizzy or Clifford in that respect, but who is); he's a great bandleader; and he's innovative.

[Sundog]

I gave up trying to compare Miles to other trumpet players a long time ago.

[Pete C]

What do I find so appealing about Miles' voice? One aspect has to do with the blues. My first love in jazz is the blues, and most of my favorite jazz artists are those who developed highly distinctive and compelling blues voices. Miles was just a motherfucker with the blues.

John, are you a fan of "The Hot Spot"?

[John L]

What do I find so appealing about Miles' voice?  One aspect has to do with the blues.    My first love in jazz is the blues, and most of my favorite jazz artists are those who developed highly distinctive and compelling blues voices.  Miles was just a motherfucker with the blues.

John, are you a fan of "The Hot Spot"?

If it has to do with good blues, then maybe I should be. What is it?

[Pete C]

John! You don't know "The Hot Spot" soundtrack album? Miles playing the blues with John Lee Hooker, Taj Mahal, and Roy Rogers. It's one of my favorite late Miles albums. A brilliant Jack Nitszche concept. Here's Eugene Chadbourne's lengthy AMG kvell (and a good paean to Miles for this thread):

A return look and listen to this historical and breathtaking collaboration between two of the great figures of modern music should naturally be prefaced by a few key facts. Although this album presents itself as the soundtrack to the film The Hot Spot, like many such releases it bares little relation to the music that was actually used in the film — not that much of this music was actually used. All one really needs to know about the film itself, other than the fact that it was directed by Dennis Hopper, is that it is awful, even by bad film standards. That it was the impetus for this marvelous music to be made is something listeners should be thankful for, particularly fans of either Miles Davis or John Lee Hooker. Anyone who grew up with the former artist during his electric transfusions of the '60s and '70s probably wondered why he wasn't playing with John Lee Hooker the whole time, since they both seemed headed in the same direction. In fact, one wonders why it took this crummy film and the personal appeal of its director to bring these two musical giants together. That they didn't seek to do something like this on their own can be looked at as a character flaw, one that can only be forgiven after listening to how wonderfully they interact here. An important aspect of the magic is their individual genius in the art of playing blues music in such utterly personal ways. There is no mistaking the sound of either Hooker or Davis for anyone else, with layer upon layer of detail backing that up — the actual sound of their instruments is distinctive, their choices of notes and timing completely unusual and impossible to imitate, and they both have a knack for casually making even the most basic sort of band track sound as if it is a style of music that has never been played before. No matter how many times one may have heard a bar band break into what they think is a Hooker boogie, a brief recovery period will still be required after first exposure to the tracks here. Often during his recording career, Hooker was able to get a particularly scintillating rhythm section sound going with whatever pros had been assembled for the occasion. This is one of these sessions, but it indeed makes it seem like a royal visit to have Davis blowing over the top of these grooves. There are other dignitaries as well. Blues guitarist Roy Rogers adds some tasteful slide guitar, and it could be said that it presents another melodic direction for the interaction. But when one has a choice to hear Hooker or Davis instead, most listeners will simply wish Rogers had ridden off into the sunset on his faithful horse instead of coming to this session. Taj Mahal, on the other hand, adds nice textures with his dobro, an instrument that is wonderfully versatile yet so often overlooked in anything other than bluegrass music or straight-ahead country blues. The latter genre, unfortunately, has too much of a sway over this performer's choice of picking patterns. He sounds like what he is: a revivalist who learned how to play blues in college. The rhythm section kicks the whole time, while composer and arranger Jack Nitzsche makes valuable contributions of his own. This includes a minor-key groove — completely unusual for Hooker, who perhaps recorded in a minor key less than a half-dozen times in his entire career. The dabs of typical film score-type music seem like nothing special until there is an entrance by Davis. These sections of him extemporizing over such routine music bring to mind one of the Ralph J. Gleason profiles of Davis, which described the artist hanging out in his music room playing along with various new releases and painfully trying to reharmonize several selections from the score of Dr. Doolittle he was thinking about recording. The image is that of normal music being twisted into something different by a master at such trickery; most of The Hot Spot soundtrack, on the other hand, presents this great jazz soloist playing over blues grooves as pure as only Hooker could make happen, an interesting contrast to some of the weaker, late-period Davis, where his bands are simply straining to be funky in an old-time bluesy way. To say this is the best recording Davis made in his final period might be misunderstood as damning with faint praise. A more solid compliment would be to contrast it with other great moments from the trumpeter's career, such as Bitches Brew or Kind of Blue, and the best parts of this soundtrack contain music that is every bit as interesting and profound. As for a Hooker album, there might be others that have better blues songs on them, but this is just about the only recording the bluesman ever did with a really great jazz soloist on it. — Eugene Chadbourne

[RainyDay]

This, gentlemen, is a great thread. I love Miles but it is instructive to hear people talk about why they don't and why do like his work. I'd like to echo comments made by vibes, JSngry and JohnL. I am not a musician or musically trained (not really) and my biggest frustration is not having the musical vocabulary to express how I feel about music. So some of you did it for me. Thanks.

[Dr. Rat]

Coming late, but I have to agree with JSngry on the Miles=vulnerability thing.

I used to dislike Davis pretty intensely. I used to scoff at his trumpet tone & command when played next to Gillespie or Clifford Brown, say -- I even did A/B listening with friends to "prove" my point.

I thought of Davis as having a whimpering sort of tone and I just didn't have patience for it.

Jump forward 8 or ten years, and I found myself liking him better and better. Now I am repulsed by a lot of Gillespie (though that may change, too).

But I think a lot of my attitude toward Davis changed when I stopped thinking of him as being vulnerable or softer or more feminine than his contemporaries.

My mental picture of him now is as one of the most contrived of jazz artists: this in a good way. I think Davis had a different way of improvising than most of his peers--he was not questing, he was not trying to find great music within himself. I think of him as listening intently to what was going on around him and adding his own to that.

His tone I think was consistent with what his method: it was dry, it could have a percussive quality, it resonated in a distinctly limited and controllable way.

Ten years on I have a lot more respect for these qualities than I did as a young man.

These are very quick jottings, and I'm sure there are excpetions and hedges I should be making all over the place, but I think that between loving and hating Davis is an aesthetic divide about how improv can be done--between impresisonism and expressionism maybe?--rather than a conflict about Davis' individual merits as a player/artist.

--eric

[RainyDay]

The thing about Miles was that he was a haunted human being with serious demons dogging him his whole life. What I hear in a lot of his music is his visceral reaction to the demons. That's what I've always heard. What I hear is such an honest expression and one that resonates loudly within me. His sound has never sounded contrived to me.

[John L]

Pete: Thanks. Yes, I remember that Miles made a soundtrack with Hooker et al. I just forgot that it was "The Hot Spot." I have heard a few tracks from it, and it sounds nice. I will have to track it down. Do you agree with that over-the-top review?

[Dr. Rat]

The thing about Miles was that he was a haunted human being with serious demons dogging him his whole life. What I hear in a lot of his music is his visceral reaction to the demons. That's what I've always heard. What I hear is such an honest expression and one that resonates loudly within me. His sound has never sounded contrived to me.

I see what you mean.

It's probably stupid to try to come up for metaphors for or to schematize artistic inspiration, but I've never let the stupidity of a project stop me before . . .

I agree with you on the visceral response thing (at least to an extent), but

From the perspective of thinking about music as an expression of this sort of life situation:

Imagine that that a musical expression of that visceral reaction is pretty much readily available to you--it's on hand often, close to the surface of your consciousness.

You don't need to get in contact with your feelings and translate them into music --to a large degree its there as music.

The matter of expressing this then is a matter of contriving the music in such a way as it fits into the particular context in which you find yourself.

[Pete C]

Do you agree with that over-the-top review?

Almost!

[RainyDay]

The thing about Miles was that he was a haunted human being with serious demons dogging him his whole life.  What I hear in a lot of his music is his visceral reaction to the demons.    That's what I've always heard.  What I hear is such an honest expression and one that resonates loudly within me.  His sound has never sounded contrived to me.

I see what you mean.

It's probably stupid to try to come up for metaphors for or to schematize artistic inspiration, but I've never let the stupidity of a project stop me before . . .

I agree with you on the visceral response thing (at least to an extent), but

From the perspective of thinking about music as an expression of this sort of life situation:

Imagine that that a musical expression of that visceral reaction is pretty much readily available to you--it's on hand often, close to the surface of your consciousness.

You don't need to get in contact with your feelings and translate them into music --to a large degree its there as music.

The matter of expressing this then is a matter of contriving the music in such a way as it fits into the particular context in which you find yourself.

If what you are creating/playing is an expression of who you are, how is that contrived? Maybe I'm misreading you but to me, music isn't "there." Someone has to pull it out of their head. It seems that when you pull something out of your head, it comes with a lot of your baggage attached to it.

Martin Scorcese seems to be consumed about themes of damnation and redemption. It's in his movies and he talks about it a lot. It doesn't have a whiff of contrivance, for me anyway.

If you are able to seprate out who you are from your art, that seems contrived to me. Or works for hire.

[frank m]

How can you folks discuss Miles as if he played only one style? I know of no other jazz musician who moved from one style of playing to another so readily. I likked some of them Others I despised, I felt so negative about his electronic phase that I did something I never thought I'd do-I walked out in the middlle of his performance--not that he cared.

[Free For All]

And for my two cents worth........

I look at Miles on several levels-

As a leader: He assembled some amazing groups (that might not have existed otherwise) that had a huge impact on the direction of the music as well as the direction of the musicians themselves.

As a musician: He had a sound in mind for each of his groups. He knew how to edit, organize and shape the music, especially in the studio. He certainly had a lot of influence from key players/composers and certain producers along the way, but it seems that Miles' vision was for the most part undiluted.

As a trumpet player: No, he didn't have all the "tools" that others like Clifford, Lee, Freddie or others had, but I find Miles to be one of the most expressive players of any I've listened to. There are examples of Miles on good days and bad days, but I wouldn't change a thing about something like the Plugged Nickel sessions- not Miles' best day as a trumpet player, but a very good day as a member and contributor to an amazing group. Same thing I like about Chet- he was somewhat limited as a trumpet player, especially towards the end but made the most of what he had- just listen to "Chet Baker in Tokyo" for some amazing late Chet. Miles isn't always the best soloist on his recordings, but I would speculate that being on the stand with him when he's struggling through a rough night may have inspired his musicians to bring a little more to the table. I do think of Miles' sound as fragile and brittle at times, but I think of this more frequently as an intentional choice of musical expression than a weakness.

I'm not going to try to change anyone's mind about Miles; everyone's opinion is significant, and if you don't like Miles, that's cool (like Lon said). We each have our favorites who mean the most to us, and we can't expect to share the same choices. It's like the "100 best" thread- interesting to discuss, but there will never be a unanimously accepted final decision. The diversity is as much a part of the music as is the virtuosity.

My question to couw and others would be "who do you think best illustrates what you do like in a trumpet player?". Just curious.

And I love Bill Evans. I don't care who knows it!

[Pete C]

Actually, while his style of MUSIC always changed, his style of PLAYING didn't change that much over the years.

[Simon Weil]

The thing about Miles was that he was a haunted human being with serious demons dogging him his whole life. What I hear in a lot of his music is his visceral reaction to the demons. That's what I've always heard. What I hear is such an honest expression and one that resonates loudly within me. His sound has never sounded contrived to me.

I think this is the closest to what I feel, except to point out there were also a whole lot of demons in the outside world when he was performing and I think they get inside his music and define it to a certain extent. I mean the whole of the 65-68 quartet sounds to me like he's going to hell, and the 70s fusion stuff sounds like he is in hell. I see that as paralleling what was going on in Society at the time.

The seventies stuff I was listening to at the time, and couldn't find a place to land on, as it were. But then I couldn't really work out the 70s, at the time. I used to do lights with this crummy group and we all used to sit round listening to rock and bits of Jazz and whatever. Bitches Brew was phenomenal at the time and you just had to listen to that. The bass player in this group, who was indeed crummy, said once that he liked all the players on BB except Miles.

And I don't know, I could see where he was coming from - but then again I thought there was something in it, big, disturbing, that I couldn't quite grasp. I don't listen to Jazz like your supposed to, following the lines, digging the tone, listening to the interplay. Primarily I hear the overall sense (or an overall sense) to the music. And just all Miles' music pre 80s gives me a sense of substantial content. Because of that specific questions I might have on the lines of "is Miles is messing up here?" are overriden/subsumed by the feeling that he was saying something and it was substantial.

I hasten to add that once I listen for a while then I do start to get into the tone etc.

Simon Weil

[couw]

And for my two cents worth........

[...]

My question to couw and others would be "who do you think best illustrates what you do like in a trumpet player?". Just curious.

thanks for your post. I hope I managed to bring across my ideas as you were one of the original instigators of this thread. Just to tear a little at your response: from the three levels you listed, I DO acknowledge the first two (as I wrote - or at least intended to do - in my original post), it's the third where the trouble begins and you seem to agree with my stance at least to some extent.

As for trumpet players I do like, I'd list Brownie and Morgan for sure, but my favourite is probably Richard Williams. Why? Because he did that KILLER version of I remember Clifford on Lateef's Pep's Vol 2 disk.

And no, I don't like Chet either....

[dave9199]

My avatar wants to pass a message along to everyone:

GO FUCK YOURSELFS MOTHERFUCKERS!

I, myself, find it heathly to question the greats. Keeps things interesting as long as someone doesn't take it personally.

If you'll notice, I don't have any smiley face next to Miles's message, that's because I have a dry sense of humor, like a hairball.

[couw]

If you'll notice, I don't have any smiley face next to Miles's message, that's because I have a dry sense of humor, like a hairball.

bezoar! maybe you shouldn't lick your fur that often...

[RainyDay]

The only other thought I'd want to share is one that has been expressed by others and that is Miles' ability to put together the best talent for a given project. I don't think it is any accident that so many musicians that have been associated with him over the years went on to achieve greatness independent of Miles, because so many of them were extraordinary talents. Listening to Miles is not just listening to him playing the trumpet. It's the trumpet and everything else that's going on. And one other thing. Miles was not afraid to take risks with his work, which means he wasn't afraid to fail. I believe he was one of the most influential and gifted artists of the 20th Century.

[Alexander Hawkins]

I agree, this is a fascinating thread. To my shame, I don't know enough Miles to contribute meaningfully, although from what I do know, I certainly side very much with those who can't 'get' or in fact dislike Miles, Bill Evans and Chet Baker. But then, where's the variety in us all liking everyone?!?

Edited February 22, 2004 by Red

[GA Russell]

I respect bandleaders who surround themselves with people who are as good as or better than they are. Up through the lost quintet, Miles certainly did that!

[dave9199]

I didn't like Miles at first because of the muted trumpet. I hated that sound. The only box I was going to get was 65-68 because in watching Ken Burns's Jazz, there's that clip of them doing Gingerbread Boy(?) and I was just getting into jazz. I thought the riff was great and borrowed a promo copy of the box set from a friend. I liked it all. It ricochet (spell check) to being a fan of Coltrane already. The Gil Evans stuff was hard at first, but I love that also. I realized I liked the muted trumpet when I thought it sounded good on the Bitches Brew box and that was the segue back to rock, which was all I listened to at that point. Ain't touching the 80's stuff though.

[Christiern]

Miles always reminded me of Billie Holiday, especially in her later years. Neither was a skillful technician, but both had the capacity to perform with an emotion that relegated the technical aspect of their artistry to a back burner. There was a compelling fragility about Billie's singing, and I felt that also in many of Miles' minimalist solos--he could express himself as eloquently with a couple of notes as many of his contemporaries did with a hornful.

When I listen to jazz, I look for feeling more than anything else--it's not about playing the right notes, it's about playing them right. I think that's why players like Wynton and Sandoval never really appealed to me, I guess.

[A Lark Ascending]

I havn't a clue how good or bad Miles' (or anyone else for that matter) technique was. But it was hearing him that sucked me fully into jazz. And 25 years on I keep listening and want to hear more.

If the burglars were to come round and say 'We're taking all your CDs except one artist" then I think Miles is who I'd keep (we have very reasonable burglars in Worksop). And that in spite of my jazz Europhilia.

Having said that I think it's marvellous to see him challenged. How much more interesting jazz looks when its demigods are being questioned rather than worshipped.

Which sacred cow is next to the slaughterhouse?