JSngry

I think Dave Liebman's wrong about melody being supreme, at least as far as that being some kind of Provable Universal Absolute. Rhythm, on the other hand...not as "style" (aka "swing") but as if you're going to have one sound follow another, you gotta figure out when they will, and then all the harmony and melody stand in line waiting for that decision to made.

Too much math for R&B, some of this is... Just enough math for R&B: Of course, the rhythmic portion of the equation (as well as the allowance of the main melody to be a section of the composition rather than its entirety) is set-up to factor in not sitting still in a theater or riding an elevator while the melody is being expositated, although I have no ideal in god's great finishing school what part of the equation the hand gestures were input to trigger. Maybe it's a tribute to tuxedos of yore, who knows? All of which to simply say that at some point, although apples and oranges can both be used in fruit salad, who wants an orange pie, and there's no such thing as apple zest. Now, does it still rain in Indianapolis in the summertime, or has climate change pretty much wiped that out?

What's this about Brian Wilson being out for the year with Tommy John surgery?

Great legacy, permanently imprinted.

I did not have the pleasure of experiencing jazz prior to 1970 in chronological order or an educated record store. I'm totally unofficial.

Now, I gotta run to go play a total whore gig. We may or may not play "Watermelon Man" in the "wrong" key and with a pianist who has likely never heard a Herbie Hancock record. Business decision. All of it.

Stewart was/is just "peacocking", which is really what he's always done. It's just the case that life, time, and his own business decisions have put him in/on a different stage on which to do it. I don't consider anything a "sellout" unless it's something put out with no belief behind it whatsoever and without any intent to do it as well as you can do it. Anything else, even "pure art" also exists as a business decision. People should ask themselves whether they look at musicians as their own personal servants, there to tickle their own personal fancies, or if they are willing to accept without malice or rancor the premise that musicians are free to pursue business the same as anybody else, which means that their plans may not always include you, and no hard feelings if that happens, best wishes, etc.. And people should really think it all the way through before they answer, because no "jazz fan" wants to admit to enjoying having servants.

Who a person plays gigs with is but a small portion of "where they come from". Life - nor character - does not begin on the bandstand!

Translated, this simply means "He started making music for which I was not the intended audience". No argument there. However, other mainstream artists who were in the same position as Hancock chose to honor their roots. I don't begrudge him the choices he made, I just don't have the same respect I would have had for him if he'd stayed the course. "Roots"? Which roots are we talking about here? Seems to me that making music for a R & B audience and/or a "crossover" audience was in the mix from the git-go. Also seems to me that as opportunities presented themselves, Herbie capitalized. Initiative and ambition are roots too! I say it still comes down to, "I don't really like Disco or Techno or Whatever, so Herbie "sold out" when he decided to explore those avenues and had success doing so". Not that it was all good, it wasn't. But it was not good because it was not good Disco or Techno or Whatever, not because it was Disco or Techno or Whatever. This notion of "selling out"...it exists, but it's not nearly as black-and-white as a lot of people want it to be.

Of course. But that "slight tinge of irony" tinges a lot of things I say, and could fairly be applied to the lecture as well. although, with there being no fee involved, it's not much of a useful lecture, is it...

Translated, this simply means "He started making music for which I was not the intended audience".

That Everst was the very first sonny Rollins album I owned. The second was Next Album. And then it was off to the races.

To quote yourself back at yourself, "You're just wrong." Yeah, that happens. I live with it. If being "in the moment" meant that everybody was being their own proactive self all the time, there would be no such thing as interaction. No. Being the reactor is every bit as much a part of being in the moment as being the proactor, perhaps even more, because if an action does not cause a reaction, was it really an action? Glad we cleared that up. BTW, leaving aside the slight tinge of irony in your "Glad we cleared that up," can you see how it's kind of annoying to be lectured about obvious aspects of jazz performance/creation? Sure. Can you see how it's also kind of annoying to have to respond to something like "So he's in the moment except when he's not? Gotcha."?

If being "in the moment" meant that everybody was being their own proactive self all the time, there would be no such thing as interaction. No. Being the reactor is every bit as much a part of being in the moment as being the proactor, perhaps even more, because if an action does not cause a reaction, was it really an action? Glad we cleared that up. I likeHerbie's soling from this period quite a lot. You don't. Difference of opinion, nothing more, even if the physics are on my side. Duke Jordan, though...I have yet to be impressed, much less moved, by anything of his past the early 1950s. And I've tried.

The older you get, the more thens there come to be, which means the more nows there once were. Gotta know which is/was which. Otherwise, it gets confusing!

Herbie from this time is always in the moment. It's just that he sometimes takes his time to survey what that moment is before contributing to it. Sometimes he's proactive, sometimes he's reactive, but seldom is he exclusively one or the other. But as far as being "pre-planned" in any way, I've never gotten that. He's got his "cells" sure, but what he does with them could go (and quite often did go) anywhere, based on the moment. As he got older, I think it did get a little less spontaneous. The VSOP thing was, like all retroactive actions, retroactive, which almost by defintition means preplanned to one degree or another. But we're not talking about that then, we're talking about another then, when then then was the now.

Don't let it hit 41, ok?

Recorded the day after the Vanguard session for BN, btw.

Thanks. I don't follow college athletics at all. It's a good deed he did.

Those fonts don't sound like Lester to me.

Who is Trent Richardson?

The liners suggest that it's a comic who is not Redd Foxx. But I think I hear Hank at least one. Either way, the first cut on Disc 2 is the coolest thing I've ever heard on a live jazz album. Or one of them.

The original quartet would more likely be some footage shot in a club...might exist (with or without sound), but I've not heard of any.

QED!

There was footage of the Izenzon/Moffett trio (in rehearsal?). Don't remember the source, though.