Larry Kart

Like the Mark Masters Konitz. As for Maria Schneider, a longtime member of her band once said to a friend of mine (a fellow musician), "It's Constant Comment music'" -- i.e. the scented tea. Have enjoyed several of the fairly recent Vanguard Orchestra albums. Wrote notes for one of all McNeely works that was outstanding. Likewise, veteran NYC trumpeter Tony Kadleck's "Around the Horn." Kadleck has Thad-like but also quite individual writing chops, especially for reeds. Thinking of Kadleck's album, one of the key criteria for me is that there be some powerful musical reason for assembling 18-or-so players -- these days that isn't always the case. With Kadleck, it's there from note one.

Picked up this one: https://www.amazon.com/Night-Suite-Tomaro-Three-Rivers/dp/B0007989QQ/ref=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1470853574&sr=1-1&keywords=mike+tomaro for $2 used a while back (it's from 2004) and was impressed -- by the writing, the quality of the band, and the solo work. Got in touch by email with leader composer-arranger Mike Tomoro and mentioned that some aspects of his writing (particularly his writing for saxes) reminded of Jim McNeely. He said I was on target there, which was nice. There's a second album by the band, which I need to pick up.

Happy birthday!

Well, he and Oliver Lake fit well. Fox's piano playing, on his own pieces and Lake's, does have a certain detectable modern classical orderliness to it, but the inherent abruptness/forcefulness and level of spiky dissonance he favors sounds a heck of a lot like how a good many pianists who might otherwise partner with a player like Lake (e.g. Muhal) would sound. The only "literature"piece they play is "Rhythm-a-ning," and while Fox doesn't play on it other than in terms of bouncing off of chosen motivic fragments and rhythmic gestures, neither does Lake. Sorry if that doesn't help that much; you probably need to hear it yourself. There's a fair amount more from Fox in various settings on YouTube.

I have or think I have one Fox album. If I can track it down, I'll report. This the one I have: https://www.amazon.com/Boston-Duets-Oliver-Lake/dp/B00002MC14/ref=sr_1_4?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1470438199&sr=1-4&keywords=donal+fox But you were curious about his more classical stuff?

Russ Freeman bio info: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2002/aug/02/guardianobituaries.arts http://articles.latimes.com/2002/jul/10/local/me-freeman10 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bvl14_6sazs I think the missing link we’ve been puzzling over in Freeman's early formation might have been Joe Albany —certainly an interactively two-handed and aggressive player.

But Haig didn't have any of that rumbling (perhaps updated boogie-woogie in origin, again almost literally two-fisted) attack that typifies Freeman's playing, nor the at times aggressive bluesiness/funkiness, nor IIRC does Haig set up and/or employ, as Freeman does, a sense of ongoing, edgy byplay and bounce between right and left hand activity. (Again, IIRC, with Haig the relationship between right and left hand is one of more or less seamless flow, with what figures originate where not being emphasized, even being somewhat concealed in the service of that sense of flow, while with Freeman one always knows what hand is generating what -- his is a style where he wants us to know and feel that.) Further, in case I didn't mention it above, especially on this album I'm struck by how much -- in the midst of all that density and two-handed drive -- virtually everything Freeman plays is fundamentally in-the-moment melodic, virtually no "gestural" figures, so to speak. (I should add, however, that Freeman's melodicism, attractive though it is, is notable more for its consistent flow/drive, not as with Haig or Duke Jordan, for producing shapes of jaw-dropping beauty/resolution. Again, there is, as with other aspects of Freeman's approach, something that seems a tad paradoxical here; that is, if one has that consistent a melodic gift, why does it seldom if ever reach, or reach for, what might be called a lyrical climax? Could it be a kind of insistence on "masculine" drive and forcefulness on Freeman's part, that almost-omnipresent rumble factor?) Finally, Freeman was a fine composer -- his ballad "The Wind, " for one, but the title track from this album is another handsome ballad with a strong spine, and then there's his memorable "groove" tune "Fan Tan" and others.

Talented reedman-composer David Sherr: "I think the reason Clare Fischer lasted so long with Prince is that they never met. To know Clare is to be annoyed by him. Clare never tired of pointing out other musicians’ supposed flaws but sometimes had difficulty reading parts other studio piano players seemed to handle with ease. A great jazz musician, though, and an interesting arranger."

https://www.amazon.com/Safe-At-Home-Russ-Freeman/dp/B01CBRPBEO/ref=sr_1_4?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1470346757&sr=1-4&keywords=russ+freeman+safe The best Freeman on record I know, a well-recorded concert from Vancouver in 1959, with a simpatico but unidentified bassist and drummer. Not for the first time, I find Freeman's style hard to describe. Two-handed, even two-fisted, and rather bluesy at times, he might seem to have been inspired by Horace Silver (as the somewhat similar East Coast pianist/onetime Getz sideman John Williams certainly was), but this was Freeman's style from early on, when Horace was not well known. A link to Hampton Hawes is possible, but I think that Freeman was basically his own man. Nor, despite his presence on the West Coast, was he ever into the neo-Basie groove that so many pianist of that locale and era favored. Also -- and this album is a fine example -- Freeman was a melodist with both hands to an uncommon degree; seldom if ever do I hear that familiar right-hand single-line melody/left-hand chordal comping texture from him; rather, melodic activity not only tends to be evenly distributed between hands but also is just as likely to be both chordal and single-line in a typically dense interactive manner. That characteristic density, if I had to pick one thing, is what makes Freeman distinctive. That he was a backer of Dick Twardzik and was responsible for Twardzik's Pacific Jazz trio date may be no accident, for Twardzik had some similar traits, though Freeman was not as overtly "far out" as Twardzik was. Another echo might be to Kenny Drew -- not of influence again but affinity, in that both men, much as they obviously admired Bud Powell, also sound as though they were fond of boogie woogie pianism in their formative years. In any case, this is one fine record.

I'm all for trading Sale, Quintana, and anyone else on the roster who has value. The Sox, to quote their GM Rick Hahn, are "mired in mediocrity," primarily because they've been following the "plug holes in the boat" model for many years and also because they have, I think, the 25th-rated farm system. The Yankees have been in some different places over the years, but that model will get you in the end. Hahn decided not to trade Sale et al. at the deadline because he thought the market for them would be better in the off-season, when all teams are bidding. He sat tight also because the Sox think that don't just need prospects but proven young ML stars, and no contending team at the deadline (and it's those teams who are in the market then) is going to give you players of that type. Again, no current Sox star will be that good when and if the team as a whole ever is good. Sure, you can still make mistakes in who you trade for/acquire as free agents -- I've heard that the Sox, who just can't help themselves when it comes to aging vets, have a big yen for Matt Holiday!

Paul -- If you're a .500 or worse team, which is what the Yankees are and would have been unless they made these two trades and probably some similar ones down the road, what the heck do you need a topnotch closer for? So you end up four games above .500 rather than five games below? Who cares? The goal, as it should be for every team, is to win the World Series eventually. That goal was receding rapidly for the Yankees; and they've taken steps that should bring them closer to it. Keeping Miller and Chapman would not have done that IMO.

Didn't know it; will remedy. Thanks.

Paul -- Why should Yankee fans care whether Miller has more good years left than Chapman? Again, it's likely that by the time the team gets good again, neither man will be a force. Further, of course, if and when the team does get good again, some of the players they got for Miller and Chapman will be responsible. Without them or their equivalents, you've got a franchise in decline but with Miller as your closer? Whoopee.

No, that was Doug Hawkins. In 1950-3, Watkins probably was still in high school in Detroit. The credit to "Doug Watkins" as engineer of "Howard McGhee Vol. 2" is a typo. See Vol. 1.

Don't know that one; I'll keep my eyes open. Way back when -- the early '80s? -- I talked to Shearing after a performance at Rick's Cafe Americain in Chicago and mentioned that on one of of his ballad performances it sounded like he was interweaving a Brahms Intermezzi. He said he was and was pleased that someone noticed, though I think his primary goal was to amuse himself as well as to come up with something that worked well in musical terms.

Lewis' "Evolution" from 1999 probably is the best piano work from him, solo or otherwise, I've ever heard, and over the years I've heard a good deal. Very swinging, almost entirely through arching rhythmic displacements; it's like much of each track is akin to a Louis Armstrong cadenza. Also, lots of creative melodic variations/inventions on familiar material that now sounds quite fresh. A Shearing Concord collection from previous albums, "Ballad Essentials." What a subtle player of ballads Shearing could be. Some aspects of some tracks are a bit studied -- e.g. "It Never Entered My Mind" flows in and out of a familiar Satie piece -- but the handsome results justify the pre-planning.

Miller is 31. Given the rebuild the Yankees probably need to embark on, he'll likely be on the downside by the time the team is good again. Chapman likewise.

A review I wrote of Nixon's nightclub act back in 1980: http://archives.chicagotribune.com/1980/04/11/page/34/article/music

Again, it's a matter of habits/tastes/preferences etc. After all, one could say that the sound of the Ellington sax section is by and large an extension of Sidney Bechet's throbbing timbre(s) on soprano -- this via Ellington's acknowledged early love for Bechet and the fact that Johnny Hodges stemmed from/loved Bechet -- and you have a sax section ideal that was based on the presence of a great many jostling overtones alongside the much less so inclined work of players like Otto Hardwicke, the whole a virtual musical equivalent to a Delacroix oil painting. That this was Ellington's reed-instrument ideal ought to go without saying. Part of the non-problem problem may be that, as the Bechet connection suggests, this was a sound and a sound-ideal that has (a la the Art Ensemble mantra) a definite "Ancient to the Future" strain to it, and the ancient side of it, I think, is what puts some arguably prissy ears on edge. P.S. A key factor in that reed sound BTW is that Ellington almost always had two quite disparate-in-sound clarinetists -- a Bigard-Procope liquid New Orleans-style player and a relatively pure toned Jimmy Hamilton type. To state the obvious, this was no accident -- Ancient and Future, so to speak, in one basket. And don't forget Carney's occasional ensemble clarinet work.

No need to do that. Just a matter of different expectations/habits/"standards"/limitations of taste.

A notable musician who went on record (I think in a Leonard Feather Blindfold Test) about the supposedly bad intonation of the Ellington sax section (plus IIRC their supposed general lack of unanimity) was Jack Teagarden.

Some maybe but not most. You can read passages from the book using Amazon's "Look inside" feature.

On Strayhorn, a crucial supplement to Hadju or even a first choice: https://www.amazon.com/Something-Live-Music-Billy-Strayhorn/dp/0195124480/ref=sr_1_6?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1469738495&sr=1-6&keywords=billy+strayhorn In particular, Van De Leur is terrific and quite detailed on how Strayhorn's music actually works, and he also nails down exactly who wrote what between Ellington and Strayhorn, mostly by examining the autograph manuscripts but also (and this is fascinating and important) by identifying particular musical maneuvers that each man made and the other did not. Leaving aside the actual sound of the Ellington orchestra, which of course can't be left aside and which affected everything Strayhorn wrote, when this information is understood, there is little doubt as to the considerable differences between Ellington and Strayhorn's ways of writing music. IIRC, Hajdu's account of who wrote what is a fair bit more anecdotal.

I think you've made my point for me. If "statements like that are just an insult," then they are not really "opinions on music [that] are largely a matter of taste and of what one expects to hear in this or that music," let alone "the impossible to reach "absolute truth" -- they are, in intent and effect, insults. And in the case of this piece, IIRC, the insult was not even made in anger (which might be a partial excuse) but was a calculated act of provocation that was aimed at stirring a journalistic uproar that would serve to puff up the name and standing (in some quarters) of the hurler of the insult. The rest of what you say above is to me a mixture of disparate issues. There is, in my world, (virtually) no current or past musical style in jazz that is inherently more or less valid, with the possible exception of straw hat/red garters Dixieland (which IMO has little to do with any actual traditional jazz). OTOH, as far as what you refer to as " "reproduction" and "copyism" in jazz, I think one needs to look at the historical context of that approach or alleged approach, which in recent times has been to some significant degree, albeit not exclusively, linked to the itself by now quite historical advent of Marsalis-ism, with all its ideological baggage as to how jazz should be played and its strictures as to what ways of playing are, by contrast, not jazz -- these claims of course resting on claims of "absolute" aesthetic and social "truth." Beyond that, when one gets to young or by now well-into-middle-age figures who more or less consciously work within "the tradition, " I admit that it comes down both to personal taste and also personal life experience on the part of the listener. If one was, as in my case, age 14 in 1956 and heard, say, Rollins' "Saxophone Colossus" when it was brand new, one's reaction to a young player whose style is steeped in c. 1956 Rollins is bound to be affected by both the fact that one has heard this before and heard it when it was a personal novel utterance on Rollins' part. BTW, let me emphasize "personal utterance," because there are many styles of jazz where "personal utterance" is not or not as much the case, and these styles do lend themselves to re-creation, if the re-creation is done with insight and care -- witness the music of France's Les Petit Jazz Band or all the glories of Trad-based music that have come out of Australia, beginning in the late '40s and for many decades thereafter. OTOH, to take only example, it's not impossible that a young or by now well-into-middle-age figure who is (to stick with Rollins-inspired players) can also come up with striking personal utterances. I hear that, for example, in tenorman Grant Stewart; and while I can explain or claim in some detail why I feel that is the case, this is only my "truth," and I know that others disagree on the value and individuality of Stewart's music or do value it but then see no particular difference between him and other players who seem to them to be in a similar stylistic bag but who seem to me to be lacking in inventiveness and individuality. So it goes. But then again, having been a jazz fan since 1954, I don't recall an era when the questions or issues I've just touched upon have been on or near the front burner as much as they seem to be now. Did, say, anyone demure in 1954 at the rooted-in-tradition music of Ruby Braff? Well, yes, IIRC, some critics did (some British critics with Leftist inclinations in particular, pretty much along open or covert racial lines -- the claim was that it was somehow wrong for a then fairly young Jewish kid from the Boston area to play the cornet in a manner that owed such a debt to Louis Armstrong). But the beauty and quite evident "personal utterance" factor in Braff's music pretty much carried the day, thanks be.

Hope you're right; John is a good friend and a brilliant writer. I thought he was saying that my use of the phrase "morally ugly" was akin to what 2nd-rate pundits say.