Rooster_Ties

Whaaaa????

My God... that very CD is currently sitting on my kitchen table. My wife's getting it as a present for a friend. What are the odds that I'd see that thing twice in two days?! What the fuck is this doing on CD??????

Who says that this does nothing to promote or pay respect to Parker?? Maybe it does, or maybe it doesn't. Or maybe it just is what it is. It's all sound. It's either interesting, or good, or both -- or it isn't either. (Or maybe some of it is good, and the rest crap.) But to judge it without hearing it first, is to simply say that a project like this could not possibly produce results of any value. Maybe yes, maybe no. You say: "Parker had it right the first time, leave it at that." I say that this isn't mean to replace the original. You might as well be Wynton or hardbop, saying that anything that doesn't swing is crap. It's not such a long road between to those two ideologies - that certain kinds of change are good, and that certain other kinds of change are inherently bad (even before the results are evaluated). I agree that probably 80% (or maybe even 90%) of projects like this are likely to have results that are substandard, and uninteresting. I resolutely refuse to say that 100% of them are crap, simply because they are what they are.

Good thing you said this, or we'd have to start a poll to find out if you should be banned from the board.

Another thing that I think Joe got dinged for, about this material -- but something which I actually like... ...is his revisiting old material (often pretty frequently), presenting it in new contexts, within a short period of time. If you look through the track-listing (AMG Review, with track-listing), you'll find a number of tracks are remakes of earlier BN material, which even in a few cases - he remade again within the span of just a few years. (Meaning he recorded three (or even in a few cases four?) studio versions of the same tune, within the span of 15 years - if you count his days with Blue Note, plus his Milestone years.) And looking at the track-listing doesn't tell the whole story, because there are one or two tunes (“Recorda Me” is at least one of them, and I think there’s another one too), that show up in different guises (and substantially different arrangements), such that they don't even have the same titles as the originals. (Whether there was some 'copyright' reason for this, or artistic reason - I can't say which.) Joe is one of the few artists I can think of who have presented multiple studio-versions of the same tunes, over such a short span of years, in such dramatically different contexts. (And in that respect, this mirrors Miles in the 70's a little bit too, at least if you consider the frequent repetition of themes across multiple 'live' albums from Miles in the 70's.)

Why don't you start a new thread about this, DEEP???? We'd like to have these kinds of discussions with you. Trouble is, they're buried in threads like this - which are nothing but a huge fuckin' ego trip on your part.

WORD!!!!!

WORD!!!! I'd really like to see some more participation from you, DEEP, in other areas of the board, especially in some heavy MUSIC threads. You obviously have a lot to offer, and I'm warming to some of your charm (SERIOUSLY!!). BUT, as it stands now, a frightingly large percentage of your posts on this board are just PISSING IN THE PUNCH BOWL. (And most of it is directed at Chris, it would seem.) Grow the fuck up a bit, and get with the PARTY. (And quit being such a party pooper. )

What about this??? - and even more so, THIS??? Moose, I don't buy your argument. What about visual artists who take iconography (or found objects), and present them in new contexts. And what about the great collage artists of the 60's (and probably the 50's -- all that stuff is usually 10 years before I really think it is.) Is that just "robbing the grave" too?? I'm not saying that these kinds of projects are necessarily good. But in the right hands, I think that creative things can happen, and new forms of expression developed. Not purely 'self'-expression, but a hybrid of the old and the new. Yeah, 80% of these kinds of projects are possibly crap. You're suggesting that 100% of them are crap, by definition. That's just as bad as hardbop railing against Miles after 1968, only because electricity is evil ("by definition") - doncha know. (Sangry, I think need some help here.) Moose, think it over some more... Forget who the source material is (Parker), and consider the process being undertaken, in abstract terms. If Greg Osby handed over the multi-track source tapes of a new recording of his own making, and had these remixologists do their thing, some of the results might be pretty interesting (and some would be crap). What's so intrinsically wrong with going back to earlier source material?? Or are we engaging in 'idolatry' over these Charlie Parker sides?? No, I'm not saying you have to 'like' any of the results. But you've dismissed an entire process, independent of even hearing any of the results, including the results of future projects not even yet undertaken. Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. PS: This isn't all directed at Moose. Judging from most of the posts in this thread, it's directed at all of you. Please respond.

Mindless ramblings about this set... "The Kicker" and "Tetragon" (the two earliest albums) sound quite a bit like extensions of his days at Blue Note -- and both are probably about as good as most of Joe's BN material. "The Kicker" has a nice three-horn front-line, with Grachan Moncur(!) and Mike Lawrence. "Tetragon" features one quite interesting wholly-improvised track that shows a side of Joe that he didn't show as often in his career - a sort of prototypical 'free-bop' sort of thing, if I remember right. "Power to the People" (Milestone, 1969) ...is without a doubt one of THE finest Joe Henderson albums of ANY era, on any label. With Herbie Hancock, Ron Carter, Jack DeJohnette, along with Mike Lawrence on a couple tracks (on trumpet). IMHO, it includes possibly THE definitive version of "Black Narcissus", and really a incredible remake of "Isotope", and I like the version of "Lazy Afternoon" here even better than one Joe did on Pete La Roca's "Basra". Also another totally improvised track, which digs about as deep as Joe was capable of (which is to say pretty darn deep, though I realize there are plenty (before and after) who dug deeper - cuz that was more their thing, than Joe's). Then there's the 'live' material with Woody Shaw (including a number of bonus cuts not found on the original album), and another live album with Japanese musicians that really cooks. (All of the live material is 'top-drawer', at least in my dresser. And you can never go wrong with Woody along for the ride.) "Multiple" goes someplace new, and how could it not with James Blood Ulmer on board. Fairly strong tunes, but it's the textures and overall vibe of "Multiple" that really gets me. Sure, it sounds a bit dated today, with a few nods to commercialism (including vocals from Joe ( ), though don't let that scare you too bad - he just adds a new flavor, and doesn't screw things up like vocals could have pretty easily). Pretty deep album, that "Multiple" is -- or at least I sure thought so when I first got it back in college. Context: "moderately commercial"; Joe's soloing: "take no prisoners!!!" - 'nuff said, 'cept that it's BAAAADDDD!!!! "The Elements" is fairly unique in the cannon, with Alice Coltrane on piano and harp, Michael White on violin, Charlie Haden, plus a percussionist and a tabla-player (both). Back in the days when I first got this box-set, this was one of the albums I couldn't quite get my ears around. I recall it being deep, but the tunes didn't catch hold with me specifically - not enough structure for my tastes (at the time). I should dust this one off. (I suspect there's maybe an incredible album here, one that I just haven't taken the time to get to know well enough.) "Black Narcissus" has updated versions "Power to the People" and the title cut, with some interesting synth-tracks overdubbed, with quite spacey results. The tunes are strong enough that I really like this treatment of the material, or perhaps I should say that I find it really interesting, though I realize many find this material somewhat lacking. Joe's still Joe, and he came to play. I like the weird context, and it works for me. I've left out a few albums, particularly those that didn't leave enough of a distinct impression to stand out on their own, from the rest on the box. (The only material on this box set that I knew in their original 'album' configurations was "The Kicker", "Power To The People" and "Multiple".) As result, quite a bit of the later material has enough similarity to it, so as to obscure the boundaries between albums. (You know, how like Mosaic packs 11 albums across 7 CD's, and it becomes hard to tell what's what.) Overall, I'd have to give the Joe Milestone box about 4 stars (out of five). Not everything is a home-run, but he constantly gets on base, time and time again. I'm sure others here would only give it 3 or 3½ stars at most, and there is certainly room for a difference of opinion about some of the later material. But everything up through 1971's "Joe Henderson in Japan" is solidly solid, by any estimation. And I often find great joy in the new directions that Joe tried after that. Not all of them work in every way, but Joe never let's the ball drop either, particularly in his own playing specifically. And in some ways, there's really not much else out there like some of the later albums on this set (at least not that I've found). That strange mix of music that tries to be slightly commercial (but certainly doesn't succeed on those grounds), and music that still tries it's damnedest to really 'reach' (even if it doesn't always quite reach where you'd like it to, or maybe quite as far as you'd like it to). Joe didn't really create an entirely new language for himself during those later Milestone years, or anything close to the wild developmental changes that Miles went through during the entire first half of that same decade. Never the less, I think that fans of Miles in the 70's should find more to like in Joe's later Milestone years, than might people who only want Joe to be the "Joe" of his Blue Note years.

Huge volumes of opus numbers does not necessarily mean substandard music. Case in point: Ernst Krenek, who's opus numbers climb all the way up to at least 240. I've yet to hear a work by Krenek that I didn't at least think was above average, and in many cases, "top drawer".

You can sample all the tracks HERE. From just these samples (which is all I've heard), several of the tracks remind me quite a bit of Ornette's "Tone Dialing" from 1995, and I mean than in a good way. Like I predicted up above in this thread: some of the tracks are probably worthless, some are "OK", and frankly - more of the tracks sounded interesting to me than I was expecting. I'd buy this one 'used' for $8 (or maybe $9) without much hesitation. We need an icon for "half-a-thumbs-up" Hey, Joe M (the guy who started this thread), if you want to trade your copy of this for something else I've got, I'll be glad to see if I have anything you'd be interested in. I'm sorta half-curious to hear the rest of this. (And I'm no huge 'hip-hop' nut either, though I do like genre-blending in general, or at least I'm open to the idea.)

And the 'outtakes' from both of those A&M albums were released (on Rounder - of all places), as "Somewhere Else". As much as I like both the A&M albums (which is quite a lot), I like "Somewhere Else" even more!! (How an album of outtakes is better than the original?? - is a bit beyond me - but hey, whatever!! ) Supposedly it's still in print, and I've seen used copies a time or two as well. ( In fact, I have a duplicate CD of this, if anyone needs one. ) Great stuff, and it includes several tracks with Don Cherry (and frankly, I think they're stronger tracks than the tracks that Cherry's on on "Purple Night").

I'd be interested in seeing it too.

I think that's the one and only one I have too. It's a TOTALLY AMAZING work, and on the strength of it - I'd probably buy all the others, sight unseen. Trouble is I've never seen recordings of any of the others.

I'm not a 'musician', just a 'musical performer' (I'm not a creative musician, but rather more like a guy in a pit orchestra, so to speak*) -- so I'm not entirely sure I can personally relate to this topic as deeply as I might like to. But in speaking with other musicians (and I do mean 'musicians'), I've come to understand that deliberately trying to learn things that are perhaps counter to one's natural tendencies, is one key to opening up new pathways to real creativity, and (I would think) moving towards a more personal technique. I remember talking with Jason Moran once a couple years ago, and he mentioned (without going into great specifics – I forget how this topic came up) about how he was doing exercises that he hoped would train himself to not think about his left-hand work in such traditional, functional ways. In some sense, he felt he had to 'unlearn' several years of prior training, that he felt had begun condition the way he approached his instrument - presumably on some unconscious level. I'm sure this is true of almost any instrument, where there are accepted 'schools' of thought on how one approaches playing and improvising. Electric guitar, either blues or rock (or country) -- or almost any jazz instrument and 'jazzful' approach. (Man, I cannot bear the thought of actually using the word 'jazzy'. ) Sorry for the feeble attempt to put all this into words. I'm operating at some academic 'theoretical' level about a topic like this, as what I do on this board is about the most "creative" thing I ever seem to do of late. *I sing in a chorus. It's a pretty good chorus, in that it's the choral arm of a symphony orchestra -- but my role is really just like that of some random violinist back in one of the back rows of the 2nd violin section.

I think the key word here is "some". Let me rephrase then. IMO Alicia Keys is one of the most talented of the current crop of R&B/Urban Contemporary/Soul/Hip-Hop (or whatever the term is) artists. I would tend to agree. I'm no particular fan of hers (really, of R&B/Urban Contemporary/Soul singers in general - so it's nothing to do with her in particular), but she does seem to have some greater depth to her than most.

I think politics is much more appropriate on this board, than AAJ. I mean, it has it's place there, I suppose (in it's own forum, so as to more easily separate it from the rest of the board, like here). But I could actually see the argument for not having Politics on the AAJ board, if that's what Mike wanted to do. I mean, the board claims to be a jazz board, at it's core. And it's an outgrown of the whole "All About Jazz" net presence, which is just that - Jazz, and nothing more. Here, however, the board is a collection of people who happen to all rally around this band we all love (can you feel the love? ), and presumably all the topics we're interested in, from music, to sports, to politics, to babes - and so on... The character of this board seems to allow for it's semi-political nature (at least among many of the posters here).

Hey DEEP, did you ever read this Olive Branch of a post that I handed you yesterday???

If anything, DEEP, you've already disarmed anyone who wants to goad you about your periodic libations (me like'm fancy words too!! ). It still seems just like it was a cheap shot to me (at worst).

And besides, DEEP, you've made a public fact of your chemical manifestations, and you've asked us to embrace you as you are. Sure, if you were a closet drunk, then such a comment would cut to the quick – far more than a mere scratch like this one.

And to follow-up a bit on my earlier post in this thread... I think mine tends to run more in terms of me getting bitten by the 'bug' of particular artists/composers, more than getting a more general urge to go the jazz vs. classical route. I mean, for about a year now I've really been on a HUGE Andrew Hill kick (in case you hadn't noticed ). And Greg Osby and Jason Moran have also figured heavily in my listening for about the last year or two. But two months from now, I might meet somebody knew who has a passion for classical music, who turns me on to several composers that I haven't heard much by - and bam, I'll shift into a different mode of interests for a while. It really has as much to do with what my opportunities are for expanding my musical horizons, consistent with my core musical interests. So outside forces play a role, definitely, in my case.