John L

RIP

Aside from the incredible music, the Diz release is really quite an historical document. With the improved sound, you can really hear Monk working on many of the tracks. Don't miss this one.

I don't hear any particularly discontinuous jumps in Coltrane's style after 65 - not any more discontinuous then the rapid evolution of the sheets of sound in 57/58 or the transition to his more liner style in 60. Furthermore, there is a fairly clear progression in the 64-and-onward recordings that seems continuous to me. Guy Do you really think so? If I had never heard Ascension, First Meditations, Meditations, Live in Seattle, Live in Japan, Interstellar Space, Expression, and the Olatunji Concert before, and somebody asked me to guess the chronology, I would be pretty lost. On the other hand, I would feel a bit more confortable taking a shot at guessing the chronology of most of the earlier sequence of recordings, at least those that feature some stylistic differences. Of course, the studio recordings of 62 and 63 are somewhat of an exception, a deliberate step backward that was not present in the live recordings of the same period. From mid-65 on, Coltrane strikes me as being much more in an "anything goes" sort of mode, no longer moving so much in a determined single linear direction, but intent on pressing the pace of experimentation in various directions.

Coltrane is a matter of taste. I don't see any reason why all jazz fans should like him. Until mid-1965, Coltrane's path seemed to be a rather continuous progression. As Coltrane progressed, he left some things of value behind. That is only natural. Yet, if you can relate to what Coltrane was doing in 1960, it is hard for me to imagine it being too big a jump to understand what was happening in 1964, and even early 1965. Is there something about the Crescent and Love Supreme Coltrane that makes the music more "difficult" than the Coltrane of 1960 with Miles in Europe, or 61 at the Village Vanguard? I don't hear it. Beginning around mid-1965, it strikes me that Coltane started making more discontinuous jumps into the unknown, for better or worse. Jazz fans will probably never agree about the relative merits of what he produced post-65. But jazz has never been the same.

Which notes are "not jazz"? I'll tell all my friends to avoid 'em. Didn't the Lincoln Center recently issue an easy reference guide on this subject?

Frank Sinatra and Tony Bennett are the most accessible jazz??? Well, maybe for the white Americans of their generation.

I file it under Eric Dolphy's name, but only because it is a part of the Eric Dolphy Prestige box.

A unique body of work that is very much of its time. It is very nice to have it under one roof, inconsistencies, commercial compromises, and all. I love this box.

Looks like her latest plastic surgery had less than thrilling results.

Apparently, Willie send out a greeting card for this birthday with the line "I have now outlived my dick."

No duplication. I just picked up these Uptown Bird and Diz releases. Fantastic! Uptown has done it again. Bird is in great shape on this high fidelity broadcast from the time of the recording ban in the Spring of 1948. Diz at the Spotlight is in much better fidelity than previous releases that I have heard.

RIP

I used to love hearing this band live back in the day. It is great that these albums are finally making it to CD, or at least I don't recall them being available before.

After reading this post, I had nightmares all night about something slithery, slidy, filthy, and greasy grabbing me by the balls.

The early Ellington on Victor has the best sound (IMO).

The former Gene Harris Fanatic recommends Soul Symphony ahead of Elegant Soul. I hope that "former" only refers to the handle, and not to fanatic.

Being a sellout would imply that he's doing it only for the money. History says otherwise. Oh, Benson has pretty much admitted it himself. I recall interviews around the time of his crossover where he explicitly stated that he was doing it for the money. I even recall some precious quote of the sort "You want me to play jazz? Give me a million dollars and I'll play you the best jazz you've ever heard." It is true that Benson likes to sing. So the fact that he started singing is separate from the question of his selling out. I also like Breezin' quite a bit. It is certainly not Benson's best jazz album, but I still consider it to be one of Benson's best all around albums. Benson would have seemed to have had the potential to continue making great jazz/pop music, but for some reason didn't. I can't stand the likes of Weekend in L.A, etc. It is not the musical direction, but the material that really sucks. I think you've got the emphasis wrong, John. I've seen Benson interviewed saying he always wanted to be a pop star. But he was initially unsuccessful, so he took up jazz guitar, because he had to learn a trade and earn money somehow. So the selling out part of his life was playing jazz. The pop music part was being true to himself. MG Thanks, MG. That is interesting. Maybe Benson gives different stories depending on who is interviewing him, or maybe he has changed his story over time. The interviews that I recall were from jazz magazines that were intially less than thrilled about Benson's change of direction.

Being a sellout would imply that he's doing it only for the money. History says otherwise. Oh, Benson has pretty much admitted it himself. I recall interviews around the time of his crossover where he explicitly stated that he was doing it for the money. I even recall some precious quote of the sort "You want me to play jazz? Give me a million dollars and I'll play you the best jazz you've ever heard." It is true that Benson likes to sing. So the fact that he started singing is separate from the question of his selling out. I also like Breezin' quite a bit. It is certainly not Benson's best jazz album, but I still consider it to be one of Benson's best all around albums. Benson would have seemed to have had the potential to continue making great jazz/pop music, but for some reason didn't. I can't stand the likes of Weekend in L.A, etc. It is not the musical direction, but the material that really sucks.

My question is why exactly does it even matter? I listen to music because I enjoy it, I could care less about it's "street cred". I can't see someone of Al's age meaning a thing to anyone young enough to have "street cred" themselves. I don't tend to break down music along racial lines though, it's not something that's important to me. But that's of course my opinion. The question pertains to the social context of the music. Some of us find that interesting.

I don't know anybody who declares Al Green "singular and monolithic" beyond his status as a major original figure in R&B who helped keep Southern Soul alive in the 70s through a slicker but still down home gritty approach. Actually, I take that back. I am aware of one person who is guilty of excessive Al Green worship: Robert Christgau. He actually argues that Green towers above all other male soul singers, while trashing people like Sam Cooke and Johnnie Taylor. But Christgau is always 100% full of shit when it comes to anything even resembling R&B. So that doesn't count. As far as the Chitlin' Circuit is concerned, what would it be today without "Love and Happiness?" The over-40 black record store that I often go to has a very large Al Grits section. Speaking of Sam Cooke, Gerald Alston's recent tribute album is really a snooze and a half. At least Al Green is trying to do something 21st-century with original music. At least give him credit for that. As for George Jackson, I love a number of his songs. But do we really need more versions of them now?

OK - I can see this. But what happens if you take Kenny Burrell out of "Midnight special"/"Back at the Chicken Shack"? You get "Prayer meetin'". MG Exactly!

One of the reasons why I really enjoy Kenny Burrell is that (IMO) he was one of the bluesiest of all jazz guitarists, right along with Wes and some others who came later under their influences. As Jim S articulated so well, Burrell's urbane approach didn't prevent him from putting across a lot of blue grit. I think of Burrell as a more uptown version of the T-Bone Walker-Pee Wee Crayton-Johnny Guitar Watson line. And that is highly satisfying for me.

I think several people could be mentioned. Let's try Tyrone Davis for a start. MG MG: What exactly do you mean by citing Tyrone Davis? Are you emphasizing the fact that many great black singers after the mid-1960s still did not cross over much to white audiences? Certainly, that is true. My point was something like the converse. Particularly after the mid-1960s, I was questioning the idea that poularity among white audiences could give an artist a stigma in the black community, particularly if the crossover did not involve any artistic compromise. Maybe that is not what is being argued here. But I was just asking for a clarification. If Al Green has lost his "street cred" in the black community, when, how, and why?

This is indeed a very interesting discussion, and I would like to continue it. Certainly, it is possible to name quite a number of fine singers whose popularity never crossed over into white America. But some of them did. So how is that related to "street cred?" OK, crossing over in the 1950s and early 1960s usually meant artistic compromises that could alienate you from core chitlin' circuit audiences. But that has not really been the case since the mid-1960s. People like JB, Aretha, Marvin, and Al Green crossed over on their own terms without artistic compromise. (Actually, the case of Marvin Gaye is interesting. When he entered his most creative phase, he actually alientated his white audiences at first. I saw Marvin Gaye live at the Oakland Colosseum when Let's Get it On had just been released and hadn't received action on the pop charts yet. I was virtually the only white person in the whole Colosseum. I saw him again in the same venue one year later, and it must have been about 1/4 white.) Back in the early 70s, Al was the man, along with Marvin, JB, Phillipe Wynne, Curtis Mayfield, Ann Peebles, Gerald Levert's old man, and a few others. Now you are saying that he has lost his "street cred" in the black community. I was serious when I wrote "that is a new one to me." Maybe you are right, but I would be interested to know what evidence you base that conclusion on. As far as comparing Al Green with Gerald Alston and Gerald Levert, the generation factor is working against Al. For today's under-45 crowd, Al had already gone to Jesus before they became pop music fans and started hearing the Geralds on quiet storm FM. Yet, is the generation that came up on Al Green really rejecting him in favor or Alston and Levert? That would be surprising to me.

Ira Tucker, the lead singer of the Dixie Hummingbirds from the 1940s until very recently, passed last week As I didn't see an obit thread here, I decided to start one. Ira Tucker was one of a kind, and maybe the single greatest living figure in gospel music before his death last week (June 24). He spanned the complete golden age of gospel music, and had a huge influence on its development, particularly in the evolution quartet singing from Jubilee to Hard Gospel. Rebert Harris (who also passed very recently) and Ira Tucker were probably the most dynamic and important figures in this transition. The Dixie Hummingbirds with Ira Tucker at the helm consistently electricified audiences everywhere they sang. They left quite a recorded legacy as well, much of which has unfortunately still not made it to the CD era. With both Tucker and Harris gone, it really does feel like the end of an era. RIP