Why I hate Miles

[jazzbo]

Well, I haven't read this whole thread yet, and I guess I can understand why someone who was into Clifford Brown and Lee Morgan MIGHT NOT be into Miles. . . . But it's the opposite for me, I love Clifford Brown and Lee Morgan, but I listen to Miles more because he has more to offer ME.

Like Jim I believe that Miles' chops were often superb and he played what he wanted to play. His timing as Jim also mentioned was amazing, a sixth sense that he had. And his leadership abilities were part of his entire musical being. He was a sculptor of sound, and like Elllington a masterful painter of the blues. He was a person who through intimidation, encouragement and perhaps even disdain brought out the very best in those on his payroll. He had a lot of tricks to use to create the architecture he wanted within his sessions.

I put on Miles records to listen to MILES as often as not. I think I always will. I don't even think of him as a trumpet player in a way that I would Brownie or Mogie or Hargrove. I think of him more as just a musician/leader, more as I think of Armstrong in the period I listen to him most (the second half of his career), a consumate thinker and acter on musical ideas and feeling. And I think of Miles as a singer in a way.

[Chrome]

The man had the mojo.

For me, this is the definitive take on Davis ... it's easy to argue about the different specific aspects of his playing (his tone, his chops, etc.), but he had something that was greater than the sum of of the parts.

On the other hand, I think the fact that he has become a "name brand" does prevent some critical thinking about his music, at least among some people. (This is not aimed at posters here.)

[DrJ]

Entering late here. Cool if people don't like Miles - but make sure you know why you don't like him. Don't just skim the surface, listen past the unconventional tone (not saying anyone here IS skimming, just urging those with more casual acquantaince to give him SERIOUS consideration).

No question in my mind Miles was a truly GREAT trumpeter when he was "on" his chops and in good health. As others have said, not a "classic" sounding jazz trumpet tone a la Clifford Brown, but then again nobody has ever out Clifford Brown'd Clifford Brown - dig?

Miles could PLAY - make no mistake. A true musician, not a technician - parsimonious with his note choices (that's almost become a cliche, but a very TRUE cliche, a master of space in the class of Jamal and Monk), and never afraid to use unconventional sounds/slurs/devices in the service of the song or solo. Listen to his playing on a tune like "Circle" from MILES SMILES - holy crap, are you gonna tell me that isn't some of the most spine tingling ballad artistry EVER? Herbie Hancock's solo on that one is justifiably the stuff of jazz legend - Bob Belden just about starts speaking in tongues describing it in the boxed set liners - but if you listen carefully you'll hear how Miles' superlative solo sets up both Herbie's and also Wayne's solos, acting as a launching pad and fertile garden of ideas for them to pick and choose from.

Let's also not forget Miles' many other attributes, beyond his trumpet playing too - when you listen to a Miles Davis record, you're also hearing fantastic band leading and selection of musicians, great compositions and arrangements, top notch production and recording (usually), and all the other related thought and effort that went in to producing RECORDS rather than a series of blowing vehicles (particularly in the Columbia years).

One last piece of food for thought - I sometimes forget, as a younger and later comer to jazz, about the issue of chronology - who started what, who did what first, etc. If you go back and reconstruct jazz history by looking at session dates and the like, you'll realize how many times Miles was first on the block to do things - from coming up with arrangements for tunes that were so definitive that everyone since references them (to the point that very few people even BOTHER trying to go back and come up with something new based on the original harmonies or melody); to incorporating electronic instruments in a truly original, thought out, and organic way; to using the studio as an instrument; to breaking away from the "hot hard bop" mold in which just about every prior East Coast trumpeter was cast; etc etc.

You put all that together and I have to admit it is pretty mind boggling that some just miss or don't get it. But again, more power to ya - it's surprising to me to look back now and realize that it took me many years to warm to and finally "get" Charlie Parker, now one of my ultimate favorites, so who knows? Give it time.

[couw]

One last piece of food for thought - I sometimes forget, as a younger and later comer to jazz, about the issue of chronology - who started what, who did what first, etc. If you go back and reconstruct jazz history by looking at session dates and the like, you'll realize how many times Miles was first on the block to do things - from coming up with arrangements for tunes that were so definitive that everyone since references them (to the point that very few people even BOTHER trying to go back and come up with something new based on the original harmonies or melody); to incorporating electronic instruments in a truly original, thought out, and organic way; to using the studio as an instrument; to breaking away from the "hot hard bop" mold in which just about every prior East Coast trumpeter was cast; etc etc.

I'm probably not the right one to judge this, but I remember reading a (positive) assesment of Miles touching on this, in which it was phrased more like: Miles was there at the right place & time. Not so much of an innovator himself, but rather a catalyst who picked up on stuff others were doing and brought it to the public at large. As I said, I don't have the knowledge on Miles to asses this, but it does sound more likely in that I find it hard to fathom that any one person can come up with so many innovations all by himself.

[DrJ]

I have to add some more:

Listen to Miles' unbelievable facility with microdivisions of the beat, with crossing bar lines and making 4/4 sound like freedom. I am 100% sure this is something he never practiced or worked with (at least in later years - maybe woodshedded earlier, and perhaps also a case of learning from "the" master in this realm during his stint with Charlie Parker) but largely just had in him. To put it another way - when you're only playing 2 or 3 notes in a several bar stretch at either a blisteringly fast tempo OR a dead crawl (two notoriously difficult ends of the tempo spectrum at both of which Miles was a flat out master), not only had those notes better be well chosen in terms of harmonic implications but they damn well better be PERFECTLY placed in rhythmic terms if there is going to be a sense of movement and forward propulsion (in the case of slow tempos) or an illusion that one is either playing at or floating above the pulse (in the case of fast tempos). Miles almost never failed to get the placement just right in either case.

The "indirect" proof of this is obtained by listening to how his rhythm sections responded reciprocally to his playing. If nothing else, just listen to Tony Williams. Yes, Miles was stoked and reinvigorated by Tony's playing (and all his other musicians' work), but the converse is also true in spades - there are times during the 2nd great quintet years where you can literally hear Tony Williams stop and take notice and turn on a dime in response to some little rhythmic idea of Miles'. Check it out.

As a related point - one other reason why Miles' versions of tunes are often still considered definitive has to do with having a knack for selecting perfect tempos. Miles used way more relaxed, mid-tempos (particularly in the 50's/early to mid 60's) than just about any other trumpet leader I can think of - when everyone else was "Off To the Races," Miles was mixing it up, with a good variety of up tempo, mid, and ballads. But "mid-tempo" is a HUGE basket - within that range, one can really fuck things up by choosing a pace that is too hurried or sounds lagging. Miles almost never missed. In fact, I defy anyone to point out an instance in which the tempo he went with was wrong - I'm sure there are some cases, but DAMN few given the size of his discography. Think of it another way - you know how Miles loved that snare "clack" thing that Philly Joe apparently came up with and he later asked Jimmy Cobb to do all the time? Imagine how terrible that would sound if the tempo wasn't right. Never happened.

So more examples of his mastery that go WAY beyond tone and the mechanics of fingering and blowing the trumpet but are at least as important in how I view someone's "technique" (if not more so).

Edited February 23, 2004 by DrJ

[Pete C]

I remember reading a (positive) assesment of Miles touching on this, in which it was phrased more like: Miles was there at the right place & time. Not so much of an innovator himself, but rather a catalyst who picked up on stuff others were doing and brought it to the public at large. As I said, I don't have the knowledge on Miles to asses this, but it does sound more likely in that I find it hard to fathom that any one person can come up with so many innovations all by himself.

I think you're right in large part--he was a catalyst and a synthesist, extremely attuned to what was going on in the wider musical culture as well as the potentialities of his chosen sidemen. The sound of the second quintet was a convergence of the history of Miles before that, the rhythmic input of Tony Williams, and the compositional/improvisational sensibilities of Wayne & Herbie, IMO. Miles gave Wayne the chance to realize certain directions that the Blakey association wouldn't allow. But Miles was the ringmaster, don't forget that.

Edited February 23, 2004 by Pete C

[Pete C]

DrJ, I'm BLOWN AWAY by your insightful posts.

[couw]

DrJ, I'm BLOWN AWAY by your insightful posts.

I like 'em too

[JSngry]

I'm probably not the right one to judge this, but I remember reading a (positive) assesment of Miles touching on this, in which it was phrased more like: Miles was there at the right place & time. Not so much of an innovator himself, but rather a catalyst who picked up on stuff others were doing and brought it to the public at large. As I said, I don't have the knowledge on Miles to asses this, but it does sound more likely in that I find it hard to fathom that any one person can come up with so many innovations all by himself.

That's a bit "loose". Certainly Miles always had his ears open, and was not at all averse to using other people's "flavors", but invariably, he'd turn it into something distinctly and uniquely his own by the time all was said and done.

Case in point - ON THE CORNER. You can hear Sly Stone ALL OVER that album, and can pinpoint the specifics, but it sounds nothing like Sly when taken as a whole - the specifics dissolve into something quite different. Or compare how Miles' band played Herbie's & Wayne's tunes w/how they themselves played them. Not even remotely similar.

I think Miles was an opportunist in the very best sense - when he saw an opportunity, he not only took it, but did something with it to make it his own. And like the best opportunists, a lot of his opportunities came about through his own making. He heard Tony Williams and KNEW that he was going to get Tony in his band. He heard Trane and KNEW that Trane would blossom in his band. You could go on.

Although I think there's a good case to made for Miles utilizing the talents of others as a stimulus for his own growth, I really don't think it's at all as simple as saying that he "picked up on stuff others were doing and brought it to the public at large". That implies that he just stood in front of the band(s) and let them do their thing, when in fact the opposite was the case. Hell, the stories of how he conducted his various electric bands through visual and musical cues are damn near legend!

[DrJ]

couw Posted: Feb 23 2004, 10:06 AM  

QUOTE (DrJ @ Feb 23 2004, 04:58 PM)

One last piece of food for thought - I sometimes forget, as a younger and later comer to jazz, about the issue of chronology - who started what, who did what first, etc. If you go back and reconstruct jazz history by looking at session dates and the like, you'll realize how many times Miles was first on the block to do things - from coming up with arrangements for tunes that were so definitive that everyone since references them (to the point that very few people even BOTHER trying to go back and come up with something new based on the original harmonies or melody); to incorporating electronic instruments in a truly original, thought out, and organic way; to using the studio as an instrument; to breaking away from the "hot hard bop" mold in which just about every prior East Coast trumpeter was cast; etc etc. 

I'm probably not the right one to judge this, but I remember reading a (positive) assesment of Miles touching on this, in which it was phrased more like: Miles was there at the right place & time. Not so much of an innovator himself, but rather a catalyst who picked up on stuff others were doing and brought it to the public at large. As I said, I don't have the knowledge on Miles to asses this, but it does sound more likely in that I find it hard to fathom that any one person can come up with so many innovations all by himself. 

I was posting at the same time Jim Sangrey was - so there's some repetition here, but...

Well I think you're right there, partly. I do think Miles came up with far more than his fair share of TRUE innovations - one reason why he's in the jazz deity class.

But no question he was also a great opportunist as you indicate, and he chose his associations not only based on musical merit but also with an eye toward being on the cutting edge. But still that's ultimately an incredible gift or talent - to be able to get it right in predicting who's going to be one of the movers and shakers in the future, almost without fail, every single time. For example, there were a host of great tenor players in the mid-60's, but Davis didn't choose just anyone, he chose Wayne Shorter - arguably the greatest mind on his instrument to emerge from that era next to Coltrane. It simply CAN'T have been luck or "being in the right place at the right time" that could explain him coming up with so many bandmates who were only later recognized as all-time greats. Again, remember that when Wayne and Herbie and Tony (and Coltrane and Garland and Chambers and Philly Joe and McLaughlin and Holland and Corea and Jarrett and...) joined Miles' groups, they had some regard in the inner most circles of jazz but were certainly not considered giants. That came after, and while it can't all be attributed to Miles, their being associated with his bands not only gave them cache but more importantly kicked their own playing and thinking up many notches.

He also had impeccable influences - e.g. the brilliance of being able to listen to someone like Ahmad Jamal and his trios and then pick up on the space thing and incorporate that into the hardbop quintet configuration, which was until then immediately identified by so many as having to always sound "hot." The brilliance of recognizing the distinctiveness of Gil Evans' approach to orchestrations and how complimentary it would be to his own conceptions.

So OK, he didn't de novo invent everything - but nobody ever did. Still, these other attributes I mention are typically almost nonexistent except in the most highly regarded. jazzmen. Most jazz players, IMHO, develop a nice technique, but then maybe or maybe not develop any kind of identifiable sound, are marginally successful in finding even one group of people who can play their music in the way they invision, and almost never come up records that sound like records rather than a collection of tunes strung together. In my view, the technique issue is WAY overplayed in the context of these other factors, which are the things that ultimately really compel me to listen to an LP or CD.

Edited February 23, 2004 by DrJ

[JSngry]

The "indirect" proof of this is obtained by listening to how his rhythm sections responded reciprocally to his playing. If nothing else, just listen to Tony Williams. Yes, Miles was stoked and reinvigorated by Tony's playing (and all his other musicians' work), but the converse is also true in spades - there are times during the 2nd great quintet years where you can literally hear Tony Williams stop and take notice and turn on a dime in response to some little rhythmic idea of Miles'. Check it out.

I think it might have been Herbie who's on record as saying that at first they saved their games for Coleman's & Herbie's solos, and played straight behind Miles until Miles asked them point blank, "why don't you do that shit behind ME?"

As Herbie/whoever put it, "we started out leading him, but by the end of the week, he was leading US!"

I think this anecdote is in the Chambers book, but don't quote me on that.

[DrJ]

Whoah, what's the Chambers book? Nice anecdote, I'd like to read more!

[couw]

this one I think

[Guy Berger]

I'm with you Guy. And on "Isn't It About that Time" on In A Silent Way Miles plays a solo that has been in my head ever since I heard it. It's funky, it's so well executed, it's like ten times better than anything I ever heard Lee Morgan do (for my taste, at least)!

That solo is just unbelievable. I mean, every note is just perfectly placed, and when he moves to the B section he hits the thing out of the park. Knowing his disdain for rehearsals, he must have come up with it on the spot.

Another favorite Miles moment is his brief duet with Herbie at the end of "Filles de Kilimanjaro".

Guy

[JSngry]

this one I think

Yep.

[Guy Berger]

I'm probably not the right one to judge this, but I remember reading a (positive) assesment of Miles touching on this, in which it was phrased more like: Miles was there at the right place & time. Not so much of an innovator himself, but rather a catalyst who picked up on stuff others were doing and brought it to the public at large. As I said, I don't have the knowledge on Miles to asses this, but it does sound more likely in that I find it hard to fathom that any one person can come up with so many innovations all by himself.

Miles was a great synthesist. He didn't invent many ideas, but he (usually) had a skill for discerning which ones were worth adopting and which parts had the most to offer. (I say usually because it took him a few years to get a clue about free jazz.) And when he took them in, he (1) combined them in novel way, (2) integrated them into their music and (3) made them sound GOOD.

He was also the equivalent of a really great point guard who doesn't always put up amazing numbers. He had an electrifying feature (especially on his regular bands) that made them play at an unusually high level. It wasn't just that he found great musicians -- he made them play at their best.

Guy

Edited February 23, 2004 by Guy Berger

[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.

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.

I like to try to rescue words from their negative connotations, sometimes.

"Contrived" is one of my projects I guess:

contrive

 

SYLLABICATION: con·trive

PRONUNCIATION:  kn-trv

VERB: Inflected forms: con·trived, con·triv·ing, con·trives

TRANSITIVE VERB: 1. To plan with cleverness or ingenuity; devise: contrive ways to amuse the children. 2. To invent or fabricate, especially by improvisation: contrived a swing from hanging vines. 3. To plan with evil intent; scheme: contrived a plot to seize power. 4. To bring about, as by scheming; manage: somehow contrived to get past the guards unnoticed. 

INTRANSITIVE VERB: To form plans or schemes. 

ETYMOLOGY: Middle English contreven, from Old French controver, contreuv-, from Medieval Latin contropre, to compare : Latin com-, com- + Latin tropus, turn, manner, style (from Greek tropos; see trep- in Appendix I).

OTHER FORMS: con·triver —NOUN

By calling Davis "contrived" I meant to bring to mind definitions 1 and 2. "Contrived" now has a pretty strong connotation of "inauthentic" or "insincere," and I definitiely did not want to say that.

As for the music being "there," I am referring to the fact that I often feel that Davis improvisiations are worked up from pre-existing melodic or rhythmic ideas--that he has a pretty well-formed idea of what he's going to play before he plays it in many of his solos--much of the composing work having already been done. The contrivance being adapting these ideas to an unpredictable musical context.

Coltrane on the other hand sometimes seems to employ this method, but he seems more generally to apply techniques rather than motivic (?) ideas and in the process of improvisation to get in touch with some part of himself (or some element of the music) that will then direct or inspire the process as it continues.

This written, of course, strictly from a listener's perspective. But I have a sense of different general ways one may improvise and contrive on the basis of having been an impromptu public speaker on sometimes complex topics for a while.

I may be applying ideas that don't translate.

[catesta]

To me, there isn't much to like. Once he stuffs that stuff in his horn, his tone becomes horrible to my ears. Way too fragile. He doesn't hold his notes but wavers around like a drunken man, hoping to hit the one that may fit where it belongs. Early in his (unmuted) carreer - BN albums come to mind - his tone was weak and his technique wasn't top-notch, but that didn't detract from the great music that was being played by those surrounding him. Later on, he specialised on this image (tone) of the vulnerable guy who understands the women or whatever. Even when not muted it started to sound like a stumbling baby.

Couw, you've got balls my friend. B)

Miles has never been one of my favorites, but I've always kept that to myself since he his held in such high regard by people with much more knowledge than myself.

Lee Morgan hit me right from the start, as did Coltrane, Duke, and so many others. I always figured Miles would catch on with me one of these days, but I'm still waiting for that day. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate Davis for what he did and the respect he has/had, I'm just not hearing it the same way as most others.

[couw]

catesta, buddy, I see you and I have tastes alike. Pity you couldn't make it to my BFT party. I betcha wouda liked it there.

I myself actually started with Miles when a friend of mine made me a tape of KoB. I guess I must have been thinking that that's the way you're supposed to be play a trumpet; I don't remember my initial impressions really. I do know that after a while, dipping my toe deeper in the jazz pond, I got Out to Lunch w/ Hubbard and then I heard Lee Morgan (started with the Procrastinator) and DAMN! That was definitely something different and definitely more to my taste.

I have been buying Miles albums every now & then since, but besides my casually liking some of the older stuff, it has never made *click*

[catesta]

catesta, buddy, I see you and I have tastes alike. Pity you couldn't make it to my BFT party. I betcha wouda liked it there.

Short memory?

I was the one with the lampshade on my head.

[couw]

I was the one with the lampshade on my head.

aaah! yes!

[couw]

I'm sorry people, please DO continue the fabulous discussion. I'm learning a whole lot. Even if I still don't like Miles's playing.

[Jazzmoose]

I'm probably not the right one to judge this, but I remember reading a (positive) assesment of Miles touching on this, in which it was phrased more like: Miles was there at the right place & time. Not so much of an innovator himself, but rather a catalyst who picked up on stuff others were doing and brought it to the public at large. As I said, I don't have the knowledge on Miles to asses this, but it does sound more likely in that I find it hard to fathom that any one person can come up with so many innovations all by himself.

Miles was a great synthesist. He didn't invent many ideas, but he (usually) had a skill for discerning which ones were worth adopting and which parts had the most to offer. (I say usually because it took him a few years to get a clue about free jazz.) And when he took them in, he (1) combined them in novel way, (2) integrated them into their music and (3) made them sound GOOD.

Excellent descriptions you guys. I've mentioned this before, but it drew no comments (probably because it was interpreted as insulting by Miles fans!), but I always think of Miles in jazz as being very similar to David Bowie in rock. Both could spot the trends early, pick out the best, find excellent musicians, and put out some ear-catching music that changed the course of their genres.

[Simon Weil]

QUOTE (Pete C @ Feb 22 2004, 05:49 PM)

QUOTE (Simon Weil @ Feb 22 2004, 03:15 PM)

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.

Or maybe he was just making music.

In other words, I can understand where you're coming from, but I find your response both overly romantic and overly analytical. 

Well, here's your opportunity to really chew me out, then.

And, plug, plug, don't miss the following articles.

Simon Weil

I wasn't chewing. Just gently nibbling.

Yeah, well, nibbling, Nibelung. I mean the guy was a romantic - kind of descending into an abyss, so how I can be over-Romatic in my take on him I ain't sure. Not to beat you over the head with this, force you into anything you don't want to do, but if you check out my linked article you'll find plenty of reason to think Miles did look at his fusion music anyway as reflective of the times.

Yours Nibelungingly (aka overanalytically),

Simon Weil

[TedR]

I like this quote from Chick Corea regarding Miles' playing:

"There's this one track on Miles and Monk at Newport, with Coltrane and the sextet, which is one of my favorite live Miles peformances. They do a version of 'Straight No Chaser', an F blues, and his solo on it, four choruses or so, is a totally marvellous, simple masterpiece. I've listened to it over and over again, and once for a lark I transcribed it, wrote it down. Miles solos are really interesting to look at on music paper, because there's nothing to them. On a Trane solo or Charlie Parker solo, you can string the notes out and see all these phrases and harmonic ideas, patterns, all kinds of things. Miles doesn't use patterns. He doesn't string notes out. It's weird. Without the expression, and without the feeling he put in it, there's nothing there."

Also thank you for the warm welcome to this forum. I look forward to participating more.