A Lark Ascending

200 pages into this and finding it a very nice read. It's territory I'm only dimly familiar with (Alyn Shipton's enthusiastic chapter in his 'New History of Jazz' made me want to find out more). I was initially terrified by the preface which is dense sociology-speak as mentioned above. But from there it's a very well told tale with just the occasional paragraph where the strange language of sociology takes over. Anyone without specialist knowledge who has an interest but feels a bit scared by it should just plunge in.

My goodness - this will be like reliving my youth. I saw them on five occasions between late '73 and summer '76, every one a quite different and completely extraordinary event. First time they screamed at the audience for five minutes and we all ended up screaming back. Second time I recall them leaving the stage and wandering around Reading Town Hall for ten minutes playing. This was the era of grandiose stage sets by Pink Floyd, Yes, Rick Wakemen etc. They had old settees, a standard lamp and a general chintzy atmosphere of the decaying bourgoisie. I wonder if I'm on any of these...I'm on the Robert Wyatt track on 'Concerts' clapping away merrily! Very good news.

I did Shostakovich by total immersion in the 80s after initially being unmoved. I'll put in a word for the 7th - often gets criticised for its first movement (which Bartok parodied in the Concerto for Orchestra). But I think there's some incredibly moving music throughout the symphony, especially the slow movement. The 15th is another stunner. I'd say the 5th and 10th are probably the ones that seem to be most clearly structured; but I find something in all (though I don't play 2 or 3 much). Big, big thumbs up for the First Violin Concerto. That one did disappear into a draw until after Stalin's death, as I recall after Shostakovich's second dressing down during the Zhadnov crackdown after WWII. Shostakovich's music works as pure music - but I find him to be a composer where your enjoyment is increased by having some understanding of the political context of the music.

I saw this band at Cheltenham a few years back and they were electrifying. Not sure about the bass player but the other two were on board.

April 1st would seem to be a little late this year:

I'm only using the first half up to 1945 - it's a nice first hand exemplar of what they're reading about elsewhere. Though they have been treated to Big Bill Broonzy ('Black Brown and White') this week and will get a dose of Josh White ('Uncle Sam Says') in the lesson that Mr. Dixon makes an appearance. Lots of scope for Mingus, Aretha Franklin, Sam Cooke, Coltrane etc later on.

Whilst putting together some lessons on the impact of WWII on the Civil Rights Movement I came across: http://www.blackww2museum.org/BillDixon-TapsToJazz.htm Thought it might be of interest.

And a final observation which I like very much: How often have I read grumbles that jazz today is not exciting, when is the next Coltrane coming along? etc Also a nice refutation for those who persue the 'You shouldn't be listening to that, you should be listening to this' approach to jazz discussion. *************** The book was published over 15 years ago. In his conclusion Gioia makes a point about how the relative neglect of West Coast jazz can by explained by its lack of the support structures that the east coast had - especially an interested critical establishment. He suggests that with the economic importance of the West Coast growing on the Pacific rim, this might lead to a corresponding increase in the general importance of the west culturally. Has that happened in any way in the last 15 years?

Just listened to that myself - always a good place to hear new things/remind you of the things hidden in your collection.

I think that I am the exact opposite, 9 days out of 10. I envy your powers of concentration (no sarcasm intended!). I generally get in about 6.00 pm, have to start up work again at 7.00 and generally don't finish until about 9.00 - I have music playing at that time, but it's not close listening. By 9.00 it hardly matters what I put on - I'm asleep within twenty minutes! I tend to save new recordings and 'knotty' stuff for the weekends!

Another marvellous passage, this time from the Shelly Manne chapter:

Expanding your musical horizons, 'growing' by listening to music, is clearly an option but hardly an imperative. It's not hard to see why adopting such an outlook can be immensly rewarding personally to a listener; and vital for at least some musicians in order to create new music. At the same time, I can completely understand those who come home at the end of the day or at the end of a long week and just want something easy on the ear - they are probably getting all the growth they need in other aspects of their lives. I'm rarely in a state at the end of the day to tackle something knotty. I choose to listen to unfamiliar music (often music that has not moved me when I've listened before) because I've experienced that thrill since the age of 14 of deliberately pushing past the tolerance zone and discovering a whole new musical world. I've never really thought of it as growth; more the equivalent of taking a holiday somewhere unusual where the support mechanisms are not as obvious as in the main resorts. I'll buy this set not to 'grow' but in the hope it will open out another area of beauty and interest.

I have an idea what to expect (I have one of the lps) . . . but I ordered it anyway! It's been some time since I've had a challenging "listening project". This should keep me busy well into next year. What can I say, I'm a glutton for punishment. I'm intending to order one for the same reason. Always good to confront ones prejudices.

I loved Ron Mathewson's playing - very prominent on 'Serious Gold'. Only saw him once, backing Jimmy Giuffre.

Fits the title to perfection!

That's the one - terrible pressing. I brought one back and the one I stuck with was only a bit better. Thus the desire for a nicely sorted new version on CD. I wonder if Ronnie was influence by Henderson playing his club (not sure if he did). The one time I saw him he did 'Blue Bossa' and 'Recorda Me' and I've got earlier versions of 'Lazy Afternoon' (which is also on Serious Gold) and 'Invitation' on Henderson discs from that era.

I've enjoyed the Ronnie Scott records I've heard from the 50s/60s without needing to hear them often. But this one from the late 70s is one of my desert island discs: I think it might have been where I first heard John Taylor; certainly my first hearing of Louis Stewart (who is outstanding and plays in a contemporary Methenyesque style, quite different from his usual swing/bebop approach). Think the sort of lightly electrified jazz (rather than 'fusion') that Stan Getz or Joe Henderson were doing at the time. Crying out for a CD issue.

The shrink-wrap on CDs. I assume they do it so it seems the CD is really new. Has driven me to downloading!

You can carry the 'musician outside the main development' thing a stage further. I suspect most of us as listeners have favourites who rarely get a mention but figure highly for us just because we get the chance to hear them frequently and follow how they develop. Over-emphasising the linear 'who is the most important' line takes no notice of the fact that jazz still has many local elements and often quite separated local audiences. So what figures large for me may be inconsequential for someone in LA. And if...as is often asserted...jazz is best live, then most of us are going to be having our best, regular listening experiences with musicians who are, at least, local to our countries. I get to see Julian Siegal or Tom Arthurs in a range of contexts; I'm unlikely to see Joe Lovano or Roy Hargrove outside some major concert hall or festival stage.

I agree. But some critics are very quick to assert the latter without considering that it might be one of the first two.

I think I heard it about the same time. Imagine checking it out because McLaughlin from Mahavishnu was on it. That bass clarinet sounded pretty strange! McLaughlin was also the draw for me. What stumped me was the way the music rarely seemed to stray from a single chord base for long stretches. Although I'd (subconsciously) heard this in the more 'jamming' type of rock, my tastes were very much towards rich harmony, unusual chord progressions and unexpected key changes (the rock of the likes of Yes, Genesis etc). It took the experienceof listening to much more jazz before I could really start to enjoy what the musicians were doing by deliberately restricting their harmonic foundations.

There's an interview with Gilmour in a recent Mojo magazine where he comments on how bemused he was at having to do those solo sets. Maybe it was the same with Wright. 10 minutes to fill - out come all the bits and bobs from his training. There's certainly some very 'Romantic' piano...all a bit Rachmaninov (or maybe Addinsell).

Exactly! I remember the 1st time i encountered what I thought was an "odd" combination in Brazilian music - a clarinet/guitar duo album by Paulo Moura and the late Raphael Rabello. The idea of those 2 instruments together was baffling to me, until I listened to the CD. (I don't think this pairing would be though of as strange in Brazil, but I would have to ask around to be sure.) Yes. I try to be cautious when I'm put off by an unusual combination. So many times I've come back at a later time, probably benefiting from hearing lots of other things in the mean time, and wondered how I missed it. 'Bitches Brew' sounded like a mess when I first heard it in '76. On the other hand there are things that sound no better many years on. And a fair few things that sound worse!

Best exemplified for me (early PF) by the live version of Astronomy Domine where he takes his solo after the guitar. His organ lines follows the chorus effect with a fading and rising that creates that other-worldly atmosphere. I was on a Messiaen binge last month and I came across something...can't remember what...that took me straight to the organ sound of the live album of 'Umma Gumma'. I always loved the swirling space age pastoralism of 'Cirrus Minor' - an English country meadow transported to Jupiter. I might be wrong, but I get the impression that you had to work harder to generate strange effects on an organ compared with a later synth.

Gioia makes quite clear that he doesn't care for Kenton overall - but he goes out of his way to recognise positive traits. He's especially praising on the later Cuban influenced music. Three other bits that warmed the cockles of my heart. On the use of oboe/flute (Shank/Cooper) in some of this music. He obviously dislikes it and quotes musicians themselves in later life dismissing their earlier experiments. But: I like that recognition that something that 'doesn't work' might just not work because we're not used to hearing it. Again, relevant to the criticism of fusion musics in many forms. Then this splendid observation on Jimmy Giuffre: I'm only passingly familiar with most of the musicians he describes, but stumbled on Giuffre way back and have always liked his music (even saw him once in a half empty upstairs pub room in Nottingham)! The chapter devoted to him held me spellbound. And Gioia has a sense of humour: (promise I won't quote the whole book!)