Forums

if you can, find his comments on Charlie Parker, who he thinks was just a harmonic trickster, essentially, who was a virtuoso but, to Freeman, uninteresting. How can anyone who thinks that be taken seriously as a critic? Here is from my Substack column about Freeman: " 1) He says: "He (Byas) came up in the 1930s, when tenor players were supposed to be just one part of a big band, taking the occasional, short solo without disrupting the action on the dance floor." This is a pretty bizarre claim; horn soloists, as Lester Young said frequently, were early on inspired by and offered their own prompts to the dancers. Lester said specifically: "The rhythm of the dancers comes back to you when you are playing." And he was far from the only one; there was Dick Wilson with Jimmy Lunceford’s band, Johnny Hodges and Ben Webster with Duke Ellington’s band, all of whom were public soloists for dancers. And more. Phil, try listening to some records. 2) He compares Byas' tone to Lester Young, which is….well, strange. Byas’ tone was not anything like Lester Young's but related to that of Coleman Hawkins, who was his prime early influence. But strangest of all was Freeman’s comments about bebop, which he doesn’t like much, and Charlie Parker. What he said about Parker was really a disqualifier; how can someone who does not understand basic musical principles write about jazz ? Freeman tells us, in reference to a bebop recording: “Anyway, listening to this mostly makes me think about why Charlie Parker’s music has never had the impact on me that it has had on so many others. Like, I can hear that he’s a virtuoso player, and I acknowledge his influence — he changed the way players after him approached composition, improvisation, and even their tone on their instruments. But any time I read about Parker being called the greatest saxophonist ever, or whatever, I always think Sure, for one particular value of “great.” “His melodically and harmonically adventurous, chord-flipping style (which he famously described as “playing clean and looking for the pretty notes”) is one way to play jazz. But it’s not the only way, by any means. Personally, I have always been more drawn to players with more rawness and grit to to their sound. And I don’t just mean free jazz.”  "

If that clip is representative I doubt I will buy.  I'm pretty sure I will listen to whatever becomes available for free streaming, but only once. There are so many great Coltrane recordings with good sound out there.

Secret Agent - Brazilian film, great reviews, tried hard but my wife & I didn't get it.

Tonight was the first night in many, many months that I finally started in on a pile of discs on my desk that needed to be uploaded to my library. The first of which was Carr's Nucleus BBC boxset.

For me, It seems like it's one of those recordings that I'd have to decide if I would be too embarrassed to play it on the radio. A couple of nights ago, I removed from a playlist a version of "Wave" done by the Roy Porter Sound Machine. I'd forgotten how terrible the recording quality was, so after going around and around in my head about it, I replaced it with The Olympians - Sirens of Jupiter. I think I'll wait on this one.