ep1str0phy

I'll second the enthusiasm for the BYGs. "Luna Surface" is cerebral, dense, and dripping with your patented 60's exigency--a sort of prototypal BYG session. The sound, however, is ridiculously muddy, the recording is brief, and there's very little "let-up" throughout the course of the album (although I found it refreshing after some two hours of AMM). "Seasons," I'll contend, is the masterpiece. It's been reissued on Sunspots as a limited edition 2-disc package... the sound is fine, the album is a stunner: 3 LPs worth of top-shelf blowing, gorgeous ensemble interplay, and all the room necessary for dynamic contrast, subtlety, and exploration. I believe the word is "epic." Enough people have spluged all over it, but "Seasons" is certainly worth all the acclaim.

Abdullah Ibrahim: The Journey The Keith Tippett Group: You Are Here... I Am There

In searching out reviews of the album, I found this little nugget-- AMG strikes again: "A good purchase for both fans of Bill Evans and Paul Motian." All two of them.

Sad news. He'll live on in our hearts (and grooves).

Burno's a bad cat--definitely fits the whole Blue Notish post-bop vibe. I'm looking forward to this one.

Oh yeah! I bought the old CD version for quite a lot of money last year and I think it's a magnificent session. Should be an RVG though, not a Connoisseur. Whoa, whoa, whoa, what? Who else was in the group? Grant Green Sextet John Gilmore (ts) Bobby Hutcherson (vib) Duke Pearson (p) Grant Green (g) Butch Warren (b) Billy Higgins (d) Rudy Van Gelder Studio, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, February 12, 1964 1299 Untitled Grant Green Tune, No. 3 Blue Note rejected 1300 Minor League - 1301 Grant's Tune - 1302 Un Poco Loco - 1303 Ezz-thetic - There was a discussion about this session somewhere around here but I can't find it right now. Quite a lineup IMO. I know people think that Gilmore + Pearson is a mismatch but quite frankly I think Gilmore sounds just fine on the more conservative Freddie Hubbard and Art Blakey sessions he participated in during the 60s. It's supposed to have been somewhat of a trainwreck but we all know how some old evaluations of unreleased sessions have proven to be off the mark - Bobby Hutcherson's The Kicker had been called an "unsuccessful session" in some liner notes, but when it finally came out in 2003 (!!) Cuscuna had to admit that it sounded pretty good after all. Either way I'd just like to hear it. After all they recorded five tunes. I'd say if it really had been that bad they would've aborted the session earlier than that. Hey, thanks for that. Sounds like a run-thru for "Solid"--although it would have been interesting to hear these charts without the Coltrane rhythm section and the Spaulding/Henderson propulsion. Another one to lust after, I guess.

Not arguing with you here--in fact, I agree with you. Again, it's easy to acknowledge Kurt's iconic status, influence, personal virtues, etc. And I'm glad that you're making the distinction between the sort of "genius" invoked to described jazz greats and that specific to Nirvana. My bone of contention is only that the term "genius" is utilized so haphazardly that it's difficult to keep track of intentions--and, moreover, ridiculously easy to misinterpret (hence all the furor over the Cobain as genius thing). So am I correct in thinking that the "realness" of Kurt's message--or, more specifically, his (emphatic) "communicative ability"--is what makes him a genius? What sort of definition are we using here (again, no vitriol here--I'm just trying to understand this)?

I was sort of waiting for this (above)--the rational response to obviously inflammatory statements (that "who is musical genius" thing is thermite--thanks for getting it out of the way, 7/4 ). Cobain's genius is certainly contentious. I don't think that's the only issue involved in the fatuous (really not pointing fingers), confusing overuse of the "genius" nomenclature. It's just that the rationale for labeling is seldom explicit. Cobain's struggles with mental incapacitation, the bullshit millieu of showbiz, and especially his desire to create in spite of circumstances go some way toward explaining why he was an icon among a generation of troubled youth, courageous, fascinating, etc. But none of this--none of it--contributes to a fuller understanding of the man's genius (if it even exists). I'm bothered by the fact that this sort of information is regularly invoked toward validating the "genius" of our musical iconology when--in all seriousness--we often deny (or, more precisely, "gloss over") more concrete (specifically aesthetic) qualities. In other words: biography does not = genius. And--I know this is a tangent--but take it back to the Miles Davis discussion from a week or so ago--there is legitimate virtue in questioning the relevance of sociological/biographical factors to the whole "genius" labeling process. Let's temper the thoughts a bit, folks.

As long as we're name-dropping: Billy Bang. The guy never fails to get a rise outta me (and such passion!). And CT--good call on Samson. I dug the Paris Transatlantic piece on the Slug's sides--they're still some of my favorite music. I was in early High School when I heard Volume 1--my first Ayler. It was the dead of winter... I was on a break, listening to the sonic vestiges of the revolution--heated the place (and my soul) right up. End tangent--like others, I'm ambivalent on Carter. Unaffected, but open to more.

Whoa, whoa, whoa, what? Who else was in the group?

Jimi Hendrix wasn't a guitarist per se? Per se who? Yeah, I wanna hear the answer to this one. Because Jimi's guitar was continually incorporated into the story-telling aspect of his songs ... the guitar playing served as emphasizers, segues, rhythm and background, etc. underlying the story being primarily being told by his lyrics. It's tough being the front man and the guitarist. How many great rock bands can you name in which the guitar genius was the front man ? What do you mean by "front man"? Are you talking about the vocalist/ringmaster aspect, or simply the center of attention? ...in which case I'd say that Eric Clapton in any number of groups (esp. Cream, although that was a sort of co-op) fits the criteria. The "guitar genius as center of attention" isn't entirely uncommon among groups with a heavily improvisational bent (e.g., the Allman Brothers--and Duane was a point of emphasis, right?).

You know, I was kind of thinking the same thing. I had forgotten just how much the guy had copped Jimi--same mannerisms, similar vocal styles... and then there's that whole splashy, ultra-lush 80's bag. An artist, a great all-'round musician--but man, that cat's vibrato just pisses me off.

Off the top of my head--Joel Dorn didn't want to append every record cover with "produced by Joel Dorn for Joel Dorn Productions" (sounds to egotistical, I guess. Feel free to debate the irony.), so he decided to use "the Masked Anouncer" as a straw man.

Hey--it's far more than can be expected from most musicians.

I'm inspired by how noble and dedicated all this sounds. Kudos (esp. to JSngry and Chuck).

Just, at the very least, disrespectful and in bad taste, which was one of the problems of attitude during the 60's, of the lesser talented Free players. I know the times were different, and Black Nationalism feelings were high and all of that but, this kind of attitude hurt their cause. In the matter of The Freedom Principle, it might be worth noting that John Litweiller has always been a strong advocate of Warne Marsh & Lee Konitz (in the case of Marsh, one of the strongest, actually, him & Larry Kart), so reading that book with the thought that it's focus is race-specific is not accurate. Not saying that anybody has/is/will, just that if you have/are/will, that you shouldn't. It's not about that. Just to throw this in the ring (and not directed toward anyone in particular)--if you want to read a pro-avant book that completely shits on the conventions of the "white" jazz contingency, seek out Frank Kofsky's "Black Nationalism and the Revolution in Music." While it's nice to see a traditional "suit" so thoroughly engrossed in the innovations of an ethnic counterculture, the book is filled with so much condescension and vitriol it's unnerving. I'm trying to piece together a thesis on this stuff, and it's remarkably difficult to build a body of sources when a substantial proportion of scholarship on the "free revolution" is just plain angry (or, even worse--in academic terms--provincial).

Just 'cause this thread is up: I just purchased a copy of Wilber Morris's "Wilber Force"--and it's great. I've found Murray to be astringent in many contexts, although this characteristic has occasionally contributed to--and not diminished--the effectiveness of the group sound (e.g., WSQ). The trio on "Wilber Force," however, sounds warm--really warm--and Murray (especially) plays with such vigor, joy, and depth that it's infectious. I mean, the whole band is on (Dennis Charles is in the drum seat), but Murray really comes off like Frank Lowe Mk.II--deep, subtle, and full of love. High recs on this one--I really need to get more DM.

Good listening, man. Is the album even in print anymore?

I think it's that very severity that allows Curson to fit into so many different contexts. It's a fairly unique niche, especially among the inside/outside crowd--what with caterwauling in the one corner and straight-up scratchiness on the other. I've always enjoyed the fact that Curson straddles the lines, opting for fairly intelligible, full-bodied rigor where most people would just fall into one of the two extremes. The cat's got a sort of seething pathos that distances him from his peers. That's just what I hear, anyway. I've been enjoying his contributions to "The Tenor Stylings of Bill Barron"--there's sort of a Bradford-esque gravitas to his playing (I don't know if it's a sonic thing; I just feel it).

Thursdays are heavy: Wilber Morris: Wilber Force Charlie Parker: Charlie Parker (Verve) Gato Barbieri Quintet: In Search of the Mystery Sidney Bechet: SB 1937-1938 Julian Priester Pepo Mtoto: Love, Love

I found (and purchased) a copy of the Strata-East "Impact" CD (the Charly issue) just this past summer in Greenwich Village. It was the last copy, but I'm sure there are still a few floating around. Still, I'd gladly buy a reissue (assuming it's an improvement). And that's 300. I'm getting there, folks.

I know it's bound to happen sooner or later, but let's have the rest of the Andrew Hill BNs out on CD (just making sure no one forgot). Also--the remainder of the Sam Rivers catalogue. "Natural Essence" is seconded.

Here's hoping that the documentary gets to the right places... Albert's tale must be told! (truth is still marching in).

Me neither! That puts you smack dab in the SF Bay. That's COLD! Man, I needed that right now.

I'm sure Lovano is flexible enough to deal with Green's context (and hey, who wouldn't want to hear a Baker/Wilson/MM&W collaboration--at least for curiosity's sake). Anyway, now that Hill is back on Blue Note, I'd love to see him work with some of the Osby crowd again. Synergy, baby.